I have the knight titan codex. Ask away.

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.

**AllSeeingSkink**

Ugavine wrote:
I really don't care about the cost of the model, the codex of just filler or miliking of the release, that's just business. Then I flicked through the store copy of the Codex.

:(

I really wanted to use an Imperial Knight. But my armies are Orks, Tyranids and Necrons. Forget about the whole, "it's your game do what you want," because it's not. The game involves other people and I want to play the game as close to RAW as possible.

GW have surely lost many sales with that stupid aliies matrix.

Use it as a Stompa? Mega dread?

**Davor**

Ugavine wrote:

GW have surely lost many sales with that stupid aliies matrix.

OR made more sales, since a lot of people will be thinking, you can't take it, I will take 2 or 3 then. So I guess that would make up for the lost sales.

I know I didn't buy when even when I could have saved $30 because, why pay so much money, then time and effort to make it and paint it, and then not be able to use it for pick up games.

**Furyou Miko**

Rippy wrote:
Furyou Miko wrote:
Frankly, the idea that they'd let anyone so poorly trained as to be BS2 anywhere near a Knight suit is the most ridiculous thing in this book.

According to the Guard codex, it takes three weeks of rifle drill to train someone up to BS3.

Rules and fluff are 100% different things, and you managed to put them in the same sentence!

Fine, I'll put it another way then.

A guardsman has a 66% accuracy rating at the range after three weeks of training. Apparently, a Knight Apparent only hits the target at the range 33% of the time. Therefore, a Knight Apparent is somehow less accurate than a Guardsman who has just completed Basic and Preparatory.

**liquidjoshi**

Or, as accurate as a conscript that's just sprayin' and prayin'.

A Knight Titan. "Sprayin' and prayin'".

That can't work out well for anyone.

**Johnnytorrance**

If you have an IK as an ally can he be a scoring unit too? I keep seeing people post all knights are scoring but I'm guessing they mean in a primary list

**BrianDavion**

Johnnytorrance wrote:
If you have an IK as an ally can he be a scoring unit too? I keep seeing people post all knights are scoring but I'm guessing they mean in a primary list

Primary only.

**Crimson**

Furyou Miko wrote:
Frankly, the idea that they'd let anyone so poorly trained as to be BS2 anywhere near a Knight suit is the most ridiculous thing in this book.

They don't. Regular knights have BS4, apparent have BS3.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Furyou Miko wrote:
I had a look this morning, I was quite impressed!

They managed to stay gender neutral for a whole two paragraphs before giving up and just saying "yeah, all knights are blokes".

That really bugged me too. There was really unnecessary, there was absolutely no reason to make this faction male only too. Personally, I'll ignore that bit of the fluff, but I'm still disappointed.

**BrianDavion**

It's worth noting that reading the IK novella it's VERY obvious that among the knightly houses are essentially RUN by the women.

**Crimson**

BrianDavion wrote:
It's worth noting that reading the IK novella it's VERY obvious that among the knightly houses are essentially RUN by the women.

That may be, but it is still gender essentialist bullcrap. Women run the household while the men pilot giant war-robots. There was really no need to bring the gender division into the knight fluff.

**BrianDavion**

Crimson wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
It's worth noting that reading the IK novella it's VERY obvious that among the knightly houses are essentially RUN by the women.

That may be, but it is still gender essentialist bullcrap. Women run the household while the men pilot giant war-robots. There was really no need to bring the gender division into the knight fluff.

My guess is GW as trying for a particular feel with the fluff for the Knights. the Novella has a VERY "40k with a dash of game of thrones" feel to it. ((heck two knights mentioned are "Sir Gregor" and "Sir Martin" for crying out loud) that said I don't disagree with the idea that 40k needs more good female characters.

One spoiler from the IK novella that might intrest you though...

Spoiler:

**CthuluIsSpy**

Crimson wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
It's worth noting that reading the IK novella it's VERY obvious that among the knightly houses are essentially RUN by the women.

That may be, but it is still gender essentialist bullcrap. Women run the household while the men pilot giant war-robots. There was really no need to bring the gender division into the knight fluff.

I don't see the problem. Historically, knights (as in, the guys on horse back) were typically men. They were probably trying to play on that.

