Talk:Lana's Primarina

Gender

What gender is it Male or female since Popplio evolves into Brionne than Primarina in which femmine looking pokemon in the anime are usually female. - unsigned comment from Feelitstill23 (talk • contribs)

It is our strict policy not to assume a Pokemon's gender. It must be explicitly stated. Tiddlywinks (talk) 01:34, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Popplio is also a starter. All starters have a 7:1 male-biased gender ratio. However, there is evidence from SM061 that Lana's Popplio is indeed female. That discussion is being had at the discussion page for that episode, and I don't think we should make any changes until a consensus is formed. Macsen (talk) 23:40, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

As an aside, I don't think the gender ratio that exists in the games exists in the anime. The gender of most Pokémon is decided by the writers of the show. But I agree that we need more evidence before we can confirm its gender. PDL (talk) 14:49, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

It's a girl for pete's sake, it was confirmed in SM061 because the female Pokemon were given ribbons, while the males were given pendants. So that pretty much says its gender. it's the same as the dance in XYZ where the females were partnered to males, the females wore crowns, and the males wore bowties. So why oh why does its gender need to be stated? I already said that I saw when it was confirmed. Come on people, get on the ball already! User:PokemonFan229 talk)

The difference is that in the XY episode, it was stated that males must dance with females, with the gender specific accessories being evidence. In SM's case, it wasn't stated whether the accessories were gender specific and could've either been random or based on trainer preference.--ForceFire 05:52, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

FWIW, I am personally not sure that XY105 actually confirmed any genders. Tiddlywinks (talk) 11:23, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Quoted here for context...

" In the Japanese dub, Monsieur Pierre mentions that Performers and their Pokémon must come to the dance party in male and female pairs (in the beginning of the episode when Serena watches his video). He uses the word 男女 danjo, which means "men and women". I don't understand Japanese too well though, so maybe someone who does speak the language can confirm this for sure. As for the outfits, Pokémon with bowties were paired with Pokémon wearing tiaras, which meant one group has to be male while the other is female. Since already confirmed male Pokémon (like Pikachu) wore bowties and confirmed female Pokémon (like Gourgeist and Eevee) wore tiaras, it was assumed that all bowtie Pokémon were male while all tiara Pokémon were female." Unless you are counter-implying that some people randomly switched outfits according to the Dawn's Piplup cross-dressing and Misha's Purrloin acting female. And all other gender(read:Sex)-paired outfits that come in twos should if one Pokémon's outfit matches their previously known gender(read:sex), as well.. But the argument is over already, isn't it? Piplup crossdressed in a way only Dawn did to her Pokémon and Misha's Purrloin pretended to be a girl to seduce Meowth and Oshawott. --BlisseyandtheAquaJets (talk) 02:10, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Good lord, really?

I did not know what lines supported genders in that episode. Every point you try to make after that quote is invalidated simply because you ran with your worst fears and never gave me any chance to respond. (Rants almost always mean you've made a bad choice. Please rein yourself in.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 11:03, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Short version then. The general base line for gender is weak due to people getting hung up on the dubbing of the word "sex" as "gender". So biological sex should be what is used in determining such things. Dawn's Piplup crossdressing and Misha's Purrloin do not entirely invalidate sexed articles of clothing because not every Trainer is Dawn or Jessie, and lying about sex doesn't make Non-Binary Pokémon exist for believing that Purrloin(For the record, I'd be all for it if and when it exists). This also applies to Ash's Charizard, Ash's Totodile, Ash's Corphish, Brock's Crobat, Brock's Ludicolo and many others. --BlisseyandtheAquaJets (talk) 21:38, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

I, for one, did not ask for a short version of anything, but...

It doesn't seem like you really came to a relevant point above, so let me make a guess: are you trying to say that, in your opinion, Lana's Popplio's gender is confirmed by what it was wearing in SM061? Tiddlywinks (talk) 21:55, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes I do because...

1.there is a relevant precedent for sexed accessories(XY105)that should be applied retroactively and thoroughly wiki-wide.

2.Biological Sex in Japanese version overrules gender spectrum discussion in relation to sexing Pokémon since we focus on the Japanese version.

3:Not every trainer is Dawn or Jessie regarding accessories and costumes and not all Pokémon lie about their sex like Misha's Purrloin did in one episode.

4.The usual reasons for why this is denied on sight are questionable if not outright bunk because of the preceding 3 points.

Hope that makes my reasoning clearer. --BlisseyandtheAquaJets (talk) 23:25, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Regarding "2", I'm hearing, "Because the Japanese describes biological sex, there can be no gender expressions contradicting it (or its traditional gender role)." I'll just let you confirm or dispute this part for now. Tiddlywinks (talk) 00:19, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

This show is not Sailor Moon or Princess Jellyfish. It doesn't explore those themes actively or passively. And you're still hung up on the word gender. I'm cool with non-traditional gender roles(heck, I encourage them to kids) and would gladly embrace them in this show or any other(Heck, I wish more anime(including this one) was more like undubbed Sailor Moon or Princess Jellyfish with gender) There's just no unquestionable evidence of non-binary Pokémon in the anime(Humans in the games do not disprove this The games are more mature than the anime by far).

