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.

http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/12/why-are-there-no-girl-wargamers/

I find a lot of agreement here, though I think it's generally more likely that girls are more interested in painting over pushing toys around a table.

I have a problem that some of the points as to why girls don't play 40k come across as though they were written by a desperate white knight who doesn't actually understand women.

The "boobplate" claim is one of them. Having feminine armor that covers the entire body is going to be more attractive to women than gender ambiguous armor. It's fully functional armor, and already a departure from highly revealing armor. Women would rather look attractive than look like a Space Marine.

The author should have complemented Dan Abnett for having at least two books where specifically mentions how the military clothing makes female characters more attractive.

One thing I would like to mention to all the desperates is that boobs do not show through armor. Stop crapping on the Scharzenkommando stormtrooper models (basic stormtrooper models with masks) because they don't have boobs. At the level of armor and clothing they wear, there's nothing that is going to visually tell you the sex of the model. Deal with it. Sorry I couldn't give you pleasure by putting down "female models" on the table.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:
http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/12/why-are-there-no-girl-wargamers/
One thing I would like to mention to all the desperates is that boobs do not show through armor. Stop crapping on the Scharzenkommando stormtrooper models (basic stormtrooper models with masks) because they don't have boobs. .

Do you have to mention you're space Germans with every post ?

Still, the article was an interesting read.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:
I find a lot of agreement here, though I think it's generally more likely that girls are more interested in painting over pushing toys around a table.

Congratulations on proving the author's point.

The "boobplate" claim is one of them. Having feminine armor that covers the entire body is going to be more attractive to women than gender ambiguous armor. It's fully functional armor, and already a departure from highly revealing armor. Women would rather look attractive than look like a Space Marine.

Yeah, of course women care more about looking attractive than men. Did you actually ask any women what they would prefer, or did you just decide for them?

(Hint: there's a wide range of preferences among women, and the moment you declare "women want to look attractive" you reveal your own ignorance.)

 blood reaper wrote:
Still, the article was an interesting read.

I thought it was really good that it brought up the problem of people tolerating the sort of behavior that keeps women out of the hobby, because it is strongly disproportionate. I think though that pushing toys around a table is going to have less appeal to girls than other games.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:
http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/12/why-are-there-no-girl-wargamers/
One thing I would like to mention to all the desperates is that boobs do not show through armor. Stop crapping on the Scharzenkommando stormtrooper models (basic stormtrooper models with masks) because they don't have boobs. .

Do you have to mention you're space Germans with every post ?

Well seeing as how they are not from Germany, they are not trolling. You are trolling by trying to bring up problematic topics. I am really sick of your trolling, including attacks against people with obvious disabilities. I know that you are the troll behind the attacks on the English Sturmkrieg, the forum, and Dark Emperor's wiki.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

The "boobplate" claim is one of them. Having feminine armor that covers the entire body is going to be more attractive to women than gender ambiguous armor. It's fully functional armor, and already a departure from highly revealing armor. Women would rather look attractive than look like a Space Marine.

The author should have complemented Dan Abnett for having at least two books where specifically mentions how the military clothing makes female characters more attractive.

One thing I would like to mention to all the desperates is that boobs do not show through armor. Stop crapping on the Scharzenkommando stormtrooper models (basic stormtrooper models with masks) because they don't have boobs. At the level of armor and clothing they wear, there's nothing that is going to visually tell you the sex of the model. Deal with it. Sorry I couldn't give you pleasure by putting down "female models" on the table.

Erm.. The one female wargamer I know plays CSM and 'nids.

Not a single slaaneshi model in sight.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:
I find a lot of agreement here, though I think it's generally more likely that girls are more interested in painting over pushing toys around a table.

Congratulations on proving the author's point.

The "boobplate" claim is one of them. Having feminine armor that covers the entire body is going to be more attractive to women than gender ambiguous armor. It's fully functional armor, and already a departure from highly revealing armor. Women would rather look attractive than look like a Space Marine.

