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.

 AegisGrimm wrote:


Not that the fact lessens the need for some more cool female models from GW, though. Especially for 40k.

More options really is the solution here. I don't see the need to remove anything, and surely simply having more things to choose from can't possibly be harmful?

 Selym wrote:
I would even go so far as to propose that it is an existential threat.

Haha, what?

One of my favorite movie characters is Ellen Ripley, she colored much of my sci-fi views.

 Galas wrote:


I don't follow any ideology, and I disagree with the core principles that feminism uses to build their narrative. That doesn't mean I don't agree with some of their ideas and affirmations. And that doesn't mean that I agree with the ideas and ideology of anti-feminists.

Too much semantics, but I'm perhaps in a similar boat. e.g. Men contain more muscle mass and so are more suitable for combat. Would I use that to preclude women from combat? No - there could be something else they bring to the table. We'll probably move to robots before that goes too far anyway.

 Selym wrote:

 Galas wrote:
For me, anti-feminist are just like Anti-fa. They can't really live without their other half, and at the end of the day they are just bored people looking for a fight (As this thread shows). The only difference is physically vs verbally.
At this point I'm equally bored of both, feminist and anti-feminists.

I'm not sure where you are picking up on a need for a fight. Outside of 40k the movement is imo waaay more dangerous than ruining a fanbase. I would even go so far as to propose that it is an existential threat. But that line of discussion is a guaranteed auto-derailer, so I will leave it there.

How wouldn't I pick a fight agaisn't someone that brings politics to my beloved hobby when he claims that he wants politics out of my beloved hobby? The hipocrisy that you have shown here is substantial. And I'm don't say this with the intention of attacking you because I'm pretty sure you are a very nice guy. But I'm not gonna be happy with what you are doing here.

This again? Curious how feminists are supposedly so vocal about stuff, when they never seem to be the first to speak. It's always some loudmouth like Carl Benjamin ("Sargon of Akkad", the Youtuber, not the historical person) who riles up his followers so they'll go spread his message everywhere.

I consider myself a feminist, and I know there are lots of people who'll hate me for that. I don't agree with all other feminist though, because we're all individuals. I don't think female Space Marines is a good idea, just as I don't think male Sisters of Battle is a good idea. Female Guardsmen though? Heck yeah! More female sculpts in factions where it makes sense, like Eldar? Absolutely!

What's really important isn't what happens in a fictional setting though, but here in our own world. As long as there is, in our reality, inequality in opportunities between the sexes, or between any other groups that should have equal rights, I will be against it. In a fictional universe, it's up to the creator(s) what kind of setting they want to create, and up to me whether I enjoy that setting or not. I happen to enjoy 40k.

 Selym wrote:

There is not just one kind of Feminism. The post-modernist and neo-marxist Feminism that is currently taking over the Canadian legal and educational systems is not the "womens' suffrage" and "equal pay for equal work" movements of old.

I'm not terribly familiar with what is going on up north, but let me preface that by saying that are loads of people with agendas on the internet looking to subvert the opposing movement with misleading information.

 Selym wrote:

 Cat_astrophe wrote:
Bear in mind I’m a male feminist.

That always makes be what to ask which kind of Feminism you subscribe to. Had I been around for the earlier feminist movements, I'd have been a male feminist, too.

 Cat_astrophe wrote:
We know females are underrepresented, and I definitely think gw should do something about this.

In terms of model lineup, I'd be very pleased with an obviously-female Eldar Farseer model, especially as my Farseer is fluffed as female (based in part on the Farseers of DoW). Female guards I think are only not done because it would require redesigning every IG model from scratch so that the facial and hip-shoulder proportions match up properly, but I would like to see that happen. Issues for me come when, as you pointed out, the actions start conflicting with lore, or cause the company to go full SJW.

