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.

You know what is the most amusing part of these debates. People say, I want female space marines. I shouldn't only have sisters of battle, they are just crazed nuns. Space marines, on the other hand, are crazed monks. But, now they will be female. Female, craze monks. Wait...

 Grumblewartz wrote:
You know what is the most amusing part of these debates. People say, I want female space marines. I shouldn't only have sisters of battle, they are just crazed nuns. Space marines, on the other hand, are crazed monks. But, now they will be female. Female, craze monks. Wait...

The difference is that marines have a whole lot more to them than "crazed monks". SoB don't.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Grumblewartz wrote:
You know what is the most amusing part of these debates. People say, I want female space marines. I shouldn't only have sisters of battle, they are just crazed nuns. Space marines, on the other hand, are crazed monks. But, now they will be female. Female, craze monks. Wait...

The difference is that marines have a whole lot more to them than "crazed monks". SoB don't.

Oh yea, we have edgy and paranoid crazed monks, vampirical crazed monks, crazed crazed monks (no the repeat ain't a mistake), furry crazed monks, and so on. Literallly the solution revolves around giving more stuff to the sisters, not to the marines.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Grumblewartz wrote:
You know what is the most amusing part of these debates. People say, I want female space marines. I shouldn't only have sisters of battle, they are just crazed nuns. Space marines, on the other hand, are crazed monks. But, now they will be female. Female, craze monks. Wait...

The difference is that marines have a whole lot more to them than "crazed monks". SoB don't.

Even assuming that statement is true, don't you think it would be better to expand the Sisters' background and model line (etc.), rather than just pasting some female heads onto the male crazy monks..?

 Lord Damocles wrote:
Even assuming that statement is true, don't you think it would be better to expand the Sisters' background and model line (etc.), rather than just pasting some female heads onto the male crazy monks..?

But what is there to expand? The problem with the SoB fluff isn't that it's missing lots of stuff, it's that the SoB are a minor faction in the Imperium. They're the enforcers of the church, not a conventional battlefield army. Sure, they see combat when necessary to achieve the objectives of the church, but when you're talking about the kind of epic planet-scale wars that define 40k the Imperium's first choice is the IG/Navy and space marines. To give SoB the same level of fluff as space marines you'd have to vastly expand their size and role in the Imperium, at which point you've created female space marines in all but name.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
My point is that in-universe matters.

In-universe stuff matters out-of-universe in the sense that we like stories that are interesting and coherent and self-cohesive. But in-universe doesn't matter in and by itself.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Using solely in-universe logic, devoid of any IRL concerns, why should Space Marines change?

I am not sure why that is an interesting perspective to you, but I can try to roleplay this. However, since neither of us exists in-universe, I cannot try to convince you yourself that marines can change. Who should be the one trying to convince, and who should be the one being convinced? Is it an Inquisitor trying to convince a Mago Biologis? Or a guardsman trying to convince another guardsman? Give me context to work with please ^^.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
But it was not a foreseen and discussed permission of the HLOT - it was a fault of "archaic wording" - not a predisposed permission.

Using an archaic wording instead of a predisposed permission is part of what makes it cool-looking. Maybe it was just the way it was agreed. Maybe it was how Thor tricked them, by introducing the wording and then using it as a political tool to force them to accept the consequences afterward. Anyhow what matters is that if Thor didn't have a LOT of political traction, and if the Sisters had not just saved the day, the Imperium definitely would not have allowed the Sisters, archaic wording or not.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I fail to see how the Dark Angels relate to this. May you enlighten me?

Look at the quote you were answering to. What Boneville said, and I agree with him, is that the Dark Angels are the only brand of Space Marines where the gender limitation derive naturally from their inspiration. The Dark Angels are really the only marines that actually draw more than a passing inspiration to monks. They have monk robes, biblical names, all the very stern stuff, austerity unlike other chapters, vows of silences, biblical names, …

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Why does the level of intertwining matter?

It is the difference between a huge change that is hard to do right and a small change that is very easy to do right. I don't mind the Sisters becoming mixed gendered. I stated it numerous time before. But I think it's a way bigger change, and harder to do, than for Marines.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Works for me. Shadowsun, for instance, could be just that.

To amend then: only that is not good enough for me.

Ahah I knew we'd see eye to eye .

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?

Once again, my comment was sculpt and convert your own female Marines, and write some fluffety fluff fanfic background piece about how your chapter is one of the two blank slate Legions referenced in every Space Marines Codex I've ever owned. Meaning you have a gap to do what you want, as does every other woman (assuming you ARE a woman, since you said representation) who feels they need representation. My distaste for rewriting the background is the fact that we play this game BECAUSE of the background. If it didn't matter, nobody would play it.

Also, is a game board for a war game the best place to fight for equality and representation? Wouldn't it be better to address that with GW proper? What I can tell you from my experience working in a gaming store is that 10% of the clientele that actually played games at the store or hosted events were female, and of those I think 1 played minis at all. The rest were RPGers or CCGers. If that is about the same percentage in other places then I really can't see how anyone would pander to 1% of the customer base. And I will reiterate that I sincerely doubt there is this massive body of female players who will absolutely refuse to game unless Space Marines have female models added, and I can't see how people can dispute that.

Sgt_Smudge wrote:

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).

For some reason it seems that there can't be monogender ANYTHING unless it's monogender female. Not sure why, but I also see guys never complain when there's monogender female stuff. Odd as that is.

 Just Tony wrote:

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?

Once again, my comment was sculpt and convert your own female Marines, and write some fluffety fluff fanfic background piece about how your chapter is one of the two blank slate Legions referenced in every Space Marines Codex I've ever owned. Meaning you have a gap to do what you want, as does every other woman (assuming you ARE a woman, since you said representation) who feels they need representation. My distaste for rewriting the background is the fact that we play this game BECAUSE of the background. If it didn't matter, nobody would play it.

Also, is a game board for a war game the best place to fight for equality and representation? Wouldn't it be better to address that with GW proper? What I can tell you from my experience working in a gaming store is that 10% of the clientele that actually played games at the store or hosted events were female, and of those I think 1 played minis at all. The rest were RPGers or CCGers. If that is about the same percentage in other places then I really can't see how anyone would pander to 1% of the customer base. And I will reiterate that I sincerely doubt there is this massive body of female players who will absolutely refuse to game unless Space Marines have female models added, and I can't see how people can dispute that.

To say that you have to do fanfiction too feel represented is not an answer to the problem. The whole point of representation as a social principle is that you need official representation, wich fanfiction is not. A wargame's fiction and models is a way to relay these ideas and create a base for them. im not saying change it and it immideatly changes society, but it can help influence a group to allow change eventually.

Aside from your example being highly anecdotal, you could justy as easily interpret it as a indicator that some customers dont care for the current product and that a renewal like more diverse models and female space marines might be what gets these people into the hobby. This conclusion is just as much speculation as yours.

I also fail to see the correlation between the discussion of representation and my gender would be, and if its important i can tell you that i am a homosexual man.

Sgt_Smudge wrote:

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).

For some reason it seems that there can't be monogender ANYTHING unless it's monogender female. Not sure why, but I also see guys never complain when there's monogender female stuff. Odd as that is.

