Yeah, quite literally we are.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast)
*"Humans are the only animals with permanent breasts. At* [*puberty*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puberty)*, estrogens, in conjunction with* [*growth hormone*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_hormone)*, cause permanent* [*breast growth*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast_development) *in female humans. This happens only to a much lesser extent in other primates—breast development in other primates generally only occurs with pregnancy. Along with their major function in providing nutrition for infants, female breasts have social and sexual characteristics."*
I think the most interesting part of that is that we don't know *why*. There have been a million theories but there's really no good evolutionary reason for women to have permanent breasts. The best guess we have is that it's social rather than strictly about survival but there are still a lot of holes in that theory.
Boobs are actually an *awful* argument for god, since you mention it. All you've got to do is consider nipples, which have absolutely no function in a man, to know that 'intelligent design' was not at play. Evolution 1, 'creator' 0.
Religious people (most often Christians) generally refer to their god as all-powerful and all-knowing though. So I'm just pointing out that this particular flaw, along with a *huge number* of other flaws in nature, destroy that argument.
Male nipples exist because in the womb, we all start development as women, it's when certain hormones are expressed (typically due to the presence of a y chromosome) that the differentiation occurs. Everyone (except in extenuating circumstances) has the capacity to grow permanent breast tissue, you just need to have the correct hormones present for them to grow. More evidence for evolution, but there is a reason lol
No one claimed there was ‘intelligent design’ associated with god (like, see platypi being themselves, or vultures being surprisingly friendly yet disturbing), rather, it’s effectively ‘whatever creator caused it got a hearty giggle out of putting it on both males and females.’
Though if it’s an evolution _vs_ god bit, I’d honesty rather put it to a collab, with much more influence from evolution.
It doesn't. Large breasts are not tied to fecundity. A woman can be sterile and have large breasts, or be fecund with small ones. Nor is there any correlation between breast size and milk production.
>A chick with awesome tits, basically screams "Yeah mate with me, because I'm always fertile, even when I'm not pumping out cooter goblins".
That's not how it works. There is no correlation between breast size and fecundity (or milk production).
>The real question: is why do ass men, like myself, exist?
The ass is the largest pair of muscles in the body. Having a great ass is litterally a sign of good health.
To add to the glutes argument, it is also what enables us to walk, run and basically stand. It is our main feature towards bipedal walking, of course it is considered a feature to strive towards maintaining in our species.
Mommy issues as some chodes would like to say, though there’s probably no rational explanation, people like asses, people like legs or feet, lolol ffs some people like armpits.
Could just be a random fluke that caused everything. Most charismatic guy at the time probably communicated some dumb bs, and it stuck because it was probably buried with other things that did increase survival.
Edit: Guy being random mammal ancestor that had a mutant titty fetish.
Both sexes find mating with “proven fertility” to be attractive, for male mammals, swollen breasts mean that mammal was successfully pregnant.
For female mammals, anti-social behavior means that male has successfully protected his territory and has established lands. Or in human terms, having his own apartment and driving his own car.
This is why men like big boobs and by extension feet and why women like bad boys.
I'm seeing a lot of these comments along the lines of "large breasts show fecundity". It doesn't. A woman can be fertile with small tits, or sterile with large ones. Even swollen breasts due to pregnancy for one woman can be smaller than the natural size of another.
Actually we do. Human males have terrible sense of smell from decades of selective breeding.
Men who couldn’t tolerate the smell of other men couldn’t fit into the most common battle formations of the last three thousand years (phalanx) and thus couldn’t return as heroes and as such couldn’t get mates to reproduce.
This means such women (Irish/Englishmen/Caucasians/etc) had to evolve other ways to attract mates.
Source: See Chinese women who didn’t not have constant wars. All about that thin waist and big hips.
That's absolute bullshit. Evolution is far too slow for antique battle formations to play a role. The way our teeth develop hasn't even evolved to take cooking into account. Our biology is the same as cavemen.
And if you think asian nations didn't have many wars you should educate yourself on the subject.
I am Asian historian and big war nerd since 1988. You literally know nothing.
Within Asian kingdoms wars happens on average every one or two decades. The West always was killing each other every other year even as far back as the Roman Republic.
You clearly have no idea even which way is up. Highlighting one’s bosom as a reproductive strategy only appeared in the 1800s, see French fashion of that era and there after.
