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.
Damn, even when it's a mod you're relentless. You're like a Flesh Tearer, always fighting no matter what.
Another fun fluffy idea; Plague Marines/Cultists who believe by delivering their pestilence they're unifying the galaxy as the Emperor intended. Real topsy turvy non-sense but I feel it could work reasonable well, in and out of canon.
To be fair, Manchu and I have had plenty of debates. And I respect Manchu's ability to talk about heated topics without losing his head (actually, I think that's pretty much a requirement of being a mod come to think of it)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/20 17:47:15
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Is this where I point out that you are just dismissing the passion of someone else dismissing a third person's passion? Or would that be dismissing your passion? Yeah ... tone/criticism conflation is a dead end. I would say it's utter bs and you know it but maybe you don't - the reason it's utter bs is because it's an infinite regression of NO U.
Moving back to something constructive: The problem with the femarine concept is not that it's political but that it's (99% of the time) just political. Again contrast this to the inexcusable lack of Guardswomen figures - while political, this is also a non-theoretical concern: (1) Guardswomen are not headcannon and (2) there is current, demonstrable market demand for Guardswomen models. This is why you don't see people respond to "where are my female IG?" with "that's just political."
Melissia wrote: To be fair, Manchu and I have had plenty of debates.
Yeah including about this very issue for the past seven years - which demonstrates (I believe) that there are valid points on both sides. No one could talk about about anything for so long, otherwise.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/03/20 17:52:06
edit: Actually now that I think of it, let's let this arc of the discussion die. It's really getting off topic and I'm sure the OP would rather us talk about something else.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2017/03/20 18:06:16
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Ranting against female IG is just as contrary to the IP as ranting in favor of femarines. Fortunately, the former is about as rare as sincere examples of the latter. And sure, people who say GW should revise the fluff so that women can't fight in the IG are "just dragging their politics into it." It's completely fair to say to such people - keep your politics out of 40k!
So one side's politics is okay but the other's isn't? I mean I'm really losing interest and feeling like this is really getting off topic but that bothers me a lot.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/03/20 18:12:15
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Melissia wrote: So one side's politics is okay but the other's isn't?
I'm saying that both the anti-female IG and the femarine issues are reliable examples of people dragging their personal politics into 40k.
It's kind of similar to the (alleged) "magical realms" phenomenon in RPGs, where one of the players (usually the GM) consciously but covertly projects their fetishes onto the campaign.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/20 18:17:53
Melissia wrote: So one side's politics is okay but the other's isn't?
I'm saying that both the anti-female IG and the femarine issues are reliable examples of people dragging their personal politics into 40k.
And "keep girls out of my space marines" is also inherently political.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Melissia wrote: And "keep girls out of my space marines" is also inherently political.
If that was the actual argument, sure. But I think the actual argument is, keep IRL politics (or personal fetishes for that matter) out of muh spehs mahreins.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/20 18:22:59
Melissia wrote: So one side's politics is okay but the other's isn't?
I'm saying that both the anti-female IG and the femarine issues are reliable examples of people dragging their personal politics into 40k.
It's kind of similar to the (alleged) "magical realms" phenomenon in RPGs, where one of the players (usually the GM) consciously but covertly projects their fetishes onto the campaign.
If you think /d/ms are only an alleged problem you and I haven't been to the same gaming circles.
Horrible, horrible circles.
The things you'll see on IRC role plays...Like spending a few sessions with a group only to realize that by the eighth session or so the DM was a raging lolicon. Noped out immediately and never returned.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/20 18:23:53
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Think of a daemon incursion like a fart you don't quite trust... you could either toot a little puff of air, bellow a great effluvium, or utterly sh*t your pants and cry as it floods down your leg.
Melissia wrote: And "keep girls out of my space marines" is also inherently political.
If that was the actual argument, sure. But I think the actual argument is, keep IRL politics (or personal fetishes for that matter) out of muh spehs mahreins.
Who are thus inherently men, and thus you want to keep girls away from your space marines, because you feel they'd be devalued by not being men. Thus, it is an inherently political view.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/20 18:24:37
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
The Doylist argument for keeping women out of the space marines is that GW decided making models for female space marines wasn't worth the bother after the great lore shift from Rogue Trader to 2e. Afterwards you could argue that they felt that this would contradict the warrior monk feel they wanted.
