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.
2018/07/31 22:28:04
Subject: Re:Why Female Space Marines are a good idea
Delvarus Centurion wrote: That's how people that use identity politics get what they want, they just call you all the names under the sun. "agree with me or your evil"
Well, that's not what I, or as far as I can tell, anyone else in this thread, as done.
Formosa wrote: He read the bols article, that’s the fem40k article
The BOLS article is the Fem40k article?
Formosa wrote: and he said the replies to it were bad, that means he supports the article.
Does this justify breaching rule #1?
Asmodios wrote: By that logic GW must provide an infinite amount of models.
No, just those for whom there is a sizeable demand, especially if they can be very easily done. There are lots of thread asking for female space marines, unlike those other things you listed, and it just requires adding some alternative bare heads, or potentially even just changing a few pronouns in the codex…
When balancing costs and benefits it feels like a clear winner here.
No, I'm no defined by it. It is part of my identity, but it doesn't define it. Sometime it's relevant, but other times it's entirely irrelevant.
With regard to space marines, they exist so far in the future, and are so much biologically modified by fictional science, that the gender could be entirely irrelevant, or very relevant, depending on what the writer decide.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Again, I'm probably going to bow out of this thread, I've said my views on the matter, it doesn't bear repeating it.
Well, let's agree to slight disagree on the exact mean to attain the goal we both want then .
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Equal. What ISN'T equal is the exposure the factions get. Which is what I complain about.
You shouldn't. The factions get exposure based on sales. If SoB were to outsell SMs, they'd have gotten plastic kits with viking and vampire and muumuu dresses by now. But they don't, so they didn't.
Chaos Sister Marines of Slannesh should be a thing, though.
Well...
* SoB are a catch 22, no one wants old models or metal so no one buys * female models DO sell and have been selling for some time now, we even have a full female gang now, Celestine sold like mad, we also have/had female models for 20yrs +, we have newer female models (give or take the past 10yrs) via DE/CWE/Quins/Chaos, etc...
Sisters had the same full range and support at the time of their release as any other army. Same strength of support and breadth as when Necrons and Dark Eldars were released. Same as when Tau were released. They're just not a popular faction, so it's kinda foolish for GW to support them. But GW does. Still ticking...
Futa Marines of Slaaneseh and Sisters of Slaanesh - that's what 40k needs. Pink, with massive purple helmets!
^ Not only this but GW will expand the range if the new ones sell like crazy and continue to sell like crazy. GW isn't running some crazy conspiracy patriarchy. If SOB had sold like SM when released and continued to sell that way we would have just as many variations of them today. Similarly, when they are re-released if they sell like crazy and continue to sell like crazy we will see more and more every year.
Funny, speaking of DE, they had the same problem, but GW did update them, go read some of the AMA's from old designers, they didnt always build off of sales, and sometimes they only built units due to sales, so there is no way of knowing why they did or didnt update SoB.
PS, in 5th they didnt even have a codex.... it was Clear that GW had the problem with them and not the Players, it costs next to nothing to make a 30 page codex compare to a 12 page WD....
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/31 22:44:18
JohnHwangDD wrote: Sisters had the same full range and support at the time of their release as any other army.
That's not true. Even in v2 they were presented as some possible ally force rather than a big codex.
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
Yes hybrid the bols article is the Fem40k article, it’s very clear from the context that is what he is referring to, even going so far as to ape a few of its comments,I can post a link if it want? in addition when he supports an attack on my community I reserve the right to push back, if you don’t like that, tough luck.
As to Delvarus comment, he is correct and if you haven’t noticed it from the qoute you yourself posted in reply to me... well, your blind mate.
You claim these models are in sizeable demand, but that demand comes from a teeny tiny part of the fan base, a very unpopular part at that, so why base your policies and marketing at these people, the same people that have been shown to not support the franchises they force change upon.
