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.

 Mrs. Esterhouse wrote:
By all means feel free to critique it. But trying to force your narrative into something created by another is not respecting intellectual property.

Wouldnt the way youy word that mean that you cant make any fanfiction about anything as your forcing narrative?

Fanfiction is lame

 Mrs. Esterhouse wrote:
Fanfiction is lame

I see.

 Mrs. Esterhouse wrote:
By all means feel free to critique it. But trying to force your narrative into something created by another is not respecting intellectual property.

Behold, in the grim dark future a single light of logic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mrs. Esterhouse wrote:
Fanfiction is lame

this how ever is wrong.


DONT YOU DARE INSULT "LOVE CAN BLOOM!" THE GREATEST FAN FICTION EVER WRITTEN!

Well at the very least fanfiction is an acknowledgement of being separate and non-canon from the source material. So it's not really forcing your own narrative since it's not being published or seen as fact. It can be easily dismissed by both the creators and fans and has significantly less impact.

I wouldnt say having an opinion, explaining it and defending said opinion is forcing anything into the narrative.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Mrs. Esterhouse wrote:
By all means feel free to critique it. But trying to force your narrative into something created by another is not respecting intellectual property.

Behold, in the grim dark future a single light of logic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mrs. Esterhouse wrote:
Fanfiction is lame

this how ever is wrong.


DONT YOU DARE INSULT "LOVE CAN BLOOM!" THE GREATEST FAN FICTION EVER WRITTEN!

You mean Heresy can Bloom?

 Grimskul wrote:
Well at the very least fanfiction is an acknowledgement of being separate and non-canon from the source material. So it's not really forcing your own narrative since it's not being published or seen as fact. It can be easily dismissed by both the creators and fans and has significantly less impact.

As opposed to the suggestions of individual Dakka posters?

There's some good fan fiction out there. And the thing is, 40K sort of invites you to write your own fan fiction. At least it used to. A lot more than it does now, I think. So it's not shocking that this conversation comes up. What do people do when they write/create fan fiction? They like to insert themselves into their little slice of the fluff.

And like I've said, I don't mind at all if people have female space marines. It's your 40K.

I do think that more female characters in the armies that are unisex wouldn't be a bad thing. Hell, it would be a good thing. There are plenty of dudes that would love to see more women characters, especially for their Imperium armies.

I can't help but picture Bill Hader in the beginning of Pineapple Express asking, "where are all the chicks man!"

Wouldn't this line of reasoning mean nothing is permissible but repetition of existing canonical facts? And that no original armies may exist or be created only use of explicitly canonical armies?

Yeah, if that's your definition of 'respect for intellectual property' then I do not share it.

 Lusall wrote:
There's some good fan fiction out there. And the thing is, 40K sort of invites you to write your own fan fiction. At least it used to. A lot more than it does now, I think. So it's not shocking that this conversation comes up. What do people do when they write/create fan fiction? They like to insert themselves into their little slice of the fluff.

And like I've said, I don't mind at all if people have female space marines. It's your 40K.

I do think that more female characters in the armies that are unisex wouldn't be a bad thing. Hell, it would be a good thing. There are plenty of dudes that would love to see more women characters, especially for their Imperium armies.

I always like good stories, do you know where one can find fan fiction? Is there a community hub or are they scattered throughout different sites?

That's not my definition of respect for intellectual property. The creators of 40k have always said it's "your game" and it's "your dudes". I'm just a player and a fan. I have no right to tell you what you can or can't do with 40k.

The original creator of 40k wrote it so only men can become space marines. For whatever reason that is how he envisioned his creation in his universe that he created. Not liking it is fine. Wanting to change it officially to better fit your narrative is not fine. This is what my definition of respect for intellectual property is. Respecting the artistic creation of another and not hijacking it.

 Just Tony wrote:
But if you ARE taking away the main difference between them, sex

It is not the main difference between them.

 Just Tony wrote:
then you are left with two mixed gender power armor armies with bolters, Rhinos, and the like.

Did that ever stop GW from making marines codices for all the colors of the rainbow and then some more, and fans from buying those?

