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.

I liked the female character in Mechanicus. I dare say that after that book, the entire Imperium owes something very important to a woman.

Wow, I didn't think store managers would actually have to face such questions. I could imagine that being a bit awkward.
On the other hand, it also kinda sounds like a challenge in diplomacy, heh.

Disciple of Fate wrote:Remember how they changed the deamonettes, I remember bare nipples, but that seems to be a no go nowadays.

Still makes me angry. Society is getting way too stuck-up.
What's worst is the hypocricy of it all. Porn consumption and sex trade goes up across all fronts, but you aren't supposed to talk about it in the public. "Everyone does it, nobody wants to admit it".

Oldschool Daemonettes ftw!

Disciple of Fate wrote:Just to be clear I have no problem with women in the army or anything. Im all for equality as long as it serves purpose, not getting random quotas like they sometimes do nowadays.

Hmm, like I said, I think that in some cases, temporary positive discrimination may be necessary to "break the ice", so to speak. To be dropped within one or two decades after you had a generation grow up in this new environment.
But I agree, for the military there need to be equal requirements for all, given the risks involved. And besides, else it isn't really equality, is it?

Lynata wrote:

Disciple of Fate wrote:Just to be clear I have no problem with women in the army or anything. Im all for equality as long as it serves purpose, not getting random quotas like they sometimes do nowadays.

Hmm, like I said, I think that in some cases, temporary positive discrimination may be necessary to "break the ice", so to speak. To be dropped within one or two decades after you had a generation grow up in this new environment.
But I agree, for the military there need to be equal requirements for all, given the risks involved. And besides, else it isn't really equality, is it?

Agreed, Im hoping that a great degree of equality will be reached reasonably soon. Im about to finish my uni history and the prospects are about equal for males and females from my study (Im male so its no disadvantage to me in the current society). Males still have a slighter advantage, but not by much, latest was about 10% easier to find a job (if looking at employment after first year).
Wh40k has a lot of equality already, mostly about the same ratio of males and females in the military, except for the 'special' worlds we only get to hear about. It just hit me that it might also be the writers. Most are male and might be a bit reluctant trying to write novels/series with a female lead. With the 'women are from venus, men are from mars' sort of thing. They should try to get some more female writers who might find it easier then the male writers to tackle those issues/books.

I liked Swallow's Battle Sister novels. He should do more of them.

Maybe it's really just a matter of personal preferences and visual association. People just not being interested in female heroes. Andy Hoare was once said to have expressed his concerns about the Sisters of Battle in that he was the only one in the GW studio who cared for them, and with him gone there'd be no-one to pick them up. Given the last couple years, I think that may have been true. And the SoB are pretty much the standard bearers for women warriors in 40k, so lack of females elsewhere is not surprising at all.

Let's see if it changes when "fresh blood" revitalises the franchise. And let's hope that it is revitalised in a positive manner.

It might be a change in generation/focus, as you say. Its a shame, even the HH is shifting away from the human element more to the marine. The first 3 HH books still had a significant female story line with Keeler. This also returned in A Thousand Sons and Mechanicum. But its dissapeared as of late.

Yeah Swallow's books are quite good, but he seems to work on some more Blood Angel books atm. At least that whats the last ending implies.

Ok you know these threads never really solve anything, but lets try that. How could you make 40k a more gender diverse setting? I think you could do it by requiring each codex to have at least two female SC. Even SM and orks would have to follow this rule. It wouldn't be that hard. Necrons would be the easiest because they are robots, you just need to change the pronouns. Orks might be tricky, but if you bring back the idea if imperial advisers you can sneak one in. SMs whould be the hardest unless you dump that silly rule that only men can be SMs.

To a limited degree I agree. Making an oversexualized or wimpy female character is downright stupid. But a female character that is relatable and can drag the readers in is more entertaining than a male character as a male. Strong female characters are usually better than male characters.

I do disagree that the sisters of battle are not overly undone and slaughtered by just about everyone.

But being able to identify females and males through power armor is almost impossible without seeing their body shapes.

nomotog wrote:
Ok you know these threads never really solve anything, but lets try that. How could you make 40k a more gender diverse setting? I think you could do it by requiring each codex to have at least two female SC. Even SM and orks would have to follow this rule. It wouldn't be that hard. Necrons would be the easiest because they are robots, you just need to change the pronouns. Orks might be tricky, but if you bring back the idea if imperial advisers you can sneak one in. SMs whould be the hardest unless you dump that silly rule that only men can be SMs.

