coolest-of-the-beans - Tumblr blog

coolest-of-the-beans · 1 month ago

Text

Euclydian Sex... how? An analysis

Alternate thisisnotawebsitedotcom pregnancy illustration

Okay this was... Not what I intended to write about, BUT as someone who is a biologist, and seeing all the different methods of people trying to figure out how to fuck a triangle... Well, I got rather interested in peering into what is canonically or word of God (aka creator) implied about Bill's species, and then what similar sexual and reproductive methods would match, that are found within our gloriously diverse and often sexually freaky smorgasbord of earthlings sexual habits.

In the following, I'll provide notes on Euclydians physical attributes and some species who have these characteristics, and what their reproductive methods of species who match these, before moving on to what is implied regarding Euclydian sexual characteristics, and examples of some of these species... before moving on to theorized off of these species some types of sexual characteristics that could occur.

I also want to say, my knowledge on reproduction is likely going to be lacking exact details on many species, since I'm not a complete walking encyclopedia of reproductive systems and sexual habits of all living beings... (Nor is my area of study on reproductive habits). So if I miss one that you are like oooOOOHHHH this fits because you are a pervert about that creature please do add. I'd also like to note I'll be using scientific terms (explained in text) as it is the easiest way to be clear on some topics. I'll also be focusing on sexual characteristics, rather than gender and sometimes may conflate the two; I'm aware (as a trans person myself) that they don't always correlate. I'm also aware no matter if you've got a general ‘sexual binary’, intersex people will always exist.

Also, just going to really quickly break down the biological definitions of what the female vs male sexes are for clarity. The sex differences are all based on anisogamy (ie, differently sized gametes), in which rhe female sex is defined by have larger, and more energetically expensive gametes that tend to be produced in smaller number, while males are defined by having smaller, less energetically expensive gametes that are produced in large numbers. Another word I'll use frequently in here is gonochoristic, which means the species is characterized by male and female sexes, in comparison to simultaneous hermaphrodity, in which both reproductive systems (male and female) exist within the same critter. And without further ado;

Physical Attributes

At the time of the show, Bill reiterates that he's actually a being of pure energy and thought (see sock opera), which is also echoed in J3. Bummer! A bit hard to fuck that, beyond metaphorically, although you can certainly jerk it to such a being (which I'm sure, Ford never did at all mmmhm, nor most of you freaks (affectionate) that are reading this post). Although technically, we do have the story from TBOB of what Bill's blood looks like when he has a visit with the CIA. There's a lot of contradictions, as it's a comedy and a lot of it is what Alex Hirsch really finds most amusing at the time rather then a concrete logical and linear concept...

Now this emphasis on Bill lacking a form is correlated by Bill's enthusiasm over a physical body, which he creates on the advent of wierdmageddon, as well as the one of the revealed scrapped pages of TBOB. The schematic of Bill's body is... well. It's unorthodox, both in the scrapped TBOB page and the wierdmageddon episode, which also are not aligned in what they look like. There's also in the blacklight journal a depiction of what Ford thinks bill would look like beneath the surface if given form, which aligns mostly to the weirdmageddon scene; suggesting mostly to be muscle with some bone beneath. But these are not what I'm most curious about, because Bill came from a species, and they weren't just pure energy and thought, but rather some form of flesh and blood. (Bill's loss of his body definitely doesn't haunt me, nuh uh).

Ford's speculation on Bill's body in J3 blacklight, and the scrapped TBOB page of Bill's schematic for his physical body

So what DO we know about them; now Alex Hirsch took the inspiration on Bill's world and species from the book Flatland: a Romance of Many Dimensions by Edwin Abbott. In this, it is reiterated that the shape's eyes also function as a mouth. That is, the species has a singular opening to both perceive and consume. He however doesn't go into details beyond that, on how sex occurs, or about how they defecate. Alas, we thus lack concrete knowledge on exactly how shapes reproduce... but we do know that they have at least one opening.

