Are there Imperial guard women?

[Elzeruth]

Just want to know if I will buy the game or not, thanks.

[Beravin]

C'mon, a 5 second google answers that question...

The answer is yes. The imperial guard doesn't care about gender. Cannon fodder is cannon fodder. Most regiments are mixed gender, though there are exceptions.

[Cipher Esteria]

It's the opposit most Regiments are Single Gender, appart from the Commandstaff.
Mixed Regiments are the exception.

[Beravin]

Hmm, maybe I'm wrong. I read that it depends on the planets culture. Established planets like Cadia supplied mixed regiments because they could afford to, while places like Catachan can't do that due to the attrition rate of living there.

[Elzeruth]

Thanks for the answer. I guess I'll pass then. Played 40k 15 years ago and never saw a single woman in the Imperium except battle sisters. Kinda ruins the immersion.

[ColeKoru]

I swear these guys all have a discord together and are like "well, 24 hours has gone by and no one has posted a forum topic about women. I'll do it this time. You're next though"

Seeing a woman ruins immersion for you? Ok.....

Well, I read the novels, played the games and painted the models. It doesn't ruin it for me. Females exist, can hold weapons, serve in the military and will fight to save their or others lives. That's reality. And any rational person would perceive that as truth in any fictional universe.

I think you had good intentions with this question, but its becoming a trend here that's obnoxious.

[Scrotumfiddler Phil]

NO WOMEN IN WH 40K? LOL CADIA WANTS TO SAY HELLO. SO DOES THE INQUISITION.

[Varivox]

and nothing of value was lost...

Yea, 15 years ago, GW lacked the models. They also suck at making female faces (to this day, no idea why).

However, "ruins the immersion" would be not having female characters. Anyone who has read any amount of lore in the past 20 years would know that the Imperium doesn't care about gender. Life is cheap and bodies are plenty. EVERYONE can die in the service of the emperor. EVERYONE will die in the service of the emperor.

Additionally, the lack of female models in the actual TT game goes against the lore. Every book has always described and shown the armies as being mixed gendered. Every lore blurb we had has shown a mixed army. The lack of female models is just due to GW's lack of ability (again, they suck at making female faces).

Your complaint only "ruins the immersion" if you have no actual understanding of the lore. Space Marines, who in the lore CAN'T have females, were designed and tested by the emperor himself, he simply couldn't figure out how to make them survive the process of becoming a space marine. So, obviously, if the emperor was willing and actively trying to make female space marines, I don't see how he would ever decree that women can't serve in other forms.

So, your big question: "Are there imperial guard women?" Yes... yes there are... probably about 50% of them. Your complaint about immersion, based on 15 year old bare minimum understanding, runs completely counter to everything we know about the lore and the Imperium itself. Immersion is only broken in the TT due to GW's own manufacturing/design limitations. This game is FAR more immersive than even the TT in this regard.

[Elzeruth]

Never said I didn't want any woman. Battle Sisters are super badass and fit the setting well. I even ended up collecting some back in the day but having women in the Imperial Guard is where I draw the line.
There's a reason why the overwhelming majority of armed conflicts had no women involved even when countries were on the brink of collapse. It's just silly in my opinion and really ruins the immersion.

Glad some of you can get past this and I hope you will enjoy the game. As for me, if I want some 40k action I'll stick with Dawn of War 1 and 2.

[Minty]

Originally posted by Elzeruth:

Thanks for the answer. I guess I'll pass then. Played 40k 15 years ago and never saw a single woman in the Imperium except battle sisters. Kinda ruins the immersion.

I suppose you just conveniently missed the miniatures of the various inquisitors, the guardsmen as part of The Last Chancers, the Games Day Commissar, the Catachan With Grenade launcher, the entire Necromunda Escher range, the original rogue-trader era female warriors in power armour, the Death Cultists, the Callidus, Inquisitor Amberly Vail and some of the Valhallan Guardsmen in the Ciaphas Cain novel series and many many other examples from the setting that were there many years ago....Mira from Space Marine, the Inquisitor from Dawn of War 2, the various artwork from the RPG books...

[Varivox]

Originally posted by Elzeruth:

Never said I didn't want any woman. Battle Sisters are super badass and fit the setting well. I even ended up collecting some back in the day but having women in the Imperial Guard is where I draw the line.
There's a reason why the overwhelming majority of armed conflicts had no women involved even when countries were on the brink of collapse. It's just silly in my opinion and really ruins the immersion.

Glad some of you can get past this and I hope you will enjoy the game. As for me, if I want some 40k action I'll stick with Dawn of War 1 and 2.

What? Sisters of Battle are okay but not in the IG? Why?

As for your "using history" as a reference... well... that's stupid. Going back to the middle ages, sure. However, back then, weapons and armour were REAAAAAALLLLLLYYYYYYYYY heavy and mortality rates were high, just in general. Warfare valued long, extended periods of hand to hand combat using heavy steel weapons and armor. However, even today, countries across the globe are increasingly including women in combat roles. Modern warfare doesn't require the raw strength it once did, since triggers don't require much to squeeze, guns are lightweight and armour is becoming more and more manageable. There is nothing stopping a female from firing a tank, nor flying a plane either. Yea, women still lag behind men in terms of the raw strength, but the modern battlefield simply doesn't value brute strength nearly as much as it once did.

