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.
Nevertheless it seems like there's a lot of people who you didn't bring around to your way of thinking in terms of female space marines being neccessary either. The idea will likely take off if it becomes broadly popular, but has the focus of this thread been to help find ways relevant to people who don't see it as neccessary or good to explore ways it could fit (I've offered my own suggestions), or to simply tell anyone who doesn't see it as an important step forward they are wrong, and add them to your block list?
RegularGuy wrote: Nevertheless it seems like there's a lot of people who you didn't bring around to your way of thinking in terms of female space marines being neccessary either.
And a not-insignificant number of those are people who didn't find many of the real world issues problems either.
I'll be totally honest here, I kinda tune out when someone suggests that representation is "woke" or "SJW propaganda".
Now, of the other people who wasn't "brought around to our way of thinking", possibly because we've discussed this a lot with them, some bloke at the very least *is* supportive of the idea, just not for overtly political reasons. While I may disagree with having to hide the real world decisions behind the change, they are still positive to the change. Of the people who didn't find Space Marines being inclusive of women important, how many of them were simply because they didn't find representation important in the first place? Genuinely, I'm interested to hear what I may have missed over a long thread.
The idea will likely take off if it becomes broadly popular, but has the focus of this thread been to help find ways relevant to people who don't see it as neccessary or good to explore ways it could fit (I've offered my own suggestions), or to simply tell anyone who doesn't see it as an important step forward they are wrong, and add them to your block list?
Ultimately, that depends on why they don't find it necessary.
It just so happens that many of the people saying it's unnecessary are doing so because they don't really care about the lack of representation, and I can't fix a lack of empathy.
The initial premise of the thread was "what would the response be if Cawl/GW made women Space Marines", which then changed into "should GW make women Space Marines", and then "how should GW make women Space Marines". And ultimately, I *do* want to hear reasons why maybe Space Marines should stay as they are - but I want those reasons to be in good faith and ultimately compassionate to people in the real world, and not "I don't think representation problems exist", because that's not an argument with a shred of empathy behind it.
If someone expresses that they don't care about the fair treatment of other humans, how do I have a fair conversation with them?
I will note, I'm not here to block or ignore users, and have no intention on doing so.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/04 00:02:26
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.
You may not find it necessary but no one is looking at abolishing anything, just a tiny redress of the scales. You agree it wouldn’t be harmful but sadly the status quo is, currently it seems ok to be abusive, openly sexist and even make death threats. That’s the reality here, I’ve been on the receiving end of it and not just here, all for the cardinal sin of placing a female style head on my marines and using the female pronouns to describe them. Nothing is being forced on anyone, anyone could ignore the change if the disliked it so much but they wouldn’t be able to hide behind “it’s against the lore” as an excuse for excluding people, male and female. I don’t judge people by whether or not they approve of female marines but on how they behave, and plenty on here have behaved atrociously. Many just plain badly.
It’s not all that GW could do but it would be a very good step in the right direction, it also isn’t going to fix sexism in any wider sense but again it’s a small step and a big step for the wargaming community. You say any answer would but insufficient for any group that want to abolish things that aren’t representative, again, no one is asking for marines to abolished or even significantly changed. No one. But an answer would be nice. We have asked and asked, when answers have been given they have been discussed, nothing has been dismissed out of hand, 57 pages on the back and forth of the “lore”, on the business arguments, on the justification of the push for female marines.
The pro female marines side has even instigated deep dives into the “lore” to see just how relevant it is, that could have gone either way, it could have been in every codex and every publication. It hasn’t. For years and never in a codex. We have shown time and again examples of abuse and bigotry and been subject to it in this thread, the trolling is still going on. Not only that is a discussion I have wanted to have for years but haven’t been allowed because the anti female marines always shouted down any attempt to with abuse and claims of SJW and culture war. (Again thank you mods for allowing this, I appreciate it must be a lot of work for you monitor this discussion a no it’s a credit to you that it has gone as long as it has). But even now we are still waiting after so many pages for an argument that isn’t that it’s lore breaking, or that there are SoB so it’s not needed or that their must be male SoB for it to be fair. Because we have done those to death and they never stack up or stand up to any scrutiny. So all we have now is people getting their feelings hurt that they don’t have or won’t say the reason they don’t want them or that they just wouldn’t like it.
As a note as well, I have not blocked anyone on this forum at all. And won’t. I have however looked at everyone who has posted anything unpleasant and tried to see how well you paint and judged you on that. I don’t know why but it seems pertinent. So if you are going to come in here and hurl abuse around then you had best be a brilliant painter that’s all I can say.
If someone expresses that they don't care about the fair treatment of other humans, how do I have a fair conversation with them?
Do you not see Sgt_Smudge, that your framing precludes a "fair conversation"?
When you tell people that your opinion is the one of empathy and moral rectitude, and imply that as a logical consequence anyone who disagrees with either your basic premise or your framing is therefore unempathetic and lacking in correctness then you yourself have created the impossibility of a "fair argument".
...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?
That might be a fair question. I only say might because based on Games Workshop's sales, 40k seems to be more popular than ever and I'm not aware of 40k's popularity ever dropping back, it seems only to have become more and more popular over time.
Your assertion that the existing background/the mere enjoyment of the existing background, is making the game unpopular is demonstrably untrue. Your assertion that people are being kept out of the hobby because space marine are all male is demonstrably untrue.
Be Pure!
Be Vigilant!
BEHAVE!
Show me your god and I'll send you a warhead because my god's bigger than your god.
Because this is, even now, a niche hobby. It’s a long way from getting a majority of men, let alone a majority of people-it’s fully possible for something to be popular among some and exclusionary towards others.
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
Err, Games Workshop's sales? Just go and look at how well the company is performing and form your own conclusion.
Because this is, even now, a niche hobby. It’s a long way from getting a majority of men, let alone a majority of people-
The hobby doesn't need a majority of the population involved with it for it to be doing well.
it’s fully possible for something to be popular among some and exclusionary towards others.
