Female Astartes Controversy: a Commentary

[Queen Nothing]

Space Marine 2 is fantastic. I completed the campaign in one grinning sitting, and I started into the class-based co-op with my 40K-fan friends today. I went into Space Marine 2 blind, and 40K: Boltgun is the only contact I've had with the 40K universe prior to SM2. I wouldn't call myself a casual fan, or even a fan at all yet. However, curious about the discussions of this game I'm enjoying, I've come to the Discussions area to see ... things are going rough. Whether the question of Diversity, or Female Astartes has come from a place of sincerity or just an intention to Clown Farm/Troll, the responses have largely treated the question with heavy criticism, and I have read through all the active threads relevant to this controversy and read through the common remarks given by both general sides of this matter. Here, I would give my observations, organized in two sections that address the Question and the Response.

The Question of Female Astartes and Space Marine 2
The first Space Marine game follows Titus, a true-blue Ultramarine that treats the Codex Astartes with reverence, but carries the perspective that one has to think critically beyond the Codex in order to succeed. Unfortunately, this makes him susceptible to suspicion, and he is accused of Heresy by Leandros. Game ends on a cliffhanger, and a fandom waits for over ten years to find out what happens next. It's important to acknowledge that Space Marine establishes Titus as the main character and creates the expectation that Space Marine 2 will continue his story. Space Marine 2 does just that, and leaves us on another cliffhanger, further establishing that Space Marine's story is about Titus and his struggle to prove his honor and faith against unfair suspicion. This is where I'm going to use a phrase that I will be talking about later.

As a woman ... I think Space Marine 2 focusing on Titus, and not a new protagonist of my own gender, is the appropriate thing. However I may think or feel about Inclusion, it still would not be right if Space Marine 2 compromised on who the main character is. Times may change, but when a series establishes its main character, it's not appropriate to expect that to change. For example: I do not expect DOOM to give me a female DOOM SLAYER option since DOOM established its main character and has stuck to that character for actual decades now. I do not need to be included or highlighted in something that surrounds a series main character. It's why there's no need for a Male Protagonist in Tomb Raider, because Tomb Raider has always been about Lara Croft, or why there doesn't need to be a Female Protagonist in Halo because it has always followed Master Chief. I've made you read this paragraph to make the distinction clear that whatever my following comments, I'm not coming at the situation from an imperious place, or from a place of thinking that the Campaign should change for any reason. I enjoyed the campaign, and I felt like the developers had some pride when they made Major Sarkaana and her role in the story. I did not feel excluded in any way by the campaign. I enjoyed Titus, Gadriel, and Chairon, and by the end of the campaign, it was hard not to address every guy I know as BROTHER.

However, I can't respond to the choices of co-op and PvP with the same generosity. These modes are ultimately what's supposed to give Space Marine 2 its long-term legs and bring a surge of popularity to 40K, and the developers have also put a roadmap out there to give players confidence in those legs. And that's the point where I look at six different classes / characters and they're all guys. There is no female option, whether by the lore-approved Sisters or by any other means. The developers are then asking me to invest time and money (for full customization) to prolong the success of their game while simultaneously they have no intention to offer female players any options in a game with six classes to choose from. Regardless of Lore™ or other considerations, it stands out that a game that wants to be sustained through player purchases and customization in 2024 nevertheless offers zero incentive to half of the market. If it sounds like I'm about to cry EXCLUSION!!!, I am not. I'm not accusing the developers of exclusion, but I am pointing out a conspicuous absence in something that is supposed to grow 40K's popularity. A simple reality of gaming for the past several years is that some choice between male and female characters is a standard feature in multiplayer games that consumers understandably expect such that even Call of Duty has accepted that reality (even if many fans have not), and that is a standard feature that is missing in SM2 and in SM2's roadmap.

