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.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
My point exactly - it's utterly arbitrary. Why is that the case?

Something about a bit of writing to justify a production/marketing issue forty odd years ago.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

I'm sorry, am I mistaken on what the topic of this thread is, which I was trying to bring the conversation back towards?

Youre not wrong but we're in the middle of a tangent. We are not wrong in discussing this, I think. If you want to bring it back to the ot, that's cool with me - but can you please ask for that instead of just jamming it into the middle of a completely separate conversation?

Edit: apologies to the mods- I'm happy to revert back to the main topic at hand after this
please let me finish out what I need to say, and hopefully make peace with a poster.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

So, would you care to shed some light on "what's tolerated", because I'm not seeing any indication that polydactylism or intersex individuals aren't tolerated in 40k.

To be fair Smudge, i'm not seeing anything explicitly stating they're tolerated either. Ultimately it's a grey area. Up to your own interpretation and whatever the plot requires at that time.seemingly I lean more towards medieval and dark age hysteria, you lean more towards something approaching tolerance.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

That's my point - what *is* tolerated?

Whatever the plot and your interpretation says is tolerated.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

All we *do* know is that the extreme mutations are persecuted against, but we aren't aware at all about "mutations" that affect real life people. It's ultimately unknown, and so Hecaton's comments on how the Imperium 'definitely kills intersex and polydactyly humans' are not coming from a place of truth.

Fair. I'll walk mine back and say that I still think I can understand how someone could come to the conclusion that they would. My own interpretation leans towards that way, but then again, I think it's clear I prefer a darker vision of the Imperium than some here. I wouldn't disagree with hecatons comments on this (elsewhere... not so much) but I'll state this is persinal opinion. Is that a fair thing to say?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

[ That's not a definition of "baseline phenotypic state" or "divine perfection of the baseline human form". As you so brought it up, define what that actually means, because you have still not done so.

With respect, why? I'm not being cheeky. It just feels nitpicky again. I mean, maybe I'm just frustrated with myself for not making it clear enough, but the paranoid cheeky voice in my head is telling me not to bother, you'll dismiss out of hand because you see me as a bad guy in this, I can't give a super specific definition, or it's old lore and you'll ignore it because its old, or it's new lore and you don't like it so you'll ignore it on principle so what's the point. I hope I'm wrong, I'd like to think of thr guy behind the smudge moniker as a decent chap, and the fact that we've been on the same side of so many other topics might give you pause on this.

I don't see why this is necessary. This is a direct quote from the lore on how mutants are regarded in the Imperium. Are these quotes somehow controversial to you, are they somehow ambivalent or is there some interpretation I am not seeing because their meaning seems pretty clear cut to me. Please, I don't understand.

In the scientific field, your baseline phenotypic characteristics is basically all the observable characteristics of an organism that result from the interaction of its genotype (total genetic inheritance) with the environment. Examples of observable characteristics include behaviour, biochemical properties, colour, shape, and size. That'll be your standard dictionary definition.

Divine perfection of the baseline Human form again seems clear cut. The basic human form (structure, shape etc) is perfect according to this in-world view. Any deviations to the form are an issue. This leads credence, depending on your interpretation, that the sixth fingers or weird mole, at least in some places, is enough to put you on the fire.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

You're right there's no citation for it - and that swings both ways. And in the case of things where I don't hear about it happening, I'm not going to pretend that it does.

Just because I don't hear that the Imperium holds ceremonies in honour of Saint Waluigi doesn't mean I should assume they do.

I disagree. And I think this is the heart of us talking past each other. I'll respect your pov. Let me explain mine. Maybe it'll help us getting back to being on more or less the same page? For me, it's far more fun to let my mind wander. I don't like to be 'railroaded' in a setting. To me, needing, or wanting things spelled put in black and white leans towards railroading. Its enough for me that something is suggested, or hinted at for my world building brain to take that idea and run with it. I don't need it stated in black and white, and while I respect it, I personally find it too stifling and limiting. Personally I'd find it hilarious if there was world called waluigi, or an ad mech forge world called le mans, I mean,why not?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

And yet, women serve in the military, ethnicity seems entirely ignored, and there's enough mutants running around that House Van Saar have plenty of political power in Necromunda.

