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.

 Manchu wrote:
I’ve also noticed very few women interested in Infinity. By contrast, I notice many more interested in Malifaux. Perhaps this related to Insectum7’s point.

It's also a much less militarized-looking setting. It does have plenty of pinup minis, though... I guess the idea that those scare women off must have been a mistake...

And actually it's funny you mention it, most of the women I know who are into wargaming are current or ex-military or come from military families. So they're more comfortable with the aesthetic/milieu.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
The escapism and heroic fantasy elements of Mehreens is too strong. It's a more appealing and honestly juvenile form of escapism than the Imperial Guard can have. I won't fully discount the possibility but bluntly turning the focus down from Marines would be a much more financially risky move than just letting girls put on their beak helmets.

And yet other fictional settings and games succeed just fine without having space marines. Your theory is simply not reasonable.

CadianSgtBob wrote:

And yet other fictional settings and games succeed just fine without having space marines. Your theory is simply not reasonable.

Yup. It's not like women are all over BattleTech; it's seen as being for the nerdiest of the nerds *because of the game*, not because of the setting (which has a number of significant female characters).

Hecaton wrote:

Oh, so you're not even making coherent statements then.

I accept your concession little buddy.

No one gives a gak about the fact that you find male-majority hobbies icky, but that's neither here nor there.

A strawman my friend, but because I'm such a nice guy I'll allow you a second chance to try again.

Well, funny you should mention that; Infinity *also* is overwhelmingly male in terms of its playerbase. It's almost like representing women in depictions in minis *doesn't* suddenly bring them running to the hobby and the people claiming that it does are speaking in bad faith.

Sorry friend, I'm not going to get distracted by getting bogged down in a discussion about a game I'm not very familiar with.

I do know for absolute certainty that Riot has done demographic analysis and found that women are extremely more likely to play female champions in League of Legends. Men by comparison are more diverse in their tastes on average. So this shows that for female League players at least they are far more likely to play female champions.

Now, would this be the same for 40k? Gut feeling is yes. You seem to believe that the hobby is inherently on average offputting towards women. Why do you think that my friend?

Absent any actual data that AoS has a different playerbase than other minis games I don't have an opinion on the subject.

Yet you'll make a definitive statement on Infinity's playerbase despite also as far as I can tell lacking those statistics. Curious...

It can be both. Also, I used the term "gynophobe," not misogynist. Like, the Emperor designed the process that creates Astartes to only work with males because he didn't want females to become Astartes.

But it's not both and you pretending it is is completely irrelevant my friend. Your head canon is not so.

Goonhammer comment sections are one of gods gifts to the internet.

Just read the article. Didn't expect that. I added a comment even if i don't know if he will show up because desagreeing on a subject is often see as a sin today.

First: fluff about space marines had always stated they have to be male so nothing new here. I for myself don't see anything in the lines quoted offensive..

Second: for someone like me who has traveled a lot (something like 15 countries so far) and see poverty, injustice, misery, and cruel other stuff all this transphobic/pronouns-thing appear to me like a "richpeople-problem" when there is so much to worry about in our today-world. (But that's my opinion. You don't have to share it.)

Worst : it's so much matraqued all over the media and its community is so ever obnoxious about it that it actually go against its original message : accept everybody. I even know people which had turn really transphobic because of that.

For myself I would prefer to remain in my dark futur universe where anything is ******-up and where everyone is hated equally and deserve to be purged in extreme (but fancy) brutal ways.

Have good games and fun with everybody.

Swastakowey wrote:

Isnt this line of logic a good reason why Marines are the way they are? They are so popular why would anyone change them? Why is this so hard for people to accept?

If you read my previous post with any comprehension you'd have the answer my friend.

And the answer is indeed that there is a good chance that there's no financially sound reason for GW to do so because the outcry might outweigh the benefits.

Psychocouac wrote:
extreme (but fancy)

Ha, that is an entertaining turn of phrase.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
I accept your concession little buddy.

I ain't conceding gak.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
A strawman my friend, but because I'm such a nice guy I'll allow you a second chance to try again.

No, I know what's up with you. That anxiety you feel when your female friends, family and acquaintances look at your minis collection... it's not going to go away if you have female space marines lol.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
I do know for absolute certainty that Riot has done demographic analysis and found that women are extremely more likely to play female champions in League of Legends. Men by comparison are more diverse in their tastes on average. So this shows that for female League players at least they are far more likely to play female champions.

But that doesn't tell you if they're going to play LoL or not in the first place. So that study doesn't actually answer the question put forth.

Besides, we know that most women who play 40k play Tyranids.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
You seem to believe that the hobby is inherently on average offputting towards women. Why do you think that my friend?

