Not the gender you thought they were

[Iscah]

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]

[SunAurel]

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

[AmemeAmeklin]

Shisui is female :<

[lunar_seraphim]

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!

[Eloah]

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

[Iscah]

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.

[Eloah]

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

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.

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.

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.

[ObsidianFire]

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

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.

[Iscah]

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?"

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.

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:

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.

[Nestama]

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.