Like I'd trust those weakling van saar! House escher all the way.

Besides, plenty muties beneath the underhive.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

The Imperium is a backwards and godawful place, but not in everything. Why do we need to invent further atrocities?

For me, rooting it in real life, (preferably things more historical and not in recent memory) the people that I know and the things I've seen brings it to life in a way rooting it in fiction simply doesn't work for me.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

"Reading into yours"? You outright misrepresent what my comments are addressing, and are repeating my own argument back to me like I oppose them.

If I've misrepresented you I apologise. Its unintentional, I assure you. For what it's worth I feel the same from you. And I'd also like to think it's unintentional. Shall we draw a line under it and move on? I'm just tired and frustrated as well. (Real life issues - First pride run, knee is shot, calf is killing me)..so yeah - sorry. *puts out hand for peace offering*

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

I'm fully agreed that there's a great deal of blank space on how the Imperium treats "mutations". But I'm not the one who's claiming that there's a concrete answer on the matter, drawn from pretty inconclusive evidence - I've already mentioned who this user is.

On reflection, I'll accept most of that.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

And I don't think that perpetuating real life prejudices and hatred are necessary in making something viscerally evil, and I personally feel that the inability to portray that same evil without needing to rely on that crutch is a sign of uninventive writing.

I find the opposite, actually. I think 40k is at its strongest when it's rooted in and based on real life (admittedly, preferably historical and not recent or too 'close to home', scrubbed, sanitised, zoomed out and turned up to 11). I don't find the writing uninventive at all.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

As I've said - the X-Men are an excellent allegory for the injustices at the time, without actually needing to spell it out in black and white and technicolour. I feel that this made them just as visceral and evocative as the real life events around them, without needing to perpetuate those injustices any further.

I'll respect your pov, I'm... neutral on this. I guess I prefer real life though.

_______________



On topic, are there female writers/designers in the studio? Would this be something that could help change the landscape?

Can I make a suggestion?

While I love watching the intellectual sparring between smudge and other people trying to engage him, can we leave the personal confrontations to PMs? Half of this thread is dedicated to long winded piece by piece rebuttals that could have just been:

PM: I disagree with you - HERE IS WHY

I agree with arguing down sexists and the other phobic "arguments" that have been made here, but this constant back in force between 3-4 people is stifling any real growth.

If you have a personal attack, message, or disagreement, take it up with them directly. But for this thread, can we discuss how female space marines would affect the greater lore?

Heres one: They'd have to completely gut and redo the Codex Astartes. The SMs would double in size, practically overnight.

Heres another: SoB/SoS would get poached by SM legions with little or ability to say no or gain say. Both view disobeying the Astartes as heresy. Well, except for Aleya, who is basically a walking FU with a top knot and a giant sword.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Can I make a suggestion?
Heres one: They'd have to completely gut and redo the Codex Astartes. The SMs would double in size, practically overnight.

Not really. The SM took huge losses in terms of Chapter strength, indeed entire Chapters of SM were eradicated or turned traitor during the events of the Rift and Psychic Awakening. Just keep doing what Guilliman has already done, more Ultima founding Chapters to rebuild the strength of humanity's greatest defenders.

Heres another: SoB/SoS would get poached by SM legions with little or ability to say no or gain say. Both view disobeying the Astartes as heresy. Well, except for Aleya, who is basically a walking FU with a top knot and a giant sword.

Can't poach a fully grown adult though Fezz, still needs to be a child to make an Astartes.

Heres one: They'd have to completely gut and redo the Codex Astartes. The SMs would double in size, practically overnight.

Nope. At least not from this. The limiting factors for producing space marines are:
1- progenoid glands
2- physically/mentally/spiritually 'pure' candidates. Most chapters reject a lot of failures before the implantation process.

Having a larger population pool doesn't change any chapter's standards of 'purity,' nor does it magically conjure more glands to implant into people to make space marines.

