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.

....Aight. This is getting silly. Screw a much later-dated piece of artwork showing arco-flagellants in gory detail, and let's look at the concept of Repentia from the original source - the models for them that were originally sculpted - for a second here.

There are three sculpts, it doesn't take that long.

Let's see, what do we expect if we're taking this concept seriously, i.e. following in line with Servitors and Arco-flagellants and other "dystopian horror" style units? Probably a bunch of emaciated, mutiliated outcasts already missing body parts, something like that?

What do we get? A bunch of perfect, voluptuous ladies whose black leather "armor" and robes just happens to include nearly exposed breasts and legs. 2/3 sculpts have their breasts barely concealed by a bit of metal, 1/3 was carefully constructed to show a some side-boob. And they've got a sergeant armed with whips and wearing a dominatrix mask.

Every prospective Sisters of Battle player is going to encounter them, and every one is going to get the intent of the joke. It's not subtle, guys. You can either decide it's not a big deal to you, or that maybe a you can find a different game/hobby, but denying that it exists is pretty freakin' dumb.

This unit was obviously intended to be a throwaway BDSM sex joke by the sculptor. Could they be redesigned into something inoffensive? Yeah, probably. But that'd require new models, which they haven't had for nearly 25 years. A piece of artwork shoved into a book somewhere showing them not as a sex joke is not going to cut it, because this is a miniature game, and those are the miniatures, right there.

Female marines? Ugh....I'm just so tired with the concept of the astartes in general now that I would just be irritated they're making yet more marine stuff. Sisters of battle are essentially the same concept, but slightly redesigned so that their rules aren't identical to astartes, which is fine, the game needs more differentiated unit archetypes and a T3 power armor army is more interesting than yet another marine statline army.

We're at the point where we can get all 9 space marine power armor marks, plus special boxes for space wolves dark angels grey knights and blood angels. Forgeworld sells 572 Dreadnought variations. Get GW to redesign Sisters as a decent plastic army, and leave one sculptor's awkward bdsm joke from 1990 behind, and redo the outdated basic infantry kits for the armies that are supposed to be equal opportunity, and you've pretty much fixed any problem that exists.

mynamelegend wrote:

Alright, so the usual response to "We'd like female Space Marines" is "Play Sisters of Battle".

Or you can do what's actually come up in this thread and just head swap them and wave your hands and say "the warp" if anyone questions it.

If you want to twist the fluff to whatever you want it to be, go for it, no one is really going to care. But I've already outlined why it's real unlikely that GW will simply cram in female marines without some serious story progression/justification, it changes the dynamic due to a pile of social assumptions.that go into the structure of space marines and the story they're involved in. Could be real interesting, if someone had a good idea of something to do with it, but frankly I don't see it changing anything more than some head swaps would right now.

And as a mildly offended sisters player, they're way more interesting than space marines. They're human, they aren't engineered for war, half their gear is more reliquary than wargear, relentless to a point space marines find them obstinate and they're ridiculous to the point of greatness. The few novels they've gotten were quite good and I'd kill a man to get a hold of the audio drama, and reading them would probably fix up your problems with them a bit. Repentia are not sexy, they're flagellants with gigantic chainsaws and a death wish. Minis are questionable, but the actual fluff and art of them of them is pretty horrifying. I like my power armored flamer wielding church ladies thank you. So long as they're pointed at someone else at least.

 Galas wrote:

 Genestealer Jesse wrote:

 Grand.Master.Raziel wrote:
I have a female friend who recently got into 40K when she spotted Codex: Space Wolves at GenCon last year. Though she geeked out at the army full of wolves, she was reported to have asked, "But where are the girls?" Granted, that is one anecdote, but it shows that this does happen.
.

OMG - Space Wolf Shield Maidens and Valkyries would be the most epic gak ever.

They don't even need to be Space Marines per se. Just cybernetical empowered humans. With the genocide of Fenris, the dire need of reinforcements the Space Wolves have, it can make sense.
And to be honest, anything that push the "Viking" more than the "Wolfy" is a good thing to me.

There is a precedent. Callidus Assassins are S4 T4 and are decidedly not Space Marines. So, there is other technology out there that can accomplish the same effect. You could maybe have power armored (or even carapace-armored) Shield Maidens who are S3 T3, then a Valkryie unit that is S4 T4, with the explanation being they undergo extensive bionic reconstruction.

I forsee that this is JUST ANOTHER troll thread. It has been discussed 10^9 times, with the same conclusion. There are no female space marines, and there will never be. Get over it.

Although, feel free to convert your SM army to be females if you want to look like a virgin manchild. Nothing holds you back...

This bait is too obvious.

HexHammer wrote:
I foresee that there will come female space marines with the end times. That the Emperor finally have figured out how to make them and Rowboat will execute the vision that he was given when meeting with his father.

(GW smelled the coffee at long last and found a pretext how to implement females to the chapters)

Always noobs or feminists who post these dumb topics about female sm. News flash! They are called sisters of battle.

Just like the Norovirus, this topic comes around at least once a year and results in explosive volumes of.... *ahem* posted.

Can we just skip the whole pretense and just get straight to the arguments of sexism in our modern society, gender stereotyping and people pretending to understand GW financial reports and sales strategy regarding plastic boobplate?

A discussion always full of fun and excitement. But not one suited for the 40k general.

Suffice to say I think my concern was expressed more eloquently than I could have: GW can't be trusted to design female space marines well, and they're frankly way behind on representing the actual gender parity that's present in their fluff.

 CadianGateTroll wrote:
Always noobs or feminists who post these dumb topics about female sm. News flash! They are called sisters of battle.

Dude, it's only 5 pages, we've been through this already.

 Wulfmar wrote:
Just like the Norovirus, this topic comes around at least once a year and results in explosive volumes of.... *ahem* posted.

Can we just skip the whole pretense and just get straight to the arguments of sexism in our modern society, gender stereotyping and people pretending to understand GW financial reports and sales strategy regarding plastic boobplate?

If the whole point of modeling boobplate is to get people to buy the models, GW is doing something wrong.

On the topic of getting our britches twisted because "secksizm" and "muh gender stereotypes," the more people say it disturbs them, the more I think it should stay because after all, Warhammer 40k should always be a dystopia.

Hawky wrote:I forsee that this is JUST ANOTHER troll thread. It has been discussed 10^9 times, with the same conclusion. There are no female space marines, and there will never be. Get over it.

Although, feel free to convert your SM army to be females if you want to look like a virgin manchild. Nothing holds you back...

HandofMars wrote:This bait is too obvious.

While whether this topic is intended as trollbait or not is up for debate (and I also reject the idea of female marines), the discussion around feminism and sexism within wargaming is something that needs discussed, albeit in a reasonable and calm way.

For example, arguments could be made about the hypermasculine nature of Space Marines and exclusion of female Marines being sexist. Being a 1980s creation, I have no doubt there was some entrenched gender politics going on, but let's calmly discuss it.

Now, there are different views of feminism and I personal consider myself a Liberal Feminist. However, from a radical feminist point of view, this is a clear case of women being excluded from the super awesome soldier group that are Space Marines, the posterboys of the universe, implications being as benign as "Women can't be part of the club" to as toxic as "Women can't be as good as men, especially these super men."

