Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/12 21:46:22
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
[DCM]
Tzeentch's Fan Girl
|
You asked an AI?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/12/12 21:46:43
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/12 21:53:26
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Servoarm Flailing Magos
|
 I thought the Omnissiah would protect me from the Tech-Heresy....
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2024/12/12 22:00:10
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/12 23:21:09
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
Annandale, VA
|
BobtheInquisitor wrote:For lower ranks, perhaps some specific helmets or accessories could be added to differentiate the helmeted fsm from the msm. Or, if legs are still separate pieces, have optional leg bits with more feminine proportions.
I feel like just giving the bare heads to fit on torsos designed to read as male is going to lead to a distinct second-class tier for female space marines.
I feel that giving them 'more feminine proportions' to beat you over the head with the fact that they represent women would be obnoxiously tokenizing. Like those old cheesecake-y fanmade female Guard sculpts that gave them exaggerated hips and triple-D cups because 'how else are you supposed to know they're women?'.
You're not, save for a bare head here and there. That's the point. We're talking about roided-up beefcake supersoldiers cosplaying walking refrigerators; Sisters-esque coding would be weird.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/12 23:28:11
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Servoarm Flailing Magos
|
It could just be like the female stormtroopers in the Rey Star Wars Trilogy. You couldnt tell the difference between men and women physically due to their armour. You only knew they were different from their voices.
They didn't need "female" armor in Star Wars.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 00:30:26
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Legendary Master of the Chapter
|
catbarf wrote:BobtheInquisitor wrote:For lower ranks, perhaps some specific helmets or accessories could be added to differentiate the helmeted fsm from the msm. Or, if legs are still separate pieces, have optional leg bits with more feminine proportions.
I feel like just giving the bare heads to fit on torsos designed to read as male is going to lead to a distinct second-class tier for female space marines.
I feel that giving them 'more feminine proportions' to beat you over the head with the fact that they represent women would be obnoxiously tokenizing. Like those old cheesecake-y fanmade female Guard sculpts that gave them exaggerated hips and triple-D cups because 'how else are you supposed to know they're women?'.
You're not, save for a bare head here and there. That's the point. We're talking about roided-up beefcake supersoldiers cosplaying walking refrigerators; Sisters-esque coding would be weird.
I’m not talking about cheesecake. I mean something closer to AOS Stormcast proportions.
See, you mention roided up beefcake soldiers, but have you looked at the art or (to a lesser extent for scale reasons) minis? Space marines do not look like Robert Zdar. The look like rugged-yet-handsome baseline human men. Sometimes they even look like specific human actors. And that’s just their faces. The bodies that fit under the armor seen in the artwork are lithe and narrow with ridiculously broad shoulders, more like basketball players than bodybuilders.
Yes, these are artistic liberties that don’t reflect the fluff as written. But they’re done anyway so little Timmys can see themselves in the power fantasy space marines rather than some body-horror freak show. Female space marines should be given the same kind of artistic liberties to allow little Cindys to see themselves in space marines. That takes a little bit more than putting a woman’s head on a body that was designed to represent an aspirational masculine ideal.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 00:30:33
Subject: Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare
|
I appreciate how Helldivers 2 handles it where it just changes the voice because in armor you can't tell the difference.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 01:15:22
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
catbarf wrote:BobtheInquisitor wrote:For lower ranks, perhaps some specific helmets or accessories could be added to differentiate the helmeted fsm from the msm. Or, if legs are still separate pieces, have optional leg bits with more feminine proportions.
I feel like just giving the bare heads to fit on torsos designed to read as male is going to lead to a distinct second-class tier for female space marines.
I feel that giving them 'more feminine proportions' to beat you over the head with the fact that they represent women would be obnoxiously tokenizing. Like those old cheesecake-y fanmade female Guard sculpts that gave them exaggerated hips and triple-D cups because 'how else are you supposed to know they're women?'.
You're not, save for a bare head here and there. That's the point. We're talking about roided-up beefcake supersoldiers cosplaying walking refrigerators; Sisters-esque coding would be weird.
no one said sisters coding and the fact that people keep trying to falsly dichotomise this argument down to 'either women look like male astartes or need tit armour and sexy legs' is just aggravating.
and it's why you need women to be part of the design and discussion rather than a bunch of men making those decisions.
