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.

 Kojiro wrote:
So you're saying a female that went through the process would still develop hips, breasts and be slimmer with less muscle mass than a male astartes?

Theoretically possible, but would probably require someone to modify the process to work on a female body, something that is totally beyond the technical capabilities of the Mechanicum.

I think they'll develop mustache.

Would look like this minus the weird color:

 Psienesis wrote:
I love threads like these. They highlight problems in the fanbase as well as they highlight problems in the game. It highlights that there are some truly odious individuals that play this game.

Should there be female Space Marines? Eh... no. It's a conceit of the setting that they're entirely male.
...

This only shows that sexism is specifically written into the game universe. The most powerful and elite troops with the best equipment, that are admired by everyone, cannot be women.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
I love threads like these. They highlight problems in the fanbase as well as they highlight problems in the game. It highlights that there are some truly odious individuals that play this game.

Should there be female Space Marines? Eh... no. It's a conceit of the setting that they're entirely male.
...

This only shows that sexism is specifically written into the game universe. The most powerful and elite troops with the best equipment, that are admired by everyone, cannot be women.

Cullexus sssassins and dark eldar witches are elite. What about them? Male witches are not allowed iirc. Maybe someone would like male leather-wearing mustached witches with power from pain. But no! Sexism!

 koooaei wrote:
Male witches are not allowed iirc.

It is spelled wyches and you have never looked at the models closely, have you? A little under half are male. A little under half of the kabalite are female too.
Also the Abbess is a High Lord, with a permanent seat.

Cool, so, what's the problem than? Plenty of 40k girls around.

Even if half the witwyches are males, they're not manly enough. Where are DAMN MUSTACHES!? Leather and mustaches are supposed to go together.

It's fiction in a fantastic setting, women could physically develop under genetic manipulation in any direction a writer or artist chooses.

Whatever you think of the whole "Astartes are men" discussion, it's obvious GW could be doing much more to represent women in the Imperium (other factions are a bit better with characters like Shadowsun, Jain Zar and Hesperax). Models like Commissars, Inquisitors, or Company HQs in the Guard would be obvious ways to provide a lot of meaningful inclusivity without needing to redesign much in terms of expenses . A single plastic kit for Battle Sisters with a lot of different bits to help customize them (like the Scion kit) would go so far. And you could easily do an "amazon world" book with rules more or less as substantial as the Cadia supplement, which would support both a standalone army or conversions.

I think it's hard to argue there's never sexism or hostility in certain gamer cultures, or that there's a general shortfall on GWs part to represent women on the tabletop. The staggering price of Sisters on the used market and the various 3rd party companies racing to make female models available is proof that the niche is underserved.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
This only shows that sexism is specifically written into the game universe. The most powerful and elite troops with the best equipment, that are admired by everyone, cannot be women.

Dan Abnett wrote a combat scene of a teenage girl singlehandedly destroying a Chaos Baneblade, armed mostly with religious conviction. There is no reason you can't write a better representation of women into 40k, with Celestine being able to go toe-to-toe with a Wraithknight and a named SC for guard who is the equivalent of Yarrick. Why can't we have Sisters a Codex with the same customization as the SM codex, with "Orders" instead of "Chapters" and equivalent levels of competence? They could be close partners with the Black Templars and easily run joint operations with equal representation in both planning and fighting at the front. The whole "hats for Grey Knights" thing is 100% sexist if you don't give Sisters meaningful roles and badass moments to balance that out.

People may argue what is and what isn't sexist, but I don't think anyone will argue GW could do a lot better. No need to lay a guilt trip on people for their hobbies though.

just gonna chime in on the female space marine bit

let me tell you something, as someone coming from the fitness industry where steroids are abused by both men and women, you do not want female astartes.

When you get guys juiced up on hgh and another pharmacy's worth of stuff they get close to astartes level of musculature. (google big Ramy)

I'd rather not post the images on here as quite frankly they are not appropriate for this forum, but women on the same cocktail of growth drugs do not look like that feminine she hulk you guys are posting.

go ahead and google image extreme steroid abuse for womens bodybuilding. You will hopefully realize these would not be tasteful models.


and yes they do grow mustaches/facial hair after years of abuse and no, checking between the legs is not a good method of gender identification either as *it* can grow quite large




having said that, they also should not rebox any current kit to have female heads added as that is a stupid waste of money and resources; instead they should create and sell accessory sprues to add them for different races.

 koooaei wrote:
I think they'll develop mustache.

Like this.

 koooaei wrote:
Cool, so, what's the problem than? Plenty of 40k girls around.

