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.

At first I thought 40K was a criticism leveled at Dark ages Europe alone.

However after looking it into it more closely (particularly the diversity you see in the 4th and 3rd ed Guard) I realized 40k is criticizing ALL of humanity. the Western parts get more focus because that is what the target audience will register more closet with it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Baldeagle91 wrote:
I remember seeing a few black guardsman in the old catachan codex. At the time I thought, why are there not more black character? Not too shabby for a 10 year old!

I was thinking the same thing at the time and then painting around 5-6 of my own guardsmen black. I also remember my dad telling me to tone it down a bit! Think thought I was gonna paint my entire army as if they were black!

Also remember seeing a completely black army painted by a white player at warhammer world a few years ago..... which seemed weird in my head but whatever!

It's not really important in terms of how players themselves paint their figures, but would be nice to see more in the official fluff. If this was fantasy though there wouldn't be much of an issue.

Just out of curiosity why did your dad want you to "tone down" the number of black miniatures in your army?

That's way more confusing than a white player with a primarily black army.

 Bronzefists42 wrote:

 Baldeagle91 wrote:
I remember seeing a few black guardsman in the old catachan codex. At the time I thought, why are there not more black character? Not too shabby for a 10 year old!

I was thinking the same thing at the time and then painting around 5-6 of my own guardsmen black. I also remember my dad telling me to tone it down a bit! Think thought I was gonna paint my entire army as if they were black!

Also remember seeing a completely black army painted by a white player at warhammer world a few years ago..... which seemed weird in my head but whatever!

It's not really important in terms of how players themselves paint their figures, but would be nice to see more in the official fluff. If this was fantasy though there wouldn't be much of an issue.

Just out of curiosity why did your dad want you to "tone down" the number of black miniatures in your army?

That's way more confusing than a white player with a primarily black army.

Ohh he thought someone might think I was being racist or something....

yeahh I know... gotta love the white middle class political correctness police

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Plumbumbarum wrote:
There can be millions of them in the fluff but they're not in the art and that's good.

Sure. Do not forget to showcase your ignorance in every possible occasion. There are not one, not two, but three female Inquisitor models for 40k, and female Inquisitors are displayed in a lot of artwork. You just have no idea what you are talking about.

Plumbumbarum wrote:
Also I didn't evean say that women ARE treated like I described but that they SHOULD be treated like that for the sake of integrity of the vision.So, a reading comprehension fail.

I love it when people go out of their way to contradict creators on what their vision is. Plain and simple, you demonstrated very well you have no idea what the vision for 40k is.

Plumbumbarum wrote:
I like equality in real life, I dont like equality in a marxist sense.

Ah. So, displaying female Inquisitors is equality in a Marxist sense. Who cares about things like “meaning” when you can use buzzword and random bad associations.

Plumbumbarum wrote:
My 'ignorance' of the setting, what do you mean?

I mean that from the inception of 40k, there has never been any racism associated to the Imperium, ever, and the hate has always been directed at mutants and abhumans. I mean that basically as soon as the High Lord were introduced, some of them have been women.

Plumbumbarum wrote:
The few odd examples? Books so canon defining that all those black and women characters never make it to the art?

Rather, I mean all the art that display them and that you have never seen. That is your ignorance.

Plumbumbarum wrote:
If you want 40k anyway, don't expect it to change according to your sensibilities

So, why are you trying to change 40k to fit your own perceived “integrity of vision” delirium?

3dog wrote:
As a white Muslim that is possibly the most mind numbingly wrong thing I've ever read.

Yeah, it is pretty damn wrong.

Haha you even posted a pic. That's cute.

Let me rephrase that. There might be millions of them in the fluff (women and black people) but they dont make it to the art, except for a few woman inquisitors or the odd black guy. Dont forget to catch on it though and post pic of some other woman in 40k not being an inquisitor as a proof of my ignorance heh.

Funny how you catch on every single possible thing and still fail again and again to prove me ignorant. With the vague and lazy posting and loose relation with used terms I present here, someone like Peregrine would have eaten me alive already. You need to improve son.