2018/07/31 22:36:06
Subject: Re:Why Female Space Marines are a good idea
Delvarus Centurion wrote: That's how people that use identity politics get what they want, they just call you all the names under the sun. "agree with me or your evil"
Well, that's not what I, or as far as I can tell, anyone else in this thread, as done.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: I am aware that there are undoubtedly women in the Green Lantern Corps, and that there probably is a female Green Lantern - I'm just not a DC fan overall!)
OMG. There are *plenty* of female Green Lanterns.
Why am I the one being quoted? I didn't say that! I know about the Star Sapphires and the like, it's one of the few DC series I still read!
2018/07/31 22:42:17
Subject: Re:Why Female Space Marines are a good idea
Delvarus Centurion wrote: That's how people that use identity politics get what they want, they just call you all the names under the sun. "agree with me or your evil"
Well, that's not what I, or as far as I can tell, anyone else in this thread, as done.
Formosa wrote: He read the bols article, that’s the fem40k article
The BOLS article is the Fem40k article?
Formosa wrote: and he said the replies to it were bad, that means he supports the article.
Does this justify breaching rule #1?
Asmodios wrote: By that logic GW must provide an infinite amount of models.
No, just those for whom there is a sizeable demand, especially if they can be very easily done. There are lots of thread asking for female space marines, unlike those other things you listed, and it just requires adding some alternative bare heads, or potentially even just changing a few pronouns in the codex…
When balancing costs and benefits it feels like a clear winner here.
No, I'm no defined by it. It is part of my identity, but it doesn't define it. Sometime it's relevant, but other times it's entirely irrelevant.
With regard to space marines, they exist so far in the future, and are so much biologically modified by fictional science, that the gender could be entirely irrelevant, or very relevant, depending on what the writer decide.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Again, I'm probably going to bow out of this thread, I've said my views on the matter, it doesn't bear repeating it.
Well, let's agree to slight disagree on the exact mean to attain the goal we both want then .
But it is true that people who employ identity politics, do in fact do that.
They are meant to be the left hand of the Emperor (Representing Females)
And the right Hand is the Custodes (Representing Males)
The paradigm of men and women working together in different but equal capacities.
The Sisters work with the Custodes, and the Custodes work with Sisters. It is that paradigm that is so obvious about them as a culture (Essentially men and women must work together to exact a goal).
Custodes are created by magic like SM so I see no problem with. Also is there anything that states they can be only men?
Yes they are his literal sons. And sisters of silence are his Daughters. That is the point of their existence. They represent Ying and Yang at the top levels of the Imperium.
Okay so I know the Custodes are not the literal sons of the Emperor as they are recruited from the sons of high ranking Terran nobles. I seriously doubt that the SoS are his literal daughters. His literal children were known as the Sensei and even their status is kind of dubious right now. Also what your saying with the hands of the Emperor doesn't really fit with a guy who was supposed to be all about reason and logic.
"I need more blanks to fight this Chaos invasion on earth."
"Shall I get all the male blanks?"
"No, I need to keep the symbolism."
For the same reason GW doesn't currently sell you models to make an all-female Attilan army, or even any Attilan model.
(Which are Huns not Mongols but whatever).
And that is: because GW doesn't have the means or the will to create models and rules for that many different “historical” armies, so they just use space marines because it allows to share most of the models between all the historical factions.
So if you want Viking Sisters, you have to do what people who want Aztec Marines do: actually put a little effort into it. These things CAN exist in fluff, and you already know that there will be an Order introduced that'll have some sorts bonuses for being up close.
So when affordable plastic comes out, what is your issue here?
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I am aware that there are undoubtedly women in the Green Lantern Corps, and that there probably is a female Green Lantern - I'm just not a DC fan overall!)
OMG. There are *plenty* of female Green Lanterns.
Why am I the one being quoted? I didn't say that! I know about the Star Sapphires and the like, it's one of the few DC series I still read!
