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.

 Irkjoe wrote:
There can't be any women because they're a brotherhood of warrior monks who live in a monastery, while the female counterpart to this are nuns in a convent otherwise known as the sisters of battle. This is obvious and completely self evident; the calls for female marines boil down to attempts to take political novelties invented barely five minutes ago and pretend it was always like that, forcing them into everything, or because you think it's cool. At least one side is honest.

Who says this is political? It’s only political because people keep trying to make it such.

 Irkjoe wrote:
There can't be any women because they're a brotherhood of warrior monks who live in a monastery, while the female counterpart to this are nuns in a convent otherwise known as the sisters of battle. This is obvious and completely self evident; the calls for female marines boil down to attempts to take political novelties invented barely five minutes ago and pretend it was always like that, forcing them into everything, or because you think it's cool. At least one side is honest.

If you're going to troll with a hyperbolic version of the side you dislike you need to make it more subtle. This is not provocative, it's just annoying.

Edit: wait, looking at your post history it looks like you're actually trying to be serious here. I don't think you have any credibility in this discussion when you post sexist nonsense like this:

I'm saying that the miniature hobby is overwhelmingly for men and that the situation where women can just wander into a group of men and game with them like a man is impossible. Women are more concerned with the social aspect while power gamer Timmy and old Gregor want to get granular about points, statistics, and why female marines break the fluff; they don't want to be bothered with her and she's repulsed by their behavior. Imagine if Timmy wanted to drink with the wine mums and watch american beauty, ha!

Have a vacation.

nope not only does it not fit the lore of the imperium's technology moving backwards. but makes zero sense logically. why when your greatest resource is manpower would you pick a weaker, less athletic, less aggressive and smaller frame to put resources into to make your super soldier. its the same reason you don't see women in the NFL/ NHL/NBA ect. despite it being an advertisers wet dream with like 4 billion women on earth you would be lucky if you could find a single one capable of being a bench warmer.

So please just stop posting this terrible idea every couple months and take these trash ideas to Disney's star wars

Asmodios wrote:
nope not only does it not fit the lore of the imperium's technology moving backwards. but makes zero sense logically. why when your greatest resource is manpower would you pick a weaker, less athletic, less aggressive and smaller frame to put resources into to make your super soldier. its the same reason you don't see women in the NFL/ NHL/NBA ect. despite it being an advertisers wet dream with like 4 billion women on earth you would be lucky if you could find a single one capable of being a bench warmer.

So please just stop posting this terrible idea every couple months and take these trash ideas to Disney's star wars

They’re ideas worth discussing, whether or not you think they are terrible ideas others think differently.

Asmodios wrote:
nope not only does it not fit the lore of the imperium's technology moving backwards.

Neither do primaris marines but here we are. GW has clearly retconned things so that the Imperium's technology is now progressing.

but makes zero sense logically. why when your greatest resource is manpower would you pick a weaker, less athletic, less aggressive and smaller frame to put resources into to make your super soldier. its the same reason you don't see women in the NFL/ NHL/NBA ect. despite it being an advertisers wet dream with like 4 billion women on earth you would be lucky if you could find a single one capable of being a bench warmer.

Because the whole point of power armor is that the strength/speed/etc of the user are irrelevant. If the user is physically weaker you turn up the gain on the servos to compensate. The comparison to a space marine isn't an NFL player, it's a Madden player sitting on their couch pressing buttons with all of the newbie assist cheats turned on.

But really the realism argument is kind of silly when space marines are running into melee with chainsaw swords, guard have tanks with zero ground clearance and a gun that can't be fired without cutting the commander in half, and literal demons from hell warp the laws of physics so thoroughly that guns are less effective against them than punching them to death with your bare hands because melee combat involves more emotions. Oh, and the entire Imperium is based around a 10,000 year old golden corpse that eats the souls of thousands of space wizards per day so it can scream really loudly and make a giant psychic beacon for the entire galaxy to navigate by as they travel through hell.

