Switch Theme:

Why Does Feminist 40k Matter?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Fresh-Faced New User





 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
 Crimson wrote:
 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Anyone who says that gender is a Social Construct doesn't know what a Gender is and how deeply tied to your physiology it is.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28582-scans-prove-theres-no-such-thing-as-a-male-or-female-brain/
It totally is a social construct.

That males and females like different things is almost completely due the upbring and the society.
So men and women have the exact same hormones and we are exactly alike when it comes to bodies? Because all this is proving is that there's no difference to look when it comes to the brain, but medically we've learned that there's massive differences when it comes to the medical needs for a man or woman. You wouldn't treat one the exact same as the other when it comes to various medical reasons.


Yooooo maybe the Gender as a social construct debate can be saved for an off topic forum or PMs. Not tryna jump in or tell anyone to stop talking about it like I'm not running your life, just, that's quite a can of worms.
   
Made in us
Posts with Authority





 kawaiipikachu wrote:
K then. This is actually my first time on a Warhammer forum or group too. Just, uh, yeah. I hope this is a sincere you mistaking me for someone else and not some weird kind of attack.


Doubt. I've seen these exact tirades on your Facebook page.

And trust me, if I wanted to attack you- I wouldn't do it here. I've a smidgen of respect for this page, enough that I try to stay mostly polite, if firm.

And I don't need to attack Feminist 40k. You've got that well in hand.

Mob Rule is not a rule. 
   
Made in pl
Wicked Warp Spider





 vaklor4 wrote:
Esasb wrote:
None should take modern feminists seriously.

They are the ones that destroy franchises (see the SJW revolution in Marvel that saw multiple comics tank). They hammer and hammer on "problems" in say comics/card games/ tabletop games but they aren't the ones investing time and money in said hobbies. They're just a very vocal (and obnoxious) minority and they are the ones bringing toxicity.

The gaming clubs i have been to (i haven't been playing to long) were always very friendly (both had 1 female player and the rest male).

And who cares if there's only a couple of factions with wich females can "identify"... i don't think anyone can "identify" with space bugs/demonic monsters with tentacles all over the place.


And on top of that, the two females in my playgroup (out of 7 people total) play Nids and Necrons respectively they aren't concerned with playing females. They just think that space bugs are cute, and death robots are badass.


My wife begs to differ... space bugs are badass! But so are dead robots

And seriously, this whole "females need more factions to identify with" seems to be a missed reasoning. By that logic Death Guard players need to identify with ugly, smelly, obese and deformed individuals to enjoy WH? How many (as a percentage of all interested) women are actually complaining about all-male SM as thier reson not to play and how many are indifferent or have have other reasons to not want to play 40K?
   
Made in gb
Fresh-Faced New User





 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
 kawaiipikachu wrote:
K then. This is actually my first time on a Warhammer forum or group too. Just, uh, yeah. I hope this is a sincere you mistaking me for someone else and not some weird kind of attack.


Doubt. I've seen these exact tirades on your Facebook page.

And trust me, if I wanted to attack you- I wouldn't do it here. I've a smidgen of respect for this page, enough that I try to stay mostly polite, if firm.

And I don't need to attack Feminist 40k. You've got that well in hand.


Do you think you could PM me or something because I really don't know who you're mistaking me for but it does make me uncomfortable to be honest. I'm genuinely not part of or active in any other Warhammer forums or Facebook groups. I have a local gaming facebook group but that's about it. Also, ad hominem attacks are just kinda crap. Like, I honestly have no idea who you are or who you think I am but I hope it's a genuine misunderstanding rather than like I said some kind of attack. So if you wanna continue that feel free to message as I don't wanna derail the thread.
   
Made in nl
Longtime Dakkanaut




1) No, feminist 40k does not matter. And feminist theory does not have a scientific basis. It is a silly superstition.

2) Space marines are clad in armour with full coverage. There are literally no way of telling, if the person inside is a man, woman or fungus. In real life there are no difference between the shape of armour for men and for women. But then again, 40k is pretty far removed from real life. Orks has no gender for example, Necrons has no gender, tau has... I don't know what gender they are really.

3) There are no pushback against women in 40k. GW produces the models that the public wants to buy. And that's it.

4) How do you know, that girls are not inherently worse at math than boys? I am not saying that they are, but it is not something you can easily test, is it? Maybe our perceived gender differences would be smaller, if more girls studied useful subjects like math, and fewer studied pointless nonsense like feminist theory.

Regards
   
Made in es
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




Vigo. Spain.