It's competitive and models (fantastical) combat. Many women are not comfortable with directly competitive games or sports, or at least participating in them themselves. Women are traditionally not interested in, say, military science fiction, which is the kind of novel that's most like 40k.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
Yet you'll make a definitive statement on Infinity's playerbase despite also as far as I can tell lacking those statistics. Curious...

Because one, I'm very familiar with Infinity, and two, we both agreed that wargaming was overwhelmingly male. You proposed an exception, which I took issue with.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

But it's not both and you pretending it is is completely irrelevant my friend. Your head canon is not so.

I agree it's headcanon. The canon is that the Astartes creation process only works on male humans.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Fantasy seems to resonate with a wider demographic than sci-fi, is more or less what I've seen. Also 40ks sci fi is particularly violent, bleak, and faschistic, even if a lark at the same time. That may also have something to do with it. Are there "good guys" in AoS? I don't really know.

Yet franchises like Star Wars (a space fantasy like 40k though yes different in tone) as well as Mass Effect (a much harder science fiction setting) have from what I can gather more notable female fanbases. I'm not incredibly convinced by this line of reasoning, especially when fantasy is also still largely more popular among men and 40k is closer to a fantasy series in space than a straight science fiction.

Transphobia in the community is bad enough that, locally, I was threatened with violence if I ever entered our FLGS, the patrons and owner backed the person threatening me, when I had his explicit threat in writing, after saying they're inclusive and would back me (I approached the owner before starting to play there).

Since then another FLGS has opened, but the folks playing are the exact same group.

It's same here.

People are refusing to answer the basic question of "do you think trans women [my example as a trans woman] are valid as women?".

If you're not willing to answer, regardless of what that answer may be, you're part of the problem.

The hobby is only as bigoted as it's community. The 40k community is pretty bigoted already.

If you want to play female marines, or trans marines, go nuts. I'm sure some people will go "nooo my fluff" - but overwhelmingly people won't care.

I however feel getting upset that established lore is reprinted is crazy.

 blood reaper wrote:
Goonhammer comment sections are one of gods gifts to the internet.

Considering they don't allow discussion... nah, it's pretty pointless. Just a circlejerk.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Void__Dragon wrote:

Yet franchises like Star Wars (a space fantasy like 40k though yes different in tone) as well as Mass Effect (a much harder science fiction setting) have from what I can gather more notable female fanbases. I'm not incredibly convinced by this line of reasoning, especially when fantasy is also still largely more popular among men and 40k is closer to a fantasy series in space than a straight science fiction.

There's also the accessibility of the media - there hasn't been a 40k game as high-profile as Mass Effect, and Star Wars is obviously film, which you just watch. 40k is much less well-known than Star Wars, you have to go seek it out, more or less. In my experience men are more willing to participate in niche fandoms.

Tyel wrote:
If you want to play female marines, or trans marines, go nuts. I'm sure some people will go "nooo my fluff" - but overwhelmingly people won't care.

I however feel getting upset that established lore is reprinted is crazy.

Theyve retconned entire factions (ie Necrons). This isn't nearly has big a shift in the lore. feth, have it be possible due to new Marines.

CadianSgtBob wrote:


And yet other fictional settings and games succeed just fine without having space marines. Your theory is simply not reasonable.

You're kind of missing the point, I'm saying that chicken or egg the inertia of Marines being the face of the setting is too strong at this point IMO. It may be that GW has forced them to become that way but at this point the Marine players probably outnumber the rest of the playerbase combined so GW has a financial incentive to both keep them happy and buying merchandise. Hard to do that if they aren't releasing marine kits and books regularly. It sucks, but it is what it is IMO.

I read the article several times to understand it better, but I still cannot make sense of it.

I'm one of the people the article mentions who might see the sentence with no issue, if you are not part of the ongoing debate.

"There is no specific hormonal or biological make-up of a human male"

I understand hormonal and biological make-up of a male as "having way more testosteron than a biological female" and "born with testicles and a penis instead of breasts, ovaries and a vagina". Thus, the claim that there is no specific make-up does not make sense to me.

Could somebody please elaborate to help me understand what the fuzz is about?

I get there is a semi different discussion going on here right now wether SM should be changed to be made up of females as well, but that does not seem to be the author's issue.

Hecaton wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:
Goonhammer comment sections are one of gods gifts to the internet.

Considering they don't allow discussion... nah, it's pretty pointless. Just a circlejerk.

Yeah I should've added the /s to my post to make it clear - it's hysterical how there is no discussion permitted and that the mods/site authors respond to everything with this incredibly snide tone.

 Blndmage wrote:
People are refusing to answer the basic question of "do you think trans women [my example as a trans woman] are valid as women?".

If you're not willing to answer, regardless of what that answer may be, you're part of the problem.

Nah. I just don't think that you're asking that in good faith, like I said upthread.