**Crimson**

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

I don't see the problem. Historically, knights (as in, the guys on horse back) were typically men. They were probably trying to play on that.

Historically Knights did't operate giant robotic suits of armour.

**CthuluIsSpy**

Crimson wrote:
CthuluIsSpy wrote:

I don't see the problem. Historically, knights (as in, the guys on horse back) were typically men. They were probably trying to play on that.

Historically Knights did't operate giant robotic suits of armour.

That changes nothing. They are called knights, and they come from noble houses. They were clearly based off of the old medieval knights of yore. That's their theme.
You might as well ask for male Sororitas. Those are based off of nuns, and historically, nuns did not field rocket launchers and flamethrowers.

**Jackal**

Only issue i have is upgrades.
So, they want you to spend out and run a full army of them right?
Thats not always possible.

At 370 / 370 PPM you cant always field to the points limit.

1,250 - 1,125 is the closest you can get.
1,500 - you can actually get this one, but need to run all paladins to do so.
1,850 - again, its possible, but only if you run all errants.
2,000 - Cant get near it.

Why not have the options for some cheap wargear to boost points when needed?

**Mr Morden**

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Crimson wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
It's worth noting that reading the IK novella it's VERY obvious that among the knightly houses are essentially RUN by the women.

That may be, but it is still gender essentialist bullcrap. Women run the household while the men pilot giant war-robots. There was really no need to bring the gender division into the knight fluff.

I don't see the problem. Historically, knights (as in, the guys on horse back) were typically men. They were probably trying to play on that.

Typically but not exclusively - I had a hoped for some ladies al la BattleTech (and pretty much every other game with giant war robots) - in fact I might look to have one of the painted as Natasha Keresnky's Mech

**CthuluIsSpy**

Mr Morden wrote:
CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Crimson wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
It's worth noting that reading the IK novella it's VERY obvious that among the knightly houses are essentially RUN by the women.

That may be, but it is still gender essentialist bullcrap. Women run the household while the men pilot giant war-robots. There was really no need to bring the gender division into the knight fluff.

I don't see the problem. Historically, knights (as in, the guys on horse back) were typically men. They were probably trying to play on that.

Typically but not exclusively - I had a hoped for some ladies al la BattleTech (and pretty much every other game with giant war robots) - in fact I might look to have one of the painted as Natasha Keresnky's Mech

Well, true, there were exceptions. Still very rare to see though, especially in battle.

**Mr Morden**

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Mr Morden wrote:
CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Crimson wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
It's worth noting that reading the IK novella it's VERY obvious that among the knightly houses are essentially RUN by the women.

That may be, but it is still gender essentialist bullcrap. Women run the household while the men pilot giant war-robots. There was really no need to bring the gender division into the knight fluff.

I don't see the problem. Historically, knights (as in, the guys on horse back) were typically men. They were probably trying to play on that.

Typically but not exclusively - I had a hoped for some ladies al la BattleTech (and pretty much every other game with giant war robots) - in fact I might look to have one of the painted as Natasha Keresnky's Mech

Well, true, there were exceptions. Such exceptions were very rare, however, to the point where it might have been exclusive.

I just like having some girls in Mech as well as boys - but hey -

Spoiler:

**CthuluIsSpy**

Mr Morden wrote:
CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Mr Morden wrote:
CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Crimson wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
It's worth noting that reading the IK novella it's VERY obvious that among the knightly houses are essentially RUN by the women.

That may be, but it is still gender essentialist bullcrap. Women run the household while the men pilot giant war-robots. There was really no need to bring the gender division into the knight fluff.

I don't see the problem. Historically, knights (as in, the guys on horse back) were typically men. They were probably trying to play on that.

Typically but not exclusively - I had a hoped for some ladies al la BattleTech (and pretty much every other game with giant war robots) - in fact I might look to have one of the painted as Natasha Keresnky's Mech

Well, true, there were exceptions. Such exceptions were very rare, however, to the point where it might have been exclusive.

I just like having some girls in Mech as well as boys - but hey -

Spoiler:

looks like GW have straight away introdcuded an exception to the rule

Oooh where? I do love some exceptions

**Mr Morden**

Read the spoiler tag futher up the thread

**CthuluIsSpy**

Mr Morden wrote:
Read the spoiler tag futher up the thread

Oh nice. It makes sense thematically too.

