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.

Probably because the Imperium are not the only ones glorifying them. GW itself is.

 Ashiraya wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
You mean when he wasn't a hero, when he was depressed? Before he got in shape and became a happy hero again?

As far as I remember, it was more a question of him using a really tight belt than him losing any weight.

You don't remember the training montage after the started his job with the enemy?
Look up big Bertha. That is a large female hero.

 Ashiraya wrote:

How does your link address my point at all? It only talks about female villains, there is no mention of male villains and how they can be large while male heroes are not.

Male heroes are large? Do you mean fat or do you mean like the Hulk?

Fat and out of shape. Like the kingpin, for example.
If we include cartoons then amethyst from Steven universe isn't a bad example (that's the short purple one right?).

 Ashiraya wrote:

And not really, unless you are saying that the female marine is equivalent to bikini armor, which is a bit of a stretch.

'Men are sexualised too!' is not all that different whether it's a question of bikini armour or that ridiculous female Marine from a few pages back. Both focus too much on emphasising femininity at the cost of any emphasis on the fact that they are warriors.

I don't see how how she isn't a warrior. She seems tall and athletic, and the armor looks dangerous. It covers all of her important bits, including her face, stomach, legs, and chest (which is what you typically see uncovered in the "bikini armor"). It doesn't even have nipple plat as far as I can tell.

My point isn't that "men are sexualized too",the clothing difference proves there is a difference between them. My point is that in both men and women we see unrealistic body images, including the barbarian images you provided. This imagies originate from a desire to portray heroes as both sexy and powerful, which they manage to do. Notice that, in your example of owl, he is supposed to be a depressed hero who is neither of these things. There is nothing wrong with Wonder Woman looking like she does when superman looks like he does, it's their outfits that are the difference. If wonder woman had a better outfit she would be fine and not catching so much flack.

I think the marine armor presented does a good job of that, so no, the argument isn't the same and you've largely misconstrued my point. I could have been clearer, the quote function is hard to use on an iPad and it really makes this hard, but you didn't have to fly in so hostile either rather than simply trying to understand someone's PoV and turn them around. It benefits no one.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Probably because the Imperium are not the only ones glorifying them. GW itself is.

I think there's a lot of accuracy to that.

Yoyoyo wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Probably because the Imperium are not the only ones glorifying them. GW itself is.

I think there's a lot of accuracy to that.

Agreed, and it's a problem you see in the fan base due to it. People hate marines like no other army in this game for almost the games history. At least since 3rd when I have been playing, despite Eldar being a lot stronger as a table top force usually.

 Brennonjw wrote:

I concede on the fashion designer, poor example. However, are cameramen "high-status" professions? Also, I see massively more respect for nurses then I do doctors. And I think the lack of "respect" for baby sitters is more related to the fact that it's usually a "teen" job, something done durring high school.

Cameramen (heh) are trained professionals who do get recognition if they're good enough. Just look at any awards for cinematography. Not as big in general society as actors or directors but there's still plenty of recognition to get within the field. Not like you can't find writers who are nobodies. IDK about nurses getting more respect or anything. Being a doctor usually pays more and is one of the stereotypical high-status professions (except IIRC in Russia, where it's mainly women). Taking care of kids that aren't yours is a job that goes back a long way and there are still plenty of families that hire a nanny.

Yoyoyo wrote:

 Brennonjw wrote:
The only difference is I don't hear you calling Banshees or SoB sexist for not having men in their main battle ranks.

You still don't get it, neither of those is glorified to the same extent. SoB don't even have a modern model line. You are proving killkrazy's point in reverse. And yes, it is sexist -- when you hold warriors up as the highest function performed in your society, and only men can become warriors, women default to have a primary value of reproduction. This is a historical reality. To steal a quote from Wikipedia, "War is to man what maternity is to the woman." Said by Italian fascist Mussolini.

