Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 00:08:10
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Bobthehero wrote:Death Korps, Scions with their masks on (arguable, but lets be a bit extreme), Elysians with rebreather masks (and even then...) would probably fit the bill. Could even go with Cadian using FW Respirators. The problem with those is that they're not clearly women. I think Ashiraya is getting at female models that look more reserved in one or more of the factions we currently have where they would fit.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/05 00:08:29
G.A - Should've called myself Ghost Ark
Makeup Whiskers? This is War Paint! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 00:41:33
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Been Around the Block
|
Sgt_Smudge wrote:BUT the reason that the Sisters of Battle even exist is because of the Decree - the Decree which prevents men from joining. You add in men to the Sisters, and now there's no reason ALL Orders can't have men. Sisters have just the same NO as Space Marines.
So if fluff can be rewritten, by bother even making a point in Dakka Background if you can bypass the actual lore by saying "it can be rewritten"?
You can't have female Space Marines because the fluff specifically says not.
Non-Hive Mind/Synapse Tyranids are said to "collapse into disarray" - they would be effectively useless without it. So without it, they effectively cease to exist as a force. I think that's a fairly good explanation.
If an Ork loses all "Orky" qualities, by what right are they an Ork? They exist, but they are no longer an Ork, because being warmongering, violent, uncaring, strong green-skinned (the opposite of my example) is INTRINSIC to being an Ork.
Well im not saying that the fluff doesnt matter, what i am saying is that those who want female space marines added to 40k knows that female space marines is not a thing in the background and thus are asking if the fluff can be changed to include this to get more miniatures too collect, feel represented in the tabletop and universe etc. etc. To argue against this you need an out of universe argument why you should not change this or why it is a bad idea.
Just stating the current background reason isnt it.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 00:46:05
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
Lusall wrote:Then retconned some fluff about some guy reading the rules and going "Ah! AH! Says no -men- under arms! Ahaha!" and boom, now we can have female "space marines" in the game which our fans have been clamoring for.
You call it this amazing piece of fluff. I call it lazy writing. It's literally the kind of thing where one of our fellow nerds is reading the 40K rule book and goes "Well see, it says you can charge up to 7 inches, not down 7 inches". Seriously, why would the Imperium suddenly go "Well gee, you found the loophole! You can keep your army!" when it's so freaking angsty about checks and balances?
Damn, if you willfully ignore basically everything about the context of the Decree Passive, then the Decree Passive doesn't make sense! Maybe try not ignoring all this then? Have you tried it?
Sgt_Smudge wrote:No, it IS still canon, because the characters ALL refer, without fail, to Astartes as MALE. Not gender neutral - male.
Isn't using the masculine form the usual way in English to refer to a mixed-gender group?
Sgt_Smudge wrote:I mean, you happily ignore the canon you yourself linked - "They must be male because the zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types." What is different between that and the Decree?
I already explained this. If you want to react to that explanation, you are welcome. But I won't repeat myself.
Sgt_Smudge wrote:What is to stop me from saying "The Decree Passive is a random arbitrary limitation which has no reason, so I don't think it should exist."
Nothing. Nothing stops you from saying the Sun rises in the West and the sky is red with the color of the pancreas either.
Sgt_Smudge wrote:No, the article you linked states a perfect valid reason that has no reference to wizards, and is purely genetic - "They must be male because the zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types." Is genetics and biology sexist now?
Ahah genetics. Valid. Omophagea. Valid genetics.
Sgt_Smudge wrote:Why is it so malleable to you, yet the Decree Passive, which is the ONLY reason Sisters can't have men, considered so sacrosanct?
I already explained this. If you want to react to that explanation, you are welcome. But I won't repeat myself.
Sgt_Smudge wrote:Is that not enough canon for you, and why do you see it as unworthy in your eyes?
I already explained this. If you want to react to that explanation, you are welcome. But I won't repeat myself.
Sgt_Smudge wrote:But all I have to do is change the word "men-under-arms" to "persons-under-arms", and then Sisters don't even exist at all.
One WORD. Everything else works fine after that change.
If you wanted to do that. But no-one wants to do that. Too bad. I was answering the question about making Sisters mixed-gender, not making Sisters disappear.
(Also you forgot about needing to rewrite every bit of fluff that involved the Sisters of Battle so your example doesn't even work at all lol)
Sgt_Smudge wrote:My argument here is purely in the sake of showing that Space Marines and Sisters of Battle have equal right to be mono-gender.
It is not working. The Sisters being mono-gendered is linked to interesting backstory, the Space Marines being mono-gendered is linked to literally one single sentence of techno-babble in an article that present organs that make no damn sense. You can't refute that.
|
"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 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 01:41:03
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Keeper of the Flame
|
Boneville wrote: Sgt_Smudge wrote:BUT the reason that the Sisters of Battle even exist is because of the Decree - the Decree which prevents men from joining. You add in men to the Sisters, and now there's no reason ALL Orders can't have men. Sisters have just the same NO as Space Marines.
So if fluff can be rewritten, by bother even making a point in Dakka Background if you can bypass the actual lore by saying "it can be rewritten"?
You can't have female Space Marines because the fluff specifically says not.
Non-Hive Mind/Synapse Tyranids are said to "collapse into disarray" - they would be effectively useless without it. So without it, they effectively cease to exist as a force. I think that's a fairly good explanation.
If an Ork loses all "Orky" qualities, by what right are they an Ork? They exist, but they are no longer an Ork, because being warmongering, violent, uncaring, strong green-skinned (the opposite of my example) is INTRINSIC to being an Ork.
Well im not saying that the fluff doesnt matter, what i am saying is that those who want female space marines added to 40k knows that female space marines is not a thing in the background and thus are asking if the fluff can be changed to include this to get more miniatures too collect, feel represented in the tabletop and universe etc. etc. To argue against this you need an out of universe argument why you should not change this or why it is a bad idea.
Just stating the current background reason isnt it.
Holy cow, you're a 7 foot tall genetic supersoldier? No? Then the Marines don't represent you as it stands. We're talking about escapism science fiction at an inch tall on a gameboard, If you want representation, then sculpt an exact replica of yourself and come up with rules from a generic commander. There's no Lithuanian American disabled veteran musician artist Transformers collectors in the fiction, I demand that every army have a character that fits that bill because, you know, representation. I already have minis that evoke my look in a few armies, so I have that covered. You don't need the background rewritten to simply be able to say "See that one inch model? That's me, undisputedly!" You can do that within the rules of the game and write your own fluff. Does nobody get this?
|
www.classichammer.com
For 4-6th WFB, 2-5th 40k, and similar timeframe gaming
Looking for dice from the new AOS boxed set and Dark Imperium on the cheap. Let me know if you can help.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 03:21:49
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Stalwart Dark Angels Space Marine
Texas
|
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Lusall wrote:Then retconned some fluff about some guy reading the rules and going "Ah! AH! Says no -men- under arms! Ahaha!" and boom, now we can have female "space marines" in the game which our fans have been clamoring for.
You call it this amazing piece of fluff. I call it lazy writing. It's literally the kind of thing where one of our fellow nerds is reading the 40K rule book and goes "Well see, it says you can charge up to 7 inches, not down 7 inches". Seriously, why would the Imperium suddenly go "Well gee, you found the loophole! You can keep your army!" when it's so freaking angsty about checks and balances?
