Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-9154802-20170511025535/@comment-9154802-20170515131930

JanembaFreak97 wrote: While you are correct in your points, I think you're missing something important. While avoiding actual reason in favor of the deus ex machina excuse of "it's fiction so who cares" is bad writing, if the writer in question has a reasonable explanation for the would-be-plothole then there's no issue. Everything doesn't need to adhere to a perfect logical and scientific standard in fiction, it only needs to be able to be explained. Let's take the Gerudo in Zelda. The Gerudo are a nearly entirely female race, with a male being born every few millenia(the last one was Ganondorf). Now, by your logic that would be awful writing, but Nintendo knew this, and so the Gerudo women are always looking for someone(usually a Hylian) to marry. While this is definitely ineffecient from an evolutionary standpoint, plenty of things naturally occurring on Earth are ineffecient. As long as a writer has reasoning and an explanation for their decisions, they're doing a good job.

While you make a good point about effeciency, that method is probably similar to how some other cultures could possibly function. What I'm looking at is how the ineffeciency of a race with more than two genders would literally be doing more harm than good, with more genders increasing death rate to the point you'd literally be dying off faster than reproducing. 3 Genders is quite this bad, but something like 50,000 genders would be literal suicide. I can't accept something this absurd without there being a detailed explanation of how it works without it literally killing everyone.