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.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
This isn't really about people playing with female marines. It's about legitimizing these dangerous fringe groups - intentionally or otherwise.

So you're saying you can't have a group in fiction like the Astartes that are emphatically all-male without "legitimizing those dangerous fringe groups."

I reject that idea because it's anti-art and anti-expression.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
These sorts of divides ultimately lead to violence. We're dangerously close to Proud Boys lynching drag queens reading books to kids at a library. The next few years will be incredibly dangerous for those that are not cis white males.

The world is typically more dangerous for males than for non-males.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Female Custodes would've been a fantastic idea. Just a couple extra heads and you're ready to go.

Unfortunately I seen what people want with their female Marines (so big tits in armor in an all female Chapter wearing what might as well be makeup) so I'll pass until that weirdness does.

Yeah, a lot of it seems pretty fetish-y.

ERJAK 805786 11391637 wrote:
Dealing with your point, that's stupid. We literally just had someone say 'all trans people are dangerously mentally ill' on the previous page, how do you deal with that point? Politely disagree? Treat it like it's just another asinine wargaming screed and not something that gets people literally killed all over the world?

Rule #1 cannot deal with topics like this because it ends up treating actual, dangerous hate speech as being significantly worse than calling someone a poo-poo head.

You're more or less siding with bigotry on this one.

How is that not a fact though? They have higher rates of sucides, higher rates of other behavioral disorders etc. With sucidide rates that high or ending outside of society how is it not dangerous. If someone has a heart defect that kills people before they reach 25years of age, it can be called dangerous. Diabetes is dangerous etc.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
We can all see marines are male. We don't need to justify it.

Huh? No, otherwise the lack of presence of female Astartes miniatures is egregious.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
The issue for me has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not there are male-only marines. It's reinforcing the reason for male only marines in a fictional universe, which gives purchase to the ne'er do wells to proclaim their cultural victory.

If you don't give a gak about the hobby, and instead about the culture war, don't expect to be taken seriously by people who enjoy the hobby.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eldarsif wrote:
I think the problem is momentum. Changing it now so late in the game would probably make a lot of Timmys angry about it and I imagine GW fears that. I personally would love to see some official female Space Marines, but at the same time I am not expecting that will happen any time soon. So I am happy to kitbash my own.

It would also bother a lot of perfectly reasonable people.

 Eldarsif wrote:
However, GW is improving on their other ranges to get to a larger demographic. The first Stormcast release was pretty much boys in gold and now they've made a lot of explicit representations in the line which I personally like. Same goes for a lot of other recent lines that are not Space Marines.

Except expanding the range to include female miniatures does not get a "larger demographic," that is a fiction.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 catbarf wrote:

GW didn't think Sisters would sell. Their stock expected to last four months ran out in two hours. I'd say any argument that starts from the premise that GW knows what will sell and what won't is on shaky ground.

GW's market research isn't amazing but it's also that they released a faction that wasn't Astartes, gave it proper support, and, surprise surprise, it was popular.

It's almost like GW is willfully ignorant to the popularity of non-Astartes factions...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Rihgu wrote:

Which is cool and all but there are plenty of dissenting opinions in the comments on that article. The ones that were deleted/banned were the hateful/incendiary ones. Or, I guess they could have even been ones in agreement, as they're gone now they really could have been anything. But since I do see dissenting/non Hivemind opinions in the comment section, it seems a pretty safe assumption that "thought conforming through coercive means" isn't occurring there.

They're just banning hateful bigots/trolls from their privately owned website.

I just disagreed with the take, entirely reasonably, and they deleted my comment. So not, that's not what they're doing, they're trying to build consensus and lean on GW. That's why I encourage everyone who disagrees with the above take to email GW and mention this article specifically and mention that you don't agree with it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I take it that you didn't like Samuel Jackson in the MCU? Surely he should have been white as that is canon.

Nah, Ultimate Nick Fury was black.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Irbis wrote:
When you encourage half of your population to do exercise while telling the other half that moving is 'improper' and 'unladylike' and telling them to stay in kitchen (see - tomboy, a word that used to be a pretty heavy slur in the past for showing such 'deviant' interests), gee, I wonder why the far bigger pool that did regular exercise produces far more stronger athletes than the group that was actively discouraged and the ones that did exercises were much smaller pool allowing for less talent from far end of bell curve to shine through. It's a mystery, eh?

