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:I'm sorry, but this "TOTALLY fine with women Space Marines, but don't want it for PC reasons" audience doesn't exist as a major bracket, because they'll call anything a "PC reason" - the majority of this demographic are just the A group in disguise.
I'm skipping a lot of what you said as there are two important things to note here.
The least important one is that you've misunderstood the groups. I am not suggesting that B group will become against female marines (effectively become in "A" group) if it is done for political reasons. But if people in group B1, who don't like politics interfering with their game, see if being done for political reasons, they will think that it's being shoehorned in without regard for the lore, and will be against it for that reason - not because they're women, but because of how insensitive and jarring the change was made.
And you then went and claimed that this would lead to an environment where those people in B group would be toxic towards what they perceived as causing the change: women.
Sorry, but your point *did* claim that.
Group B1 are unfortunately in a bit of sticky situation, because as much as they say they don't want "politics" in their game, it's always been there, and if Group B1 don't see that, how can I trust that people in Group B1 would also not turn around to any lore change, "respectful" or not, and call that "political"?
Again - you mention "insensitive". I think it's pretty insensitive that we need to appease people who would otherwise kick off at completely innocent women if their lore got changed. If anyone needs to be more sensitive, I think it might just be them?
The second, most important thing is how you seem to think that having the moral highground will affect anything in real life. If you were to make the change, and say "well I don't care about the people who don't like the change because they are morally inferior to me, why should I care what they think?", and then turn a far greater proportion of people (hell, or any greater proportion than it would have been if handled well) against the idea, it doesn't matter how much higher your horse is than theirs - they will still make the hobby either no better for women, or worse.
Sorry, but no. I have morals, and I'm going to stick with them. I'm not calling anyone "morally inferior", but my god, if folks can't see why maybe it's a little bit of a problem that some of the people in Group B1 would act toxic towards women because they didn't get a nice neat bow on their fictional setting, maybe I'm not the one who needs to self-reflect.
I have a motorbike. It has loud exhausts, and government regulations say that's bad now and you can't have them. I'm not fussed about the volume of the exhausts, the decision to have loud ones was arbitrary, but I'm in no rush to change them. The MOT comes due and I take it to my garage, and they have a set of new exhausts which will make my bike quieter, more powerful, and more efficient, and a government grant to pay for them.
If they say to me "we're changing the exhausts on your bike, for free, because the government said you can't have the exhausts you used to have any more", I will feel unhappy about that, and feel like the government is interfering with my stuff.
If they say "We're changing your exhausts for free, these ones will make the bike more powerful, more efficient, and quieter, which makes if fit with government regs", I will say "wow, thanks, that's awesome!". I won't feel like the government has been interfering with my stuff.
In both cases, when I ride away it's on a bike that's quieter, more efficient, more powerful, and conforms to government regs.
Again, you underestimate the response. *You* might say "oh, that's fine", but I know that there would be a significant (possibly even majority) of the group you just outlined who would see both responses as "the government's interfering with my stuff" simply because the MOT changed their exhaust in the first place.
I'm sorry, but you really aren't considering just how large of a group that is. It doesn't matter what sort of bow you put on it, if they have enough of an aversion to "political" content that they would, as you said, make the environment toxic towards women, they will see it as political.
Regardless of peoples stance on the female marines, initiating this change with a big statement of how 40k is being interfered with by external issues, and the changes are being made exclusively for that reason, and not giving it decent justification in the lore, will cause more people to oppose it than just progressing the lore in the right direction and not even mentioning the politics.
And why are those people opposing it? Does their opposition to "political" things win out over their supposed desire for women's representation?
And in both cases, we all ride away with a flagship faction which conforms to societal regulations. So why is it so important to shove it down peoples throats that it is political?
Why should I be prevented from saying that it is? Better yet, why is it so important to hide what this is from people who apparently are so fragile in their avoidance of "political" topics that they would (as you said) make the environment toxic for women?
I'm not "shoving it down" anyone's throat. I'm just saying that we don't need to pretend like we need to justify anything through the lore, because this is about more than the lore. We're all grown ups. We can handle a retcon. Some people can't handle death threats.
As another analogy - you have a pack of domestic dogs. Some like cats, some don't care about cats, one or two hate cats, and about half of them will attack anything that's thrown at them.