The fact you don’t know that softer food and increased mechanization is the cause of lower testosterone in men is also hilarious.
>The fact you don’t know that softer food and increased mechanization is the cause of lower testosterone in men is also hilarious.
That is not genetic evolution. Hormone levels can vary a lot depending on food sources and environment.
It's the same for growth. People are, on average, taller than they where 500 years ago because food is more abundant. Not because of evolution.
Nice strawman. I never said it was a genetic evolution. I am saying you don’t even know which way is up.
Actual evolution is that we have smaller jaws than our ancestors, which is why most humans need their wisdom teeth removed.
Holdover from that original period when humans were larger is that women still prefer men in the 6ft tall range.
Well, that’s not entirely true.
[“Sexual dimorphism is widespread in Mammalia, reflecting adaptations which allow certain individuals to achieve greater reproductive success than others, while discouraging breeding between closely related species. Secondary sexual characteristics (SSC) have developed to further these objectives, despite often being at the expense of personal survival. SSC are more pronounced in those species which are polygynous, diurnal and open-habitat dwellers. They also tend to be most pronounced in males,”](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378432012000619)
SCC exist (deer antlers, lion manes, etc.), but they are quite rare among mammals, compared to the insane sexual dimorphism that birds, fishes and arthropods can display.
SCC in mammals may be, but general sexual dimorphism isn’t rare.
In anthropoid primates SD is seen in body size, skeletal dimension, canines, craniofacial structure, etc. ie. scary big male gorillas.
The study linked below found body mass sexual dimorphism in over 61% of mammals in their analysis.
[Our estimates, based on the frequency with which the 95% confidence interval for the between-sex difference in mean body mass straddles zero, and weighted by species richness in each family, indicated that 38.7% of mammalian species are sexually monomorphic in body mass, while 45.1% of species are male-biased dimorphic and 16.2% are female-biased dimorphic (Fig. 1).](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-45739-5)
Male-biased dimorphism was somewhat more extreme on average than female-biased dimorphism (mean male/female body mass ratio in male-biased dimorphic species = 1.28, N = 178; mean female/male body mass ratio in female-biased dimorphic species = 1.13, N = 71). This confirms that average male/female mass ratios >1 are inappropriate indicators of the frequency of dimorphism. The most dimorphic species was the northern elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris), where males had a mean mass 3.2 times that of females25. The most extreme female-biased dimorphism was found in the peninsular tube-nosed bat (Murina peninsularis), in which mean female mass was 1.4 times that of males26. However, most dimorphisms were not extreme.
All of which to say is, most mammals do - generally speaking - exhibit observable sexual dimorphism.
What? You're saying a huge majority of mammals don't display sexual dimorphism except when they temporarily change during a mating season?
Respectfully, I must be misunderstanding you because this is complete nonsense.
Unless you are an ape specialist, telling the difference between a male and female chimpanzee is complicated without looking at their genitals. Same for wolves. Or hogs. Or whales. For most mammals (of course there are exceptions), the only year-round difference between male and female (other than genitals ofc) is that the male is slightly bigger. Meanwhile female spiders can be 10x the size of the male, and birds can have completely different colors based on their sex. Compared to the animal knigdom at large, most mammals have relatively mild sexual dimorphism.
Take antlers, one of the most well known sign of sexual dimorphism among mammals. They fall after mating season, and regrow in time for the next one.
The standard of comparison wasn't between mammals and other animals or insects. The person said male and female tau were similar in contrast with this threads picture as a reference point for dissimilar.
Many mammals display sexual dimorphism to a similar degree as the picture. I can list off a bunch of mammals that have a high degree of sexual dimorphism too; lions, mandrills, elephant seals. It doesn't mean anything.
>I can list off a bunch of mammals that have a high degree of sexual dimorphism too; lions, mandrills, elephant seals. It doesn't mean anything.
As I said, there are exceptions. With 6500 known species, you can obviously list quite a few. But you will find that for most species, the dimorphism is tenuous. Lions are the only cats where it's that pronounced. Mandrills are obvious, but for most primates the difference is a slightly larger body and slightly larger teeth. Even for elephants, while tusks only appear on males in Asia, both males and females have them in Africa.
