Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Not everyone automatically assumes someone is trolling, but when people post stuff like this:

 DizzyStorey wrote:
I am building a female space marine army for the soul purpose of pissing off butthurt fanboys. I love the warrior woman archetypes and I started looking into space marines, when I discovered that this was a point of outrage and fury within the community, So at that point my mind was made up! I had to do this!

people will start to think you're trolling.

Manchu wrote:
Your main premise is, the female Space Marines concept is no different from any other deviation from official background material. You keep stating it as a question - why is the idea of female SM treated so differently? - but given that I comprehensively answered the question, at this point I am pretty sure you are being entirely rhetorical.

Please, I am not being rhetorical. The reason I keep repeating the question is because the order of the discussion has gone like this:

1. I hypothesise that female Space Marines are treated disproportionately severely by the community compared to other similar statements in the fluff. The only explanation I can think of for this is unconscious gender-bias because it involves phenomena that are hallmarks of gender-bias in wider culture (primarily discomfort around the notion of women being in similar positions of power, strength or legitimacy compared to men).
2. I have stated examples that support my hypothesis, and asked the community for logical criticisms of those examples and possible other hypotheses to explain the behaviour I am observing.
3. Members of the community have submitted their criticisms, and other potential hypotheses which I have in turn logically critiqued. I know anyone could be a dog on the internet, but I have been through significant education in the field of scientific critique of arguments. I understand that I myself have an unconscious bias towards wanting my own hypothesis to be correct, and have tried my utmost to be impartial in this logical critique.
4. As none of the alternative hypotheses posited so far have passed through that logical critique intact (although we have gained a significant number of useful insights), I have restated my question and asked the community for their ideas.

Now, I am human! I have got a bit heated at times in this argument which I'm sorry for! But I feel like my position still stands and I'm trying to be as objective as possible.

Manchu wrote:

In fact, I think you are now arguing that the notion of female Space Marines should be treated the same way as any other proposed deviation from published material.

Perhaps I haven't been clear in my explanations, apologies. I'll describe my argument now.

1. I believe that female Space Marines should be treated no different to any other deviation from fluff of a similar magnitude.
2. With the help of people who have joined this discussion, I have attempted to define the parameters by which the magnitude of a piece of fluff is measured. So far, we have these:
- Significantly changes a faction's fluff to the point that it directly affects other people's armies (for instance, saying that Necrons don't exist)
- Fact-statement rather than value-statement
3. Female Space Marines does not appear to fit the criteria outlayed for a piece of fluff that should by those rules be deemed
4. Female Space Marines also do not appear to elicit the same response as other pieces of fluff that fit a similar profile (such as Ultramarines are blue)
5. So, it would logically follow that the passion by which people defend the immutability of female Space Marines is caused by something other than its importance to the rest of the setting. The only thing that I can think of is unconscious gender bias*.

So, I am arguing that female Space Marines should be treated exactly the same as other pieces of fluff that are similar to it judged by the criteria that we produce (in this instance, either to accept that it is mutable, or to uphold the ire with which this particular piece of fluff is defended for every post that bends the fluff).

Manchu wrote:

But you are arguing in the face of reality here. Let's go back to OP's example of gorilla SM. Gorilla SM is just as bad as or worse than, in terms of not fitting the published material, female SM. Yet the former (probably) wouldn't produce reams of pushback because it is not code for judging/trolling/making fun of 40k fans. But the latter is exactly that. So what you are in effect arguing is that 40k fans should be cool with being trolled.

This is why I keep noting - come to the community with an awesome-looking converted army and an ethusiastic attitude and people will understand you are not trolling ... and, as if by magic, there will not be the same amount of pushback. Frontload a demonstration of sincerity. As opposed to - like in this case - frontloading judgementalism.

Well, that is the first possible explanation for the behaviour we have observed that holds water past the first logical critique.

So, just to make sure we have the hypothesis correct. You are stating that the strength with which people have attacked the idea of female Space Marines in this thread is due to its history as a tool for Trolls. I can see that being a possible explanation. This is is supported by the slightly confrontative tone taken by the OP regarding the subject, which may have primed people into thinking they were being trolled.

I would argue that when it became clear that DizzyStorey wasn't trolling (when she put significant effort into appeasing the fluff concerns of her dissenters, such as trying to find ways that fit with the pseudoscience technobabble of 40k) and apologised for her earlier confrontative tone, people should have relented and said it was ok to have female Astartes (as it would now be evident that she is not trolling). However, I definitely understand that when you're worked up about something it's really hard to cool down!

So, now we have two workable hypotheses which we can test against each other in as scientific a way as possible.

1. Female Space Marines are treated differently because of unconscious gender bias causing a more extreme response than is otherwise applied
2. Female Space Marines are treated differently because they are often used as a tool for Trolling, and there is no gender bias at play

How about this as an experiment? In a month's time when this has all passed over, I will post three topics in the Background forum. The first will be titled 'Female Space Marines', wherein I will state my desire to make an army of female Space Marines, provide a plea that I am not trolling, provide a brief fluff explanation for how it could happen, and ask whether I should do it. The second will be titled 'White Ultramarines', wherein I will state my desire to make an army of white Ultramarines, provide a plea that I am not trolling, provide a brief fluff explanation for how it could happen, and ask whether I should do it. The third will be titled 'Chaos Eldar', wherein I will state my desire to make an army of Chaos Eldar, provide a plea that I am not trolling, provide a brief fluff explanation for how it could happen, and ask whether I should do it.

