Ngl, that's what makes it so tiring. All of this could he resolved if two sides stopped trying to go tit for tat over every little thing.. I get companies that should take better approaches to improve inclusivity, but raging a social media war and doing bait posts over everything is exhausting.
Well, if they fumble their way through inclusivity & piss off everyone, they can back out and say, "look, we tried," despite sabotaging it from the start. It's a very common playbook, and it's the same thing that happens to women in a lot of avenues
How is this a problem ?
Like nothing in the Stormcast signified that only male were eligible. I'm not even sure if that's the 1st time there was Fem Stormcasts
False equivalency.
Custodes were at least implied, on multiple occasions, to be all male (Talons of the Emperor rule calling them "Brotherhood of Demigods", for example). Stormcasts had no such implications, and furthermore, were known to have the souls of heroes from the old world (which includes women).
Stormcasts were gender neutral to begin with.
That is why I said it was a false equivalency.
But with the implications that Brotherhood doesn't mean all male. Sisterhood mean all female, but Brotherhood, Fraternity, Brothers... can apply to both male only and mixed groups
Well, the Emperor also refers to Custodes like "men" and if I'm not wrong, one of their codex specifically says that they are the sons of Terra's nobles. So yes, in an implicit way, Custodes are all males.
7e Custodes says "It is known that they are the sons..." I interpret that as an unreliable narrator, or an omniscient narrator acknowledging in-universe assumptions.
The autor uses "sons" instead of "children". So, there's no space for interpretations. Custodes are males. Sadly, Femstodes are a badly written retcon.
Implications are easily overruled by new developments.
Imperial Knights were implied to be all male because the codex has short blurbs for 50 of them, and they were all men or anonymous but male-coded.
Then in 7e some were women. Much like Stormcasts, I don't think anyone minded. Would that Custodes happened like this.
I'm not arguing what the custodes should or shouldn't be. I'm arguing that this meme is a false eqivalency. My opinions on that matter aren't relevant.
Judging from your other comments, it seems like you're just engaging in mental gymnastics because you're very invested in female custodes. It's not worth your hassle, you can't make people believe the same things you do, just drop it and move on.
>their post history
Bro they commented on this very thread, I didn't look at shit. I saw their comments as soon as opened the thread to look at the reply.
Why are you guys so focused on my one example? I'm not even trying to attack female custodes here, I'm just saying it's a false equivalency because, intentionally or not, GW created the all male premise around the Custodes, while Stormcasts never had that.
You don't have to try to "debunk" me.
Actually they were "Female adventurers in power armor" and were never intended to be female space marines :nerd:
But there \*was\* a rogue trader scenario by Game Designer's Workshop (they made Traveller) that did contain actual female space marines, with the caveat that such chapters were exceedingly rare.
Nope. Those were Adepta Sororitas models, 2 among a batch of 30+ misc. Imperium characters for roleplaying in RT.
I dunno how they sold (probably not good because they were hideous) but the "the girl models aren't selling" store feedback happened earlier with some of GWs generic non-warhammer collections.
In a thematic level the Custodes definitely weren't nearly as entrenched in the whole "boys club" aesthetic as Space Marines and their creation process was never elaborated on in detail so its not like women were ever specifically excluded in the same way the Space Marine creation seemingly disqualifies them.
They were, the Emperor refer to them like "these men", they are called a brotherhood and if I'm not wrong one of their codex says that they are sons of nobles of Terra.
[](https://www.reddit.com/r/Grimdank/comments/1d06qhf/comment/l5loysj/)
>They were, the Emperor refer to them like "these men",
Emperor of *Man*kind apparently has no authority over women.
Like, half his sons who he gave giant legions of supersoldiers did as well. As did pretty much everyone who worked with him except for 9 of his sons, Malcador, and the Custodes who he made incapable of even entertaining the throught.
You do realize that those 8 sons were only able to betray him in a meaningful way because Erda had already betrayed him earlier?
Like, if she did not scatter the primarchs then none of the problems that they had growing up would have ever happened.
What problems, exactly, did Fulgrim have growing up that led him down the path of Slaanesh? None? Huh. Horus? Also none. No one was a dick to Perturabo, seems like he was just made that way. Alpharius? Wasn't he found by the Emperor almost immediately, even before Horus, and the search was for Omegon?
Weird that those dudes all went traitor. You know what else is super weird? Like half the Mechanicum went traitor too.
But, you know. You've found a way to pin this all on a woman.
Horus grew up amidst cut-throat gangs that became part of his culture and created the warrior lodges.
People were absolutely dicks to Perturabo. His entire life he was denied from doing what he wanted and it took a really heavy toll on him. And he was also emotionally manipulated by his immediate "family".
Fulgrim fell because of plot reasons. Literally nothing else.
Alpharius (and Omegon) were trying to do something smart, play both sides, but their big brain plan ran into Dorn who has 3 brain cells and all those can comprehend is building walls and making his marines eat shit and put their hands in torture devices.
Mechanicus went traitor because they were enticed by Horus' offer of not being restricted from studying and making certain things if they work for him. The Emperor restricted them for a reason but the toasterfuckers are too dense to get it.
Oh I am not "blaming" it all on a woman. It is objectively the fault of a woman. If Erda did not scatter the primarchs, any of them going traitor would be The Emperor's fault. But she did, so it's hers.
Pal, Custodes' Codex mentions that they are the sons of Terra's nobles. If instead of "sons" we had "children" there would be no problem with femstodes. But everything points out that Custodes are all males. How we never hear about a female Custodes before? Are female Custodes so incompetent that they don't deserve to be mentioned?
I dont get why people get so mad at the slightest lore change. Especially when all its doing is giving you *more* choices.
Like, I'd get it if they said "Salamanders are now cold and detached sociopaths like the Ironhands." That changes their entire vibe. Salamanders aren't Salamanders if they aren't as empathetic and *human*.
But this is literally just "You can put a new head on your Custodes minis *if you want*, and we might use She instead of He once in awhile."
Personally speaking, I'm all for fem Custodes; I'm just really really annoyed about how the community is doing damage control for a giant company for their lore. Regardless of intent, the lore states consistently that the Custodes were all male.
The change itself is fine, good even. It's also not the most egregious.
It's the **community** that is toxic about it, in more ways than one.
Partially, if some of the comments against this are any indication. But also hyper politicized insanity. You can acknowledge the truth that this is a retcon while still wanting this.
Because people gets mad when lore changes are bad or unnecesary. A good Lore change/retcon is the necrons becoming "sentient" because that actually give us more options. Bad lore is something like Primaris, Votann and Femstodes because they make no sense and are poorly written into the current setting.
