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.
Are you really that unused to someone disagreeing with you that you take everything that I say as a personal attack?
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
"By this point I'm convinced 100% that every single race in the 40k universe have somehow tapped into the ork ability to just have their tech work because they think it should."
Swastakowey wrote: sisters of battle hardly even fight real battles anyway , unless some poor family has a kid with 6 toes counts.
Let's see, off the top of my head...
- Took part in the third Armageddon War - Successfully held out against 4 Space Marine Chapters and Mechanicus Tech Guard during a siege - Fought off a Red Corsairs invasion - Took part in a Crusade alongside the Black Templars - Successfully raided a Daemon world for lost relics - Have the duty of wiping out rogue Marine Chapters, which they have done successfully multiple times
So yeah, they're as hardcore and as capable as any other fighting force. And one of their main jobs is defending Ecclesiarchy worlds, which are as open to attack and invasion from any sort of enemy as any other Imperial world.
I'd say that the Sisters having AoFs and the SoF puts them above Stormtroopers. And if we're factoring in equipment, then the Sisters have the edge there too.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/02/15 00:37:57
Order of the Righteous Armour - 542 points so far.
If being called out on being lazy is insulting, then stop being lazy.
I have pointed out, several times by now, that there in fact were "male Sisters of Battle" in the lore. With remarkably few exceptions, no one cares, and no one wants to play as the Frateris Templar. Your "male Sisters of Battle" objections are, essentially, a solution to a non-existent problem.
That you continuously ignore the discussion and then pretend to act like you've responded, even when you haven't-- now THAT is insulting.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Troike wrote: So yeah, they're as hardcore and as capable as any other fighting force.
They also participated in fighting against Abbadon's Black Crusades. IIRC they had forces on Cadia?
Though admittedly, fighting Chaos Space MArines isn't a "real battle", since CSMs... well, you know... suck
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/02/15 00:12:03
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
I'd say that the Sisters having AoFs and the SoF puts them above Stormtroopers. And if we're factoring in equipment, then the Sisters have the edge there too.
Mind you, I did not talk about rules or equipment.
I talked about personal skill in fluff.
Gamewise Stormtroopers beat Sisters, so if you want to make it a rule discussion, it's a moot point.
That you continuously ignore the discussion and then pretend to act like you've responded, even when you haven't-- now THAT is insulting.
I am sorry, I am trying to keep myself out of this tarpit, but this is such a steaming piece of hypocrisy that I just can't help pointing it out. You can wave your once-there-were-male-SoBs anecdote as much as you like, but both you and I know that what he is talking about is making male SoBs now. Which, honestly, was more than obvious to me. Pulling up a historical footnote is not equivalent to something like GW introducing actual male SoB models now, and you know that too.
Melissia wrote: Though admittedly, fighting Chaos Space MArines isn't a "real battle", since CSMs... well, you know... suck
Wow, Melissia reminds everyone about how much she hates CSM/SM in case anyone forgot (As if anyone could, you throw it out all the time.) in a 40K discussion.
What a surprise.
Wow, I am so shocked.
How extraordinarily unpredictable.
What next, will you praise a discussion-relevant weapon, strategy or similar with 'It's also really good at killing Marines!'? Will you throw out some not-very-obscure praise for IG, SoB or Orks, your beloved factions (Often combined with the former praise)? Or maybe something even more surprising, like dismissing someone's argument that effectively refutes yours by simply flat out ignoring it and accusing them of not reading the thread?!
The above is sarcasm, just so you know.
No but really... I find myself just answering this to your words about Astartes.
Yes, Melly. We get that you don't like them. There is no need to ram it into the face of everyone at every opportunity. A little mention here and there about how they are not your favourite faction suffices, and is a great deal less inflammatory to boot.
At this point, things like what I quoted just comes across as flamebait.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/02/15 03:15:54
I'd say that the Sisters having AoFs and the SoF puts them above Stormtroopers. And if we're factoring in equipment, then the Sisters have the edge there too.
Mind you, I did not talk about rules or equipment.
I talked about personal skill in fluff.
Gamewise Stormtroopers beat Sisters, so if you want to make it a rule discussion, it's a moot point.
That you continuously ignore the discussion and then pretend to act like you've responded, even when you haven't-- now THAT is insulting.
I am sorry, I am trying to keep myself out of this tarpit, but this is such a steaming piece of hypocrisy that I just can't help pointing it out. You can wave your once-there-were-male-SoBs anecdote as much as you like, but both you and I know that what he is talking about is making male SoBs now. Which, honestly, was more than obvious to me. Pulling up a historical footnote is not equivalent to something like GW introducing actual male SoB models now, and you know that too.