Do you agree that 'Space Marines are male' and 'Ultramarines are blue' are two statements that are comparable pieces of fluff using the criteria identified above (fact-statements that will have a non-effect on other people's armies)? If not, why do you think they are not comparable so we might be able to find a piece of fluff that is better-comparable?

The third option is to try and control for the effects of gender-bias. 'Chaos Eldar' are a similarly controversial subject to female Space Marines, but lack the potential gender-bias, and will be useful as a control.

This actually gets me on to why I keep pressing this subject, and why I am absolutely not being rhetorical or arguing for argument's sake. I think it would be a very good thing if this behaviour would stop, or at least be reduced. Regardless of whether the explanation is due to gender-bias or symbol-of-trolling, it would be beneficial to expose what the motivations for such ire are to the community so they can react in an informed way. For instance, if the former is the case, then it would genuinely help the world be a better place if people (including myself) recognised their actions might be affected by gender-bias and made an effort to avoid it.

People like DizzyStorey who felt attacked would feel more welcome and perhaps stay on to be a valued member of this excellent community.
People who might otherwise have got really angry about it would feel less stressed about it, and perhaps not end up with animosity between people who have no real reason to argue.
It would be beneficial for everyone, and actually help to expand the community rather than diminish it.

If the main reasoning behind it is symbol-of-trolling, then the response is exactly the same. Everyone knows the worst possible thing you can do to a troll is to feed it. If DizzyStorey genuinely was a troll (which I really don't believe she is, as she has apologised for her tone, sought to make the fluff work with her idea, and generally acted in a reasonable manner past her first few initial posts), she would be delighted by the outrage it has caused.

However, if people recognised that they might be being baited into something, they might not post in which case the troll gets bored and moves somewhere else.

I hope that helps explain things in a clear and (admittedly not very) concise way. If you think I'm wrong about a particular thing, or have got my thoughts twisted somehow, I'd welcome the discussion of how

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

Spoiler:

 DizzyStorey wrote:

Manchu wrote:
Your main premise is, the female Space Marines concept is no different from any other deviation from official background material. You keep stating it as a question - why is the idea of female SM treated so differently? - but given that I comprehensively answered the question, at this point I am pretty sure you are being entirely rhetorical. In fact, I think you are now arguing that the notion of female Space Marines should be treated the same way as any other proposed deviation from published material.

But you are arguing in the face of reality here. Let's go back to OP's example of gorilla SM. Gorilla SM is just as bad as or worse than, in terms of not fitting the published material, female SM. Yet the former (probably) wouldn't produce reams of pushback because it is not code for judging/trolling/making fun of 40k fans. But the latter is exactly that. So what you are in effect arguing is that 40k fans should be cool with being trolled.

This is why I keep noting - come to the community with an awesome-looking converted army and an ethusiastic attitude and people will understand you are not trolling ... and, as if by magic, there will not be the same amount of pushback. Frontload a demonstration of sincerity. As opposed to - like in this case - frontloading judgementalism.

Firstly the very concept of wanting female space marines for any reason, ( Think its cute? Think its cool? Want variation? Hell you saw some cool fan art that inspired you ) Than that should not be "code for trolling" The concept of liking female space marines should not be considered so ridiculous and insane that the only reason anyone could possible want it is to troll.
Now I wont deny ever trolling people, After seeing a sore spot that frustrates you in a community that frustrates you its hard not to pick at it and lash back, But if you do that in the past cause you get mad or frustrated or aggrivated that doesnt mean that you dont also like the idea or cant possibly be genuine. I made this post not to discuss space marines but to get constructive and fair feed back and help fixing up loose ends, not to face a wave of opposition and a hundread dudes trying to convince me why what i want is dumb and i should not want it. That wasnt the point of this post and as you can see iv started coming back less and less cause its gotten so far derailed and made into something its not.
Now i am very happy for the support iv recieved and Iam even happier about the people who have put there bias's or opinions aside to actually give me genuine information i can use and helped me decide which army is the coolest of the bunch.
So in the end, Yeah i poked at a nerve in the past cause I was mad but this is something I actually do care about reguardles of that. the two are not mutually exclusive, but that this was not the point of this discussion, a nice talk full of helpful information ware we leave our flag waving "defense of fluff" at the door.

And when you say if i made a beautifully converted army with polite enthusiasm id be met with possitivity? That is not at all true. I was on a forum the other day ware this guy was showing off frankly the prettiest made fem pace marine iv ever seen and the comments were things like "Looks good, now burn it" cause people could not let go of there hatred for it long enough to just admire the work of art. Or they would go onto paragraphs of informing him "why i dont support fem marines" sometimes a post just isnt about your opinions on the existence of fem marines and they just want to show there art or get some help justifying something, if dont want to justify it than dont post.

I hate this mentality of every disagreement or anyone saying or holding confrontational views is automatically a troll and thus should be disreguarded. Heres the thing, people have nuances, people are complicated.

Not everyone automatically assumes someone is trolling, but when people post stuff like this:

 DizzyStorey wrote:
I am building a female space marine army for the soul purpose of pissing off butthurt fanboys. I love the warrior woman archetypes and I started looking into space marines, when I discovered that this was a point of outrage and fury within the community, So at that point my mind was made up! I had to do this!

people will start to think you're trolling.

We have to acknowledge that you're right in this instance. I do believe that people got the initial impression that she may have been trolling.

However, personally I don't think that explanation works fully. After she apologised for the tone of her statements in the OP, and made a concerted effort to make her fluff fit other people's interpretations of the 40k universe, I feel it should have been evident to anyone looking on that she was not a troll.

Unfortunately, at that point she was still told repeatedly that 'she could have genetically modified women, but they would never be Space Marines'. That suggests that there is something more than 'we thought she was a troll' behind the strength with which people reject the notion of female Space Marines.