Space Marines are the protagonists of the setting, but looking up to them or wanting to emulate them is a lot like idealizing Patrick Bateman in American Psycho. You're missing the joke.

That's why I find it so strange to ask for female space marines -- glorifying men as warriors at the expense of women is emblematic of fascism. And that's very much part of the grimdark, even if GW isn't shoving that logical connection in your face.

I'd hardly say SM are the "protagonists" being that they kill any form of desenter, I think "protagonist" would go to Tau, if not nobody at all (part of the grimdark). I think GW pushes them NOT out of some form of ignorant sexism, but becuase they are rather iconic, easy to assemble and paint, and have some of the most variety in colors to appeal to more people.

I still don't see how it's "at the expense of women" at all. It's just making a connection that is there, but ignoring the rest of the connection. SM are glorified over EVERYTHING barring the Emperor in fluff, and to single out women from that everything is just blatantly cherry picking. People beyond adolescence cannot become space marines, so are we going to start calling space marines ageist? You have to be in close to peak form to survive the transformation, so are Space marines fat shaming? Most marines only recruit from a select few worlds, so are they being "racists (planet-ist?)" to other planets? To try and single out these issues in a game in one ONLY faction that states "only men" in the fluff is just silly.

Due to the limits of the model lines, yes, IG and SM are "male only" until cadians get a new model pack and they add female heads (like they did for Tau), but then they will get whined at for the models having the same bodies, or having the ability to kill women in a tabletop game.

Where are you seeing more respect for nurses than doctors?
I've worked with a lot of healthcare professionals and in medical centers. I find nurses to be the least respected people in the building by both the staff and the patients.

Akiasura wrote:
Where are you seeing more respect for nurses than doctors?
I've worked with a lot of healthcare professionals and in medical centers. I find nurses to be the least respected people in the building by both the staff and the patients.

Recently (past 10 years) there's been a push and more people are aware of the BS that nurses have to deal with, and when it comes up, I've always heard more praise for nurses rather then doctors.

Ah that would explain it, I haven't been there for the most part since I started as a professor.
That'd be interesting if it's the case. Nurses always had the rawest deal when I was there.

Akiasura wrote:

Look up big Bertha. That is a large female hero.

Fat and out of shape. Like the kingpin, for example.
If we include cartoons then amethyst from Steven universe isn't a bad example (that's the short purple one right?).

Ursula is a big female villain who instantly leaps to mind.

I don't see how how she isn't a warrior. She seems tall and athletic, and the armor looks dangerous. It covers all of her important bits, including her face, stomach, legs, and chest (which is what you typically see uncovered in the "bikini armor"). It doesn't even have nipple plat as far as I can tell.

It is barely half the width of the armour it is supposed to match, is fitted with boobplate (which is a pretty big warning sign in itself) and is inexplicably about as thin or thinner than a Guardsman is - and he isn't wearing tank armour!
When you change the armour that much to look feminine rather than practical, it is almost gauranteed to be objectification in play.

My point isn't that "men are sexualized too",the clothing difference proves there is a difference between them. My point is that in both men and women we see unrealistic body images, including the barbarian images you provided.

True, but one has exaggerated physical strength characteristics (with sex appeal added on top) whereas the other has only sex appeal.

I could have been clearer, the quote function is hard to use on an iPad and it really makes this hard, but you didn't have to fly in so hostile either rather than simply trying to understand someone's PoV and turn them around. It benefits no one.

I apologise if I came across as hostile. Not my intent. I am quite frustrated by the topic because it feels like I am adressing things that I have adressed a million times before, but I assure you that does not reach into any ill opinion of you.

As an added thing, here is a picture of a character of mine, a fantasy elf in somewhat practical-looking armour. Compare to the female space marine picture and see the contrast - in particular when you highlight the fact that one wears heavy leather armour and the other wears tank plating!

GW is a for profit company, they will not make models that they don't think will sell well.