I'll say that most of the female players that I know play or Tyranids or Orks. Specially Tyranids.. I don't know exactly why but I think theres a relation that can be drawn from that. I don't know exactly what one.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/03 16:07:09


 Crimson Devil wrote:

Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

ERJAK wrote:
Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

 
   
Made in us
Posts with Authority





 kawaiipikachu wrote:
Do you think you could PM me or something because I really don't know who you're mistaking me for but it does make me uncomfortable to be honest. I'm genuinely not part of or active in any other Warhammer forums or Facebook groups. I have a local gaming facebook group but that's about it. Also, ad hominem attacks are just kinda crap. Like, I honestly have no idea who you are or who you think I am but I hope it's a genuine misunderstanding rather than like I said some kind of attack. So if you wanna continue that feel free to message as I don't wanna derail the thread.


Cool, let me help you here.

Instead of making the most noise about me having a pretty good idea who you are, how about you engage my argument? It doesn't make me doubt my assessment at all when you're more concerned about me 'mistaking you for someone else' than you are engaging the discussion.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/03 16:08:16


Mob Rule is not a rule. 
   
Made in fi
Courageous Space Marine Captain






 Adeptus Doritos wrote:


Or perhaps it's because we're sexually dimorphic species and work according to our instincts that have been hardwired through millions of years of evolution to lean toward certain things.

So, yeah.

As I said, it's more than just biology. So, feel free to rage about how it's just some genitals that make the difference.

Science disagrees with you. The brain is what you are. Did you read the article?

Computer games are a good example. Originally they were marketed gender neutrally, and both genders played them equally. But in the 80's the marketing switched to marketing to boys, and games and computer became mainly a boy thing. It was so influential that it created a gender gap in the tech field. Nowadays it finally starting to get more balanced again.

https://qz.com/911737/silicon-valleys-gender-gap-is-the-result-of-computer-game-marketing-20-years-ago/
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/12/04/female_gamers_and_masculine_marketers_polygon_s_history_of_the_sexist_selling.html

Seriously, this sort of societal influence affects our behaviour, and especially behaviour of children massively.

   
Made in gb
Fresh-Faced New User





pismakron wrote:
1) No, feminist 40k does not matter. And feminist theory does not have a scientific basis. It is a silly superstition.

2) Space marines are clad in armour with full coverage. There are literally no way of telling, if the person inside is a man, woman or fungus. In real life there are no difference between the shape of armour for men and for women. But then again, 40k is pretty far removed from real life. Orks has no gender for example, Necrons has no gender, tau has... I don't know what gender they are really.

3) There are no pushback against women in 40k. GW produces the models that the public wants to buy. And that's it.

4) How do you know, that girls are not inherently worse at math than boys? I am not saying that they are, but it is not something you can easily test, is it? Maybe our perceived gender differences would be smaller, if more girls studied useful subjects like math, and fewer studied pointless nonsense like feminist theory.

Regards


This again feels like a more ad hominem argument and a feminism is bad arguement than one against anything that was brought up but I will say that social theory is based on science and since the late 1800s sociology has fought for its place as a science. Point 3 ignores the consume-reproduce hypothesis. As for point 4 yes lots of studies have been done, and that also ignores the lack of female representation in STEM and how stereotypes that women can't go into STEM cause a lack of motivation to study it. I would address this in more depth but I'm not here to have a debate about psychology.

Point 2 I agree with, although I would argue Orks are coded more male personally but that's subjective, one supposes.
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




I would love to see more female minis in game there are a few

Eldar, Dark Eldar and Harlequins have some female minis but could do with being more even sometimes (All the Harlequin character models are male, and 3/5ths of the troupe box are too for example)
I believe Dark Eldar have the most female minis in the game from multi gendered factions
Imperial Guard should have some female figures- Lieutenant Mira from the Space marine game for example-she was well done (but for some reason there's nothing?)
And as I don't want to reset the clock I'll not mention everybody's favorite metal only line....

But more is always better (Pretty much anything not Space Marines would be nice at this point- another reason to curse Primaris they could have done something other than the most represented faction for once)

A thing to remember though is It only really has an effect on the human and eldar factions because the rest are arguably ambiguous by our human standards.
  • Tau suits don't clearly show either gender- The pilots can be whatever you want

  • Kroot- they've never said what their females look like if there is any outward difference from the males

  • Vespid (See Kroot)

  • Necrons- They're robot bodies and have no gender distinctive forms (Though I will point out all their named characters are male)

  • Tyranids- don't typically have a gender as most are incapable of reproduction

  • Orks- are asexual fungus lifeforms.
  •    
    Made in us
    Beautiful and Deadly Keeper of Secrets





     Crimson wrote:
     Adeptus Doritos wrote:


    Or perhaps it's because we're sexually dimorphic species and work according to our instincts that have been hardwired through millions of years of evolution to lean toward certain things.

