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.

 unitled wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
I love reading these threads where feminists pretend to love/ always loved 40k.... yet

1.Don't like the model range due to lack of diversity (ignore the fact that all models grey and the only thing separating a female and male space marine is a head swap)
2. Don't like the lore because of lack of diversity (ignoring that GW encourages you to make your own lore and unique army)
3. Don't like the player base because of lack of diversity/ everyone is a bigot/fascist/racist ect.

I'm always curious what exactly you like about 40k? Or is the truth that you simply want to turn someone else's hobby into your so that we have to be miserable people that cant enjoy anything without feeling oppressed about 10000 different things

You know you can enjoy something and acknowledge it has issues right? Also, I started on GW over 20 years ago and proud to call myself a feminist. At what point does this become 'my' hobby?

Never, in the same way it will never become "my" hobby, being a feminist has nothing to do with it, just as if i was a misandryst (SP?) would have no bearing either, such is life.

Tell that to asmodios then

 unitled wrote:
Tell that to asmodios then

haha telling everyone

 Crimson wrote:
I think you're projecting now. I'm not really sure what your argument is besides talking gak about the FB group (which may or may not be true) and posting meme pics.

If you don't know what my argument is, you're still too focused on the little bruise I dealt to your ego about making things regardless of whether or not it's lore-friendly.

 Crimson wrote:
It is not constructive to make such claims based mere hunch.

It's not when you're wrong.

And in a lot of cases, where I've seen this thing posted before- I wouldn't have made this leap. But, I've read the OP's exact style, phrasing, and references a multitude of times on the very page we're talking about. This is neither the first nor last time they've done this. In fact, their entire reaction to being 'named without being named' is always the exact same. He goes into a panic, and refuses to actually engage a 'debate' or 'discussion' (unless you're agreeing with him), and then plays victim because he really, really hates the fact that people found out 'Feminist 40k' is less 'feminism', and more like a bunch of guys that would do anything to get a woman to game with them.

 unitled wrote:
You know you can enjoy something and acknowledge it has issues right? Also, I started on GW over 20 years ago and proud to call myself a feminist. At what point does this become 'my' hobby?

I like the way you try to craft it as 'having its issues'. What I think you mean to say is "acknowledge the issues that I have with it". Just because you dislike something does not make it a universal fault.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
and more like a bunch of guys that would do anything to get a woman to game with them.

They are just nice guys.

Rosebuddy wrote:


What makes the 40K setting fascist isn't that the Imperium has those qualities. it's that they're written as largely justified because that's just how the galaxy works.

Well it IS how the galaxy works in 40k. It would be a pretty boring wargame without conflict and war. Thankfully it is a fictional empire in a fictional galaxy full of fictional demons and fictional aliens.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
I think you're projecting now. I'm not really sure what your argument is besides talking gak about the FB group (which may or may not be true) and posting meme pics.

If you don't know what my argument is, you're still too focused on the little bruise I dealt to your ego about making things regardless of whether or not it's lore-friendly.

 Crimson wrote:
It is not constructive to make such claims based mere hunch.

It's not when you're wrong.

And in a lot of cases, where I've seen this thing posted before- I wouldn't have made this leap. But, I've read the OP's exact style, phrasing, and references a multitude of times on the very page we're talking about. This is neither the first nor last time they've done this. In fact, their entire reaction to being 'named without being named' is always the exact same. He goes into a panic, and refuses to actually engage a 'debate' or 'discussion' (unless you're agreeing with him), and then plays victim because he really, really hates the fact that people found out 'Feminist 40k' is less 'feminism', and more like a bunch of guys that would do anything to get a woman to game with them.

 unitled wrote:
You know you can enjoy something and acknowledge it has issues right? Also, I started on GW over 20 years ago and proud to call myself a feminist. At what point does this become 'my' hobby?

I like the way you try to craft it as 'having its issues'. What I think you mean to say is "acknowledge the issues that I have with it". Just because you dislike something does not make it a universal fault.