'walking refrigerators that somehow still have feminine faces' is just as dumb as 'sisters coding'. you're saying that only their face should be feminine but the rest must be masculine? How convenient. Why not just say that because they're so masculinised that the current marine faces could be men or women, they just all look super mannish.
Or you know, you accurately portray a woman's body being roided out in the same way you portray a man's body being roided out, which results in similar but distinct bulks due to the distinct body shapes they have.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 04:31:37
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
Hellebore wrote:
'walking refrigerators that somehow still have feminine faces' is just as dumb as 'sisters coding'. you're saying that only their face should be feminine but the rest must be masculine? How convenient. Why not just say that because they're so masculinised that the current marine faces could be men or women, they just all look super mannish.
Or you know, you accurately portray a woman's body being roided out in the same way you portray a man's body being roided out, which results in similar but distinct bulks due to the distinct body shapes they have.
We're both on team femarine, but I'm genuinely struggling to picture what you have in mind. Can you provide an example of what you're picturing?
To my mind, the point of the marinification process is to turn people into walking muscle fridges. So it seems to me that any sexually dimorphic differences between builds would be pretty subtle to the point of maybe not being detectable on a mini. But I'm open to hearing you out.
|
ATTENTION. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 04:41:40
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Servoarm Flailing Magos
|
Because I am a glutton for punishment I went to my Chatgpt buddy, the Omnissiah, and asked him for a female marine, and I got this:
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 05:20:16
Subject: Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Resolute Ultramarine Honor Guard
|
shortymcnostrill wrote:[
Allowing females to become space marines would be just another deck chair shuffle, and probably a smaller shuffle than the others. The effect would be more space marine recruits, allowing them a bit more numbers if they don't limit their max number at 1000, or just allowing quicker recovery from attrition if they do. In a setting that treats numbers as an afterthought anyway, I don't see this having an impact greater than the other points.
I've already said this but I still think:
Its not going to break the game if they add female marines. People can play this game using a roll of quarters and a magic marker. They don't need models. Making Space Marines with obvious boobs is pretty far down the bang-for-the-buck list. The upheaval of the new rules design has left far bigger holes to fill than a form fitting boob plate.
|
My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 05:35:23
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
Lathe Biosas wrote:Because I am a glutton for punishment I went to my Chatgpt buddy, the Omnissiah, and asked him for a female marine, and I got this:
I'm seeing basically a normal marine, but with a weirdly slender waist/torso. Which I don't think would be particularly fluffy and I don't particularly want to see on the tabletop. But I'm also not sure what Hellebore is asking for if not this.
(No disrespect intended, Hellebore.)
|
ATTENTION. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 05:39:50
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Legendary Master of the Chapter
|
Wyldhunt wrote: Hellebore wrote:
'walking refrigerators that somehow still have feminine faces' is just as dumb as 'sisters coding'. you're saying that only their face should be feminine but the rest must be masculine? How convenient. Why not just say that because they're so masculinised that the current marine faces could be men or women, they just all look super mannish.
Or you know, you accurately portray a woman's body being roided out in the same way you portray a man's body being roided out, which results in similar but distinct bulks due to the distinct body shapes they have.
We're both on team femarine, but I'm genuinely struggling to picture what you have in mind. Can you provide an example of what you're picturing?
To my mind, the point of the marinification process is to turn people into walking muscle fridges. So it seems to me that any sexually dimorphic differences between builds would be pretty subtle to the point of maybe not being detectable on a mini. But I'm open to hearing you out.
GW minis don’t do subtle. They do Heroic scale, which means features are exaggerated and proportions altered unrealistically for effect. Space marine minis are not precisely-proportioned, fluff-accurate scale models. Why would you insist on imposing those standards only on FSM, especially to produce an outcome that visually erases the existence of FSM?
Also, when did they stop portraying Space Marines as they did in 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th editions and when did they start painting them as muscle fridges? Because that phrase describes none of the iconic space marine artwork.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 05:57:00
Subject: Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Resolute Ultramarine Honor Guard
|
BorderCountess wrote:Breton wrote: BorderCountess wrote:
But from an objective standpoint, the themes of Space Marines don't require them to be male - just hyper-violent war machines.
I'd say "preach on my Battle Brother", but that might open a can of worms.
And then you type it out, anyway?