Well a reason as to why monogender female stuff isnt questioned by guys could be that they are either made as jokes, see nuns with guns, or as fanservice. Never actually giving a good depiction of women for women, but as a depiction of what guys want to see.

 Boneville wrote:
Well a reason as to why monogender female stuff isnt questioned by guys could be that they are either made as jokes, see nuns with guns, or as fanservice. Never actually giving a good depiction of women for women, but as a depiction of what guys want to see.

I wouldn't exactly say Space Marines are a good depiction of men being the fanatical, genocidal, generally single-minded former-child-soldiers they are.

Regardless I don't think men would object to a good depiction of women for women. Though I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that.

Social justice, basically.

Carol Danvers has been one of Marvel's most popular characters for years now, as well as pretty much EVERY female Xmen character with the notable exception of Jean Grey. However, it seems that the internet as a whole won't be satisfied until the white cis male is the token thrown in.

Also, to Boneville, since Space Marines are pretty much asexual, giving themselves fully to their war craft, wouldn't they NOT represent you in the first place? I will say again, NO FICTION IN THE HISTORY OF EVER WILL SHOW EQUAL REPRESENTATION FOR EVERY SECT OF EVERYTHING THAT'S EXISTED EVER. That applies to 40K. And yes, writing your own fluff piece can handwave ANYTHING into existence in the game as far as sticking to the rules of the books go. I fail to see how officially femming Marines in publication will change that.

Yeah I don't exactly think that 40K is the place to go to for a good depiction of anything, unless you're looking for a good depiction of "crazy".

That said, the oft touted heroes of the setting are predominantly marines, who are all male. IMO that situation could be improved, although the easiest step to take would be to focus less on marines.

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
My point is that in-universe matters.

In-universe stuff matters out-of-universe in the sense that we like stories that are interesting and coherent and self-cohesive. But in-universe doesn't matter in and by itself.

So, if in-universe doesn't count, why the double standard on the Decree Passive and the Creation of a Space Marine article? Because both are coherent, self-cohesive and interesting is subjective.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Using solely in-universe logic, devoid of any IRL concerns, why should Space Marines change?

I am not sure why that is an interesting perspective to you, but I can try to roleplay this. However, since neither of us exists in-universe, I cannot try to convince you yourself that marines can change. Who should be the one trying to convince, and who should be the one being convinced? Is it an Inquisitor trying to convince a Mago Biologis? Or a guardsman trying to convince another guardsman? Give me context to work with please ^^.

I'm not sure if I'm not explaining this right, or if you're being obtuse, but I'll assume the former. Allow me to reiterate it.
Without real life concerns and reasons of our world, such as representation of groups, why should Space Marine lore change?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
But it was not a foreseen and discussed permission of the HLOT - it was a fault of "archaic wording" - not a predisposed permission.

Using an archaic wording instead of a predisposed permission is part of what makes it cool-looking. Maybe it was just the way it was agreed. Maybe it was how Thor tricked them, by introducing the wording and then using it as a political tool to force them to accept the consequences afterward. Anyhow what matters is that if Thor didn't have a LOT of political traction, and if the Sisters had not just saved the day, the Imperium definitely would not have allowed the Sisters, archaic wording or not.

Funny, but I don't see any of the latter part of your response in there. It appears the only thing that mattered, political traction or not, was the archaic wording, because that is all we're told.
Not to mention "cool-looking" is subjective. One might say, and this is not necessarily my personal opinion, that the archaic wording should not have happened, because they could expect someone, if they actually cared about stopping the Ecclesiarchy having power, would use a gender neutral term.
I'm also seeing some "maybes" thrown in there - it's not even confirmed.

The Creation of a Space Marine article has less fluff around it, but is far more to the point, and allows little deviance from the fact that females are not compatible with Astartes genetic tissue.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I fail to see how the Dark Angels relate to this. May you enlighten me?

Look at the quote you were answering to. What Boneville said, and I agree with him, is that the Dark Angels are the only brand of Space Marines where the gender limitation derive naturally from their inspiration. The Dark Angels are really the only marines that actually draw more than a passing inspiration to monks. They have monk robes, biblical names, all the very stern stuff, austerity unlike other chapters, vows of silences, biblical names, …

Does that matter? Space Marines are prohibited from female members for a reason completely different to the monks. Their aesthetic has nothing to do with it. The ONLY reason cited in canon, as you kindly pointed out, is that gene-seed is not compatible. You don't need to look like a monk to do that.

So, I ask again, as you've avoided the question: What purpose does the gender restriction have on the Sisters?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Why does the level of intertwining matter?

It is the difference between a huge change that is hard to do right and a small change that is very easy to do right. I don't mind the Sisters becoming mixed gendered. I stated it numerous time before. But I think it's a way bigger change, and harder to do, than for Marines.

Why? Now for Marines, every mention of "Brothers" or "Sons" has to be changed to "Children".
For Sisters, any reference of "Sisters" or "Daughters" needs to be changed to "Children".

What else needs changing? Or better yet - why does it actually NEED changing? There are two mono-gender factions, both opposing, and if Space Marine saturation was reduced and the Sisters getting more love and time, what would be the problem?

Insectum7 wrote:Yeah I don't exactly think that 40K is the place to go to for a good depiction of anything, unless you're looking for a good depiction of "crazy".

That said, the oft touted heroes of the setting are predominantly marines, who are all male. IMO that situation could be improved, although the easiest step to take would be to focus less on marines.

I cannot agree more. 40k is not for depiction and recognition of groups. It is a setting, where the vast majority of people do horrible things, or have horrible things done to them. And Space Marines should get far less limelight. Give it over to someone else.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

 Boneville wrote:
Well a reason as to why monogender female stuff isnt questioned by guys could be that they are either made as jokes, see nuns with guns, or as fanservice. Never actually giving a good depiction of women for women, but as a depiction of what guys want to see.

I wouldn't exactly say Space Marines are a good depiction of men being the fanatical, genocidal, generally single-minded former-child-soldiers they are.

Regardless I don't think men would object to a good depiction of women for women. Though I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that.

What im basically getting at is that what you listed is negative traits but the main thing with space marines is how good they ate and how they are the best soldiers of the imperium of man. They are essentially a male powerfantasy that can do anything and encompass most of the good traits. They are Brave, dutyfull, loyal, strong, tough, resourceful etc. Very rarely are they portrayed in the same bad way some other factions are.

there is a implication when you gate this to only men being able to become this. That women dont have these ideals or capacity of becoming it, as i have said earlier these are the sort of subconscious and conscious decision making the factions and characters that seeps into fiction from society as a whole.

Just Tony wrote:Social justice, basically.

Carol Danvers has been one of Marvel's most popular characters for years now, as well as pretty much EVERY female Xmen character with the notable exception of Jean Grey. However, it seems that the internet as a whole won't be satisfied until the white cis male is the token thrown in.

Also, to Boneville, since Space Marines are pretty much asexual, giving themselves fully to their war craft, wouldn't they NOT represent you in the first place? I will say again, NO FICTION IN THE HISTORY OF EVER WILL SHOW EQUAL REPRESENTATION FOR EVERY SECT OF EVERYTHING THAT'S EXISTED EVER. That applies to 40K. And yes, writing your own fluff piece can handwave ANYTHING into existence in the game as far as sticking to the rules of the books go. I fail to see how officially femming Marines in publication will change that.

