My Thoughts on Female Space Marines

[Doghouse]

My thoughts exactly, then you could just say the Astartes are a much cruder mass produced far more flawed process in comparison to how Custodes are made. The complications of which only seem to work with male chromosomes because they need to churn them out and not worry about making them as refined as the superior Custodes. 

[Warhead01]

I guess I still don't get it. 
I wonder, would the Space Marine units be different or the same with the inclusion of female Space Marine miniatures. 
If the faction as a whole, as in on paper, would remain exactly the same as it is now then it makes no difference beyond how people decide to models their models and they are free to do kit bash and conversions and sculpt their models to their harts content. If GW doesn't think they can sell a product in enough volume then they are not likely to take a risk in costs.  The other issue is relying only on GW for miniatures. If they do not produce what you want you are free to look elsewhere or diy.  That's part of the hobby.  Model your models how ever you like and let the dice decide. 

As far as lore, for me, I'm not interesting in changing what was but could go either way on future lore. Primaris Space Marines could have opened that door. 
However, not every human is a candidate to become an Astartes. The faction of people drawn from an entire world is tiny.  These candidates have one standard as far as I understand it that they all have to meet and exceed. 
I've lost my train of thought.

Edited May 10, 2021 by Warhead01

[Torbenos]

Is what we need right now really a new line of space marine miniatures to be released?

[Marshal Loss]

Female Custodes would have been good if they had wanted to go that route. They're made with a different process to Astartes that hasn't been massively explored and there would be ample room for logical lore reasoning there especially as it was a new army previously only having one metal rogue trader era model.

 

You could easily explain it away because the process and materials would be far superior and therefore more likely to be able to succeed. I think given the mystery behind how they are created you could even go the same way they did with Stormcast and have a clear visible difference between the two.

Agreed. It's frustrating in retrospect, because at the time GW made that decision they had only designed the baseline Custodes kit. Could easily have added women into later kits (just as Stormcast started out entirely male, and over time they have gradually added more and more women into more recent releases). Missed opportunity.

[Halandaar]

I can't understand why some people are so vehemently opposed to the idea to be honest. Does it really matter what kind of sex bits the original human had before they were completely remade into a transhuman killing machine, where behind inches of ceramite you can't tell the difference anyway?

[Brother Tyler]

The basis of Fulkes’ argument is that “there was never a hardline reason that said women couldn’t be Astartes…” and the only credible support for that assertion was the screencap of the post by Alan Merrett saying that “[the] reason there aren’t female Space Marines has nothing to do with lore, or background or character of Marines.” Both of these are unequivocally wrong.
 

…only a small proportion of people can become Space Marines. They must be male because zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types…

 
That is a hardline explicit lore reason for women not being Adeptus Astartes. That was from a 1st edition Chapter Approved Article that was first published in White Dwarf Magazine, re-printed in the Warhammer 40,000 Compendium, and later re-printed in the Index Astartes Apocrypha. That explanation has continued to appear through various editions, slightly modified, but generally consistent in making it explicitly clear that only males can become Adeptus Astartes. Realistically, it’s pseudo-science and any number of people can pick it apart (and some of them might even know what they’re talking about). Whether we like it or not, whether we agree or disagree with the science, it is an established fact.
 
What Alan Merrett probably meant was that the initial concepts for the Space Marines didn’t preclude females and that the restriction was incorporated later after the practicalities of sales logistics and design crept in. He almost certainly knows this better than any of us (unless some of us are GW overlords in disguise ) so I can accept that as fact.
 
If we look at the 1st edition rulebook, we have the famous “Sister Sin” image (also tied to the unknown fate of the Rainbow Warriors Chapter):
 

 
Sister Sin is considered by many to be a proto-Adepta Sororitas, but the figure clearly follows design elements of the main Adeptus Astartes line. There are small variations in terms of the chestplate and the headgear, but everything else is consistent with the portrayals of [other] Space Marines at that time. In the 1st edition rulebook the Space Marines weren’t quite the transhuman warriors that we now know; that version came later in 1st edition. In that rulebook Space Marine stat lines were very similar to those of normal humans, having some small differences in terms of their elan and wargear. I don’t doubt that initial concepts included females, but they were later dropped because of the logistics that Alan Merrett cites. As a result, the female adventurer models that pre-dated the game were realigned into the Adepta Sororitas range instead of being Space Marines. The Adepta Sororitas were mentioned in the 1st edition rulebook, but no images are directly attributed to them (Sister Sin being the only one that might be interpreted as an Adepta Sororitas).
 
