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.
WhiteBobcat wrote: This...this is why we will never get new Sisters models.
Half the player base will turn into sobbing piles of mush if they appear "too feminine", and the other half will revolt if they appear too androgynous.
Because in a universe where actual demons wander around slaughtering people, children have their flesh melted off by virus bombs, and ten thousand people a day are thrown into a blender to power a throne, the most objectionable thing about the game universe is curved armor.
99% agree (we will get new sisters ) its just seems silly how much people make a big deal about the subject. Personally I love the Sisters design and think its some of GWs better work (unpopular opinion probably but its a better looking design than Space Marine armor). What I don't want see happen is GW change the Sister's armor only for the sake of political correctness as it feels like betraying the artistic integrity of the company. Nothing in 40k is practical between the giant walking robots, rampant disregard for using helmets, most melee weapon designs, 95% of the settings vehicles, etc. Catachans apparently have abs made of the same thing as flak armor because they get 5+ saves while sometimes not even having on a Tshirt but I don't see petitions or threads about them beefcake eye candy or whatever.
StupidYellow wrote: I think Sisters probably should drop the heels and corsets.
Sister armor doesn't have high heels. I think it was one GW artist that threw heels on them but nearly all the stuff GW shows has them wearing plate armor like sabatons that are flat. The plate armor corsets I think work well as its very gothic fashion design which fits with their armor looking like gothic plate.
Are you sure? I thought I saw at least one or two with heels but I'll defer that.
Unfortunately they are just the naughty Nun type of character. I mean look at the Mistress on the Repentia. It's nothing but reinforcing a silly Stereotype.
Part of me even thinks it reinforces women are basically toys. It feels bad to say it but part of me does feel that way.
Regardless I would buy them if they released them. Possibly simply to support them.
The SoS suffer from a similar women are all DDD tall models, and their boob plates are basically half of the chest piece. They should have militarized sports bras or something more practical.
Anyway we can't all like the same thing. But it did partially put me off them.
WhiteBobcat wrote: This...this is why we will never get new Sisters models.
Half the player base will turn into sobbing piles of mush if they appear "too feminine", and the other half will revolt if they appear too androgynous.
Because in a universe where actual demons wander around slaughtering people, children have their flesh melted off by virus bombs, and ten thousand people a day are thrown into a blender to power a throne, the most objectionable thing about the game universe is curved armor.
99% agree (we will get new sisters ) its just seems silly how much people make a big deal about the subject. Personally I love the Sisters design and think its some of GWs better work (unpopular opinion probably but its a better looking design than Space Marine armor). What I don't want see happen is GW change the Sister's armor only for the sake of political correctness as it feels like betraying the artistic integrity of the company. Nothing in 40k is practical between the giant walking robots, rampant disregard for using helmets, most melee weapon designs, 95% of the settings vehicles, etc. Catachans apparently have abs made of the same thing as flak armor because they get 5+ saves while sometimes not even having on a Tshirt but I don't see petitions or threads about them beefcake eye candy or whatever.
StupidYellow wrote: I think Sisters probably should drop the heels and corsets.
Sister armor doesn't have high heels. I think it was one GW artist that threw heels on them but nearly all the stuff GW shows has them wearing plate armor like sabatons that are flat. The plate armor corsets I think work well as its very gothic fashion design which fits with their armor looking like gothic plate.
Are you sure? I thought I saw at least one or two with heels but I'll defer that.
Unfortunately they are just the naughty Nun type of character. I mean look at the Mistress on the Repentia. It's nothing but reinforcing a silly Stereotype.
Part of me even thinks it reinforces women are basically toys. It feels bad to say it but part of me does feel that way.
Regardless I would buy them if they released them. Possibly simply to support them.
The SoS suffer from a similar women are all DDD tall models, and their boob plates are basically half of the chest piece. They should have militarized sports bras or something more practical.
Anyway we can't all like the same thing. But it did partially put me off them.
S.Y.
S.Y.
The Sisters have never had heels in any of their models. The ONLY artwork that has ever depicted heels was Blanche's second edition codex cover. Unfortunately that piece is so iconic to 40k, it's almost always the one people think of first. But nowhere else has that happened. They have never been a "naughty nun" type character. Their look has always been dark and gothic. If you want naughty nun, go look at Raging Hero's. The Repentia are probably the most horrifying unit in the codex if you read their fluff. I always equated them too Fantasy's version of Dwarf slayers. Nutjobs who through some slight, real or otherwise, want to gain redemption in battle and death. And just so happen to do so wearing rags. The superior is just there to make sure they do it. They are only human after all. If it makes you think of them as toys, then with all respect, you need to look at them differently. The boob plate is a stupid argument. It's almost the epitome of the internet. Getting worked up over pointless things.