Damn, if you willfully ignore basically everything about the context of the Decree Passive, then the Decree Passive doesn't make sense! Maybe try not ignoring all this then? Have you tried it?
No...no I get it. I'm just saying it's not that clever. It's the dumbest excuse they could come up with to make a female space marine army. Seriously...why, after all the blood that was spilled in the age of apostasy, would the High Lords of Terra make a rule saying the Ecclesiarchy can't have an army, only to forget all that and go "Dang man. That's super dope clever. No men under arms. But they're women. So smart of you...guess you can have your army bro"?
But all of this has gone completely off track. If you want female space marines in your army...knock yourself out. I literally couldn't care. But for the fluff proper there are plenty of good reasons to explain why females can't be a space marine that aren't "It's sexist".
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/11/05 03:30:28
(Successor Chapter) 2000 pts
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 10:33:50
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Been Around the Block
|
Just Tony wrote:Boneville wrote: Sgt_Smudge wrote:BUT the reason that the Sisters of Battle even exist is because of the Decree - the Decree which prevents men from joining. You add in men to the Sisters, and now there's no reason ALL Orders can't have men. Sisters have just the same NO as Space Marines.
So if fluff can be rewritten, by bother even making a point in Dakka Background if you can bypass the actual lore by saying "it can be rewritten"?
You can't have female Space Marines because the fluff specifically says not.
Non-Hive Mind/Synapse Tyranids are said to "collapse into disarray" - they would be effectively useless without it. So without it, they effectively cease to exist as a force. I think that's a fairly good explanation.
If an Ork loses all "Orky" qualities, by what right are they an Ork? They exist, but they are no longer an Ork, because being warmongering, violent, uncaring, strong green-skinned (the opposite of my example) is INTRINSIC to being an Ork.
Well im not saying that the fluff doesnt matter, what i am saying is that those who want female space marines added to 40k knows that female space marines is not a thing in the background and thus are asking if the fluff can be changed to include this to get more miniatures too collect, feel represented in the tabletop and universe etc. etc. To argue against this you need an out of universe argument why you should not change this or why it is a bad idea.
Just stating the current background reason isnt it.
Holy cow, you're a 7 foot tall genetic supersoldier? No? Then the Marines don't represent you as it stands. We're talking about escapism science fiction at an inch tall on a gameboard, If you want representation, then sculpt an exact replica of yourself and come up with rules from a generic commander. There's no Lithuanian American disabled veteran musician artist Transformers collectors in the fiction, I demand that every army have a character that fits that bill because, you know, representation. I already have minis that evoke my look in a few armies, so I have that covered. You don't need the background rewritten to simply be able to say "See that one inch model? That's me, undisputedly!" You can do that within the rules of the game and write your own fluff. Does nobody get this?
Self-insertion and representation is not the same thing. Representation is that games workshop acknowledges that women may want to represent themselves as something other than zealous battle nuns in corsets or aliens. Its easy to find something to represent you if you share gender with the vast majority of the tabletop. Why are you so adamant to not have the background rewritten but then say that if you dont feel represented, in the case of female space marines, you have to rewrite the fluff?
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 11:37:48
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Trazyn's Museum Curator
|
Lusall wrote: Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Lusall wrote:Then retconned some fluff about some guy reading the rules and going "Ah! AH! Says no -men- under arms! Ahaha!" and boom, now we can have female "space marines" in the game which our fans have been clamoring for. You call it this amazing piece of fluff. I call it lazy writing. It's literally the kind of thing where one of our fellow nerds is reading the 40K rule book and goes "Well see, it says you can charge up to 7 inches, not down 7 inches". Seriously, why would the Imperium suddenly go "Well gee, you found the loophole! You can keep your army!" when it's so freaking angsty about checks and balances?
Damn, if you willfully ignore basically everything about the context of the Decree Passive, then the Decree Passive doesn't make sense! Maybe try not ignoring all this then? Have you tried it? No...no I get it. I'm just saying it's not that clever. It's the dumbest excuse they could come up with to make a female space marine army. Seriously...why, after all the blood that was spilled in the age of apostasy, would the High Lords of Terra make a rule saying the Ecclesiarchy can't have an army, only to forget all that and go "Dang man. That's super dope clever. No men under arms. But they're women. So smart of you...guess you can have your army bro"? But all of this has gone completely off track. If you want female space marines in your army...knock yourself out. I literally couldn't care. But for the fluff proper there are plenty of good reasons to explain why females can't be a space marine that aren't "It's sexist". Yeah, that doesn't make sense. For a regime so paranoid about betrayal and order, they sure seem fine with the Church flagrantly disregarding one of their laws. Maybe its because the SoB isn't really an army, as they are supposed to be less numerous than marines, but then why would they be presented as a stand alone army with armored vehicles? I mean, its a cool concept and I do like the Baroque aesthetic, but its really one of the weaker parts of the IoM's lore.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/05 11:38:25
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 14:34:53
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar
|
Boneville wrote: Sgt_Smudge wrote:BUT the reason that the Sisters of Battle even exist is because of the Decree - the Decree which prevents men from joining. You add in men to the Sisters, and now there's no reason ALL Orders can't have men. Sisters have just the same NO as Space Marines.
So if fluff can be rewritten, by bother even making a point in Dakka Background if you can bypass the actual lore by saying "it can be rewritten"?
You can't have female Space Marines because the fluff specifically says not.
Non-Hive Mind/Synapse Tyranids are said to "collapse into disarray" - they would be effectively useless without it. So without it, they effectively cease to exist as a force. I think that's a fairly good explanation.
If an Ork loses all "Orky" qualities, by what right are they an Ork? They exist, but they are no longer an Ork, because being warmongering, violent, uncaring, strong green-skinned (the opposite of my example) is INTRINSIC to being an Ork.
Well im not saying that the fluff doesnt matter, what i am saying is that those who want female space marines added to 40k knows that female space marines is not a thing in the background and thus are asking if the fluff can be changed to include this to get more miniatures too collect, feel represented in the tabletop and universe etc. etc. To argue against this you need an out of universe argument why you should not change this or why it is a bad idea.
Just stating the current background reason isnt it.
But they are/can be represented in every other gendered field aside from Space Marines. If GW got up and did something about the existing lore, we could have female Guardsmen, Eldar, Tau and an updated Sisters range. Space Marines and their variants are the ONLY all male groups, and I would fully support if GW toned down the Space Marine love for the sake of the regular humans.
And can I use this same argument to have male Sisters of Battle? Could you give me an out-of-universe argument as to why GW shouldn't have male SOBs?
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Lusall wrote:Then retconned some fluff about some guy reading the rules and going "Ah! AH! Says no -men- under arms! Ahaha!" and boom, now we can have female "space marines" in the game which our fans have been clamoring for.
You call it this amazing piece of fluff. I call it lazy writing. It's literally the kind of thing where one of our fellow nerds is reading the 40K rule book and goes "Well see, it says you can charge up to 7 inches, not down 7 inches". Seriously, why would the Imperium suddenly go "Well gee, you found the loophole! You can keep your army!" when it's so freaking angsty about checks and balances?
Damn, if you willfully ignore basically everything about the context of the Decree Passive, then the Decree Passive doesn't make sense! Maybe try not ignoring all this then? Have you tried it?