For various reasons Sisters of Battle doesn't seem to have sold well from their inception. They don't give a crap about social justice issues, they only care about money. Until they are convinced that female minis will move money, just like any other release they are not going to make new ones.

Well if we are going to move this to all forms of media this is quickly going to fall apart. There is just too much variation out there, especially recently. I was mainly talking about superheroes since that was the original topic, and I think we can agree that Ursula isn't really a super villain.

The armor doesn't match marines because it's not made by the same company, so I don't think it's a big deal. Honestly I always thought marines look too squat and aren't the best models (those shoulder pads). The boob plate might be a problem for you, I don't see it as a big deal. Nipple plate is where I draw the line.

For the barbarian images, I only see unrealistic images and I'm okay with it since I don't want to role play Chris Christie. Same for superheroes, if you update the costumes I think the women aren't dramatically different form the men in terms of sex appeal. The costumes go too far, basically being thongs for lol reasons. I'm honestly surprised marvel and dc haven't considered such a minor change that would buy them a lot of goodwill.

I appreciate your apology.

Edit, I don't think your armor or the marine would bother me. I think the marine is indeed sexier so if this is your standard I can see why it would annoy you, but I think we can agree that the marine is a lot better than say....She Hulk in terms of warrior women.

 Captain Joystick wrote:
Ironically the most characteristically GW-lazy method to introduce then to the setting would also be the most controversially progressive: say they recruit men and women (boys and girls, really) and the resultant physical changes make the resultant post-human astartes look a certain way regardless of the aspirant's gender. Take it a step further and argue the use of male pronouns in the fluff is in the gender-neutral sense and a product of their psychological deconstruction during the process. "You are not male, you are not female, these are the labels nature gave to you because it could not see your potential. You are Death!"

That's not the GW way. The GW way is to add female heads on sprue, add a special character and refer to “her armor” or “her weapons” or “her victory”, and just pretend that this specific article from WD 98 do not exist. Because as far as I know, that article is basically the whole of the fluff that would be invalidated, and given how dumb the Omophagea is, that would not be something to be too sad about…
Yeah, I would not mind this happening.

 Ashiraya wrote:
(NSFW inside because spoiler tags cannot be embedded inside other spoiler tags)

Spoiler:

Akiasura wrote:
I don't have a problem with them being sexualized personally. Women want to play sexy females like men want to play sexy males. Have you seen He-Man? Talk about unrealistic body images. A lot of the male models are heavily muscled in this game too.

Do we really have to go through something so basic as why power fantasy and objectification are different things?

You know what that means, Dakka! DING DING DING DING!

It's time for the FEMALE ARMOR RHETORIC BINGO!



And we hit SQUARE ONE!

To properly explain why He-Man, Conan and the like are not comparable to what we're seeing here, allow me to elaborate. Bare skin does not equal objectification.

Consider the following image. (Spoilered because NSFW).



The one on the left wears more clothing than the one on the right, but which one is more sexualised?

Indeed, it's the one on the left. The right looks like a plausible, savage barbarian (I'd probably have added -some- kind of chest support but that can easily be done with just a few straps).

He-Man is a muscular monster, displaying his enviable strength! But it does not make him sexualised. Musclemonsters usually are not that sexy.

If he had looked more like this Dead or Alive character, then yeah, sure, I could buy that. This fighter outfit is clearly designed to look attractive. But how often do you see this in games, movies, models, etc? (Spoilered because size)



Not very often.

It is the difference between looking at your character, and looking through the eyes of your character. You're not supposed to think He-Man is sexy, you're supposed to want to be as strong as he is! Compare to Red Sonya, who is a warrior-barbarian clearly designed to titillate the audience.

And that, my friends, is why objectification and power fantasy are different.

Carry on.

With those specific examples being used, I almost feel like I'm reading one of my own messages .
Great minds think alike, they say .

Anyway, I welcome someone telling me they can quote enough fat female characters from fighting games that I cannot find 10 fat male characters from fighting game for each female ones . Anyone want to take up the challenge? Same for old female characters and old male ones, by the way.