FYI, I saw vast majority of 40k art since Rogue Trader, have almost all of it also have thousands hours played in DoW 2 not to mention having my own female inquisitor for my own fluff. You ofc misinterpreted one sentence and made a whole case around it.

How many pictures of female inquisitors are in the inquisition codex? 2,3? What percentage is that? Codex grey knights I dont remember 100% but wasnt it an actual 0? Codex daemonhunters there was 1 I think but not sure, obviously I dont remember all of it, not going to dig it up either.

No, displaying female Inquisitors is not equality in marxist sense, you dont get it. I explained it answering other poster. I like female inquisitors btw just like I like sisters.

No I dont want to impose my vision on 40k. I think that actual mysogyny would fit the Imperium but Im not posting how GW has a not enough misogyny problem or start treads asking why so many women. I also dont want people with pc like vision to impose theirs.

There are black dictators in the world. They ussualy dont sit in the middle of roman/ gothic inspired architecture (or as arstechnica said what look like "if every steampunk fan was an ardent catholic and was designing buildings for a facist empire"). Connotations, references crap like that.

I have a proposition though. I can be ignorant about 40k, it's kind of a compliment in disguise imo tbh so let's just assume you are right. I hate the ideas but have nothing against people and this conversation will only end with me being rude and vicious. If you really think that exchanging two thirds of bald white man with black and hispanic men in 40k would be good, then ok agree to disagree etc. I think it would be ridiculous, as fitting as black Heimdalll to midgard and just another USA in spaace we have dozens of, this time with gothic flair.

Plumbumbarum wrote:
Let me rephrase that. There might be millions of them in the fluff (women and black people) but they dont make it to the art, except for a few woman inquisitors or the odd black guy.

 RazgrizOne wrote:

This is one of the worst problem of "everything is political". TV shows are political, books are political, music is political, movies are political and 40k is political. Ironically the people suffering the most from this, are the ones trying to push this agenda. Can they even enjoy ANY media anymore? How can you enjoy something, when all you're thinking about is "Let's see how well everyone is represented in this"? How can you get lost in a work of fiction, when all you do, is trying to judge how well this supports your political goals?

I tend to agree to this conclusion, because I am seldom annoyed by the constant politization of things some angry militants are trying to make. But after reading pretty much everything in this thread, some questions are always popping in my head. And I prefer make it crystal clera right now ; I don't think GW is racist or something.

Somebody said earlier most of white people are victims of colour-blindness phenomenom, when you can't understand criticism coming form coloured people who actually suffer from racism, or more simply you don't care about representation because you were never confronted to this issue being a white westerner. I'm convinced GW does not purposefully chose not to paint coloured people, they just ignore them because they don't even think about representation. 40k is their creation, and they created it in their image. They are white westerners and thus, humans in 40k are white. This has strictly no fluffy reason to be such, but it is. A galactic-spanning empire, a million word, a million specific conditions, but still, one colour ? That's highly and utterly unlikely. Look at our current planet and you'll have a clue.

GW painting is not mean, it's not racist, but it is certainly the outcome of well-rooted white mindset which is sometimes affected by cultural racism.

I think it is legitimate for the coloured people to be pissed off by the lack of identification they feel. Moreover, it is quite easy to mock them when you are white and every single mini of the range is an overmanly powerful white dude (same reasoning can be applicable to gender). If you chose to play the Blood Angels, the Space Wolves or any other chapter and the only thing you see everywhere in 40k material are Ultramarines, would you feel identifed ? Would you like to see how your beloved scifi universe don't even try to make you part of it?

Saying nothing is wrong with 40k and representation in it is useless is not a crime but certainly ain't ridden of colour-blindness. And the mere facts that the huge majority of players are white male westerners and that the huge majority of GW staff is white male westerners is no coincidence.

Racism seems not to be a credible explanation for this, but none of us are sociologists and are able to shed light on these issues so we'll probably never find out.

Well I am an actual sociologist but more importantly I know GW history and it for sure is not racism. The Imperium is a ripoff of 20000ad torquemada empire which was an evil side and the whole thing carried a strong anti racist message. GW might have twisted it a bit but it was still facist racist evil and generaly obnoxious place and sm were a band of psychopats.

