Work Text:
Quirks aren’t exclusively based on a person’s parents' quirks. The science behind quirk genetics is based upon chance and probability. To clarify, a person’s parent’s quirks do matter a large amount, just not as much as it seems. This can be supported by several factoids from the rise of quirks as well as current genetics.
The most prominent thing that affects what quirk a person gets is their parent’s quirks. Based on the most recent study from Dr.Garaki, a renowned quirk scientist, “a child has a 29% chance of having a mix of both parents' quirks, a 69% chance of having one parent’s quirk, and a 10% chance of having something else.” [1]This means that every child has a 98% chance of having one of those quirk combinations. However, this leaves a leftover 2% of children that will not have their parent’s quirks.
This 2% is really what should be explored here, as they are the object of many debates within the general scientific community. At the very dawn of quirks, studies were drawn by private scientists on really how much of the population was gaining quirks per generation. This continuous research study has been kept up for over 200 years now, and provides excellent statistics on the types of quirks that have emerged and how quickly they did so. At the very dawn of quirks, there were only 2% of people in the first generation with quirks. The second generation, 4, the third, 8, the fourth, 16 and so on. Now, we (as a quirked population) are bordering on 98% of the population having quirks since we are about halfway through our 7th generation of quirk users. Now, having only 0.2% of our populations being quirkless, it is harder to keep a continuous stream of data. Thus, the study switched to focusing more on quirk types and classifications based on new research. This research data provides more explanation on what’s really happening when a person doesn’t have their parent’s quirks.
To get context for this, first it must be explained how quirks worked and how they evolved. At the turn of the 21st century, the first quirk users were born, the very first being the glowing baby. From there, in each subsequent year, there was an increase in what percentage of the population had quirks. [2] At the very beginning of quirks, there were no duplicates or “very similar” quirks. There really is no such thing as two quirks that are the exact same due to different activation methods and genetic barriers, but that’s for another time. [3]
It wasn’t until the second generation of quirks that full body mutative quirks and similar quirks began appearing. [4] This was likely due to the genetic quirk diversity at the beginning of quirks. With the second generation, a trend was noticed that people who are related (even very distantly) are more likely to have similar quirks. It is extremely rare, and an odd mutation at that, to find two people who are not related whatsoever who have similar quirks. Now, it is pretty easy to find people who have similar quirks due to the lack of genetic diversity in certain areas because of the quirk wars which later led into family specific neighbourhoods.
A similarly related note can be found in the children of quirkless people. Even if one parent has a quirk, a child born to someone quirkless is more likely to have a random quirk than their other parents quirk or being quirkless. This is most likely due to the unpredictability of the genes of the quirkless parent. Even without realising it, many people with quirks that combine well together end up together which is part of what leads into quirk singularity and the strength of quirks as they progress. This is why most quirk gene mutations happen.
However, mutations can also occur in a family line if a person has children with someone who’s quirk would not work with their own. For example, a time quickening quirk and a time slowing quirk together, while with a similar concept would have to be a mutation or one parent’s quirk. With a pair like this, the chances for mutation are boosted to 1 in 4 births (or a 25% chance). [5]
These mutations also give reason to lead into why the current classification systems for quirks don’t make sense. As we all know, the 3 basic classification systems for quirks are Emitative (Emitter), Transformative, and Mutative. However, this actually makes no sense in the context of modern quirks. From the third generation of quirks onward, quirks began to exhibit sets of traits from both parents, regardless of actual quirk. So, a person with a fire resistance quirk might also have a small webbed fingers mutation from their other parent. At the very beginning of quirks, even these small mutations could be counted as a quirk, but it is no longer classified as such. Otherwise, this person could be considered to have two quirks.
This is really just the tip of the iceberg with quirk genetics. Take Endeavour, the number 2 Japanese hero, he has small patches of rough skin similar to scaling on his palms, which isn’t related to his quirk but does help him with hero work. Additionally, his hearing and speed seem to be superior to the average person, which may be a past residual mutation in his family.
Additionally, even people without side effect mutations sometimes have quirks that fit multiple categories. Take someone who can control water who also has a fish mutation. This person only has one quirk factor that lets them do this, but they clearly have both a mutation and an emitter aspect. This alone creates a discrepancy in their idea of classifications. Enough said.
All together, this can really be summed up as quirks aren’t what they seem and the public view of them needs to be evaluated due to continued progression of how quirks evolve over time. Our current classification system may have worked at the dawn of quirks, but quirks are no longer a rarity and need to be reclassified and researched to be properly represented in research as such.
Bibliography,:
1.
Garaki, Kyudai. “A study of punnett squares and their impacts on quirk genetics.” All for Science Inc., Version 12, Volume 1425, Random for You, July 15, 2237, Japan.
2.
Shigaraki, Hisashi. “The Generational Increase of Quirk Users.” All for Science Inc., Version 2, Volume 17-1579, Random for You, July 15, 2037 - Ongoing, Japan.
3.
Midoriya, Hisashi. “Mutations in quirkless genetics.” All for Science Inc., Version 18, Volume 1298, Random for You, July 15, 2027, Japan