Furthermore, that explanation doesn't quite gel with this experience from the same quote:

Yeah, the fervency of the opposition honestly has nothing to do with "people be trolling". People troll with "SPESS MARINES HAV SPESS SECKS!" threads all the time, but those threads die down very quickly, and never get to the vehemence of a Female Space Marines thread.

@Ynneadwraith

The femarine concept generates more pushback than other proposed deviations from the published fluff. That isn't your hypothesis - that is the premise assumed by your actual hypothesis, which is: The femarine concept generates more pushback than other proposed deviations from the published fluff because there is a sexist bias among 40k fans against that concept.

You have not demonstrated that your hypothesis is sound. Instead, you begin by assuming it is true and challenging others to disprove it by giving an examples of other proposed deviation from the published fluff that would generate as much or more pushback.

This is in effect disingenuous because, as explained above, your initial premise is that the femarine concept generates more pushback than other proposed deviations from the published fluff. Furthermore, the premise is not really even in dispute. Most people would agree, the femarine concept does in fact generate the most pushback.

The genuine issue is why? Your claim is, it is because 40k fans (or at least those posting on message boards) are sexists. My claim is, it is because the femarine concept has been widely used (it cannot be emphasized enough, including ITT) to make fun of, troll, and judge 40k fans.

 Melissia wrote:
People troll with "SPESS MARINES HAV SPESS SECKS!" threads all the time, but those threads die down very quickly, and never get to the vehemence of a Female Space Marines thread.

People make fun of nerds all the time. The difference with this specific example of making fun of nerds is, it ties into a larger mainstream social trend of self-righteously declaring that anything and everything is sexist or racist, etc. In this specific case, it is not just a case of trolling (which is generally just done for the sake of the joy of hurting someone else's feelings) but also under the cover of being a real and serious social issue that distinguishes the rational, noble progressives from the filthy, degenerate bigots. It is in fact the exact same thing that nerds are used to in day-to-day life: mainstream people saying "we are normal and right and moral whereas you are terrible and sick and foolish" ... well, the terrible, sick, foolish nerds went off into their own space and made things like 40k which eventually became profitable enough to attract the interests of the kind of people who marginalized the nerds in the first place.

At this point we're basically in a "chicken or egg" argument.

Manchu wrote:
[snip]

My objection is that they're excluding other marginalized nerds in the process, a fact that I find abhorrent and revealing.

There's actually a lot of this in gamer culture in general, of which 40k is just a subsection.

Manchu wrote:
@Ynneadwraith

The femarine concept generates more pushback than other proposed deviations from the published fluff. That isn't your hypothesis - that is the premise assumed by your actual hypothesis, which is:

The femarine concept inspires more pushback than other proposed deviations from the published fluff because there is a sexist bias among 40k fans against that concept.

Please, that is not the case. I implore you. Myself and a number of others have provided examples where femmarines have generated a massive pushback where other similar breaks in fluff have not (of which this thread is only one). That is the hypothesis: that femmarines are treated differently from other fluff statements that are similar.

Gender-bias is one possible explanation. Apologies, I should have made that clearer.

Manchu wrote:

You have not demonstrated that hypothesis. Instead, you begin by assuming it is true and challenging others to disprove it by giving an example of another proposed deviation from the published fluff that generates as much or more pushback.

Please, I have not assumed it is true. I have stated constantly that it is the only explanation that I can think of to explain it that stands up to logical criticism using the criteria that we have identified. As it is an unpleasant thing and I don't want it to be true, I have implored other people of the community consistently to provide me with another explanation that stands up to a similar amount of criticism based on the observed behaviour.

The first idea that has been posited that stands up to the first pass of logical criticism is the 'symbol-of-trolling' idea.

I'm trying to prove that they are treated differently as a first step. I think you yourself do understand that they are treated differently, by asserting that it's due to trolling rather than trying to claim that they're treated the same (although correct me if I'm wrong).

How else am I supposed to provide evidence for my claim other than try to show that other pieces of fluff that meet the same criteria are treated differently? That's how the scientific method works:

1. I posit a statement that may or not be false
2. Evidence is posted (by me) that supports the notion that the statement is true (anecdotes from my fellow dakka users regarding their experience of femmarine posts related to other posts such as male SoB)
3. We ask for evidence to disprove our theory. So far, we have been provided with a number of other hypotheses, but I have yet to hear from anyone who has provided a similar anecdote about how they came across a femmarine thread that was treated the same as any other similar bending of the fluff. We have had a lot of statements of 'if it were done this way, I would be fine with it', but that is not nearly as strong of a statement as it actually having happened.

So, at this point, the 'femmarines are treated differently' appears to be the likely outcome, but we will need more evidence to persuade people that it is true.

Manchu wrote:

The genuine issue is why? Your claim is, it is because 40k fans (or at least those posting on message boards) are sexists. My claim is, it is because the femarine concept has been widely used (it cannot be emphasized enough, including ITT) to make fun of, troll, and judge 40k fans.

I understand your claim, and that is why I formulated our little experiment as I did. Would you agree that it would help shed light onto the subject?

If all 3 threads I post garner the same response, then that would suggest that femmarines aren't treated differently and I am proved wrong. I am happy to be proved wrong.
If the Chaos Eldar and femmarines threads get hate, but the white Ultramarines don't then that would suggest that the hate is caused by the subject being something that is already a hot topic
If the femmarines thread gets hate, but the Chaos Eldar and the white Ultramarines threads don't, that would suggest that it is likely to be unconscious gender bias (that is present in everyone, I'm not singling out 40k fans here)

Would you agree that that is a good way to actually test our hypotheses?