---
That said, doubling the SM numbers isn't a problem.
1- Primaris basically already did this.
2-Its _still_ a trivial number compared to the size of the galaxy.

Heres another: SoB/SoS would get poached by SM legions with little or ability to say no or gain say.

Eh. Sisters of Battle are trained in the same <fake-latin gobblegook> program Commissars and Stormtroopers are. I can't think of many (any?) complaints that the marines are snaffling those candidates.

SoS defining traits are being Nulls. AFAIK, no space marines are recruited from that population, even if they could do it consistently (being very rare, despised and mostly used by Inquisitors or Asssassins).

Son are you disrespecting the Schola Progenium? The best damn boarding school in the Imperium where you have no choice in going there because you are an orphan.

Stepping aside from the mutant purging discussion, there's no particular reason that the process which makes Astartes couldn't only work on male humans, so the people saying that it makes no sense are off base. I could outline a few ways that could, in theory, work.

Hecaton wrote:
Stepping aside from the mutant purging discussion, there's no particular reason that the process which makes Astartes couldn't only work on male humans, so the people saying that it makes no sense are off base. I could outline a few ways that could, in theory, work.

Can you also outline the efficiency of using a Chainsword as compared to an ordinary blade?
What about how to best kill a daemon from the Warp? Use real science, please.
Or what's the best way to penetrate an Orkish forcefield?

 JNAProductions wrote:

Hecaton wrote:
Stepping aside from the mutant purging discussion, there's no particular reason that the process which makes Astartes couldn't only work on male humans, so the people saying that it makes no sense are off base. I could outline a few ways that could, in theory, work.

Can you also outline the efficiency of using a Chainsword as compared to an ordinary blade?
What about how to best kill a daemon from the Warp? Use real science, please.
Or what's the best way to penetrate an Orkish forcefield?

I mean, if people say "a chainsword is more efficient than a normal sword at killing orks" se accept it as part of the setting's technology conceits. Same thing with "this process only works on male humans."

Hecaton wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

Hecaton wrote:
Stepping aside from the mutant purging discussion, there's no particular reason that the process which makes Astartes couldn't only work on male humans, so the people saying that it makes no sense are off base. I could outline a few ways that could, in theory, work.

Can you also outline the efficiency of using a Chainsword as compared to an ordinary blade?
What about how to best kill a daemon from the Warp? Use real science, please.
Or what's the best way to penetrate an Orkish forcefield?

I mean, if people say "a chainsword is more efficient than a normal sword at killing orks" se accept it as part of the setting's technology conceits. Same thing with "this process only works on male humans."

The chainsword is accepted because it looks really cool. Not because it's in any way practical, or a realistically useful weapon.

So unless you want to say "Excluding women from the most popular, most visible, and most customizable faction" is ALSO cool, I fail to see how that'd apply here. Because 40k isn't sci-fi. It's sci-fantasy. It has basically no grounding in real science.

Hecaton wrote:
Stepping aside from the mutant purging discussion, there's no particular reason that the process which makes Astartes couldn't only work on male humans, so the people saying that it makes no sense are off base. I could outline a few ways that could, in theory, work.

Please do.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

Hecaton wrote:
Stepping aside from the mutant purging discussion, there's no particular reason that the process which makes Astartes couldn't only work on male humans, so the people saying that it makes no sense are off base. I could outline a few ways that could, in theory, work.

Can you also outline the efficiency of using a Chainsword as compared to an ordinary blade?
What about how to best kill a daemon from the Warp? Use real science, please.
Or what's the best way to penetrate an Orkish forcefield?

I mean, if people say "a chainsword is more efficient than a normal sword at killing orks" se accept it as part of the setting's technology conceits. Same thing with "this process only works on male humans."

The chainsword is accepted because it looks really cool. Not because it's in any way practical, or a realistically useful weapon.

So unless you want to say "Excluding women from the most popular, most visible, and most customizable faction" is ALSO cool, I fail to see how that'd apply here. Because 40k isn't sci-fi. It's sci-fantasy. It has basically no grounding in real science.