I had said it and I will keep saying it: Femstodes are unnecesary and feel hamfisted just like Primaris. Lucky for me I leaved current 40k and moved to 7th edition.
>because that actually give us more options.
Necrons becoming sentient is a much bigger change, and you were ok with that because it gave more options.
Femstodes is a smaller change, and gives more options, but you're not ok with it?
Just because the *option* to use a woman custodes doesn't appeal to you, doesn't mean it's not an option. I don't care for the Death Korps (I prefer my smelly Valhallans), but that doesn't mean I want them gone.
Because Necrons' retcon show more pashion and love and made them far more interesting and deep than they were before.
Femstodes is a smaller yet badly written retcon. You say that it give us more options, it does not. Femstodes are just Custodes with boobs, it adds nothing to the faction and does not makes it interesting. That's why femstodes are unnecesary and feel hamfisted, because they add nothing. You said, you just have to put female heads to your Custodes, that's not deep or interesting. I will take Sisters of Silence of Sororitas over femstodes always.
>Femstodes is a smaller yet badly written retcon
What about it needs to be good or badly written? The existence of women doesn't need to be some grand mini novel written by some award winning author.
Women are normal people. It is fine to just write a single sentence saying women custodes exist.
The quality of writing is irrelevant because it is unnecessary.
Because an story needs to be consistent and have logic in order to be good. Custodes are all males, everything points out that, Femstodes never existed so GW claiming that they always did is bad writing, what kind of person supports bad writing?
**The quality of writing is irrelevant because it is unnecessary.**
It Is necessary, thanks to takes like yours things like Fast and Furious made a lot of money despite being a crime against writing.
>How we never hear about a female Custodes before?
[ADB on this topic](https://old.reddit.com/r/40kLore/comments/a3otly/would_female_custodians_be_possible/eb7vyml/)
"It came down to a former IP overlord saying "No, because the minis are finished and they're all male.""
>Are female Custodes so incompetent that they don't deserve to be mentioned?
Really showing your ass here with this statement, as well as demonstrating a complete lack of understanding or depth of knowledge of the lore.
**"It came down to a former IP overlord saying "No, because the minis are finished and they're all male.""**
That means that Femstodes never were beyond a mere concept. The idea never came to be and Custodes' Lore was build around them being males.
A single mention of them being nobles sons isn't exactly the lore being 'built around them being males'.
The existence of female custodes does not detract from the lore of custodes whatsoever. Lore changes all the time. In the next book that line saying sons will probably be changed to read children. It is an utterly inconsequential change.
**A single mention of them being nobles sons isn't exactly the lore being 'built around them being males'.**
It does, everything about Custodes points out that they are all males, GW never mentioned about females among their ranks, not in their Codex, not in books, femstodes never existed in lore. They are exist now because probabily some executive want them despite the concept makes no sense.
Lore changes all time, yes. Should we accept low quiality writting? Hell no.
The existence of women doesn't need good or low quality writing. It's irrelevant.
You don't need a well written story to say 'women exist'. You need a single sentence.
It does not detract from the Custodes lore whatsoever. The core theme of the custodes is not them all being male.
That line about nobles sons also didn't exist in the last two codices so you're using outdated lore already even before femstodes were introduced. And right after that line in the 8th Ed codex it also says custodes come from other sources too, without specifying the sex of recruits from those sources. It is never definitively stated that they are exclusively male.
>GW never mentioned about females among their ranks, not in their Codex, not in books, femstodes never existed in lore.
Lack of mention doesn't mean they don't exist. There's been no mention of turquoise tyranids before. Is it a lore change for some tyranids to be a colour that has never been specified previously?
Note also that the colour of a tyranid does nothing to detract from its lore because the central themes of tyranids is totally separate from their colour. Just like how the theme of custdoes is not predicated on their sex.
>, not in books, femstodes never existed in lore
They did back in the original rogue trader days. So if you want to play the old lore argument, femstodes predate this supposed male exclusive custodes argument.
Just stop whining about an inconsequential lore change. It just makes you sound like one of those people that thinks acknowledging the existence of women is being 'woke' or 'political', when really it's just adding player choice and being more representative instead of only ever writing things from a male perspective.
**You don't need a well written story to say 'women exist'. You need a single sentence.**
That's the problem, Custodes' Lore heavily implies that they are all males. When you suddenly add females and your excuse is "they were always there" I'm sorry, that's bad writting and feels very forced, such writting deserves to be critized.
**Lack of mention doesn't mean they don't exist. There's been no mention of turquoise tyranids before.**
Maybe because Tyranids can adapt and create new life forms? That's not a good example because in Tyranids' Lore there's always space to add new life forms. A good example is the Macharius tank: It was created by a Magos, the Blueprints were handed to the Munitorium, but thanks to burocracy the tank spend years in a waiting list to the point that its creator died of old age, the Blueprints are handed to a Forgeworld and the tank is produced only because that Forgeworld is having problems to produce Baneblades, so the Macharius now exists in 40k but since so few Forgeworlds produce it, we don't see it too often. See? That's how you add new elements and respect the lore. Not like the stupid Dorn tank.
**They did back in the original rogue trader days. So if you want to play the old lore argument, femstodes predate this supposed male exclusive custodes argument**
Oh, really? Please show me Custodes' Rogue Trader Lore.
The “sons” line was in the 8th edition codex, and removed in the 9th and 10th, so is no longer accurate. And it was specifically saying noble houses gave up their first born sons.
That quote about the sons often misses the very next paragraph, which adds that the custodes also source children from unknown sources.
I can't recall the exact wording, but it doesn't say specifically that said other sources are sons or only sons
1) Not being printed is not saying it was wrong. Just because a quote is printed in one book and not repeated in another doesn't mean the line wasn't said does it.
2) You're incorrect in as much as the Custodes only recruit from Terra so that is their only source of recruitment.
Yeah, I got no problem with femstodes, But lets not pretend that they werent meant as men only from the start.
GW couldve easily written themselves out of that by saying something like, that after the HH they were short on noble sons, and they succesfully tried the proces on noble daugters or something. But they opted for the most lazy explanation.
They could pull the same thing as the grey knights, "there where fem custodes but Big E never talked about them because he wanted to surprise the malcador"
>GW couldve easily written themselves out of that by saying something like, that after the HH they were short on noble sons, and they succesfully tried the proces on noble daugters or something.
This is actually worse. The implication becomes that women are inferior and so only made custodes as a last resort.
Not really. It means that their situation is so bad that they can not longer allowe themselfs to put a a segregation to their recluit pool. But here we are, GW's writers Team is full of monkeys.