Peregrine that's not much, also isn't that all from North American sources? I know GW endorses those but licensed authors seem to enjoy some creative freedom. Show me a woman in astra militarium codex.

Not to mention those might be examples of GW catering to US market which is exactly what is wrong here, that people in the US demand that even if it doesnt make sense

I liked Mira though, she was a great character.

Plumbumbarum wrote:
Peregrine that's not much, also isn't that all from North American sources?

It's not much, but that's all I bothered to post. There are more images where those came from, characters in BL books, etc. As for North American sources, why does it matter? GW doesn't have different tiers of canon based on where a product is created or published.

Show me a woman in astra militarium codex.

I doubt there are any, but who cares? The codex is only the shallowest overview of the fluff, and each "modern" codex keeps making it shorter and more focused on the exact contents of the plastic kits. You won't see any pictures of female guardsmen in the codex because all of the codex pictures are unconverted Cadian/Catachan plastic kits.

Not to mention those might be examples of GW catering to US market which is exactly what is wrong here, that people in the US demand that even if it doesnt make sense

How doesn't it make sense? Female guardsmen (and women in other non-marine roles) make complete sense, because the Imperium doesn't care who you are as long as you can wear your t-shirt and carry your flashlight. Women can die just as well as men, so why would you voluntarily give up half your potential pool of conscripts?

Also, I disagree that something is "wrong" with the situation, even if the US market is the primary factor. The US is a huge market for GW, so why should only UK customers matter?

Why on earth would women be less present?

For instance, Cadia has a conscription rate of 100%, and the differences between women and men become largely irrelevant in 40k because the difference between a human and, say, a Necron is far larger. Both the woman and the man are going to die to the gauss rifle all the same, so why halve the size of your armies by only recruiting one gender when you need every last pair of hands to fight for the Imperium?

Ninjaed by Peregrine!

Btw I already said that lasgun line breaker units are a fitting place for women and black people in 40k. Still I prefer crazy screaming white men only ofc just because it doesnt look USA in space and keeps the backwards vibe intact.

Plumbumbarum wrote:
Btw I already said that lasgun line breaker units are a fitting place for women and black people in 40k.

So, you're not a racist, but the appropriate place for black people in 40k is as cannon fodder? That doesn't even make any sense because after 40,000 years of history modern nations/racial prejudice/etc will be completely forgotten. A zealot for racial purity in 40k isn't going to have the same views as a 1950s KKK member, they're going to obsess over the superiority of humanity as a whole.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Plumbumbarum wrote:
because it doesnt look USA in space

Except that's what you're asking for, you want US-style racism in a setting where it doesn't make sense at all.

 Peregrine wrote:

Plumbumbarum wrote:
Peregrine that's not much, also isn't that all from North American sources?

It's not much, but that's all I bothered to post. There are more images where those came from, characters in BL books, etc. As for North American sources, why does it matter? GW doesn't have different tiers of canon based on where a product is created or published.

Show me a woman in astra militarium codex.

I doubt there are any, but who cares? The codex is only the shallowest overview of the fluff, and each "modern" codex keeps making it shorter and more focused on the exact contents of the plastic kits. You won't see any pictures of female guardsmen in the codex because all of the codex pictures are unconverted Cadian/Catachan plastic kits.

Not to mention those might be examples of GW catering to US market which is exactly what is wrong here, that people in the US demand that even if it doesnt make sense

How doesn't it make sense? Female guardsmen (and women in other non-marine roles) make complete sense, because the Imperium doesn't care who you are as long as you can wear your t-shirt and carry your flashlight. Women can die just as well as men, so why would you voluntarily give up half your potential pool of conscripts?

Also, I disagree that something is "wrong" with the situation, even if the US market is the primary factor. The US is a huge market for GW, so why should only UK customers matter?

Because North America is pc crazy (though Europe catches up fast now) and you just cant leave a good old mysogyinst and racist setting alone heh.

It's not about UK or USA customers. It's about the idea that setting should change because target audience changes, I hate it 40k will loose character because of it. Everything becomes similar, dulled or sth.

You are awfuly easy to conjure btw heh.

Plumbumbarum wrote:
Because North America is pc crazy (though Europe catches up fast now) and you just cant leave a good old mysogyinst and racist setting alone heh.

