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.
Insectum7 wrote: To the first: The comparison I would draw is that it would be unthinkable to segregate sports by race, but segregating the sexes in sport still seems like an appropriate measure to take in most cases.
To the second: I think when we're talking about fictional universes and fantasies, it's ok to draw lines here and there based on your target audiences or the point you're trying to make. Wakanda or Wonder Woman's Island of the Amazons come to mind. As does My Little Pony, for that matter.
The point of Wakanda not helping outsiders is made out to be a bad thing though. The whole plot of BP1 was that Wakanda had shut itself off from the world instead of using its position to be a world leader in combating poverty and starvation.
And the major theme behind the Amazons across the history of Wonder Woman is that in cutting themselves off from the world of man, they have become fearful and insular rather than championing equality and fairness.
I don't see how not allowing female SM makes a super strong point about how bad the Imperium is when we already have despotism, genocide, eternal war, poverty, starvation, slavery, and the casual brutality of people dying because a three was supposed to be a four on a spreadsheet made from human skin. It's not exactly vital to the founding pillars of "40k universe is bad mkay".
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/12/02 21:52:25
Right. If people feel deeply about this no-girls-allowed brotherhood, their army could still be like that even if some other people were allowed to play mixed-gender chapters.
Sledgehammer wrote: Space marines are a brotherhood and thus to add female space marines would completely destroy the relationship and culture that only a group of men can share together. The same can be said for the Sororitas.
And what sort of "relationship and culture" is that which ONLY men can have, and no-one else can? And what examples of that can be seen in the relationships and culture of Space Marines in 40k, which, as you say, could ONLY be expressed if those people identified as male?
Empirically, please.
The speech before Againcourt in Henry the Vth is a great example.
Spoiler:
What's he that wishes so?
My cousin, Westmoreland? No, my fair cousin;
If we are mark'd to die, we are enough
To do our country loss; and if to live,
The fewer men, the greater share of honour.
God's will! I pray thee, wish not one man more.
By Jove, I am not covetous for gold,
Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost;
It yearns me not if men my garments wear;
Such outward things dwell not in my desires.
But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive.
No, faith, my coz, wish not a man from England.
God's peace! I would not lose so great an honour
As one man more methinks would share from me
For the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more!
Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,
That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made,
And crowns for convoy put into his purse;
We would not die in that man's company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.
This day is call'd the feast of Crispian.
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when this day is nam'd,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say "To-morrow is Saint Crispian."
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars,
And say "These wounds I had on Crispin's day."
Old men forget; yet all shall be forgot,
But he'll remember, with advantages,
What feats he did that day. Then shall our names,
Familiar in his mouth as household words—
Harry the King, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester—
Be in their flowing cups freshly rememb'red.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be rememberèd—
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.
I don't see how that expresses feelings that can ONLY be held by someone who identifies as male.
Also of relevance might be this quote, also from Shakespeare (a playwright, not a military leader): "Full of sound and fury; Signifying nothing." (Macbeth, 5:5:27-28)
Have you ever been in a fraternal society? Have you ever been in a group of men? The dynamic is different and to claim otherwise is to deny the truth.
I'd say most of the possibly different dynamics you hint at would disappear if that group of "men" was completely asexual, brainwashed, religiously fanatic and raised in a society were apparently gender roles don’t really are a question. We're not talking about a group of male german drunkards on their way to Mallorca here.
Also, any study about that stuff can only tell us something about the current 20th/21st century state of affairs. Gender differences mostly are a result of culture, and we're talking about a world that's so far away from our culture that... well, the people that build the pyramids are far closer to us than anything 40000 years (or 28000 years) in the future.
Sledgehammer wrote: Continuing to claim there is no difference in male and female relations or preferences is madness. There is a plethora of studies that support this.