Just because something exists IRL doesn't mean it mean it exists in the anime's falsely idealized world... And if you are so convinced that gender and sex are separated in the anime, follow through with it, be bold and progressive and change articles to what their gender is and write a new "Sex" cell section to place said biological section into, whichI support fully, because more wikis need to challenge that old rotten standard. If you're going to argue this, stand by it(Unless staff have a policy against seperating sex and gender in templates) and make a difference.

So, in summary, TLDR and all that jazz, I believe that they CAN and SHOULD exist and be explored, just that they aren't CURRENTLY doing so in an active or passive way, nor have the writers of any Pokémon product done so, FOR POKéMON THEMSELVES, as they are NOT humans Any human traits(In the anime especially) are projections of our humanity onto pets like IRL ...and likely wont exist or be explored with animals IN GENERAL.

Is that a clear enough statement? --BlisseyandtheAquaJets (talk) 02:43, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

(resetting indent)1) Like I said previously, XY105 actually said that males have to dance with females. Just because it happened once, doesn't mean it's true every other time. Just because a female Pikachu, female Venusaur, and a female Butterfree has appeared in the anime, doesn't mean that every other gender difference exists. The anime has to acknowledge the gender differences. Same here, SM061 did not acknowledge whether the accessories were gender specific or not, and assuming that it is is speculation. 2) What are you even talking about here? How Japan uses the word sex is irrelevant to the discussion. 3) Pokémon is a harder thing to decipher when regarding genders because not all of them have gender differences, accessories and clothing being put on them could just be their trainers preferences and not a sign of their gender. Behavioral patterns is not the best way to determine gender, because a guy can act like a girl and vice versa.--ForceFire 03:08, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

I explicitly wasn't accusing you of anything, BlisseyandtheAquaJets. I very specifically left it there so that I didn't have to make an assumption in order to continue.

But long story short, it sounds like my summary was kind of right. "Gender always conforms to traditional roles in the anime (matching their sex)" is your belief. I could argue that, but it's already been decided. As a matter of policy, we simply will not make that assumption.

You said "if you are so convinced that gender and sex are separated in the anime", but it's not about being convinced or anything—those concepts (as they are known outside of the Pokemon world; and that's specifically concepts as opposed to words) are always separate, even in the anime. That doesn't mean we must therefore have fields for both "sex" and "gender". That's because the Pokemon "mythos" effectively conflates those words. We all know this—and we can't ignore it. Trying would only bring incredible confusion and wouldn't necessarily help anything. Tiddlywinks (talk) 03:50, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

This is insane...

To Tiddlywinks: No that isn't my belief. You missed my point entirely. I know now that you just lazily skimmed for cherry-pickable, dismissive, out of context evidence w/o reading and gelling together the enirety of what I said as a whole. I'm not transphobic for Pete's sake. I just don't see hard proof of gender working the realistic human way with Pokémon in the POKéMON Anime's Universe ONLY. Prove that sex and gender are different, not in ALL anime, but in this one. No two franchises or their parts follow the same rules bor themes as real-life ones. The Princess Jellyfish anime heavily focuses on, for example, heavy positive trans themes and outright states that trans people exist in its fictional but realistic world, whereas Princess Mononoke has no statement one way or another and no trans themes in a fantastical, unrealistic setting.

To Force Fire: They aren't going to spoon-feed us the answers, you know. Unless you go to TV Tokyo w/a list of things you absolutely need confirmed via such. And counter-speculation does not dismiss other speculation entirely. And Bulbapedia is one to talk about speculation with all of its shipping pages entirely built on such...hypocrisy much? Does the anime show evidence of Pokémon themselves living counter to biological sex as an identity and not by deception or by trainer choice?--BlisseyandtheAquaJets (talk) 05:51, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

I don't think I'm that wrong. I think at worst I've just framed it in a way you don't like. (I don't mean to say I'm not "wrong", but rather more that you're not making the effort to credit what accuracy it has and/or simply correct it.) I've honestly tried to understand you. You're the one who keeps fearing the worst...

You ask me to "prove" that sex and gender are different in the anime. ...I don't have to unless you also have to prove that they're the same. They're both assumptions. We can argue over which is more reasonable (I definitely could), but it's a bedrock assumption you have to make one way or the other. The only difference is in the particular values we're each bringing to the situation. (And just in case: no, I'm not talking about transphobia, or whatever bad connotation you might imagine.) If I can't "prove" it to your satisfaction that doesn't mean you "win", it only means you always had different values and were very unlikely to break from them. (I /am/ willing to discuss it. But I'd rather have this understanding out there first if so.)