Melissia wrote: Though admittedly, fighting Chaos Space MArines isn't a "real battle", since CSMs... well, you know... suck
Wow, Melissia reminds everyone about how much she hates CSM/SM in case anyone forgot (As if anyone could, you throw it out all the time.) in a 40K discussion.
What a surprise.
Wow, I am so shocked.
How extraordinarily unpredictable.
What next, will you praise a discussion-relevant weapon, strategy or similar with 'It's also really good at killing Marines!'? Will you throw out some not-very-obscure praise for IG, SoB or Orks, your beloved factions (Often combined with the former praise)? Or maybe something even more surprising, like dismissing someone's argument that effectively refutes yours by simply flat out ignoring it and accusing them of not reading the thread?!
The above is sarcasm, just so you know.
No but really... I find myself just answering this to your words about Astartes.
Yes, Melly. We get that you don't like them. There is no need to ram it into the face of everyone at every opportunity. A little mention here and there about how they are not your favourite faction suffices, and is a great deal less inflammatory to boot.
At this point, things like what I quoted just comes across as flamebait.
She's just a troll. I have her on ignore but sometimes engage with her for my own amusement.
Although if she actually believes the stuff she posts (which is hard unless she quaritines herself from the Black Library) that CSM's are among the most powerful factions, considering well, that a fair amount of their number are invincible and immortal, and can spread diseases like doubworm, which kill entire planets in a month or less. There's a reason why the IOM refers to the Chaos Gods and the CSM's that serve as their will outside the materium as the 'Archenemy', and it's not because they often win against them without crippling losses.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/02/15 03:43:20
“There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance.”
Melissia wrote:Even if you only recruit "the best" of these people, you're still missing out on the non-bald, non-white, non-men, who are taller or shorter than 5'10", and whom have no familial relationship to you, many of whom could very well be far better applicants than the ones you did accept.
Melissia wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I'm not sure what chapter only recruits people with a family relation to them.
All of them do; they require genetic similarity to the gene-seed. If you aren't genetically compatible enough, the gene-seed rejects you and you die a horrible and painful death.
See this is why I just don't understand what you're arguing. Or why you took issue with my comment rather. Marines take the best applicants that will work for them. Now if you want to claim that women shouldn't be excluded from that pool feel free but I'd like to see some evidence that the process for males- which we know isn't perfect- is just as viable for females. I'd be willing to wager the lack of a Y chromosome will complicate matters and that that complication doesn't warrant the effort of solving it.
Melissia wrote:Even if you only recruit "the best" of these people, you're still missing out on the non-bald, non-white, non-men, who are taller or shorter than 5'10", and whom have no familial relationship to you, many of whom could very well be far better applicants than the ones you did accept.
Melissia wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I'm not sure what chapter only recruits people with a family relation to them.
All of them do; they require genetic similarity to the gene-seed. If you aren't genetically compatible enough, the gene-seed rejects you and you die a horrible and painful death.
See this is why I just don't understand what you're arguing. Or why you took issue with my comment rather. Marines take the best applicants that will work for them. Now if you want to claim that women shouldn't be excluded from that pool feel free but I'd like to see some evidence that the process for males- which we know isn't perfect- is just as viable for females. I'd be willing to wager the lack of a Y chromosome will complicate matters and that that complication doesn't warrant the effort of solving it.
Goes back to what I said, fixing that issue to create female space marines will take more time and effort that could be spent just simply making more marines. Rather than spend extra time and resources creating them, they can spend less for more, by using males.
I just gave up because that other person is just a pain to read and type too.
Kojiro wrote: See this is why I just don't understand what you're arguing.
A brother and sister have closer genetics than two boys from different families. Thus, the genetic similarities requirement would not be reasonably expected to exclude women.
Thus, while genetic compatibility is an issue that would limit the number of candidates, it's not the issue that restricts marines from recruiting women, and this is also backed up by GW's lore anyway, which states something vague about male hormones (never mind that there's not really such a thing, and both men and women use "male hormones" and "female hormones", but GW's ignorance of biochemistry aside...).
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/02/15 05:40:20
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
I agree with all that brother heraluse has said,
and add that chaos is certainly more powerful (x about 6) then SOB. if it came to a fight between space marines and the same number of SODB, space marines would quite literally rip them to pieces. as in rip them In half. as in marines = win.
am I done yet? yes, yes I am.
Kojiro wrote: See this is why I just don't understand what you're arguing.
A brother and sister have closer genetics than two boys from different families. Thus, the genetic similarities requirement would not be reasonably expected to exclude women.
Thus, while genetic compatibility is an issue that would limit the number of candidates, it's not the issue that restricts marines from recruiting women, and this is also backed up by GW's lore anyway, which states something vague about male hormones (never mind that there's not really such a thing, and both men and women use "male hormones" and "female hormones", but GW's ignorance of biochemistry aside...).
