Yup. Why is this such a mindblowing idea? As a metal skeleton, what 'female signifiers' should she have? A f***ing bow in her hair?So...you just made a Necron Lady by having a custom Lord model and gave it a female name?
Here's the thing: Necrons are alien skeletons! They don't scream 'male!' to me, they scream 'undead'. It wouldn't make sense to give her boobs or any of the usual 'female signifiers'! I mean, I toyed with that whole bow idea, then remember she has no hair, only a polished steel skull, so I just thought 'Nah.' I mean, might maybe have gone for some kind of feminine porcelain mask or other, but to me, that suggests vanity, and the character's a fighter and soldier, so why would she give two tugs about her appearance?
Where is it written that every female character in 40K must include the word 'beautiful' somewhere in the description?
Here's the thing: including women? It's as simple as INCLUDING WOMEN. The only armies whose models are directly affected are the explicitly human ones. It's why I didn't remodel my Cadian torso pieces: real female soldiers look a lot like men. Most often, the only time you can tell the difference is facially.
Hard to spot that feminine physique under all the webbing, yes?
I like my models to make sense, and I can't stand it (CAN'T STAND IT) when someone blobs two balls of milliput on a figure and goes 'I AM DOING FEMALE MODELS' in a Very Serious Voice, as though what they have done is anything but ridiculous.
Of course, that could be my preference for 'realism' (which, yes, 40K, so very much a relative term) over 'fantasy' - it comes across in my colour palette choices too. I hardly ever use bright colours, even when I'm doing Eldar. The brightest my colours get are sort of dirty whites and faded greys.
You have a very limited view of gender.We can even turn Sue into Joe, which is accompanied by infusions of testosterone. So basically you would turn a female recruit into a male. She can keep her genitalia (which you would not see in her armor anyways), most probably lose her boobs (they are not needed she is a warrior, no mother), get a very deep voice, grow hair in funny places and probably lose hair on the head.
So yes. We can do this. But you still have no female space marine but a forced transgender marine who might or might not keep her identity as female but is hardly recogniseable as one.
What people's bodies are and how they feel about them? Sometimes they don't match. I don't know if I'd say she was forced trans. More like a woman with male signifiers. If she's a het woman, her body is irrelevant to her. She gets more body hair? So what? This may be a surprise to you but SO DO ALL WOMEN. Some even need to shave their faces. In fact, most women past the menopause will need to deal with facial hair that begins to grow due to the change in hormones. They don't suddenly turn trans, or turn into men. Their features don't become male. They don't turn anything.
The fact you seem to think all women can be identified by the same rote signifiers says less about women and more about you.
[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/09/26/balpreet-kaur-dignified-sikh-woman-deflects-bullying-taunts-facial-hair-pictures_n_1915674.html[/url]
[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/02/17/sikh-woman-harnaam-kaur-embraces-facial-hair-taunts-suicidal-video-pictures_n_4801741.html[/url]
In terms of models what does this mean? Head swaps. That's all we need. Just head swaps.
(And yes, I do think about these things and they do matter to me, because sci-fi is supposed to be about Big Ideas. The fact you so dismissively say 'Meh, a woman on hormones is just a man' is oversimplified and insulting. The world is broad and vast - why is your imagination smaller than it?)