This is cool
Flight Rising Discussion
Discuss everything and anything Flight Rising.
TOPIC | [Worldbulding] Dragon Sexuality
You got 2^11 possibilities, right? 2,048 combinations of the 11 elements?
Fascinating and delightfully alien... a pity, then, that dragons do seem to come in male and female, in away that matters for breeding. Elements of hatchlings are the element of the *nest*, so elements of the parents seems, mechanically, to not matter in the least. I really do think this is a shame, as I like your concept here and would love to see it expanded.
One could assume, as I think do you do, that reproduction and attraction are decoupled in dragons. But why have romantic bonds at all? Perhaps dragons do not have family units, but rather raise young communally. No need for specific pairs. However, there is that period of incubation (which might last five days... or fifty days, or five years, or some other duration, depending on how or if you translate RL time to FR time), during which the breeding pair need to tend their eggs together. Would it not make sense for dragons to have an inherent sense of connection and desire for companionship during that incubation time, to ensure the nest is tended properly?
Of course, nest-bonds may not last long after the hatching of the young. Or, maybe they do. Maybe it varies. "Romance" beyond this temporary breeding state may be alien to dragons entirely. After all, they're only "Ready to breed" cyclically. When not in their season, dragons may be effectively aro/ace.
Just speculating here!
Fascinating and delightfully alien... a pity, then, that dragons do seem to come in male and female, in away that matters for breeding. Elements of hatchlings are the element of the *nest*, so elements of the parents seems, mechanically, to not matter in the least. I really do think this is a shame, as I like your concept here and would love to see it expanded.
One could assume, as I think do you do, that reproduction and attraction are decoupled in dragons. But why have romantic bonds at all? Perhaps dragons do not have family units, but rather raise young communally. No need for specific pairs. However, there is that period of incubation (which might last five days... or fifty days, or five years, or some other duration, depending on how or if you translate RL time to FR time), during which the breeding pair need to tend their eggs together. Would it not make sense for dragons to have an inherent sense of connection and desire for companionship during that incubation time, to ensure the nest is tended properly?
Of course, nest-bonds may not last long after the hatching of the young. Or, maybe they do. Maybe it varies. "Romance" beyond this temporary breeding state may be alien to dragons entirely. After all, they're only "Ready to breed" cyclically. When not in their season, dragons may be effectively aro/ace.
Just speculating here!
You got 2^11 possibilities, right? 2,048 combinations of the 11 elements?
Fascinating and delightfully alien... a pity, then, that dragons do seem to come in male and female, in away that matters for breeding. Elements of hatchlings are the element of the *nest*, so elements of the parents seems, mechanically, to not matter in the least. I really do think this is a shame, as I like your concept here and would love to see it expanded.
One could assume, as I think do you do, that reproduction and attraction are decoupled in dragons. But why have romantic bonds at all? Perhaps dragons do not have family units, but rather raise young communally. No need for specific pairs. However, there is that period of incubation (which might last five days... or fifty days, or five years, or some other duration, depending on how or if you translate RL time to FR time), during which the breeding pair need to tend their eggs together. Would it not make sense for dragons to have an inherent sense of connection and desire for companionship during that incubation time, to ensure the nest is tended properly?
Of course, nest-bonds may not last long after the hatching of the young. Or, maybe they do. Maybe it varies. "Romance" beyond this temporary breeding state may be alien to dragons entirely. After all, they're only "Ready to breed" cyclically. When not in their season, dragons may be effectively aro/ace.
Just speculating here!
Fascinating and delightfully alien... a pity, then, that dragons do seem to come in male and female, in away that matters for breeding. Elements of hatchlings are the element of the *nest*, so elements of the parents seems, mechanically, to not matter in the least. I really do think this is a shame, as I like your concept here and would love to see it expanded.
One could assume, as I think do you do, that reproduction and attraction are decoupled in dragons. But why have romantic bonds at all? Perhaps dragons do not have family units, but rather raise young communally. No need for specific pairs. However, there is that period of incubation (which might last five days... or fifty days, or five years, or some other duration, depending on how or if you translate RL time to FR time), during which the breeding pair need to tend their eggs together. Would it not make sense for dragons to have an inherent sense of connection and desire for companionship during that incubation time, to ensure the nest is tended properly?
Of course, nest-bonds may not last long after the hatching of the young. Or, maybe they do. Maybe it varies. "Romance" beyond this temporary breeding state may be alien to dragons entirely. After all, they're only "Ready to breed" cyclically. When not in their season, dragons may be effectively aro/ace.
Just speculating here!
@FireOpalNebula
Yeah, this is all true. I'm of the opinion, though, you can't effectively break rules until you establish them. There is no such thing as chaos until you know what order is.
But everything you're describing is why I chose to leave "romantic attraction" out of "sexual attraction." So, yes, but everything you're talking about is something I purposefully removed from the equation because talking about things like dragon personality types, education, and interests is a part of a different kind of attraction. As I say - we also split attraction like this. The differences between "sexual" male and female (which are binary in Sornieth) are obvious enough to make a non-dimophic species like Fae dragons understand them to the extent they understand what it is to have neither of these - as I think is your point with the "length of a lash" bit. Because it is obvious, even to us (we have the dragons marked explicitly as "male" or "female," even though there appear to be no physical differences). I prefer to think it's elemental, though, magical - not physical. Just because I like to think dragons are less physical beings than they are magical ones. This isn't necessarily correct, of course! It's just how I prefer to think about it.
Because, as opposed to what happens with humans on earth, every time a dragon attempts to breed, offspring result. Element makes no difference in breeding, so there is no such thing as an "unnatural" elemental attraction between modern dragons. However, thinking about whatever the equivilent of "sexual" attraction would be in this paradigm may not have an equivilent for, for example, dragon/beast pairs. They cannot reproduce - but they could share the "romantic" attraction equivilent. And if these diverge, then there is no such thing as an "unnatural" attraction like you're describing. It's a "romantic" attraction, not... whatever "sexual" attraction is called.
As Mindrop was saying, though, reproduction is much more likely within this paradigm to be separate from attraction. I agree that is quite likely - though it doesn't have to be if that's how someone wants their lore to work. I haven't decided, myself. One of the pros of this approach is that I wouldn't have to worry about breeding dragons outside of their romantic pair - dragon romantic attraction being divorced from reproduction. And, it might work like this for lots of dragons, but there could still yet be dragons that don't prefer this.
But, at least for me, it's helpful to know what the majority of dragons are like. This makes it more interesting to build out minorities, too - because the way these groups are built by definition depend on how the larger groups around them live. (Of course, I could do it backwards - I just find that it usually results in pretty flat social groups.)
For example, it's still a mystery to me whether I want to even include male and female as attraction points for the non-dimorphic speices in my own lore (though if I were to write a similar post about dragon gender, I'd address it either way). To me, even more interesting, because that way I can have everything: Skydancers are sexually dimporphic, so they would take male and female into account, but Mirrors aren't, so they wouldn't. I don't know why I wouldn't do that, because having both is, to me, extremely appealing just because it sounds fun!
Yeah, this is all true. I'm of the opinion, though, you can't effectively break rules until you establish them. There is no such thing as chaos until you know what order is.
But everything you're describing is why I chose to leave "romantic attraction" out of "sexual attraction." So, yes, but everything you're talking about is something I purposefully removed from the equation because talking about things like dragon personality types, education, and interests is a part of a different kind of attraction. As I say - we also split attraction like this. The differences between "sexual" male and female (which are binary in Sornieth) are obvious enough to make a non-dimophic species like Fae dragons understand them to the extent they understand what it is to have neither of these - as I think is your point with the "length of a lash" bit. Because it is obvious, even to us (we have the dragons marked explicitly as "male" or "female," even though there appear to be no physical differences). I prefer to think it's elemental, though, magical - not physical. Just because I like to think dragons are less physical beings than they are magical ones. This isn't necessarily correct, of course! It's just how I prefer to think about it.