I have to be polite. I am not getting suspended from dakka dakka over this.
but, you are wrong again.
a brother and sister are GENETICALLY closer, but they have different CROMOZONES and this means that males are TECHNICALLY closer in that respect.
and your male hormones argument,
look at a man,
look at a woman, notice a difference?
if yes, you are seeing the work of male testosterone and hormones having different effects to female ones. they may be the same thing, but they are REACTING DIFFERENTLY.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/02/15 05:47:21
the shrouded lord wrote: a brother and sister are GENETICALLY closer, but they have different CROMOZONES and this means that males are TECHNICALLY closer in that respect.
Nope.
The genetic (and biological) difference between male and female is very slight; the Y chromosome codes for essentially nothing.
As for the first part, I'm not interested in an "X is better than Y" argument. I only brought Sisters up simply to show that, in 40k, the Imperium produces women soldiers of unparalleled competence and ability, meaning that obviously in 40k it is not that the girl recruits are not capable of meeting hte Astartes standard in combat competency. There are no female Astartes for a different reason.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/02/15 05:52:11
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Me mocking CSMs is like a Space Wolf fanboy mocking Ultramarines. It's a friendly joke.
Also, pretty much everyone, including CSM fans, mocks Failbaddon
It's strange, but some people have an even worse sense of humor than I.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/02/15 05:56:23
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Kojiro wrote: See this is why I just don't understand what you're arguing.
A brother and sister have closer genetics than two boys from different families. Thus, the genetic similarities requirement would not be reasonably expected to exclude women.
Thus, while genetic compatibility is an issue that would limit the number of candidates, it's not the issue that restricts marines from recruiting women, and this is also backed up by GW's lore anyway, which states something vague about male hormones (never mind that there's not really such a thing, and both men and women use "male hormones" and "female hormones", but GW's ignorance of biochemistry aside...).
Then why not promote the idea of pig marines or monkey marines while you are at it.
Of course we arent too different genetically, we still need to mate, we still have 2 legs, 10 fingers, hair and so forth. We are all mostly the same with enough minor differences to be hugely noticeable. That does not mean that a "minor difference" is nothing in terms of genetics. Its huge, thats why assuming (and you are assuming, by the way) that women and men react to hormones in the same manner is a huge flaw in the argument. Because we dont. A girl wanted to be a boy when I was kid, from age 13 she took pills to make her more "boy like", guess what, she didnt naturally grow buff like the boys did, her voice only wen slightly deeper after she spent years practicing yo lower it and so on, but more importantly he physical make up didnt change. If she stopped taking the pills shed very quickly turn back to a typical everyday girl.
We share hormones yes but we react differently and one of the hormones is more prominent in each gender.
Genders are different, thats fine, and yes they could probably find a way to make female marines, but as it stands currently it is not possible as women lack the basics to become one before any change happens.
Swastakowey wrote: Then why not promote the idea of pig marines or monkey marines while you are at it.
I will assume you are not a jackass who is intending to say that women are pigs and monkeys; because that is effectively what you just said. With that said, this statement is nothing more than a nonsensical strawman argument. Let's move on.
As a general rule, yes, we do. For example, with higher than average levels of testosterone, a woman grows body hair and facial hair. With higher than average levels of estrogen, a boy develops "feminine" breasts and a higher voice. These changes are especially noticeable during the onset of puberty.
In truth, a marked excess of testosterone over a long period of time would create a poorly disciplined soldier that is unfit for duty anyway, regardless of gender. Plenty of people have had their bodies destroyed by this, both male and female. So I am MUCH more willing to believe that none of the treatments that are given to Astartes have anything to do with actual testosterone.
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2014/02/15 06:11:32
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Swastakowey wrote: Then why not promote the idea of pig marines or monkey marines while you are at it.
I will assume you are not a jackass who is intending to say that women are pigs and monkeys; because that is effectively what you just said. With that said, this statement is nothing more than a nonsensical strawman argument. Let's move on.
As a general rule, yes, we do. For example, with higher than average levels of testosterone, a woman grows body hair and facial hair. With higher than average levels of estrogen, a boy develops "feminine" breasts and a higher voice. These changes are especially noticeable during the onset of puberty.
What!? Jump the gun,
Pigs and apes have close genetics to us (not extremely cclose but close) so I was making a joke... typical of someone of your demenour, assuming males as sexist.. (another joke... dont throw a fit(i didnt say that because you are a women(another joke)another joke)
Seriously jeeze.
And its not a higher voice, its a voice that breaks into highs more frequently when a man takes estrogen. and the breasts are nothing like a womens when you compare them. I have seen it happen during my college (12-19 years old in NZ) and its not as extreme as its made out to be. Their choice of clothing hides their gender better than any pills they take.
