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.

 Karak Norn Clansman wrote:
There were female Space Marines early on: Both models and the Sister Sin purging a Rainbow Warrior artwork from the Rogue Trader era.
Then GW did it right and instead made Sisters of Battle into their very own cool thing.

It went the other way - Space Marines became their own thing while the sisters stayed largely unchanged.
Remember the original marines were penitent orders of roided-up ex-convict monks in power armour.

Sister Sin herself was also a political joke (French iconography, special forces, blowing a hole in the side of the rainbow warrior - very 80s)

Who has said that adding female Space Marines will ruin the setting forever? Where/when?
You're misrepresenting people's positions.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Apple fox wrote:
Sisters of battle have been highly Fetishised over the years, they are great within the setting for what they are, and getting way better.

But they are not a great counter point to the desire for better representation.

And female space marines haven't? You need to look at some more "fan art"
If FSM becomes a thing they'll get fetishized too with "dommy marine mommy" nonsense. Because that's how the fanbase works.

That's fanart. SoB are fetishized in their official models. They go into combat in corsets and blatant boob (power) armor. And that's not even getting into the previous incarnation of repentia.

Do you see Space Marines going into battle naked, with only a loin cloth and gimp mask? How about even just topless to show off rippling muscles (which should be deformed to the point of appearing non human but we all know that if GW were to depict said look, they'd appear as chiseled adonises)?

Contrary to popular belief, not every woman is enamored with the SoB style. Which makes the fact that they're only option for a human female army kind of the problem for anyone who wants to be on the 'good guy' Imperial side.

kirotheavenger wrote:Who has said that adding female Space Marines will ruin the setting forever? Where/when?
You're misrepresenting people's positions.

Am I?


Should I be ignoring these comments? And I've not even looked in the other threads, but I don't think I'd have a hard time finding similar.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Apple fox wrote:
Sisters of battle have been highly Fetishised over the years, they are great within the setting for what they are, and getting way better.

But they are not a great counter point to the desire for better representation.

And female space marines haven't? You need to look at some more "fan art"
If FSM becomes a thing they'll get fetishized too with "dommy marine mommy" nonsense. Because that's how the fanbase works.

That’s actually fine, it’s GW that has made them like that. Sexuality is fine for me in media, I think dark Eldar are cool. And even have more sisters than I know what to do with.
But the only real representation out side of some spots here and there is the fetishisation, it doesn’t look good and isn’t good.
This sorta comes back to, space marines get to be cool. And everyone else has to sit in there spotlight.
When allmost every faction is just mostly all guys, the space marines being all men doesn’t seem that sacred.

 Cybtroll wrote:
Heads, heads are all that's needed. It is disingenuous to think differently. If you think a Centurion armour need changes to accommodate a female... I really think there's nothing to add here rather than suggesting to look more carefully.

And yes, ALSO some new kits would be AWESOME, specifically for Chaos.
Emperor's Children and World Eaters would be a fantastic place to start introducing new kits with more options for different genders (EC because... Well, just because) and World Eaters because as far as I'm aware if you're angry enough you're good for Khorne (and they have the non secondary impact of recognizing that violence and anger isn't a male prerogative).

I can get behind potential supply chain issue, another overloading of Marines releases etc etc. But those are GW's problems, not us. And you can shout down anything, including inventing fire, if you focus on possible bad effects (everything has those, at least potentially, even the smallest changes).


Tell me how an additional sprue of female head and the official legitimation to make Female Marine hurts your hobby, because I'm see derailing and obfuscation, but not an answer to that.
It's exactly the same that that we already have in terms of additional sprue to create a specific Chapter like DA or SW.

And, I won't to reiterate again: I'm one of those who don't aknowledge Primaris, don't collect them, and I stay true to my Firstborns. There's a very high chance I won't even purchase female marine if available: but I'm not a egocentric maniac: why should my personal indifference come at the expenses of other which instead may want such option? It's an extra option, not a gender-swap.

Fun fact: I never realized, but there's a pretty good alternate Sammael for DA by Wargame Exclusive that is a female. Love the bike (much better than the original) but never thought about buying it because converting the rider would be an hassle.
If Female Marine would have been a thing, I've probably bought it without thinking twice.
So, even when you think something doesn't involve you, you really can never know.

helmets? Why would a female wear a different helmet from a man? Are female heads somehow different in the universe of warhammer?

They are not.

Apple fox wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Apple fox wrote:
Sisters of battle have been highly Fetishised over the years, they are great within the setting for what they are, and getting way better.