    So, yeah.

    As I said, it's more than just biology. So, feel free to rage about how it's just some genitals that make the difference.

    Science disagrees with you. [b]The brain is what you are. Did you read the article?[/b]

    Computer games are a good example. Originally they were marketed gender neutrally, and both genders played them equally. But in the 80's the marketing switched to marketing to boys, and games and computer became mainly a boy thing. It was so influential that it created a gender gap in the tech field. Nowadays it finally starting to get more balanced again.

    https://qz.com/911737/silicon-valleys-gender-gap-is-the-result-of-computer-game-marketing-20-years-ago/
    http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/12/04/female_gamers_and_masculine_marketers_polygon_s_history_of_the_sexist_selling.html

    Seriously, this sort of societal influence affects our behaviour, and especially behaviour of children massively.
    Once again, the brain is not the only part of the body. As it seems you've ignored anyone who disagreed with this article a moment ago.
       
    Made in us
    Posts with Authority





     Crimson wrote:
    Science disagrees with you. The brain is what you are. Did you read the article?


    Riiiiight. So there's no series of factors created by hormones, genes, etc.... right?

     Crimson wrote:
    Computer games are a good example. Originally they were marketed gender neutrally, and both genders played them equally. But in the 80's the marketing switched to marketing to boys, and games and computer became mainly a boy thing. It was so influential that it created a gender gap in the tech field. Nowadays it finally starting to get more balanced again.


    So a bunch of guys, on a hunch, said, "let's market to boys for no reason and see where this goes".

    Just flying by the seat of their pants, and suddenly became financially successful.

    What a lucky guess those fellows made.


    Mob Rule is not a rule. 
       
    Made in ca
    Regular Dakkanaut




    This thread is only proving to me that even here on dakka there is some ridiculous toxicity against female players. In the past this has been one of the more friendly environments I have found for miniature wargaming which makes it even weirder to me.
       
    Made in us
    Dakka Veteran




    I'm curious.

    I'm terrible at converting, even though I love to do it. At one point I was tinkering with converting my entire Sororitas army into Tzeentch disciples, and this got me into seeing "what can I convert into a chaos space marine." Of course, battle sisters made great rubric marines. The story and fluff behind the thought wasn't that they were Ahriman's tag-a-longs, but instead a separate force dedicated to Tzeentch piggy-backing on the rules.

    Needless to say, I have some weird stuff. Raging Heroes (a company that is shameless when it comes to this male gaze thing you call out) actually makes some REALLY great models that eased in as Aspiring Sorcerers, and are still very tasteful: Arushka, Tarja, and Sashenka from the Kurganovas Army, specifically.

    I took Space Marine Centurion models and popped Dark Eldar Wytch heads on them... and I had really spiffy Obliterators that just lack a few spikey bits for making all chaosy.

    Now I've since scuttled the project, mainly because I am not a fan of the Tzaangor-heavy approach the codex is forcing people, but my converting to my army lore and intentions hasn't stopped. Now I have Astra Militarum forces (Catachan) models being represented by actual GW models: Escher Gangs from Necromunda. They are my army's version of Infantry Squads. Oddly, when I washed their faces and bodies... you cannot even tell what race they are. They look a bit of anything when the light is right. I just shrugged and laughed at the thought, because instead of having a specific cultural look... they have a very multi-cultural appeal... which makes sense in that in 40k human sub-culture isn't a big sticking point, they've all grown past that to deal with larger external threats from the galaxy. Trust me, eldar don't care what race of human you are, you're still occasionally useful meat used to divert a rampaging WAAAGH or take a hit from a hive fleet.

    Speaking of external races... 40k is largely divided into 3 macro-groups that encompass the armies: xenos, chaos, and imperium. I went looking for rampant sexism in each of these forces because... well, there has to be something for everyone, right?

    We start with the xenos, since I listed them first. Eldar have questionably female sculpts with their Guardians... I can't tell if those are supposed to be pectoral muscles or breasts... which is great because they left it up to my perception. They also have Howling Banshees and Jain'Zar. Farseers are a head away from being female and tastefully so, as I have recently converted one into Farseer Macha to lead my Biel'Tan army. Clearly no sexism there. Dark Eldar have Wytch cults, Succubi, and not to mention Yvraine came from there (and she is a central character in the ongoing plot). Tau are... Tau. Pretty sure garbage cans with missile packs strapped to the top are fairly genderless, which can be extended to their whole species. Tyrannids.. seriously? I cannot tell the gender of a squirrel at first glance, so who knows what a Tyrannid is, other than trying to eat my face. Best part is, setting them on fire renders them all asexual (sorry, channeling my inner zeal for purifying heretics there). Necrons... I could paint a bunch of boney bags and call them all female, who could tell? Orcs could have more representation, but I think this is more due to their primal culture and not games workshop intentionally injecting subversive male dominance into their game. Even then, there is enough female representation in this macro group to say: "no problems here".