I said I assumed that was not your intent, even if it was what you communicated. That's assuming you AREN'T being sexist.
Or perhaps you'd prefer me to stop doing that, and to instead assume you are being sexist by default?
I was merely communicating to you the unfortunate implications in your previous post. Not making any accusations.
Swastakowey wrote: and the breasts are nothing like a womens when you compare them.
I think I'm going to stop here before someone's tempted to post an image (including myself, as I had an image from a clinical study ready to post even) Hypo/Hyper-androgenism/estrogenism have all been studied extensively.
Actually, now that I think of it, unless they're using an entirely artificial hormone, Space Marines would need higher than normal estrogen in order to promote the bone density they require (low estrogen ratings in men result in low bone density). Really, it'd only require a very slight change in the ratios of hormones to have female Space Marines, the more I think about it.
In the end, it really just comes down to it being an aesthetic choice by Games Workshop.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/02/15 06:25:41
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Melissia wrote: I said I assumed that was not your intent, even if it was what you communicated. That's assuming you AREN'T being sexist.
Or perhaps you'd prefer me to stop doing that, and to instead assume you are being sexist by default?
Swastakowey wrote: and the breasts are nothing like a womens when you compare them.
I think I'm going to stop here before someone's tempted to post an image (including myself, as I had an image from a clinical study ready to post even) Hypo/Hyper-androgenism/estrogenism have all been studied extensively.
Actually, now that I think of it, unless they're using an entirely artificial hormone, Space Marines would need higher than normal estrogen in order to promote the bone density they require (low estrogen ratings in men result in low bone density). Really, it'd only require a very slight change in the ratios of hormones to have female Space Marines, the more I think about it.
No I was seriously not being sexist, I literally was making a joke about you arguing that genetic difference is minor enough for it not to matter and the fact that great apes and unconfirmedably pigs have similar genes to us, therefore you should be argueing they can be made into marines too. But whatever. Vilify me for a joke with nothing to do with sexism.
And im going buy my experience with watching a few people who took hormones to try change who they are grow and develop during my time at college. Since I have witnessed those changes over five years those are what I based my knowledge on. After all I watched it happen. There is also a limit on how far those changes go too.
I have had enough arguing because I think you are just some guy being a troll. I will be apart of a long list of people that have ignored you. Good bye (simple because you assumed me sexist, which I take offense to)
Automatically Appended Next Post: Just realized she said she assumed me not sexist... big mistake haha, slight over reaction. Oh well ignored anyways.
But I will apologize for that, its monthly banking day. Im tired.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/02/15 06:35:07
I skipped all 11 pages of discussion and I am addressing the original poster.
I would really like to see female space marines. It would not be hard in the slightest to work it into the background and say that it has always been so.
I would like to see more gender diversity in the game as a whole. I did try to discus this but it turned sour soon and I think I was focused on the fringe issues instead of the core of the argument.
The lack of female space marines are just part of the issue with a complete lack of female models in the GW range at all. I do belive it would have a possetive inpact on the hobby both from a theoretical and empirical standpoint.
We could have female space marines. (Would be awsome, no reason not to. If we have wimen in the army in 2014 why not in the year 40K?)
More female dark eldar models. (Eldar does not have as many female models as they should have, even though it is one of the few places where you have it.)
More female eldar models. (DE feature a lot of female models but not many, and mostly as an excuse to see girls in skinny clothes.)
We could have female imperial guard. (This one is just baffeling!)
Chaos demons have female models but only slanesh and only in the trope of the seducteres. This sadens me a lot.
Chaos space marines could be female, and where are the female cultistst?
Orks and Necrons are both gender neutral in the fluff but they are represented very masculine. They might not have a sex, but they certanly have a gender and that is male. The robots in particular could be more gender neutral or ambiguous. The orks I would arguable should be left as masculine as they are based on rugby players.
Tyranids do have a big line of female names creatires wich is a very good step. Also when it comes to gender diversaty they are for the most part asexual wich is a very good change. With the other sexles rases being represented very masculine this is apreciated. Although it sadens me that one of their most controversial creatures, the tervigon, is playing on womanhood and using birth as a weapon. Usualy I would just go with it, but when female representations are soo few as there are in the game it stands out like a sore thumb.
Sisters of battle is currently the "female option" in warhammer 40K. But I do find it unfortunat that the only female option is synonym with fanatasism to the point of being very unreasonable. Playing up to the trope off furies and women being in-logical.
While I would assume a statement like this would bade me in the warmth shower of flaming disagreement this is how I feel. Doing something with these things would be an excellent way to get more women into the hobby.