 Just Tony wrote:
You basically guarantee nobody would touch Sisters with a ten foot pole in that case, as they'd simply be cheaper worse Marines at that point. Currently the ONLY draw Sisters have is their background as a mainly female army, which is easily run as a completely female army by not running any of the available male models from the Codex. As a Sisters fan, I figured you above anyone else would understand that, but then I see your sig and realize that's not the case...

As a Sisters fan I can guarantee that you are wrong, that I would still be drawn to them nonetheless and that being all female is definitely NOT the only draw they have. But you can just ignore facts I guess.

 Grimskul wrote:
So they want to change the male only faction (space marines) to be mixed gender while maintaining the female only faction of sisters of battle as it is.

Nah. We said we were fine with Dark Angels staying male only. It's fine, one male-only faction and one female-only faction. See, it's you who hate equality and want double standard, or whatever you accuse us of.

 Mrs. Esterhouse wrote:
But trying to force your narrative into something created by another is not respecting intellectual property.

“Force your narrative” sounds like empty buzzword to me.

Boneville wrote:

 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?

Adding female Space Marines is as "bad" as adding Male Sisters of Battle. To me, it is the same scenario. If Sisters of Battle did not exist, I would push for mixed gender Space Marines.

So, with that knowledge, why should it be changed?

I say you lose the sense of hopelessness in the Imperium, and the cost of gene-seed. Hopelessness in that they cannot use a full 50% of their potential applicants due to gender, and the cost of gene-seed being that great power, but 50% of the population cannot accept it.

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?

My point was that if gender is such a big deal then why doesnt it come up more often. it just seems like space marines are genetically enhanced super soldiers in power armour with a variety of weapons following the codex astartes. if gender was such a big deal that they just have to be male, why isnt that more pronounced?

If being green was such a big deal, why doesn't it come up more for Orks?

However, the genetically enhanced trait is the price the Imperium pay for losing half their potential Space Marines. They're pragmatic at heart, instead of pumping out Space-Marines-lite of mixed gender, they give them enhancements instead for the tactical flexibility.

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?

Wich is probably if you play space marines you look for the chapter with less of that angle and more of others you do want. just because you cannot believe that it began as power fantasy doesnt make it less so, and i was reffering to the creators of space marines not all players. i should have made that clearer, my bad.

I cant compare space marines and sisters. sisters are never portrayed as equal to space marines thus they cannot be each others counterpart. sisters power armour is not as bulky and looks like a corset and comes with high heels. atleast on the early codex cover if i recall correctly. They are nothing alike. The space marines come in different varieties of fanatical, sisters are always fanatical.

as long as the sisters are tied to the church they will always be fanatical in one way and they will never be genetically enhanced like space marines so they can never be super soldiers in the same way.

Sisters are portrayed just as well as Space Marines - just less often (in which I would support there being more Sisters depictions). They fight alongside Salamanders in the creation of the Land Raider Redeemer, just as well as their Astartes comrades, lead a solo assault on a daemon world (which is a Grey Knight tier feat), and hold off the Imperial palace from vastly more Astartes forces during the Reign of Blood. They're no less badass.

Space Marines have more exposure. I do not support that. I would support SoB exposure. With enough exposure, SoB could easily have varying levels of faith and methods of battle (certain orders being more defensive, and others favouring rapid closure to targets to burn them up close). There are still more similarities between Space Marines (and variants) and Sisters than anywhere else:
Power armour as their signature armour
Bolter as signature weapon
Seen as holy/unholy figures of their deity, and in some cases, actually protected by.
Use of the Rhino and variants
A penchant for purging and burning
Fanatically loyal in some way, either to the Imperium, Emperor, Primarch, Chaos God, etc
Mono-gender

Are you saying Sisters of Battle need genetic enhancements to make them badass? I don't agree with that statement? Not to mention that if Sisters can fight off threats the same as Astartes, WITHOUT implants, that makes them a hell of alot more respectable.

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?

I always answered the question at hand wich was about female space marines. What you tried to spin it as was not that.