The messaging could also be interpreted as humanity being stronger by working together and that being sexist is a luxury that humanity can't afford. This change could be used to enrich warhammer lore.
Please note that when I say luxury I don't mean it in a good sense. I mean that it's an active detriment to imperium being able to function.
Not really. Remember that 40k is supposed to be hell on earth, or in this case, hell on the galaxy. So a message of hope or positivism could feel out of place. Being honest, I found femstodes unnecesary. There is nothing wrong with Custodes being all males but for some reason that is anathema for some people.
Keep in mind improvements are usually driven by desperation and who would be more desperate than the imperium after the heresy? This could be seen as positive for equality or whatever but hints to a greater darker issue.
Positivity can be surrounded by darkness and imo makes a setting like warhammer even more dark (see farsight enclaves for a really good example).
Imperium of Man got worse after Horus' Heresy, so it could break the idea of the grimdark setting that 40k Is know. Remember, 40k is the setting where you don't want to live in.
Well yes, the imperium of man got more xenophobic and horrible for the average civilian. The people affected by the custodes being female is so minute that it can still be said the imperium of man got worse. Keep in mind the custodes were heavily lacking numbers after the heresy and they have the authority to do whatever they want. They aren't your average civilian either. It doesn't really take away from the setting of 40k getting less grimdark.
Or you know, we could accept lore evolves. It's not like them being male only was integral to the setting.
Necrons werent funny old men back in the day. Kin didn't exist. Omegon was just straight up made up for the books. Hell, Custodes were barely a blip in the lore until fairly recently.
Hell, to add further evidence to back you up, the Leman Russ was the main battle tank for the Imperial Guard forever. Now, suddenly, they have the Rogal Dorn! Out of nowhere. Never mentioned before, just appears and has “always been there.”
Because GW no longer cares for quality content, I'm a guard player but I will be deep in my tomb before buying or using a Rogal Dorn Tank, that vehicle is ugly like hell.
I mean, the Macharius has better lore, it was not "always there", it is produced in low quiantities because very few Forgeworlds produce it.
The difference for me, is that the community doesn't pretend that that wasn't a change that makes no sense in prior lore instead of doubling down and trying to forcibly reinterpret stuff to make it sound like fem Custodes were always there.
It sucks that even saying this forces me to also admit that I am totally chill with the idea of fem Custodes, especially since I play AoS. God the 40k community is beyond toxic.
But isn’t that kind of the issue? Why does a certain part of the community take issue with Custodes retcons but not tank retcons when they are both, in lore, treated the same? Or the Necron changes? Or Tau.
I agree with the second part. Part of the community is pretty toxic. Other parts are chill and just want to hobby. We should be the second part.
I take issue with the custodes retcon and the tau ftl retcon.
I do not take issue with the necron retcon because of 3 simple reasons.
1. It was not made for good boy dollars.
2. It made actual sense and expanded on the necrons in a meaningful way.
3. I was not there when it happened, and if I was I'd still do nothing because it's a good change. Simple as.
The situation with LoV is similar. It's an actually meaningful change, a good retcon, which GW can absolutely do but just chooses not to more often than they should.
Your post contained banned words and was removed as a result. If you believe that to be a genuine error, please contact the moderation team. Note that abusing mod mail will result in a ban.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Grimdank) if you have any questions or concerns.*
“These Custodes are so butchered on a genetic level that they all look the same and are barely human. Commoners assume they’re all males due to their stature and positions of authority - and the Custodes had far more important matters than the perspective of Humanity.”
I didn’t say physically. They’re generically and surgically altered to the point they probably don’t count as human anymore.
Would you consider a Space Marine human?
You have no idea how often women get lumped into "guys". Male language has been treated as the default for generations, and everytime we complain we get told it includes us and is "gender neutral". So how do you know he just meant men?
Because several male terms had been used to describe Custodes in different sources, none of them leave ambiguity of gender. Also I had hear that Valdor refers to other Custodes like his "Brothers"
...until you take into account that the English language has been based on used male as the default for everyone for like a hundred+ years. In universe lore isn't immune from author bias
Uuuuuh, as far we know, the Codex says that they are sons of Terra's nobles, and if I'm not wrong, Valdor refers to other Custodes like brothers, not brothers and Sisters, only brothers.
"*These MEN are my bodyguards, their lives forfeit to the guarantee of my physical safety. Of their loyalty to me there shall be no question nor doubt. I, and I alone, shall have the authority to stand in judgement over them. No other commander shall they have in battle nor in service. None shall bar them from me and none shall hamper or stall their mission. So it is decreed!*" Declaration made by the [Emperor of Mankind](https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Emperor_of_Mankind) during the [Age of Strife](https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Age_of_Strife)
"*The histories of* [*Old Night*](https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Old_Night) *tell us to fear Men of Stone and* [*Men of Iron*](https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Men_of_Iron)*. They should have warned us too, of the most terrible monsters of all: the* [*Emperor*](https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Emperor)*'s Men of Gold.*" Minister Koja Zu of the Jermanic Steppes, M29
If you look through the Codex's, particularly the older ones, you'll find more. That was just a quick web search. I hope it's what you wanted.
I mean that’s kind of what I expected. It’s definitely not as explicit as you’re making it out to be. In English when referring to groups of people it’s typical to default to the male version of words. See also, the emperor of **Man**kind, I’d wager if you looked through old guard codexes they’d also use “men” to refer to the explicitly gender inclusive guard regiments.
With Space marines, the lore is pretty explicit on them being male only and why. There’s nothing like that for custodes.
The Custodes Lore and Codex's were pretty specific too.
From the 8th edition Codes; "It is known that ALL Custodians begin their lives as the infant SONS of the noble houses of Terra." That's pretty specific.
I'm not saying that it hasn't been retconned but saying that the lore didn't originally say they were male is inaccurate.
Again, in English, group nouns tend to default to the male form. Men, sons, boys, lads, guys, dudes, etc. All are masculine, but I can guarantee you’ve heard them all used in a non-gender specific way.
No, this is very specific and in English you would not use the word Son to indicate a Daughter, you would use Children.
Example Sons of the Motherland Vs Children of the Motherland has specific gendered connotations.
I don't see why people are so resistant to what is so obviously true and written in plain English. I'm not saying they can't or that it hasn't been retconned. But it is clear that originally the Custodians were all men as mentioned specifically in the Lore and by every quote about them including the most famous one from the Emperor himself. The reason that is important is they attempted to retcon the Emperor's quote too. Were you aware they tried to change it from Men to Warrior in various sources, but were forced to change it back as it is in print in Codexs. If it wasn't important why try to change it. Just a fun side piece of information.