But they are not a great counter point to the desire for better representation.

And female space marines haven't? You need to look at some more "fan art"
If FSM becomes a thing they'll get fetishized too with "dommy marine mommy" nonsense. Because that's how the fanbase works.

That’s actually fine, it’s GW that has made them like that. Sexuality is fine for me in media, I think dark Eldar are cool. And even have more sisters than I know what to do with.
But the only real representation out side of some spots here and there is the fetishisation, it doesn’t look good and isn’t good.
This sorta comes back to, space marines get to be cool. And everyone else has to sit in there spotlight.
When allmost every faction is just mostly all guys, the space marines being all men doesn’t seem that sacred.

Yeah, also when you add all the marine factions and chaos marine factions together you get like...10/20 factions in the game, and probably over 50% of the model releases.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

kirotheavenger wrote:Who has said that adding female Space Marines will ruin the setting forever? Where/when?
You're misrepresenting people's positions.

Am I?

Spoiler:

 Argive wrote:
Will this be a trend now every other week until people get fed up or mindless bickering and leave the site??

We have a ban on politics and religion for a reason. Wokness is a political religion that will gobble up and spit out and ruin everything it touches..

SemperMortis wrote:
"It absolutely should happen" Why? is it just too much to ask for the woke mob to not ruin everything in their attempt to make everything the same? Can you name me a single person who said "I was going to start playing 40k but when I found out there was only a single ALL FEMALE army that was just massively updated with new rules and a feth ton of new models...I couldn't play the game in good conscious".

Should we have Female Necrons as well? How about Female Orkz? Why? The only reason I can see is to appease the woke mob who scream and complain and than when a company finally gives in, it loses money and fans because the 12 people who fought the issue tooth and nail had no intention of actually playing the game in the first place.

Should I be ignoring these comments? And I've not even looked in the other threads, but I don't think I'd have a hard time finding similar.

I wonder if you've read the comments beyond what you've underlined. Because it seems clear to me they're not referring to female space marines but the agenda pushing them.

 Karak Norn Clansman wrote:
There were female Space Marines early on: Both models and the Sister Sin purging a Rainbow Warrior artwork from the Rogue Trader era.

Then GW did it right and instead made Sisters of Battle into their very own cool thing. Do not dilute this improvement of 40k worldbuilding: Monk and nun elite warrior orders shall not be mixed. Pluck archaic strings, and know your instrument.

There is fundamentally no other reason than this: It isn't about space tech, popular palatability or anything else. Sometime in the 1990s, GW saw that they played better to the spirit of their own setting by making elite warrior monks and elite warrior nuns into their own separate orders. The plebeian Imperial Guard is not the arena for this, and neither is the eclectic Inquisition or the Mechanicus and Titanicus with their contempt for matters of the flesh. No, the Astartes, Sororitas, Custodes and Sisters of Silence are the relevant arenas for religious warrior orders. Monks and nuns of war.

I've seen quite a few claim "Space Marines aren't warrior monks anymore" in reply to this, as if for some reason the whole fortress monasteries, a monastic and ascetic lifestyle involving large amounts of routine, ritual and prayers, calling each other battle-brothers etc thing doesn't count, with claims that them being male isn't a important part of their lore because the last place that definitely mentioned it was Index Astartes back in the early 2000s and it hasn't appeared in a codex since.

I'm talking about unhelmeted head obviously. Does it need specification or were you just muddling the water even more?

(And that's about model anyway, not lore).

And about their supposed monastic life... Did you read the standard day of a Marine? It's much more akin to a special forces training regimen then a monastic life.
Aside from the fact that, of course, that I would say that the biggest part of monks and nuns identities are their detachment for material worries, and the fact that they don't fight. Both flying in the face of Marine.

So, maybe you are confusing your stereotypes of monks with the real deal. Kind of life you're stereotyping people as woke because they think more options is better than less.

We have the DIY faction: let's take it seriously.

 Manchu wrote:
One thing to note is, people who disagree that GW must or should make female SM on the whole seem to have no problem with female Stormcast.

I mean I distinctly remember that in the thread about the new AOS starter box there was pretty heated discussion because several people expressed their opposition to female Stormcast...

Aren't Imperial Guard the DIY faction? They're portrayed as far more flexible than even Astartes.

Or aren't Orks the DIY faction? Their whole shtick is unique ramshackle constructs.

Or maybe there is no "DIY faction"

 kirotheavenger wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

kirotheavenger wrote:Who has said that adding female Space Marines will ruin the setting forever? Where/when?
You're misrepresenting people's positions.