Yes, but considering the Imperium's level of paranoia and angst about so many issues - case in point, Inquisitor Karamazov - why on earth was the Decree passed with such an obvious fault?
I'm not ignoring the context, I'm well aware of it. I'm just saying that it's almost as if the loophole was left in (you might even say by a Wizard) to allow for the Sisters of Battle to be all female, and not because it's a natural event.
Sgt_Smudge wrote:No, it IS still canon, because the characters ALL refer, without fail, to Astartes as MALE. Not gender neutral - male.
Isn't using the masculine form the usual way in English to refer to a mixed-gender group?
Not in my experience. Children of the Emperor is gender neutral. Sons of the Emperor is not.
Sgt_Smudge wrote:I mean, you happily ignore the canon you yourself linked - "They must be male because the zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types." What is different between that and the Decree?
I already explained this. If you want to react to that explanation, you are welcome. But I won't repeat myself.
And I offered a counterargument. You have yet to make a counterargument which doesn't involve a wizard's interference.
Sgt_Smudge wrote:What is to stop me from saying "The Decree Passive is a random arbitrary limitation which has no reason, so I don't think it should exist."
Nothing. Nothing stops you from saying the Sun rises in the West and the sky is red with the color of the pancreas either.
So really, it's not a very valid argument, is it? Not to mention it also applies to your own comment on "random arbitrary limitations".
Sgt_Smudge wrote:No, the article you linked states a perfect valid reason that has no reference to wizards, and is purely genetic - "They must be male because the zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types." Is genetics and biology sexist now?
Ahah genetics. Valid. Omophagea. Valid genetics.
I'm sorry, since when was the Omophagea the only implant? There's 18 more.
And last I checked, females did have different hormone and tissue types to men. Making it a perfectly valid biological difference which affects Space Marine biology. Is that sexist?
Sgt_Smudge wrote:Why is it so malleable to you, yet the Decree Passive, which is the ONLY reason Sisters can't have men, considered so sacrosanct?
I already explained this. If you want to react to that explanation, you are welcome. But I won't repeat myself.
And I offered a counterargument. You have yet to make a counterargument which doesn't involve a wizard's interference. And said wizardly interference ALSO applies to your own argument.
Sgt_Smudge wrote:Is that not enough canon for you, and why do you see it as unworthy in your eyes?
I already explained this. If you want to react to that explanation, you are welcome. But I won't repeat myself.
And I offered a counterargument. You have yet to make a counterargument which doesn't involve a wizard's interference. As it stands, you apply the Wizard Did It card to anything you don't seem to support, creating a rather large double standard. Why is the Decree Passive exempt from the Wizard Did It card?
Sgt_Smudge wrote:But all I have to do is change the word "men-under-arms" to "persons-under-arms", and then Sisters don't even exist at all.
One WORD. Everything else works fine after that change.
If you wanted to do that. But no-one wants to do that. Too bad. I was answering the question about making Sisters mixed-gender, not making Sisters disappear.
(Also you forgot about needing to rewrite every bit of fluff that involved the Sisters of Battle so your example doesn't even work at all lol)
Actually, by causal effect, removing the inception of the Sisters would, by nature, delete all reference of the Sisters. I'm talking about this from an in-universe reasoning, which is what I care about. There is an in-universe reason for both factions being mono-gender, therefore I support both factions being mono-gender.
And I already disproved you in that there are people who want male SOBs. "Too bad."
I was showing how if you're going to change small details, I only need to change a word to delete Sisters. It's that simple. Their existence hinges on someone being unable to write laws - which I can imagine you would use the Wizard Did It card if you wanted to remove Sisters with the same passion you want to rewrite Marine fluff.
Sgt_Smudge wrote:My argument here is purely in the sake of showing that Space Marines and Sisters of Battle have equal right to be mono-gender.
It is not working. The Sisters being mono-gendered is linked to interesting backstory, the Space Marines being mono-gendered is linked to literally one single sentence of techno-babble in an article that present organs that make no damn sense. You can't refute that.
But they are both canon, so are therefore both acceptable reasons.
Sisters backstory relies on someone not writing laws properly. Space Marine backstory hinges on GW's biology laws. They are the same.
Not to mention "interesting" is an opinion, unlike the fact of female incompatibility to Astartes genetic material.
If you're talking about things not making sense, please explain how the Decree Passive was passed as a law when the author of it seems to have no actual law training.
Boneville wrote: Just Tony wrote:Boneville wrote: Sgt_Smudge wrote:BUT the reason that the Sisters of Battle even exist is because of the Decree - the Decree which prevents men from joining. You add in men to the Sisters, and now there's no reason ALL Orders can't have men. Sisters have just the same NO as Space Marines.
So if fluff can be rewritten, by bother even making a point in Dakka Background if you can bypass the actual lore by saying "it can be rewritten"?
You can't have female Space Marines because the fluff specifically says not.
Non-Hive Mind/Synapse Tyranids are said to "collapse into disarray" - they would be effectively useless without it. So without it, they effectively cease to exist as a force. I think that's a fairly good explanation.
If an Ork loses all "Orky" qualities, by what right are they an Ork? They exist, but they are no longer an Ork, because being warmongering, violent, uncaring, strong green-skinned (the opposite of my example) is INTRINSIC to being an Ork.
Well im not saying that the fluff doesnt matter, what i am saying is that those who want female space marines added to 40k knows that female space marines is not a thing in the background and thus are asking if the fluff can be changed to include this to get more miniatures too collect, feel represented in the tabletop and universe etc. etc. To argue against this you need an out of universe argument why you should not change this or why it is a bad idea.
Just stating the current background reason isnt it.
Holy cow, you're a 7 foot tall genetic supersoldier? No? Then the Marines don't represent you as it stands. We're talking about escapism science fiction at an inch tall on a gameboard, If you want representation, then sculpt an exact replica of yourself and come up with rules from a generic commander. There's no Lithuanian American disabled veteran musician artist Transformers collectors in the fiction, I demand that every army have a character that fits that bill because, you know, representation. I already have minis that evoke my look in a few armies, so I have that covered. You don't need the background rewritten to simply be able to say "See that one inch model? That's me, undisputedly!" You can do that within the rules of the game and write your own fluff. Does nobody get this?
Self-insertion and representation is not the same thing. Representation is that games workshop acknowledges that women may want to represent themselves as something other than zealous battle nuns in corsets or aliens. Its easy to find something to represent you if you share gender with the vast majority of the tabletop. Why are you so adamant to not have the background rewritten but then say that if you dont feel represented, in the case of female space marines, you have to rewrite the fluff?
So, I want to see Chaos Space Marines that follow the Emperor. Khorne Bloodletters that worship Nurgle. Direct contradictions of what actually MAKES them possible. Because representation doesn't care about established fluff, right?
Representation is fine, so long as it obeys in-universe laws. Otherwise, what's the point of having established rules (ie, Decree Passive and female incompatibility with gene-seed) if you wave the "Representation" stick around and bypass that?
And funnily enough, women should be lore represented in EVERY GENDERED ARMY except Space Marines. Only Space Marines deny female entry. So aside from Space Marines, who get far too much publicity, there should be more than enough female representation in gendered armies (so Daemons, Tyranids, Orks, and to some extent Necrons, whose form doesn't change, but fluffwise can be female - see the leader of the Maynarkh Dynasty).
