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.

Not Online!!! wrote:
And at no point is it shouting at clouds either.

Are you sure?

Does complaining about the existence of Primaris Marines, or Centurians, or Stormtalons actually achieve anything?

Not Online!!! wrote:

Kiro had a nice post in the other thread. Change and retcons just because are damaging to the setting, or indeed all settings. He brought up Harry potter and hermione.

That really depends on the change, and the setting.

40K as a setting has been changing constantly since its inception. And almost every one of those changes has been heralded by someone as the thing that will destroy the setting. And yet, 30 years on, here we are.

It’s nothing complicated. People who like a thing, like that thing. People who don’t like a thing, want it to be something else that they would or might like.

Anyone who wants female SMs can have them right now, with some conversions (or even NO conversions, considering how some of them envision female SMs) and some homebrew fluff. Anything more than that is a separate desire; for a corporation to validate their opinions on what other people should think about SMs. That logic is the objectionable part.

 Manchu wrote:
It’s nothing complicated. People who like a thing, like that thing. People who don’t like a thing, want it to be something else that they would or might like.

Anyone who wants female SMs can have them right now, with some conversions (or even NO conversions, considering how some envisions female SMs) and some homebrew fluff. Anything more than that is a separate desire; for a corporation to validate their opinions on what other people should think about SM. That logic is the objectionable part.

This.

Shame one can only exalt once.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
And at no point is it shouting at clouds either.

Are you sure?

Does complaining about the existence of Primaris Marines, or Centurians, or Stormtalons actually achieve anything?

GW gonna GW and GW is greedy so reselling marines to marine players was naturally happening sooner or later.
Doesn't change the fact that there are a lot of SM players that just don't bother with the primaris stuff.... or centurions for that matter.

Not Online!!! wrote:

Kiro had a nice post in the other thread. Change and retcons just because are damaging to the setting, or indeed all settings. He brought up Harry potter and hermione.

That really depends on the change, and the setting.

40K as a setting has been changing constantly since its inception. And almost every one of those changes has been heralded by someone as the thing that will destroy the setting. And yet, 30 years on, here we are.

Not Online!!! wrote:
But surely that can't be, considering Insaniaks position we all must accept dictated changes and Kasens , since they argue from a position of "right" . /SARCASM

I will apologize for inadvertently implying insanity. I like to believe I'm coming from a position of 'reasonable,' and I'm excited to see if it works.

It feels better, at least. I've tried yelling. It's not fun past the short term, and unless you own a significant social media account or news site, only so effective.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:
Does complaining about the existence of Primaris Marines, or Centurians, or Stormtalons actually achieve anything?

Not for me. And oh, how I tried.

If we’re talking about introducing female SM as a matter of homebrew fluff, there could be any number of unrelated, simultaneous explanations. The galaxy is vast and full of variety.

For example: One could imagine a Chapter of SM that have been out of contact with the High Lords for millennia. They have very poor records of their origins and cannot recall, and so are not even aware of, a time when they did NOT have female members. When they re-contact the wider Imperium, they are persecuted for gene-heresy. Or perhaps, in order to avoid persecution, they become highly secretive.

Anyhow, this is a lot more interesting than some corporate mandate that “from now on we will sell female SM.”

 Manchu wrote:
It’s nothing complicated. People who like a thing, like that thing. People who don’t like a thing, want it to be something else that they would or might like.

You're missing the camp in the middle that like a thing, but are also willing to accept changes to that thing.

I like Spiderman. I couldn't care less whether his web shooters are artificial or inbuilt. I like the Star Wars EU, but I don't mind that the prequels and sequels both ignored it. I like the 40K setting... and I liked both the version of it as it existed in 2nd edition when I started, and the version that exists now.

Anyone who wants female SMs can have them right now, with some conversions (or even NO conversions, considering how some envisions female SMs) and some homebrew fluff. Anything more than that is a separate desire; for a corporation to validate their opinions on what other people should think about SM. That logic is the objectionable part.

I think for many it's less about corporate validation directly, and more about the fact that corporate validation would result in them receiving less abuse online for those conversions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:

GW gonna GW and GW is greedy so reselling marines to marine players was naturally happening sooner or later.
Doesn't change the fact that there are a lot of SM players that just don't bother with the primaris stuff.... or centurions for that matter..

So... if they already ignore the bits they don't like anyway, why would the addition of women to the ranks be a problem? Couldn't they just ignore them along with the Primaris and Centurions?

 Manchu wrote:

Anyone who wants female SMs can have them right now, with some conversions (or even NO conversions, considering how some of them envision female SMs) and some homebrew fluff. Anything more than that is a separate desire; for a corporation to validate their opinions on what other people should think about SMs. That logic is the objectionable part.