Because, as opposed to what happens with humans on earth, every time a dragon attempts to breed, offspring result. Element makes no difference in breeding, so there is no such thing as an "unnatural" elemental attraction between modern dragons. However, thinking about whatever the equivilent of "sexual" attraction would be in this paradigm may not have an equivilent for, for example, dragon/beast pairs. They cannot reproduce - but they could share the "romantic" attraction equivilent. And if these diverge, then there is no such thing as an "unnatural" attraction like you're describing. It's a "romantic" attraction, not... whatever "sexual" attraction is called.
As Mindrop was saying, though, reproduction is much more likely within this paradigm to be separate from attraction. I agree that is quite likely - though it doesn't have to be if that's how someone wants their lore to work. I haven't decided, myself. One of the pros of this approach is that I wouldn't have to worry about breeding dragons outside of their romantic pair - dragon romantic attraction being divorced from reproduction. And, it might work like this for lots of dragons, but there could still yet be dragons that don't prefer this.
But, at least for me, it's helpful to know what the majority of dragons are like. This makes it more interesting to build out minorities, too - because the way these groups are built by definition depend on how the larger groups around them live. (Of course, I could do it backwards - I just find that it usually results in pretty flat social groups.)
For example, it's still a mystery to me whether I want to even include male and female as attraction points for the non-dimorphic speices in my own lore (though if I were to write a similar post about dragon gender, I'd address it either way). To me, even more interesting, because that way I can have everything: Skydancers are sexually dimporphic, so they would take male and female into account, but Mirrors aren't, so they wouldn't. I don't know why I wouldn't do that, because having both is, to me, extremely appealing just because it sounds fun!
@FireOpalNebula
Yeah, this is all true. I'm of the opinion, though, you can't effectively break rules until you establish them. There is no such thing as chaos until you know what order is.
But everything you're describing is why I chose to leave "romantic attraction" out of "sexual attraction." So, yes, but everything you're talking about is something I purposefully removed from the equation because talking about things like dragon personality types, education, and interests is a part of a different kind of attraction. As I say - we also split attraction like this. The differences between "sexual" male and female (which are binary in Sornieth) are obvious enough to make a non-dimophic species like Fae dragons understand them to the extent they understand what it is to have neither of these - as I think is your point with the "length of a lash" bit. Because it is obvious, even to us (we have the dragons marked explicitly as "male" or "female," even though there appear to be no physical differences). I prefer to think it's elemental, though, magical - not physical. Just because I like to think dragons are less physical beings than they are magical ones. This isn't necessarily correct, of course! It's just how I prefer to think about it.
Because, as opposed to what happens with humans on earth, every time a dragon attempts to breed, offspring result. Element makes no difference in breeding, so there is no such thing as an "unnatural" elemental attraction between modern dragons. However, thinking about whatever the equivilent of "sexual" attraction would be in this paradigm may not have an equivilent for, for example, dragon/beast pairs. They cannot reproduce - but they could share the "romantic" attraction equivilent. And if these diverge, then there is no such thing as an "unnatural" attraction like you're describing. It's a "romantic" attraction, not... whatever "sexual" attraction is called.
As Mindrop was saying, though, reproduction is much more likely within this paradigm to be separate from attraction. I agree that is quite likely - though it doesn't have to be if that's how someone wants their lore to work. I haven't decided, myself. One of the pros of this approach is that I wouldn't have to worry about breeding dragons outside of their romantic pair - dragon romantic attraction being divorced from reproduction. And, it might work like this for lots of dragons, but there could still yet be dragons that don't prefer this.
But, at least for me, it's helpful to know what the majority of dragons are like. This makes it more interesting to build out minorities, too - because the way these groups are built by definition depend on how the larger groups around them live. (Of course, I could do it backwards - I just find that it usually results in pretty flat social groups.)
For example, it's still a mystery to me whether I want to even include male and female as attraction points for the non-dimorphic speices in my own lore (though if I were to write a similar post about dragon gender, I'd address it either way). To me, even more interesting, because that way I can have everything: Skydancers are sexually dimporphic, so they would take male and female into account, but Mirrors aren't, so they wouldn't. I don't know why I wouldn't do that, because having both is, to me, extremely appealing just because it sounds fun!
Yeah, this is all true. I'm of the opinion, though, you can't effectively break rules until you establish them. There is no such thing as chaos until you know what order is.
But everything you're describing is why I chose to leave "romantic attraction" out of "sexual attraction." So, yes, but everything you're talking about is something I purposefully removed from the equation because talking about things like dragon personality types, education, and interests is a part of a different kind of attraction. As I say - we also split attraction like this. The differences between "sexual" male and female (which are binary in Sornieth) are obvious enough to make a non-dimophic species like Fae dragons understand them to the extent they understand what it is to have neither of these - as I think is your point with the "length of a lash" bit. Because it is obvious, even to us (we have the dragons marked explicitly as "male" or "female," even though there appear to be no physical differences). I prefer to think it's elemental, though, magical - not physical. Just because I like to think dragons are less physical beings than they are magical ones. This isn't necessarily correct, of course! It's just how I prefer to think about it.
Because, as opposed to what happens with humans on earth, every time a dragon attempts to breed, offspring result. Element makes no difference in breeding, so there is no such thing as an "unnatural" elemental attraction between modern dragons. However, thinking about whatever the equivilent of "sexual" attraction would be in this paradigm may not have an equivilent for, for example, dragon/beast pairs. They cannot reproduce - but they could share the "romantic" attraction equivilent. And if these diverge, then there is no such thing as an "unnatural" attraction like you're describing. It's a "romantic" attraction, not... whatever "sexual" attraction is called.
As Mindrop was saying, though, reproduction is much more likely within this paradigm to be separate from attraction. I agree that is quite likely - though it doesn't have to be if that's how someone wants their lore to work. I haven't decided, myself. One of the pros of this approach is that I wouldn't have to worry about breeding dragons outside of their romantic pair - dragon romantic attraction being divorced from reproduction. And, it might work like this for lots of dragons, but there could still yet be dragons that don't prefer this.
But, at least for me, it's helpful to know what the majority of dragons are like. This makes it more interesting to build out minorities, too - because the way these groups are built by definition depend on how the larger groups around them live. (Of course, I could do it backwards - I just find that it usually results in pretty flat social groups.)
For example, it's still a mystery to me whether I want to even include male and female as attraction points for the non-dimorphic speices in my own lore (though if I were to write a similar post about dragon gender, I'd address it either way). To me, even more interesting, because that way I can have everything: Skydancers are sexually dimporphic, so they would take male and female into account, but Mirrors aren't, so they wouldn't. I don't know why I wouldn't do that, because having both is, to me, extremely appealing just because it sounds fun!
|
Almedha | share project Fandragons Lore Starts Here (WIP) I collect Pulsing Relics! |
| ____ |
|
@ShadowWas
You know, when you say it that way, it sounds so simple.
Well... it can work that way. Sexuality is lore, if you will, not mechanics. Human sexuality works that way, too; a lesbian is physically capable of reproducing with a male. A Wind dragon that's only elementally attracted to Light dragons can still reproduce with a Shadow dragon - sexuality is about attraction, not ability to produce offspring. Obviously, there are, in humans, combinations of physical attributes you have to go with if you want to have a chance to produce offspring. The same with dragons.
This is why I think it's largely up to the player's own lore whether the male and female aspect contributes to the experience, if you will. We haven't been told anything about dragons' sexualities if I remember correctly - only genders. So you could have magical male and female, in which case those would play into elemental attraction - because male and female are a part of the magic. But if they are not, then it might not matter. It could be that if a dragon is attracted to a Shadow dragon, it's any Shadow dragon regardless of whether it's male or female. A dragon would only have to make that distinction if they wanted to reproduce.
I haven't decided how I personally want to approach it, but it's a possibility.