Edit: Forgot tau and kroot. They are awsome, but Tau could do with more female model/markers. The kroot are not veyr masculine and gender netral for the most part.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/02/15 07:25:04
Niiai wrote: I skipped all 11 pages of discussion and I am addressing the original poster.
I would really like to see female space marines. It would not be hard in the slightest to work it into the background and say that it has always been so.
I would like to see more gender diversity in the game as a whole. I did try to discus this but it turned sour soon and I think I was focused on the fringe issues instead of the core of the argument.
The lack of female space marines are just part of the issue with a complete lack of female models in the GW range at all. I do belive it would have a possetive inpact on the hobby both from a theoretical and empirical standpoint.
We could have female space marines. (Would be awsome, no reason not to. If we have wimen in the army in 2014 why not in the year 40K?)
More female dark eldar models. (Eldar does not have as many female models as they should have, even though it is one of the few places where you have it.)
More female eldar models. (DE feature a lot of female models but not many, and mostly as an excuse to see girls in skinny clothes.)
We could have female imperial guard. (This one is just baffeling!)
Chaos demons have female models but only slanesh and only in the trope of the seducteres. This sadens me a lot.
Chaos space marines could be female, and where are the female cultistst?
Orks and Necrons are both gender neutral in the fluff but they are represented very masculine. They might not have a sex, but they certanly have a gender and that is male. The robots in particular could be more gender neutral or ambiguous. The orks I would arguable should be left as masculine as they are based on rugby players.
Tyranids do have a big line of female names creatires wich is a very good step. Also when it comes to gender diversaty they are for the most part asexual wich is a very good change. With the other sexles rases being represented very masculine this is apreciated. Although it sadens me that one of their most controversial creatures, the tervigon, is playing on womanhood and using birth as a weapon. Usualy I would just go with it, but when female representations are soo few as there are in the game it stands out like a sore thumb.
Sisters of battle is currently the "female option" in warhammer 40K. But I do find it unfortunat that the only female option is synonym with fanatasism to the point of being very unreasonable. Playing up to the trope of the harpy and women being in-logical.
While I would assume a statement like this would bade me in the warmth shower of flaming disagreement this is how I feel. Doing something with these things would be an excellent way to get more women into the hobby.
I have never heard a single women ever say they will do wargaming if they could use more female models. Its all fine and good to want it, but all it will do is cost GW more money (unless the women have big boobs and so forth, which isnt what you want) because nobody will buy them. Otherwise they would have done so already. Its also pretty rare to have women in the army actually there to fight rather than desk jobs and so forth. its a touchy subject but if there was a need GW would have done it by now in my opinion.
Of course at the end of the day they can try but its not a big deal overall in my opinion.
As I said im not against it but im not for it as I see at as a futile attempt really. Plus there are millions of big breasted models from other companies (an example of what to expect 99% of the time when females are presented as models). But look at victoria miniatures. Some female models to your liking will come out soon.
It seems more males want it than females. I dont know why this is the case but at the end of the day, remember GW isnt the only one that makes models. I urge you to try other companies because you will find models of your liking (especially for humans) and it also broadens your hobby. But yea victoria miniatures is doing some like you describe so check them out in a few months.
Niiai wrote: I skipped all 11 pages of discussion and I am addressing the original poster.
I would really like to see female space marines. It would not be hard in the slightest to work it into the background and say that it has always been so.
I would like to see more gender diversity in the game as a whole. I did try to discus this but it turned sour soon and I think I was focused on the fringe issues instead of the core of the argument.
The lack of female space marines are just part of the issue with a complete lack of female models in the GW range at all. I do belive it would have a possetive inpact on the hobby both from a theoretical and empirical standpoint.
We could have female space marines. (Would be awsome, no reason not to. If we have wimen in the army in 2014 why not in the year 40K?)
More female dark eldar models. (Eldar does not have as many female models as they should have, even though it is one of the few places where you have it.)
More female eldar models. (DE feature a lot of female models but not many, and mostly as an excuse to see girls in skinny clothes.)
We could have female imperial guard. (This one is just baffeling!)
Chaos demons have female models but only slanesh and only in the trope of the seducteres. This sadens me a lot.
Chaos space marines could be female, and where are the female cultistst?
Orks and Necrons are both gender neutral in the fluff but they are represented very masculine. They might not have a sex, but they certanly have a gender and that is male. The robots in particular could be more gender neutral or ambiguous. The orks I would arguable should be left as masculine as they are based on rugby players.
Tyranids do have a big line of female names creatires wich is a very good step. Also when it comes to gender diversaty they are for the most part asexual wich is a very good change. With the other sexles rases being represented very masculine this is apreciated. Although it sadens me that one of their most controversial creatures, the tervigon, is playing on womanhood and using birth as a weapon. Usualy I would just go with it, but when female representations are soo few as there are in the game it stands out like a sore thumb.