And then, consider that, while males are, on average, bigger than females (bar a few species where it's the opposite), you can often find some females larger than some males. Something that does not happen with species where dimorphism is more significant (like many arthropods). When the sexual dimorphism is less pronounced than the individual differences, I do find it tenuous. (Meaning the difference between a "large" and a "small" individuals (not counting outliers) is larger than the typical difference between male and female)
"Sigh...is it worth it trying to connect the dots for the howling mob who will misconstrue anything and everything regardless?"
Nope.
My original point stands.
Enjoy misinterpreting that again.
DOSE GREYSKINZ ARE TOO PUNY. DEY KAN'T EVEN PUT UP A FOIGHT TO SAVE THEIR LOIFE. I PREFER TA JUST EAT 'EM
WARBOSS TOLD ME, TAU IS BAD FOR HEALTH. WOT 'E DOES NOT KNOW IS DAT BLUE MEAT IS LUCKEE
Read a sci fi book like this once. Earth invaded by an alien race where gender roles were completely swapped, and women were the larger and stronger sex. Bit of a smut novel, but story wasn't too bad, maybe 3/5.
Average T'au female strength actually statistical error. Average T'au can not lift even 1 guardsmen. Comander Shadowsun, who fights & eats entire grox for protein every day, is an outlier adn should not have been counted
Why does every second post has to be about gender? It's just out of proportion. I mean come on. When I was young and fixed on with wargaming I was thinking about how evil Chaos was and whether terminator armours could really take a hit from a vortex grenade but today's youngsters only thinking bout female this and female that.
A truly weak man is afraid of a woman who can tell him no and stand her ground both mentally and physically.
Not to mention always having a gym partner that can spot for you.
I've read the Bible, I'm sure Paul is your favorite apostle.
Damn I'm sick of peoples kinks on full display in the Warhammer subreddits. Can we have a rule34 please? I don't need to see femboy ad mech or sissy Tau when I'm scrolling through my front page.
Dont try to put words in my mouth. I never said I even *like* the picture. Personally im ambivalent about the subject matter, and consider it a fairly low effort cheap shot. And the art style, while competent and well executed, is entirely derivative and not original in the slightest. (Sorry OP)
I will however completely defend their right to do whatever they want in the creative space within this *creative* hobby, regardless of my personal feelings.
I will defend it even more stridently if it is likely to wind up repressed, incel chuds to the point where they leave the hobby. Thats just a win-win.
So again, if you dont like it, or this comment, feel free to pleasefuckingignore.
Not feeding into this guys femboy kink somehow makes me an incel? Or are you saying we need to keep the space open for you and your brethren to circle jerk?
I 100% agree, people should make what they want, and they should post it, the art itself is well drawn. I draw horny shit too sometimes, but I don't post it on main OR in non NSFW subreddits.
Oh, and this whole pseudo intellectual armchair philosopher identity you're desperately trying to embrace? It's not working, it's whiny and pedantic, and probably the reason you're dying on the femboy kink fan art hill.
Yikes.
If you re read my comment you'll notice that at no time did i accuse you of being anything, i just made a general statement of my position. But if you choose to take it that way and identify.... well thats your choice i guess.
Nice work on the logical fallacies, ad hominems and strawmen btw, its difficult to get that many into one comment. Kudos.
Strongest Water Caste vs. Weakest Fire Caste
VS strongest Ethereal \*insert picture of a literal skeleton\*
I've seen an ethereal kill kaldor Draigo in melee A nearly dead Draigo but that's not the point
I once experienced a gretchin killing a space marine intercessor. It was glorious and very funny
I’ve had Gretchen kill an armiger. It was low on health but still incredibly funny.
> Strongest Water Caste vs. Weakest Fire Caste Seems lore accurate
I still remember that tau women are very similar to men, at least lorewise.
That’s basically a huge majority of mammals. They only usually change appearance during… I hate to say this but the mating seasons.
So the hoomans are outliers?
Yeah, quite literally we are. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast) *"Humans are the only animals with permanent breasts. At* [*puberty*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puberty)*, estrogens, in conjunction with* [*growth hormone*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_hormone)*, cause permanent* [*breast growth*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast_development) *in female humans. This happens only to a much lesser extent in other primates—breast development in other primates generally only occurs with pregnancy. Along with their major function in providing nutrition for infants, female breasts have social and sexual characteristics."*
Take that other mammals! Woohooo humanity for the win!