You can say that about literally anything.
As to 40k speciffically, look at how quickly Indomitus sold out. Now compare that with Dominion. As of several minutes ago, you can still get the box of coins with an order of Dominion, which means they've sold less than 33,050 units, at least from Games Workshop online. And you can still get the limited edition rulebook, Indomitus sold out on the day.
Be Pure!
Be Vigilant!
BEHAVE!
Show me your god and I'll send you a warhead because my god's bigger than your god.
If someone expresses that they don't care about the fair treatment of other humans, how do I have a fair conversation with them?
Do you not see Sgt_Smudge, that your framing precludes a "fair conversation"?
When you tell people that your opinion is the one of empathy and moral rectitude, and imply that as a logical consequence anyone who disagrees with either your basic premise or your framing is therefore unempathetic and lacking in correctness then you yourself have created the impossibility of a "fair argument".
I'm not sure that asking that people justify their point without saying "I don't care about how people feel excluded" is precluding fair conversation.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but should we *not* be empathetic here? Am I wrong for expecting empathy and sympathy for people who very much feel excluded?
You're saying to me that you can disagree with needing women Space Marines without being unempathetic - so please, show me. Show me an argument from someone who has considered the valid feelings of people excluded from the hobby, acknowledged their own worth as human beings, put their feelings in mind, and still says women Space Marines aren't the way forward, and why not.
I'm not precluding fair conversation by expecting a shred of empathy here. That's the bare minimum of what I should expect from any discussion.
...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?
That might be a fair question. I only say might because based on Games Workshop's sales, 40k seems to be more popular than ever and I'm not aware of 40k's popularity ever dropping back, it seems only to have become more and more popular over time.
However, is this because of Space Marines being all male, or is it because the sculpts are more appealing, or the marketing is more successful, or the rules are more attractive, or any number of factors? Is 40k's current popularity anything to do with their exclusion of women from their flagship faction?
And again, as I believe touched on above, a game can be "more popular than ever" and still be exclusive. Just because it's popular with one demographic doesn't change that another demographic feels like they're not welcome.
Your assertion that the existing background/the mere enjoyment of the existing background, is making the game unpopular is demonstrably untrue. Your assertion that people are being kept out of the hobby because space marine are all male is demonstrably untrue.
Um, no, not at all actually.
Women still feel held at arm's length, regardless of how many more men flock to 40k. Just because it's growing increasingly popular doesn't mean that it's happening across all demographics.
The game can be popular with one demographic, and unpopular with another - that is a fairly reasonable claim, yes? What I'm asking is if/why adding women Space Marines would make it unpopular with the demographic is it already popular with.
Err, Games Workshop's sales? Just go and look at how well the company is performing and form your own conclusion.
And is that because Space Marines can't be women?
Because this is, even now, a niche hobby. It’s a long way from getting a majority of men, let alone a majority of people-
The hobby doesn't need a majority of the population involved with it for it to be doing well.
And just because it's doing well doesn't mean it's not excluding people.
it’s fully possible for something to be popular among some and exclusionary towards others.
You can say that about literally anything.
But that doesn't make it incorrect. Just because 40k is popular amongst a predominantly male audience doesn't change that it is exclusionary towards the women's audience - and I'm asking why we shouldn't change that. Why *should* we settle for that?
As to 40k speciffically, look at how quickly Indomitus sold out. Now compare that with Dominion. As of several minutes ago, you can still get the box of coins with an order of Dominion, which means they've sold less than 33,050 units, at least from Games Workshop online. And you can still get the limited edition rulebook, Indomitus sold out on the day.
Have you considered that this is potentially because Dominion is for AoS, a smaller, newer game, which is less influential and marketed than 40k?
I'm sure it couldn't be that.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/04 01:07:47
Oh cool, the pro-female SM peeps have to explain their argument for someone who hasn't read the thread. Must be a day ending in "y". Letsa go!
Spoiler:
Do you not see Sgt_Smudge, that your framing precludes a "fair conversation"?
When you tell people that your opinion is the one of empathy and moral rectitude, and imply that as a logical consequence anyone who disagrees with either your basic premise or your framing is therefore unempathetic and lacking in correctness then you yourself have created the impossibility of a "fair argument".
I really hope that you aren't implying that those in the hobby who use the background to be sexist, promote exclusionary behavior, and justify death threats are the morally right people. There has been good discussion between the posters in this thread and the only times problems have arisen is due to behaviour such as that mentioned previously, if someone is clearly trolling or if they simply post "I'm right, you're wrong so shut up". It's not my fault that the vast majority of these cases happen to be on the anti-female SM side of the discussion.
Spoiler:
That might be a fair question. I only say might because based on Games Workshop's sales, 40k seems to be more popular than ever and I'm not aware of 40k's popularity ever dropping back, it seems only to have become more and more popular over time.
Your assertion that the existing background/the mere enjoyment of the existing background, is making the game unpopular is demonstrably untrue. Your assertion that people are being kept out of the hobby because space marine are all male is demonstrably untrue.
Popularity as a whole doesn't mean popularity with certain people. And just so we're 100% clear here, it's not just that SM are male-exclusive that people feel unwelcome in the hobby. It goes a little something like this:
Spoiler:
Space Marines are the flagship faction of 40k.
They get the lion's share of marketing/releases.
This means that the majority of factions in the game are some flavour of SM.
Because of this variety in flavour, a core tenant of SM is that the hobbyist can paint/convert/give them whatever background they want and it would still be accepted within the "canon".
However, the freedom of creativity for SM is not allowed if someone makes their SM female.
Why? Because the background says so (sort of).
Why does that background say so? Because GW made rubbish female models back in ye' olden' dayes' and they didn't sell well.
But GW has improved their sculpting talent since then, so why are there no female SM allowed?
Because the background says so.