Yep, we agree on this i think, I have asked him twice now to reply to my breakdown of what is wrong with his BOLS article and he still hasnt, show a lack of integrity and moral courage, further hurting his cause, I have asked many many times for him to apologise publicly for that article and attacking the community he pretends to love, this will go a long way to redress the issues people have with him and his political movement, as it stands now he has zero credibility, and his message has suffered for it.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

If you don't know what my argument is, you're still too focused on the little bruise I dealt to your ego about making things regardless of whether or not it's lore-friendly.

At this point I'm just honestly confused. I don't even know what the thing you think I'm upset about is.

 Formosa wrote:
Yep, we agree on this i think, I have asked him twice now to reply to my breakdown of what is wrong with his BOLS article and he still hasnt, show a lack of integrity and moral courage, further hurting his cause, I have asked many many times for him to apologise publicly for that article and attacking the community he pretends to love, this will go a long way to redress the issues people have with him and his political movement, as it stands now he has zero credibility, and his message has suffered for it.

You wanna hear the funny thing?

FEMINIST 40k: "We want female guardsmen!"

EVERYONE: "Oh, yeah- that'd be awesome!"

FEMINIST 40k: "Plastic Sisters, with improved units and the like! And different boob plate options!"

EVERYONE: "YES!"

FEMINIST 40k: "Female characters in 40k!"

EVERYONE: "Hell yeah!"

FEMINIST 40k: "Female Space Marines!"

[only a few people cheer]

FEMINIST 40k: *Posts 5000 word essay on why the Warhammer 40k community is toxic and sexist, and needs to be 'fixed'*

[People are angry for being painted with broad strokes and called disgusting things]

FEMINIST 40k: "See? It's PROOF they hate women!" [in a man's voice]

 Earth127 wrote:
I recognized the style of the OP too, someone using academic langauge (explained) to brooch a dangerous subject. In neither his style nor line of thinking do I see clear evidence pointing to one particular FB page. I have read many threads like this on many forums and really none of it is new and none of it specific enough that I would brazenly declare knowing who OP is.

If you're familiar with the person, and their writings- you'll see it's a lot more than style. It's references, examples, and 'sources'. Not sure where you're at, but I'm not sure I've encountered too many 'academics' that want female space marines, praise Mao and Marx, make overly-elaborate posts that use more buzzwords than actual facts, and duck and hide from any possible counter-argument.

The 40k community is small, and like I said- if it's a coincidence, it's a pretty damned bizarre one.

Please take your identity politics and take it to someplace else. I cant be any nicer about that.

Table wrote:
Please take your identity politics and take it to someplace else. I cant be any nicer about that.

What a disgusting bald faced lie.... your canadian, you can be MUCH nicer than that hahah

 unitled wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
I love reading these threads where feminists pretend to love/ always loved 40k.... yet

1.Don't like the model range due to lack of diversity (ignore the fact that all models grey and the only thing separating a female and male space marine is a head swap)
2. Don't like the lore because of lack of diversity (ignoring that GW encourages you to make your own lore and unique army)
3. Don't like the player base because of lack of diversity/ everyone is a bigot/fascist/racist ect.

I'm always curious what exactly you like about 40k? Or is the truth that you simply want to turn someone else's hobby into your so that we have to be miserable people that cant enjoy anything without feeling oppressed about 10000 different things

You know you can enjoy something and acknowledge it has issues right? Also, I started on GW over 20 years ago and proud to call myself a feminist. At what point does this become 'my' hobby?

See the difference between the "feminist" and everybody else is nobody else is trying to fundamentally change what the hobby is. The basic feminist argument seems to be that 1. the background is racist/sexist 2. The models are racist/sexist 3. The people who play are racist/sexist..... Guess what 40k becomes if you 1.change the background 2. change all the models 3. replace all the players.... You all of a sudden dont have 40k and thats what people dont want because we enjoy the setting for what it is.