First of all, the comic book industry has begun to change its, lets say, aged approach to writing women. they realised that alot of women read comic books, and behold gradual change. I will claim that all fiction in the history of the world has been greatly influenced by the movements and social expectations of its surroundings, no text is apolitical, and convey this either explicitly or implicitly.

Publication of the idea will mean Officiality, so that people cant just say, oh you have written female space marines? well they dont exist and cant happen your army doesnt actually work in real fluff.

Well since i am male i have just about every army to find someone to represent me in. A thousand varieties of super soldiers? check. Egyptian farao robot? check. A thousand varieties of evil super soldiers? check. Average soldier? check.
and i dont even have to do any custom modeling to get them.

Boneville wrote:

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

 Boneville wrote:
Well a reason as to why monogender female stuff isnt questioned by guys could be that they are either made as jokes, see nuns with guns, or as fanservice. Never actually giving a good depiction of women for women, but as a depiction of what guys want to see.

I wouldn't exactly say Space Marines are a good depiction of men being the fanatical, genocidal, generally single-minded former-child-soldiers they are.

Regardless I don't think men would object to a good depiction of women for women. Though I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that.

What im basically getting at is that what you listed is negative traits but the main thing with space marines is how good they ate and how they are the best soldiers of the imperium of man. They are essentially a male powerfantasy that can do anything and encompass most of the good traits. They are Brave, dutyfull, loyal, strong, tough, resourceful etc. Very rarely are they portrayed in the same bad way some other factions are.

there is a implication when you gate this to only men being able to become this. That women dont have these ideals or capacity of becoming it, as i have said earlier these are the sort of subconscious and conscious decision making the factions and characters that seeps into fiction from society as a whole.

Actually, men, as in mature, post pubescent males, cannot become Space Marines. BOYS, as in pre/early teen males, are chosen to be Astartes. By the time most of the target audience encounter Space Marines, they will have passed the age of acceptance into being a Space Marine.

Space Marines are not a male power fantasy, simply because what about them is male? They're posthuman, genetically enhanced freaks whose genitalia is probably either atrophied, removed, or just not functioning. At which point, a Space Marine actually pretty much becomes a eunuch who identifies as male. The faction males should identify most with, by your logic, would be Guardsmen.

No-one is saying Sisters of Battle are not brave, dutiful, loyal, strong, tough or resourceful. Hell, a Sister could probably batter a guardsmen male with impunity. And what are the negatives or Sisters? I don't think they have any innate negative traits, in my experience.

Just Tony wrote:Social justice, basically.

Carol Danvers has been one of Marvel's most popular characters for years now, as well as pretty much EVERY female Xmen character with the notable exception of Jean Grey. However, it seems that the internet as a whole won't be satisfied until the white cis male is the token thrown in.

Also, to Boneville, since Space Marines are pretty much asexual, giving themselves fully to their war craft, wouldn't they NOT represent you in the first place? I will say again, NO FICTION IN THE HISTORY OF EVER WILL SHOW EQUAL REPRESENTATION FOR EVERY SECT OF EVERYTHING THAT'S EXISTED EVER. That applies to 40K. And yes, writing your own fluff piece can handwave ANYTHING into existence in the game as far as sticking to the rules of the books go. I fail to see how officially femming Marines in publication will change that.

First of all, the comic book industry has begun to change its, lets say, aged approach to writing women. they realised that alot of women read comic books, and behold gradual change. I will claim that all fiction in the history of the world has been greatly influenced by the movements and social expectations of its surroundings, no text is apolitical, and convey this either explicitly or implicitly.

However, comic books maintain a multiple universe/canon nature, unlike 40k, which has one canon universe. It's not the same - a comic book universe can change a character or plotline with far more ease than 40k. 40k isn't quite the platform of political agenda that comic books are, for better or worse.

Publication of the idea will mean Officiality, so that people cant just say, oh you have written female space marines? well they dont exist and cant happen your army doesnt actually work in real fluff.

Yes, the real fluff. Because a fantasy universe has rules. Some of the 40k rules being no Female Astartes, and no Male Sisters of Battle.

Well since i am male i have just about every army to find someone to represent me in. A thousand varieties of super soldiers? check. Egyptian farao robot? check. A thousand varieties of evil super soldiers? check. Average soldier? check.
and i dont even have to do any custom modeling to get them.

Errr, what?
A thousand varieties of super soldiers - Unless you are a Space Marine, you are not represented by that. They are post-human genetically engineered freaks - you are not, I presume.

Egyptian *Pharaoh* Robot - I'm sorry, have you actually read up on the Orphean War? Because that features a female Phaeron commanding the Dynasty. Not to mention that nothing is actually stopping you having female Necrons. It's just that that will not be reflected in their frame, because their body, built by the Ctan, doesn't distinguish gender - it's a skeletal frame for a glorified automata.

Evil super soldiers - As above, except unless you pledged your soul to unknowable extradimensional deities, you won't be represented like that.

Average soldier - the ONE case. Which I will agree - Imperial Guard, Tau and Eldar variants should all receive a more polygender range of options. However, in lore, you are not prohibited from having female guardsmen.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Boneville wrote:

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

 Boneville wrote:
Well a reason as to why monogender female stuff isnt questioned by guys could be that they are either made as jokes, see nuns with guns, or as fanservice. Never actually giving a good depiction of women for women, but as a depiction of what guys want to see.

I wouldn't exactly say Space Marines are a good depiction of men being the fanatical, genocidal, generally single-minded former-child-soldiers they are.

Regardless I don't think men would object to a good depiction of women for women. Though I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that.

What im basically getting at is that what you listed is negative traits but the main thing with space marines is how good they ate and how they are the best soldiers of the imperium of man. They are essentially a male powerfantasy that can do anything and encompass most of the good traits. They are Brave, dutyfull, loyal, strong, tough, resourceful etc. Very rarely are they portrayed in the same bad way some other factions are.

there is a implication when you gate this to only men being able to become this. That women dont have these ideals or capacity of becoming it, as i have said earlier these are the sort of subconscious and conscious decision making the factions and characters that seeps into fiction from society as a whole.

Actually, men, as in mature, post pubescent males, cannot become Space Marines. BOYS, as in pre/early teen males, are chosen to be Astartes. By the time most of the target audience encounter Space Marines, they will have passed the age of acceptance into being a Space Marine.

Space Marines are not a male power fantasy, simply because what about them is male? They're posthuman, genetically enhanced freaks whose genitalia is probably either atrophied, removed, or just not functioning. At which point, a Space Marine actually pretty much becomes a eunuch who identifies as male. The faction males should identify most with, by your logic, would be Guardsmen.

No-one is saying Sisters of Battle are not brave, dutiful, loyal, strong, tough or resourceful. Hell, a Sister could probably batter a guardsmen male with impunity. And what are the negatives or Sisters? I don't think they have any innate negative traits, in my experience.

Just Tony wrote:Social justice, basically.

Carol Danvers has been one of Marvel's most popular characters for years now, as well as pretty much EVERY female Xmen character with the notable exception of Jean Grey. However, it seems that the internet as a whole won't be satisfied until the white cis male is the token thrown in.