Sisters of battle is currently the "female option" in warhammer 40K. But I do find it unfortunat that the only female option is synonym with fanatasism to the point of being very unreasonable. Playing up to the trope of the harpy and women being in-logical.
While I would assume a statement like this would bade me in the warmth shower of flaming disagreement this is how I feel. Doing something with these things would be an excellent way to get more women into the hobby.
I have never heard a single women ever say they will do wargaming if they could use more female models. Its all fine and good to want it, but all it will do is cost GW more money (unless the women have big boobs and so forth, which isnt what you want) because nobody will buy them. Otherwise they would have done so already. Its also pretty rare to have women in the army actually there to fight rather than desk jobs and so forth. its a touchy subject but if there was a need GW would have done it by now in my opinion.
Of course at the end of the day they can try but its not a big deal overall in my opinion.
As I said im not against it but im not for it as I see at as a futile attempt really. Plus there are millions of big breasted models from other companies (an example of what to expect 99% of the time when females are presented as models). But look at victoria miniatures. Some female models to your liking will come out soon.
It seems more males want it than females. I dont know why this is the case but at the end of the day, remember GW isnt the only one that makes models. I urge you to try other companies because you will find models of your liking (especially for humans) and it also broadens your hobby. But yea victoria miniatures is doing some like you describe so check them out in a few months.
because some men (commonly those who don't know what the son is and have decided there basement is the only universe) like plastic bewbs.
Swastakowy I think you are a bit of mark. While you have no personal experience with women saying they would play wargames if there where female models I do have it. I work in a store that sells GW products among other merchandise. I have had severl female custemors that ask me if I can find them some female models because they want to start playing warhammer. When I do not find some that are sutable for them they often say they will think about it and they never come back.
You say that it is prety rare to have women in the army for duties other then desk jobs. I do not agree, it just depends on what countries you are looking at. Israel has a LOT of women in their army. Norway, my country, also have hat female volenters for the army for quite some time and the debate of having gender neutral army recruitment for the interactively has been discussed a lot.
If your oponion on a female model is a big brested model then this is a clear indication that you would be well served to have more female models in your game. There are a lot of ways to do this. As GW seems to work on very gender conserveative representation a headswap would probably suffice for space marines and tau. It would be really easy, and it would not make sense that a female SM would look much different then a male marine as they have grown so much during the procedure.
I do not know the gender balance of players, but I know so many male players vs the female players I know. This could come from a lot of factors, not an unrepresentative of female models. You state that you see more males complain about this then females, do you think this is because more males are engaged in the hobby?
Niiai wrote: I skipped all 11 pages of discussion and I am addressing the original poster.
I would really like to see female space marines. It would not be hard in the slightest to work it into the background and say that it has always been so.
I would like to see more gender diversity in the game as a whole. I did try to discus this but it turned sour soon and I think I was focused on the fringe issues instead of the core of the argument.
The lack of female space marines are just part of the issue with a complete lack of female models in the GW range at all. I do belive it would have a possetive inpact on the hobby both from a theoretical and empirical standpoint.
We could have female space marines. (Would be awsome, no reason not to. If we have wimen in the army in 2014 why not in the year 40K?) More female dark eldar models. (Eldar does not have as many female models as they should have, even though it is one of the few places where you have it.) More female eldar models. (DE feature a lot of female models but not many, and mostly as an excuse to see girls in skinny clothes.) We could have female imperial guard. (This one is just baffeling!) Chaos demons have female models but only slanesh and only in the trope of the seducteres. This sadens me a lot. Chaos space marines could be female, and where are the female cultistst?
Orks and Necrons are both gender neutral in the fluff but they are represented very masculine. They might not have a sex, but they certanly have a gender and that is male. The robots in particular could be more gender neutral or ambiguous. The orks I would arguable should be left as masculine as they are based on rugby players.
Tyranids do have a big line of female names creatires wich is a very good step. Also when it comes to gender diversaty they are for the most part asexual wich is a very good change. With the other sexles rases being represented very masculine this is apreciated. Although it sadens me that one of their most controversial creatures, the tervigon, is playing on womanhood and using birth as a weapon. Usualy I would just go with it, but when female representations are soo few as there are in the game it stands out like a sore thumb.
Sisters of battle is currently the "female option" in warhammer 40K. But I do find it unfortunat that the only female option is synonym with fanatasism to the point of being very unreasonable. Playing up to the trope off furies and women being in-logical.
While I would assume a statement like this would bade me in the warmth shower of flaming disagreement this is how I feel. Doing something with these things would be an excellent way to get more women into the hobby.