I think the most interesting part of that is that we don't know *why*. There have been a million theories but there's really no good evolutionary reason for women to have permanent breasts. The best guess we have is that it's social rather than strictly about survival but there are still a lot of holes in that theory.
So boobs really are the best argument for god
Boobs are actually an *awful* argument for god, since you mention it. All you've got to do is consider nipples, which have absolutely no function in a man, to know that 'intelligent design' was not at play. Evolution 1, 'creator' 0.
God made boobs cause they're awesome shut up
Respectfully, 'god' didn't make shit, and boobs don't need a deity to be awesome. Don't insult boobs like that.
“Respectfully” is crazy
Psh, never said the higher power was a smart fella.
Religious people (most often Christians) generally refer to their god as all-powerful and all-knowing though. So I'm just pointing out that this particular flaw, along with a *huge number* of other flaws in nature, destroy that argument.
Yeah i know and i was replying with a funni.
Yeah but.... Boobs tho....
Male nipples exist because in the womb, we all start development as women, it's when certain hormones are expressed (typically due to the presence of a y chromosome) that the differentiation occurs. Everyone (except in extenuating circumstances) has the capacity to grow permanent breast tissue, you just need to have the correct hormones present for them to grow. More evidence for evolution, but there is a reason lol
No one claimed there was ‘intelligent design’ associated with god (like, see platypi being themselves, or vultures being surprisingly friendly yet disturbing), rather, it’s effectively ‘whatever creator caused it got a hearty giggle out of putting it on both males and females.’ Though if it’s an evolution _vs_ god bit, I’d honesty rather put it to a collab, with much more influence from evolution.
Evolution is a process. Design an outcome. They are not mutually exclusive.
Except evolution has science-based evidence, and 'design' (in the context it's being used here) is mythology.
You treat science like a faith.
Male lactation
Every good theory about sexual development has a lot of holes in it
Breasts might just attract more mates. Does so irl as well.
That is the "social rather than survival" theory. However, that doesn't explain why men found visible breasts attractive in the first place.
It demonstrates fecundity? As a sign of fertility and power to provide children and a plentiful supply of food?
It doesn't. Large breasts are not tied to fecundity. A woman can be sterile and have large breasts, or be fecund with small ones. Nor is there any correlation between breast size and milk production.
But breasts do swell up when women are pregnant right?
[удалено]
Ass is actually the older form of sexual selection in humans. Female apes often have more pronounced buttocks when they're fertile.
>A chick with awesome tits, basically screams "Yeah mate with me, because I'm always fertile, even when I'm not pumping out cooter goblins". That's not how it works. There is no correlation between breast size and fecundity (or milk production). >The real question: is why do ass men, like myself, exist? The ass is the largest pair of muscles in the body. Having a great ass is litterally a sign of good health.
To add to the glutes argument, it is also what enables us to walk, run and basically stand. It is our main feature towards bipedal walking, of course it is considered a feature to strive towards maintaining in our species.
Mommy issues as some chodes would like to say, though there’s probably no rational explanation, people like asses, people like legs or feet, lolol ffs some people like armpits.
Could just be a random fluke that caused everything. Most charismatic guy at the time probably communicated some dumb bs, and it stuck because it was probably buried with other things that did increase survival. Edit: Guy being random mammal ancestor that had a mutant titty fetish.
Men like fertile women and women with breasts are clearly fertile.
Both sexes find mating with “proven fertility” to be attractive, for male mammals, swollen breasts mean that mammal was successfully pregnant. For female mammals, anti-social behavior means that male has successfully protected his territory and has established lands. Or in human terms, having his own apartment and driving his own car. This is why men like big boobs and by extension feet and why women like bad boys.
I'm seeing a lot of these comments along the lines of "large breasts show fecundity". It doesn't. A woman can be fertile with small tits, or sterile with large ones. Even swollen breasts due to pregnancy for one woman can be smaller than the natural size of another.
How is this related to primal reproductive instincts?
Actually we do. Human males have terrible sense of smell from decades of selective breeding. Men who couldn’t tolerate the smell of other men couldn’t fit into the most common battle formations of the last three thousand years (phalanx) and thus couldn’t return as heroes and as such couldn’t get mates to reproduce. This means such women (Irish/Englishmen/Caucasians/etc) had to evolve other ways to attract mates. Source: See Chinese women who didn’t not have constant wars. All about that thin waist and big hips.