Bill displaying drinking from his eye (one orifice)

Alright, what do we know of being with only one opening? Beings that only have one opening are not uncommon for earthlings; sea anemones, sea urchins, sea stars and flatworms subscribe to a singular opening! This opening is used to consume food and expel waste (although I know of no organism where the primary, or even really secondary, light sensing organ is in the exact same point of the mouth; buccal feeding tentacles yes, in tube worms, around the mouth, but not the mouth. Simply not the most ideal construction). Of these listed, most are gonochoristic, with the exception of flatworms who are simultaneous hermaphrodites (although there's always the odd few species), and some sea anemones who are sequential hermaphrodites (ie, sex change over time). Most of these species, while being gonochoristic, are broadcast spawners with external fertilization, as is seen with sea urchins, sea stars, and sea anemones, or a mix with sperm being broadcast spawned which is then taken up and used to fertilize eggs internally (some sea anemones). In these examples, sperm and eggs are released through the single mouth/anus opening. The one exception to this that I've listed, which are free-living flatworms, who usually have what would be considered a second opening (cheating...) which is much smaller and is specifically for sexual reproduction (a gonopore). In all flatworms species, the eggs are thus internally fertilized, and then later deposited to develop outside of their parent.

Beyond that this provides us with knowing that we've only at least a singular opening, it also does suggest that the species are surrounded by a very thick skin or exoskeleton. This is reiterated by the offhand comment in J3 by Bill on Fiddleford seeing Bill removing his exoskeleton to feed (again, putting to question the being made of pure energy and thought, and also seemingly refuting the way he is shown to consume with his eye, and violating the knowledge we have from Flatland). But Bill does seem to be made of a tough exoskeleton of some type.

So; what do we have reproductive wise on critters with exoskeletons? Both external and internal fertilization can occur; sea urchins such as previously mentioned are broadcast spawners, but they are not the only group to have exoskeletons. Many crustaceans (crabs, prawns etc) have the male's delivering their sperm packets to the females after the female undergoes ecdysis (molting), thus, allowing the females while not encased to take up the sperm and use it when they are able to do so (often actual fertilization is delayed). Often the female crustaceans after fertilization deposits the eggs onto her underside in which she cares for them before they hatch. Insects, of course, are also a big bunch with peculiar habits. Most insects have, much like free-living flatworms, a pore devoted to sexual reproduction; they also have separate sexes, and generally do internal fertilization, and lay eggs instead of doing live birth. An example of exoskeleton reproduction includes beetles, some of which, who have a thin tube-like 'flagellum' (intromittant organ/penis) that is normally stored within their body, but can be extended to longer then themselves; this then is inserted into their coiled reproductive tract of the females (think silly straws!) to deposit their sperm. And the list can go on…

Reproductive methods and mating habits

Now, other then that, what do we know of sexual habits? Although we are provided scant information, we do come to the understanding that Bill was the offspring of two parents, which seem to be coded vaguely male and female; Euclid and Scalene, in a nuclear family-esque situation. This suggests gonochorism; something that, due to the fact that we live in a species that is gonochoristic, this subtextual reiteration of our general understandings of a ‘typical family’ and expressions of sex and gender is not surprising. However, Alex Hirsch has in a reddit AMA, in character as Bill, said that Euclydians have 14 million genders... which suggests he lies outside of our typical and general understandings of gender and sexual binaries. Not an atypical move, of alien species being retrofitted as being 'outside' of our general understanding of two genders and sexes, due to being ‘inhuman’(which is another discussion entirely). It is also worth noting that this is 'word of god' rather than something that's more canonical.