Edit: Forgot tau and kroot. They are awsome, but Tau could do with more female model/markers. The kroot are not veyr masculine and gender netral for the most part.
You see, these are the kinds of players I absolutely despise. This would involve a massive and pointless retcon for every single race across the board, despite every woman I know who plays W40K doesn't give a flying gak about female models for Astartes (CSM or SM), and instead typically play either Nids or CSM's. The fluff is currently fine as it is, if not largely perfect for stability and ripe for ever moving the plot forward. There's no reason to actually add female models at all besides a cheap attempt at pandering for more sales that are unlikely to even work in the first place (and from a marketing perspective, neckbeard rage can actually hurt, take a look at EA and stupidly getting voted worst company in America) that simply destroys the story and slaughters key tropes that have been in place for over a decade. Political correctness is quite simply annoying as feth. Not to mention all of your ideas are completely ignorant of the fluff.
Although you already made a topic on this... and ridiculed because most of your thoughts are completely pointless, coupled with how you always backpedal on this subject. "Female Daemons", do you even know how daemons work?
Changing things simply for the sake of changing them/political correctness and aiming for marketing minorities simply leads to things like Ultimate Spider-Man being killed off and being replaced by a black-hispanic guy. Minority superheroes are great. Killing/destroying a story just to justify a marketing move? Any rage directed on the subject is completely justified.
The only faction that needs females models is the Guard, as canonically there are female guardsmen.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/02/15 07:38:10
“There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance.”
Niiai wrote: I skipped all 11 pages of discussion and I am addressing the original poster.
I would really like to see female space marines. It would not be hard in the slightest to work it into the background and say that it has always been so.
I would like to see more gender diversity in the game as a whole. I did try to discus this but it turned sour soon and I think I was focused on the fringe issues instead of the core of the argument.
The lack of female space marines are just part of the issue with a complete lack of female models in the GW range at all. I do belive it would have a possetive inpact on the hobby both from a theoretical and empirical standpoint.
We could have female space marines. (Would be awsome, no reason not to. If we have wimen in the army in 2014 why not in the year 40K?)
More female dark eldar models. (Eldar does not have as many female models as they should have, even though it is one of the few places where you have it.)
More female eldar models. (DE feature a lot of female models but not many, and mostly as an excuse to see girls in skinny clothes.)
We could have female imperial guard. (This one is just baffeling!)
Chaos demons have female models but only slanesh and only in the trope of the seducteres. This sadens me a lot.
Chaos space marines could be female, and where are the female cultistst?
Orks and Necrons are both gender neutral in the fluff but they are represented very masculine. They might not have a sex, but they certanly have a gender and that is male. The robots in particular could be more gender neutral or ambiguous. The orks I would arguable should be left as masculine as they are based on rugby players.
Tyranids do have a big line of female names creatires wich is a very good step. Also when it comes to gender diversaty they are for the most part asexual wich is a very good change. With the other sexles rases being represented very masculine this is apreciated. Although it sadens me that one of their most controversial creatures, the tervigon, is playing on womanhood and using birth as a weapon. Usualy I would just go with it, but when female representations are soo few as there are in the game it stands out like a sore thumb.
Sisters of battle is currently the "female option" in warhammer 40K. But I do find it unfortunat that the only female option is synonym with fanatasism to the point of being very unreasonable. Playing up to the trope of the harpy and women being in-logical.
While I would assume a statement like this would bade me in the warmth shower of flaming disagreement this is how I feel. Doing something with these things would be an excellent way to get more women into the hobby.
I have never heard a single women ever say they will do wargaming if they could use more female models. Its all fine and good to want it, but all it will do is cost GW more money (unless the women have big boobs and so forth, which isnt what you want) because nobody will buy them. Otherwise they would have done so already. Its also pretty rare to have women in the army actually there to fight rather than desk jobs and so forth. its a touchy subject but if there was a need GW would have done it by now in my opinion.
Of course at the end of the day they can try but its not a big deal overall in my opinion.
As I said im not against it but im not for it as I see at as a futile attempt really. Plus there are millions of big breasted models from other companies (an example of what to expect 99% of the time when females are presented as models). But look at victoria miniatures. Some female models to your liking will come out soon.
It seems more males want it than females. I dont know why this is the case but at the end of the day, remember GW isnt the only one that makes models. I urge you to try other companies because you will find models of your liking (especially for humans) and it also broadens your hobby. But yea victoria miniatures is doing some like you describe so check them out in a few months.
because some men (commonly those who don't know what the son is and have decided there basement is the only universe) like plastic bewbs.
While I dont doubt that this is true in some cases you may wanna be careful, someone might feel a little bad about reading that haha.
