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.

BlaxicanX wrote:


I've always liked the design of Halo's armor. I think the above picture would be a cool design to work off of for a female Elysian or Cadian design.

I'd buy it

Looks close to something elysian at least. Not quite Cadian mind you.

I like the pic well enough. With slight mods to the armor, it could be paint-schemed into an Arbiter, too... though she'd need some gauntlets.

It's not easy but, some swapping and slight editing of Eldar Guardian female bodies and legs and Dark Eldar female heads might make a moderately mixed gender squad.

You would have to add on lots of puches and things. Also, you would rely on the paint scheme for uniformity. The idea is to not notice the Guardsman in question is a chick at first glance but, upon closer inspection you realize she has suitably feminine features; without being to over the top like Raging Heroes Dark Elves or something...

You can greenstuff ammo pouches and web-gear easily enough. I mean, those are basically just lines and lumpy boxes, so... the hard part is getting your details right with the Xacto.

But, yeah, that's generally the idea. From a few feet away, the minis should be fairly indistinguishable (excepting weapon load-outs, perhaps) but, in hand, one should be like "oh, those aren't dudes".

RancidHate wrote:
The idea is to not notice the Guardsman in question is a chick at first glance but, upon closer inspection you realize she has suitably feminine features; without being to over the top like Raging Heroes Dark Elves or something...

Personally given the Imperiums diversity in their Guard units I feel the range should include both types - so near indistiguisable from their male comrades and over the top "warrior women" - Raging Heroes/ Xena / Saxa style and various stuff in between...........

Like the Warrior Women of Xenan 7 in the lore?





No, I'm not at all joking. It was background for a member of Schaeffer's Last Chancers.

And why not - visually, it's just an "inversed gender" version of the warrior men from <insert random feral world>.

One of the cool things in the Guard .. its regiments really can look like just about anything.

So you're saying...I can have a regiment dressed up like the members of Judas Priest or RHPS?

CthuluIsSpy wrote:So you're saying...I can have a regiment dressed up like the members of Judas Priest or RHPS?

Judas Priest is easy. Hive world gangers!
RHPS seems more tricky, but I think it could be done.

 Lynata wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:So you're saying...I can have a regiment dressed up like the members of Judas Priest or RHPS?

Judas Priest is easy. Hive world gangers!
RHPS seems more tricky, but I think it could be done.

Everything is possible with Tim Curry.

Seriously, Fabius Bile Tim Curry conversion. This has to be done.

RHPS might be a Slaaneshi Traitor Guard unit (more believably, any way) but, otherwise, sure, go ahead. Whatever blows your hair back.

The problem with this question is that it ignores a lot of the context. Warhammer 40,000 is a game about war. Putting men and women in the same combat unit in all real-life experiments has led to a breakdown in discipline due to the inability of a few years of training to overcome millions of years of evolution. Background-wise, the Imperium has got plenty of all-female regiments (I recall one in ten as the number, but I can't recall the source), but the number of mixed-gender regiments can be counted on one hand due to the discipline arguments. I'd like to applaud Sandy Mitchell's somewhat intelligent portrayal of the problems inherent in mixed-gender military units in the Ciaphas Cain books here, by the way.

I'd also like to observe that the original poster's remarks that every female character in Warhammer is "a pious sexually repressed nun, a snobbish aristocrat, or a sex slave captured by the dark elder" [sic]; spelling issues aside, I have in point of fact encountered no female characters in any Games Workshop novel I have read that fit any of those descriptions (though Kiera did impersonate a snobbish aristocrat once, does that count?).

Not to mention that given that the 'poster-child' army is composed of chemically-castrated super-soldiers that have been so thoroughly altered with cybernetics and hormone treatment that even if they did accept women we'd be hard-pressed to tell them apart, major female characters in those settings are rather implausible.

