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.

 Frozen Ocean wrote:
Tempestus Scions fluff,

Uh? As far as I know they mention females of high fate being sent to be SoBs.

True. Temestus are from Schola Progenium, where large ortion of women go into the ranks of Ecclesiarchy and some into Commissariat, Inquisition, Officios, Ministorums etc...

Tempestus are special operatives, and like it their real world equivaents, there are no women either.

Where does it says that?

As fas as I know (and my logical deduction goes), I never noticed anything about female tempestus in their fluff. But If you can prove me wrong, I'l accept it.

 Hawky wrote:
As fas as I know (and my logical deduction goes), I never noticed anything about female tempestus in their fluff. But If you can prove me wrong, I'l accept it.

Fortunately that fluff is non-canon (and badly written) fanfiction and can safely be ignored. Storm troopers are drawn from normal IG sources, so can potentially include whatever men or women are in their initial regiments. Cadian Kasrkin would likely have female soldiers to go along with the 100% recruitment rate for people on Cadia, regardless of gender.

 Bobthehero wrote:
Where does it says that?

It has been the fluff for some time in the Codexes that mention the Schola that men only become Commissars ad Storm troopers, however its directly contradicted by many BL novels including Helsreach and the Cain novels.

The latter I do treat as just as cannon as anything else GW produces.

Ciaphas Cain: Hero of the Imperium, apparently. Lexicanum typically never adds anything without a citation, and while the piece on Guardswomen is labelled as being from one source, I personally don't doubt its accuracy.

I need to go back and read my Cain books as I don't recall the 10% but do recall Inquisitor Vail and Cain talking about how regiments are normally single sex to avoid "issues".

Because good stories are almost always told following acts of heroism, which Space Marines are known for.

But that's irrelevant to my point - if women are not included because they are uncommon than by the same logic Marines should be even rarer.

If they had established the 40k universe as a male dominated one that would make sense form a fluff point of view but the fact that the supporting and equally official novels show a very different Imperium is odd and annoying.

Is it really? Even their codex?

E// Femae commissars are a thing (there was a miniature, athough a bad one).
So there is an inconsistercy.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Where does it says that?

It has been the fluff for some time in the Codexes that mention the Schola that men only become Commissars ad Storm troopers,

What? No, all it says is that women of exceptionnal faith go to be Sobs, that's it, no mention of Stormtroopers or Commissar being gender-locked.

 Hawky wrote:
Even their codex?

They don't have one. Storm troopers are part of the IG codex (and IG variant army lists like the DKoK and armored company).

 Bobthehero wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Where does it says that?

It has been the fluff for some time in the Codexes that mention the Schola that men only become Commissars ad Storm troopers,

What? No, all it says is that women of exceptionnal faith go to be Sobs, that's it, no mention of Stormtroopers or Commissar being gender-locked.

It does in the SOB Codex's. However as I said that's then contradicted by other official sources. I don't have the current Tempestus Codex so can't say either way what that says.

 Mr Morden wrote:


I need to go back and read my Cain books as I don't recall the 10% but do recall Inquisitor Vail and Cain talking about how regiments are normally single sex to avoid "issues".

I just need to read them, honestly. I typically don't read 40k novels, since I like to absorb as much "factual" information as possible from various areas so I can create stories while either playing on the tabletop or when I'm painting my collections.

But that's irrelevant to my point - if women are not included because they are uncommon than by the same logic Marines should be even rarer.

Incorrect - A Space Marine is more likely to showcase acts of heroism in 40k than almost anyone else, hence why they are featured so much despite being such a small organisation.

If you're talking about the tabletop game, then yes the logic doesn't exactly add up. But then again, Triptide Wings don't make sense in the lore either.

If they had established the 40k universe as a male dominated one that would make sense form a fluff point of view but the fact that the supporting and equally official novels show a very different Imperium is odd and annoying.

I would personally say that it is a male dominated universe. This is not to say that women do not have a significant role, but that they are in smaller quantity in most cases than men.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
You're obviously implying that they didn't have models because they were female.

Prove it.

Boss! Yes, boss ! Sure, boss! How many push-up should I do boss?

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Boss! Yes, boss ! Sure, boss! How many push-up should I do boss?

You don't have to prove him wrong if you don't want to, but I don't think there is any need for snarkiness.

I personally will be very interested if you have some evidence to prove that GW deliberately didn't make models for them because they're female - not much about the meaning behind their business practices is known to the general public these days...

I mean, GW has announced they're making new Sisters models...

and I don't see how they would make Guardsmen look like women in other ways than boob armour.

 Matthew wrote:
I mean, GW has announced they're making new Sisters models...

and I don't see how they would make Guardsmen look like women in other ways than boob armour.

Either through the shape of their faces or the shape of their legs and arms. Making them more slender next to the male Guardsmen should make them look noticeably different without the need for bare heads/boob armour.

Mind you, even that's still bound to piss some sensitive people off - "not all women are that shape!". Can't have it both ways, guys, and there's only so many casts a model company can make for a single box set.

