Flanker wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
If they allow Femarines then all my dudes are Primarchs that get along with everyone and every race and have pet Canifexes and have unlocked the secret to Necron technology and can friendship kick the Chaos gods into whatever non-existence Horus is living in.

You can do whatever you want. That's part of the draw to Warhammer. The original reason for 2 missing primarchs was for people to come up with their own chapters. You see threads all the time like "Theory: What if a missing primarch was a blank/landed on a xenos planet/started their own empire?" If a player wants his SM to only walk on their hands in tie-dye armor and worship the Rising Sun Emperor and his Teletubbies Primarchs, they can model and play their army that way. It's their money and their time invested in the models, they can do whatever they want.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

DizzyStorey wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Dizzy, where are those quotes from?

I don't think I've ever seen GW say anything about femarines aside from them not existing for "psuedoscience reasons", not have I see an female Space Marine in any 40k video game.

I think a big thing is that you say that the fluff about Space Marines being male only is not important - why is it any less important than anything else? Why is that a redundant piece of fluff? Is Slaanesh's entire existence redundant? Is all the stuff about the God Emperor being Throne-bound all disposable? How about the Decree Passive?
Why is that bit of fluff irrelevant and not worth treating with the same ideal as the rest of 40k fluff?

Cause that good sir is major fluff not small time minor fluff that nobody but only the most extreme care about. Its like saying "Kroot have blue eyes instead of black" sure somebody might freak out but that person is probably a lunatic.

But what defines fluff as major or minor? Fluff is fluff. What categorically makes Slaanesh more valuable than the genetic makeup of Space Marines?

There is nothing in the fluff that says that a piece of fluff is any less important, there's no hard fluff and soft fluff.

For example. D&D says drow are evil. But there was a book about a good drow. They didnt alter things that were super important to making D&Ds world and story what it is.
There are degrees of severity at play here and only the most obbsessive people would care.

Drow are not genetically evil. FeMarines are genetically impossible. This example doesn't work.

What dictates severity? Your opinion, which is subjective? There's no definitive guide, therefore all canon, unless retconned, is valid. In the case of this, where Space Marine have consistently been male-only, this is a non-negiotiable of the setting. That doesn't mean female supersoliders in power armour don't exist, but it means they're not Space Marines.

My brother plays a "Good" Ork team.. its fun, its cool and it feths with the fluff a bit. But nobody cares cause of the rule of cool. This is cooler so its acceptable.

And that's subjective. Coolness is not objective. I might think it's uncool, and therefore not acceptable.

However, more on this - Orks are not even EVIL. Orks, by default are Chaotic, and are hardwired genetically to be predisposed to Waaagh!ing. That doesn't make them evil - it makes them no more evil than a bacteria or virus.
It's completely plausible to have these "Good" Orks - could we have some more information on this?

Female space marines are kick ass and cool idea. So in my books, it gets a pass.

Subjective.

Having an all or nothing attitude is silly, its like saying "If they make weed legal than next murder will be legal! Cause if drugs arent immoral than there is no morality!" Stop, breath. and think about why this is different from that.

Except we're talking about the same thing here - fluff. Not two completely unrelated crimes.

There's nothing to indicate that some fluff is more valid than other fluff at face value. Absolutely nothing. In fact, with Space Marines being consistently male for such a long time, that element of their fluff is more valid than the entire existence of Scions (as Scions, not Storm Troopers), Newcrons, and, to the best of my knowledge, the entire Tau Empire.
If you want to handwave FeMarines for being weak fluff, just remember that they've been like that for longer than many factions have even existed.

Humans are natorious for picking and choosing what they like and dislike from something. They take the things they love and they ignore the stuff thats gak.
And it doesnt get much shittier than the frankly rediculous and near embaressing, pointless fluff that prevents something as cool as fem space marines./

Again, subjective. Just because you think it's cool doesn't mean it's right. Just because you dislike it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

And human nature is not an excuse to break established rules of a setting. If we go by that logic, I can eradicate whole laws:
"It's human nature to pick and choose what I want to do - I want to go an murder someone, and you can't stop me, because human nature!"

The importants of something in the lore is based on how much it affects something. What does a 1 in a trillion chance of fem space marine effect? 1 or two of the faceless little buggers in power armors smuggling boobs instead of sassages.. thats it. What does slannesh affect? A whole gak tun of lore.

Adding FeMarines would require the retconning of every book featuring Space Marines, because otherwise, women wouldn't be represented where they're meant to be. As I have discussed with you, I support female representation, but in the areas they are said to be present. That's not in the Space Marines. So no, FeMarines is not a small issue. It's a fluff issue, and they're all equal.

Thats why little tweaks like this are unimportant, could be changed tomorrow and literally nobody should care except for the most insane individuals. ( especally when its not there army and effects them 0% Caring what i do with my models is hella creepy and obsessive )

So because I care about the established lore of a game, I'm creepy and obsessive?