The issue is that this argument is a load of dingo's kidneys. The latter because gender egalitarian warrior monk societies are basically ubiqutous to the fantasy genre by this point and monogendered ones would actually be unusual for a modern fantasy fan's expectations, and the former because most marines are in highly concealing armor anyway, it'd at most be a few new head sculpts they'd have to make.
I'm not particularly interested in listening to watsonian defenses of this.
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Think of a daemon incursion like a fart you don't quite trust... you could either toot a little puff of air, bellow a great effluvium, or utterly sh*t your pants and cry as it floods down your leg.
Melissia wrote: Who are thus inherently men, and thus you want to keep girls away from your space marines, because you feel they'd be devalued by not being men.
= projecting
That was an excellent demonstration of why the femarine issue is "just political." We're right back to the false premise the femarine issue turns on 99% of the time it is brought up, namely that the SM are an all-male faction because [misogyny]. I mean, let's just reword that a bit so it refers to Adpetus Sororitas:
Who are thus inherently women, and thus you want to keep boys away from your sisters of battle, because you feel they'd be devalued by not being women.
1: I don't think you know what the term "projecting" means in this context if you're going to use it in response to my post.
2: Okay, if it doesn't devalue marines to have them be female, why do you object so strongly? I don't accept "Because tradition" to be a strong argument in and of itself. The tradition must have value other than the simple fact that it's a tradition. "Because tradition" is inherently political anyway so you're not proving your point if that's your argument.
Manchu wrote: I mean, let's just reword that a bit so it refers to Adpetus Sororitas:
Who are thus inherently women, and thus you want to keep boys away from your sisters of battle, because you feel they'd be devalued by not being women.
... and hey presto, instant WTF moment.
Actually, I have argued that it's perfectly acceptable for there to be unaugmented, but highly skilled men in power armor, who have weird powers because of faith. We'd not likely call them "Sisters of Battle" due to the oddities of the English language, but that's mostly a linguistic thing more than anything. Figuring out what to call them is another debate entirely, as Brothers of Battle is confusing because Space Marines call themselves Battle Brothers (and, disappointingly, the English language is not of much help; "brothers" can refer to all humans, male and female, but "sisters" cannot). (as a side note, depending on your view of the Imperium and the schola progenium, there may very well be transwomen in the Sisters of Battle, but they'd likely not identify as male so that's not really helpful to the discussion)
Actually, we have lore in the Dark Heresy supplements where an elite Guard unit that were the favored unit of a planet's nobility were equipped with light power armor, so it's entirely within the realm of possibility.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2017/03/20 18:49:11
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Melissia wrote: And "keep girls out of my space marines" is also inherently political.
This. The idea that wishing to maintain the status quo isn't just as political as wishing to change it is utter BS and needs to die. It is such an obvious fallacy that the person using it pretty much instantly loses any credibility on the subject.
Melissia wrote: And "keep girls out of my space marines" is also inherently political.
This. The idea that wishing to maintain the status quo isn't just as political as wishing to change it is utter BS and needs to die. It is such an obvious fallacy that the person using it pretty much instantly loses any credibility on the subject.
There is indeed an entire major political ideology devoted to keeping things the same and opposing change. So the idea that it is the less political stance is quite simply baffling.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/20 18:54:51
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Think of a daemon incursion like a fart you don't quite trust... you could either toot a little puff of air, bellow a great effluvium, or utterly sh*t your pants and cry as it floods down your leg.
Please no more NO U responses today, thanks in advance.
Melissia wrote: Okay, if it doesn't devalue marines to have them be female, why do you object so strongly?
Let's unload this loaded question. The rhetorical structure here implies that there ought to be femarines but for [reasons]. It should be the other way around: there is no reason to retcon the setting to add femarines but for [reasons]. Again for the sake of just emphasizing the structure, let's substitute another example (this time female IG): it's not a matter of demonstrating why there should be female IG to people who think women should not fight in the IG - instead the burden is on those people to demonstrate why the setting should be retconned to exclude female IG. As a fan of 40k, I tend to be "conservative" about fluff continuity - that is to say, I believe in a presumption against retcons. This isn't an argument about "tradition" - it's a practical dictum.
Melissia wrote: Actually, I have argued that it's perfectly acceptable for there to be unaugmented, but highly skilled men in power armor, who have weird powers because of faith.
But that's not at issue; no more so than saying, sure some women can be genetically augmented into super soldiers who wear power armor - they just wouldn't be Space Marines. In any case, the point you missed was, IRL sexism isn't at issue when it comes to SM and SoB. It's easier to see with SoB, which has some ominous implications.