(At this point the argument against female SM becomes tediously circular and we move on to Real Life problems)
Hold on, hobbyists are doing it anyway. Wait, why are they getting harassed and threatened?
Oh, because they didn't adhere to the background.
But the background has seen extensive change since it was first written over two decades ago and this particular part isn't really focused on nowadays. People are using it as a reason to be exclusionary/hateful, surely we should change this?
No, because that would be "political".
(Here the argument becomes tedious and circular again)
Does that make it clearer for you?
Spoiler:
Err, Games Workshop's sales? Just go and look at how well the company is performing and form your own conclusion.
Again, overall popularity doesn't mean that popularity is balanced between different groups.
Spoiler:
The hobby doesn't need a majority of the population involved with it for it to be doing well.
Correct. It does, however, need to be a place where anyone can join and enjoy without fear of harassment or threat. Currently, it is not that.
Spoiler:
You can say that about literally anything.
As to 40k speciffically, look at how quickly Indomitus sold out. Now compare that with Dominion. As of several minutes ago, you can still get the box of coins with an order of Dominion, which means they've sold less than 33,050 units, at least from Games Workshop online. And you can still get the limited edition rulebook, Indomitus sold out on the day.
Here are some reasons as to why Dominion didn't sell out on day one:
1 - GW actually produced enough copies for once.
2 - There were specific systems put in place to prevent scalpers from using bots to buy out all the stock and then scalp it on eBay.
3 - AoS has a much greater diversity in factions played and the box didn't work with the diversity of player factions. 11 factions benefited from one half of the Indomitus box (Space Marines) whereas only 1 benefited from either half of Dominion.
4 - AoS probably doesn't have the same size of player base 40k does which means fewer people likely to buy the box.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/04 01:29:06
I'm not sure that asking that people justify their point without saying "I don't care about how people feel excluded" is precluding fair conversation.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but should we *not* be empathetic here? Am I wrong for expecting empathy and sympathy for people who very much feel excluded?
You're saying to me that you can disagree with needing women Space Marines without being unempathetic - so please, show me. Show me an argument from someone who has considered the valid feelings of people excluded from the hobby, acknowledged their own worth as human beings, put their feelings in mind, and still says women Space Marines aren't the way forward, and why not.
I'm not precluding fair conversation by expecting a shred of empathy here. That's the bare minimum of what I should expect from any discussion.
I can't tell if you're a troll Sgt_Smudge but if you are, then you are a master at it and I doff my cap.
Again, you have framed your position as the one of empathy and moral rectitude so there is now no position from which to disagree with your basic premise or your framing which does not make the person disagreeing unempathetic and incorrect.
The game can be popular with one demographic, and unpopular with another - that is a fairly reasonable claim, yes?
It's a reasonable claim but it's a universal truth, some things are popular with some and unpopular with others which is also reasonable.
What I'm asking is if/why adding women Space Marines would make it unpopular with the demographic is it already popular with.
But this question is disconnected to the idea presented above. You're telling me that you believe that female space marines are necessary because of empathy, humanity and rightness. With such an objective in mind, the popularity or lack thereof is irrelevent, you're reddressing a wrong, you have a duty to see the creation of female space marines.
Just because 40k is popular amongst a predominantly male audience doesn't change that it is exclusionary towards the women's audience
It's your opinion that that is the case and that it is space marines that are the core issue. I watch a lot of women youtubers and it seems to me that they have the same spread of interest in the general hobby as the men youtubers. One very small channel I follow, she explained that she mostly paints the minis she paints because she's very comfortable painting cloth, and was nervous about painting armour because she didn't know how to tackle large flat panels on a mini so, marines would not be her first choice for an army for a very straight forward reason.
Have you considered that this is potentially because Dominion is for AoS, a smaller, newer game, which is less influential and marketed than 40k?
I'm sure it couldn't be that.
And I'm sure it couldn't be that either Sgt_Smudge, especially considering that the hype train has been in full force for months, so on that at least, we agree.
Be Pure!
Be Vigilant!
BEHAVE!
Show me your god and I'll send you a warhead because my god's bigger than your god.
JNAProductions wrote: Hecaton, what real-world reasons are there to not have female Marines? What real-world reason is there to be against representation?
Mainly, representation doesn't actually help women feel at home in the hobby. Wargaming itself is uninteresting to many women (more women than men); maybe it's socialization or maybe it's innate, doesn't matter. I strongly suspect myself that more women and girls would engage with the setting through roleplaying games or other media besides wargaming.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
JNAProductions wrote: Was Hecaton up in arms over Primaris? Because they were a much bigger change than saying "We expanded the recruitment pool."
You may not find it necessary but no one is looking at abolishing anything, just a tiny redress of the scales. You agree it wouldn’t be harmful but sadly the status quo is, currently it seems ok to be abusive, openly sexist and even make death threats.
You and others on your side have been quite abusive towards those you disagree with as well. As far as death threats go, I don't know.
And again, for those of you saying that representation is important for getting women into the hobby - there are other miniature games that have a more even male/female split on their flagship factions, and they have no massive or even noticeable influx of female players. So I think the proof is against you there.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2021/07/04 03:37:17
JNAProductions wrote: Hecaton, what real-world reasons are there to not have female Marines? What real-world reason is there to be against representation?
Mainly, representation doesn't actually help women feel at home in the hobby. Wargaming itself is uninteresting to many women (more women than men); maybe it's socialization or maybe it's innate, doesn't matter. I strongly suspect myself that more women and girls would engage with the setting through roleplaying games or other media besides wargaming.
Well I showed my wife this bit and Her response was a bit of discomfort and the statement that representation most certainly matters to her in her RPG’s and the like. And that with folk saying things like what you said it’s a no wonder women wouldn’t feel comfortable in the hobby. Just in case you would like a woman’s perspective from outside the hobby, which is the perspective that matters most when it comes to discussing what matters to women.
Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. -Kurt Vonnegut
The idea that women are somehow less interested in wargaming is hilarious. They're less interested in THIS specific way of wargaming, which is in no way given or immutable.... It's simply as it is, but can be different.
You can backtrack THE EXACT SAME DISCUSSION in RPG forum in the first year of 2000 (from 1995 to 2010, depending on where you live). Up to that point, the only intersection with Rpg and female audience where the Goth culture and Vampire the Masquerade.
Guess what? Female where interested, but not in old incarnation on RPGs l. Now we gave new ones, that support both the old approaches, bit add new ones.
The same happended with Larp around 2010-2015 (at least in Italy, not sure in US that I think are behind in this specific gaming segment).
We moved (in general) from Lorien enclosed campaigns focused on fighting and politics to full fledged roleplaying events (including, for the sake of the argument, Victorian gala events, historical reconstruction and such).
There are cases after this transition where 80% of participants where female, because they felt interested and engaged in different storylines, storytelling and character within the boundaries of the hobby.
And note: none cried SJW and other idiotic stuff... Ever. Everyone was simply happy we're more than before, also doing more varied things Because the buzzwords to shut the discussion down weren't invented yet (if it was more than a propaganda buzzword, the same problem would have been expressed with other words. It hasn't).
In general, it's almost inevitably a simple failure in imagination. Which I always find pretty damning when manifest itself in a hobby that is supposed to encourage imagination and creativity.
I don't get why people conflate what they believe (or the current temporary contingencies) with things as they are.
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.
Cybtroll wrote: The idea that women are somehow less interested in wargaming is hilarious. They're less interested in THIS specific way of wargaming, which is in no way given or immutable.... It's simply as it is, but can be different.
You can backtrack THE EXACT SAME DISCUSSION in RPG forum in the first year of 2000 (from 1995 to 2010, depending on where you live). Up to that point, the only intersection with Rpg and female audience where the Goth culture and Vampire the Masquerade.
Guess what? Female where interested, but not in old incarnation on RPGs l. Now we gave new ones, that support both the old approaches, bit add new ones.
The same happended with Larp around 2010-2015 (at least in Italy, not sure in US that I think are behind in this specific gaming segment).
We moved (in general) from Lorien enclosed campaigns focused on fighting and politics to full fledged roleplaying events (including, for the sake of the argument, Victorian gala events, historical reconstruction and such).
There are cases after this transition where 80% of participants where female, because they felt interested and engaged in different storylines, storytelling and character within the boundaries of the hobby.
And note: none cried SJW and other idiotic stuff... Ever. Everyone was simply happy we're more than before, also doing more varied things Because the buzzwords to shut the discussion down weren't invented yet (if it was more than a propaganda buzzword, the same problem would have been expressed with other words. It hasn't).
In general, it's almost inevitably a simple failure in imagination. Which I always find pretty damning when manifest itself in a hobby that is supposed to encourage imagination and creativity.
I don't get why people conflate what they believe (or the current temporary contingencies) with things as they are.
Very interesting! Thanks for sharing.
This actually touches on the other thread of why are there fewer female players in the first place. It's actuslly something that interests me, maybe a bit more than 'female marines'.
For what its worth the baseline argument I've seen why rpgs pulled this off and wargames haven't is that wargames are generally far more narrow in scope*, there is a vast vast array of different types of rpgs, board games and larps, and they encompass more than just fighting and looting. I think there is at least some bit of merit to that. One of my worst experiences ever was a 3 hour dungeon crawl where is was.just.fighting. bored me to tears! I'd also add that these kinds of games often have an intimate social aspect to them and far stronger group dynamics than our wargaming cliques have where the 'ideal' state often seems to be 'I should be able to play a game with a perfect stranger and not need to talk to them or discuss anything'.
* there's caveats, and I think it's reflective of the broadening and 'hybridisation' of game types you see these days. Its harder to do it for wargames as they tend to be very narrowly focused. Types of games matter. most of my friends are female. Couple of years ago my wife took me to warhammer world and we did the tour. As an aside whw is awesome! What grabbed her attention were the bloodbowl minis - she loves her nfl and rugby - and not the guys and guns and tanks. So guess what? I bought her bloodbowl and painted up.all the doods as per her specification. Its our go to group game when friends come over. I've mentioned it elsewhere, but of our friends, I can imagine three of four would love to play the game, stemming from their love of sports etc and yes, theyre bloody competitive ladies.I think one in particular has the 'gaming gene' and I could probably get her involved with warhammer:underworlds or warcry. Maybe even necromunda, so long as we don't play 'technicalmunda' (honestly, a 'warcry'ed infinity or necromunda would be my gaming nirvana). Thst said, I don't think any of them would be drawn to the more 'militaristic' or 'large scale' nature of 40k- despite loving my doods, not one of them has ever asked to get involved. I don't think any of them would want to play a stranger or would feel comfortable in an lgs (and I think these are stronger barriers that need addressed). Us playing together would also be rooted in the 'intimate group' dynamic I spoke about earlier - female majority group, and we're all friends going back to kidhood in some cases. It's not 'just the game', its 'time with friends/family'. I think the hobby side disinterests them too, so I'd need to paint their stuff, which admittedly I'd enjoy doing. Although my wife has painted a biker marine once!
And again, as I believe touched on above, a game can be "more popular than ever" and still be exclusive. Just because it's popular with one demographic doesn't change that another demographic feels like they're not welcome.
Women still feel held at arm's length, regardless of how many more men flock to 40k. Just because it's growing increasingly popular doesn't mean that it's happening across all demographics.
The game can be popular with one demographic, and unpopular with another - that is a fairly reasonable claim, yes? What I'm asking is if/why adding women Space Marines would make it unpopular with the demographic is it already popular with.
But that doesn't make it incorrect. Just because 40k is popular amongst a predominantly male audience doesn't change that it is exclusionary towards the women's audience - and I'm asking why we shouldn't change that. Why *should* we settle for that?