One can hope you'd get the not so subtle point.
Most of the themes for Space Marines are recycled historicals.
And while many of those sources for inspiration were themselves historically sexist, none of them specifically required having boy-parts. The ones that had sex-based restrictions were generally influenced by sexist religious organizations.
Or not. Amazonian Societies don't have to be led by warrior women. Sure its the primary surface level attribute people with passing knowledge of history will recognize, but its not necessary. We can do an entirely male society of Amazons and people will still get the reference.
How much less toxic does it get when you tell people who disagree with you its only because of their toxic politics protecting the status quo and they might as well be human traffickers?
1) If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
2) Excessive hyperbole. Have I called people and/or their opinions sexist and toxic? You bet; see number 1. Equating that to human trafficking? That is a step WAY too far, and is solely a product of your imagination.
Yes, I was pointing out your excessive hyperbole as well as a heaping helping of bigotry. How many times do you think someone in the Klan justified their hate with the Duck Test? Automatically Appended Next Post: Wyldhunt wrote: Lathe Biosas wrote:Because I am a glutton for punishment I went to my Chatgpt buddy, the Omnissiah, and asked him for a female marine, and I got this:
I'm seeing basically a normal marine, but with a weirdly slender waist/torso. Which I don't think would be particularly fluffy and I don't particularly want to see on the tabletop. But I'm also not sure what Hellebore is asking for if not this.
(No disrespect intended, Hellebore.)
If I saw that in "the wild" (i.e. no context)? I'd start wondering which Inquisitor that was. Mostly based on AI errors - the color isn't really any chapter - too grey for UM, not grey enough for Wolves - there is no chapter shoulder pad just two Eagles. The belt icon isn't high quality but when you're already thinking Inquisitor it could be a stylized version of their symbol. Top that off with the antique elbows and some sort of chain undershirt instead of a black carapace. Automatically Appended Next Post: BobtheInquisitor wrote:
GW minis don’t do subtle. They do Heroic scale, which means features are exaggerated and proportions altered unrealistically for effect. Space marine minis are not precisely-proportioned, fluff-accurate scale models. Why would you insist on imposing those standards only on FSM, especially to produce an outcome that visually erases the existence of FSM?
Also, when did they stop portraying Space Marines as they did in 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th editions and when did they start painting them as muscle fridges? Because that phrase describes none of the iconic space marine artwork.
Well there's two different parts to the "question". Are we talking in fluff, on the tabletop, or both? Eventually everyone gets to both, but almost everyone also starts with primarily one or the other. And nothing is "accurate" compared to the other. Textually, even an old Marine was supposedly a 7 foot tall hulk of walking steel muscle and sinew over a fused rib cage wrapped in a cermatie shell that spends 800 years eating nutrient gruel. As people have pointed out the artwork right next to this description isn't guaranteed to match. Then you throw a third representation medium (minis) into the mix and its just going to get worse.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2024/12/13 06:21:12
My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 06:30:41
Subject: Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Krazed Killa Kan
|
Space Marines should look less like a regular male and be a much more grotesque form. I think the idea of female Space Marines runs into the massive problem of the trans human process turning a person into a 600lb brick of bone, meat, and fury isn't going to have anything left that resembles the female form. If they made the lore to allow females to undergo the transformation process to become a Space Marine then its whatever (still disagree with the idea of changing something for the sake of change) but trying to make them look anything remotely feminine is absolutely counter to the entire concept of the transformation process. If the goal is to make a massive slab of beef to be a super soldier then the end result should be the same if you use a male or female starting base as the whole point of the transformation is to produce a super soldier by modifying the human form into some sort of ideal fighting form.
|
"Hold my shoota, I'm goin in"
Armies (7th edition points)
7000+ Points Death Skullz
4000 Points
+ + 3000 Points "The Fiery Heart of the Emperor"
3500 Points "Void Kraken" Space Marines
3000 Points "Bard's Booze Cruise" |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 06:31:00
Subject: Gender In 40k And M
|
 |
Resolute Ultramarine Honor Guard
|
Andykp wrote:
Yeah I’m pretty sure I didn’t type anything about human trafficking.
Isn't that what toxic masculinity does though? Isn't it always about subjugate women like chattel? Why else would those even men be so toxic?