Also, to Boneville, since Space Marines are pretty much asexual, giving themselves fully to their war craft, wouldn't they NOT represent you in the first place? I will say again, NO FICTION IN THE HISTORY OF EVER WILL SHOW EQUAL REPRESENTATION FOR EVERY SECT OF EVERYTHING THAT'S EXISTED EVER. That applies to 40K. And yes, writing your own fluff piece can handwave ANYTHING into existence in the game as far as sticking to the rules of the books go. I fail to see how officially femming Marines in publication will change that.

First of all, the comic book industry has begun to change its, lets say, aged approach to writing women. they realised that alot of women read comic books, and behold gradual change. I will claim that all fiction in the history of the world has been greatly influenced by the movements and social expectations of its surroundings, no text is apolitical, and convey this either explicitly or implicitly.

However, comic books maintain a multiple universe/canon nature, unlike 40k, which has one canon universe. It's not the same - a comic book universe can change a character or plotline with far more ease than 40k. 40k isn't quite the platform of political agenda that comic books are, for better or worse.

Publication of the idea will mean Officiality, so that people cant just say, oh you have written female space marines? well they dont exist and cant happen your army doesnt actually work in real fluff.

Yes, the real fluff. Because a fantasy universe has rules. Some of the 40k rules being no Female Astartes, and no Male Sisters of Battle.

Well since i am male i have just about every army to find someone to represent me in. A thousand varieties of super soldiers? check. Egyptian farao robot? check. A thousand varieties of evil super soldiers? check. Average soldier? check.
and i dont even have to do any custom modeling to get them.

Errr, what?
A thousand varieties of super soldiers - Unless you are a Space Marine, you are not represented by that. They are post-human genetically engineered freaks - you are not, I presume.

Egyptian *Pharaoh* Robot - I'm sorry, have you actually read up on the Orphean War? Because that features a female Phaeron commanding the Dynasty. Not to mention that nothing is actually stopping you having female Necrons. It's just that that will not be reflected in their frame, because their body, built by the Ctan, doesn't distinguish gender - it's a skeletal frame for a glorified automata.

Evil super soldiers - As above, except unless you pledged your soul to unknowable extradimensional deities, you won't be represented like that.

Average soldier - the ONE case. Which I will agree - Imperial Guard, Tau and Eldar variants should all receive a more polygender range of options. However, in lore, you are not prohibited from having female guardsmen.

The point is i have alot of options to be represented. Women? not so many.

IF the space marines are so unrelatable, that noone but genetically enhanced supermen can be represented by them, then why is it so important that they are male? From your description gender shouldnt matter in the slightest. So why cant we have female space marines?
Just because it is hard to rewrite stuff doesnt make it impossible.

Also space marines are not a male powerfantasy, just like H.P Lovecrafts story "the white ape" is not about White and black people interbreeding.

 Boneville wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Boneville wrote:

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

 Boneville wrote:
Well a reason as to why monogender female stuff isnt questioned by guys could be that they are either made as jokes, see nuns with guns, or as fanservice. Never actually giving a good depiction of women for women, but as a depiction of what guys want to see.

I wouldn't exactly say Space Marines are a good depiction of men being the fanatical, genocidal, generally single-minded former-child-soldiers they are.

Regardless I don't think men would object to a good depiction of women for women. Though I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that.

What im basically getting at is that what you listed is negative traits but the main thing with space marines is how good they ate and how they are the best soldiers of the imperium of man. They are essentially a male powerfantasy that can do anything and encompass most of the good traits. They are Brave, dutyfull, loyal, strong, tough, resourceful etc. Very rarely are they portrayed in the same bad way some other factions are.

there is a implication when you gate this to only men being able to become this. That women dont have these ideals or capacity of becoming it, as i have said earlier these are the sort of subconscious and conscious decision making the factions and characters that seeps into fiction from society as a whole.

Actually, men, as in mature, post pubescent males, cannot become Space Marines. BOYS, as in pre/early teen males, are chosen to be Astartes. By the time most of the target audience encounter Space Marines, they will have passed the age of acceptance into being a Space Marine.

Space Marines are not a male power fantasy, simply because what about them is male? They're posthuman, genetically enhanced freaks whose genitalia is probably either atrophied, removed, or just not functioning. At which point, a Space Marine actually pretty much becomes a eunuch who identifies as male. The faction males should identify most with, by your logic, would be Guardsmen.

No-one is saying Sisters of Battle are not brave, dutiful, loyal, strong, tough or resourceful. Hell, a Sister could probably batter a guardsmen male with impunity. And what are the negatives or Sisters? I don't think they have any innate negative traits, in my experience.

Just Tony wrote:Social justice, basically.

Carol Danvers has been one of Marvel's most popular characters for years now, as well as pretty much EVERY female Xmen character with the notable exception of Jean Grey. However, it seems that the internet as a whole won't be satisfied until the white cis male is the token thrown in.

Also, to Boneville, since Space Marines are pretty much asexual, giving themselves fully to their war craft, wouldn't they NOT represent you in the first place? I will say again, NO FICTION IN THE HISTORY OF EVER WILL SHOW EQUAL REPRESENTATION FOR EVERY SECT OF EVERYTHING THAT'S EXISTED EVER. That applies to 40K. And yes, writing your own fluff piece can handwave ANYTHING into existence in the game as far as sticking to the rules of the books go. I fail to see how officially femming Marines in publication will change that.

First of all, the comic book industry has begun to change its, lets say, aged approach to writing women. they realised that alot of women read comic books, and behold gradual change. I will claim that all fiction in the history of the world has been greatly influenced by the movements and social expectations of its surroundings, no text is apolitical, and convey this either explicitly or implicitly.

However, comic books maintain a multiple universe/canon nature, unlike 40k, which has one canon universe. It's not the same - a comic book universe can change a character or plotline with far more ease than 40k. 40k isn't quite the platform of political agenda that comic books are, for better or worse.

Publication of the idea will mean Officiality, so that people cant just say, oh you have written female space marines? well they dont exist and cant happen your army doesnt actually work in real fluff.

Yes, the real fluff. Because a fantasy universe has rules. Some of the 40k rules being no Female Astartes, and no Male Sisters of Battle.

Well since i am male i have just about every army to find someone to represent me in. A thousand varieties of super soldiers? check. Egyptian farao robot? check. A thousand varieties of evil super soldiers? check. Average soldier? check.
and i dont even have to do any custom modeling to get them.

Errr, what?
A thousand varieties of super soldiers - Unless you are a Space Marine, you are not represented by that. They are post-human genetically engineered freaks - you are not, I presume.

Egyptian *Pharaoh* Robot - I'm sorry, have you actually read up on the Orphean War? Because that features a female Phaeron commanding the Dynasty. Not to mention that nothing is actually stopping you having female Necrons. It's just that that will not be reflected in their frame, because their body, built by the Ctan, doesn't distinguish gender - it's a skeletal frame for a glorified automata.

Evil super soldiers - As above, except unless you pledged your soul to unknowable extradimensional deities, you won't be represented like that.

Average soldier - the ONE case. Which I will agree - Imperial Guard, Tau and Eldar variants should all receive a more polygender range of options. However, in lore, you are not prohibited from having female guardsmen.

The point is i have alot of options to be represented. Women? not so many.