    Chaos? Well, there are problems here... and there are not. See, I believe Chaos is a faction that can use any model in GW's range to fill a force. There's always a great story, too. Want female berserkers? There's tons of options in Age of Sigmar (even the upcoming Daughters of Khaine). If Daemonettes are too sexualized for your tastes, then use models that fit your expectations. Speaking of daemonettes, pretty sure Slaanesh daemons are pretty uni-gender in representation... and while you're entitled to your opinion on the nature of that representation, the fact remains... they are there (though the latest codex makes me wonder if GW realizes they're still there). Again, the biggest draw to Chaos, for me, is that it is a converter's paradise. I walk into the shop and look at all walls and go: wow, that'd be nice in my old Tzeentch army. So chaos representation of females in battle? Check.

    And now we're to the Imperium. Adepta Sororitas is the easiest to pick on, but let's make this a bit harder. Sisters of Silence probably should have been pulled into the Custodes Codex, I think all those super specialized, tiny forces of the Emperor's agents should be bundled together. Still, the Sisters of Silence are, again, a head away from being a model that doesn't look like a sister of silence (my Canoness population appreciates the SoS sculpts with the heads from statuesque miniatures). They'd probably work for normal Battle Sisters if the plastic sister drought continues. I've already demonstrated how I incorporated a female fighting force into the Astra Militarum. Space Marines are a bit harder, but I know there is a company that makes some Eisen<something> models that convert very easily into power armored females (Alexis Ego Queen runs them frequently in her Sororitas army if you take a moment to look her up on YouTube). I think it is safe to say that they are represented. I could go on, but the fact is... over or under representation is still representation.

    All of that is raw modeling and desire. I had a desire, I made it happen, largely with GW stuff available to me. Is it easy and right there in front of me? Nope. Was it rewarding to make my army more MY ARMY by spending time to overcome those hurdles? Yup. Is Games Workshop pandering a sociological narrative to force their ideology of "females are breeders and support and don't belong on the battlefield!", I think I proved that it is certainly not the case. If anything, they've battled sociological norms by representing females across the spectrum. If we, as a race, were perpetually locked in an endless war where our race is being slaughtered whole sale... where do you think the women would really be? They become a VALUABLE asset to the war machine OFF of the battlefield. It takes almost 20 years to create a new soldier to fight for the Imperium. Most of the children won't even be able to carry that fight. So the real problem here is: women need to make children. Lots of them. Like so many, that they won't have time to be on the battle field... because if they were there... there's no one making baby space marines in those hive worlds... and the race loses the long game. That is literally how war was fought, and on the scale that the Imperium is represented to be engaged with their battle for survival, it is not too much of a logical leap to make that assumption. So the fact that there are races out there with current female representation defies the expected norms of warfare. Again, I find it difficult to see how GW is being sexist. Women are represented, women are more than eye-candy in model form (they have representation in literature). And anyone who says the hobby is closed off to women due to a lack of plastic-shaped boobs really doesn't understand the hobby. You are literally a knife and some green stuff away from doing anything you want.

    Instead of bitching about the perceived problem (see, it isn't a problem in the game, it is a problem with the perception of the game), go out and set yourselves to resolving it. Represent female fighting forces. Yvraine, Jain'Zar, Banshees, Harlequins, Wytches, and Succubi all in a Ynnari united force. What is it people say? Be the change you want to see? You'd probably be getting props for your army and creativity instead of flamed on internet boards. I know people like my army. If you want, I'll post some of my conversions to prove I am not talking from my forth point of contact, but as for now, we'll work on the honor system because I'd have to get my phone... snap photos, upload to drive, import to here... zzz. I'm Italian, which means I am notoriously lazy.

    TL/DR: Nothing to see here, move along. Truly. There is not a problem unless you chose to twist the reality to suit your narrative.
       
    Made in es
    Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




    Vigo. Spain.

    People why do you keep saying that Tau don't have a gender?! The Firewarrior Box has equal representation! Theres the same number of male heads than female heads.
    That you don't know how to differentiate them is your problem. Tau are like chicken, you need to know what to look for.

    This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/02/03 16:19:50


     Crimson Devil wrote:

    Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

    ERJAK wrote:
    Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

     
       
    Made in fi
    Courageous Space Marine Captain






     ZebioLizard2 wrote:
    Once again, the brain is not the only part of the body. As it seems you've ignored anyone who disagreed with this article a moment ago.