Are you kidding?

 koooaei wrote:
Even if half the witwyches are males, they're not manly enough. Where are DAMN MUSTACHES!? Leather and mustaches are supposed to go together.

They are evil space elves, not space dwarfs. Elves and facial hair don't work together .

 stormotron wrote:
having said that, they also should not rebox any current kit to have female heads added as that is a stupid waste of money; instead they should sell accessory sprues to add them for different races.

The Scion kit has something like 17 heads for about 5 models. There is *zero* reason they can't add some female heads to any future kits rather than making it an additional and completely gratuitous expense to field women in your army.

It should not be more expensive or suboptimal to play women in 40k, this is what gets rightfully tagged as a sexist decision. GW would get raked over hot coals for this in the media and I would agree with the analysis. What would you think if a recently male-only gym made it more expensive for women to have their own locker room?

If women want to play 40k with female minis, there should not be a higher barrier to entry. No additional $$$ required, no weaker rules on the tabletop, no needlessly negative treatment by other players in real-life. Which includes being tone-deaf or dismissive of their concerns. That's what's meant by inclusivity.

I don't know, maybe I am some kind of wild-eyed idealist but this just doesn't seem like a great message.

 koooaei wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
I love threads like these. They highlight problems in the fanbase as well as they highlight problems in the game. It highlights that there are some truly odious individuals that play this game.

Should there be female Space Marines? Eh... no. It's a conceit of the setting that they're entirely male.
...

This only shows that sexism is specifically written into the game universe. The most powerful and elite troops with the best equipment, that are admired by everyone, cannot be women.

Cullexus sssassins and dark eldar witches are elite. What about them? Male witches are not allowed iirc. Maybe someone would like male leather-wearing mustached witches with power from pain. But no! Sexism!

Please don't insult everyone's intelligence by claiming that SMs are not the poster boys of 40K.

I would be perfectly happy to have some leather moustache witches.

Yoyoyo wrote:

 stormotron wrote:
having said that, they also should not rebox any current kit to have female heads added as that is a stupid waste of money; instead they should sell accessory sprues to add them for different races.

The Scion kit has something like 17 heads for about 5 models. There is *zero* reason they can't add some female heads to any future kits rather than making it an additional and completely gratuitous expense to field women in your army.

It should not be more expensive or suboptimal to play women in 40k, this is what gets rightfully tagged as a sexist decision. GW would get raked over hot coals for this in the media and I would agree with the analysis. What would you think if a recently male-only gym made it more expensive for women to have their own locker room?

If women want to play 40k with female minis, there should not be a higher barrier to entry. No additional $$$ required, no weaker rules on the tabletop, no needlessly negative treatment by other players in real-life. Which includes being tone-deaf or dismissive of their concerns. That's what's meant by inclusivity.

I don't know, maybe I am some kind of wild-eyed idealist but this just doesn't seem like a great message.

For one there are female only gyms, so there's that. There's also gyms that bar men off of certain rooms as well while making them pay as much as women.

I agree that NEW kits could/should have female heads. but unless they redo an entire line, its not cost effective to repackage every race by making new sprues to appease whats probably a minor demographic of customers.

Just look at the roll out process of round bases for sigmar! that's just adding a bag of bases, no alteration to the sprues in many cases.

that's life, life isn't fair. oh no, you had to pay a few extra bucks to play an already expensive niche tabletop game because you wanted to go against the grain and have niche special kits for your personal tastes.......

 stormotron wrote:

Yoyoyo wrote:

 stormotron wrote:
having said that, they also should not rebox any current kit to have female heads added as that is a stupid waste of money; instead they should sell accessory sprues to add them for different races.

The Scion kit has something like 17 heads for about 5 models. There is *zero* reason they can't add some female heads to any future kits rather than making it an additional and completely gratuitous expense to field women in your army.

It should not be more expensive or suboptimal to play women in 40k, this is what gets rightfully tagged as a sexist decision. GW would get raked over hot coals for this in the media and I would agree with the analysis. What would you think if a recently male-only gym made it more expensive for women to have their own locker room?

If women want to play 40k with female minis, there should not be a higher barrier to entry. No additional $$$ required, no weaker rules on the tabletop, no needlessly negative treatment by other players in real-life. Which includes being tone-deaf or dismissive of their concerns. That's what's meant by inclusivity.

I don't know, maybe I am some kind of wild-eyed idealist but this just doesn't seem like a great message.

For one there are female only gyms, so there's that. There's also gyms that bar men off of certain rooms as well while making them pay as much as women.

I agree that NEW kits could/should have female heads. but unless they redo an entire line, its not cost effective to repackage every race by making new sprues to appease whats probably a minor demographic of customers.