It's not about whether or not you accept it,it's about whether or not the setting is that way. You've got people in this thread saying it doesn't make sense, and I'm here to tell you it doesn't make any more or less scientific sense one way or the other.

My reaction to your critique is that Astartes shouldn't necessarily be the most popular, or visible, faction and definitely shouldn't be the mst customizable. I've already outlined as to why portraying the Imperium as unironically heroic is fascism/totalitarian apologia.

Hecaton wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

Hecaton wrote:
Stepping aside from the mutant purging discussion, there's no particular reason that the process which makes Astartes couldn't only work on male humans, so the people saying that it makes no sense are off base. I could outline a few ways that could, in theory, work.

Can you also outline the efficiency of using a Chainsword as compared to an ordinary blade?
What about how to best kill a daemon from the Warp? Use real science, please.
Or what's the best way to penetrate an Orkish forcefield?

I mean, if people say "a chainsword is more efficient than a normal sword at killing orks" se accept it as part of the setting's technology conceits. Same thing with "this process only works on male humans."

The chainsword is accepted because it looks really cool. Not because it's in any way practical, or a realistically useful weapon.

So unless you want to say "Excluding women from the most popular, most visible, and most customizable faction" is ALSO cool, I fail to see how that'd apply here. Because 40k isn't sci-fi. It's sci-fantasy. It has basically no grounding in real science.

It's not about whether or not you accept it' it's about whether or not the setting is that way. You've got people in this thread saying it doesn't make sense, and I'm here to tell you it doesn't make any more or less scientific sense one way or the other.

My reaction to your critique is that Astartes shouldn't necessarily be the most popular, or visible, faction and definitely shouldn't be the mpst customizable. I've already outlined as to why portraying the Imperium as unironically heroic is fascism/totalitarian apologia.

So, in the same post where you say "It's not about whether or not you accept it" about one thing, you then go on to say "But ignoring the reality of the situation, this is how I think it should be."

I'll agree with you that Marines get vastyl outsized influence as to what they should get, but you can't just ignore that because you don't like it.

Edit: Also, "Hey, we can do various surgeries and hypno-indoctrinations to make you a better killing machine! All it'll cost you is your humanity!" applying to people of all genders is hardly portraying the Imperium as heroic.

 JNAProductions wrote:
So, in the same post where you say "It's not about whether or not you accept it" about one thing, you then go on to say "But ignoring the reality of the situation, this is how I think it should be."

Sure, and you're saying "ignoring the reality of the situation, this is how *I* think it should be." Obviously I disagree and think my ideal state is better.

 JNAProductions wrote:
I'll agree with you that Marines get vastyl outsized influence as to what they should get, but you can't just ignore that because you don't like it.

Astartes are also all male, but you're suggesting ignoring that because you don't like it.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Edit: Also, "Hey, we can do various surgeries and hypno-indoctrinations to make you a better killing machine! All it'll cost you is your humanity!" applying to people of all genders is hardly portraying the Imperium as heroic.

It's more the idea that they need to encompass all race, gender, and sexual orientation identities within them because they're the protagonist faction. Astartes are portrayed as the "most heroic" faction in the setting, and that's a big fething problem because they're defenders of a society of baby-killing religious totalitarians. Instead of trying to make them more all-encompassing, to allow people who aren't men to be portrayed as heroes within the setting, I'd rather see the focus taken off of them. Adding female Astartes just digs the "heroic evil Imperium" hole deeper.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Andykp wrote:

Hecaton wrote:
Stepping aside from the mutant purging discussion, there's no particular reason that the process which makes Astartes couldn't only work on male humans, so the people saying that it makes no sense are off base. I could outline a few ways that could, in theory, work.

Please do.

Yeah, so the first and most obvious way is if the process requires upregulating genes on the y chromosome to function properly. No y chromosome, no genes to upregulate, no effect. That is to say, it works by turning on genes past their normal level of activity, and those genes only exist on the y chromosome.

One of the big failure points for the process of creating an Astartes is the proper development of the black carapace; there are setting notes of the structural torsion involved as it grows literally ripping the aspirant apart if it gets too strong too fast. We know that boys and girls have significantly different bone densities even before puberty, so it's possible that there's just no good path forward for female Astartes to grow strong at the correct rate.

