Y’know, I had a moment of reflection while reading some of the impressions people had about Space Marine 2. Found one specifically praising it because “it has no wokeness.”
I don’t get it… I mean, this setting is clearly a dystopian sci-fi horror where pretty much everyone is either an asshole, or cannon fodder, right? What the hell does it matter what gender said characters identify as? Why would it matter if we had all types of Space Marines (yeah, yeah, lore, yadda-yadda, but c’mon…the Rubicon Primaris itself contradicts a whole lotta lore… it’s 40k, its lore is as stable as melted cheese), or trans characters, or agender, or anything else?
It’s one of those situations when one realises they like the same thing a lot of very unpleasant people like. And even though the reasons for liking said thing are diametrical opposites, it still leaves one with that sort of… icky feeling… Speaking personally, I almost feel guilty for loving 40k when seeing how a lot of assholes genuinely simp for Big E’s Genocidal Utopia…
These sort of opinions should just be entirely ignored. They are from unserious people either celebrating or raging at imaginary non-problems. “Woke” in it’s modern usage by right leaning culture war dorks is entirely undefined, from including PoC to acknowledging queer people exist.
So, I feel you on getting the ick from sharing the same space as these bigots, but don’t let them take away hobbies from you because of their narrow minded hate.
Thank you for the reality check, you’re entirely correct! And, to be fair, the “other end” of the fanbase have so far been some of the most genuinely friendly people, simply excited to share the gloom and doom of 40k with anyone who’s interested!
Couldn’t quit even if I wanted to, my Pile of Shame makes sure of that…
Yeah it’s the same when you have a complaint that aligns with the bigots. Like the female custodes debacle. I don’t care what gender the marines are, but I do think GW handled it poorly.
If they had just had… Idk the mechanicus find some relic that allowed women recruits to survive the upgrade to space marine, primaris, and custodes, and had them deliver a sick ‘more bodies for the war’ line, it would’ve been better.
Saying that does feel icky because there are people who are just against women being marines and custodes. I’m not. If GW did it better, I’d have nothing to say and the bigots would still be bigots.
In Gee Dubs defence, there had been speculation for years over female Custodes precisely because, unlike Space Marines, Custodes were not explicitly noted as being male-only.
I’ll take the L on that, I didn’t know it wasn’t explicitly said. I don’t remember any speculation like that either.
Still I take it from what you’re saying that there were also no female custodian characters over the years, right? It doesn’t help the misconception but it isn’t the same as saying there aren’t any.
Oh yeah, there were never female Custodes mentioned, which is why it was such a debate. My best guess is that Gee Dubs overlooked it when they changed Space Marines to male-only genetically modified supersoldiers after the Rogue Trader days, and when they realized their mistake, decided to keep it ambiguous in the Custodes’ case they wanted to change it later.
For the record, the 7th edition Adeptus Custodes codex does have a lore section that states Custodes are all the
infant sons of the noble houses of Terra
And that the custodes are a brotherhood.
I like the change and most people railing against it have no clue. Female custodes were originally intended by the author of the first real Custodes perspective novel.
Aaron Dembski-Bowden has publicly stated (in 2016) that authors wanted them but were told no by corporate because the box of models didn’t have female heads.
Very, very good highlight! They did both the fans and the concept itself a disservice by introducing it through a hand-wavey half a paragraph’s worth of retcon…
But that just tracks with James Borkshop’s slew of highly questionable decisions as of late. Imagine how much new blood (and fresh cash) they would’ve drawn in with a proper expansion to the story which would open up augmentation to basically anyone. How hard is it to attribute it as a modification of the process made by Cawl, who’s already at near Mary-Sue levels of big-brainedness? And it’d add more flavour to Guilliman’s rather rational take on doing things as well! Plus it’d reinforce the long-term tragedy of the entire universe itself, that everything is doomed even when Humanity’s not being as big of a bunch of regressive zealots because we already made things bad beyond the point of resolution. Poignant message, imho…
when seeing how a lot of assholes genuinely simp for Big E’s Genocidal Utopia…
Arguably, poe’s law is driving a lot of that. I would think very few people actually think the 40k universe and its morality is good. I know me and my group don’t think it’s good, just entertaining.
the hell does it matter what gender said characters identify as? Why would it matter if we had all types of Space Marines (yeah, yeah, lore, yadda-yadda, but c’mon…the Rubicon Primaris itself contradicts a whole lotta lore… it’s 40k, its lore is as stable as melted cheese), or trans characters, or agender, or anything else?
tbf, I think you’ve kinda hit the nail on the head with that.