Its not about forcing anything on people or codeces. Space marines are fine, being countered by SoB (they need an new codex though). Imperial guard its easy, add another steel legion or cadian character, they are males and females, so just pick out a female commander (enough action around Cadia even though they arent shipped off-world often). Drop a catachan or cadian one, enough of those, you could put harker and pask together on one page for example. But they should provide the models. Necrons, just add in females, the robot bodies proly dont make any difference. Orks are a bit asexual, they are fungus after all. Dark Eldar and regular eldar have quite a decent ratio. But the main point is that even though the above takes time and money, just changing the main character of a novel doesnt. Thats the main point, why dont they bring the female role more to the fore in novels. If you should believe the background females are employed almost as heavily as men, yet Black Library doesnt represent this.

With reference specifically to the models:

 Crimson wrote:
HOWEVER, it becomes problematic when these are pretty much only (human) female models you have. There should be a wide variety of different sorts of female models, like there is wide variety of male models.

This was the point I was making, and I hope that in my posts I was not coming off as anti-sexuality under any circumstances. I don't think sexuality is an inherently bad/shameful thing (I'm in NO WAY socially conservative), it has a place and can be represented in artistically, whether tastefully or provocatively. The problem is the over-representation as compared to more "normal," or at least non-sexualized, portrayals of women. There should be a balance.

I'm all for fully-nude daemonettes, and by all means sexualize them as much as you want, the way their fluff is written its completely appropriate. I like your view of why sisters repentia would forgo any armor, Lynata, unfortunately, the models as they are were clearly designed to sexualize them. I'd actually prefer them more naked to portray an animalistic nature as apposed to some absurd illusion of "sexy" armor. What would help would be toning down the SoB PA a bit, I don't think it's crazy over-the top, just unnecessarily sexual when sexuality isn't called for. Some female guardsman in the same fatigues and flak armor would be an awesome addition as well. If you want sexy female models, at least provide some sensible fluffy background as to why you want to show them that way.

With respect to women as represented in the fluff:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
40k is very dark and gw might think it will turn people off if they write too much about the ''brutal slaughter of the .... female regiment''. Gender isnt really mentioned in the big picture, women die by quite a good amount, but it is almost never mentioned as express as certain male guard regiment.

This, unfortunately, is just outright wrong. GW has a history of murdering off women with disturbing frequency. One of the most famous was the Grey Knights killing a bunch of sisters just for the hell of it and because wearing chick blood is cool. Seriously, if they're as resistant to daemons as every bit of fluff says they are, they should never have needed to do that, it doesn't make any sense unless GW just likes killing SoB.

I am by no means the best source of BL fluff, I've read a bunch of the books, but not even a majority, so I cannot speak entirely to how women are represented in all of the literature. I have seen some cases where the women seem fairly portrayed and others which could have done a much better job. Here its less about sexualization and more about just an accurate presentation of women, as most female characters seem to be rather flat. Far too often women are either overly pious and blandly heroic, or else playing the role of victims. I even agree with Jimsolo that this is an 'R' setting, and as such, theres nothing wrong with including some sex with the violence, and in some cases it might actually do more to add some depth. In the end, I just think it would be refreshing to see some well-round, engaging female "main" characters in an overly male-dominated setting.

As to the question of of whether we, as a society can handle seeing female heros and women in combat, I think that very, very slowly those prejudices are eroding (the US now allows women to serve in combat roles for example). I personally want to see all those barriers fall down, and I would encourage any media source to try and further that goal, and to some degree, I believe all media has a social responsibility to deal with issues of gender, sexuality, race, etc in a fair and balanced way. As much as I get that they want to appeal to a customer base, they're denying themselves a chance at actually expanding their base by not including more women.

My main issue here is, the 40k setting has already established, time and again, that women fight and some are heroes. In a way, its sort of GWs fault for only going halfway with the idea. If you're going to have women in the setting, and establish that many are meant to play important roles, even in the violent bits, then go all the way and have more fleshed out female characters. By having them there, but not really giving them much of a spotlight, it makes it seem more male-biased than if you never mentioned them at all. Women are in 40k, they're just relegated to a second-tier status while the ubermales dominate the lead roles.

ragingmunkyz wrote:With respect to women as represented in the fluff:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
40k is very dark and gw might think it will turn people off if they write too much about the ''brutal slaughter of the .... female regiment''. Gender isnt really mentioned in the big picture, women die by quite a good amount, but it is almost never mentioned as express as certain male guard regiment.