Again - I don't dispute that the femarine concept generates the most pushback. I don't see a reason to try and test this.

Manchu wrote:
Again - I don't dispute that the femarine concept generates the most pushback. I don't see a reason to try and test this.

Why don't you see a reason to try and test why that is the case?

There is a possibility that people are unconsciously acting in a way that is harmful to this community, and generally reprehensible (as many people do everywhere, not just in nerd culture or even 40k specifically). As a mod who is in some way responsible for how people behave in this place, I would think that you would be very happy for this to be tested (especially seeing as I'll be doing all the legwork for it). Especially especially seeing as it may provide the evidence you need to prove that this is all a reaction to perceived trolling, and that I am wrong in suggesting that people are unwittingly behaving in a sexist manner, vindicating both yourself and others.

I don't want to be pushy or anything, but this is the proverbial 'put your money where your mouth is'.

(1) X gets the most pushback.

(2) X gets the most pushback because of Y.

A test to confirm (1) doesn't have anything to do with (2).

Have you considered the possibility that the reason that Female Space Marines appear to get so much more pushback is not because people disagree with them more... but because people defend them more?

A lot of times in this thread, the phrase 'it's weird that people will spend 7 pages telling someone that Female Space Marines are impossible' has been used. But that isn't the case. This thread didn't get to 7 pages just because of people disliking the idea, but because there was a discussion between people who do agree with them and those who don't.

To clarify the point I'm trying to make, consider other threads about potentially lore-breaking army backgrounds. For example, let's say I created a Space Marine army background that reads something like: "And these guys are BFF's with everyone in the Imperium, get all the best gear, are supreme close combat specialists, can use Chaos weapons without being tainted, are better psykers than Grey Knights and Thousand Sons, better strategists than the Ultramarines, etcetera etcetera." In other words, a Chapter that's the bestest at everything always.

Usually, such a thread will get a page's worth of comments as to why said background sucks (usually due to reasons of being over-the-top Mary Sue-ish), with some pointers on how to improve it if the posters feel generous that day. The OP of such a thread will then either rage against his critics and attempt to defend his ideas, or take some of the advice given, hoping to improve his army's story, or something else altogether.

End result? Maybe 2-3 pages of actual thread.

Compare that to Female Space Marine threads, who easily get to 10 pages of thread through the discussion of whether or not it's possible alone.

@Ezra Tyrius

You make a very strong point.

Another controversial idea OP raised is a Gue'la being in command of Tau. To me, this is a very interesting point - but I think this is pretty unlikely/unsupported by existing fluff. But no one cares enough about this proposed fluff divergence to say, well it could happen because of X or because of Y or because of Z. The reason is, I think, it doesn't tie to some mainstream cultural trend of siting in moral judgment of easy targets (i.e., nerds - people who are already traditional social outcasts).

Manchu wrote:
(1) X gets the most pushback.

(2) X gets the most pushback because of Y.

A test to confirm (1) doesn't have anything to do with (2).

That's why I have made the experiment so that we can compare 3 different concepts that should have different levels of pushback based on what causes it. I thought I'd explained that here:

If all 3 threads I post garner the same response, then that would suggest that femmarines aren't treated differently and I am proved wrong. I am happy to be proved wrong.
If the Chaos Eldar and femmarines threads get hate, but the white Ultramarines don't then that would suggest that the hate is caused by the subject being something that is already a hot topic
If the femmarines thread gets hate, but the Chaos Eldar and the white Ultramarines threads don't, that would suggest that it is likely to be unconscious gender bias (that is present in everyone, I'm not singling out 40k fans here)

I know it's the whole 'anyone can be a dog on the internet' thing, but I've worked as a researcher before so I understand how to construct experiments to point us towards potential explanations for behaviour.

Do you think that it doesn't work to tease that out at least in some way can you think of another experiment that would better?

 Ezra Tyrius wrote:
Have you considered the possibility that the reason that Female Space Marines appear to get so much more pushback is not because people disagree with them more... but because people defend them more?

A lot of times in this thread, the phrase 'it's weird that people will spend 7 pages telling someone that Female Space Marines are impossible' has been used. But that isn't the case. This thread didn't get to 7 pages just because of people disliking the idea, but because there was a discussion between people who do agree with them and those who don't.
.

Ah thankyou that's a really valuable insight. So, how do we control for that in the experiment?

There's two options here. The first is not to defend at all and count how many people say 'I'd be happy with that' as opposed to 'you can't do that'. The second is to argue back against each of them an equal amount and see which discussion goes on the furthest.

I believe that the second option would be more valuable as it would demonstrate better the strength of people's convictions, rather than a straight poll of who's ok with something and who's not (which we can do at the same time with a little poll at the top of the thread).

I am open to suggestions on that though.

I don't think measuring how much pushback an idea gets explains why the idea gets pushback. In other words, I don't think your proposed explanations for the various results are necessarily valid. I think they are assumptions. I think the whole proposal is an example of begging the question under the cover of "science."

I am not sure how to go about demonstrating that the hypothesis "40k fans push back against the femarine concept because they are sexists" is true.

Manchu wrote:
@Ezra Tyrius

You make a very strong point.

Another controversial idea OP raised is a Gue'la being in command of Tau. To me, this is a very interesting point - but I think this is pretty unlikely/unsupported by existing fluff. But no one cares enough about this proposed fluff divergence to say, well it could happen because of X or because of Y or because of Z. The reason is, I think, it doesn't tie to some mainstream cultural trend of siting in moral judgment of easy targets (i.e., nerds - people who are already traditional social outcasts).