The third is that the window to create an Astartes is relatively narrow, and must be done at a particular time in development. Since boys and girls mature at different rates, there might be no window, or it might be prohibitively small, for the process designed for male humans to work on a girl.

Does any of that make sense? It is, to a certain extent arbitrary, because this isn't real technology, but the idea that you could have a process like this that only works properly on male humans is fairly plausible.

I like the way you say "Significantly different" as though it's a foregone conclusion that the boys would be showing higher numbers, when the actual study you linked showed a higher bone density at the hip on average in boys and a higher bone density in the spine on average in girls.

Nah though, I'm sure the 9.2% bone density at the hip is that GAME CHANGER for the creation of a ten foot tall space human, extremely science, very powerful.

Just, I dont know. Stick to accusing everyone you disagree with of being sexual fetishists for their choice of plastic space soldier models, it's less embarrassing.

 the_scotsman wrote:
I like the way you say "Significantly different" as though it's a foregone conclusion that the boys would be showing higher numbers, when the actual study you linked showed a higher bone density at the hip on average in boys and a higher bone density in the spine on average in girls.

Uh, in a scientific sense the "significant" has to do with the confidence interval.

At the point at which people's skeletons are being ripped apart, yeah, maybe that 9.2% matters.

 the_scotsman wrote:
Just, I dont know. Stick to accusing everyone you disagree with of being sexual fetishists for their choice of plastic space soldier models, it's less embarrassing.

For you, maybe.

I feel like we are discussing a moot point here.

The same levels of fictional science can be added to support the argument in both directions. we can write 10 pages of pseudo-science to support the process only working on boys just as easily as we could write 10 pages of pseudoscience stating that the process only works on girls, or 10 pages of why it only works on cats, or 10 pages of why it only works on people named "Sam" who are capricorns born on a planet precisely 0.8 lightyears from the rift.

Such fiction is not part of 40k lore, so cannot be considered in whether or not the lore prohibits or encourages female Astartes. I'm fairly certain that anyone who knows anything about people can accept that boys and girls have physical differences. What you're arguing, Hecaton, is that these differences are not only enough to justify pseudo-science exclusion but also that this is already somehow actively described in the setting, which we have established some pages ago that it isn't any more - we have the relic of all astartes being male, but we have no current lore to explain why this is. It's simply an accepted fact, rather than a fully explained one (such as "why are necrons robots", which is explained in detail in their lore).

So I can say that:

The process works by uprating genes found in the X chromosome, and is regulated sufficiently that it does not cause double the effect on females (though I admit that females become uber-marines would be a seriously cool route to take... and would add the whole "emperor was afraid that they would be too powerful" to the lore in a way that makes sense... you could even have them make female marines for astartes and then female uber-marines for chaos, where fabius bile didn't limit the dosage to create the same level of marines!).

The bone density of the candidates is initially strengthened using calcium-rich food and supplements to get them to the required strength. Hypergravitic sleeping chambers promote high bone density development.

The window to create an astartes is sufficiently wide in both male and female candidates as to not be prohibitive. All candidates have their development synchronised through hormone controlled meals to ensure that each batch of candidates is cooked to perfection, no burnt edges or doughy middles. (I may be a bit hungry typing this...)


I agree with you that it is plausible for a process to only affect males, but it is also just as plausible for it to also affect females.



My current favourite candidate for introducing female marines now is to go into the process affecting X chromosomes, the emprah being afraid of female marines as they have twice as many X chromosomes as men, so the results could be unstable, and then introduce stable female marines for the imperium via cawls refinement of the process, and female monster marines for chaos through bile giving no flips and making them anyway!

Thus we have inclusivity without the beige porridge that is "and they are all equal because to say otherwise might be misunderstood as an opinion". Female marines were never made because they were too marine-y and uncontrollable. The "good" guys refined the process to double recruits. The bad guys made unstable, overly marine-y female marines because they are good at killing. It would be so cool!

