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.

The Dreadnote wrote:I think it's a good idea in principle. What I doubt is GW's capability to make decent female minis.

Amen.


Achem: on the issue of femarines.

Personally, I see no reason why not, and before someone screams 'fluff!!!!' and tries to smack me with a printed out copy of lexicanum bound into a bible, hear me out:

Let's look at the real reason that, previously, there have been no female space marines. No, I'm not talking about the extra genetic improbabilities on top the already impossible biology of space marines, I'm talking about grimdark. Female space marines are not grimdark.

Why?

Because it, equality among the super ass kickers, would be a positive thing. Positive things do not exist in 40k (to the degree that one wonders how electricity works) and Space Marines are asexual super soldier psychopaths who have absolutely no recognizable human emotions whatsoever besides rage and the need to kill in the name of their god. They represent the very worst parts of humanity from it's very grimmest period, weaponized.

But, wait, you say, that's changed since x edition! Look at all those nice novels about how honorable and human the space marines are!

Yes, and that brings me to my next point: things have changed. Previously, and this was correct, many people claimed that femarines would undermine how space marines are in fluff. However, thanks to writers such as McNeill, this is no longer the case. Space Marines are now supposed to be noble knights, as seen through the rose tinted soft focus view we all have of chivalry. They are now no longer the asexual inhuman killing machines that they used to be. (And very much not asexual in the case of Space Wolves).

So, you say, what of it? So space marines are now moral and positive beings? And?

Female space marines existing would have 0 impact on this. In fact, it might help it a bit, where the Inquisition and Soroitas (who are still screaming hateful religious fanatics, so far) do not.

But Space marines are supposed to be knight monastic orders and such you say. Where were those in the source material (ie history)?

Historically, all female knightly orders existed, and some where even martial (read: combat oriented) orders.

But fluff says....

Fluff gets re-written by GW on an hourly basis (even when it's not passed off to subcontractors such as FFG). If they figured that they would sell more space marines if they had greenstuff boobs on there, you bet your ass that you'd see femarines on every storeshelf. Saying 'well fluff says' is about as effective against GW editorial fiat as flak armor is against a demolisher cannon. Look at Grey Knights. Or Lamentors. Remember when the Emperor was just some guy, and still alive? Back when squats roamed the the universe?

I might point to the god-awful female catachan as an example of one of GW's attempts at female form....

Personally I liked the Phoenix Club's female Cadian armor torsos. Wasn't TOO far from 40k, but also they were visibly female.

Howard A Treesong wrote:Wow, half way through page two and no one has posted the Orc Cheerleader...

I think the problem with GW and female figures is based on two things; historically their female sculpts have been of very variable quality and secondly their core market of younger players are mainly into 'kewl' stuff with lots of crash-bang-whallop with tough dudes in big armour and guns and moar-dakka, they are not interested in female figures, their inclusion into the range either bores or embarrasses them.

The problem there is the demographic of that core market is changing. Locally, we've seen more and more of these strange creatures entering the game stores. They have oddly shaped bodies and smell of soap and water.

I would suggest that tastefully done female minis would sell quite well to this emerging demographic. Particularly the ones that have me sculpting/modding them one by one anyway. (Since I know nothing of resin molding)

Guitardian wrote:No. 40k is not meant for pushup bras and makeup and form fitting thigh hugging power armor, it is meant for dudes.. ugly... muscley... dudes. stupid warmongering oafs with veins popping out of their heads and guns with barrels as wide as their fists. The avon lady would not fit in, nor the victorias secret skank. laughed at, raped, cast aside, because in the grim darkness of the future that girls, as a whole, are not made to argue about feminism and equality in mud and blood soaked trenches with drooling madmen.

I will accept 'girls in the 40k universe' as a premise when said girls are big, fat, and butch as hell instead of musculature-showing ab models with enhanced boobs in skimpy outfits and thigh high dominatrix boots that for some reason confer the same save as hulking armor plates the size of a car hood.

I might point out that according to fluff Colonel Regina Kasteen of the Valhallen 597th is not only a excellent officer, but has a nice ass. This is stated as fact. In fluff. And actually she does that 'argue about feminism and equality in mud and blood soaked trenches with drooling madmen' thing. Against orks, necrons, chaos, and genestealers. In Fluff. Put that in your 40k chauvinism and smoke it.