Asmodios wrote:
nope not only does it not fit the lore of the imperium's technology moving backwards. but makes zero sense logically. why when your greatest resource is manpower would you pick a weaker, less athletic, less aggressive and smaller frame to put resources into to make your super soldier. its the same reason you don't see women in the NFL/ NHL/NBA ect. despite it being an advertisers wet dream with like 4 billion women on earth you would be lucky if you could find a single one capable of being a bench warmer.

So please just stop posting this terrible idea every couple months and take these trash ideas to Disney's star wars

As much as I dislike the idea of lore being changed, this wouldn't be an issue. The process starts right around when puberty does and before puberty men and women aren't all that different in terms of build or athletic ability. You might need girls who have dreams of becoming marines taking puberty blockers while waiting for their shot at the trials, but that shouldn't be an issue. Then, once the process starts the body is dominated by other processes and the limited differences in base hormone levels are unlikely to matter; if they do doubtless female reproductive organs could be removed and testes implanted for whatever length of time their presence might matter for.

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
nope not only does it not fit the lore of the imperium's technology moving backwards. but makes zero sense logically. why when your greatest resource is manpower would you pick a weaker, less athletic, less aggressive and smaller frame to put resources into to make your super soldier. its the same reason you don't see women in the NFL/ NHL/NBA ect. despite it being an advertisers wet dream with like 4 billion women on earth you would be lucky if you could find a single one capable of being a bench warmer.

So please just stop posting this terrible idea every couple months and take these trash ideas to Disney's star wars

They’re ideas worth discussing, whether or not you think they are terrible ideas others think differently.

No they aren't worth discussing... its diversity for the sake of diversity which is just trash and adds nothing to a setting. you end up in one swift blow making space marines and sisters of battle less unique. stop trying to shove modern day politics into a space dystopia

Asmodios wrote:

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
nope not only does it not fit the lore of the imperium's technology moving backwards. but makes zero sense logically. why when your greatest resource is manpower would you pick a weaker, less athletic, less aggressive and smaller frame to put resources into to make your super soldier. its the same reason you don't see women in the NFL/ NHL/NBA ect. despite it being an advertisers wet dream with like 4 billion women on earth you would be lucky if you could find a single one capable of being a bench warmer.

So please just stop posting this terrible idea every couple months and take these trash ideas to Disney's star wars

They’re ideas worth discussing, whether or not you think they are terrible ideas others think differently.

No they aren't worth discussing... its diversity for the sake of diversity which is just trash and adds nothing to a setting. you end up in one swift blow making space marines and sisters of battle less unique. stop trying to shove modern day politics into a space dystopia

Is it really so hard to accept that people might want female marines because it sounds like an interesting idea and not some deep-seated conspiracy to undermine democracy?

Lammia wrote:
Sisters are normal humans. Nutty ones, but standard and not bio-enhanced people.

The only change is people would be able to say 'This model was afab and called Garr. They had a tough life that made their trials to become a fully fledged battle brother seem easy. They were my favourite Tac. Marine to paint.' And for no one to reply 'but the lore...'

Yeah, that doesn't answer any of my questions. But then you're also quick to lie that those questions are about "the Lore" and not many to all aspects of the game. Those questions are about the lore. And balance. And collections/already owned models. And the inevitable human reaction to greener grass.

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:

Breton wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
I'm not going to refuse to play against a female space marine army, I wouldn't bat an eyelid and would happily have a chat about their story etc. But I don't think it needs writing into the core fluff.

You're better than I am then. I'd already be looking for an escape route because chances are too great they're one of two people - some sort of home brew special character with Magnus' psychics, Mortarian's combat prowess, and Guilliman's force multiplication all for the exorbitant price of 100 points OR someone who's going to call me a misogynist transphobe for not letting them win.

That’s a bit of a leap.

Because the Home Brew Mary Sue are built by strictly following the canon and codex? Or because we haven't already seen people who disagree about the Non-Transgender Male or Female marines called Transphobic, but get away with it because the MOD in here aligns with them more than the people being name called?