Bill being held by his parents from thisisnotawebsitedotcom, and the Bill AMA gender response (from the linked Google doc)

Now, of course, sex and gender are not the same thing; but there are indeed species that are not beholden to sexual binaries or hermaphroditism and for that we've got the wonderful Fungi Kingdom. Sexes don't exist; rather what matters instead is the number of copies of the same species genetic material and if it is different regarding reproduction. Something that is similar to what Bill's quip may functionally look like! This sharing of genetic material is done by fusing two different individuals cells together, in which the two different haploid nuclei (ie cell center with a single copy of genes) proceed to fuse to form a diploid nuclei (a cell center with a set of two genes); this then goes on to form a fruiting body (mushroom), in which the genetic material is mixed for genetic diversity, and then split into haploid nuclei again through meiosis to form spores to be spread as a new mushroom. Thus, if Euclidians didn't really have genders/many many genders which if taken to mean sexes, they may reproduce similarily; the two shapes may come together, join, share genetic material which is used for reproduction... And having haploid and diploid complex organisms isn't unheard of, bee's do so, amount other species.

However; at this point we've yet to discuss something important. Yes, that's right. The thisisnotawebsite.com photo that shows a baby triangle inside a uterus, with the caption, "look what's growing inside you! See you in 9 months papa!" Now, this immediate brings to mind male pregnancy (mpreg). Clearly this is supposed to be a joke thing, (the baby has a soother with a baby bottle... worrying to see inside a uterus), but nevertheless, we forge on... And in fact, this is not the first time Alex has joked about mpreg regarding Bill or Euclydians, having apparently in a Twitter thread in 2021 drawn a pregnant Bill with a poll for who impregnated Bill, with a unanimous vote for Ford, which Alex jokes 'is canonical now'. Pregnancy is again recently joked about by Alex Hirsch in posting the Bill imprint image on a vein-y membrane, with the words GESTATING on it, directly implying that someone, such a maybe Alex himself, being pregnant with Bill. It seems to be a favoured joke of Alex's, but these are more 'word of god' then canonical, compared to thisisnotawebsitedotcom photo which is by degrees, more considered 'canon', even if it's again meant likely as a joke/threat thing from Bill.

Collection of all three Bill pregnancy instances

Now, of course, if we do take Mpreg as a fact... Male pregnancy relies on the fact that the male sex exists, as does gonochronism in the species. If we discard that for a second to rather instead focus on simultaneous hermaphrodity, we'll discover that internal fertilization is quite common, yet, I do not know of live-bearing simultaneous hermaphrodites. The thing is, livebearing itself isn't all that common beyond some fish species and most mammals especially say, compared to say eggs or broadcast spawning (and some mammals such monotremes don't even even bear live young but lay eggs). This is really down to that it's very energetically costly to whomever if carrying the young, but does usually mean that the young has a stronger chance of survival by being carried within the mother, and by the time the young is born they (generally) are more fully formed and more likely to survive. In biology we generally lump reproductive methods on a spectrum of two types of strategies, separated by the selected traits that looks at the quantity vs quality of offspring; this is called r/K selection theory. K-strategists, as this implies, are species that emphasize quality over quantity of offspring, at the expense of the parent. Frequently, they will only bear single offspring, take longer periods of time to rear their offspring; livebearers are on the closer end to this spectrum. As you can imagine, r-strategists are on the opposite end of the spectrum; broadcast spawners are a good example of this. With the implication of mpreg, this suggests that Euclydians are K-strategists species, reminiscent of Homo sapiens, also the point of suggesting that gestation period of about 9 months (or a little longer since he's already well formed). This is further correlated with that Bill seems to be an only child, and the Bill-child in the uterus is the only one in there. Bill was also clearly looked after by his parent's in the same way human children are looked after by their parents, which suggests a very high input of parental investment for their species, hitting all the strong K-strategist marks. These categories themselves are also correlated to life styles (as is all reproductive habits); stable, long living species that are higher in the food chain tend to be K-strategists, while short-living and often prey species will be r-strategists. As a result of this, live birth itself is also a spectrum; some species pop out as mini versions of their parents (ie, horses) whose species have uncertainty (ie, predators on the open plains they are being born on) while others come out undercooked (human babies, panda babies, etc...) who are more likely to have a more ‘stable’ lifestyle.

Now from our understanding, given the squishy and less rigid form of Bill in his baby photos, it suggests that the species lean to the undercooked side of live birth, much like a human baby (also suggests the exoskeleton/skin rigidizes over time). As the parents seem to continue living after Bill's conception, it also suggests that their species can reproduce multiple times (iteroparous) rather then dying after reproducing (semelparous). This further correlates to the implications that pregnancy is the typical Euclydians method of reproduction.