This, unfortunately, is just outright wrong. GW has a history of murdering off women with disturbing frequency. One of the most famous was the Grey Knights killing a bunch of sisters just for the hell of it and because wearing chick blood is cool. Seriously, if they're as resistant to daemons as every bit of fluff says they are, they should never have needed to do that, it doesn't make any sense unless GW just likes killing SoB.

Apologies for not explaining it in my initial post, but I adressed it in the next:
I think its still different in the SoB question (you expect them to die, just like space marines if victory isnt an option). They have been trained most of their lives with good equipment, a bit like stormtroopers (a bit of a stretch but comparable). Im talking about just regular female guardsman(women?). The question is if people would still enjoy a book like 15 hours if it was about an all female regiment for example. I think they are afraid to cross a moral line. That is, large scale description of women and child soldiers (under 18 like whiteshields) in some of the more gruesome fiction. Black Library writes book that can be quite harsh sometimes.
The history of murdering women involves mostly sister of battle, I cant really recall many other stories besides the sister ones. Well not updating their codex might be construed as their attempt to have everyone enjoy slaughtering SoB

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

nomotog wrote:
Ok you know these threads never really solve anything, but lets try that. How could you make 40k a more gender diverse setting? I think you could do it by requiring each codex to have at least two female SC. Even SM and orks would have to follow this rule. It wouldn't be that hard. Necrons would be the easiest because they are robots, you just need to change the pronouns. Orks might be tricky, but if you bring back the idea if imperial advisers you can sneak one in. SMs whould be the hardest unless you dump that silly rule that only men can be SMs.

Its not about forcing anything on people or codeces. Space marines are fine, being countered by SoB (they need an new codex though). Imperial guard its easy, add another steel legion or cadian character, they are males and females, so just pick out a female commander (enough action around Cadia even though they arent shipped off-world often). Drop a catachan or cadian one, enough of those, you could put harker and pask together on one page for example. But they should provide the models. Necrons, just add in females, the robot bodies proly dont make any difference. Orks are a bit asexual, they are fungus after all. Dark Eldar and regular eldar have quite a decent ratio. But the main point is that even though the above takes time and money, just changing the main character of a novel doesnt. Thats the main point, why dont they bring the female role more to the fore in novels. If you should believe the background females are employed almost as heavily as men, yet Black Library doesnt represent this.

I think you would have to force it if you want them to change. I also don't think just changing novels would be enough. Add a character to a novel and they don't have the same fame as a codex unit. A novel character tends not to get out of the novel. They also can be removed rather easily. If they are a full model, then they get font billing on the GW web page, you are practically guaranteed to learn about them, they are also unlike to be removed or killed off. A strong change can only come from a change to the core of the setting.

nomotog wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

nomotog wrote:
Ok you know these threads never really solve anything, but lets try that. How could you make 40k a more gender diverse setting? I think you could do it by requiring each codex to have at least two female SC. Even SM and orks would have to follow this rule. It wouldn't be that hard. Necrons would be the easiest because they are robots, you just need to change the pronouns. Orks might be tricky, but if you bring back the idea if imperial advisers you can sneak one in. SMs whould be the hardest unless you dump that silly rule that only men can be SMs.

Its not about forcing anything on people or codeces. Space marines are fine, being countered by SoB (they need an new codex though). Imperial guard its easy, add another steel legion or cadian character, they are males and females, so just pick out a female commander (enough action around Cadia even though they arent shipped off-world often). Drop a catachan or cadian one, enough of those, you could put harker and pask together on one page for example. But they should provide the models. Necrons, just add in females, the robot bodies proly dont make any difference. Orks are a bit asexual, they are fungus after all. Dark Eldar and regular eldar have quite a decent ratio. But the main point is that even though the above takes time and money, just changing the main character of a novel doesnt. Thats the main point, why dont they bring the female role more to the fore in novels. If you should believe the background females are employed almost as heavily as men, yet Black Library doesnt represent this.

I think you would have to force it if you want them to change. I also don't think just changing novels would be enough. Add a character to a novel and they don't have the same fame as a codex unit. A novel character tends not to get out of the novel. They also can be removed rather easily. If they are a full model, then they get font billing on the GW web page, you are practically guaranteed to learn about them, they are also unlike to be removed or killed off. A strong change can only come from a change to the core of the setting.