I can see the argument made and acknowledge the claim is not unfounded. However, quite easily changed by GW by shoehorning FeMarines into the setting. So why don't they?

Well, as I previously mentioned I don't disagree on the argument made, I disagree on the usefulness of changing the fluff so radically. In the end, Space Marines are, functionally, genderless, as they have no sexual or personal desires except to fight in battle. Either men or women can do this in 40k, as shown by Sisters of Battle. This is not to say that Sisters of Battle fill the niche that FeMarines would, because they don't, and to say they are in fact reinforces the argument, as shown by stats, fluff and level of GW and player support all being significantly inferior to Space Marines. All I am saying is that both male and female are capable of complete devotion to the cause at cost of chastity and personal desires.



Now, why then should we not bring in FeMarines, even as a modelling option to standard marine kits? Well, for one, there are two routes to go with the models:

1. Boobs. Boobs, Boobs, Boobs. More specifically boob-armour. Which in itself is sexist and personally found distasteful, as it needless sexualises the model by giving it boobs for aesthetics. Space Marine armour is not form-fitting, and changing the shape of it to make it clear that "THIS MODEL HAS BEWBS" is pointless and tacky. From a fluff perspective, it would also make the armour thinner, change the angle and shape and thus the deflective properties, and be totally unnecessary.

2. No Boobs. This means a Female Space Marine would wear the exact same armour as the male versions, with the same levels of protection, and look identical in every single way. The only change would be the helmetless heads. Even then, would a female Space Marine look different to a male? Maybe more rounded features to distinguish between? Haircut would not be needed. After all, what use does a Space Marine have for long hair? It gets in the way, is something for an enemy to grab hold of in combat. Would a female marine not simply shave or cut their hair short like males, as it serves no practical purpose in the theatre of war? In which case, what aesthetic differences would a female marine have to a male one, and would it be enough to warrant a whole new model line?


Now, the fluff would require complete overhaul. For 30 years, Astartes are singularly male, no exceptions. Various reasons exist with no real clear answer, however, it has been suggested that only males can go through the transformation as it works in concert with male puberty and the massive increase in testosterone that men gain. Women obviously do not get this amount, so if the process requires it, its a genetic blocker to them. Now, this depends on whether the Emperor designed the process to exclude females, or whether the process simply doesn't work with them. Intentional or side effect? At current, its a side effect. It's like how the Pill doesn't work on men for contraception, because they don't have the right biology for it.

Changing this would require a fluff overhaul on the scale of Necrons 5th Ed, and would be very costly to do. This may also irk some players, although why, I have no idea and don't condone this for obvious reasons.

Why not invent a method that allows them to become Astartes? Well, if the process doesn't work with females, why invest resources to turn women into Space Marines when it works well enough already? Its a plain waste of resources to fix a military issue that doesn't exist.






In summary, there is very little to justify the change in the models, as on a realistic spectrum, they should look identical. In the fluff, they would be functionally identical as well, and would require a massive and costly overhaul of fluff so some can feel justified in pointing to their models and saying "These are females and its canon." The plain old argument of cost vs benefit in the real world would be rediculously weighted against it. All that would change is your headcanon aboout your own models would then become canon.

Now, I would not be opposed to FeMarines entering the fluff if GW did so today. I would just rather they spent their budget on releasing new models, fluff and other stuff, as well as developing rules.

HandofMars wrote:
This bait is too obvious.

Yes.... and NO. I have two daughters age 10 and 7. I am trying to warp my 10 year old into some miniature gaming with "Old Dad." When we went into the FLGS she was amazed by the quality of models and the inventory but with WH40K the first thing she asked was "where are the girls at?" She bought a 28mm princess Leia and is painting that model right now.

That said... can there not be any bastion of male dominated anything anymore? If WH40K can't be a perverse, oppressive, bigoted, sexist, sadistic, xenophobic, not at all homophobic, nightmare and cruelty fueled wet dream... what can?

And BOOM.

Deadshot cuts to the chase, gives a succinct and well argued case (which I incidentally agree with).

Exalted.

 Grand.Master.Raziel wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 Genestealer Jesse wrote:

 Grand.Master.Raziel wrote:
I have a female friend who recently got into 40K when she spotted Codex: Space Wolves at GenCon last year. Though she geeked out at the army full of wolves, she was reported to have asked, "But where are the girls?" Granted, that is one anecdote, but it shows that this does happen.
.

OMG - Space Wolf Shield Maidens and Valkyries would be the most epic gak ever.

They don't even need to be Space Marines per se. Just cybernetical empowered humans. With the genocide of Fenris, the dire need of reinforcements the Space Wolves have, it can make sense.
And to be honest, anything that push the "Viking" more than the "Wolfy" is a good thing to me.

There is a precedent. Callidus Assassins are S4 T4 and are decidedly not Space Marines. So, there is other technology out there that can accomplish the same effect. You could maybe have power armored (or even carapace-armored) Shield Maidens who are S3 T3, then a Valkryie unit that is S4 T4, with the explanation being they undergo extensive bionic reconstruction.

Yeah, the Imperium Assasins have the technology to make super humans that aren't space marines. In many cases I'll say that your Callidus or Eversor assasin can without a problem kill a normal Space Marine in 1vs1. Some kind of Valkirie/Shieldmaiden to the Space Wolves don't need to be so powerfull, but its a precedent that you can have some kind of "Servant" to the Space Wolves, or "Auxiliar unit", without being Female Space Marines.



I agree that the models of the Sister Repentia don't do merit to the twisted reality of their fluff. But those models are a child of their time, the 80's. You can't judge that with our standarts of today. I expect that, when they relaunch SOB (Please do it GW ) They will give them a more aproppiate look with their fluff.

@Deadshot

I disagree with you on several points. Space Marines are clearly represented as men, vehiculate masculine values and stereotypes and have a rich emotional lives. They create strong relationships and express all the palets of human emotion like disgust, pride, stubborness and yes, even fear, but its more a fear of humiliation than aything else. Some Space Marines create strong bonds with each others or even with simple humans. Some, even, love as shown in the first three novels of the Horus Heresy and in the Salamander novels for example. You can totally imagine Space Marines as genderless warriors, but that's not ho they are portrayed in a lot of books, source material and art work. While their focus is on war, its not their sole concern. They are deeply religious and strongly tradtionnal. They question they role within the Imperium and their relationships with human on a frequent basis. Many have a taste for art, laws, science and engineering.

As for your arguments about modelling, they constitute an argument from incredulity since I can imagine numerous ways to represent women as Space Marines in an evident, yet non overly sexualised fashion (AKA no boob plate). I don't think any argument should be based on the efficiency of the design of the Space Marine armor to avoid going in pseudo-scientific explainations.

The same goes with the transformation of Space Marines. The New Marines are, potentially, created in a different, better fashion. No overhaul is needed in adding a new type of units. Centurion didn't massively altered the fluff of the Space Marines, neither were all their fliers. We aren't talking about retconning the fact that all Space Marines were male, but are meerly saying that, after 10 000 years, its now possible for women to become Space Marines. In such circomstances there is no retcon, only addition of new information that changes the future of the Adeptus Astartes, not its past. This makes your argument moot.