In model form? Agreed. That should be rectified.

In fluff form? Incorrect. There are just as many opportunities for female representation as men. Let's go through every 40k faction, and for the sake of lore, combine all Space Marine factions together, because they generally function the same.

Space Marines (inc. Grey Knights, Deathwatch, Blood Angels, Space Wolves, Dark Angels, Chaos Space Marines, any Space Marines in Khorne Daemonkin) - Male, due to genetic restrictions.

Astra Militarum - Mixed gender. No restrictions.

Militarum Tempestus - Mixed gender, as far as I know.

Adeptas Sororitas - Female, due to Decree Passive.

Cult Mechanicus - Do these even have genders? If so, there's nothing preventing females. Mixed gender.

Skitarii - Same as Cult Mech.

Inquisition - Mixed gender.

Imperial Knights - Fluff both ways. Evidence of female Freeblade Knights, but by doctrine, male. Not impossible to fluff female Knights, so mixed gender.

Officio Assassinorum - Mixed gender.

Renegade Knights - Same as Imperial Knights, probably more chance of females, due to being Renegade.

Daemons in Khorne Daemonkin and Chaos Daemons - Agender. Neither male or female, though Slaaneshi daemons will undoubtedly possess sexual characteristics of either/both.

Orks - Agender. They're mushrooms.

Eldar, Dark Eldar and Harlequins - Mixed gender.

Necrons - Mixed gender. Their frames all look the same, but could be any gender pre-transformation, without requiring any converting.

Tau Empire - Mixed gender.

Tyranids - Agender.

Genestealer Cults - Mixed gender. The Hive Mind takes any who will take it in.

As you can see, that's a total of 11 mixed gender races (counting the Admech and Skitarii), 3 agender factions, 1 exclusively male race (seeing as Astartes technically all count as one race, due to the same creation process), and 1 exclusively female race.

I don't see any fluff concern there. I do see a concern in that Space Marine covers a lot, but from a lore perspective, they should not count as different races as they function the same, with a similar biology and equipment. However, I would support a reduced Space Marine presence in both fluff and game, to promote the other factions, especially Sisters.

IF the space marines are so unrelatable, that noone but genetically enhanced supermen can be represented by them, then why is it so important that they are male? From your description gender shouldnt matter in the slightest. So why cant we have female space marines?
Just because it is hard to rewrite stuff doesnt make it impossible.

Space Marines are important to be male because the fluff in creating them specifies that females are not genetically compatible for Astartes implants. The fluff that says this is just as canonically valid as the Decree Passive which locks Sisters as monogender.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
As you can see, that's a total of 11 mixed gender races (counting the Admech and Skitarii), 3 agender factions, 1 exclusively male race (seeing as Astartes technically all count as one race, due to the same creation process), and 1 exclusively female race.

I don't see any fluff concern there. I do see a concern in that Space Marine covers a lot, but from a lore perspective, they should not count as different races as they function the same, with a similar biology and equipment. However, I would support a reduced Space Marine presence in both fluff and game, to promote the other factions, especially Sisters.

IF the space marines are so unrelatable, that noone but genetically enhanced supermen can be represented by them, then why is it so important that they are male? From your description gender shouldnt matter in the slightest. So why cant we have female space marines?
Just because it is hard to rewrite stuff doesnt make it impossible.

Space Marines are important to be male because the fluff in creating them specifies that females are not genetically compatible for Astartes implants. The fluff that says this is just as canonically valid as the Decree Passive which locks Sisters as monogender.

I have never in any of my comments really asked for fluff reasons, seeing as i entered the thread stating that in universe reasons isnt arguments against this and you have yet to actually point out what female space marines would break. in fact what you have done is pointing out how their gender isnt really important for their identity as a faction, seeing as you continually point to one in universe explanation and holding it up instead of actually stating what it means for the faction to open up for women.

From what i have been saying whats canon or not isnt important because, once again, it can be rewritten.

 Boneville wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
As you can see, that's a total of 11 mixed gender races (counting the Admech and Skitarii), 3 agender factions, 1 exclusively male race (seeing as Astartes technically all count as one race, due to the same creation process), and 1 exclusively female race.

I don't see any fluff concern there. I do see a concern in that Space Marine covers a lot, but from a lore perspective, they should not count as different races as they function the same, with a similar biology and equipment. However, I would support a reduced Space Marine presence in both fluff and game, to promote the other factions, especially Sisters.

IF the space marines are so unrelatable, that noone but genetically enhanced supermen can be represented by them, then why is it so important that they are male? From your description gender shouldnt matter in the slightest. So why cant we have female space marines?
Just because it is hard to rewrite stuff doesnt make it impossible.

Space Marines are important to be male because the fluff in creating them specifies that females are not genetically compatible for Astartes implants. The fluff that says this is just as canonically valid as the Decree Passive which locks Sisters as monogender.

I have never in any of my comments really asked for fluff reasons, seeing as i entered the thread stating that in universe reasons isnt arguments against this and you have yet to actually point out what female space marines would break. in fact what you have done is pointing out how their gender isnt really important for their identity as a faction, seeing as you continually point to one in universe explanation and holding it up instead of actually stating what it means for the faction to open up for women.

From what i have been saying whats canon or not isnt important because, once again, it can be rewritten.

So really, what's the point of 40k actually having canon and lore if it can be rewritten at your whim? Why are in-universe reasons not valid arguments? After all, it's the only reason Sisters of Battle are mono-gender too.

Why bother having a BACKGROUND discussion, when you don't care about BACKGROUND sources? After all, we're in the BACKGROUND subforum.

If you want to argue this point from a meta perspective, I don't think 40k Background is appropriate. 40k General Discussion would fit that better.

And while I can, I'll pose the same question to you - what is the importance of gender identity of the Sisters of Battle? What would it mean to open it up to men?

Sgt_Smudge wrote:Why bother having a BACKGROUND discussion, when you don't care about BACKGROUND sources? After all, we're in the BACKGROUND subforum.

If you want to argue this point from a meta perspective, I don't think 40k Background is appropriate. 40k General Discussion would fit that better.

And while I can, I'll pose the same question to you - what is the importance of gender identity of the Sisters of Battle? What would it mean to open it up to men?

Boneville wrote:My point was that you cant say there can be no female space marines because there exists an in universe explanation, because it can be rewritten. The fictional universe can be written anyway anytime so if the only limitation on female space marines is the fluff says no, and the fluff can be rewritten, then what is the problem here? Why cant there be female space marines?

Boneville wrote: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.

Boneville wrote: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.

As you see i have already answered these questions, here is statements on the in universe stuff as arguments and my thoughts on the sisters. besides, discussing how the background as written could be altered and the out of game reasons one might want to (or not want to) do that seems perfectly fitting for the fluff board to me

 Boneville wrote:

Sgt_Smudge wrote:Why bother having a BACKGROUND discussion, when you don't care about BACKGROUND sources? After all, we're in the BACKGROUND subforum.

If you want to argue this point from a meta perspective, I don't think 40k Background is appropriate. 40k General Discussion would fit that better.

And while I can, I'll pose the same question to you - what is the importance of gender identity of the Sisters of Battle? What would it mean to open it up to men?

