|
Post by Melissia on Apr 23, 2017 19:00:20 GMT -5
*On a side note, this is another reason why I prefer the 40k RPGs. The GM can patch up some of the more egregious grim-derp, and maybe bend things here and there based on what the group wants to do. Ask Mel about her catgirl techpriestess. She was hilarious.
|
|
|
Post by kirsten on Apr 24, 2017 2:13:01 GMT -5
Also, the Space Marines simply don't need "more bodies for the line"; they're a hyperelite force of shock troops, a la the Spetznaz/RMC; they take the best (of their respective home worlds) and then render them transhuman super-soldiers. The Guard taking in female recruits kind of makes sense, though I'd point out female/male mixed combat formations have proven to have mixed effectiveness, even with as doublehard an army as the IDF. Bodies for the line is a Guard thing, though, given the mostly pre-1967 nature of IG influences. [thought exercise] As a thought experiment, let us put aside the whole "gene seeds only work on men". Let's assume that we can do the sensory upgrades, acid glands, not needing sleep, et al, to a Space Marine. I mean, the brain and central nervous system alterations alone could make the process incompatible with females, but we can put that aside. Let's talk strength and toughness. Females have lower bone density, significantly lower muscle density, and higher body fat %'s, than men, as an overall. Humans are a significantly sexually dimorphic species. The transformation massively enhances the candidates muscles, bone structure, to the point they wind up being a foot/foot and a half taller, double armour ribcage, etc, etc - S4, T4. If you're working from a baseline that only 60%/70% of normal capability, and doubling it, you're still only winding up at 120-140% of average male strength. Or; congratulations, you spent a fortune to create what Catachan produces naturally. [/thought exercise] My personal opinion remains; plastic Sisters. Sisters don't require a rework to existing canon, they're one of the most Gothic elements of the setting, and they're way cooler than Space Marines. Failing that, female Guard. none of which is true for 40k. because 40k is a made up universe. The canon has already been reworked to say you can have female space marines. Female space marines would be exactly the same as male space marines.
|
|
|
Post by andres on Apr 24, 2017 7:47:21 GMT -5
Melissia Thank you for yor kind and considered response. Unfortunately I will have to point out what seems to me to be a misapprehension. Nobody has any moral ownership of 40k (GW has what you'd call the moral(incorrect translation?) right on the IP but that is legal territory. I took time to point out what seems obvious to me, each person gets something different out of the game. For me it is lack of politically correct narrative, if this is to change I shall leave the hobby. Other people might decide to quit should their reason to like 40k go away, I cannot imagine that there might not potentially be some hypothetical change that would make you quit (oversimplification of rules, rise in prices, drop in the quality of figures, redirection of the company's focus...). Indeed there is no argument in what I said in the quoted text (as you rightly pointed out). Just the expression of my desire for the avoidance of a certain development and an implied warning that people of my tastes form part of the consumer base and might react in a similar manner. As for the sisters and female guard I agree and would probably buy these kits if they appeared in plastic.
|
|
|
Post by Melissia on Apr 24, 2017 9:05:19 GMT -5
People can like female space marines as an idea for artistic or creative reasons, without pushing politics. But what you're doing is basically dismissing the entire idea as purely politics-- because of YOUR politics. All the while acting like the only reason anyone would ever support female space marines is because of their politics. And that's why I responded "keep your politics out of my 40k". 40k's grimdarkness is not merely e vessel to be used to support your political views. It is not politically correct OR anti-politically correct. It simply is.
This basically is an extension of the arguments people had on DakkaDakka that there shouldn't be any female guardsmen because "they should stay home and breed more guardsmen"-- a dumb, poorly thought out argument. The grimdarkness of the Imperium isn't its sexism. It's its apathy to the value of a human life. It doesn't care of the value of each individual soldier. It only cares that the soldier can stand up and hold a lasgun. It only cares that the soldier can pull the trigger.