And all the "issues" for 40k that you see aren't actually issues because of 1. The background is fiction and doesn't hurt anyone 2. The model are grey and don't exclude anyone 3. The Warhammer community is the single most excepting/ nice community I've ever been a part of and I've done everything from play professional sports to the tabletop games.

pismakron wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:


What makes the 40K setting fascist isn't that the Imperium has those qualities. it's that they're written as largely justified because that's just how the galaxy works.

Well it IS how the galaxy works in 40k. It would be a pretty boring wargame without conflict and war. Thankfully it is a fictional empire in a fictional galaxy full of fictional demons and fictional aliens.

You could definitely have a conflict-ridden 40K galaxy without the setting justifying fascism, though.

I am genuinely confused as to why people think Marx has anything to do with gender. The good man lived in the victorian era (which as you might know was all about strict gender roles) and this is pretty evident in his works. There is absolutely nothing feminist or gender-related in the writings of Karl Marx. Marx wrote about economy, dialectics (especially his theories of dialectical materialism) and related philosophical concepts, social class, societal problems and politics. He was concerned with the welfare of women and wanted to improve their position in society (he wanted to do that for people in general, not just women), but he could hardly be called feminist. He never wrote on gender at all.
So I propose we leave Marx out of this. This discussion is already ridiculous enough.

Rosebuddy wrote:
[You could definitely have a conflict-ridden 40K galaxy without the setting justifying fascism, though.

I don't think you're thinking of 'fascism' here correctly, and it's fine- it's normal. Some people think 'fascism' and 'dad' are the same thing.

But keep in mind *why* it's 'justified'.

Humanity is f**cked. Like, literally on the verge of complete annihilation. And their complete annihilation was the only thing that could have 'saved' the galaxy from chaos. Every little thing humanity endures is the best that can possibly be done to ensure survival. That includes annihilating entire planets, conscripting teenagers, sending psykers to be sacrificed, everything is awful.

There is NO other option. There is no 'let's reason with our enemies'. There is no, 'maybe something else would work better'.

What you're calling 'fascism' is only 'justified' here because it's a tool of last resort.

That's how desperate humanity is.

I disagree with that interpretation, Adeptus Doritos, but that is a discussion about the lore so its off topic. And I know my view is not a very popular one.

Rosebuddy wrote:

pismakron wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:


What makes the 40K setting fascist isn't that the Imperium has those qualities. it's that they're written as largely justified because that's just how the galaxy works.

Well it IS how the galaxy works in 40k. It would be a pretty boring wargame without conflict and war. Thankfully it is a fictional empire in a fictional galaxy full of fictional demons and fictional aliens.

You could definitely have a conflict-ridden 40K galaxy without the setting justifying fascism, though.

In a setting where everything is out to kill you and the only choice is total war, how can you not have fascism? That's where the grimdarkness from the setting comes from. Its not as if a bunch of lords got together and decided to be donkey-caves for the fun of it. They are donkey-caves because the alternative is annihilation.
Not to mention that it doesn't even justify fascism to begin with, as unless you are a masochist or insane, you really wouldn't want to live in Imperium.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
The good man.. Karl Marx.

'Good men' don't bum off everyone until they have no friends left.

'Good men' don't make their wives sell family heirlooms because he refuses to work.

'Good men' don't knock up their wives when they can't feed their family as it is.

'Good men' don't have unpaid housekeepers they knock up when their wife is having miscarriages and stillbirths.

'Good men' don't make their bastard son with the housekeeper use the back door and sell the kid into child labor.

'Good men' actually hold a job before they criticize how the workers should be paid.

'Good men' don't advocate stealing property from other human beings.

'Good men' don't tell workers they've no place to speak unless they've been educated in the philosophies.

Karl Marx was NOT a good man. And he died covered in weeping sores and in agony- and he deserved every bit of it.

Rosebuddy wrote:

pismakron wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:


What makes the 40K setting fascist isn't that the Imperium has those qualities. it's that they're written as largely justified because that's just how the galaxy works.

Well it IS how the galaxy works in 40k. It would be a pretty boring wargame without conflict and war. Thankfully it is a fictional empire in a fictional galaxy full of fictional demons and fictional aliens.