What has always surprised and disappointed me was the visceral hate some people have for the idea of female Space Marines. Worse is some people’s inability to control themselves and behave in a respectful manner when the issue comes up online. I can understand those that cite the lore (I’m in that camp, after all). The people whose position I don’t understand are the ones who are opposed to the concept of female Space Marines at any cost. The grimdark Warhammer 40,000 is completely different from our modern world – individual rights are not really a concern within the Imperium. Females in the Imperium have the same opportunities as males. There are female Inquisitor Lords, female rogue traders, female commissars, etc. Females have the same opportunities as their male counterparts to serve the Emperor, to fight, and to die. Moreover, the vast majority of the Imperium’s subjects have absolutely no idea how youths are turned into the Emperor’s Angels of Death. Parents aren’t given a choice as to whether or not their children will be taken by the Adeptus Astartes. That wouldn’t really change if GW ever allows for female Adeptus Astartes.
 
The counter to the above is that I don’t understand some peoples’ desire for equal representation overturning lore. For some, I know, there is an aspect of wish-fulfilment and/or identification. In this, many of us choose (sub-)factions that align with our own self-image or a fantasized version thereof. Part of the reason for the popularity of the Adeptus Astartes, after all, is that they are superior to normal warriors (who doesn’t want to be among the elite, after all?). Hobbyists often identify with their favorite factions. There are other reasons that some might want female Space Marines, and none of them are objectively “bad” despite the objections that will arise from some quarters. For me as a male, the exclusion of males from the Adepta Sororitas isn’t objectionable because the lore gives us a rationale. If I want to play a zealous male warrior there are alternatives in the Adeptus Astartes (Black Templars come to mind, but there are many others) or I can look at the Ordo Sanctorum of the Inquisition or historical representation of the Frateris Templars. Or I can look at the Crusader models. Alternately, I can look at the Necromunda range and House Cawdor. Different strokes for different folks, obviously, so my personal flexibility in accepting faction exclusions is simply representative of one segment of the hobby community.
 
Throughout human history there have been groups that had certain exclusions and these have varied from society to society. Some historical exclusions might not be in line with some of our modern sensibilities, but there are exclusions in modern times, too. The Imperium of Mankind isn’t an enlightened society based on the evolution of modern sensibilities. It’s a dystopian future where everything has gone wrong, a regression rather than a progression. The exclusion of females from the Adeptus Astartes line doesn’t bother me any more than the exclusion of males from the Adepta Sororitas. Each exclusion is explained by explicit lore (even if we think that lore is flimsy). I do expect fair representation in those ranges that don’t have the exclusions (e.g., Astra Militarum, Aeldari Guardians, Drukhari Kabalites, etc.). In places where GW has established some sort of lore exclusion, however, I just shrug my shoulders and accept that exclusion. In truth, the Adeptus Astartes and Adepta Sororitas have the most strongly supported exclusions. It’s the Adeptus Custodes and Sisters of Silence whose exclusivity is a bit more puzzling (I can’t recall if the Adeptus Custodes lore explicitly identifies a basis for the exclusion; and the Pariah gene isn’t confined solely to females as demonstrated by the Culexus Assassin).
 
While the explicit lore gives us a canon basis for exclusivity within certain factions, there’s nothing stopping hobbyists from exercising their creativity and changing things up a bit. I’ve never had any problem with hobbyists that want to collect female Space Marines (except when they try to argue that there is an official lore basis for them).
 
It’s worth noting, however, that the two most recent versions of Codex: Space Marines haven’t included the language that restricts the Adeptus Astartes to males. These, coincidentally, are the two codices that include Primaris Space Marines and have been published as Games Workshop has worked to improve representation of diversity within the setting. GW hasn’t published a hard reversal of the “male only” lore for the Adeptus Astartes and it has preserved the Decree Passive’s verbiage for the Adepta Sororitas, but some might interpret the minor adjustments in the lore as the potential groundwork for such a shift in the future. The Primaris Space Marines are the obvious entry point for such a potential change for the Adeptus Astartes, and [future] politicking (in universe) could rationalize the abolition of the Decree Passive. Personally, I don’t see such changes happening, or if they do it won’t be any time soon simply due to the age of the molds (i.e., the real world cost to implement such changes isn’t justified at present).
 
Moving beyond different hobbyists’ preferences for changing the exclusions, the more important issue is how different hobbyists will react if GW decides to change the lore. Most, I think, will have a healthy response – simply shrugging their shoulders and moving on. Some hobbyists will incorporate the expanded models while others may choose to preserve the older exclusions within their collections. Some hobbyists, however, will have unhealthy responses, spewing vitriol and enacting other overreactions such as getting rid of their armies (some in drama queen fashion by destroying those armies). The worst reactions will be overly emotional toxicity online and in games, attacking hobbyists that are willing to embrace the expanded lore (or who decide to deviate from the exclusions in their armies now). It is the history of posts in this latter vein that have resulted in discussions about female Space Marines being closed – a measure taken to preserve the peace here at the Bolter & Chainsword.
 