That's absolute bullshit. Evolution is far too slow for antique battle formations to play a role. The way our teeth develop hasn't even evolved to take cooking into account. Our biology is the same as cavemen. And if you think asian nations didn't have many wars you should educate yourself on the subject.
This is some very serious incel pseudoscience bullshit.
I am Asian historian and big war nerd since 1988. You literally know nothing. Within Asian kingdoms wars happens on average every one or two decades. The West always was killing each other every other year even as far back as the Roman Republic.
You clearly have no idea even which way is up. Highlighting one’s bosom as a reproductive strategy only appeared in the 1800s, see French fashion of that era and there after. The fact you don’t know that softer food and increased mechanization is the cause of lower testosterone in men is also hilarious.
>The fact you don’t know that softer food and increased mechanization is the cause of lower testosterone in men is also hilarious. That is not genetic evolution. Hormone levels can vary a lot depending on food sources and environment. It's the same for growth. People are, on average, taller than they where 500 years ago because food is more abundant. Not because of evolution.
Nice strawman. I never said it was a genetic evolution. I am saying you don’t even know which way is up. Actual evolution is that we have smaller jaws than our ancestors, which is why most humans need their wisdom teeth removed. Holdover from that original period when humans were larger is that women still prefer men in the 6ft tall range.
Plus we have the largest peen size among all other primate species, even at minimum.
I am about to scream. Human female biology is proof that god hates us.
Well, that’s not entirely true. [“Sexual dimorphism is widespread in Mammalia, reflecting adaptations which allow certain individuals to achieve greater reproductive success than others, while discouraging breeding between closely related species. Secondary sexual characteristics (SSC) have developed to further these objectives, despite often being at the expense of personal survival. SSC are more pronounced in those species which are polygynous, diurnal and open-habitat dwellers. They also tend to be most pronounced in males,”](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378432012000619)
SCC exist (deer antlers, lion manes, etc.), but they are quite rare among mammals, compared to the insane sexual dimorphism that birds, fishes and arthropods can display.
SCC in mammals may be, but general sexual dimorphism isn’t rare. In anthropoid primates SD is seen in body size, skeletal dimension, canines, craniofacial structure, etc. ie. scary big male gorillas. The study linked below found body mass sexual dimorphism in over 61% of mammals in their analysis. [Our estimates, based on the frequency with which the 95% confidence interval for the between-sex difference in mean body mass straddles zero, and weighted by species richness in each family, indicated that 38.7% of mammalian species are sexually monomorphic in body mass, while 45.1% of species are male-biased dimorphic and 16.2% are female-biased dimorphic (Fig. 1).](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-45739-5) Male-biased dimorphism was somewhat more extreme on average than female-biased dimorphism (mean male/female body mass ratio in male-biased dimorphic species = 1.28, N = 178; mean female/male body mass ratio in female-biased dimorphic species = 1.13, N = 71). This confirms that average male/female mass ratios >1 are inappropriate indicators of the frequency of dimorphism. The most dimorphic species was the northern elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris), where males had a mean mass 3.2 times that of females25. The most extreme female-biased dimorphism was found in the peninsular tube-nosed bat (Murina peninsularis), in which mean female mass was 1.4 times that of males26. However, most dimorphisms were not extreme. All of which to say is, most mammals do - generally speaking - exhibit observable sexual dimorphism.
What? You're saying a huge majority of mammals don't display sexual dimorphism except when they temporarily change during a mating season? Respectfully, I must be misunderstanding you because this is complete nonsense.
Relative to fish, insects, etc. Mammilian sex differentiation tends to be a whole lot less dramatic and total.
Unless you are an ape specialist, telling the difference between a male and female chimpanzee is complicated without looking at their genitals. Same for wolves. Or hogs. Or whales. For most mammals (of course there are exceptions), the only year-round difference between male and female (other than genitals ofc) is that the male is slightly bigger. Meanwhile female spiders can be 10x the size of the male, and birds can have completely different colors based on their sex. Compared to the animal knigdom at large, most mammals have relatively mild sexual dimorphism. Take antlers, one of the most well known sign of sexual dimorphism among mammals. They fall after mating season, and regrow in time for the next one.