This is exactly the point, well put.

When it's supported by such thin justification as "I see no reason not to change it" and/or "I personally don't feel very strongly about current lore" it gets even more objectionable.

My desire is for people to don't berate the other depending on how the play with their toys.
It's sad that in order to have that, we have to pass through the validation of a corporation, because I too would prefer that gamer can do simply whatever they want... but that's not the world we live in: people judge, and we can't pretend everyone to simply don't care (I don't care at all of what other think of me, even less while I play - at anything. But I learned I can't pretend everyone to do the same).
So, you it's not smart thinking, it's simply callousness.

I'm pretty happy anyway to find out so many people are ok with female space marine, as long as they're an amateur fan project without mainstream value that need to rely on your condescendence to go beyond the fact that they're wrong.

It's the quintessential definition of discrimination: but you be you.

And again, I'm waiting to see all those defender of the modelling freedom the next time a female space marine appear online.

I think for many it's less about corporate validation directly, and more about the fact that corporate validation would result in them receiving less abuse online for those conversions.

Strong disagree.

First, people aren’t going out of their way to care about conversions unless they are either notably cool or notably lame.

Second, if your female SM conversions are notably lame then the problem is not that they are female but that, however you have converted them in particular, is lame.

Third, if your female SM conversions and/or homebrew fluff is cool, people on balance will not object.

There is, or at least there was years ago, a kneejerk reaction against FSM conversions because they tended to be really bad. I don’t think that exists anymore. Conversions in general are better these days but there is also stuff like IRL women cosplaying as Space Marines in a way that looks cool.

because I too would prefer that gamer can do simply whatever they want... but that's not the world we live in

Yes it is. You can play with your toys however you want without getting anyone’s permission. But if you want other people to agree with how you do it or praise you, that’s a separate matter.

Considering that a lot of people are ignoring my requests in the opening posts and arguing about this here, which I Explicitly asked them not to...

I just want to thank everyone who voted before these threads are inevitably shut due to people not following the rules.

Seriously, if there were a disappointed emoji, I would be using it right now.

Big thanks to everyone who did follow the rules and just posted their reasons for voting, without feeling the need to pick holes in other peoples reasons!

What is the tangible, fictional, creative je ne se quoi of categorically irrevocably enshrining the mono sex of space marines? What is its value to the setting that people want to defend it changing?

We know the imperium employs women across all facets of its military, from assassins, to guard, to skitarii, to sororitas, inquisitors, high lords, naval leaders, generals, storm troopers, scions etc etc etc.

It's pretty clear that the Imperium itself wouldn't CARE if women became space marines.

So my question is what is it about them NOT being space marines that adds to an empire that clearly would have them if they could?

I think the reason female space marines results in such flamewars is because it's wrapped but in divisive modern politics and is often framed along moral lines.

There's been many references in these threads to sexists/misogynists/bigots/similar.
People generally object to being labelled like that, especially when they're not like that and in fact they've reached their opinion for entirely different reasons.
So they defend themselves, not always politely.

I think you’re spot-on about that Kiro.

Furthermore, there is a weird attitude at work here: “Prove to me that the IP you like should not be changed so that I (MIGHT) like it more!”

How is this my burden? Coming at an existing fanbase with that energy is really frustrating.

easiest solution:

Marines to not have a sex or gender after the process
they are heavily altert to become more than humans that there is nothing left for them that you could refer to as "male" (or female)

English doesn't handle genderless too well though, and typically defaults to the male when in doubt.
So that just gets us back to where we are now.

Also, there is something really iconic about SM calling each other “brother” that would be terrible to lose.

 Manchu wrote:
Also, there is something really iconic about SM calling each other “brother” that would be terrible to lose.

Why would it be lost? Despite also having 4 sisters, I still refer to my male sibling as my brother.

I think that was specifically in regards to going genderless, presumably meaning "Battle Sibling". Which just sounds awful next to the beautifully alliterate "Battle Brother" that rolls off the tongue a lot nicer as well.

But even just adding female marines would hurt it. "He who fights by my side shall be my brother" doesn't make as much sense when there's a chance they'd be your sister instead, to name just one example.

I was following up on Kodos’s comment about having genderless SM.

ninja’d by Kiro

 Manchu wrote:
Also, there is something really iconic about SM calling each other “brother” that would be terrible to lose.

There was something iconic about marines being indoctrinated criminals at the time they were released, but everyone got over that (well except blizzard).