Davor wrote: When I am saying sexualizing I am not saying they look slutty or anything like that. I am saying GW can exactly like the link you have shown, not put any breasts on the minis. GW can clearly make a mini look feminine without breasts on the models just like the link you have provided. So in my opinion yes GW is sexualizing the minis by placing breasts on the minis because they don't have to, but choose to do so anyways. Again nothing wrong with that.
I would agree, on normal figures, you can do a female form without the exaggerated breast plate. The issue with trying to portray the SOB specifically as female is that they ARE wearing power armor. The other ways to depict the figures as female would be the other shapes of the body: hips, shoulder shape, slimness, etc that is all covered by power armor. Would it be any less sexualized to mold the armor with flaring hips or something along those lines? I'll be honest that I never gave this issue a real thought until I started on these forums and saw all of the threads about this. Much ado about nothing I say.......
Vash108 wrote: Personally I don't think boob armor and tactical heels make any fething sense.
I don't think practicality is very abundant in many facets of the Imperium - technology has reached a point where it can be impractically stylish but still incredibly destructive, ideal for a proud and arrogant, galaxy spanning dictatorship.
Vash108 wrote: Personally I don't think boob armor and tactical heels make any fething sense.
I don't think practicality is very abundant in many facets of the Imperium - technology has reached a point where it can be impractically stylish but still incredibly destructive, ideal for a proud and arrogant, galaxy spanning dictatorship.
I guess? But still the physical/tactiacl/protective issue with boob armor is silly. It really just says hey look... boobs! Plus I feel having some practical, for the most part which is asking a lot for 40k, would possibly attack more female players, who can be put off by those kinds of things.
My wife for one, would get into it if their female models weren't as sexed up.
I guess? But still the physical/tactiacl/protective issue with boob armor is silly. It really just says hey look... boobs! Plus I feel having some practical, for the most part which is asking a lot for 40k, would possibly attack more female players, who can be put off by those kinds of things.
My wife for one, would get into it if their female models weren't as sexed up.
If GW released some female Guardsman, I'd expect them to have more practical armour, since the AM typically have more practical looking weapons, armour and vehicles. Space Marines and SoB are ostentatious and impractical since they are the forefront of the Imperium's might and pride - the pretty boys/girls essentially. I don't think their aesthetic will change due to that, nor will the practicality of their weapons and armour change.
WhiteBobcat wrote: This...this is why we will never get new Sisters models.
Half the player base will turn into sobbing piles of mush if they appear "too feminine", and the other half will revolt if they appear too androgynous.
Because in a universe where actual demons wander around slaughtering people, children have their flesh melted off by virus bombs, and ten thousand people a day are thrown into a blender to power a throne, the most objectionable thing about the game universe is curved armor.
99% agree (we will get new sisters ) its just seems silly how much people make a big deal about the subject. Personally I love the Sisters design and think its some of GWs better work (unpopular opinion probably but its a better looking design than Space Marine armor). What I don't want see happen is GW change the Sister's armor only for the sake of political correctness as it feels like betraying the artistic integrity of the company. Nothing in 40k is practical between the giant walking robots, rampant disregard for using helmets, most melee weapon designs, 95% of the settings vehicles, etc. Catachans apparently have abs made of the same thing as flak armor because they get 5+ saves while sometimes not even having on a Tshirt but I don't see petitions or threads about them beefcake eye candy or whatever.
StupidYellow wrote: I think Sisters probably should drop the heels and corsets.
Sister armor doesn't have high heels. I think it was one GW artist that threw heels on them but nearly all the stuff GW shows has them wearing plate armor like sabatons that are flat. The plate armor corsets I think work well as its very gothic fashion design which fits with their armor looking like gothic plate.
Are you sure? I thought I saw at least one or two with heels but I'll defer that.
Unfortunately they are just the naughty Nun type of character. I mean look at the Mistress on the Repentia. It's nothing but reinforcing a silly Stereotype.
Part of me even thinks it reinforces women are basically toys. It feels bad to say it but part of me does feel that way.
Regardless I would buy them if they released them. Possibly simply to support them.
The SoS suffer from a similar women are all DDD tall models, and their boob plates are basically half of the chest piece. They should have militarized sports bras or something more practical.
Anyway we can't all like the same thing. But it did partially put me off them.
S.Y.
S.Y.