Personally I don't think 'there aren't any female marines' is the largest component of why more girls don't get involved in wargaming. It might be as aspect, maybe a large part for some, but on the whole, I dont think they're reflective of thr majority; and there are bigger barriers in existence, and these are what really cause the 'feelings of exclusion'. I presume you're aware of them (you seem a socially aware guy, in fairness) but I think focusing on this one aspect (and in fairness, it's the topic of the thread) can risk missing the forest for the trees.
I don't think adding female marines will be unsuccessful. However I don't think it will get significantly more 'new punters' through the door. At least initially**. (I think other changes need to be made that I would argue put up more barriers). I think they'll appeal to more guys who want female marines than female players who feel excluded. (This isn't a reason not to do it by the way, I'll absolutely accept that - I would love to see a shield maiden or valkyrie themed unit, still in love with that not-reiver from.earlier too!).
As you say, why should we settle for that, and why shouldn't we change that. I'm in full agreement.
** I think gaming culture itself needs a bit of a shake, the types of games we play, how we interact, the group dynamics etc. Get more people through the door first, then have the marines waiting for them - I don't think just having the marines will be enough to enact the changes you want to.see. so yes to what you say, but it's part of a greater whole, not the solution in itself.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/04 10:40:31
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I'm not sure that asking that people justify their point without saying "I don't care about how people feel excluded" is precluding fair conversation.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but should we *not* be empathetic here? Am I wrong for expecting empathy and sympathy for people who very much feel excluded?
You're saying to me that you can disagree with needing women Space Marines without being unempathetic - so please, show me. Show me an argument from someone who has considered the valid feelings of people excluded from the hobby, acknowledged their own worth as human beings, put their feelings in mind, and still says women Space Marines aren't the way forward, and why not.
I'm not precluding fair conversation by expecting a shred of empathy here. That's the bare minimum of what I should expect from any discussion.
You have framed your position as the one of empathy and moral rectitude so there is now no position from which to disagree with your basic premise or your framing which does not make the person disagreeing unempathetic and incorrect.
I've not "framed" it as anything, beyond a basic level of respect. I've asked you to show me an argument from someone that considers the feelings of women and still turns around and says that women Space Marines don't need to exist.
That's not painting any argument as "unempathetic", because apparently there should be arguments out there that are empathetic, right?
Right?
Look, if this is your way of saying that you don't *have* an argument that is also respectful of women calling for representation, that's fine. Just admit it, instead of trying to claim like I'm making this impossible for you. It's totally possible - if you happened to have an argument that you claim to have.
The game can be popular with one demographic, and unpopular with another - that is a fairly reasonable claim, yes?
It's a reasonable claim but it's a universal truth, some things are popular with some and unpopular with others which is also reasonable.
But then I have to ask why are those things unpopular? In 40k's case, we have women literally telling us why it's unpopular with them (because of the all-boys-club mentality and lack of good representative figures) - so is that not something we should change?
What I'm asking is if/why adding women Space Marines would make it unpopular with the demographic is it already popular with.
But this question is disconnected to the idea presented above. You're telling me that you believe that female space marines are necessary because of empathy, humanity and rightness. With such an objective in mind, the popularity or lack thereof is irrelevent, you're reddressing a wrong, you have a duty to see the creation of female space marines.
No, you've missed the point. I'm mentioning "empathy" (I never mentioned humanity and rightness, don't put words in my mouth) because we literally have women telling us what they want. It's not disconnected at all. I believe that women Space Marines are necessary because that's what women are saying would help with their feelings of exclusion in the hobby - and people feeling excluded from the hobby for a perfectly changeable reason isn't something that we should just ignore, because that would be unempathetic.
Just because 40k is popular amongst a predominantly male audience doesn't change that it is exclusionary towards the women's audience
It's your opinion that that is the case
If women say it's exclusionary, then that opinion ceases to be so. It then becomes a fact.
that it is space marines that are the core issue.
Not the core issue, no. But one of the most visible, fixable, and simplest to resolve.
I watch a lot of women youtubers and it seems to me that they have the same spread of interest in the general hobby as the men youtubers. One very small channel I follow, she explained that she mostly paints the minis she paints because she's very comfortable painting cloth, and was nervous about painting armour because she didn't know how to tackle large flat panels on a mini so, marines would not be her first choice for an army for a very straight forward reason.
And most of my friends in the hobby are women, and they're all pro-women Astartes.
Again - in your example, just because she wouldn't want to paint Space Marines doesn't mean that she is opposed to women Space Marines. I wouldn't want to paint Orks because of their various textures, but I'm not advocating that Orks shouldn't exist.
Have you considered that this is potentially because Dominion is for AoS, a smaller, newer game, which is less influential and marketed than 40k?
I'm sure it couldn't be that.
And I'm sure it couldn't be that either Sgt_Smudge, especially considering that the hype train has been in full force for months, so on that at least, we agree.
Hype trains don't make up for nearly 40 years of legacy and fanbase though.
Hecaton wrote:
JNAProductions wrote: Hecaton, what real-world reasons are there to not have female Marines? What real-world reason is there to be against representation?
Mainly, representation doesn't actually help women feel at home in the hobby.
Don't know about that one, chief, considering that most of the women I speak to sing the praises of good representation and how it makes them feel like an organic part of the world.
You criticised the pro-women Astartes crowd earlier for speaking "for" women, but isn't that what you're doing here?
Wargaming itself is uninteresting to many women (more women than men)
And wargaming is also uninteresting to many men too. But there are both men, women, and everyone in between who *do* enjoy it. Why shouldn't we appeal to all of them?
maybe it's socialization or maybe it's innate, doesn't matter.
I mean, it kinda *does* matter, because if you happened to believe it was innate (which would be ridiculous), then you could make an argument that it was just "biology" and there was no point fighting against that.
Fortunately, there is no conclusive evidence that biology keeps women out of wargaming.
I strongly suspect myself that more women and girls would engage with the setting through roleplaying games or other media besides wargaming.