Mate, the first study you linked argued that there were more similarities than differences, and that the differences were likely the cause of external cultural contexts - ie, people behaving in a certain way because that's how their culture had raised them. That's not "inherent", and has no bearing at all on what a supersoldier in the year 40,000 pumped full of space steroids and hypno-indoctrination would behave like.
There are more similarities than differences, but those differences can be profound. You can deny it all you want, but there are differences and there is nothing wrong with having a faction that explores the themes of male friendships.
By all means put female heads on your space marines, nothing is stopping you.
Insectum7 wrote: To the first: The comparison I would draw is that it would be unthinkable to segregate sports by race, but segregating the sexes in sport still seems like an appropriate measure to take in most cases.
To the second: I think when we're talking about fictional universes and fantasies, it's ok to draw lines here and there based on your target audiences or the point you're trying to make. Wakanda or Wonder Woman's Island of the Amazons come to mind. As does My Little Pony, for that matter.
The point of Wakanda not helping outsiders is made out to be a bad thing though. The whole plot of BP1 was that Wakanda had shut itself off from the world instead of using its position to be a world leader in combating poverty and starvation.
And the major theme behind the Amazons across the history of Wonder Woman is that in cutting themselves off from the world of man, they have become fearful and insular rather than championing equality and fairness.
All of that is true.
To which I'll say I like my interpretation of the all male Marines as being a symbol of militant hyper-patriarchy which resulted in the most catastrophic cataclysm the Imperium ever witnessed, the Horus Heresy. The hyper-male power fantasy is great and all, but if that goes unchecked, viola! endless war and strife! Yaay!
[DCM]
Chief Deputy Sub Assistant Trainee Squig Handling Intern
But Marines aren’t men.
They’re Astartes. Mutilated, psychoindoctrinated super soldiers entirely removed from humanity, doomed form a young age to a violent death, either by the selection and conversion process, or ultimately in battle.
Astartes. Are. No. Longer. Human. They do not experience the human condition. They do not experience humanity.
And if you don’t believe women can be in a Brotherhood? Go look up the 1976 Eurovision Winners, Brotherhood of Man.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2024/12/02 21:59:54
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
Sledgehammer wrote: There are more similarities than differences, but those differences can be profound. You can deny it all you want, but there are differences and there is nothing wrong with having a faction that explores the themes of male friendships.
Yet you cannot actually name these differences.
By all means put female heads on your space marines, nothing is stopping you.
And if there were female marines, nothing would force you to put them in your army.
Sledgehammer wrote: Space marines are a brotherhood and thus to add female space marines would completely destroy the relationship and culture that only a group of men can share together. The same can be said for the Sororitas.
And what sort of "relationship and culture" is that which ONLY men can have, and no-one else can? And what examples of that can be seen in the relationships and culture of Space Marines in 40k, which, as you say, could ONLY be expressed if those people identified as male?
Empirically, please.
The speech before Againcourt in Henry the Vth is a great example.
Spoiler:
What's he that wishes so?
My cousin, Westmoreland? No, my fair cousin;
If we are mark'd to die, we are enough
To do our country loss; and if to live,
The fewer men, the greater share of honour.
God's will! I pray thee, wish not one man more.
By Jove, I am not covetous for gold,
Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost;
It yearns me not if men my garments wear;
Such outward things dwell not in my desires.
But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive.
No, faith, my coz, wish not a man from England.
God's peace! I would not lose so great an honour
As one man more methinks would share from me
For the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more!
Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,
That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made,
And crowns for convoy put into his purse;
We would not die in that man's company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.
This day is call'd the feast of Crispian.
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when this day is nam'd,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say "To-morrow is Saint Crispian."
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars,
And say "These wounds I had on Crispin's day."
Old men forget; yet all shall be forgot,
But he'll remember, with advantages,
What feats he did that day. Then shall our names,
Familiar in his mouth as household words—
Harry the King, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester—
Be in their flowing cups freshly rememb'red.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be rememberèd—
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.
I don't see how that expresses feelings that can ONLY be held by someone who identifies as male.