**Frozen Ocean**

Argh, again? Does it specifically say that they are all male, or does it just only show male pilots? If it does explicitly say so, then yeah, I'm ignoring that.

In classic Victorian times, a noble house was run by a woman. Being the wife of a Lord was a job; you were essentially the highest grade of servant. You would run the house and organise absolutely everything. You would hire and fire servants to be your employees in the service of your husband's house. All of this work was done so that the husband could basically never think about any responsibilities and get about playing golf or going hunting or whatever else he wanted to do with all his money that particular day. The women ran the house not because they were in charge or superior to the men, but because the men didn't want to do the work and the women were automatically required to by virtue of being women. So saying "they run the House" is a huge fallacy on GW's part.

It's bad enough that we have so few female characters in general, but now yet another faction is explicitly all-male (and not even for any reason, this time!)? Space Marines are innately all-male, Orks are innately "male", and Tyranids are genderless, but what about the Eldar, Tau, Imperial Guard, Inquisitors (who actually lost the one female character they had) and 5th-ed Necrons, who have one named female character between them (Shadowsun) and one unit that is "the girls" (Banshees, even though Aspects are not explicitly gendered, but of course all of the Phoenix Lords were guys except one)? What about the supposedly-genderless Chaos Daemons? The Dark Eldar have Lady Malys (who will probably disappear next update and is notably inferior to a male character, which she has a bit of a complex about) and Lelith Hesperax, but Lelith is part of the Wyches, who basically exist to be "look the Dark Eldar are pervy and stuff, they have girls in bikinis!". Why couldn't we have a cool character like Drazhar, but female? Why are there no female Inquisitors, Tech-Priests, Farseers, Phaerons, Commissars, Warp Spider Exarchs, tank commanders, Lords of Change, etc?

Spoiler'd for people who don't care. I mostly gathered this information because I was curious.

Spoiler:

And now Knights, too. You could say that they're patterning it off Victorian households - but that still doesn't make it okay or even make sense.

EDIT: Being patterned on historical knights is still dumb. Historical knights were pretty much all-male because of the massive amounts of sexism and inequality of the time period. Also, even that idea, which is "girls can't fight because men are stronger/etc", doesn't apply to giant mech suits. Also note that the reason for Space Marines being male is "woo science" and not "girls can't fight". There is no reason for a lack of female Knights, Guardsmen, Necrons, Eldar, etc. Playing with gender roles to fit a theme would be better if the setting wasn't already so massively biased.

**CthuluIsSpy**

There is a female demon princess of khorne, actually. Her name was Valkia, iirc.

Well, in Warhammer Fantasy, anyway.

Why should necrons be gendered? They are alien robots. The necrontyr might not even had a female gender to begin with.

The reason why something non-specific is male is due to cultural bias in the English language; the default is always male unless specified otherwise.

Does it state anywhere that the Young King must not be female? King could be a ceremonial term. All it says on lexi is that an Exarch is chosen.

**Mr Morden**

Yeah its very anoying - every other minitures game seems to put out female models and characters left right and centre - GW - just now and again.

Quite a few ladies were left in charge of castles during sieges............

Fantasy is a bit better - but still not great.

I am thinking of having one of my Knights painted like this

Just need to get the right pilot model.............

Spoiler:

**Crimson**

Frozen Ocean wrote:
Argh, again? Does it specifically say that they are all male, or does it just only show male pilots? If it does explicitly say so, then yeah, I'm ignoring that.

It says that it is the eldest sons of the nobles that become the knight pilots.

**knas ser**

Frozen Ocean wrote:
Argh, again? Does it specifically say that they are all male, or does it just only show male pilots? If it does explicitly say so, then yeah, I'm ignoring that.

In classic Victorian times, a noble house was run by a woman. Being the wife of a Lord was a job; you were essentially the highest grade of servant. You would run the house and organise absolutely everything. You would hire and fire servants to be your employees in the service of your husband's house. All of this work was done so that the husband could basically never think about any responsibilities and get about playing golf or going hunting or whatever else he wanted to do with all his money that particular day. The women ran the house not because they were in charge or superior to the men, but because the men didn't want to do the work and the women were automatically required to by virtue of being women. So saying "they run the House" is a huge fallacy on GW's part.