Wanting to fix the absurd lack of characters that aren't white men, especially in a setting where that absence doesn't make any sense, is hardly "PC crazy". And TBH what "PC" usually means is "I know this is offensive, but the only way I can think of to defend it is to whine about how nothing should be criticized".

It's not about UK or USA customers. It's about the idea that setting should change because target audience changes, I hate it 40k will loose character because of it. Everything becomes similar, dulled or sth.

I really fail to see having female guardsmen or black space marines is making 40k "lose character". In fact, the exact opposite is true: 40k gains character because it has a greater depth of fluff instead of just the same white male Cadians copy/pasted everywhere.

That's the thing, though. The setting *isn't* changing. There's been "minorities" and women in roles throughout the Imperium since the era of Rogue Trader in the fluff, and even once-upon-a-time in the kits line.

It's only now, most of those older kits are no longer in production and are no longer available, that people get the idea that there's no women in the Guard (patently false, as mentioned previously, old fluff mentions the Xenans by name, and a former member shows up in the Last Chancers), or that the people of M41 give a gak about the color of your skin when there's those things out there.

 Peregrine wrote:

Plumbumbarum wrote:
Btw I already said that lasgun line breaker units are a fitting place for women and black people in 40k.

So, you're not a racist, but the appropriate place for black people in 40k is as cannon fodder? That doesn't even make any sense because after 40,000 years of history modern nations/racial prejudice/etc will be completely forgotten. A zealot for racial purity in 40k isn't going to have the same views as a 1950s KKK member, they're going to obsess over the superiority of humanity as a whole.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Plumbumbarum wrote:
because it doesnt look USA in space

Except that's what you're asking for, you want US-style racism in a setting where it doesn't make sense at all.

Jesus please not again. Did you read my previous posts? I know they re hard to read but please try.

Im not racist, I think 40k should be racist just as any backwards xenophobic society. Why would racial tensions disappear? Sure outside danger changes priorities but doesnt exclude one group exploiting the other etc. It's not me showing Imperium as predominantly white btw, it's GW.

Still it's mainly about a visual message for me, not fluff. Racialy diverse Imperium looks like a modern, advanced society not a backwards xenophobic one. Rationalisation is one thing but visual connotation is another.

I am fairly sure the Imperium is sufficiently absurd to avoid it looking modern, no matter whether the inhabitants have brown or pink skin.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Why on earth would women be less present?

For instance, Cadia has a conscription rate of 100%, and the differences between women and men become largely irrelevant in 40k because the difference between a human and, say, a Necron is far larger. Both the woman and the man are going to die to the gauss rifle all the same, so why halve the size of your armies by only recruiting one gender when you need every last pair of hands to fight for the Imperium?

Ninjaed by Peregrine!

The need for Babies? World War Z concerning russia has women treated as purely baby makers due to A) Low female ratio and B) the need for soldiers etc.

Also who says sexism isn't rife in the 40k universe? Also the separation of labour using gender is incredibly common and logical thing, maybe they are in charge of mostly industry, production, logistical and medical area's?

Plumbumbarum wrote:
Im not racist, I think 40k should be racist just as any backwards xenophobic society.

They are. Remember the whole "aliens are only good for killing" attitude?

Why would racial tensions disappear?

Because the nations, cultures, and history that produced those tensions haven't existed for about eight times the length of recorded history? Why should someone care that 40,000 years ago another person's distant relatives immigrated to their distant relatives' country on some long-forgotten planet? Do people in the real world still have racial tensions over whose ancient Sumerian ancestors had a problem with each other?

It's not me showing Imperium as predominantly white btw, it's GW.

Yes, and the point is that portrayal is the result of unimaginative authors and artists operating under society's "the default character is a straight white man" assumption, not something that makes sense in the setting.

Racialy diverse Imperium looks like a modern, advanced society not a backwards xenophobic one.

No it doesn't. If the only way that you can tell that a society is backwards and xenophobic is that it's all-white then I really have to wonder about your perceptiveness.

 Peregrine wrote:

Plumbumbarum wrote:
Because North America is pc crazy (though Europe catches up fast now) and you just cant leave a good old mysogyinst and racist setting alone heh.