Also reminds me of the other "female representation" issues. It's a longstanding tenet of Feminism that everyone is equal (though, this part is not often adhered to), therefore everyone should get equal results. For example, if the UK population is 51% female and 49% male, then the company called GW should have a staff that is 51% female. And this even extends to fanbases, where it has become an aspiration of 3rd wave Feminism (and is the objective of Feminist 40k) to make fanbases become 51% female. The argument goes that equality = everyone is the same, so therefore people are only deterred by representational capacity in a fandom. It is not that miniature wargaming is just more appealing to males on averave, no, it is that women are not represented enough in the lore/models.

With ththe feminism I subscribe to, should’ve made it clear, sorry, it’s not what’s going on now. I see myself as a feminist because I believe that, obviously everyone should be equal, which of course earlier waves of feminism certainly represented and had success to a point in doing so. So to answer that part, no, of course I don’t support the kind of stuff we’re seeing regularly throughout the world now, because in my mind that’s not feminism, that’s people wanting to be angry at something. And to the second part, I tried to make this clear (sorry) I don’t at all think we should have a 50/50 split in the ig or anything close to that, like, maybe 1/3 or less female so as not to incite further controversy, or even Better include 20 head options or something like that so everyone’s happy. It sounds hard, but I wasn’t trying to say “redesign the entire range with equal genders” but something more along the lines of “add a few female models, even as just options, to keep everyone happy” I completely agree that it’s stupid to force equality, because that goes against human nature. I’m simply asking that they add the option for it. And anyhoo, with th redesigning thing, primaris are out, and to a newcomer they’d just look like bigger marines, which is essentially a reskin, so it’s not entirely impossible. Sorry if I’m rambling I’ve got a lot of models to paint before Thursday so I’m kind of rushing out these messages.
That’s just my 2 cents though, feel free to have your own opinions

Well, I think this thread is well on its way to locked status seeing as most people can't and won't shift their opinions on this. That being said, I do find it to be a very strange argument. I personally have never heard a woman or any other "feminist" bash Warhammer 40k for being non-feminist, including myself. I do think the only issue I have is the MMO syndrome of sex appeal over safety in some models, but it's not that bad. The reason I have never heard anyone complain is because I talk about the lore first and always, and the lore IS feminist! There are plenty of women in power positions and their role on the battlefield is "almost" (Dan Abnett) always respected, and when it's not it's the entire point of the novel! (Also Dan Abnett). The lore doesn't care about race, gender, creed, morality, it cares about survival in a time when it is impossible to live, and that's why I love it. However, when I get done talking about that world, and anyone I talk to is interested, they see the practical game and wonder where that inclusion is. That's when I hear the disappointment and lack of interest. The game doesn't need female space marines, and nobody who knows the lore argues that, but Games Workshop should honor their own lore by including the amazing elements of the lore into their actual tabletop with better representation and I don't really see the argument there.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Selym wrote:
It is not that miniature wargaming is just more appealing to males on averave, no, it is that women are not represented enough in the lore/models.

Chicken and egg. We tell girls that dolls are proper toys and that legos and science and other things are not feminine. Maybe if we stopped forcing them down a path (boys, too) then they'd more freely explore their interests without stigma?

This was once tried in an experiment with young children, and with a social engineering project in scandinavian countries. Wherever people were given increased freedom to be whatever they want, the more they fall into stereotypical roles. Children given the freedom to play with whatever toys they want (free of social conditioning), the males invariably drew towards weapons and tools more than females, and females invariably drew towards dolls more than the males.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFBk1iLMPds

Men and women have different average psychologies, affected by baseline brain structure and hormonal differences. It's one of the most powerful arguments in favour of allowing transpeople to transition.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 Selym wrote:

There is not just one kind of Feminism. The post-modernist and neo-marxist Feminism that is currently taking over the Canadian legal and educational systems is not the "womens' suffrage" and "equal pay for equal work" movements of old.

I'm not terribly familiar with what is going on up north, but let me preface that by saying that are loads of people with agendas on the internet looking to subvert the opposing movement with misleading information.

To add to this, tumblr attention-seekers are not representative of a global movement for equality.

These threads always devolve so frigging fast, unfortunately.

Not that a female Farseer or a couple of female Exarchs (other than Banshees, which actually could use some cool male models) wouldn't be sweet.