Force is never a good way to get them to put out the miniatures, they will drop them at the first possible moment. They still are a business, they see no need in producing these things, even if its as easy as just adding some extra heads to the sprues. The problem atm seems to be a turn away from females in novels. The appearences they are making are becoming less significant. I can understand not producing female models, but not ignoring them in the fluff. This is just their way of thinking, they seem to find women less important, this needs changing. Even at the core of the fluff they still have quite some equality in the Imperium itself... just not inside gw.

Evileyes wrote:
What I never liked, was the fact that one in 1000 humans or something similar, are psyker's. And all of them, every single damn one, is male. Hell of a coincidence that.

I believe it's much more slim that that. Also, one of the stories in the GK omnibus, the female inquisitor is a psyker. She has the ability to speed absorb information in books. This leads her to find the true-name of a daemon, and go crazy, or something.

It's always been my opinion that if you try hard enough, you will find something misogynistic, homophobic, phallic, religious, sacrilegious, insert-cause-here, in any sort of medium should you really want (or not) to.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
(sometimes you just have to pick the best person for the job regardless of race or gender, even if it might be a male whih already fills 80% of a company).

When you have a history of oppression, the oppressed part of the populace is going to have a long history of NOT being skilled, of NOT having the cultural mindset of the dominant social class, and of having lingering values that negatively effect their ability to thrive.

This is the reason behind quotas, behind positive/reverse discrimination, etc. To help develop within various oppressed groups and subgroups the cultural mindset that they CAN get ahead and how exactly to do that.

And, quite frankly, this is (the?) one area where the Imperium is more progressive than modern society is.

 daedalus wrote:
It's always been my opinion that if you try hard enough, you will find something misogynistic, homophobic, phallic, religious, sacrilegious, insert-cause-here, in any sort of medium should you really want (or not) to.

And if you try hard enough to ignore it, it all goes away-- as long as you're a member of the dominant social class. It's quite easy for a straight white heterosexual male to ignore the discrimination that non-straight/non-white/non-heterosexual/non-males receive and act as if it doesn't exist even as they perpetuate it.

 Melissia wrote:
And if you try hard enough to ignore it, it all goes away-- as long as you're a member of the dominant social class. It's quite easy for a straight white heterosexual male to ignore the discrimination that non-straight/non-white/non-heterosexual/non-males receive and act as if it doesn't exist even as they perpetuate it.

And sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar. But I'm a fat white middle class guy. I have my head in the sand and pretend I don't see bigotry when it's actually present.

I'll go back to my sitcoms, Family Guy, South Park, and other forms of entertainment designed for my demographic, and continue being reminded of how the white guy is the utter buffoon, whilst the female is the voice of reason and temperament.

Or, more likely, I won't care, because it really doesn't bother me. Obviously, this is because I've had it so well for so long that the fact that I have it so much better than women, being part of the dominant social class.

 daedalus wrote:
And sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar. But I'm a fat white middle class guy. I have my head in the sand and pretend I don't see bigotry when it's actually present.

You can be sarcastic all you want, but it's still very much the case.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As an aside, the BA nipple-armor bothers me as well. It's an obnoxious and unnecessary addition to the armor, and I get why they did it, but that still doesn't make me like it any more

 daedalus wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
And if you try hard enough to ignore it, it all goes away-- as long as you're a member of the dominant social class. It's quite easy for a straight white heterosexual male to ignore the discrimination that non-straight/non-white/non-heterosexual/non-males receive and act as if it doesn't exist even as they perpetuate it.

And sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar. But I'm a fat white middle class guy. I have my head in the sand and pretend I don't see bigotry when it's actually present.

I'll go back to my sitcoms, Family Guy, South Park, and other forms of entertainment designed for my demographic, and continue being reminded of how the white guy is the utter buffoon, whilst the female is the voice of reason and temperament.

Or, more likely, I won't care, because it really doesn't bother me. Obviously, this is because I've had it so well for so long that the fact that I have it so much better than women, being part of the dominant social class.

Are you being sarcastic or honest?

Reading this thread, I'm reminded of that scene at the beginning of Iron Man where Tony Stark is being talked to by the soldier who's driving the vehicle he's in and responds with "Good god you're a woman." When someone is wearing enough gear, you can barely tell, if at all.