Asmodios wrote:
nope not only does it not fit the lore of the imperium's technology moving backwards. but makes zero sense logically. why when your greatest resource is manpower would you pick a weaker, less athletic, less aggressive and smaller frame to put resources into to make your super soldier. its the same reason you don't see women in the NFL/ NHL/NBA ect. despite it being an advertisers wet dream with like 4 billion women on earth you would be lucky if you could find a single one capable of being a bench warmer.

So please just stop posting this terrible idea every couple months and take these trash ideas to Disney's star wars

The blood angels turn scrawny dregs into giant adonis's, creating a physical transformation far beyond what you object to in a naturally athletic and healthy woman becoming a marine.

If blood angel geneseed can remake dregs, then remaking a woman is comparatively trivial.

 Adeptekon wrote:




I don't think the issue is whether or not to add an Amazons chapter (I'd be for it), but instead making the brotherhoods co-ed.

Different people will have different issues based on their individual perspective. Mine is a health of the game standpoint. I don't think Social Justice in a giant chess game requiring model railroad skills is either effective, or important. I think being able to call all the people who call Marines "boring" and "bloated" a misogynist because they hate Marines and Marines are now female would be fun, but also not good for the health of the game. Neither are female marines. The most obvious reason: Trickle down to Sisters players and armies has already stymied anyone who avoided answering those questions. Trickle down everywhere else will just be further iterations of issues. If Bellisarius Cawl figured out how to induct women, why can't Mad Doc Grotsnik figure out how to implant geneseed in Ghaz?

 Hellebore wrote:


The reason this doesn't make sense is the 55-80 genes that exist on the Y chromosome have very little effect.

Aside from the fact that fluff is entirely handwaving around MacGuffins, wouldn't the inert or nearly inert genes be the best place to work your magic?

Having cleaned out a bunch of unnecessary nonsense, we can give this thread one last chance to stay on track.

Keep it civil and on-topic, please.

Marines and sisters are not monks or nuns; monks and nuns are required to live in seclusion and never leave their cloisters. Marines are friars and sisters are religious sisters.

The most important thing is that they are all required to give up all earthly attachments by taking vows of poverty and chastity, so that most importantly they cannot have children,

Marines do not and cannot have children and do not or cannot have sexual partners. That is not at all a reason for marines to be sex segregated.

Aecus Decimus wrote:

HighLordRep: We need to talk about all these troops you have.
AdMinRep: The Adepta Sorortias! Glorious, aren't they! Devout followers. Expert fighters. True beacons of the Emperor's Grace.
HighLordRep: I distinctly remember saying-
AdMinRep: No men under arms, yes, we heard you. And, as you can see, we have none.
HighLordRep: Cool story bro, the exterminatus fleet will be there shortly to deal with your treason.

The whole thing is just silly from an in-universe point of view. Higher authority in a totalitarian dystopia isn't going to just shrug and say "well, guess you found a loophole", they're going to immediately crush their rivals for power and do it with extra brutality as a lesson to anyone else who might think about finding a clever loophole in the law.

For the same reasons as marines don’t need to be sex segregated, sisters are an ideal outcome for the the other lords of the imperium.

Vows of chastity and poverty do two things. One they make very elite and loyal troops because of having nothing to do but train all day. For the second, it makes them much harder to recruit than frateris templars were. It’s very likely that the Frateris Templars could be infinitely expanded by mass inducting existing guard regiments, mercenaries or PDFs, equipping them extravagantly, and lavishing rewards on both the leaders and the troops. The Temple Tendency that established the Ministorum was founded by a wealth obsessed Guard officer and Vandire was originally lord of the Administratum for taking control of both organizations, of course they were capable of expanding the Templars this way.

The religious vows of the sisters are essential to preventing them from mass recruiting new units or mass inducting units from other branches. Unlike marines they aren’t sterile so they benefit from sex segregation and of course if they were AMAB brothers, it would be much easier to join up but start a secret family on the side.

The other high lords definitely want their former rival to have a military. Almost every time in history that one country has defeated another, they put a friendly local faction in charge and secretly begin rearming the military. They make their defeated rival into a proxy and use it against the next enemy. The lords of all the other institutions definitely want the ecclesiarchy to have a small powerful military, for totally selfish reasons.