Formosa wrote: in addition when he supports an attack on my community I reserve the right to push back, if you don’t like that, tough luck.
That's not how the forum work, as I've been told repeatedly. If someone disrespect you and breach rule #1, you shouldn't breach rule #1 to answer in kind, you should just report the message to the moderators. If I do respond in kind to someone who breach rule #1, I get my ban. Maybe the moderators will treat you differently, but that's how it works in theory, and how it was applied to me.
Formosa wrote: As to Delvarus comment, he is correct and if you haven’t noticed it from the qoute you yourself posted in reply to me... well, your blind mate.
There is literally nothing about rapists in that quote. I'll put it again so you can check yourself:
Spoiler:
Andykp wrote: I started a thread just like this last week after reading the article on bols and being appalled by its responses. I was equally appalled after my thread was closed down within hours opening because of “a dozen or more” complaints. There is a problem in this hobby. I can on,y talk about 40k as I dont play other games really.
Having female marines is important. And I’m going to say it, it’s important because of diversity. Because of equality. We don’t have equality, all things are not equal. Women are underrepresented in all walks of life. They need to represented more. We have to actively do this. There are lots of ways of doing it.
I think it matters in 40k because it is a chunk of life that is very under represented. I don’t think having female marines would see a surge of women start playing, but when I got my daughter, who was interested in her dads hobby, the 40k starter set, there were no female characters in it all. No female models.
In the last thread I was literally told it was ok because of greyfax, Celestine, sisters of battle and a drawing in the guard codex. But that’s a joke. Two characters and a heavily stereotypical female trope based army that hasn’t been touched in 6 editions. We need female marines because they are the poster “boys” of 40k. That’s where we need the strong female characters. They are needed elsewhere too. Female admech models, lots in the fluff, non in plastic. Female guard models. Nids and necrons are exempt by being asexual.
Worst of all though is the anger this topic openned up. And that the anger got the conversation closed down. The anger and the scale of response shows there is an issue in the community. Sexism is its name. And the angry minority I hope it’s a minority’s but ain’t sure) shouting and crying in the internet stops us being able to discuss that, so the problem isn’t going to go away.
All the usual complaints are here, it’d break the fluff, “they’ve” got sisters, why no male sisters of battle, pseudo science and psychology about hormones and male behavioural traits. It’s the same patriarchal rubbish we have heard about any gender dispute.
I think the better way to phrase the question is, what harm would having females in the principle faction in 40k do?
I was told not to reopen my thread or leave it a while and expect the same response. People had accused me of trolling. I’m not. I have a genuine concern. I’m not going to take to the streets and protest. But I am going to keep talking about how to make our hobby more inclusive.
FYI I am a white middle class straight man. But I’m also the single father to a daughter growing up in an uneven world where she will face hardships she would have if she had been a boy. Any small step to balance that world out helps. Other fathers of daughters on here have messaged me saying the same thing. Video games, films, books all figured this out a while ago and stormcast show that Gw has too. It’s just too scared to pull the trigger in 40k. What’s best about the stormcast females is that they aren’t a big deal. They aren’t a whole separate section in boob armour. They are just there. The same as the men, no explanation needed. That’s a good example.
Formosa wrote: You claim these models are in sizeable demand, but that demand comes from a teeny tiny part of the fan base, a very unpopular part at that, so why base your policies and marketing at these people, the same people that have been shown to not support the franchises they force change upon.
Well, that's like your opinion, man. They did the change for the Tau and it was awesome, I hope they will do the same with the Imperial Guard and the Space Marines!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/31 22:47:28
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2018/07/31 22:50:09
Subject: Re:Why Female Space Marines are a good idea
Delvarus Centurion wrote: That's how people that use identity politics get what they want, they just call you all the names under the sun. "agree with me or your evil"
Well, that's not what I, or as far as I can tell, anyone else in this thread, as done.