Am I?

Spoiler:

 Argive wrote:
Will this be a trend now every other week until people get fed up or mindless bickering and leave the site??

We have a ban on politics and religion for a reason. Wokness is a political religion that will gobble up and spit out and ruin everything it touches..

SemperMortis wrote:
"It absolutely should happen" Why? is it just too much to ask for the woke mob to not ruin everything in their attempt to make everything the same? Can you name me a single person who said "I was going to start playing 40k but when I found out there was only a single ALL FEMALE army that was just massively updated with new rules and a feth ton of new models...I couldn't play the game in good conscious".

Should we have Female Necrons as well? How about Female Orkz? Why? The only reason I can see is to appease the woke mob who scream and complain and than when a company finally gives in, it loses money and fans because the 12 people who fought the issue tooth and nail had no intention of actually playing the game in the first place.

Should I be ignoring these comments? And I've not even looked in the other threads, but I don't think I'd have a hard time finding similar.

I wonder if you've read the comments beyond what you've underlined. Because it seems clear to me they're not referring to female space marines but the agenda pushing them.

What agenda? People wanting to be represented in media. Woke as a negative term is pushing an agenda, this entire push against it is an agenda.
The pushback here is veiled in sexism and GW itself help perpetuate that, things can be done well. And GW mostly pushed towards low effort and easy. And now it’s a issue since they are behind and it just makes the setting look dumb.

No, Marines are. All faction allow personalization by design, but no product line come even closer to the variety that Marine have reflected in their model line.

How many regiment of Guardsmen are currently sold? 3? 4?
How many Orks clan have specific miniatures (even simple stuff like a pauldrons)?

 Cybtroll wrote:
I'm talking about unhelmeted head obviously. Does it need specification or were you just muddling the water even more?

(And that's about model anyway, not lore).

And about their supposed monastic life... Did you read the standard day of a Marine? It's much more akin to a special forces training regimen then a monastic life.
Aside from the fact that, of course, that I would say that the biggest part of monks and nuns identities are their detachment for material worries, and the fact that they don't fight. Both flying in the face of Marine.

So, maybe you are confusing your stereotypes of monks with the real deal. Kind of life you're stereotyping people as woke because they think more options is better than less.

We have the DIY faction: let's take it seriously.

Special Forces have morning, midday and afternoon prayer, that lasts for an hour at a time?
Of course Space Marines are going to have combat training, they are soldiers. What makes them monastic are the prayer sessions, the rituals, the iconography and the terminology.
Imagine if the Navy Seals started wearing robes, crosses, call each other Brother, hang out in a monastery and are required to pray at certain times. Would they not be monastics?

Beardedragon wrote:

 Cybtroll wrote:
Heads, heads are all that's needed.

helmets? Why would a female wear a different helmet from a man? Are female heads somehow different in the universe of warhammer?

They are not.

Heads, not helmets. You know, like an unhelmeted head.

 Cybtroll wrote:
No, Marines are. All faction allow personalization by design, but no product line come even closer to the variety that Marine have reflected in their model line.

How many regiment of Guardsmen are currently sold? 3? 4?
How many Orks clan have specific miniatures (even simple stuff like a pauldrons)?

I would say that's a different thing.
If selling models is all you want, why aren't you happy with the new Cadian kit?

Does monks have training exercises?
(Spoiler: they don't). Like, even manual labour is not mandatory for all monks order is n the middle ages.
To be precise: the AdMech focus on transcribing old knowledge is much much more "monks" than what Marines will ever be.... ..they even have the robes to show it.

So, they're as much special forces as they are monks. And then again, you're stereotyping ""monks" as Western ones... But Marine encompasses all cultures, so Easter monks (mixed gender) should be allowed to.

PS: because it's not me, or you that need to be happy. Who need to be happy are as many people as possible, and I'm no authority to tell people their fun ruins my fun. Are you?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:When the argument should be : HOW CAN WE REPRESENT THE fething UNIVERSE BETTER ON THE fething TABLE AND HOW CAN WE GROW OUR GAMING COMMUNITIES!

Why isn't the argument "Why is the universe so predicated on the denial of women in this one particular faction?" Why is the absence of women such a critical feature that we can add hover tanks, we can revive Primarchs, we can rewrite Necrons, and we can bring dead characters to life, but we can't have a headswap on our plastic war dolls?