This is kind of repeating the above, but assumning that any given writer DOES NOT "account for the gender spectrum of real life in their respective worlds" is an equally valid issue. In the absence of a clear statement by the authority in question, a conclusion either way is ASSUMPTION (or SPECULATION, if you will). Period. (Again, which way you think that should fall has to do with the values you bring to it.)

I will happily admit it. We are speculating that a gender spectrum exists. But you have to speculate one way or the other since there has been no explicit statement. And it is our policy from on high that we will not presume that Pokemon cannot express gender different from their traditional role. Our "version" is not more "speculative" than yours; yours does not have an inherently better claim as less (to say nothing of 'not at all') "speculative".

I kind of don't want to start another point, but you've been mentioning things like "Dawn's Piplup crossdressing and Misha's Purrloin do not entirely invalidate sexed articles of clothing because not every Trainer is Dawn or Jessie" and "Not every trainer is Dawn or Jessie regarding accessories and costumes" and "ONLY 2 Trainers have done this outside of deceptions". On the one hand, you're admitting there are cases where Pokemon have had outfits that do not conform with their traditional gender role. Yet on the other, you insist that it's okay to make the default assumption for any other time that clothing matches traditional gender roles. In other words: true, "not every Trainer is Dawn or Jessie", but at the same time you cannot say that NO other Trainer is like Dawn or Jessie (or that any given character is definitely not like Dawn or Jessie). It's nonsensical. If it's happened before it can happen again, and there's no guarantee we'd know it. Tiddlywinks (talk) 06:33, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

At a fundamental level, no part of asking that something like a Pokemon's gender be based on demonstrable facts should be very outrageous. If a Pokemon's gender is clearly stated, there's plainly no assumptions required. If, however, a Pokemon just wears a skirt, or...IDK, stares at a wedding dress, then calling it a female definitely requires an assumption. (It annoys me that this simpler formulation only occurred to me now...)

A majority consensus is by no means an absolute "good". Unidentified moves are a very clear example of where a "consensus" (or unchallenged assumption) can easily turn out very wrong (and has). The gender policy isn't altogether the same beast, but zero assumptions is plainly the safest option. Tiddlywinks (talk) 08:00, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

I am 99% CERTAIN that Lana's Popplio is FEMALE. For one, in SM061, SM069, SM078, SM083, SM085, and all the other episodes with the Ultra Guardian missions, all of the female Pokémon have ribbons as part of their Ultra Guardian outfits, while all the males have pendants. Since they wear these in every single episode, I don't think this is an error. And why would the animators design two different tracker designs? Also, since Bounsweet's entire evolution chain is 100% Female, and since it wears a ribbon too, it proves that Lana's Popplio is also female, if the ribbons actually DO depict the gender, than Mallow's Steenee/Tsareena, Lana's Popplio, AND Sophocles' Togedemaru are all female. The real reason I believe Lana's Popplio to be female, is when in the Japanese subbed version of SM099, Lana is looking for Popplio, when she says exactly this: "Where are you Ashimari? She's gone..." This pretty much is case closed, because who else knows a Pokémon's gender better than their Trainer? But just for safety, in case the subs got it wrong or something, we should wait until the episode is released in English. But yeah, I'm almost certain that Lana's Popplio is female. Josiahsays (talk) 04:00 P.M. 1/16/2019 (EST)

As said above, this doesn't count as proof towards Popplio's or anyone else's gender--BigDocFan (talk) 21:06, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Lana's Popplio used Sing

In Episode 56 of Pokemon Sun and Moon, it's very clear even tho now on discovered it that Popplio was the one using Sing that put Jigglypuff to sleep. Even tho Komala was the one who doodled on it's face, Komala isnt a pokemon that can learn sing. The show clearly show that once they started practicing singing before Jigglypuff returns, Popplio was the one who wasn't drowsy while it was singing. So Lana's Popplio could already know the move Sing. -- Wolfgerlion64 (talk) 20:36, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

No matter how clear you think it may be, Bulbapedia policy is not to state moves unless they are explicitly named in dialogue or official closed captions. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 20:50, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

While I'm not for or against the issue Komala can learn Sing through breeding.--Rahl (talk) 15:39, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Popplio's Gender

Thought I would make a note that Lana used a female pronoun as she was searching for Popplio in the japanese version of SM099. Hopefully this can be confirmed by other users and maybe stated in the english dub.PardescanSlowbro (talk) 22:57, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

To add onto this, during SM106 right before Popplio evolves into Brionne, Lillie comments about how "she's singing," in reference to Popplio's actions at that moment in time. --Lamarfll (talk) 19:31, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

That was the subtitles only. There was no gender pronoun used in the actual dialogue. --FinnishPokéFan92 (talk) 20:02, 3 March 2019 (UTC)