So if I played a game of D&D with you, you wouldn't chastise me because my Drow is rainbow coloured, innately vulnerable to magic, terrible eyesight, tougher but slower than a Dwarf, incapable of stealth, with a thick bushy ginger beard, a pacifist merchant, loved by everyone, and lawful good.

I mean, if you complained about that, that's creepy and obsessive, right?

So I say do what you want cause at the end of the day, they are plastic toys. Little pieces of resin and glue. So make your male sisters of battle. Make your fem marines. Make your good orks and have a blast cause none of it really matters.

To you.
Unfortunately, other people may have to play against your models, and then it DOES matter to them. They are allowed an opinion, and may refuse to play. You can't force them to play and accept your view, just like I can't with you. I'm just trying to explain that the setting and established rules of it oppose your idea.

-------------------------------------------

Sgt. Cortez wrote:Well, if you want to have female space Marines with no boob armor why don't you simply take SM with female heads and play them with SoB rules?

I did suggest the idea in another thread, and got this response.

 DizzyStorey wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Why not use SM models with female heads, and use them as Count-As SoB? Hell, just call them SoB in an improved armour variant?

Eh, Mostly cause buying the signature haircutes are hard, they wont have all the emblems and I dont want to be restricted to the black and red paint job, i like the freedom that comes with space marine paint jobs and custom chapters. And if i dont paint the armor black and red, whats really left to signify them as sisters of battle.
Most importantly though... aggravating people is not really a barrier for me. There are plenty of viable work arounds that make for genuinely intrigue and fun story telling potential, the rogue apothecary or thunder warrior genetics are all decent fluff ( Plus I am enamoured with the amazonian themes )

And at the end of the day Its what i am most comfortable and happy with.

When I outlined that not all Sisters are black and red armoured, can have their own custom fluff (like any other faction), and asked if this made any difference, I got this response:

DizzyStorey wrote:No it has not swayed me cause I do not need to explain to you why I am disinterested in the sisters of battle and have absolutely no interest in doing what you tell me to just to appease a thousand crying man-children.

Manchu wrote:
Please keep in mind that Rule Number One is Be Polite. Thanks!

Flanker wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:
If they allow Femarines then all my dudes are Primarchs that get along with everyone and every race and have pet Canifexes and have unlocked the secret to Necron technology and can friendship kick the Chaos gods into whatever non-existence Horus is living in.

You can do whatever you want. That's part of the draw to Warhammer. The original reason for 2 missing primarchs was for people to come up with their own chapters.

You see threads all the time like "Theory: What if a missing primarch was a blank/landed on a xenos planet/started their own empire?" If a player wants his SM to only walk on their hands in tie-dye armor and worship the Rising Sun Emperor and his Teletubbies Primarchs, they can model and play their army that way. It's their money and their time invested in the models, they can do whatever they want.

DizzyStorey wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

DizzyStorey wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Dizzy, where are those quotes from?

I don't think I've ever seen GW say anything about femarines aside from them not existing for "psuedoscience reasons", not have I see an female Space Marine in any 40k video game.

I think a big thing is that you say that the fluff about Space Marines being male only is not important - why is it any less important than anything else? Why is that a redundant piece of fluff? Is Slaanesh's entire existence redundant? Is all the stuff about the God Emperor being Throne-bound all disposable? How about the Decree Passive?
Why is that bit of fluff irrelevant and not worth treating with the same ideal as the rest of 40k fluff?

Cause that good sir is major fluff not small time minor fluff that nobody but only the most extreme care about. Its like saying "Kroot have blue eyes instead of black" sure somebody might freak out but that person is probably a lunatic.

But what defines fluff as major or minor? Fluff is fluff. What categorically makes Slaanesh more valuable than the genetic makeup of Space Marines?

There is nothing in the fluff that says that a piece of fluff is any less important, there's no hard fluff and soft fluff.

For example. D&D says drow are evil. But there was a book about a good drow. They didnt alter things that were super important to making D&Ds world and story what it is.
There are degrees of severity at play here and only the most obbsessive people would care.

Drow are not genetically evil. FeMarines are genetically impossible. This example doesn't work.

What dictates severity? Your opinion, which is subjective? There's no definitive guide, therefore all canon, unless retconned, is valid. In the case of this, where Space Marine have consistently been male-only, this is a non-negiotiable of the setting. That doesn't mean female supersoliders in power armour don't exist, but it means they're not Space Marines.

My brother plays a "Good" Ork team.. its fun, its cool and it feths with the fluff a bit. But nobody cares cause of the rule of cool. This is cooler so its acceptable.

And that's subjective. Coolness is not objective. I might think it's uncool, and therefore not acceptable.

However, more on this - Orks are not even EVIL. Orks, by default are Chaotic, and are hardwired genetically to be predisposed to Waaagh!ing. That doesn't make them evil - it makes them no more evil than a bacteria or virus.
It's completely plausible to have these "Good" Orks - could we have some more information on this?