You have a cat, which you want to add to the group - it can take the one or two dogs which will attack it anyway, because the dogs that like cats will defend them. Do you introduce it gently, or do you throw it at them, and then say "why should I care what the dogs which attack anything thrown at them will do to a cat that's thrown at them, they clearly hate cats!"?
Domestic dogs aren't people. People should know better than to be toxic to other people just because some fictional writing changed without warning.
Am I wrong for asking people to put other people first?
Not every reason for not wanting something is about sexism. I like cheese, don't like peanuts. If you offer me cheesy peanuts, I will turn them down - it doesn't mean I don't like cheese.
Sure - but this isn't about cheese. It's about other human beings.
Hecaton wrote:You aren't allowing room for anyone to disagree with you without being denigrated as a sexist.
Hey, maybe if some people didn't imply that the existence of women around men makes them all horny and "distracting", maybe that wouldn't happen.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/02 21:34:21
I have to say that several times in this thread it's been insinuated that I'm a sexist, though I will say it's not been by Gert. I'll agree using the royal "you", as opposed to a directed claim!
This bugs me because I genuinely find it funny that somehow the pro-female SM crowd is stifling the opinions of those who are anti-female SM when in reality there are over 50 pages in the thread and the only time's people have been told to stop discussing from the pro-female SM side is when that poster has said things that are out of line in accordance with the forum rules. In fact, I and others been told loads of times to shut up and stop talking about female SM in this and other threads while also being insulted constantly. Of course, the insults are the usual nonsense of "you SJW Marxist Liberal Leftist", which are beyond meaningless. Getting called a fascist and being compared to a dogmatic religious crusader wasn't funny.
Gert wrote:If their entire enjoyment of 40k comes down to things being thrown in with little explanation or reason then why didn't they leave when Necrons were redone or when Centurions/Primaris/GSC/Knights were added? Is their specific tolerance limited to the inclusion of female SM? If so then they were just group A, waiting for an excuse.
Precisely.
I've said this several times in the thread - why is it women Space Marines that are the problem here? It can't be because this hypothetical Group B1 cares that much about lore being "respectful", because the lore isn't even respectful to itself.
Why is women Space Marines the hurdle here? Is it because women Space Marines are "political"? Why are they political inherently? Why do I need to make a lore justification for them, and not for Centurions, or Primaris, or Stormravens, or Stormtalons, or grav-guns? I think the answer, and please, correct me if I'm mistaken, is that the inclusion of women is seen as a political intrusion from the outset. And if the simple inclusion of women is seen political before the lore can even come in and say "nooo, wait, this is totally something Cawl did!", then the problematic element has already struck.
People won't be put off because I'm being "political" about this. People will be put off because they were always put off, and any "lore reasoning" is just damage control.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/02 21:42:31
Oh yes you are. The utter lack of self-awareness is honestly mind-blowing at this point.
The idea that a selfish corporation like GW would claim moral authority over its playerbase is disgusting. Doesn't matter what they're saying, really.
Wanna provide some evidence for that claim there chief?
And again, if you don't care about SM and you don't care what GW does, why join the discussion.
Exhibit A, this thread. You aren't allowing room for anyone to disagree with you without being denigrated as a sexist.
Going to have to call bullsh@t on this mate. We have time and time again met any disagreement with logic, facts and reason. There has not been an argument made against female marines that we have not argued against with in universe and real life logic. Some people have been called sexist. But they behaved as such, Matt swain for example.
We have been more than patient in rebutting the same arguments again and again a no again. At no point have we just turned around and told you to sod off for being sexist. The last 10-20 pages of discussion have been us patiently explain to you why we disagree with you. You have not been dismissed as sexist once, we are still engaging with you now. So please don’t be so disrespectful to then effort that has been put into adrsssing your concerns and yours alone.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: personally I'd rather GW develop females in factions that have them before they include a token head for a marine that upon close close inspection is apparently female.
the inclusion of sisters of battle in the 9th edition trailer was a promising sign. as well as piety and pain.
Not ignoring this it’s just been done to death earlier on in the thread. Sisters them selves are not great for representation, fetish nuns, very subservient etc. And in that trailer they were rescued by marines which are far tougher and harder and braver but also all male! Marines need the representation because they are marines, they are 40K, they are the face of the hobby and they exclude women.
PS. See Hecaton, someone has disagreed with me and I haven’t called them a sexist. Again.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/02 23:32:03
Oh yes you are. The utter lack of self-awareness is honestly mind-blowing at this point.