So it actually looks like the original poster is complaining about a symptom of a larger problem, that of an excessive focus on the Space Marines in background material and novels. Drop that and put out more Eldar-, Imperial Guard-, and Inquisition-focused novels and the 'misogyny' will solve itself.

AnomanderRake wrote:Putting men and women in the same combat unit in all real-life experiments has led to a breakdown in discipline due to the inability of a few years of training to overcome millions of years of evolution.

You do realise that there's a bunch of armies that disagree with your assessmen, right?
Also, you might be surprised to hear that the hunter-gatherer separation apparently isn't quite as old as you think it is.

AnomanderRake wrote:Background-wise, the Imperium has got plenty of all-female regiments (I recall one in ten as the number, but I can't recall the source), but the number of mixed-gender regiments can be counted on one hand due to the discipline arguments.

I've never heard of such arguments in any GW source. What sort of background are you referring to? Besides, I have a hard time believing that a mixed-gender regiment is more difficult to control than one made up of convicts.

AnomanderRake wrote:So it actually looks like the original poster is complaining about a symptom of a larger problem, that of an excessive focus on the Space Marines in background material and novels. Drop that and put out more Eldar-, Imperial Guard-, and Inquisition-focused novels and the 'misogyny' will solve itself.

Undoubtedly, this plays a huge role. Yet even looking just at the Imperial Guard, GW has dropped the ball on a lot of opportunities there.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Putting men and women in the same combat unit in all real-life experiments has led to a breakdown in discipline

This has not been proven by research and experience in the real world.

I think that there should be females in the kits, but they shouldn't obviously be female. By obviously I don't mean overly sexualised like some of the miniatures that are out there.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
I think that there should be females in the kits, but they shouldn't obviously be female. By obviously I don't mean overly sexualised like some of the miniatures that are out there.

I would agree. One of the bigger issues encountered in mediums where female characters are more present isn't so much that they're underrepresented - though arguably that's true too - but that they're represented in a certain way, namely, to appeal to the male player/reader/whatever. One of my bigger praises for the recent Daemonettes was that they looked androgynous, rather than like bust-tastic space babes, thus tying them in nicely with the fluff that suggests they choose appearances based on what the beholder is attracted to (as opposed to generic "sexy space girl," which really is attractive only to certain people) as well as producing a model I would be happy to buy and not feel like I was purchasing what amounted to softcore porn in model form.
If more models are produced, they need to fit the theme of the army. A female Guardsman is still a Guardsman, and would look pretty much like her compatriots except for a few minor differences.

 Lynata wrote:

AnomanderRake wrote:Background-wise, the Imperium has got plenty of all-female regiments (I recall one in ten as the number, but I can't recall the source), but the number of mixed-gender regiments can be counted on one hand due to the discipline arguments.

I've never heard of such arguments in any GW source. What sort of background are you referring to? Besides, I have a hard time believing that a mixed-gender regiment is more difficult to control than one made up of convicts.

AnomanderRake wrote:So it actually looks like the original poster is complaining about a symptom of a larger problem, that of an excessive focus on the Space Marines in background material and novels. Drop that and put out more Eldar-, Imperial Guard-, and Inquisition-focused novels and the 'misogyny' will solve itself.

Undoubtedly, this plays a huge role. Yet even looking just at the Imperial Guard, GW has dropped the ball on a lot of opportunities there.

What Anomander Rake is refering to is that in the first Cain novel he mentions that in the early days when the two regiments merge there are a number of pregnancies that occur which he has to deal with and which he notes can be an issue for mixed regiments that a Commissar has to deal with one way or another. It may be that some Regiments use sterlisation to overcome this - although the Guard also seems to use the old Roman idea of settling veterans on planets to have proper Imperial children and also I would imagine gives a decent ready made backbone of a PDF.

In this specific case there were also severe tensions at first as the two units that merged together as both understrength after suriving tryanids but the male unit were officially front line and the female support (although both fought the Nids in the vicious fighting) - also that the female CO had several months seniority over the more experienced male CO and so had command. IIRC it all came to head over which regiments dress dinner plates to use............. Cain managered to sort it out eventually and they became a renowned veteran regiment.