Female space marines are kick ass and cool idea. So in my books, it gets a pass.

Subjective.

Having an all or nothing attitude is silly, its like saying "If they make weed legal than next murder will be legal! Cause if drugs arent immoral than there is no morality!" Stop, breath. and think about why this is different from that.

Except we're talking about the same thing here - fluff. Not two completely unrelated crimes.

There's nothing to indicate that some fluff is more valid than other fluff at face value. Absolutely nothing. In fact, with Space Marines being consistently male for such a long time, that element of their fluff is more valid than the entire existence of Scions (as Scions, not Storm Troopers), Newcrons, and, to the best of my knowledge, the entire Tau Empire.
If you want to handwave FeMarines for being weak fluff, just remember that they've been like that for longer than many factions have even existed.

Humans are natorious for picking and choosing what they like and dislike from something. They take the things they love and they ignore the stuff thats gak.
And it doesnt get much shittier than the frankly rediculous and near embaressing, pointless fluff that prevents something as cool as fem space marines./

Again, subjective. Just because you think it's cool doesn't mean it's right. Just because you dislike it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

And human nature is not an excuse to break established rules of a setting. If we go by that logic, I can eradicate whole laws:
"It's human nature to pick and choose what I want to do - I want to go an murder someone, and you can't stop me, because human nature!"

The importants of something in the lore is based on how much it affects something. What does a 1 in a trillion chance of fem space marine effect? 1 or two of the faceless little buggers in power armors smuggling boobs instead of sassages.. thats it. What does slannesh affect? A whole gak tun of lore.

Adding FeMarines would require the retconning of every book featuring Space Marines, because otherwise, women wouldn't be represented where they're meant to be. As I have discussed with you, I support female representation, but in the areas they are said to be present. That's not in the Space Marines. So no, FeMarines is not a small issue. It's a fluff issue, and they're all equal.

Thats why little tweaks like this are unimportant, could be changed tomorrow and literally nobody should care except for the most insane individuals. ( especally when its not there army and effects them 0% Caring what i do with my models is hella creepy and obsessive )

So because I care about the established lore of a game, I'm creepy and obsessive?

So if I played a game of D&D with you, you wouldn't chastise me because my Drow is rainbow coloured, innately vulnerable to magic, terrible eyesight, tougher but slower than a Dwarf, incapable of stealth, with a thick bushy ginger beard, a pacifist merchant, loved by everyone, and lawful good.

I mean, if you complained about that, that's creepy and obsessive, right?

So I say do what you want cause at the end of the day, they are plastic toys. Little pieces of resin and glue. So make your male sisters of battle. Make your fem marines. Make your good orks and have a blast cause none of it really matters.

To you.
Unfortunately, other people may have to play against your models, and then it DOES matter to them. They are allowed an opinion, and may refuse to play. You can't force them to play and accept your view, just like I can't with you. I'm just trying to explain that the setting and established rules of it oppose your idea.

-------------------------------------------

Sgt. Cortez wrote:Well, if you want to have female space Marines with no boob armor why don't you simply take SM with female heads and play them with SoB rules?

I did suggest the idea in another thread, and got this response.

 DizzyStorey wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Why not use SM models with female heads, and use them as Count-As SoB? Hell, just call them SoB in an improved armour variant?

Eh, Mostly cause buying the signature haircutes are hard, they wont have all the emblems and I dont want to be restricted to the black and red paint job, i like the freedom that comes with space marine paint jobs and custom chapters. And if i dont paint the armor black and red, whats really left to signify them as sisters of battle.
Most importantly though... aggravating people is not really a barrier for me. There are plenty of viable work arounds that make for genuinely intrigue and fun story telling potential, the rogue apothecary or thunder warrior genetics are all decent fluff ( Plus I am enamoured with the amazonian themes )

And at the end of the day Its what i am most comfortable and happy with.

When I outlined that not all Sisters are black and red armoured, can have their own custom fluff (like any other faction), and asked if this made any difference, I got this response:

DizzyStorey wrote:No it has not swayed me cause I do not need to explain to you why I am disinterested in the sisters of battle and have absolutely no interest in doing what you tell me to just to appease a thousand crying man-children.

This obviously means way more to you than it ever should and I am starting to suspect you may be on the autism spectrum with the level of fanaticism on display... It simply does not matter... like at all... This is getting embarrassing and weird that you care so much.

I sorta just wanted to talk about some fun army ideas and this is like, the weirdest gak.

I could respond and argue back and you can than do the same thing countering each-others points for days, but that wouldn't lead to anything other than a creepy fit over plastic figurines. If I ever had somebody tell me my army was unacceptable to play against in this little game cause of the gender of my soldiers, I would probably die of second hand embarrassment and avoid them like the plague. Its a table top game not your bible.

So this fun little thread idea has been ruined by fanatical lunatics who care way way way way too much about there space marines privet parts. I am gunna do what I like and thank you for making this conversation about you and your vendetta...