But yea I think its an exaggerated problem. (or is it? dun dun dun dunnnnn).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Niiai wrote: Swastakowy I think you are a bit of mark. While you have no personal experience with women saying they would play wargames if there where female models I do have it. I work in a store that sells GW products among other merchandise. I have had severl female custemors that ask me if I can find them some female models because they want to start playing warhammer. When I do not find some that are sutable for them they often say they will think about it and they never come back.
You say that it is prety rare to have women in the army for duties other then desk jobs. I do not agree, it just depends on what countries you are looking at. Israel has a LOT of women in their army. Norway, my country, also have hat female volenters for the army for quite some time and the debate of having gender neutral army recruitment for the interactively has been discussed a lot.
If your oponion on a female model is a big brested model then this is a clear indication that you would be well served to have more female models in your game. There are a lot of ways to do this. As GW seems to work on very gender conserveative representation a headswap would probably suffice for space marines and tau. It would be really easy, and it would not make sense that a female SM would look much different then a male marine as they have grown so much during the procedure.
I do not know the gender balance of players, but I know so many male players vs the female players I know. This could come from a lot of factors, not an unrepresentative of female models. You state that you see more males complain about this then females, do you think this is because more males are engaged in the hobby?
No I think im on the mark, its an exaggerated problem. People bring up Israel a lot but I have read a lot to the contrary. When you say a lot are we talking like what? 20 females over the years? Because I have (in a tiny town) met 3 female players who dont care, none that want to start playing if females models are available and one that travels the world teaching people how to paint.
I agree things may be different where you are but like you said, your country is not the world, GW needs to think of the bigger picture, and that bigger picture is a largely male audience who couldnt care less on the subject. thats all im saying. And for every non big boobed female model you find im sure I can double that figure with small boob models. Its just how it is. If you truly feel its a problem why not promote a new game system or actively try fix it? Seems better than waiting for change, because that solves nothing at the end of the day.
Im not putting you down or being mean, im just stating my reasoning behind why its the way it is (in my opinion) and why change is not necessary. I dont buy from GW personally so I have no reason to argue that it should be male only. Just remember there are worse things in the world that need to be changed.
Remember that radical change is a regular killer of anything popular (bands, shows, artists well anything). People dont like it. and you will have many reactions from viewers and posters that will suggest the same thing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/02/15 07:46:02
Why do you keep asking women who play warhammer if they think it isn't a problem. While there is some merit in it, would it not better to ask women who do not play warhammer?
I do agree that warhammer probably have other things it should adress first, and I do not think it would generate a lot or revenue for GW and quite frankly I am not so conserned with GW's revenue.
I do agree that there are worse things in the world that needs to change, but how we represent ourselves through culture is a big part of who we are. I would like warhammer to be more female representative.
Edited in isn't in the first sentence. A dyslexcia mistake. :-(
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/02/15 08:45:09
Niiai wrote: Why do you keep asking women who play warhammer if they think it is a problem. While there is some merit in it, would it not better to ask women who do not play warhammer?
I do agree that warhammer probably have other things it should adress first, and I do not think it would generate a lot or revenue for GW and quite frankly I am not so conserned with GW's revenue.
I do agree that there are worse things in the world that needs to change, but how we represent ourselves through culture is a big part of who we are. I would like warhammer to be more female representative. I
No I said women who play it dont think its a problem, and women who dont play it simply dont care. (in my experience)
If GW didnt have their revenue then not only would we not bother talking about this (as it would be dead) you would also notice your business hurt by a loss of the No 1 game at the moment.
I can see what you are trying to do but I think its a bit wasteful of time and resources for anyone to commit too. Id rather more male guardsmen as GW ones are limited and lackluster, but I use 3rd party models to counter this. You should try do the same. look for some alternatives and stock them in your store. It may bring in those female would be players you missed out on.
Then there would be little to complain about as you are doing your bit and making a change.
Well I would like to keep the discussion away from how much the store I am working at is generating in income. I do not think I am allowed to discuss the income of the store. For me personaly I would probably pick up another game where I can paint models as I enjoy that part of the hobby a lot. As for the store I think we would survive the loss of GW finansialy, althought I would miss it. We are also selling fantasy/sci-fi books, comics, board games, card games, lego, roleplay games and other things. We would probably excnange that part of the store with another thing, porbably some sort of miniature game. Probably one of the many competative GW games that have a good representive of female models and is selling well, witch there are a few of.
As for the discussion in general. Why does this subject generate so much feelings? I do not net see people saying "not this AGAIN" when they discuss what primarc was the coolest or what not. What is it about this subject you object so much against being discussed on the forums?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/02/15 09:08:44
, unless some poor family has a kid with 6 toes counts.
40IK - PP Conversion Project Files