Aecus Decimus wrote:

The Imperium is based on the medieval church... its structures, various institutions and aesthetics; marines join monasteries, which is men only like the monks that they are based on. That's the whole point. Tech is irrelevant.

"The Imperium is based upon, among other things, the pop culture version of the medieval Catholic church" is not the same as "the Imperium must function exactly like the medieval Catholic church". 40k is not a history textbook.

PS: all that church stuff? That's a retcon. The original 40k setting drew much more inspiration from things like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_AD_(comics) and marines used to be condemned criminals sent to die usefully, not warrior monks. So if you're going to be outraged at the idea of retcons you can't simultaneously argue that marines must be monks.

Space Marines are described as "warrior monks" in the original Rogue Trader, iirc.

But also, a lot of the very early stuff was pulled as 40k found it's footing. Which is why the "UM Librarian was half Eldar" argument doesn't work. There are aspects of the lore that were dropped, and aspects of the lore that were built upon and reinforced. Space Marines as "warrior monks" is one of those that stuck, and stuck hard.

Aecus Decimus wrote:


"The Imperium is based upon, among other things, the pop culture version of the medieval Catholic church" is not the same as "the Imperium must function exactly like the medieval Catholic church". 40k is not a history textbook.

PS: all that church stuff? That's a retcon. The original 40k setting drew much more inspiration from things like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_AD_(comics) and marines used to be condemned criminals sent to die usefully, not warrior monks. So if you're going to be outraged at the idea of retcons you can't simultaneously argue that marines must be monks.

Monks and Nuns are men and woman respectively, by definition. And It's not a retcon, chapters have always had fortress monasteries and Marines were not always condemned criminals it says they were recruited from feral worlds some of which were hive criminals.

Insectum7

Any reference to anything in rogue trader is a non-argument it isn't 40K and has nothing to do with 40K it was a parody based on WHFB. 40K wasn't even set up in lore until 2nd edition and they spent 3rd and 4th ed actually setting the lore in stone so to speak. it stayed effectively unchanged for the next 25 years. until the Cawl/primaris thing that was a direct result of the chapter house lawsuit in the real world.

 Irkjoe wrote:
Monks and Nuns are men and woman respectively, by definition. And It's not a retcon, chapters have always had fortress monasteries and Marines were not always condemned criminals it says they were recruited from feral worlds some of which were hive criminals.

Once again, 40k is not a history book. Marines are not medieval Christian monks. "Warrior monks", "nuns with guns", etc, are shorthand descriptions for some of the concepts GW borrowed from but they are in no way absolute laws. That's why you have "monks" that spend most of their time on crusade outside their monastery, returning only briefly to re-arm for the next campaign, instead of being a cloistered religious order dedicated entirely to serving God within their monastery. You can't simultaneously argue that space marines must strictly follow the precedent of real-world monks and accept their departures from the concept when it's something you personally like to see.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:
But also, a lot of the very early stuff was pulled as 40k found it's footing. Which is why the "UM Librarian was half Eldar" argument doesn't work. There are aspects of the lore that were dropped, and aspects of the lore that were built upon and reinforced. Space Marines as "warrior monks" is one of those that stuck, and stuck hard.

How well the argument works depends on how hard your line against retcons is. If your line is "the fluff as it stands now is good and this proposed change would make it worse" then it's a fine argument. Half-eldar marines are no loss and you aren't trying to argue that all retcons are automatically bad. But if your line is that all retcons are bad and a retcon must be rejected purely because it is a retcon then yes, the half-eldar Ultramarine is a very strong counter to that argument. You can't argue against all retcons while simultaneously supporting the retcons that you personally like.

 Irkjoe wrote:
Monks and Nuns are men and woman respectively, by definition..

But not usually vampires. Or werewolves. Or ethereal wraiths with their heads on fire.

It's possible that GW are not adhering strictly to the historical inspiration from which some of their concepts are drawn.