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Lusall wrote: Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Lusall wrote:Then retconned some fluff about some guy reading the rules and going "Ah! AH! Says no -men- under arms! Ahaha!" and boom, now we can have female "space marines" in the game which our fans have been clamoring for.
You call it this amazing piece of fluff. I call it lazy writing. It's literally the kind of thing where one of our fellow nerds is reading the 40K rule book and goes "Well see, it says you can charge up to 7 inches, not down 7 inches". Seriously, why would the Imperium suddenly go "Well gee, you found the loophole! You can keep your army!" when it's so freaking angsty about checks and balances?
Damn, if you willfully ignore basically everything about the context of the Decree Passive, then the Decree Passive doesn't make sense! Maybe try not ignoring all this then? Have you tried it?
No...no I get it. I'm just saying it's not that clever. It's the dumbest excuse they could come up with to make a female space marine army. Seriously...why, after all the blood that was spilled in the age of apostasy, would the High Lords of Terra make a rule saying the Ecclesiarchy can't have an army, only to forget all that and go "Dang man. That's super dope clever. No men under arms. But they're women. So smart of you...guess you can have your army bro"?
But all of this has gone completely off track. If you want female space marines in your army...knock yourself out. I literally couldn't care. But for the fluff proper there are plenty of good reasons to explain why females can't be a space marine that aren't "It's sexist".
Yeah, that doesn't make sense. For a regime so paranoid about betrayal and order, they sure seem fine with the Church flagrantly disregarding one of their laws. Maybe its because the SoB isn't really an army, as they are supposed to be less numerous than marines, but then why would they be presented as a stand alone army with armored vehicles?
I mean, its a cool concept and I do like the Baroque aesthetic, but its really one of the weaker parts of the IoM's lore.
Very much this. I have no real issue with the Decree Passive, but if people will ignore the Marine fluff to justify one idea, the inverse should also be true. Seriously, it's almost as if by some Deus Ex Machina that they didn't have anyone who could write proper laws and used a gender specific pronoun instead of a neutral one.
|
They/them
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 16:40:44
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Glorious Lord of Chaos
The burning pits of Hades, also known as Sweden in summer
|
General Annoyance wrote: Bobthehero wrote:Death Korps, Scions with their masks on (arguable, but lets be a bit extreme), Elysians with rebreather masks (and even then...) would probably fit the bill. Could even go with Cadian using FW Respirators.
The problem with those is that they're not clearly women. I think Ashiraya is getting at female models that look more reserved in one or more of the factions we currently have where they would fit.
To clarify, taking a male model with no skin showing and claiming it is female is really not good enough. Some claim to be unable to tell the difference, but I certainly can.
I do not want something like helmeted female space marines. The difference is invisible and irrelevant from a model standpoint. I want something like this.
http://m.imgur.com/a/SlQzM
(My Shepard from ME3, a good example of a woman in sci-fi armor).
Looks sensible, and yet you can easily tell it's most likely not a guy in there.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/05 16:41:32
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 16:47:01
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Heroic Senior Officer
|
''Male models'' They're genderless, if you see everything as male by default, its your own problem.
Personally, I can't stand that stupid trope about wearing full armor without wearing at least some sort of head protection, and the visor in your screenshots sure as hell don't do it.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 17:03:42
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Glorious Lord of Chaos
The burning pits of Hades, also known as Sweden in summer
|
Do you have a better term than male model for 'model designed to look male'?
The DKoK are closest with a 'maybe' but even then complete androgynousness is not what I am after. I don't have a problem with a model whose sex is identifiable, I just want some gosh darn nuance!
As for the example, it was just an example. A helm works too. But I like the visor.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/05 17:04:22
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 17:12:45
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Ancient Space Wolves Venerable Dreadnought
I... actually don't know. Help?
|
I'm not really seeing why people feel the need to have female marines?
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 17:33:25
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Heroic Senior Officer
|
Ashiraya wrote:
As for the example, it was just an example. A helm works too. But I like the visor.
I mentionned the visor because without seeing the face, I honestly couldn't tell your Shep gender.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 17:58:50
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Brutal Black Orc
|
Ashiraya wrote: General Annoyance wrote: Bobthehero wrote:Death Korps, Scions with their masks on (arguable, but lets be a bit extreme), Elysians with rebreather masks (and even then...) would probably fit the bill. Could even go with Cadian using FW Respirators.
The problem with those is that they're not clearly women. I think Ashiraya is getting at female models that look more reserved in one or more of the factions we currently have where they would fit.
To clarify, taking a male model with no skin showing and claiming it is female is really not good enough. Some claim to be unable to tell the difference, but I certainly can.
I do not want something like helmeted female space marines. The difference is invisible and irrelevant from a model standpoint. I want something like this.
http://m.imgur.com/a/SlQzM
(My Shepard from ME3, a good example of a woman in sci-fi armor).
Looks sensible, and yet you can easily tell it's most likely not a guy in there.
I'm pretty sure you'll have those new SoB in that king of style.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 19:57:06
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Been Around the Block
|
Sgt_Smudge wrote:Boneville wrote: Sgt_Smudge wrote:BUT the reason that the Sisters of Battle even exist is because of the Decree - the Decree which prevents men from joining. You add in men to the Sisters, and now there's no reason ALL Orders can't have men. Sisters have just the same NO as Space Marines.
So if fluff can be rewritten, by bother even making a point in Dakka Background if you can bypass the actual lore by saying "it can be rewritten"?
You can't have female Space Marines because the fluff specifically says not.
Non-Hive Mind/Synapse Tyranids are said to "collapse into disarray" - they would be effectively useless without it. So without it, they effectively cease to exist as a force. I think that's a fairly good explanation.
If an Ork loses all "Orky" qualities, by what right are they an Ork? They exist, but they are no longer an Ork, because being warmongering, violent, uncaring, strong green-skinned (the opposite of my example) is INTRINSIC to being an Ork.
Well im not saying that the fluff doesnt matter, what i am saying is that those who want female space marines added to 40k knows that female space marines is not a thing in the background and thus are asking if the fluff can be changed to include this to get more miniatures too collect, feel represented in the tabletop and universe etc. etc. To argue against this you need an out of universe argument why you should not change this or why it is a bad idea.
Just stating the current background reason isnt it.
But they are/can be represented in every other gendered field aside from Space Marines. If GW got up and did something about the existing lore, we could have female Guardsmen, Eldar, Tau and an updated Sisters range. Space Marines and their variants are the ONLY all male groups, and I would fully support if GW toned down the Space Marine love for the sake of the regular humans.
And can I use this same argument to have male Sisters of Battle? Could you give me an out-of-universe argument as to why GW shouldn't have male SOBs?
Well if the game opened up abit and female representation was more widespread in the miniatures range with things like female space marines then i have no problem with adding male sisters of battle. But just adding male sisters without this is just a slap in the face considering how many female models there is in the game.
I personally think that the sisters being the only armed force of the ecclisiarchy is immensly stupid, and would welcome such a change to diversify the ecclisiarchy as a faction. But i also realise the problems with it coonsidering the situation were in now.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: So, I want to see Chaos Space Marines that follow the Emperor. Khorne Bloodletters that worship Nurgle. Direct contradictions of what actually MAKES them possible. Because representation doesn't care about established fluff, right?