And what if "growing our gaming communities" comes at the cost of "representing the ****ing universe on the ****ing table"? Which do you prioritise? Because it sure seems that people would rather have the latter than the former - so, perhaps don't mention them in the same breath.

Also, the swear filter's doing wonders for you, but when I quote it, I can see every word. Swearing doesn't make your argument look any better, especially as gratuitously as that.

Did it ever ocur to you, that a lot of people are disagreeing with you because you are willfully missrepresenting them and by virtue of that start to become hostile to you?

What part am I wilfully misrepresenting?

And bold to claim that the same isn't being done back to me. I've already had to point out how I never claimed that "women Space Marines will fix everything and this is the only problem with 40k's blatant faults of representation!"

So please, if I'm misrepresenting, I'd love to see where. Perhaps you can elaborate on what I'm missing.

I dunno, the rest of the point you graciously didn't quote.. maybee there? Actually not maybee but that's irrelevant for you like the rest of that comment you so choose to graciously ignore?

 Cybtroll wrote:
No, Marines are. All faction allow personalization by design, but no product line come even closer to the variety that Marine have reflected in their model line.

How many regiment of Guardsmen are currently sold? 3? 4?
How many Orks clan have specific miniatures (even simple stuff like a pauldrons)?

That's a consequence of marine bloat, the solution to which is not more marines.
Guardsmen are in sore need of an update (and they actually HAD models for multiple regiments), and you're expected to kitbash orks because conversions are meant to be their focus.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Cybtroll wrote:
Does monks have training exercises?
(Spoiler: they don't).

Yes, actually, they did if they are of the Military Order variety.
You know, like the Knight Templars, which one Marine chapter is a clear reference to.
Don't tell me I'm stereotyping Marines as Western Monks when you apparently don't know what Military Orders are.

kirotheavenger wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

kirotheavenger wrote:Who has said that adding female Space Marines will ruin the setting forever? Where/when?
You're misrepresenting people's positions.

Am I?

Spoiler:

 Argive wrote:
Will this be a trend now every other week until people get fed up or mindless bickering and leave the site??

We have a ban on politics and religion for a reason. Wokness is a political religion that will gobble up and spit out and ruin everything it touches..

SemperMortis wrote:
"It absolutely should happen" Why? is it just too much to ask for the woke mob to not ruin everything in their attempt to make everything the same? Can you name me a single person who said "I was going to start playing 40k but when I found out there was only a single ALL FEMALE army that was just massively updated with new rules and a feth ton of new models...I couldn't play the game in good conscious".

Should we have Female Necrons as well? How about Female Orkz? Why? The only reason I can see is to appease the woke mob who scream and complain and than when a company finally gives in, it loses money and fans because the 12 people who fought the issue tooth and nail had no intention of actually playing the game in the first place.

Should I be ignoring these comments? And I've not even looked in the other threads, but I don't think I'd have a hard time finding similar.

I wonder if you've read the comments beyond what you've underlined. Because it seems clear to me they're not referring to female space marines but the agenda pushing them.

What "agenda"? The only agenda I've described is adding women Astartes.

kirotheavenger wrote:Aren't Imperial Guard the DIY faction?

In lore, or in practice? In lore, yes, infinitely so.

In practice? Absolutely not. The only sufficiently multipose Guardsman ranges are Cadians and Catachans, and unless the player invests a TON into greenstuff, kitbashes, or third party bits, their Guardsmen will barely be any different from the next generic Cadian variant.

Space Marines, on the other hand, were one of the first of the new batch of Codexes to get custom Chapter rules, and GW has been very vocal in creating "your own Chapter". Hell, they even made a series on it in White Dwarf, about their Tome Keepers Chapter.

That's not to mention their ready sales of upgrade kits, nice flat armour, and easily customisable bits that switch between kits like a glove.

Practically, Space Marines are defined far more as the "homebrew faction.

They're portrayed as far more flexible than even Astartes.

Only in the lore, and even that's not super touched on. Compare the difference between the noble, Greco-Roman Ultramarines with their pure geneseed and adherence to the Codex and the Space Wolves who are their complete opposite, including literal werewolves in their army.
Now compare even something like the Savlar Chem-Dogs to the Vostroyans. Yeah, there's difference, but *werewolf* level differences?

Or aren't Orks the DIY faction? Their whole shtick is unique ramshackle constructs.

Orks are the "convert what you like, it's already scrap" faction. That only applies their vehicles and weapons though - not to the Orks themselves necessarily.

Or maybe there is no "DIY faction"

I have one of those unpainted Primaris funko pops right on my deskside. Do you know what it says on the box of that Primaris funko pop?