Photo of squishy baby Bill, TBOB

With that understanding, this brings us to the real-life champs of m-preg of the animal kingdom, and the only ones known to do so: the humble syngnathidae family (seahorses, seadragons, pipefish and their ilk). Now, how this functions is that (after courtship, in which they do little dances and change colour), the two will mate. The females have an ovipositor, which is inserted into the males brood-pouch to deposit the eggs (noted to be from the dozens to thousands!), and the male releases sperm into the brood pouch for fertilization. The eggs are then embedded into the skin of the pouch, with spongy tissue growing around them to supply them with nutrients they need beyond their yolk sacs within their eggs.

Seahorse sex, diagram and photo

Euclydian reproductive methods

With this background let's look at what's possible for Euclydian reproductive methods; but before that, let us summarize the sexual and physical characteristics of Euclydians:

one opening for both perception and consuming (ish)

exoskeleton/tough skin surface

Live birth

Implied mpreg, or at most simultaneous hermaphroditism live birth

Sex implied to be gonochoristic (male/female) but also may not be and number in thousands

Small/single young in brood, with high parental investment after birth (K-strategist)

Now we can go over a few theories, as pulled from the above examples (and more I'll get into), to go over:

gonad set up: simultaneous hermaphrodity/gonochorism/only degrees of difference in genetic material.

Reception of genetic material; perception/mouth orifice also utilized for reproduction vs a gonopore/separate sexual orifice vs ecdysis for reproduction vs physical merging

passing over of genetic material: eversible penis/modified tentacle/arm/oviposition vs merging of bodies

Now the Mpreg image implies that Bill's species are gonochoristic, and that the males of Euclydians possess a brood pouch to facilitate pregnancy. Although, if we disregard the implication of gender as sex, there is a possibility of them being simultaneously hermaphroditic, and a uterus is present in all Euclydians, as is a penile structure or however the sperm is to be transferred (v energetically costly, so would be a surprise from a biological standpoint). If they are Mpreg gonocharistic then that means the males have no need for a penis or other sperm delivery system beyond into their brood-pouch, and it is only the females who would be equipped with a oviposition. Sorry pregnant Ford lovers, if you're taking Bill's 'gender' at face value. Interesting thought process would be if you had simultaneous hermaphrodity, but instead of a penile structure, ovipositors are used instead. This however has no precedence (but also, how much of this is really about the science, rather then good fun, learning new things, and idea brewing?).

How about how the genetic material is received? Now we are provided no suggestion of a secondary orifice on Bill beyond his eye. This doesn't mean he doesn't necessarily not have one, as many species tend to have a gonopore, etc for sexual reproduction, more so than species who only adhere to a single orifice; besides there's no need, in fact the opposite, within the children's show, for Bill to show Hole. Of course this doesn't mean Euclydians perhaps don't use the eye/mouth for reproduction; both are possible. In this situation of Mpreg gonocharistic, that would mean the orifice would lead to a brood pouch, in which the ovipositor would deposit the eggs into; or for simultaneous hermaphrodite the penis to ejaculate sperm into.

Now another possibility as mentioned is ecdysis, or molting; this is when the exoskeleton is shed, a requirement over time if a species has a calcified (ie, rigid) exoskeleton, when the individual gets to larger than the shell it currently inhabits (this may be bypassed by a spiral structure correlating to growth, such as snail shells, or, some snails also literally secrete acid to dissolve the inside of the shell to also continue to increase interior of the shell, although I do not know if this occuring in a crustacean such as shrimp or crabs). This molting then allows the reproductive material to be taken up while they are soft and squishy; the normally closed gonopore would be open for business, before it all gets closed up again. However, regarding exoskeletons that are this stiff, the exoskeleton would certainly hamper the stretch required for pregnancy; eggs are normally carried instead on the ventral surface of the exoskeletons or deposited elsewhere to grow. Of course, if the exoskeleton is more of a thick skin like substance, you are much more likely to be able to get the stretch required by pregnancy, as is depicted by Alex in the one twitter drawing (or have very small, and very unobtrusive pregnancy, such as marsupial pregnancy, but that doesn't align to Alex's drawing).