 Quickjager wrote:
Its disingenuous Ynneadwraith to say it is defended with a suspicious amount of ire. By simply saying that you putting a label on everyone who cares/defends a point about the setting, a label that is suggestive if not explicitly said.

The same thing can be said about the flipside as a result, but no one does that because they can see why it is a slippery slope. If you want a fair discussion of the point my advice to you is not to bring it up.

 DizzyStorey wrote:
Army Ideas!

This is genuine, iv got three ideas that really speak to me and I am not sure which to go with.

Imperial Guard Suicide Squad:
Basically criminals and mutants of the slums and hiveworlds, the undesirables, Stouts, Servitors, Ratlings, Ogryns, Wulfen, brutal criminals and rogues. People that are the most expendable, sent to the most hellish far reaches of the galaxy and who grow a tight bond together as companions and the undesirables of the empire.
This speaks to me as a very fun concept and something I can see myself getting really attached too.

Amazonian Space Marines:
Exactly as the title suggests, created on there homeworld of Themiscyra by a rogue Organiscist Cultus for vain legacy purposes and deployed around the galaxy serving his goals and
staying one step ahead of the inquisition for the high crime of suspected heretical gene-seed tampering.

Geu'vesa Tau Unit:
Left behind by the imperial guard they were captured by the Tau and learned of the greater good, armed with a new purpose and knowlage there commander rose to the occasion and integrated into Tau society so thoroughly that she now leads Tau soldiers into battle and holds official rank and trust within the fire caste.
I would rely heavily on imperial guard troops but mix it with Tau soldiers and invest in a female commander unit. This is lore friendly as the Tau do not acknowledge race or origins only your dedication to the greater good and your service to the Tau empire.

The Mercenary Core:
A unbound army made up of only alien models without armies of there own, a Sslyth commander, Stingwings, Many Assorted Kroot Units, Human Mutants like Ogryn & Ratlings (by far my favourite unit by design is the Ratlings )
All with the common goal of making a name for themselves as fierce deadly mercenaries owning no allegiances or loyalty to anyone other than the highest bidder.
I really like this idea as its purely unique and makes use of some of the most intriguing units in the game, However! from what I hear rulewise its a bit of a clusterf**k.

This is part a discussion on the viability of the army concepts and part a discussion on the lore and story potential which is what truly excites me about these ideas.

 Ynneadwraith wrote:
DizzyStorey has described two different army concepts here that break the fluff of their respective factions, but provide neat in-universe explanations of why they do. The first is her brother's army of 'good orks' which were convinced that they were 'good guys' and because of the Ork gestalt field, they believed it enough that it became true. The second is her idea that a bonkers and fantastically vain Magos Biologis has created a world of genetically engineered Amazonian warrior-women (which sounds like exactly the sort of thing a megalomaniac magos biologis might do).

Both are pretty original and interesting (I've never heard of the latter as an in-universe explanation of femmarines before), and you can do some pretty kickass stuff messing with people's heads by making these overtly feminine genetically engineered warriors (because if you're bonkers enough to make a world full of women, you're probably going to make them overtly feminine as well) have all sorts of creepy bionic modifications.

However, only one of those ideas has brought about a disproportionate amount of backlash from the community. She's not stating 'oh yeah, btw, half of the Marines ever made are women now'. She's stating that 'her dudes' are dudettes instead, and is being told fairly strongly that she can't do that because it breaks fluff.

That's what I think stands out enough to suggest it might be motivated by underlying sexism.

 Ynneadwraith wrote:
think stands out enough to suggest it might be motivated by underlying sexism.

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

 Ynneadwraith wrote:
think stands out enough to suggest it might be motivated by underlying sexism.

I'm just anal about lore, not a woman-hater. Chill dude. I'd be getting just as heated over Male Sororitas.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
The Good Orks example is absolutely fine. Good and Bad are subjective, and Ork's aren't genetically coded to be Bad. They're as bad as a bacteria is: they're driven to fighting and being fast and having loud dakka, but that doesn't make them bad. As such, the Good Orks don't break fluff.

A mad Magos creating genetically engineered Amazons in power armour is fine, so long as these Warrior Women are not regarded as Adeptus Astartes Space Marines. They are not Imperially endorsed, as such. In that regard, that might be better suited as CSM, but it's a grey area.
However, one problem with this - this Magos edges on "genius" levels of intellect to be able to do this, as such a feat can only be accomplished by Fabius Bile, who is on a par with the Emperor for gene-splicing. As such, this Magos does verge on the slightly Mary Sue of the spectrum. As such, this could be a concern if we have a Fabius-knock-off.

There's nothing wrong with female genetically enhanced warriors wearing power armour, as I've said. But there is an issue with female Space Marines, which is what I'm addressing.
Does being genetically enhanced add anything to OP's idea? Is being genetically modified a non-negotiable?
Being Amazonic is represented well even on a Guardsman statline (see Catachans), and as such, Sisters of Battle would suffice and be a simpler solution.
If OP is after gameplay Space Marines, then that's very different, and doesn't pertain to Background

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

 Ynneadwraith wrote:
think stands out enough to suggest it might be motivated by underlying sexism.

