Not the gender you thought they were

So, have you ever encountered that enemy or boss that because of the setup, and what you know of their race or background you assume they are one gender, only to learn later on that they were the other gender all along.

Well, I was running Xelphatol the other day with my FC, and I commented how I like to point out that the second boss is female, since it still shocks people. Well, as expected someone was surprised, and was like how do you know, lol. I simply mentioned its the Ixal naming convention for females. I also pointed out a little later how one of the Namazu in the Seven Hundred Seventy Seven, Gyorei, is female as well; to the same shock.

So it got me thinking, as there others out there, that we think are one gender but are actually the other. This is a list for those that are hard to tell at a glance since the sexes probably look almost identical. So Kobolds are out since we know, for now, the females are pink; real original SE, lol

He's what I got:
Dotoli Ciloc - The second boss of Xelphatol, we know because of the Ixal naming convention
Methuli Cattlan the Hard - Quest giver for the Ixal Beast Tribe, we know because of the Ixal naming convention
Gyorei - The Weaver Namazu in the Beast Tribe Quests, we know because she is refered to as she/her in the cutscenes

I still remember the hubub early in ARR's service over Brayflox Alltalks and her gender - the info for Brayflox's Longstop used male pronouns to identify her so everyone just assumed our gobbie cheese connoisseur was male.... then sometime later Brayflox's Longstop HM was released and... suddenly she was being identified with female pronouns, with much confusion from players and leading SE to sheepishly admit the earlier information was wrong and that Brayflox is a female goblin. ;)

Then there is the old Nael van Darnus controversy, which even the development team themselves were not entirely sure as to how to identify Nael properly (the Nael model in 1.0 used male elezen animations, and Nael was identified with male pronouns in the lyrics for Rise of the White Raven, yet some members of the development team apparently referred to Nael as a woman, and not helped in ARR with Turn 9 showing a very female elezen under that helm and even Urianger confused as to why they were looking at a woman instead of a man like they expected).

Eventually it was settled on making the 'real' Nael male but long dead, and his identity stolen by his younger sister, and thus the Nael 1.0 players fought at the Rivenroad (and the shade in Second Coil of Bahamut in ARR) was female. Sure it's one hell of a retcon, but at least it does make sense.

I think it's a natural confusion with any of the only-one-model beast tribe races, especially if pronouns aren't used straightaway. Other than the silly pink kobolds there's simply no way of telling, and perhaps we subconsciously expect them to look a little different.

Even having come in after they resolved the error with Brayflox's gender that Enkidoh was talking about, I was a little surprised when I first saw (in the dungeon description, I think) that she was a "she". I like it though. She's pretty awesome.

At least you can tell goblin gender by name, once you've picked up the pattern (-ix/-ox name endings). Likewise the Vanu Vanu with Vanu/Vali 'surnames'.

The ray-tamer Kojin (Makura?) is also female.

(I wish they had at least a bit of variety with beast tribe character appearances - even if they just made two or three faces, it would be much better than all of them being perfectly identical. Especially the human-faced Ananta.)

Ananta are a one-gender race though. There are no males. Probably due to Allagan shenanigans. They likely identify as female since Lakshmi is female. As far as why Lakshmi is female, I have my suspicions that she's like Garuda, but with her morality flipped. She was probably originally an Allagan who helped the Ananta get out of Azyz Lla and the Ananta thought she was their goddess after enough time had past.

Like with Goblins and Ixal, you can tell the Slyph's "gender" by their name endings as well. The "male" slyphs can produce bulbs and their names all end with "xio". "Female" slyphs flower at a different time than the pollinating season. Their names end in "xia".

Sahagan are another one-gender race. Kinda. One female lays all the sahagan eggs and she and the other females stay on the ocean floor. The males stay up on the oceans' surface. So we've never seen a female sahagan as far as I can tell.

I always assumed Twintania was female, but I'm not sure if there is any confirmation of their gender.

To be honest, it's pretty fair for the Beastman models to make it difficult to tell genders apart. Even in real life, humans are pretty terrible at discerning the gender of non-humans, unless there's a fair amount of sexual dimorphism going on.

Housecats, for example. Most people who don't own cats have trouble discerning the gender of a cat without lifting up its tail and taking a gander at its gonads - and even cat owners sometimes have trouble.

Doubtless, if Beastmen were real, humans that spent a significant amount of time around them would probably start to pick up on various tells (beyond their names) to determine male from female, but it's reasonable that those differences would be subtle enough that the game is justified in using the same models for both.

