Facts of Monster Life

[tmazanec1]

OK, I said I wouldn't tackle this one, but here goes:
Can different monster types reproduce? Mike
s mother (in the audience of the company play) looks just like him. But the day care teacher thought the disquised Boo was Sully's child, and she looked nothing like him. And Mike and Celia are an article, as they say. I would say that children may take after parents, but do not have to.
What about the mechanics? This might be the fish style eggs and fertilization for maximum verstility, I don't know. Anyone want to take a stab at this?

[pitbulllady]

I know that you're aware of the concept of "genotype" vs. "phenotype", right? Two organisms can LOOK completely different, yet be of the same, or closely-related, species. All of the monsters basically are derived from HUMAN genetic stock, with some intermingled DNA of other species, but that variance is probably relatively slight, at best. Most, if tested with OUR DNA testing kits, would probably show up as being predominantly human, genetically. This would mean that assuming that most monster couples, regardless of their appearance, would be genetically compatible with each other and capable of producing offspring. The key issues would be whether they had the same number of chromasomes, and more importantly, whether there was any physical attraction between them in the first place, and whether or not the right uhm, "parts"..., would even fit. It's difficult to imagine beings this advanced reproducing by spawning or other primitive means, like most fish or amphibians. Of course, the appearance of the offspring, even those born to similar-looking parents, would be completely random and unpredictable, based on the almost infinate possibilities of phenotypical expression. The exception would be those types of monsters who have historically been ostracized from their society due to their appearance, who would be forced to choose partners of similar type/appearance for generation after generation, to the point where they would eventually "breed true", and produce offspring which looked like their parents. I'd wager this to be the case with reptile-like monsters, though there is always that chance that even furry parents could produce a scaly youngster, much to their dismay. There is also the very distinct possibility that a monster couple could in fact produce a child which has, superficially at least, a HUMAN appearance, since the human genes they brought with them from our world will not simply "go away"!

And since I know that the topic is coming up eventually, I might as well tackle the issue of how monsters can reproduce sexually if they don't appear to have any "equipment". Many male animals keep their "equipment" safely tucked up within their abdominal cavities except when in actual use, making it very difficult for sometimes even experts to distinguish between males and females. I doubt many of you on here could look at a picture of one of my snakes and tell if it is male or female, without knowing a lot about snakes, yet male snakes not only have ONE er, uh, "tool", but TWO! I'd assume that most monsters would also follow a similar pattern of hidden "agendas", if you will. We've gotten into some really hot debates on this in various Foster's forums, with regards to Imaginary Friends on that show, which are essentially monsters themselves. They obviously have two distinct genders, yet with a few exceptions(and those wear clothing to cover up the evidence), they have no visable genitalia, yet it has been revealed that some, at least, CAN reproduce sexually themselves, and others have expressed very strong interest in the opposite gender, indicating the presence of at least gonads.

pitbulllady

[tmazanec1]

Yes, I am aware of genotype and phenotype (I used the terms in my Science of Monster World thread). I can see how two different looking monsters can have a child, and it could have five heads (though that seems rare, given that it was in the newspaper). But how would they manage to do it in the first place, if the phenotype of the genitalia could be so different as to not "fit"? And how would a monster give birth to a Ted?

[tmazanec1]

Later thought...artificial insemination and Ceasareans?

[pitbulllady]

tmazanec1 said:

Yes, I am aware of genotype and phenotype (I used the terms in my Science of Monster World thread). I can see how two different looking monsters can have a child, and it could have five heads (though that seems rare, given that it was in the newspaper). But how would they manage to do it in the first place, if the phenotype of the genitalia could be so different as to not "fit"? And how would a monster give birth to a Ted?

That's why I specifically mentioned that the "parts" would have to "fit", although since A.I. is common in our world, as are Caesareans, I'd be willing to bet that they are common in the Monster World, too. And then, there's always adoptions.

There were other birdlike monsters in the movie, so I'd guess that Ted was just one of those abnormally large(REALLY abnormally large)youngsters born/hatched to one of those couples. I read a book once that was written by Michael Jordan's mom, and she is 5 '3", so short people can have really, really tall offspring.


pitbulllady

[RandallBoggs]

Well in some ways, Randall could be unique himself.
I do recall what one of his parents WOULD have been if he is unique but I can't remember at the moment what it was.