As for the reason why should such change occur, the answer to me is pretty simple and htere are two possible. One, the New Marine creating process is, by complete chance, working on women too. Two, its a deliberate change in order to make Space Marines better, by removing a non-excellence based criteria to become a Space Marines. If you want the best and brightest to become Space Marines, many of the best and brightest human beings are women. By this you naturally improve and widden your recruitment base and thus can recruit better aspirants. This is very useful when you are fighting for your survival.

The only reason I am opposed to women Space Marines is because I think GW will lack the proper inspiration to make them anything else, but tacky (or useless) and, if not, will fail to preserve the most interesting part of the Space Marine characterisation: their machismo and homoerotism. Could it be done well and preserve these aspects and add quality women Space Marines? Yes, but its difficult. For these reason, I don't think your arguments are very convincing. To me, half of them are non sequitur and the other half are arguments from incredulity and fallacious appeal to traditions.

PS: The Repentia model we have date back from 2003 when the Codex Witch Hunter was first published. The unit concept might date back from the Rogue Trader era, but not the models.

 Galas wrote:

 Grand.Master.Raziel wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 Genestealer Jesse wrote:

 Grand.Master.Raziel wrote:
I have a female friend who recently got into 40K when she spotted Codex: Space Wolves at GenCon last year. Though she geeked out at the army full of wolves, she was reported to have asked, "But where are the girls?" Granted, that is one anecdote, but it shows that this does happen.
.

OMG - Space Wolf Shield Maidens and Valkyries would be the most epic gak ever.

They don't even need to be Space Marines per se. Just cybernetical empowered humans. With the genocide of Fenris, the dire need of reinforcements the Space Wolves have, it can make sense.
And to be honest, anything that push the "Viking" more than the "Wolfy" is a good thing to me.

There is a precedent. Callidus Assassins are S4 T4 and are decidedly not Space Marines. So, there is other technology out there that can accomplish the same effect. You could maybe have power armored (or even carapace-armored) Shield Maidens who are S3 T3, then a Valkryie unit that is S4 T4, with the explanation being they undergo extensive bionic reconstruction.

Yeah, the Imperium Assasins have the technology to make super humans that aren't space marines. In many cases I'll say that your Callidus or Eversor assasin can without a problem kill a normal Space Marine in 1vs1. Some kind of Valkirie/Shieldmaiden to the Space Wolves don't need to be so powerfull, but its a precedent that you can have some kind of "Servant" to the Space Wolves, or "Auxiliar unit", without being Female Space Marines.

Spoiler:

the_scotsman wrote:
....Aight. This is getting silly. Screw a much later-dated piece of artwork showing arco-flagellants in gory detail, and let's look at the concept of Repentia from the original source - the models for them that were originally sculpted - for a second here.

There are three sculpts, it doesn't take that long.

Let's see, what do we expect if we're taking this concept seriously, i.e. following in line with Servitors and Arco-flagellants and other "dystopian horror" style units? Probably a bunch of emaciated, mutiliated outcasts already missing body parts, something like that?

What do we get? A bunch of perfect, voluptuous ladies whose black leather "armor" and robes just happens to include nearly exposed breasts and legs. 2/3 sculpts have their breasts barely concealed by a bit of metal, 1/3 was carefully constructed to show a some side-boob. And they've got a sergeant armed with whips and wearing a dominatrix mask.

Every prospective Sisters of Battle player is going to encounter them, and every one is going to get the intent of the joke. It's not subtle, guys. You can either decide it's not a big deal to you, or that maybe a you can find a different game/hobby, but denying that it exists is pretty freakin' dumb.

This unit was obviously intended to be a throwaway BDSM sex joke by the sculptor. Could they be redesigned into something inoffensive? Yeah, probably. But that'd require new models, which they haven't had for nearly 25 years. A piece of artwork shoved into a book somewhere showing them not as a sex joke is not going to cut it, because this is a miniature game, and those are the miniatures, right there.

Female marines? Ugh....I'm just so tired with the concept of the astartes in general now that I would just be irritated they're making yet more marine stuff. Sisters of battle are essentially the same concept, but slightly redesigned so that their rules aren't identical to astartes, which is fine, the game needs more differentiated unit archetypes and a T3 power armor army is more interesting than yet another marine statline army.

We're at the point where we can get all 9 space marine power armor marks, plus special boxes for space wolves dark angels grey knights and blood angels. Forgeworld sells 572 Dreadnought variations. Get GW to redesign Sisters as a decent plastic army, and leave one sculptor's awkward bdsm joke from 1990 behind, and redo the outdated basic infantry kits for the armies that are supposed to be equal opportunity, and you've pretty much fixed any problem that exists.

I agree that the models of the Sister Repentia don't do merit to the twisted reality of their fluff. But those models are a child of their time, the 80's. You can't judge that with our standarts of today. I expect that, when they relaunch SOB (Please do it GW ) They will give them a more aproppiate look with their fluff.

The Repentia are a child of the '80s, but I don't think this should be used as an excuse. In fact, I think this should be used as the stick and carrot both to encourage new Sisters models. The carrot "GW could have better gender representation and attract more female and feminist customers" and the stick being "You don't have enough female miniatures that aren't half-naked "

No because there are more marines in a single chapter than there are assassins of a single temple. Apply any logic you want, the current fluff won't get around it.

It's a complete rewrite or nothing.

 Quickjager wrote:
No because there are more marines in a single chapter than there are assassins of a single temple. Apply any logic you want, the current fluff won't get around it.

It's a complete rewrite or nothing.

If you are answering to my point, I think you need to re-read it, because that has nothing to do with what I said

epronovost wrote:
@Deadshot

I disagree with you on several points. Space Marines are clearly represented as men, vehiculate masculine values and stereotypes and have a rich emotional lives. They create strong relationships and express all the palets of human emotion like disgust, pride, stubborness and yes, even fear, but its more a fear of humiliation than aything else. Some Space Marines create strong bonds with each others or even with simple humans. Some, even, love as shown in the first three novels of the Horus Heresy and in the Salamander novels for example.

Are they represented as men? They use masculine pronouns, of course, and *were* males at birth. Post-Astartes implantation, they're eunuchs who use male pronouns. If I was reduced to just my head (so detached from my genetalia, torso, arms, legs etc etc) and I go by a male pronoun, am I a male? What about the inverse - a head which goes by female pronouns?

Also, I've read all three of the original Horus Heresy novels and didn't find any love (that is, beyond that of comradeship) present. Is that what you were implying, or something else?

You can totally imagine Space Marines as genderless warriors, but that's not ho they are portrayed in a lot of books, source material and art work. While their focus is on war, its not their sole concern. They are deeply religious and strongly tradtionnal. They question they role within the Imperium and their relationships with human on a frequent basis. Many have a taste for art, laws, science and engineering.

Absolutely so. How does that relate to their gender? I can be genderless and have taste in art/law/science/engineering. Alternatively, I can be genderfluid and have the same tastes.
Does my gender affect my tastes?

As for your arguments about modelling, they constitute an argument from incredulity since I can imagine numerous ways to represent women as Space Marines in an evident, yet non overly sexualised fashion (AKA no boob plate). I don't think any argument should be based on the efficiency of the design of the Space Marine armor to avoid going in pseudo-scientific explainations.