Just look at the roll out process of round bases for sigmar! that's just adding a bag of bases, no alteration to the sprues in many cases.

that's life, life isn't fair. oh no, you had to pay a few extra bucks to play an already expensive niche tabletop game because you wanted to go against the grain and have niche special kits for your personal tastes.......

A really minor demographic; people actually insulted by such things.

GW gradually are redoing entire lines. Besides, they don't need to redo a whole line to add one kit to it.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

I would be perfectly happy to have some leather moustache witches.

Now we're talking. Eddie Murphy Cult ftw.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 n0t_u wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
I think they'll develop mustache.

Like this.

Yesss. They're hilarious! True amazons.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
GW gradually are redoing entire lines. Besides, they don't need to redo a whole line to add one kit to it.

theyd still need to rebox them, which isn't exactly easy nor cost effective. considering people pay for shoulder pads for specific chapters, I really don't understand the problem in charging something like $10 for like 20 female heads. this is a kit they could roll out much more feasibly

having said that if they did choose to update for example the cadian kit, then sure go ahead and add them then during the redesign. That would make more economic and logistical sense

 n0t_u wrote:


A really minor demographic; people actually insulted by such things.

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at with this comment, but all im suggesting is a cost effective way for GW to actualize this in a timely fashion.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Please don't insult everyone's intelligence by claiming that SMs are not the poster boys of 40K.

I think that it's somewhat representative. There are mostly boyz in this hobby. So, we get manly knights and boob plated sob as we're the majority. Get more girls into the hobby and there will be more strong females on the posters. It's not that people ara against female players or something. I'd personally like to get my wife interested, but... She likes painting, however the actual tabletop game doesn't interest her even slightless.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 stormotron wrote:


theyd still need to rebox them, which isn't exactly easy nor cost effective. considering people pay for shoulder pads for specific chapters, I really don't understand the problem in charging something like $10 for like 20 female heads. this is a kit they could roll out much more feasibly

Have you seen those cadians? They're the size of a space marine and their hands are boxy bear paws. Just female heads won't make it.

Also, i'm glad someone took on mustaches. That's exactly what i was refering to.

Maybe...current models are allready mixed males and females?! Girls are just on steroids.

 koooaei wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Please don't insult everyone's intelligence by claiming that SMs are not the poster boys of 40K.

I think that it's somewhat representative. There are mostly boyz in this hobby. So, we get manly knights and boob plated sob as we're the majority. Get more girls into the hobby and there will be more strong females on the posters. It's not that people ara against female players or something. I'd personally like to get my wife interested, but... She likes painting, however the actual tabletop game doesn't interest her even slightless.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 stormotron wrote:


theyd still need to rebox them, which isn't exactly easy nor cost effective. considering people pay for shoulder pads for specific chapters, I really don't understand the problem in charging something like $10 for like 20 female heads. this is a kit they could roll out much more feasibly

Have you seen those cadians? They're the size of a space marine and their hands are boxy bear paws. Just female heads won't make it.

Also, i'm glad someone took on mustaches. That's exactly what i was refering to.

Maybe...current models are allready mixed males and females?! Girls are just on steroids.

lol I am really tempted to post some pictures when I get home from work here soon to further my point. just not something I want to lookup on my work computer.

but ya cadians in general could serve to be redone. I feel something proportional like the elysian kit could get away with just a head swap

 stormotron wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
GW gradually are redoing entire lines. Besides, they don't need to redo a whole line to add one kit to it.

theyd still need to rebox them, which isn't exactly easy nor cost effective. ... ...

GW don't seem to have any trouble boxing new kits like Knight Titans or Tau Ballbusters, or reboxing WHFB kits as bundles or as AoS kits, or reboxing old snap-fit kits for the new starter sets that have been announced at Nuremberg Toy Fair.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 stormotron wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
GW gradually are redoing entire lines. Besides, they don't need to redo a whole line to add one kit to it.

theyd still need to rebox them, which isn't exactly easy nor cost effective. ... ...

GW don't seem to have any trouble boxing new kits like Knight Titans or Tau Ballbusters, or reboxing WHFB kits as bundles or as AoS kits, or reboxing old snap-fit kits for the new starter sets that have been announced at Nuremberg Toy Fair.