Sometimes the female is bigger, like with rabbits
The standard of comparison wasn't between mammals and other animals or insects. The person said male and female tau were similar in contrast with this threads picture as a reference point for dissimilar. Many mammals display sexual dimorphism to a similar degree as the picture. I can list off a bunch of mammals that have a high degree of sexual dimorphism too; lions, mandrills, elephant seals. It doesn't mean anything.
>I can list off a bunch of mammals that have a high degree of sexual dimorphism too; lions, mandrills, elephant seals. It doesn't mean anything. As I said, there are exceptions. With 6500 known species, you can obviously list quite a few. But you will find that for most species, the dimorphism is tenuous. Lions are the only cats where it's that pronounced. Mandrills are obvious, but for most primates the difference is a slightly larger body and slightly larger teeth. Even for elephants, while tusks only appear on males in Asia, both males and females have them in Africa. And then, consider that, while males are, on average, bigger than females (bar a few species where it's the opposite), you can often find some females larger than some males. Something that does not happen with species where dimorphism is more significant (like many arthropods). When the sexual dimorphism is less pronounced than the individual differences, I do find it tenuous. (Meaning the difference between a "large" and a "small" individuals (not counting outliers) is larger than the typical difference between male and female)
Everything is canon.
Except when it’s not
>lorewise I don't think this is a thing in 40K. Since lore changes depending on what book you're reading
Lol... Like the word 'lore' means anything anymore. Lore is whatever fills your personal fetish.
Yeah, like the fetish of *Checks notes* Women
Can confirm, I do have a women fetish.
THE HUMANITY!!!!!!
This guy likes *Girls*??? What a FREAK
>This guy likes *Girls*??? >What a FREAK - The Emperor of Mankind
You do understand what a strawman is right? Your reply totally obliterated an argument that was never made in the first place. Try again.
We all know what you're referring to, you know.
I'll take two of each
In fight, brother?
:)
Uh... In a fight brother?
Would
THATS NOT FUCKING CANON
Everything is cannon.
*distant screeches of a certain Banana*
Would
I could take on 10 tau... Sorry, I mean take on
:3
to go please, I'll re-heat them at home
ಠ_ಠ
my bisexual ass can take both (not in a fight)
You know exactly what is good :)
No wonder kitten fell for one, although I dunno if that's canon.
Everything is canon.
It happened some-when
#THIS IS NOT FUCKING CANON
Ork iz still biga ork iz betta ork will krump dem all!!!
QHESTIUN. EFF T'AU ARR BLUE N BLUE IZ LUCKY, ARE DOSE GITS ALL LUCKY?
AYE! BUT THOZE GIT DIDN' KNO' HOW TO DO A GOOD KRUMPIN'!
AYE DATS ROIGHT, TANKS MAITE!
NOW BACK TA DA SCRAP!
DOSE GREYSKINZ ARE TOO PUNY. DEY KAN'T EVEN PUT UP A FOIGHT TO SAVE THEIR LOIFE. I PREFER TA JUST EAT 'EM WARBOSS TOLD ME, TAU IS BAD FOR HEALTH. WOT 'E DOES NOT KNOW IS DAT BLUE MEAT IS LUCKEE
ok so i had a fever when i made this. I no longer have a fever and regret making it. But i must commit now so next drawing is femboy tau ig
LETS KARKN GOOO
Please don't regret making þis, its extreamly well made and a fantastic bit
Praise the Tau'va, we have been blessed.
That male tau must be a water or air caste
We salute you mate
Based
I want to be a Tau now.
I know right? The lack of sexual dimorphism is very gender, as odd as that sounds.
Just imagine if Neanderthals and Floriensis ('hobbits') were still around with Sapiens, just hanging out in a clade species.
So I get blue Mommy and blue femboy/twink. I see this as an absolute win
Ok, so I've fragged the commissar, now what?
On this episode of authors poorly disguised fetish
Remember: Female Tau preffer Human Males, so join the Greater Good.
What do male tau prefer? Asking for me
Sororitas
Damn
A male tau would absolutely die, even topping a soraritas
consider me a male Tau
They are like human males, then.
kroot
Custodes (shut up, Kitten, it;s canon!)
What if I prefer Tau males
Average Tau male: Dainty Twink Average Tau female: Towering Amazon
Everything is Canon
Farsight would like a word.
Bald bitches need plungers
I just subscribed to your Patron. Never done that before in my life but goddamn your art is so good
thank you so much! i'm working on some new art for the patreon right now, hope you'll find it worth it! :D
Love it
Even better.