There is only one niggle I have with this thread, and that's the poll; it kind of presumes agreement, with two "agree" options, and with no "disagree somewhat" option, thus forcing your voters into certain camps when it comes to the issues OP brings up despite those voters perhaps not actually wanting to be in those camps.

 Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:
I would agree. One of the bigger issues encountered in mediums where female characters are more present isn't so much that they're underrepresented - though arguably that's true too - but that they're represented in a certain way, namely, to appeal to the male player/reader/whatever. One of my bigger praises for the recent Daemonettes was that they looked androgynous, rather than like bust-tastic space babes, thus tying them in nicely with the fluff that suggests they choose appearances based on what the beholder is attracted to (as opposed to generic "sexy space girl," which really is attractive only to certain people) as well as producing a model I would be happy to buy and not feel like I was purchasing what amounted to softcore porn in model form.

The problem for me is that they're not beautiful and sensual, and Slaanesh is supposed to be beautiful and sensual. I think keeping the "two-gendered" look (Because it's a neat idea) while changing the heads and clothing to be less harsh and twisted would help. Or alternatively, have "harsh" and "non-harsh" faces so that you can show what a Daemonette looks like with its glamour on or off.

I think the Black Library and the codices are very distinct in their treatment of women. I really wish that we could get some plastic sisters, because A. I like fire, B. I like their bucket helmets, and C. They really need 'em.

 Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
I think that there should be females in the kits, but they shouldn't obviously be female. By obviously I don't mean overly sexualised like some of the miniatures that are out there.

I would agree. One of the bigger issues encountered in mediums where female characters are more present isn't so much that they're underrepresented - though arguably that's true too - but that they're represented in a certain way, namely, to appeal to the male player/reader/whatever. One of my bigger praises for the recent Daemonettes was that they looked androgynous, rather than like bust-tastic space babes, thus tying them in nicely with the fluff that suggests they choose appearances based on what the beholder is attracted to (as opposed to generic "sexy space girl," which really is attractive only to certain people) as well as producing a model I would be happy to buy and not feel like I was purchasing what amounted to softcore porn in model form.
If more models are produced, they need to fit the theme of the army. A female Guardsman is still a Guardsman, and would look pretty much like her compatriots except for a few minor differences.

Precisely, I think you put it better than I did.

I like how female warriors were done in the Wood Elf plastics. There's a few torsos that have breasts, but they're not obviously female, like some Raging Heroes minis.

1068SCP wrote:

 Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:
I would agree. One of the bigger issues encountered in mediums where female characters are more present isn't so much that they're underrepresented - though arguably that's true too - but that they're represented in a certain way, namely, to appeal to the male player/reader/whatever. One of my bigger praises for the recent Daemonettes was that they looked androgynous, rather than like bust-tastic space babes, thus tying them in nicely with the fluff that suggests they choose appearances based on what the beholder is attracted to (as opposed to generic "sexy space girl," which really is attractive only to certain people) as well as producing a model I would be happy to buy and not feel like I was purchasing what amounted to softcore porn in model form.

The problem for me is that they're not beautiful and sensual, and Slaanesh is supposed to be beautiful and sensual. I think keeping the "two-gendered" look (Because it's a neat idea) while changing the heads and clothing to be less harsh and twisted would help. Or alternatively, have "harsh" and "non-harsh" faces so that you can show what a Daemonette looks like with its glamour on or off.

I think the Black Library and the codices are very distinct in their treatment of women. I really wish that we could get some plastic sisters, because A. I like fire, B. I like their bucket helmets, and C. They really need 'em.

You could make the argument that the miniatures are what they actually look like, and that they don't represent the glamour that the creature actually has - though I quite liked your point about having "glamour-on" and "glamour-off" heads.
Still, it's worth remembering that there's only so much a sculptor can convey through a plastic miniature.

