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.

strepp wrote:

 His Master's Voice wrote:

strepp wrote:
More on topic (and IMO), GW could entice more women gamers by toning down the sexualization of their (limited) female line. My wife saw a Lelith Hexperax model I had painted, rolled her eyes at me and asked why anyone goes into war in a bikini.

Thanks, but no, thanks. I like my Lilith the way she is. Next thing we know they'll come for Slaanesh.

As Kawauso eloquently put it above, there is absolutely room for characters like Lilith (although according to my significant other, just not where anyone else can see ). No one is calling for a knee-jerk removal of models like this from the setting, but instead to supplement the other side of it. I have a Harlequin army, and I really like that there's the opportunity to make 50% of your troupe female. They're bringing this in in other lines (Stormcasts), and I'm confident they'll be able to eventually reach parity, but in the meantime, a disproportionate number of sexualized models will run the risk of steering away prospective players.

Albino Squirrel, it would be illegal to refuse someone a job based on how they look (race, hair colour, etc.) - you're just as protected from one as the other. Just consider that no one is on the receiving end of a stop-and-frisk because of their hair colour.

In Canada, maybe. In the US I'm not aware of any law that says I can't discriminate in hiring based on looks. Maybe there are such laws in other places. Is that why people in British TV shows are so unattractive?

 Galas wrote:
One of the best ways to gain more Female gamers is banning stinky gamers from their stores. Extra points if they are stinky and give strange and horny looks at every female that enter the store. BOOM. Like 300% more female gamers.

This is a point I was trying to make but was attempting a more subtle approach.

I've seen female staff (in training) in the last couple of GW/Warhammer stores I've been in

which is another major way they can encourage female gamers, it not only puts a female role model in store it (hopefully) cuts down on the worst of the male gamer clique behaviour

 Galas wrote:
The problem is not female sexualization.
The problem is that we don't have enough male sexualization!

Female sexualization would also be less of an issue if we had more (read: any) non-sexualised options.

It seems you don't have anything left to contribute to the conversation, Albino Squirrel; if you're going to be somewhat inflammatory it should probably remain on-topic, at least?

strepp wrote:
I have a Harlequin army, and I really like that there's the opportunity to make 50% of your troupe female. They're bringing this in in other lines (Stormcasts), and I'm confident they'll be able to eventually reach parity, but in the meantime, a disproportionate number of sexualized models will run the risk of steering away prospective players.

Absolutely.

I think they nailed it with the Dark Eldar revamp - IIRC, the Kabalite Warriors kit is a 6/4 male/female split and the Wyches are 6/4 female/male. The rest of the range I believe is similarly balanced.

I find it a little disheartening that this didn't indicate a trend going forward and kits like the Harlies remain something of an exception. But I think they are on the right track.

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
I've seen female staff (in training) in the last couple of GW/Warhammer stores I've been in

which is another major way they can encourage female gamers, it not only puts a female role model in store it (hopefully) cuts down on the worst of the male gamer clique behaviour

I don't have any local GW to frequent, sadly, but I've heard a number of anecdotes that seem to indicate this is a general trend. I certainly think you're right, as well, as far as the potential something like that has for positive impact on an LGS' local culture.

 Ashiraya wrote:

Female sexualization would also be less of an issue if we had more (read: any) non-sexualised options.

I think for the most part we're all on the same page where this is concerned, which is encouraging.

strepp wrote:

I'm calling BS on you.

If you really think having red hair equates to being bisexual or black in the United States, you really need to educate yourself on the current social issues facing our part of the world, ie. no one is refusing you rights because of your hair colour.

As an adult, sure. I mean, I can't donate sperm and signing up for online dating is useless, but as far as societal prejudices go, that's not that bad. As a kid though...

In response to some of your previous comments in this thread, it's fallacious to compare "Tumblr feminism", as you so put it, to the movement of the celestial bodies as both "useful theories".