These examples being?
They would need the same strength as a current Astartes, or else they wouldn't be in the army. So their mass needs to be the same. They would most likely lack boobs anyway, due to having them removed. So, we're left with their faces, which may be obscured by helmets. Many could well be bald, and males could have long hair too - of course, they may need it short, due to it presenting a liability in melee combat. So, face shape? However, with all the drugs and implants, especially in their heads, who's to say that they would look different?

Essentially, there's a good chance that a female inducted into the Astartes would look identical.

The same goes with the transformation of Space Marines. The New Marines are, potentially, created in a different, better fashion. No overhaul is needed in adding a new type of units. Centurion didn't massively altered the fluff of the Space Marines, neither were all their fliers. We aren't talking about retconning the fact that all Space Marines were male, but are meerly saying that, after 10 000 years, its now possible for women to become Space Marines. In such circomstances there is no retcon, only addition of new information that changes the future of the Adeptus Astartes, not its past. This makes your argument moot.

Only in the NuMarines, I might add. If the NuMarines are capable of female recruits, I will not bat an eyelid. It would be a retcon if it were in the standard Astartes though.

As for the reason why should such change occur, the answer to me is pretty simple and htere are two possible. One, the New Marine creating process is, by complete chance, working on women too.

In which case, brilliant. No complaints from me.

Two, its a deliberate change in order to make Space Marines better, by removing a non-excellence based criteria to become a Space Marines. If you want the best and brightest to become Space Marines, many of the best and brightest human beings are women. By this you naturally improve and widden your recruitment base and thus can recruit better aspirants. This is very useful when you are fighting for your survival.

If you want the best and brightest to be Space Marines, then surely you would want an excellence based criteria? If it were possible that a female could be implanted, and if they passed all the same tests that a male applicant would, then there's no reason they shouldn't be applicable. If they accomplish the same mental and physical tasks, then so be it - induct them.
Your idea would widen then base, but not mean you could induct better applicants, because you still need them to be up to standard, and survive the implantation process.

The only reason they aren't considered is because we know that the standard gene-seed does not work for them.

The only reason I am opposed to women Space Marines is because I think GW will lack the proper inspiration to make them anything else, but tacky (or useless) and, if not, will fail to preserve the most interesting part of the Space Marine characterisation: their machismo and homoerotism.

Is that the essential reason? If it were just that, why keep it?

Could it be done well and preserve these aspects and add quality women Space Marines? Yes, but its difficult. For these reason, I don't think your arguments are very convincing. To me, half of them are non sequitur and the other half are arguments from incredulity and fallacious appeal to traditions.

And are my counterarguments similar?

 Deadshot wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 Grand.Master.Raziel wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 Genestealer Jesse wrote:

 Grand.Master.Raziel wrote:
I have a female friend who recently got into 40K when she spotted Codex: Space Wolves at GenCon last year. Though she geeked out at the army full of wolves, she was reported to have asked, "But where are the girls?" Granted, that is one anecdote, but it shows that this does happen.
.

OMG - Space Wolf Shield Maidens and Valkyries would be the most epic gak ever.

They don't even need to be Space Marines per se. Just cybernetical empowered humans. With the genocide of Fenris, the dire need of reinforcements the Space Wolves have, it can make sense.
And to be honest, anything that push the "Viking" more than the "Wolfy" is a good thing to me.

There is a precedent. Callidus Assassins are S4 T4 and are decidedly not Space Marines. So, there is other technology out there that can accomplish the same effect. You could maybe have power armored (or even carapace-armored) Shield Maidens who are S3 T3, then a Valkryie unit that is S4 T4, with the explanation being they undergo extensive bionic reconstruction.

Yeah, the Imperium Assasins have the technology to make super humans that aren't space marines. In many cases I'll say that your Callidus or Eversor assasin can without a problem kill a normal Space Marine in 1vs1. Some kind of Valkirie/Shieldmaiden to the Space Wolves don't need to be so powerfull, but its a precedent that you can have some kind of "Servant" to the Space Wolves, or "Auxiliar unit", without being Female Space Marines.

Spoiler:

the_scotsman wrote:
....Aight. This is getting silly. Screw a much later-dated piece of artwork showing arco-flagellants in gory detail, and let's look at the concept of Repentia from the original source - the models for them that were originally sculpted - for a second here.

There are three sculpts, it doesn't take that long.

Let's see, what do we expect if we're taking this concept seriously, i.e. following in line with Servitors and Arco-flagellants and other "dystopian horror" style units? Probably a bunch of emaciated, mutiliated outcasts already missing body parts, something like that?

What do we get? A bunch of perfect, voluptuous ladies whose black leather "armor" and robes just happens to include nearly exposed breasts and legs. 2/3 sculpts have their breasts barely concealed by a bit of metal, 1/3 was carefully constructed to show a some side-boob. And they've got a sergeant armed with whips and wearing a dominatrix mask.

Every prospective Sisters of Battle player is going to encounter them, and every one is going to get the intent of the joke. It's not subtle, guys. You can either decide it's not a big deal to you, or that maybe a you can find a different game/hobby, but denying that it exists is pretty freakin' dumb.

This unit was obviously intended to be a throwaway BDSM sex joke by the sculptor. Could they be redesigned into something inoffensive? Yeah, probably. But that'd require new models, which they haven't had for nearly 25 years. A piece of artwork shoved into a book somewhere showing them not as a sex joke is not going to cut it, because this is a miniature game, and those are the miniatures, right there.

Female marines? Ugh....I'm just so tired with the concept of the astartes in general now that I would just be irritated they're making yet more marine stuff. Sisters of battle are essentially the same concept, but slightly redesigned so that their rules aren't identical to astartes, which is fine, the game needs more differentiated unit archetypes and a T3 power armor army is more interesting than yet another marine statline army.

We're at the point where we can get all 9 space marine power armor marks, plus special boxes for space wolves dark angels grey knights and blood angels. Forgeworld sells 572 Dreadnought variations. Get GW to redesign Sisters as a decent plastic army, and leave one sculptor's awkward bdsm joke from 1990 behind, and redo the outdated basic infantry kits for the armies that are supposed to be equal opportunity, and you've pretty much fixed any problem that exists.

I agree that the models of the Sister Repentia don't do merit to the twisted reality of their fluff. But those models are a child of their time, the 80's. You can't judge that with our standarts of today. I expect that, when they relaunch SOB (Please do it GW ) They will give them a more aproppiate look with their fluff.

The Repentia are a child of the '80s, but I don't think this should be used as an excuse. In fact, I think this should be used as the stick and carrot both to encourage new Sisters models. The carrot "GW could have better gender representation and attract more female and feminist customers" and the stick being "You don't have enough female miniatures that aren't half-naked "

But again as has been shown changing your product for feminists from tumblr does not improve sales ever in fact it loses them.

They don't buy the products and won't even if you change them, its not a thing up for debate there are too many examples of toxic third wave feminism infiltrating and then destroying communities just look what they did to new atheism.

Honestly I wouldn't want a bigot coming into the place I play and start going on about how straight white guys are responsible for all evil in the world and then demand you let them win because your ancestor did something to their ancestor.

Feth that.

hobojebus wrote:


But again as has been shown changing your product for feminists from tumblr does not improve sales ever in fact it loses them.