The idea that a selfish corporation like GW would claim moral authority over its playerbase is disgusting. Doesn't matter what they're saying, really.
Wanna provide some evidence for that claim there chief?
And again, if you don't care about SM and you don't care what GW does, why join the discussion.
Exhibit A, this thread. You aren't allowing room for anyone to disagree with you without being denigrated as a sexist.
If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck....
I'm all for female Space Marines, give them boobplate and thinner armour, make it clear they are women, proud and strong. A simple head swap does not properly represent equality. Sell all unit boxes with 50/50 representation.
If for no other reason than to decrease the popularity of Space Marines, or better yet kill 40k and GW all together. Honestly I just want to see what would happen, would a Warp rift open up in London and unleash Chaos?!
I could be wrong of course, but there's only one way to find out...BRING ON THE FEMALE MARINES.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/03 07:53:22
Old World Prediction: The Empire will have stupid Clockwork Paragon Warsuits and Mecha Horses
Oh yes you are. The utter lack of self-awareness is honestly mind-blowing at this point.
The idea that a selfish corporation like GW would claim moral authority over its playerbase is disgusting. Doesn't matter what they're saying, really.
Wanna provide some evidence for that claim there chief?
And again, if you don't care about SM and you don't care what GW does, why join the discussion.
Exhibit A, this thread. You aren't allowing room for anyone to disagree with you without being denigrated as a sexist.
If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck....
Going to have to call bullsh@t on this mate. We have time and time again met any disagreement with logic, facts and reason. There has not been an argument made against female marines that we have not argued against with in universe and real life logic. Some people have been called sexist. But they behaved as such, Matt swain for example.
Nah. Smudge was lying about my posts, people were calling me an imbecile, people were saying all sorts of rude and weird gak. But you see it as ok because you're on the "right" side.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/03 08:00:46
Well, for what is worth, being abrasive, heavily implying hidden motivation in the other people, being presumptuous (for example, thinking that a couple of rlsassy lines are enough to rebuttal long articulated posts).... And then crying foul and lament that the other are the aggressive ones is neither particularly original, inventive or unheard of.
On the contrary, it's a pretty standard low level argument. As Bill Bullard said: opinion is the lower form of knowledge, it doesn't require knowledge, communication or accountability. Empathy is the higher: it requires to put in pause your ideas to open to someone's else.
You seem under the impression that your opinion is somehow relevant to the thread and that there's some kind of burden of the proof on the other people to convince you (and the possible part of the hobby that agrees with you)...
I can't speak for others (you should try it sometime), but the reason why I'm still engaging with you is not to talk to you: is to everyone else who is silently reading the topic that your arguments have no bearing (and it seems you've lost traction and mostly self-sabotaging you position in the last pages).
I can't condone a place where abusers and abused are threated the same: it's destined to doom, so there is no reason to participate in it.
Goose LeChance wrote: I'm all for female Space Marines, give them boobplate and thinner armour, make it clear they are women, proud and strong. A simple head swap does not properly represent equality. Sell all unit boxes with 50/50 representation.
If for no other reason than to decrease the popularity of Space Marines, or better yet kill 40k and GW all together. Honestly I just want to see what would happen, would a Warp rift open up in London and unleash Chaos?!
I could be wrong of course, but there's only one way to find out...BRING ON THE FEMALE MARINES.
I get this is a joke post but there's really no evidence to suggest adding female SM would kill 40k. Also, GW is based in Nottingham not London.
It's not a joke post at all. I'm 100% in support of female Space Marines and the sooner it happens the better. Just make sure these neo-liberal capitalists at GW put their money where their mouths are. I want to see what happens.
It's time to stop virtue signalling and take action. Female Space Marines NOW.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/03 10:08:35
Old World Prediction: The Empire will have stupid Clockwork Paragon Warsuits and Mecha Horses
Goose LeChance wrote:I'm all for female Space Marines, give them boobplate and thinner armour, make it clear they are women
Why would they need boobplate and thinner armour? They're still genetically enhanced super soldiers in massively thick power armour - boobplate and thinner armour are entirely unnecessary, and would contribute more to ideas of sexual dimorphism.
A simple head swap does not properly represent equality. Sell all unit boxes with 50/50 representation.
A headswap is all that is realistically needed to represent this, considering how the armour is thick enough to hold anyone in it. But I would totally agree with a 50/50 split of all bare heads on the sprue.