Crimson wrote: The idea that wishing to maintain the status quo isn't just as political as wishing to change it is utter BS
No, it isn't. People enjoy things for non-political reasons. Just because someone else wants to change those things for political reasons does not make opposition to such change political in itself.
Kain wrote: There is indeed an entire major political ideology devoted to keeping things the same and opposing change.
And yet you don't have to be a Republican to realize that the "Special Edition" of Star Wars was a mistake ...
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2017/03/20 19:10:53
So why are people so dead-set against it? Unless it makes them feel iffy to think about Female Space Marines moreso than another change in a similarly innocuous and low-relevance piece of fluff. Can people please reflect on their own internal though-processes to reach that conclusion and prove me wrong about it please. I really don't like the connotations the above explanation has.
So, until someone can actually provide me with a justification for that stance, can we just call them Astartes and call it a day?
Official fluff is relevant to the universe.
Fan-fiction is not.
You want a justification for why people are dead-set against fan-fiction in this context over established lore, do I really have to explain why you are wrong here?
Your attitude about the issue is the reason why you can't see eye-to-eye with people trying to repeat more of the same to you. You want a thought process?
I like this universe > I refer to official sources for all my entertainment needs. - End process.
Your thought process: - I like this universe > I prefer to insert this fan-fiction here. - End process.
From an individual perspective, you can go official, fan-fiction, or a hybrid of both. It's your hobby. The problem here is when you take your fan-fiction and argue why people who prefer the official material won't except it, and you try to either spin an unsupported in-universe justification for it or you ask/demand that the fanbase justify to YOU why it isn't possible to satisfy your criteria, if such exists.
So all this song and dance about what fluff is important, what isn't, what should or shouldn't be overlooked, it's all besides the point. So you're either just doing some 'light' trolling act, or searching for someone to troll that is sexist towards the concept of Female marines or something, and if you find someone like that.. it still has nothing to do with the issue of official material vs fan fiction anyway.
I dont think you understand that any story you come up for any of your units is technically fanfiction. It is a story made up by a fan and thus it is fanfiction. So what you are saying is you do not like making up your own stories with the game which is fine, play however you want.
40k's canon policy is that there is no canon policy and it's all supposed to be a guide for "your dudes" outside of a relatively small number of absolute truths. The monogendered status of marines does not carry the same weight as the absolute truths (the existence of the major factions, major events like the horus heresy, the tyrannic wars, and the war in heaven, the gods being real etc) and has no real reason to exist besides GW at best, being too lazy to make some female space marine sized head sculpts and at worst GW's designers being actively sexist.
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Think of a daemon incursion like a fart you don't quite trust... you could either toot a little puff of air, bellow a great effluvium, or utterly sh*t your pants and cry as it floods down your leg.
Crimson wrote: Manchu, could you stop derailing this thread with your politics?
The only politics I've dragged into this thread involves advocating female IG figs - but you're right, that's off-topic (I only brought it up because it was a useful counter example).
Can I ask you something, though? And I don't mean offense with this, I really don't, but I've come to wonder...
...why do they have to be Astartes? Why can't the Astartes be an all-male warrior brotherhood?
Because it's political.
*BOOOOO HISSSSSS*
shudaaupp!!
The Sisters of Battle just don't cut it for some of the ladies around here... I think it's because of their available range.. they need plastics and upgrade kits for more customisation. GW you have failed the Loyalist female Imperial Consumers! FOR SHAME GW! Countless women turning to foul Xeno species instead... for shame.
The second hand embarrassment for you is overwhelming...
Manchu wrote: there is no reason to retcon the setting to add femarines but for [reasons].
People have been giving reasons this entire thread. "It's cool!" "I'd like marines that are more like me." "I think there should be less concern for gender" and etc.
You can say you don't find these arguments compelling. And fair enough. But "tradition" is not a valid argument for itself. Why do you find the argument for male-exclusive space marines to be more compelling than the argument against?
Manchu wrote: Again for the sake of just emphasizing the structure, let's substitute another example (this time female IG): it's not a matter of demonstrating why there should be female IG - the relevant question is showing why the setting should be retconned to exclude female IG.