And as far as cooldowns go, I just view that as part of the magic, too. It exhausts a dragons magic reserves so they are not capable of reproducing again for however-long a cooldown is according to one's accounting of time. Because the "ready to breed" period is not really a cycle - it's a build-up, after which they can breed at any time. And then they are reduced to "zero" again and have to replenish their magic.
As for family groups, I tend to think of those being more related to species than anything else. Which would make that topic an absolute bear to tackle because of mixed-breed pairs. And then integrating how each Flight might view raising hatchlings (I think Plague has a different view of parenting than Earth, for sure, for sure).
Who knows! Either way, it's fun to think about.
You know, when you say it that way, it sounds so simple.
Well... it can work that way. Sexuality is lore, if you will, not mechanics. Human sexuality works that way, too; a lesbian is physically capable of reproducing with a male. A Wind dragon that's only elementally attracted to Light dragons can still reproduce with a Shadow dragon - sexuality is about attraction, not ability to produce offspring. Obviously, there are, in humans, combinations of physical attributes you have to go with if you want to have a chance to produce offspring. The same with dragons.
This is why I think it's largely up to the player's own lore whether the male and female aspect contributes to the experience, if you will. We haven't been told anything about dragons' sexualities if I remember correctly - only genders. So you could have magical male and female, in which case those would play into elemental attraction - because male and female are a part of the magic. But if they are not, then it might not matter. It could be that if a dragon is attracted to a Shadow dragon, it's any Shadow dragon regardless of whether it's male or female. A dragon would only have to make that distinction if they wanted to reproduce.
I haven't decided how I personally want to approach it, but it's a possibility.
And as far as cooldowns go, I just view that as part of the magic, too. It exhausts a dragons magic reserves so they are not capable of reproducing again for however-long a cooldown is according to one's accounting of time. Because the "ready to breed" period is not really a cycle - it's a build-up, after which they can breed at any time. And then they are reduced to "zero" again and have to replenish their magic.
As for family groups, I tend to think of those being more related to species than anything else. Which would make that topic an absolute bear to tackle because of mixed-breed pairs. And then integrating how each Flight might view raising hatchlings (I think Plague has a different view of parenting than Earth, for sure, for sure).
Who knows! Either way, it's fun to think about.
@ShadowWas
You know, when you say it that way, it sounds so simple.
Well... it can work that way. Sexuality is lore, if you will, not mechanics. Human sexuality works that way, too; a lesbian is physically capable of reproducing with a male. A Wind dragon that's only elementally attracted to Light dragons can still reproduce with a Shadow dragon - sexuality is about attraction, not ability to produce offspring. Obviously, there are, in humans, combinations of physical attributes you have to go with if you want to have a chance to produce offspring. The same with dragons.
This is why I think it's largely up to the player's own lore whether the male and female aspect contributes to the experience, if you will. We haven't been told anything about dragons' sexualities if I remember correctly - only genders. So you could have magical male and female, in which case those would play into elemental attraction - because male and female are a part of the magic. But if they are not, then it might not matter. It could be that if a dragon is attracted to a Shadow dragon, it's any Shadow dragon regardless of whether it's male or female. A dragon would only have to make that distinction if they wanted to reproduce.
I haven't decided how I personally want to approach it, but it's a possibility.
And as far as cooldowns go, I just view that as part of the magic, too. It exhausts a dragons magic reserves so they are not capable of reproducing again for however-long a cooldown is according to one's accounting of time. Because the "ready to breed" period is not really a cycle - it's a build-up, after which they can breed at any time. And then they are reduced to "zero" again and have to replenish their magic.
As for family groups, I tend to think of those being more related to species than anything else. Which would make that topic an absolute bear to tackle because of mixed-breed pairs. And then integrating how each Flight might view raising hatchlings (I think Plague has a different view of parenting than Earth, for sure, for sure).
Who knows! Either way, it's fun to think about.
You know, when you say it that way, it sounds so simple.
Well... it can work that way. Sexuality is lore, if you will, not mechanics. Human sexuality works that way, too; a lesbian is physically capable of reproducing with a male. A Wind dragon that's only elementally attracted to Light dragons can still reproduce with a Shadow dragon - sexuality is about attraction, not ability to produce offspring. Obviously, there are, in humans, combinations of physical attributes you have to go with if you want to have a chance to produce offspring. The same with dragons.
This is why I think it's largely up to the player's own lore whether the male and female aspect contributes to the experience, if you will. We haven't been told anything about dragons' sexualities if I remember correctly - only genders. So you could have magical male and female, in which case those would play into elemental attraction - because male and female are a part of the magic. But if they are not, then it might not matter. It could be that if a dragon is attracted to a Shadow dragon, it's any Shadow dragon regardless of whether it's male or female. A dragon would only have to make that distinction if they wanted to reproduce.
I haven't decided how I personally want to approach it, but it's a possibility.
And as far as cooldowns go, I just view that as part of the magic, too. It exhausts a dragons magic reserves so they are not capable of reproducing again for however-long a cooldown is according to one's accounting of time. Because the "ready to breed" period is not really a cycle - it's a build-up, after which they can breed at any time. And then they are reduced to "zero" again and have to replenish their magic.
As for family groups, I tend to think of those being more related to species than anything else. Which would make that topic an absolute bear to tackle because of mixed-breed pairs. And then integrating how each Flight might view raising hatchlings (I think Plague has a different view of parenting than Earth, for sure, for sure).
Who knows! Either way, it's fun to think about.
|
|
Almedha | share project Fandragons Lore Starts Here (WIP) I collect Pulsing Relics! |
| ____ |
|
ghfdsghs I love worldbuilding and I'm studying sociology, but I absolutely love to learn how societies develop over time. So I propose my idea here too!
Old dragons hate cross-flight couples
Okay, so the dragon sexuality works not based on the physical appearance but on the magical energies. So what if in the ye olden days fire flight dragons only nested with other fire dragons, ice dragons with other ice dragons and so on. The main idea could possibly be that the dragons must keep the elemental energies pure through the generations, kinda like royals and royal blood, but apply that to an entire elemental type. So what you get is this mideaval dragon society where the dragons must keep it a secret if they ever mated with a dragon with a different elemental type.
I read the TED talk and the only idea I had was some old dragon going "kids these days and their cross-flight couples. Back in my days we nested with a dragon from our own flight harrumph"
Old dragons hate cross-flight couples
Okay, so the dragon sexuality works not based on the physical appearance but on the magical energies. So what if in the ye olden days fire flight dragons only nested with other fire dragons, ice dragons with other ice dragons and so on. The main idea could possibly be that the dragons must keep the elemental energies pure through the generations, kinda like royals and royal blood, but apply that to an entire elemental type. So what you get is this mideaval dragon society where the dragons must keep it a secret if they ever mated with a dragon with a different elemental type.
I read the TED talk and the only idea I had was some old dragon going "kids these days and their cross-flight couples. Back in my days we nested with a dragon from our own flight harrumph"
ghfdsghs I love worldbuilding and I'm studying sociology, but I absolutely love to learn how societies develop over time. So I propose my idea here too!
Old dragons hate cross-flight couples
Okay, so the dragon sexuality works not based on the physical appearance but on the magical energies. So what if in the ye olden days fire flight dragons only nested with other fire dragons, ice dragons with other ice dragons and so on. The main idea could possibly be that the dragons must keep the elemental energies pure through the generations, kinda like royals and royal blood, but apply that to an entire elemental type. So what you get is this mideaval dragon society where the dragons must keep it a secret if they ever mated with a dragon with a different elemental type.
I read the TED talk and the only idea I had was some old dragon going "kids these days and their cross-flight couples. Back in my days we nested with a dragon from our own flight harrumph"
Old dragons hate cross-flight couples
Okay, so the dragon sexuality works not based on the physical appearance but on the magical energies. So what if in the ye olden days fire flight dragons only nested with other fire dragons, ice dragons with other ice dragons and so on. The main idea could possibly be that the dragons must keep the elemental energies pure through the generations, kinda like royals and royal blood, but apply that to an entire elemental type. So what you get is this mideaval dragon society where the dragons must keep it a secret if they ever mated with a dragon with a different elemental type.