Representation is fine, so long as it obeys in-universe laws. Otherwise, what's the point of having established rules (ie, Decree Passive and female incompatibility with gene-seed) if you wave the "Representation" stick around and bypass that?
And funnily enough, women should be lore represented in EVERY GENDERED ARMY except Space Marines. Only Space Marines deny female entry. So aside from Space Marines, who get far too much publicity, there should be more than enough female representation in gendered armies (so Daemons, Tyranids, Orks, and to some extent Necrons, whose form doesn't change, but fluffwise can be female - see the leader of the Maynarkh Dynasty).
If there actually was khorne deamons who would object to the depiction of their champion then it would be a problem with representation. Only, Khorne daemons dont exist and women do, wich means your example isnt representation at all.
Another question is also what purpose the gender restriction serves for the faction as a whole, with only dark angels actually having inspiration from something that involve their gender.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 20:21:34
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Ancient Venerable Dreadnought
|
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
It never set Marines apart in a universe where male are hardly rare. Being all-male never featured heavily in their identity
A fairly convenient bit of tailchasing you've done to reason this one out. Sisters of Battle have gender as their identity but the Battle Brothers of the Space Marines don't have gender as an identity. Because reasons, or something.
Except that their lack of sexuality does indeed specifically define them in the 40K lore. The fact that they have multiple sub-themes like being space furries or vampires doesn't set some incredible differentiation from the Sisters of Battle who only have one theme: being Angry Space Nuns.
If being the "Sisters" of Battle is enough to establish gender identity, then being Battle "Brothers" is more than enough to establish the Space Marines. Heck, the entire story of Space Marines dating back to the Heresy has focused around the Father/Son relationships between Emperor and Primarchs, and between the Primarchs and the Marines, because each had in turn been made in the image of the previous. There's literally one throwaway line about "No men under arms" that rationalizes the Sisters of Battle as all-female. The entire mythology of 40K is about the tragedy of the Space Marines /Primarchs and their relationship with their fathers, as well as their inability to understand human conventions of sexuality, love, etc because for them there is no differentiation among their kind. The establishment of gender identity of the Space Marines is right there in the forefront of the lore. Pretending that doesn't exist is kinda silly.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 21:06:37
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar
|
Boneville wrote: Sgt_Smudge wrote:Boneville wrote: Sgt_Smudge wrote:BUT the reason that the Sisters of Battle even exist is because of the Decree - the Decree which prevents men from joining. You add in men to the Sisters, and now there's no reason ALL Orders can't have men. Sisters have just the same NO as Space Marines. So if fluff can be rewritten, by bother even making a point in Dakka Background if you can bypass the actual lore by saying "it can be rewritten"? You can't have female Space Marines because the fluff specifically says not. Non-Hive Mind/Synapse Tyranids are said to "collapse into disarray" - they would be effectively useless without it. So without it, they effectively cease to exist as a force. I think that's a fairly good explanation. If an Ork loses all "Orky" qualities, by what right are they an Ork? They exist, but they are no longer an Ork, because being warmongering, violent, uncaring, strong green-skinned (the opposite of my example) is INTRINSIC to being an Ork. Well im not saying that the fluff doesnt matter, what i am saying is that those who want female space marines added to 40k knows that female space marines is not a thing in the background and thus are asking if the fluff can be changed to include this to get more miniatures too collect, feel represented in the tabletop and universe etc. etc. To argue against this you need an out of universe argument why you should not change this or why it is a bad idea. Just stating the current background reason isnt it.
But they are/can be represented in every other gendered field aside from Space Marines. If GW got up and did something about the existing lore, we could have female Guardsmen, Eldar, Tau and an updated Sisters range. Space Marines and their variants are the ONLY all male groups, and I would fully support if GW toned down the Space Marine love for the sake of the regular humans. And can I use this same argument to have male Sisters of Battle? Could you give me an out-of-universe argument as to why GW shouldn't have male SOBs? Well if the game opened up abit and female representation was more widespread in the miniatures range with things like female space marines then i have no problem with adding male sisters of battle. But just adding male sisters without this is just a slap in the face considering how many female models there is in the game.
But why specifically female Space Marines, and not just every other faction that has no reason not have female models? Why do you want to change the ONE faction (and subgroupings) who explicitly don't have females? Why are Space Marines so important that they must be changed to be polygender? I personally think that the sisters being the only armed force of the ecclisiarchy is immensly stupid, and would welcome such a change to diversify the ecclisiarchy as a faction. But i also realise the problems with it coonsidering the situation were in now.
Except that the ONLY reason the Ecclesiarchy can even have soldiers in the first place is because of an oversight in the Decree Passive. That oversight ONLY allows for female soldiers, and frankly, one might argue it's stupid that the Ecclesiarchy were even allowed to get away with the Sisters as their army. Sgt_Smudge wrote: So, I want to see Chaos Space Marines that follow the Emperor. Khorne Bloodletters that worship Nurgle. Direct contradictions of what actually MAKES them possible. Because representation doesn't care about established fluff, right? Representation is fine, so long as it obeys in-universe laws. Otherwise, what's the point of having established rules (ie, Decree Passive and female incompatibility with gene-seed) if you wave the "Representation" stick around and bypass that? And funnily enough, women should be lore represented in EVERY GENDERED ARMY except Space Marines. Only Space Marines deny female entry. So aside from Space Marines, who get far too much publicity, there should be more than enough female representation in gendered armies (so Daemons, Tyranids, Orks, and to some extent Necrons, whose form doesn't change, but fluffwise can be female - see the leader of the Maynarkh Dynasty). If there actually was khorne deamons who would object to the depiction of their champion then it would be a problem with representation. Only, Khorne daemons dont exist and women do, wich means your example isnt representation at all.
Ah, if there were Space Marines who object to the depiction of them only as females... Funnily enough, Space Marines don't exist - which is the exact argument you used on the Khorne Daemons situation. Women exist IRL. Space Marines do not exist IRL. Women can be depicted in 40k, because they exist IRL. Space Marine women cannot, because Space Marine women do not exist IRL. Another question is also what purpose the gender restriction serves for the faction as a whole, with only dark angels actually having inspiration from something that involve their gender.
I ask you the same question - what purpose does the gender restriction have on the Sisters?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/05 21:07:01
They/them
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 21:08:23
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
Lusall wrote:It's the dumbest excuse they could come up with to make a female space marine army. Seriously...why, after all the blood that was spilled in the age of apostasy, would the High Lords of Terra make a rule saying the Ecclesiarchy can't have an army, only to forget all that and go "Dang man. That's super dope clever. No men under arms. But they're women. So smart of you...guess you can have your army bro"?
That is where you got things wrong. They explicitly didn't forget it. Sebastian Thor pushed them to accept the formulation knowing full well that it would therefore allow him to keep Sisters of Battle. The fact they had just saved the day explicitly played a part too. Sgt_Smudge wrote:I'm talking about this from an in-universe reasoning, which is what I care about.
Oh, I guess that's the problem here. I care for out-of-universe stuff. Because out of universe stuff is the reason why we do things. Sgt_Smudge wrote:And I already disproved you in that there are people who want male SOBs.