 Cream Tea wrote:
This again? Curious how feminists are supposedly so vocal about stuff, when they never seem to be the first to speak. It's always some loudmouth like Carl Benjamin ("Sargon of Akkad", the Youtuber, not the historical person) who riles up his followers so they'll go spread his message everywhere.

I consider myself a feminist, and I know there are lots of people who'll hate me for that. I don't agree with all other feminist though, because we're all individuals. I don't think female Space Marines is a good idea, just as I don't think male Sisters of Battle is a good idea. Female Guardsmen though? Heck yeah! More female sculpts in factions where it makes sense, like Eldar? Absolutely!

What's really important isn't what happens in a fictional setting though, but here in our own world. As long as there is, in our reality, inequality in opportunities between the sexes, or between any other groups that should have equal rights, I will be against it. In a fictional universe, it's up to the creator(s) what kind of setting they want to create, and up to me whether I enjoy that setting or not. I happen to enjoy 40k.

Why would we hate you, I hate fem40k, but on the whole most feminists I've met are ok, you've just shown how different you are to those bigots and sexists over there, so what's to hate?

Like I said before guard should have female models, keep the bodies the same but give us different heads, as a woman in full PPE just looks like a smaller fella in full PPE.

Also woman in the military are basically men with boobs, some of the most sexist, disgustingly horrible stuff I have heard has come from them, it's hilarious and military banter is not for the faint hearted.

 Cream Tea wrote:
This again? Curious how feminists are supposedly so vocal about stuff, when they never seem to be the first to speak. It's always some loudmouth like Carl Benjamin ("Sargon of Akkad", the Youtuber, not the historical person) who riles up his followers so they'll go spread his message everywhere.

I consider myself a feminist, and I know there are lots of people who'll hate me for that. I don't agree with all other feminist though, because we're all individuals. I don't think female Space Marines is a good idea, just as I don't think male Sisters of Battle is a good idea. Female Guardsmen though? Heck yeah! More female sculpts in factions where it makes sense, like Eldar? Absolutely!

What's really important isn't what happens in a fictional setting though, but here in our own world. As long as there is, in our reality, inequality in opportunities between the sexes, or between any other groups that should have equal rights, I will be against it. In a fictional universe, it's up to the creator(s) what kind of setting they want to create, and up to me whether I enjoy that setting or not. I happen to enjoy 40k.

Pretty much completely agree

 Selym wrote:

Men and women have different average psychologies, affected by baseline brain structure and hormonal differences. It's one of the most powerful arguments in favour of allowing transpeople to transition.

I don't think it's a problem if girls play with dolls more than boys do, but I do think it's a problem that a boy who wants to play with dolls (they do exist) is stigmatised. I think it should be perfectly acceptable for one to engage in stereotypically "male" or "female" behaviour regardless of gender, and if that means boys generally engage in "male" activities, that's fine, but you don't have to be trans to be interested in "the other gender's" toys.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Selym wrote:
I would even go so far as to propose that it is an existential threat.

Haha, what?

Answered in a PM, as my answer will derail.

Let's get some female guard models, more female characters, new Sisters of Battle, and maybe some different skin tones featured in GW's studio models and artwork. OK, OK, just to keep it realistic I'll give up on SoB.

Anyone making a fuss after that, is definitely suspect.

This argument is so easy to win in 40k because it's so easy to give Feminists what they claim they want without really changing the IP at all except for some new models. So give it to them. Everyone who truly loves the game wins. When those who are left unsatisfied start demanding half the Primarchs get retroactively gender bent or that all depictions of violence get taken out of the rules and lore and the game become about all of the races standing shoulder to shoulder in the same State-issued Solidarity Coveralls, it won't be hard to brush them aside.

So, I think it got overlooked (because I didn't explicitly say it), but I consider myself a feminist.

That being said, it's important to define what "feminist" means - I think the definitions the "anti-fem" crowd would give and the one I would give are highly different. It's kind of like how I would call myself a liberal, but think the anti-vaxxers or the like at the extreme end of the liberal wing are idiots and closer to alt-right than liberal (horseshoe theory).