There are plenty of things that have changed in the setting that people simply accepted as a retcon and moved on. Primarchs not being immortal and them all dying by M35, primarchs not being giants. vulcan dying at Istvaan - except now he's a literal daemon that regrows his body and can't die.


Iconic is subjective, all these discussions are subjective. What people do and don't like is subjective. GW has no problem retconning marines being allowed their own naval and airforce assets, despite them clearly saying they were taken away after the heresy to split up command and make it harder for a marine chapter to ever again do what horus did. But that doesn't sell marine fliers.

In the end, there is nothing that having female space marines takes away (except gendered noun brother). there is nothing that a human with XX chromosomes joining the marines and being super soldiered does that makes marines somehow less (except arguments that are nothing more than 'women are worse').


And as I said above, the imperium itself wouldn't blink if 50% of all its marines started out as prepubescent girls rather than boys. They're all just soldiers in the imperial machine like every other woman in every conceivable position within the imperium.

What they ADD is a particular power fantasy (that only MARINES provide, not sisters) currently only provided to male gamers, and representation which scientifically objectively matters.

The imperium wouldn't care, why should you?

Of course he's spot on.
Problem is that all the bad discriminatory behaviors in the history do not come because a few racist (or mysoginist, or whatever) people go around and subjugate the entire population.

It's because we (has a species) don't care about what happens outside our nose and outside our view (for prove see: history).
We need pointers out when we have discriminatory behaviors small and big because, unless we're the one caught in a pickle, we can't realize that.
(And that's one of the big tragedy of the Imperium: it's the incarnation of this indifference)

We're talking about a fictional world, and you feel hurt/annoyed/disturbed only because someone propose the idea of changing a faction to add option while not requiring you to do anything to either recognize or implement the change.
And, almost in the same post, there is this going around telling other people to be indifferent to what other thinks "because it's just a game".



The lore really is badly written about this topic: we've debated it at length. Flies in the face of SM faction, is biologically unsusteinable, don't add to the setting... While the opposite will improve modelling opportunities, provide an interesting backstory for the change, and won't be remotely bad or shoehorned as every other changes already done to the setting

You're defending bad writing that should be amended, because you're nostalgic. Own it.

LOL if it’s so bad why do you even care about it in the first place?

Obviously, it’s good enough that here you are on a website dedicated to it, arguing about it.

It ain’t broken. It don’t need fixin’.

If anybody wants to do their own homebrew thing, there’s not a thing preventing it.

 Manchu wrote:
Also, there is something really iconic about SM calling each other “brother” that would be terrible to lose.

well, we don't have that in German and phrases like Battle Brother is kind of similar to Brothers in Arms without the dedicated Gender but more like "you are close like siblings and not just people doing the same job"

so it always was more like Battle Buddy than "brother not sister"

going with a term that replaces brother with something that does not refer to a Gender but still sounds cool would do the job

Just because GW has made worse changes to the lore before doesn't meant they should make a bad change now.

We should be advocating for improved stability of the lore, not increasing instability.

Of course GW will do it anyway if they want to. But this thread is about what I think should happen, so that's what I'm sharing and why.

 Manchu wrote:
LOL if it’s so bad why do you even care about it in the first place?

Obviously, it’s good enough that here you are on a website dedicated to it, arguing about it.

It ain’t broken. It don’t need fixin’.

If anybody wants to do their own homebrew thing, there’s not a thing preventing it.

Ok so lets make marines men and women and you can homebrew an exclusively male order. Better to start expansive and have your doods to be narrower.

 Cybtroll wrote:
Of course he's spot on.
Problem is that all the bad discriminatory behaviors in the history do not come because a few racist (or mysoginist, or whatever) people go around and subjugate the entire population.

It's because we (has a species) don't care about what happens outside our nose and outside our view (for prove see: history).
We need pointers out when we have discriminatory behaviors small and big because, unless we're the one caught in a pickle, we can't realize that.


We're talking about a fictional world, and you feel hurt/annoyed/disturbed only because someone propose the idea of changing a faction to add option while not requiring you to do anything to either recognize or implement the change.
And, almost in the same post, there is this going around telling other people to be indifferent to what other thinks "because it's just a game".



The lore really is badly written about this topic: we've debated it at length. Flies in the face of SM faction, is biologically unsusteinable, don't add to the setting... While the opposite will improve modelling opportunities, provide an interesting backstory for the change, and won't be remotely bad or shoehorned as every other changes already done to the setting

You're defending bad writing that should be amended, because you're nostalgic. Own it.

oh boy are you missing the ballpoint by a large margin. Its not just about not wanting female space marine from a lorewise perspective.