They don't buy the products and won't even if you change them, its not a thing up for debate there are too many examples of toxic third wave feminism infiltrating and then destroying communities just look what they did to new atheism.

Honestly I wouldn't want a bigot coming into the place I play and start going on about how straight white guys are responsible for all evil in the world and then demand you let them win because your ancestor did something to their ancestor.

Feth that.

Count me in this camp. I think it's a great idea for GW's product line in general to be more inclusive and representative, for them to show some love to SoB, and even for them to "modernize" models like the Repentia to make them more tasteful. However, there is a very thin line for something like female Space marines; on one side there's simply more adolescent fap fuel, and on the other there's intentionally destroying thematic and textual elements of the setting for the sole purpose of turning 40k into a blunt political instrument. I don't want to attract people who want either of those things. Giving the latter group concessions only shows them you can be cowed into allowing them to police your thoughts and to use coercive, cult-like tactics to extort your compliance.

hobojebus wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 Grand.Master.Raziel wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 Genestealer Jesse wrote:

 Grand.Master.Raziel wrote:
I have a female friend who recently got into 40K when she spotted Codex: Space Wolves at GenCon last year. Though she geeked out at the army full of wolves, she was reported to have asked, "But where are the girls?" Granted, that is one anecdote, but it shows that this does happen.
.

OMG - Space Wolf Shield Maidens and Valkyries would be the most epic gak ever.

They don't even need to be Space Marines per se. Just cybernetical empowered humans. With the genocide of Fenris, the dire need of reinforcements the Space Wolves have, it can make sense.
And to be honest, anything that push the "Viking" more than the "Wolfy" is a good thing to me.

There is a precedent. Callidus Assassins are S4 T4 and are decidedly not Space Marines. So, there is other technology out there that can accomplish the same effect. You could maybe have power armored (or even carapace-armored) Shield Maidens who are S3 T3, then a Valkryie unit that is S4 T4, with the explanation being they undergo extensive bionic reconstruction.

Yeah, the Imperium Assasins have the technology to make super humans that aren't space marines. In many cases I'll say that your Callidus or Eversor assasin can without a problem kill a normal Space Marine in 1vs1. Some kind of Valkirie/Shieldmaiden to the Space Wolves don't need to be so powerfull, but its a precedent that you can have some kind of "Servant" to the Space Wolves, or "Auxiliar unit", without being Female Space Marines.

Spoiler:

the_scotsman wrote:
....Aight. This is getting silly. Screw a much later-dated piece of artwork showing arco-flagellants in gory detail, and let's look at the concept of Repentia from the original source - the models for them that were originally sculpted - for a second here.

There are three sculpts, it doesn't take that long.

Let's see, what do we expect if we're taking this concept seriously, i.e. following in line with Servitors and Arco-flagellants and other "dystopian horror" style units? Probably a bunch of emaciated, mutiliated outcasts already missing body parts, something like that?

What do we get? A bunch of perfect, voluptuous ladies whose black leather "armor" and robes just happens to include nearly exposed breasts and legs. 2/3 sculpts have their breasts barely concealed by a bit of metal, 1/3 was carefully constructed to show a some side-boob. And they've got a sergeant armed with whips and wearing a dominatrix mask.

Every prospective Sisters of Battle player is going to encounter them, and every one is going to get the intent of the joke. It's not subtle, guys. You can either decide it's not a big deal to you, or that maybe a you can find a different game/hobby, but denying that it exists is pretty freakin' dumb.

This unit was obviously intended to be a throwaway BDSM sex joke by the sculptor. Could they be redesigned into something inoffensive? Yeah, probably. But that'd require new models, which they haven't had for nearly 25 years. A piece of artwork shoved into a book somewhere showing them not as a sex joke is not going to cut it, because this is a miniature game, and those are the miniatures, right there.

Female marines? Ugh....I'm just so tired with the concept of the astartes in general now that I would just be irritated they're making yet more marine stuff. Sisters of battle are essentially the same concept, but slightly redesigned so that their rules aren't identical to astartes, which is fine, the game needs more differentiated unit archetypes and a T3 power armor army is more interesting than yet another marine statline army.

We're at the point where we can get all 9 space marine power armor marks, plus special boxes for space wolves dark angels grey knights and blood angels. Forgeworld sells 572 Dreadnought variations. Get GW to redesign Sisters as a decent plastic army, and leave one sculptor's awkward bdsm joke from 1990 behind, and redo the outdated basic infantry kits for the armies that are supposed to be equal opportunity, and you've pretty much fixed any problem that exists.

I agree that the models of the Sister Repentia don't do merit to the twisted reality of their fluff. But those models are a child of their time, the 80's. You can't judge that with our standarts of today. I expect that, when they relaunch SOB (Please do it GW ) They will give them a more aproppiate look with their fluff.

The Repentia are a child of the '80s, but I don't think this should be used as an excuse. In fact, I think this should be used as the stick and carrot both to encourage new Sisters models. The carrot "GW could have better gender representation and attract more female and feminist customers" and the stick being "You don't have enough female miniatures that aren't half-naked "

But again as has been shown changing your product for feminists from tumblr does not improve sales ever in fact it loses them.

They don't buy the products and won't even if you change them, its not a thing up for debate there are too many examples of toxic third wave feminism infiltrating and then destroying communities just look what they did to new atheism.

Honestly I wouldn't want a bigot coming into the place I play and start going on about how straight white guys are responsible for all evil in the world and then demand you let them win because your ancestor did something to their ancestor.

Feth that.

I think your issues go beyond the basics of whether or not there should and feasibly could be introduced into the setting. If you have an issue with feminism, feminists or females in the gaming clun that's your problem and doesn't belong in this discussion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Luciferian wrote:

hobojebus wrote:


But again as has been shown changing your product for feminists from tumblr does not improve sales ever in fact it loses them.

They don't buy the products and won't even if you change them, its not a thing up for debate there are too many examples of toxic third wave feminism infiltrating and then destroying communities just look what they did to new atheism.

Honestly I wouldn't want a bigot coming into the place I play and start going on about how straight white guys are responsible for all evil in the world and then demand you let them win because your ancestor did something to their ancestor.

Feth that.

Count me in this camp. I think it's a great idea for GW's product line in general to be more inclusive and representative, for them to show some love to SoB, and even for them to "modernize" models like the Repentia to make them more tasteful. However, there is a very thin line for something like female Space marines; on one side there's simply more adolescent fap fuel, and on the other there's intentionally destroying thematic and textual elements of the setting for the sole purpose of turning 40k into a blunt political instrument. I don't want to attract people who want either of those things. Giving the latter group concessions only shows them you can be cowed into allowing them to police your thoughts and to use coercive, cult-like tactics to extort your compliance.

Its called "demographics" and markets. If there's a vocal enough faction within the overall market asking for one thing, like FeMarines (copyrigjhting that) then why should GW not be permitted to produce them? If the rest of the market cares that muvh they can be as vocal. Let the business follow business. Its not cult tactics, its supply and demand.

Let's not mix terms i'm very specifically against 3rd wave feminism i am myself a 2nd wave femenist.

I'm against a very specific group not feminism in general.

I've got nothing against women nor do i have a problem playing games with them.