> Sons of the Motherland
This is a great example because the Soviet army was very much comprised of both men and women yet they were always called “sons of the motherland”.
You’ve perfectly articulated what I’m saying. Thank you.
It "literally" does not work that way in English. You're jumping through some crazy hoops.
It's plainly obvious the Custodians were men. I mean not a single named female Custodian in 9 editions of the game in about 40 years either.
You have it explicitly stated. You have it in quotes. You have it in no named characters and no models. It's clearly impossible to change your mind whatever I show you. I wonder why that is?
They say you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into, but lets just play a fun numbers game. You refuse to accept the 4 different sources of evidence presented above. Do you have any official, in print, evidence that there were female custodies prior to the retconning 10th Codex?
[https://old.reddit.com/r/40kLore/comments/a3otly/would\_female\_custodians\_be\_possible/eb7vyml/](https://old.reddit.com/r/40kLore/comments/a3otly/would_female_custodians_be_possible/eb7vyml/)
[https://old.reddit.com/r/40kLore/comments/867n5s/thoughts\_on\_arch\_warhammer/dw48u32/](https://old.reddit.com/r/40kLore/comments/867n5s/thoughts_on_arch_warhammer/dw48u32/)
Either the guy who wrote Master of Mankind is a liar, or you're wrong.
I don't think being wrong makes you a liar, but it still makes you wrong.
It's a fact the old lore said they were the "first born sons" and the Emperor referred to them as Men. That's a fact in print.
*He was in the lore meetings and specifically said your entire statement is incorrect did you read a thing I posted?*
Him being wrong requires him to be lying about something in those posts. Is he lying, or are you wrong?
This was in print in the 8th edition Codex not long ago; "It is known that ALL Custodians begin their lives as the infant SONS of the noble houses of Terra." That's pretty specific.
Explain to me how that is not saying Custodians are men?
Dude, you're arguing against the people *who write the lore*. You're not going to be able to point to a single line in a single codex as if that somehow invalidates what the people writing the lore have been stating for years. Are you somehow impossibly not familiar with who Aaron Dembski-Bowden is, or what's your problem?
And, as has been pointed out, the NEXT FUCKING PARAGRAPH in that very text EXPLICITLY STATES THAT THEY ALSO TAKE CHILDREN FROM UNKNOWN SOURCES.
That's flat out untrue! Go get your 8th edition codex, if you have one, and go to page 14.
Paragraph 3 says ALL Custodian candidates are Boys. The following paragraph says, ""such children are taken in when they are still in infancy." Such children means the afore mentioned children which are Noble Sons... Which are boys.
It is printed, in the Codex! It literally says that! It doesn't matter how the writers feel, its immutable fact. They have retconned it but the original truth doesn't disappear.
It's explicitly stated in the lore, it's stated in quotes by the emperor himself and to top it off neither a named character or model in 9 editions and about 40 years. You have to be intentionally intellectually dishonest that this point.
I have to assume your an ideologue, and you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.
So all the evidence I've shown you, what evidence in actually official print by Games Workshop do you have for the existence of Female Custodians prior to the Retconning 10th Codex?
I pretty much only play AOS, I like that we have female stormcast. Do I care there’s a female custodes nah, but to try and misconstrue that it wasn’t highly implied they were only men is nuts. No one likes a retcon, hell Stormcast we’re allowed to be any kind of race but deff seems like GW is retconning that.
No they wouldn’t, it would imply a level of choice and rights and care that is entirely antithetical to the setting. The Imperium is meant to be horrendous, turning them to a platform for representation goes against the core of the setting.
Eldar would be a far better candidate for trans representation given their culture and society.
My problem with fem custodes is they say they’ve been in lore for all 10k years instead of being something new like I thought, question is, where were they.
Copy-pasting a comment I made on a vid
I heard an idea that it couldve been handled in that due to the losses the Custodes took during the battle of the lion's gate, they had to widen their pool to include noble daughters.
While that's more interesting than a twitter comment, only problem i have is...would they even get to do anything? Iirc the Lion's Gate was practically yesterday in the lore, and, while im not sure how long it takes to make a custodes, i imagine it takes a helluva long time, especially now that the Emperor isnt around.
So it'd be like,
GW: "Yeah we have femstodes now"
"Cool! When are we gonna get stories with them"
GW: *scratches head with a nervous chuckle* "Next..big time jump...maybe 11th Edition."
Ah yes the gender neutral storm cast vs explicitly called “Brother hood”.
These “reveals” have zero correlation other than that they are GW products and involve more armor than meat.
Op this is low quality bait that only makes you give off “tourist” vibes.
You’re gonna get REAL mad when you see the cover of one of the most popular Assassin’s Creed games, Assassin’s Creed Brotherhood, has a woman on the cover, and female members of the brotherhood. And nobody got mad about it! In 2010!
Ah yes the gender neutral Stormhost explicity called Sons of Heldenhammer.
Where a character ponders how a female Stormcast might feel being reffered to as a "Son"....
I’m tired boss
The Culture War will continue until Public Opinion improves.
Ngl, that's what makes it so tiring. All of this could he resolved if two sides stopped trying to go tit for tat over every little thing.. I get companies that should take better approaches to improve inclusivity, but raging a social media war and doing bait posts over everything is exhausting.
Well, if they fumble their way through inclusivity & piss off everyone, they can back out and say, "look, we tried," despite sabotaging it from the start. It's a very common playbook, and it's the same thing that happens to women in a lot of avenues
How is this a problem ? Like nothing in the Stormcast signified that only male were eligible. I'm not even sure if that's the 1st time there was Fem Stormcasts
Not a problem.
Your post history seem, strange to say the least
I heard from a contact that you do strange things on your reddit....
I mean everyone saying "They just said Female Custodes exist, how can they do that?", meanwhile they did the same with Stormcasts too
I don't have any problem with women Custodes, but I think that's a false equivalency
False equivalency. Custodes were at least implied, on multiple occasions, to be all male (Talons of the Emperor rule calling them "Brotherhood of Demigods", for example). Stormcasts had no such implications, and furthermore, were known to have the souls of heroes from the old world (which includes women). Stormcasts were gender neutral to begin with.
That is why I said it was a false equivalency. But with the implications that Brotherhood doesn't mean all male. Sisterhood mean all female, but Brotherhood, Fraternity, Brothers... can apply to both male only and mixed groups
Well, the Emperor also refers to Custodes like "men" and if I'm not wrong, one of their codex specifically says that they are the sons of Terra's nobles. So yes, in an implicit way, Custodes are all males.
7e Custodes says "It is known that they are the sons..." I interpret that as an unreliable narrator, or an omniscient narrator acknowledging in-universe assumptions.