I read the TED talk and the only idea I had was some old dragon going "kids these days and their cross-flight couples. Back in my days we nested with a dragon from our own flight harrumph"
|
You start with an impossible goal: defeating the unbeatable enemy. And then you do whatever you gotta do to achieve it! Because even you can't know how much potential you have until you push yourself past your limits. THAT'S how you make yourself not just stronger... but stronger than you ever imagined you could be!  
|
|
@Melova
It's definitely lots of fun to think about!
And I think you're probably right about ye olden day dragons only mating with dragons of the same element! The encyclopedia is written as if about prehistoric societies of dragons, as well: wherein clans are generally single species in the land of their origin (though Wildclaw, I believe, talks about Plague Wildclaws?). Coatls would migrate to Fire to mate, so that means at some point in dragon history all Coatls were fire, as well.
It's very interesting because in Sornieth, element isn't just about a "magical race," but also about the dragons' "countries of origin" and possibly "religion." At some point, dragons became much more egalitarian about other Flights. In real life, it's because players started playing - but in Sornieth...? Definitely deserves some thought.
It's definitely lots of fun to think about!
And I think you're probably right about ye olden day dragons only mating with dragons of the same element! The encyclopedia is written as if about prehistoric societies of dragons, as well: wherein clans are generally single species in the land of their origin (though Wildclaw, I believe, talks about Plague Wildclaws?). Coatls would migrate to Fire to mate, so that means at some point in dragon history all Coatls were fire, as well.
It's very interesting because in Sornieth, element isn't just about a "magical race," but also about the dragons' "countries of origin" and possibly "religion." At some point, dragons became much more egalitarian about other Flights. In real life, it's because players started playing - but in Sornieth...? Definitely deserves some thought.
@Melova
It's definitely lots of fun to think about!
And I think you're probably right about ye olden day dragons only mating with dragons of the same element! The encyclopedia is written as if about prehistoric societies of dragons, as well: wherein clans are generally single species in the land of their origin (though Wildclaw, I believe, talks about Plague Wildclaws?). Coatls would migrate to Fire to mate, so that means at some point in dragon history all Coatls were fire, as well.
It's very interesting because in Sornieth, element isn't just about a "magical race," but also about the dragons' "countries of origin" and possibly "religion." At some point, dragons became much more egalitarian about other Flights. In real life, it's because players started playing - but in Sornieth...? Definitely deserves some thought.
It's definitely lots of fun to think about!
And I think you're probably right about ye olden day dragons only mating with dragons of the same element! The encyclopedia is written as if about prehistoric societies of dragons, as well: wherein clans are generally single species in the land of their origin (though Wildclaw, I believe, talks about Plague Wildclaws?). Coatls would migrate to Fire to mate, so that means at some point in dragon history all Coatls were fire, as well.
It's very interesting because in Sornieth, element isn't just about a "magical race," but also about the dragons' "countries of origin" and possibly "religion." At some point, dragons became much more egalitarian about other Flights. In real life, it's because players started playing - but in Sornieth...? Definitely deserves some thought.
|
|
Almedha | share project Fandragons Lore Starts Here (WIP) I collect Pulsing Relics! |
| ____ |
|
This was a very fun read!
Dragon gender is interesting because we don’t really have a good grasp of it. In human world, traditionally the concept of gender is very rigid. In western society it is, at least, and that was then… shall we say “exported” to the rest of the world. But it doesn’t have to be that way in FR, we know that dragons have gender(s) but we don’t get a really good insight into how that works in their society. I also think it’s fair to say that there is a divide between different genders within breeds and elements so it’s not just that.
We don’t have any evidence of any gender roles in their society (I’m pretty sure), and I know OP said that nothing outside of the encyclopedia is considered canon, but Fiona is confirmed trans and there’s nothing in the encyclopedia that disproves that. This means that they have a sense of gender, but it’s not inherently connected to sex and it’s not tied to any gender roles, considering that gender is very much a construct, this makes for a very interesting situation and I would love to have more to work with here.
Now, if it simply (I say simply but it’s certainly not simple) something to do with magic, then I imagine it is related to procreation in the sense that your intrinsic magical energy either has genetic information to give or needs to take genetic information… or something like that, instead of simply combining the energy. And then gender is something of an offshoot to that.
One tricky aspect is that they speak a language we don’t. And everything related to their identity and society is being communicated to outsiders in a language that is not made to describe it. In English we have three sets of third-person pronouns we (traditionally) ascribe to individuals related to gender (she/her/hers, he/him/his, and they/them/theirs) in recent years we’ve added more to our lexicon and are adapting to people using whatever they want. In dragonic, they could theoretically have pronouns by element, or even by element and sex, or by breed and element. They could have gendered first-person and second-person pronouns. They could have a hundred different “standard” pronouns. They could also have no gendered pronouns.
Also, who’s to say they use “male” and “female” in the same way they do. In their language maybe “male” is actually a term that refers directly to their sexual dimorphism and is potentially different for different species. So a direct translation of “male” for a wildclaw would actually be along the lines of “front-horn”.
But as already mentioned, “gender” is a weird term so it’s hard to even effectively contextualize it for Sornieth. Working with different species makes everything incredibly complicated because IRL we don’t even have anything that can compare to it. We have a distinct difference between gender, nationality, religion, and race. Whereas for dragons it’s more like gendernationalityreligionrace and also none of that at the same time.
Taking all of that into account, sexuality gets wildly complicated. And things like “back in my day we nested with dragons from our own flight” could be less of a sexuality thing and more of a nationality thing. So the entire thing is very hard to discern, especially as outsiders looking in.
All that said, in my lore, it’s all irrelevant. (English ) pronouns are decided by vibes only, relationships and the nature of them are decided by vibes only, gender is decided by vibes only, breeding is decided by who is available to give me more fodder.
Dragon gender is interesting because we don’t really have a good grasp of it. In human world, traditionally the concept of gender is very rigid. In western society it is, at least, and that was then… shall we say “exported” to the rest of the world. But it doesn’t have to be that way in FR, we know that dragons have gender(s) but we don’t get a really good insight into how that works in their society. I also think it’s fair to say that there is a divide between different genders within breeds and elements so it’s not just that.
We don’t have any evidence of any gender roles in their society (I’m pretty sure), and I know OP said that nothing outside of the encyclopedia is considered canon, but Fiona is confirmed trans and there’s nothing in the encyclopedia that disproves that. This means that they have a sense of gender, but it’s not inherently connected to sex and it’s not tied to any gender roles, considering that gender is very much a construct, this makes for a very interesting situation and I would love to have more to work with here.
Now, if it simply (I say simply but it’s certainly not simple) something to do with magic, then I imagine it is related to procreation in the sense that your intrinsic magical energy either has genetic information to give or needs to take genetic information… or something like that, instead of simply combining the energy. And then gender is something of an offshoot to that.
One tricky aspect is that they speak a language we don’t. And everything related to their identity and society is being communicated to outsiders in a language that is not made to describe it. In English we have three sets of third-person pronouns we (traditionally) ascribe to individuals related to gender (she/her/hers, he/him/his, and they/them/theirs) in recent years we’ve added more to our lexicon and are adapting to people using whatever they want. In dragonic, they could theoretically have pronouns by element, or even by element and sex, or by breed and element. They could have gendered first-person and second-person pronouns. They could have a hundred different “standard” pronouns. They could also have no gendered pronouns.
Also, who’s to say they use “male” and “female” in the same way they do. In their language maybe “male” is actually a term that refers directly to their sexual dimorphism and is potentially different for different species. So a direct translation of “male” for a wildclaw would actually be along the lines of “front-horn”.