The Imperium is grimdark, but it is not a mirror of modern sexism, or of your political views. Man, woman, child? Doesn't matter. All are fodder for the eternal war to defend the Imperium. The people pushing this, along with your argument about "political correctness" (which they also used), are acting like they're trying to keep politics out of 40k, when ultimately they're actually just trying to push their own politics into it-- just like you're doing right now. So again, keep your politics out of my 40k. And stop pretending it's anything BUT politics. Opposing "political correctness" is just as political as supporting it.
|
|
|
Post by kirsten on Apr 24, 2017 10:17:18 GMT -5
Exactly, female space marines would not impact the setting in any way. It is just imposing 21st century misogyny into a toy soldier far future.
|
|
|
Post by Melissia on Apr 24, 2017 12:01:00 GMT -5
FFS I don't even care for the concept. If there's male-only space marines or both male and female, or if they're suddenly made to be female-only, won't bother me. I see that as just a minor point of trivia, at best.
I just hate that particular argument in and of itself. Dismissing the passion of people who like the idea as nothing more than politics is utter BS.
|
|
|
Post by kirsten on Apr 24, 2017 12:21:54 GMT -5
I would favour female space marines personally, but I don't especially care either way. Likewise I just get pissed off at the specious arguments used against it, it really shouldn't be that big of a deal.
|
|
|
Post by ElegaicRequiem on Apr 24, 2017 22:31:28 GMT -5
FFS I don't even care about Female Space Marines and wouldn't care if they're never released, I just hate the arguments. I prefer Sisters and Guard, ordinary humans doing extraordinary things. This, but also I like the idea of marines being fallible and still bound by flaws of human psyche. My marines are portrayed in my fluff as being comparatively fragile and precious in number to Murheenz that GW wants to have. While they're fighting and dying valiant deaths, the chapter slowly shrinking, unable to maintain initiates, the PDF/IG force continues to adapt to losses with ease. You know, because it's just a matter of giving a person a gun and some training before sending them out to get some XP and hardening them up, as opposed to a lengthy process of training/indoctrination, then bodily modifications and such. Somewhere in the underlying theme of the fluff is the idea that making men into marines is a waste as opposed to just making humanity the best it can be and finding out that that was good enough all along.
|
|
|
Post by RedsandRoyals on Apr 25, 2017 6:39:23 GMT -5
That's also part of why I like the Heresy as a setting. Marines are more fallible, more human, and more expendable.
|
|
|
Post by Machine Gun Kelly on Sept 20, 2017 10:03:22 GMT -5
Well I know it is some time since this thread was active, but I am going to light it up again.
I don´t Think GW should make female Space Marines or suddenly rush in female SM as if they have always been there. The main reason are fluff and lore. By making females common in SM chapters or chapters made up of females the transformation from what SM always have been is too large. Which in turn lessens the believability of the universe. At least if the introduction of female SM are not done right. A more fun and in character way to introduce women into SM chapters are to sneak them in. And the way to do it is to borrow from Vikings shield maidens. Start by adding ancient myths about female space marines, or myths about space marine heroes with names that are female. Then slowly work them in by adding more recent sightings. But for a "long" time keep female SM rare in the fluff.
Personally I don´t think we need more power armours with curvy hips and boob plates, SOB fills that slot nicely. If GW should go for making female SM I hope they use ordinary SM bodies, add female head with scars and some burn marks. This would also explains why they would be quite unknown and seldom mentioned. As SM wear helmets and power armour, few outside the chapter realise that there might be a women amongst the "brothers". And as the gender is of no importance for the SM, out of tradition they call every one "brother".
Something like that.
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on Sept 21, 2017 4:25:15 GMT -5
I'd just not do it. We've only got 2 Guard regiments in plastic, and a profusion of increasingly rare, pointlessly specialised Space Marines, when even your basic Astarte is supposed to be super-rare. Run the Primaris line out, replace the basic, 1-wound variant, and actually get some fornicateing line troops out in plastic that aren't decades-old Cadian and Catachan kits. Get some plastic Sisters of Battle out. Get some plastic Vostroyans or Valhallans out. Do the goddamn Frateris militia and give me Heavy stubbers as both heavy and special weapons options. While you're at it, where the everloving fornicate is my Vendetta?