Which kits would you recommend they rebox? im just curious so I can get an idea of logistics/feasability


Automatically Appended Next Post:
View at your own risk; these are your genetically/pharmaceutically enhanced "female space marines" in the making



and people already complain soritas have manly faces.......

and for good measure, lets take a look at palumboism; which occurs when your internal organs grow from abusing human growth hormones


sorry to rain on your fantasies for female space marines. could they exist? maybe, but if they were to under go the same morbid genetic enhancement space marines go through, they aren't going to be the sexy slim waisted power armoured figures you'd like them to be.

 jonolikespie wrote:
Theoretically possible, but would probably require someone to modify the process to work on a female body, something that is totally beyond the technical capabilities of the Mechanicum.

It's not just that though. Marines are largely considered asexual as is, and if you put a female through the same procedure I suspect you'd end up with an entity so indistinguishable from their male counterparts that the distinction would be useless. And that's what true equality would represent- females being just as big and strong, not slimmed down version with hips and breasts. But if you make them identical their gender will become meaningless in every possible way. Hell the gender of marines in the universe as is doesn't really matter now.

Yoyoyo wrote:
If women want to play 40k with female minis, there should not be a higher barrier to entry. No additional $$$ required, no weaker rules on the tabletop, no needlessly negative treatment by other players in real-life. Which includes being tone-deaf or dismissive of their concerns. That's what's meant by inclusivity.

I don't know, maybe I am some kind of wild-eyed idealist but this just doesn't seem like a great message.

If people want to play 40K with female minis there is no need for anyone to accomodate that unless they feel it makes economic sense to do so.

You're making a connection that a majority of women want female miniatures and are somehow excluded if female miniatures aren't available. Do you have anything at all to back up that assumption? I don't see any clear connection between female players and female minis in other games.

Proving that would probably require doing some sort of thinking thing with looking stuff up and talking to people.

God I'm sure there is a name for it, other companies must do it right?
It's almost like its....it's like a research. But for a specific group of people with money. Like a market.

Man why can't I remember the name of this? I wonder if Gw knows it...

 Scott-S6 wrote:

Yoyoyo wrote:
If women want to play 40k with female minis, there should not be a higher barrier to entry. No additional $$$ required, no weaker rules on the tabletop, no needlessly negative treatment by other players in real-life. Which includes being tone-deaf or dismissive of their concerns. That's what's meant by inclusivity.

I don't know, maybe I am some kind of wild-eyed idealist but this just doesn't seem like a great message.

If people want to play 40K with female minis there is no need for anyone to accomodate that unless they feel it makes economic sense to do so.

You're making a connection that a majority of women want female miniatures and are somehow excluded if female miniatures aren't available. Do you have anything at all to back up that assumption? I don't see any clear connection between female players and female minis in other games.

You know, Infinity has a pretty significant proportion of female characters to the male ones, and yet there is no difference in the amount of women playing the game compared to 40k (at least that I have ever seen).

 Scott-S6 wrote:
You're making a connection that a majority of women want female miniatures and are somehow excluded if female miniatures aren't available. Do you have anything at all to back up that assumption?

I am not really interested in you trying to put the burden of proof on me, you don't find the above assumption is common sense?

Further to that, I think a majority of women would be quite happy to avoid an environment in which their desire for representation is questioned. Don't you?

On economic rationalizations, car companies weigh recall costs against the of cost of potential lawsuits. I'm not obligated to find that admirable and their economic motivations don't mean I can't hold an opinion about the value of their actions.

 stormotron wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 stormotron wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
GW gradually are redoing entire lines. Besides, they don't need to redo a whole line to add one kit to it.

theyd still need to rebox them, which isn't exactly easy nor cost effective. ... ...

GW don't seem to have any trouble boxing new kits like Knight Titans or Tau Ballbusters, or reboxing WHFB kits as bundles or as AoS kits, or reboxing old snap-fit kits for the new starter sets that have been announced at Nuremberg Toy Fair.

Which kits would you recommend they rebox? im just curious so I can get an idea of logistics/feasability

It is probably best to leave that decision to GW, don't you think?

Yoyoyo wrote:

 Scott-S6 wrote:
You're making a connection that a majority of women want female miniatures and are somehow excluded if female miniatures aren't available. Do you have anything at all to back up that assumption?

I am not really interested in you trying to put the burden of proof on me, you don't find the above assumption is common sense?

No, I would suggest that it's a rather sexist assumption. Do you see men refusing to play SoB because it excludes them? Are video games with female leads excluding men?

You're the one making the supposition so the burden of proof is on you to back it up.

Do you see lots more women playing games that are completely gender neutral or games that have plenty of female minis? I don't.

Frankly there isnn't a rational economic argument here.

GW have over 1,400 SKUs in production. To build a couple of new female SKUs would add a minute fraction of costs.

Even if not a single woman bought any, there are men who would buy them.