Also of relevance might be this quote, also from Shakespeare (a playwright, not a military leader): "Full of sound and fury; Signifying nothing." (Macbeth, 5:5:27-28)
Have you ever been in a fraternal society? Have you ever been in a group of men? The dynamic is different and to claim otherwise is to deny the truth.
I'd say most of the possibly different dynamics you hint at would disappear if that group of "men" was completely asexual, brainwashed, religiously fanatic and raised in a society were apparently gender roles don’t really are a question. We're not talking about a group of male german drunkards on their way to Mallorca here.
Also, any study about that stuff can only tell us something about the current 20th/21st century state of affairs. Gender differences mostly are a result of culture, and we're talking about a world that's so far away from our culture that... well, the people that build the pyramids are far closer to us than anything 40000 years (or 28000 years) in the future.
And yet space marines are not written as entirely unrelatable. Their brotherhood is what grounds them and allows the audience to empathize and relate with them. Female space marines change the dynamic, the theming, and the lore, when there are already other female factions and representation. I dont see the need. Different people are drawn to factions in different ways, and some like the brotherhood shared by the marines.
Insectum7 wrote: To the first: The comparison I would draw is that it would be unthinkable to segregate sports by race, but segregating the sexes in sport still seems like an appropriate measure to take in most cases.
To the second: I think when we're talking about fictional universes and fantasies, it's ok to draw lines here and there based on your target audiences or the point you're trying to make. Wakanda or Wonder Woman's Island of the Amazons come to mind. As does My Little Pony, for that matter.
The point of Wakanda not helping outsiders is made out to be a bad thing though. The whole plot of BP1 was that Wakanda had shut itself off from the world instead of using its position to be a world leader in combating poverty and starvation.
And the major theme behind the Amazons across the history of Wonder Woman is that in cutting themselves off from the world of man, they have become fearful and insular rather than championing equality and fairness.
All of that is true.
To which I'll say I like my interpretation of the all male Marines as being a symbol of militant hyper-patriarchy which resulted in the most catastrophic cataclysm the Imperium ever witnessed, the Horus Heresy. The hyper-male power fantasy is great and all, but if that goes unchecked, viola! endless war and strife! Yaay!
Would you still be able to enjoy your dudes being all of that if somewhere in another building someone else was enjoying mixed gender space marines? Or do your dudes only work as your dudes when other people are forbidden from making their dudes the dudes and dudettes they want?
I get why they work for you, but I wonder if you can’t have them your way while also allowing them to be open to other ways of being? Or is having them just so worth the cost of alienating many potential customers and players and keeping an ugly smudge on GW’s public perception and the reputation of the hobby as a whole? What form of compromise are you open to, if any?
Sledgehammer wrote: There are more similarities than differences, but those differences can be profound. You can deny it all you want, but there are differences and there is nothing wrong with having a faction that explores the themes of male friendships.
Yet you cannot actually name these differences.
By all means put female heads on your space marines, nothing is stopping you.
And if there were female marines, nothing would force you to put them in your army.
But more importantly it does change how EVERYONE relates to the army and identifies with them. That is ultimately why I play my army and am drawn to them.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/12/02 22:07:01
Crimson wrote: Right. If people feel deeply about this no-girls-allowed brotherhood, their army could still be like that even if some other people were allowed to play mixed-gender chapters.
It seems obvious, but the same can be said in the reverse? Nobody is stopping you from making and playing with your female Marines. This is just circular.
[DCM]
Chief Deputy Sub Assistant Trainee Squig Handling Intern
How?
How does it change? How does representation change the appeal to the majority?
You may recognise this question from earlier. Where you didn’t offer an actual answer, just unsubstantiated guff about how men and women can’t bond like men can.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
Crimson wrote: Right. If people feel deeply about this no-girls-allowed brotherhood, their army could still be like that even if some other people were allowed to play mixed-gender chapters.