And people on this forum have made tons of arguments why women should be excluded from the Imperial guard. I find them not to be compelling compared to the reasons why there are female Imperial Guard. Their arguments went like"women are too weak to be soldiers", "women should be back at home giving birth to more men who can fight", "women need to be protected from war (by men)", and other similar arguments.
My argument, IMO, wins out over any of these. Simply put, the Imperium doesn't care about the gender of any particular guardsmen. They desire bodies that can hold lasguns and pull the trigger when ordered. Both men and women can do this. Therefor the Imperium uses both. The Imperium's apathy as I described is far more grimdark than any of the reasons given for excluding women from the Imperial Guard.
Manchu wrote: As a fan of 40k, I tend to be "conservative" about fluff continuity - that is to say, I believe in a presumption against retcons. This isn't an argument about "tradition"
"I am conservative, but I'm not arguing for tradition" is like saying "I am progressive, but I'm not arguing for change". It is an inherent contradiction in itself.
Manchu wrote: But that's not at issue; no more so than saying, sure some women can be genetically augmented into super soldiers who wear power armor - they just wouldn't be Space Marines.
And people have been saying that this entire thread-- Including me! The organization of the Adeptus Astartes is a specific organization in the Imperium, just like the Adepta Sororitas. And there being female "space marines" doesn't mean that they would be accepted in to, or come out of, the Imperial organization known as the "Adeptus Astartes". But that doesn't mean that they can't actually exist, because the 40k universe is vast, with widely ranging possibilities.
Manchu wrote: People enjoy things for non-political reasons. Just because someone else wants to change those things for political reasons does not make opposition to such change political in itself.
Conservatism is a political ideology, whether or not you are willing to admit it is is irrelevant.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
The Imperium puts actual factual children in the line of battle in the ranks of the Imperial Guard and nobody thinks this is immoral or all that unusual if perhaps a bit desperate within the Imperium. The idea that the Imperium would care about risking the lives of its female half of the population is Salvador Dali tripping on LSD grade surreal.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/20 19:22:49
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Think of a daemon incursion like a fart you don't quite trust... you could either toot a little puff of air, bellow a great effluvium, or utterly sh*t your pants and cry as it floods down your leg.
Melissia wrote: And "keep girls out of my space marines" is also inherently political.
This. The idea that wishing to maintain the status quo isn't just as political as wishing to change it is utter BS and needs to die. It is such an obvious fallacy that the person using it pretty much instantly loses any credibility on the subject.
I'm sorry Manchu, but I have to agree with both Melissia and Crimson on this particular point.
I actually can't think of a reason that isn't political behind the sheer determination with which people defend the idea that 'there can't be any female Space Marines'. If you'd like to offer one I'd be very pleased to hear it
Melissia's decrying of gak being labeled 'political' was in response to this comment:
Can I ask you something, though? And I don't mean offense with this, I really don't, but I've come to wonder...
...why do they have to be Astartes? Why can't the Astartes be an all-male warrior brotherhood?
Because it's political. *BOOOOO HISSSSSS*
shudaaupp!!
The Sisters of Battle just don't cut it for some of the ladies around here... I think it's because of their available range.. they need plastics and upgrade kits for more customisation. GW you have failed the Loyalist female Imperial Consumers! FOR SHAME GW! Countless women turning to foul Xeno species instead... for shame.
Which given the dismissive tone and general attempt to avoid the actual questions being asked by decrying everything as political, and therefore for some reason not worth of discussion because of it. I feel Melissia's response was perfectly measured and justified.
Moving back to something constructive: The problem with the femarine concept is not that it's political but that it's (99% of the time) just political. Again contrast this to the inexcusable lack of Guardswomen figures - while political, this is also a non-theoretical concern: (1) Guardswomen are not headcannon and (2) there is current, demonstrable market demand for Guardswomen models. This is why you don't see people respond to "where are my female IG?" with "that's just political.
There's a couple of subtle differences between female guardsmen and female space marines that make the comparison not a great one. If someone posts about how they want to make an all-female Guard army, you don't get 7 pages of people trying desperately to say that it's impossible.
If someone posts about how they want to make a Chaos Eldar army, you don't get 7 pages of people trying desperately to say that it's impossible (I know, I've got Chaos Eldar in my plog).
If someone posts about how they want to make a female Space Marine army, you get this.
It's really, really odd why that's the case. As an obviously intelligent person, I'd like to hear your take on why that particular piece of fluff is a no-go despite the fact that it's relatively minor compared to other stuff that is routinely bent and broken.