If for no other reason than to decrease the popularity of Space Marines, or better yet kill 40k and GW all together. Honestly I just want to see what would happen, would a Warp rift open up in London and unleash Chaos?!
... you want to add women Space Marines in order to *decrease* the popularity of Space Marines?
Why? How?
Also, wrong location - Nottingham would be the place to go. Maybe I'll pick up some cool mutations while I'm at it.
Hecaton wrote:Nah. Smudge was lying about my posts
Which part was the lie again?
The bit where you said that adding women Space Marines would lead to pregnancies and that all the male Space Marines would get all horny?
The bit where you said the people only wanted women Space Marines to fulfil fetishistic desires?
The bit where you said that including women would make the setting "homogenised"?
The bit where you said the Imperium *definitely* killed intersex folks at birth?
I don't believe I made any of those up. Other folks in the thread can go and verify these, if they so want to.
Goose LeChance wrote:It's time to stop virtue signalling and take action. Female Space Marines NOW.
I genuinely wish you luck, I would suggest everyone who wants to actually step up and make a change contact GW directly, and often. Let your voices be heard, posting on forums or twitter isn't enough.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Has anyone sent GW an email yet?
Perhaps you Londonianites should protest in front of GWHQ. Since you're at the heart of the corruption.
It's not really activism if you aren't doing anything
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/03 16:57:00
Old World Prediction: The Empire will have stupid Clockwork Paragon Warsuits and Mecha Horses
Goose LeChance wrote:I genuinely wish you luck, I would suggest everyone who wants to actually step up and make a change contact GW directly, and often. Let your voices be heard, posting on forums or twitter isn't enough.
Implying that I don't do both?
I can ask GW all I like, but if I can persuade other people to do the same, by outlining why women Astartes are something to ask for and opposing the arguments against it, then that might end up being two people asking GW, or three, or four, or more.
Perhaps you Londonianites should protest in front of GWHQ. Since you're at the heart of the corruption.
Firstly, GWHQ ain't in London. Secondly, Londonianites? Lolwut? You have no idea where the UK users here are actually from.
It's not really activism if you aren't doing anything
Shooting down bigots in hobby spaces, including online forums, is still "doing" things - even if it's simply making observers think for a wee second.
Goose LeChance wrote:I genuinely wish you luck, I would suggest everyone who wants to actually step up and make a change contact GW directly, and often. Let your voices be heard, posting on forums or twitter isn't enough.
Implying that I don't do both?
I can ask GW all I like, but if I can persuade other people to do the same, by outlining why women Astartes are something to ask for and opposing the arguments against it, then that might end up being two people asking GW, or three, or four, or more.
Perhaps you Londonianites should protest in front of GWHQ. Since you're at the heart of the corruption.
Firstly, GWHQ ain't in London. Secondly, Londonianites? Lolwut? You have no idea where the UK users here are actually from.
It's not really activism if you aren't doing anything
Shooting down bigots in hobby spaces, including online forums, is still "doing" things - even if it's simply making observers think for a wee second.
Thank you for your service.
Old World Prediction: The Empire will have stupid Clockwork Paragon Warsuits and Mecha Horses
Yeah, this is the Tucker Carlson method of engagement now. Take the logical outcome that is being advocated for, and push it to an extreme version of itself, and propose anyone NOT part of that version is somehow wrong.
It's how we have a current war on Xmas because people took issue with Coffee cups at Starbucks.
If we aren't picketing outside the HQ of a head quarters, we are suddenly the pariahs and ones creating the problem.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Yeah, this is the Tucker Carlson method of engagement now. Take the logical outcome that is being advocated for, and push it to an extreme version of itself, and propose anyone NOT part of that version is somehow wrong.
It's how we have a current war on Xmas because people took issue with Coffee cups at Starbucks.
If we aren't picketing outside the HQ of a head quarters, we are suddenly the pariahs and ones creating the problem.
Nice shift there "goose".
I thought inclusivity was important, it's a big issue right?
So instead of arguing amongst us wee plebeians, who have no say in the matter, why aren't you going after the giant mega corp that makes all the decisions? Are you merely a clout chaser? Internet back pats? Does it make you feel superior to others?