I'm just anal about lore, not a woman-hater. Chill dude. I'd be getting just as heated over Male Sororitas.

 Ynneadwraith wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
The Good Orks example is absolutely fine. Good and Bad are subjective, and Ork's aren't genetically coded to be Bad. They're as bad as a bacteria is: they're driven to fighting and being fast and having loud dakka, but that doesn't make them bad. As such, the Good Orks don't break fluff.

A mad Magos creating genetically engineered Amazons in power armour is fine, so long as these Warrior Women are not regarded as Adeptus Astartes Space Marines. They are not Imperially endorsed, as such. In that regard, that might be better suited as CSM, but it's a grey area.
However, one problem with this - this Magos edges on "genius" levels of intellect to be able to do this, as such a feat can only be accomplished by Fabius Bile, who is on a par with the Emperor for gene-splicing. As such, this Magos does verge on the slightly Mary Sue of the spectrum. As such, this could be a concern if we have a Fabius-knock-off.

There's nothing wrong with female genetically enhanced warriors wearing power armour, as I've said. But there is an issue with female Space Marines, which is what I'm addressing.
Does being genetically enhanced add anything to OP's idea? Is being genetically modified a non-negotiable?
Being Amazonic is represented well even on a Guardsman statline (see Catachans), and as such, Sisters of Battle would suffice and be a simpler solution.
If OP is after gameplay Space Marines, then that's very different, and doesn't pertain to Background

'Good Orks' does break fluff every bit as much as female Astartes. If Orks in 40k are categorically neither good nor evil, then a bunch of Orks scooting around the galaxy saving damsels in distress and coming to people's rescue breaks the fluff (because they are categorically good). Yet no-one has a problem with it.

There's absolutely no reason that the OP couldn't have her dudes as bonafide female Adeptus Astartes Space Marines, or at least functionally identical in biological modification.

Said Magos could well have worked his magic back in the Dark Age of Technology, when presumably humanity's scientists knew a hell of a lot more about genetic engineering than either the Emperor or Fabulous Bill.

Even if that's not the case, having your character verge on the bordeline of Mary Sue doesn't quite justify people telling someone that they categorically cannot do what they want with their dudes, or putting so much effort into providing obstacles for them to do what they want to do that it puts them off from doing it. It's just not in the spirit of the 40k universe.

If anything, having a Tech Magos that is so utterly brilliant and competent in his field that he can equal Fabius Bile's expertise with genetic enhancement, and then rather than use that for the betterment of the Imperium he goes and uses that genius to make a planet entirely full of attractive genetically enhanced female warriors for his own amusement strikes me as really rather fitting into the whole grimdark feel of 40k.

Does being genetically enhanced detract anything from anyone else's experience of the game? If the OP wants genetically engineered female Astartes, rather than SoB or female Guardsmen, why is it that she has to pick from the two latter options when she's got a perfectly good (and quite original) justification for why she can have female Astartes?

It's just that it's not really helpful to spend a disproportionate amount of effort telling someone that they can't have female Space Marines when we're more than happy to accept other breaks in the fluff so long as they're justified in a clever way. It is genuinely curious as to why this particular piece of fluff is so strongly enforced, and honestly the only answer I can come to as to why it is is underlying sexism.

I'd just like to see more people putting their intelligence to use finding clever ways to let the OP do what they want, rather than just throwing up a whole host of barriers and saying 'nah, can't do it'. That sort of negative attitude is offputting and drives people away from the hobby, which is just crap really.

 Ynneadwraith wrote:
The thing is that i genuinely don't believe its disingenuous. 40k encourages you to play around with the fluff and bend it however you please. For instance, i know that exodites are portrayed in the fluff as basically dino-riding amish cowards. For mine, i've completely reinvented what they are to be basically creepy eldar technobarbarians. That's a massive break from the official fluff, but has got nothing but positive comments.

I honestly believe that the idea of female space marines is defended so rigorously, above and beyond other ideas that break fluff in just as major of a way, is indicative of underlying sexism. The fact that this one small statement has taken on an almost gospel-like quality from among the thousands and thousands of other statements seems to me to be motivated by sexism.

Now, I want to clarify. I'm not intending to brand anyone who points out that it breaks fluff as an evil mysoninistic dickbag. It does break fluff. Fair enough. Ask if the poster is aware that it breaks fluff, and if they are but want to do it anyway then fine. 40k specifically allows people to twist fluff to make 'their dudes'.