You did? I'm afraid I missed it - how different is the idea of Ork Marines from Female Marines from a modelling opportunities 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?

I already stated them very clearly as the thread went on.

Which I also refuted.

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.

But that doesnt change the fact that it is about the background.

I think this is a cyclical argument. I would be more than happy if this point were dropped, as it won't be resolved.

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
So, if in-universe doesn't count, why the double standard on the Decree Passive and the Creation of a Space Marine article?

Because of the relevant differences between those are out of universe, of course.

But I'm talking about in-universe validity, of which both are. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it less valid as canon.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
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?

Without reasons of our world, it's pretty hard to tell, because since the 40k world doesn't actually exists, well…
everything, I mean everything in 40k happens because of real life reasons. Everything. Like for instance “Some GW writer wants to make a story that's compelling to read of real-life” or “GW wants to sell miniatures in real life”…

Okay, I am rather sure you're attempting to avoid the actual question. I would rather prefer if you indulged me and actually answered my question, instead of bringing real life in. I am not debating real life. I am debating the validity of canon in a fictional universe. If you'd rather not do that, I don't think our arguments will get anywhere on eachother, with the greatest respect.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Funny, but I don't see any of the latter part of your response in there.

Yeah, apparently you didn't quote the right part. I may get access to my codex this week-end, if so I'll post the relevant quotes.

I await eagerly, but in my looking, I couldn't find anything supporting that. However, I wouldn't deny the evidence if I saw it.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Does that matter?

Yes it does, for out of universe reasons.

See above.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
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?

And what if the sun turned into an ice-cream too? We will never see the Sisters developed nearly as much as the marines. It is even worth mentioning how some codex (can't remember which one, maybe it's rather the WD article that got all the nice fluff in it) don't have much deviation between orders, while marines have a HUGE diversity among chapters, which means marines will always get more variety than Sisters…

Rather defeatist, isn't it?

I'm requesting more Sisters exposure, and you're advocating practically giving up on the Sisters (flying in the face of their "essential and logical place in 40k canon" - not an exact quote) and just changing the Space Marines instead, regardless of their lore which opposes it.
Seriously, just adding more female models and increasing Sisters exposure and variety would be easier for GW.

Ashiraya wrote:

 Matthew wrote:
Let's recap: There is 1 male only faction and 1 femal eonly faction. The rest are agender or mixed. What's the problem again?

Let's look at it. I just checked the GW website.

Male/Masculine only:

Space Wolves
Dark Angels
Blood Angels
Deathwatch
Space Marines (Technically all the SM factions are Space Marines, but each one individually gets more support than the SoB do so they definitely count)
Astra Militarum
Militarum Tempestus
Cult Mechanicus (This one and Skitarii could be in mixed because it is often hard to tell their gender, but whenever I take a close look at their body shape it seems masculine and the models are referred to as 'he' on their website etc so I'll slap occam's razor on this one)
Skitarii
Inquisition
Chaos Space Marines
Khorne Daemonkin
Necrons (The one that bothers me the least. They are obviously masculine skeletons, and feminine ones only exist in the background, but they are still skeletons).

Female/feminine only:
Adepta Sororitas (ancient metal-only faction, halfway to squatted already)

Mixed factions:
Eldar (Howling Banshees. The rest are all male models)
Dark Eldar (These are more mixed than I remember. I guess I should expect that from the lightly dressed space elves)
Harlequins (one of the models in the basic troop box; the rest are male)
Chaos Daemons (A dubious case since all models are either masculine or androgynous)
Tau (They have Shadowsun, I guess, and that one Ghostkeel pilot)

N/A:
Tyranids
Imperial Knights

Somewhat agreed, but I wouldn't class Astra Militarum, Tempestus Militarum, Inquisition, Necrons, Skitarii or Admech as male only, at least not in fluff. There are plenty of fluff reasons why mixed genders can be in these factions, and I wouldn't call Necrons, Skitarii or Admech male because they are just forms - Necrons are literally skeletons, and there's nothing that would imply that female Necrons have a different body to male ones.