Another fun fluffy idea; Plague Marines/Cultists who believe by delivering their pestilence they're unifying the galaxy as the Emperor intended. Real topsy turvy non-sense but I feel it could work reasonable well, in and out of canon.
Ooh now that's a neat idea I love it when people add grey areas to CSM.
I've got my own little idea brewing about a Slaaneshi Cult that do what they do because they genuinely believe that humanity is better off under the 'everything or nothing' rule of Slaanesh compared to the crushing oppression of the Imperium.
'Bad guys', but doing what they do because they think what they're doing is 'good'
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/20 19:27:26
In the Warp, getting trolled by Tactical_Spam, AKA TZEENTCH INCARNATE
Can we seriously not just agree to disagree, at this point? This discussion is going nowhere, and I doubt it's going to end well for any of us, or for this thread for that matter.
Personally, I'm going to stay in the 'Female Astartes aren't possible'-camp, for the reasons I've posted before; the rest of you, figure it out for your bloody selves.
If anyone still wants to discuss modelling ideas for female space marines or one of the other ideas, I'm all ears.
Tactical_Spam: Ezra is fighting reality right now.
War Kitten: Vanden, you just taunted the Dank Lord Ezra. Prepare for seven years of fighting reality...
War Kitten: Ezra can steal reality
Kharne the Befriender:Took him seven years but he got it wrangled down
Annnd another one ... just going to ignore them from here on.
Melissia wrote: Why do you find the argument for male-exclusive space marines to be more compelling than the argument against?
To clarify, I'm going to assume you understand my explanation that (1) I like the 40k setting as it is and (2) that's why I think retconning it requires a damn good reason. So let me give you an example of what I consider a damn good reason: Newcrons! IMO Oldcrons were a conceptual dead end because they were so one-dimensional and indistinct. Unfortunately, their existing fluff was pretty comprehensive (if also very weak) so there wasn't room to "explain" personality into it. I understand that the former concept has its own aesthetic strengths. But that wasn't going to support developing the faction, which is probably one of the reasons crons were neglected for so long.
Melissia wrote: "I am conservative, but I'm not arguing for tradition"
I put "conservative" in quotation marks because I was using the term broadly, as opposed to referencing politics. Having to explain this is ... boring.
Melissia wrote: But that doesn't mean that they can't actually exist, because the 40k universe is vast, with widely ranging possibilities.
Agreed. I have no problem with - and I don't think most people have a problem with - someone saying, my own personal army fluff is here are some genetically-modified, power-armored women ... or heck, even calling them Space Marines to boot. The issue is the argument "this IP is sexist because there are no women SM."
Ezra Tyrius wrote: If anyone still wants to discuss modelling ideas for female space marines
Please post a thread in the Painting and Modeling section for this discussion. Thanks!
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/03/20 19:35:18
Well earlier I had deleted a response saying it was high time we stop, but got dragged back in to it. I think this time I'll stick with it. I've said my piece, as it were, and now I gotta go do stuff.
As a parting thought-- Manchu, what's your opinion on the cybernetics suggestion I gave earlier?
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Manchu wrote: To clarify, I'm going to assume you understand my explanation that (1) I like the 40k setting as it is and (2) that's why I think retconning it requires a damn good reason. So let me give you an example of what I consider a damn good reason: Newcrons! IMO Oldcrons were a conceptual dead end because they were so one-dimensional and indistinct. Unfortunately, their existing fluff was pretty comprehensive (if also very weak) so there wasn't room to "explain" personality into it. I understand that the former concept has its own aesthetic strengths. But that wasn't going to support developing the faction, which is probably one of the reasons crons were neglected for so long.
I'd say that 8 (and counting) pages of debate where one side can't justify their position beyond 'I like it that way' is a damn good reason to retcon something.
As retcons go, it's utterly and pitifully small. Below the level that is almost continually undertaken by GW every time the output another piece of fluff. We're not even talking about saying 'oh yeah, half of the Ultramarines are women'. We're just saying that it is possible to make Astartes modifications work with women, (which is utterly ludicrous that we have to justify that so strongly when we are perfectly happy to wave past any number of more drastic fluff bending).
Why is it that 'no female Space Marines' is felt to be so integral to the fabric of the 40k universe that people feel it's a bad retcon to undo it.