HoundsofDemos wrote:

For various reasons Sisters of Battle doesn't seem to have sold well from their inception.

Weren't they first released at the very end of 2nd edition, when everyone knew there was soon going to be a 3rd edition? Hardly ideal circumstances. They got a Chapter Approved list during 3rd edition and did get some tweaked or outright new models when the Witchhunter codex was released, during 3rd too IIRC. No plastics, though, and no army book all to themselves. They weren't as well-rounded as other armies because they were part of a bigger package with inquisitors and auxiliary troops and such. And now the model range has shrunk and there isn't even a physical book for them. Definitely an uphill struggle.

If space marines had gotten nothing but metal models and half a book since 2nd edition, I don't think they would've been very popular either.


And that's not even touching the fact that IG troopers being sold in mixed gender boxes wouldn't be a problem. Unless of course GW decides to go all tits-out which is admittedly a possibility.

Come on, haven't you figured out yet? GW is just not that interested in "girl 40k" market to invest more. Here's another identical example. GW stopped producing decent russian translations for their materials like 3-4 years ago. Now all we got is prompt translations. Saw a 7-th russian rulebook and couldn't read it. It was simply awful.
Why did it happen? Are GW racists? Nope, just russian market doesn't interest them enough to bother translating everything. Those who can - read source material, others either ask every damn thing or give up. A few start learning english but it's very rare.
The exact same thing happens here. There are allready sob, wyches and a bunch of female characters and heads. You've got your stuff proportionally to the ammount of care GW has towards you and your money. It's business.

 koooaei wrote:
You've got your stuff proportionally to the ammount of care GW has towards you and your money. It's business.

Very grimdark indeed

Someone mentioned male nurses and so on, and it's a little off topic but I just wanted to touch on it. Male nurses and primary school teachers actually advance faster and are paid better than their female counterparts, despite being a numerical minority. It is quite the opposite of how women do in male-dominated fields.

Something that is silly about the Space Marine stuff is it isn't a well-grounded part of the setting. It is practically a footnote that they are all dudes. They don't use it to launch any kind of social commentary. It doesn't cause anything interesting in the setting. That's part of what's so creepy about it: it's tough to understand why it's there other than "girls are icky" (and it's not the only example of that in GW's games - orks and dwarves come to mind).

Also, even though it is not really used for it in 40k IMO despite what some people in the thread are saying, it would be nice to be able to come and play a game without the writers reproducing existing oppressions in the game universe as "flavour" for male players.

so any time anything isn't split 100 percent down the middle it's oppressive? I'm a liberal guy but the above to me is just silly. It's been established for a while that the Emperor based the Primarchs and marines off his own genes and because he is a male that he couldn't get the process to work with woman. That doesn't need to change due to some social justice vision on how the world needs to be.

OH! they even brought up female primarchs in one of the HH novels (a conversation between malcador and the emperor) IIRC the Big E said it wouldn't have worked, however do with that as you will as I haven't read the book in quite a while

Not to bypass the argument, but while the author does lament the lack of female marines, the main point of the article is to say that GW needs to make the Imperial Guard models as representative as they are in the books. Also mentions Sisters could use an update.

Not horrifically controversial positions.

I'm on board with both and suspect that when guard get re cut they might get some female heads. As for Sisters being redone, that's probably going to come down to whether the sales department bean counters consult the emperors tarrot and determine if the auspices declare that there is money to be had.

GW has redone DE, GK, fairly recently and has launched three brand new armies via admech Skitarri and Harlequin. It's going to come down to whether those launches were successful.

 Brennonjw wrote:

You can be a boy baby sitter. I was.
You can be a boy fashion designer, e.g. Giorgio Armani, etc.
You can be a boy nurse. We've got some on DakkaDakka.
Blah blah.

It is the fact that there is a gender gate on admission that is sexist, not the field that you enter into by passing through the gate.