Space Marines I would class as one faction, seeing as their only real difference is cosmetic. I don't think the difference in Space Marines, maybe barring the loyalist/traitor divide, is enough to warrant separate status.

If this is about models, then you're absolutely right, and I will state again - I fully support the inclusion of more females into the armies that have a fluff reason to have women.

 Grimskul wrote:

 Matthew wrote:
Let's recap: There is 1 male only faction and 1 femal eonly faction. The rest are agender or mixed. What's the problem again?

They sort of have a "want their cake and eat it too" situation. So they want to change the male only faction (space marines) to be mixed gender while maintaining the female only faction of sisters of battle as it is.

I'd be fine with SoB squatted (it feels like it is going that way at this point) if it meant more representation elsewhere. In fact, proper representation among IG (And non-token Eldar, pretty please?) would be enough for me. SM do not bother me too much personally though I can certainly see why they can get tiresome for others.

Generally this.

Anemone wrote:Personally I have little problem with females who cannot be visibly discerned as such. The conception that any Fire Warrior can be either gender is fine to me, I prefer it to boob-plated Fire Warriors, though I would agree that an exposed Female and Male commander head would then be preferable.

Generally agreed with, but considering many Tau commanders don't expose their heads (assuming you mean Battlesuit commanders), there wouldn't even be a need for the heads.

Additionally saying that it all boils down to 'respect' for 'intellectual property' is ridiculous since that argument instantly negates the capacity for the critique of anything. If 'respect' for 'intellectual property' simply means accept anything created exactly as is then a great wealth of all discussions which have occurred on this site are excluded.

I think critique using in-universe reasons to better clarify or confirm in-universe traits is generally okay, but I am hesitant to change canon things for IRL reasons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Boneville wrote:

 Lusall wrote:
There's some good fan fiction out there. And the thing is, 40K sort of invites you to write your own fan fiction. At least it used to. A lot more than it does now, I think. So it's not shocking that this conversation comes up. What do people do when they write/create fan fiction? They like to insert themselves into their little slice of the fluff.

And like I've said, I don't mind at all if people have female space marines. It's your 40K.

I do think that more female characters in the armies that are unisex wouldn't be a bad thing. Hell, it would be a good thing. There are plenty of dudes that would love to see more women characters, especially for their Imperium armies.

I always like good stories, do you know where one can find fan fiction? Is there a community hub or are they scattered throughout different sites?

1d4chan has some, but they tend to be a bit NSFW or lulz-worthy.
Dakka Fiction has some good material on it.

Insert shameless plug on the links in my sig but don't feel obliged to because they're nothing compared to some other works in there, notably Dark Lord Seanron's Death of the Emperor I'm sorry I'll stop

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
But I'm talking about in-universe validity, of which both are.

Yeah they are both “valid”. I just think one is part of an interesting lore and the other is not. Hence there is one that I think would require a lot of effort to salvage said lore if it was retconned, and the other can be retconed easily without too much fuss.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Okay, I am rather sure you're attempting to avoid the actual question.

No I just don't understand it. Trust me it is not clear.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Seriously, just adding more female models and increasing Sisters exposure and variety would be easier for GW.

With 10 space marines codex and billions of marine models already released? I care to disagree with that easier statement. Especially since canonically Sisters are one of the most uniform and homogeneous factions.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
But I'm talking about in-universe validity, of which both are.

Yeah they are both “valid”. I just think one is part of an interesting lore and the other is not. Hence there is one that I think would require a lot of effort to salvage said lore if it was retconned, and the other can be retconed easily without too much fuss.

Emphasis on "think". Which is fine. I just disagree, but that's just me.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Okay, I am rather sure you're attempting to avoid the actual question.

No I just don't understand it. Trust me it is not clear.

Many apologies - I've tried as best as I can to ask the question I want, but if it's not coming out right, so be it. I can try and express it again, or we can just let it go.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Seriously, just adding more female models and increasing Sisters exposure and variety would be easier for GW.

With 10 space marines codex and billions of marine models already released? I care to disagree with that easier statement. Especially since canonically Sisters are one of the most uniform and homogeneous factions.