But then, beyond that... again... using history here is just... so... STOOOOOPID! The Imperium is besieged on EVERY side from xenos. From Chaos corrupting from within, Tomb Worlds waking up on planets with trillions of humans, genestealer cults attacking from within, Eldar doing elfy BS, god only knows how big the Tyranid swarm is (and at least a half dozen distinguishable hivefleets invading from everywhere... Orks fighting everything... a literal god of disease and pestilence creating zombie viruses... Do you REALLY think that humanity could have the luxury to have a protected and outdated notion of chivalry like that? When a tyranid swarm invades a system of planets and the psychic echo drives psykers insane, do you think they just don't attack the women? Do you think the planets can afford to keep half of their population from fighting?

When the emperor gets his daily SEVERAL THOUSAND PSYKERS sacrificed to him... do you think they don't sacrifice women to him?

Even then, this is 2021, the game takes place in 40,000, do you not think that materials and such are even more lightweight and capable? And why would you use human vs human tactics and think they would, at all, apply in such a far out setting against such insane, crazy enemies. Each of those old wars, that didn't use female fighters, were performed by and against people who had similar notions of "don't hit the woman", each nation's army was crippled equally in that regard, creating a "fair" war. It also meant women knew they were relatively safe and had no incentive to fight, since they'd still be safe. Tyranids wouldn't afford them the same luxury.

Go watch the trailer for 9e 40k from last year. The FIRST thing we see is a female soldier watching her male counterpart get his face melted. Simply put, your argument relies on an anachronistic understanding of modern warfare and applying that to a fictional setting and pretending that the types of battles and wars would be remotely similar.

[Elzeruth]

Originally posted by Minty:

Originally posted by Elzeruth:

Thanks for the answer. I guess I'll pass then. Played 40k 15 years ago and never saw a single woman in the Imperium except battle sisters. Kinda ruins the immersion.

I suppose you just conveniently missed the miniatures of the various inquisitors, the guardsmen as part of The Last Chancers, the Games Day Commissar, the Catachan With Grenade launcher, the entire Necromunda Escher range, the original rogue-trader era female warriors in power armour, the Death Cultists, the Callidus, Inquisitor Amberly Vail and some of the Valhallan Guardsmen in the Ciaphas Cain novel series and many many other examples from the setting that were there many years ago....

Yes I probably ''conveniently'' missed these as I was never an Imperial guard or Space Marines player. Again I'm not against the idea of women having a role in the Imperium. Having female inquisitors or some special tactical units made only of females does make sense in the 40k setting and it sounds interesting.
What I don't like though is having women as part of the regular, rank and file soldiers on the battlefield and pretending there's nothing wrong with it. This ignores the varied reasons why women almost never take part in armed conflicts (physical and psychological reasons) while also denying the essential place of women in any warlike society (making babies = more warriors). I'm sure the enemies of the Imperium would be filled with joy at the sight of women on the battlefield knowing humans would go extinct in a couple of years.

[Minty]

Originally posted by Elzeruth:

Originally posted by Minty:

I suppose you just conveniently missed the miniatures of the various inquisitors, the guardsmen as part of The Last Chancers, the Games Day Commissar, the Catachan With Grenade launcher, the entire Necromunda Escher range, the original rogue-trader era female warriors in power armour, the Death Cultists, the Callidus, Inquisitor Amberly Vail and some of the Valhallan Guardsmen in the Ciaphas Cain novel series and many many other examples from the setting that were there many years ago....

Yes I probably ''conveniently'' missed these as I was never an Imperial guard or Space Marines player. Again I'm not against the idea of women having a role in the Imperium. Having female inquisitors or some special tactical units made only of females does make sense in the 40k setting and it sounds interesting.
What I don't like though is having women as part of the regular, rank and file soldiers on the battlefield and pretending there's nothing wrong with it. This ignores the varied reasons why women almost never take part in armed conflicts (physical and psychological reasons) while also denying the essential place of women in any warlike society (making babies = more warriors). I'm sure the enemies of the Imperium would be filled with joy at the sight of women on the battlefield knowing humans would go extinct in a couple of years.

Female guardsmen are something which has been part of the setting for at least 15 years. It is not a new thing at all.

If you don't think everyone is going to have an equally terrible situation when in the "cruelest most bloody regime imaginable" in a horrific terrifying universe, then it sounds like you have a very strange view of the setting, its themes and what it involves, because in absolutely no way does the Imperium resemble a society where any of what you said there matters in terms of who serves in combat.