Even correcting for that, human males build muscle far more quickly than female and out limb lengths are more optimized for leverage. So don't try to say it's all social conditioning or whatever.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
[quote=vipoid 805786 11391632 55b4f23109bb4f5979f77edc0c9a96ba.jpg"Due to the genetic and hormonal conditioning, Space Marines always emerge from the process as, to all intents and purposes, biologically male."

Men are on average physically stronger, that is a biological fact.

But that is only somewhat relevant in military, which does recruit women, and almost mostly irrelevant in 40k, in which powered armor exist, in which biological augmentation exist, in which most of the warfare is done with ranged weapons (which are massive equalizers).

I mean, the fact that the IG has all female regiments and mixed regiments show that gender is not something 40k military forces or the IoM really care about... except when it comes to Marines (and Sisters, although in the Sisters case it is because in-universe political loopholes).

And the truth is that Astartes are so hilariously enhanced that biological gender differences wouldn't really matter. Astartes are recruited when they are still kids, before puberty starts giving male children a physical edge, and then proceed to add modification after modification. A female recruit? it should be trivial to modify her body through hormone therapy and surgical enhancements, it would be a drop in the ocean that is the extensive Astartes modifications.

Sure you could make the argument that the resultant Astartes would be anatomically identical to any male Astartes. And with the heavy indoctrination one could even argue that such female recruit would no longer be female*. After all, an Astartes masculinity is also artificial, at the end of it an Astartes has far less in common with the average man than the average man has with the average woman. The only reason Astartes still refer to themselves using masculine terms and pronouns is because Chapter culture, but biologically their gender has pretty much been surgically modified to the point of nullification.

*And wouldn't forced gender transition be particularly grimdark? It definitely is a horrifying prospect.

 Lord Damocles wrote:

GW didn't use the term 'biological male' though...

Smudge will never acknowledge that lol

Asmodios wrote:
Sorry, but if you find that sentence as an attack on trans people you are unhinged and the last thing you should be worried about is board games. Meanwhile, the same article calls to"punch" fascists in the face but by reading the article as written the article is essentially stating that any disagreement on this topic is fascism.
So now we get this hilarious article that finds an imaginary call to violence against trans while actively calling for violence against anyone who disagrees.

Luckily i hardly ever watched any of their WAAC trash but ill make especially sure to stay clear from their name and brand now.

That's projection, I think.

Nowhere did I say the snippet was an attack on trans. I did say it wasn't a useful or helpful thing to place into a rulebook.

Right now you have the in group who feel attacked. Then you have the out group who also feels attacked. I can't tell the in group to stop feeling attacked, but the reality is that they are the ones who are safe. Some idle "punch nazis" threat on the internet pales in comparison to the very real violence suffered by the out groups.

Karol wrote:

ERJAK 805786 11391637 wrote:
Dealing with your point, that's stupid. We literally just had someone say 'all trans people are dangerously mentally ill' on the previous page, how do you deal with that point? Politely disagree? Treat it like it's just another asinine wargaming screed and not something that gets people literally killed all over the world?

Rule #1 cannot deal with topics like this because it ends up treating actual, dangerous hate speech as being significantly worse than calling someone a poo-poo head.

You're more or less siding with bigotry on this one.

How is that not a fact though? They have higher rates of sucides, higher rates of other behavioral disorders etc. With sucidide rates that high or ending outside of society how is it not dangerous. If someone has a heart defect that kills people before they reach 25years of age, it can be called dangerous. Diabetes is dangerous etc.

Because it doesn't match their narrative and thus is disregarded. I love how he's treating as if though this is a hotbed of extremist radicalization. They've already started with trying to silence people by labelling people as bigots or transphobes for disagreeing and now that has failed they're showing their hand from how they're basically begging for the mods to censor or ban people they disagree with, matching exactly the kind of mindset that was already seen in the Goonhammer comments early on. They don't want discourse, they just want people to regurgitate their only talking points and shout down everyone else that doesn't share their opinion. I'm pretty sure most sane people on this thread have already agreed that this one line from GW is being blown out of proportion, and it's just virtue signallers and people who have a lot of extra baggage giving it all this hidden meaning and power over the trans community somehow.