It isn't fallacious. I was drawing a comparison between scientific theories which predict outcomes and less scientific theories which simply attempt to explain how the world works. Tumblr feminism, when it bothers to try to predict something, fails repeatedly, spectacularly, and publicly. That's where I draw the line of validity. If something seems right but fails to answer new questions, it is not right. And if it is not right, it is worth pointing out whenever someone tries to say that it is.

Wonder Woman inspired a whole bunch of girls that they aren't exempt from being superheroes by virtue of their gender - ask any kid wearing Wonder Woman apparel why they like her.

There are no shortages of positive female role models and DEFINITELY not shortages of female superheroes. I won't, but I could, name a few hundred female super heroes that are just as popular and well known as their male counterparts. If any girl thinks they can't become a superhero because they are a girl, the simple truth is, they can't become a superhero because they are stupid.

Media has portrayed polarized the sexes for the longest time, with men as the heroes and women as those in distress, and it's frankly nice to see a movie where the sex/gender of the characters doesn't matter to the storyline. The idolization vs. objectification nicely contrasts the underlying problem, and dismissing it as "Tumblr feminism" shows your ignorance on the topic.

You know, I just saw an article the other day saying how awesome Star Trek Discovery was because it was the first Star Trek with a black lead... which makes me wonder if the author of the article had ever heard of Deep Space Nine. Probably not. Because the people who proclaim, loudly and often, that media is sexist tend to be pretty darn ignorant of the media they are criticizing. Maybe it isn't ignorance (it is). Maybe they are just being selective about what they choose to draw attention to in order to underscore their point and make them seem like the saviors of women everywhere. But it is probably ignorance. And I just can't help but wonder who is really polarizing the sexes right now...

Of course, all of this could and probably should be continued in PM rather than airing dirty political laundry out in the open.

I, for one, and fething sick of all these discussion about boob armor and how GW isn't attracting womens or how guys are creepy and stinky - all these discussions are just pure bs, but they tend to get closed before any closure is drawn on the matter. As such, these comments - these ignorant, stupid comments with no basis in reality - keep popping up. Over and over and over again. You can't just have the last word and then move the discussion private or close the thread. This is a discussion about how GW can draw an audience with more women, and I think not having to read about sexist boob armor is every time the Sisters of Battle are brought up is a good start.

More on topic (and IMO), GW could entice more women gamers by toning down the sexualization of their (limited) female line. My wife saw a Lelith Hexperax model I had painted, rolled her eyes at me and asked why anyone goes into war in a bikini. I told her about the background of the character and why she might be so scantily clad, but her immediate reaction was of distaste. Having a model range like that will cause people to immediately form opinions of both the company producing the models and the people buying them, which goes a very long way to keeping them away from the hobby. Add in that the community and shops are male-dominated (or as others in this thread have put it, "Oh my god is that a real girl?!"), and it further drives women away.

All bs. Women don't care if a model is scantily clad. Men care, on behalf of women. Your wife may have rolled her eyes, but I'll bet that was the end of it for her. An eye roll and she moved on. Not you though. No, you've decided to read oppression into that eye roll and declare anything that could elicit an eye roll to be an affront to humanity. Take your wife's initiative. Roll your eyes and move on.

Children children, Nobody exists on purpose, no body belongs anywhere, and we're all gonna die. Come back to the topic at hand?

At any moment I have said that "guys" in general are creepy and stinky. But guys like that exist, they are real, and they are pretty disgusting (And to clarify, womens like those exist too, but they normally don't go to wargaming clubs) . So please Sqorgar stop calling BS at everything you disagree with and then make a strawman of other peoples arguments. But to be honest it appears you are taking this discussion a bit too personal and too serious, so maybe the one that should roll eyes and move on... is you?

 Ashiraya wrote:

Female sexualization would also be less of an issue if we had more (read: any) non-sexualised options.

Please. You don't see guys going around complaining about all the shirtless barbarians and their glorious pectoral muscles, and praising Infinity's fat Yuan-Yuan figure for its inclusive representation of mass-wealthy masculinity. These are idealized bodies here, and it is okay to want them to be attractive, even on a battlefield.