To be perfectly honest, the original statement is fairly dubious itself. Personally, i think it would have been much better to say that you can have female space marines, but in actuality they look damn near identical to male space marines. Pump anyone with that level of testosterone and biological augmentations and you'd end up with a Space Marine regardless of what you started from. It's not as if theres any sexuality left after their indoctrination anyway.

epronovost wrote:

 Ynneadwraith wrote:
The thing is that i genuinely don't believe its disingenuous. 40k encourages you to play around with the fluff and bend it however you please. For instance, i know that exodites are portrayed in the fluff as basically dino-riding amish cowards. For mine, i've completely reinvented what they are to be basically creepy eldar technobarbarians. That's a massive break from the official fluff, but has got nothing but positive comments.

I honestly believe that the idea of female space marines is defended so rigorously, above and beyond other ideas that break fluff in just as major of a way, is indicative of underlying sexism. The fact that this one small statement has taken on an almost gospel-like quality from among the thousands and thousands of other statements seems to me to be motivated by sexism.

Now, I want to clarify. I'm not intending to brand anyone who points out that it breaks fluff as an evil mysoninistic dickbag. It does break fluff. Fair enough. Ask if the poster is aware that it breaks fluff, and if they are but want to do it anyway then fine. 40k specifically allows people to twist fluff to make 'their dudes'.

To be perfectly honest, the original statement is fairly dubious itself. Personally, i think it would have been much better to say that you can have female space marines, but in actuality they look damn near identical to male space marines. Pump anyone with that level of testosterone and biological augmentations and you'd end up with a Space Marine regardless of what you started from. It's not as if theres any sexuality left after their indoctrination anyway.

Being passionnate about this part of the fluff up to the point of refusing any exeption to the rule is indeed rather strange.

As an extra point, no one ever shat a brick when I decided to create the Bortherhood of Thor, the male Sisters of Battle. The response was actually rather positive and they thought it made sense even if the fluff states that Ecclesiarchy cannot maintain men under arms wich is the reason why Sisters are sisters in the first place. I simply found/created another loophole. I do think that it wnet well, because SoB are unpopular and largely unknown. Very few people could tell why Sisters were all women from a fluff point of view. Nobody discuss the monogender nature of the Sisterhood because to few people are interested in the lore of this army. Every aspect of the Space Marines are debated from their size, their age, the "real" power of their guns, the exact size of their Chapter, their tactics, their greatest heroes etc.

Women cannot be Space Marines can have its loopholes.

Being passionnate about this part of the fluff up to the point of refusing any exeption to the rule is indeed rather strange.

 Ynneadwraith wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
Its disingenuous Ynneadwraith to say it is defended with a suspicious amount of ire. By simply saying that you putting a label on everyone who cares/defends a point about the setting, a label that is suggestive if not explicitly said.

The same thing can be said about the flipside as a result, but no one does that because they can see why it is a slippery slope. If you want a fair discussion of the point my advice to you is not to bring it up.

The thing is that i genuinely don't believe its disingenuous. 40k encourages you to play around with the fluff and bend it however you please. For instance, i know that exodites are portrayed in the fluff as basically dino-riding amish cowards. For mine, i've completely reinvented what they are to be basically creepy eldar technobarbarians. That's a massive break from the official fluff, but has got nothing but positive comments.

I honestly believe that the idea of female space marines is defended so rigorously, above and beyond other ideas that break fluff in just as major of a way, is indicative of underlying sexism. The fact that this one small statement has taken on an almost gospel-like quality from among the thousands and thousands of other statements seems to me to be motivated by sexism.

Now, I want to clarify. I'm not intending to brand anyone who points out that it breaks fluff as an evil mysoninistic dickbag. It does break fluff. Fair enough. Ask if the poster is aware that it breaks fluff, and if they are but want to do it anyway then fine. 40k specifically allows people to twist fluff to make 'their dudes'.

To be perfectly honest, the original statement is fairly dubious itself. Personally, i think it would have been much better to say that you can have female space marines, but in actuality they look damn near identical to male space marines. Pump anyone with that level of testosterone and biological augmentations and you'd end up with a Space Marine regardless of what you started from. It's not as if theres any sexuality left after their indoctrination anyway.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

It's completely logical to have Orks doing this - as long as there's fighting and krumping heads involved, it's all Orky. Orks are Chaotic X - they can do "good" things and "bad" things, and anything in between. If they have the delusion that they should rescue poor damsels in distress for their reward to go on and continue krumpin' heads, it's completely logical.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Functionally identical biological modification, as I think I mentioned, is fine. But they are not regarded as official Imperially sanctioned Space Marines, hence my whole point.
"There's nothing wrong with female genetically enhanced warriors wearing power armour. There is an issue with female Space Marines."

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Wasn't the Emperor alive back in the DAOT? Wouldn't he also have this skill?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I'm purely asking OP if being genetically enhanced is essential to this idea - as I maintain, being an Astartes is a lore impossibility, but being genetically engineered is not. If being genetically enhanced was a desired goal, then that can be reached with these options supplied.
If not, then why are SoB not being discussed, and instead being blown off as the complaints of "a thousand crying man-children"?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Or just that, like Tactical_Spam, I am rather anal about lore. Not sexist. I'd argue just as strongly about male Sisters as I would about this.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Again, I've been attempting to do this, just highlighting the specificities of it.