Sure you did. There is a huge, very relevant of people who want male SoB and I know because you told me some pals of you that don't have the internet do want male SoB. Sgt_Smudge wrote:Why do you want to change the ONE faction (and subgroupings) who explicitly don't have females?
You mean half the range of the game? Sgt_Smudge wrote:Except that the ONLY reason the Ecclesiarchy can even have soldiers in the first place is because of an oversight in the Decree Passive.
Where you say it's an oversight, I say it's a deliberate way to save face. I just wish I was at my place with my 2nd ed codex to give you a precise quote and be done with it… Sgt_Smudge wrote:Another question is also what purpose the gender restriction serves for the faction as a whole, with only dark angels actually having inspiration from something that involve their gender.
I ask you the same question - what purpose does the gender restriction have on the Sisters?
The answer seems to be in the question already. Ashiraya wrote:To clarify, taking a male model with no skin showing and claiming it is female is really not good enough.
Works for me. Shadowsun, for instance, could be just that. Except for Space Wolves  ? I'll note that not many faction in 40k get any development on their sexuality, though. Not much sexy in the IG, the Mechanicus, the Sororitas, the Orks, the Tau, … Veteran Sergeant wrote:The fact that they have multiple sub-themes like being space furries or vampires doesn't set some incredible differentiation from the Sisters of Battle who only have one theme: being Angry Space Nuns.
The fact of having hundreds of different and incompatible sub-themes doesn't differentiate them from Sisters who don't have any? Hum, okay, if you say so. Veteran Sergeant wrote:Heck, the entire story of Space Marines dating back to the Heresy has focused around the Father/Son relationships between Emperor and Primarchs, and between the Primarchs and the Marines, because each had in turn been made in the image of the previous. There's literally one throwaway line about "No men under arms" that rationalizes the Sisters of Battle as all-female. The entire mythology of 40K is about the tragedy of the Space Marines /Primarchs and their relationship with their fathers, as well as their inability to understand human conventions of sexuality, love, etc because for them there is no differentiation among their kind. The establishment of gender identity of the Space Marines is right there in the forefront of the lore. Pretending that doesn't exist is kinda silly.
I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say right there. Is it some kind of idea about father/son relationships?
|
This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2016/11/05 21:24:29
"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 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 21:40:18
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar
|
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Sgt_Smudge wrote:I'm talking about this from an in-universe reasoning, which is what I care about.
Oh, I guess that's the problem here. I care for out-of-universe stuff. Because out of universe stuff is the reason why we do things.
But we change things that are in-universe. And those two universe are separate, because one is FANTASY, and therefore is not indicative of reality. But still - neither argument is more correct than the other. Sgt_Smudge wrote:And I already disproved you in that there are people who want male SOBs.
Sure you did. There is a huge, very relevant of people who want male SoB and I know because you told me some pals of you that don't have the internet do want male SoB.
Actually, I appear to have encountered equal measures of both. You just appear to be "telling me some pals of yours" who want female Space Marines. And it's not number that matters, it's what affects GW. Regardless of that, you actually accepted my proving of people who wanted male SOBs with a "Meh." You didn't contest it one bit. Sgt_Smudge wrote:Why do you want to change the ONE faction (and subgroupings) who explicitly don't have females?
You mean half the range of the game?
If you actually read my comments, you'd see that I do not support the prevalence of Space Marines, and would welcome their reduction. And again, from an in-universe perspective, because we are going to affect in-universe issues, Space Marines are a relatively small organisation. So, from an in-universe perspective, explain to me why Space Marines should change. Sgt_Smudge wrote:Except that the ONLY reason the Ecclesiarchy can even have soldiers in the first place is because of an oversight in the Decree Passive.
Where you say it's an oversight, I say it's a deliberate way to save face. I just wish I was at my place with my 2nd ed codex to give you a precise quote and be done with it…
Nope, as far as I can recall, the main reason given is that someone (perhaps these wizards you seem obsessed with, who knows) used a gender specific pronoun. In fact, I can quote you from the codex. Sisters of Battle 2nd Edition Codex wrote:Other transformations were at the order of the High Lords of Terra. The most important of these was the Decree Passive 00001288/M36. Amongst other prohibitions on military activity, the Decree Passive forbade the Ecclesiarchy from controlling any "Men under arms" ... This was duly done, but for one exception. Seeing that some military force would be needed, and not wishing the Ecclesiarchy to be totally subservient to the will of the Adeptus Terra and the Imperial Guard, Sebastian Thor kept the one army he was allowed under the Decree Passive. Due to the archaic wording of the law, the Daughters of the Emperor did not break the ban.
Emphasis mine. The High Lords used an "archaic wording" - an oversight - giving Thor a loophole. Sgt_Smudge wrote:Another question is also what purpose the gender restriction serves for the faction as a whole, with only dark angels actually having inspiration from something that involve their gender.
I ask you the same question - what purpose does the gender restriction have on the Sisters?
The answer seems to be in the question already.
I don't see why their name as Sisters means anything, especially coming from the person who said that the masculine naming of Space Marines wasn't relevant. Purely as an unnamed organisation, what purpose does the gender restriction have on the Adeptas Sororitas? And seeing as you haven't appeared to address any of the comments on this general theme: "What is different between (Space Marine genetics being incompatible with women) and the Decree? You have yet to make a counterargument which doesn't involve a wizard's interference."
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/11/05 22:09:51
They/them
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 22:32:40
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Been Around the Block
|
Sgt_Smudge wrote:Boneville wrote: Sgt_Smudge wrote:Boneville wrote: Sgt_Smudge wrote:BUT the reason that the Sisters of Battle even exist is because of the Decree - the Decree which prevents men from joining. You add in men to the Sisters, and now there's no reason ALL Orders can't have men. Sisters have just the same NO as Space Marines.
So if fluff can be rewritten, by bother even making a point in Dakka Background if you can bypass the actual lore by saying "it can be rewritten"?
You can't have female Space Marines because the fluff specifically says not.
Non-Hive Mind/Synapse Tyranids are said to "collapse into disarray" - they would be effectively useless without it. So without it, they effectively cease to exist as a force. I think that's a fairly good explanation.
If an Ork loses all "Orky" qualities, by what right are they an Ork? They exist, but they are no longer an Ork, because being warmongering, violent, uncaring, strong green-skinned (the opposite of my example) is INTRINSIC to being an Ork.
Well im not saying that the fluff doesnt matter, what i am saying is that those who want female space marines added to 40k knows that female space marines is not a thing in the background and thus are asking if the fluff can be changed to include this to get more miniatures too collect, feel represented in the tabletop and universe etc. etc. To argue against this you need an out of universe argument why you should not change this or why it is a bad idea.
Just stating the current background reason isnt it.
But they are/can be represented in every other gendered field aside from Space Marines. If GW got up and did something about the existing lore, we could have female Guardsmen, Eldar, Tau and an updated Sisters range. Space Marines and their variants are the ONLY all male groups, and I would fully support if GW toned down the Space Marine love for the sake of the regular humans.
And can I use this same argument to have male Sisters of Battle? Could you give me an out-of-universe argument as to why GW shouldn't have male SOBs?
Well if the game opened up abit and female representation was more widespread in the miniatures range with things like female space marines then i have no problem with adding male sisters of battle. But just adding male sisters without this is just a slap in the face considering how many female models there is in the game.