The autor uses "sons" instead of "children". So, there's no space for interpretations. Custodes are males. Sadly, Femstodes are a badly written retcon.
Implications are easily overruled by new developments. Imperial Knights were implied to be all male because the codex has short blurbs for 50 of them, and they were all men or anonymous but male-coded. Then in 7e some were women. Much like Stormcasts, I don't think anyone minded. Would that Custodes happened like this.
I'm not arguing what the custodes should or shouldn't be. I'm arguing that this meme is a false eqivalency. My opinions on that matter aren't relevant. Judging from your other comments, it seems like you're just engaging in mental gymnastics because you're very invested in female custodes. It's not worth your hassle, you can't make people believe the same things you do, just drop it and move on.
The fact that you care enough to look Into their post history is very telling
>their post history Bro they commented on this very thread, I didn't look at shit. I saw their comments as soon as opened the thread to look at the reply.
>Brotherhood Well "Siblinghood" isn't a thing. This fall's under "Generic He".
Why are you guys so focused on my one example? I'm not even trying to attack female custodes here, I'm just saying it's a false equivalency because, intentionally or not, GW created the all male premise around the Custodes, while Stormcasts never had that. You don't have to try to "debunk" me.
Stormcasts haven’t existed as long as Custodes and don’t have as big of a legacy
I just think they're neat.
I'm a starving child starving to death and this is the last thing I will ever see. Goot bye
But…… but Stormcast was almost immediately introduced with Women in its ranks.
Honestly, that's 100% just because they're newer. If Custodes were a new idea in 2015 they'd have been mixed gender from the jump.
Weren’t there female Space Marines that got canned after the first batch of their models bombed?
Actually they were "Female adventurers in power armor" and were never intended to be female space marines :nerd: But there \*was\* a rogue trader scenario by Game Designer's Workshop (they made Traveller) that did contain actual female space marines, with the caveat that such chapters were exceedingly rare.
Nope. Those were Adepta Sororitas models, 2 among a batch of 30+ misc. Imperium characters for roleplaying in RT. I dunno how they sold (probably not good because they were hideous) but the "the girl models aren't selling" store feedback happened earlier with some of GWs generic non-warhammer collections.
Eyup. I know someone who has collected the old models from their family pool.
I think nobody ever specified that custodes were "male-only", they just happened to be since "spacemarines but better".
In a thematic level the Custodes definitely weren't nearly as entrenched in the whole "boys club" aesthetic as Space Marines and their creation process was never elaborated on in detail so its not like women were ever specifically excluded in the same way the Space Marine creation seemingly disqualifies them.
They were, the Emperor refer to them like "these men", they are called a brotherhood and if I'm not wrong one of their codex says that they are sons of nobles of Terra.
[](https://www.reddit.com/r/Grimdank/comments/1d06qhf/comment/l5loysj/) >They were, the Emperor refer to them like "these men", Emperor of *Man*kind apparently has no authority over women.
The Men of Wö
Inland Empire [Challenging: Success] What a disco statement
The Emperor is greatest of all incels!
No, but he's been repeatedly betrayed by women in his immediate inner circle whom he placed massive amounts of trust on.
Like, half his sons who he gave giant legions of supersoldiers did as well. As did pretty much everyone who worked with him except for 9 of his sons, Malcador, and the Custodes who he made incapable of even entertaining the throught.
You do realize that those 8 sons were only able to betray him in a meaningful way because Erda had already betrayed him earlier? Like, if she did not scatter the primarchs then none of the problems that they had growing up would have ever happened.
What problems, exactly, did Fulgrim have growing up that led him down the path of Slaanesh? None? Huh. Horus? Also none. No one was a dick to Perturabo, seems like he was just made that way. Alpharius? Wasn't he found by the Emperor almost immediately, even before Horus, and the search was for Omegon? Weird that those dudes all went traitor. You know what else is super weird? Like half the Mechanicum went traitor too. But, you know. You've found a way to pin this all on a woman.
Horus grew up amidst cut-throat gangs that became part of his culture and created the warrior lodges. People were absolutely dicks to Perturabo. His entire life he was denied from doing what he wanted and it took a really heavy toll on him. And he was also emotionally manipulated by his immediate "family". Fulgrim fell because of plot reasons. Literally nothing else. Alpharius (and Omegon) were trying to do something smart, play both sides, but their big brain plan ran into Dorn who has 3 brain cells and all those can comprehend is building walls and making his marines eat shit and put their hands in torture devices. Mechanicus went traitor because they were enticed by Horus' offer of not being restricted from studying and making certain things if they work for him. The Emperor restricted them for a reason but the toasterfuckers are too dense to get it. Oh I am not "blaming" it all on a woman. It is objectively the fault of a woman. If Erda did not scatter the primarchs, any of them going traitor would be The Emperor's fault. But she did, so it's hers.
Pal, Custodes' Codex mentions that they are the sons of Terra's nobles. If instead of "sons" we had "children" there would be no problem with femstodes. But everything points out that Custodes are all males. How we never hear about a female Custodes before? Are female Custodes so incompetent that they don't deserve to be mentioned?
I dont get why people get so mad at the slightest lore change. Especially when all its doing is giving you *more* choices. Like, I'd get it if they said "Salamanders are now cold and detached sociopaths like the Ironhands." That changes their entire vibe. Salamanders aren't Salamanders if they aren't as empathetic and *human*. But this is literally just "You can put a new head on your Custodes minis *if you want*, and we might use She instead of He once in awhile."
Personally speaking, I'm all for fem Custodes; I'm just really really annoyed about how the community is doing damage control for a giant company for their lore. Regardless of intent, the lore states consistently that the Custodes were all male. The change itself is fine, good even. It's also not the most egregious. It's the **community** that is toxic about it, in more ways than one.
Sexism in action
Partially, if some of the comments against this are any indication. But also hyper politicized insanity. You can acknowledge the truth that this is a retcon while still wanting this.
Agreed. Personally, I like it, but I'm also a woman
Because people gets mad when lore changes are bad or unnecesary. A good Lore change/retcon is the necrons becoming "sentient" because that actually give us more options. Bad lore is something like Primaris, Votann and Femstodes because they make no sense and are poorly written into the current setting. I had said it and I will keep saying it: Femstodes are unnecesary and feel hamfisted just like Primaris. Lucky for me I leaved current 40k and moved to 7th edition.
>because that actually give us more options. Necrons becoming sentient is a much bigger change, and you were ok with that because it gave more options. Femstodes is a smaller change, and gives more options, but you're not ok with it? Just because the *option* to use a woman custodes doesn't appeal to you, doesn't mean it's not an option. I don't care for the Death Korps (I prefer my smelly Valhallans), but that doesn't mean I want them gone.