"DIY".

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Special Forces have morning, midday and afternoon prayer, that lasts for an hour at a time?
Of course Space Marines are going to have combat training, they are soldiers. What makes them monastic are the prayer sessions, the rituals and the terminology.
Imagine if the Navy Seals started wearing robes, crosses, call each other Brother, hang out in a monastery and are required to pray at certain times. Would they not be monastics?

Do all Chapters do that? Because if I'm not mistaken that particular excerpt was only in reference to one Chapter's routine, as was last printed, what, in 3rd edition? 4th?

If the Navy Seals started drinking not!Mead from horns, wearing wolf pelts, and singing about their sagas, I'd be more likely to call them vikings than monastics.

It's almost like some Chapters are more monastically inspired than others!

Apple fox wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

kirotheavenger wrote:Who has said that adding female Space Marines will ruin the setting forever? Where/when?
You're misrepresenting people's positions.

Am I?

Spoiler:

 Argive wrote:
Will this be a trend now every other week until people get fed up or mindless bickering and leave the site??

We have a ban on politics and religion for a reason. Wokness is a political religion that will gobble up and spit out and ruin everything it touches..

SemperMortis wrote:
"It absolutely should happen" Why? is it just too much to ask for the woke mob to not ruin everything in their attempt to make everything the same? Can you name me a single person who said "I was going to start playing 40k but when I found out there was only a single ALL FEMALE army that was just massively updated with new rules and a feth ton of new models...I couldn't play the game in good conscious".

Should we have Female Necrons as well? How about Female Orkz? Why? The only reason I can see is to appease the woke mob who scream and complain and than when a company finally gives in, it loses money and fans because the 12 people who fought the issue tooth and nail had no intention of actually playing the game in the first place.

Should I be ignoring these comments? And I've not even looked in the other threads, but I don't think I'd have a hard time finding similar.

I wonder if you've read the comments beyond what you've underlined. Because it seems clear to me they're not referring to female space marines but the agenda pushing them.

What agenda? People wanting to be represented in media. Woke as a negative term is pushing an agenda, this entire push against it is an agenda.
The pushback here is veiled in sexism and GW itself help perpetuate that, things can be done well. And GW mostly pushed towards low effort and easy. And now it’s a issue since they are behind and it just makes the setting look dumb.

There you go again accusing anyone who disagrees with you of being sexist! can you please stop knocking down that strawman? Do you really belive over 2/3rds of the dakka dakka community are a bunch of mysigionistic donkey-caves?

 Crimson wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
One thing to note is, people who disagree that GW must or should make female SM on the whole seem to have no problem with female Stormcast.

I mean I distinctly remember that in the thread about the new AOS starter box there was pretty heated discussion because several people expressed their opposition to female Stormcast...

True, true.

But I think what you mean by "heated discussion" is some people didn't like female Stormcast and then the usual dog piling and gaslighting with "YuR a SeXiSt" began.

It would be interesting to see the sales numbers on the new Stormcast, whenever these topics come up I always think about the stores I go to, their shelves are full of Nolzur's female models, stacked twice as deep as the males and monsters... collecting dust.

BrianDavion wrote:

Apple fox wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

kirotheavenger wrote:Who has said that adding female Space Marines will ruin the setting forever? Where/when?
You're misrepresenting people's positions.

Am I?

Spoiler:

 Argive wrote:
Will this be a trend now every other week until people get fed up or mindless bickering and leave the site??

We have a ban on politics and religion for a reason. Wokness is a political religion that will gobble up and spit out and ruin everything it touches..

SemperMortis wrote:
"It absolutely should happen" Why? is it just too much to ask for the woke mob to not ruin everything in their attempt to make everything the same? Can you name me a single person who said "I was going to start playing 40k but when I found out there was only a single ALL FEMALE army that was just massively updated with new rules and a feth ton of new models...I couldn't play the game in good conscious".

Should we have Female Necrons as well? How about Female Orkz? Why? The only reason I can see is to appease the woke mob who scream and complain and than when a company finally gives in, it loses money and fans because the 12 people who fought the issue tooth and nail had no intention of actually playing the game in the first place.

Should I be ignoring these comments? And I've not even looked in the other threads, but I don't think I'd have a hard time finding similar.

I wonder if you've read the comments beyond what you've underlined. Because it seems clear to me they're not referring to female space marines but the agenda pushing them.