I would personally love to see some subtly-sculpted female models, with heads to go with them. Armies like IG and Tau, for instance, should never have the sort of overexaggerated models so many people seem to want.

 Niiai wrote:
Not all the races do this.

All space marines yes.
Imperial guard yes, and it is a mistake.
Tau, we do not really know how their females look or what passes as masculinaty.
Eldar and Dark eldar: A good represensation of males and females. We could still have more females.
Necroms seems to have a maskuline gender representation but no sex. This is bad. It should be neatral or both.
Orks are also very maskuline gender and no sex. Quite bad.
Tyranids have females (lay eggs) and no males.

At this point you're falling into the trap of wanting female models for political correctness reasons. Look at the fluff, the models are supposed to represent it, not societal views.

Space Marines have a fluff justification, and even if they didn't, female space marines would look no different on the tabletop. Their armor is one size fits all, boob-plate shouldn't ever come into it.
IG could use some many female sculpts, if they were very subtle, with some head swaps.
Tau wear baggy bodysuits and hard body armor--you would literally be unable to tell the difference unless the helmet was off.
Eldar and Dark Eldar I agree are a good mix. We could probably use better female guardians, but even then, they all wear full body armor, and you should barely be able to tel.
Necrons are metal skeletons. Skeletons don't have a visible sex. This is not bad, it would make no sense to sculpt breasts onto them, or to make fembot versions, when their whole theme is "metal terminator skeletons"
Orks have literally no fluff reason to have female models. They don't even have genitals! They reproduce asexually through spores, why would having a single, gorilla-like body type be bad?
Tyranids are mostly genderless. If I remember correctly, many of the foot troops don't even have full digestive systems, just weapons.

 Melissia wrote:
The Bechdel Test:

1: Story has two women, preferably named women.
2: Have at least one conversation...
3: ... that doesn't involve a man or men, or the male population in general.

tl;dr, not everything a female character would talk about in 40k has to do with loving men.

Would a book fail the Berscher test if the main character was a guy and therefore (unless he was dropping some ease in the words of Samwise) would inherently be part of every conversation?

nomotog wrote:

Are you being sarcastic or honest?

Good point. A lot of that is sarcastic. I think claims of misogyny are overblown in 40k, for reasons others have already posted. I could repeat them for you if you want, despite that I do not want to. I AM a fat white middle class guy. I do not think that I'm a misogynist. I hold the door for women. I'll also catch the door for a guy. Over half the people I work with are women, and the majority of them are in positions of power or authority over the men. I think most of them genuinely deserve to be there.

I'm not sure whatever other sanity check I can make to confirm the apparent misogyny I possess from thinking the topic is preposterous.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DemetriDominov wrote:


Would a book fail the Berscher test if the main character was a guy and therefore (unless he was dropping some ease in the words of Samwise) would inherently be part of every conversation?

Eaves. He was droppin' eaves.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
And really, that's still wrong, 'cuz 'e wadn't droppin' no eaves, mista Gandalf sir.

 DemetriDominov wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
The Bechdel Test:

1: Story has two women, preferably named women.
2: Have at least one conversation...
3: ... that doesn't involve a man or men, or the male population in general.

tl;dr, not everything a female character would talk about in 40k has to do with loving men.

Would a book fail the Berscher test if the main character was a guy and therefore (unless he was dropping some ease in the words of Samwise) would inherently be part of every conversation?

I would let it pass if he was a part of a conversation with two women that where talking about a topic that wasn't him or about a man. Like if he was talking with two other women about how lace is so hard to wash. That would pass. It's a very strange test. (Lesbian porn almost always passes.) I find the test works best when used globally rather then on each individual story. If you what to test a story, you can use better measures then the Bechdel test.

I only read the first two pages but I just want to say I am really impressed by the discussion. Very reasonable and even tempered analysis of both sides. Then again I voted straight down the middle so it does match up with my opinion lol. I am honestly shocked GW hasn't cashed more in on sex appeal so I think they get props for that.

nomotog wrote:

 DemetriDominov wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
The Bechdel Test:

1: Story has two women, preferably named women.
2: Have at least one conversation...
3: ... that doesn't involve a man or men, or the male population in general.

tl;dr, not everything a female character would talk about in 40k has to do with loving men.