Riiiiiight... you know that 40k isn't just wargaming, and has other media aspects too, like the art, roleplaying games, fiction, video games, etc etc, and that roleplaying games like Deathwatch still have the "no women Space Marines allowed" rule, right?
If you want them to engage with the setting, that still doesn't change how the setting itself says "no women Space Marines".
Even if we assume that women don't join in on the wargaming side, why is the setting still exclusionary?
As far as death threats go, I don't know.
... you don't know if it's okay to make death threats over plastic models?
Here's a hint - no, it's not.
And again, for those of you saying that representation is important for getting women into the hobby - there are other miniature games that have a more even male/female split on their flagship factions, and they have no massive or even noticeable influx of female players. So I think the proof is against you there.
Actually, we *have* proof. It's called women telling us that representation is important. I think that kind of trumps anything else, really.
macluvin wrote:
Hecaton wrote: Mainly, representation doesn't actually help women feel at home in the hobby. Wargaming itself is uninteresting to many women (more women than men); maybe it's socialization or maybe it's innate, doesn't matter. I strongly suspect myself that more women and girls would engage with the setting through roleplaying games or other media besides wargaming.
Well I showed my wife this bit and Her response was a bit of discomfort and the statement that representation most certainly matters to her in her RPG’s and the like. And that with folk saying things like what you said it’s a no wonder women wouldn’t feel comfortable in the hobby. Just in case you would like a woman’s perspective from outside the hobby, which is the perspective that matters most when it comes to discussing what matters to women.
Bolded for emphasis.
Hecaton, I don't understand how you can say in one breath "this isn't what women want" when in the same breath, you invalidate the voices of women.
You make claims that all the pro-women Astartes commenters are only making these argument to fulfil their own fetishes, while you outright ignore the voices of women also.
Deadnight wrote:Personally I don't think 'there aren't any female marines' is the largest component of why more girls don't get involved in wargaming. It might be as aspect, maybe a large part for some, but on the whole, I dont think they're reflective of thr majority; and there are bigger barriers in existence, and these are what really cause the 'feelings of exclusion'. I presume you're aware of them (you seem a socially aware guy, in fairness) but I think focusing on this one aspect (and in fairness, it's the topic of the thread) can risk missing the forest for the trees.
I don't think adding female marines will be unsuccessful. However I don't think it will get significantly more 'new punters' through the door. At least initially**. (I think other changes need to be made that I would argue put up more barriers). I think they'll appeal to more guys who want female marines than female players who feel excluded. (This isn't a reason not to do it by the way, I'll absolutely accept that - I would love to see a shield maiden or valkyrie themed unit, still in love with that not-reiver from.earlier too!).
As you say, why should we settle for that, and why shouldn't we change that. I'm in full agreement.
** I think gaming culture itself needs a bit of a shake, the types of games we play, how we interact, the group dynamics etc. Get more people through the door first, then have the marines waiting for them - I don't think just having the marines will be enough to enact the changes you want to.see. so yes to what you say, but it's part of a greater whole, not the solution in itself.
No, you are absolutely right there - women Astartes alone wouldn't be anywhere near enough. As you say, it's part of the greater whole, a motion towards the solution, but definitely not the solution itself.
I'd be lying if I said that "fixing this one thing will fix everything", because that would be incredibly reductionist of me, but it definitely is, from what I understand of the reasons women aren't that interested, a largely contributing factor!
Removed - BrookM
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/04 12:31:54
JNAProductions wrote: Hecaton, what real-world reasons are there to not have female Marines? What real-world reason is there to be against representation?
Mainly, representation doesn't actually help women feel at home in the hobby. Wargaming itself is uninteresting to many women (more women than men); maybe it's socialization or maybe it's innate, doesn't matter. I strongly suspect myself that more women and girls would engage with the setting through roleplaying games or other media besides wargaming.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
JNAProductions wrote: Was Hecaton up in arms over Primaris? Because they were a much bigger change than saying "We expanded the recruitment pool."
You may not find it necessary but no one is looking at abolishing anything, just a tiny redress of the scales. You agree it wouldn’t be harmful but sadly the status quo is, currently it seems ok to be abusive, openly sexist and even make death threats.
You and others on your side have been quite abusive towards those you disagree with as well. As far as death threats go, I don't know.
And again, for those of you saying that representation is important for getting women into the hobby - there are other miniature games that have a more even male/female split on their flagship factions, and they have no massive or even noticeable influx of female players. So I think the proof is against you there.
Please show a post where I have been abusive? Money where you’re mouth is time please. Also note any part of posts I have had removed are only because I was discussing abuse directed at us that was then deleted. So go on. Show me where I have been abusive?
Removed - BrookM
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/04 12:32:08
Females are included in the story and setting of Warhammer 40,000. I think people are mistaking what is represented on the tabletop versus what is established in lore. The Astra Militarum, Adeptus Mechanicus, Officio Assassinorum, Imperial Knights, Inquisition, etc. all include females. There are even a couple of factions that are comprised of only females. So why are people saying that there isn't enough female diversity?
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2021/07/04 12:12:57
I'm not sure that asking that people justify their point without saying "I don't care about how people feel excluded" is precluding fair conversation.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but should we *not* be empathetic here? Am I wrong for expecting empathy and sympathy for people who very much feel excluded?
You're saying to me that you can disagree with needing women Space Marines without being unempathetic - so please, show me. Show me an argument from someone who has considered the valid feelings of people excluded from the hobby, acknowledged their own worth as human beings, put their feelings in mind, and still says women Space Marines aren't the way forward, and why not.
I'm not precluding fair conversation by expecting a shred of empathy here. That's the bare minimum of what I should expect from any discussion.
I can't tell if you're a troll Sgt_Smudge but if you are, then you are a master at it and I doff my cap.
Again, you have framed your position as the one of empathy and moral rectitude so there is now no position from which to disagree with your basic premise or your framing which does not make the person disagreeing unempathetic and incorrect.