I do want to say, I feel like the 40k community as a whole has generally been very chill with tolerance/diversity. I mean, I'm gay and I play, so does my b/f, and the gaming group I frequent (~15-20 people) includes at least one non-binary person and one in an openly nonmonagmous relationship. Never heard anything bad about any of those things. We all want to be grown adults and want to go play with our overcosted little toy soldiers with as little excessive drama drawn into it as possible. We have enough as it is debating if that 8" charge was enough to make it in to melee. And seriously, nobody/very few cared that the Eldar box had an androgenous (? nonbinary? hermaphroditic?) avatar or female emissary of Ynnead, for example...just some people like to stir the pot. OP, I'm looking at you.

 Galas wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 Galas wrote:
For me, anti-feminist are just like Anti-fa. They can't really live without their other half, and at the end of the day they are just bored people looking for a fight (As this thread shows). The only difference is physically vs verbally.
At this point I'm equally bored of both, feminist and anti-feminists.

I'm not sure where you are picking up on a need for a fight. Outside of 40k the movement is imo waaay more dangerous than ruining a fanbase. I would even go so far as to propose that it is an existential threat. But that line of discussion is a guaranteed auto-derailer, so I will leave it there.

How wouldn't I pick a fight agaisn't someone that brings politics to my beloved hobby when he claims that he wants politics out of my beloved hobby? The hipocrisy that you have shown here is substantial. And I'm don't say this with the intention of attacking you because I'm pretty sure you are a very nice guy. But I'm not gonna be happy with what you are doing here.

I think you misread me, I was pointing to the picking up on the push for a fight, not on the picking of a fight. Which I actually am, but I don't want to bring destruction outside of a a single containable thread. I don't perceive you as attacking anything except highly justifiable targets, such as my own arguments.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

HuskyWarhammer wrote:
OP, I'm looking at you.

I admit I'm stirring the pot, but I really am just looking for views and the current state-of-play in 40k.

Something I've always been curious about is hownexactly you make a model look female while keeping away from things that are considered sexist by some.

Take the female Far Seer for example. Their heads are totally covered by the ghost helm, they can't have boob plate because sexism or whatever and the Eldar are a naturally slender race. The same problem applies to any female with a helmet or any sort of face protection and the muntitorum factories are hardly going to make armour with special pinched in waists so we can all see that the wearers are female. Same applies to space marines but then I subscribe to the No Space Marines without helmets philosophy so I dunno. Every one of my grey knights could be women under there.

I think we're encountering different ideas of what female 40k models should be like. I don't mind SoB boob-plate, because that's their religion (ha!), and I would not mind Farseer boob-plate if done subtly as ornate armour. I would be quite pleased with some obviously female Farseer heads, as the helms look awkward to me.

But gratuitous boob-plate is gratuitous. It makes no real sense for the IG to do it (or irl armies would have done it earlier), and be-breasted marines would be just... ew. And illogical, but that's a secondary concern in 40k.

 Sim-Life wrote:
Something I've always been curious about is hownexactly you make a model look female while keeping away from things that are considered sexist by some.

Take the female Far Seer for example. Their heads are totally covered by the ghost helm, they can't have boob plate because sexism or whatever and the Eldar are a naturally slender race. The same problem applies to any female with a helmet or any sort of face protection and the muntitorum factories are hardly going to make armour with special pinched in waists so we can all see that the wearers are female. Same applies to space marines but then I subscribe to the No Space Marines without helmets philosophy so I dunno. Every one of my grey knights could be women under there.

Isn't there something about this in the Eldar lore, like Aspect Warriors are traditionally both genders, but the armor takes the appearance of the "traditional" one - hence boob plate on banshees (which may be male underneath) but pec plate on scopions, etc. that may be female under?

 Selym wrote:
I think we're encountering different ideas of what female 40k models should be like. I don't mind SoB boob-plate, because that's their religion (ha!), and I would not mind Farseer boob-plate if done subtly as ornate armour. I would be quite pleased with some obviously female Farseer heads, as the helms look awkward to me.