 Tyran wrote:
And the truth is that Astartes are so hilariously enhanced that biological gender differences wouldn't really matter. Astartes are recruited when they are still kids, before puberty starts giving male children a physical edge, and then proceed to add modification after modification. A female recruit? it should be trivial to modify her body through hormone therapy and surgical enhancements, it would be a drop in the ocean that is the extensive Astartes modifications.

If the process involves upregulation of genes that are on the y chromosome, then it wouldn't work on female humans.

Hecaton wrote:
If you don't give a gak about the hobby, and instead about the culture war, don't expect to be taken seriously by people who enjoy the hobby.

If you think the hobby is being reassured that marines can only be male then I'm not sure you're really enjoying the hobby.

 Daedalus81 wrote:


If you think the hobby is being reassured that marines can only be male then I'm not sure you're really enjoying the hobby.

I don't think that. But you stated your reasoning for wanting there to be female marines is that you thought there was a cultural imperative to make media along those lines.

That Space Marines are only male reflects the cultural background in which they were originally created in Britain during the early 80´s (more specifically as a power fantasy for male teenagers, even doe with a satitic sense that has been lost greatly since). Obviously the fictional pseudo science involve in the "only male superhumans" is going to be at odds with actual science.

As a cultural product they cannot be inclusive Space Marines are no venue for representation, neither of women or trans people. If you have progressive views you should better ask for them to regain their satiric nature rather than the more "serious" tone of the last years.

In this sense Paul Verhoeven adaptation of "Starship troopers" is genius even doe the Argentinian charecters are depicted by WASP´s actors. Introducing Trans, Gay and Racialized actors in a selfrightcheus and "serious" adaptation of the militaristic and reactionary novel would have been lame (at best).

If you are complaining that a land mine with the shape of a toy is not manufactured with enviromental friendly materials perhaps you are missing the point.

Hecaton wrote:

 Tyran wrote:
And the truth is that Astartes are so hilariously enhanced that biological gender differences wouldn't really matter. Astartes are recruited when they are still kids, before puberty starts giving male children a physical edge, and then proceed to add modification after modification. A female recruit? it should be trivial to modify her body through hormone therapy and surgical enhancements, it would be a drop in the ocean that is the extensive Astartes modifications.

If the process involves upregulation of genes that are on the y chromosome, then it wouldn't work on female humans.

Even then genes can be modified, and 40k has genetic engineering far beyond anything modern civilization is capable of producing. It should be a trivial issue.
But anyways, the point is that the "boys only Marines" has nothing to do with the biological differences between genders, but rather is a product of a corporate directive.

Any in-universe justification of it is nothing but executive meddling, which is apparently common according to BL writers.

Hecaton wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
"Due to the genetic and hormonal conditioning, Space Marines always emerge from the process as, to all intents and purposes, biologically male."

That would probably be fine for people like the writer of the article in the OP, but not for the Female Marines crowd, and it's the latter that's here in this thread.

One problem at a time.

Karol wrote:

ERJAK 805786 11391637 wrote:
Dealing with your point, that's stupid. We literally just had someone say 'all trans people are dangerously mentally ill' on the previous page, how do you deal with that point? Politely disagree? Treat it like it's just another asinine wargaming screed and not something that gets people literally killed all over the world?

Rule #1 cannot deal with topics like this because it ends up treating actual, dangerous hate speech as being significantly worse than calling someone a poo-poo head.

You're more or less siding with bigotry on this one.

How is that not a fact though? They have higher rates of sucides, higher rates of other behavioral disorders etc. With sucidide rates that high or ending outside of society how is it not dangerous. If someone has a heart defect that kills people before they reach 25years of age, it can be called dangerous. Diabetes is dangerous etc.

Wait....have you ever thought of um, WHY suicide rates might be higher amongst trans people? I'll give you a hint, it has nothing to do with being trans, and everything to do with people being horrible to them. When your family kicks you out for being "different" or "not normal", and you are told your entire life that you are worth less than someone else, and that you don't matter and that your identity is fake, of course this will happen.

It reminds me of that Onion article that read something like "local trans woman would rather feel safe than brave".

Karol wrote:

But if you try to revert it doesn't it end up like scouting in the US, where boy scouts had to close down

You are mistaken on this. They are not closed down.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
Sorry, but if you find that sentence as an attack on trans people you are unhinged and the last thing you should be worried about is board games. Meanwhile, the same article calls to"punch" fascists in the face but by reading the article as written the article is essentially stating that any disagreement on this topic is fascism.
So now we get this hilarious article that finds an imaginary call to violence against trans while actively calling for violence against anyone who disagrees.