Psychocouac wrote:

Second: for someone like me who has traveled a lot (something like 15 countries so far) and see poverty, injustice, misery, and cruel other stuff all this transphobic/pronouns-thing appear to me like a "richpeople-problem" when there is so much to worry about in our today-world. (But that's my opinion. You don't have to share it.)

You are aware that trans people can live in poverty as well and are in fact far more likely to be the victims of violence when doing so?

Hecaton wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:
First by numbers you give for XY androgen insensitivity 0.005%. that means if the Imperium has 4-8 quadrillion people, the low end according to Google with arguments for 15qad, or multiple quintillion people, let's average that to 6 quadrillion people, Wich means there are 3,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 people in the Imperium at the MINIMUM.
How many Space Marines are there?

What if XY-androgen insensitivity is one of the failure conditions for the Astartes creation process?

Then that means there are SO MANY MORE, you picked one of the rarer things the others would be way more common. You're not going to get out of this by ignoring it.

 Blndmage wrote:

Theyve retconned entire factions (ie Necrons). This isn't nearly has big a shift in the lore. feth, have it be possible due to new Marines.

And there's some of us who think the change to the Necron lore in 5th was a bad move.

 Blndmage wrote:
People are refusing to answer the basic question of "do you think trans women [my example as a trans woman] are valid as women?"

Are you arguing this question is fundamental as to whether GW is transphobic?

This seems like it could be a tangent but I’m not sure that question is quite as simple as you seem to imply. To put it mildly, there is a lot of disagreement among transwomen about who is valid and not.

 Blndmage wrote:
Theyve retconned entire factions (ie Necrons).

And a lot of people hated it. The difference is that Necrons were a dead army with a model line just one step short of "throw this embarrassment in the trash with the squats" so there was really nothing to lose. Changing space marines, the core of their brand, to appease a minority who want women in this one specific faction (and ignore all the others) would be a much larger risk.

 Blndmage wrote:

Then that means there are SO MANY MORE, you picked one of the rarer things the others would be way more common. You're not going to get out of this by ignoring it.

So many more what? Failure conditions? So? It's clear in the fluff that not everyone makes it through the process.

Hecaton wrote:


Nah. I just don't think that you're asking that in good faith, like I said upthread.

I actually do think her overtly accusing you of such was out of line but now your refusal to answer the question at all is interesting when it would cost you nothing to affirm "trans women are women". Why do you hesitate to do so?

 Void__Dragon wrote:

Psychocouac wrote:

Second: for someone like me who has traveled a lot (something like 15 countries so far) and see poverty, injustice, misery, and cruel other stuff all this transphobic/pronouns-thing appear to me like a "richpeople-problem" when there is so much to worry about in our today-world. (But that's my opinion. You don't have to share it.)

You are aware that trans people can live in poverty as well and are in fact far more likely to be the victims of violence when doing so?

*Raises hand*
Disabled, in poverty trans girl from a provincial capital
Ya, we're at risk constantly, being yelled at by bigots gets EXHAUSTING.

 Blndmage wrote:
Transphobia in the community is bad enough that, locally, I was threatened with violence if I ever entered our FLGS, the patrons and owner backed the person threatening me, when I had his explicit threat in writing, after saying they're inclusive and would back me (I approached the owner before starting to play there).

That is unfortunate and those people should be in prison for their actions, and certainly should not be tolerated in the 40k community. But that has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

People are refusing to answer the basic question of "do you think trans women [my example as a trans woman] are valid as women?".

What does that have to do with the topic of space marines having to start from a male body? Nothing in that GW quote in any way says that trans women are not women.

Hecaton wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

Theyve retconned entire factions (ie Necrons). This isn't nearly has big a shift in the lore. feth, have it be possible due to new Marines.

And there's some of us who think the change to the Necron lore in 5th was a bad move.

I agree, I'm really unhappy with what they did to my faction.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

I actually do think her overtly accusing you of such was out of line but now your refusal to answer the question at all is interesting when it would cost you nothing to affirm "trans women are women". Why do you hesitate to do so?

Because Blndmage has repeatedly been trying to accuse people of all sorts of things lately, and I'm not trying to play that game. Moreover, in the context the question was brought up in, it's a pointless question; whether or not someone is "valid as a woman" is not a matter of biology. The Inquisition can stay in 40k, I'm not LARPing it.

 blood reaper wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

 blood reaper wrote:
Goonhammer comment sections are one of gods gifts to the internet.

Considering they don't allow discussion... nah, it's pretty pointless. Just a circlejerk.

Yeah I should've added the /s to my post to make it clear - it's hysterical how there is no discussion permitted and that the mods/site authors respond to everything with this incredibly snide tone.

Ummmmmm build your own website?



It's disturbing how some people behave with just a crumb of power.