But why specifically female Space Marines, and not just every other faction that has no reason not have female models? Why do you want to change the ONE faction (and subgroupings) who explicitly don't have females?
Why are Space Marines so important that they must be changed to be polygender?
I actually said the whole game as in every faction and the female space marines was just an example, i dont know why you are talking like i was stating that only the space marines would change and no other.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Ah, if there were Space Marines who object to the depiction of them only as females...
Funnily enough, Space Marines don't exist - which is the exact argument you used on the Khorne Daemons situation.
Women exist IRL. Space Marines do not exist IRL. Women can be depicted in 40k, because they exist IRL. Space Marine women cannot, because Space Marine women do not exist IRL.
Im not entirely sure what you mean by that reasoning, but i was pointing out that the example wasnt representation because neither space marines nor khorne daemons is a minority in our society that hasnt been represented well. The reason why space marines was written that way and sisters too could almost certainly have stemmed from these very real issues.
I ask you the same question - what purpose does the gender restriction have on the Sisters?
Well i already stated that i think the restrictions are uneeded and i was in favor of opening up every faction for mixed 50/50 gender ratio.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 22:36:54
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
I am completely at loss at what your point is here.
Sgt_Smudge wrote:You just appear to be "telling me some pals of yours" who want female Space Marines.
I never said that. I didn't have too. There is a number of people that vocally call for it online and that I have never even met. But I wrote “Meh” so that settles it, those people you talk about definitely exists and are revelant.
Sgt_Smudge wrote:So, from an in-universe perspective, explain to me why Space Marines should change.
Why would I do that we neither you nor I live in-universe? Is it some roleplay thing you want me to do? If so I'll just burn you to death for heresy, it's the way we do it in-universe  .
Sgt_Smudge wrote:Sisters of Battle 2nd Edition Codex wrote:Other transformations were at the order of the High Lords of Terra. The most important of these was the Decree Passive 00001288/M36. Amongst other prohibitions on military activity, the Decree Passive forbade the Ecclesiarchy from controlling any "Men under arms" ... This was duly done, but for one exception. Seeing that some military force would be needed, and not wishing the Ecclesiarchy to be totally subservient to the will of the Adeptus Terra and the Imperial Guard, Sebastian Thor kept the one army he was allowed under the Decree Passive. Due to the archaic wording of the law, the Daughters of the Emperor did not break the ban.
Emphasis mine. The High Lords used an "archaic wording" - an oversight - giving Thor a loophole.
It doesn't say that the archaic wording was an oversight, did it?
Sgt_Smudge wrote:I don't see why their name as Sisters means anything, especially coming from the person who said that the masculine naming of Space Marines wasn't relevant.
I don't think it had anything to do with the Dark Angel's name either. Did it?
Sgt_Smudge wrote:And seeing as you haven't appeared to address any of the comments on this general theme: "What is different between (Space Marine genetics being incompatible with women) and the Decree? You have yet to make a counterargument which doesn't involve a wizard's interference."
Yeah. I am done with this. You ignored all the counter-arguments I gave you, no point in mentioning again how one is a random one-liner of pseudo-science with no link to the rest of the lore and the other one is deeply intertwined with it.
|
"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 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 23:00:34
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Rotting Sorcerer of Nurgle
|
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Sgt_Smudge wrote:I don't see why their name as Sisters means anything, especially coming from the person who said that the masculine naming of Space Marines wasn't relevant.
I don't think it had anything to do with the Dark Angel's name either. Did it?
Well technically, the name Dark Angels is implied to be a masculine name considering the context in which the name originated.
|
H.B.M.C.- The end hath come! From now on armies will only consist of Astorath, Land Speeder Storms and Soul Grinders!
War Kitten- Vanden, you just taunted the Dank Lord Ezra. Prepare for seven years of fighting reality...
koooaei- Emperor: I envy your nipplehorns. <Magnus goes red. Permanently>
Neronoxx- If our Dreadnought doesn't have sick scuplted abs, we riot.
Frazzled- I don't generally call anyone by a term other than "sir" "maam" "youn g lady" "young man" or " HEY bag!"
Ruin- It's official, we've ran out of things to talk about on Dakka. Close the site. We're done.
mrhappyface- "They're more what you'd call guidlines than actual rules" - Captain Roboute Barbosa
Steve steveson- To be clear, I'd sell you all out for a bottle of scotch and a mid priced hooker.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 23:32:06
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar
|
Boneville wrote: Sgt_Smudge wrote:Boneville wrote: Sgt_Smudge wrote:Boneville wrote: Sgt_Smudge wrote:BUT the reason that the Sisters of Battle even exist is because of the Decree - the Decree which prevents men from joining. You add in men to the Sisters, and now there's no reason ALL Orders can't have men. Sisters have just the same NO as Space Marines. So if fluff can be rewritten, by bother even making a point in Dakka Background if you can bypass the actual lore by saying "it can be rewritten"? You can't have female Space Marines because the fluff specifically says not. Non-Hive Mind/Synapse Tyranids are said to "collapse into disarray" - they would be effectively useless without it. So without it, they effectively cease to exist as a force. I think that's a fairly good explanation. If an Ork loses all "Orky" qualities, by what right are they an Ork? They exist, but they are no longer an Ork, because being warmongering, violent, uncaring, strong green-skinned (the opposite of my example) is INTRINSIC to being an Ork. Well im not saying that the fluff doesnt matter, what i am saying is that those who want female space marines added to 40k knows that female space marines is not a thing in the background and thus are asking if the fluff can be changed to include this to get more miniatures too collect, feel represented in the tabletop and universe etc. etc. To argue against this you need an out of universe argument why you should not change this or why it is a bad idea. Just stating the current background reason isnt it.
But they are/can be represented in every other gendered field aside from Space Marines. If GW got up and did something about the existing lore, we could have female Guardsmen, Eldar, Tau and an updated Sisters range. Space Marines and their variants are the ONLY all male groups, and I would fully support if GW toned down the Space Marine love for the sake of the regular humans. And can I use this same argument to have male Sisters of Battle? Could you give me an out-of-universe argument as to why GW shouldn't have male SOBs? Well if the game opened up abit and female representation was more widespread in the miniatures range with things like female space marines then i have no problem with adding male sisters of battle. But just adding male sisters without this is just a slap in the face considering how many female models there is in the game.
But why specifically female Space Marines, and not just every other faction that has no reason not have female models? Why do you want to change the ONE faction (and subgroupings) who explicitly don't have females? Why are Space Marines so important that they must be changed to be polygender? I actually said the whole game as in every faction and the female space marines was just an example, i dont know why you are talking like i was stating that only the space marines would change and no other.
But the game can open up to have more female representation without even involving the Space Marines. You don't even need to change the Space Marines to do it. That's my whole argument - female representation is good, except in the one place it doesn't make sense - the Space Marines. Sgt_Smudge wrote: Ah, if there were Space Marines who object to the depiction of them only as females... Funnily enough, Space Marines don't exist - which is the exact argument you used on the Khorne Daemons situation. Women exist IRL. Space Marines do not exist IRL. Women can be depicted in 40k, because they exist IRL. Space Marine women cannot, because Space Marine women do not exist IRL. Im not entirely sure what you mean by that reasoning, but i was pointing out that the example wasnt representation because neither space marines nor khorne daemons is a minority in our society that hasnt been represented well. The reason why space marines was written that way and sisters too could almost certainly have stemmed from these very real issues.