    But certainly it is the thing where your personality and the 'essence' of you resides?

       
    Made in us
    Posts with Authority





    Zatsuku wrote:
    This thread is only proving to me that even here on dakka there is some ridiculous toxicity against female players. In the past this has been one of the more friendly environments I have found for miniature wargaming which makes it even weirder to me.


    How are people being hostile toward female players?

    By you making this statement, you're being hostile toward military veterans. Do you hate veterans?

    Of course you don't, but you can disagree with my statement or dislike what I say as an individual.

    Let's stop shielding arguments with "OMG you hate women!"

    Mob Rule is not a rule. 
       
    Made in gb
    Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





    Earth

     kawaiipikachu wrote:
     Formosa wrote:
    There needs to be a disconnect established here.

    Fem40k

    More female models

    Asking for more female models is fine.

    Fem40k have attacked the community with accusations of "toxic" "sexist" and "racist" behaviour, they refuse to have an open dialogue due to non existent "threats" as such anything they say has been tainted and is viewed as "SJW" noise to be ignored, if they want to be taken seriously they need to issue a public apology for the BOLS article, until then no matter what they say, they will be viewed with suspicion and distrust.


    I suppose, but I think that opens the debate about how the internet has changed how views are expressed. Like my semi point about the Male Gaze because I had to condense everything, because the idea of the Male Gaze has basically, online, become any woman dressed sexually when actually it goes a lot deeper than that. Like, yes, there is an air of sexism and racism when nearly all models are male and have european features.

    But I do fully see the point about how these points when said on an online medium without proper explanation of what these buzzwords mean causes people to switch off and view it as you say, noice to be ignored. I personally find the BOLS article fine, and find this admin response http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2017/10/feminist-40k-admins-respond.html to really explain how annoying it can be to have a select few in the community who get genuinely upset at the idea of female characters.

    I don't mean to be so wish washy or sound centrist on the argument as that is far from where my allignment is, but I will say understanding why this blacklash exists, as I overviewed in the OP, is kinda key to understanding how to get a point across.

    But internet culture as I will losely call it leads to people having the agency to say "screw you guys for being sexist" and "screw feminist 40k for attacking the hobby I love" and both sides aren't right or wrong. In my own opinion I'd say that yeah it is problematic to only want male figures for your army but you're still allowed to do it. SOB are problematic and I love them, and sadly, that's part of any movement like feminism - disagreement within it, as some people will yell misogyny at me and others will agree.

    However it is good to not see too much backlash against female models themselves like there's a term for it I forget someone please find it for me when the argument over an issue becomes bigger than the issue itself. It feels all the emotions we have around feminism have charged the Feminist 40k movement to end up being a bigger deal than it was to want female models. Wording there isnt perfect, but I hope that makes sense.


    yep thats the problem, the Fem40k people have turned the discussion from more female models, into "do as we say or you are X/Y/Z"

    When you attack a community it no longer matters what your message is, good or bad, you are then seen as an outsider trying to cause trouble.

    " it has its dark underbelly: a tribal and woefully toxic group of players who seek to isolate and protect “their” fandom at all costs, similar to a child screaming over “their” section of the playground when it is to be shared for everyone."
    Unacceptable as it ignores context within the setting, directly attacks wargaming fanbase.

    "This has plagued the fandom for generations, and while not exclusive to the game, has turned off many players who feel uncomfortable playing a hobby that requires interaction with such folk."
    Generalist statement that has no proof and provides no proof, passed off as fact even though it is opinion.

    "demeaning and crass treatment of women in game stores, condoning racist and abhorrent behavior towards minorities or disabled persons, online harassment, and shaming other people for daring to enjoy the same hobby."
    Again making a statement with no proof, using buzzwords to try to bring people to their cause and attempting to gain credibility through outrage, engaging in the same behaviour that they claim to be fighting against in the very same sentence.

    "It is one thing to deny the existence and experiences of the many, many players who have faced "
    Again, no proof provided.

    "such treatment by self-proclaimed “fans”"
    Attempted undermining of any counter points.

    "this has forced many of us in the community to shun open spaces for fear of inviting anything from rape threats to unsolicited advances from these shining examples of humanity. "
    Attempting to gain emotional support and cause outrage to reinforce their political ideology, falling back on the usual "rape" threats SJW tactic, still no proof provided and again attempted undermining of any counter points.

    "Feminist 40K is a closed community, and that is not because we want to be, but because we have to be."
    refusal to have open dialogue, closed group that only allows like minded people, victim mentality again, another attempt at closing off counter points.