By now, if you're still reading, you may have one of several common points about the disparity that have been brought up, so this should be about the right time to address the common statements I've seen:

"If you want to play as a female Astartes, you should know about the Sisters ..." I've seen perhaps hundreds of renditions of this statement by now, and it's the first one I'm addressing because it gets into the first real problem I'm seeing in these discussions: False Equivalencies. The common sentiment is that the Sisters of Silence / of Battle are powerful entities that command great reverence in the Imperium, even having more clout than Astartes, therefore women interested in 40K should look to those factions for their interest in playing a female character. However, this notion ignores that the Sisters do not hold the same respect by GW or the fandom, reflected in their sexualized, titillating (for 40K standards) designs. Furthermore, the tone of most of the comments suggesting the Sisters as the alternative to the Astartes is that of the Sisters being where women are relegated, very much in the tone of the fallacious "Separate but Equal" principle that upheld racial segregation in the late-19th century. Importantly, the reason that there's calls for female Astartes despite the Sisters' existences is that those giving the calls can see the fallacious Separate but Equal situation that the Sisters represent. Many comments have, continuing to use false equivalency, said that, "Well men don't go demanding for there to be male Sisters of Battle, so you can't demand for female Astartes!" That statement has said something many times without it being properly acknowledged: the Sisters are seen as lesser, so naturally no guy would ever want to be a part of them. By implication, is says something more in-essence: "I expect women to be in a marginalized compartment in the fandom and the lore."

The next common sentiment: "As a woman, I have never been bothered at all by ..." In most of these statements, these apparent women cite that the Sisters exist — again, a false equivalence — and that they don't care if there's disparity or prejudice in the fandom because they personally have gotten along fine. The issue with these sentiments is that they essentially say, "I have found a comfortable place within the discrimination, therefore I will act as though the discrimination isn't there for myself or for other women." There will always be those that are disrespected by a group or institution that would rather sell out their own for acceptance or to otherwise avoiding disrupting a comfortable status quo. If women that preach for change do not represent all women, women that have accepted their place assigned to them by the men within the fandom also do not represent all women. I have a moral obligation to be blunt: a woman that helps men dogpile and abuse other women has forgotten the face of her mother and is basically an Uncle Tom. Harsh, and not consistent with the tone I want to deliver, but it'd be wrong if at least one of us didn't call it out for what it is.

Been holding off, but the next common theme of countless messages is, "LORE! READ THE LORE! DON'T DISRESPECT THE LORE! OMG DIDN'T YOU READ THE LORE?! CLEARLY YOU DIDN'T OR ELSE YOU'D KNOW ..." So here we are, Lore vs. Female Astartes. I'm not about to argue why or why not lore supports or denies the notion of female Astartes, and despite being brand new to this universe, I've read enough comments about gene seeds and incompatibility with female physiology to have it all burned in my retinas for life. I'm not going to try and deny Lore. However, lore is only as valuable and inviolable as it services the Themes of a universe or piece of fiction, and changes to lore are only as necessary as they improve the lore's service to the Themes. Lore can and will change where there's a will in GW to do make it happen within the cybernetic space magic of 40K, so the important thing to analyze is (1) what is thematically gained by female Astartes and (2) what is thematically lost by the hypothetical (re)addition of female Astartes?

Before continuing, it's essential to establish the definition of Theme in relation to story: Themes are the contents, messages, and implications that relate to real life or the real human experience. When somebody asks, "What is this story about?," the professional/academic meaning of that question is, "Why should I care about the story?" For Space Marine 2, the story is about rebuilding trust and faith. You should care about the story because Titus figures out that if he wants his battle brothers to believe in him, he has to believe in them too despite the mess he's been through. It's not that deep, but I don't think either I or you expect Space Marines to act like they're a guest on the Oprah show. If I ever see a Space Marine reach for a box of tissues, I will be creeped out.

So, with Theme established, I want to seek the bedrock Theme of 40K, the thing that you absolutely cannot get rid of and still be 40K. Again, I'm not going to pretend I know more about 40K than I do, but I find the bedrock in this iconic paragraph:

"To be a man in such times is to be one amongst untold billions. It is to live in the cruelest and most bloody regime imaginable. These are the tales of those times. Forget the power of technology and science, for so much has been forgotten, never to be re-learned. Forget the promise of progress and understanding, for in the grim dark future there is only war. There is no peace amongst the stars, only an eternity of carnage and slaughter, and the laughter of thirsting gods."

I appreciate that 40K gives us direct insights to its heart, and I do feel that helps to identify what 40K is could be About. In this analyst's opinion, 40K appears to be about how warfare regresses humanity, causes us to turn to brutal religious dogmas and machine-like treatment of people. Whether 40K is being satirical in one instance or grimdark serious in another, 40K's fundamental abstract identity is this theme. No matter what lore is built, it must respect the theme of Warfare Regressing Humanity. It must respect that, in Warhammer 40K's universe, the individual is utterly meaningless without their total contribution to the war efforts across the galaxy. For the survival of Humanity, individuality cannot matter.

So ... what does this notion have to say about the concept of Female Astartes?