Hecaton wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
So, in the same post where you say "It's not about whether or not you accept it" about one thing, you then go on to say "But ignoring the reality of the situation, this is how I think it should be."

Sure, and you're saying "ignoring the reality of the situation, this is how *I* think it should be." Obviously I disagree and think my ideal state is better.

 JNAProductions wrote:
I'll agree with you that Marines get vastyl outsized influence as to what they should get, but you can't just ignore that because you don't like it.

Astartes are also all male, but you're suggesting ignoring that because you don't like it.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Edit: Also, "Hey, we can do various surgeries and hypno-indoctrinations to make you a better killing machine! All it'll cost you is your humanity!" applying to people of all genders is hardly portraying the Imperium as heroic.

It's more the idea that they need to encompass all race, gender, and sexual orientation identities within them because they're the protagonist faction. Astartes are portrayed as the "most heroic" faction in the setting, and that's a big fething problem because they're defenders of a society of baby-killing religious totalitarians. Instead of trying to make them more all-encompassing, to allow people who aren't men to be portrayed as heroes within the setting, I'd rather see the focus taken off of them. Adding female Astartes just digs the "heroic evil Imperium" hole deeper.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Andykp wrote:

Hecaton wrote:
Stepping aside from the mutant purging discussion, there's no particular reason that the process which makes Astartes couldn't only work on male humans, so the people saying that it makes no sense are off base. I could outline a few ways that could, in theory, work.

Please do.

Yeah, so the first and most obvious way is if the process requires upregulating genes on the y chromosome to function properly. No y chromosome, no genes to upregulate, no effect. That is to say, it works by turning on genes past their normal level of activity, and those genes only exist on the y chromosome.

One of the big failure points for the process of creating an Astartes is the proper development of the black carapace; there are setting notes of the structural torsion involved as it grows literally ripping the aspirant apart if it gets too strong too fast. We know that boys and girls have significantly different bone densities even before puberty, so it's possible that there's just no good path forward for female Astartes to grow strong at the correct rate.

The third is that the window to create an Astartes is relatively narrow, and must be done at a particular time in development. Since boys and girls mature at different rates, there might be no window, or it might be prohibitively small, for the process designed for male humans to work on a girl.

Does any of that make sense? It is, to a certain extent arbitrary, because this isn't real technology, but the idea that you could have a process like this that only works properly on male humans is fairly plausible.

Let’s draw a line under the baby killing aspect of things, it’s in no way relevant to this topic.

No, none of it does. You are try to justify something using pretty shoddy real world science, when the thing yiu are trying to justify is based entirely on made up very shoddy magic sci-fi science. The process of making marines doesn’t specify which chromosomes they are linked to, doesn’t mention any male only hormones (they don’t exist).

But l’ll I indulge your boys vs girls and growth spurts and bone density arguments, they don’t stand up to even the mildest scrutiny. For one, in the made up process of making a marine they are filled with hormones and genetically altered so that there growth is unnatural so any comparison to real world growth rates is flawed because the growth rate and bone densities would be stimulated to an artificial level. Any arguments about x and Y chromosomes is moot to because the process will involve the manipulation of the genetic code, so it would be easy to assume that if they are adding and removing genes and gene switches then why could they not just as easily add any missing x or y based chromosomes? No reason at all.

But in truth the process could work on any one or anything because it is entirely made up with any grounding in any real science what so ever. You could make it work on cats, gorillas or even tables! It’s entirely pointless trying to use any scientific explanation to justify an entirely fantastical process. Some Bloke is right. It’s a massive waste of time.

As for your point about about not liking that marines are the main faction, sorry it’s tough luck on that one. They are, and will ever be. That’s what 40K is. You not liking when they appear heroic, that’s fine, I too like that there are no good guys in the setting, but removing the restriction on women becoming marines doesn’t detract from that. They can still be the “baby killing” monsters but some of them will be women. I don’t understand how it would alter that. We are arguing for representation in the real world, in setting the nature of marines as a faction would be identical, just some of them would be women. I think you are confusing the two different things here.