Luckily i hardly ever watched any of their WAAC trash but ill make especially sure to stay clear from their name and brand now.

That's projection, I think.

Nowhere did I say the snippet was an attack on trans. I did say it wasn't a useful or helpful thing to place into a rulebook.

Right now you have the in group who feel attacked. Then you have the out group who also feels attacked. I can't tell the in group to stop feeling attacked, but the reality is that they are the ones who are safe. Some idle "punch nazis" threat on the internet pales in comparison to the very real violence suffered by the out groups.

An exact quote from one of your earlier posts in this thread “This isn't really about people playing with female marines. It's about legitimizing these dangerous fringe groups - intentionally or otherwise.” So your saying that space marines being male is “legitimizing dangerous fringe groups”. Sorry but this is the same mental gymnastics used by the goon hammer people to paint completely normal text as dangerous to trans individuals. Once again a group not being in every single space of a game is not dangerous or an attack. Just because I’ve never seen a story about a white salamander marine does not mean the GW writers are writing dangerous coded language against me.

Karol wrote:

ERJAK 805786 11391592 wrote:Referring to the other comment about 'private websites' why would you keep hate speech around? Why would you bother? Statement like Steelhead's 'I think trans people have a dangerous mental disorder' SHOULDN'T be engaged with. All that does is give free advertising for vile ideas. If you get someone who spews hate speech on your platform, the CORRECT response is to just ban them off and be done with it.

How isn't it dangerous if they have so much higher rates to suffer from addiction, sucide, be draged in to sex work etc.

Have you considered WHY we're more likely to be pushed into those situations? Hint: it's not our biology or mental stability that causes it.

It is not vile it is just stating the horrible truth.

No, it's stating from a position of ignorance, and acts to dehumanise us. It's fething vile language, and it's exactly the kind of stuff that I'm saying is wrong.

We're bloody PEOPLE. Stop trying to call us "dangerous" or "mentally unwell".

steelhead177th wrote:this topic is ludicrous and meant to stir up trouble so a few can feel moral superior to those that don't follow their non-standard views, while exploting a tiny percentage of the human population with an extreme and harmful mental disorder.

Feth you. I'm a human being. I'm not extreme. I'm not harming anyone. And of the mental disorders I do have, they're unrelated to my gender.

steelhead177th wrote:and ERJAK, i said harmful not dangerous. try reading the comment correctly and stop putting words in my mouth.

I don't fething care. I'm not harmful to anyone.

Very disappointing and bad form.

Coming from the person who called me "harmful and extreme"? Go feth yourself, you don't know the meaning of bad form.

Manchu wrote:This is complicated topic but Rule One still applies. Good pointer: Deal with the points people make without ad hominem. Thank you!

Mods, you can't ask people to use Rule One when there are users here who are calling myself, and people like me, "harmful" or "dangerous" or "unwell" based on who I am.

If people can do that with impunity, Rule One is either selective, or non existent.

I'm a human bloody being, and I don't appreciate being called a "fetishist", "dangerous", "harmful", "extreme" or any of the other gak being slung around here.

ERJAK wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
This is complicated topic but Rule One still applies. Good pointer: Deal with the points people make without ad hominem. Thank you!

Dealing with your point, that's stupid. We literally just had someone say 'all trans people are dangerously mentally ill' on the previous page, how do you deal with that point? Politely disagree? Treat it like it's just another asinine wargaming screed and not something that gets people literally killed all over the world?

Rule #1 cannot deal with topics like this because it ends up treating actual, dangerous hate speech as being significantly worse than calling someone a poo-poo head.

You're more or less siding with bigotry on this one.

Agreed. There's nothing to "agree/disagree" or "discuss" about users calling me "extremely and harmfully mentally ill".

TheBestBucketHead wrote:Did he say that they're dangerously mental ill or did he say that it is a harmful mental disorder, considering their extremely high suicide rates, and the fact that they consider top surgery a life saving surgery due to this? I feel there's an important distinction.

In the nicest way, have you considered WHY we have such high suicide rates? Hint - it's not to do with our own heads.

Hecaton wrote:I reject that idea because it's anti-art and anti-expression.

You wouldn't know anti-art and anti-expression if it hit you over the head with a urinal that had Dada graffitied on it.