The Sisters have never had heels in any of their models. The ONLY artwork that has ever depicted heels was Blanche's second edition codex cover. Unfortunately that piece is so iconic to 40k, it's almost always the one people think of first. But nowhere else has that happened. They have never been a "naughty nun" type character. Their look has always been dark and gothic. If you want naughty nun, go look at Raging Hero's. The Repentia are probably the most horrifying unit in the codex if you read their fluff. I always equated them too Fantasy's version of Dwarf slayers. Nutjobs who through some slight, real or otherwise, want to gain redemption in battle and death. And just so happen to do so wearing rags. The superior is just there to make sure they do it. They are only human after all. If it makes you think of them as toys, then with all respect, you need to look at them differently. The boob plate is a stupid argument. It's almost the epitome of the internet. Getting worked up over pointless things.
The Iconic artwork where they are portrayed as basically a bunch of fanatical chainsword female Redemption seeking individuals is fine. What they made however is vastly different.
Nuns have always been a male fantasy, the Mistress is basically the epitome of that. As are sisters in a lesser sense.
I'm not worked up as you put it, but rather concerned that GW will hold onto out dated concepts rather than accepting the way forward which will change them from a stereotype into female Religious Soldiers.
Azreal13 wrote: Except, with Power Armour, you wear it directly over the skin.
No you don't. Even looking at the models and artwork could tell you that.
look again, cause the power armor is attached to the skin thru various access points, even the GW movie shows that.
No. First of all there is a massive difference between Astartes power armour and regular power armour.
The Astartes wear a body glove (which is the thick rubbery thing you see through the joints of the armour) underneath their armour. (the "access points" you see are the interface ports of the Marine's implants that interface with the bodygove (which presumably interfaces with the armour itself in turn).
The SoB and other non-Astartes do not have the required augmentations to be able interface with their power armour and just wear normal padding and clothing underneath it.
Also, what GW movie? GW has made no movies afaik. Unless you count those little Warhammer TV ads as movies that is.
Asterios wrote: furthermore in my SCA groups the women who do wear flat chested armor are usually complaining it restricts their breathing and some have had customized "boob" plated armor made. now while flat chested armor might not restrict those with small cup sizes it does effect many who have given birth and or are naturally or "enhanced" sized large breasts.
Sure.
If that is so, they are either not wearing a thick enough gambeson or their armour is too small. Just get them a larger size. No need for protrusions on the chest, that is only impractical at best, dangerous at worst in combat. Flat-chested armours deflect incoming blows better. There is no practical excuse for boob armours.
what never heard of Ultramarines: a warhammer 40,000 movie screenplay done by Dan Abnett? also I repeat do you wear armor? if the armor is too big leaving a lot of space or even padding space it will not do its job properly and will be too cumbersome to wear. as to Boob armor having no practical excuse evidently the ancient women who used it in combat thought it did, since it does exist.
and where does it say the SoB's wear anything under their armor?
Lol, the abomination that is the Ultramarines movie is a fan movie, not a GW production. It is a lore violating piece of gak that needs to be purged.
As to the armour, thicker padding does not decrease the effectiveness. If you have a lot of empty space either you need a thicker gambeson underneath or a smaller size armour.
As to what Sisters wear beneath their armour, look closely at the miniatures.
Also, ancient women did not wear boob armour. Thats a ridiculous claim
Wow a movie done under license from GW and written by one of GW's own writers is a fan film in your eye, seriously that just made you look foolish, as to armor padding if it takes more then a 1/4"-1/2" of padding you have an armor issue going on, also ancient women did wear boob armor (why else make it?) was it worn in combat? no was it more ceremonial? yes was said armor worn in battlefields? yes, was the wearer in combat? no, were women in combat a lot? not hardly, what kind of armor did warrior women wear in ancient times? very little if any, so your point being if we go by historical statistics of ancient fighting women the SoB's would be running the field practically naked.
Thinks Palladium books screwed the pooch on the Robotech project.
Davor wrote: I would have fully agreed but the I believe the comment of " so maybe it is best that find some way for you to deal with this obviously troubling matter on your own." I found was totally not needed and made it a personal attack instead of saying how he was "sick to death" of it.
After all this is not Warseer and people are allowed to have opinions on Dakka. He could have said what he wanted without making it personal. But personal he decided to make it. I brought it up so someone will not say that it's coming from that thread. It is coming from that thread, I got upset, at the common, I vented, now on my part it's all water under the bridge now.
So without getting upset, it does make a good discussion. After all on one side it's nice to have realism and not treat women as sexual objects but then on the other hand, it's nice to have mini that are like Kingdom Death has done.
I can see both sides of the camp as I said. But for some reason I guess I just would like to see some serious butt kicking sisters instead of seeing them as sexual objects like I did when I was younger.
Boob armour=/=sexual objects
Once again, we march to war, for Victory or Death!
Never wake yourself at night, unless you are spying on your enemy or looking for a place to relieve yourself. - The Poetic Edda
As if any of the stuff in the GW universe is practical. No Space Marine could move in the armour... heck, it is absolutely impossible to use the guns besides hip fire...
That's just a female Space Marine something which I hope SoB don't become.
My sibling is extremely pro keeping the oversexualization that Sisters have, high heels, corsets, and pointed bra points.
I agree on the first point. Sisters have never had high heels, the corset as it has always been is almost unrecognizable as such. Only two models I know of have anything but one raised band over the breast armor.
I feel that a lot of folks need to look actually look at the models before commenting on their, ya know, look.
Are you kidding? They haven't gone far ENOUGH! I'm not going to be content until there is Labia Armor.
That out of the way, who fething cares? Should all fantasy/AOS minis with breasts on them be resculpted to not be prominent? I'm pretty sure most tunic style shirts or draping blouses don't curve UNDER breasts, especially in a world which looks like it hasn't invented the bra yet. If the model has boob armor, it affects nothing. Does it make it easier for a super small model to be easily identifiable as female? Yep. Are they scissoring/stuffing digits/naked? Probably not. So yeah, I think they are fine.
I love boob armour. Just like I love nipples on Sanguiniary Guard/batman.
40K is a romanticized fictional universe that is over the top in every way, including aesthetics. I love that things don't make sense. I love that things are stylized. I don't want this blandness of modern military.
If it doesn't look like it stepped out of the vatican, it doesn't belong in 40K. This isn't sci-fi. It's fantasy in space. Lets keep it that way!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/10/18 01:07:50
Square Bases for Life!
AoS is pure garbage
Kill Primaris, Kill the Primarchs. They don't belong in 40K
40K is fantasy in space, not sci-fi
Kojiro wrote: If the SoB were redone and all sexualisation was removed- if you couldn't actually tell they were female, how would the people complaining about sexism and sexualisation react?
Depends. If they keep the baroque, over-done artistic look, and make it even more obvious, I will likely LOVE it. If they look just like Space Marines, I won't. But yeah, it could be great.
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
And to mutilate their bodies so they fit in their armour
I think the plates themselves are not representative of where the wearer's actual shoulders are - if you look at the Terminator models, there is a very large area beyond where their arm actually fits into the armour and where the shoulder plate ends. They're just massive for the sake of being massive
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/10/17 23:35:07
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Depends. If they keep the baroque, over-done artistic look, and make it even more obvious, I will likely LOVE it. If they look just like Space Marines, I won't. But yeah, it could be great.
That would relegate all 'femaleness' to the fluff only you realise? Anyone who wants to 'identify' with female models, or see themselves represented on the table, would have to be content with merely knowing that the fluff indicates these models are female? There are sure to be people who would complain about that. You can't represent something if no one can tell what that something is.
CT GAMER wrote: The whole Catachan "beefcake" bulging biceps things is rather offensive and objectifying too.
Let's lose our collective minds over it too...
It is a different kind of objectification. One is typically a sexual fantasy (sexy ass-kicking nuns who all have F cup breasts, tiny waists and a thigh gap you can drive a rhino through), the other a power fantasy (big manly rambonegger men kill all the bad guys in the jungle with our huge muscles rargh).
If the catachans all ran around with cod-pieces borrowed from Henry VIII then you may have a point. But they don't.
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
CT GAMER wrote: The whole Catachan "beefcake" bulging biceps things is rather offensive and objectifying too.
Let's lose our collective minds over it too...
It is a different kind of objectification. One is typically a sexual fantasy (sexy ass-kicking nuns who all have F cup breasts, tiny waists and a thigh gap you can drive a rhino through), the other a power fantasy (big manly rambonegger men kill all the bad guys in the jungle with our huge muscles rargh).
If the catachans all ran around with cod-pieces borrowed from Henry VIII then you may have a point. But they don't.
I dont really buy in to the idea of power fantasy vs sexual fantasy in the context of comparing catachans to sisters. They're caricatures more than anything, which just means they're exaggerated. When you exaggerate a woman, boobs get bigger. When you exaggerate a man, his junk doesn't get bigger because you normally don't see a dude's junk through clothing anyway.
You don't have to assign a power or sexual fantasy to it at all, just take them for the caricatures they are and be done with it.
If sisters were modeled in a remotely sexual way I might agree with the fantasy angle, but in this case I don't think so.
) its just seems silly how much people make a big deal about the subject. Personally I love the Sisters design and think its some of 
40IK - PP Conversion Project Files