Please, I'd like an answer to that. Someone please do some genuine self-reflection and try to come up with a reason they feel so strongly about it. What does it actually affect about your life, or your faction, or your dudes?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/20 19:54:24
Flanker wrote: For people who are acting like the lore must be treated as golden (despite saying otherwise), the canon of this game has been changed so much over time. I'm not even talking about from the silliness of RT days, but plenty of 3rd/4th edition things and later have been retconned. Some people still see themselves as the defenders of the realm of fluff saying what others can and can't do with regards to femarines for some reason. As Ynneadwraith said, any other time people post something lore-breaking, people say 'go with it' when it's done well. An Ork-looted carnifex? Great model, that's sweet! Femarines? You can't do that!
"Everything is canon, nothing is true." I already posted that earlier in this thread. The whole universe is supposed to be bendable to what you want to make. It's a setting to forge your own narrative. When it comes to building your army, rule of cool reigns.
Maybe SoB doesn't cut it because the player would rather play SM! The reverse situation (male SoB) has been discussed and people were ok with the poster's reasoning behind it, despite the Ecclesiarchy not being allowed to maintain men under arms. That's on par with Femarines in terms of lore-breaking. Others on here weren't up in arms like they are for femarines.
Thankyou for coming out in support, it's appreciated
It really is just femmarines that people take specific umbrage to, and I can't work out the justification for it.
I don't mind if people don't like the idea. No-one's forcing you to make an army of them or anything. There's no need for 7 pages (and counting) of dialogue of people trying their utmost to prove that it's impossible.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Melissia wrote: Ranting about politics and assuming everyone else is talking about politics too, when we're really just thinking "well this can be cool if done this way" and "I had an idea for a really cool army", is really fething disrespectful, can we stop already?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Flanker wrote: When it comes to building your army, rule of cool reigns.
And that's the fething truth of the matter.
Apologies, I shouldn't really have brought it up in the first place. I was just trying to think of some reason, any reason, why people were so attached to that one particular piece of fluff as to feel compelled to argue that it's immutable when all the evidence I've provided suggests that minor pieces of fluff that don't break the universe are perfectly acceptable to be changed to make 'your dudes'.
I had hoped it would prompt some honest self-reflection on why people felt it was so important to them.
I-I do have an answer for why this is hated and not other things... People aren't consciously being sexist, infact some might not even realize why they feel the way they do. But there has been this underlining sexist tones to nerd culture for a while now. I dont know when it started but its not just present here. When people questioned Quiets design in the new metal gear solid. Everyone freaked out! Or the mechanic girl in Final Fantasy 15. Theres this tone that any comment on womans clothing, design or inclusion is a negative thing. besides being an already hostile environment with "Fake gamer girl" inquisitions trying to weed out the reals from the fakes and constant anger over the inclusion of more veriaty of female characters ( Old, muscular, ugly, overweight, giant, same as the men variety ) people get put on edge or uncomfortable. And why i cant actually say. I have no idea when it started or why its present. you would thin that more Variety and choice would be nothing but a good thing.
And no its not me trying to be political or anything its just observation on how fandoms and communities behave and react on average to criticism. There are bad apples in every group and I hear yeah. I just find that the hostilities iv faced when trying to get into many of these hobbies range from excessive unwanted attention to downright contempt...
So no i dont know why this is more infuriating or upsetting than any other minor fluff alterations and yes it does make me not want to take part in communities but. I do it anyway cause I have friends in here like you who are really nice and make me feel more comfortable ^ _ ^ But id be lieing if i said it didnt at times make the hobby unpleasent with the amount of resistance I am met with over the simple sharing of ideas.
But i dont think its anyones fault, i think that there is something thats cultivating this aversion to females within the community. When I was a kid there wasnt this fear of change we have now.
Anyway thank you so much for being a voice of reason in this forum. Its made the difference between me staying or leaving having a sizably few people supporting me, If i had just simply been crushed under a mountain of anger and resistance than id probably had left by now, but Iv met 4 people here that are now really close friends! And a few others who I hope to become friends with in the future!
Automatically Appended Next Post: Let me give an example of something people would think is cool... If got plastic gorilla heads and put them on space marine armour and say "A genius used a variant gene-seed to make a hyper intelligent gorilla army to help him get off a stranded jungle planet full of old world tech long forgotten" people wouldnt be outraged or mad. they would think it was funny and probably share it around and talk about it ( if the models were made well.. which by the way I would love to do! )
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/20 19:57:04
*BOOOOO HISSSSSS* 