The problem with "sexualized" models is that people start to think they exist only to be sexualized. That they are dirty little playthings for dirty little boys. So you can create sexualized models so long as something about them represents a bit of internal integrity - some reason for the sexualization to exist in addition to titillation. If a woman can look at a sexy model and see it as a character, it doesn't matter that it is sexy. We just have to avoid models that look like little more than blow up dolls. And even that is okay sometimes. I too often see people take something that does have integrity and purposely try to undermine it in order to revert it to a blow up doll simply because, in their diseased minds, sexuality is a sin and thus anything which is vaguely sexual must be as well.

I've seen people advocating for female models which are not discernibly female. What's the fething point then? Why make the extra work for modellers, extra SKUs to buy, and extra figures to argue about if there is no visible, practical, or functional different between them? And if you do make a model visibly female, where is the line where it becomes "sexualized"? Is it how they pose, with their sexy buttock poking out, wearing high heels on the battlefield, or wearing impractical, decorative armor designed to enhance the fact that they are female? Is the line literally "this model makes me feel a little funny downstairs" or is there an objective point somewhere between "vaguely of the female gender" and "blow up doll" that the model's design must cross for it to be considered a verboten design choice?

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Kawauso wrote:

When people can look to a game they play and see examples of people like themselves in it, it's a very welcoming and encouraging feeling. It's nice to be acknowledged and affirmed, and it's the sort of thing that's difficult to understand for anyone who is used to seeing themselves represented nearly 100% of the time in the media they consume.

I'm going to call bs on this. I don't think anybody is looking at Warhammer 40k and thinking, wow, I really identify with these ten foot tall space soldiers with extra internal organs in peak physical condition fighting heresy and xenophobic threats under an oppressive and dogmatic galactic hegemony because I too am a white man.

People are made up of more than just their skin color and dangly bits between their legs. Like, if that's how you interpret and identify with the world at large, you've got serious issues of empathy and understanding for your fellow man, and you might as well be playing pretend at being human.

This last part makes you an idiot, Sqorgar. Don't deny someone else's experience. Someone literally just told you representation is important to them (and someone upthread, too) then you "call bs" on it. I'm so pleased you are here to let everyone know how they're allowed to feel. That you don't understand the point being made and the topic at hand proves you should refrain from commenting on it.

 Galas wrote:
At any moment I have said that "guys" in general are creepy and stinky. But guys like that exist, they are real, and they are pretty disgusting (And to clarify, womens like those exist too, but they normally don't go to wargaming clubs) . So please Sqorgar stop calling BS at everything you disagree with and then make a strawman of other peoples arguments. But to be honest it appears you are taking this discussion a bit too personal and too serious, so maybe the one that should roll eyes and move on... is you?

I am not originally from the wargaming scene. I came from video games. And I've seen these unfounded declarations of sexism and racism destroy the hobby I love and the community I used to belong to. I'm a social justice refugee. I came here to get away from this white knighting and moral oppression.

I've seen friends labeled as sexists, racists, misogynists, white supremacists, and even nazis just for liking a particular video game and I've seen people threaten them and promise to punch them, even stalk them at conventions. This kind of moral grandstanding may seem like it is being done for the greater good (for the greater good), but all it is doing is giving people excuses to treat one another like crap - and given social media the excuse to silence, belittle, harass, and even spy on people with opinions they find disagreeable. These people are so full of themselves that they can ruin a stranger's life over nothing and still fail to have a "are we the baddies?" moment.

This movement has destroyed video games, comic books, science fiction novels, social media, atheism, and a lot of other things that I used to enjoy (seriously, look it up if you don't believe me), and yeah, maybe when I see the seeds of stupidity start to grow in wargaming, I'm a little wary. If people want to try to shame me for liking battlefield bikinis, then I see no problem with shaming them for the ignorance of their supposed good intentions.

Maybe you could take all your views back to subreddits instead of baiting on Dakka?