But the Ecclesiarchy shows plenty of variety in it's organisation - from clearing new pastures for the God-Emperor, to defending Shrine Worlds, to enlightening reunited human colonies, etc etc. Sisters could easily be expanded without the removal of any entrenched lore, which would go hand in hand with a new wave of miniatures.

Regarding the Space Marine codexes, I've made my point clear repeatedly.

Yes, Smudge, that was me just looking at the models. I am aware there is more diversity in the lore, but it feels like that diversity is something GW is trying to hide, or perhaps simply not paying any heed.

So, one way female space marines could be implemented without changing existing lore, would be to say at one point the Emperor secretly did marry. And this Empress was as powerful as he was and at some point she was put on an unknown planet where she is protected by space marines made up of her genetic material. Say it was the most guarded secret of the emperor and they are just now spreading through the galaxy.

I'm fairly new to 40k and don't know a lot of the existing lore so I'm not sure if this is feasible or not but I dislike retcons and would rather see something like this used. Especially if it would please fellow fans of the game.

That is too big a stretch I feel.

Maybe something related to the two missing Legions and them not being as missing as we thought.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Grimskul wrote:
Well at the very least fanfiction is an acknowledgement of being separate and non-canon from the source material. So it's not really forcing your own narrative since it's not being published or seen as fact. It can be easily dismissed by both the creators and fans and has significantly less impact.

As opposed to the suggestions of individual Dakka posters?

I'm not against an individual user's own take on the fluff. I may disagree and point out certain conflicts with fluff but at the end of the day it's a fictional world and you can go for whatever your interested. There'll always be people who want to push the limits and try out non-canon things like Chaos Grey Knights, Alpha Plus Psyker Necrons or super populous Craftworld Eldar which players will know are home-brewed. However, advocating changing a faction's core fluff for the sake of one's own idea of "proper representation" is overkill in my opinion. It's similar to how comics are trying to appeal to the LGBT community but execute it poorly by simply placing racial/sexual minorities in the positions of heroes that are already established rather than taking chances and crafting a well-developed original superhero where their sexuality/race is part of but not their only defining trait. There's some exceptions to this (Falcon replacing Cap, etc.) but I feel that doing this is the same thing since there's no precedent nor any solid reason to change something tied to their origins. I know that this doesn't apply to your stance since you've made your point quite clear and honestly I agree with you that the best way to deal with this is just increasing the representation from current mixed gender factions for females rather than unnecessarily changing the factions that are decidedly one sex.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
But if you ARE taking away the main difference between them, sex

It is not the main difference between them.

Yes it is. With the exception of the EXACT Imperial department they answer to, Sisters of Battle are essentially weaker Black Templars.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
then you are left with two mixed gender power armor armies with bolters, Rhinos, and the like.

Did that ever stop GW from making marines codices for all the colors of the rainbow and then some more, and fans from buying those?

No, it didn't. Quite a few people lambast GW for doing EXACTLY that, but that is neither here nor there. The difference is that there are enough Marine players to squeeze for those books. The models are the same with a few exceptions between chapters, so it all comes down to the background behind the chapter. I'm fine with background, but I don't think every damn chapter needs its own special snowflake rules. We at least agree on that. Also, if people were actually buying the SOB codices and model kits, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
You basically guarantee nobody would touch Sisters with a ten foot pole in that case, as they'd simply be cheaper worse Marines at that point. Currently the ONLY draw Sisters have is their background as a mainly female army, which is easily run as a completely female army by not running any of the available male models from the Codex. As a Sisters fan, I figured you above anyone else would understand that, but then I see your sig and realize that's not the case...

As a Sisters fan I can guarantee that you are wrong, that I would still be drawn to them nonetheless and that being all female is definitely NOT the only draw they have. But you can just ignore facts I guess.

As stated before, Sisters of Battle are essentially Black Templars. If you didn't have the sex of the models as an issue, you'd basically have a Neophyte army in power armor and Black Templars proper, yet they can't mix. So you could run an entire army of weaker Templars with worse rules, or you could just run Templars. THAT is my point. So show me the "facts" that disprove this.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Grimskul wrote:
So they want to change the male only faction (space marines) to be mixed gender while maintaining the female only faction of sisters of battle as it is.