[Elzeruth]

Originally posted by Varivox:

Originally posted by Elzeruth:

Never said I didn't want any woman. Battle Sisters are super badass and fit the setting well. I even ended up collecting some back in the day but having women in the Imperial Guard is where I draw the line.
There's a reason why the overwhelming majority of armed conflicts had no women involved even when countries were on the brink of collapse. It's just silly in my opinion and really ruins the immersion.

Glad some of you can get past this and I hope you will enjoy the game. As for me, if I want some 40k action I'll stick with Dawn of War 1 and 2.

What? Sisters of Battle are okay but not in the IG? Why?

As for your "using history" as a reference... well... that's stupid. Going back to the middle ages, sure. However, back then, weapons and armour were REAAAAAALLLLLLYYYYYYYYY heavy and mortality rates were high, just in general. Warfare valued long, extended periods of hand to hand combat using heavy steel weapons and armor. However, even today, countries across the globe are increasingly including women in combat roles. Modern warfare doesn't require the raw strength it once did, since triggers don't require much to squeeze, guns are lightweight and armour is becoming more and more manageable. There is nothing stopping a female from firing a tank, nor flying a plane either. Yea, women still lag behind men in terms of the raw strength, but the modern battlefield simply doesn't value brute strength nearly as much as it once did.

But then, beyond that... again... using history here is just... so... STOOOOOPID! The Imperium is besieged on EVERY side from xenos. From Chaos corrupting from within, Tomb Worlds waking up on planets with trillions of humans, genestealer cults attacking from within, Eldar doing elfy BS, god only knows how big the Tyranid swarm is (and at least a half dozen distinguishable hivefleets invading from everywhere... Orks fighting everything... a literal god of disease and pestilence creating zombie viruses... Do you REALLY think that humanity could have the luxury to have a protected and outdated notion of chivalry like that? When a tyranid swarm invades a system of planets and the psychic echo drives psykers insane, do you think they just don't attack the women? Do you think the planets can afford to keep half of their population from fighting?

When the emperor gets his daily SEVERAL THOUSAND PSYKERS sacrificed to him... do you think they don't sacrifice women to him?

Even then, this is 2021, the game takes place in 40,000, do you not think that materials and such are even more lightweight and capable? And why would you use human vs human tactics and think they would, at all, apply in such a far out setting against such insane, crazy enemies. Each of those old wars, that didn't use female fighters, were performed by and against people who had similar notions of "don't hit the woman", each nation's army was crippled equally in that regard, creating a "fair" war. It also meant women knew they were relatively safe and had no incentive to fight, since they'd still be safe. Tyranids wouldn't afford them the same luxury.

Go watch the trailer for 9e 40k from last year. The FIRST thing we see is a female soldier watching her male counterpart get his face melted. Simply put, your argument relies on an anachronistic understanding of modern warfare and applying that to a fictional setting and pretending that the types of battles and wars would be remotely similar.

Are you implying being a soldier in the 40k universe is somehow physically and mentally easier than during WW1 and 2 or even during the Middle Ages? ok lol

Also the notion of ''chivalry'' is pure ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. Most women who were part of defeated societies ended up raped, tortured and put into slavery. I don't know if you can call that ''spared''.

But that's besides the point. Yes today a lot of armies around the world comprise women too and that's great. In actual warzones where military forces are present though you won't find them. Why? There are many scientific and military articles about that but women simply lack the physical and psychological capabilities needed in these situations. Sorry but that's just biology.

Originally posted by Minty:

Originally posted by Elzeruth:

Yes I probably ''conveniently'' missed these as I was never an Imperial guard or Space Marines player. Again I'm not against the idea of women having a role in the Imperium. Having female inquisitors or some special tactical units made only of females does make sense in the 40k setting and it sounds interesting.
What I don't like though is having women as part of the regular, rank and file soldiers on the battlefield and pretending there's nothing wrong with it. This ignores the varied reasons why women almost never take part in armed conflicts (physical and psychological reasons) while also denying the essential place of women in any warlike society (making babies = more warriors). I'm sure the enemies of the Imperium would be filled with joy at the sight of women on the battlefield knowing humans would go extinct in a couple of years.

Female guardsmen are something which has been part of the setting for at least 15 years. It is not a new thing at all.

If you don't think everyone is going to have an equally terrible situation when in the "cruelest most bloody regime imaginable" in a horrific terrifying universe, then it sounds like you have a very strange view of the setting, its themes and what it involves, because in absolutely no way does the Imperium resemble a society where any of what you said there matters in terms of who serves in combat.

The Imperium isn't different from the thousands of societies, Kingdoms and Empires who had been the brink of collapse throughout history. Whether the enemies are bearded and smelly barbarians or giant eight legged insects does not make the situation different. Yet, none of these societies decided to enlist women as regular soldiers. Not only would it destroy any hope of population recovery during and after the war but it would also make matters worse with soldiers unfit for direct confrontation.

[«§ëvënPrøxy»]

The question already seems answered. This thread is going to be locked before it devolves into further posts specifically about women.

Originally posted by Forum Guidelines:

What to avoid:

• Posts or threads on the subject of sexual orientation, race, religion, or politics.