But gratuitous boob-plate is gratuitous. It makes no real sense for the IG to do it (or irl armies would have done it earlier), and be-breasted marines would be just... ew. And illogical, but that's a secondary concern in 40k.

But there are people who have issues with Sister boob plate and theoretical Far Seer boob plate. Howling Banshees are another good example since masks are a part of their equipment and they're all female. You can't really visually represent their fluff without adding some obviously feminine features which would be considered sexist by some people.

 Luciferian wrote:
Let's get some female guard models, more female characters, new Sisters of Battle, and maybe some different skin tones featured in GW's studio models and artwork. OK, OK, just to keep it realistic I'll give up on SoB.

Anyone making a fuss after that, is definitely suspect.

This argument is so easy to win in 40k because it's so easy to give Feminists what they claim they want without really changing the IP at all except for some new models. So give it to them. Everyone who truly loves the game wins. When those who are left unsatisfied start demanding half the Primarchs get retroactively gender bent or that all depictions of violence get taken out of the rules and lore and the game become about all of the races standing shoulder to shoulder in the same State-issued Solidarity Coveralls, it won't be hard to brush them aside.

In all honesty, GW just needs to update their products. Cadians have terrible proportions and do a disservice to both males and females. They really would just need to do what they did for Tau strike teams: mostly helmeted with some male and female heads, just pick what you want. Since they've done it once I suspect they'll do it again. They've also gotten more variety in their skin tones of late, in the Guard codex they have a few black guardsmen. So it's a start that'll take some time.

The only real point of contention (that I have seen) is that some people have advocated for female marines. I personally don't see the point because a genetically enhanced female super soldier would look EXACTLY like a male enhanced super soldier. Especially with armor. Unless you make the armor feminine, which also makes no sense and might draw attention for sexualizing them. So either it's strictly a lore change or you're treading a fine line of what is or is not an acceptable female model. Either scenario is bad IMO.

 Sim-Life wrote:
Something I've always been curious about is hownexactly you make a model look female while keeping away from things that are considered sexist by some.

Take the female Far Seer for example. Their heads are totally covered by the ghost helm, they can't have boob plate because sexism or whatever and the Eldar are a naturally slender race. The same problem applies to any female with a helmet or any sort of face protection and the muntitorum factories are hardly going to make armour with special pinched in waists so we can all see that the wearers are female. Same applies to space marines but then I subscribe to the No Space Marines without helmets philosophy so I dunno. Every one of my grey knights could be women under there.

There was a thread about precisely that, but it got locked. Just like this thread will get locked. Men and women are biologically different, and as such, there is no way to give them each representation as sculpts without showing those differences somehow. Although that clearly doesn't account for pantsu french maid models.

I see people here who identify as both Feminist and anti-Feminist who say that the solution is simply more of everything for everyone. More options, not less. I agree. Then, we can all have our thing and stand together as 40k fans against culture warriors whose only interest in the hobby is to use it as a political bludgeon.

As a side note, Feminist40k is a really creepy, cult-like group made up almost entirely of straight white male "allies". They have an ideological purity test you have to take before you can even join the group. With all of the things coming out these days, people like that are probably the last people one should trust, if you know what I'm saying.

 Sim-Life wrote:
Something I've always been curious about is hownexactly you make a model look female while keeping away from things that are considered sexist by some.

Like this:


Or like this:


The "A woman in practical uniform is indistinguishable from a male" isn't really true to any miniature sculptor that knows how to sculpt a female body. GW does the "finest miniatures in the world" (They won't, we all know that), and they do "heroic proportions"; not realistic ones. So they'll have 0 problems doing female models for Eldar and Imperial Guard that aren't sexualized but are still obviously female.
I'll concede, GW learned how to sculpt a female face 1 and a half year ago, so baby steps.

HuskyWarhammer wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:
Something I've always been curious about is hownexactly you make a model look female while keeping away from things that are considered sexist by some.