But again to point this out only 16% of american and 7% of uk women call themselves femenist, the vast majority of women do not support modern feminism either, because like me they know it's become a hate movement and has long since diverted away from equality.

But nice attempt at strawmanning.

 Deadshot wrote:



I think your issues go beyond the basics of whether or not there should and feasibly could be introduced into the setting. If you have an issue with feminism, feminists or females in the gaming clun that's your problem and doesn't belong in this discussion.

 Deadshot wrote:


Its called "demographics" and markets. If there's a vocal enough faction within the overall market asking for one thing, like FeMarines (copyrigjhting that) then why should GW not be permitted to produce them? If the rest of the market cares that muvh they can be as vocal. Let the business follow business. Its not cult tactics, its supply and demand.

Unfortunately I have to disagree with you. Not that anyone should be able to produce or buy whatever they want, but that such a demand for this specific thing exists in a profitable manner. Outside of an extremely vocal and extremely small minority who use coercion instead of purchasing power to achieve their goals, no one is really clamoring for female Space Marines, even the more "feminist" people in this thread. "Just because" isn't a compelling reason to seek something like that, but enforcing and policing political boundaries IS.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Are they represented as men? They use masculine pronouns, of course, and *were* males at birth. Post-Astartes implantation, they're eunuchs who use male pronouns. If I was reduced to just my head (so detached from my genetalia, torso, arms, legs etc etc) and I go by a male pronoun, am I a male? What about the inverse - a head which goes by female pronouns?

Also, I've read all three of the original Horus Heresy novels and didn't find any love (that is, beyond that of comradeship) present. Is that what you were implying, or something else?

Space Marines aren't masculine only by virtue of their phenotype, but they are masculine in the socio-cultural sense by modern Occidental standards. They are described and interract very much like stereotypical cisgendered males.

In the Horus Heresy novels and Salamanders novels, some relationships could be described as romantic, but never as sexual (Ka'dai and his apothecary is the biggest one as some within the chapter even Wonder if they were fully in love). You can have romance with someone without being sexualy attracted or consume this relationship. It's what we usualy refer as Platonic love, a deep sense of communion that goes beyond friendship, but never become fully sexual (though there might be a form of sexual tension). That's the form of relationship I was referring to as homoerotic love.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Absolutely so. How does that relate to their gender? I can be genderless and have taste in art/law/science/engineering. Alternatively, I can be genderfluid and have the same tastes.
Does my gender affect my tastes?

The argument you are refering to doesnt adress the gender of Space Marines but their vision as purely war machine which they are not. They are warriors yes, but they can be more.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

These examples being?
They would need the same strength as a current Astartes, or else they wouldn't be in the army. So their mass needs to be the same. They would most likely lack boobs anyway, due to having them removed. So, we're left with their faces, which may be obscured by helmets. Many could well be bald, and males could have long hair too - of course, they may need it short, due to it presenting a liability in melee combat. So, face shape? However, with all the drugs and implants, especially in their heads, who's to say that they would look different?

Essentially, there's a good chance that a female inducted into the Astartes would look identical.

Again, this is an argument of incredulity based on nothing very concrete. Space Marines look just like men. Some are beautiful, others, ugly as balls. AlI of them look muscular, but not built like weightlifters, more like martial artists or sport adepts. I don't see why it would be different for women Space Marines. They could and probably would look like highly athletic women. Who knows how and why the New Marine transformation affect the body of a women. Since its a work of fiction, we can find all sorts of justifictions for the chosen appearence of women Marines (which woud be based on peronnal preferences). For example, if I wanted them to look like bikini supermodels (not that's what I would do, I would model the after combat sport athlete), I could say that their muscle, while small, are superperformant and they stand almost a foot taller than Space Marine men due to how the new cocktail of hormones makes the growth spur of women stop at the same time than men. This makes them, much taller and leaner, but just as strong and heavy. That's just one example of many that make as much sense as yours. I could also declare that, in general, Space Marine women are a little bit weaker than their masculine counterpart, but they are nimbler and have sharper senses thus making them just as good on the battlefield. Bikini model Space Marine women make as much sense as ultra butch Space Marine Women provided there is an explanation behind those choices that can hold the water just as well as having fused rib-cage, but still being capable of breathing. Truth be told, if we are consistent, there is probably a wide variety of shape and size within the Space Marines, some are certainly much taller and stronger than others, while some are more quick, nimble and agile. If some Space Marines are pretty others are ugly. It would be the same for women.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

If you want the best and brightest to be Space Marines, then surely you would want an excellence based criteria? If it were possible that a female could be implanted, and if they passed all the same tests that a male applicant would, then there's no reason they shouldn't be applicable. If they accomplish the same mental and physical tasks, then so be it - induct them.
Your idea would widen then base, but not mean you could induct better applicants, because you still need them to be up to standard, and survive the implantation process.

The only reason they aren't considered is because we know that the standard gene-seed does not work for them.

There are three elements for a person to become a Space Marine as we speak. He must be a boy, he must be amongst the best and brightest on his planet, he must survive the implantation. If the best and brightest on your planet happens to be a girl, she will never be a Space Marines. If New Marines can be women, it reduces the quantity of non-excellence based requirements from 2 to 1. Its not hard to imagine that amongst the best and brightest teenager on a planet there will be a good quantity of women, hell in some places and time, it might be the majority of the best and brightest. Having a wider base with the same level of available spots allows you to better refine your recruits. The best 5 out of 200 are more probably, but not necessarly, better than best 5 out of 100.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Is that the essential reason? If it were just that, why keep it?

Because I consider it a definingtrait of the Space Marines, an important part of their characterisation and their most interesting aspect. Its what makes Space Marine more than simple power fantasy for young men in my opinion.

I only want my fething plastic Sisters of Battle GW! Greywaf, the Sisters of Silence and Saint Celestine and the Geminae are all beautifull models!

Let me give you my money GW! Why you don't want that?!

epronovost wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Are they represented as men? They use masculine pronouns, of course, and *were* males at birth. Post-Astartes implantation, they're eunuchs who use male pronouns. If I was reduced to just my head (so detached from my genetalia, torso, arms, legs etc etc) and I go by a male pronoun, am I a male? What about the inverse - a head which goes by female pronouns?

Also, I've read all three of the original Horus Heresy novels and didn't find any love (that is, beyond that of comradeship) present. Is that what you were implying, or something else?

Space Marines aren't masculine only by virtue of their phenotype, but they are masculine in the socio-cultural sense by modern Occidental standards. They are described and interract very much like stereotypical cisgendered males.

There we are. You're applying modern values and expectations to a setting that's more in common with the middle ages than our own.

Not to mention that you're using a stereotype of modern times to justify something thousands of years in the future.
Not quite what I'd call evidence.

In the Horus Heresy novels and Salamanders novels, some relationships could be described as romantic, but never as sexual (Ka'dai and his apothecary is the biggest one as some within the chapter even Wonder if they were fully in love). You can have romance with someone without being sexualy attracted or consume this relationship. It's what we usualy refer as Platonic love, a deep sense of communion that goes beyond friendship, but never become fully sexual (though there might be a form of sexual tension). That's the form of relationship I was referring to as homoerotic love.