It's bad enough that we have so few female characters in general, but now yet another faction is explicitly all-male (and not even for any reason, this time!)? Space Marines are innately all-male, Orks are innately "male", and Tyranids are genderless, but what about the Eldar, Tau, Imperial Guard, Inquisitors (who actually lost the one female character they had) and 5th-ed Necrons, who have one named female character between them (Shadowsun) and one unit that is "the girls" (Banshees, even though Aspects are not explicitly gendered, but of course all of the Phoenix Lords were guys except one)? What about the supposedly-genderless Chaos Daemons? The Dark Eldar have Lady Malys (who will probably disappear next update and is notably inferior to a male character, which she has a bit of a complex about) and Lelith Hesperax, but Lelith is part of the Wyches, who basically exist to be "look the Dark Eldar are pervy and stuff, they have girls in bikinis!". Why couldn't we have a cool character like Drazhar, but female? Why are there no female Inquisitors, Tech-Priests, Farseers, Phaerons, Commissars, Warp Spider Exarchs, tank commanders, Lords of Change, etc?

Spoiler'd for people who don't care. I mostly gathered this information because I was curious.

Spoiler:

Boys
Adeptus Sororitas: Uriah Jacobus
Chaos Daemons: Kairos Fateweaver, Epidemus, The Blue Scribes, Skulltaker, The Changeling, Karanak, Be'lakor
Chaos Space Marines: Abaddon, Typhus, Ahriman, Khârn the Betrayer, Fabulous Bill, Lucius the Eternal, Huron Blackheart
Dark Eldar: Asdrubael Vect, Baron Sathonyx, Kheradruakh, Duke Sliscus, Drazhar, Urien Rakarth
Eldar: Eldrad Ulthran, Prince Yriel, Illic Nightspear, Asurmen, Karandras, Fuegan, Baharroth, Maugan Ra, The Avatar of Khaine
Orks: Ghazghkull Thraka, Mad Dok Grotsnik, Boss Snikrot, Boss Zagstruk,
Inquisition: Karamazov, Coteaz
Imperial Guard: Lord Castellan Creed, Colour Sergeant Kell, Knight Commander Pask, Sergeant Bastonne, Colonel 'Iron Hand' Straken, Guardsman Marbo, Gunnery Sergeant Harker, Commissar Yarrick, Captain Al'Rahem, Commander Chenkov, Mogul Kamir, Nork Deddog
Necrons: Imotetk the Stormlord, Trazyn the Infinite, Nemesor Zahndrekh, Vargard Obyron, Illuminor Szeras, Orikan the Diviner, Anrakyr the Traveller, Shard of The Deceiver, Shard of The Nightbringer
Space Marines: Commander Dante, Mephiston, The Sanguinor, Astorath the Grim, Chapter Master Gabriel Seth, Captain Tycho, Brother Corbulo, Lemartes, Cypher the Fallen Angel, Supreme Grand Master Azrael, Grand Master of Librarians Ezekiel, Belial, Asmodai, Sammael, Castellan Crowe, Lord Kaldor Draigo, Justicar Thawn, Brother-Captain Stern, Grand Master Mordrak, Marneus Calgar, Captain Sicarius, Chief Librarian Tigurius, Chaplain Cassius, Kor'sarro Khan, Forgefather Vulkan He'stan, Captain Kayvaan Shrike, Darnath Lysander, Pedro Kantor, High Marshal Helbrecht, Chaplain Grimaldus, Scout Sergeant Telion, Logan Grimnar, Njal Stormcaller, Canis Wolfborn, Ragnar Blackmane, Ulrik the Slayer, Bjorn the Fell-Handed, Arjac Rockfist, Lukas the Trickster
Tau Empire: Commander Farsight, Darkstrider, Aun'va, Aun Shi, Longstrike, Bravestorm, O'Vesa, Brightsword, Sha'vastos, Ob'lotai (AI imprint of a male character), Arra'kon, Torchstar

Girls
Adeptus Sororitas: Saint Celestine
Chaos Daemons: The Masque
Dark Eldar: Lady Malys, Lelith Hesperax
Eldar: Jain Zar
Inquisition: Valeria (removed)
Tau: Commander Shadowsun

Breakdown:
Note: I don't have every Codex, so I'm using GW's site. This means I'll probably miss some who don't have models. I'm also not including Forge World.