It seems obvious, but the same can be said in the reverse? Nobody is stopping you from making and playing with your female Marines. This is just circular.
This is not true, and I believe you know it isn’t. There are lots of toxic gatekeepers in the hobby, and many online groups—the primary social outlet for lots of hobbyists—outright delete or ban posts showing female space marines. Until GW officially states FSM are a thing, anyone from the mere lore stickler to the wehrebooist chud is out to ruin every FSM player’s day.
Crimson wrote: Right. If people feel deeply about this no-girls-allowed brotherhood, their army could still be like that even if some other people were allowed to play mixed-gender chapters.
It seems obvious, but the same can be said in the reverse? Nobody is stopping you from making and playing with your female Marines. This is just circular.
Sure. Technically true. But I would like GW to stop giving the cover of "but my lore" for people who get hostile whenever people post pictures of female marines or even mention them.
Sledgehammer wrote:You can deny it all you want, but there are differences and there is nothing wrong with having a faction that explores the themes of male friendships.
In what way do Space Marines "explore" those themes? Can you define those themes, in such a way that is not, and could not, be shared with the presence of women or non-binary people in them?
And, like I've repeated - can you define "Brotherhood" and "Sisterhood" in mutually exclusive ways, without referring to the genders of the people who perform those relationships? Because your refusal to do so indicates that you can't.
By all means put female heads on your space marines, nothing is stopping you.
Already ahead of you there, my Chapter includes Astartes of a plurality of genders, all bound by the same close relationship, the same one that binds all Chapters.
Sledgehammer wrote:
Sgt. Cortez wrote: Also, any study about that stuff can only tell us something about the current 20th/21st century state of affairs. Gender differences mostly are a result of culture, and we're talking about a world that's so far away from our culture that... well, the people that build the pyramids are far closer to us than anything 40000 years (or 28000 years) in the future.
And yet space marines are not written as entirely unrelatable. Their brotherhood is what grounds them and allows the audience to empathize and relate with them. Female space marines change the dynamic, the theming, and the lore, when there are already other female factions and representation. I dont see the need. Different people are drawn to factions in different ways, and some like the brotherhood shared by the marines.
So, men should be able to relate to the inhuman, hypno-indoctrinated super soldier, but not women? Why?
Should women be put off from playing/enjoying Space Marines, according to you?
(And that's not getting into if we even *should* be empathising/relating with Space Marines!)
Sledgehammer wrote: There are more similarities than differences, but those differences can be profound. You can deny it all you want, but there are differences and there is nothing wrong with having a faction that explores the themes of male friendships.
Yet you cannot actually name these differences.
By all means put female heads on your space marines, nothing is stopping you.
And if there were female marines, nothing would force you to put them in your army.
But more importantly it does change how EVERYONE relates to the army and identifies with them. That is ultimately why I play my army and am drawn to them.
So, you would only play Space Marines if, not just you, but *everyone else* wasn't supposed to have women's heads on them?
Crimson wrote: Right. If people feel deeply about this no-girls-allowed brotherhood, their army could still be like that even if some other people were allowed to play mixed-gender chapters.
It seems obvious, but the same can be said in the reverse? Nobody is stopping you from making and playing with your female Marines. This is just circular.
Well, except for the cries of "BUT THAT'S NOT CANON".
And you can put as much or as little heed into that as you like, but let's not argue like that isn't used to browbeat or harass people. Plus, I doubt you'd see anyone saying "nuh uh, you've GOT to include some women in your Space Marines, that's the rules!"
One side is saying "hey, let's open up the options here for what people want": the other is saying "no, you're not supposed to do things that way, there's only one way to do this".
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2024/12/02 22:15:51
How does it change? How does representation change the appeal to the majority?
You may recognise this question from earlier. Where you didn’t offer an actual answer, just unsubstantiated guff about how men and women can’t bond like men can.