But as already mentioned, “gender” is a weird term so it’s hard to even effectively contextualize it for Sornieth. Working with different species makes everything incredibly complicated because IRL we don’t even have anything that can compare to it. We have a distinct difference between gender, nationality, religion, and race. Whereas for dragons it’s more like gendernationalityreligionrace and also none of that at the same time.
Taking all of that into account, sexuality gets wildly complicated. And things like “back in my day we nested with dragons from our own flight” could be less of a sexuality thing and more of a nationality thing. So the entire thing is very hard to discern, especially as outsiders looking in.
All that said, in my lore, it’s all irrelevant. (English ) pronouns are decided by vibes only, relationships and the nature of them are decided by vibes only, gender is decided by vibes only, breeding is decided by who is available to give me more fodder.
This was a very fun read!
Dragon gender is interesting because we don’t really have a good grasp of it. In human world, traditionally the concept of gender is very rigid. In western society it is, at least, and that was then… shall we say “exported” to the rest of the world. But it doesn’t have to be that way in FR, we know that dragons have gender(s) but we don’t get a really good insight into how that works in their society. I also think it’s fair to say that there is a divide between different genders within breeds and elements so it’s not just that.
We don’t have any evidence of any gender roles in their society (I’m pretty sure), and I know OP said that nothing outside of the encyclopedia is considered canon, but Fiona is confirmed trans and there’s nothing in the encyclopedia that disproves that. This means that they have a sense of gender, but it’s not inherently connected to sex and it’s not tied to any gender roles, considering that gender is very much a construct, this makes for a very interesting situation and I would love to have more to work with here.
Now, if it simply (I say simply but it’s certainly not simple) something to do with magic, then I imagine it is related to procreation in the sense that your intrinsic magical energy either has genetic information to give or needs to take genetic information… or something like that, instead of simply combining the energy. And then gender is something of an offshoot to that.
One tricky aspect is that they speak a language we don’t. And everything related to their identity and society is being communicated to outsiders in a language that is not made to describe it. In English we have three sets of third-person pronouns we (traditionally) ascribe to individuals related to gender (she/her/hers, he/him/his, and they/them/theirs) in recent years we’ve added more to our lexicon and are adapting to people using whatever they want. In dragonic, they could theoretically have pronouns by element, or even by element and sex, or by breed and element. They could have gendered first-person and second-person pronouns. They could have a hundred different “standard” pronouns. They could also have no gendered pronouns.
Also, who’s to say they use “male” and “female” in the same way they do. In their language maybe “male” is actually a term that refers directly to their sexual dimorphism and is potentially different for different species. So a direct translation of “male” for a wildclaw would actually be along the lines of “front-horn”.
But as already mentioned, “gender” is a weird term so it’s hard to even effectively contextualize it for Sornieth. Working with different species makes everything incredibly complicated because IRL we don’t even have anything that can compare to it. We have a distinct difference between gender, nationality, religion, and race. Whereas for dragons it’s more like gendernationalityreligionrace and also none of that at the same time.
Taking all of that into account, sexuality gets wildly complicated. And things like “back in my day we nested with dragons from our own flight” could be less of a sexuality thing and more of a nationality thing. So the entire thing is very hard to discern, especially as outsiders looking in.
All that said, in my lore, it’s all irrelevant. (English ) pronouns are decided by vibes only, relationships and the nature of them are decided by vibes only, gender is decided by vibes only, breeding is decided by who is available to give me more fodder.
Dragon gender is interesting because we don’t really have a good grasp of it. In human world, traditionally the concept of gender is very rigid. In western society it is, at least, and that was then… shall we say “exported” to the rest of the world. But it doesn’t have to be that way in FR, we know that dragons have gender(s) but we don’t get a really good insight into how that works in their society. I also think it’s fair to say that there is a divide between different genders within breeds and elements so it’s not just that.
We don’t have any evidence of any gender roles in their society (I’m pretty sure), and I know OP said that nothing outside of the encyclopedia is considered canon, but Fiona is confirmed trans and there’s nothing in the encyclopedia that disproves that. This means that they have a sense of gender, but it’s not inherently connected to sex and it’s not tied to any gender roles, considering that gender is very much a construct, this makes for a very interesting situation and I would love to have more to work with here.
Now, if it simply (I say simply but it’s certainly not simple) something to do with magic, then I imagine it is related to procreation in the sense that your intrinsic magical energy either has genetic information to give or needs to take genetic information… or something like that, instead of simply combining the energy. And then gender is something of an offshoot to that.
One tricky aspect is that they speak a language we don’t. And everything related to their identity and society is being communicated to outsiders in a language that is not made to describe it. In English we have three sets of third-person pronouns we (traditionally) ascribe to individuals related to gender (she/her/hers, he/him/his, and they/them/theirs) in recent years we’ve added more to our lexicon and are adapting to people using whatever they want. In dragonic, they could theoretically have pronouns by element, or even by element and sex, or by breed and element. They could have gendered first-person and second-person pronouns. They could have a hundred different “standard” pronouns. They could also have no gendered pronouns.
Also, who’s to say they use “male” and “female” in the same way they do. In their language maybe “male” is actually a term that refers directly to their sexual dimorphism and is potentially different for different species. So a direct translation of “male” for a wildclaw would actually be along the lines of “front-horn”.
But as already mentioned, “gender” is a weird term so it’s hard to even effectively contextualize it for Sornieth. Working with different species makes everything incredibly complicated because IRL we don’t even have anything that can compare to it. We have a distinct difference between gender, nationality, religion, and race. Whereas for dragons it’s more like gendernationalityreligionrace and also none of that at the same time.
Taking all of that into account, sexuality gets wildly complicated. And things like “back in my day we nested with dragons from our own flight” could be less of a sexuality thing and more of a nationality thing. So the entire thing is very hard to discern, especially as outsiders looking in.
All that said, in my lore, it’s all irrelevant. (English ) pronouns are decided by vibes only, relationships and the nature of them are decided by vibes only, gender is decided by vibes only, breeding is decided by who is available to give me more fodder.
|
Rein She/Her FR+1 |
secret message! secret message! in the signature! secret, secret, secret, secret message! |
|
 "One day you will be old enough to start reading fairytales again." |
@Aserein
I'm glad you found it interesting!
Yeah, I thought gender was separated enough from sex in the modern zeitgeist that I would tackle it alone in a separate thread. But why not consider some preliminary thoughts?
It does seem (with some support) that some modern conception of gender is conflated with what we might otherwise call "personality." It's an interesting problem to tease out when trying to study "gender" in real life (and, as far as I know, no one has done this task adequately to actually conclude anything). I'd say there's no indication this is not true in dragon society for dragons that view "gender" as a thing divorced from the Sorniethian sexual binary. Not the least of which reason is that we have no idea what being "trans" means to Fiona. Fiona doesn't seem to dress any differently from other dragons, and looks like an m pose Skydancer. The use of "she/her" is really the only thing we know about "trans" dragons so far - and that with having exactly zero understanding of what she/her means. It's really inadequate to draw any kind of conclusion about dragon "gender," at all. Especialy since dragon "gender" in terms of roles, dress, and behavior seems to have no bearing on anything except, apparently, to Fiona and Scribbles. All the other dragons, regardless of whether they appear to be male or female, wear necklaces or scarves or hats or nothing - almost in even numbers regardless of their genders. Which is... interesting, and I only have one explanation.
So far in canon, I think the species that are confirmed to view "gender" (whatever that is) as different from mechanical sex are Skydancers (Fiona, canon because the art is of an m Skydancer, but the pronouns are feminine - "lack of proof to the contrary" is insufficient for canonicity to my philosophy, but this doesn't apply to Fiona), Fae dragons (Scribbles is referred to as they in the Bogsneak story), and possibly Spirals (green dragon in A New Direction is also referred to as they).
