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.

 MetalOxide wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:

 MetalOxide wrote:
People think female guardsmen would look like Mira from Space Marine... no they wouldn't. The Imperial Guard fight on many different planets, most likely harbouring harsh conditions; I somehow doubt your average man/woman could survive. I recon the average Guardsman/woman need the build of schwarzenegger to fight in the environments such as Tyranid infested worlds ect.

Except that Mira was a Cadian, who's Imperial Guard regiments are under near constant attack by daemons. Unless you're running Codex: Whole Army of Rambos, I think your average guardswoman would fair just as well as your average guardsman...

I would expect that cadians would have to be muscular as well.

Except muscular does not mean Governator levels of bulk either.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 MetalOxide wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:

 MetalOxide wrote:
People think female guardsmen would look like Mira from Space Marine... no they wouldn't. The Imperial Guard fight on many different planets, most likely harbouring harsh conditions; I somehow doubt your average man/woman could survive. I recon the average Guardsman/woman need the build of schwarzenegger to fight in the environments such as Tyranid infested worlds ect.

Except that Mira was a Cadian, who's Imperial Guard regiments are under near constant attack by daemons. Unless you're running Codex: Whole Army of Rambos, I think your average guardswoman would fair just as well as your average guardsman...

I would expect that cadians would have to be muscular as well.

Except muscular does not mean Governator levels of bulk either.

No, but she is not going to have a petite body with a pretty little face and nicely tide back hair. I admit, I was overexaggerating about schwarzenegger physique.

She'd probably look more like this...

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

KalashnikovMarine wrote:Thinking about it. in certain cases women may even have an advantage.

No.

It's just fact of biology. While there are a small, small number of women who have abnormal body types that will make them comparable to men, as an average, no, there's really just no solid advantage to being female in a combat environment. There is so much more to combat than simply aiming a rifle and pulling a trigger. I know that some people like to pretend that there isn't, but it's not the case. The average woman cannot carry the same proportional load, and not the same actual load. It was of no surprise that the first two female volunteers for the School of Infantry for Marine officers did not complete the course and there have been no subsequent volunteers. One of them did not even pass the initial conditioning and strength test.

.

With a simple google serch it was easy to find information that shows that yes female may have advantages over men in a combat environment , not the same but men simply being superior at it is wrong.

But I think this shows exactly what's wrong, so much asumption taken as fact and it realy translates into the tone I feal within the hobby.
One thing i do feal is that there is sexism in the hobby , like in a lot of things and isn't as clear as just sexy models.
I like some sexy models but I get frustrated completely trying to find heric and awsome :( I will be getting some KD stuff so will see how it holds up when it comes.

But another thaght I had about marketing is that it's less than sex sells and more that sex sells easy, would be interesting to see what people actuly want from the KD kickstarter. One of the things I have notice recently with the men around me is that sex doesn't sell to them so much, and some of them are as put off as I am about it at times.
And I think if more girls did start to get into the hobby it would change a bit, but at this time it doesn't feal very welcome quite often.
And after read this thread I feel some people not even welcoming here.

 MetalOxide wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:

 MetalOxide wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:

 MetalOxide wrote:
People think female guardsmen would look like Mira from Space Marine... no they wouldn't. The Imperial Guard fight on many different planets, most likely harbouring harsh conditions; I somehow doubt your average man/woman could survive. I recon the average Guardsman/woman need the build of schwarzenegger to fight in the environments such as Tyranid infested worlds ect.

Except that Mira was a Cadian, who's Imperial Guard regiments are under near constant attack by daemons. Unless you're running Codex: Whole Army of Rambos, I think your average guardswoman would fair just as well as your average guardsman...

I would expect that cadians would have to be muscular as well.

Except muscular does not mean Governator levels of bulk either.

No, but she is not going to have a petite body with a pretty little face and nicely tide back hair. I admit, I was overexaggerating about schwarzenegger physique.