Our life experiences and perceptions are obviously different. However a change like that will inherently change how people interact and perceive their army whether they want female space marines or not.
Yup, I wouldn't play Sororitas if they started including mr's of battle. Their theme is what makes them enjoyable.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/12/02 22:20:33
How does it change? How does representation change the appeal to the majority?
You may recognise this question from earlier. Where you didn’t offer an actual answer, just unsubstantiated guff about how men and women can’t bond like men can.
Maybe substantiating it would be awkward. It might involve ruining a biscuit or something.
How does it change? How does representation change the appeal to the majority?
You may recognise this question from earlier. Where you didn’t offer an actual answer, just unsubstantiated guff about how men and women can’t bond like men can.
Our life experiences and perceptions are obviously different. However a change like that will inherently change how people interact and perceive their army whether they want female space marines or not.
No. That’s restating the allegation. It is not explaining nor demonstrating such an impact.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: You may recognise this question from earlier. Where you didn’t offer an actual answer, just unsubstantiated guff about how men and women can’t bond like men can.
Our life experiences and perceptions are obviously different.
Gee! Almost like your argument that "men and women are totally different, there's no way you can have the same friendships and relationships between them" wasn't really all that factual, and was just your own experience of that.
How does it change? How does representation change the appeal to the majority?
You may recognise this question from earlier. Where you didn’t offer an actual answer, just unsubstantiated guff about how men and women can’t bond like men can.
Our life experiences and perceptions are obviously different. However a change like that will inherently change how people interact and perceive their army whether they want female space marines or not.
No. That’s restating the allegation. It is not explaining nor demonstrating such an impact.
There are female factions and intersex factions. Why don't you play them instead?
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: You may recognise this question from earlier. Where you didn’t offer an actual answer, just unsubstantiated guff about how men and women can’t bond like men can.
Our life experiences and perceptions are obviously different.
Gee! Almost like your argument that "men and women are totally different, there's no way you can have the same friendships and relationships between them" wasn't really all that factual, and was just your own experience of that.
You obviously didn't understand. Men and women can be friends, but those friendships are different and its well documented.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2024/12/02 22:23:50
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: You may recognise this question from earlier. Where you didn’t offer an actual answer, just unsubstantiated guff about how men and women can’t bond like men can.
Our life experiences and perceptions are obviously different.
Gee! Almost like your argument that "men and women are totally different, there's no way you can have the same friendships and relationships between them" wasn't really all that factual, and was just your own experience of that.
You obviously didn't understand. Men and women can be friends, but those friendships are different and its well documented.
Use your words. Explain HOW they're different.
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: You may recognise this question from earlier. Where you didn’t offer an actual answer, just unsubstantiated guff about how men and women can’t bond like men can.
Our life experiences and perceptions are obviously different.
Gee! Almost like your argument that "men and women are totally different, there's no way you can have the same friendships and relationships between them" wasn't really all that factual, and was just your own experience of that.
You obviously didn't understand. Men and women can be friends, but those friendships are different and its well documented.
Sledgehammer wrote: There are female factions and intersex factions. Why don't you play them instead?
And that’s dodging the question entirely. Stick to the point in hand.
The point in hand is still “how does representation impact the appeal to the majority”
Because space marine players have kind of already signed on to space marines...
40k has representation and the women in the Sororitas and the guard are just as badass. You don't need to change an entire faction and how all of the currently invested players interact with them in that pursuit because it already exists in the setting.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/12/02 22:38:54
Insectum7 wrote: To the first: The comparison I would draw is that it would be unthinkable to segregate sports by race, but segregating the sexes in sport still seems like an appropriate measure to take in most cases.
To the second: I think when we're talking about fictional universes and fantasies, it's ok to draw lines here and there based on your target audiences or the point you're trying to make. Wakanda or Wonder Woman's Island of the Amazons come to mind. As does My Little Pony, for that matter.