    "Warhammer 40,000 is built upon decades of continuously rewritten and fluid fiction, with changes made to reflect the times and Games Workshops’ player base."
    Wrong, 40k is one of the most consistent universes around, small changes are made here and there but on the whole it has been consistent throughout, expanding upon an idea is no re writing it, they should know this.

    "such as the unnecessary sexualization of female-oriented miniatures to the lack of representation in model choice"
    Personal opinion passed off as fact, 40k has massive representation of "minorities", grey model, paint how you like.

    "and request Games Workshop"
    Nothing has come across as a request yet.

    "The vitriolic reaction to this"
    prove it.

    "Aside from the individual harassment of our players, there have been attempts at banning our page, concerted efforts to shut us down"
    no evidence provided again, consistent with clear victim mentality displayed so far, another weak attempt to gain sympathy for non existent issue.

    "nd continuous defamation and bullying online for the audacity of challenging established canon"
    The very things they are in fact doing in this very article, they fired the first shot and are now crying because they have apparently been "bullied", provide proof.

    "Take Adepta Sororitas armour. It emphasises the female figure to a sexualised level "
    Ignoring context again to push political ideology, there is a reason they look this way.

    "but alongside nearly-naked repentant fanatics, a long-running mistreatment in both in-game lore and GW codexes, and lack of relatively cheap and updated armies, it’s hard for women"
    Based on assumption that woman want female models, based on assumption that woman are so shallow that they can ONLY play the game if there are more woman models, ignoring context of models yet again.

    "to not take that as a statement that GW just doesn’t care much for its female player base"
    Yet another false equivalence, yet another attempt to gain favour through "outrage"

    "The matter of variety in ethnicity of models also turns away minorities who prefer to be represented by more than cultural stereotypes born of the comic books and action movies of the 80’s."
    This is an outright lie, the models are grey, paint them how you like, also no proof provided yet again and passing off opinion as fact.

    "Ask the frothing, furious fans who spend the better half of their day finding ways to harass other fans who also want to make small plastic soldiers kill each other. "
    aaaaaand another attempt to discredit any disenting views, another attack on the 40k community..... sigh

    "We love its over-the-top design, its shameless lifting of tropes from pop culture, its satire of fascistic theocracy, its sheer scale and flexibility that allows one to make an army that is very much our own"
    And yet you are unable to "make your own" female army using 3rd party parts.... hmmm, amazed they didnt spot this obvious counter point and try to shut it down.

    "Everyone wins: minorities gain better representation"
    Again, grey models, based on assumption that a black person will only play the game if it has black people in it, inherently bigoted point of view that

    " more options for writing and models are sold"
    assumption, provide proof

    " It’s much deeper than simply changing a coat of paint or adding a pair of accentuated breasts on a chestplate"
    Is it? then why havent you actually shown this, again making a general statement with no backing, if its "deeper" than this, show us.

    "but the reactionary views of loud, stubborn dinosaurs are truly ruining the experience, as much as they claim to be the victim."
    Another attack on counter points, another attack on the 40k community "you agree with us or you are a dinosaur" and attempted displacement, this whole article show that they infact have the "victim" mentality and have tried several times to reinforce it.

    "Representation matters. It shows people that they are recognised"
    Yep it does, well done....

    " it allows women to safely play the hobby without spending the whole time staring at sexualised representations of the female form"
    Another assumption, woman like those models, woman dislike those models, like men they have differing opinions, also, the males are just as sexualised, but no one cares about that right??

    "and then deal with men who seem to think they have a right to allow what women can or can’t feel demeaned by"
    Actually this is exactly what you are doing right now, how ironic!

    "it allows gaming to be a fun hobby without fear of being harassed online, threatened, insulted or publicly shamed for one’s preference of miniature post-humans."
    Yay! more victim mentality and apparent threats from the community,, yay more lack of proof... yaaaaay!

    TL/DR

    So they have basically tried to use a reasonable demand to push their political views, they have used tried and tested SJW behaviour and the usual "rape, sexist, racist" tropes to disuade counter points, and finally the usual "you are with us or you are X/Y/Z"

    This is why Fem40k is not taken seriously.
       
    Made in gb
    Thrall Wizard of Tzeentch





     Crimson wrote:
     Adeptus Doritos wrote:
    Anyone who says that gender is a Social Construct doesn't know what a Gender is and how deeply tied to your physiology it is.

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28582-scans-prove-theres-no-such-thing-as-a-male-or-female-brain/
    It totally is a social construct.

    That males and females like different things is almost completely due the upbring and the society.