I'll admit it's been some time since I've played Space Marine, BUT the lexicanum has images of her, and she has far from a pretty little face and petite body.

 Alfndrate wrote:
I'll admit it's been some time since I've played Space Marine, BUT the lexicanum has images of her, and she has far from a pretty little face and petite body.

She does have a pretty little face (with a bit of dirt on it) and a petite body compared to a regular guardsmen. She certainly doesn't come across as a beefy woman.

http://www.spacemarine.com/game/characters/single-player

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:
I'll admit it's been some time since I've played Space Marine, BUT the lexicanum has images of her, and she has far from a pretty little face and petite body.

She does have a pretty little face (with a bit of dirt on it) and a petite body compared to a regular guardsmen. She certainly doesn't come across as a beefy woman.

http://www.spacemarine.com/game/characters/single-player

PURDY FACE

I have long stood against sexism in miniature wargaming. This is why in protest for the unacceptable sexualization of the Sisters Repentia (and having nothing to do whatsoever with how fething expensive the models are) I created the Brotherhood Repentia. Boys in bondage!

Take a long hard look at the majority ( I say majority so as not to be overgeneralizing and saying everyone) of people in the hobby/culture of miniatures and wargaming. First they are mostly male and in my experiences (again MY experiences) are not filled with the highest of social skills and graces and the interaction with the female side of the species is either 1. something that terrifies them, or, 2. something they just arent familiar with (again these are generalizations I realize they dont apply to all situations or personages) . People are literally just taking teenage fantasy and molding it into a product that people will purchase. Its simple consumer think, make a product that appeals to your target market and sell it. Yes they are pushing an image of a woman that in all practicality doesn't and shouldnt exist. But as others have said if they pushed the real would anyone buy it? Its a money making endeavor and that is not to condone it as being ok but lets separate this from a moral question. Is it immoral? Perhaps, in the same manner in which selling barbies is immoral, it presents the same and in all honesty much more widely accepted unrealistic body image. This whole debate is fighting a symptom not the disease. The problem is the society in which objectification is rampant. Though we have made great strides over the last several decades in terms of gender equality, gender image has become endlessly more skewed. But we live in times where your free to express your sexuality far more than almost any time in history (well at least in most of the western world). The side effect of this is that there is a bit of de-sensitivity to sex, the more its out there in the media, the easier it becomes to access, the more the envelope eventually will need to be pushed to elicit interest or response. It becomes one-upsmanship, company A says checkout this model with d-cups wearing a metal corset, company 2 says screw that I will raise you an F-cup and fishnets. They are all competing for the slightly pervish dollar and the only way to get it is to push the envelop and out do what has come before. Sex and capitalism...forever entwined.

 Dannyevilguy wrote:
Brotherhood Repentia.

Many laughs, Danny. Thank you for that.

Apple fox wrote:
With a simple google serch it was easy to find information that shows that yes female may have advantages over men in a combat environment , not the same but men simply being superior at it is wrong.

Not trying to be sexist here, but I did a google search and didn't actually find much in the way of what advantages women have over men in combat roles. I saw a couple of anecdotal things saying women are better multitaskers, however different studies swing one way or the other as to whether that's actually true.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Alfndrate wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:
I'll admit it's been some time since I've played Space Marine, BUT the lexicanum has images of her, and she has far from a pretty little face and petite body.

She does have a pretty little face (with a bit of dirt on it) and a petite body compared to a regular guardsmen. She certainly doesn't come across as a beefy woman.

http://www.spacemarine.com/game/characters/single-player

PURDY FACE

Clean the dirt off and it'd work for me She still has long-ish hair, soft features. A lot prettier, little-er, and petite-er than this dude...

I wouldn't get into this conversation unless someone clarified the term 'sexist'. It's one of those nebulous terms that can vary from perspective.

As for some of the other points; a woman doesn't have to be better than a man in any field, just as good in the areas that matter. Being an effective soldier is more about fast reflexes and mental clarity that lifting heavy things and grunting.

Arguing about the place of women in a marine or guard army is a bad point of comparison as the Imperium is inherently stupid and prejudiced. It's like saying humans are smarter than Tau, otherwise the guard would recruit more Tau. If you want to have female models, have fun with it! My Guard includes xenos and females because they went rogue. I have female space marines because Slaanesh created them to prove she was perfect and could do what the Emprah couldn't. (And no, not a single one of them looks like Megan Fox.)

Boggy Man wrote:
I wouldn't get into this conversation unless someone clarified the term 'sexist'. It's one of those nebulous terms that can vary from perspective.

As for some of the other points; a woman doesn't have to be better than a man in any field, just as good in the areas that matter. Being an effective soldier is more about fast reflexes and mental clarity that lifting heavy things and grunting.

This is an astoundingly uninformed statement.

 Monster Rain wrote:

Boggy Man wrote:
I wouldn't get into this conversation unless someone clarified the term 'sexist'. It's one of those nebulous terms that can vary from perspective.

As for some of the other points; a woman doesn't have to be better than a man in any field, just as good in the areas that matter. Being an effective soldier is more about fast reflexes and mental clarity that lifting heavy things and grunting.

This is an astoundingly uninformed statement.

Yes I'm sorry. We should all remember how Patton broke the Falaise Pocket by throwing medicine balls at it.

See, that's kind of what I was saying. The majority of soldiers aren't renowned generals.

Being in the infantry has a lot to do with how strong you are. I take it you've never walked 20 miles carrying the baseplate to an 81mm mortar. Also, Patton, being a complete badass, is the worst example (non-Marine) that you could have used.

 Monster Rain wrote:
See, that's kind of what I was saying.

Being in the infantry has a lot to do with how strong you are. I take it you've never walked 20 miles carrying the baseplate to an 81mm mortar. Also, Patton, being a complete badass, is the worst example (non-Marine) that you could have used.

I've carried a 50 pound backpack for just as many miles over the course of three days... I are manly nao?

It's not a question of manliness, it's the requirement of having a certain amount of strength and fortitude to be an effective soldier.

And over three days? Do it in 1/8 that time and I'll be... well, impressed isn't the word...

 Monster Rain wrote:
It's not a question of manliness, it's the requirement of having a certain amount of strength and fortitude to be an effective soldier.

And over three days? Do it in 1/8 that time and I'll be... well, impressed isn't the word...

I know it's not, I was also a boy scout... a mere lad, but in far better shape :(

and is Impressed worse than the word you would be? lol

 Monster Rain wrote:
See, that's kind of what I was saying.

Being in the infantry has a lot to do with how strong you are. I take it you've never walked 20 miles carrying the baseplate to an 81mm mortar.

I don't mean to say there isn't a lot of strength training involved, or course you are being pushed to your limits, and of course a women's limits tend to be below a man's. The question is, how much of that is training and discipline and how much is needed to fight effectively. (Carrying a wounded soldier, your gear, loading a shell, in the grim derpness of space of course.)

I'll still give you the point and sincerely thank you for your service. You're quite right, I'm too gimped up to discuss to this in anything but the hypothetical.

Woaw women can shoot just as good as men, en what carrying heavy stuff, ever heard of helicopter lifters and such. As far as i know women have some advantage in jet fighters dealing with high G i think.

It is all about training, and before all the comfort of electric appliances, women worked the fields, washed the clothes, prepared the food and while at it , cared and beared a zillion kids.

People watched too many old Hollywood movies.

I refer to my previous post about the qualities of a soldier, and answer your question Monster Rain, with a yes.

 Monster Rain wrote:
Also, Patton, being a complete badass, is the worst example (non-Marine) that you could have used.

Hell yeah!

Boggy Man wrote:
I'll still give you the point and sincerely thank you for your service. You're quite right, I'm too gimped up to discuss to this in anything but the hypothetical.