G.A

If victoria miniatures can pull it off, then theoretically so could the "greatest miniatures company in the world"

I for one would like to see more Imperial Guard regiments? Remember how we had Steel Legion, Vostroyans, Last Chancers, First and Only, Tallarn and Mordians? That was awesome. Now its just Cadians and Catachans.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
If victoria miniatures can pull it off, then theoretically so could the "greatest miniatures company in the world"

Emphasis on theoretically, of course. GW is a much bigger company than Victoria Miniatures, and that can bring both benefits and complications when thinking and creating new product lines.

I for one would like to see more Imperial Guard regiments? Remember how we had Steel Legion, Vostroyans, Last Chancers, First and Only, Tallarn and Mordians? That was awesome. Now its just Cadians and Catachans.

Agreed, I'd like to see those return. But again, you have the same potential complications with making a squad of female Guardsmen, not to mention the fact that, if we were to get those regiments back, people would want them to cast females for every regiment.

 Matthew wrote:
I mean, GW has announced they're making new Sisters models...

and I don't see how they would make Guardsmen look like women in other ways than boob armour.

Here's a pretty good example!

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
If victoria miniatures can pull it off, then theoretically so could the "greatest miniatures company in the world"

I for one would like to see more Imperial Guard regiments? Remember how we had Steel Legion, Vostroyans, Last Chancers, First and Only, Tallarn and Mordians? That was awesome. Now its just Cadians and Catachans.

Limited Tallarn, Mordian, Steel Legion, Tanith and Vostroyan ranges are still available direct from GW. As are the entirety of the Last Chancers.

 General Annoyance wrote:

 Matthew wrote:
I mean, GW has announced they're making new Sisters models...

and I don't see how they would make Guardsmen look like women in other ways than boob armour.

Either through the shape of their faces or the shape of their legs and arms. Making them more slender next to the male Guardsmen should make them look noticeably different without the need for bare heads/boob armour.

Mind you, even that's still bound to piss some sensitive people off - "not all women are that shape!". Can't have it both ways, guys, and there's only so many casts a model company can make for a single box set.

G.A

problem is we are talking GW where SM's are supposed to tower over Cadian troops and yet in miniature they are the same size, also at 28mm facial features can get lost under helmets and hats.

 Spinner wrote:

 Matthew wrote:
I mean, GW has announced they're making new Sisters models...

and I don't see how they would make Guardsmen look like women in other ways than boob armour.

Here's a pretty good example!

problem is those pictures are like twice the size of the actual minis, so other then the ones with hair it would be hard to distinguish them from males.

 General Annoyance wrote:
You don't have to prove him wrong if you don't want to, but I don't think there is any need for snarkiness.

Yeah I was just very annoyed by how he made it sound like an order.
For the record I don't think it was the result of some explicit policy that they didn't made models for many female special characters, rather just good old unconscious bias. And I do believe that there was an explicit policy to remove characters without a model. My response was mostly in jest (hence the smiley) with a grain of truth (I really believe there is some unconscious bias at work on how most SC, especially the most prominent one, are male). While I don't have any proofs to provide, I am pretty sure neither does Lord Damocles, and I really don't think shouting “Prove it” can lend itself to some fruitful exchange.

Asterios wrote:


problem is we are talking GW where SM's are supposed to tower over Cadian troops and yet in miniature they are the same size, also at 28mm facial features can get lost under helmets and hats.

Keep in mind it is Heroic scale, meaning that not everything is in correct proportions. Also, much like Orks, most Space Marines aren't standing up straight, and would be about the right height if they stood upright and weren't in running or firing positions.

problem is those pictures are like twice the size of the actual minis, so other then the ones with hair it would be hard to distinguish them from males.

Compared to the male versions those models have more slender legs and arms, and there is a distinctive groove in their armour. That is a small thing to notice, yes, but one that will be more easy to notice when you put the models together, which you certainly will be for Guardsmen.

Other good ones I picked up recently

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 General Annoyance wrote:
You don't have to prove him wrong if you don't want to, but I don't think there is any need for snarkiness.

Yeah I was just very annoyed by how he made it sound like an order.
For the record I don't think it was the result of some explicit policy that they didn't made models for many female special characters, rather just good old unconscious bias. And I do believe that there was an explicit policy to remove characters without a model. My response was mostly in jest (hence the smiley) with a grain of truth (I really believe there is some unconscious bias at work on how most SC, especially the most prominent one, are male). While I don't have any proofs to provide, I am pretty sure neither does Lord Damocles, and I really don't think shouting “Prove it” can lend itself to some fruitful exchange.

What isn't a 'fruitful exchange' is assigning motives to people for which you have absolutely no evidence.

You're the one making the claim, so it's your responsibility to support your assertions (accusations).

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Yeah I was just very annoyed by how he made it sound like an order.
For the record I don't think it was the result of some explicit policy that they didn't made models for many female special characters, rather just good old unconscious bias. And I do believe that there was an explicit policy to remove characters without a model. My response was mostly in jest (hence the smiley) with a grain of truth (I really believe there is some unconscious bias at work on how most SC, especially the most prominent one, are male). While I don't have any proofs to provide, I am pretty sure neither does Lord Damocles, and I really don't think shouting “Prove it” can lend itself to some fruitful exchange.

Unconscious bias, as in having a preference for male models over females?

I mean I guess... could you elaborate that point to me a bit more?


We have no evidence to prove it either way, really, hence why we should really not be making such a big deal out of this subject all the time. If GW came out and said "yeah well we can't be bothered to make female models" or something similar to that, then I'd understand, but currently, this discussion has and will not make any extra progress over the other dozen threads that have discussed it in the past.

I don't think he was yelling at you to prove it. A bit passive aggressive, sure, but even so, we should always try our best to keep everything at head level on threads like this, even if others are not - controversial discussion is always more fruitful (in the non sarcastic way) when people stay polite and positive

 Mr Morden wrote:
Other good ones I picked up recently

Spoiler:

I like those a lot - is this from a manufacturer, or did you make them yourself?

Asterios wrote:


problem is those pictures are like twice the size of the actual minis, so other then the ones with hair it would be hard to distinguish them from males.

I think they're a little more distinguishable than that, but even if that's true, that works fine for me. At a distance, they're all part of another faceless squad rushing into enemy fire. If you look up close to admire the paint or something, you start to pick out the differences...and then they all get killed by fleshborers anyway.

Welcome to the Guard, trooper!

 General Annoyance wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Other good ones I picked up recently

Spoiler:

I like those a lot - is this from a manufacturer, or did you make them yourself?

I just buy things

There are a number of great manufacturers - Victoria has already been mentioned, those are: http://www.brother-vinni.com/index_eng.htm

Copplestone do some really good ones as well, as do Reaper.

Some of my favourite sci-fi war films have plenty of women - Aliens, Starship Troopers, Edge of Tomorrow,

 Lord Damocles wrote:
You're the one making the claim, so it's your responsibility to support your assertions (accusations).

You know, that's precisely why I don't want to have a conversation with you. I pointed out some unsupported assumption you made (i.e. “[SC] don't have models not because they are female but for some other reason”). You made this assumption implicitly when you implied that “[SC] were removed because they had no model” was in direct contradiction with “[SC] were removed because they were female”. I merely pointed out that you didn't bring anything to support it. But rather than supporting it, you now play the “burden of proof” game famously used by online debaters that care more about being, or at least appearing right (and self-righteously so) than about convincing anyone. The whole “burden of proof” concept used as a rhetorical argument is completely shallow, but here we are even in a position when if applied correctly it goes in my favor.

I have fulfilled all my responsibilities now.

 General Annoyance wrote:
I mean I guess... could you elaborate that point to me a bit more?

Sure I need to go now and I'm a bit late but I'll do so later. But I'm afraid I don't have any spectacular wisdom in stock, sorry ^^'.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 General Annoyance wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Other good ones I picked up recently

Spoiler:

I like those a lot - is this from a manufacturer, or did you make them yourself?

I just buy things

There are a number of great manufacturers - Victoria has already been mentioned, those are: http://www.brother-vinni.com/index_eng.htm

Copplestone do some really good ones as well, as do Reaper.

Some of my favourite sci-fi war films have plenty of women - Aliens, Starship Troopers, Edge of Tomorrow,

I'll have to check those out - I was aware of (and thinking of buying from) Victoria Miniatures, but those other ones are new to me. Cheers

I think GW would do well with female characters - Inquisitors, especially (I'm writing about my own female Inquisitor for use in storytelling). I think they should at least consider making female HQ's for armies where it would fit; those wouldn't require as much effort as making sculpts for a whole new box of Guardsmen.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 General Annoyance wrote:
I mean I guess... could you elaborate that point to me a bit more?

Sure I need to go now and I'm a bit late but I'll do so later. But I'm afraid I don't have any spectacular wisdom in stock, sorry ^^'.

Pretty sure I'm none the wiser - I think people who may have such wisdom about this subject would prefer to keep away from it

well i see this thread has still made no productivity as always.

When ever this topic gets brought up it always ends the exact same way

We want female models
Ok well sisters of battle are coming out.

No in guard
Alright well, they could jsut do female heads.

No female models!
well the only way to define that would be breasts which with armor on you would not notice.

at which point we end up in a downward spiral of back and forth bickering, and cheap shots and ultimately arrive at the same conclusion.

The only way to make models that are distinguished as female other then female heads would be sexualized armor, which would then get bitched about, but then when you make it normal that gets bitched about because you cant tell they are female, which gets bitch about, so you sexualize the armor which gets bitched about, so you... ect ect.

I mean honestly the models from Victoria, block out the heads, you cant tell if they are male or female models. (As it should be because the armor is standard.)


So like always, this thread makes no progression, only makes people salty, and ends in a bitching contest.