You could definitely have a conflict-ridden 40K galaxy without the setting justifying fascism, though.

You are the reason we cannot have nice things. I jest. Kinda. Look friend. Nothing justifies fascism in 40k. The setting is quite brutal because that is its flavor. If you dont like that flavor kindly sod off and find one you do like. This is why I despise identity politics. There are things you may not enjoy, it does not mean others cannot enjoy that very same thing. It is a game. Played by men and young boys. WIth out these very same men and boys who are horrible sexist pigs, 40k would not exist. But in the end.......

It...........................................is................................................fictional. No one is getting hurt and no one needs representation in this fictional universe. I kindly suggest that you, and "feminist gamers" go find something you like and leave us sexist nazi pigs to enjoy our terrible breeding ground for future fascist's.

What is next up on the alter of diversity? Im sorrry if I am being severe here. I am a liberal but I do not interject my politics where they do not belong, you should not as well.

Asmodios wrote:


See the difference between the "feminist" and everybody else is nobody else is trying to fundamentally change what the hobby is. The basic feminist argument seems to be that 1. the background is racist/sexist 2. The models are racist/sexist 3. The people who play are racist/sexist..... Guess what 40k becomes if you 1.change the background 2. change all the models 3. replace all the players.... You all of a sudden dont have 40k and thats what people dont want because we enjoy the setting for what it is.

And all the "issues" for 40k that you see aren't actually issues because of 1. The background is fiction and doesn't hurt anyone 2. The model are grey and don't exclude anyone 3. The Warhammer community is the single most excepting/ nice community I've ever been a part of and I've done everything from play professional sports to the tabletop games.

That's not really the argument, it is caricature of it. It is that representation of females in fluff is lacking and in model form even more lacking. This is at least partly due certain sexist attitudes ingrained in the culture, as is the opposition to addressing this issue. This doesn't mean that the GW designers, or the players are bigots (though of course in huge player base there will be fair share of bigots.) Many people get super defensive when it is pointed out that institutionalised sexism or racism might be a thing. But it is a thing, it affects all of us, and realising this is the first step at trying to address it.

And people want things that about 40K changed all the time. Eldar have almost always been OP as feth, yet most people don't think that asking that to be addressed is somehow ruining 40K.

Rosebuddy wrote:

pismakron wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:


What makes the 40K setting fascist isn't that the Imperium has those qualities. it's that they're written as largely justified because that's just how the galaxy works.

Well it IS how the galaxy works in 40k. It would be a pretty boring wargame without conflict and war. Thankfully it is a fictional empire in a fictional galaxy full of fictional demons and fictional aliens.

You could definitely have a conflict-ridden 40K galaxy without the setting justifying fascism, though.

The setting doesn't 'justify facism'. The setting takes things that facist regimes have claimed are "emergency powers" and asked "what kind of emergency would you need for this s*** to be actually necessary?"

40k could be read as a condemnation of facism simply by taking a look at the vast array of existential threats and hostile physics in the 41st milennium, and saying "this is how absurd the world has to be before facism becomes defensible".

 Crimson wrote:
That's not really the argument, it is caricature of it. It is that representation of females in fluff is lacking and in model form even more lacking. This is at least partly due certain sexist attitudes ingrained in the culture, as is the opposition to addressing this issue. This doesn't mean that the GW designers, or the players are bigots (though of course in huge player base there will be fair share of bigots.) Many people get super defensive when it is pointed out that institutionalised sexism or racism might be a thing. But it is a thing, it affects all of us, and realising this is the first step at trying to address it.

Hold on, let me get this straight.

The lack of female models and female characters in the fluff is because of institutionalized racism and sexism. A vast conspiracy to make the womenfolk and Pee-Oh-Seez feel awful. And adding these things will start fixing these societal problems (that no one can provide genuine evidence for).

I just want to make sure I'm summarizing that correctly.

Because it's hilarious, I'm now convinced you're the greatest satirist ever.