Nah. We said we were fine with Dark Angels staying male only. It's fine, one male-only faction and one female-only faction. See, it's you who hate equality and want double standard, or whatever you accuse us of.

Cool, we can swing that. While we're at it, only the Sisters of the Penitent Rose can be all female. Equality and all. Wouldn't want double standards.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Mrs. Esterhouse wrote:
But trying to force your narrative into something created by another is not respecting intellectual property.

“Force your narrative” sounds like empty buzzword to me.

To everyone else, it sounds like a political agenda. Looks like one as well.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Boneville wrote:

 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?

Adding female Space Marines is as "bad" as adding Male Sisters of Battle. To me, it is the same scenario. If Sisters of Battle did not exist, I would push for mixed gender Space Marines.

So, with that knowledge, why should it be changed?

I say you lose the sense of hopelessness in the Imperium, and the cost of gene-seed. Hopelessness in that they cannot use a full 50% of their potential applicants due to gender, and the cost of gene-seed being that great power, but 50% of the population cannot accept it.

I will say that you have a good reason to believe that, it is a good explanation of the themes present. But i have to say that in my opinion the hopelessness and desperation of the imperium can be conveyed without locking down the faction to one gender.

I would explain it by having the geneseed be deadly if youre not compatible, meaning 50% of the people that gets chosen die when the gene seed is adminestrated. it would then go in line with the imperium using it despite the risk because the cost is deemed acceptable. Then i add the fact that gene seed is deemed a holy relic from the golden age and cant be tampered with despite the fact that they cant "fix" the mortality rate because they cant use it that way and by decree only the space marines themselves can choose who gets to initiate this transformation, wich they do because of honour, martial skill etc and not actually if they are safe from the gene seed killing them.

I think this shows that the imperium is desperate for survival but still hold the past to such a high degree that they arent willing to progress forward.

Because to me at the end of the day female space marines is a best case scenario and i dont really care all that much if i never see them even though i will defend my opinion and said oipinion is entrenched in the idea of representation and equality. What i meant by the in-universe explanations was that i wanted you to give me the sort of explanation that you just gave me. i now understand why you think it is important for the faction to be male only.

And i must confess that i might have kept the discussion going just to see if i can get this sort of answer.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Boneville wrote:

 Lusall wrote:
There's some good fan fiction out there. And the thing is, 40K sort of invites you to write your own fan fiction. At least it used to. A lot more than it does now, I think. So it's not shocking that this conversation comes up. What do people do when they write/create fan fiction? They like to insert themselves into their little slice of the fluff.

And like I've said, I don't mind at all if people have female space marines. It's your 40K.

I do think that more female characters in the armies that are unisex wouldn't be a bad thing. Hell, it would be a good thing. There are plenty of dudes that would love to see more women characters, especially for their Imperium armies.

I always like good stories, do you know where one can find fan fiction? Is there a community hub or are they scattered throughout different sites?

1d4chan has some, but they tend to be a bit NSFW or lulz-worthy.
Dakka Fiction has some good material on it.

Insert shameless plug on the links in my sig but don't feel obliged to because they're nothing compared to some other works in there, notably Dark Lord Seanron's Death of the Emperor I'm sorry I'll stop

Oh yeah, thanks. i will have to check it out.

Ashiraya wrote:Yes, Smudge, that was me just looking at the models. I am aware there is more diversity in the lore, but it feels like that diversity is something GW is trying to hide, or perhaps simply not paying any heed.

Ah, I see. Yes, I'd agree that GW should promote more diversity in the factions that can already receive it.

Boneville wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Boneville wrote:

 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?

Adding female Space Marines is as "bad" as adding Male Sisters of Battle. To me, it is the same scenario. If Sisters of Battle did not exist, I would push for mixed gender Space Marines.

So, with that knowledge, why should it be changed?

I say you lose the sense of hopelessness in the Imperium, and the cost of gene-seed. Hopelessness in that they cannot use a full 50% of their potential applicants due to gender, and the cost of gene-seed being that great power, but 50% of the population cannot accept it.