[Princess Luna]

Why do people not aksed for a female character in TF2? Did they not see lack of women there?

[Doomsalesman]

Originally posted by Realigo Actual:

Fact: put them in, half the guys playing will pick a girl anyway

They started with them, they should put them back in. You don't need to sell a selectable video game gender you just need to sell the game.

I want Space Marine games with 8 foot tall megaboob gina carano astartes

Space Marine 2 can be the platform that starts this.

They weren't in the original Rogue trader, the bit everyone points to was written in a US hobby Magazine in the 80's and wasn't officially written or included by GW....it was basically fan made and copywrite and GW's size in the 80's meant they probably weren't aware of it or had no reason to do something about it at the time.

TLDR: There were NEVER female Space Marines in OFFICIAL GW lore

[astgdzfgdsg]

If they do fem marines I think I'm not only done with Warhammer but all big franchises period, I'm just so deeply tired of seeing the stuff I grew up with go down the toilet.

Why should I get invested in something like that if they can't be trusted not to horribly mismanage it?

I will be going all in on AI. AI content. Indie AI. AI everything. And the sooner everyone in hollywood and the AAA game industry and so on loses their jobs because of AI the better.

[VigilantPhase449]

sigh women ruin everything... holding true even more nowadays...

[The Lord Of Lmao]

Why even bring this up. No one asked about your ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ opinion on something that is nothing to do with the game. Just shut your mouth.

[FlynnTheFearless]

Funny part women are represented. The whole thread is just a random attack on the game. Not to mention them pushing their politics in things that have nothing to do with politics or even real people for that matter. They are complaining about a make believe that doesn't exist.

[Lamat]

This wall of text does not merit another wall of text. (ended up with a wall all the same haha)
You want the simple answer? Because it is the way it is. Men are man, females are females, space marines are men, and no matter how much ideology you insert into something it will not turn a cat into a dog.

Too confrontational and bigoted for you? READ ON.

THE MORE INTERESTING QUESTION IS THIS: Why always try to change the things you allegedly love instead of enjoying them the way they are? Have you considered that the way they are is what is truly great about them? That maybe man have a certain quality NONTRANSFERABLE TO WOMEN that make space marine a certain way? You mentioned brotherhood and camaraderie. It is called BROTHERhood for a reason.
Would it be consistent with the universe you say you like to violate its internal rules on the online coop portion of the game (which is heavily interconnected with the main campaign) just so that YOU can feel represented?
Chew on that one for a little bit.
Again, would you want someone to change WHO YOU ARE so that it is more fitting to the way that someone thinks YOU should be? Do you really call that "love"??

If I should judge you by the way your post started all diplomatic and little by little unraveled into a cliched cynical rant, I would say you really don't like warhammer 40k as much as you say you do. When you like something, you don't pull it apart into pieces, dissect it and then "Frankenstein" it to your likeness. You love it for what it is.
And you even said you don't consider yourself a fan.
This is not to say that you are not allowed to speak your mind about something, but it is more of an indicator of your motive behind it and how constructive or not your criticism is.
So I question your motives: they sound ideologically charged and biased, more of a weaponized speech than true admiration for something you are fond of. A "pose" of sorts.
Again I wonder why you would say you like a fictional world and then go "what is thematically lost by the hypothetical (re)addition of female Astartes?"
Have you ever being around men? Ever wondered why Titus would not be a good guest at Oprah's show?
Starting to see how ideologically contaminated your arguments are? No? check this out:
"women interested in 40K should look to those factions (Sisters) for their interest in playing a female character. However, this notion ignores that the Sisters do not hold the same RESPECT by GW or the fandom".
I think YOU are the one disrespecting the fictional world you say you really like, and YOU are the one with such a low opinion of what YOU consider to be a "relegated" class.
It is YOU that thinks women of this universe need to be PROMOTED to YOUR modern and civilized standards of societal rules and, ultimately, YOU the one saying that the sisters are not good enough for 21st century sensibilities.
I find it so very ironic to try and force "diversity and equality" or concepts like "Separate but Equal" into a world well know for being oppressive, bleak, DARK, nihilistic, totalitarian, dystopian, chauvinistic, religiously drenched and GRIM.

What part did you actually like about Space marine 2??? Or 40k in general for that matter. Was it Titus "rebuilding trust and faith" maybe? Anything else you noticed about the story? Besides the emotional roller coaster that is Titus, our leading man.