 Irkjoe wrote:
There can't be any women because they're a brotherhood of warrior monks who live in a monastery, while the female counterpart to this are nuns in a convent otherwise known as the sisters of battle. This is obvious and completely self evident; the calls for female marines boil down to attempts to take political novelties invented barely five minutes ago and pretend it was always like that, forcing them into everything, or because you think it's cool. At least one side is honest.

Yeah, those political novelties or giving women equal rights and any representation in media.

Makes it pretty clear you'd like society to look like the Imperium, but even more repressive.

Aecus Decimus wrote:

Once again, 40k is not a history book. Marines are not medieval Christian monks. "Warrior monks", "nuns with guns", etc, are shorthand descriptions for some of the concepts GW borrowed from but they are in no way absolute laws. That's why you have "monks" that spend most of their time on crusade outside their monastery, returning only briefly to re-arm for the next campaign, instead of being a cloistered religious order dedicated entirely to serving God within their monastery. You can't simultaneously argue that space marines must strictly follow the precedent of real-world monks and accept their departures from the concept when it's something you personally like to see.

How well the argument works depends on how hard your line against retcons is. If your line is "the fluff as it stands now is good and this proposed change would make it worse" then it's a fine argument. Half-eldar marines are no loss and you aren't trying to argue that all retcons are automatically bad. But if your line is that all retcons are bad and a retcon must be rejected purely because it is a retcon then yes, the half-eldar Ultramarine is a very strong counter to that argument. You can't argue against all retcons while simultaneously supporting the retcons that you personally like.

They call themselves monks, are organized like monks, live dedicated to their religion like monks... are male monastics which are monks. They are explicitly space monks, in a brotherhood, and you are writing all of that off as shorthand to be ignored because anything can be whatever you want? Can men be "Sisters"? Where's the line? This is very silly.

None of this was ever retconned.

@Stratigo
Hyperbolic nonsense, you people are taking modern movements and retroactively inserting them into something written when they didn't exist and pretending it was always that way. And to top it off it's an oppressive theocratic empire.

 Irkjoe wrote:
They call themselves monks, are organized like monks, live dedicated to their religion like monks... are male monastics which are monks. They are explicitly space monks, in a brotherhood, and you are writing all of that off as shorthand to be ignored because anything can be whatever you want? Can men be "Sisters"? Where's the line? This is very silly.

Except they don't live like historical monks. Real-world monks were a cloistered religious order focused on service to God in their monastery, with limited interaction with the outside world. Marines are a crusading order dedicated to warfare against the enemies of the state, spending most of their time away from their monastery on distant battlefields and returning home only to rearm and prepare for the next campaign. You're willing to accept this major departure from what defines a real-world monk, why is gender any different?

None of this was ever retconned.

Yet. That doesn't mean that it can't be. Marines hadn't been retconned to have air superiority fighters until GW decided it was time to sell space marine aircraft kits and changed the fluff to permit them.

Aecus Decimus wrote:

 Irkjoe wrote:
They call themselves monks, are organized like monks, live dedicated to their religion like monks... are male monastics which are monks. They are explicitly space monks, in a brotherhood, and you are writing all of that off as shorthand to be ignored because anything can be whatever you want? Can men be "Sisters"? Where's the line? This is very silly.

Except they don't live like historical monks. Real-world monks were a cloistered religious order focused on service to God in their monastery, with limited interaction with the outside world. Marines are a crusading order dedicated to warfare against the enemies of the state, spending most of their time away from their monastery on distant battlefields and returning home only to rearm and prepare for the next campaign. You're willing to accept this major departure from what defines a real-world monk, why is gender any different?

The Catholic military orders of the Crusades will be shocked to hear this.

Breton wrote:
The Catholic military orders of the Crusades will be shocked to hear this.

Irrelevant. The popular concept of "monk" that defines the term is a dude in a robe sitting silently in a monastery copying bibles by hand.

If you want to pick out isolated exceptions to the rule here's some (as far as I can tell 100% sincere) female Christian monks: https://www.prayerfoundation.org/why_lady_monks.htm

Aecus Decimus wrote:

Breton wrote:
The Catholic military orders of the Crusades will be shocked to hear this.

Irrelevant.