Boneville wrote:My point was that you cant say there can be no female space marines because there exists an in universe explanation, because it can be rewritten. The fictional universe can be written anyway anytime so if the only limitation on female space marines is the fluff says no, and the fluff can be rewritten, then what is the problem here? Why cant there be female space marines?

Boneville wrote: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.

Boneville wrote: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.

As you see i have already answered these questions, here is statements on the in universe stuff as arguments and my thoughts on the sisters. besides, discussing how the background as written could be altered and the out of game reasons one might want to (or not want to) do that seems perfectly fitting for the fluff board to me

No, you have just said we can change the fluff. I want to know why that fluff needs changing, with a reason derived from the Background of 40k. I don't want real world examples, because I think that would be more suited to 40k General Discussion.

If your answer is just going to be along the lines of "well, seeing as we can rewrite the fluff so it's irrelevant", then you've just nullified the entire 40k Background section, because it can be rewritten.
"Why do Space Marines carry bolters?" "Doesn't matter, it can be rewritten, so it's irrelevant."
"Who's the strongest Primarch?" "Doesn't matter, it can be rewritten, so it's irrelevant."
"What is the Decree Passive?" "Doesn't matter, it can be rewritten, so it's irrelevant."

Do you see why I don't think that answer's appropriate for a Background discussion?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Boneville wrote:

Sgt_Smudge wrote:Why bother having a BACKGROUND discussion, when you don't care about BACKGROUND sources? After all, we're in the BACKGROUND subforum.

If you want to argue this point from a meta perspective, I don't think 40k Background is appropriate. 40k General Discussion would fit that better.

And while I can, I'll pose the same question to you - what is the importance of gender identity of the Sisters of Battle? What would it mean to open it up to men?

Boneville wrote:My point was that you cant say there can be no female space marines because there exists an in universe explanation, because it can be rewritten. The fictional universe can be written anyway anytime so if the only limitation on female space marines is the fluff says no, and the fluff can be rewritten, then what is the problem here? Why cant there be female space marines?

Boneville wrote: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.

Boneville wrote: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.

As you see i have already answered these questions, here is statements on the in universe stuff as arguments and my thoughts on the sisters. besides, discussing how the background as written could be altered and the out of game reasons one might want to (or not want to) do that seems perfectly fitting for the fluff board to me

No, you have just said we can change the fluff. I want to know why that fluff needs changing, with a reason derived from the Background of 40k. I don't want real world examples, because I think that would be more suited to 40k General Discussion.

If your answer is just going to be along the lines of "well, seeing as we can rewrite the fluff so it's irrelevant", then you've just nullified the entire 40k Background section, because it can be rewritten.
"Why do Space Marines carry bolters?" "Doesn't matter, it can be rewritten, so it's irrelevant."
"Who's the strongest Primarch?" "Doesn't matter, it can be rewritten, so it's irrelevant."
"What is the Decree Passive?" "Doesn't matter, it can be rewritten, so it's irrelevant."

Do you see why I don't think that answer's appropriate for a Background discussion?

That is a very reductionist statement and interpretation on what io have said so far in this thread. Youre setting this argument up so that you dont have to explain your stance on female space marines. Let me explain:

My stance has been as you see that the explanation in universe for no female space marines is all too clear. a blanket no. Myself and some others have said that there is no reason for this limitation because the space marines dont do enough with this in their faction identity.

They can be so many things ranging from space vikings to space marines who has dark secrets etc. But none, not even bog standard space marines has their gender be the most important part.

In light of this i have stated many very real reasons of why and theories on how they became that way. I have been clear on the part that the only limitation on the men in sisters of battle has been that in the current state so many miniatures of women is in the sisters range and just now removing it takes the majority of the female models with it. I have been talking about representation on wich i got back that males wasnt suypposed to be represented by space marines, further diluting the space marines must be male thing.

I also think you can open up alot more stories with female space marines than without. Like space wolf apothecaries that could be modelled after valkyries for example.

But so far these points have been ignored and reduced to "you just want to rewrite everything, nothing matters" when the fact is i care about the background just not this part.

And you still havent explained what in the space marines identity the fact that they are male is important to beyond that one line. But still demand that everyone else gives a reason on sisters.

Lastly Are you really saying that discussion about a fluff passage is not a background disussion?

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
Except that their lack of sexuality does indeed specifically define them in the 40K lore.

Except for Space Wolves

That happened in what, one crappy novel written over 15 years ago? Really weak argument to point at one canonically incompatible novel to overwrite almost 30 years of established fluff. Might as well cite Ian Watson's Space Marine while you're at it. Or CS Goto.

 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.

Absolutely. In the end, putting a different thematic "skin" on Space Marines is superficial in terms of narrative, because in the end, they're still Space Marines. They differentiating rulesets have been a factor of game economics. The Space Marines sell so many models, Games Workshop came up with different ways to play them. In-universe though, the distinction between a Space Wolf and an Ultramarine is a question of fur pelts and helmet crests. Fundamentally they're the same thing. There are just 1000 different personalities of Space Marines, and only 6 different personalities of Sisters of Battle. Trying to pretend that's an incredible differentiation in the scope of an argument on gender and sexual identity is pointless. Being a male is no different for a Blood Angel than it is for a Dark Angel. The concept of self for a Space Marine is fairly consistent. It's why they all share the same basic rules of ATSKNF, and have since 2nd Edition (the birth of "modern" 40K). Because, at their core, Space Marines are all the same thing. Genetically and biologically modified post-human child-soldiers indoctrinated beyond a sense of self to unquestioned loyalty to the Emperor. The shape of their cuspid teeth or their penchants for tactical bathrobes are flavor text.

I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say right there.

This does not surprise me.

 Boneville wrote:
That is a very reductionist statement and interpretation on what io have said so far in this thread. Youre setting this argument up so that you dont have to explain your stance on female space marines.

I have explained my stance on Female Space Marines. I do not think they are necessary, because there is a fluff explanation as to why they cannot exist, and I do not see a problem with the limitation, as it runs parallel to the inverse restriction on gender with the Sisters of Battle. I accept the fluff, as there is no reason for me to question it over any other piece of fluff, such as "Why are orks green?" or "Why does a lasgun look like that?" or "Why does the Warp exist?" There is no neglected gender fluff wise, but I can completely agree that representation of women in the factions they should be represented in is shockingly neglectful.

Let me explain:

My stance has been as you see that the explanation in universe for no female space marines is all too clear. a blanket no. Myself and some others have said that there is no reason for this limitation because the space marines dont do enough with this in their faction identity.

They can be so many things ranging from space vikings to space marines who has dark secrets etc. But none, not even bog standard space marines has their gender be the most important part.

Does everything have to be integral to the "faction identity"? One could ask why are orks predominantly green under the same idea. It's just a trait of Space Marines, like how they wear power armour, and are genetically engineered - a side effect of the genetic enhancement being that it cannot work on women.

In light of this i have stated many very real reasons of why and theories on how they became that way. I have been clear on the part that the only limitation on the men in sisters of battle has been that in the current state so many miniatures of women is in the sisters range and just now removing it takes the majority of the female models with it. I have been talking about representation on wich i got back that males wasnt suypposed to be represented by space marines, further diluting the space marines must be male thing.

So, if there was more female representation in the rest of 40k, which I do support wholeheartedly, would you still push for female Astartes?