Ah yeah, I meant to mention the sylphs but I forgot in the end. Also I didn't mean Ananta needed different appearances to differentiate gender, just that in general it's weird to have these characters with human faces but they all look completely identical. (I guess we can blame it on Allagan cloning...)

It does make sense to label them as female though - aside of their appearance, they're able to [get pregnant / lay eggs, I forget which]. There are some animals that can actually do this, if I remember correctly.

Also it bugs me that the sylphs' "seed-bearing gender" is considered male, because that's the opposite of how plants are normally labelled. Not all plants have a difference of course, but some species will differentiate between flowers that grow into fruit and those that only produce pollen to fertilise the fruit-flowers. They are considered female and male flowers exactly because they correspond to female (child-bearing) and male roles in reproduction.

It at least makes a little more sense from the lorebook explanation that talks about the sylphs not really having male and female genders, but something else entirely (though still doesn't explain why they would pick up those labels 'the wrong way around'). The in-game description for the sylph minion doesn't go into any of that, and just says it's the males that produce seeds. Which they shouldn't, because that means that group should have been classified as the "female" gender in the first place.


Random trivia - it seems that beast tribe names only get capitalised if they're a specific race name, not a generic fantasy creature. eg. "Ixal, Sahagin, sylphs, Amalj'aa and kobolds" is correct.

ARE WE JUST ASSUMING THEIR GENDERS

Nope. The Lore Book goes into it quite a bit. The exception would be the Amalja'a which don't really have male/female roles or name except when it's breeding time. But they communally raise all the kids of one tribe together so, that might be part of why.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

snip

---

The thing about the Sylph though is you can't think of them as plants, but rather, plant like animals. What defines male and female isn't how the reproduction is done, it's just which reproductive cell they produce; males produce sperm cells and females egg cells. Keep in mind there are a few animal species where the male is the "female" to us, seahorses being the most well known.

Also I can't believe I forgot to mention the goblins and the sylph with their naming conventions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eloah

Keep in mind there are a few animal species where the male is the "female" to us, seahorses being the most well known.

---

Male seahorses are still male and still produce the sperm, not the eggs. They just have a pouch that the female lays her eggs into. [Wikipedia link]

I always thought the lala in the Eureka quest was female but then evil megane chan used male pronouns and became evil megane kun

Shisui is female :<

I thought Frixio was a little grandma Sylph when I first met him in-game. But now I know he's a little grandpa Sylph! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

Male seahorses are still male and still produce the sperm, not the eggs. They just have a pouch that the female lays her eggs into. [Wikipedia link]

---

I think you missed my point

Yes I’ve totally missed your point - unless it’s that “male seahorses are female to us” in which case I got it and think it’s incorrect. Male seahorses are not “female to us”. They are male. They are not any less male because they get ‘pregnant’ because they still do not produce the eggs inside their body, they receive them from the female.

Female flowers produce seeds (eggs). Male flowers produce pollen (sperm). It seems logical to me that therefore the seed-producing and pollen-producing should be classified in line with that and everything else.

For what it’s worth, the two named sylphs we have seen take on human Hyuran forms are Noraxia, who appears as a male, and Silbexio from the beast tribe finale quest, who appears as a female.

Hmm... at first it didn't look like you understood, but based on what you wrote you do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

Male seahorses are not “female to us”. They are male. They are not any less male because they get ‘pregnant’ because they still do not produce the eggs inside their body, they receive them from the female.

---

I mentioned that what determines sex is what cell the organism produces, sperm cells for males and egg cells for females.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

Female flowers produce seeds (eggs). Male flowers produce pollen (sperm). It seems logical to me that therefore the seed-producing and pollen-producing should be classified in line with that and everything else.

---

And here you are applying the knowledge you already have towards something you don't know much about which is a common practice for organisms that don't have a "set" binary structure compared to humans.

Basically, what I was saying is that, the qualities we associate with females, being pregnant, giving birth, care taking, etc will be telegraphed onto another creature we know very little about, if we see those qualities in said creature. But, that's just our preconception based on what we are use to. Seahorses were an example, commonly known at this point, because if someone didn't know any better, but they knew about our genderfied roles, like a young child, they would think the male seahorse is female. That's why my original comment had quotation marks around the word female. It's not that the animal was female, it's that the role is considered "female" to us, because that's what we are use to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

For what it’s worth, the two named sylphs we have seen take on human Hyuran forms are Noraxia, who appears as a male, and “Sylvie” from the beast tribe finale quest - I can’t remember her real name but it was an “o” ending.