Well, I have saw this kind of rethoric from years now. "They are destroying everything!" but to be honest I have never encountered this personally, and when I have encounter it, is normally people that from both sides just like to fight, in a marginal number, and very easy to avoid. But we are from different countries, probably thats affect the perception.

I have seen many, many places of healthy comunication and even discussion about all those hobbys you have mentioned. But well, I'm not here to negate your experience and call it BS, I fell sorry for you in regard that you have lost many of your hobbys.

 Sqorgar wrote:

The problem with "sexualized" models is that people start to think they exist only to be sexualized. That they are dirty little playthings for dirty little boys. So you can create sexualized models so long as something about them represents a bit of internal integrity - some reason for the sexualization to exist in addition to titillation. If a woman can look at a sexy model and see it as a character, it doesn't matter that it is sexy. We just have to avoid models that look like little more than blow up dolls.

This was exactly the point I was making when you accused me of "Tumlr feminism"; there was no white knighting, no moral oppression, just pointing out that "hey, if you want to get more women in gaming, maybe dial-down the toxic over-sexualisation and have a more balanced / justified model line".

So stop acting like the victim.

Edit; not that I think GW has a massive problem here, compared to some other areas of the media, but they definitely have significant room for improvement.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Kawauso wrote:

When people can look to a game they play and see examples of people like themselves in it, it's a very welcoming and encouraging feeling. It's nice to be acknowledged and affirmed, and it's the sort of thing that's difficult to understand for anyone who is used to seeing themselves represented nearly 100% of the time in the media they consume.

I'm going to call bs on this. I don't think anybody is looking at Warhammer 40k and thinking, wow, I really identify with these ten foot tall space soldiers with extra internal organs in peak physical condition fighting heresy and xenophobic threats under an oppressive and dogmatic galactic hegemony because I too am a white man.

People are made up of more than just their skin color and dangly bits between their legs. Like, if that's how you interpret and identify with the world at large, you've got serious issues of empathy and understanding for your fellow man, and you might as well be playing pretend at being human.

This last part makes you an idiot, Sqorgar. Don't deny someone else's experience. Someone literally just told you representation is important to them (and someone upthread, too) then you "call bs" on it. I'm so pleased you are here to let everyone know how they're allowed to feel. That you don't understand the point being made and the topic at hand proves you should refrain from commenting on it.

I didn't deny their experience. I have no doubt that some people are extrinsically motivated and need constant reaffirmation to bolster their self esteem. I'm calling bs on the idea that anybody sees themselves represented 100% of the time and that they can't understand being an outsider.

I'm an overweight, balding 40 year old programmer with two children. Do you think I identify with any part of being a space marine? Like even a little. No, of course not. What about Wonder Woman? Did I enjoy that movie because the idea of being a female superhero deeply resonated with me? Nope. Because identification with the material is not fundamental to enjoying it. I hate how people act like representation means anything. It doesn't. What it does is signal to specific blocs of people that the game is designed for them - which is fine, but it isn't a fething moral imperative. And I'd argue that it doesn't make a whole lot of difference when it comes down to it. Ghostbusters 2016 signals woman power loud and clear, but pretty much everyone (male and female) avoided that movie like the plague because those signals were literally all it had going for it.

Look at the male fandom surrounding My Little Pony. MLP does nothing to indicate that 20 year old men would or should enjoy it, and yet they do. Maybe a little too much. Maybe sometimes in wrong and improper ways. But it doesn't have to go erecting signposts saying "Look at me, I'm just like you" to get attention.

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Galas wrote:
At any moment I have said that "guys" in general are creepy and stinky. But guys like that exist, they are real, and they are pretty disgusting (And to clarify, womens like those exist too, but they normally don't go to wargaming clubs) . So please Sqorgar stop calling BS at everything you disagree with and then make a strawman of other peoples arguments. But to be honest it appears you are taking this discussion a bit too personal and too serious, so maybe the one that should roll eyes and move on... is you?