It's not impossible to have genetically engineered women in power armour. It is, on the other hand, to have female Space Marines, as determined by the Imperium's classification of Space Marine, due to the double X chromosome.

epronovost wrote:

Being passionnate about this part of the fluff up to the point of refusing any exeption to the rule is indeed rather strange.

Women cannot be Space Marines can have its loopholes. These slightly, but tolerated abhuman women can because of "insert pseudoscience here". What about this slightly heretical Chapter found a way thanks to this xeno technology. As you can see, the general rule can remain, but be amended for exception.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

I would amend that to "Women cannot be genetically engineered basasses in power amour can have it's loopholes."

epronovost wrote:
@Sgt_Smudge
A possible loophole for the no women can be Space Marines can derive from the fact that there is such a thing as intersex people who make a rock hard definition of what a women is vs a men almost impossible to pinpoint with precision and by the fact that abhuman exists.

The rule simply mention women, thus we have to assume they are talking about human women, we don't know if some abhuman can become Space Marines or not.

An abhuman women population might very well carry a mutation that allows the geneseed to work on her as a side effect.

In the same way, it's possible to think that a large number of intersex people who would be indentified to women in almost all circomstances are capable of receiving the geneseed. Receiving the geneseed is what makes a genetically enhanced human to take the name Space Marines. In all those cases, the women would be Space Marines.

 DizzyStorey wrote:
I have a few other ideas of how it could work too.. And I never said endorsed by the imperium, Infact iv said it was heretical and isolated multiple times. Kinda like this lunatic who made them wanted his own little privet chapter for his own purposes.

I was thinking they could be made using re-descovered thunder warrior genes, which didnt have the traditional restrictions.
Or they could be from a planet which has its population mutated to be adapted to the process, so you wouldn't even need a particularly brilliant scientist to make it work. Just say "Yep these girls have genes in them to survive" and somebody descovered them.. With mutations that make people into wolf monsters and grow eyestocks this sounds simple making them all harboring a Y chromosome or something. Some genetic wibbly wabbly nonesense.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Such as a Y chromosome? If they have a Y chromosome, then by biological argument (which seems to be what 40k is basing their definitions on), the abhuman is not a woman - they are intersex or male.

Ynneadwraith wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

It's completely logical to have Orks doing this - as long as there's fighting and krumping heads involved, it's all Orky. Orks are Chaotic X - they can do "good" things and "bad" things, and anything in between. If they have the delusion that they should rescue poor damsels in distress for their reward to go on and continue krumpin' heads, it's completely logical.

I don't know, both myself and Melissia above think that that's a more egregious break from the fluff (not lore, fluff). Orks are interested in fighting and that's it. Having them interested in being 'good' is un-Orky. Yet most people have less of an issue with that than whether or not Space Marines can have boobs.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Functionally identical biological modification, as I think I mentioned, is fine. But they are not regarded as official Imperially sanctioned Space Marines, hence my whole point.
"There's nothing wrong with female genetically enhanced warriors wearing power armour. There is an issue with female Space Marines."

But why?

I have yet to hear a single compelling reason why it's ok to make an exception for the Ork thing, but if the OP wants her female Space Marines she flat-out can't have them. She can have some pseudo-marines if she wants, but the official genuine stuff is off limits or people get their knickers in a twist.

Just so you don't think I'm some bleeding-hearts liberal who will let anything fly, I'm an Eldar person first and foremost. The idea of 'Chaos-worshipping Eldar' makes me twitch. However, I can think of half a dozen reasons how you could make that work if you really wanted to. And not some pseudo-version of what the person originally wanted. Genuine chaos-worshipping Eldar.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I'm purely asking OP if being genetically enhanced is essential to this idea - as I maintain, being an Astartes is a lore impossibility, but being genetically engineered is not. If being genetically enhanced was a desired goal, then that can be reached with these options supplied.
If not, then why are SoB not being discussed, and instead being blown off as the complaints of "a thousand crying man-children"?

The OP seems pretty switched on, knowing enough about the fluff (not lore) to be considering making a Gue'vesa converted army. I'm assuming that she knows about the SoB, and has decided she's not interested (for whatever reason, it doesn't really matter).

My main point is why having a female Astartes is a lore impossibility when damn near anything else isn't. That's what I think is odd.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Or just that, like Tactical_Spam, I am rather anal about lore. Not sexist. I'd argue just as strongly about male Sisters as I would about this.

But you didn't argue about the 'good Orks' thing, and think that's fine despite it being a break in the fluff. I really hope you don't think I'm singling you out on this at all, I just think that the opinion of the community at large regarding this is very odd.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Again, I've been attempting to do this, just highlighting the specificities of it.

It's not impossible to have genetically engineered women in power armour. It is, on the other hand, to have female Space Marines, as determined by the Imperium's classification of Space Marine, due to the double X chromosome.

