Tumblelog by Soup.io
Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

prokopetz:

I realise it’s a very minor peeve to set alongside much more serious concerns, but you know what gets me about the whole “the males are big gnarly monsterboys and the females are human ladies wearing body paint” trope in fantasy critter design?

Dentition.

That is, the size, shape and arrangement of the teeth.

Evolutionary speaking, dietary needs and opportunities dictate dentition; you develop different sorts of teeth for different types of diets. Even if we’re talking about a magically created species and evolution isn’t a factor, let’s assume for the sake of argument that whoever created them knew what they were doing and gave them the correct sort of teeth for their dietary needs.

So if the males and females have totally different dentition, that only makes sense if we’re proposing that the sexes have totally different dietary needs.

Imagine a sapient species where 50% of them are obligate carnivores adapted to a feast-and-fast intake cycle, and the other 50% are generalist omnivores adapted to frequent small meals.

If they’re meant to be a natural species, what sort of bizarre evolutionary pressures would yield that arrangement? Extreme dietary dimorphism is practically unheard-of in nature, at least among land-dwelling vertebrates, so the explanation has gotta be a good one!

And what sort of society would they build as a result?

Don't be the product, buy the product!

Schweinderl