(Image by Bummerdude)

Here’s a question: do you specify a specific gender to certain Pokémon? Say, you see a Machamp, and do you assume that it would be a male Pokémon because it looks really masculine? Not that it’s a bad guess, since Machamp is usually male. How about Meganium? It has flower petals and a more cute look, so would you assume it is female? While Meganium is a starter Pokémon (a dominantly male type), it could be a female.

For today’s article, we will explore the topic of the tendency to put certain Pokémon into certain genders because from our point of view, each Pokémon behaves like an individual character, and gender could come into play for characters. Once ready, let’s delve into this subject.

Stereotyping

One reason we would specify certain gender to certain Pokémon would be stereotypes. We classify certain characteristics as male, while certain other characteristics would be female. For example, aggressiveness and muscles would be marked as a male Pokémon, while beauty and cuteness (for a fully-evolved Pokémon) would be female characteristics.

Some of the Pokémon that we would assume exhibit characteristics normally found on certain gender are reflected in the gender ratio of the Pokémon, so the assumption is valid. For example, Tauros is a bull, and it will always be a male no matter what, and the same goes to Miltank, a cow that is always female.

There are others with a gender ratio that gives the possibility of the opposite gender, such as Alakazam and Gothitelle, with a 3:1 and 1:3 male-to-female ratio respectively. If you are out of the loop, Alakazam’s moustache is a male characteristic while Gothitelle’s dress and bows are visually female.

The gender ratio doesn’t always reflect on general assumptions, though. This is most evident on starter Pokémon and some rare Pokémon, examples being Chikorita and Amaura, who is usually male, though they could be a female as well.

Names could come into play for stereotypes as well. As demonstrated in the above picture, Mr. Mime’s name gives you the assumption that it is supposed to be a male due to the salutation, while Misdreavus is usually considered female due to the “Mis-” in its name. It should be noted that their English names are given this distinction, considering that their Japanese names are more gender-neutral.

Perhaps when the designers design certain Pokémon, they have a certain gender in mind, which won’t translate completely well to the games since having both genders for each Pokémon is important for breeding. This would explain how certain Pokémon could pass as a one gender species even if they could be either male or female, and how certain Pokémon even have gender differences in case they need it for the sexual dimorphism.

It’s interesting to note that some later Pokémon are given clear gender differences to really differentiate themselves. The earliest example is the Nidoran family, who are the only Pokémon to have the distinction of a different names between the gender. If the Nidorans were to be introduced today, Nidoking and Nidoqueen would be one species instead of two. Generation 5 is the first Generation where some Pokémon have clear distinctions (Unfezant, Frillish and Jellicent), though Generation 4 has its minor share, such as Pikachu.

There are definitely obvious genders to certain Pokémon. With that being said, there are other Pokémon whose gender isn’t immediately obvious, so it is liable to be given differing opinions. This is where the personal opinion on the gender of Pokémon comes in.

Personal Opinion

Some Pokémon are gender neutral in ways that different people have reasons to believe that certain Pokémon are a certain gender. If you see a Roserade, for example, different people might think it is a male or a female, with valid reasons from either side. If they can’t decide, call it an “it”, the same way we refer to animals as “it”.

It is possible that certain characteristics of that Pokémon cause us to think of it as a certain gender, though it is different from culture to culture, which is how no two people are alike in perceiving a certain gender on certain Pokémon. I couldn’t think of any examples that illustrate this point, but there should be cases where this happen.

Perhaps it could also be the way certain Pokémon are caught. Say, you might have a male Goomy, so your time with it would cause you to think that Goodra should be a male because you are used to the notion that it is male. This works on Pokémon that are usually considered male or female, so if you spent considerable time with a female Aggron, Aggron would be female to you.

Not every Pokémon is assigned a gender, including legendaries, but that doesn’t stop players or fans from assigning a “gender” to them, like how romance languages assign gender to inanimate things. That Golurk would usually be male because of its tough hide, or that Meloetta is female because it looks like a female singer/dancer.

In conclusion, the personal opinion on a Pokémon’s gender is a combination of feeling, reason and certain signs that you associate with a certain gender. There is one thing for certain: there is at least someone that think every Pokémon is either gender, even though they are normally only assigned one gender.

It’s fun to share different interpretations for each Pokémon’s gender, considering the opposite of certain expectations have fascinating reasons to learn from. What gender do you specify to certain Pokémon? Feel free to comment. I hope you enjoyed reading this article as much as I have writing it.

Thanks for reading.