At least right now when I haven't had a chance to sit down and write out how it fits in my concept (I don't know what I think unless I write it down, and... sometimes not even then), I think Fiona is possibly body dysphoric - not gender dysphoric, at least until I think about it more thoroughly. Because, as far as I can see, gender doesn't exist for dragons. No dragons seem to have any relationship with gender at all, including Fiona (who is not dressed disimilarly to either the male or female dragons at the Trading Post, for example). So I'm forced to conclude that Fiona is not trans-gender (using the social definition of gender divorced from biological sex). Fiona is trans-sex. Which, yeah, I know, that means something else in our world, but I can't think of anything else.
Ah, language, the constantly-moving target of communication. Though, point of order, English has the third-person pronoun it/it/its, as well. Hasn't frequently been used for individuals, but today people do.
Anyway, that's not to say some of that isn't influenced by assumptions based on that sex - which is part of what makes up gender. For example, it may be that male Skydancers are more emotionally sensitive than females because of their extra and longer antennae. I have no idea - I literally just came up with that right now. But maybe Fiona doesn't want to be considered emotionally-sensitive like males. For example. I can see an argument that this could be gender-based or sex-based. I'd lean toward sex, because it's literally the only thing we know exists; meanwhile, we've been given no evidence that gender does. It would almost require retconning at this point, it's been so non-existent.
Which leaves Scribbles. Scribbles could be explained by the fact that dragons are in mixed-species clans and relationships now. Even if, in the past, Fae dragons had no "genders" besides those assigned by magic origin (because they come with identical appearance and ability, there would be no "gender role" applied to these). It may be that Scribbles adopted a gender not otherwise native to the species... Perhaps because of Snappers, which are one of the physically sexually dimorphic species, in size. But even then, Scribbles doesn't seem to be bucking any "gender roles" held by other dragons - not the least of which reason is because the dragons we've seen display no gender roles of this type. Swipp wears a hat, one of his daughters wears a necklace, and the other wears nothing - like Scribbles. I'm imagining at this point that Scribbles is adopting another species' idea of sexual dimorphism. All that to say, we have no other "evidence" for gender except for Fiona and Scribbles.
I may actually be inclined to believe that "they" is actually the pronoun that dragons use to indicate social distance - like languages that have formal yous and such. This makes sense for the Spiral in A New Direction, and it could be that Scribbles prefers social distance (as far as I know, we don't know how Tomo refers to Scribbles). Which... I like that. That's fun.
Otherwise, the pronouns "he" and "she" in English makes sense to refer to the original biological compatibility between two dragons - especially if it is immediately perceptible, magically. Because, of course, in Sornieth it really is this simple when it comes to mechanical sex. And, evolutionarily speaking, there is nothing more important to a species constantly at war than to be constantly reproducing.
I think I may end up replacing gender with elemental affinity in my own lore. I use "he" and "she" as indicated above - it's nothing to do with gender, because gender roles don't seem to exist, perhaps even for the dragons for whom sexual dimorphism affects their physical bodies and, potentially, abilities in a way that differentiates them from their counterparts. It's just a "sense," if you will, of which dragons they could reproduce with. So, I think, for most of dragon society, it would make sense for terms for these two things to exist: male and female, he and she. That's easy to translate into English, and there's no reason why dragons would have trouble translating between species because a female Wildclaw can breed with a male Imperial, but not a female one. Even if a dragon is male, he wouldn't be expected to be stronger or larger or whatever - because for Ridgebacks the opposite is true. For Tundras, the two sexes are approximately the same size. For Coatls, the males are bigger. That is to say, gender, at the very least as a universal concept, cannot exist. And as a mixed society that theoretically can determine sex with a sense, it would be meaningless to try to use these terms to express anything other than sex... because sex still needs to be expressed somehow. Gender, on the other hand? It doesn't need expressed, because it doesn't seem to exist.
I could be wrong. But I really can't see it. Everything is too easily explained by something other than gender, because if the use of gendered pronouns is the only evidence we have of social gender...? That's really not enough when sex very obviously exists.
... That was not even half of what I wanted to say, but I think I'd better stop. No one asked for a book, but I guess I've written one.
I'm glad you found it interesting!
Yeah, I thought gender was separated enough from sex in the modern zeitgeist that I would tackle it alone in a separate thread. But why not consider some preliminary thoughts?
It does seem (with some support) that some modern conception of gender is conflated with what we might otherwise call "personality." It's an interesting problem to tease out when trying to study "gender" in real life (and, as far as I know, no one has done this task adequately to actually conclude anything). I'd say there's no indication this is not true in dragon society for dragons that view "gender" as a thing divorced from the Sorniethian sexual binary. Not the least of which reason is that we have no idea what being "trans" means to Fiona. Fiona doesn't seem to dress any differently from other dragons, and looks like an m pose Skydancer. The use of "she/her" is really the only thing we know about "trans" dragons so far - and that with having exactly zero understanding of what she/her means. It's really inadequate to draw any kind of conclusion about dragon "gender," at all. Especialy since dragon "gender" in terms of roles, dress, and behavior seems to have no bearing on anything except, apparently, to Fiona and Scribbles. All the other dragons, regardless of whether they appear to be male or female, wear necklaces or scarves or hats or nothing - almost in even numbers regardless of their genders. Which is... interesting, and I only have one explanation.
So far in canon, I think the species that are confirmed to view "gender" (whatever that is) as different from mechanical sex are Skydancers (Fiona, canon because the art is of an m Skydancer, but the pronouns are feminine - "lack of proof to the contrary" is insufficient for canonicity to my philosophy, but this doesn't apply to Fiona), Fae dragons (Scribbles is referred to as they in the Bogsneak story), and possibly Spirals (green dragon in A New Direction is also referred to as they).
At least right now when I haven't had a chance to sit down and write out how it fits in my concept (I don't know what I think unless I write it down, and... sometimes not even then), I think Fiona is possibly body dysphoric - not gender dysphoric, at least until I think about it more thoroughly. Because, as far as I can see, gender doesn't exist for dragons. No dragons seem to have any relationship with gender at all, including Fiona (who is not dressed disimilarly to either the male or female dragons at the Trading Post, for example). So I'm forced to conclude that Fiona is not trans-gender (using the social definition of gender divorced from biological sex). Fiona is trans-sex. Which, yeah, I know, that means something else in our world, but I can't think of anything else.
Ah, language, the constantly-moving target of communication. Though, point of order, English has the third-person pronoun it/it/its, as well. Hasn't frequently been used for individuals, but today people do.
Anyway, that's not to say some of that isn't influenced by assumptions based on that sex - which is part of what makes up gender. For example, it may be that male Skydancers are more emotionally sensitive than females because of their extra and longer antennae. I have no idea - I literally just came up with that right now. But maybe Fiona doesn't want to be considered emotionally-sensitive like males. For example. I can see an argument that this could be gender-based or sex-based. I'd lean toward sex, because it's literally the only thing we know exists; meanwhile, we've been given no evidence that gender does. It would almost require retconning at this point, it's been so non-existent.
Which leaves Scribbles. Scribbles could be explained by the fact that dragons are in mixed-species clans and relationships now. Even if, in the past, Fae dragons had no "genders" besides those assigned by magic origin (because they come with identical appearance and ability, there would be no "gender role" applied to these). It may be that Scribbles adopted a gender not otherwise native to the species... Perhaps because of Snappers, which are one of the physically sexually dimorphic species, in size. But even then, Scribbles doesn't seem to be bucking any "gender roles" held by other dragons - not the least of which reason is because the dragons we've seen display no gender roles of this type. Swipp wears a hat, one of his daughters wears a necklace, and the other wears nothing - like Scribbles. I'm imagining at this point that Scribbles is adopting another species' idea of sexual dimorphism. All that to say, we have no other "evidence" for gender except for Fiona and Scribbles.
I may actually be inclined to believe that "they" is actually the pronoun that dragons use to indicate social distance - like languages that have formal yous and such. This makes sense for the Spiral in A New Direction, and it could be that Scribbles prefers social distance (as far as I know, we don't know how Tomo refers to Scribbles). Which... I like that. That's fun.