As for you not wanting marines to be so dominant marketing wise, that is an entirely different discussion and has nothing to do with women being marines. Fact is they are the most dominant faction, and exclude any female representation. GW won’t change their dominance, they are the USP, so let’s change the lack of representation. The nature of the faction won’t change at all. Just some pronouns.

If there is no need for statistical differences in the individual units, is there any thing that says we can't just MAKE the change ourselves, and not wait for GW to catch up?

GW has in the past picked up Fan-cannon and made it real, so why not this?

In Devastation of Baal, there's a child character who is crippled in body and slightly brain damaged due to an accident during his attempt to become an Astartes. After the battle ends an Apothecary scans him, says apart from minor surgery the child would be perfectly fine for implantation.
If SM can fix brain damage and a ruined body of a child and still turn them into a SM, using female candidates is hardly a stretch.

Ehmn, sorry to rain on your parade, but even assuming that Progenoids only works on Y chromosomes, I still think I deserve my Female Space Marine.

https://novonordiskfonden.dk/en/news/more-women-than-expected-are-genetically-men/

(Brief summary: even XY human can be women. So Marine can literally be women already.... If we go for the genome path. It appears that hormones really play a direct role, and in case of Astartes those are synthetic).

I want to be clear: "male" and "female" are those kind of concepts (others are "true", "right" or "wrong") that apparently and superficially are solid, clear to everyone and undisputed.
Expect that at any more attentive analysis, they aren't: they're social constructs when not entirely fantastic.

To summarize, if becoming a Marine is a more radical alteration than a sex change (and I think it is), everything coated in lore is not a justification AGAINST, but a justification FOR.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
If there is no need for statistical differences in the individual units, is there any thing that says we can't just MAKE the change ourselves, and not wait for GW to catch up?

GW has in the past picked up Fan-cannon and made it real, so why not this?

I like the idea but at the same time there's no guarantee that GW will actually pick up on it. In the meantime people will still get sent abuse and death threats, which I for one would like to avoid.

 Gert wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
If there is no need for statistical differences in the individual units, is there any thing that says we can't just MAKE the change ourselves, and not wait for GW to catch up?

GW has in the past picked up Fan-cannon and made it real, so why not this?

I like the idea but at the same time there's no guarantee that GW will actually pick up on it. In the meantime people will still get sent abuse and death threats, which I for one would like to avoid.

They Will Not Be Missed.

But in all serious, it's about time we did a cleanup of the house around here. Far too many sexists, phobists, racists, and ilk in the hobby currently. They feel far too comfortable.

 Gert wrote:
In Devastation of Baal, there's a child character who is crippled in body and slightly brain damaged due to an accident during his attempt to become an Astartes. After the battle ends an Apothecary scans him, says apart from minor surgery the child would be perfectly fine for implantation.
If SM can fix brain damage and a ruined body of a child and still turn them into a SM, using female candidates is hardly a stretch.

hahahha - ONLY THE STRONGEST RECRUITS CAN BECOME ASTARTES, WOMEN COULD NEVER -

....well except for this one bedridden child that's, you know.

Yeah, not going to lie, Dante, arguably the greatest living Astartes of all time, came from basically a sickly child with Radiation poisoning that was too weak to make most of the "tests".

Edit: added Living

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 Gert wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
If there is no need for statistical differences in the individual units, is there any thing that says we can't just MAKE the change ourselves, and not wait for GW to catch up?

GW has in the past picked up Fan-cannon and made it real, so why not this?

I like the idea but at the same time there's no guarantee that GW will actually pick up on it. In the meantime people will still get sent abuse and death threats, which I for one would like to avoid.

They Will Not Be Missed.

But in all serious, it's about time we did a cleanup of the house around here. Far too many sexists, phobists, racists, and ilk in the hobby currently. They feel far too comfortable.

I think you misunderstand. It's the people making female marines that, for reasons which defy common sense, are receiving death threats, not the people who are against it.

There are too many sexists, phobists and racists full stop. You can't "make 40k not a place for them" because there should simply be no place for them. But then, you can't make "being sexist" against the 40k rules without 40k becoming inherently political (in the colloquial sense of political, not the strict dictionary definition).