Please, what on earth have I said that makes you think I'm in any way sitting on moral judgement of easy targets? That's an assumption you've made as to my motivations when I have clearly stated a number of times that I am doing this because I don't want people to be dicks to each other, especially if they don't realise it. That goes for whether they're nerds or not. I'm not attacking nerd-dom with this. I'm not attacking anyone with this. I'm just suggesting that something unpleasant might be going on without people realising it and might actually be able to make everyone's life less stressed!

Apologies if I lost my cool with that response, I must admit I found it insulting that someone thinks that I am picking on people who are easy targets. I can assure you 100% that that is not the case and couldn't be further from the truth. Please believe me.

Manchu wrote:

it could happen because of X or because of Y or because of Z

That's why I'm proposing an experiment to try and find out whether X is caused by Y or Z or a bit of both or neither. An experiment which for some reason you were opposed to even taking place, and then I assume were ok with taking place but took issue with my method when I had explained how my method works in the comment you were replying to.

Sorry for the confusion! I don't think you personally are here to judge or make fun of nerds (you say you are a nerd, I don't disbelieve it). Rather - it's my impression that the whole phenomenon of arguing about femarines exists because there is a larger phenomenon of picking on nerds, including by castigating nerds as sexists and racists because of the fiction we like.

Manchu wrote:
I don't think measuring how much pushback an idea gets explains why the idea gets pushback. In other words, I don't think your proposed explanations for the various results are necessarily valid. I think they are assumptions. I think the whole proposal is an example of begging the question under the cover of "science."

I am not sure how to go about demonstrating that the hypothesis "40k fans push back against the femarine concept because they are sexists" is true.

Perhaps it would help to explain the logic by which I will draw the strength of each conclusion from the data potentially encountered (which is based on a scientific method frequently used in peer-reviewed psychology journals, one of which I am published in).

The topic 'White Ultramarines' carries no pre-existing history as a tool for trolling. By comparing it to 'Female Space Marines' which is a similar statement in the fluff, we can compare what the potential effect of something being a previous tool for trolling is on people's reactions.

The topic 'Female Space Marines' is a controversial topic which involves phenomena that through other scientific research has been related to gender-bias (women being in similar positions of power, strength or legitimacy compared to men). 'Chaos Eldar' is a subject that is also controversial, but has no such connotations or relationship with gender. By comparing these two, we can compare what the potential effect of something that involves gender compared to something that doesn't.

Can you see how the method works? It's the basis of the vast majority of behavioural research, and has been accepted by peer-reviewed journals since the dawn of psychological research. Compare X against Y (where Y differs on one key aspect, Z) and you can reliably suggest that the differences are related to Z (unless someone can come up with a meaningful uncontrolled variable. One of which Ezra has already pointed out, which we have attempted to control for by standardising the level of argument.

Now, I won't assume that this will 'prove' anything. It's not nearly a large enough sample for that level of certainty. However, it will provide additional evidence towards whichever claim the data supports.

Manchu wrote:

 DizzyStorey wrote:
That wasnt the point of this post and as you can see iv started coming back less and less cause its gotten so far derailed and made into something its not.

The conversation moved on from femarines to theories about Gue'la. Then you came back into the thread to post this:

Spoiler:

 DizzyStorey wrote:

 Ezra Tyrius wrote:
Can we seriously not just agree to disagree, at this point? This discussion is going nowhere, and I doubt it's going to end well for any of us, or for this thread for that matter.

Personally, I'm going to stay in the 'Female Astartes aren't possible'-camp, for the reasons I've posted before; the rest of you, figure it out for your bloody selves.

If anyone still wants to discuss modelling ideas for female space marines or one of the other ideas, I'm all ears.

Apparently not.. cause agreeing to disagree does not result in the immediate death of all fem marine figs... I find people are too passionate and angry over this very concept to ever agree to disagree.

which is what rekindled talk about femarines. You are stirring the pot at the same time that you are complaining about it. This is exactly why the femarines concept is code for trolling. Again:

Manchu wrote:
If you have the money and the time, you can make whatever army you like. But you already know that. So is it just a question of requiring some kind of approval from others? Or teasing them for withholding it? Seems pointless in either case.

Ya see I didnt realize the conversation had moved on as I was about 2 pages behind the rest of the conversation, while catching up I saw something I wanted to respond too. If I had known the topic was over I would have left it be.
As you can see I am clearly discouraging the continuation of the topic and thus desiring to continue it would seem quite counter productive would it now?
And again, I do not believe having an opinion about something even if it starts an arguement is "Trolling" Its simply holding an unpopular opinion.

Manchu wrote:
Sorry for the confusion! I don't think you personally are here to judge or make fun of nerds (you say you are a nerd, I don't disbelieve it). Rather - it's my impression that the whole phenomenon of arguing about femarines exists because there is a larger phenomenon of picking on nerds, including by castigating nerds as sexists and racists because of the fiction we like.

Ah I see, no worries

I'm this gakky about gender bias if I see it in non-nerds too! Not just gender bias either, in case you think I'm some sort of blind crusader. I'm like this whenever I encounter something where I think someone's being unfair for no good reason (most likely unintentionally, I don't think anyone here's being intentionally horrible).

I understand that there is a wider phenomenon of people picking on nerds (which has only got worse now that 'geek is chic' so people are encroaching on areas which were once free of such judgement). I just want that lack of judgement to be as wide-reaching as possible, so if there's something that might be in the way of that (or might not!) I'd like to explore it

If the femmarines thread gets hate, but the Chaos Eldar and the white Ultramarines threads don't, that would suggest that it is likely to be unconscious gender bias

Can see you why your proposal amounts to begging the question?