A further suggested opportunity would be looking at the possibility of a 'merging' (conjugation) of the shapes. This is more of a technique which would be similar to fungi as previously mentioned; bacteria also swap genetic material using this method. In doing so the cell membrane of these organisms join to allow the intracellular contents (and specifically genetic) be exchanged. This... becomes a lot more difficult at a non-cellular level as there are way more structures to be rearranged to all this interaction if we are talking about actual skin (made of many cellular layers), not to mention if there is an actual chitin or calcareous exoskeleton that would require to be dissolved. This is not exactly impossible, although if the exoskeleton is dissolved you would require something like, say a mucus matrix like what occurs during earthworm sex to ensure that the gametes are not running off on you, and can be delivered from one orifice to the other. However it is interesting to note that the flatland a romance movie displays their bodies not dissimilar to a single celled organism, suggesting a much simplified body plan as creatures go. In the J3 page, they are not overly large, but rather seem to be only a handful of centimeters in diameter, which perhaps would not be too difficult to occur (but creatures the same size will rarely, if at all, use that method for fertilization). Also, the specialization of a uterus and pregnancy itself arose out of sexual characteristics of gonochorism, which allowed specialization to occur to support their sexual characteristics to the lifestyles they exist under. As a result, such an ancestral style of gene mixing that then goes on to pregnancy is not seen in life, and unlikely to occur, but certainly can be kept in mind anyhow! Although interestingly, when Ford visits the world that's similar to Bill’s, he is attacked for being a, quote, “vulgar shape” as he is not equilateral. Is there then a connection between being non-equal to sexual reproduction, which is why it's vulgar? Speculation, speculation.

J3 pages on Ford's visit to the two dimensional dimension.

This unlikeliness of merging of bodies then relies on some structure to pass genetic material over. This can come in the form of penile or oviposition structure. What do we have for this? Well, eversible penises are immensely common in the animal kingdom, infact more so then a penis that is outside the body. Beetles, slugs, whales, hell you look at cats and dogs, and their penises are eversible. A penis, however would rely then on the species to be likely simultaneously hermaphroditic to have mpreg. Regarding simultaneous hermaphroditity and penises, we've got the wonderful previously mentioned flatworms. Some of these flatworm species (planaria species to be more exact) have eversible penises. One delightful species of planaria, Macrostomum hystrix practices hypodermic insemination; that is, it uses it's stylet (ie male copulatory organ/penis) to stab through the skin of it's mating partner to release sperm into the body which then finds it's way to their partners eggs. This species is also theorized to likely self-fertilize by stabbing themselves in the head when without a reproductive partner.

Another common simultaneous hermaphrodite with eversible penises includes gastropods (slugs, snails and their ilk)! These bad boys got lots going on for them, and most actually do simultaneous reciprocal mating, in which both partners provide the other with their sperm. Some do internal fertilization (the ol' stick the penis into the gonopore), and some do external fertilization, which includes their penises rubbing together to transfer sperm. Some also like to do acrobatics with mucus and dangling from trees (suspension play?). The sperm apparently can be either used for fertilization, or digested, fascinatingly (a specialized reproductive organ is used for this). They've also got some funky allohormone stuff going on; that is, some species spread mucus with chemicals in it which effects their partner’s organs to increase the likelihood that their sperm is used to fertilize eggs, through sperm storage or egg laying tendencies. Some species also don't even just spread this mucus on their partner but actually fire a dart into the flesh of their partner, allowing the hormone to be taken up immediately. Not the wackiest thing though, which may go to the occurrence of apophallation, which occurs ins some of the slug species that practice internal fertilization, in which the acting male’s penis gets stuck in the female (suggested possibly done intentionally, through a muscle in the female reproductive tract), who then chews off the males penis, and usually proceeds to eat it. Yow! Penises can also come in many forms, such as the echidna’s four headed dick. The world is full of strange and bizarre wonders.