Which Horus Heresy relationship (barring the Primarchs, because they're a whole other beast) could be deemed as romantic? I can only think of ones in very deep respect, which I wouldn't class as "love", homoerotic or otherwise. Hell, the suffix -erotic implies sexual alone.

You can also have a very strong friendship and not call it love.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Absolutely so. How does that relate to their gender? I can be genderless and have taste in art/law/science/engineering. Alternatively, I can be genderfluid and have the same tastes.
Does my gender affect my tastes?

The argument you are refering to doesnt adress the gender of Space Marines but their vision as purely war machine which they are not. They are warriors yes, but they can be more.

I absolutely agree that they're not 100% war machine, but their purpose, their intended goal, is as that. What they do in their off-time, as laid out by the 4th (?) edition Codex, is up to them, but if that interferes in their primary goal, then they're not a very good Space Marine, are they?

It's like being a builder nowadays, but you get distracted from your work birdwatching. Your job, your primary purpose in your society, is as a builder, but you can still birdwatch in your spare time.

Still - this has no bearing on gender. Still, as long as we agree that one's tastes are not defined by gender.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

These examples being?
They would need the same strength as a current Astartes, or else they wouldn't be in the army. So their mass needs to be the same. They would most likely lack boobs anyway, due to having them removed. So, we're left with their faces, which may be obscured by helmets. Many could well be bald, and males could have long hair too - of course, they may need it short, due to it presenting a liability in melee combat. So, face shape? However, with all the drugs and implants, especially in their heads, who's to say that they would look different?

Essentially, there's a good chance that a female inducted into the Astartes would look identical.

Again, this is an argument of incredulity based on nothing very concrete. Space Marines look just like men. Some are beautiful, others, ugly as balls. AlI of them look muscular, but not built like weightlifters, more like martial artists or sport adepts. I don't see why it would be different for women Space Marines. They could and probably would look like highly athletic women.

With the amount of drugs they'd be pumped up with? All of them look like bodybuilders - no graces, just sheer muscle. There's pictures that support that notion - it's not "based on nothing concrete". It's canon. That's what a Space Marines looks like not because he's male, but because of the sheer testosterone in his system. If you're insinuating otherwise, could you show me a picture of a Space Marine out of armour who doesn't look like a weightlifter? I see them looking far more like Hafthor Bjornsson than Bruce Lee.

Who knows how and why the New Marine transformation affect the body of a women. Since its a work of fiction, we can find all sorts of justifictions for the chosen appearence of women Marines (which woud be based on peronnal preferences). For example, if I wanted them to look like bikini supermodels (not that's what I would do, I would model the after combat sport athlete), I could say that their muscle, while small, are superperformant and they stand almost a foot taller than Space Marine men due to how the new cocktail of hormones makes the growth spur of women stop at the same time than men. This makes them, much taller and leaner, but just as strong and heavy. That's just one example of many that make as much sense as yours.

But why limit that to women? Why aren't mens' muscles superperformant too then? Why can't men look identical?

Why is having a difference between men and women an issue that you wish to distinguish? They're both superhumans hopped up on god knows how many drugs and hormones - why would they look any different?

Why don't you think women shouldn't look like massive bodybuilders, like the normal marines look like?

I could also declare that, in general, Space Marine women are a little bit weaker than their masculine counterpart, but they are nimbler and have sharper senses thus making them just as good on the battlefield.

If they're weaker, then why are they accepted in? If they can't match the basic standard of a Space Marine, then they're not up to snuff. They'd make a brilliant SoB or Guardwoman though.

What about male marines who are a little bit weaker but nimbler than their brethren? Are they still inducted, despite not meeting the requirement? Is there a different standard for gender? Why?

Bikini model Space Marine women make as much sense as ultra butch Space Marine Women provided there is an explanation behind those choices that can hold the water just as well as having fused rib-cage, but still being capable of breathing. Truth be told, if we are consistent, there is probably a wide variety of shape and size within the Space Marines, some are certainly much taller and stronger than others, while some are more quick, nimble and agile. If some Space Marines are pretty others are ugly. It would be the same for women.

Yes, but all Space Marines look "ultra-butch". Seriously, find one that doesn't. Just one Marine who doesn't look like a bodybuilder. Of course there's variety, but not an entirely new build.

There's my reasoning for FeMarines looking like bodybuilders - because ALL Space Marines do.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

If you want the best and brightest to be Space Marines, then surely you would want an excellence based criteria? If it were possible that a female could be implanted, and if they passed all the same tests that a male applicant would, then there's no reason they shouldn't be applicable. If they accomplish the same mental and physical tasks, then so be it - induct them.
Your idea would widen then base, but not mean you could induct better applicants, because you still need them to be up to standard, and survive the implantation process.

The only reason they aren't considered is because we know that the standard gene-seed does not work for them.

There are three elements for a person to become a Space Marine as we speak. He must be a boy, he must be amongst the best and brightest on his planet, he must survive the implantation. If the best and brightest on your planet happens to be a girl, she will never be a Space Marines. If New Marines can be women, it reduces the quantity of non-excellence based requirements from 2 to 1. Its not hard to imagine that amongst the best and brightest teenager on a planet there will be a good quantity of women, hell in some places and time, it might be the majority of the best and brightest. Having a wider base with the same level of available spots allows you to better refine your recruits. The best 5 out of 200 are more probably, but not necessarly, better than best 5 out of 100.

Absolutely - so long as the quality of the "brightest and best" doesn't change. Female recruits need to jump through the same hoops as anyone else to be a Space Marines. That's my whole point.

There is only two elements - being the best, and surviving. Because with the normal Space Marines, it was impossible for the woman to survive, they simply couldn't proceed. Now, if the NuMarine procedure is the same, but allows for females, then the net hasn't changed - it's just that women can now actually survive, and have a chance at the same goal as men.

The standards shouldn't/haven't changed.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Is that the essential reason? If it were just that, why keep it?

Because I consider it a definingtrait of the Space Marines, an important part of their characterisation and their most interesting aspect. Its what makes Space Marine more than simple power fantasy for young men in my opinion.

I see it differently, but they're both opinions and both valid. Suffice to say, I believe that cancels both points to be moot for this discussion.

To the best of my knowledge, the line “all Marines must be male” first appeared in an article in a very early White Dwarf and was reprinted in the Warhammer 40,000 Compendium, circa 1989. Parts of that article were reprinted again in White Dwarf #249.

hasn't changed.

This is obviously a topic on which no one has a strong opinion.

Seriously, though, while I empathize with 3rd wave feminism, I also wonder: is this a thing? Is there pressure coming to add women space marines?

 Popsghostly wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 Genestealer Jesse wrote:

 Grand.Master.Raziel wrote:
I have a female friend who recently got into 40K when she spotted Codex: Space Wolves at GenCon last year. Though she geeked out at the army full of wolves, she was reported to have asked, "But where are the girls?" Granted, that is one anecdote, but it shows that this does happen.
.

OMG - Space Wolf Shield Maidens and Valkyries would be the most epic gak ever.

They don't even need to be Space Marines per se. Just cybernetical empowered humans. With the genocide of Fenris, the dire need of reinforcements the Space Wolves have, it can make sense.
And to be honest, anything that push the "Viking" more than the "Wolfy" is a good thing to me.