Sort of yeah, and again not singling you out. There's been much more unhelpful comments in this thread than yours.

There's honestly nothing in the fluff that states 'if someone is a women they're not a Space Marine'. There is something in the fluff that states that the technologies that the Imperium uses to make Space Marines doesn't work on women.

I really don't think it's a technical impossibility that one person in the entire history of the galaxy-spanning Imperium has worked out how to make it work.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

I would amend that to "Women cannot be genetically engineered basasses in power amour can have it's loopholes."

But why?

Why this arbitrary restriction on this particular piece of fluff when nearly everything else is absolutely fine given a half-decent fluff explanation?

DizzyStorey wrote:I have a few other ideas of how it could work too.. And I never said endorsed by the imperium, Infact iv said it was heretical and isolated multiple times. Kinda like this lunatic who made them wanted his own little privet chapter for his own purposes.

I was thinking they could be made using re-descovered thunder warrior genes, which didnt have the traditional restrictions.
Or they could be from a planet which has its population mutated to be adapted to the process, so you wouldn't even need a particularly brilliant scientist to make it work. Just say "Yep these girls have genes in them to survive" and somebody descovered them.. With mutations that make people into wolf monsters and grow eyestocks this sounds simple making them all harboring a Y chromosome or something. Some genetic wibbly wabbly nonesense.

 Ynneadwraith wrote:
It's a throwaway comment so GW didn't have to shell out the expenditure for making the molds for female SM torsos decades ago when they were just getting started.

It really is nothing important. If it changes, literally nothing else in the universe is affected. It doesn't break the fluff at all because it has no effect on anything else at all.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Such as a Y chromosome? If they have a Y chromosome, then by biological argument (which seems to be what 40k is basing their definitions on), the abhuman is not a woman - they are intersex or male.

Why does the mutation have to be a Y chromosome? Why can't it be something else entirely that functions as a Y chromosome for the purpose of Astartes modifications but is otherwise inactive?

This is a universe where people can mutate so that tentacles erupt from their armpits. The above really isn't anything above and beyond.

We go back to why this is immutable fact and other things aren't?

 Ezra Tyrius wrote:
I think we're all taking this a bit too far, honestly. Ultimately, it all boils down to this:

- Female Astartes, as in, the superhuman warriors created through the process devised by the Emperor of Mankind, are not possible. The lore outright states this (and I believe the Emperor himself touched upon the subject once, but I could be mistaken).

- Female Space Marines, as in, superhuman warriors created through any other means than the Imperium-sanctioned, Emperor-created process, are completely possible. There are numerous instances in the fluff where human beings have been altered genetically or biologically through various processes. For example, plenty of the old Imperial Army regiments that served in the Great Crusade had been genetically tampered with (such as the Geno Five-Two Chilliad).

As for 'why can't the women become Astartes?'... no-one but GW can answer that question. We can speculate, of course, but in the end, we have only the lore and the in-universe explanations to guide us.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:


With abhumans, yes, they won't be standard human, but the given rule seems to imply specifically male traits, which, if an abhuman had, they would have to be classed as male, no?
The actual quote we are given is "They must be male because the zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types". The rule mentions specifically male hormones and tissues. Such as a Y chromosome? If they have a Y chromosome, then by biological argument (which seems to be what 40k is basing their definitions on), the abhuman is not a woman - they are intersex or male. Again, identification means nothing. So long as you have "male hormones and tissue types", which only males and intersex would have, you can be an Astartes. Yes, a loophole exists in intersex having a Y chromosome, but unless one has that chromosome, they cannot be a recognised and official Astartes.

epronovost wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:


With abhumans, yes, they won't be standard human, but the given rule seems to imply specifically male traits, which, if an abhuman had, they would have to be classed as male, no?
The actual quote we are given is "They must be male because the zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types". The rule mentions specifically male hormones and tissues. Such as a Y chromosome? If they have a Y chromosome, then by biological argument (which seems to be what 40k is basing their definitions on), the abhuman is not a woman - they are intersex or male. Again, identification means nothing. So long as you have "male hormones and tissue types", which only males and intersex would have, you can be an Astartes. Yes, a loophole exists in intersex having a Y chromosome, but unless one has that chromosome, they cannot be a recognised and official Astartes.

An abhuman women with good old XQ chromosome (remember they don't necessarly have the same genes than normal humans and nowhere does it say that abhuman have to be able to reproduce with one another) could very well be implanted the geneseed because, due to hasard (or fate), it's compatible. Geneseed thus works only with XY chromosome (human male/intersex only) and XQ chromosome (female abhuman from Themyscira only). Why, because women from Themyscira produce prabofolium instead of testosterone and due to its chemical property, prabofolium "tricks" the geneseed into thinking that the women is a men and thus the implantation works. See how with bs science you can solve problems of bs sciences? Ain't that great!

There you go, I just made a loophole in the rule no women can be Space Marines because. It respect all the composant of the fluff while allowing for an exception.