Space Marines are not an army for representation, because no-one is a 7 foot tall genetically altered killing machine, regardless of your gender.

I also think you can open up alot more stories with female space marines than without. Like space wolf apothecaries that could be modelled after valkyries for example.

A lot more stories could be opened up if Orks could be Space Marines. Like Space Wolf terminators being modelled like Siege Trolls. Or if Tyranids could be Space Marines, because then we can have a Tyranid-ified Thunderwolf Cerberus.
Does this mean we can have Ork and Tyranid Space Marines?

But so far these points have been ignored and reduced to "you just want to rewrite everything, nothing matters" when the fact is i care about the background just not this part.

But why is this part of the background so malleable?

And you still havent explained what in the space marines identity the fact that they are male is important to beyond that one line. But still demand that everyone else gives a reason on sisters.

They are male because the fluff says so. That's what it boils down to for me, in much the same way that orks are green.

Lastly Are you really saying that discussion about a fluff passage is not a background disussion?

No, I'm saying applying reasoning from our logic and world is not a background discussion, especially when one is trying to change the background for real world reasons instead of in-universe ones.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I have explained my stance on Female Space Marines. I do not think they are necessary, because there is a fluff explanation as to why they cannot exist, and I do not see a problem with the limitation, as it runs parallel to the inverse restriction on gender with the Sisters of Battle. I accept the fluff, as there is no reason for me to question it over any other piece of fluff, such as "Why are orks green?" or "Why does a lasgun look like that?" or "Why does the Warp exist?" There is no neglected gender fluff wise, but I can completely agree that representation of women in the factions they should be represented in is shockingly neglectful..

Actually you have referred to a fluff piece that states that women cant be space marines. So i ask you: what would change or break for the space marines if GW tomorrow changes the passage and introduces female space marines? What change is so horrible that the passage cant be changed?

Does everything have to be integral to the "faction identity"? One could ask why are orks predominantly green under the same idea. It's just a trait of Space Marines, like how they wear power armour, and are genetically engineered - a side effect of the genetic enhancement being that it cannot work on women.

Yes, otherwise all factions become space marines if there are nothing that separates them, in the case of the identity of space marines no chapter uses their male gender too such an extent that it is necessary to make such a statement and could just be a later addition to justify it. After all if we cant critizise it- how can we change it?

So, if there was more female representation in the rest of 40k, which I do support wholeheartedly, would you still push for female Astartes?

Space Marines are not an army for representation, because no-one is a 7 foot tall genetically altered killing machine, regardless of your gender.

The point is that it is a power fantasy, something you want to be. Space Marines are made super badass and strong so people can go "I wanna be a super soldier", for this reason they are male because men made the universe and men want to be super men.That fantasy is represented, butr it wasnt written with what women wanted to see.

Yes, i would still be pushing for female space marines. But with a slightly shifted angle, because i see no reason why women cant have a similar power fantasy directed at them.

A lot more stories could be opened up if Orks could be Space Marines. Like Space Wolf terminators being modelled like Siege Trolls. Or if Tyranids could be Space Marines, because then we can have a Tyranid-ified Thunderwolf Cerberus.
Does this mean we can have Ork and Tyranid Space Marines?

Of course. But then you would have to make another thread to discuss it in.

But why is this part of the background so malleable?

Because of the many problems i have with the implications of such a statement.

They are male because the fluff says so. That's what it boils down to for me, in much the same way that orks are green.

Cant terminators do backlflips? What fluff is the right fluff?

No, I'm saying applying reasoning from our logic and world is not a background discussion, especially when one is trying to change the background for real world reasons instead of in-universe ones.

I am putting forth arguments as to why i think you should change the background, the discussion is still firmly about the background.

Boneville, I'm not going to quote your copious walls of text, I'm just going to sum up a few points.

You feel that the fluff should be rewritten to make every faction co-ed as to allow an even mix of female models in every army, correct? Wouldn't that basically render the differences thematically and aesthetically between SOB and SM obsolete?

If so, how would you feel if they got the license and permission to start a Drac army in 40K? They are explicitly asexual, reproducing without binary reproduction, and have no sexes OR gender roles. Would that need to be rewritten to cater to your wants? Would you basically say everything Larry B. Longyear wrote in the fiction of his creation?

I'll wait til you get back to me on that.

 Just Tony wrote:
Boneville, I'm not going to quote your copious walls of text, I'm just going to sum up a few points.

You feel that the fluff should be rewritten to make every faction co-ed as to allow an even mix of female models in every army, correct? Wouldn't that basically render the differences thematically and aesthetically between SOB and SM obsolete?

If so, how would you feel if they got the license and permission to start a Drac army in 40K? They are explicitly asexual, reproducing without binary reproduction, and have no sexes OR gender roles. Would that need to be rewritten to cater to your wants? Would you basically say everything Larry B. Longyear wrote in the fiction of his creation?

I'll wait til you get back to me on that.

More or less correct, i wouldnt say every army because there are exceptions. Tyranids is one where i dont feel that gender plays a role at all for example. For necrons there are regalias of queens like cleopatra that could make good models. But yes, the human factions i feel hasnt done enough with their gender limitations to warrant it wich is why i feel it should be changed.

I dont see a problem with the overlapping of the two factions as one is drawn from super soldiers genetically enhanced etc and addinmg space marines wouldnt necessarily mean that all current space marines get genderswapped but would allow for female space marine chapters and mixed ones of course, the other faction can then explore the religious themes of the ecclisiarchy, so i dont see the thematic and aesthetic overlap.

from my research on the drac, they seem to be written explicitly to be alien. i dont see how they would be rewritten considering the point was to be inhuman and alien to us. Much like the tyranids and daemons (although i have huge problems with slaanesh, and their "supposed" androgenous appereance) but more of a "mirror" being. The point has always been that the space marines always has been linked too humanity so they dont have that "pass".

Had the space marines been introduced as a separate hemaphroditic alien faction i wouldnt have a problem.

Boneville wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I have explained my stance on Female Space Marines. I do not think they are necessary, because there is a fluff explanation as to why they cannot exist, and I do not see a problem with the limitation, as it runs parallel to the inverse restriction on gender with the Sisters of Battle. I accept the fluff, as there is no reason for me to question it over any other piece of fluff, such as "Why are orks green?" or "Why does a lasgun look like that?" or "Why does the Warp exist?" There is no neglected gender fluff wise, but I can completely agree that representation of women in the factions they should be represented in is shockingly neglectful..

Actually you have referred to a fluff piece that states that women cant be space marines. So i ask you: what would change or break for the space marines if GW tomorrow changes the passage and introduces female space marines? What change is so horrible that the passage cant be changed?

Firstly, I have no idea what that first sentence referred to.

Secondly, I think the more important thing, which is more accepted in debates like this, is why should be changed in the first place? I shouldn't have to justify that which already exists.
Prove to me that it should be changed, and then I can contest. However, I won't just respond to a "But why not" without a reason.

Does everything have to be integral to the "faction identity"? One could ask why are orks predominantly green under the same idea. It's just a trait of Space Marines, like how they wear power armour, and are genetically engineered - a side effect of the genetic enhancement being that it cannot work on women.