- The specifically female faction, the Sororitas, have one female character and one male character.
- The genderless faction, the Daemons, have nine "male" characters and one female character who is "female" "because Slaanesh". Why can't we get a female Bloodthirster or something? Heck, why no female Daemon Princes, ever?
- If a unit is nameless and non-gender-specific, it will be male almost always (e.g. Farseer). If there are any girls in a squad of nameless troopers, it's very rare (Guardians).
- If something is genderless and not a Tyranid, it is referred to as male unless it's to do with Slaanesh and also pretty/elegant/etc. Why is the Masque female but the Changeling is male? Especially the Changeling!
- Total is 111 boys vs 7 girls, including Valeria.

Let's take away gender-specific characters, mostly Space Marines (characters whose gender is because of what they are).

Boys
Adeptus Sororitas: Uriah Jacobus
Chaos Daemons: Kairos Fateweaver, Epidemus, The Blue Scribes, Skulltaker, The Changeling, Karanak, Be'lakor
Dark Eldar: Asdrubael Vect, Baron Sathonyx, Kheradruakh, Duke Sliscus, Drazhar, Urien Rakarth
Eldar: Eldrad Ulthran, Prince Yriel, Illic Nightspear, Asurmen, Karandras, Fuegan, Baharroth, Maugan Ra
Inquisition: Karamazov, Coteaz
Imperial Guard: Lord Castellan Creed, Colour Sergeant Kell, Knight Commander Pask, Sergeant Bastonne, Colonel 'Iron Hand' Straken, Guardsman Marbo, Gunnery Sergeant Harker, Commissar Yarrick, Captain Al'Rahem, Commander Chenkov, Mogul Kamir, Nork Deddog
Necrons: Imotetk the Stormlord, Trazyn the Infinite, Nemesor Zahndrekh, Vargard Obyron, Illuminor Szeras, Orikan the Diviner, Anrakyr the Traveller, Shard of The Deceiver, Shard of The Nightbringer
Tau Empire: Commander Farsight, Darkstrider, Aun'va, Aun Shi, Longstrike, Bravestorm, O'Vesa, Brightsword, Sha'vastos, Ob'lotai (AI imprint of a male character), Arra'kon, Torchstar

Girls
Dark Eldar: Lady Malys
Eldar: Jain Zar
Inquisition: Valeria (removed)
Tau: Commander Shadowsun

It's now 57 vs 4, including Valeria. I removed a few things that I feel need explained; the Avatar, because Khaine is a male god (whatever that means), even though there still isn't any reason why the Young King can't be female; The Masque and Lelith, because their gender is used as part of their job (Dark Eldar/Slaanesh perviness, boys aren't allowed to be pretty/graceful). I didn't remove the C'tan because there's no reason why they need to be gendered - unlike Khaine, because Eldar gods are generally treated like big Eldar.

And now Knights, too. You could say that they're patterning it off Victorian households - but that still doesn't make it okay or even make sense.

EDIT: Being patterned on historical knights is still dumb. Historical knights were pretty much all-male because of the massive amounts of sexism and inequality of the time period. Also, even that idea, which is "girls can't fight because men are stronger/etc", doesn't apply to giant mech suits. Also note that the reason for Space Marines being male is "woo science" and not "girls can't fight". There is no reason for a lack of female Knights, Guardsmen, Necrons, Eldar, etc. Playing with gender roles to fit a theme would be better if the setting wasn't already so massively biased.

On the subject of women piloting giant robots, there was an interesting study by the US airforce to see "if women could be as good a pilots as men". Don't blame me for the mindset that went into it, btw. Anyway, they got their answer. They found that women on average fired faster than the men, who typically hesitated before pulling the trigger.

I don't think it was a large difference. Just amusing in a daft way because the whole expectation of the people who set it up was to see if women could be as good as men, not to find out they were better.