Maybe you're afraid of what could happen. Could GW go out of business if they made female Spice Mariners? Would the shareholders, lawyers and bean counters even allow it? What are they waiting for? Are plastic toys more important than being inclusive? Is money more important? hmm
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/03 18:50:23
Old World Prediction: The Empire will have stupid Clockwork Paragon Warsuits and Mecha Horses
So instead of arguing amongst us wee plebeians, who have no say in the matter, why aren't you going after the giant mega corp that makes all the decisions? Are you merely a clout chaser? Internet back pats? Does it make you feel superior to others?
Maybe you're afraid of what could happen. Could GW go out of business if they made female Spice Mariners? Would the shareholders, lawyers and bean counters even allow it? What are they waiting for? Are plastic toys more important than being inclusive? Is money more important? hmm
It's clear that you're trolling. Just because people are arguing with someone online doesn't mean they can't also take other actions. Also, your assumption that people who argue for any kind of social change are only doing it so they look "better than other people" for saying these things shows that you only see these issues as political, as theoretical things for you to sit back and argue about while ignoring that they affect real people.
Yes there are far greater obstacles women face in our sexist society than space marines not allowing women in warhammer's lore but that doesn't change the fact that there's no good reason why they can't be included in the lore. The problem isn't that women are actually set back in a material way by not having representation as marines (although its arguable that they still are slightly), but the fact that GW is unwilling to make this change signals something about the culture of this game and the people who play it. It tells people its ok to gatekeep and it tells women that they aren't fully welcome. So I ask, why is it that you are against this change?
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Yeah, this is the Tucker Carlson method of engagement now. Take the logical outcome that is being advocated for, and push it to an extreme version of itself, and propose anyone NOT part of that version is somehow wrong.
It's how we have a current war on Xmas because people took issue with Coffee cups at Starbucks.
If we aren't picketing outside the HQ of a head quarters, we are suddenly the pariahs and ones creating the problem.
Nice shift there "goose".
I thought inclusivity was important, it's a big issue right?
It is. And that includes talking about that with the community.
I don't quite appreciate the implication that talking about this online is wasted time, which very much feels like a method to shut up people rocking the boat.
So instead of arguing amongst us wee plebeians, who have no say in the matter, why aren't you going after the giant mega corp that makes all the decisions? Are you merely a clout chaser? Internet back pats? Does it make you feel superior to others?
We can all do both, thank you very much.
If you genuinely care that much about making sure that the giant mega-corp gets the message, perhaps you'd care to join us?
Maybe you're afraid of what could happen. Could GW go out of business if they made female Spice Mariners?
Why on earth would they? You've made this assumption twice, I'm curious why the two would be related.
It's kind of like saying "would the world end if GW made women Space Marines!!" - it seems entirely hyperbolic and fearmongering. Women Space Marines won't make GW go out of business, any more so than women Stormcast Eternals did.
Would the shareholders, lawyers and bean counters even allow it?
That depends how profitable they would see it being. They would see it being more profitable if more of the hobby spoke up in favour of it, which is the point of us folks here arguing to sway people in favour of it.
What are they waiting for? Are plastic toys more important than being inclusive? Is money more important? hmm
Ultimately, yes.
But it does turn out that inclusion and representation are remarkably profitable (see D&D becoming increasingly inclusive, and increasingly profitable to boot) - so perhaps the two aren't mutually exclusive.
So instead of arguing amongst us wee plebeians, who have no say in the matter, why aren't you going after the giant mega corp that makes all the decisions? Are you merely a clout chaser? Internet back pats? Does it make you feel superior to others?
Maybe you're afraid of what could happen. Could GW go out of business if they made female Spice Mariners? Would the shareholders, lawyers and bean counters even allow it? What are they waiting for? Are plastic toys more important than being inclusive? Is money more important? hmm
It's clear that you're trolling. Just because people are arguing with someone online doesn't mean they can't also take other actions. Also, your assumption that people who argue for any kind of social change are only doing it so they look "better than other people" for saying these things shows that you only see these issues as political, as theoretical things for you to sit back and argue about while ignoring that they affect real people.
Yes there are far greater obstacles women face in our sexist society than space marines not allowing women in warhammer's lore but that doesn't change the fact that there's no good reason why they can't be included in the lore. The problem isn't that women are actually set back in a material way by not having representation as marines (although its arguable that they still are slightly), but the fact that GW is unwilling to make this change signals something about the culture of this game and the people who play it. It tells people its ok to gatekeep and it tells women that they aren't fully welcome. So I ask, why is it that you are against this change?
Where did I say i was against it? I'm literally daring you to make the change happen.
So how many emails have you sent to GW again?