Why does it matter in 40k? It would just be irrelevant and therefore not worth mentioning or shoehorning in.
I know the whole “This games woke!” mob are obnoxious, but it does annoy me sometimes when there’s an irrelevant token character when the story doesn’t need it.
Do it properly or don’t do it at all. Stop chucking token characters into stuff just for mass appeal, it’s ultimately a disservice.
Make interesting original characters and stories that revolve around that, rather than trying to cram that into something else.
Agreed, I don’t want inclusion for inclusion’s sake, either! It’d be like the current issue with movies being rebooted to be inclusive. Inclusivity’s not the problem, it’s that the stories themselves are both unfit and have grown stale. Make something new, make those characters actual characters, give’em their own history, make’em their own entities!
Late edit: to clarify, I still thoroughly believe there’s no reason why we can’t have diverse characters in 40k! But don’t just shove’em in there for the sake of it.
What the hell does it matter what gender said characters identify as? Why would it matter if we had all types of Space Marines (yeah, yeah, lore, yadda-yadda, but c’mon…the Rubicon Primaris itself contradicts a whole lotta lore… it’s 40k, its lore is as stable as melted cheese), or trans characters, or agender, or anything else?
Approaching it from the opposite direction, 40k is supposed to be a dystopia, why would you want gender equality and all that nice stuff in a dystopia, unless you thought it was dystopian?
I have a single, objective reason: narrative integrity. To expand upon this, the more varied the people who are utterly suffering, the more it underlines and amplifies that suffering and the context which generates it. That should be enough even just from a literary perspective.
Also, edit to add: the dystopia in 40k isn’t concerned with who you are, just that you accept full servitude to the Imperium. I honestly couldn’t see most Black Ship attendants hating a trans psyker any more than a cis one. Nor would the Astra Militarum ever turn its nose on fodder just because one uses different pronouns.
And that’s exactly the point! Let it be a fully inclusionary dystopia! Let the Imperium’s complete and utter disregard for a person’s individuality oppress everyone. This dystopia is literally religious cyberpunk, where they’ve replaced The Corporation with The Religion. And Big E didn’t care who or what you were as long as you obeyed orders, that is clear throughout all existing doctrines across the Imperium’s infrastructure. Everyone is meat.
Approaching it from the opposite direction, 40k is supposed to be a dystopia, why would you want gender equality and all that nice stuff in a dystopia, unless you thought it was dystopian?
Representation is not about being moral, it’s about being audience-inclusive. If there’s no reason not to be inclusive of a sector of your audience, then refusing to do so simply makes large portions of the audience feel less welcome enjoying the work.
Y’know, I had a moment of reflection while reading some of the impressions people had about Space Marine 2. Found one specifically praising it because “it has no wokeness.”
I don’t get it… I mean, this setting is clearly a dystopian sci-fi horror where pretty much everyone is either an asshole, or cannon fodder, right? What the hell does it matter what gender said characters identify as? Why would it matter if we had all types of Space Marines (yeah, yeah, lore, yadda-yadda, but c’mon…the Rubicon Primaris itself contradicts a whole lotta lore… it’s 40k, its lore is as stable as melted cheese), or trans characters, or agender, or anything else?
It’s one of those situations when one realises they like the same thing a lot of very unpleasant people like. And even though the reasons for liking said thing are diametrical opposites, it still leaves one with that sort of… icky feeling… Speaking personally, I almost feel guilty for loving 40k when seeing how a lot of assholes genuinely simp for Big E’s Genocidal Utopia…
These sort of opinions should just be entirely ignored. They are from unserious people either celebrating or raging at imaginary non-problems. “Woke” in it’s modern usage by right leaning culture war dorks is entirely undefined, from including PoC to acknowledging queer people exist.
So, I feel you on getting the ick from sharing the same space as these bigots, but don’t let them take away hobbies from you because of their narrow minded hate.
Thank you for the reality check, you’re entirely correct! And, to be fair, the “other end” of the fanbase have so far been some of the most genuinely friendly people, simply excited to share the gloom and doom of 40k with anyone who’s interested!
Couldn’t quit even if I wanted to, my Pile of Shame makes sure of that…
Hey, if Superman likes WH40K then its alright with me.
Yeah it’s the same when you have a complaint that aligns with the bigots. Like the female custodes debacle. I don’t care what gender the marines are, but I do think GW handled it poorly.
If they had just had… Idk the mechanicus find some relic that allowed women recruits to survive the upgrade to space marine, primaris, and custodes, and had them deliver a sick ‘more bodies for the war’ line, it would’ve been better.