Wanting to fix the absurd lack of characters that aren't white men, especially in a setting where that absence doesn't make any sense, is hardly "PC crazy". And TBH what "PC" usually means is "I know this is offensive, but the only way I can think of to defend it is to whine about how nothing should be criticized".

It's not about UK or USA customers. It's about the idea that setting should change because target audience changes, I hate it 40k will loose character because of it. Everything becomes similar, dulled or sth.

I really fail to see having female guardsmen or black space marines is making 40k "lose character". In fact, the exact opposite is true: 40k gains character because it has a greater depth of fluff instead of just the same white male Cadians copy/pasted everywhere.

It gets deep, nice and cosy. A great place for everyone (to die but still). It's mainly modern societies that let women fight but out of a sudden a dark age esque facists decide that women are better on the front than as soldier factories at home. Maybe, doesnt fit for me though.

How about female space marines? Wouldnt they kill 40k character? I saw a lot of such propositions here.

 Baldeagle91 wrote:
The need for Babies?

Who cares about babies? There are already way too many of them for the hive city to feed them all, and future ability to make babies doesn't really help you very much if the Tyranids eat your entire planet. And really, sacrificing the future for a desperate hope of gaining a few more minutes of miserable existence is the fundamental theme of the Imperium.

Also who says sexism isn't rife in the 40k universe?

The lack of explicit sexism in the fluff?

Also the separation of labour using gender is incredibly common and logical thing

It isn't really, at least not to the agree that it exists in the real world.

I've also just thought.... isn't the black gene or whatever more regressive than the white one?

So technically speaking if each planet was a mix of different ethnic groups they would slowly seem more white unless black skin was beneficial? Aka desert like, and even then we know evolution is random, meaning it's not always guaranteed to produce further skin colour mutations.

Plumbumbarum wrote:
It's mainly modern societies that let women fight

Or desperate societies. If Space Stalingrad is being invaded by the Tyranids then everyone is conscripted and sent into the meat grinder. It's not about fairness and equality, it's about the Imperium not caring who you are as long as you can wear your t-shirt and shine your flashlight.

How about female space marines? Wouldnt they kill 40k character? I saw a lot of such propositions here.

That's an entirely separate issue because, unlike other parts of the Imperium, there is explicit fluff that the space marine transformation process only works on men. There is no such technical reason preventing a woman from putting on her t-shirt and shining her flashlight at a Tyranid to annoy it a little bit before it eviscerates and devours her just like the man next to her.

@Peregrine all whites is not the only way I can tell a society is xenophobic and racist but in conjunction with medieval references it really helps to convey the message, especialy in visual department. I also dont see a valid reason for changing the heavy whitish vibe of the Imperium.

I predict it will change though and you will get your depth.

Also, if we are going to entertain the 'women are less suitable as warriors because men have better physiology for it' angle, then why are there not far more female officers? After all, the size of your biceps does not affect your ability to plan out strategies. Men and women are just as intelligent.

 Baldeagle91 wrote:

 Bronzefists42 wrote:

 Baldeagle91 wrote:
I remember seeing a few black guardsman in the old catachan codex. At the time I thought, why are there not more black character? Not too shabby for a 10 year old!

I was thinking the same thing at the time and then painting around 5-6 of my own guardsmen black. I also remember my dad telling me to tone it down a bit! Think thought I was gonna paint my entire army as if they were black!

Also remember seeing a completely black army painted by a white player at warhammer world a few years ago..... which seemed weird in my head but whatever!

It's not really important in terms of how players themselves paint their figures, but would be nice to see more in the official fluff. If this was fantasy though there wouldn't be much of an issue.

Just out of curiosity why did your dad want you to "tone down" the number of black miniatures in your army?

That's way more confusing than a white player with a primarily black army.

Ohh he thought someone might think I was being racist or something....

yeahh I know... gotta love the white middle class political correctness police

How is having a model painted with dark skin tones racist?

Plumbumbarum wrote:
@Peregrine all whites is not the only way I can tell a society is xenophobic and racist but in conjunction with medieval references it really helps to convey the message, especialy in visual department.