Facts that dont support my unsupported claim are irrelevant. As is the fact that Multi-chapter SM Forces are called Crusade Fleets. That they participated in The Great Crusade to liberate the holy lands of the Imperium from oppressors like independence, and the control of "others".

 Irkjoe wrote:

They call themselves monks, are organized like monks, live dedicated to their religion like monks... are male monastics which are monks. They are explicitly space monks, in a brotherhood, and you are writing all of that off as shorthand to be ignored because anything can be whatever you want? Can men be "Sisters"? Where's the line? This is very silly.

None of this was ever retconned.

@Stratigo
Hyperbolic nonsense, you people are taking modern movements and retroactively inserting them into something written when they didn't exist and pretending it was always that way. And to top it off it's an oppressive theocratic empire.

And of course they are still using the words wrong. Cenobitic brothers who do works in the world live in a canonry, friary, or convent. Monasteries are for seclusion. The purpose of being sex segregated even in a friary which interacts with the secular world is to prevent the forming of personal attachments like parenthood, and marines are not capable of conceiving children.

 aphyon wrote:
Insectum7

Any reference to anything in rogue trader is a non-argument it isn't 40K and has nothing to do with 40K it was a parody based on WHFB. 40K wasn't even set up in lore until 2nd edition and they spent 3rd and 4th ed actually setting the lore in stone so to speak. it stayed effectively unchanged for the next 25 years. until the Cawl/primaris thing that was a direct result of the chapter house lawsuit in the real world.

Since you are very visible about playing old editions I did not expect this meme from you.

The legions, primarchs, the four god aligned traitors, and duel between the primarch Horus and the Emperor are from three years prior to second edition. Marines having t4 is from two years and three months prior to second edition, and the nineteen organs of the gene seed are from February of 1987, five months after the release of Rogue Trader. All of these things have bylines with the same person, Priestley, except for the legions which are from Jervis’s epic games. Rogue Trader is 40k, 40k is rogue trader. By the release of third edition this was all very firm, there was no firming needed.

Most relevant to the thread, all of classic/true 40k exists in stasis. First through third editions have never been able to reach out and stop the bad decisions GW made since then. Try as they might, GW can’t truly erase all the paper and PDF copies of the classic editions.

Aecus Decimus wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
But also, a lot of the very early stuff was pulled as 40k found it's footing. Which is why the "UM Librarian was half Eldar" argument doesn't work. There are aspects of the lore that were dropped, and aspects of the lore that were built upon and reinforced. Space Marines as "warrior monks" is one of those that stuck, and stuck hard.

How well the argument works depends on how hard your line against retcons is. If your line is "the fluff as it stands now is good and this proposed change would make it worse" then it's a fine argument. Half-eldar marines are no loss and you aren't trying to argue that all retcons are automatically bad. But if your line is that all retcons are bad and a retcon must be rejected purely because it is a retcon then yes, the half-eldar Ultramarine is a very strong counter to that argument. You can't argue against all retcons while simultaneously supporting the retcons that you personally like.

All you have to realize is that not all retcons have the same weight, and it does little good in pretending that they do in order to try and score a point.

Only an idiot would argue that retconning all-male Space Marines, and retconning a half-Eldar Librarian, have the same weight/inertia.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 aphyon wrote:
Insectum7

Any reference to anything in rogue trader is a non-argument it isn't 40K and has nothing to do with 40K it was a parody based on WHFB. 40K wasn't even set up in lore until 2nd edition and they spent 3rd and 4th ed actually setting the lore in stone so to speak. it stayed effectively unchanged for the next 25 years. until the Cawl/primaris thing that was a direct result of the chapter house lawsuit in the real world.

I wouldn't say RT wasn't 40k. Much that came into being then has stuck it out through the long haul. But yes, I do agree that there was a stabilization brought on in the years following it's introduction.

Breton wrote:
Facts that dont support my unsupported claim are irrelevant. As is the fact that Multi-chapter SM Forces are called Crusade Fleets. That they participated in The Great Crusade to liberate the holy lands of the Imperium from oppressors like independence, and the control of "others".

Crusading knights =/= monks.