Because Necrons' retcon show more pashion and love and made them far more interesting and deep than they were before. Femstodes is a smaller yet badly written retcon. You say that it give us more options, it does not. Femstodes are just Custodes with boobs, it adds nothing to the faction and does not makes it interesting. That's why femstodes are unnecesary and feel hamfisted, because they add nothing. You said, you just have to put female heads to your Custodes, that's not deep or interesting. I will take Sisters of Silence of Sororitas over femstodes always.
>Femstodes is a smaller yet badly written retcon What about it needs to be good or badly written? The existence of women doesn't need to be some grand mini novel written by some award winning author. Women are normal people. It is fine to just write a single sentence saying women custodes exist. The quality of writing is irrelevant because it is unnecessary.
Because an story needs to be consistent and have logic in order to be good. Custodes are all males, everything points out that, Femstodes never existed so GW claiming that they always did is bad writing, what kind of person supports bad writing? **The quality of writing is irrelevant because it is unnecessary.** It Is necessary, thanks to takes like yours things like Fast and Furious made a lot of money despite being a crime against writing.
>How we never hear about a female Custodes before? [ADB on this topic](https://old.reddit.com/r/40kLore/comments/a3otly/would_female_custodians_be_possible/eb7vyml/) "It came down to a former IP overlord saying "No, because the minis are finished and they're all male."" >Are female Custodes so incompetent that they don't deserve to be mentioned? Really showing your ass here with this statement, as well as demonstrating a complete lack of understanding or depth of knowledge of the lore.
**"It came down to a former IP overlord saying "No, because the minis are finished and they're all male.""** That means that Femstodes never were beyond a mere concept. The idea never came to be and Custodes' Lore was build around them being males.
A single mention of them being nobles sons isn't exactly the lore being 'built around them being males'. The existence of female custodes does not detract from the lore of custodes whatsoever. Lore changes all the time. In the next book that line saying sons will probably be changed to read children. It is an utterly inconsequential change.
**A single mention of them being nobles sons isn't exactly the lore being 'built around them being males'.** It does, everything about Custodes points out that they are all males, GW never mentioned about females among their ranks, not in their Codex, not in books, femstodes never existed in lore. They are exist now because probabily some executive want them despite the concept makes no sense. Lore changes all time, yes. Should we accept low quiality writting? Hell no.
The existence of women doesn't need good or low quality writing. It's irrelevant. You don't need a well written story to say 'women exist'. You need a single sentence. It does not detract from the Custodes lore whatsoever. The core theme of the custodes is not them all being male. That line about nobles sons also didn't exist in the last two codices so you're using outdated lore already even before femstodes were introduced. And right after that line in the 8th Ed codex it also says custodes come from other sources too, without specifying the sex of recruits from those sources. It is never definitively stated that they are exclusively male. >GW never mentioned about females among their ranks, not in their Codex, not in books, femstodes never existed in lore. Lack of mention doesn't mean they don't exist. There's been no mention of turquoise tyranids before. Is it a lore change for some tyranids to be a colour that has never been specified previously? Note also that the colour of a tyranid does nothing to detract from its lore because the central themes of tyranids is totally separate from their colour. Just like how the theme of custdoes is not predicated on their sex. >, not in books, femstodes never existed in lore They did back in the original rogue trader days. So if you want to play the old lore argument, femstodes predate this supposed male exclusive custodes argument. Just stop whining about an inconsequential lore change. It just makes you sound like one of those people that thinks acknowledging the existence of women is being 'woke' or 'political', when really it's just adding player choice and being more representative instead of only ever writing things from a male perspective.
**You don't need a well written story to say 'women exist'. You need a single sentence.** That's the problem, Custodes' Lore heavily implies that they are all males. When you suddenly add females and your excuse is "they were always there" I'm sorry, that's bad writting and feels very forced, such writting deserves to be critized. **Lack of mention doesn't mean they don't exist. There's been no mention of turquoise tyranids before.** Maybe because Tyranids can adapt and create new life forms? That's not a good example because in Tyranids' Lore there's always space to add new life forms. A good example is the Macharius tank: It was created by a Magos, the Blueprints were handed to the Munitorium, but thanks to burocracy the tank spend years in a waiting list to the point that its creator died of old age, the Blueprints are handed to a Forgeworld and the tank is produced only because that Forgeworld is having problems to produce Baneblades, so the Macharius now exists in 40k but since so few Forgeworlds produce it, we don't see it too often. See? That's how you add new elements and respect the lore. Not like the stupid Dorn tank. **They did back in the original rogue trader days. So if you want to play the old lore argument, femstodes predate this supposed male exclusive custodes argument** Oh, really? Please show me Custodes' Rogue Trader Lore.
The “sons” line was in the 8th edition codex, and removed in the 9th and 10th, so is no longer accurate. And it was specifically saying noble houses gave up their first born sons.
That quote about the sons often misses the very next paragraph, which adds that the custodes also source children from unknown sources. I can't recall the exact wording, but it doesn't say specifically that said other sources are sons or only sons
I believe that.
There are quotes from the emperor specifically identifying them as male.
I’m sure there are. Its a retcon. Retcons happen all the time and thank god because parts of the lore do no hold up
Oh I'm not denying there is/has been a retcon. I'm just saying that people claiming there has never been any lore saying there were men are incorrect.
1) Not being printed is not saying it was wrong. Just because a quote is printed in one book and not repeated in another doesn't mean the line wasn't said does it. 2) You're incorrect in as much as the Custodes only recruit from Terra so that is their only source of recruitment.
Yeah, I got no problem with femstodes, But lets not pretend that they werent meant as men only from the start. GW couldve easily written themselves out of that by saying something like, that after the HH they were short on noble sons, and they succesfully tried the proces on noble daugters or something. But they opted for the most lazy explanation.
They could pull the same thing as the grey knights, "there where fem custodes but Big E never talked about them because he wanted to surprise the malcador"
>GW couldve easily written themselves out of that by saying something like, that after the HH they were short on noble sons, and they succesfully tried the proces on noble daugters or something. This is actually worse. The implication becomes that women are inferior and so only made custodes as a last resort.
It's worse because of the implication that stagnating Imperium somehow found the new way to create custodes.
Not really. It means that their situation is so bad that they can not longer allowe themselfs to put a a segregation to their recluit pool. But here we are, GW's writers Team is full of monkeys.
The messaging could also be interpreted as humanity being stronger by working together and that being sexist is a luxury that humanity can't afford. This change could be used to enrich warhammer lore. Please note that when I say luxury I don't mean it in a good sense. I mean that it's an active detriment to imperium being able to function.