I am not originally from the wargaming scene. I came from video games. And I've seen these unfounded declarations of sexism and racism destroy the hobby I love and the community I used to belong to. I'm a social justice refugee. I came here to get away from this white knighting and moral oppression.

I've seen friends labeled as sexists, racists, misogynists, white supremacists, and even nazis just for liking a particular video game and I've seen people threaten them and promise to punch them, even stalk them at conventions. This kind of moral grandstanding may seem like it is being done for the greater good (for the greater good), but all it is doing is giving people excuses to treat one another like crap - and given social media the excuse to silence, belittle, harass, and even spy on people with opinions they find disagreeable. These people are so full of themselves that they can ruin a stranger's life over nothing and still fail to have a "are we the baddies?" moment.

This movement has destroyed video games, comic books, science fiction novels, social media, atheism, and a lot of other things that I used to enjoy (seriously, look it up if you don't believe me), and yeah, maybe when I see the seeds of stupidity start to grow in wargaming, I'm a little wary. If people want to try to shame me for liking battlefield bikinis, then I see no problem with shaming them for the ignorance of their supposed good intentions.

Looks like someone's been triggered.

 Sqorgar wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Sqorgar wrote:

 Kawauso wrote:

When people can look to a game they play and see examples of people like themselves in it, it's a very welcoming and encouraging feeling. It's nice to be acknowledged and affirmed, and it's the sort of thing that's difficult to understand for anyone who is used to seeing themselves represented nearly 100% of the time in the media they consume.

I'm going to call bs on this. I don't think anybody is looking at Warhammer 40k and thinking, wow, I really identify with these ten foot tall space soldiers with extra internal organs in peak physical condition fighting heresy and xenophobic threats under an oppressive and dogmatic galactic hegemony because I too am a white man.

People are made up of more than just their skin color and dangly bits between their legs. Like, if that's how you interpret and identify with the world at large, you've got serious issues of empathy and understanding for your fellow man, and you might as well be playing pretend at being human.

This last part makes you an idiot, Sqorgar. Don't deny someone else's experience. Someone literally just told you representation is important to them (and someone upthread, too) then you "call bs" on it. I'm so pleased you are here to let everyone know how they're allowed to feel. That you don't understand the point being made and the topic at hand proves you should refrain from commenting on it.

I didn't deny their experience. I have no doubt that some people are extrinsically motivated and need constant reaffirmation to bolster their self esteem. I'm calling bs on the idea that anybody sees themselves represented 100% of the time and that they can't understand being an outsider.

I'm an overweight, balding 40 year old programmer with two children. Do you think I identify with any part of being a space marine? Like even a little. No, of course not. What about Wonder Woman? Did I enjoy that movie because the idea of being a female superhero deeply resonated with me? Nope. Because identification with the material is not fundamental to enjoying it. I hate how people act like representation means anything. It doesn't. What it does is signal to specific blocs of people that the game is designed for them - which is fine, but it isn't a fething moral imperative. And I'd argue that it doesn't make a whole lot of difference when it comes down to it. Ghostbusters 2016 signals woman power loud and clear, but pretty much everyone (male and female) avoided that movie like the plague because those signals were literally all it had going for it.

Look at the male fandom surrounding My Little Pony. MLP does nothing to indicate that 20 year old men would or should enjoy it, and yet they do. Maybe a little too much. Maybe sometimes in wrong and improper ways. But it doesn't have to go erecting signposts saying "Look at me, I'm just like you" to get attention.

You're. Missing. The. Point.

Wilfully.

It's not about you, and what you think. But thanks for clogging this entire thread with one overweight white man's thoughts. We didn't have quite enough of those out there on the internet.

I'd love to discuss calmly and help educate you on some of my views, but you ran in shouting with your blinkers on, so I'm not gonna waste energy trying.

So where are the real applicable suggestion to getting women into gaming? Has anyone you know. Asked them? *massive cricket chirping*

There are plenty of female geeks who play roleplaying games and video games and all sorts of other nerdy hobbies. At it's core wargaming seems to be something women are not naturally inclined to like as much as others. That is a fact or we would have seen more efforts into getting them playing by now.