If you are ready to admit that 40k is about "Warfare Regressing Humanity", then you must surely see how backwards your argument is, right? Asking for the water to be less wet so you can enjoy its watery goodness without the hassle of all that humidity, much?

Sometimes the "good fight" is all that matters, is it? The "theme" is important as long as you can insert whatever ideology is necessary for the world to be a more "equal" and (ironically) "diverse" place.
Ideology is a weapon of war and in the sad pathetic wimpy world of the 21st century there is only war... The cultural war.

"Lore can and will change where there's a will in GW to do make it happen within the CYBERNETIC SPACE MAGIC OF 40K, so THE IMPORTANT THING to analyze is..."
That sentence DOES NOT make every change right, consistent and respectful or constructive to a fictional world. You do know that, right? The fact that you CAN do something does not mean you SHOULD or that it is RIGHT.
You don't build your house on shifting sands for a reason.
Anywaysssss, good luck enjoying the game and 40k (at least the parts that you agree with and can tolerate)

[John Cena]

as a woman i aint gonna read all that

[Pyromaniac]

Too long; didnt read

Female space marines and female custodes do not extist; there are enough fitting women in the universe..

Go ask for a game with Sisters of Battle or Sisters of Silence. Everyone of us "misogynists" would love games with them too

[76561197988918266]

didn't read; you always could have a strong powerful female character as an inquisitor or rogue trader. Can get power armor and all that.

[Galahad]

Originally posted by Queen Nothing:

Space Marine 2 is fantastic. I completed the campaign in one grinning sitting, and I started into the class-based co-op with my 40K-fan friends today. I went into Space Marine 2 blind, and 40K: Boltgun is the only contact I've had with the 40K universe prior to SM2. I wouldn't call myself a casual fan, or even a fan at all yet. However, curious about the discussions of this game I'm enjoying, I've come to the Discussions area to see ... things are going rough. Whether the question of Diversity, or Female Astartes has come from a place of sincerity or just an intention to Clown Farm/Troll, the responses have largely treated the question with heavy criticism, and I have read through all the active threads relevant to this controversy and read through the common remarks given by both general sides of this matter. Here, I would give my observations, organized in two sections that address the Question and the Response.

The Question of Female Astartes and Space Marine 2
The first Space Marine game follows Titus, a true-blue Ultramarine that treats the Codex Astartes with reverence, but carries the perspective that one has to think critically beyond the Codex in order to succeed. Unfortunately, this makes him susceptible to suspicion, and he is accused of Heresy by Leandros. Game ends on a cliffhanger, and a fandom waits for over ten years to find out what happens next. It's important to acknowledge that Space Marine establishes Titus as the main character and creates the expectation that Space Marine 2 will continue his story. Space Marine 2 does just that, and leaves us on another cliffhanger, further establishing that Space Marine's story is about Titus and his struggle to prove his honor and faith against unfair suspicion. This is where I'm going to use a phrase that I will be talking about later.

As a woman ... I think Space Marine 2 focusing on Titus, and not a new protagonist of my own gender, is the appropriate thing. However I may think or feel about Inclusion, it still would not be right if Space Marine 2 compromised on who the main character is. Times may change, but when a series establishes its main character, it's not appropriate to expect that to change. For example: I do not expect DOOM to give me a female DOOM SLAYER option since DOOM established its main character and has stuck to that character for actual decades now. I do not need to be included or highlighted in something that surrounds a series main character. It's why there's no need for a Male Protagonist in Tomb Raider, because Tomb Raider has always been about Lara Croft, or why there doesn't need to be a Female Protagonist in Halo because it has always followed Master Chief. I've made you read this paragraph to make the distinction clear that whatever my following comments, I'm not coming at the situation from an imperious place, or from a place of thinking that the Campaign should change for any reason. I enjoyed the campaign, and I felt like the developers had some pride when they made Major Sarkaana and her role in the story. I did not feel excluded in any way by the campaign. I enjoyed Titus, Gadriel, and Chairon, and by the end of the campaign, it was hard not to address every guy I know as BROTHER.