Grey Templar wrote:Geneseed is consistantly stated as being matched to the Y chromosome, meaning it would be impossable to have a female space marine.

the Geneseed would simply fail to activate, or the unfortunante girl would begin to basically change her sex. if the hormone influx didn't kill her first.

Incorrect. The geneseed is *not* match to the y chromosome in fluff, but rather to the more vague 'male tissue types'. The fluff makes vague references to hormones and prepubescent males, but if this neophyte is prepubescent, I'm a frakking ork:




So frankly one should take anything to do with the geneseed in fluff with a grain of salt.

Grey Templar wrote:i have no problem with Female IG or female anything else, with the exception of Female Space Marines.-

the issue i have with Female Marines is that it goes COMPLETELY against the established fluff i have come to love(which has all other organizations having female fighters, except orks for obvious reasons)


if they changed such a foundational fluff bit it would basically change the game's background copmpletely, and for what? just so the game doesn't appear sexist?

I would have a problem with male sisters(brothers?) of battle because the fluff is that the Ecclesiarchy was forbidden from maintaining Men at Arms. the Ecclesiarchy cleverly got around this by having an all female force.



GW has written some very nice fluff. if they alter it because of a percieved gender bias then it's clear that the game has lost integrity. the integrity of staying true to the core of the established fluff.

the Fluff is fine at it's very base and doesn't need an overhaul of this magnitude.

Um, Grey Templar, in what way has GW stayed true to established fluff? Are Space Marines still criminals serving a life sentence to serve a living Emperor with Imperial Gaurdsmen serving aside their beastmen colleges? What ever happened to all those funny short abhumans with beards that built the Imperium's Titans and other extremely large vehicles such as the Leviathan command vehicle?

Has anyone seen a Zoat lately?

I hate to say it, but GW totally tosses out their fluff every time they write a new codex. Look at Blood Angels. Or Grey Knights. Or even IG with it's vanishing and reappearing vehicles. "Vanquishers don't exist!' 'No, wait, they do!' 'No, wait, they don't!' 'No, wait, yes they do again because we want to make a plastic kit!'

Or how about that IG hovertank or the hoverbike commissar?


Never mind that the geneseed is a biological impossibility that could only function if it was powered by the warp. How does it grow just fine in admech tankgrown slaves regardless of gender, but not in space marine candidates regardless of gender?

Bastion of Mediocrity wrote:I still have not heard why any of the female marine advocates are not complaining about no male models in the sisters of battle. Gender Inequality!!!! (that is 50% of the population being ignored)

I like that the sisters of battle are all female. But if we are so worried about gender inequality, why don't we push for men in the sisters of battle?

Actually, at one point in SoB history, there were, effectively, male sisters of battle, the Frateris Templars, who's gear and tactics SoB were derived from once the Frateris Templars were disbanded due to the Decree Passive. The only reason the SoB themselves still exist is due to a legal loophole.

Grey Templar wrote:it's unlikely that the 2 missing primarchs are female.

the basic desire to have symmetry would have mandated the Emperor creating 1/2 and 1/2 which he didn't.

besides, the Emperor basically cloned himself to make the Primarchs.


if 2 were female that would result in them having 2 identicle X chromosomes without significant alteration(not a problem with all the scientific alteration going on, but still an issue)

its simpler just to keep the primarchs male. one less step in the creation process as you don't have to off the bat fix certain problems.

Actually, that's incorrect, it would have been simpler to have them female. There are fewer steps, hormonally speaking, for something to go wrong, since humans default to female form if they have malformed receptors for testosterone.

Secondly, no, the Emperor DID NOT clone himself to make the primarchs. He (other people) genetically engineered them (for him) as supermen based off his own DNA. There is a BIG difference there.

Considering the variety of frankly wild and convoluted genetic alterations that the primarchs had, it's actually more surprising that one of them was not female.

Leigen_Zero wrote:

I think you are referring to fantasy orcs, AFAIK there were never female orks in 40K not even in RT days, it was always the spore thingy.