 Crimson wrote:

Asmodios wrote:


See the difference between the "feminist" and everybody else is nobody else is trying to fundamentally change what the hobby is. The basic feminist argument seems to be that 1. the background is racist/sexist 2. The models are racist/sexist 3. The people who play are racist/sexist..... Guess what 40k becomes if you 1.change the background 2. change all the models 3. replace all the players.... You all of a sudden dont have 40k and thats what people dont want because we enjoy the setting for what it is.

And all the "issues" for 40k that you see aren't actually issues because of 1. The background is fiction and doesn't hurt anyone 2. The model are grey and don't exclude anyone 3. The Warhammer community is the single most excepting/ nice community I've ever been a part of and I've done everything from play professional sports to the tabletop games.

That's not really the argument, it is caricature of it. It is that representation of females in fluff is lacking and in model form even more lacking. This is at least partly due certain sexist attitudes ingrained in the culture, as is the opposition to addressing this issue. This doesn't mean that the GW designers, or the players are bigots (though of course in huge player base there will be fair share of bigots.) Many people get super defensive when it is pointed out that institutionalised sexism or racism might be a thing. But it is a thing, it affects all of us, and realising this is the first step at trying to address it.

And people want things that about 40K changed all the time. Eldar have almost always been OP as feth, yet most people don't think that asking that to be addressed is somehow ruining 40K.

So, whats next, getting in a time machine and bitching at the knights templar for being a warrior fraternity? Come on man.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Formosa wrote:

Table wrote:
Please take your identity politics and take it to someplace else. I cant be any nicer about that.

What a disgusting bald faced lie.... your canadian, you can be MUCH nicer than that hahah

:(

Rosebuddy wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 unitled wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:


I don't want to turn gaming into a segue into identity politics or sociology.

Yeah, why can't people shut up and let me enjoy this game about a fascist society who enforces their xenophobic law through state-sponsored violence without bringing politics into it?

So I'm not allowed to play Chess without thinking about race? Or Othello?

If I play poker, because of the card being made of trees, and trees are being cut down, I should be thinking about the environment?

If I play Risk, I shouldn't be thinking about how to win/enjoy a BOARD GAME, but should instead by thinking about global politics and warfare?



Yeah, I believe there's a thing called "escapism". For some, 40k IS escapism, and I see no reason why that should be wrong. If someone doesn't want to bring politics into a board game for plastic toy soldiers, I think that's a reasonable request.

There's a solid difference between escapism and refusing to think about anything ever. 40K has far more modern-world political origins than chess does.

Does it really? Considering it was made as a parody of events several decades before now, I don't really see how it can still be classed as contemporary. In my experience of theatre (yeah, I know, not exactly groundbreaking), things that are ten years old aren't even classed as modern. I fail to see how a wargame that's, what, thirty years old? can bring to "modern-world politics".

Again, I'm not saying to "refusing to think about anything ever". I'm saying that a fictional, genre-merging, over-the-top parody wargame about sentient fungi and chainsaw swords isn't the right place to go thinking about it.

Still - so no chess. Why not Othello? Risk?

You're bristling at the suggestion that perhaps people should analyse the intellectual content of the things they interact with and offer up "thinking about global politics" as a ridiculous hypothetical conclusion to such behaviour.

I wouldn't say "bristling" was the right word, but maybe that's how I come across.

If you're suggesting that it's bad to "bristle" at the suggestion "people should analyse the intellectual content of the things they interact with", then my above points on Chess and Risk should still stand, no?

Nothing wrong with thinking and doing things about global politics. But there are FAR better places to do it than a toy soldiers game which a percentage of a percentage of a percentage of the world's population to has ANY experience of.

The 40K setting is definitely fascist. It's a setting where eternal suspicion, genetic cleansing, war against an incomprehensible alien Other and hatred of compassion is perhaps grim but the only way that things could be. There has to be mass violence based upon the intrinsic qualities of the non-human. It's not just that the Imperium is written as fascists as part of justifying any faction fighting against any other faction in a tabletop game originally based on a mix of Judge Dredd and Dune.