The last thing we need is more Space Marine saturation.
|
|
|
Post by treadiculous on Sept 21, 2017 6:46:35 GMT -5
People can like female space marines as an idea for artistic or creative reasons, without pushing politics. But what you're doing is basically dismissing the entire idea as purely politics-- because of YOUR politics. All the while acting like the only reason anyone would ever support female space marines is because of their politics. And that's why I responded " keep your politics out of my 40k". 40k's grimdarkness is not merely e vessel to be used to support your political views. It is not politically correct OR anti-politically correct. It simply is. This basically is an extension of the arguments people had on DakkaDakka that there shouldn't be any female guardsmen because "they should stay home and breed more guardsmen"-- a dumb, poorly thought out argument. The grimdarkness of the Imperium isn't its sexism. It's its apathy to the value of a human life. It doesn't care of the value of each individual soldier. It only cares that the soldier can stand up and hold a lasgun. It only cares that the soldier can pull the trigger. The Imperium is grimdark, but it is not a mirror of modern sexism, or of your political views. Man, woman, child? Doesn't matter. All are fodder for the eternal war to defend the Imperium. The people pushing this, along with your argument about "political correctness" (which they also used), are acting like they're trying to keep politics out of 40k, when ultimately they're actually just trying to push their own politics into it-- just like you're doing right now. So again, keep your politics out of my 40k. And stop pretending it's anything BUT politics. Opposing "political correctness" is just as political as supporting it. I think what you are saying here is really valid, I'm not sure if what I've said previously has contributed to your thoughts of 'The people pushing this, along with your argument about "political correctness" (which they also used)'. I hope not. However I can see that what I said may seem like I am supporting a certain political point of view. I was more of the thinking that we should just leave the fluff be rather than re-write a chunk of it to accommodate external views based on the feelings of contemporary society. I warmly receive and support the adjustments to our society that political correctness brings, I believe in equality and fairness and appreciate that certain attitudes should be questioned for their derogatory implications and practices. I hoped to convey this in my statements on this thread though feel I may have ended up sounding like I support the 'tradition against change' view! However, this still seems liking I'm trying to serve a political agenda, whereas I'm much of the 'its a game, come have fun together regardless' attitude
|
|
|
Post by andres on Sept 21, 2017 9:29:34 GMT -5
Well here I went thinking this unpleasantness was over... Allright, no space marines of the female persuasion have emerged at this time. Hence the discussion is purely theoretical. From my personal observation many players and fans tend to either ignore or detest changes brought about after the gathering storm (fluffwise, rules had mixed reception). I cannot fathom the idea that a shift like the one suggested in this thread could be received warmly when smaller changes are treated with suspicion. Nevertheless I could be wrong in some of my assumptions. It is rather likely that different communities perceive changes in a different light. I and most people I play with would find the introduction of women astartes and the opinion that 40k can .... promote the adjustments to our society that political correctness brings, and push for equality and fairness... peculiar. We might be in the minority . Perhaps when it comes to these kind of decisions the fanbase does not even count. Nevertheless I would beg you to tell me just out of curiosity is there for any of you a female space marine equivalent? (meaning any change unpleasant enough to turn you of the hobby)
|
|
|
Post by Machine Gun Kelly on Sept 22, 2017 1:05:54 GMT -5
I don´t agree with you that changing fluff is a major problem, when you consider the whole IRL development of WH40k history. There have been lots of changes since it always have been a developing universe. For example Necrons were introduced (still remember the first WD battle report against SOB). Tau were introduced et cetera. The problem usually are changing fluff that incorporates the empire. In my opinion it is when GW make changes that are large or unbeliavable that most problems occur. For me one of those changes (which was part of why I drifted away from WH40k), was during 5 or 6 ed when all armies should have fliers. Suddenly without explanation SM had a flier piloted by a SM. And we should just accept that it had always been there. It was just stupid.
On the other hand changing the fluff slowly to accept that there might be female SM could be done and in many ways it would actually fit right in. Look at SM as they are presented today. What a human have between their legs are probably the least interesting thing a SM can imagine. They would look at fighting skill, belief in the emperor and loyalty. Also as SM are chemically/hypno indoctrinated and genetically enhanced they would not be "led astray" by having a women amongst their ranks. And I can´t really imagine that SM have a "locker room" culture in their ranks any way. If you read the descriptions on whom gets chosen to be SM in the fluff that level of fitness could be described as less common in females and if the chemical/ genetical engineering are streamlined for men even less women would survive, making them really unique.