Beyond a penis, there are other ways to transfer sperm! This includes those of the cephalopod family, (octopods and squid), in which the males of most of these species have a specifically modified arm, with a tip for depositing sperm packets within the females mantle cavity (a hectocotylus). This can be determined by the lack of suckers on the top of the hectocotylus, and which have a sperm duct running along the inside of the arm. Some function essentially as a penis, while others are used differently; one species, the Blanket Octopus, has a sperm filled pouch on his; this, when he is ready to mate, bursts, filling the arm with his sperm; the hectocotylus then breaks off, and he presents it to the female for her to use, and she tucks it into her mantle cavity. Apparently she can keep multiple severed sperm arms within her for use. Another species also does a similar thing with their hectocotylus, in which the males arm breaks off within a cavity in the female mantle. Similar to a hectocotylus, Nautilli also have a spadix, which is multiple arms fused together, which is used to transfer sperm (other cephalopod species have the typical eversible penis). Now, one thing to note for tentacle porn fuckers out there, the reproductive arm is generally only ever one, or two arms, or a singular apparatus made of multiple arms, while the majority would not be used specifically for sexual activity, although certainly can be involved. Anyhow, lots of interesting sperm transference options!

Octopus sex diagram and photos of two different cephalopod species hectocotylus

Unfortunately regarding Mpreg, knowledge of ovipositors is limited... But are not the only known use of ovipositors! Ovipositors are used in insects, often used for laying eggs on a surface, or laying the eggs inside a safe space if the ovipositor being long and hard (such as dirt), or parasitically within another creature to provide food and relative safety for the eggs. One may suggest that in some ways, the newer GESTATING implied Bill pregnancy, would more align to a oviposition situation, in which another species is carrying the young of what is clearly not its own species. The species then doesn't require the male of the sex to have typical egg-rearing capabilities either. Much in the same way, the ultrasound is clearly based on a human ultrasound, which may also provide the suggestion that parasitism is involved. Now, from what we see of Euclydians suggest that parasitism isn't the case, since we do not learn about a host-species, which would be the case if parasitic oviposition was a typical sexual thing. (Although, taking a step away from science and to stories, a PNW Indigenous nation, the Tlingit, have a story of Raven turning into a pineneedle, who was then drank by a Chief's daughter, who later gave birth to him and raised him as her son and raven ends up stealing the sun. I could see Bill doing that sort of thing, tbh). Bill specifically utilizing parasitism would also not be a surprise from me. Also, if you do have a simultaneous hermaphrodite, or even parthenogenesis (female only), it is possible that they could self fertilize, and then insert their their eggs within another species in a parasitic manner (billford child and Ford Mpreg possible?). Regarding parthenogenesis, I believe some can actually incorporate other (closely related) species DNA into their own (salamanders, I believe) to allow for some diversity beyond birthing/laying genetic clones.

Now back to our regularly scheduled planning of ovipositors. There is another fish species that has ovipositors, and long ones! These are bitterlings, and use them to lay their eggs within freshwater mussels to keep them safe. Very interesting!

Bitterling with ovipositor extended

I'd say to sum up overall, Euclydians seem to learn towards simultaneous hermaphrodity, or gonochorism with male pregnancy. Regarding Mpreg, the female would then possess a ovipositor as a way to pass over an egg to the male brood pouch; as we have yet to have any proof of a secondary opening likeliest as so far would be the transference of the egg through the eye-mouth opening, and the species can reproduce multiple times throughout their life (iteroparous). The child is then born, without a hardened exoskeleton or rigid skin, which likely then hardens over its maturity. The child is then under the care of the parents for multiple years, and seem to hold generally to a monogamous dual partnership for parenting. Of course, this is one option of many which I've touched on in here. I hope many of you find something within the write up to spark your interest! Get researching, get funky, get creative, get kinky!

#Read Later #GF

223 notes · View notes