The point of Wakanda not helping outsiders is made out to be a bad thing though. The whole plot of BP1 was that Wakanda had shut itself off from the world instead of using its position to be a world leader in combating poverty and starvation.
And the major theme behind the Amazons across the history of Wonder Woman is that in cutting themselves off from the world of man, they have become fearful and insular rather than championing equality and fairness.
All of that is true.
To which I'll say I like my interpretation of the all male Marines as being a symbol of militant hyper-patriarchy which resulted in the most catastrophic cataclysm the Imperium ever witnessed, the Horus Heresy. The hyper-male power fantasy is great and all, but if that goes unchecked, viola! endless war and strife! Yaay!
Would you still be able to enjoy your dudes being all of that if somewhere in another building someone else was enjoying mixed gender space marines? Or do your dudes only work as your dudes when other people are forbidden from making their dudes the dudes and dudettes they want?
I get why they work for you, but I wonder if you can’t have them your way while also allowing them to be open to other ways of being? Or is having them just so worth the cost of alienating many potential customers and players and keeping an ugly smudge on GW’s public perception and the reputation of the hobby as a whole? What form of compromise are you open to, if any?
I'm not sure how much of it is about my personal enjoyment of my army. My faction already died, being sent to Legends in the wake of the atrocious Primaris takeover. But on a conceptual level, I just think it's ok for some products to be aimed at boys while other products are aimed at girls. Nature or nurture, these are different viewpoints that exist and it should be possible for any form of expression to cater to either or both.
I should also mention that many years ago (roundabouts the introduction of Primaris) I was more on the pro-FSM side of things. But having watched the dialogue around this type of issue in 40k, other franchises, and within the broader culture, I switched sides and have become pleased that Space Marines have been a holdout, simply because of some of the numerous double standards that seemed to show up. Interestingly, it almost seems like having the all male faction is the more punk/transgressive thing these days. I grew up in the 90's. I appreciate a little "edge". Back in the day it was the "satanic panic". Now I guess it's "40k is going to make you a mysogynist."
I accept that it will likely change at some point. Entertainingly it will probably be because GW, like the Imperium, is callous in is chase for its tithe.
Side note, I also think that many of these conversations are held within a western context, and that it helps to acknowledge 40k is a global franchise that caters (or attempts to cater) to people who will resonate with concepts or themes quite differently.
Crimson wrote: Right. If people feel deeply about this no-girls-allowed brotherhood, their army could still be like that even if some other people were allowed to play mixed-gender chapters.
It seems obvious, but the same can be said in the reverse? Nobody is stopping you from making and playing with your female Marines. This is just circular.
This is not true, and I believe you know it isn’t. There are lots of toxic gatekeepers in the hobby, and many online groups—the primary social outlet for lots of hobbyists—outright delete or ban posts showing female space marines. Until GW officially states FSM are a thing, anyone from the mere lore stickler to the wehrebooist chud is out to ruin every FSM player’s day.
Then don't join those groups?
Fyi, despite being a "lore stickler" I'm not going to complain about your FSM models.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/12/02 22:43:33
Sledgehammer wrote: Because space marine players have kind of already signed on to space marines...
40k has representation and the women in the Sororitas and the guard are just as badass. You don't need to change an entire faction and how all of the currently invested players interact with them in that pursuit because it already exists in the setting.
I'm a Space Marine player, and I think Marines being all men is silly.
Your preference (Marines being all men) affects all Space Marine players, because male models are the only option available.
Mixed gender marines allow those who want them to use them, and those who want single gender armies can still do so simply by not using the models they don't want to use.
There is absolutely zero reason that the introduction of female space marines needs to affect 'all of the currently invested players' any more than they want it to.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: You may recognise this question from earlier. Where you didn’t offer an actual answer, just unsubstantiated guff about how men and women can’t bond like men can.
Our life experiences and perceptions are obviously different.
Gee! Almost like your argument that "men and women are totally different, there's no way you can have the same friendships and relationships between them" wasn't really all that factual, and was just your own experience of that.