Not really, because "everyone is white by default" applies to most fiction in 2015, not just dystopian settings.

I also dont see a valid reason for changing the heavy whitish vibe of the Imperium.

The reason is that it doesn't make any sense fluff-wise. It's the product of authors and artists who operate under society's "characters are always straight white men by default" assumptions and don't put any effort into questioning them, not a consequence of in-universe fluff.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Also, if we are going to entertain the 'women are less suitable as warriors because men have better physiology for it' angle, then why are there not far more female officers? After all, the size of your biceps does not affect your ability to plan out strategies. Men and women are just as intelligent.

And let's not forget about the pilots. If we're going to steal power armor from Starship Troopers why not also steal Heinlein's idea that all of the starship crew and fighter pilots will be women because of their superior tolerance for g-forces.

 Peregrine wrote:

Plumbumbarum wrote:
It's mainly modern societies that let women fight

Or desperate societies. If Space Stalingrad is being invaded by the Tyranids then everyone is conscripted and sent into the meat grinder. It's not about fairness and equality, it's about the Imperium not caring who you are as long as you can wear your t-shirt and shine your flashlight.

How about female space marines? Wouldnt they kill 40k character? I saw a lot of such propositions here.

That's an entirely separate issue because, unlike other parts of the Imperium, there is explicit fluff that the space marine transformation process only works on men. There is no such technical reason preventing a woman from putting on her t-shirt and shining her flashlight at a Tyranid to annoy it a little bit before it eviscerates and devours her just like the man next to her.

Fair enough with Stalingrad example, there are valid reasons for women on the front in some cases. As said, I prefer copypaste cadians though.

Visuals > Fluff for me

On female sm thouh. Lets ditch the fluff and imagine the artwork for a sec, half the Ultramarines are women. Does it kill the character and mood for you? I ask because it would for me, in a second. Roman legion reference,dead. Monk reference, dead. Knight reference, dead.

I think that gw dont want to kill the medieval reference in Imperium either. Probably at the cost of logic and probabilty, wouldnnt be a first time really. Id agree if that was the case ofc.

Plumbumbarum wrote:
On female sm thouh. Lets ditch the fluff and imagine the artwork for a sec, half the Ultramarines are women. Does it kill the character and mood for you?

No, it wouldn't, even if female SM somehow was visually bad. Astartes are gene-stimmed, modified, bulked up, and generally tampered with to the point where they are no longer really human. After having their skeletons altered, muscles super-buffed, hormones changed and all the other changes, they would barely be recognisable as female anymore, and they would CERTAINLY not be recognisable as female once clad in massive Power Armour. In fact, it's dubious if they would be physically female at all after the process.

Here is how a female Space Marine would look.



Looks okay to me.

Plumbumbarum wrote:
As said, I prefer copypaste cadians though.

Ok, so now we're talking about your personal preferences, not the fluff of 40k as defined by GW (where Cadians are not anywhere near as common as they are in the codex art).

Visuals > Fluff for me

I don't really see how you can separate the two. Visuals are part of the fluff, and they are defined by the fluff. In fact, take away the fluff of the Imperium and just look at a picture of a space marine and all you have is a generic scifi soldier without any of the dystopian elements that define 40k

Does it kill the character and mood for you? I ask because it would for me, in a second. Roman legion reference,dead. Monk reference, dead. Knight reference, dead.

Not really, because "male" is not an essential part of those references. You might as well argue that the Roman legion reference is dead because marines carry bolters instead of javelins and swords.

As long as we're talking about what makes sense fluff wise it's absurd to think that people would only have one skin color when abhumans are a thing. Consider that most people in 40K don't have access to space travel and also that many populations have been isolated for enough time for genetic variations to occur. Also, There's basically an equal amount of genetic variation between a blonde haired white person and a brown haired white person as there is between a blonde haired white person and a black person. Look it up.

Ashiraya I thought you know, helmetless, heavier jaws but still womanly features, long hair in the wind or sth else to show they are women still. Even if now they would be just be men without balls doesnt mean gw couldnt make up some pseudo science babble to justify them if they introduced female sm. As I said ditch the fluff for a moment and imagine a female space marines alongside men ones.