Formosa wrote: He read the bols article, that’s the fem40k article
The BOLS article is the Fem40k article?
Formosa wrote: and he said the replies to it were bad, that means he supports the article.
Does this justify breaching rule #1?
Asmodios wrote: By that logic GW must provide an infinite amount of models.
No, just those for whom there is a sizeable demand, especially if they can be very easily done. There are lots of thread asking for female space marines, unlike those other things you listed, and it just requires adding some alternative bare heads, or potentially even just changing a few pronouns in the codex…
When balancing costs and benefits it feels like a clear winner here.
No, I'm no defined by it. It is part of my identity, but it doesn't define it. Sometime it's relevant, but other times it's entirely irrelevant.
With regard to space marines, they exist so far in the future, and are so much biologically modified by fictional science, that the gender could be entirely irrelevant, or very relevant, depending on what the writer decide.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Again, I'm probably going to bow out of this thread, I've said my views on the matter, it doesn't bear repeating it.
Well, let's agree to slight disagree on the exact mean to attain the goal we both want then .
But there isn't a screaming demand for female SM. There is one vocal FB group that makes the same thread every week. I mean GW did a large survey and enough people wanted a sisters update that they did it. Because we can work under the assumption that GW is going to produce the models which have the highest demand (that's how companies work) it's clear that more of the community wants SOB then female SM. My guess is this is similar to the SJW craze in comic books where a small group screamed loudly until they overhauled everything and then they moved on without actually buying anything they screamed for. That's why sales plummeted for everything but the movies that actually kept close to the original lore. Now if feminist 40k wants to put their money where their mouth is and buy up ever SOB model in existence with the "10s of thousands of female gamers just waiting for representation" that we keep hearing about, we will see more and more female models.
More realistically fans of 40k will buy SOB and they will be very popular at first with more stable sales down the line adding more range releases but never coming close to that of more popular lines
2018/07/31 22:50:10
Subject: Re:Why Female Space Marines are a good idea
Delvarus Centurion wrote: That's how people that use identity politics get what they want, they just call you all the names under the sun. "agree with me or your evil"
Well, that's not what I, or as far as I can tell, anyone else in this thread, as done.
Formosa wrote: He read the bols article, that’s the fem40k article
The BOLS article is the Fem40k article?
Formosa wrote: and he said the replies to it were bad, that means he supports the article.
Does this justify breaching rule #1?
Asmodios wrote: By that logic GW must provide an infinite amount of models.
No, just those for whom there is a sizeable demand, especially if they can be very easily done. There are lots of thread asking for female space marines, unlike those other things you listed, and it just requires adding some alternative bare heads, or potentially even just changing a few pronouns in the codex…
When balancing costs and benefits it feels like a clear winner here.
No, I'm no defined by it. It is part of my identity, but it doesn't define it. Sometime it's relevant, but other times it's entirely irrelevant.
With regard to space marines, they exist so far in the future, and are so much biologically modified by fictional science, that the gender could be entirely irrelevant, or very relevant, depending on what the writer decide.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Again, I'm probably going to bow out of this thread, I've said my views on the matter, it doesn't bear repeating it.
Well, let's agree to slight disagree on the exact mean to attain the goal we both want then .
But it is true that people who employ identity politics, do in fact do that.
Please either quote only the part of my message that you want to answer to, or just put @Hybrid at the beginning of your message, instead of putting some huge block quote like this.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @Asmodios, same thing as Delvarus Centurion wrt quotes.
Also don't forget that creating an entirely new line of miniatures is much much more costly and big than just adding a few head variants in kits that you would release regardless.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/31 22:52:24
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
They are meant to be the left hand of the Emperor (Representing Females)
And the right Hand is the Custodes (Representing Males)
The paradigm of men and women working together in different but equal capacities.
The Sisters work with the Custodes, and the Custodes work with Sisters. It is that paradigm that is so obvious about them as a culture (Essentially men and women must work together to exact a goal).