Yes, otherwise all factions become space marines if there are nothing that separates them, in the case of the identity of space marines no chapter uses their male gender too such an extent that it is necessary to make such a statement and could just be a later addition to justify it. After all if we cant critizise it- how can we change it?

I actually have no idea what you just said. Could you re-iterate?

So, if there was more female representation in the rest of 40k, which I do support wholeheartedly, would you still push for female Astartes?

Space Marines are not an army for representation, because no-one is a 7 foot tall genetically altered killing machine, regardless of your gender.

The point is that it is a power fantasy, something you want to be. Space Marines are made super badass and strong so people can go "I wanna be a super soldier", for this reason they are male because men made the universe and men want to be super men.That fantasy is represented, butr it wasnt written with what women wanted to see.

Yes, i would still be pushing for female space marines. But with a slightly shifted angle, because i see no reason why women cant have a similar power fantasy directed at them.

Okay, read these words - I do not want to be a Space Marine devoid of compassion for anything barring the slaughter of the enemies of my state.
I cannot believe that ALL men want that fantasy. You cannot categorise all men want to be super men and have power fantasies, because it is patently incorrect.

Women have just as much of a power fantasy opportunity directed at them - they're called the Sisters of Battle. They wear massive, hulking power armour, making them massively durable, carry the same weapons as the Space Marine, making them strong, and have even more of a thing for fire and purging righteously than Astartes. In fact, the ONLY real difference between the two, barring gender, is that the Sisters face the same threats WITHOUT genetic enhancements - which makes them EVEN MORE badass. They're as close to a Space Marine as a human can get without the Black Carapace.

Women have the option for power fantasy.
They do not have the option to be genetically enhanced by gene-seed. But they CAN be genetically enhanced via the Assassinorum. So really, what is it they're lacking?

A lot more stories could be opened up if Orks could be Space Marines. Like Space Wolf terminators being modelled like Siege Trolls. Or if Tyranids could be Space Marines, because then we can have a Tyranid-ified Thunderwolf Cerberus.
Does this mean we can have Ork and Tyranid Space Marines?

Of course. But then you would have to make another thread to discuss it in.

But really - how different is that to your previous point?

But why is this part of the background so malleable?

Because of the many problems i have with the implications of such a statement.

Which are?

They are male because the fluff says so. That's what it boils down to for me, in much the same way that orks are green.

Cant terminators do backlflips? What fluff is the right fluff?

Due to the increased validity of contrasting canon sources and Goto's track record, the Terminator backflip is not canon. The Creation of a Space Marine quote has never been overridden, to my knowledge, so is therefore correct fluff.

No, I'm saying applying reasoning from our logic and world is not a background discussion, especially when one is trying to change the background for real world reasons instead of in-universe ones.

I am putting forth arguments as to why i think you should change the background, the discussion is still firmly about the background.

Using real world examples and reasoning.
In-universe, there is nothing wrong with Space Marines being all male.

Only males can be space marines for the same reason only females can be slayers in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. That's how the creators wanted it. You either accept or don't. If you can't, then there's many other fictions out there to help you escape reality and live out your fantasies.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Boneville wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I have explained my stance on Female Space Marines. I do not think they are necessary, because there is a fluff explanation as to why they cannot exist, and I do not see a problem with the limitation, as it runs parallel to the inverse restriction on gender with the Sisters of Battle. I accept the fluff, as there is no reason for me to question it over any other piece of fluff, such as "Why are orks green?" or "Why does a lasgun look like that?" or "Why does the Warp exist?" There is no neglected gender fluff wise, but I can completely agree that representation of women in the factions they should be represented in is shockingly neglectful..

Actually you have referred to a fluff piece that states that women cant be space marines. So i ask you: what would change or break for the space marines if GW tomorrow changes the passage and introduces female space marines? What change is so horrible that the passage cant be changed?

Firstly, I have no idea what that first sentence referred to.

Secondly, I think the more important thing, which is more accepted in debates like this, is why should be changed in the first place? I shouldn't have to justify that which already exists.
Prove to me that it should be changed, and then I can contest. However, I won't just respond to a "But why not" without a reason.

The point of the question was that for someone who is very adamant to not include female space marine, you havent actually elaborated on why such a change would be bad for the faction. you have said that fluff says no, asked what gender means to sisters, but when asked with the same question you refuse to give an answer as to what in the space marines as a faction limits this.

I have my own theory: because you lose nothing. nothing in the space marines description (other than prefixes) or themes of different chapters actually stop working because female space marines are added to them. Or can you prove me wrong?

Does everything have to be integral to the "faction identity"? One could ask why are orks predominantly green under the same idea. It's just a trait of Space Marines, like how they wear power armour, and are genetically engineered - a side effect of the genetic enhancement being that it cannot work on women.

Yes, otherwise all factions become space marines if there are nothing that separates them, in the case of the identity of space marines no chapter uses their male gender too such an extent that it is necessary to make such a statement and could just be a later addition to justify it. After all if we cant critizise it- how can we change it?

I actually have no idea what you just said. Could you re-iterate?

Boneville wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
Boneville, I'm not going to quote your copious walls of text, I'm just going to sum up a few points.

You feel that the fluff should be rewritten to make every faction co-ed as to allow an even mix of female models in every army, correct? Wouldn't that basically render the differences thematically and aesthetically between SOB and SM obsolete?

If so, how would you feel if they got the license and permission to start a Drac army in 40K? They are explicitly asexual, reproducing without binary reproduction, and have no sexes OR gender roles. Would that need to be rewritten to cater to your wants? Would you basically say everything Larry B. Longyear wrote in the fiction of his creation?

I'll wait til you get back to me on that.

More or less correct, i wouldnt say every army because there are exceptions. Tyranids is one where i dont feel that gender plays a role at all for example. For necrons there are regalias of queens like cleopatra that could make good models. But yes, the human factions i feel hasnt done enough with their gender limitations to warrant it wich is why i feel it should be changed.

I dont see a problem with the overlapping of the two factions as one is drawn from super soldiers genetically enhanced etc and addinmg space marines wouldnt necessarily mean that all current space marines get genderswapped but would allow for female space marine chapters and mixed ones of course, the other faction can then explore the religious themes of the ecclisiarchy, so i dont see the thematic and aesthetic overlap.

from my research on the drac, they seem to be written explicitly to be alien. i dont see how they would be rewritten considering the point was to be inhuman and alien to us. Much like the tyranids and daemons (although i have huge problems with slaanesh, and their "supposed" androgenous appereance) but more of a "mirror" being. The point has always been that the space marines always has been linked too humanity so they dont have that "pass".

Had the space marines been introduced as a separate hemaphroditic alien faction i wouldnt have a problem.

So an army of entirely male Amazons as someone makes the models able to be 50/50 ratios means someone will inevitably run nothing but one sex. We're not going to throw gender into it, since ANY model can identify as a gender different than their sex. Actually, that might be the best out for you, since you're looking for a reason to do this and it might work in the fluff. Y chromosome? Yep. Identifies as female? Check. Techically, that would make them female Space Marines, or you are invalidating the entire Trans community. You could even run them as The Rainbow Warriors just to make sure you have everything covered.

Past that, the part where someone told you about the Slayers. Same thing applies as far as that goes. You either need to accept the background as it is, or find wiggle room, like I gave you in the last paragraph.