Yes, lets just call the nerd on the other side of the table a bigot. He's the one "gatekeeping women".
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/03 19:21:21
Old World Prediction: The Empire will have stupid Clockwork Paragon Warsuits and Mecha Horses
Cybtroll wrote: Well, for what is worth, being abrasive, heavily implying hidden motivation in the other people, being presumptuous (for example, thinking that a couple of rlsassy lines are enough to rebuttal long articulated posts).... And then crying foul and lament that the other are the aggressive ones is neither particularly original, inventive or unheard of.
You were being abrasive to people you disagreed with before I even butted into the thread. Why do you think that only my side has the requirement to be civil?
On the contrary, it's a pretty standard low level argument. As Bill Bullard said: opinion is the lower form of knowledge, it doesn't require knowledge, communication or accountability. Empathy is the higher: it requires to put in pause your ideas to open to someone's else.
You should take your own advice and criticize your own side for using blog posts claiming that representation is the reason that more women aren't involves in 40k.
You seem under the impression that your opinion is somehow relevant to the thread and that there's some kind of burden of the proof on the other people to convince you (and the possible part of the hobby that agrees with you)...
I mean I definitely take my own opinion more seriously than yours.
I can't speak for others (you should try it sometime), but the reason why I'm still engaging with you is not to talk to you: is to everyone else who is silently reading the topic that your arguments have no bearing (and it seems you've lost traction and mostly self-sabotaging you position in the last pages).
Have I? It looks to me like y'all have mostly given up because the shaming and the anecdotes won't convince me.
I thought inclusivity was important, it's a big issue right?
So instead of arguing amongst us wee plebeians, who have no say in the matter, why aren't you going after the giant mega corp that makes all the decisions? Are you merely a clout chaser? Internet back pats? Does it make you feel superior to others?
I've said this before: you push for equality and do what good you can where you can. Most of us probably aren't in positions where big corporations or anyone in charge of landmark legislation will listen to us, but we're in the position where we can discuss this sort of thing with each other - and if we can change some of those attitudes in little ways, advance the conversation just a little, or at least give some lurkers a better basis for understanding, that's got to be at least as worthwhile as any other discussion on Dakka.
Maybe you're afraid of what could happen. Could GW go out of business if they made female Spice Mariners? Would the shareholders, lawyers and bean counters even allow it? What are they waiting for? Are plastic toys more important than being inclusive? Is money more important? hmm
Slaanesh's balls in a pita, that's in the running for the most fething ridiculous thing I've seen in this thread. GW consistently survives years of bad decisions from the anticonsumer to totally boneheaded; it'll survive a good one.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/03 19:24:39
"All you 40k people out there have managed to more or less do something that I did some time ago, and some of my friends did before me, and some of their friends did before them: When you saw the water getting gakky, you decided to, well, get out of the pool, rather than say 'I guess this is water now.'"
Goose LeChance wrote: Where did I say i was against it? I'm literally daring you to make the change happen.
While asking people to stop discussing it on forums though.
I fail to see why people can't do both.
I am also curious again about your comments, such as "If for no other reason than to decrease the popularity of Space Marines, or better yet kill 40k and GW all together." and "Maybe you're afraid of what could happen. Could GW go out of business if they made female Spice Mariners?"
Yes, lets just call the nerd on the other side of the table a bigot. He's the one gatekeeping women.
I mean, yeah - they totally *could* be. They also might not be. It all depends on what systems they choose to uphold and propagate.
Does this nerd on the other side of the table leer at women, and fight just a little bit too hard to keep women relegated to the Sisters of Battle? If so, probably a bigot, and probably contributing to gatekeeping.
Being a "nerd on the other side of the table" doesn't make someone a good or a bad person. Their actions, and the causes they choose to support, would define that.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hecaton wrote:You should take your own advice and criticize your own side for using blog posts claiming that representation is the reason that more women aren't involves in 40k.
If it's women making those blog posts, and women saying that representation would increase women's involvement in 40k, I think those are pretty good sources.
After all, who would know women better than women?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/03 19:27:33
JNAProductions wrote: Hecaton, what real-world reasons are there to not have female Marines? What real-world reason is there to be against representation?
Perhaps he's of the opinion it isn't essential to modify the existing and enjoyed literature and faction of Space Marines that people enjoy for perceptions of the utility of representation? Perhaps he and others think any potential problems are really in the plastic models, nor even the body of fiction.