Custodes are created by magic like SM so I see no problem with. Also is there anything that states they can be only men?
Yes they are his literal sons. And sisters of silence are his Daughters. That is the point of their existence. They represent Ying and Yang at the top levels of the Imperium.
Okay so I know the Custodes are not the literal sons of the Emperor as they are recruited from the sons of high ranking Terran nobles. I seriously doubt that the SoS are his literal daughters. His literal children were known as the Sensei and even their status is kind of dubious right now. Also what your saying with the hands of the Emperor doesn't really fit with a guy who was supposed to be all about reason and logic.
"I need more blanks to fight this Chaos invasion on earth."
"Shall I get all the male blanks?"
"No, I need to keep the symbolism."
Yes because Allegories in a universe where Lucifer (I mean horus) breaks from his Arch Angels (Primarchs) and fights a war in heaven only to be cast out by his Creator (The Emperor)
Yes totally.
Male Blanks are exist though and they are used as Assassins. (Who usually only take males)
Sisters of Silence are witch hunters. That is one of their major tasks. (And they only take females)
Custodes are his sons because they are made from and by the Emperor. So they are his 'sons' but not in the classical sense. They worship him more like their king.
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2018/07/31 22:56:53
Subject: Re:Why Female Space Marines are a good idea
Delvarus Centurion wrote: That's how people that use identity politics get what they want, they just call you all the names under the sun. "agree with me or your evil"
Well, that's not what I, or as far as I can tell, anyone else in this thread, as done.
Formosa wrote: He read the bols article, that’s the fem40k article
The BOLS article is the Fem40k article?
Formosa wrote: and he said the replies to it were bad, that means he supports the article.
Does this justify breaching rule #1?
Asmodios wrote: By that logic GW must provide an infinite amount of models.
No, just those for whom there is a sizeable demand, especially if they can be very easily done. There are lots of thread asking for female space marines, unlike those other things you listed, and it just requires adding some alternative bare heads, or potentially even just changing a few pronouns in the codex…
When balancing costs and benefits it feels like a clear winner here.
No, I'm no defined by it. It is part of my identity, but it doesn't define it. Sometime it's relevant, but other times it's entirely irrelevant.
With regard to space marines, they exist so far in the future, and are so much biologically modified by fictional science, that the gender could be entirely irrelevant, or very relevant, depending on what the writer decide.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Again, I'm probably going to bow out of this thread, I've said my views on the matter, it doesn't bear repeating it.
Well, let's agree to slight disagree on the exact mean to attain the goal we both want then .
But it is true that people who employ identity politics, do in fact do that.
Please either quote only the part of my message that you want to answer to, or just put @Hybrid at the beginning of your message, instead of putting some huge block quote like this.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @Asmodios, same thing as Delvarus Centurion wrt quotes.
Also don't forget that creating an entirely new line of miniatures is much much more costly and big than just adding a few head variants in kits that you would release regardless.
I never said anyone in this thread has done that, I was replying to a comment about an article talking about people who do do that.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/31 22:58:19
2018/07/31 22:58:11
Subject: Re:Why Female Space Marines are a good idea
Delvarus Centurion wrote: That's how people that use identity politics get what they want, they just call you all the names under the sun. "agree with me or your evil"
Well, that's not what I, or as far as I can tell, anyone else in this thread, as done.
Formosa wrote: He read the bols article, that’s the fem40k article
The BOLS article is the Fem40k article?
Formosa wrote: and he said the replies to it were bad, that means he supports the article.
Does this justify breaching rule #1?
Asmodios wrote: By that logic GW must provide an infinite amount of models.
No, just those for whom there is a sizeable demand, especially if they can be very easily done. There are lots of thread asking for female space marines, unlike those other things you listed, and it just requires adding some alternative bare heads, or potentially even just changing a few pronouns in the codex…
When balancing costs and benefits it feels like a clear winner here.