For everyone it’s important to remember that this is just a game. In spite of those that disagree with the exclusions, they aren’t intended as oppressive bigotry. Similarly, it won’t be the end of the world or an insult if those exclusions are lifted in the future. Regardless of what happens (or doesn't happen), participate in the hobby in a way that you find enjoyable and don't get upset if other people participate in the hobby in their own way (unless they're cheating - cheating is bad).
 
 
 
 
 
Note: The first version of this reply was drafted almost immediately after Fulkes started his topic yesterday. We closed that discussion, however, so I didn’t post it there. I’ve revised the reply twice since then, especially after this new topic was created, sometimes incorporating commentary as a result of other replies. Some of the points I’ve made have also been covered in other replies, but I haven’t removed them since they’re necessary to the overall progression of my reply. This is a fairly active topic, however, so the two hours or so that I’ve spent revising my reply this morning don’t necessarily take into account some of the more recent replies.

[Kastor Krieg]

To me it's pretty clear. 40k and especially Space Marines, the most iconic 40k "thing", are mostly, overwhelmingly GUYS, GUYS, GUYS. Simple as that.

Now, somebody comes up and says "But what about Space Marine GIRLS?" and havoc ensues. Why?

Because it's all about a perception of control and representation. One group of people, severely underrepresented in this almost exclusively male-authored, male-read, male-characterized medium feels they have too little representation. They simply want the same feeling that guys have all the time - the ability to identify on some level with the characters. And the characters are men doing manly things like prosecuting a galactic war. The other group, who is greatly overrepresented in the medium, the male one, also wishes for the same feeling and same kind of hobby satisfaction.

So, when the first group arrives at the medium and does anything in the general direction of "Hey, make it about US as well!", it automatically reads to the overrepresented group as "Hey, don't make it as much about THOSE GUYS anymore!", so they lash out because they don't want to lose... guess what? 

REPRESENTATION.

It's a big galaxy, we can really share it with a chapter or ten of female Marines, boys.

[Kastor Krieg]

In places where GW has established some sort of lore exclusion, however, I just shrug my shoulders and accept that exclusion.

Well, yeah, because you're not among the ones being constantly and completely, vehemently excluded, eh? ;)

 

Gotta remember that not so long ago (90s, early 2000s) mostly all of the community was still on the "girls?! in my 40k?! ew, cooties!" level of social integration with our female and female-presenting gaming friends. This has changed during the last two decades, not without a hard push for representation in Games Workshop media and advertisement.

 

Those who so harshly and aggressively push back against homegrown female Astartes models / chapters could really use getting with the times.

[Brother Tyler]

 

In places where GW has established some sort of lore exclusion, however, I just shrug my shoulders and accept that exclusion.

Well, yeah, because you're not among the ones being constantly and completely, vehemently excluded, eh?

 

Actually, I am:

• Males can't be in the Adepta Sororitas except as non-Sororitas auxiliaries such as crusaders, arco-flagellants, etc.
• Males can't be in the Sisters of Silence.
• There are no male Howling Banshee models.

That's why I specifically mentioned that the exclusion of males from the Adepta Sororitas doesn't bother me in my post. 

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

There’s a good number of women who play the game now and they play various factions. I’m sure there are but I have witnessed any that play SoB. To me is interesting to consider that "what if" scenario. I’m not gonna get bent if geedub never produces female Space Marines but I think the concept could be cool.

[Doctor Perils]

Can we have male Adeptus Sorritas?

Perhaps not Male Adeptus Sororitas... But I do think the Crusader Houses should be expanded quite a lot as a whole subfaction in a larger "Adeptus Ministorum" codex, giving way for representation of most people in that codex

 

 

Snip

Could just say that all parts of the human anatomy that you cant kill people with is removed, then marines are neither gender. That way everybodys upset so no ones feelings on the matter, well... matter. 

 

Actually, if we started to refer to Space Marines as Non-Binary, or as any gender, I'd be even happier about it. At this stage of the game, I believe it would be counterproductive to change the gender representation of Firstborn, but I can't see any problem with expanding representation for Primaris. Space Marines being the starter faction and the outward face of the whole game does mean that representation actually does matter.

 

I remember when Neave Blacktalon was previewed as the first female stormcast model and there was a whole uproar... which died down pretty immediately, because the expansion of the playerbase and diversification of storytelling and viewpoints was such a positive for the game and the wider hobby.