What agenda? People wanting to be represented in media. Woke as a negative term is pushing an agenda, this entire push against it is an agenda.
The pushback here is veiled in sexism and GW itself help perpetuate that, things can be done well. And GW mostly pushed towards low effort and easy. And now it’s a issue since they are behind and it just makes the setting look dumb.

There you go again accusing anyone who disagrees with you of being sexist! can you please stop knocking down that strawman? Do you really belive over 2/3rds of the dakka dakka community are a bunch of mysigionistic donkey-caves?

Both those posts are. And I never said anything specific about all people. But to say a lot of this discussion doesn’t have issues is a bit of a joke. Those posts both highlight it specificity.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
What part am I wilfully misrepresenting?

And bold to claim that the same isn't being done back to me. I've already had to point out how I never claimed that "women Space Marines will fix everything and this is the only problem with 40k's blatant faults of representation!"

So please, if I'm misrepresenting, I'd love to see where. Perhaps you can elaborate on what I'm missing.

I dunno, the rest of the point you graciously didn't quote.. maybee there?

Such as? Please, could you show me?

When I edit sections from quotes out, I do it to avoid massive blocks of text. Lord knows my text blocks are large enough as is.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:You know, like the Knight Templars, which one Marine chapter is a clear reference to.

Underlined for emphasis.

You're right. There are some Chapters which are especially well linked to ancient orders of knights and warrior-monks. But there are others that aren't. That's why I'm so dubious of "look how important this warrior monk thing is", when it's so clearly handwaved to make way for other cool things, like Space Werewolves, or Space Maori, or Space Vampires, or Space Tacticool, or Space Flaming Daemon Skeletons.

I'm not saying that no Space Marines have warrior monk trappings or references. Only that it doesn't apply to all of them.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Goose LeChance wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
One thing to note is, people who disagree that GW must or should make female SM on the whole seem to have no problem with female Stormcast.

I mean I distinctly remember that in the thread about the new AOS starter box there was pretty heated discussion because several people expressed their opposition to female Stormcast...

True, true.

But I think what you mean by "heated discussion" is some people didn't like female Stormcast and then the usual dog piling and gaslighting with "YuR a SeXiSt" began.

If I recall correctly, wasn't your comment on the Stormcast thread removed by mods?

I wonder why?

Are they really sexist? or are they critical of certain attempts at influence by a minority or outsiders of the hobby?

No, you're confusing the Stormcast release day rumour thread with a completely different thread in AoS background

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
What part am I wilfully misrepresenting?

And bold to claim that the same isn't being done back to me. I've already had to point out how I never claimed that "women Space Marines will fix everything and this is the only problem with 40k's blatant faults of representation!"

So please, if I'm misrepresenting, I'd love to see where. Perhaps you can elaborate on what I'm missing.

I dunno, the rest of the point you graciously didn't quote.. maybee there?

Such as? Please, could you show me?

When I edit sections from quotes out, I do it to avoid massive blocks of text. Lord knows my text blocks are large enough as is.

Multiple points in the same ballpark of the part you quoted.
Including but not limited to the typical debate style involved centered squarly arround subjective sentiments, with not so much a hint of understanding or attempt at of the opposing side (both ways).
An need to seek validation via company for a (supposedly) needed social political change in an fantastical universe which serves as a ground escapism for reasons of validation again of ones own agenda. Because there ARE options for GW to increase the diversity without NEEDING to force feed an agenda into Marines OR Sisters for that matter.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Are they really sexist? or are they critical of certain attempts at influence by a minority or outsiders of the hobby?

We happen to be part of the hobby, it’s entirely that to dismiss and push us out.
It’s that specifically that turn this discussion hostile, using terms like Woke as a negative is used constantly in very specific ways.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:You know, like the Knight Templars, which one Marine chapter is a clear reference to.

Underlined for emphasis.

You're right. There are some Chapters which are especially well linked to ancient orders of knights and warrior-monks. But there are others that aren't. That's why I'm so dubious of "look how important this warrior monk thing is", when it's so clearly handwaved to make way for other cool things, like Space Werewolves, or Space Maori, or Space Vampires, or Space Tacticool, or Space Flaming Daemon Skeletons.

I'm not saying that no Space Marines have warrior monk trappings or references. Only that it doesn't apply to all of them.

Most "generic" chapters still have references to monastics though.
It's just that some chapters go all in (such as Black Templars and arguably Dark Angels) and others barely touch upon it (such as Space Wolves).
Vikings also underwent their own set of religious rituals too, so they arguably were the Norse version of Military Orders anyway.