Otherwise, the pronouns "he" and "she" in English makes sense to refer to the original biological compatibility between two dragons - especially if it is immediately perceptible, magically. Because, of course, in Sornieth it really is this simple when it comes to mechanical sex. And, evolutionarily speaking, there is nothing more important to a species constantly at war than to be constantly reproducing.
I think I may end up replacing gender with elemental affinity in my own lore. I use "he" and "she" as indicated above - it's nothing to do with gender, because gender roles don't seem to exist, perhaps even for the dragons for whom sexual dimorphism affects their physical bodies and, potentially, abilities in a way that differentiates them from their counterparts. It's just a "sense," if you will, of which dragons they could reproduce with. So, I think, for most of dragon society, it would make sense for terms for these two things to exist: male and female, he and she. That's easy to translate into English, and there's no reason why dragons would have trouble translating between species because a female Wildclaw can breed with a male Imperial, but not a female one. Even if a dragon is male, he wouldn't be expected to be stronger or larger or whatever - because for Ridgebacks the opposite is true. For Tundras, the two sexes are approximately the same size. For Coatls, the males are bigger. That is to say, gender, at the very least as a universal concept, cannot exist. And as a mixed society that theoretically can determine sex with a sense, it would be meaningless to try to use these terms to express anything other than sex... because sex still needs to be expressed somehow. Gender, on the other hand? It doesn't need expressed, because it doesn't seem to exist.
I could be wrong. But I really can't see it. Everything is too easily explained by something other than gender, because if the use of gendered pronouns is the only evidence we have of social gender...? That's really not enough when sex very obviously exists.
... That was not even half of what I wanted to say, but I think I'd better stop. No one asked for a book, but I guess I've written one.
@Aserein
I'm glad you found it interesting!
Yeah, I thought gender was separated enough from sex in the modern zeitgeist that I would tackle it alone in a separate thread. But why not consider some preliminary thoughts?
It does seem (with some support) that some modern conception of gender is conflated with what we might otherwise call "personality." It's an interesting problem to tease out when trying to study "gender" in real life (and, as far as I know, no one has done this task adequately to actually conclude anything). I'd say there's no indication this is not true in dragon society for dragons that view "gender" as a thing divorced from the Sorniethian sexual binary. Not the least of which reason is that we have no idea what being "trans" means to Fiona. Fiona doesn't seem to dress any differently from other dragons, and looks like an m pose Skydancer. The use of "she/her" is really the only thing we know about "trans" dragons so far - and that with having exactly zero understanding of what she/her means. It's really inadequate to draw any kind of conclusion about dragon "gender," at all. Especialy since dragon "gender" in terms of roles, dress, and behavior seems to have no bearing on anything except, apparently, to Fiona and Scribbles. All the other dragons, regardless of whether they appear to be male or female, wear necklaces or scarves or hats or nothing - almost in even numbers regardless of their genders. Which is... interesting, and I only have one explanation.
So far in canon, I think the species that are confirmed to view "gender" (whatever that is) as different from mechanical sex are Skydancers (Fiona, canon because the art is of an m Skydancer, but the pronouns are feminine - "lack of proof to the contrary" is insufficient for canonicity to my philosophy, but this doesn't apply to Fiona), Fae dragons (Scribbles is referred to as they in the Bogsneak story), and possibly Spirals (green dragon in A New Direction is also referred to as they).
At least right now when I haven't had a chance to sit down and write out how it fits in my concept (I don't know what I think unless I write it down, and... sometimes not even then), I think Fiona is possibly body dysphoric - not gender dysphoric, at least until I think about it more thoroughly. Because, as far as I can see, gender doesn't exist for dragons. No dragons seem to have any relationship with gender at all, including Fiona (who is not dressed disimilarly to either the male or female dragons at the Trading Post, for example). So I'm forced to conclude that Fiona is not trans-gender (using the social definition of gender divorced from biological sex). Fiona is trans-sex. Which, yeah, I know, that means something else in our world, but I can't think of anything else.
Ah, language, the constantly-moving target of communication. Though, point of order, English has the third-person pronoun it/it/its, as well. Hasn't frequently been used for individuals, but today people do.
Anyway, that's not to say some of that isn't influenced by assumptions based on that sex - which is part of what makes up gender. For example, it may be that male Skydancers are more emotionally sensitive than females because of their extra and longer antennae. I have no idea - I literally just came up with that right now. But maybe Fiona doesn't want to be considered emotionally-sensitive like males. For example. I can see an argument that this could be gender-based or sex-based. I'd lean toward sex, because it's literally the only thing we know exists; meanwhile, we've been given no evidence that gender does. It would almost require retconning at this point, it's been so non-existent.
Which leaves Scribbles. Scribbles could be explained by the fact that dragons are in mixed-species clans and relationships now. Even if, in the past, Fae dragons had no "genders" besides those assigned by magic origin (because they come with identical appearance and ability, there would be no "gender role" applied to these). It may be that Scribbles adopted a gender not otherwise native to the species... Perhaps because of Snappers, which are one of the physically sexually dimorphic species, in size. But even then, Scribbles doesn't seem to be bucking any "gender roles" held by other dragons - not the least of which reason is because the dragons we've seen display no gender roles of this type. Swipp wears a hat, one of his daughters wears a necklace, and the other wears nothing - like Scribbles. I'm imagining at this point that Scribbles is adopting another species' idea of sexual dimorphism. All that to say, we have no other "evidence" for gender except for Fiona and Scribbles.
I may actually be inclined to believe that "they" is actually the pronoun that dragons use to indicate social distance - like languages that have formal yous and such. This makes sense for the Spiral in A New Direction, and it could be that Scribbles prefers social distance (as far as I know, we don't know how Tomo refers to Scribbles). Which... I like that. That's fun.
Otherwise, the pronouns "he" and "she" in English makes sense to refer to the original biological compatibility between two dragons - especially if it is immediately perceptible, magically. Because, of course, in Sornieth it really is this simple when it comes to mechanical sex. And, evolutionarily speaking, there is nothing more important to a species constantly at war than to be constantly reproducing.
I think I may end up replacing gender with elemental affinity in my own lore. I use "he" and "she" as indicated above - it's nothing to do with gender, because gender roles don't seem to exist, perhaps even for the dragons for whom sexual dimorphism affects their physical bodies and, potentially, abilities in a way that differentiates them from their counterparts. It's just a "sense," if you will, of which dragons they could reproduce with. So, I think, for most of dragon society, it would make sense for terms for these two things to exist: male and female, he and she. That's easy to translate into English, and there's no reason why dragons would have trouble translating between species because a female Wildclaw can breed with a male Imperial, but not a female one. Even if a dragon is male, he wouldn't be expected to be stronger or larger or whatever - because for Ridgebacks the opposite is true. For Tundras, the two sexes are approximately the same size. For Coatls, the males are bigger. That is to say, gender, at the very least as a universal concept, cannot exist. And as a mixed society that theoretically can determine sex with a sense, it would be meaningless to try to use these terms to express anything other than sex... because sex still needs to be expressed somehow. Gender, on the other hand? It doesn't need expressed, because it doesn't seem to exist.
I could be wrong. But I really can't see it. Everything is too easily explained by something other than gender, because if the use of gendered pronouns is the only evidence we have of social gender...? That's really not enough when sex very obviously exists.
... That was not even half of what I wanted to say, but I think I'd better stop. No one asked for a book, but I guess I've written one.
I'm glad you found it interesting!
Yeah, I thought gender was separated enough from sex in the modern zeitgeist that I would tackle it alone in a separate thread. But why not consider some preliminary thoughts?