However, I can't respond to the choices of co-op and PvP with the same generosity. These modes are ultimately what's supposed to give Space Marine 2 its long-term legs and bring a surge of popularity to 40K, and the developers have also put a roadmap out there to give players confidence in those legs. And that's the point where I look at six different classes / characters and they're all guys. There is no female option, whether by the lore-approved Sisters or by any other means. The developers are then asking me to invest time and money (for full customization) to prolong the success of their game while simultaneously they have no intention to offer female players any options in a game with six classes to choose from. Regardless of Lore™ or other considerations, it stands out that a game that wants to be sustained through player purchases and customization in 2024 nevertheless offers zero incentive to half of the market. If it sounds like I'm about to cry EXCLUSION!!!, I am not. I'm not accusing the developers of exclusion, but I am pointing out a conspicuous absence in something that is supposed to grow 40K's popularity. A simple reality of gaming for the past several years is that some choice between male and female characters is a standard feature in multiplayer games that consumers understandably expect such that even Call of Duty has accepted that reality (even if many fans have not), and that is a standard feature that is missing in SM2 and in SM2's roadmap.

By now, if you're still reading, you may have one of several common points about the disparity that have been brought up, so this should be about the right time to address the common statements I've seen:

"If you want to play as a female Astartes, you should know about the Sisters ..." I've seen perhaps hundreds of renditions of this statement by now, and it's the first one I'm addressing because it gets into the first real problem I'm seeing in these discussions: False Equivalencies. The common sentiment is that the Sisters of Silence / of Battle are powerful entities that command great reverence in the Imperium, even having more clout than Astartes, therefore women interested in 40K should look to those factions for their interest in playing a female character. However, this notion ignores that the Sisters do not hold the same respect by GW or the fandom, reflected in their sexualized, titillating (for 40K standards) designs. Furthermore, the tone of most of the comments suggesting the Sisters as the alternative to the Astartes is that of the Sisters being where women are relegated, very much in the tone of the fallacious "Separate but Equal" principle that upheld racial segregation in the late-19th century. Importantly, the reason that there's calls for female Astartes despite the Sisters' existences is that those giving the calls can see the fallacious Separate but Equal situation that the Sisters represent. Many comments have, continuing to use false equivalency, said that, "Well men don't go demanding for there to be male Sisters of Battle, so you can't demand for female Astartes!" That statement has said something many times without it being properly acknowledged: the Sisters are seen as lesser, so naturally no guy would ever want to be a part of them. By implication, is says something more in-essence: "I expect women to be in a marginalized compartment in the fandom and the lore."

The next common sentiment: "As a woman, I have never been bothered at all by ..." In most of these statements, these apparent women cite that the Sisters exist — again, a false equivalence — and that they don't care if there's disparity or prejudice in the fandom because they personally have gotten along fine. The issue with these sentiments is that they essentially say, "I have found a comfortable place within the discrimination, therefore I will act as though the discrimination isn't there for myself or for other women." There will always be those that are disrespected by a group or institution that would rather sell out their own for acceptance or to otherwise avoiding disrupting a comfortable status quo. If women that preach for change do not represent all women, women that have accepted their place assigned to them by the men within the fandom also do not represent all women. I have a moral obligation to be blunt: a woman that helps men dogpile and abuse other women has forgotten the face of her mother and is basically an Uncle Tom. Harsh, and not consistent with the tone I want to deliver, but it'd be wrong if at least one of us didn't call it out for what it is.

Been holding off, but the next common theme of countless messages is, "LORE! READ THE LORE! DON'T DISRESPECT THE LORE! OMG DIDN'T YOU READ THE LORE?! CLEARLY YOU DIDN'T OR ELSE YOU'D KNOW ..." So here we are, Lore vs. Female Astartes. I'm not about to argue why or why not lore supports or denies the notion of female Astartes, and despite being brand new to this universe, I've read enough comments about gene seeds and incompatibility with female physiology to have it all burned in my retinas for life. I'm not going to try and deny Lore. However, lore is only as valuable and inviolable as it services the Themes of a universe or piece of fiction, and changes to lore are only as necessary as they improve the lore's service to the Themes. Lore can and will change where there's a will in GW to do make it happen within the cybernetic space magic of 40K, so the important thing to analyze is (1) what is thematically gained by female Astartes and (2) what is thematically lost by the hypothetical (re)addition of female Astartes?

Before continuing, it's essential to establish the definition of Theme in relation to story: Themes are the contents, messages, and implications that relate to real life or the real human experience. When somebody asks, "What is this story about?," the professional/academic meaning of that question is, "Why should I care about the story?" For Space Marine 2, the story is about rebuilding trust and faith. You should care about the story because Titus figures out that if he wants his battle brothers to believe in him, he has to believe in them too despite the mess he's been through. It's not that deep, but I don't think either I or you expect Space Marines to act like they're a guest on the Oprah show. If I ever see a Space Marine reach for a box of tissues, I will be creeped out.