Such an answer can never suffice for those persuaded that any space or fiction with popularity that doesn’t include female characters must be abolished, but not everyone is persuaded that is necessary, nor a root cause of any problem. Some will call people so persuaded "human garbage", or if they are women "suffering from internalized patriarch" or some such of course. I generally find that isn't true, my own opinion of course, and I find atitudes like that tend to foster resentment and division which limit progress toward improving access and participation among women (the actual goal).
As I've said before, I don't think the specific program of GW adopting female marines is the only or neccessary program or approach to making 40k more accessable to women. Not that GW can't do that of course, their IP. Not that it would be neccessarily harmful either. Just that it isn't a moral and social imperative by which we should judge the worth of fellow players over.
JNAProductions wrote: Hecaton, what real-world reasons are there to not have female Marines? What real-world reason is there to be against representation?
Perhaps he's of the opinion it isn't essential to modify the existing and enjoyed literature and faction of Space Marines that people enjoy for perceptions of the utility of representation? Perhaps he and others think any potential problems are really in the plastic models, nor even the body of fiction.
Such an answer can never suffice for those persuaded that any space or fiction with popularity that doesn’t include female characters must be abolished, but not everyone is persuaded that is necessary, nor a root cause of any problem. Some will call people so persuaded "human garbage", or if they are women "suffering from internalized patriarch" or some such of course. I generally find that isn't true, my own opinion of course, and I find atitudes like that tend to foster resentment and division which limit progress toward improving access and participation among women (the actual goal).
As I've said before, I don't think the specific program of GW adopting female marines is the only or neccessary program or approach to making 40k more accessable to women. Not that GW can't do that of course, their IP. Not that it would be neccessarily harmful either. Just that it isn't a moral and social imperative by which we should judge the worth of fellow players over.
Was Hecaton up in arms over Primaris? Because they were a much bigger change than saying "We expanded the recruitment pool."
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
So instead of arguing amongst us wee plebeians, who have no say in the matter, why aren't you going after the giant mega corp that makes all the decisions? Are you merely a clout chaser? Internet back pats? Does it make you feel superior to others?
Maybe you're afraid of what could happen. Could GW go out of business if they made female Spice Mariners? Would the shareholders, lawyers and bean counters even allow it? What are they waiting for? Are plastic toys more important than being inclusive? Is money more important? hmm
It's clear that you're trolling. Just because people are arguing with someone online doesn't mean they can't also take other actions. Also, your assumption that people who argue for any kind of social change are only doing it so they look "better than other people" for saying these things shows that you only see these issues as political, as theoretical things for you to sit back and argue about while ignoring that they affect real people.
Yes there are far greater obstacles women face in our sexist society than space marines not allowing women in warhammer's lore but that doesn't change the fact that there's no good reason why they can't be included in the lore. The problem isn't that women are actually set back in a material way by not having representation as marines (although its arguable that they still are slightly), but the fact that GW is unwilling to make this change signals something about the culture of this game and the people who play it. It tells people its ok to gatekeep and it tells women that they aren't fully welcome. So I ask, why is it that you are against this change?
Regardless of my opinion elsewhere here we agree on this, this fella is clearly trolling and using an alt account to do so, brand new, low post count, deliberate inflamatory language, I agree with you, a troll.
JNAProductions wrote: Hecaton, what real-world reasons are there to not have female Marines? What real-world reason is there to be against representation?
Perhaps he's of the opinion it isn't essential to modify the existing and enjoyed literature and faction of Space Marines that people enjoy for perceptions of the utility of representation?
My counterpoint - are the people who want to keep things unmodified aware and accepting of the fact that what they enjoy is making the game unpopular to others?
Are they okay with that? Is their enjoyment of fictional super soldiers not having women worth keeping people out of the hobby for? Is that an acceptable trade for them?
Just that it isn't a moral and social imperative by which we should judge the worth of fellow players over.
That entirely depends on the answers they give, and their justifications for doing so.
If their justification was "I don't care about people feeling excluded because of some arbitrary fiction, they can go suck a lemon", then I'm absolutely going to judge them for that, because that's just plain rude and unsympathetic.
57 Pages and still no answer from the other side as to why we can't just make Female Primaris Marines. Baffling.
But on the bright side my block list is now an entire page! And we've shone Sunlight into some of the darker corners of the hobby. If nothing else, I'm proud of Dakka Forums tonight.