Would a book fail the Berscher test if the main character was a guy and therefore (unless he was dropping some ease in the words of Samwise) would inherently be part of every conversation?

I would let it pass if he was a part of a conversation with two women that where talking about a topic that wasn't him or about a man. Like if he was talking with two other women about how lace is so hard to wash. That would pass. It's a very strange test. (Lesbian porn almost always passes.) I find the test works best when used globally rather then on each individual story. If you what to test a story, you can use better measures then the Bechdel test.

Correct, it's meant as a test of a genre or media as a whole, rather than of an individual example.

ZSO, SAHAAL wrote:Include normal female characters

Here's your problem. There are no normal characters in 40k, regardless of gender.

It's a problem of the lack of a "straight man", not that GW hates women.

I dunno - just throwing a bunch of women into the Imperial Guard would go a long way, so much so that I'd actually consider the entire topic a non-issue, for the IG is pretty much the flagship of the Imperium when it comes to representing its populace in all the franchise's media.

One of the things the Space Marine videogame did well was Lieutenant Mira. When I first heard about her I thought she's sort of a "token girl" at best, damsel in distress at worst. But even though I have retained a feeling this is at least part of the truth, after actually playing the game I have to say that the character's visual design and personality were very good and fitting.
So, why not have a mini like her in the range? Could've even been used to promote the game, just like GW produced a mini of Ephrael Stern (complete with rules) for the graphic novel.

The Guardsmen, at least many of them, are probably as normal as it gets ... sufficiently so that people can identify with them. I mean, half the regiments are straight rip-offs from Earth's own history.

When I had to make a character for Only War, all I needed to do was think of the war movies I watched, or browse wikipedia for some inspiration. See the trivia section at the end of this page for what I mean.

(Valhallans ftw!)

[edit] speaking of Valhalla, I just remembered this:

"By the sixth week of fighting, the Orks reached the main food chamber with its hundreds of nutrient slime vats. Almost half the Orks had been killed, but the remainder were every bit as determined as ever. The scent of the bubbling green slime assailed their keen nostrils and they licked their scaly lips in anticipation. The Valhallans prepared to put up a final resistance. If the chamber was captured they would starve within a week. Every man, woman and child that could carry a gun crowded into the chamber and its surrounding galleries. The battle would decide which race would survive on Valhalla."
- 2nd Edition Codex: Imperial Guard

That depends on your view of the fluff. As far as I'm concerned, as many women serve in the Imperial Guard/Navy as men, and there are as many female heroes/saints/officers as well. I'm not gonna continue this, but I just want to give my two cents on the matter.

I'm all for strong female characters, not Charlie's angels like but decently written,i am so sick to the back teeth of 104lb woman 1 punching a 230lb man in some stupid ass girl power nonsense.

Or any Angelina Jolie crap, anyone who watches game of.thrones? Take a look at that female knight, she is badass, sisters of battle look like HER to me, all worn, beaten a little disheveled... You know.. Not like they just got out of makeup all perfect after a 40ft rtransformer just blew up half.the city...

Like so?

I guess it's all a matter of experience. Battle Sisters enter active service at the age of ~17, where they'd probably still look somewhat young/pure/intact - fitting for the angelic image they are supposed to project towards the populace. However, the older they get, the more battles they see, and the more gritty they become. The miniatures actually represent this as fairly well, what with the Canoness having a bionic eye and scarred face:

Admiral Valerian wrote:As far as I'm concerned, as many women serve in the Imperial Guard/Navy as men

I think everyone in this thread agrees on that, actually.
You just don't see those women. No minis, no fluff in the 'dex, no nothing.

Women are weak and can't grow beards. That's why they need a strong personality.
Tssk.

Are we all forgetting that Eldar and Dark Eldar have mixed gender forces? I should also point out that Lelith Hesperax (Succubus) and Jain Zar (Phoenix Lord) are some of the most badass characters in 40k


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Formosa wrote:
I'm all for strong female characters, not Charlie's angels like but decently written,i am so sick to the back teeth of 104lb woman 1 punching a 230lb man in some stupid ass girl power nonsense.

Or any Angelina Jolie crap, anyone who watches game of.thrones? Take a look at that female knight, she is badass, sisters of battle look like HER to me, all worn, beaten a little disheveled... You know.. Not like they just got out of makeup all perfect after a 40ft rtransformer just blew up half.the city...

I assume you're on about Brienne of Tarth?