So, with Theme established, I want to seek the bedrock Theme of 40K, the thing that you absolutely cannot get rid of and still be 40K. Again, I'm not going to pretend I know more about 40K than I do, but I find the bedrock in this iconic paragraph:

"To be a man in such times is to be one amongst untold billions. It is to live in the cruelest and most bloody regime imaginable. These are the tales of those times. Forget the power of technology and science, for so much has been forgotten, never to be re-learned. Forget the promise of progress and understanding, for in the grim dark future there is only war. There is no peace amongst the stars, only an eternity of carnage and slaughter, and the laughter of thirsting gods."

I appreciate that 40K gives us direct insights to its heart, and I do feel that helps to identify what 40K is could be About. In this analyst's opinion, 40K appears to be about how warfare regresses humanity, causes us to turn to brutal religious dogmas and machine-like treatment of people. Whether 40K is being satirical in one instance or grimdark serious in another, 40K's fundamental abstract identity is this theme. No matter what lore is built, it must respect the theme of Warfare Regressing Humanity. It must respect that, in Warhammer 40K's universe, the individual is utterly meaningless without their total contribution to the war efforts across the galaxy. For the survival of Humanity, individuality cannot matter.

So ... what does this notion have to say about the concept of Female Astartes?

I think that given there's no incentive to go on and make your own thing, many people feel like bullying what already exists into following their morals or rules.

But an alternative exists to this, too. Go play something else.

As a woman, if you sit down with a game, and find THIS much wrong with it, and find yourself disagreeing fundamentally with the character's designs or appearances - then GO PLAY SOMETHING ELSE!!

Really. You don't see tons of men lobbying or arguing for male representation in Tomb Raider or Horizon. If we have a problem with the way a character looks, most of us just don't play the game. I can't think of anything that's more of a waste of time other than to sit yourself down to immerse yourself in a game that you disagree with. And find yourself writing essays about.

[Galahad]

Being like 'why aren't there sisters of battle in this game?' when it's called Space Marine 2, when the story is that two teams of Space Marines branch off and fight aliens..... when there actually exist Sisters of Battle games.... idk what to say dude.

[SerBlackKnight]

I don't understand modern people. They want to make Tolkien's elves rough, they want to make dwarves who never see the sun black, they want a universe where there is only war and the stronger (physically speaking) model is a male, meaning when you make machines of war that need strength as much as anything else, you choose male men, which also suck, so you enhance them further to push them to their outmost limit, which is why they have 21 extra organs put to them in a process that kills most of them. You think they would want to put those on women when they are already stretching their resources thin?
This is a world where you kill a million people, to make 1 enhanced supersoldier, and you want them to try and do something that is probably not efficient, just because it appeals to someone's feelings?
Unfortunately in a brutal world there is no place for sentiment, which is also true on our own reality as well. In times of war, since the dawn of humans and even to this day, look what happens at every war. 0 sentiment and only logic. Those with sentiment tend to die.
The universe is set that way and there is specific logic behind it. Even if it wasn't, this is what it is established because that is how they wanted to create this universe. If some people don't like it, they don't have to try and change it, instead what they could do, is create or support the creation of a similar universe with different rules and laws.
It is fantasy and what happens is up to the creators and not for the fans or nonfans to decide what should happen or get it cancelled!

And this universe even though harsh as hell, still has a ton of good female characters and female representation, which logically is way more than it should in such a war heavy universe but you know what, it is because of their blind faith to the Emperor and noone can stop them from fighting for him, which is a good enough reason for me to have as much female representation as possible, but don't expect the people who rule and make the decisions to waste resources on them. A good example is the Blanks, which are so immensely powerful that they don't care about physical potential and only mental, which is why you have the Sisters of Silence.

If you can't see the logic behind all this, then I am sorry to say you are blinded by own personal agenda and complexes.

[Adanu]

Making female space marines would not only be lore breaking, but would be an obvious signal to anyone who pays attention that DEI has infiltrated and to steer clear of Warhammer like so many other games have been ruined by them.

This is not about you, this is about a setting that has it's own rules. Learn to live with those rules, or don't get into 40k. It's just that simple.

We are under no obligation to accept this ridiculous change to the setting to cater to you.

[Szarekh the Silent King]

Any real proofs about that HALF of a market? To my knowledge, such games has 90+% battle brothers audience.