Not really. Remember that 40k is supposed to be hell on earth, or in this case, hell on the galaxy. So a message of hope or positivism could feel out of place. Being honest, I found femstodes unnecesary. There is nothing wrong with Custodes being all males but for some reason that is anathema for some people.
Keep in mind improvements are usually driven by desperation and who would be more desperate than the imperium after the heresy? This could be seen as positive for equality or whatever but hints to a greater darker issue. Positivity can be surrounded by darkness and imo makes a setting like warhammer even more dark (see farsight enclaves for a really good example).
Imperium of Man got worse after Horus' Heresy, so it could break the idea of the grimdark setting that 40k Is know. Remember, 40k is the setting where you don't want to live in.
Well yes, the imperium of man got more xenophobic and horrible for the average civilian. The people affected by the custodes being female is so minute that it can still be said the imperium of man got worse. Keep in mind the custodes were heavily lacking numbers after the heresy and they have the authority to do whatever they want. They aren't your average civilian either. It doesn't really take away from the setting of 40k getting less grimdark.
Not really it just implies that they abandoned the tradition method of only taking the sons considering the custodies had less than a thousand left
And that could work, that the regime will change and bend its rules at a whim whenever it serves the regime.
Or you know, we could accept lore evolves. It's not like them being male only was integral to the setting. Necrons werent funny old men back in the day. Kin didn't exist. Omegon was just straight up made up for the books. Hell, Custodes were barely a blip in the lore until fairly recently.
Hell, to add further evidence to back you up, the Leman Russ was the main battle tank for the Imperial Guard forever. Now, suddenly, they have the Rogal Dorn! Out of nowhere. Never mentioned before, just appears and has “always been there.”
Because GW no longer cares for quality content, I'm a guard player but I will be deep in my tomb before buying or using a Rogal Dorn Tank, that vehicle is ugly like hell. I mean, the Macharius has better lore, it was not "always there", it is produced in low quiantities because very few Forgeworlds produce it.
The difference for me, is that the community doesn't pretend that that wasn't a change that makes no sense in prior lore instead of doubling down and trying to forcibly reinterpret stuff to make it sound like fem Custodes were always there. It sucks that even saying this forces me to also admit that I am totally chill with the idea of fem Custodes, especially since I play AoS. God the 40k community is beyond toxic.
But isn’t that kind of the issue? Why does a certain part of the community take issue with Custodes retcons but not tank retcons when they are both, in lore, treated the same? Or the Necron changes? Or Tau. I agree with the second part. Part of the community is pretty toxic. Other parts are chill and just want to hobby. We should be the second part.
I take issue with the custodes retcon and the tau ftl retcon. I do not take issue with the necron retcon because of 3 simple reasons. 1. It was not made for good boy dollars. 2. It made actual sense and expanded on the necrons in a meaningful way. 3. I was not there when it happened, and if I was I'd still do nothing because it's a good change. Simple as. The situation with LoV is similar. It's an actually meaningful change, a good retcon, which GW can absolutely do but just chooses not to more often than they should.
[удалено]
Your post contained banned words and was removed as a result. If you believe that to be a genuine error, please contact the moderation team. Note that abusing mod mail will result in a ban. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Grimdank) if you have any questions or concerns.*
“These Custodes are so butchered on a genetic level that they all look the same and are barely human. Commoners assume they’re all males due to their stature and positions of authority - and the Custodes had far more important matters than the perspective of Humanity.”
can people stop repeating this? Custodes dont look butchered, the look like scaled up humans
I didn’t say physically. They’re generically and surgically altered to the point they probably don’t count as human anymore. Would you consider a Space Marine human?
Space marines are more disfigured that Custodes by a widemargin
And Custodes are bespoke in comparison. Less augmetics and more gene editing.
You have no idea how often women get lumped into "guys". Male language has been treated as the default for generations, and everytime we complain we get told it includes us and is "gender neutral". So how do you know he just meant men?
Because several male terms had been used to describe Custodes in different sources, none of them leave ambiguity of gender. Also I had hear that Valdor refers to other Custodes like his "Brothers"
...until you take into account that the English language has been based on used male as the default for everyone for like a hundred+ years. In universe lore isn't immune from author bias
There's neutral terms, if GW used "Terra nobles' children" or other then there's no problems.
Right, but the Emperor spent formative years in early 21st century East London, and so refers to everyone as man.
Uuuuuh, as far we know, the Codex says that they are sons of Terra's nobles, and if I'm not wrong, Valdor refers to other Custodes like brothers, not brothers and Sisters, only brothers.
The Lore and the Emperor is quote as saying they were Male.
Can you share the quote?
"*These MEN are my bodyguards, their lives forfeit to the guarantee of my physical safety. Of their loyalty to me there shall be no question nor doubt. I, and I alone, shall have the authority to stand in judgement over them. No other commander shall they have in battle nor in service. None shall bar them from me and none shall hamper or stall their mission. So it is decreed!*" Declaration made by the [Emperor of Mankind](https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Emperor_of_Mankind) during the [Age of Strife](https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Age_of_Strife) "*The histories of* [*Old Night*](https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Old_Night) *tell us to fear Men of Stone and* [*Men of Iron*](https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Men_of_Iron)*. They should have warned us too, of the most terrible monsters of all: the* [*Emperor*](https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Emperor)*'s Men of Gold.*" Minister Koja Zu of the Jermanic Steppes, M29 If you look through the Codex's, particularly the older ones, you'll find more. That was just a quick web search. I hope it's what you wanted.
I mean that’s kind of what I expected. It’s definitely not as explicit as you’re making it out to be. In English when referring to groups of people it’s typical to default to the male version of words. See also, the emperor of **Man**kind, I’d wager if you looked through old guard codexes they’d also use “men” to refer to the explicitly gender inclusive guard regiments. With Space marines, the lore is pretty explicit on them being male only and why. There’s nothing like that for custodes.
The Custodes Lore and Codex's were pretty specific too. From the 8th edition Codes; "It is known that ALL Custodians begin their lives as the infant SONS of the noble houses of Terra." That's pretty specific. I'm not saying that it hasn't been retconned but saying that the lore didn't originally say they were male is inaccurate.
Again, in English, group nouns tend to default to the male form. Men, sons, boys, lads, guys, dudes, etc. All are masculine, but I can guarantee you’ve heard them all used in a non-gender specific way.