For me it is totally plausible and acceptable that there have always been females in the SM ranks but they are very rare. And it would not be like the SM commanders tells the leader of IG they are working with that:" Oh yeah, by the way. Battle brother Dolores over there. He is a woman. You got a problem with that?"
As for plastic female SM. I agree that there are more pressing matters, like plastic SOB. But there is a lack of female plastics for conversions and I hope that the plastic Eschers in Necromunda are made with that in mind. It is actually quite sad that they didn´t include women in those relativtly new plastics, Genestealer cults and Chaos cultists.
|
|
|
Post by RedCuffs on Sept 23, 2017 2:11:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by imperatordeus on Sept 24, 2017 22:22:40 GMT -5
I'm no overly familiar with the Space Marine fluff reasons against female Marines,in fact I first heard that they existed yesterday! To be honest I had never thought about female SMs before, but I have no objections to it. Clearly with the introduction of Primaris Marines the established lore isn't all that sacred! I don't see why Cawl couldn't come up with a way to modify the process (if it was even necessary), to produce female Primaris Marines. Maybe nothing can be done for the regular Marines now, but I don't think it would break the lore to have female Primaris Marines at least!
IG/AM has always been my primary army, and I was always surprised that there weren't any female rank and file Guard models at all. I can only think of three off the top of my head: there was a female Catachan armed with a grenade launcher that was clearly inspired by Vasquez from Aliens, and there were two female models in Schaefer's Last Chancers. A friend of mine who plays Eldar tells me that on the Guardian sprue one of the five torsos is female. I'm not sure if that sprue is older than the Cadian sprue, but why couldn't they at least put a female head or two on the sprue?
I hope they don't make Cadian Guardswomen with form fitting uniforms and boob plates for armour, but it would be nice to see a model depict a more female body type wearing the standard Cadian body armour (maybe a slightly smaller version of it to reflect that fact that men are typically larger than women), and loose fitting fatigues like all the male Cadian models have. I would also like to see some female Commissars too. I am aware that there was a Games Day model way in the past, but I personally can't imagine that a bustier would fit within Imperial or Officio Prefectus uniform regulations, lol. I would like to see a female Commissar in a proper uniform.
My hope is that with the announcement mentioned in the video that RedCuffs linked to above that they come out with a female squad of Cadians sometime in the future. I hope it's a separate box, partially so that the players who don't want female soldiers in their armies have nothing to complain about, but mostly because I have almost 200 Cadians already, and I'd like to be able to sprinkle some women into my existing squads. It would get expensive to do that very fast if you only got, say two or three females per box! They have a plastic Commissar now and it would be nice to have some variety after they inevitably discontinue the metal ones and the finecast Lord Commissar.
|
|
|
Post by RedsandRoyals on Sept 24, 2017 22:50:52 GMT -5
GW is trying to capture new segments of gamers, now that it has strong competition from X-Wing and some other brands. That may not manifest as female space marines, you can already see it in Sigmar models (widening array of skin tones, and more female models) and some 40k. St. Celestine, for example, was painted so it looked like she was wearing knight's plate, rather than as some sort of armored stripper. I'm also firmly convinced we'll see plastic SoBs within the next year (hopefully this christmas. That would be awesome). I think we'd have to wait longer for female Cadians, but there's a decent chance we'd see them next time a large IG release wave gets pushed out.
|
|
|
Post by RedCuffs on Sept 25, 2017 16:24:32 GMT -5
commissar.proboards.com/thread/7334I knew I saw some guardwomen on here somewhere. You have to scroll down a bit to see the pic showing the sprues. Thanks for that photobucket ... you bunch of bomboclarts.
|
|
|
Post by Paimon on Sept 25, 2017 17:21:25 GMT -5
So I was thinking about female Space Marines as I was driving home today, and it occurred to me that, while the genetic explanation for there being no female space marines is obvious nonsense, a more grim dark reason could exist. Specifically, that, since the Space Marines are decedents of the Primarchs, who are decedents of the Emperor, and because there is some personality cross contamination down the line, it could well be that the process works on girls just fine, but they come out of it as men, as large segments of their personality, and identity are overwritten by the process.