It does seem (with some support) that some modern conception of gender is conflated with what we might otherwise call "personality." It's an interesting problem to tease out when trying to study "gender" in real life (and, as far as I know, no one has done this task adequately to actually conclude anything). I'd say there's no indication this is not true in dragon society for dragons that view "gender" as a thing divorced from the Sorniethian sexual binary. Not the least of which reason is that we have no idea what being "trans" means to Fiona. Fiona doesn't seem to dress any differently from other dragons, and looks like an m pose Skydancer. The use of "she/her" is really the only thing we know about "trans" dragons so far - and that with having exactly zero understanding of what she/her means. It's really inadequate to draw any kind of conclusion about dragon "gender," at all. Especialy since dragon "gender" in terms of roles, dress, and behavior seems to have no bearing on anything except, apparently, to Fiona and Scribbles. All the other dragons, regardless of whether they appear to be male or female, wear necklaces or scarves or hats or nothing - almost in even numbers regardless of their genders. Which is... interesting, and I only have one explanation.
So far in canon, I think the species that are confirmed to view "gender" (whatever that is) as different from mechanical sex are Skydancers (Fiona, canon because the art is of an m Skydancer, but the pronouns are feminine - "lack of proof to the contrary" is insufficient for canonicity to my philosophy, but this doesn't apply to Fiona), Fae dragons (Scribbles is referred to as they in the Bogsneak story), and possibly Spirals (green dragon in A New Direction is also referred to as they).
At least right now when I haven't had a chance to sit down and write out how it fits in my concept (I don't know what I think unless I write it down, and... sometimes not even then), I think Fiona is possibly body dysphoric - not gender dysphoric, at least until I think about it more thoroughly. Because, as far as I can see, gender doesn't exist for dragons. No dragons seem to have any relationship with gender at all, including Fiona (who is not dressed disimilarly to either the male or female dragons at the Trading Post, for example). So I'm forced to conclude that Fiona is not trans-gender (using the social definition of gender divorced from biological sex). Fiona is trans-sex. Which, yeah, I know, that means something else in our world, but I can't think of anything else.
Ah, language, the constantly-moving target of communication. Though, point of order, English has the third-person pronoun it/it/its, as well. Hasn't frequently been used for individuals, but today people do.
Anyway, that's not to say some of that isn't influenced by assumptions based on that sex - which is part of what makes up gender. For example, it may be that male Skydancers are more emotionally sensitive than females because of their extra and longer antennae. I have no idea - I literally just came up with that right now. But maybe Fiona doesn't want to be considered emotionally-sensitive like males. For example. I can see an argument that this could be gender-based or sex-based. I'd lean toward sex, because it's literally the only thing we know exists; meanwhile, we've been given no evidence that gender does. It would almost require retconning at this point, it's been so non-existent.
Which leaves Scribbles. Scribbles could be explained by the fact that dragons are in mixed-species clans and relationships now. Even if, in the past, Fae dragons had no "genders" besides those assigned by magic origin (because they come with identical appearance and ability, there would be no "gender role" applied to these). It may be that Scribbles adopted a gender not otherwise native to the species... Perhaps because of Snappers, which are one of the physically sexually dimorphic species, in size. But even then, Scribbles doesn't seem to be bucking any "gender roles" held by other dragons - not the least of which reason is because the dragons we've seen display no gender roles of this type. Swipp wears a hat, one of his daughters wears a necklace, and the other wears nothing - like Scribbles. I'm imagining at this point that Scribbles is adopting another species' idea of sexual dimorphism. All that to say, we have no other "evidence" for gender except for Fiona and Scribbles.
I may actually be inclined to believe that "they" is actually the pronoun that dragons use to indicate social distance - like languages that have formal yous and such. This makes sense for the Spiral in A New Direction, and it could be that Scribbles prefers social distance (as far as I know, we don't know how Tomo refers to Scribbles). Which... I like that. That's fun.
Otherwise, the pronouns "he" and "she" in English makes sense to refer to the original biological compatibility between two dragons - especially if it is immediately perceptible, magically. Because, of course, in Sornieth it really is this simple when it comes to mechanical sex. And, evolutionarily speaking, there is nothing more important to a species constantly at war than to be constantly reproducing.
I think I may end up replacing gender with elemental affinity in my own lore. I use "he" and "she" as indicated above - it's nothing to do with gender, because gender roles don't seem to exist, perhaps even for the dragons for whom sexual dimorphism affects their physical bodies and, potentially, abilities in a way that differentiates them from their counterparts. It's just a "sense," if you will, of which dragons they could reproduce with. So, I think, for most of dragon society, it would make sense for terms for these two things to exist: male and female, he and she. That's easy to translate into English, and there's no reason why dragons would have trouble translating between species because a female Wildclaw can breed with a male Imperial, but not a female one. Even if a dragon is male, he wouldn't be expected to be stronger or larger or whatever - because for Ridgebacks the opposite is true. For Tundras, the two sexes are approximately the same size. For Coatls, the males are bigger. That is to say, gender, at the very least as a universal concept, cannot exist. And as a mixed society that theoretically can determine sex with a sense, it would be meaningless to try to use these terms to express anything other than sex... because sex still needs to be expressed somehow. Gender, on the other hand? It doesn't need expressed, because it doesn't seem to exist.
I could be wrong. But I really can't see it. Everything is too easily explained by something other than gender, because if the use of gendered pronouns is the only evidence we have of social gender...? That's really not enough when sex very obviously exists.
... That was not even half of what I wanted to say, but I think I'd better stop. No one asked for a book, but I guess I've written one.
|
|
Almedha | share project Fandragons Lore Starts Here (WIP) I collect Pulsing Relics! |
| ____ |
|
It occurs to me we may see a gender role in dragon society in the trading post! Hoarding may be a gendered behavior: we see both Tomo and Crim hoarding things (physical or abstract - yes, I'm stretching. Nice to meet you). That is, they collect and keep things. Meanwhile, all of our male dragons with hoards are giving away objects, not collecting them (Joxar, Galore, and Pinkerton).
That to say, there's so very little information, you know... I'm still not sure gender exists in a universal way. Fiona may fall into the "he" category for Skydancers due to social roles, but "she," for, say, Coatls just because of the way dragons vastly differ from one another.
I, for one, would very much like to know more about Fiona. At this point there's doesn't seem to be much else for me to say on the topic of dragon gender except that it probably doesn't exist. At least, not as we account it, you know.
That to say, there's so very little information, you know... I'm still not sure gender exists in a universal way. Fiona may fall into the "he" category for Skydancers due to social roles, but "she," for, say, Coatls just because of the way dragons vastly differ from one another.
I, for one, would very much like to know more about Fiona. At this point there's doesn't seem to be much else for me to say on the topic of dragon gender except that it probably doesn't exist. At least, not as we account it, you know.
It occurs to me we may see a gender role in dragon society in the trading post! Hoarding may be a gendered behavior: we see both Tomo and Crim hoarding things (physical or abstract - yes, I'm stretching. Nice to meet you). That is, they collect and keep things. Meanwhile, all of our male dragons with hoards are giving away objects, not collecting them (Joxar, Galore, and Pinkerton).
That to say, there's so very little information, you know... I'm still not sure gender exists in a universal way. Fiona may fall into the "he" category for Skydancers due to social roles, but "she," for, say, Coatls just because of the way dragons vastly differ from one another.
I, for one, would very much like to know more about Fiona. At this point there's doesn't seem to be much else for me to say on the topic of dragon gender except that it probably doesn't exist. At least, not as we account it, you know.
That to say, there's so very little information, you know... I'm still not sure gender exists in a universal way. Fiona may fall into the "he" category for Skydancers due to social roles, but "she," for, say, Coatls just because of the way dragons vastly differ from one another.
I, for one, would very much like to know more about Fiona. At this point there's doesn't seem to be much else for me to say on the topic of dragon gender except that it probably doesn't exist. At least, not as we account it, you know.
|
|
Almedha | share project Fandragons Lore Starts Here (WIP) I collect Pulsing Relics! |
| ____ |
|