Anyway, I don't have a massive issue with GW wanting to basically do Medieval Knights in Space, and thus inheriting some of the sexism of the time, but I do have some of an issue with it. You can see how it happened, but it's not as if anything of great value would have been lost to change it. Like you've shown, it's not that it is necessarily a problem as an isolated incident, but that it is a problem in the context of things always being like this. It's okay in things like Space Marines (where they're so grotesquely engineered that sex would be practically indistinguishable anyway), but it irks me in things like Eldar where they really are gender equal. Would it kill to have a few of those unhelmeted Eldar heads be female? Or to even up the gender ratios of the named characters?

**CthuluIsSpy**

knas ser wrote:

but it irks me in things like Eldar where they really are gender equal. Would it kill to have a few of those unhelmeted Eldar heads be female? Or to even up the gender ratios of the named characters?

Who knows, maybe there aren't that many Eldar women? Some female heads would be nice though.
Evening up the ratio of name characters would be problematic, however; that would result in adding even more SC, and that may hurt the balance.

Still, it would be nice to see a Valkia like character in Wh40k.

**knas ser**

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
The reason why something non-specific is male is due to cultural bias in the English language; the default is always male unless specified otherwise.

That's not true. There's an old convention to use "him" or "his" when referring to a hypothetical person as in "the marine will check his gun", but that's not to say that anything non-specific is male and that convention is on its last legs anyway, replaced by either the writer mixing genders in their writing or more commonly using "their" as a non-gender specific singular.

Quick test - did it leap out at you as weird that in the above I wrote: "the writer mixing genders in their writing"? No, because the convention has changed. Would it have leapt out at you if I wrote: "the writer mixing genders in his writing"? Yes, for most people it would because the strange assumption and exclusion of women would catch your attention and make you wonder why I was assuming writers were male - I'd appear old fashioned, essentially.

English is actually a great deal less gendered than many other languages, especially European ones. In most of those, non-gendered items actually have a gender, note the "le / la" in French for example. I'm very happy we don't have that in English.

**Mr Morden**

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
knas ser wrote:

but it irks me in things like Eldar where they really are gender equal. Would it kill to have a few of those unhelmeted Eldar heads be female? Or to even up the gender ratios of the named characters?

Who knows, maybe there aren't that many Eldar women? Some female heads would be nice though.
Evening up the ratio of name characters would be problematic, however; that would result in adding even more SC, and that may hurt the balance.

Still, it would be nice to see a Valkia like character in Wh40k.

There is not reason why she is not in both as GW seem to be putting their Daemons in both universes.....................

**knas ser**

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
knas ser wrote:

but it irks me in things like Eldar where they really are gender equal. Would it kill to have a few of those unhelmeted Eldar heads be female? Or to even up the gender ratios of the named characters?

Who knows, maybe there aren't that many Eldar women? Some female heads would be nice though.

There's never been anything in the fluff to suggest a lack of Eldar women. Few children, yes. But sexual imbalance, no. We can put this one down just to bias on the part of GW authors.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Evening up the ratio of name characters would be problematic, however; that would result in adding even more SC, and that may hurt the balance.

I can live with new characters being added. The game's been around for twp decades. Maugan-Ra can have a female colleague introduced somewhere in there without "hurting the balance". Why find counter-arguments to that?

**CthuluIsSpy**

knas ser wrote:
CthuluIsSpy wrote:
The reason why something non-specific is male is due to cultural bias in the English language; the default is always male unless specified otherwise.

That's not true. There's an old convention to use "him" or "his" when referring to a hypothetical person as in "the marine will check his gun", but that's not to say that anything non-specific is male and that convention is on its last legs anyway, replaced by either the writer mixing genders in their writing or more commonly using "their" as a non-gender specific singular.

Quick test - did it leap out at you as weird that in the above I wrote: "the writer mixing genders in their writing"? No, because the convention has changed. Would it have leapt out at you if I wrote: "the writer mixing genders in his writing"? Yes, for most people it would because the strange assumption and exclusion of women would catch your attention and make you wonder why I was assuming writers were male - I'd appear old fashioned, essentially.

English is actually a great deal less gendered than many other languages, especially European ones. In most of those, non-gendered items actually have a gender, note the "le / la" in French for example. I'm very happy we don't have that in English.

Don't you mean "writers in their language"?

Their is plural. There is only one writer.