Yeah, of course women care more about looking attractive than men. Did you actually ask any women what they would prefer, or did you just decide for them?

(Hint: there's a wide range of preferences among women, and the moment you declare "women want to look attractive" you reveal your own ignorance.)

In the first point, it's speculation about a gender based interest. Would you have a problem with this? "In general, boys don't like to play with Barbies."

I'm not saying all women would find it attractive, or that they should find it attractive. I'm saying that he shouldn't jump to the conclusion that anything attractive=objectification and is degrading. It's a common tactic of desperate boys to try to impress girls by going off on things that are "sexist." I've seen the argument made quite a few times in GW. What I haven't seen in the same location is girls point out that they prefer SoB armor to Space Marine armor. That might cause an overload for them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Selym wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

The "boobplate" claim is one of them. Having feminine armor that covers the entire body is going to be more attractive to women than gender ambiguous armor. It's fully functional armor, and already a departure from highly revealing armor. Women would rather look attractive than look like a Space Marine.

The author should have complemented Dan Abnett for having at least two books where specifically mentions how the military clothing makes female characters more attractive.

One thing I would like to mention to all the desperates is that boobs do not show through armor. Stop crapping on the Scharzenkommando stormtrooper models (basic stormtrooper models with masks) because they don't have boobs. At the level of armor and clothing they wear, there's nothing that is going to visually tell you the sex of the model. Deal with it. Sorry I couldn't give you pleasure by putting down "female models" on the table.

Erm.. The one female wargamer I know plays CSM and 'nids.

Not a single slaaneshi model in sight.

The one woman I know who actually plays, has SoB and Space Marines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:
Still, the article was an interesting read.

I thought it was really good that it brought up the problem of people tolerating the sort of behavior that keeps women out of the hobby, because it is strongly disproportionate. I think though that pushing toys around a table is going to have less appeal to girls than other games.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:
http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/12/why-are-there-no-girl-wargamers/
One thing I would like to mention to all the desperates is that boobs do not show through armor. Stop crapping on the Scharzenkommando stormtrooper models (basic stormtrooper models with masks) because they don't have boobs. .

Do you have to mention you're space Germans with every post ?

Well seeing as how they are not from Germany, they are not trolling. You are trolling by trying to bring up problematic topics. I am really sick of your trolling, including attacks against people with obvious disabilities. I know that you are the troll behind the attacks on the English Sturmkrieg, the forum, and Dark Emperor's wiki.

One.They are heavily influenced by Germany in various ways. Denying it is pointless.
Two. I'm not trolling, I'm making a point about an annoying habit of your posting.
Three. Trying to play a victim card by bring up disabilities. Obvious sign you have no form to your argument.
Four: That's the only truth in your post.

My wife plays and loves it. We both started at the same time a little while before we got married.

However, I could see how the specified behavior would drive a women away... But to be honest I have never seen such behavior at any of the shops I have visited (I know I don't visit them often). There was always at least one there. Not to mention all the shops had at least one female employee, one was a manager who played Orks.

My friend is a wargamer, and she is a girl.

We also have quite a few girls at my FLGS.

I think the whole gender assumption that they would rather look attractive than look "functional" (or look like a Space Marine as you said) is a pretty broad assumption. They all actually like the look of "realistic" models in a sense that girls don't look like sex toys and guys aren't ripped and over-the-top.

While I would agree that wargaming is a man dominated interest, mostly because guys have a natural wiring to fight and like things that fight while women don't have that natural wire so war is "cooler" to males than females generally speaking, women can easily enjoy it. Local player behavior can vary though, if you have a lot of those sexist and "vile" players at your place then women will be less inclined to play.

Not quite sure what side of the fence you are on though

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes, in the SM codex. It talks about the genetic therapy, and says females are genetically inadaptable to it.
Also, I believe there was one primarch who tried to make a SM breeding programme, to make organic marines, but it created faaaar too many mutants. I believe he had to kill them all and then exiled himself.