No, I'm no defined by it. It is part of my identity, but it doesn't define it. Sometime it's relevant, but other times it's entirely irrelevant.
With regard to space marines, they exist so far in the future, and are so much biologically modified by fictional science, that the gender could be entirely irrelevant, or very relevant, depending on what the writer decide.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Again, I'm probably going to bow out of this thread, I've said my views on the matter, it doesn't bear repeating it.
Well, let's agree to slight disagree on the exact mean to attain the goal we both want then .
But it is true that people who employ identity politics, do in fact do that.
Please either quote only the part of my message that you want to answer to, or just put @Hybrid at the beginning of your message, instead of putting some huge block quote like this.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @Asmodios, same thing as Delvarus Centurion wrt quotes.
Also don't forget that creating an entirely new line of miniatures is much much more costly and big than just adding a few head variants in kits that you would release regardless.
Yeah you realize that GW already makes female heads right.... as well as about 1000 3rd party companies. It would be incredibly dumb for them to take up valuable display space and the logistics to support the same kits with female heads. Instead, they make money just having people kit bash or buy female heads
2018/07/31 22:59:20
Subject: Re:Why Female Space Marines are a good idea
Delvarus Centurion wrote: That's how people that use identity politics get what they want, they just call you all the names under the sun. "agree with me or your evil"
Well, that's not what I, or as far as I can tell, anyone else in this thread, as done.
Formosa wrote: He read the bols article, that’s the fem40k article
The BOLS article is the Fem40k article?
Formosa wrote: and he said the replies to it were bad, that means he supports the article.
Does this justify breaching rule #1?
Asmodios wrote: By that logic GW must provide an infinite amount of models.
No, just those for whom there is a sizeable demand, especially if they can be very easily done. There are lots of thread asking for female space marines, unlike those other things you listed, and it just requires adding some alternative bare heads, or potentially even just changing a few pronouns in the codex…
When balancing costs and benefits it feels like a clear winner here.
No, I'm no defined by it. It is part of my identity, but it doesn't define it. Sometime it's relevant, but other times it's entirely irrelevant.
With regard to space marines, they exist so far in the future, and are so much biologically modified by fictional science, that the gender could be entirely irrelevant, or very relevant, depending on what the writer decide.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Again, I'm probably going to bow out of this thread, I've said my views on the matter, it doesn't bear repeating it.
Well, let's agree to slight disagree on the exact mean to attain the goal we both want then .
But it is true that people who employ identity politics, do in fact do that.
Please either quote only the part of my message that you want to answer to, or just put @Hybrid at the beginning of your message, instead of putting some huge block quote like this.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @Asmodios, same thing as Delvarus Centurion wrt quotes.
Also don't forget that creating an entirely new line of miniatures is much much more costly and big than just adding a few head variants in kits that you would release regardless.
Yeah you realize that GW already makes female heads right.... as well as about 1000 3rd party companies. It would be incredibly dumb for them to take up valuable display space and the logistics to support the same kits with female heads. Instead, they make money just having people kit bash or buy female heads
Yeah and they could make female tyranids and orks does that mean they should...
Formosa wrote: in addition when he supports an attack on my community I reserve the right to push back, if you don’t like that, tough luck.
That's not how the forum work, as I've been told repeatedly. If someone disrespect you and breach rule #1, you shouldn't breach rule #1 to answer in kind, you should just report the message to the moderators. If I do respond in kind to someone who breach rule #1, I get my ban. Maybe the moderators will treat you differently, but that's how it works in theory, and how it was applied to me.
Formosa wrote: As to Delvarus comment, he is correct and if you haven’t noticed it from the qoute you yourself posted in reply to me... well, your blind mate.
There is literally nothing about rapists in that quote.