 Melissia wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Putting men and women in the same combat unit in all real-life experiments has led to a breakdown in discipline

This has not been proven by research and experience in the real world.

I would beg to differ on this point. How many of you have actually served in military combat units, in combat? I for one have, and have experience based insight on the matter. The issue isnt necissarily "women in unit X cause a breakdown in discipline and chain of command," this example is ultimately not the case. Including females in combat arms units doesn't cause an immediate breakdown in morale and discipline with soldiers running willy nilly acting like horny teenagers and ignoring orders/officers (although typical soldiers do always act like horny teenagers anyway ). What is typically meant by a breakdown in discipline is that research has shown that soldiers, NonCommissioned Officers and Officers are more likely to make WRONG decisions or least beneficial decisions in a combat environment in order to minimize risk to female troops. There have been quite a few EXHAUSTIVE DoD studies on the matter that have proven these findings.

Breakdown of "discipline" aside, the biggest argument for lack of females in combat roles, and hence the scarcity of women in the 40k environment, is the inherent differences in physical performance between men and women. Are there women serving in the army who are faster than me, stronger than me, and more tactically/techically proficient marksment than me? Sure, absolutely, but they are VERY few and far between. It is a simple fact of evolution that men handle the physical rigours of combat better than women. The average soldier in full kit/combat load is anywhere between 210-240 pounds. Your larger soldiers (200-240lbs) are pushing 300+ with a full combat load and body armor. Do most women in the army handle the 50-80 pounds of combat gear as well as men? More than half the time yes, the issue comes to MEDEVAC, which as any seasoned combat vet will tell you is essential to any and all combat operations. Should a 120lb female's battle buddy get wounded, she now has to carry her own combat gear, plus another 200+ pounds of potentially dead weight, while still having to return suppressive fire to help secure the area, which means either firemen's carry while leaving your weapon hand free, or dragging your buddy through the dirt by his gear while returning fire. I hate to say it, but most women in the military can NOT physically accomplish this. It is for these exact reasons that until recently, women were precluded from combat units in the US armed forces.

Gender analysis aside, it may come as a shock that I actually support the move for women to serve equally in combat units. There are women who are perfectly capable of performing combat rigours as well as, if not better than their male counterparts. Again, these women are the EXCEPTION to the rule, and they are very very scarce. I'm all for gender equality, as long as the women can perform to the same physical and mental standards as the men in combat. In the grimdark future of the 40th Millennia, constant warfare and skirmishes probably have left your standard civlian populace at a higher degree of military readiness than most professional armies on earth today, meaning a greater percentage of the female population is most likely able to perform at high levels in combat environments. GW should introduce more into their model range, but it by no means should be a 50/50, realistically it would be more like 1/10.

guidsgjg wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Putting men and women in the same combat unit in all real-life experiments has led to a breakdown in discipline

This has not been proven by research and experience in the real world.

I would beg to differ on this point, and I will provide no sources to back up my claims.

Fixed that for you.

I'm more concerned with the fact that all the women I've read about are gorgeous, dainty things that either fall apart in combat or under otherwise stressful events. Give me grizzled, gruff warriors of any gender and i'll be happy. Lt. Mira is my exception as she was a hyper badass.

I'm certainly aware that the US have an issue in this regard - driven by cultural perception of gender roles (USAWC study), and resulting in a rather ugly and hostile atmosphere permeating just about every level of hierarchy, if this article is to be believed (what the hell happened there @ LaVena Johnson?!).

In a way, I suppose you are right in that it really is a lack of discipline if certain elements within the military are that committed to bias and conservative attitudes, although this is (a) not really surprising given that it's a change from how many people grew up and (b) merely a temporary effect that will, on the long term, be mitigated by continueing integration of females in combat units. Just like it worked for other nations. Do you think that black people in the army were treated equally from day 1 once segregation ended?
Such a culture is the real reason for why "until recently women were precluded from combat units in the US armed forces" - otherwise a limitation would have simply enforced a certain minimum of physical capabilities rather than prohibiting entire population groups regardless of individual ability. Any evidence concerning some supposed averages in body capacity is, in the end, just a weak excuse to justify a policy that did not actually respect body capacity at all but simply looked at whether the individual had their primary sexual organs on the out- or inside.