But those issues do not exist in 40k. Space Marines do not need female representatives, because in your own argument - there are no Space Marines, female or otherwise, that are asking to be represented. I ask you the same question - what purpose does the gender restriction have on the Sisters? Well i already stated that i think the restrictions are uneeded and i was in favor of opening up every faction for mixed 50/50 gender ratio.
Or, have two factions, just two, that are monogendered, which counteract eachother. You know, like we have now? Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: I am completely at loss at what your point is here.
My point is that in-universe matters. In-universe issues like the Decree Passive and female genetic incompatibility. Sgt_Smudge wrote:You just appear to be "telling me some pals of yours" who want female Space Marines.
I never said that. I didn't have too. There is a number of people that vocally call for it online and that I have never even met. But I wrote “Meh” so that settles it, those people you talk about definitely exists and are revelant.
Well, you admit it then. My thanks. Sgt_Smudge wrote:So, from an in-universe perspective, explain to me why Space Marines should change.
Why would I do that we neither you nor I live in-universe? Is it some roleplay thing you want me to do? If so I'll just burn you to death for heresy, it's the way we do it in-universe  .
If the meaning behind my message wasn't clear, I shall re-iterate. Using solely in-universe logic, devoid of any IRL concerns, why should Space Marines change? Sgt_Smudge wrote:Sisters of Battle 2nd Edition Codex wrote:Other transformations were at the order of the High Lords of Terra. The most important of these was the Decree Passive 00001288/M36. Amongst other prohibitions on military activity, the Decree Passive forbade the Ecclesiarchy from controlling any "Men under arms" ... This was duly done, but for one exception. Seeing that some military force would be needed, and not wishing the Ecclesiarchy to be totally subservient to the will of the Adeptus Terra and the Imperial Guard, Sebastian Thor kept the one army he was allowed under the Decree Passive. Due to the archaic wording of the law, the Daughters of the Emperor did not break the ban.
Emphasis mine. The High Lords used an "archaic wording" - an oversight - giving Thor a loophole.
It doesn't say that the archaic wording was an oversight, did it?
But it was not a foreseen and discussed permission of the HLOT - it was a fault of "archaic wording" - not a predisposed permission. Sgt_Smudge wrote:I don't see why their name as Sisters means anything, especially coming from the person who said that the masculine naming of Space Marines wasn't relevant.
I don't think it had anything to do with the Dark Angel's name either. Did it?
I fail to see how the Dark Angels relate to this. May you enlighten me? You still have not plainly answered what purpose the gender restriction has on the Sisters. Sgt_Smudge wrote:And seeing as you haven't appeared to address any of the comments on this general theme: "What is different between (Space Marine genetics being incompatible with women) and the Decree? You have yet to make a counterargument which doesn't involve a wizard's interference."
Yeah. I am done with this. You ignored all the counter-arguments I gave you, no point in mentioning again how one is a random one-liner of pseudo-science with no link to the rest of the lore and the other one is deeply intertwined with it.
Why does the level of intertwining matter? They are both canon.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/05 23:35:38
They/them
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 23:46:19
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Glorious Lord of Chaos
The burning pits of Hades, also known as Sweden in summer
|
To amend then: only that is not good enough for me. Automatically Appended Next Post: Bobthehero wrote: Ashiraya wrote:
As for the example, it was just an example. A helm works too. But I like the visor.
I mentionned the visor because without seeing the face, I honestly couldn't tell your Shep gender.
Probably because you are used to either androgynous DKOK, musclebound hulks, or boobplate bimbos.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/05 23:47:00
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/05 23:48:22
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Am I missing something here? What's wrong with Shadowsun?
|
G.A - Should've called myself Ghost Ark
Makeup Whiskers? This is War Paint! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/06 00:00:16
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Glorious Lord of Chaos
The burning pits of Hades, also known as Sweden in summer
|
Nothing. I am just saying that I would not be happy with only Shadowsuns.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/06 00:02:54
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Ashiraya wrote:Nothing. I am just saying that I would not be happy with only Shadowsuns.
Oh my bad, completely misunderstood what you said.
Must be the fever
|
G.A - Should've called myself Ghost Ark
Makeup Whiskers? This is War Paint! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/06 00:09:06
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Heroic Senior Officer
|
Ashiraya wrote:Probably because you are used to either androgynous DKOK, musclebound hulks, or boobplate bimbos.
Actually I work with women in combat gear fairly often.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/06 00:09:27
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/06 00:17:37
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Been Around the Block
|
Sgt_Smudge wrote: But the game can open up to have more female representation without even involving the Space Marines. You don't even need to change the Space Marines to do it. That's my whole argument - female representation is good, except in the one place it doesn't make sense - the Space Marines.
Well you could open up even more representation by involving the space marines too and the only thing stopping it seems to be the one thing that is easiest to fix.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Ah, if there were Space Marines who object to the depiction of them only as females...
Funnily enough, Space Marines don't exist - which is the exact argument you used on the Khorne Daemons situation.
Women exist IRL. Space Marines do not exist IRL. Women can be depicted in 40k, because they exist IRL. Space Marine women cannot, because Space Marine women do not exist IRL.
Im not entirely sure what you mean by that reasoning, but i was pointing out that the example wasnt representation because neither space marines nor khorne daemons is a minority in our society that hasnt been represented well. The reason why space marines was written that way and sisters too could almost certainly have stemmed from these very real issues.
But those issues do not exist in 40k.
Space Marines do not need female representatives, because in your own argument - there are no Space Marines, female or otherwise, that are asking to be represented.
The problem is that 40k wasnt written in a vacuum devoid from contact and influence with the underlying problems and forces that shape our society. These things creep into what we write and how we interpret things in our daily life.
The fact that the issues with representation and shoddy views on women was so strong , and is still strong, means that it is highly unlikely that this didnt find its way into 40k fluff.
It isnt space marines that should have representation because they are fictional and can be changed however GW should decide, but the actual women in this world.
I ask you the same question - what purpose does the gender restriction have on the Sisters?
Well i already stated that i think the restrictions are uneeded and i was in favor of opening up every faction for mixed 50/50 gender ratio.
Or, have two factions, just two, that are monogendered, which counteract eachother. You know, like we have now?
Because i dont like the idea of characters and factions being primarily based on what gender they happen to have, like how i dont like characters in fiction being based on their sexuality and other traits second, wich becomes the focus if they are the only ones who are somehow exempt from something other factions or characters follow.
But, how about this, Say that GW tomorrow changes all of the background to accomodate the female space marines. They are now a thing and all problems retconned.
The question is as follows: What broke? What did this destroy for the space marines?
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/11/06 00:36:49
Subject: Women In The Imperium
|
 |
Glorious Lord of Chaos
The burning pits of Hades, also known as Sweden in summer
|
Bobthehero wrote: Ashiraya wrote:Probably because you are used to either androgynous DKOK, musclebound hulks, or boobplate bimbos. Actually I work with women in combat gear fairly often. I doubt those are 28mm models, though. I am not asking for modern day military armor. I understand the need for stylization. But it has to have some semblance of plausibility.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/06 00:38:17
|
|
 |
 |
|
|