Fans clash over female Adeptus Custodes in Warhammer 40k as canon updates spark confusion; here is the latest on the situation.
In the Warhammer 40k universe, where galaxy-spanning battles and ancient grudges are the norm, it’s no surprise that a few pronouns could ignite a firestorm. The latest debate? Whether female Adeptus Custodes—once accepted (begrudgingly by some) as a new addition to the Emperor’s elite—are still part of the lore.
Fans have been clashing harder than Orks and Eldar after The Ultimate Guide to Warhammer 40K seemed to suggest an abrupt return to the boys-only club. But hold onto your boltguns, because co-author Gavin Thorpe has weighed in, throwing a plasma grenade of clarification into the fray.
So, are female Adeptus Custodes still canon? Let’s sort through the chaos.
The Female Custodes Canon Conundrum
The Warhammer 40k universe is famous for its grimdark chaos, sprawling lore, and a fanbase that will defend their favorite minutiae with the ferocity of an Ork Waaagh. The latest battleground? Female Adeptus Custodes again…
Earlier this year, the powers at Games Workshop (GW) confirmed female Custodes (but not Female Space Marines)—those golden-armored guardians of the Emperor—were officially part of the lore.
First in the Adeptus Custodes Codex, and then in Tithes. The announcement shook up a longstanding tradition of male-only Custodes, and as expected, the reactions ranged from cheers of inclusivity to cries of “heresy!”
The Guide That Stirred the Warp
Then came The Ultimate Guide to Warhammer 40K (affiliate link), released on October 29th. Co-written by Guy Haley and Gavin Thorpe, this lore-packed book quickly sparked an uproar.
Why? Because of its male-centric language. Featuring phrases like “brotherhoods” and passages exclusively using male pronouns had some fans convinced female Custodes were out faster than a Guardsman in a Tyranid swarm.
Social media lit up, with YouTuber Marshall Bohemond and X-user Wokehammer L’s dissecting the guide. They argued the language was no accident, portraying it as proof that GW had walked back their decision on female Custodes.
Adding fuel to the fire, Wokehammer L’s even shared a physical copy of the guide to underline their point.
Gavin Thorpe’s Canon Clarification
Yes, of course they are. Not every miniature is included and I don’t recall exactly but we may have already finished that section when the series / miniature went public (DK didn’t have access to pre-release pics).
— Gav Thorpe (@gavthorpe.bsky.social) December 28, 2024 at 3:02 AM
Just as the community was preparing for all-out war, co-author Gav Thorpe decided to intervene. Taking to the social platform BlueSky, Thorpe clarified that female Custodes remain canon. The language in the guide, he suggested, was more about timing than a deliberate retcon. Apparently, the section on Custodes was finalized before female Custodes miniatures were revealed.
While Thorpe’s statement was an olive branch to fans supporting inclusivity, it also left others skeptical. After all, how does a company known for its attention to detail accidentally publish lore that contradicts its own canon?
A History of Grimdark Adjustments
For those familiar with GW, this isn’t exactly unprecedented. The company has a long history of tweaking, retconning, and rewriting its lore—sometimes with aplomb, sometimes with all the subtlety of an Ork mek. It’s the price of maintaining a universe this sprawling.
But when it comes to gender representation, things get extra dicey. Some fans see the setting’s adherence to tradition as its core appeal, while others feel it’s long overdue for modernization. The Custodes controversy sits at the crossroads of these two perspectives, sparking a debate louder than a Titan stepping on bubble wrap.
Timing: A Comedy of Errors?
Here’s where it gets stickier than a Nurgling’s sneeze. The guide was published six months after GW publicly introduced Female Custodes. Fans were quick to question why gender-neutral language wasn’t implemented. A quick pronoun change or nixing terms like “brotherhood” could’ve avoided the mess.
Was it an oversight? A deliberate choice? Or—as some conspiracy theorists claim—a masterclass in community gaslighting? Regardless of intent, the inconsistency has left many fans feeling frustrated. In an already divided community, it’s not a great look.
The Fallout in the Fanbase
Predictably, reactions to Thorpe’s clarification were mixed. Fans who supported female Custodes felt validated, while opponents saw this as yet another example of what they call “forced diversity.” For many, though, the real issue isn’t representation—it’s the inconsistency and lack of clear communication from GW.
In a fandom as invested as Warhammer’s, trust is everything. Whether you’re swinging a chainsword for tradition or championing progress, it’s hard to stay loyal when the story keeps changing mid-battle.
So, Where Does This Leave the Lore on Female Custodes?
So, what’s the verdict? It seems like Female Custodes are still canon in Warhammer 40k. That’s the official word from Thorpe and GW. Sure, the guide’s language muddied the waters, but it doesn’t seem to overwrite the previous announcements.
What this debacle truly underscores is the challenge of managing a universe as beloved and polarizing as Warhammer 40K. Changes will always ruffle some feathers—whether they’re servo-mounted or not.
One thing’s for sure: the Imperium’s greatest threat isn’t Chaos, Tyranids, or even a Necron resurgence. Lately, it seems to be inconsistency in the lore. And judging by the debates raging across forums and social media, the fanbase isn’t about to let it go quietly.
Warhammer 40k Factions Explained: A Complete Guide to Every Army
What do you think about Games Workshop not keeping a closer eye on the fact that female Custodes are canon or not in Warhammer 40k?