    I think you have misinterpreted this paper as evidence of social and cultural influences solely contributing to a persons gender. This is simply untrue. It is not one factor but several that contribute to this identity. The paper, or article commentary on it, you have linked argues not for gender being a social construct, but rather there being no respective female/male brain. There are still big differences between the brains of men and women, just the scale of the overlap is much larger than thought. Thus it is incorrect to deny the impact, the role biology has not only in our physical development, but also in the determination of the rules and constructs that govern our society. To quote a subsequent study to the one the article you linked was commentating on: "Whereas a strict dichotomy between male/female brains does not exist, this does not diminish or negate the importance of considering statistical differences between the sexes".

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4833246/
       
    Made in us
    Beautiful and Deadly Keeper of Secrets





     Crimson wrote:
     ZebioLizard2 wrote:
    Once again, the brain is not the only part of the body. As it seems you've ignored anyone who disagreed with this article a moment ago.

    But certainly it is the thing where your personality and the 'essence' of you resides?
    Given that the essence of me changed wildly when chemicals produced by my body was interrupted by various things.. I'm going to say yes to the idea that is where your personalty resides. But the mind is a plaything of the body when hormones and issues come to light or issues resides.

    Having seen many people change drastically in the medical field due to issues bodily issues, chemical imbalances, and all sorts of things.. The idea that everything about oneself is just a concept created by one's mind rather then the full self is easily proven wrong.
       
    Made in gb
    Fresh-Faced New User





     Adeptus Doritos wrote:
     kawaiipikachu wrote:
    Do you think you could PM me or something because I really don't know who you're mistaking me for but it does make me uncomfortable to be honest. I'm genuinely not part of or active in any other Warhammer forums or Facebook groups. I have a local gaming facebook group but that's about it. Also, ad hominem attacks are just kinda crap. Like, I honestly have no idea who you are or who you think I am but I hope it's a genuine misunderstanding rather than like I said some kind of attack. So if you wanna continue that feel free to message as I don't wanna derail the thread.


    Cool, let me help you here.

    Instead of making the most noise about me having a pretty good idea who you are, how about you engage my argument? It doesn't make me doubt my assessment at all when you're more concerned about me 'mistaking you for someone else' than you are engaging the discussion.


    Because your original long post where you quoted me a lot was very charged and I don't personally have interest or time to respond to it all given how the tone made it come across. Frankly just the way i can't make you PM me you can't make me comb through your response, especially given all the assumptions and statements you made, I could say a lot to it. It was, however, pretty condesending rather than open and that's not discussion. But prehaps your general hostility towards me has something to do with who you think I am - I'm not you, I can't tell our motivation so I can't sit here and judge you for it or make assumptions. Heck, for all I know the person you think I am could have treated you like crap so you feel hostility to me. I can't judge. But I can choose not to engage in a fruitless discussion that wouldn't lead anywhere. I am glad to hear all this feedback from others as I am interested in what the community has to say now I've gathered my own thoughts, and they may change if this thread continues and new arguments are made, because our opinions are never solid. But I'm not here to be talked down to.

    So by all means PM me or don't, in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter, stay in this thread or don't, it's your choice and I have to respect that. I only ask you show the same respect, and if you can't I don't engage. Regardless, you have your POV and are free to debate it here. I just won't be a part of that.
       
    Made in us
    Posts with Authority





     kawaiipikachu wrote:
    So by all means PM me or don't, in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter, stay in this thread or don't, it's your choice and I have to respect that. I only ask you show the same respect, and if you can't I don't engage. Regardless, you have your POV and are free to debate it here. I just won't be a part of that.


    "You didn't agree with me and I don't have an argument for your statement, even though I expect you to read my wall of text. Therefore, I can't discuss with you."

    Feminist 40k admin confirmed.

    You honestly expect to hurl mud at the community, dictate how we should think (and how we are thinking), and expect people to come to you with open arms and embrace you?


    Mob Rule is not a rule. 
       
    Made in gb
    Fresh-Faced New User





    Zatsuku wrote:
    This thread is only proving to me that even here on dakka there is some ridiculous toxicity against female players. In the past this has been one of the more friendly environments I have found for miniature wargaming which makes it even weirder to me.


    Yeah, some people here are kinda hostile but I wouldn't hold it against them. They have their own backgrounds which shaped their views and opinions, and creating a dialogue just aims to bridge that gap really. Not always successfuly and it'd be nice if people were more respectful, but this is the internet.

    Most people are still good eggs.
       
    Made in us
    Posts with Authority





     kawaiipikachu wrote:
    Most people are still good eggs.


    So, really- if people take umbrage with you making the false accusation that we're hostile to women, that means they're 'bad eggs'?

    You're not figuring out why Feminist 40k isn't very... appreciated, are you?