I fully admit that my reason for wanting female marines is entirely political. It makes sense fluff wise and business too if you ask me but the main reason is political, and I’m pretty sure everyone in here asking for it will admit that it’s down to their politics. Most if not all already have by asking for inclusion and the like. It’s the ones saying they don’t want it due to fluff reasons that are arguing in bad faith. It is their politics that wants them to not have female marines.
Was anyone suggesting it wasn't political for you? Did I miss someone suggesting the "everyone who disagrees with me is evil incarnate" argument wasn't poltical in nature?
I did not cast any judgement on them for that either. But if some people are so upset at bringing in a change to enable women to be more included in the game that they quit, I will cast judgement on them and not miss them if they leave the hobby.
As for human trafficking, that’s just an stupid and pointless comment.
I didn't cast judgment on those toxic people who won't agree with me for a multitude of reasons I boiled down to toxic masculinity and misogyny? I am curious where your line is drawn. If we have to include female space marines to "include" women in a game, do we have to make bug eyed alien Space Marines to include the Tyranids? Do we need to put teats on Tervigons?
|
My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 09:21:47
Subject: Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Veteran Knight Baron in a Crusader
Bamberg / Erlangen
|
Andykp wrote:I love that over the years we have persisted with these threads and each time it gets less toxic and more progressive.
I know this post is a few days old, but I wanted to leave a quick comment.
I had one person reach out to me directly to express their support for some of my posts in this thread. They also explained that they and someone they know are not participating on purpose because they're afraid of reprisals against their account. I've seen at least two other users have their (not pro-FSM) text removed within a day of posting. Meanwhile, repeated summaries of the anti-FSM side as being misogynistic and sexist, or even the outright call for their exclusion (in the other thread), didn't even result in a "keep it down, folks" post from a moderator.
If this thread is anything to go by how previous discussions about the topic were handled, then your impression for it becoming "less toxic and more progressive" stems not from changing the hearts and minds of people, but from intimidation and forced exclusion (=bans). I hope the irony of the situation is not lost on you.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2024/12/13 09:24:12
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 10:14:44
Subject: Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare
|
^Yup, I've noticed the same.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 11:51:10
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Witch Hunter in the Shadows
|
Lathe Biosas wrote:Because I am a glutton for punishment I went to my Chatgpt buddy, the Omnissiah, and asked him for a female marine, and I got this:
Now featuring Henry Cavil as Ultramarine Sergeant Mann, and Callista Flockheart as Lieutenant Annorax.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 13:11:07
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
[DCM]
Tzeentch's Fan Girl
|
Lathe Biosas wrote:Because I am a glutton for punishment I went to my Chatgpt buddy, the Omnissiah, and asked him for a female marine, and I got this:
This is... not terrible for AI. Details aside, that's probably pretty darn close to what I'd like to see on a table.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 13:16:47
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Lathe Biosas wrote:Because I am a glutton for punishment I went to my Chatgpt buddy, the Omnissiah, and asked him for a female marine, and I got this:
That's just a SoB head stuck on marine armour.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 13:30:09
Subject: Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
[DCM]
Tzeentch's Fan Girl
|
Breton wrote:Yes, I was pointing out your excessive hyperbole as well as a heaping helping of bigotry. How many times do you think someone in the Klan justified their hate with the Duck Test?
If you'd like to cite examples, I welcome the chance to re-evaluate my statements and apologize if necessary. I'd be especially curious as to where you think I was being a bigot. Keep in mind: bigotry is hating/discriminating against someone because of inherent characteristics, such as race. As I've said elsewhere, I'm not required to tolerate intolerance; if you choose to be sexist, I will call you out on it.
And get that Klan gak out of here. There's NO justifying anything they've done and you damn well know it.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 15:10:04
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
[DCM]
Moustache-twirling Princeps
Gone-to-ground in the craters of Coventry
|
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: Lathe Biosas wrote:Because I am a glutton for punishment I went to my Chatgpt buddy, the Omnissiah, and asked him for a female marine, and I got this:
That's just a SoB head stuck on marine armour.
With a waist.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 16:03:25
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
Annandale, VA
|
BobtheInquisitor wrote:I’m not talking about cheesecake. I mean something closer to AOS Stormcast proportions.
I get that, and I'm not accusing you of wanting cheesecake minis.