 

 

It adds representation. Space Marines dominate 40k. Most of the books are about them, most of the art depicts them, most of the models are them. They are at the absolute heart of everything Warhammer 40k is, and that is never going to change. Yes, females exist in other factions, yes the Sisters of Battle are a thing, but the inevitable consequence of all-male Space Marines is a universe where the overwhelming majority of the setting's material depicts men. It makes it a lot harder for a woman to pick up a campaign book or a novel or a box of miniatures and see herself in the setting. That's just a fact.

 

This is what it boils down to for me. If marines weren't the central, ever-present institution that they are, it wouldn't matter. But they are, and so I can see why for some individuals it really does matter. This is why the "we have all-female sisters, so there's nothing wrong with all-male space marines" argument doesn't fly for me. One is not equal to the other.

 

To be clear, I don't think it needs to happen. This isn't something I'm actively campaigning for. But female marines wouldn't ruin my enjoyment of the setting, and as others have said above, gender doesn't really matter when it comes to marines. Do all factions need to be gender equal? I don't think so, but I also don't see a good reason for there not being female space marines beyond "the lore says (x)", when the lore already changes all the time. I'm not an authority on this sort of thing. I just try to keep an open mind. Occasionally I see people bring up historical reasons for why men should be depicted more than women in tabletop 40k, and as a actual historian, I think those arguments are spectacularly nonsensical.

 

A universe where e.g. Custodians were all male, Sisters were all female, and Marines were both male and female, would be far more equitable in my view. If I were in charge of 40k, I'd consider doing that.

 

This is such a tricky issue to discuss because, like it or not, representation in a fictional setting like 40k is just one part of a far larger sociopolitical issue. There's no right or wrong answer here. I applaud the measured responses on this thread, and appreciate the vigilance of our moderators.

I think this is really the biggest reason for expanding representation for Space Marines.

[Marshal Loss]

It’s the Adeptus Custodes and Sisters of Silence whose exclusivity is a bit more puzzling (I can’t recall if the Adeptus Custodes lore explicitly identifies a basis for the exclusion)

The latest Sisters of Silence lore (HH: Inferno) doesn't offer any real explanation for exclusivity; a few alternative explanations are offered, but their origins are shrouded in mystery. On the Adeptus Custodes, ADB had this to say:

 

 

 

There is no lore saying Custodians are X, Y, or Z, because until very recently, there was no Custodian lore at all. That's why I'd be fine with female Custodians (and the models would look badass). Anyone saying it breaks the lore is lying and/or wrong, because we were actually in the meetings and sending the emails discussing the invention of said lore, and there was literally nothing in the old lore that weighed comprehensively (or at all) either way. I can think of reasons it would make sense. I can think of reasons it wouldn't. But it's a very minor point.

[templargdt]

I'm utterly against female space marines.  Saying almost anything else on this subject is probably against the forum rules, and the mods should simply meltagun this topic when it comes up, because it cannot be discussed outside of current politics and a certain ideology which you criticize at your peril.  

[templargdt]

I can't understand why some people are so vehemently opposed to the idea to be honest. Does it really matter what kind of sex bits the original human had before they were completely remade into a transhuman killing machine, where behind inches of ceramite you can't tell the difference anyway?

Yes.

[Valkyrion]

It's not so much about being vehemently opposed to the idea of female space marines as much as being vehemently opposed to changing established fiction to fit the ideas of real life society.

 

Had female space marines been a thing, remained a thing, models were made and included in codexes and armies for the last 30 years then no one would say 'we should make it so that women can't be space marines.' 

[Warhead01]

 

 I remember when Neave Blacktalon was previewed as the first female stormcast model and there was a whole uproar... which died down pretty immediately, because the expansion of the playerbase and diversification of storytelling and viewpoints was such a positive for the game and the wider hobby.

I recall at the time my largest problem was the sculpt. My wife pointed out it looked like the top of one model and the lower half of a different model.

I'm just opposed to them without helmets. I don't even like Space Marines not wearing a Helmet. Buggs me to no end. 

Dude, Lady, whatever just put that helmet on! 

[Sarvis]

 

 

If female or LGBTQ or other members want to model and fluff their Marines to present as female, to get representation in the hobby, this especially should never be stifled. There's also no fathomable issue with a male member sticking female, grot or Tau heads onto their Marine bodies and calling it a project.

 

What should not be allowed is open bashing of users' models / unit fluff for doing something that isn't canon but doesn't hurt anyone.