...

On the subject of female marines. I've always thought the base concept of marines was that of a fraternity of warrior-monks, yes we could re-write the fluff and put females in there, but it would lose a lot of the base concept in the process, perhaps detracting from what makes space marines unique, and not just another generic sci-fi genetically modified super-solider.

Not entirely correct: originally 40k orks = WFB orks. They were identical, so logically, there would have been female orks the first time around, but we're heading into some seriously /TG/ terrain here.

And there have been, historically speaking, female sororities of warrior nuns.

Grey Templar wrote:
GW moved away from the "Fantesy in space" feeling because it was the right thing to do.

hence they axed the Squats and had the Zoats become extinct.

the result is a Sci-fi that is unique and has a very deep and engaging fluff.

It's not even close to Sci-Fi. 40k is still very much Fantasy in Space. What's really sad is it measured softer on the Sci-fi scale then Spelljammer does. Which had space ships propelled by giant space hamsters.

Let's stop and think: 40k space ships alone are impossible, they exist in defiance of Newton's laws of Motion AND everything humanity knows about structural stress, never mind the fantasy genetics that allow for space marines. Or the fact there are sorcerers running around that fry things with lightening.

Grey Templar wrote:

besides, SM usually recruit from Feral worlds which 95% of the time will not have females be the warrior class. it would be kinda odd to have SM show up and take a daughter to be a warrior from a society that doesn't do that sort of thing.
...
fortunantly i see no evidence of GW changing the fluff to allow for Female marines any time soon.

So, you don't think them removing the thing about needing to be male from C:SM is a change?

Approx 20% of the Sarmatian 'warrior graves' on the lower Don and Volga contained women armed for combat. The Sarmatians as a culture existed from around the 6th century BC to around the 4th Century AD. A thousand year run when you're enemies included the Roman Empire and the Huns at the same time isn't bad. Many nordic cultures had similar practices. Unfortunately, the record is not clear just how common female warriors in primitive cultures are, however, your '95%' is likely incorrect. We can actually PROOVE higher rates then that, and accounts from other cultures of the period imply the rate was much higher.

Brutus notes the Lusitanian women "fighting and perishing in company with the men with such bravery that they uttered no cry even in the midst of slaughter" and the Bracari, a Celtic tribe from Gallaecia that the women "bearing arms with the men, who fought never turning, never showing their backs, or uttering a cry."

Marius in his campaign against the Cimbrians also notes that the women fought alongside the men, and then fought on after the men were all slain.

Boudica's army, it is suggested in Tacticus, was more women then men.

To me, this would suggest that your appraisal of 'feral' cultures is inaccurate.

themocaw wrote:/me decides to make a counts-as-Grey-Knights army consisting entirely of psychic schoolgirls.

With Samurai swords?

The sad part is, it's not that much different from how things are...

"Now, Abaddon, one shall stand, and one shall fall!' - Optimus Prime, Dreadknight

Ascalam wrote:If ytou want to play an anime army, play tau

Use tau with the GK codex as counts as.. that would be awesome...

I dunno, with all these not-Gundams that the GKs are driving around these days...

Grey Templar wrote:

I was moving it BACK to where it belongs

but seriously, you couldn't have had an all male SoB army.

an all male Witch Hunter army yeah. using ISTs and Inquisitors.

Again, since you keep dodging the answer, you could have an all male SoB army if it was set during, or just previous to, the Age of Apostasy.

Grey Templar wrote:ok True, but then it would be 'counts as' and wouldn't be SoB on a fluff standard

True, since SoB had a different name at that time.

Personally, I think the reason that most people don't question is is that the reason given makes some sense. (That they exist as they currently stand, based on a legal loophole.) How to put this: All female SoB has a reason that makes sense in a real world frame of reference. The all male space marine's reason is in defiance of a real world frame of reference.

Part of the problem is that 40k is fantasy thinly disguised as Sci-Fi. People who see it as a sci-fi universe expect it to behave in a sci-fi manner, in that science, or what passes for it, follows the same basic rules as the real world.

Ouze wrote:

Going off on a tangent, I really appreciate how nuanced and troll-free this thread has gone so far. When the topic of female marines came up, to be frank, I wasn't sure it could happen.