So go ask the female gaming community at large. Maybe you don't ever get massive amount of women on the tabletop. It could simply be something that never happens as weird as that is. However you might be able to increase the appeal of your models and pick them up as hobbyists.

Maybe instead of just having tournaments you can also have large events with more focus on the painting and modelling aspects of it. Heck how about the best well constructed stories and lore surrounding people's custom armies and soldiers can win prize support. Give people a reason to go really in depth on the lore of their armies for actual prizes and I think you would see a lot more female turn outs.

Please stay on topic and get out with the bickering.

Edit
Get the feth of of this thread melon-fether. I don't want anymore dumb politics.

Normally I don't like sexualization, not because I don't like sex ( ) but because 90% of the time is just used as a cheap marketing tool. Like those cheap games in Facebook that their add is basically a girl in bikini with a roman helmet.
Sexuality can be used as a strong narrative element, Sunstone for example, is a erotic graphic novel (You can read it free in Deviantart from Stjepan Šejić (Shinniez), totally recommend it) and one of the best examples of how to create a good history WITH sex (Actually theres no graphic sex in the comic).

And to be honest, like everyone I have no problems with sparkles of pure sexual and erotic fanservice. But we should be generous and at least give everyone a bit of it, a Sigvald for every Lelith

 Gamgee wrote:
So where are the real applicable suggestion to getting women into gaming? Has anyone you know. Asked them? *massive cricket chirping*

There are plenty of female geeks who play roleplaying games and video games and all sorts of other nerdy hobbies. At it's core wargaming seems to be something women are not naturally inclined to like as much as others. That is a fact or we would have seen more efforts into getting them playing by now.

So go ask the female gaming community at large. Maybe you don't ever get massive amount of women on the tabletop. It could simply be something that never happens as weird as that is. However you might be able to increase the appeal of your models and pick them up as hobbyists.

Maybe instead of just having tournaments you can also have large events with more focus on the painting and modelling aspects of it. Heck how about the best well constructed stories and lore surrounding people's custom armies and soldiers can win prize support. Give people a reason to go really in depth on the lore of their armies for actual prizes and I think you would see a lot more female turn outs.

Please stay on topic and get out with the bickering.

Exactly. As I posted very early on, a bunch of middle-aged white men won't have the answers. Go chat to the people you want to attract. Actually ask them.

 Galas wrote:
Normally I don't like sexualization, not because I don't like sex ( ) but because 90% of the time is just used as a cheap marketing tool. Like those cheap games in Facebook that their add is basically a girl in bikini with a roman helmet.
Sexuality can be used as a strong narrative element, Sunstone for example, is a erotic graphic novel (You can read it free in Deviantart from Stjepan Šejić (Shinniez), totally recommend it) and one of the best examples of how to create a good history WITH sex (Actually theres no graphic sex in the comic).

And to be honest, like everyone I have no problems with sparkles of pure sexual and erotic fanservice. But we should be generous and at least give everyone a bit of it

I'm a huge anime fan, and i used to like fan service as they call it..... up until the silver age of anime died (somewhere between 2006 and 2007) and instead of just being used to add to a show, fan service slowly began to replace the plot. it got to the point that you couldn't distinguish anime from hentai some times. like fething queens blade. horrible horrible show.... passable as a really bad hentai.

Yeah, thats why I said that sexuality can be used in good ways... and in wrong and cheap ways. Is the cheap sexual content that personally I don't like, at least, when it is so abundant that is the only thing that remains. I'm not of ice, but The good thing if brief twice good.

 Sqorgar wrote:
In all three of those examples, they are people who were already engaging with the media (and presumably enjoying it already) and merely enjoyed it slightly more when they found something rare that complimented them - and the rarity is important.

In all three cases it's about people who enjoyed the media (survivor bias at work, DUH!) but that would enjoy it more if had better representation. All those that would have started by didn't because of lack of representation aren't posting on Dakka.