The game can be popular with one demographic, and unpopular with another - that is a fairly reasonable claim, yes?
It's a reasonable claim but it's a universal truth, some things are popular with some and unpopular with others which is also reasonable.
What I'm asking is if/why adding women Space Marines would make it unpopular with the demographic is it already popular with.
But this question is disconnected to the idea presented above. You're telling me that you believe that female space marines are necessary because of empathy, humanity and rightness. With such an objective in mind, the popularity or lack thereof is irrelevent, you're reddressing a wrong, you have a duty to see the creation of female space marines.
Just because 40k is popular amongst a predominantly male audience doesn't change that it is exclusionary towards the women's audience
It's your opinion that that is the case and that it is space marines that are the core issue. I watch a lot of women youtubers and it seems to me that they have the same spread of interest in the general hobby as the men youtubers. One very small channel I follow, she explained that she mostly paints the minis she paints because she's very comfortable painting cloth, and was nervous about painting armour because she didn't know how to tackle large flat panels on a mini so, marines would not be her first choice for an army for a very straight forward reason.
Have you considered that this is potentially because Dominion is for AoS, a smaller, newer game, which is less influential and marketed than 40k?
I'm sure it couldn't be that.
And I'm sure it couldn't be that either Sgt_Smudge, especially considering that the hype train has been in full force for months, so on that at least, we agree.
I can assure smudge has been most patient and effusive in his responses and is in no way a troll, he has dealt with many. All that you are saying has been discussed to death in this thread and your argument does not stack up I’m afraid. 40K isn’t popular and getting more popular because women are excluded for they key factions, it’s getting more popular in spite of that. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t remove some outdated misogynistic nonsense from back in the day. 40K isn’t more popular than AoS because it’s excludes women and isn’t as representative. That’s just silly. It’s already been established that the community is seen as a safe place for bigots who hide behind the lore as an excuse. (Note, not everyone who is anti female marines is a bigot but those who are are given plenty of defence by the rest of the community). Why should we not change a bit of lore that is out of print and hasn’t been in a single codex ever to make the community a nicer place that will make some people feel more welcome in the community? Please answer that, no one has managed to date.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Psionara wrote: Where are all these calls of "sexism" and "misogyny" coming from? Females are included in the story and setting of Warhammer 40,000. I think people are mistaking what is represented on the tabletop versus what is established in lore. The Astra Militarum, Adeptus Mechanicus, Officio Assassinorum, Imperial Knights, Inquisition, etc. all include females. There are even a couple of factions that are comprised of only females.
The posts that are openly sexist and misogynistic have been deleted due to there abusive nature. They come from the fact that anyone who discusses this topic gets abuse based on their gender or identity, not by everyone but by enough.
As for the lore being sexist, it is in that it arbitrarily excludes people based purely on their gender, the definition of sexist. Their is no reason for women to not be Marines it was decided entirely without basis. We have discussed sisters to death but end of the day, marines make up around half the factions and they exclude women for no good reason. All the factions you just listed have a handful of female models at best and some of them only this last month or so. Representation is getting better but isn’t great and while marines are excluded it will, only ever but tokenisitic.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/04 12:20:24
Psionara wrote:Where are all these calls of "sexism" and "misogyny" coming from?
Predominantly from some pretty sexist comments made in this thread - such gems as "women Space Marines would just get pregnant all the time", for example.
Females are included in the story and setting of Warhammer 40,000. I think people are mistaking what is represented on the tabletop versus what is established in lore. The Astra Militarum, Adeptus Mechanicus, Officio Assassinorum, Imperial Knights, Inquisition, etc. all include females. There are even a couple of factions that are comprised of only females.
You're right - but that doesn't really translate when the flagship faction is all male, and also that the lore is still excluding women from the Space Marines needlessly.
I've mentioned this repeatedly - representation is nothing without visibility. And the most visible faction in all of 40k are the Space Marines. When your most visible faction is all male, that most assuredly contributed towards the idea that the hobby as a whole is directed towards men, and when there is an *explicit* rule saying "uh, no women allowed in this super popular and iconic faction!", that only furthers that feeling of exclusion.
Now, I know that the common response to this is "well, just make something else the flagship faction" or "just increase representation everywhere except the Space Marines". My responses are as follows: 1. It is impractical to make other factions the flagship. Space Marines are already market dominant, and GW have made their favouritism of Space Marines abundantly clear. It would cost prohibitive amounts to elevate another faction to flagship status, and still wouldn't touch the historical impact that Space Marines would continue to thrive from. 2. Why can't we increase representation in the Space Marines anyway? Why do we need to tiptoe around the lore? 3. Representation is nothing without visibility, so increasing representation in side-factions doesn't change that the most prominent faction is still exclusive. 4. Space Marines offer things that other factions simply don't - a particular aesthetic, a particular gameplay style, a particular freedom of design and culture. Improving things in other factions wouldn't change how Space Marines are still needlessly exclusive.
You mention how there is a difference between tabletop and lore, but the lore still prevents women Space Marines, and for what reason? - An arbitrary biological restriction? It's all made-up. Why can't the Magic Space Super Soldier Serum Juice work on women? - Enforcing the theme of Space Marines as a monkly warrior fraternity? But Space Marines have moved away from that design for years now, and now are more defined by their factional player freedoms and customisation - Chapters are free to be more creative and explore more avenues than just "warrior monk", and have for a long time now. Arguably, this design philosophy would be *more* bolstered by women Astartes. - The Emperor/Imperium is sexist? So why are the Imperial Guard mixed gender? - Tradition? Those "traditions" kinda went out the window when Primaris showed up. - Artistic merit? What merit does excluding women give?