 Peregrine wrote:

Plumbumbarum wrote:
As said, I prefer copypaste cadians though.

Ok, so now we're talking about your personal preferences, not the fluff of 40k as defined by GW (where Cadians are not anywhere near as common as they are in the codex art).

Visuals > Fluff for me

I don't really see how you can separate the two. Visuals are part of the fluff, and they are defined by the fluff. In fact, take away the fluff of the Imperium and just look at a picture of a space marine and all you have is a generic scifi soldier without any of the dystopian elements that define 40k

Does it kill the character and mood for you? I ask because it would for me, in a second. Roman legion reference,dead. Monk reference, dead. Knight reference, dead.

Not really, because "male" is not an essential part of those references. You might as well argue that the Roman legion reference is dead because marines carry bolters instead of javelins and swords.

That would be personal preference if it wasnt also what GW portrays, artwork is also the way to define the settings. Im not specificaly about Cadians though, I mean I prefer copypaste Cadians (expression - yours btw - for current portrayal of IG by GW) over your previous suggestion of more diverse guard. I prefer the way it is now, women in the books games or somewhere but as going by GW codex art, nowhere to be seen on the battlefield or not significant enough to show them - even at the expense of logic suggesting that they could at some point in some battle make the entire frontline (on the other hand maybe they just dont use them because reasons. I guess you can cite historical examples all day where women used would make a difference but werent, out of some cultural superstitions)

A picture of a Space Marine doesnt show exactly dystopian but it shows a lot. It is an intimidating figure with skull shaped helmet, a kind of buffed and less silly Darth Vader. The purity seals, eagles, tell a story already. Now take an artwork with multiple (example that old Rogue Trader one with a nod to Hitler parade) and dystopia starts to show up. Take some older art with perspective typical for middle ages paintings, the artwork alone is able to show you what kind of place 40k is. It is times more important to me than fluff, I can have the best description for something ever but if it doesnt show on a picture or the model, it is worthless to me. I find the fluff being mediocorely written stories slapped on ripped of elements and it's quite frankly tiring at parts, artwork is the main medium of communication of 40k imo. It is ofc just as ripped off but has it's own distinct epic grimdarkness that sells it immediatly. Sure fluff helps also the stories are needed for the sake of the game and to put it into some context but Id be fine with just few general explenations and stronger bits like billion on the boarding ramp or dreadnought a walking coffin, especialy that 40k is in general so ridiculous and absurd that it doesnt hold up anyway, it works on impressions more than explanations imo.

@Mustela I love to discuss general themes of 40k but discussing actual genetics is taking it too far. 40k is not star trek, it doesnt even pretend to make much sense in a way of details. Ofc it has to have enough internal logic to not completly crumble but any realism discussion ends at orks imo. As I per above it's imo more about impressions than explanations. About strong visual messages that are crudely glued together by fluff later. Btw this paragraph should be last but Im not writing it again, dont want to go insane.

@Peregrine
Ugh Im not really sure if I properly put it into words. In other words, million of guardswomen in the books, none on the art in the codex now, art takes precedence.

Male not part of monk, knight reference, I kind of lost you there. I really feel like I hit some language barrier this time.

Plumbumbarum wrote:
I think that actual mysogyny would fit the Imperium

Even though that it has been made abundantly clear in the fluff that this can vary from planet to planet, but at the highest level of the Imperium, there is none? Explicitly none, with women being High Lords? The only position on the Imperium that is too high for a woman to reach is God-Emperor of Humanity, because there is only one guy with this title and he never died.

Plumbumbarum wrote:
I also dont want people with pc like vision to impose theirs.

Well, I really, really do not care that you do not want me to do .

Plumbumbarum wrote:
There are black dictators in the world. They ussualy dont sit in the middle of roman/ gothic inspired architecture (or as arstechnica said what look like "if every steampunk fan was an ardent catholic and was designing buildings for a facist empire").

As a matter of fact, neither do white dictators.

Plumbumbarum wrote:
I think it would be ridiculous, as fitting as black Heimdalll to midgard and just another USA in spaace we have dozens of, this time with gothic flair.

Let us make it full of Indian-looking people, then. That way it will not be USA in space .