---

For one thing, I don't recall Noraxia turning into a Hyur, but that doesn't mean anything. I'm not sure if you can say that this has any merit, since we know the Sylphs use transformation magic. We know they can take on the forms of other creatures they have seen. There is a probability that each of these Sylphs only saw that one sex, or something to that effect. But that's speculation on both parts.

The one thing we do know is that, canonically, the "io" sylphs are male to us and the "ia" are female to us; this is most likely because of the O and A being associated with male and female respectively. Plants are bisexual, and since the Sylph are plant-like they probably are as well, which explains why all of them can produce pods. We also know that the "females" have higher arcane abilities compared to the males to compensate for their "latebloom" status; an art they use to protect their whole community. This is no different than other animals that have the females act as the primary protectors; something we see in game with the Miqo'te Sun Seekers as well.

Here's the relevant paragraph from the lore book...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lore Book, p.255

Sylphic gener, or lack thereof, can also be confusing for outsiders to comprehend. Those slyphs who possessboth stamen and pistil are capable of producing bulbs, and are classified as "everblooms." Generally considered, "male" by other races, their name are characterized by the "xio" suffix. Sylphs whose names end in "xia" are known as "lateblooms," a classification which stems from the trait of flowering at irregular times during the pollinating season, The "females" of the race, the lateblooms' inability to produce podlings is balanced by an innate talent for the arcane arts, their undiluted reserves of aether gifting them the potential to become powerful spellcasters.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eloah

And here you are applying the knowledge you already have towards something you don't know much about which is a common practice for organisms that don't have a "set" binary structure compared to humans.

Basically, what I was saying is that, the qualities we associate with females, being pregnant, giving birth, care taking, etc will be telegraphed onto another creature we know very little about, if we see those qualities in said creature. But, that's just our preconception based on what we are use to. Seahorses were an example, commonly known at this point, because if someone didn't know any better, but they knew about our genderfied roles, like a young child, they would think the male seahorse is female. That's why my original comment had quotation marks around the word female. It's not that the animal was female, it's that the role is considered "female" to us, because that's what we are use to.

---

That is what I'm doing with the sylphs though - applying the standard concept of "childbearing gender = female" to conclude that the seed-bearing gender of sylphs must be equivalent to female - and yet the lorebook entry says that they are "generally considered 'male' by the other races". That implies the sylphs themselves do not have a concept of male and female, it's only a label that's been applied to them by the 'human' races trying to make sense of the unfamiliar sylph genders. (On a side note: it occurs to me that the sylphs' odd phrasing of "this one", "that one" for all pronouns avoids having to use "he/she", necessary in normal speech but awkward if they don't have the concept.)

So how would they come to consider that group 'male' in the first place? If you have [sylph gender A] and [sylph gender B] and you want to classify them as male-equivalent and female-equivalent, why would you overlook the primary difference that only one gender can bear seeds?

Did they not spend that much time studying them, and just say "'xio' name endings sound male, 'xia' endings sound female, let's go with that?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eloah

For one thing, I don't recall Noraxia turning into a Hyur, but that doesn't mean anything. I'm not sure if you can say that this has any merit, since we know the Sylphs use transformation magic. We know they can take on the forms of other creatures they have seen. There is a probability that each of these Sylphs only saw that one sex, or something to that effect. But that's speculation on both parts.

---

It's entirely missable, but if you visit the main hall to talk to all the minor characters each time their dialogue changes, at one point you'll find Noraxia glamoured/transformed into a Hyur. (Brown skin, green mohawk and facepaint, wearing an acton and no pants. "This one is very convincing, yes?" she asks...)

She's made this disguise while already at the Waking Sands, so has certainly seen people in an assortment of races and genders. Fair point that she still might not grasp the difference, and her Hyuran form has a rather gender-ambiguous appearance. (It actually took me until my third time through the game to realise it was a male character, because I wasn't thinking of the possibility, and it only clicked because I noticed 'she' had a male-only hairstyle.)

Meanwhile it seemed that Silbexio had been 'undercover' pretending to be a Hyur for some time prior to the story (Noraxia actually mentions knowing a "walking one in the Ashcrown Consortium" which is almost certainly 'Silvie'). When disguised he uses human grammar and pronouns and - whether coincidental or not - has a more definitely female appearance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eloah

The one thing we do know is that, canonically, the "io" sylphs are male to us and the "ia" are female to us; this is most likely because of the O and A being associated with male and female respectively. Plants are bisexual, and since the Sylph are plant-like they probably are as well, which explains why all of them can produce pods.