I totally agree here. Less wolf, more Viking= better.

Think we need plastic sisters before we get female space marines.

Space Wolf Shield Maidens would go downhill every bit as fast as bikini power armour, especially with characters like Lukas Strifeson in the Wolves' ranks.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
There we are. You're applying modern values and expectations to a setting that's more in common with the middle ages than our own.

Not to mention that you're using a stereotype of modern times to justify something thousands of years in the future.
Not quite what I'd call evidence.

Space Marines are a modern creation by modern men for consomption by modern persons as entertainment. They aren't a social thought experiment on gender stereotype in the far future. They are the exact opposite. They are the product of our vision of what a perfect monastic soldier should be and look like in a science fanstasy setting. Its a typical power fantasy. There is no denying it. Space marine are strongly gendered and explicitly so. Nobody ask the question are Space Marine men or women? Do they behave like men or women? We have a very clear answer to both those question. From an inside perspective, you are right, we don't know how they perceive themselves sexualy speaking, but that's a non sequitur. Since they are imaginary, their only real identity is the one we ascribe to them.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

You can also have a very strong friendship and not call it love.

You can also have a very stong friendship and call it love. Both are just as likely and possible depending on your interpretation of some cues, inuendo and events.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

I absolutely agree that they're not 100% war machine, but their purpose, their intended goal, is as that. What they do in their off-time, as laid out by the 4th (?) edition Codex, is up to them, but if that interferes in their primary goal, then they're not a very good Space Marine, are they?

It's like being a builder nowadays, but you get distracted from your work birdwatching. Your job, your primary purpose in your society, is as a builder, but you can still birdwatch in your spare time.

Still - this has no bearing on gender. Still, as long as we agree that one's tastes are not defined by gender.

I completly agree on that. The concept presented by deadshot was that of Space Marines without gender and solely war machines. Space Marines are men and are more than simple war machine (even if its their primary function). My mention of their hobbies and passion was to prove that they were more than machine, not that they were men. They are men due to their apperance, values and behaviors, not because of their hobbies.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

With the amount of drugs they'd be pumped up with? All of them look like bodybuilders - no graces, just sheer muscle. There's pictures that support that notion - it's not "based on nothing concrete". It's canon. That's what a Space Marines looks like not because he's male, but because of the sheer testosterone in his system. If you're insinuating otherwise, could you show me a picture of a Space Marine out of armour who doesn't look like a weightlifter? I see them looking far more like Hafthor Bjornsson than Bruce Lee.

Most images in my opinion, especially those of scouts (who are the most useful since its easier to see their mensuration) makes them look more like Heavy or Welterweight boxers or martial artists. Several of those at the bottom of this entry on Wikia are good example of this. Note the two Raven Guards with the snipers, the Space Wolf and the Imperial Fist at the top. They are too slim to be proper bodybuilder and to lean and tall to be good weightlifters, but have the proper appearence to be tough soldiers. I can easily imagine a tough women with similar mensuration and she would still look feminine.

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Scout_Marines

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Why is having a difference between men and women an issue that you wish to distinguish? They're both superhumans hopped up on god knows how many drugs and hormones - why would they look any different?

Why don't you think women shouldn't look like massive bodybuilders, like the normal marines look like?

Why don't you want them to be different? Does the idea of a women super soldier, stronger than any men displeases you particularly?

I already mention why its interesting to a have Space Marine women, because they bring a greater aesthetic diversity. I like to see men and women in a model army because they bring a bit of variety and a slight touch of originality to the hole.

Since I personnaly think that Marines aren't forced to look like bodybuilders (even if some will look like so) i think this question answers itself. Since God knows how many drugs and hormones are pumped into them, we don't know how they would look like either. They could remain very feminine for all we know since, even amongst women bodybuilders, many still look feminine. It could even make them look even more feminine for all we know.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

If they're weaker, then why are they accepted in? If they can't match the basic standard of a Space Marine, then they're not up to snuff. They'd make a brilliant SoB or Guardwoman though.

What about male marines who are a little bit weaker but nimbler than their brethren? Are they still inducted, despite not meeting the requirement? Is there a different standard for gender? Why?

Weaker in terms of physical might doesn't mean worse in combat in general. Strength is one of the many, many factor that makes a good solider and in a form of warfare mostly done at range with guns and canons, it's not even a vital one either. There is already weaker, but nimbler marines. Abbadon was much stronger than Loken who was himself stronger than Lucius who happens to be better swordsmen than both of them becasue he's more nimble and agile. Its the same thing for all of them. Why would you think the requirements to become a Space Marine involve strength test? Why would it be the only test or the most important one? If so, girls will outperform boys on average since between the age of 10 and 14 years old (the prime age of recruitment for Space Marines), girls are taller, heavier and stronger than boys on average. The situation reverse itself around the age of 16-18 years old, but at that point, Marines are already on the battlefield serving in Scout units. Nowhere do I mention that women would have different test than men, simply that most of them might be in the lower tier within their chapter in terms of physical strength, but that this apparent weakness can be compensated by other qualities much like Space Marine men who are in the same situation.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Yes, but all Space Marines look "ultra-butch". Seriously, find one that doesn't. Just one Marine who doesn't look like a bodybuilder. Of course there's variety, but not an entirely new build.

There's my reasoning for FeMarines looking like bodybuilders - because ALL Space Marines do.

There's my reasoning, Space Marines women would look like women because women bodybuilder, Heavyweight and Welterweight boxers, or even soldier women look like women not like men at all. The difference in term of aesthetic is obvious. Even if I was to admit all Space Marines look like bodybuilders (I think they look like strong soldiers, but not like bodybuilders), your argument for them being identical to men to point where the difference is moot is a bit strange. Plus, considering that we are talking about changing the apperance of (some) Space Marines saying that they all look the same, thus should keep on looking the same is a fallacious appeal to tradition. It doesn't make any sense for them to look the same if we make them different. If you take all that I have said and the fact that I think I have found Space Marines who don't look like bodybuilders, you should see why I am supporting such a vision.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Absolutely - so long as the quality of the "brightest and best" doesn't change. Female recruits need to jump through the same hoops as anyone else to be a Space Marines. That's my whole point.

There is only two elements - being the best, and surviving. Because with the normal Space Marines, it was impossible for the woman to survive, they simply couldn't proceed. Now, if the NuMarine procedure is the same, but allows for females, then the net hasn't changed - it's just that women can now actually survive, and have a chance at the same goal as men.

The standards shouldn't/haven't changed.

indeed, I never said the standards would need to change (they are probably different from Chapter to Chapter anyway). I am simply stating the obvious. The best and brightest teenagers of a planet will count amongst them a plurality of girls, sometime a minority at certain time and space, sometime a majority. Right now, the very best potential warrior in the galaxy might be a girl, as such, the very best warrior might not be able to become a Space Marine. If the New Marine can be women, than, there is no reason why the very best potential warriors in the galaxy couldn't be Space Marines. That's the crux of my argument and I think we both agree on that.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

I see it differently, but they're both opinions and both valid. Suffice to say, I believe that cancels both points to be moot for this discussion.

I'm perfectly fine with that! I would also like to know what you think is the most interesting thing about Space Marines in terms of character if you don't mind sharing (potentialy by PM as to not derail the thread).