    Mob Rule is not a rule. 
       
    Made in gb
    Fresh-Faced New User





     Adeptus Doritos wrote:
     kawaiipikachu wrote:
    So by all means PM me or don't, in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter, stay in this thread or don't, it's your choice and I have to respect that. I only ask you show the same respect, and if you can't I don't engage. Regardless, you have your POV and are free to debate it here. I just won't be a part of that.


    "You didn't agree with me and I don't have an argument for your statement, even though I expect you to read my wall of text. Therefore, I can't discuss with you."

    Feminist 40k admin confirmed.

    You honestly expect to hurl mud at the community, dictate how we should think (and how we are thinking), and expect people to come to you with open arms and embrace you?



    Um, I think you didn't read anything I said, but okay. It's not a case of "I don't have a response," it's a case of I choose what I respond to and what I have time to respond to. I'm sorry you're so upset that I can't respond to it, but as I said 1) Lack of time to pick it apart, 2) the tone is very off putting and rude, so I just won't.

    Im not attacking anyone in the community, and no, I'm not a Feminist 40k admin.

    I'm just gonna stop responding after this because honestly this is a new level of rudeness and hosility on what is otherwise a nice Forum.
       
    Made in fi
    Courageous Space Marine Captain






     Adeptus Doritos wrote:
     Crimson wrote:
    Science disagrees with you. The brain is what you are. Did you read the article?

    Riiiiight. So there's no series of factors created by hormones, genes, etc.... right?

    There are. And those factors have affected the development of the brains studied. Turns out the effect is insignificant.


    Just flying by the seat of their pants, and suddenly became financially successful.

    What a lucky guess those fellows made.

    Using the prevailing societal attitudes in the marketing is often successful. It also reinforces these attitudes.

    It always puzzles me how people who are so adamant that gender is essentialist and is not affected by the society also oppose making upbringing and marketing more gender neutral. If you're right, doing so should not matter...

       
    Made in us
    Fixture of Dakka






     Adeptus Doritos wrote:
     Crimson wrote:
    Science disagrees with you. The brain is what you are. Did you read the article?


    Riiiiight. So there's no series of factors created by hormones, genes, etc.... right?

     Crimson wrote:
    Computer games are a good example. Originally they were marketed gender neutrally, and both genders played them equally. But in the 80's the marketing switched to marketing to boys, and games and computer became mainly a boy thing. It was so influential that it created a gender gap in the tech field. Nowadays it finally starting to get more balanced again.


    So a bunch of guys, on a hunch, said, "let's market to boys for no reason and see where this goes".

    Just flying by the seat of their pants, and suddenly became financially successful.

    What a lucky guess those fellows made.



    Funny.. b.c science shows Males without any influence will go after stuff like cars and trucks where females will go after things like dolls. This is also shown in Primates.

    Its like we knew this all along

    Link (need to copy paste i think, dakka is weird about some links)
    Spoiler:
    http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(10)01449-1?_returnURL=http%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0960982210014491%3Fshowall%3Dtrue

    This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/02/03 16:35:18


       
    Made in us
    Dakka Veteran




     kawaiipikachu wrote:

    I'm just gonna stop responding after this because honestly this is a new level of rudeness and hosility on what is otherwise a nice Forum.


    How long have you been here? Oh right, just today

    Seriously, you cannot come into someone else's playground, tell them you're changing the rules because YOU think the current rules are unfair, and expect them to all be like "oh, yes, yes, yes, we were so unenlightened!"

    That's actually bullying, regardless of if you have a point or not. That's why people receive your "enlightenment" as hostile, bullyish, and quite thuggish.
       
    Made in gb
    Dakka Veteran





    How are we categorising Slaanesh demons here?

    Joking aside, I'd like to see female Guard, Custodes too would be fine. Are all the males who have the Pariah gene made into Assassins whilst all the females go to the Sisters Of Silence?

    Is the 41st millennium still tied to a binary gender system? I'd gotten the impression from some of the novels I'd read that people's race in the future was wildly divergent from what we have now (what with millennia of interbreeding and then the question of different planets and the likes of different abhuman species developing over the years of isolation) are the gender lines really so strict?

    Take a look at what I've been painting and modelling: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/725222.page 
       
    Made in es
    Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




    Vigo. Spain.

    If I remember correctly the last space marine Sternguard box has a face that has african features. Yeah we all know grey men are grey men but facial features aren't the same. And it also has the face of Captain Tiatus. Man, that box surely was epic. Not the price, of course.

    This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/03 16:36:08


     Crimson Devil wrote:

    Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

    ERJAK wrote:
    Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

     
       
     
    Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
    Go to: