# The Emperor, genetics and no female Space Marines



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

So as I typically do I was mulling some stuff over in my mind on the way to work and was struck by a random thought on why the Emperor needs to use the Y chromosome to make Marines. Basically it's because of something the gene has: a short leg. My thought is to minimize rejection, failure and catastrophic mutation the geneseed amends that short leg of the Y early in puberty basically making it an artificial X. The body is already geared to read that chromosome for puberty so it just reads the additional instructions on top of the base ones.

Also crossed my mind is that the switch for psykers is likely in the X chromosome since both sexes can be psykers.

Thoughts, or disagreements?


----------



## Iraqiel (May 21, 2008)

Possible. 

I think it would be difficulty to justify the inability to create female space marines, but in the same way that speying a bitch is much more intrusive than castration, perhaps it's simply that they additional physiological stress on top of the already immensely harrowing insertion of the black carapace leads to a sufficiently high failure rate of candidates. The inefficiency has led to an all inclusive ban on the practice to save progenoid glands and time? Maybe this would then justify female space marines for chapters like the Crimson Fists, who are decimated and urgently need recruits no matter the cost?

In relation to the psyker gene; It may be linked to the gender chromosome, but there are a lot of other possible chromosomes that it could be a mutation of, or perhaps all mankind in the 41st millenium is not the same species as now, despite outward appearances? Perhaps the chromosome chains are sufficiently different?


----------



## Brother Armiger (Mar 24, 2016)

If I'm not mistaken, Space Marines aren't castrated. There's rogue Space Marines that have fled and started families of their own. Their children were healthy, big- but not 'astartes'.


----------



## Haskanael (Jul 5, 2011)

Brother Armiger said:


> If I'm not mistaken, Space Marines aren't castrated. There's rogue Space Marines that have fled and started families of their own. Their children were healthy, big- but not 'astartes'.


I would love to know where you found that information


----------



## Brother Armiger (Mar 24, 2016)

Haskanael said:


> I would love to know where you found that information



I can't remember where I was reading it, but I believe it was specifically about one Chapter hunting astartes that had fled to begin normal lives. If I find it, I'll share it.

But it's slightly less absurd than THEY CUT THEIR PENISES OFF!


----------



## Haskanael (Jul 5, 2011)

Brother Armiger said:


> I can't remember where I was reading it, but I believe it was specifically about one Chapter hunting astartes that had fled to begin normal lives. If I find it, I'll share it.
> 
> But it's slightly less absurd than THEY CUT THEIR PENISES OFF!


I just figured that the transformation into a space marine left the marines infertile


----------



## Brother Armiger (Mar 24, 2016)

Haskanael said:


> I just figured that the transformation into a space marine left the marines infertile



I would hope it did. 

Can you imagine the expectations of an Astartes dad?

"SON I AM DISAPPOINT"

And just imagine the ass beatings.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

I disagree.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

The reason I was figuring it was done that way was the need to add extra genetic switches telling the growing body that certain organs needed to be turned on, ect. Plus we know some generic tampering occurs since they end up often sharing traits with their Primarch.


----------



## Euphrati (May 24, 2009)

*lets out a long sigh and drags out her soapbox*

Out of everything in the 30/40k universe that people accept without question- all of the deamonic entities, xenos species, psykers with god-like powers, lobotomized human-machine hybrids, perpetuals, Primarchs, etc...

The fact that seems to come up for argument over and over again is that females CAN NOT be astartes.

Let me be clear here, the lore does not leave wiggle room: Astartes are, and can only be, male.

'But, but.. what if *insert whatever lore butchering left-field concept that the arguer has convinced themselves of*...' 

No. Just, NO. The lore states directly that the process fails if tried on a female. Not sometimes work in rare cases. Not one in a billion chance. Fails - and fails catastrophically at that. Why does it fail? It fails because the process doesn't work on those who are genetically female. 

Why is this so hard of a pill to swallow over all of the strange and bizarre facets of 30/40k? You want boobs on your army, got it... Sisters of Battle are that way :washim:. Yes, I know they need an update. I hope they get a glorious one sometime soon, with enough plastic models and bitz to choke a bloodthirster. The fact that their models are less than stellar right now is no reason to take a chainglave to nearly 30 years of established lore. 

*kicks soapbox over*

Now, onto the second topic that has reared its head in this thread. Astartes and procreation.

The Crimson Fist book - Rynn's World touches on this topic. Apparently, one of the older chapter masters (Traegus) had attempted a breeding program with _failed _aspirants. It is noted in this program that only aspirants that failed early in the process to become astartes were viable for the breeding because after a certain point in the process (if they even survived failure) they were rendered sterile. This breeding program failed so spectacularly that is was not only abandoned but was banned from ever being attempted again.

Now, there are some Chapters that encourage their warriors to _live _among the people of their home world (Salamanders are a great example of this). These Chapters tend to emphasis protection of humanity and 'living' amongst the human population helps to remind the trans-human astartes of this mentality as it is apparently easy for astartes to 'forget' their humanity and view normal mortals with disdain.

From everything the lore hints at- astartes cannot breed (be that from lack of viability to lack of desire). But, the lore has notable instances of astartes becoming 'attached' to females in a protective sense. This can be seen in a number of storylines- from Ragnar (40k Space Wolves) to Argel Tal (30k Word Bearer). It seems that physical attraction and desire is mostly wiped out from an astartes through the indoctrination process and any lingering traces that remain convert into a fierce desire to 'protect' the female in question- much like a highly trained attack dog 'bonding' to a certain individual.


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

:goodpost:


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

Euphrati said:


> *lets out a long sigh and drags out her soapbox*
> *kicks soapbox over*


You didn't actually read the OP, did you?

The OP was about a potential reason why there were no female Space marines, not asking why there could not be any.


----------



## Euphrati (May 24, 2009)

hailene said:


> You didn't actually read the OP, did you?
> 
> The OP was about a potential reason why there were no female Space marines, not asking why there could not be any.


Yes, I did read the OP. At the end of their post they opened the floor to 'Thoughts, or disagreements?'. Which is what I put forth.

My post, if you read it closely, was to the _thought _that of all the odd points of lore in the 30/40k universe that people accept without question- why is it that the 'no female astartes' seems to be a sticking point in people's craws when the lore is very clear on the matter. Basically, I was asking why is it that this bit of established lore seems to be always questioned over others. It is why I prefaced my post with the allusion of the soapbox- meaning I was about to air a personal view on a topic (something that the OP encouraged at the end of their post).

After that I went on to touch on the secondary topic(s) raised in the thread, referencing points of cannon and offering my own personal opinion on it.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

There are no female astartes and there never will be and the fluff is absolutely concrete that the made up science doesn't work on the lady people with the boob things. That's as far as it goes; if you introduce real science 40k falls apart at the best of times. The only thing I can think of that's even a vague shot is the Daemonculabula, which was a. a woman with astartes gene seed and b. as far as I know accepted female 'aspirants' as well as male, but what crawled out after 'the process' was usually hard to call a space marine at the best of times. God knows what it'd do to someone that wasn't already an ideal astartes candidate i.e. a woman.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

I agree the made up science suffers when real science shows up but it was a way I could see using real science to justify the made up science.

Basically I was bouncing my random brain leavings for the sake of possible discussion.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

Euphrati said:


> Yes, I did read the OP. At the end of their post they opened the floor to 'Thoughts, or disagreements?'. Which is what I put forth.


Ah, so you misunderstood the post then, I think.

The post was asking about thoughts or disagreements about the idea of the Y chromosome's "short leg" allowed the Emperor and his fleshsmiths to scribble in some extra instructions (as opposed to a woman's double Xs having no space, apparently. I have little knowledge about genetics and chromosomes).

I don't believe the OP was asking why there weren't any female Space Marines.



Euphrati said:


> Basically, I was asking why is it that this bit of established lore seems to be always questioned over others.


Basically because in a universe of daemons, basically magic, and incredibly advanced medical science that _is_ basically magic, it seems odd that women are singled out of the Space Marine club.

With all that went into the making of the primarchs and space marines, seems odd to cut your recruiting pool in half.

Compared to the rest of the universe, it seems like it requires a reader to suspend their disbelief a bit.

Which I do, but it's still something odd.


----------



## Reaper45 (Jun 21, 2011)

hailene said:


> Ah, so you misunderstood the post then, I think.
> 
> The post was asking about thoughts or disagreements about the idea of the Y chromosome's "short leg" allowed the Emperor and his fleshsmiths to scribble in some extra instructions (as opposed to a woman's double Xs having no space, apparently. I have little knowledge about genetics and chromosomes).
> 
> ...


People are just going to have to get over the fact that females are different than males.

Secondly once you're wearing power armor no one is going to be noticing that you have boobs.


Seeing as how boobie armor is extremely stupid and has never been done in history.

The blood angels chest armor thing is a different story altogether.


----------



## Euphrati (May 24, 2009)

hailene said:


> Ah, so you misunderstood the post then, I think.


No, I understood where the OP was going with their thoughts on the matter- giving a possible modern scientific explanation as to why the astartes process only works on males.

But, this is not modern science. We already know that the Emperor's own male genecode, warpcraft, and all sorts of voodoo was thoroughly tangled up in the creation of the Primarchs and, subsequently, their Legions.

My point was why do we really need a detailed explanation? Why does this particular bit of lore_ have to be explained above and beyond_ the already numerous references in the lore that it simply doesn't work on females?



hailene said:


> Basically because in a universe of daemons, basically magic, and incredibly advanced medical science that _is_ basically magic, it seems odd that women are singled out of the Space Marine club.
> 
> With all that went into the making of the primarchs and space marines, seems odd to cut your recruiting pool in half.
> 
> ...


If you look at it as a numbers game and in breeding terms, not in a society bound by political correctness, it actually makes logical sense to limit it to males only.

You are looking to create the perfect warrior- strong, highly physical, highly aggressive. Traits that are, as a whole, naturally higher in human males. This is a simple biological fact. Not to mention that adding testosterone to a 'normal' woman to meet the same natural level found in a male causes all sorts of issues biologically. 

Because of how human reproduction works, a healthy population can stand to lose more males and still remain viable to recoup the loss suffered in a much _shorter _time than if it lost the same number of females.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Why over explain lore? Because I think it's fun. I mean I am same person who spent the better part of a day researching the Imperium's rough population to try and work out a realistic number of Sisters of Battle for the setting. Stuff like this is what I do.

And lengthenibg the short leg on the Y just seems like it's have less possible ways to wrong than lengthening the legs on the X beyond what it is. The body could read an X chromosome (even if it was essentially a fake X made to trick the body into running additional instructions) over expecting it to read a gene it's not designed to read. Additionally regular Marines require no voodoo or else they would need psykers or sorcerors to create instead of apothocaries.

One fluff justification I think Insawfor the lack of female Marines is that it's to keep the Marines tied to humanity, to be dependent on them so they could never breed on their own and become completely devoid of their human roots or reject those they protect.

Which is an arguement I like, but I also like my gene one too.


----------



## Euphrati (May 24, 2009)

Actually, there is some very specific 'voodoo' required for standard astartes. 

It is called geneseed.

They cannot produce more geneseed from scratch, as it requires already mature geneseed to grow more in the body of a new astartes. Much to the dismay of Legions that suffered great losses in the heresy.

No geneseed, no astartes. Geneseed is a direct genetic line back to the first astartes, the Primarchs, and the Emperor's original 'voodoo'.

It might not require a pysker to install it, but it sure was created by one of the greatest psykers to live.


----------



## Brother Armiger (Mar 24, 2016)

Euphrati said:


> ...[A LENGTHY SERMON FILLED WITH THE FURY AND RIGHTEOUSNESS OF THE GOD-EMPEROR OF MANKIND]...



You know it always baffled me how some of those people whine about the Astartes having no women, and the lengths they go to justify it being possible...

When we should do a comparison:

The Astartes are genetically enhanced as boys to become walking, biologically augmented, superhuman killing machines. They are artificially psychologically conditioned to be a warrior in a cohesive unit fighting in the name of the Emperor. They are given the best arms and armor and vehicles in the Imperium. Most of the time, these young boys are taken against their will and press-ganged into service until they die.

The Sisters of Battle are a bunch of crazy-ass bitches, but they're just mortal women. They train to become hardass warriors and have a camaraderie with their sisters forged in battle and experiences together. They have power armor, bolters, meltas, flamers, and a church organ on tank tracks. These women can quit if they want, and are all volunteers to this life.

Who's the real badass? Why do people obsess over women being Space Marines when women are already the most TERRIFYING force in the Imperium? 

If women could be Space Marines, they'd take them from the Sisters of Battle and there would be absolutely nothing in the Galaxy that wasn't human and screaming the Hymns of the God-Emperor to the top of their lungs.


----------



## Iraqiel (May 21, 2008)

Brother Armiger said:


> You know it always baffled me how some of those people whine about the Astartes having no women, and the lengths they go to justify it being possible...
> 
> When we should do a comparison:
> 
> ...


Hahaha Nice.


----------



## Shandathe (May 2, 2010)

It seems like a reasonable explanation, as it explains both why there's a maximum age on becoming a Space Marine (you'd otherwise expect recruitment to heavily focus on older veterans), and why the process would only work on males.

Note, in my view it's extremely likely that the Dark Age of Technology also had a process for females, and it's actually equally likely that the process would've been conspicuously missing from the book the Emperor had to work from. Reason: As soon as you make a superior man and a superior female, and they can breed, you've just made your species obsolete. The situation may well have been the biological equivalent to the Men of Iron... and been resolved in a similar manner 

Anyway, the situation is as it is, and Brother Armiger worded my feelings on it quite well :biggrin:


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

Brother Armiger said:


> When we should do a comparison:


Pardon me, but I feel/believe some of things here are incorrect or wrong.



Brother Armiger said:


> They are artificially psychologically conditioned to be a warrior in a cohesive unit fighting in the name of the Emperor.


Well they are really conditioned to be a fighting brotherhood in the name of the Emperor, their respective primarch, and the Imperium as a whole.



Brother Armiger said:


> Most of the time, these young boys are taken against their will and press-ganged into service until they die.


Any sources on this one? Because I think this is an extreme minority more than anything. For what little I've ever seen in regards to recruitment, its viewed as a great honour and a lot of prestige and positive is thrust on both attempting to be taken and those who might achieve it.

Space Wolves, Black Templars, Crimson Fists, and Imperial Fists only take those who are proven warriors in some way, Ultramarines, Salamanders, and White Scars look for the most fit and, likely barring the Scars, have an active pool of aspirants trying to be chosen willingly.

Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Flesh Tearers, and Mortifactors have aspirants compete to see who is the best. This doesn't mean all of them ultimately go through with it (read Angels of Darkness for this one) but they do not return to their people.


I would think that those who are taken unwillingly are in the far, far, far minority. This seems more true given the fact that aspirants are taken at the start of puberty, a time when you can be at some of your most competitive.



Brother Armiger said:


> The Sisters of Battle are a bunch of crazy-ass bitches, but they're just mortal women.


Space marines might be augmented and modified, but they are also mortal and some of them can be bat shit crazy.

If your aiming to do a humble comparison, then you honestly don't have much beyond the fact that the Sororitas are unaugmented. They are a highly trained, elite sisterhood fighting in the name of the Emperor, the founder of their order, and the Imperium. They have access to some of the best weapons, wargear, and vehicles available to mankind; and they are trained/conditioned from an early age for this life and no other.



Brother Armiger said:


> They train to become hardass warriors and have a camaraderie with their sisters forged in battle and experiences together.


Replace sisters with brothers and this describes Space Marines, and replace with fellow soldiers and your describing the Guard.



Brother Armiger said:


> They have power armor, bolters, meltas, flamers, and a church organ on tank tracks.


The exorcist aside, marines have all of this to so whats your point?



Brother Armiger said:


> These women can quit if they want, and are all volunteers to this life.


Sure, a sister from one of the majoris houses (since your likely ignoring the minoris ones for this) that has achieved a certain rank or suffered hideous injuries could retire from front line actions, but they will always do something for the Sororitas.

And do you have any sources to back up sisters being volunteers? Because last I recall they are about as brainwashed (possibly even more so in some cases) as marines to be servants of the Imperial church and their duty only ends upon death.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Sisters are drawn from the oprhans in the Schola and are all women who showed incredible levels of faith and devotion as children. That only gets further enhanced by the church.

Battle Sisters "retire" to non-militant orders mainly, or end up working for/becoming Inquisitors. Or dying.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Shandathe said:


> Reason: As soon as you make a superior man and a superior female, and they can breed, you've just made your species obsolete. The situation may well have been the biological equivalent to the Men of Iron... and been resolved in a similar manner


That's... actually a really cool theory. It's not that female Astartes _can't_ be done, but anyone who does it has the Inquisition come knocking. With extreme prejudice. And their work announced, posthumously, as a failure of catastrophic proportions, so nobody ever tries it again.

I like it a lot.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Zion said:


> So as I typically do I was mulling some stuff over in my mind on the way to work and was struck by a random thought on why the Emperor needs to use the Y chromosome to make Marines. Basically it's because of something the gene has: a short leg. My thought is to minimize rejection, failure and catastrophic mutation the geneseed amends that short leg of the Y early in puberty basically making it an artificial X. The body is already geared to read that chromosome for puberty so it just reads the additional instructions on top of the base ones.
> 
> Also crossed my mind is that the switch for psykers is likely in the X chromosome since both sexes can be psykers.
> 
> Thoughts, or disagreements?


The idea has merit, I think, but it's hard to say either way with 40k. 

There are a few sorta hand-wavey ways you can go about explaining marines being only male, with this sorta being one of them. As far as adding stuff into the genome, assuming you add said stuff into a non-coding region, you can pretty much get away with murder; the body can't really tell if something isn't you once it's in the genome, especially in terminally differentiated cells - that's why retroviruses work. On the Y chromosome, it's true that it might be a little easier to do something like this and get away with it simply because there are comparatively fewer genes and the ones which are there can be fudged without the person dyeing. This might help to explain marines being incapable of fathering children as the process might cause a loss-of-functon mutation in a gene like spy which is needed to initiate spermatogenesis. So yeah, that's one explanation. 

Another explanation, and one I like, is that aspirants undergo the process during puberty because maturation and activation of the various organs required male sex hormones, which increase drastically during puberty. If activation of the various organs were tied to DHT levels, for example, it would make perfect sense for the process to only work in males because DHT levels are considerably higher in males than females. I suppose you could supplement females with male sex hormones as a workaround, but why? It isn't as though the Imperium is lacking in young men. As far as this going into explaining why marines can't father children, well.... perhaps they can, just not with human women. Assuming that they can't reproduce with human women, it is possible that marines, due to whatever genetics modifications they undergo, are genetically different enough that they can no longer produce viable offspring with humans. Which would make them a different species, but, hey, space magic. 

At the end of the day, you can explain away whatever you want in 40K however you want to do it, because none of it makes any god damn sense. Even what I said above is probably largely horse shit, and there's something I've forgotten from one of my genetics courses that explains why it's horse shit. But, again, space magic.

Oh, and to the psyker thing, I have no reason to think that it's a sex-linked trait, besides the fact that males and females can become psykers. It's entirely possible that the phenotype is polygenic and that the genes responsible are on one OR MORE different chromosomes, which may or may not include X. Polygenic incoherence can get complicated fast.


----------



## Euphrati (May 24, 2009)

MidnightSun said:


> That's... actually a really cool theory. It's not that female Astartes _can't_ be done, but anyone who does it has the Inquisition come knocking. With extreme prejudice. And their work announced, posthumously, as a failure of catastrophic proportions, so nobody ever tries it again.
> 
> I like it a lot.


*Narrows her eyes and sighs*

See? This is what I'm talking about. It seems like people simply cannot accept females _can not_ be astartes. Even when the lore is outright specific on it cannot be done- not that 'well, it is possible but the wrath of the =][= will fall on you!'. 

There always seems to be someone trying to butcher the lore in some round-a-bout way to justify their army of female 'marines'.

Yet, I have yet to see someone try and pass off an army of MALE battle sisters.... :scratchhead:


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Euphrati said:


> Yet, I have yet to see someone try and pass off an army of MALE battle sisters.... :scratchhead:


..... you mean space marines? :angel:


----------



## Euphrati (May 24, 2009)

gen.ahab said:


> ..... you mean space marines? :angel:


:laugh:

Nope, I mean full on Sisters of Battle- here is my Adepta Sororitas army, oh by the way they are all male! Doesn't my Canoness look smashing in _*His *_fleur de lis embossed armour?

Who says 'Sisters' cannot be boys....


----------



## Shandathe (May 2, 2010)

Euphrati said:


> See? This is what I'm talking about. It seems like people simply cannot accept females _can not_ be astartes. Even when the lore is outright specific on it cannot be done- not that 'well, it is possible but the wrath of the =][= will fall on you!'.
> 
> There always seems to be someone trying to butcher the lore in some round-a-bout way to justify their army of female 'marines'.
> 
> Yet, I have yet to see someone try and pass off an army of MALE battle sisters.... :scratchhead:


I'm not saying anyone in the Imperium can do it, I'm arguing that Humanity at its peak, during the Dark Age of Technology, *definitely* would have had the ability. Note the Navigator Houses also stem from this period. If you can create a (mostly) stably breeding human line that can actually see the Warp, you can do the same for superhumans. The fact that it's a bad idea due to the aforementioned side effect of getting yourself an "Obsolete" tag would not have stopped it happening :grin:

As for male Battle Sisters... The idea's actually been tossed around before, mostly for counts-as purposes. Not sure if it's been done properly the way you'd want it to be, but we may see some should there ever be a new Sisters Codex with a lot of new toys everyone wants. 

As for who said 'Sisters' cannot be boys... that would've been the High Lords of Terra. The previous incarnation of Ecclesiarchy forces, Frateris Templar, can arguably be build on the Sororitas Codex. Between 30K and 40K though, difficult time period to find a game in


----------



## Brother Armiger (Mar 24, 2016)

darkreever said:


> Pardon me, but I feel/believe some of things here are incorrect or wrong.


While we're nitpicking, "Incorrect" and "wrong" are both the same thing. 



darkreever said:


> Any sources on this one? Because I think this is an extreme minority more than anything. For what little I've ever seen in regards to recruitment, its viewed as a great honour and a lot of prestige and positive is thrust on both attempting to be taken and those who might achieve it.


Astartes take the most qualified. That doesn't always mean 'recruit', or 'offer'. A lot of guys line up for it, but you also have to keep in mind that the Astartes are pulling 13-year-old boys in many cases. Hardly an 'adult decision', but you could argue feral world cultures and the like.





darkreever said:


> I would think that those who are taken unwillingly are in the far, far, far minority. This seems more true given the fact that aspirants are taken at the start of puberty, a time when you can be at some of your most competitive.


And a child.




darkreever said:


> Space marines might be augmented and modified, but they are also mortal and some of them can be bat shit crazy.


Whereas, all SOBs are completely bonkers. In a good way.



darkreever said:


> And do you have any sources to back up sisters being volunteers? Because last I recall they are about as brainwashed (possibly even more so in some cases) as marines to be servants of the Imperial church and their duty only ends upon death.


As I understood, the Sisters don't have to be Sisters. It's a lifestyle choice. Better question, you got sources saying they're forced in?


----------



## Brother Armiger (Mar 24, 2016)

Euphrati said:


> *Narrows her eyes and sighs*
> 
> See? This is what I'm talking about. It seems like people simply cannot accept females _can not_ be astartes. Even when the lore is outright specific on it cannot be done- not that 'well, it is possible but the wrath of the =][= will fall on you!'.
> 
> ...



Welcome to 2016. If it's white, male, or heterosexual in its entirety it must be 'enriched'.

I've seen this conversation a thousand times with more 'radical' elements. This is how I picture the progression...

RADICAL: "Why are there no female Space Marines?"

WH40k: "Because it's in the lore. Emperor said so. Emperor made it so. And it just doesn't work."

RADICAL: "But what science supports that?"

WH40k: "I don't know, you'd have to ask the giant super-psychic guy that fights gods and demons about this. He'd also be the guy you want to ask why a .75 Caliber gyrojet explosive projectile is feasible, while you're talking science and physics and whatnot."

RADICAL: "We want women!"

WH40k: "We made Adeptus Sororitas. Very effective. Power armor. They can pull off some rather amazing feats and go toe-to-toe with Space Marines on the tabletop and hold their own."

RADICAL: "But where are they?"

WH40k: "Those Adeptus Sororitas didn't do as well as we'd hoped. Not a lot of people bought them."

RADICAL: "Make female Space Marines, then."

WH40k: "No. There are females in every other army. The lore says no, and we're not going to re-write that just to accomodate you."

RADICAL: "BIGOT! SEXIST!"

WH40k: "Look, the last time we made a bunch of females they didn't sell."

RADICAL: "Make all Space Marines female! Then people will be forced to play them!"

WH40k: "How much are you spending on this product?"

RADICAL: "I... have... I play Pathfinder...?"

WH40k: "Piss off."


----------



## Reaper45 (Jun 21, 2011)

Shandathe said:


> I'm not saying anyone in the Imperium can do it, I'm arguing that Humanity at its peak, during the Dark Age of Technology, *definitely* would have had the ability. Note the Navigator Houses also stem from this period. If you can create a (mostly) stably breeding human line that can actually see the Warp, you can do the same for superhumans. The fact that it's a bad idea due to the aforementioned side effect of getting yourself an "Obsolete" tag would not have stopped it happening :grin:
> 
> As for male Battle Sisters... The idea's actually been tossed around before, mostly for counts-as purposes. Not sure if it's been done properly the way you'd want it to be, but we may see some should there ever be a new Sisters Codex with a lot of new toys everyone wants.
> 
> As for who said 'Sisters' cannot be boys... that would've been the High Lords of Terra. The previous incarnation of Ecclesiarchy forces, Frateris Templar, can arguably be build on the Sororitas Codex. Between 30K and 40K though, difficult time period to find a game in


One good reason as to why we need female astartes.

Equal rights is not a valid reason.


----------



## Iron-Within (Jan 23, 2016)

Brother Armiger said:


> While we're nitpicking, "Incorrect" and "wrong" are both the same thing.
> 
> Astartes take the most qualified. That doesn't always mean 'recruit', or 'offer'. A lot of guys line up for it, but you also have to keep in mind that the Astartes are pulling 13-year-old boys in many cases. Hardly an 'adult decision', but you could argue feral world cultures and the like.
> 
> ...


Dude come on, your asked for sources and come back being a cheeky ass and requiring sources from the person not agreeing with you.

Complete weaksauce


----------



## Brother Armiger (Mar 24, 2016)

Iron-Within said:


> Dude come on, your asked for sources and come back being a cheeky ass and requiring sources from the person not agreeing with you.
> 
> Complete weaksauce



Oh, I'm sorry. I was enjoying some humor about a fictional game about little plastic men, not writing a research paper. 

You don't have to ride the mod's power sword, if you know what I mean.

Oh, and if you'd like your answer- as I'm reading it, they require a dedication of faith beyond their peers. I'm pretty sure if you looked at a Drill Abbot and said, "I'm not into this Adeptus Sororitas combat shit" you might get smacked, but they don't want you if you're not into it.

Grabbing this from the 40k wiki (it's actually more detailed than the Lexicanum).


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

Brother Armiger said:


> While we're nitpicking, "Incorrect" and "wrong" are both the same thing.


Your nitpicking, I wasn't. Unless you count addressing each part of a post as nitpicking, then I guess I am.



Brother Armiger said:


> Astartes take the most qualified. That doesn't always mean 'recruit', or 'offer'. A lot of guys line up for it, but you also have to keep in mind that the Astartes are pulling 13-year-old boys in many cases. Hardly an 'adult decision', but you could argue feral world cultures and the like.


I don't know, in the case of aspirants taken from death or feral worlds they are being given the chance to receive their cultures highest honour (prove yourself worthy to be accepted amongst the 'sky warriors')

And when it comes to aspirants of more advanced worlds, chapters still look for those who would barely think twice about leaving their old life behind. In the novel Sons of Dorn by Chris Roberson there is a scout who was taken from a hive world where he had been a pit slave and used in death matches for the entertainment of others.



Brother Armiger said:


> Whereas, all SOBs are completely bonkers. In a good way.


Except they are not, unless we choose to ignore all of the stories in which they are not.



Brother Armiger said:


> As I understood, the Sisters don't have to be Sisters. It's a lifestyle choice. Better question, you got sources saying they're forced in?


"Female Progena may well be entered into the Adepta Sororitas. Progena of both sexes may be recruited into the Inquisition or even the Officio Assassinorum. Though the lifestyle of the teachers and pupils is strict and puritan, *it is a great honour to pass through the Schola Progenium, and
those who do are well aware of their privilege*."
Pg 6, codex adeptus sororitas

"Every Battle Sister is an orphan *raised from birth to believe in the righteousness of their cause*."

"Each squad of Battle Sisters is led by a Sister Superior. These warriors are ranked beneath the Canonesses of the Orders Militant and each is directly responsible for the conduct and training of her squad. When a *Sororitas joins one of the Orders Militant, she will be adopted by a Sister Superior*, and as she learns the ways of battle, it will be this mentor who looks after her physical and spiritual training."
Pg 45, codex adeptus sororitas

Now I know there are more, possibly in the 5th edition sororitas stop-gap codex, codex witch hunters, the novel faith and fire, and in other short stories or novels (one of the Cain novels is about his retired life at a schola where there is at least one sister training new recruits).

But lets just look at the above three. And yes you are right, the women who become sisters did not have to do so, there is a chance they could have been picked up by the inquisition, assassin orders, imperial navy, guard, or become a storm trooper. For those who are taken into the sororitas, their entire life they are raised to believe in serving the imperial church and their order.

Once they start down that road, they get adopted into a family of sorts, and the conditioning they had been going through in a schola continues (or more likely ramps up).

A sister who no longer, say, feels the calling of fighting on the front lines and who has also had a knack for language or healing might turn to one of the orders minoris. But remember thats essentially turning your back on and walking away from the family you had been brought into. Its likely not something you see very often.


----------



## Euphrati (May 24, 2009)

Brother Armiger said:


> Welcome to 2016. If it's white, male, or heterosexual in its entirety it must be 'enriched'.


One of the reasons I enjoy 30/40k is the lack of 'politically correct force it down your throat' vitriol that is rampant in today's society.



Reaper45 said:


> One good reason as to why we need female astartes.


No, there is no good reason for female astartes. We do not, in fact, need them. 

Astartes are male. Lore makes this absolutely clear. The is no 'grey area' here. Get over it.

(this is coming from a female by the way)


----------



## Brother Armiger (Mar 24, 2016)

Euphrati said:


> One of the reasons I enjoy 30/40k is the lack of 'politically correct force it down your throat' vitriol that is rampant in today's society.


Oh, don't think our hobby isn't targeted for Exterminatus by the Adeptus Socjus. If this were the place to discuss it, I'd find articles that claim we do everything from advocate 'that four-letter R-word' and that we're all some form of right-wing bigots.

I was reading something earlier about how people are putting up 'safe gaming space' cards to virtue-signal that they aren't bigots and rapists, and to deter the same. 

More of these folks that thinking some piece of paper or sign will magically deter bad people, even more comical because it's not a legal document or anything of the sort. Truth be told, most of the horrible people I know go well out of their way to signal that they aren't what they are as a deceptive tactic.

The worst part was is that I politely commented to the creator of these cards and signs that it seemed to me that it'd be more often used to say, "Look at us, we are better than those guys over there that don't have the card"... or worse, it'd work as well as the pretty pink anti-bullying bracelets that just made it easier for bullies to target the kids that were going in trash cans and lockers...

...I was called a 'gamergater' and blocked immediately.

On the subject of_ 'Muh Female Spehss Muhreenz', _I've got a pretty simple philosophy.

*1- I don't care what you think of the canon, you aren't writing it.

2- I don't care about your headcanon. Very few people do.

3- If the canon changed, I'd not be bothered too much as long as it made sense.

4- I don't think the canon needs to change, and I doubt GW does either.

5- I don't care if you modify your models to put a woman's head on your Space Marines, it's your money.

6- I don't want to hear a sermon on gender or sexism or feminism, I'm at the table to play a game and I will not waste my recreational time hearing your lecture.

7- If you are playing at a FGLS and you don't like my attitude about this, I'd rather you keep it to yourself because I'll probably make the people in charge well aware that you harass other players.*



darkreever said:


> Your nitpicking, I wasn't. Unless you count addressing each part of a post as nitpicking, then I guess I am.


I'm not 'nitpicking'.

And it's *You're.

:grin:

Anyway, you've got the book in front of you. I think where I'm seeing the difference:

Conditioning through schooling, religion, etc.- Adeptus Sororitas
Invasive brainwashing techniques- Adeptus Astartes

I read somewhere that the Space Marine psychological indoctrination is more along the lines of hypnosis and some very Manchurian Candidate-type stuff.


----------



## Brother Armiger (Mar 24, 2016)

Double post. SHH....


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

Classes have been kicking my ass. I'll see what I can do.



Euphrati said:


> But, this is not modern science. We already know that the Emperor's own male genecode, warpcraft, and all sorts of voodoo was thoroughly tangled up in the creation of the Primarchs and, subsequently, their Legions.
> 
> My point was why do we really need a detailed explanation? Why does this particular bit of lore have to be explained above and beyond the already numerous references in the lore that it simply doesn't work on females?


That's my point. There's a bunch of voodoo here.

I am not debating whether or not Space Marines can be female in the canon. I think we can all agree that canonically it has been stated multiple times across multiple sources that the Astartes is an all boys club. There is no need to refute this argument because no one here is making it.

I would also like to think that we can agree that it was basically an arbitrary choice that Space Marines had to be all male. Within the logic of the universe and the technological and biological marvels that the primarchs and Space Marines are, there is enough wiggle room that a little chromosome couldn't stop them.

But the creators decided against it. Just like how Ultramarines' armor is blue and not orange or that the Thunderhawk carries 35 marines and not 50. The creators had to make a decision and it was done.

On the other hand, don't take it as a given that the creators _had_ to disallow female Space Marines. It was a choice they made but it was not the only choice.

Hopefully we can agree on this.



Euphrati said:


> Nope, I mean full on Sisters of Battle- here is my Adepta Sororitas army, oh by the way they are all male! Doesn't my Canoness look smashing in His fleur de lis embossed armour?


I know this was a tongue in cheek comment, but there is a real reason why we don't see Brothers of Battle.

In the aftermath of the Age of Apostasy the Ecclesiarchy was forbidden to have to have men under arms (though this is not always followed). Having militia is one thing, but attaining the supply and equipment required for these Brothers of Battle would require some serious collusion with someone with real pull. And even then, it probably would be relatively short-lived.



Brother Armiger said:


> Oh, I'm sorry. I was enjoying some humor about a fictional game about little plastic men, not writing a research paper.


You're free to your own opinion, but if you want to bring people to see your point of view you're probably going to need more than snarky rhetoric. Usually evidence and citations will help your position.

You don't have to if you don't want to, but people will take you less seriously and that hampers any rational discussion considerably.


----------



## Brother Armiger (Mar 24, 2016)

hailene said:


> You're free to your own opinion, but if you want to bring people to see your point of view you're probably going to need more than snarky rhetoric. Usually evidence and citations will help your position.
> 
> You don't have to if you don't want to, but people will take you less seriously and that hampers any rational discussion considerably.


Oh, I don't think you understand. This wasn't a 'debate' I was taking seriously and I really don't care how you feel about my opinion. It's solid enough and it's been there quite a while. I don't care if you like my position or not, I'm still going to be on it. 

Sorry if that sounds cold, but I'm not here to cater to feels and I'm not particularly concerned about turning a conversation about little plastic soldiers into an academic debate.

In other words, it's a joke- not a Genestealer tongue. Don't take it so hard.

The day I'm terribly concerned about being taken SUPER ACADEMICALLY seriously in a Warhammer 40k discussion is the day I need to start my medication and therapy or at least go talk to someone. It's not a big deal if you dislike my opinion, I don't have to validate it for you, and if you think I'm wrong about something- manifest some intestinal fortitude like the other guy did and show me. 

I'm not flaming you. I'm not insulting you. I simply don't care if you like my opinion- it does not need validation from you or anyone else. 


I've just always been baffled at how sensitive people are when they don't get the response to 'Muh Feemail Sphess Murheens' they want. 

It's not in the canon lore, no one is stopping you from putting lady-heads on bodies, and if GW doesn't listen to us about anything else they're not going to start just because people are barking about women in Astartes Armor.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

Brother Armiger said:


> I've just always been baffled at how sensitive people are when they don't get the response to 'Muh Feemail Sphess Murheens' they want.


I am not sure why you keep trying to state that female Space Marines don't exist in the canon. No one in the thread has suggested anything to the contrary.

Even the OP, as I mentioned before, took the belief that females could not become Space Marines as a given. The OP was just musing some in-universe reasons why.

Whatever baggage you're carrying about the idea of female Space Marines (which, I again repeat that no one has brought up as within the given canon as possible) does no one any favors. It is apparently preventing you from even approaching the OP's idea.



Brother Armiger said:


> Sorry if that sounds cold, but I'm not here to cater to feels and I'm not particularly concerned about turning a conversation about little plastic soldiers into an academic debate.


You're probably in the wrong forum then. We are here literally to converse about little plastic figures living in a fictional universe with daemons and magic.

If this is beneath or beyond you, your time would probably be better spent elsewhere. 

Of course you're free to waste your time as you will. It is, after all, yours to spend.


----------



## Brother Armiger (Mar 24, 2016)

hailene said:


> I am not sure why you keep trying to state that female Space Marines don't exist in the canon. No one in the thread has suggested anything to the contrary.
> 
> Even the OP, as I mentioned before, took the belief that females could not become Space Marines as a given. The OP was just musing some in-universe reasons why.
> 
> Whatever baggage you're carrying about the idea of female Space Marines (which, I again repeat that no one has brought up as within the given canon as possible) does no one any favors. It is apparently preventing you from even approaching the OP's idea.


The topic was mentioned, I commented on it. If you missed it, you should review it. There was a rather lengthy, and well-worded statement from another forum member. Take your time reading, it's a forum and not a phone call.



hailene said:


> You're probably in the wrong forum then. We are here literally to converse about little plastic figures living in a fictional universe with daemons and magic.
> 
> If this is beneath or beyond you, your time would probably be better spent elsewhere.
> 
> Of course you're free to waste your time as you will. It is, after all, yours to spend.


If I'm incorrect about something- by all means, show me. I own 2 Codexes and I rely on the Wiki and memory for most of what I say. You can be a good member of the community, and say: "According to Page X in Y book, it's actually Z"- or you can be snarky yourself and say, "Well, PROVE IT! SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS THAT!"

It's a game, dude- with lore that's flipped and flopped around to absurd degrees since the mid-80's and not everyone is going to know the most updated version of the Canon Lore. The only thing that's changed more than the Lore behind this game is the price tags on the boxes. 

It is neither beneath me, nor beyond me to discuss little plastic men. It is *far* beneath me to pretend that any and all discussion about little plastic men must be on the level of academic debate and to believe that no jest, exaggeration, or even friendly jab about this fictional universe based on satire should exist.

But I do enjoy seeing someone of the community trying to drive more people out of it.

EDIT: Why is it you're able to see a tongue-in-cheek statement from some people, but not others?


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

Brother Armiger said:


> The topic was mentioned, I commented on it. If you missed it, you should review it. There was a rather lengthy, and well-worded statement from another forum member. Take your time reading, it's a forum and not a phone call.


Then please quote it for me. I cannot find it.

The closest thing is Euphrati going on her soapbox about something that no one had brought up.



Brother Armiger said:


> It is far beneath me to pretend that any and all discussion about little plastic men must be on the level of academic debate and to believe that no jest, exaggeration, or even friendly jab about this fictional universe based on satire should exist.


I have bad news for you if you think backing up what you say is on the level of an "academic debate".

This whole thing grinds to a halt if we just spew what we think at each other. It gets us no where and no one is convinced or enlightened.

If someone is more versed in the canon or lore than you then rejoice. They have something to teach you. At the end of the day you're ahead as you know more going to bed than you did waking up that day. The teacher did not learn anything new that day.

If you want to be humorous then be humorous. That's fine. 

If someone tries to pick apart your humor's logic just smile and say it was a joke. We all know now to take it too seriously. We laugh and move on.

Don't make a joke and get defensive when someone asks you to cite your sources. You can't and that's fine since it was intended as a joke.

You're new here and so we (or at least I) am making allowances for any social missteps you are taking. I am here trying to explain how things generally roll around here. It's a learning experience for all of us.


----------



## Brother Armiger (Mar 24, 2016)

hailene said:


> Then please quote it for me. I cannot find it.
> 
> The closest thing is Euphrati going on her soapbox about something that no one had brought up.


That'd be the one.



hailene said:


> I have bad news for you if you think backing up what you say is on the level of an "academic debate".
> 
> This whole thing grinds to a halt if we just spew what we think at each other. It gets us no where and no one is convinced or enlightened.
> 
> If someone is more versed in the canon or lore than you then rejoice. They have something to teach you. At the end of the day you're ahead as you know more going to bed than you did waking up that day. The teacher did not learn anything new that day.


"Teaching" and smugly demanding evidence without making any reference to anything contrary are so different, it's dog turds and chocolate. Similar colors and that's about it.



hailene said:


> If you want to be humorous then be humorous. That's fine.
> 
> If someone tries to pick apart your humor's logic just smile and say it was a joke. We all know now to take it too seriously. We laugh and move on.
> 
> Don't make a joke and get defensive when someone asks you to cite your sources. You can't and that's fine since it was intended as a joke.


If I have to find a source to validate a joke, then I'm dealing with someone who might be taking things a bit too seriously to enjoy the humor. That's the point.

"Actually dude, it's X, not Y."

"Oh, cool. You still can't touch my Z."



hailene said:


> You're new here and so we (or at least I) am making allowances for any social missteps you are taking. I am here trying to explain how things generally roll around here. It's a learning experience for all of us.


"Making allowances" -what on the face of Holy Terra entitles you to make 'allowances' for me? "Social Missteps"? News flash, guy: Just because it bothers YOU doesn't mean it's a 'Misstep'. You hold your opinion and personal feelings in higher regard than they belong.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

Brother Armiger said:


> That'd be the one.


Then maybe reread it since she was the one blasting people about female space marines not making sense. It didn't make sense for her to bring it up and not too much for you to support her. It basically was a strawman that she crushed (as strawmen tend to go).



Brother Armiger said:


> "Teaching" and smugly demanding evidence without making any reference to anything contrary are so different, it's dog turds and chocolate. Similar colors and that's about it.


That's sorta the basis of debate. Person to bring the claim has to back it up. Proving the lack of existence for evidence can sometimes be impossible.

If I said the Emperor had a big bowl of cereal every morning...there is no real way to disprove me. There is no evidence and technically no real way to disprove my claim.

Doesn't make it right. It's on me to prove that the Emperor eats the cereal...not for the other person to disprove me. If I do somehow prove it, then the ball does fall into the other person's court. But I as the claimer have to prove myself right first.



Brother Armiger said:


> If I have to find a source to validate a joke, then I'm dealing with someone who might be taking things a bit too seriously to enjoy the humor


The internet does not transmit humor well. Add some smilies or some other overt way to demonstrate you are joking. Even then, that's no guarantee that your intent will get across. Misunderstandings happen and so we have to go about our way clearing them...not making more, yeah?



Brother Armiger said:


> "Making allowances" -what on the face of Holy Terra entitles you to make 'allowances' for me? "Social Missteps"?


You are clearly clashing with the culture of the forum. That is expected since you are new. Happens to all of us when we move into new social circles.

Some places you take off your shoes before you walk in, others you can keep your shoes on. Something funny in one group is frowned upon in another.

I am just speaking as someone who _is_ more familiar with the norms of the forum. You are your own person (as you seem eminently aware). If you want to mesh well with this community (or most communities for that matter) you need to adapt to the social expectations of the group. I am just trying to explain some of ours here.

Of course this is a two way street and you are free to comment on our norms here. So far I have not seen anything to convince me that the norm needs to change, but I'm all ears. 

I'm off to bed. I'll chat with you tomorrow hopefully.


----------



## Brother Armiger (Mar 24, 2016)

hailene said:


> Then maybe reread it since she was the one blasting people about female space marines not making sense. It didn't make sense for her to bring it up and not too much for you to support her. It basically was a strawman that she crushed (as strawmen tend to go).


Well, as I read the original post and the title- it was somewhat related to the topic.



hailene said:


> That's sorta the basis of debate. Person to bring the claim has to back it up. Proving the lack of existence for evidence can sometimes be impossible.
> 
> If I said the Emperor had a big bowl of cereal every morning...there is no real way to disprove me. There is no evidence and technically no real way to disprove my claim.
> 
> Doesn't make it right. It's on me to prove that the Emperor eats the cereal...not for the other person to disprove me. If I do somehow prove it, then the ball does fall into the other person's court. But I as the claimer have to prove myself right first.


I'll debate on law, politics, and social policy. If I'm mistaken about little plastic men it's not going to eat me up too much. As a matter of fact, it seems like me being mistaken about something bothers other folks a bit more than it ever will bother me. 

I'll keep it simple: * If you treat every discussion like a debate, you're going to have a miserable life.
*
Like I said, I only got a few books and the last time I had a Codex before this: You could still buy those Necrons that look like the love child of a Transformer and a Dia De La Muerte mask. I've only -recently- starting reading more books, and before this all I'd read was the Guant's Ghosts series. Aside from this, a few youtube videos, and the wiki- I run on memory. 

I'm not in any contest to prove I know more or less than someone, nor am I over-eager to prove I do.



hailene said:


> The internet does not transmit humor well. Add some smilies or some other overt way to demonstrate you are joking. Even then, that's no guarantee that your intent will get across. Misunderstandings happen and so we have to go about our way clearing them...not making more, yeah?
















hailene said:


> You are clearly clashing with the culture of the forum. That is expected since you are new. Happens to all of us when we move into new social circles.


You're clearly doing a lot of speaking for persons other than yourself. If I cause a severe issue I'm certain a moderator will ping me.



hailene said:


> I am just speaking as someone who _is_ more familiar with the norms of the forum. You are your own person (as you seem eminently aware). If you want to mesh well with this community (or most communities for that matter) you need to adapt to the social expectations of the group. I am just trying to explain some of ours here.


I didn't come here to be like you. I came to share my input and read that of others. Sometimes my input won't please everyone. That's cool because I didn't put it in to please everyone. Just the facts- I'm not particularly worried about some people disliking my opinion. I'll live with it.



hailene said:


> Of course this is a two way street and you are free to comment on our norms here. So far I have not seen anything to convince me that the norm needs to change, but I'm all ears.


Your other mistake was believing that I'm here to 'change the norm'. Your little gatekeeping attempt isn't doing so well. I'm me. I have my beliefs. If they are too 'brash' for your group- well, what's one more person leaving?

I mean, that -is- the story of every WH40k community, right?


----------



## scscofield (May 23, 2011)

Enough, they asked for more than 'I read this somewhere' and you didn't back it up. If your not going to bother to back it up fine, but being a douchebag for multi pages is not the way to continue.


----------



## Brother Armiger (Mar 24, 2016)

scscofield said:


> Enough, they asked for more than 'I read this somewhere' and you didn't back it up. If your not going to bother to back it up fine, but being a douchebag for multi pages is not the way to continue.


How am I being a douchebag by stating my side of things, and what position are you in to dictate who does what here?


----------



## scscofield (May 23, 2011)

Brother Armiger said:


> You're clearly doing a lot of speaking for persons other than yourself. If I cause a severe issue I'm certain a moderator will ping me.





Brother Armiger said:


> what position are you in to dictate who does what here?


----------



## Brother Armiger (Mar 24, 2016)

It didn't say so on your image, that's why I ask.

I'm still unclear on some things, where was I a 'douchebag'? I kept tactful and firm. Is there a rule against upsetting senior members of the forum?


----------



## scscofield (May 23, 2011)

Back on topic please


----------



## Brother Armiger (Mar 24, 2016)

scscofield said:


> Back on topic please



Space Marines leaving to have semi-normal lives: http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Cloud_Runner

This would be where I'd read that. Having a family, well- I can't see that in there, maybe I incorrectly inferred that. It makes mention of his great-great-great grandfather being one of the Astartes from the Dark Angels- I'd assume that meant great-grandpappy laid some 'power glaive' at some point, and I'd always thought that right at puberty is when Astartes were drafted. 

Adeptus Sororitas not being press-ganged: http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Adepta_Sororitas

Also inferred in there, as well as from the basic requirements to be one of them- 'lacking of faith' would be a disqualifier, and saying "I would rather not" seems like it'd be 'lacking in faith'. Do not get me wrong, I would fully expect the young lady to be given something -terrible- for declining it, as well as some mockery.

Space Marine Press-gang recruiting: http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Space_Marines

"Still others watch and kidnap potential warriors, turning them into Astartes whether they will it or not."

Now, someone be kind and show me, if any of this- which is inaccurate? I'm running off wikis here, not Codex.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

Brother Armiger said:


> How am I being a douchebag by stating my side of things, and what position are you in to dictate who does what here?


Yellow and Orange Usernames mean site moderators, red names mean administrator. Make a note of it. I'd also advise you to familiarize yourself with the Forum Rules and bear in mind that not everyone will feel the need to explain if you're stepping out of line. Short story here is that you agree to the site rules when you sign up and it is not our responsibility to ensure you have read them. It is yours. 
That said, the actual atmosphere of the forum is something you'll figure out on your own but if a disagreement arises, feeding it is generally not going to end on a positive. That's the end of my newbie advice session which I presume you did not really need but who knows. 


So back on topic as Sco requested. I think the lore is too well established at this point to be changed without creating a massive divide. It would be like the schism of the Heresy itself, the loyalist fanbase wanting the fluff to stay the same and the radical PC crowd who welcome the show of gender equality in an otherwise totally fucked setting. It would take years for the changes to be accepted, hell people still bitch about necron lore at that changed like five or six years ago now right? Maybe less? I forget. 

Anyway, I agree with most of the points Armiger made. Not saying which because I've had this discussion more times than I care to count and I don't have any desire to participate in it any further.


----------



## Brother Armiger (Mar 24, 2016)

Serpion5 said:


> Yellow and Orange Usernames mean site moderators, red names mean administrator.


I just thought it meant you were angry.



Serpion5 said:


> Anyway, I agree with most of the points Armiger made. Not saying which because I've had this discussion more times than I care to count and I don't have any desire to participate in it any further.


Can you validate or invalidate those three links/statements I placed? I'm dying to know if I've been misinformed, misread, or just plain WRONG.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

Brother Armiger said:


> I just thought it meant you were angry.


Sometimes it's both. 



Brother Armiger said:


> Can you validate or invalidate those three links/statements I placed? I'm dying to know if I've been misinformed, misread, or just plain WRONG.


I'm a xenos player/fluff guy/modeller so no. Fuck space marines.


----------



## Euphrati (May 24, 2009)

Throne of Terra this topic grew a set of legs while I was sleeping.



hailene said:


> I know this was a tongue in cheek comment, but there is a real reason why we don't see Brothers of Battle.
> 
> In the aftermath of the Age of Apostasy the Ecclesiarchy was forbidden to have to have men under arms (though this is not always followed). Having militia is one thing, but attaining the supply and equipment required for these Brothers of Battle would require some serious collusion with someone with real pull. And even then, it probably would be relatively short-lived.


Yes, my comment about 'male' Sisters was highly tongue in cheek. :grin:

I was using it to point out how people seem to accept that SoB are female (and only female) without question, yet cannot seem to accept that Astartes are male (and can only be male). I actually find the fact that you couldn't even call them Sisters and immediately started calling them 'Brothers of Battle' quite humourous. 

As you pointed you- the reason Sisters are female is embedded in the lore. No one questions it. Yet, if you think about it, the lore regarding it comes down to a group of politically powerful windbags (high lords of terra) merely saying 'this _shall _not be' where, in the case of astartes, the lore states 'this _cannot _be'. Yet, from what I have seen, the astartes lore is consistently the one being questioned even though it is the most set in stone. 



hailene said:


> The closest thing is Euphrati going on her soapbox about something that no one had brought up.


It was brought up. The core concept of the post was what I was questioning. It is what the thread is, at its root, about. The OP was mulling over the thought of a scientific reason why the lore is how it is. Why the astartes process only works on males. My post, if you read it carefully, is questioning why does this bit of lore need a _reason _above and beyond what is already stated? 



hailene said:


> Then maybe reread it since she was the one blasting people about female space marines not making sense. It didn't make sense for her to bring it up and not too much for you to support her. It basically was a strawman that she crushed (as strawmen tend to go).


Perhaps I am misunderstanding you here (or you are misunderstanding me). I am, in a round about sense, agreeing with the OP- astartes are only male. My point was that the lore is absolutely clear about the topic (regardless of the lack of a detailed reason as to _Why_) yet it gets constantly poked both by those trying to support it and by those trying to find a way around it. And my main question was why do people seem to gravitate to this topic over and over again vs all of the other fuzzy topics in the lore base of 30/40k? The only real reason that I can come up with (that isn't driven by some outside PC reason) as to why is that people hate absolutes.


----------



## unxpekted22 (Apr 7, 2009)

Serpion5 said:


> I'm a xenos player/fluff guy/modeller so no. Fuck space marines.


After reading the entire thread, that is like the perfect punchline to end it with Serpion, lol.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Serpion5 said:


> Fuck space marines.


No, don't fuck Space Marines, that's heresy.

As for "needing a reason" for the boys only club, we technically don't but I like to mull stuff over in my head and every once in a while ask questions no one else cares about. Probably comes from the world building parts of my brain in relation to writing. 

And it's not like it hurts to have a reason.


----------



## Iraqiel (May 21, 2008)

Aaaaahhh this thread reminds me of the old days... Back when I was bright eyed and thought that Chaos had room for good guys in it.

Man, was I wrong! Although... female space marines could still be a thing if...










KHORNE WILLS IT!


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

Euphrati said:


> Yet, if you think about it, the lore regarding it comes down to a group of politically powerful windbags (high lords of terra) merely saying 'this shall not be' where, in the case of astartes, the lore states 'this cannot be'. Yet, from what I have seen, the astartes lore is consistently the one being questioned even though it is the most set in stone.


Long and short of short of it? It comes down to 2 reasons: 1. The Space marines get a lot more limelight. Hence all the interest around them. 2. Space Marines are (I think it is safe to say) just cooler than the Sisters. They get all the coolest toys, niftiest abilities, most badass back stories. Their most inexperienced and weakest members could take on dozens of regular humans. Their exploits are legend.

That's why, I think, a lot of people clamor for female Space Marines.



Euphrati said:


> My post, if you read it carefully, is questioning why does this bit of lore need a reason above and beyond what is already stated?


Because we are curious beings and like to have things work in an internally consistent manner.

We don't just need to know that things work, we need to know _why_ they work.



Euphrati said:


> Perhaps I am misunderstanding you here (or you are misunderstanding me). I am, in a round about sense, agreeing with the OP- astartes are only male.


Let me try to rephrase myself. Who in this thread has argued that there _should_ be female Space Marines? Like within the canon.

No one, to my knowledge.

I was just commenting that your little soapbox episode was very strange given the context of the rest of the thread. 

You tried to tear apart an argument no one had made.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Shandathe said:


> I'm not saying anyone in the Imperium can do it, I'm arguing that Humanity at its peak, during the Dark Age of Technology, *definitely* would have had the ability. Note the Navigator Houses also stem from this period. If you can create a (mostly) stably breeding human line that can actually see the Warp, you can do the same for superhumans. The fact that it's a bad idea due to the aforementioned side effect of getting yourself an "Obsolete" tag would not have stopped it happening :grin:


I'm reasonably sure we can state that there WERE and probably still ARE augmented women who could be classified as 'super humans', but not Space marines. Marines are a product of the Imperium and a creation of the Emperor. While a lot of what went into them probably came out of the Dark Age of Technology, their creation required the Primarch. The Primarchs were not around during the Dark Age, so I feel that it's safe to assume that neither were marines. Was there an analog during the Dark Age? Maybe. Can we definitely state there were marines? No. Why? Because unless GW writes it down on paper, we can't say anything. 

That being said, GW may well have written down that there were space marines before the Imperium and the Emperor just ripped off some long dead group of biologists. I've never read anything which states that, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.


Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Reaper45 (Jun 21, 2011)

Euphrati said:


> One of the reasons I enjoy 30/40k is the lack of 'politically correct force it down your throat' vitriol that is rampant in today's society.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I was asking for one good reason, I don't see a need for female astartes.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

A need for female marines? Chaos Marine breeding program.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Zion said:


> A need for female marines? Chaos Marine breeding program.


:shok:

I've seen enough hentai to know how that would pan out.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

gen.ahab said:


> :shok:
> 
> I've seen enough hentai to know how that would pan out.


Maybe not enough unless you predicted this (copied from 1d4chan):


> Honsou, You Sick Fuck
> 
> We know that you among the fans, despite all our attempts to dissaude you, want cute FEMALE SPHESS MAHREENS! And there is good news - technically, there ARE Female Space Marines IN OFFICIAL LORE. The catch? Yes there is a catch. And this one is the worst.
> 
> ...


So yeah....chaos magic to make female space marines....who were breeding tanks....

Ew.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Zion said:


> Maybe not enough unless you predicted this (copied from 1d4chan):
> 
> 
> So yeah....chaos magic to make female space marines....who were breeding tanks....
> ...


I forgot about that lovely little..... piece of fiction. Yeah. McNeil is fucked in the head.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

gen.ahab said:


> I forgot about that lovely little..... piece of fiction. Yeah. McNeil is fucked in the head.


It's good to forget. That's your brain protecting you from the awful.


----------



## Kreuger (Aug 30, 2010)

gen.ahab said:


> :shok:
> 
> I've seen enough hentai to know how that would pan out.


Streamed across the info-waves of the imperium? 




Zion said:


> Maybe not enough unless you predicted this (copied from 1d4chan):
> 
> 
> So yeah....chaos magic to make female space marines....who were breeding tanks....
> ...





gen.ahab said:


> I forgot about that lovely little..... piece of fiction. Yeah. McNeil is fucked in the head.


McNeil might be fucked in the head but he didn't come to with this. Frank Herbert did in the Dune series. 

Axolotl Tanks aka female Bene Tleilax.



> "The axlotl tanks! He remembered emerging time after time: bright lights and padded mechanical hands. The hands rotated him and, in the unfocused blurs of the newborn, he saw a great mound of female flesh — monstrous in her almost immobile grossness ... a maze of dark tubes linked her body to giant metal containers"


Add a little daemonic chaos flavor and there ya' go.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Well still pretty twisted and wrong.


----------



## Kreuger (Aug 30, 2010)

Yeah. The first few Dune books are good but the deeper in the series you go the stranger they get.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Kreuger said:


> stuff


Well that's one series off the list. :laugh:


----------



## Kreuger (Aug 30, 2010)

Aww. The first 2 or 3 are sci-fi classics and are pretty brilliant, especially the first 2, Dune and Dune Messiah. 

Book 4 is decent. After that it gets strange and less good.


----------