You're right. The Imperium of Man is fascist, totalitarian, egalitarian in that EVERYONE is crushed down, xenophobic, hyper-violent, and that's portrayed in a best case scenario as admirable, or in a worst case scenario, as their only means of survival. It's setting where xenophobia, fascism, hatred and violence are the menu of the day, where billions of lives are tossed away because of hatred and war and slaughter, because it's the only way to survive.



And it's all MADE UP.

You heard me.
Unreal.
Fake.
Fictional.

It's all FICTIONAL fascism. There's no daemons out to get you! There's no Inquisition lurking around to burn you because you got a nosebleed when you read a certain book. There's not even a (realistically functioning) chainsword! It's made up. It's not real.
So why should a fictional setting for a boardgame made to sell plastic toys written decades ago be treated like some deep political message?

So you don't find the idea of the Imperium to be cool? That's 100% okay. Don't play as them. You find their mere existence abhorrent? Don't interact with the (fictional) universe where they (fictionally) exist. Also 100% okay.

If YOU want to bring politics in, that's your choice. But if someone else doesn't want to, it's perfectly reasonable for them to ignore the politics you're forcing in, and escape from it.
Because for some people, this is a hobby, where they can escape from all the politics you're advocating bringing in.

Galas wrote:I like the imperium just as I like Sauron, Mordor and Isengard in LOTR. That doesn't mean I support what they actually represent in real life. But as fiction they are cool. They couldn't be more different from my political views.

Absolutely agreed.
My go-to in 40k is the Imperium.
If given a choice, I will always choose to play as Clone Troopers/Storm Troopers/First Order in a Star Wars setting.
In WHFB/AoS, my favourite faction is Skaven.

Just because I like to play as these in a FICTIONAL setting doesn't mean I'm suddenly a fascistic backstabber - probably furthest from it. But fiction isn't reality, and I think that's a REALLY good thing.

Galas wrote:The 40k setting his a parody, they aren't justified, is just that the galaxy sucks and everybody is horrible, like the Negative Universes of DC (I don't know if you have read Dark Nights: Metal)... and I don't know if you have realised that since Guilliman was resurrected they have been doing the good work of putting the Imperium that follow Guilliman as the good guys. Thats why he put aside all the Lords of Terra, those old and incompetent bad guys!

Is hard to marketing your setting to the widder audience when the "protagonists" are space-Nazis/KKK. Personally I prefer the grimdark, warhammer setting, I have always defended that the Imperium of man are the Great Devourer, not the Tyranids, but some people will "abuse" me for saying that... eh Sgt_Smudge?

*hurls abuse*

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:
[You could definitely have a conflict-ridden 40K galaxy without the setting justifying fascism, though.

I don't think you're thinking of 'fascism' here correctly, and it's fine- it's normal. Some people think 'fascism' and 'dad' are the same thing.

But keep in mind *why* it's 'justified'.

Humanity is f**cked. Like, literally on the verge of complete annihilation. And their complete annihilation was the only thing that could have 'saved' the galaxy from chaos. Every little thing humanity endures is the best that can possibly be done to ensure survival. That includes annihilating entire planets, conscripting teenagers, sending psykers to be sacrificed, everything is awful.

There is NO other option. There is no 'let's reason with our enemies'. There is no, 'maybe something else would work better'.

What you're calling 'fascism' is only 'justified' here because it's a tool of last resort.

That's how desperate humanity is.

Yeah, that's kinda fethed up way to look at it. It is a view that in certain circumstances facism is justified. It is not. 40K Imperium is plainly evil. And I love that, because that's the flavour of the setting and whole thing is absurd black comedy.

Asmodios wrote:
...See the difference between the "feminist" and everybody else is nobody else is trying to fundamentally change what the hobby is. The basic feminist argument seems to be that 1. the background is racist/sexist 2. The models are racist/sexist 3. The people who play are racist/sexist..... Guess what 40k becomes if you 1.change the background 2. change all the models 3. replace all the players.... You all of a sudden dont have 40k and thats what people dont want because we enjoy the setting for what it is.