And, even *if* I hadn't pointed out how the lore argument is more than a little fragile, once again, I have to ask if the lore is more important than the real people asking for representation in the first place.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/04 12:29:47
Psionara wrote: Females are included in the story and setting of Warhammer 40,000. I think people are mistaking what is represented on the tabletop versus what is established in lore. The Astra Militarum, Adeptus Mechanicus, Officio Assassinorum, Imperial Knights, Inquisition, etc. all include females. There are even a couple of factions that are comprised of only females. So why are people saying that there isn't enough female diversity?
Did you read even the last two pages of this thread? Time to break it down again for the second time in 24 hours I guess.
AM have 2 female models, one of which is locked behind an event wall, and a singular upgrade sprue for Cadians, and for the vast majority of the lifespan of the faction there have been naff all female models. So despite the background having AM be a mixed organisation the models don't reflect that and are not representative.
Admech/Knights don't have a way to identify outside of using feminine pronouns when playing the game so they're discounted.
Assassins/Inquisition are minor factions at best and have very few models, most of which are male. Not representative.
SoB are the premier female-led faction that still has options to include male models in the army. This doesn't make it a win for representation since shoehorning female hobbyists into a faction of religious fanatics with little to no customisation options is hardly fair.
SoS are not a faction. They are a unit with three loadout options. Again, maybe don't push female hobbyists into a faction where the core idea is women who don't talk.
Now that's out of the way let's keep going with some of the problems that arise with SM being male-only:
Spoiler:
Space Marines are the flagship faction of 40k.
They get the lion's share of marketing/releases.
This means that the majority of factions in the game are some flavour of SM.
Because of this variety in flavour, a core tenant of SM is that the hobbyist can paint/convert/give them whatever background they want and it would still be accepted within the "canon".
However, the freedom of creativity for SM is not allowed if someone makes their SM female.
Why? Because the background says so (sort of).
Why does that background say so? Because GW made rubbish female models back in ye' olden' dayes' and they didn't sell well.
But GW has improved their sculpting talent since then, so why are there no female SM allowed?
Because the background says so.
(At this point the argument against female SM becomes tediously circular and we move on to Real Life problems)
Hold on, hobbyists are doing it anyway. Wait, why are they getting harassed and threatened?
Oh, because they didn't adhere to the background.
But the background has seen extensive change since it was first written over two decades ago and this particular part isn't really focused on nowadays. People are using it as a reason to be exclusionary/hateful, surely we should change this?
No, because that would be "political".
(Here the argument becomes tedious and circular again)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/04 12:34:31
Psionara wrote: Females are included in the story and setting of Warhammer 40,000. I think people are mistaking what is represented on the tabletop versus what is established in lore. The Astra Militarum, Adeptus Mechanicus, Officio Assassinorum, Imperial Knights, Inquisition, etc. all include females. There are even a couple of factions that are comprised of only females. So why are people saying that there isn't enough female diversity?
AM have 2 female models, one of which is locked behind an event wall,
I dunno about that Gert. I always assumed the ad mech rangers and vanguard squads were split about 50/50 male/female based on the 2 different types of torso/groin armour you see on the models - no 'official source' or anything, but I always read this as how to determine which was male/female.
Not that you see any of their faces to actually confirm. Or whether there's much that's actuslly recognisably human under it all.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/04 13:59:50
I dunno about that Gert. I always assumed the ad mech rangers and vanguard squads were split about 50/50 male/female based on the 2 different types of torso/groin armour you see on the models - no 'official source' or anything, but I always read this as how to determine which was male/female.
Not that you see any of their faces to actually confirm. Or whether there's much that's actuslly recognisably human under it all.
Looking at that now and what I see is that there are 5 of each leg option in the kit. If I were to read into the design choices I would say that in line with the background the Vanguard are to be represented with the torsos with more front-facing armour and the Rangers with the less armoured design so that the player builds two squads of 5 and then buys another box to round them out to 10.
In reality, I just think it's to provide variation in the models. And as you have said one of the features of the Admech is that you aren't really able to tell if they're still human or machine.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/04 14:17:04
AM have 2 female models, one of which is locked behind an event wall,
I dunno about that Gert. I always assumed the ad mech rangers and vanguard squads were split about 50/50 male/female based on the 2 different types of torso/groin armour you see on the models - no 'official source' or anything, but I always read this as how to determine which was male/female.
Not that you see any of their faces to actually confirm. Or whether there's much that's actuslly recognisably human under it all.
He means AM as in IG, I think. I can’t think of any female admech minis at all, although, as you say, there’s plenty of room for them- more than in many factions, model-wise.
In thinking about the fluff, I can only actually recall a single mention of a objectively "female" AM, and that was in one of the Cain books, that he has a dalliance with. something about "her tail". There may be many more, but I am not extremely well versed in the Ad mech fluff. That is my subjective observation.
AM 3 possibly 4 heads on a sprue released last month. A sergeant that is event only and there was a commissar but no longer available.
Admech, none specifically but it would be harder to tell.
Inquisition, 2 models
Assassins 1 out of 4.
Knights is an odd one because it’s mostly vehicles, the one human you can see is built with either a helmet or a beard so it’s 50/50 at best although they do have decent in fluff representation so any knight could have a female pilot.
So a good estimate would be 7-8 models specifically depicting women outside of sisters of battle and silence.
Craftworld we have 1 in 4 guardians and the howling banshees/Jain Zar. That’s it for these paragons of equality.
Couple of harlequins. Dark eldar fare a bit better but only thanks to wych cults.
Now genestealer cults have a hand ful at best, couple of characters that are female and some crew, 2nd wave of kits was better than the first.
Still around 2 dozen total female miniatures outside of battle sisters.
That’s pretty poor. Especially guard. Lots of representation in the fluff. Very little on the table top, but none of these exclude women like the 16 marine based factions. 16! That’s a marine faction for every 2 sisters of battle kits available.
There's a couple in the Heresy books and scattered around various 40k novels but since Admech only really came into model form very recently they don't have the backlog of feature stories like AM does.
I can't tell if you're a troll Sgt_Smudge but if you are, then you are a master at it and I doff my cap.