Well said Smudge. This particular line of thinking really gets my goat. Essentialist gender stereotypes of how people should think and who they should be friends are toxic and need to go.
As a (cis, het) male whose closest friends are mostly women (including my closest friend), the external perception of ‘you must be sleeping with each other’ is incredibly irritating, but otherwise friendships are the same.
For marines the ‘sleeping with each other’ angle is clearly not a thing so sex/gender are pretty irrelevant to their interpersonal relationships
Sledgehammer wrote: Because space marine players have kind of already signed on to space marines...
40k has representation and the women in the Sororitas and the guard are just as badass. You don't need to change an entire faction and how all of the currently invested players interact with them in that pursuit because it already exists in the setting.
I'm a Space Marine player, and I think Marines being all men is silly.
Your preference (Marines being all men) affects all Space Marine players, because male models are the only option available.
Mixed gender marines allow those who want them to use them, and those who want single gender armies can still do so simply by not using the models they don't want to use.
There is absolutely zero reason that the introduction of female space marines needs to affect 'all of the currently invested players' any more than they want it to.
Ok, then just put female or sister of battle heads on your army, no one is stopping you =). You know very well that you want it in the lore and for it to be canon and that by doing so you are changing how people view and interface with them. You just dont care about the other opinion and how it affects their ability to interface with their army.
Look at primaris, we're still having debates almost 10 years later and its now dang near mandatory to run them.
Remind me which real-world group Primaris Marines are, if you could. It’d be unfortunate for them to be represented into the exclusion of the real-world group Firstborn Marines are.
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: You may recognise this question from earlier. Where you didn’t offer an actual answer, just unsubstantiated guff about how men and women can’t bond like men can.
Our life experiences and perceptions are obviously different.
Gee! Almost like your argument that "men and women are totally different, there's no way you can have the same friendships and relationships between them" wasn't really all that factual, and was just your own experience of that.
You obviously didn't understand. Men and women can be friends, but those friendships are different and its well documented.
Do you have anything original to add, or are you just going to regurgitate half-read articles (which aren't all even academic, like this one!), which don't even support your point!
I mean, hell, this article (despite having absolutely no sources or scholarly backing) even says "Although these differences do not apply to all male-male and female-female friendships, this provides a general idea of how male-male friendships differ from female-female friendships." You're making all these claims about how different and utterly alien men and women's friendships are, but there's absolutely no mutually exclusive way to seperate them, nor have you acknowledged the cultural and performative aspects of these relationships!
And you're STILL not using any of your own words or descriptions, and STILL avoiding answering the questions of:
- What defines brotherhood and sisterhood in a way that makes them mutually exclusive, without resorting to describing the genders of those who perform those relationships? - Where do queer people fit in with these definitions? - How do Space Marines and Sisters of Battle respectively perform these relationships in a meaningful way in the 41st millenium? - If Space Marines are to be empathised with, why should men be able to, but not women? - What acts of exclusively "male friendship" do Space Marines perform, which could only be performed by men? - Why is it necessary for everyone's Space Marines, not just yours, to be all-male?
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: The point in hand is still “how does representation impact the appeal to the majority”
Because space marine players have kind of already signed on to space marines.
I signed on to Space Marines for reasons other than "bc men" - and I actively want them to be more than only men. My enjoyment of Space Marines isn't dependent on them being men. If yours is, then that's your problem, and whatever anyone else does with their toy soldier men has nothing to do with how you enjoy yours.
40k has representation and the women in the Sororitas and the guard are just as badass.
The men in the Custodes and Guardsmen are just as badass too. If you want a male army, go play one of them, and give them all male heads.
They're the same thing, right?
You don't need to change an entire faction and how all of the currently invested players interact with them in that pursuit because it already exists in the setting.
I'm a currently invested player, and I want this faction to change.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/12/02 23:05:09