The world is typically more dangerous for males than for non-males.

Oh, you're being serious?

Sweet jesus.

Yeah, a lot of it seems pretty fetish-y.

The only person who seems to be putting a fetish into it is you. Do you have something you want to tell us?

Karol wrote:How is that not a fact though? They have higher rates of sucides, higher rates of other behavioral disorders etc. With sucidide rates that high or ending outside of society how is it not dangerous. If someone has a heart defect that kills people before they reach 25years of age, it can be called dangerous. Diabetes is dangerous etc.

Yet again, has anyone actually considered WHY we have such a high suicide rate? And that MAYBE, it isn't to do with us?

Lord Damocles wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
As a trans person, I also find the aforementioned "biological male" mention grim, and I'm one of the signatures on the letter highlighting it's issues. Do I think GW is transphobic? No. I think they used a term which has negative connotations due to it's use as a transphobic dogwhistle.

GW didn't use the term 'biological male' though...

Quote "...hormonal and biological make-up of the human male...".

Don't be obtuse just because they didn't spell it out in block capitals and put a little footnote on it saying "HEY BIGOTS USE THIS TO TARGET TRANS FOLK!!"

Grimskul wrote:They've already started with trying to silence people by labelling people as bigots or transphobes for disagreeing and now that has failed they're showing their hand from how they're basically begging for the mods to censor or ban people they disagree with, matching exactly the kind of mindset that was already seen in the Goonhammer comments early on.

Yeah - you're goddamn right I disagree with people calling me mentally ill or dangerous or harmful or extreme or a fetishist. You're goddamn right I disagree with people saying that the fething gak that I have to put up with from people who can't respect my *humanity* isn't real. You're goddamn right that I expect the mods to stick to their own Rule One and do something about it.

They don't want discourse, they just want people to regurgitate their only talking points and shout down everyone else that doesn't share their opinion.

What discourse is there to have when people are calling me "mentally ill".

kurhanik wrote:Wait....have you ever thought of um, WHY suicide rates might be higher amongst trans people? I'll give you a hint, it has nothing to do with being trans, and everything to do with people being horrible to them. When your family kicks you out for being "different" or "not normal", and you are told your entire life that you are worth less than someone else, and that you don't matter and that your identity is fake, of course this will happen.

Finally. Someone gets it. Thank you.

There is an esoteric element to this whole debate that makes it very hard to follow.

This paragraph though

Let’s get the science out of the way: There is no specific hormonal or biological make-up of a human male. Sex is basically a pair of giant buckets of characteristics we lump people into. There is no single specific indicator of sex, there are hundreds, and almost every human who has ever existed is a jumbled mix of them. If you have enough traits of one kind we crudely decide you are “male”. Enough of another and we go for “female”. Not enough of either for us to make a snap judgment on little evidence? Well those people are intersex and they get “fixed”.

Shouldn't every instance of the term sex be replaced with gender in this paragraph? I thought that sex was a rock solid scientific category consisting of male and female. Whereas gender was divided into man and woman and was at least to some extent a social construct?

As someone who is in the category of trans (non-binary she/they), I don't know. I'm not going to say GW is transphobic in the sense that they actively campaign against trans people existing. It's not bigotry per se, but rather a bit ignorant of the science to write that maleness is something solely hormonal.

Furthermore, masculinity - the societal traits associated with maleness - is something that has changed radically in terms of societal views since the dawn of modern living. We no longer expect boys and men to do heroic or violent deeds as a matter of course, as the post-Roman societies of Europe and those Feral Worlds Astartes chapters draw from in 40k did. And we shouldn't. Rather, men's lives in the West and large portions of the Eurasian east center around their labor - their role as the "family breadwinner" or "man of the house".

In addition, geneseed is not solely hard-scientific genetic modification even if we allow that it only affects assigned-male-at-birth people for those reasons. It's warp-touched, as it comes from the Primarchs, who are themselves creatures of the Warp. The Warp is a realm where narrative overwrites physical laws. And Geneseed clearly has some import in the Warp, as we see it time and time again used to curry favor with the Chaos Gods, as with Erebus sacrificing geneseed from Istvaan III in Know No Fear.