Aww man. All I was saying is that physical strength is a factor. I agree with you that mental acuity and reflexes are both good things for a soldier to have.

I think we are missing an important point in this argument. Now, obviously all humans & all soldiers are not Olympic athletes, but if you looked at the women's weight lifting categories, they tend to be slim. So i can quite easily buy a woman with infantry required strength having Lt. Miras body structure. And before anyone says a blasted thing, i know that there are a lot of Olympic weight lifters with a lot of girth to them, wide body range there.

 DemetriDominov wrote:
I refer to my previous post about the qualities of a soldier, and answer your question Monster Rain, with a yes.

Which question was that? And since you are apparently following the thread and you haven't replied to my earlier question I'm very suspicious of you right now.

Bear in mind that I'm totally for equal treatment of women, and that they should be in the military and all that jazz. I'm just going to throw a flag when people say things that are demonstrably untrue.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Alfndrate wrote:
and is Impressed worse than the word you would be? lol

Appeased!

I took a break from the thread and have now come back, not really sure if I want to stay.

This is what I am saying yes to when you asked if I was serious Monster Rain:

 DemetriDominov wrote:

The most successful women in 40k are the eldar - tall, beautiful, and arrogant. The most unsuccessful women in the universe are squats - short, fat, and unattractive. You're right, you really don't have to look very hard.

 Gymnogyps wrote:

Someone else says, hey, I feel marginalized in tabletop miniwargaming, even though I like that hobby and participate just like you. But there is an institutional underlying prejudice about me because of what i am, what I look like, not who I am.

And you say GTFO. If you say anything bad about it, you deserve what you get. My haven can't be yours.

Wow.

I'm saying that people are accepting up until the point you actively reject them and then it stops. Some people are exceptions and can accept people regardless of whether or not it is reciprocated, but I think they are rare.

So the way for someone to make it their haven is to first be accepting towards those already present in the haven. Impugning their interests as "sexist, exploitive and offensive" isn't doing that.

And again the same old nonsense about "women in combat isn't realistic". Yes, women on average don't have the same physical strength/size/endurance as men. Yes, I'm sure you can point to plenty of studies where there are roles where men have a significant advantage. But, I have one simple question:

What exactly about 40k is realistic?

 Peregrine wrote:
And again the same old nonsense about "women in combat isn't realistic". Yes, women on average don't have the same physical strength/size/endurance as men. Yes, I'm sure you can point to plenty of studies where there are roles where men have a significant advantage. But, I have one simple question:

What exactly about 40k is realistic?

Well this discussion covers all miniatures really. But your point still stands.

Unrealistic is perfectly fine. Part of the complaints from the side that claim sexism though, is how females are portrayed in an unrealistic manner with the sexualized armor and body types. So people make the counter argument that female soldiers are unrealistic to begin with.

 Dannyevilguy wrote:
Unrealistic is perfectly fine. Part of the complaints from the side that claim sexism though, is how females are portrayed in an unrealistic manner with the sexualized armor and body types. So people make the counter argument that female soldiers are unrealistic to begin with.

Well, ignoring the "I don't want to be objectified" issue and just looking at realism:

Women in combat at all is a minor bit of unrealism, if it's unrealistic at all. Nobody sane disputes that women can fight, the only realism issue is over precisely which roles they can fill effectively and whether the army in question is the best of the best (where it even matters) or just anyone capable of holding a lasgun and dying. It's no worse than countless other unrealistic things in every game, so singling it out for criticism is ridiculous. And, even if it is unrealistic, the violation of realism is done for a good reason: to give more people a character they can identify with and promote greater equality in the hobby.

Women waring chainmail bikinis in combat is a major offense against realism. It isn't believable at all, and immediately stands out as a stupid idea without even having to think about it very hard. And, unlike having women at all, it's done for a bad reason. There's no greater good being served by defying strict realism a bit, it's just sex appeal at the expense of some potential players.