>>50647539Even if “non-binary” was agreed upon and not controversial at all it still wouldn’t make any sense.
Let’s just pretend everyone agrees that gender and sex do not do vary.
Animals do not have gender.
According to gender theory, gender is a SOCIAL construct. The justification for sex-based differences in Pokémon is that a large amount of animals, like humans, are sexually dimorphic species. This implies phenotypical expression that is unique between the sexes, like bird males having massive plums and bright patterns despite being more visible to threats for mating purposes (looking for sexes females to have offspring with). Pokémon are based on animals and “evolve” (based on Darwin’s theory obviously)
Projecting “gender” onto animals actually makes non-binary and binary systems invalid and even further discredits a frankly pseudointellectual pseudoscience (redundant) trend in academic culture.
I hope it happens because that would accelerate the decline of this shared larp and of ignorance