To bring this into perspective, here is an excerpt from a somewhat older official study by the army:

"In the process of evolution the American negro has not progressed as far as the other sub-species of the human family. As a race he has not developed leadership qualities. His mental inferiority and the inherent weaknesses of his character are factors that must be considered with great care in the preparation of any plan for his employment in war. In the past wars the negro has made a fair laborer, but an inferior technician. As a fighter he has been inferior to the white man even when led by white officers. [...] Negro soldiers as individuals should not be assigned to white units."
- Memorandum for the Chief of Staff regarding Employment of Negro Man Power in War, November 10, 1925

Oh, and those NCOs and officers who are incapable of looking past their personal bias? I'd say they should simply be transferred to stations where those wrong decisions are less likely to cause harm, or (perhaps better, considering the above links) where they just don't work with any female soldiers.

I'm glad we agree on equality and same standards, though. That's really all it comes down to, and I firmly believe that even the US military will eventually evolve beyond its current climate once the role of women becomes as accepted as the role of black soldiers in the decades following that study quoted above.

GW should introduce more into their model range, but it by no means should be a 50/50, realistically it would be more like 1/10.

Depending on the individual world, I'd say.

ExNoctemNacimur wrote:I think that there should be females in the kits, but they shouldn't obviously be female. By obviously I don't mean overly sexualised like some of the miniatures that are out there.

Like Mr. Morden, I think there should be both. Just like the Catachans are overly "masculinised". And with the Escher-like Xenan regiments in the 3E Guard Codex there's even a GW example.

But if that's referring to the Cadians, then I definitively agree. It's all a matter of what the regiment is supposed to represent!

As for the new Daemonettes ... I really don't think they look androgynous (as in that case they should appeal to both genders) but just ugly. Of course this boils down to perception and preferences, but in my opinion the original minis conveyed the image of Slaaneshi daemons way better than this new "kids-friendly" version.

actually someone sharing their life experiance, especially when they have actually been through the military, and quoting DoD studies is referencing things FYI

reality is actually a good source of information, ignore it at your peril

easysauce wrote:
reality is actually a good source of information, ignore it at your peril

Ironic, all things considered.

The "reality" a while back was that gays couldn't integrate with straight people in the military; the "reality" a bit further back was taht black people couldn't integrate with white people in the military; going even further back, the "reality" was that peasants were incapable of integrating with nobles in the military. In each case, it is proven that these "realities" which are believed to be biological were actually social constructs which can be torn down to produce a better military force.

Very logically fallacious.

Fester McAgue wrote:
I'm more concerned with the fact that all the women I've read about are gorgeous, dainty things that either fall apart in combat or under otherwise stressful events. Give me grizzled, gruff warriors of any gender and i'll be happy. Lt. Mira is my exception as she was a hyper badass.

They can be sexy and bad ass apparently: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Dressed-Kill-Charlotte-Madison/dp/0755319613

Captain Charlotte Madison was the first female Apache pilot in the Army Air Corps and is still one of only two. She is the 27-year-old veteran of two tours of Afghanistan, and the pilot ever to have gone `Winchester` - to have used every single piece of ammunition in the Apache`s awesome armoury - in a single sortie.

 Lynata wrote:
I'm certainly aware that the US have an issue in this regard - driven by cultural perception of gender roles (USAWC study), and resulting in a rather ugly and hostile atmosphere permeating just about every level of hierarchy, if this article is to be believed (what the hell happened there @ LaVena Johnson?!).

...

I read that article.

WTF!? How the hell can gak like that be allowed to happen? I am ashamed being part of human race.