Although, there is a book by Dan Abnett, called "The Killing Ground" where the exiled Ultramarine Captain Uriel Ventris visits an Iron warriors planet, wherein there were "Daemonculaba".
Basically giant mutant pregnant women who were forced to give birth to full-grown chaos marines. There were also a feth-ton of mutant failures however, and all the marines produced were male...

I find these articles interesting. They take an interesting phenomenon, which is that despite no shortage of female gamers hardly any play wargames, and seemingly always come to the conclusion that it's due to the social failings of male wargamers.

So, rather than consider that there might be something simply unappealing to women about the game, they assume that out of all human activities, wargaming attracts the most socially repuslive enthusiasts. It's an odd conclusion.

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

5th ed SM codex.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

The SM codex, can't name the page though...

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Creation_of_a_Space_Marine#.UUTcoBcqx9M

Lexicanum wrote:They must be male because the zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types.

Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

Selym wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

5th ed SM codex.

washout77 wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

The SM codex, can't name the page though...

blood reaper wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Creation_of_a_Space_Marine#.UUTcoBcqx9M

Lexicanum wrote:They must be male because the zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types.

Them

 washout77 wrote:
My friend is a wargamer, and she is a girl.

We also have quite a few girls at my FLGS.

I think the whole gender assumption that they would rather look attractive than look "functional" (or look like a Space Marine as you said) is a pretty broad assumption. They all actually like the look of "realistic" models in a sense that girls don't look like sex toys and guys aren't ripped and over-the-top.

While I would agree that wargaming is a man dominated interest, mostly because guys have a natural wiring to fight and like things that fight while women don't have that natural wire so war is "cooler" to males than females generally speaking, women can easily enjoy it. Local player behavior can vary though, if you have a lot of those sexist and "vile" players at your place then women will be less inclined to play.

Not quite sure what side of the fence you are on though

Good point.

On the overly ripped male models, I just thought of this:

I admit I didn't get too far into the article because I find it incredibly offensive and sexist.

Making the claim that women want to be treated with respect and like human beings, then following it up with a generalization about how men, including my self apparently, are busy trying to get into their pants, treating them like idiots, and oogling them. I'm not sure about other people, but I've never seen an example of the "typical horny geek" in my entire life and I've hung out with quite a few nerds in my day. I find it incredibly offensive for an article to paint such a picture of me and the people I know and to try and establish that we just can't keep it in out pants and play a game.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there actually anything in the canon that explicitly says that there can't be any female space marines?

Yes the implants are designed for male physiology and hormones, they won't bound with female anatomies.

What is the source for this?

Rick Priestley's 1988 article "The Origins of the Legiones Astartes" which has been reprinted pretty much constantly throughout the game's entire lifespan, pretty much unchanged. It's literally one of the oldest unchanged pieces of the 40K canon there is, lol.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
I admit I didn't get too far into the article because I find it incredibly offensive and sexist.

Making the claim that women want to be treated with respect and like human beings, then following it up with a generalization about how men, including my self apparently, are busy trying to get into their pants, treating them like idiots, and oogling them.

Ditto. I've only seen a few people who are like that, and none of them were wargamers. (They were a bunch of idiots at my school).

 Savageconvoy wrote:
I admit I didn't get too far into the article because I find it incredibly offensive and sexist.

Making the claim that women want to be treated with respect and like human beings, then following it up with a generalization about how men, including my self apparently, are busy trying to get into their pants, treating them like idiots, and oogling them. I'm not sure about other people, but I've never seen an example of the "typical horny geek" in my entire life and I've hung out with quite a few nerds in my day. I find it incredibly offensive for an article to paint such a picture of me and the people I know and to try and establish that we just can't keep it in out pants and play a game.

It also mentions that people tolerate that behavior.

 Inquisitor Ehrenstein wrote:
In the first point, it's speculation about a gender based interest. Would you have a problem with this? "In general, boys don't like to play with Barbies."

Hint: a big part of the reason boys don't play with "girl" toys is because everyone around them says "those are for girls" and makes their life hell if they disagree.