And all the "issues" for 40k that you see aren't actually issues because of 1. The background is fiction and doesn't hurt anyone 2. The model are grey and don't exclude anyone 3. The Warhammer community is the single most excepting/ nice community I've ever been a part of and I've done everything from play professional sports to the tabletop games.

...No?

The background is seldom the problem. The solution to lacking representation in the miniatures range is to expand it, not to replace it. The people who play aren't universally racist/sexist, but the people who take complaints about the state of the game and read them as "ooh, you want to destroy everything" are kind of a problem.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
That's not really the argument, it is caricature of it. It is that representation of females in fluff is lacking and in model form even more lacking. This is at least partly due certain sexist attitudes ingrained in the culture, as is the opposition to addressing this issue. This doesn't mean that the GW designers, or the players are bigots (though of course in huge player base there will be fair share of bigots.) Many people get super defensive when it is pointed out that institutionalised sexism or racism might be a thing. But it is a thing, it affects all of us, and realising this is the first step at trying to address it.

Hold on, let me get this straight.

The lack of female models and female characters in the fluff is because of institutionalized racism and sexism. A vast conspiracy to make the womenfolk and Pee-Oh-Seez feel awful. And adding these things will start fixing these societal problems (that no one can provide genuine evidence for).

I just want to make sure I'm summarizing that correctly.

Because it's hilarious, I'm now convinced you're the greatest satirist ever.

Our time is up BROTHER. We shall now be punished for being sexist and have our toys taken away until we play nice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
...See the difference between the "feminist" and everybody else is nobody else is trying to fundamentally change what the hobby is. The basic feminist argument seems to be that 1. the background is racist/sexist 2. The models are racist/sexist 3. The people who play are racist/sexist..... Guess what 40k becomes if you 1.change the background 2. change all the models 3. replace all the players.... You all of a sudden dont have 40k and thats what people dont want because we enjoy the setting for what it is.

And all the "issues" for 40k that you see aren't actually issues because of 1. The background is fiction and doesn't hurt anyone 2. The model are grey and don't exclude anyone 3. The Warhammer community is the single most excepting/ nice community I've ever been a part of and I've done everything from play professional sports to the tabletop games.

...No?

The background is seldom the problem. The solution to lacking representation in the miniatures range is to expand it, not to replace it. The people who play aren't universally racist/sexist, but the people who take complaints about the state of the game and read them as "ooh, you want to destroy everything" are kind of a problem.

This is backlash from the recent invasion of "feminism" to other historically male based games and media. And honestly. Its justified to an extent. Identity politics solves nothing. Only ruins.

So gender is a social construct and telling little girls that they should be playing with Barbies (female toys) is a tool of patriarchal oppression designed to maintain societal gender expectations.

And the way to liberate them is to provide better access to more female toys?

Identity politics are destroying civil society.

 Crimson wrote:
Yeah, that's kinda fethed up way to look at it. It is a view that in certain circumstances facism is justified. It is not. 40K Imperium is plainly evil. And I love that, because that's the flavour of the setting and whole thing is absurd black comedy.

Yes, think of it this way.

"Humanity was so screwed, that the ONLY way they could survive was to be fascists, and sacrifice a little piece of that humanity."

THAT is how desperate we have to be to have any reason to be fascists.

Also, comedy- Communism probably just got tossed right outside the window.

Rosebuddy wrote:

pismakron wrote:

Rosebuddy wrote:


What makes the 40K setting fascist isn't that the Imperium has those qualities. it's that they're written as largely justified because that's just how the galaxy works.

Well it IS how the galaxy works in 40k. It would be a pretty boring wargame without conflict and war. Thankfully it is a fictional empire in a fictional galaxy full of fictional demons and fictional aliens.

You could definitely have a conflict-ridden 40K galaxy without the setting justifying fascism, though.

The 40k setting justifies nothing of the kind. Not anymore than the smurfs justifies communism, judge dreadd justifies police states, or smallworld justifies genocide, or risk justifies expansionist wars. They are all fictional universes with fictional rules and fictional logic.