I'll put it again so you can check yourself:
Spoiler:
Andykp wrote: I started a thread just like this last week after reading the article on bols and being appalled by its responses. I was equally appalled after my thread was closed down within hours opening because of “a dozen or more” complaints. There is a problem in this hobby. I can on,y talk about 40k as I dont play other games really.
Having female marines is important. And I’m going to say it, it’s important because of diversity. Because of equality. We don’t have equality, all things are not equal. Women are underrepresented in all walks of life. They need to represented more. We have to actively do this. There are lots of ways of doing it.
I think it matters in 40k because it is a chunk of life that is very under represented. I don’t think having female marines would see a surge of women start playing, but when I got my daughter, who was interested in her dads hobby, the 40k starter set, there were no female characters in it all. No female models.
In the last thread I was literally told it was ok because of greyfax, Celestine, sisters of battle and a drawing in the guard codex. But that’s a joke. Two characters and a heavily stereotypical female trope based army that hasn’t been touched in 6 editions. We need female marines because they are the poster “boys” of 40k. That’s where we need the strong female characters. They are needed elsewhere too. Female admech models, lots in the fluff, non in plastic. Female guard models. Nids and necrons are exempt by being asexual.
Worst of all though is the anger this topic openned up. And that the anger got the conversation closed down. The anger and the scale of response shows there is an issue in the community. Sexism is its name. And the angry minority I hope it’s a minority’s but ain’t sure) shouting and crying in the internet stops us being able to discuss that, so the problem isn’t going to go away.
All the usual complaints are here, it’d break the fluff, “they’ve” got sisters, why no male sisters of battle, pseudo science and psychology about hormones and male behavioural traits. It’s the same patriarchal rubbish we have heard about any gender dispute.
I think the better way to phrase the question is, what harm would having females in the principle faction in 40k do?
I was told not to reopen my thread or leave it a while and expect the same response. People had accused me of trolling. I’m not. I have a genuine concern. I’m not going to take to the streets and protest. But I am going to keep talking about how to make our hobby more inclusive.
FYI I am a white middle class straight man. But I’m also the single father to a daughter growing up in an uneven world where she will face hardships she would have if she had been a boy. Any small step to balance that world out helps. Other fathers of daughters on here have messaged me saying the same thing. Video games, films, books all figured this out a while ago and stormcast show that Gw has too. It’s just too scared to pull the trigger in 40k. What’s best about the stormcast females is that they aren’t a big deal. They aren’t a whole separate section in boob armour. They are just there. The same as the men, no explanation needed. That’s a good example.
Formosa wrote: You claim these models are in sizeable demand, but that demand comes from a teeny tiny part of the fan base, a very unpopular part at that, so why base your policies and marketing at these people, the same people that have been shown to not support the franchises they force change upon.
Well, that's like your opinion, man. They did the change for the Tau and it was awesome, I hope they will do the same with the Imperial Guard and the Space Marines!
That pretty much answer several of your questions, as to me being treated differently, well having read through your back log I wouldn’t say you have done anything I would consider worth banning for, the tone of a lot of your replies is extremely hostile in the off topic forum, but I put that down to being passionate about your cause, but that’s just my opinion eh.
No it’s pretty clear that only a tiny part of the 40k fan base follows your politics, the vast majority simply just want to play our game and paint our models without all this forced diversity nonsense cropping up to try and force us to your way of doing things (collective “your” not specifically you), but here is something we can agree on, female bloody guard, where are they? Hurry up and get them out there GW, as for tau, they have had females in the unit since the original plastic kit, PPE hides the detail and no, no female marines.
Like I said a few pages back, if they made enhanced sisters no one would bat an eyelid, don’t mess with marines though, especially if it’s just to satisfy your obsession with identity politics.
2018/07/31 23:09:19
Subject: Re:Why Female Space Marines are a good idea
15k+
Emperor's Spears 2500
Beastmen 10k
-- $k 
-- 9k 
-- 6k 
-- 4k 
-- 
and no, no female marines.