Take the female Far Seer for example. Their heads are totally covered by the ghost helm, they can't have boob plate because sexism or whatever and the Eldar are a naturally slender race. The same problem applies to any female with a helmet or any sort of face protection and the muntitorum factories are hardly going to make armour with special pinched in waists so we can all see that the wearers are female. Same applies to space marines but then I subscribe to the No Space Marines without helmets philosophy so I dunno. Every one of my grey knights could be women under there.

Isn't there something about this in the Eldar lore, like Aspect Warriors are traditionally both genders, but the armor takes the appearance of the "traditional" one - hence boob plate on banshees (which may be male underneath) but pec plate on scopions, etc. that may be female under?

This is true. Male Banshee Eldar wear boob plate and female Dire Avengers, etc... don't. But thats a specific case. One example of indistinguible male-female models are Tau Firewarriors. The box has both female and male heads, but with helmets you can't tell who is who, but thats because Tau don't have breasts.

Dandelion wrote:


In all honesty, GW just needs to update their products. Cadians have terrible proportions and do a disservice to both males and females. They really would just need to do what they did for Tau strike teams: mostly helmeted with some male and female heads, just pick what you want. Since they've done it once I suspect they'll do it again. They've also gotten more variety in their skin tones of late, in the Guard codex they have a few black guardsmen. So it's a start that'll take some time.

The only real point of contention (that I have seen) is that some people have advocated for female marines. I personally don't see the point because a genetically enhanced female super soldier would look EXACTLY like a male enhanced super soldier. Especially with armor. Unless you make the armor feminine, which also makes no sense and might draw attention for sexualizing them. So either it's strictly a lore change or you're treading a fine line of what is or is not an acceptable female model. Either scenario is bad IMO.

I agree completely.

This thread has been suprisingly respectful of all sides and full of people throwing out well thought out solutions and obsticles.

Im actually really proud

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Selym wrote:
I think we're encountering different ideas of what female 40k models should be like. I don't mind SoB boob-plate, because that's their religion (ha!), and I would not mind Farseer boob-plate if done subtly as ornate armour. I would be quite pleased with some obviously female Farseer heads, as the helms look awkward to me.

But gratuitous boob-plate is gratuitous. It makes no real sense for the IG to do it (or irl armies would have done it earlier), and be-breasted marines would be just... ew. And illogical, but that's a secondary concern in 40k.

But there are people who have issues with Sister boob plate and theoretical Far Seer boob plate. Howling Banshees are another good example since masks are a part of their equipment and they're all female. You can't really visually represent their fluff without adding some obviously feminine features which would be considered sexist by some people.

I agree with lore-abiding Banshee armour, and I would justify the Farseer boob-plate with them having the technical capacity and (previous) artistic freedom to make subtly female features on combat gear. For variety's sake, if nothing else.

Here's an example:

 Commissar Benny wrote:
You need only look at Marvel, Magic the Gathering, Hollywood, the new Star Wars movie to see where that road leads. Devastation, ruin, decay & billions in lost revenue everything that ideology touches.

Heaven forbid we see more women as major characters in our imaginary worlds. The cootie epidemics could wipe out entire franchises. The crows will pluck out our eyeballs! The sun will bleach our bones! And lo, the survivors will wander the shattered ruins of comic stores and convention halls, lamenting the fools of the past whose willfulness - nay, whose blind hubris wrought such apocalyptic insanity! Woe! Woe unto those who write major characters without testicles!

There's really no reason not to have female Guard, or what have you. In fact, there's a thriving third-party market for it. You can throw out whatever buzzwords you like or put scare quotes around the word diversity or whatever the new hotness for these threads is, but there's nothing wrong with expanding the character roster beyond the five billion different super-grizzled Marines.

To be honest Marvel and comic-books in general are in a downfall since the 90's. It has nothing to do with feminism, etc... The Mighty Thor (The one with the female protagonist) has been one of the most popular and economically sucessfull Marvel comics since his release.
So please lets put to bed the "SJW killed Marvel" because they didn't. Bad history arcs, the internet, repetition until boredom of the fans, a dying media, etc... thats whats killing mainstream comic books.