Saying that does feel icky because there are people who are just against women being marines and custodes. I’m not. If GW did it better, I’d have nothing to say and the bigots would still be bigots.
In Gee Dubs defence, there had been speculation for years over female Custodes precisely because, unlike Space Marines, Custodes were not explicitly noted as being male-only.
I’ll take the L on that, I didn’t know it wasn’t explicitly said. I don’t remember any speculation like that either.
Still I take it from what you’re saying that there were also no female custodian characters over the years, right? It doesn’t help the misconception but it isn’t the same as saying there aren’t any.
Oh yeah, there were never female Custodes mentioned, which is why it was such a debate. My best guess is that Gee Dubs overlooked it when they changed Space Marines to male-only genetically modified supersoldiers after the Rogue Trader days, and when they realized their mistake, decided to keep it ambiguous in the Custodes’ case they wanted to change it later.
For the record, the 7th edition Adeptus Custodes codex does have a lore section that states Custodes are all the
And that the custodes are a brotherhood.
I like the change and most people railing against it have no clue. Female custodes were originally intended by the author of the first real Custodes perspective novel.
Aaron Dembski-Bowden has publicly stated (in 2016) that authors wanted them but were told no by corporate because the box of models didn’t have female heads.
Very, very good highlight! They did both the fans and the concept itself a disservice by introducing it through a hand-wavey half a paragraph’s worth of retcon…
But that just tracks with James Borkshop’s slew of highly questionable decisions as of late. Imagine how much new blood (and fresh cash) they would’ve drawn in with a proper expansion to the story which would open up augmentation to basically anyone. How hard is it to attribute it as a modification of the process made by Cawl, who’s already at near Mary-Sue levels of big-brainedness? And it’d add more flavour to Guilliman’s rather rational take on doing things as well! Plus it’d reinforce the long-term tragedy of the entire universe itself, that everything is doomed even when Humanity’s not being as big of a bunch of regressive zealots because we already made things bad beyond the point of resolution. Poignant message, imho…
Totally agree with your comment though. F**k those idiots who say things like that (even if not serious).
Arguably, poe’s law is driving a lot of that. I would think very few people actually think the 40k universe and its morality is good. I know me and my group don’t think it’s good, just entertaining.
I truly hope you’re right, and that we’re just seeing a loud minority… Would be a pity otherwise…
tbf, I think you’ve kinda hit the nail on the head with that.
Why does it matter in 40k? It would just be irrelevant and therefore not worth mentioning or shoehorning in.
I know the whole “This games woke!” mob are obnoxious, but it does annoy me sometimes when there’s an irrelevant token character when the story doesn’t need it.
Do it properly or don’t do it at all. Stop chucking token characters into stuff just for mass appeal, it’s ultimately a disservice.
Make interesting original characters and stories that revolve around that, rather than trying to cram that into something else.
Agreed, I don’t want inclusion for inclusion’s sake, either! It’d be like the current issue with movies being rebooted to be inclusive. Inclusivity’s not the problem, it’s that the stories themselves are both unfit and have grown stale. Make something new, make those characters actual characters, give’em their own history, make’em their own entities!
Late edit: to clarify, I still thoroughly believe there’s no reason why we can’t have diverse characters in 40k! But don’t just shove’em in there for the sake of it.
Approaching it from the opposite direction, 40k is supposed to be a dystopia, why would you want gender equality and all that nice stuff in a dystopia, unless you thought it was dystopian?
I have a single, objective reason: narrative integrity. To expand upon this, the more varied the people who are utterly suffering, the more it underlines and amplifies that suffering and the context which generates it. That should be enough even just from a literary perspective.
Also, edit to add: the dystopia in 40k isn’t concerned with who you are, just that you accept full servitude to the Imperium. I honestly couldn’t see most Black Ship attendants hating a trans psyker any more than a cis one. Nor would the Astra Militarum ever turn its nose on fodder just because one uses different pronouns.
And that’s exactly the point! Let it be a fully inclusionary dystopia! Let the Imperium’s complete and utter disregard for a person’s individuality oppress everyone. This dystopia is literally religious cyberpunk, where they’ve replaced The Corporation with The Religion. And Big E didn’t care who or what you were as long as you obeyed orders, that is clear throughout all existing doctrines across the Imperium’s infrastructure. Everyone is meat.
Representation is not about being moral, it’s about being audience-inclusive. If there’s no reason not to be inclusive of a sector of your audience, then refusing to do so simply makes large portions of the audience feel less welcome enjoying the work.
Or if you are stuck between orks on the south and tyranids on the north, do you really care about bathrooms at that point?
If that’s your situation, the bathroom is your pants.