I've generally found there are certain people that like to troll this subject, and only one of them appeared early on, before that particular item came up.

Personally, I've been enjoying us having a troll free discussion of the matter (for once) and would like to see this pattern continue.

Though, In all honesty, the new Codex: Grey Knights has shocked a lot of people in the 'fluff first' camp, so they may be distracted at the moment. After all, femmarines are far less canon breaking then Grey Knights that bathe in blood and burn down the garden of nurgle.

avondale wrote:I think it would be more interesting if there was more female miniatures for SM, IG, Tau, and Eldar, for chaos the end result would probably look very disturbing maybe and I don't want to even talk about the orks.

I thought that Chaos is supposed to look disturbing....? Gender is a very vague notion with some of them anyway....

Mr Morden wrote:hmm well I voted no.1 (wont suprise anyone who knows me)

Amongst my consdierable collection I have pretty much all the female human models made for 40K including

Original Imperial Army (now Guard) soldiers (in and out of power armour) wielding wepaons from lasgun to autocannon (singlehanded)
Schaffers last Chancers figures
Female Tanith
Escher Gangers (about 35 of them)
Female Inqusitor

You don't have the female catachan with grenade launcher? (then again, I'm missing rocket girl from Last Chancers)


He, I'd like to see the option, even if it was someone like Chapterhouse putting out bits other then head swaps, since their existing line of female head swaps is awful, for Sm and IG. Though just for the amusement of certain people, a buxom tau on a bikini would be hilarious.

I wondered how long before someone had to try and troll the thread by breaking it out. We made it onto page six, so that's pretty good for the subject and avoiding having some troll pop on.

Part of the problem is that, supposedly, space marines are the best. When looking for the best, why limit your pool of candidates? I've seen more then a few occasions where a female actually out performed her male rivals for a position.

Obsidian wrote:One of the problem I think is that people do view 40K as a typical future, when, where Space marines are concerned you should look back the the medieval era and the militant orders during the crusades e.g. the templars, all monks, all brothers. There are no female militant orders other than that of careing (Nursing).

Wow, talk about totally ignoring the Hundred Years War.

MrMorden ninja'd most of my standard reply to this, but, grand total there were something like 37 militant orders for women between 1100 and 1600. Several other militant orders allowed members of either sex, though out of combat they were quartered separately.

@Paul: Incorrect on Eldar. Some of them are clearly male and female. Their armor does not make them androgynous.

@Mellissa: a 'female' necron lord might not be too far out of fluff, considering thy retain a greater amount of their original minds and personality, and gender does play a small role in that.

@Luna: and that more or less addresses the real problem, Most GW female sculpts suck. Maybe they should subcontract to Hasselfree or Reaper or something.

Obsidian wrote:
I'm not ignoring anything. The exceptions do not make the rule. 1 female leader does not consitute a order millitant. And if you read my post is does mention women in orders militant in exactly the positions I mentioned 'they undertook menial and hospitaller functions' from the mentioned web page. I will grant you that I missed the Order of the Hatchet but then again this was formed in Spain during an hour of desperate need when under Moorish occupationhad this not been the case than it would not have formed, this is no doubt the case with any other Millitant order which had female fighters.

Oh? How about The Cordeliere? Est 1498 by Annede Bretagne, Widow of Charles VIII of France.

Or this lovely account...

"Among the Franks there were indeed women who rode into battle with cuirasses and helmets, dressed in men's clothes; who rode out into the thick of the fray and acted like brave men although they were but tender women, maintaining that all this was an act of piety, thinking to gain heavenly rewards by it, and making it their way of life. Praise be to him who led them into such error and out of the paths of wisdom! On the day of battle more than one woman rode out with them like a knight and
showed (masculine) endurance in spite of the weakness (of her sex); clothed only in a coat of mail they were not recognized as women until they had been stripped of their arms. Some of them were discovered and sold as slaves." - Francisco Gabrieli. Arab Historians of the Crusades pg 207, from a translation of Imad al Din's account of the battle of Hattin. This was also commented on by Ibn al Athir.