Just to demonstrate that I understand your methodology (because I get the impression you think otherwise): Topics A and B are both controversial but only Topic A has to do with gender. If Topic A has more pushback than Topic B then it must be because Topic A involves gender.

The issue is, there is no disagreement that the topic is either (a) more controversial or (b) more controversial because gender is involved.

The actual controversy is whether there is more pushback because the people pushing back are sexists or for some other reason ... such as, the people pushing back recognize the topic as part of a larger hostile framework. The proposed methodology cannot test for this.

 DizzyStorey wrote:
while catching up I saw something I wanted to respond too

And the thing you wanted to respond to is the same topic that you also say you don't want others to continue talking about.

 DizzyStorey wrote:
I do not believe having an opinion about something even if it starts an arguement is "Trolling" Its simply holding an unpopular opinion.

I agree with that. Stating an unpopular opinion is not trolling by itself. Stating a popular opinion for "the sole purpose of pissing off the butthurt fanboys" is by definition trolling, however.

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

Spoiler:

 DizzyStorey wrote:

Manchu wrote:
Your main premise is, the female Space Marines concept is no different from any other deviation from official background material. You keep stating it as a question - why is the idea of female SM treated so differently? - but given that I comprehensively answered the question, at this point I am pretty sure you are being entirely rhetorical. In fact, I think you are now arguing that the notion of female Space Marines should be treated the same way as any other proposed deviation from published material.

But you are arguing in the face of reality here. Let's go back to OP's example of gorilla SM. Gorilla SM is just as bad as or worse than, in terms of not fitting the published material, female SM. Yet the former (probably) wouldn't produce reams of pushback because it is not code for judging/trolling/making fun of 40k fans. But the latter is exactly that. So what you are in effect arguing is that 40k fans should be cool with being trolled.

This is why I keep noting - come to the community with an awesome-looking converted army and an ethusiastic attitude and people will understand you are not trolling ... and, as if by magic, there will not be the same amount of pushback. Frontload a demonstration of sincerity. As opposed to - like in this case - frontloading judgementalism.

Firstly the very concept of wanting female space marines for any reason, ( Think its cute? Think its cool? Want variation? Hell you saw some cool fan art that inspired you ) Than that should not be "code for trolling" The concept of liking female space marines should not be considered so ridiculous and insane that the only reason anyone could possible want it is to troll.
Now I wont deny ever trolling people, After seeing a sore spot that frustrates you in a community that frustrates you its hard not to pick at it and lash back, But if you do that in the past cause you get mad or frustrated or aggrivated that doesnt mean that you dont also like the idea or cant possibly be genuine. I made this post not to discuss space marines but to get constructive and fair feed back and help fixing up loose ends, not to face a wave of opposition and a hundread dudes trying to convince me why what i want is dumb and i should not want it. That wasnt the point of this post and as you can see iv started coming back less and less cause its gotten so far derailed and made into something its not.
Now i am very happy for the support iv recieved and Iam even happier about the people who have put there bias's or opinions aside to actually give me genuine information i can use and helped me decide which army is the coolest of the bunch.
So in the end, Yeah i poked at a nerve in the past cause I was mad but this is something I actually do care about reguardles of that. the two are not mutually exclusive, but that this was not the point of this discussion, a nice talk full of helpful information ware we leave our flag waving "defense of fluff" at the door.

And when you say if i made a beautifully converted army with polite enthusiasm id be met with possitivity? That is not at all true. I was on a forum the other day ware this guy was showing off frankly the prettiest made fem pace marine iv ever seen and the comments were things like "Looks good, now burn it" cause people could not let go of there hatred for it long enough to just admire the work of art. Or they would go onto paragraphs of informing him "why i dont support fem marines" sometimes a post just isnt about your opinions on the existence of fem marines and they just want to show there art or get some help justifying something, if dont want to justify it than dont post.

I hate this mentality of every disagreement or anyone saying or holding confrontational views is automatically a troll and thus should be disreguarded. Heres the thing, people have nuances, people are complicated.

Not everyone automatically assumes someone is trolling, but when people post stuff like this:

 DizzyStorey wrote:
I am building a female space marine army for the soul purpose of pissing off butthurt fanboys. I love the warrior woman archetypes and I started looking into space marines, when I discovered that this was a point of outrage and fury within the community, So at that point my mind was made up! I had to do this!

people will start to think you're trolling.

Hinde-sight is sorta 20-20, I was mad at wanted to push buttons. Doesnt mean I cant try to move on and calm down later. I didnt figure id be sticking around so I wanted to go out with a double middle finger to people who I was frustrated with. But I changed my mind the more I talked to individuals who were polite and nice.

 DizzyStorey wrote:
Doesnt mean I cant try to move on and calm down later.

Good point. So what do you think about this issue of Tau-supremacy? I think it is heavily implied by the fluff - if not outright stated because making it explicit would ruin the tongue-in-cheek propaganda style of 40k fluff, including Tau fluff. But one of the biggest indications is that the structure of Tau society itself places Ethereals at the top, unquestionably. The whole premise of Tau society is that Ethereals must be in charge. And Ethereals are only and always Tau. No non-Tau can ever be promoted to the "rank" of Ethereal because it isn't a rank - it is a social and racial caste. In other words, the most fundamental principle of Tau civilization is actually a matter of race.