This is kind of an extension of the 'female space marines look like male space marines' argument, but makes it fit into the lore a bit better.
|
|
|
Post by RedCuffs on Sept 26, 2017 5:51:29 GMT -5
So I was thinking about female Space Marines as I was driving home today, and it occurred to me that, while the genetic explanation for there being no female space marines is obvious nonsense, a more grim dark reason could exist. Specifically, that, since the Space Marines are decedents of the Primarchs, who are decedents of the Emperor, and because there is some personality cross contamination down the line, it could well be that the process works on girls just fine, but they come out of it as men, as large segments of their personality, and identity are overwritten by the process. This is kind of an extension of the 'female space marines look like male space marines' argument, but makes it fit into the lore a bit better. That's the most sensible explaination I've heard yet Paimon. I think there are three facets to this question. 1-Should we have Female Space Marines in the 40K lore ? 2-Should we have Female Space Marine models ? 3-Should we have Female Space Marines in the game mechanic ? My personal opinion ... 1-Sure, why not. Cawl's a genius and can do anything with the human bio-system. Could they be descended from a prominent Sister and whatever cognitive and physical deficit there may be could be bio/gene engineered to a Space Marine level. 2-I don't see the point. If a Space marine has to be "x" high, "y" wide and "z" the other SM stuff then the male and female would look the same wouldn't they ? Maybe do a sprue of female heads that is compatible with the superhuman physique ? But would that pay a positive return from initial outlay from a business point of view ? 3-It'd be nice to see the female specialists I worked with in several operational theatres, on the front line, represented somehow. But their "specialisations" cant really be represented very well in the 40K mechanic. Maybe as characters with specific abilities ?
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on Oct 2, 2017 4:59:29 GMT -5
I'm bemused why the genetic arguments are nonsense.
It's a biological process that's barely understood and carried out over the space of nearly a decade. It may not be compatible with female physiology. Given we are one if the more sexually dimorphic species, this hardly seems implausible.
|
|
|
Post by Paimon on Oct 2, 2017 18:06:55 GMT -5
The thing is, male genetics are female genetics, with parts missing. The Y chromosome is an X chromosome missing an arm. It isn't even the whole Y chromosome that makes a man masculinize, it's the SRY gene, which is the gene that tells your gonads to develop into testes rather than ovaries. This can sometimes be activated on someone who has XX chromosomes, and results in an XX man. Similarly, in someone who is XY, and has an active SRY gene, sometimes they have Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome. When this happens, the SRY gene says "Gonads become Testes" but the testosterone produced by the testes is completely ignored by the body. In this case, the body remains female, and androphilic (the default as far as we can tell) and no one notices that this girl is any different from any other until she doesn't start puberty.
There are lots of genetic diseases that are carried through the mother's line, but only express themselves in males, typically when there is a recessive defect in one of the mother's X chromosomes, and the Y doesn't have the Arm that would otherwise cancel it out. Women have [more] robust genetics (and tend to be more likely to survive pre-natal development), if anything, it would be the extra robustness that makes the process slightly more difficult, but that assumes that all of the changes are primarily done on the X chromosome, and are recessive.
There are no organ or blood transplants that require a donor of a specific gender. And testosterone works just as well on women as it does on men.
|
|
|
Post by ElegaicRequiem on Oct 2, 2017 19:42:24 GMT -5
Testosterone: It just works.
|
|
|
Post by emptyhat on Oct 5, 2017 15:25:38 GMT -5
Plot twist: the process depends on upgrading the Y chromosome into an X.
|
|
|
Post by Melissia on Oct 7, 2017 10:33:53 GMT -5
Given we are one if the more sexually dimorphic species We are not. I wouldn't even put us in the top 1000 sexually dimorphic species on the planet; including insects, we don't even reach the top million most sexually dimorphic species, but that's partially because insects are total attention whores.
|
|