The same is true of SoBs. I have already said I would welcome leather moustache SoBs. Even if I hadn't, though, it would not make SMs non-sexist.

IDK what Banshees are but no doubt they are sexist too.

At any rate, you seem to have come to the realisation that 40K is rather sexist, and that's good.

 HiveFleetPlastic wrote:
Something that is silly about the Space Marine stuff is it isn't a well-grounded part of the setting. It is practically a footnote that they are all dudes. They don't use it to launch any kind of social commentary. It doesn't cause anything interesting in the setting. That's part of what's so creepy about it: it's tough to understand why it's there other than "girls are icky"

Exactly this. As far as I know, the only official sources that states only men can become space marines are literally ONLY ONE LINE in an article in WD98 that also mentions that marines can get the memory of any creature they eat. It is likely now also mentioned in the RPG, but it's still completely incidental. Changing it would actually invalidate so few fluff, and yet people keep acting like it would change everything…

I like how in Warhammer, we wouldn't question the prosess of making space marines. We would be worried about not getting eaten or dismembered. This whole conversation is surreal. I couldn't give a flying feth what space marines were IRL. They are 9' tall super humans, tougher than nails, and hit harder than a pick up truck. That's cool. Do we need to make it not cool when we say, "Lets make sure everything is represented in a dystopian future where that issue isn't even a concern." I am amazed nobody brought up that there weren't black people represented in warhammer 40k.

It's been restated in the Horus Heresy series that the science the Emperor used does not work on woman. I don't see why this is an issue.

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
I like how in Warhammer, we wouldn't question the prosess of making space marines. We would be worried about not getting eaten or dismembered. This whole conversation is surreal. I couldn't give a flying feth what space marines were IRL. They are 9' tall super humans, tougher than nails, and hit harder than a pick up truck. That's cool. Do we need to make it not cool when we say, "Lets make sure everything is represented in a dystopian future where that issue isn't even a concern." I am amazed nobody brought up that there weren't black people represented in warhammer 40k.

So because you think Marines are cool, people shouldn't question them?

Thanks, but no thanks.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
I like how in Warhammer, we wouldn't question the prosess of making space marines. We would be worried about not getting eaten or dismembered. This whole conversation is surreal. I couldn't give a flying feth what space marines were IRL. They are 9' tall super humans, tougher than nails, and hit harder than a pick up truck. That's cool. Do we need to make it not cool when we say, "Lets make sure everything is represented in a dystopian future where that issue isn't even a concern." I am amazed nobody brought up that there weren't black people represented in warhammer 40k.

So because you think Marines are cool, people shouldn't question them?

Thanks, but no thanks.

No, I am saying, at the end of the day, does it even matter? Who cares that SM are all male and SoB are all female? Is it even important?

More importantly, he said marines would be less cool if women could be marines too.

 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.

Should there be females represented in every other aspect of the Imperium (and all the other armies that have gender dimorphism?) Hell yes.

The only way this might be ok is if the models were utterly non-sexualized. I don't want to be associated with any weirdos that are getting their jollies off by imagining an army of scantily clad warrior women.

Never run a Wytch Cult? Don't know anyone who has played Dark Eldar over a few editions, back to when the Wytches were good? Scantily-clad female models have been a thing in 40k since forever. In the larger hobby scene of tabletop games and RPG miniatures, scantily-clad models of both genders have always been a thing. After all, there's plenty of Conan wannabes in their fur loincloths and huge pecs on the male side of the house in fantasy gaming, and always has been.

Point and case. Dark eldar and slaanesh players are the worst.
Additional, banshee should be wearing som kind of armor to justify the 3+

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
More importantly, he said marines would be less cool if women could be marines too.

Aren't I just the most offensive person imaginable? Having an opinion? I guess that's offensive. Are you going to tell me its offensive that I said black people aren't hugely represented? Are you SJW, Bro?