Also I am not sure iv said this yet but I am sorry for being abrasive and annoying in earlier posts. I understand it hurt my credibility for all future discussions but I was frustrated and I am sure all of you here who have spoke to me in privet know I am just passionate and very frustrated right now.
So yeah.. Sorry...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Manchu wrote:

 DizzyStorey wrote:
Doesnt mean I cant try to move on and calm down later.

Good point. So what do you think about this issue of Tau-supremacy? I think it is heavily implied by the fluff - if not outright stated because making it explicit would ruin the tongue-in-cheek propaganda style of 40k fluff, including Tau fluff. But one of the biggest indications is that the structure of Tau society itself places Ethereals at the top, unquestionably. The whole premise of Tau society is that Ethereals must be in charge. And Ethereals are only and always Tau. No non-Tau can ever be promoted to the "rank" of Ethereal because it isn't a rank - it is a social and racial caste.

I believe the Tau are complicated. I think they believe the Ethereals are the only ones capable of bringing the greater good but that if you agree with them you can be assigned a place within the empire ( under the ethereals of course ) ware you are free to progress and prove yourselves worthy.

Manchu wrote:
Can see you why your proposal amounts to begging the question?

Apologies, I'm not quite following what you mean by 'begging the question'. Can you explain?

Manchu wrote:

Just to demonstrate that I understand your suggestion (because I get the impression you think otherwise): Topics A and B are both controversial but only Topic A has to do with gender. If Topic A has more pushback than Topic B then it must be because Topic A involves gender.

The issue is, there is no disagreement that the topic is either (a) more controversial or (b) more controversial because gender is involved.

Agreed, we cannot completely isolate the cause. However, through this extensive debate, we have come down to two possible explanations of the behaviour that stand up to logical scrutiny and fit the anecdotes we have heard of so far: gender-bias, and symbol-of trolling.

As a psychological researcher, I definitely understand fully that we cannot say "Topics A and B are both controversial but only Topic A has to do with gender. If Topic A has more pushback than Topic B then it must be because Topic A involves gender"

However, what we can say is: "Topics A and B are both controversial but only topic A has to do with gender. If Topic A has more pushback than Topic B then it is probably something to do with gender, seeing as that is the main difference between them, in the absence of another explanation that fits the observed data better".

Now, if we repeat that in an experiment of two halves, one for 'gender' and one for 'trolling', and then compare the two against each other we can find out which variable potentially has the greater effect (again, providing no-one can come up with an uncontrolled variable that explains the differences better). This is the basis of nearly all psychological research.

There are statistical packages I can put this through as well that will estimate the validity of the data we find, again widely used in psychological research to make sure we're not clutching at numbers that are insignificant.

Manchu wrote:

The actual controversy is whether there is more pushback because the people pushing back are sexists or for some other reason ... such as, the people pushing back recognize the topic as part of a larger hostile framework. The proposed methodology cannot test for this.

I think I understand what you're getting at. 'Female Space Marines' is a symbol for trolling, but none of the others are. So, in order to control for that variable and isolate that as a cause, we need to find another topic that is also a symbol for trolling, is a similar (to say minor) bending of the fluff, and could also conceivably be a genuine request (so I can write about it being genuine).

As a researcher, I can state that the experiment will still function without this (that's what the Chaos Eldar thread is there to control for). However, finding another subject that is similar to female Space Marines in the 'history for trolling' department would help make the results stronger.

This is where I genuinely need your unadulterated help. I can't think of something at the moment, and I will undertake the experiment with or without it (please don't lock the threads!), but if you could help me find something that fits then it will help assuage your fears over the experiment design.

Manchu wrote:
People make fun of nerds all the time. The difference with this specific example of making fun of nerds is, it ties into a larger mainstream social trend of self-righteously declaring that anything and everything is sexist or racist, etc. In this specific case, it is not just a case of trolling (which is generally just done for the sake of the joy of hurting someone else's feelings) but also under the cover of being a real and serious social issue that distinguishes the rational, noble progressives from the filthy, degenerate bigots. It is in fact the exact same thing that nerds are used to in day-to-day life: mainstream people saying "we are normal and right and moral whereas you are terrible and sick and foolish" ... well, the terrible, sick, foolish nerds went off into their own space and made things like 40k which eventually became profitable enough to attract the interests of the kind of people who marginalized the nerds in the first place.

Oh please, enough with this silly victim complex. 'Evil feminists try to oppress the poor nerds.' Utterly laughable. When a large number of people claim that something is sexist or racist, 98,5% of the time it is because it is sexist or racist, not because they're trolling. Gender representation in 40K is gak, and yes, it is kinda sexist. This does not mean that liking 40K makes you sexist, but denying that there is a problem probably does.

Manchu wrote:
So what do you think about this issue of Tau-supremacy? I think it is heavily implied by the fluff - if not outright stated because making it explicit would ruin the tongue-in-cheek propaganda style of 40k fluff, including Tau fluff. But one of the biggest indications is that the structure of Tau society itself places Ethereals at the top, unquestionably. The whole premise of Tau society is that Ethereals must be in charge. And Ethereals are only and always Tau. No non-Tau can ever be promoted to the "rank" of Ethereal because it isn't a rank - it is a social and racial caste. In other words, the most fundamental principle of Tau civilization is actually a matter of race.

As something other than scientifically testing the causes of femmarine hate, I absolutely love the sort of re-casting of the Tau as a super-Orwellian state, with all the shiny stuff about the 'greater good' in the fluff being about as real as the propaganda that comes out of North Korea. Fits much nicer in with the grimdark rest of the universe that even the 'good guys' of the galaxy are worse than the government in 1984.

If that's how it actually is, I'd imagine that any Gue'vesa that's promoted to any rank higher than 'below the Tau castes' would be done purely as a pawn for propaganda purposes, or as a tool to get one over on your political allies.