I dont have an issue with people conversions or personal armies, I have issue with people saying GW should make fem marines. Either way I have no faith in GW with the lore now, Primaris marines running round with the most vanilla Primarch ever penned farting out miracles all over the Imperium even though its ripped in half and Chaos is drinking your soul out through your nose, Im not a fan of Age of Guilliman...

 

Some people use the diversity card, but are they genuine with their requests or are they part of the toxic 'woke' movement that see's everything as problematic and wants 'diversity' jammed in everywhere for them to them move on when the franchise has flopped? Also what body shape do the femmarines have? Curvy and busty or the bodyshape of a 12 year old boy so she isnt over sexualised? Even if they give in and make fem marines some of the people that want them will still complain.

 

Representation, I want short fat bald bearded people, bring back Squats, they have always been in the lore and they are great. :D

 

Either way give us new Eldar Aspects before you ruin anything else GW.

Agreed on all counts.

[Sarvis]

Just gonna throw in a quote from metalmammoth that I hadn’t considered before, but is probably one of the best points against female astartes.

 

 

“Also, think about perhaps the most heinous aspect of your idea: Little girls taken from their families and subjected to all the horror and agony of Astartes training. Sound fun to ya? Does it?! The mutilations, vivisections, beatings, and outright torture? The grotesqueries of failed implantations? And all this, by keeping in mind the point above: Likely they didn't want to be there...”

 

Taking little girls from their families and subjecting them to the astartes process seems.... way far past grimdark then I hope anyone is comfortable with.

Edited May 9, 2021 by Sarvis

[Marshal Loss]

Taking little girls from their families and subjecting them to the astartes process seems.... way far past grimdark then I hope anyone is comfortable with.

And taking little boys doesn't? I know you're not saying that, but come on, let's not go there. There are some parts of the 40k universe that undoubtedly reflect the horrors of the real world that are not elaborated on for good reason. If this topic is going to stay open, steer clear...

[Sarvis]

 

 

Taking little girls from their families and subjecting them to the astartes process seems.... way far past grimdark then I hope anyone is comfortable with.

And taking little boys doesn't? I know you're not saying that, but come on, let's not go there. There are some parts of the 40k universe that undoubtedly reflect the horrors of the real world that are not elaborated on for good reason. If this topic is going to stay open, steer clear...

Yes I think it’s worse. It comes off as rapey and makes me uncomfortable to think about. Torturing lttle girls is just too far over the line for me. Can’t help how I feel.

[Halandaar]

• There are no male Howling Banshee models.

 

This isn't correct. When the new plastic kit came out GW said the Exarch with the bare head was a male, although barring that head it looked the same as any other Banshee, because the armour is symbolic and represents a female form regardless of the gender of the occupant.

Edited May 9, 2021 by Halandaar

[Valkyrion]

Saying that the lore prohibits females from becoming space marines isn't leading people to suicide. 

 

No one is saying that you, Person A, shouldn't declare that your space marines are female, or homosexual, or trans or anything of the sort. People are saying that Games Workshop shouldn't say that.

 

They are your toy soldiers, we're in a free society, and you can do whatever you want with your property within the bounds of the law.

[Oxydo]

Yes I think it’s worse. It comes off as rapey and makes me uncomfortable to think about. Torturing lttle girls is just too far over the line for me. Can’t help how I feel.

Of course you can't help how you feel. You can however recognise that that is a double standard and avoid using it as an argument.

[Halandaar]

 

I can't understand why some people are so vehemently opposed to the idea to be honest. Does it really matter what kind of sex bits the original human had before they were completely remade into a transhuman killing machine, where behind inches of ceramite you can't tell the difference anyway?

Yes.

 

Why?

[Bryan Blaire]

Couldn’t there be “super Sororitas” that eschew ties with the Ecclisiarchy with gene-seed implants and “beefier” power armor akin to the Space Marines and go from there?

 

Then you’d have an exclusively male faction and exclusively female faction, made the same way and doing the same things - both operate out of fortress monasteries, fight for the Imperium on their terms, etc.  They could even be part of the same Adeptus.

 

Hell, for all we know “Cawl already did this” and GW is simply waiting for the right time to produce the models.

 

I’m not even sure the models would be all that different - there’s some body variation amongst Marines, but it seems to be more in the size aspect, and some of the underlying birth features, but there’s also a lot that gets remade (or should get remade if we weren’t playing with magitech space wizard science).  So you’d probably have your pick of conversion material depending on whether you wanted your “Adeptus Astartes Amazonius” to be smaller (convert from SoB figs) or larger (convert from Gravis figs).

 

The grimdark monstrousness of the creation method remains the same, regardless of who it happens to - it could happen to frogs, and it would be monstrous.