Society needs to deal with this sort of thing. 40k isn't something you can use to make this sort of change. I agree that people making death threats should be punished, but that falls to the law of the country, not to someone from the local GW rule enforcement squad.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 the_scotsman wrote:

 Gert wrote:
In Devastation of Baal, there's a child character who is crippled in body and slightly brain damaged due to an accident during his attempt to become an Astartes. After the battle ends an Apothecary scans him, says apart from minor surgery the child would be perfectly fine for implantation.
If SM can fix brain damage and a ruined body of a child and still turn them into a SM, using female candidates is hardly a stretch.

hahahha - ONLY THE STRONGEST RECRUITS CAN BECOME ASTARTES, WOMEN COULD NEVER -

....well except for this one bedridden child that's, you know.

Perhaps they have a "Make a Wish" foundation in the grimdark future?

 some bloke wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 Gert wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
If there is no need for statistical differences in the individual units, is there any thing that says we can't just MAKE the change ourselves, and not wait for GW to catch up?

GW has in the past picked up Fan-cannon and made it real, so why not this?

I like the idea but at the same time there's no guarantee that GW will actually pick up on it. In the meantime people will still get sent abuse and death threats, which I for one would like to avoid.

They Will Not Be Missed.

But in all serious, it's about time we did a cleanup of the house around here. Far too many sexists, phobists, racists, and ilk in the hobby currently. They feel far too comfortable.

I think you misunderstand. It's the people making female marines that, for reasons which defy common sense, are receiving death threats, not the people who are against it.

There are too many sexists, phobists and racists full stop. You can't "make 40k not a place for them" because there should simply be no place for them. But then, you can't make "being sexist" against the 40k rules without 40k becoming inherently political (in the colloquial sense of political, not the strict dictionary definition).

Society needs to deal with this sort of thing. 40k isn't something you can use to make this sort of change. I agree that people making death threats should be punished, but that falls to the law of the country, not to someone from the local GW rule enforcement squad.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 the_scotsman wrote:

 Gert wrote:
In Devastation of Baal, there's a child character who is crippled in body and slightly brain damaged due to an accident during his attempt to become an Astartes. After the battle ends an Apothecary scans him, says apart from minor surgery the child would be perfectly fine for implantation.
If SM can fix brain damage and a ruined body of a child and still turn them into a SM, using female candidates is hardly a stretch.

hahahha - ONLY THE STRONGEST RECRUITS CAN BECOME ASTARTES, WOMEN COULD NEVER -

....well except for this one bedridden child that's, you know.

Perhaps they have a "Make a Wish" foundation in the grimdark future?

Be the change you wish to see. Change what you can, where you can. GW is not the cause of the hate in this country, but it is trying, obviously, to change it. We can help in that by working in our community to show positive growth and change. More inclusivity only helps the hobby.

Be the change you wish to see. Change what you can, where you can. GW is not the cause of the hate in this country, but it is trying, obviously, to change it. We can help in that by working in our community to show positive growth and change. More inclusivity only helps the hobby.

Oh I 100% agree that the world would be better without _ists, but I feel like it's not GW's place to tell people to change that. They are, ultimately, a game manufacturing company. I would not expect instructions on how to be a good person and how to influence ethics in society inside an airfix kit, either!

I don't expect Football teams to take a stance for Black lives mattering, but I support them for doing so, and promote that type of thinking. We can promote the inclusivity in the hobby that we wish to see by making changes. I for one will refer to my Custodes or Salamanders as they/them, and try to not refer to them as males, or in that pronoun. I will give more money to hobby stores that promote my values and foster a safe atmosphere.

I just mentioned female marines in another thread outside of this one and got told to keep it in my pants by someone who had posts deleted on here. The threats and hate will still come.

Andykp wrote:
I just mentioned female marines in another thread outside of this one and got told to keep it in my pants by someone who had posts deleted on here. The threats and hate will still come.

I saw that, and am sorry I did not report the post. Thank you for reminding me to be better.