Or how about the Knights of Saint Mary, which allowed women in combat, who, at the order of Pope Urban IV - "are to be allowed to bear arms for the defence of the catholic faith and ecclesiastical freedom, when specifically required to do so by the Roman church. For subduing civil discords they may carry only defensive weapons, provided they have the permission of the diocesan."
Of course, they were later suppressed by Pope Sixtus V.

According to Guibert of Nogent, Emperor Conrad III, during the second Crusade, brought with him a "troop of Amazons", who's ultimate fate was left unrecorded, though most likely they died at the second battle of Dorylaeum, with 9/10ths of the rest of his army.


As far as Spain goes, it was common for quite some time after Reconquesta (and, indeed, in one case to this very day) for militant orders to permit women entry and the right to bare arms. France and the Low Countries also had this, though to a lesser degree. This could have something to do with Spain having had women under arms since Roman times. Despite their rather odd views on women in other periods (Inquisition).

"The example is of the Noble Women of Tortosa in Aragon, and recorded by Josef Micheli Marquez, who plainly calls them Cavalleros or Knights, or may I not rather say Cavalleras, seeing I observe the words Equitissae and Militissae (formed from the Latin Equites and Milites) heretofore applied to Women..." - Ashmole, The Institution, Laws, and Ceremony of the Most Noble Order of the Garter (1672)

Obsidian wrote:
You want to play that card female fighters were more common during the Roman era in many of the 'barbarian' races than the whole of the medieval period e.g. Boudicca and the Celtic peoples of Britain, Brttiany and Catalonia, infact it was said one of the reasons that the Romans hated fighting the Britions was after thay killed the men they then had to deal with the narked off wife who was just as brutal.

While supposedly a large number of Breton and Pict warriors were female, my favorite was always Marius against the the Cimbri and the Teutons. Marius reported that when the battle went poorly for the men, the women emerged from their wagon castles with swords and threatened their own men to ensure that they would continue to fight. After reinforcements arrived for the Romans, the Cimbrian men all were killed, but the women continued to fight. When the Cimbrian women saw that defeat was imminent, they killed their children and committed suicide rather than be taken as captives.

Obsidian wrote:
To counter the 18th century argument the women who marched with Wellingtons army were just wives cooking, cleaning bringing up sprogs and 'NOT' front line fighters! There were women who did fight on the front line, but they were disguised as men and the medicals of the era usually consited of the recruting sargent paying the doctor to announce that all men were fit for duty with out even examining them! There was also a group of women who wanted to form a millita for the defence of England, but they were refused the request. Read the the book Following the Drum by Annabel Venning for more on this. I know a lot on this subject as I am a member of the 95th Rifles reenactment society.

'To think I lay with a thousand men
and a maiden all the while!'

And how does the 95th give you insight on the 18th Century? They only went into the line in 1800 at Copenhagen as RN snipers, IIRC. That would be the 19th Century, wouldn't it? [As a member of the 116th PVI, I know something about the 19th Century (And didn't I smoke some of your guys at Ridgeway in Canada a few years ago? Or was that the Queen's Own? I get the two confused on occasion.)]

Obsidian wrote:
I don't want to get in to a long discussion on this and take this thread OT but some of the sources you have cited have dubious merit and many are out right refuted.

It's a tough nut. In reality, any account can be challenged. The most famous of one I can recall off the top of my head was a refutation that Napoleon Bonaparte existed (and that he was, in fact, mythological), while he was still very much alive.

The problem is that there are only five accounts of Hattin. I used Imad al Din as he was actually present. Some of the refutations of the account are contradictory themselves, pointing out both that the Christians would not have recorded it as an embarrassment to them and in the same paragraph claiming they would have because it was unusual. The authors forget that you cannot have it both ways.

Personally, it would not surprise me if there were, as at least two of the orders mentioned to be present allowed women in their ranks. I would suggest that, as a specific number is not mentioned, it may be that a handful of women were present under arms.

It's sort of like machine guns used during the American Civil War. Most experts will swear on a stack of bibles that they were never used, but I can produce fifteen accounts of them being used in combat. Were they widespread or the norm? No. But they did exist.


However, I would suggest tha5t PMs would be a better place to discuss this.