But these aren't Stormcast. Stormcast armor is form-fitting, it copies the ancient Greek trope of aesthetically depicting muscle. The men have separate pec-plates. The women have uniboob armor (subtle, but it's there). Everyone gets sculpted abs and shapely calves. It's really just the enormous GW-signature pauldrons that depart from the artistically-idealized-skintight design, and both male and female models get them.
If anything, Stormcast are closer to Eldar armor design, or ironically Sisters. It's pretty easy to tell who's under the armor because it contours to the body under the armor and has aesthetic elements that further exaggerate their form.
Space Marine armor isn't like that. Bell-bottom greaves, giant chestplates, smooth uncontoured armor plates. It's closer to, say, power armor from Starcraft, and when we see women wearing it in that franchise, they look like... women in the same power armor as men. It's as much a walking tank as it is a suit of armor; there's nothing about its design that says you must have certain secondary sex characteristics to wear it.
I'll also point out that Space Marine model anatomy is already weird, to the point where artistic depictions of a character actually wearing it tend to make significant stylistic alterations. The models themselves imply the occupants have narrow waists, wide hips, slender thighs, and either uncomfortable squatting posture or more thigh gap than any female mini GW has produced. Marine armor design leans masculine on the whole as a result of going for big and strong, but there are no codpieces, pecs, or bulging biceps. The most explicitly male-coded parts of the design are the broad shoulders and massive pauldrons- GW staples that, again, they use on both male and female Stormcast, if that's the point of reference.
We're talking about models that don't exaggerate the human form the way Stormcast do, while also having proportional weirdness that isn't strictly male-coded. So I'll echo Wyldhunt's question: What exactly would you expect a female Marine to look like? Because I genuinely struggle to think of how you could code Astartes power armor as female without it looking gratuitous. That AI art is a perfect example- coding male Marines as hulking beefcakes and female Marines as wasp-waisted waifus does not seem like a win for inclusivity.
More importantly where inclusivity is concerned:
BobtheInquisitor wrote:Female space marines should be given the same kind of artistic liberties to allow little Cindys to see themselves in space marines.
As soon as you design different body types for female Marines, you are asserting that female Marines are obviously recognizably different from their male counterparts. That's opening a can of worms. For one thing, it's actively perpetuating that all the existing kits are male-only, and if Little Cindy wants to see herself in her army she's going to have to buy the new kits with the female Marine bits in them. It also raises the question of whether new kits will have the parts to be all-male or all-female, or if a mix is mandatory. It's a different situation from AoS creating Stormcast from scratch; here we're talking about making an enormous and currently all-male line more inclusive, and I don't think a solution that requires slowly replacing the entire line is ideal.
Like I've said before, at this point I'm pro-FSM, but if GW were to implement FSM I think the Custodes approach is the way to go. Female Marines are there, maybe they've always been there or maybe not, but either way the existing range can be leveraged to depict female characters.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/13 23:40:30
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Legendary Master of the Chapter
|
You make a good point about the Stormcasts. I thought the Primaris marines were a bit more true scaled than real space marines and with pec plates, though, which would open the door for wider hipped legs, or a slightly higher waist. If that’s not possible, then we’re back to more feminine-associated accessories and robe/armor cuts. Helmets (for characters or specialists) can have a more feminine shape or plume/crest arrangement, something associated with what women wore in the appropriate appropriated culture for the chapter, like Valkyrie armor and helmets for Space Wolf FSM characters or female torso cuirasses for Blood Angel characters.
I think the problem with your argument that differently shaped female marines would make male marines read as male…is that they already read as all male.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/14 00:48:05
Subject: Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar
|
Breton wrote: BorderCountess wrote:Breton wrote:Most of the themes for Space Marines are recycled historicals. And while many of those sources for inspiration were themselves historically sexist, none of them specifically required having boy-parts. The ones that had sex-based restrictions were generally influenced by sexist religious organizations.
Or not. Amazonian Societies don't have to be led by warrior women. Sure its the primary surface level attribute people with passing knowledge of history will recognize, but its not necessary. We can do an entirely male society of Amazons and people will still get the reference.