You talk about female space marines but why arent you talking female chaos space marines? Why would there be female space marines but not female chaos space marines? So already now, if you were Games workshop, you would be dedicated to make new kits not just for space marines but also female chaos space marines. thats double up on kits already there.

Then after the dust is settled, the next woke person, like you, would ask, why does fungus, aka orks, have to look masculine? why couldnt they also have feminine traits? then people would rage at the lack of female commisars, and the snowball is already moving.

Theres no stopping the woke train where people want to demand diversity in a setting that never gave a damn about it, with a playerbase that generally speaking also dont give a damn about it.


From GW point of view, doing all these things you guys want isnt just a snap with their fingers, its entirely new kits that needs to be made for both space marines and chaos space marines. You cant just add extra helmets in a tiny little bag and put it in the box as well, it would have to be placed on the sprue that we all receive.

And given this is extra work i can assure you, it would mean pushing back everything else, just to make room for your wokeness. Meaning new releases that are actually relevant, such as new models for the new codexes and thus, the new codexes themselves, would be pushed back as well.

Lets talk the ork scenario going on atm. new releases that happens along side the new codex. Even if the codex is done, if they werent finished with the new sculpts they would not release the codex. So because we wanted to add new female variants to two different factions, because again, adding female space marines but not female chaos space marines would be slowed as F, we're now pushing back new releases and thus, possibly new codexes.


Im not going to want to have new female models so much i would like to see actually relevant new releases being pushed back. Even if you said, hey! we can just add new female space marines, and not have females in other positions like aggressors etc. And i would just say, sure, but how long would that keep up? People would complain that there werent ENOUGH female space marines in enough positions. why cant they be aggressors? So its a complete overhaul of the entire faction. + parts of the chaos space marine faction. its not a small thing you are asking for. So no its not just about the lore. But sure the lore is a little weird around that point but you know what? thats okay. Its okay for the lore to be a little skewered and not make 100% sense but what angers people is when lore is being retconned. So if female space marines dont exist and suddenly they do? thats a retcon, and people hate retcons because it messes up everything.

that people werent happy with sisters of battle and started craving more and more diversity is just proving my point, that people wouldnt stop at female space marines. It would never end there, its a snowball effect because thats what being woke is. we would be asking for feminine orks as well as feminine looking khorne daemons. because daemons and fungus dont have an actual gender, so why cant they be feminine?

I feel so triggered

 Hellebore wrote:
Ok so lets make marines

Let me stop you right there. We’re not creating this IP. We’re not rebooting it. It’s been around for decades and is already highly successful.

Again: it isn’t broken and doesn’t need fixing.

If someone wants to do something with their own toys that is an exception to what’s “canon”, that’s fine. That exception doesn’t need to become the “new canon.”

To be clear, the best way to introduce female Space Marines, lorewise, is for each person who wants to do this to come up with their own homebrew backstory for the how’s and why’s of THEIR GUYS (or Their Gals or Their Gals & Guys) being the way they are.

 Manchu wrote:

 Hellebore wrote:
Ok so lets make marines

Let me stop you right there. We’re not creating this IP. We’re not rebooting it. It’s been around for decades and is already highly successful.

Again: it isn’t broken and doesn’t need fixing.

If someone wants to do something with their own toys that is an exception to what’s “canon”, that’s fine. It doesn’t need to become the “new canon.”

Ok so when GW makes female marines you'll just go along with it.

GW can do no wrong. Ok fine. Then get out of the conversation because you've just shown it's a pointless one for you. You've just stated that your premise denies this whole thread.

You responded before my edit but I think it bears clarifying again.

I have no problem with the idea that in the vastness of the galaxy depicted by 40k, and not just vastness in terms of space and time but also the sheer amount of potential for strange things to happen, that somewhere there could be female Space Marines.

That specific “somewhere” in terms of the real world is, in the creative hands of the hobbyists who want to play that specific possibility.

It’s not that female SM strictly have no place in 40k; rather, the place for that is still today what it has always been: as a personal project.

 Hellebore wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

 Hellebore wrote:
Ok so lets make marines

Let me stop you right there. We’re not creating this IP. We’re not rebooting it. It’s been around for decades and is already highly successful.

Again: it isn’t broken and doesn’t need fixing.

If someone wants to do something with their own toys that is an exception to what’s “canon”, that’s fine. It doesn’t need to become the “new canon.”

Ok so when GW makes female marines you'll just go along with it.

GW can do no wrong. Ok fine. Then get out of the conversation because you've just shown it's a pointless one for you. You've just stated that your premise denies this whole thread.

It's a pointless conversation for all of us at the end of the day. telling someone to GTFO just because he disagrees with you while admitting it is silly.