Ooh, I would absolutely utterly love to read a Tau novel based on things like life in Soviet Russia or North Korea, where everything seems shiny on the outside but if you look too closely you get watched like a hawk by the secret police, and perhaps disappear into the back of a black Devilfish never to be seen again.

It could be done from the perspective of someone who's escaped that oppressive regime to the assumed safety of the Enclaves (which depending on how grimdark you want it to be could be better or just as bad...)

 Crimson wrote:

Manchu wrote:
People make fun of nerds all the time. The difference with this specific example of making fun of nerds is, it ties into a larger mainstream social trend of self-righteously declaring that anything and everything is sexist or racist, etc. In this specific case, it is not just a case of trolling (which is generally just done for the sake of the joy of hurting someone else's feelings) but also under the cover of being a real and serious social issue that distinguishes the rational, noble progressives from the filthy, degenerate bigots. It is in fact the exact same thing that nerds are used to in day-to-day life: mainstream people saying "we are normal and right and moral whereas you are terrible and sick and foolish" ... well, the terrible, sick, foolish nerds went off into their own space and made things like 40k which eventually became profitable enough to attract the interests of the kind of people who marginalized the nerds in the first place.

Oh please, enough with this silly victim complex. 'Evil feminists try to oppress the poor nerds.' Utterly laughable. When a large number of people claim that something is sexist or racist, 98,5% of the time it is because it is sexist or racist, not because they're trolling. Gender representation in 40K is gak, and yes, it is kinda sexist. This does not mean that liking 40K makes you sexist, but denying that there is a problem probably does.

Agreed! Nerds are the dominant culture at the moment. Not really the victims or oppressed anymore. ( especially by the evils of feminism. )

 Ynneadwraith wrote:
I'm not quite following what you mean by 'begging the question'. Can you explain?

Begging the question means assuming the conclusion. Like I said, your actual hypothesis is "the femarine concept generates the most pushback because the people pushing back are sexist." You would be assuming your conclusion by defining pushback to the femarines concept as sexist.

 Ynneadwraith wrote:
we cannot say "Topics A and B are both controversial but only Topic A has to do with gender. If Topic A has more pushback than Topic B then it must be because Topic A involves gender"

i meant that as an example of a sound argument - although sure your qualification ("probably involves gender") is better. But like I said, we both already agree that the femarine concept (a) generates the most pushback and (b) this is because the concept involves gender. Where we disagree is, you believe the operative factor is the sexism of 40k fans - whereas I believe the operative factor is this phenomenon of marginalization (including but not limited to "colonization") which created 40k fans - and all nerds - to begin with.

 Ynneadwraith wrote:
However, finding another subject that is similar to female Space Marines in the 'history for trolling' department would help make the results stronger.

I don't think there is anything even remotely like the concept of femarines for this purpose because it is so strongly tied to a specific trend in mainstream political culture. However, if you wanted to test whether 40k fans are sexist, maybe you could start a thread about an all-female IG regiment and see how that goes. But of course, I can tell you the result: posters will say "that already exists in the fluff."

 Crimson wrote:
Gender representation in 40K is gak, and yes, it is kinda sexist. This does not mean that liking 40K makes you sexist, but denying that there is a problem probably does.

Oh please yourself.

Manchu wrote:
And if anything about 40k - as a product line - is sexist, it is definitely the lack of Guardswomen models. That is an example of applicably "dragging politics into it."

Manchu wrote:
... contrast this to the inexcusable lack of Guardswomen figures - while political, this is also a non-theoretical concern: (1) Guardswomen are not headcannon and (2) there is current, demonstrable market demand for Guardswomen models.

 Crimson wrote:
Manchu, could you stop derailing this thread with your politics?

Manchu wrote:
The only politics I've dragged into this thread involves advocating female IG figs - but you're right, that's off-topic (I only brought it up because it was a useful counter example).

 DizzyStorey wrote:
Nerds are the dominant culture at the moment.

Not at all. The dominant culture has started to consume IPs that were produced by nerd culture. That does not make mainstream people nerds.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DizzyStorey wrote:
I believe the Tau are complicated. I think they believe the Ethereals are the only ones capable of bringing the greater good but that if you agree with them you can be assigned a place within the empire ( under the ethereals of course ) ware you are free to progress and prove yourselves worthy.

If the Greater Good is just this simple, rational concept that is race-blind ... then why are the Ethereals necessary? Why is it that only the Ethereals can shepherd the Empire in the path of the Greater Good?

Manchu wrote:
I don't think there is anything even remotely like the concept of femarines for this purpose because it is so strongly tied to a specific trend in mainstream political culture.

And this trend is?
(You kinda already said earlier what you mean, but I wish you'd clarify. I don't want to put words in your mouth.)

The inescepable fact of humanity is that people want representation of themselves and their groups in the fiction they consume. When you have half of the human population who has for the longest time, been excluded, marginalized, sexualized, or even outright villified in most of humanity's history in the creation of fiction, you're going to get women pushing hard for increasing more visible female representation in fiction and wanting a decrease in sexualized portrayals of their gender and sex. You also see this with racial minorities such as black and native american populations who want to see more of their population represented in a morass of seemingly endless whiteness in most visual and even textual medium. And of course, sexual and gender identity minorities have also pushed for greater representation in the face of thousands of years of straight up erasure or even demonization. Queer people, racial minorities, and women aren't coming to take away your franchises from you, they just want to be represented in a respectful way and given actual prominence rather than just existing in the margins of settings and universes after being pushed to the sidelines for most of storytelling's collective history.