---

They don't all produce pods. (If that's been your understanding up to this point, we may not be arguing from the same set of facts here.)

From the lorebook entry that ObsidianFire posted just above:

Quote:

---

Those sylphs who possess both stamen and pistil are capable of producing bulbs, and are classified as "everblooms."

The "females" of the race, the lateblooms' inability to produce podlings is balanced by an innate talent for the arcane arts [...]

---

Back down the Wikipedia rabbithole on the fun topic of plant reproductive morphology so I'm getting my facts right...

From reading the articles it seems the terms 'male' and 'female' shouldn't technically be used to talk about plant parts, but for simplicity I'll continue to do so.

A stamen is the pollen-producing 'male' part of a flower and a pistil is the 'female' part that develops into seeds/fruit.

The lorebook description says that everbloom sylphs are those that have "both stamen and pistil", which means that lateblooms must not have both - and if they can't produce pods then that suggests they are lacking a pistil. Therefore it would indicate that they do have stamens, and again would make more sense equated to male than female.

And going from the terminology section of the Wikipedia page, it seems this is a valid state for plants: "Androdioecious: having male flowers on some plants, bisexual ones on others".


Also, plants are not always 'bisexual', and some do have completely separate 'male' and 'female' plants. I was aware of holly, and Wikipedia led me to this list of dioecious plants (the proper term for it), so there are quite a few.

Plants may also produce separate 'male' and 'female' flowers on a single plant - eg. this picture of pumpkin flowers, with the large bulge (ovary) on the female flower stalk that will swell and become the pumpkin itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chewy2nd

I always assumed Twintania was female, but I'm not sure if there is any confirmation of their gender.

---

Been awhile since I checked, but I'm pretty sure the lore book states Twintania is female.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

Lots of good info

---

I think I see where the misunderstanding is, on my part. I was inferring this line:

Quote:

---

stems from the trait of flowering at irregular times

---

as the process of being able to give birth, not the birth itself. Which actually makes more sense, since how would you name a new Sylph xio/xia if they all flower together. I was combining the above with the later line you mentioned:

Quote:

---

the lateblooms' inability to produce podlings

---

in the same way some humans are "unable" to have children. Its not like it's a definite no, pre se, it's just that the natural occurrence doesn't happen as it should. The most common I know of for human women is Polycystic Overies, where a woman can look very "fertile" but, carrying a naturally conceived child to term is almost impossible without outside assistance. So all of the info was there I was just viewing it from my own perspective since it's what I've experienced; well my mother, I'm the miracle baby, lol?

As for the part about the xia Sylph, why would they be lacking the pistil, why couldn't they lack the stamen?

And, as for what to call each "gender", i dunno, maybe they flipped a gil, XD

Also, I personally know that plants have "genders", mostly cause of watermelon, but felt it was just easier to say bisexual, since that's the easiest classification without going into too much detail. I too used Wikipedia and saw all of the terms and was like "okay I don't wanna right a book, so, let's just say bisexual and be done with it"

Also as for the Sylph speech of "this one" and "that one", I think it's more the localization team getting around the fact that English doesn't have a gender neutral pronoun like Japanese. Not sure about French or German though. I remember hearing something about their speech patterns, and how it is in Japanese, it couldn't be replicated in English, so they made their own that still gets across the same feel. I could try and find it but it's been a few years, I think it was mentioned when Ramuh was released since his song has the Sylphic Language in it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nestama

Been awhile since I checked, but I'm pretty sure the lore book states Twintania is female.

---

Yup Lore Book says she

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eloah

As for the part about the xia Sylph, why would they be lacking the pistil, why couldn't they lack the stamen?

---

It seems more logical to me, and less convoluted.

If they are defined by their inability to produce seed, it seems more probable that it's because they don't have a pistil, than that every one of them has a nonfunctional one, or has no chance to receive pollen from the everblooms (who are presumably flowering throughout the season, judging from that name, and should be available at whatever time a latebloom flowers).

If they only have stamens, they can pollinate the everblooms.

If they only have nonfunctional pistils, they are not producing either pollen or seeds - which means they are not passing on their genes in any form, and that seems improbable for a large section of a population. (From a quick count through the list of NPC names in East Shroud, the number of xio and xia sylphs seem to be roughly equal.)