I'm saying that he shouldn't jump to the conclusion that anything attractive=objectification and is degrading.

So you just ignore the common marketing strategy of using attractive women as sex objects to appeal to men?

It's a common tactic of desperate boys to try to impress girls by going off on things that are "sexist."

Oh good, dismiss criticism as "white knighting" as if the only reason anyone could possibly say something like that is to impress a woman.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
Making the claim that women want to be treated with respect and like human beings, then following it up with a generalization about how men, including my self apparently, are busy trying to get into their pants, treating them like idiots, and oogling them.

Sorry, but it's true. That kind of behavior is extremely common. Yes, specific men might not be guilty of it, but the hobby in general (as the article is addressed to) certainly is.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
Making the claim that women want to be treated with respect and like human beings, then following it up with a generalization about how men, including my self apparently, are busy trying to get into their pants, treating them like idiots, and oogling them.

Sorry, but it's true. That kind of behavior is extremely common. Yes, specific men might not be guilty of it, but the hobby in general (as the article is addressed to) certainly is.

I've never seen any evidence of it. Have you?

What's your opinion on this, Melissia?

Selym wrote:
I've never seen any evidence of it. Have you?

No, but only because there haven't been any women playing 40k while I've been there and I don't pay attention to D&D/MTG/etc elsewhere in the store.

Now, the important question here is are you a man or a woman? Because if you're a man you need to thinking for a moment about how easy it is to miss inappropriate behavior that isn't directed at you. And then you should see what other people have to say. For example, the "worst game store" threads usually have a nice supply of comments like "my wife won't even go in the store because of the people there".

 Peregrine wrote:

Selym wrote:
I've never seen any evidence of it. Have you?

No, but only because there haven't been any women playing 40k while I've been there and I don't pay attention to D&D/MTG/etc elsewhere in the store.

Now, the important question here is are you a man or a woman? Because if you're a man you need to thinking for a moment about how easy it is to miss inappropriate behavior that isn't directed at you. And then you should see what other people have to say. For example, the "worst game store" threads usually have a nice supply of comments like "my wife won't even go in the store because of the people there".

I am male, but I can see where inappropriate behaviour is used (I was brought up in that kind of family).
Though I must admit I've never seen "worst wargaming store" threads.

Well let me turn the logic back on the original article.

It's because of YOU. People like you who perpetuate the idea that the wargaming, and the "geek" community as a whole, is filled up with a bunch of savage drooling man-children who will hump the most feminine leg in the room at the first sign of a skirt.

It's because you focus on the issue of gender instead of character.

It's because you think that women don't play wargames because of something men do to chase them away, instead of assuming it's by their own conscious decision.

Here's a quick question. How many black wargamers do you know? How many Hispanic?

I don't know how many I've encountered or played against, because it never even occured to me. I didn't stalk the first black person I saw gaming and asked if he's there to purchase for his white friend. I didn't ask him if he got lost because the game is predominantly white males that play. I did the exact same thing I did to any women I see in the game.
I didn't care. It didn't even register in my mind the slightest bit. Quite frankly I was more concerned about the physical appearance of my opponent's models.

Part of the difficulty I have playing is that I don't generally find 1v1 games of anything very appealing. I can't even remember the last time I played anything 1v1 against a friend that wasn't a tabletop wargame.

I enjoy competitive games a huge amount, but nearly always in a team context, and for whatever reason most wargames seem to be aimed primarily at 1v1 games instead.

I think the problem behind that is more due to board size than anything else. Too small of models and you don't really get a good feel for them, too large of a board and it's too much empty space, too small and you spend entire turns just moving into range, and so on. Throwing extra people onto the board starts to become problematic especially when most like to play games of 1.5K plus.

Personally I've found 500-750 team games to be decent size and very fun. Just enough that you're complimenting instead of hindering your team mate.

It is interesting now that I think of it. I guess just due to the limited market it's hard to establish games designed for 4 players.