I'd actually like to jump on this and say I agree with this! Knights needing to be "male" is a surface level attribute, that is not necessary in the world GW are trying to tell. People will still get the reference of Space Marines having elements reminiscent of knights and crusaders and monks (in the appropriate Chapters), even if they have women in them. The semiotic meanings of "knight" don't suddenly change when you don't know who's under the helmet, and a Black Templar will always look like a Teutonic Knight In Space, regardless of if it's a roided up man or woman in the armour. People will still get the reference. a_typical_hero wrote:I've seen at least two other users have their (not pro-FSM) text removed within a day of posting.
Considering that one of those users was attempting a transphobic dogwhistle, I think that's for good reason. Blatant transphobia (and yes, I'm not just talking "ooh, they disagree with me", I'm referring to Actually Transphobic Comments) have no place here or anywhere else. Can't speak for the other, mostly because I don't remember it, but I'm going to assume it wasn't because they were opposed to women Astartes. Could I just have confirmation that you agree that transphobic comments (Actually Transphobic Comments and rhetoric, not just "you disagree with me", just to clarify) are abhorrent?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/12/14 00:48:59
They/them
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/14 01:29:10
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
BobtheInquisitor wrote:
GW minis don’t do subtle. They do Heroic scale, which means features are exaggerated and proportions altered unrealistically for effect. Space marine minis are not precisely-proportioned, fluff-accurate scale models.
This is more or less what I'm getting at. I'm struggling to imagine differences between the builds of male and female space marines that would be significant enough to show up on a mini. I'd think any such differences would be pretty darn subtle, so I'm not sure we need to go out of our way to designate male and female bodies.
catbarf wrote:
But these aren't Stormcast. Stormcast armor is form-fitting, it copies the ancient Greek trope of aesthetically depicting muscle. The men have separate pec-plates. The women have uniboob armor (subtle, but it's there). Everyone gets sculpted abs and shapely calves. It's really just the enormous GW-signature pauldrons that depart from the artistically-idealized-skintight design, and both male and female models get them.
If anything, Stormcast are closer to Eldar armor design, or ironically Sisters. It's pretty easy to tell who's under the armor because it contours to the body under the armor and has aesthetic elements that further exaggerate their form.
Space Marine armor isn't like that. Bell-bottom greaves, giant chestplates, smooth uncontoured armor plates. It's closer to, say, power armor from Starcraft, and when we see women wearing it in that franchise, they look like... women in the same power armor as men. It's as much a walking tank as it is a suit of armor; there's nothing about its design that says you must have certain secondary sex characteristics to wear it.
I'll also point out that Space Marine model anatomy is already weird, to the point where artistic depictions of a character actually wearing it tend to make significant stylistic alterations. The models themselves imply the occupants have narrow waists, wide hips, slender thighs, and either uncomfortable squatting posture or more thigh gap than any female mini GW has produced. Marine armor design leans masculine on the whole as a result of going for big and strong, but there are no codpieces, pecs, or bulging biceps. The most explicitly male-coded parts of the design are the broad shoulders and massive pauldrons- GW staples that, again, they use on both male and female Stormcast, if that's the point of reference.
This. Well put as usual, catbarf.
|
ATTENTION. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/14 01:30:43
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Servoarm Flailing Magos
|
Ok, before I go any further. I realize that a single female Chaos Space Marine does not solve the "No Girls Allowed" issue, but... I thought that if I could find one instance in the Black Library archives, it could possibly show that it wouldnt destroy the foundations of Warhammer 40,000.
The reason for this post is: I found one... and not in Rogue Trader either.
In Storm of Iron by Graham McNeill, there is a female character named Karla.
She starts as a slave who is forced to polish the armor of a Chaos Space Marine, and through the corrupting influence of Chaos, she eventually undergoes a transformation into a Chaos Space Marine herself.
I know this is just one instance, and it uses "The powers of corruption," to overcome issues, but it is a female Space Marine, and I don't think anyone screamed for the head of Graham McNeill, nor boycotted GW.
This might be one tiny step, and I hope it is taken well. I mean no disrespect to anyone.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/14 01:35:48
Subject: Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
UK
|
Chaos also has suits of armour with nothing inside them; marines so corrupted by the warp that they are basically incomprehensible mounds of flesh utterly fused to their suits. Some are cracking open with pulsing growths and weapons tearing out of their bodies; some are entirely given over to a demonic possession. Nurgle's Marines are utterly brimming with inhuman life in the form of maggots and other things crawling and creeping and feasting on the body inside. To say nothing of the things that they grow themselves like belly mouths; tentacles and more.