 Sqorgar wrote:
If you saw minority models or left handed guns all the time, no doubt it would cease to be something seen as noteworthy, and thus would not deliver such excitment.

“If someone didn't slap you on the face very very hard every time you got into a GW store, you would stop noticing it! You wouldn't have this nice feeling of excitement from not being slapped hard in the face!”
Yeah, so?

 Sqorgar wrote:
Why do we consider Nathan Drake, the protagonist of Uncharted, to be a hero, even though he murders the population of a small city in each game? Because it is what it is, and as gamers, we can either accept that or we can whine about it - and the people who accept it tend to have happier, fuller lives which the games contribute to rather than draw away from.

How does this have any bearing on anything?

 Sqorgar wrote:
And if you want to get completely technical, 40,000 years in the future, the concept of race would be gone anyway, since cultures would've come and gone and come again a hundred thousand times on a hundred thousand planets. Skin color would naturally favor lighter skin since space travel would yield less exposure to the sun, creating seasonal depression to people with darker skin while people with lighter skin would thrive more because they would require less exposure to sunlight to produce vitamin D. On the planets where sunlight and radiation was stronger, we have the technology (like sunscreen) to make up for that deficit. Not to mention, if the Emperor were white, it could be seen that those with darker complexions simply fall out of fashion in an effort to appease their god emperor.

To get completely technical, this is what experts call “a very stupid explanation of why this universe that has space-hobbit snipers and space-ogre soldiers and space magic only has white people”.

 Sqorgar wrote:
You may come up with a bunch of compelling reasons (to you) that you deserve this thing, but it's just justification for something you want, not something you need, deserve, or righteously should have.

What you are saying here is “Warhammer 40k shouldn't be made for you. It should be made for me and people like me. You, and what you want, is completely irrelevant to what 40k should be”.

 Sqorgar wrote:
I see heterosexual characters all the time and it does nothing for me. If anything, you should be excited that your proclivities are still rare and unusual enough to excite you. If bisexuality were commonplace, you'd likely look at Col Volgin with the exact same thrill and joy as a vegetarian looking at an eggplant.

If people never slapped you in the face, you would not be happy about each day were you don't get slapped in the face! I never get slapped and I don't even notice it!”

 Albino Squirrel wrote:
No one in the United States is refused any rights for being black or bisexual either.

People in the US are being refused to live because they are black of bisexual. You may have forgotten about it, but hate crimes happen.
“But it's not in the law, the law says it's illegal!”.

 Sqorgar wrote:
Please. You don't see guys going around complaining about all the shirtless barbarians and their glorious pectoral muscles

Because those aren't sexualized. When men find some characters sexualized the way female characters are sexualized, they complain about the character is changed. I have proofs.

 Sqorgar wrote:
I've seen people advocating for female models which are not discernibly female. What's the fething point then?

What's the point in male models that you can't identify as male models? Because the whole space marine range is exactly that. The only thing beside fluff that shows marines are male beside fluff is the heads. And yet noone complains.

 Sqorgar wrote:
I am not originally from the wargaming scene. I came from video games. And I've seen these unfounded declarations of sexism and racism destroy the hobby I love and the community I used to belong to. I'm a social justice refugee. I came here to get away from this white knighting and moral oppression.

I'm really not sad you had to flee from the video game scene because I think you were making it worse and I wouldn't mind if you had to flee from the wargaming scene too. I wish more people that share you idea would flee the video game scene too. Would make it way better for those who stay.

Well said!

 Galas wrote:
Sexuality can be used as a strong narrative element, Sunstone for example, is a erotic graphic novel (You can read it free in Deviantart from Stjepan Šejić (Shinniez), totally recommend it) and one of the best examples of how to create a good history WITH sex (Actually theres no graphic sex in the comic).

Stjepan Šejić is great and loves to laugh at how ridiculous the “sexy” stuff is, and his own superhero work (as opposed to the whole "loves stories between BDSM lesbians”) never goes into that kind of things. I've been dying to buy a physical edition of Switched, but I couldn't find one in France :(.