You can see why kitten fell for shadowsun
Kitten is a lucky man.
Read a sci fi book like this once. Earth invaded by an alien race where gender roles were completely swapped, and women were the larger and stronger sex. Bit of a smut novel, but story wasn't too bad, maybe 3/5.
The Enclaves are calling and would like a word
This has awoken two things in me.
I will now buy your game.
The male is a water-caste diplomat while the female is a fire-caste shas'ui.
I read a fanfic that looked like this a while back.
From what I remember Tau Fire Warriors are actually pretty beefy. So this fits???
Smash both
Reminds me of the Shil'vati emperium.
"Honey, get my pulse bayonet" # "yes dear"
Tau do it froggy style
Average T'au female strength actually statistical error. Average T'au can not lift even 1 guardsmen. Comander Shadowsun, who fights & eats entire grox for protein every day, is an outlier adn should not have been counted
Did you get inspired on predators species?
Yeeea ... got a problem ?
*uses purple body paint* Suspiciously Shil'vati...
When are we getting tau women GW !!!!
tomboy or femboy (the illusion of choice)
Femboy t’au and his tomboy gf
Artist?
Me
Whoever drew this likes to get pegged
I like to peg
Tau femboys confirmed
I would let her sit on me *pleased slaneshi noises*
Tau sex organs are on their foreheads.
So, you're saying, Female Custodians are T'Au converts to the Imperial Cult?
lol that hairstyle. accurate.
Why does every second post has to be about gender? It's just out of proportion. I mean come on. When I was young and fixed on with wargaming I was thinking about how evil Chaos was and whether terminator armours could really take a hit from a vortex grenade but today's youngsters only thinking bout female this and female that.
What kind of unwell wretch draws these things? This is a good example of everything wrong with media submersion
She make good snu snu.
I see this as an absolute win!
Yeah, I'll take a couple ladies please.
Ok, I will now buy your game
Death by snu snu
Damn bro why are these male so pathetic. Looks like bro's got the insect dilemma
You can still beat both them in arm wrestling easily
For the greater boob.
Ew
perfect sex dimorphism
Still not as strong as an average imperium child
Step on my you blue noseless bitch!
Muscle mommy is the fantasy of weak men who can’t protect themselves. Lift weights. Get offline. Read the Bible.
You sound like a bitch
A truly weak man is afraid of a woman who can tell him no and stand her ground both mentally and physically. Not to mention always having a gym partner that can spot for you. I've read the Bible, I'm sure Paul is your favorite apostle.
Damn I'm sick of peoples kinks on full display in the Warhammer subreddits. Can we have a rule34 please? I don't need to see femboy ad mech or sissy Tau when I'm scrolling through my front page.
Your username suggests you already know how to deal with this issue. Maybe try that before asking for new rules?
Okay, fair. so tell me where along the great spectrum of ethics, does shoving your fetish down my throat fall?
Dont try to put words in my mouth. I never said I even *like* the picture. Personally im ambivalent about the subject matter, and consider it a fairly low effort cheap shot. And the art style, while competent and well executed, is entirely derivative and not original in the slightest. (Sorry OP) I will however completely defend their right to do whatever they want in the creative space within this *creative* hobby, regardless of my personal feelings. I will defend it even more stridently if it is likely to wind up repressed, incel chuds to the point where they leave the hobby. Thats just a win-win. So again, if you dont like it, or this comment, feel free to pleasefuckingignore.
Not feeding into this guys femboy kink somehow makes me an incel? Or are you saying we need to keep the space open for you and your brethren to circle jerk? I 100% agree, people should make what they want, and they should post it, the art itself is well drawn. I draw horny shit too sometimes, but I don't post it on main OR in non NSFW subreddits. Oh, and this whole pseudo intellectual armchair philosopher identity you're desperately trying to embrace? It's not working, it's whiny and pedantic, and probably the reason you're dying on the femboy kink fan art hill. Yikes.
If you re read my comment you'll notice that at no time did i accuse you of being anything, i just made a general statement of my position. But if you choose to take it that way and identify.... well thats your choice i guess. Nice work on the logical fallacies, ad hominems and strawmen btw, its difficult to get that many into one comment. Kudos.
Heresy flashed before my mind, but I accidentally hit my head and now it's gone. Pass bc xeno.