I will say that you have a good reason to believe that, it is a good explanation of the themes present. But i have to say that in my opinion the hopelessness and desperation of the imperium can be conveyed without locking down the faction to one gender.

I would explain it by having the geneseed be deadly if youre not compatible, meaning 50% of the people that gets chosen die when the gene seed is adminestrated. it would then go in line with the imperium using it despite the risk because the cost is deemed acceptable. Then i add the fact that gene seed is deemed a holy relic from the golden age and cant be tampered with despite the fact that they cant "fix" the mortality rate because they cant use it that way and by decree only the space marines themselves can choose who gets to initiate this transformation, wich they do because of honour, martial skill etc and not actually if they are safe from the gene seed killing them.

I think this shows that the imperium is desperate for survival but still hold the past to such a high degree that they arent willing to progress forward.

Because to me at the end of the day female space marines is a best case scenario and i dont really care all that much if i never see them even though i will defend my opinion and said oipinion is entrenched in the idea of representation and equality. What i meant by the in-universe explanations was that i wanted you to give me the sort of explanation that you just gave me. i now understand why you think it is important for the faction to be male only.

And i must confess that i might have kept the discussion going just to see if i can get this sort of answer.

Well, no worries now. At the end of the day, it's unlikely either of us will get a chance to give these opinions to GW proper.

Why do these threads always devolve in to female space marine threads?

Space Marines are a tiny, practically insignificant portion of the Imperium, with close to zero effects on the day to day economy, governance, culture, and military power of any given planet. Yes, GW focuses on them because there's a lot of people in GW who are fans of Space Marines, but that doesn't actually mean that they must be the end discussion of a "Women in the Imperium" thread.

 Melissia wrote:
Why do these threads always devolve in to female space marine threads?

Space Marines are a tiny, practically insignificant portion of the Imperium, with close to zero effects on the day to day economy, governance, culture, and military power of any given planet. Yes, GW focuses on them because there's a lot of people in GW who are fans of Space Marines, but that doesn't actually mean that they must be the end discussion of a "Women in the Imperium" thread.

I think I actually touched on this. In universe, Space Marines are a tiny force. Hardly enough to warrant the Imperium being classed as sexist purely based on that.

Of course, it's their exposure on the tabletop that is where they are more common. In fact, I'd probably be willing to say that there's probably more Space Marine minis than actual Space Marines in the 41st Millenium.

Indeed. To be honest, the Imperium isn't really more sexist than modern society; in some ways more, in some ways less, depending on the planet and the institution.

For example, the Imperial Guard for the most part doesn't care what your junk looks like. It only cares if you can point a lasgun at the enemy and pull the trigger before getting killed. They make a few adjustments for the sake of efficiency-- single gender units are more common than mixed gender units, to avoid pregnancy risks-- but for the most part, they're gender-blind.

By contrast, the Schola Progenium has some serious sexism in that it's believed to be the proper role for women graduates to join the Adepta Sororitas, militant or non-militant as by the capability of the woman in question (while the Sisters are a lot more prestigious of an organization in-universe than a lot of people realize, that doesn't make it not sexist).

And the Inquisition is, as an organization, completely gender-blind. They concern themselves with their inquisitorial duties and whoever has the iron will and immense capability to fulfill them has the job.

Games workshop's inability to make female cahracters for the Guard and Inquisition along with other groups (Eldar and Tau for example) is a failing of Games Workshop as a company (and as human beings), but IMO it's not actually reflective of the lore, which does not contain the same biases as Games Workshop's creative teams do. It contains entirely different biases, and TBH I don't think it's really better or worse, overall, than real life.

Women in the Schola can be Stomrtroopers and Commissars as well, its only the most pious ones that go and become SoBs

Oh I never said they couldn't. I said they are pushed towards the Sororitas and it's considered the proper place for women graduates to be. Female commissars and stormtroopers are considered rare and aberrations because most women are pushed towards the Sisterhood.

Where'd you get that? The Scion codex seemed pretty neutral on it.