The way women are represented in general in the Witchblade universe:

The way women are represented in Switch

(And not liking to how how sexy he can draw women in Sunstone where it's actually thematically appropriate because way too NSFW )

 Jadenim wrote:

This was exactly the point I was making when you accused me of "Tumlr feminism"; there was no white knighting, no moral oppression, just pointing out that "hey, if you want to get more women in gaming, maybe dial-down the toxic over-sexualisation and have a more balanced / justified model line".

I think the Tumblr feminism was a response to the idolization vs possession beer and pretzels pop psychology.

I also said that the sexualization was NOT the problem. Not sure how that's exactly the point you were trying to make. I specifically said that sexualization is fine if you can give off the impression that the model is an actual character and not just a blow up doll designed for the sexual comfort of horny virgin nerds, and that even THAT is okay sometimes. I don't think there is such a thing as "over-sexualization" and if there were, I would be the last person to describe it as toxic. Something is either sexualized or it isn't. You can't, and I think you'll agree with me here, take it too far when very act of making it sexualized in the first place already crosses that moral line for most people. I guess different people have different pearl-clutching points (I do declare, nipples! *faints*), but as it is a spectrum, different for every person, I don't think you can objectively declare any single point in that spectrum "ok, now this is too far". The difference between a PG-13 and an R is political, not moral.

Came back to the thread to find that somebody seemed to think that the Ghostbusters reboot was somehow about translating feminist theory into film. Then also attributed that complete fantasy into being the reason the movie objectively failed to connect with the audience.

Views like that are why we can buy into the widespread ignorance of the theoretical far future of 40k. We're doomed.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Galas wrote:
Sexuality can be used as a strong narrative element, Sunstone for example, is a erotic graphic novel (You can read it free in Deviantart from Stjepan Šejić (Shinniez), totally recommend it) and one of the best examples of how to create a good history WITH sex (Actually theres no graphic sex in the comic).

Stjepan Šejić is great and loves to laugh at how ridiculous the “sexy” stuff is, and his own superhero work (as opposed to the whole "loves stories between BDSM lesbians”) never goes into that kind of things. I've been dying to buy a physical edition of Switched, but I couldn't find one in France :(.

BDSM lesbians have their right to be represented in the media too
I'll be honest, I started reading it because "BDSM lesbians" (And to be honest I found it randomly browsing Deviantart), I ended loving the characters as human beings

 Galas wrote:
I'll be honest, I started reading it because "BDSM lesbians" (And to be honest I found it randomly browsing Deviantart), I ended loving the characters as human beings

I am 100% unsurprised by this comment and I attribute it to Stjepan being a very very good storyteller in addition to being a very good artist.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

It's not about you, and what you think. But thanks for clogging this entire thread with one overweight white man's thoughts. We didn't have quite enough of those out there on the internet.

But it is about me. I'm a paying customer of Games Workshop. My wife is as well. And one day, god willing, my two daughters. So what I think on this matters, because if they go off chasing people who aren't their customer by pissing off those who are, well, it's happened before and it has never really gone well. Ask any Marvel fan. Heck, ask Marvel themselves.

As for my thoughts, I'm not an overweight white man. Or rather, I'm not just an overweight white man. Those are, by far, the most least noteworthy things about me, and it no more accurately describes me as a person than red describes a tomato. And that's exactly my point. If we reduce people down to these stereotypes, we lose the big picture. We start focusing on trees and we miss the forest.

For instance, if you want to know why the gender gap exists, you will never answer that question if the only variable you look at is one's gender. You can come up with theories, but like I already explained, you wouldn't be able to build predictions off it. You wouldn't be able to plan for and build a better tomorrow. So instead of explaining why things are the way they are, let's look for answers to how things will be tomorrow if we go down this particular path - and like I mentioned, we've seen this happen repeatedly. We know what happens when we go down this road and it DESTROYS industries.