To tie this all together, I think if GW wanted to, they could eliminate the passage and lose little lore-wise. It very well could be that Geneseed is tied to those masculine narratives of conquest and heroism. I'm not asking for female Space Marines, as that's a whole 'nother can of worms.

murphs wrote:
There is an esoteric element to this whole debate that makes it very hard to follow. I thought that sex was a rock solid scientific category consisting of male and female.

Then you thought wrong.

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Signed.

I don't think there is any malice or intentional bigotry on GW's part, they're just thoughtlessly copy-pasting the same old text (though the wording seems to be slightly updated,) but it has unfortunate implications nevertheless, and they should aim to do better.

And like this forum constantly shows, there is a lot of toxicity and bigotry in this hobby, so GW should try to consciously avoid to even accidentally legitimising any of it.

 Crimson wrote:
Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Signed.

I don't think there is any malice or intentional bigotry on GW's part, they're just thoughtlessly copy-pasting the same old text (though the wording seems to be slightly updated,) but it has unfortunate implications nevertheless, and they should aim to do better.

And like this forum constantly shows, there is a lot of toxicity and bigotry in this hobby, so GW should try to consciously avoid to even accidentally legitimising any of it.

I'm asking in good faith here to better understand the position: in your opinion, what are some unfortunate implications in this case?

 Tyran wrote:
Men are on average physically stronger, that is a biological fact.

But that is only somewhat relevant in military, which does recruit women

Yes, almost exclusively for non-combat roles which vastly outnumber combat roles. The military needs air traffic controllers, nurses, sonar technicians, warehouse managers, and the list goes on. The military does not recruit women for combat roles. When women were allowed to join combat units in the USMC, they repeatedly failed PT tests required to remain in those combat units, so the standards were lowered for everyone because "equality". That is why I wouldn't expect to see female space marines even if it was possible, because air traffic controllers and warehouse managers aren't really represented in a tabletop wargame and 99.999999% of women in the military do those roles rather than toting a 240 to raids on Tban strongholds.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

murphs wrote:
There is an esoteric element to this whole debate that makes it very hard to follow. I thought that sex was a rock solid scientific category consisting of male and female.

Then you thought wrong.

Right so has the definition of sex changed to be the same as gender?

Hecaton wrote:

If the process involves upregulation of genes that are on the y chromosome, then it wouldn't work on female humans.

It's 2022, now anyone can have a Y chromosome just by declaring it. Didn't you get the memo?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

murphs wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

murphs wrote:
There is an esoteric element to this whole debate that makes it very hard to follow. I thought that sex was a rock solid scientific category consisting of male and female.

Then you thought wrong.

Right so has the definition of sex changed to be the same as gender?

Do you actually think these people understand the distinction beyond screeching at people on the internet about how gender is a fluid concept?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Vatsetis wrote:
That Space Marines are only male reflects the cultural background in which they were originally created in Britain during the early 80´s (more specifically as a power fantasy for male teenagers, even doe with a satitic sense that has been lost greatly since). Obviously the fictional pseudo science involve in the "only male superhumans" is going to be at odds with actual science.

It very closely reflects the real world proportion of women in combat roles in any military around the world. You might as well be mad about the lack of straight male hairdressers or fashion experts in the media.

why are you lot once again following people that attempt to take a trench and turn it into the alpine range?

An all male biological army is not an issue. An all female fanatical nun convent of a absurdly xenophobic religion is not a problem, an caste society with a clear hierarchical head of "faith" is not problematic either. It is the lore to a dystopian galaxy fethed beyond anything.

It's clearly not something somone, realistcally anyone, should feel the need to aspire too, the only thing that should matter for us as a community of hobbiest is the fun on the table and around the hobby. And that includes not being an donkey-cave to your opposing player, even if you may not like their politics or philosophy or looks.

sheesh

Calling it now, here is where the thread goes off its rails and degenerates into people screeching at each other.

 Togusa wrote:
Calling it now, here is where the thread goes off its rails and degenerates into people screeching at each other.

I think you're a bit late for that, sadly.

 Togusa wrote:
Calling it now, here is where the thread goes off its rails and degenerates into people screeching at each other.

Bro that happened pages ago. Been here long enough to know that this was gonna be a gak show from the moment it started.
The sooner people realize that its just a make believe game and stop trying to apply real world things to it the better. Im just here to push plastic dolls around a table.

Just sit back and enjoy the show.

Well, we have left this open for a while and now it is time to lock things up. Thanks for all those who participated in good faith.