Chaos doesn't follow the rules for what makes a marine at all - on any level. In fact its kind of their thing to not follow the rules of the Astartes and the Emperor.
Also I'm going to say it now - one thing GW have pushed time and again is that MODELS sell above all else for them. If Female Marines are basically almost 100% identical to regular Marines then there isn't anything for GW to "sell" with those designs.
If GW made it so that women could be regular bogstandard Marines then you can bet that it would come with a new design. GW is well aware that most customers who walk in their shops are not reading pages of Lore; pouring over every detail of books written 30years ago to this day.
They are walking into a shop; seeing a game being played; seeing display models and going "I want that one" - Perhaps with a bit of staffer encouragement.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2024/12/14 01:36:47
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/14 01:36:28
Subject: Re:Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
Lathe Biosas wrote:Ok, before I go any further. I realize that a single female Chaos Space Marine does not solve the "No Girls Allowed" issue, but... I thought that if I could find one instance in the Black Library archives, it could possibly show that it wouldnt destroy the foundations of Warhammer 40,000.
The reason for this post is: I found one... and not in Rogue Trader either.
In Storm of Iron by Graham McNeill, there is a female character named Karla.
She starts as a slave who is forced to polish the armor of a Chaos Space Marine, and through the corrupting influence of Chaos, she eventually undergoes a transformation into a Chaos Space Marine herself.
I know this is just one instance, and it uses "The powers of corruption," to overcome issues, but it is a female Space Marine, and I don't think anyone screamed for the head of Graham McNeill, nor boycotted GW.
This might be one tiny step, and I hope it is taken well. I mean no disrespect to anyone.
I read that one. It's... a weird enough situation that I'm not sure she really counts for purposes of this conversation. She was undergoing vague chaos possession shenanigans at the time. It doesn't seem like she was an astartes unless the demon went out of its way to give her a betcher's gland, lharaman's ear, etc. before making her vanish into the warp the next day. Rather it seems like the demon just allowed her to somehow pilot the stolen armor for a few hours.
EDIT: A better counterpoint might be the not-startes from Harrowmaster. They're transhuman ladies in power armor that are about the size of a marine and implied to have comparable capabilities. The main character gets all huffy and insists they're not "really astartes," and the local heretech just goes,
"Yeah yeah. There's more than one way to build a transhuman. Calm your jimmies, Jimmy. Enjoy your semantics."
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/12/14 01:38:12
ATTENTION. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2024/12/14 01:53:41
Subject: Gender In 40k And Marines
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
Annandale, VA
|
BobtheInquisitor wrote:I think the problem with your argument that differently shaped female marines would make male marines read as male…is that they already read as all male.
That's not quite what I was getting at, but I think you're assigning too much importance to how the models read. Gamers thought Samus Aran was male because of the character sprite, but they got over it. Custodes still have male-coded miniatures but are now canonically mixed-gender. Again, Starcraft has the giant shoulders and pauldrons but both men and women wearing them. You just tell players that anyone can wear the armor, and that's that.
Because fundamentally, the sorts of physical characteristics that feed into the martial power fantasy Marines embody are things that are going to traditionally read as male. I think you'll struggle to make female Marines actually read as female without either really exaggerating the female characteristics or compromising the could-fistfight-a-truck-and-win visual design that defines the faction. I'd genuinely be interested to see concepts, but it's telling that GW had to opt for explicitly gender-coded form-fitting armor for Stormcast in order to have characters with broad shoulders and giant pauldrons still read as female. I don't think just giving a helmeted Intercessor wider hips or a slightly higher waist would do that.
In any case, the point I was making was that if GW were to create new and obviously different female Marine models, then that would be making the inclusivity of the faction subject to a full range refresh and however long that takes. Stating that both male and female Marines use the same armor instead allows you to roll out conversion bits like the things you described to augment the existing kits. That allows the existing range to be more inclusive, allows the studio to quickly add female representation to their Marine marketing, and makes it easier for new kits to support both male and female build options. Maybe it sounds like a cop-out, but I think it's the most straightforward and productive way to implement female Marines without having to redo the faction that is still undergoing a redo.
|
|
|
 |
 |
|