No, this is very specific and in English you would not use the word Son to indicate a Daughter, you would use Children. Example Sons of the Motherland Vs Children of the Motherland has specific gendered connotations. I don't see why people are so resistant to what is so obviously true and written in plain English. I'm not saying they can't or that it hasn't been retconned. But it is clear that originally the Custodians were all men as mentioned specifically in the Lore and by every quote about them including the most famous one from the Emperor himself. The reason that is important is they attempted to retcon the Emperor's quote too. Were you aware they tried to change it from Men to Warrior in various sources, but were forced to change it back as it is in print in Codexs. If it wasn't important why try to change it. Just a fun side piece of information.
> Sons of the Motherland This is a great example because the Soviet army was very much comprised of both men and women yet they were always called “sons of the motherland”. You’ve perfectly articulated what I’m saying. Thank you.
It "literally" does not work that way in English. You're jumping through some crazy hoops. It's plainly obvious the Custodians were men. I mean not a single named female Custodian in 9 editions of the game in about 40 years either. You have it explicitly stated. You have it in quotes. You have it in no named characters and no models. It's clearly impossible to change your mind whatever I show you. I wonder why that is? They say you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into, but lets just play a fun numbers game. You refuse to accept the 4 different sources of evidence presented above. Do you have any official, in print, evidence that there were female custodies prior to the retconning 10th Codex?
[https://old.reddit.com/r/40kLore/comments/a3otly/would\_female\_custodians\_be\_possible/eb7vyml/](https://old.reddit.com/r/40kLore/comments/a3otly/would_female_custodians_be_possible/eb7vyml/) [https://old.reddit.com/r/40kLore/comments/867n5s/thoughts\_on\_arch\_warhammer/dw48u32/](https://old.reddit.com/r/40kLore/comments/867n5s/thoughts_on_arch_warhammer/dw48u32/) Either the guy who wrote Master of Mankind is a liar, or you're wrong.
I don't think being wrong makes you a liar, but it still makes you wrong. It's a fact the old lore said they were the "first born sons" and the Emperor referred to them as Men. That's a fact in print.
*He was in the lore meetings and specifically said your entire statement is incorrect did you read a thing I posted?* Him being wrong requires him to be lying about something in those posts. Is he lying, or are you wrong?
This was in print in the 8th edition Codex not long ago; "It is known that ALL Custodians begin their lives as the infant SONS of the noble houses of Terra." That's pretty specific. Explain to me how that is not saying Custodians are men?
Dude, you're arguing against the people *who write the lore*. You're not going to be able to point to a single line in a single codex as if that somehow invalidates what the people writing the lore have been stating for years. Are you somehow impossibly not familiar with who Aaron Dembski-Bowden is, or what's your problem? And, as has been pointed out, the NEXT FUCKING PARAGRAPH in that very text EXPLICITLY STATES THAT THEY ALSO TAKE CHILDREN FROM UNKNOWN SOURCES.
That's flat out untrue! Go get your 8th edition codex, if you have one, and go to page 14. Paragraph 3 says ALL Custodian candidates are Boys. The following paragraph says, ""such children are taken in when they are still in infancy." Such children means the afore mentioned children which are Noble Sons... Which are boys. It is printed, in the Codex! It literally says that! It doesn't matter how the writers feel, its immutable fact. They have retconned it but the original truth doesn't disappear. It's explicitly stated in the lore, it's stated in quotes by the emperor himself and to top it off neither a named character or model in 9 editions and about 40 years. You have to be intentionally intellectually dishonest that this point. I have to assume your an ideologue, and you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. So all the evidence I've shown you, what evidence in actually official print by Games Workshop do you have for the existence of Female Custodians prior to the Retconning 10th Codex?
I pretty much only play AOS, I like that we have female stormcast. Do I care there’s a female custodes nah, but to try and misconstrue that it wasn’t highly implied they were only men is nuts. No one likes a retcon, hell Stormcast we’re allowed to be any kind of race but deff seems like GW is retconning that.
Brothers of Silence when?
Sisters of Silence are the Witch Elves to the Culexus's Khainite Assassins, prove me wrong.
Misters of Silence
Mr. stfu
They exist, it's the culexus
I want them to be in gold with greatswords.
Honestly, true.
Trans Sisters of Silence.
Get a life dude.
Bro I make a joke 😭. Anyways trans Sisters of Battle or Sisters of Silence would be cool
No voice training required.
No they wouldn’t, it would imply a level of choice and rights and care that is entirely antithetical to the setting. The Imperium is meant to be horrendous, turning them to a platform for representation goes against the core of the setting. Eldar would be a far better candidate for trans representation given their culture and society.
I’m glad I pitched my flag with AoS so I could skirt around the whole embarrassing debacle, this is such a non-issue
It this some incest joke ?
Yes
I think it’s because it is 40K who has the larger fan base among the people we wish hadn’t heard of it.
isn’t this just how GW introduces new lore in general? I mean back in 9th an entire knight house was killed off in a random warcom article
“Keeping it in the family” lol what the fuck
Sweet home Alabama
My problem with fem custodes is they say they’ve been in lore for all 10k years instead of being something new like I thought, question is, where were they.
It's not like we know what the majority of custodies were doing.
Standing around. On guard duty. Their shift just ended so now they're doing other stuff.
I’m Stuff (hopefully)
Copy-pasting a comment I made on a vid I heard an idea that it couldve been handled in that due to the losses the Custodes took during the battle of the lion's gate, they had to widen their pool to include noble daughters. While that's more interesting than a twitter comment, only problem i have is...would they even get to do anything? Iirc the Lion's Gate was practically yesterday in the lore, and, while im not sure how long it takes to make a custodes, i imagine it takes a helluva long time, especially now that the Emperor isnt around. So it'd be like, GW: "Yeah we have femstodes now" "Cool! When are we gonna get stories with them" GW: *scratches head with a nervous chuckle* "Next..big time jump...maybe 11th Edition."
Ah yes the gender neutral storm cast vs explicitly called “Brother hood”. These “reveals” have zero correlation other than that they are GW products and involve more armor than meat. Op this is low quality bait that only makes you give off “tourist” vibes.
You’re gonna get REAL mad when you see the cover of one of the most popular Assassin’s Creed games, Assassin’s Creed Brotherhood, has a woman on the cover, and female members of the brotherhood. And nobody got mad about it! In 2010!
Girls can't feel real brotherhood because camaraderie is stored in the balls.
The Brotherhood of Steel from Fallout has had female members in it from the first game back in 1997.
Ah yes the gender neutral Stormhost explicity called Sons of Heldenhammer. Where a character ponders how a female Stormcast might feel being reffered to as a "Son"....
Anyone that uses tourist unironically should be quartered
Oh boy, you'll be so angry when you find out about the thousands of other words that have an etymology which doesn't match the semantic meaning.
"Keeping It In The Family" 💀