Ew! It's a girl.

The only generation during which I wanted as few female Pokémon on my team as possible was Gen 2, because in those games the gender was determined by the attack stat, and males were stronger. Once Gen 3 made the gender its own characteristic, I stopped caring.

It also doesn't matter to me when it comes to breeding: in every game, I have a Ditto as a permanent resident at the daycare center.

When I was a kid and was playing Fire Red, I had 110 pokemon all that were male. Back in the old grades we were all like 'Ew! It's a girl.' I was always scared that somebody would come to my house, see a female pokemon and then I'll be the laughing stock till the end of high school.

But right now I don't care about gender much but for some of my favorite pokemon like Alakazam I generally prefer them to be Male.

I admit I used to mind when I was younger.(there used to be rumors that males leveled up faster)

Now its mainly based on what makes sense to me. Like having a female machamp just seemed weird to me and a male jinx... Well you get what I mean. xD

It's not so much my preference, but what kind of attacks they specialize in. If they're physical attackers, then they have to be male. If they're special attackers, then they're female. Except for Sceptile, for some reason I just can't see it being a female. Weird...

i dont giove a poodoo.

i even name them neutrally or so...

I nickname everything, and as you can imagine, some nicknames only work for a specific gender. And I nickname the same Pokémon with the same names in every Pokémon game I play. For example, my Bulbasaur has always been "Treetop" since I bought Yellow, but that's a gender-neutral nickname. I nickname my female Dratini "Yoyo" and huge props to you if you know where that character is from.

For aesthetics, there are some Pokémon I'll only catch in a specific gender. Like male Machop, or female Gothita.

I know a few people have said they want their teams to be like in-game trainers who have all of their Pokémon a specific gender. As a ROM hacker, I can tell you why. There's a byte that sets the gender of a Trainer within the game data, and the byte also affects the gender of all of the Trainer's Pokémon (unless he/she has a gender exclusive). This is no longer true as of 5th gen, where you can see NPC's with mixed gender teams. With some NPC's in 5th gen I think it's random what gender every Pokémon is.

As a little kid I used to worry what people (other boys, really) would think if I had a lot of female Pokémon. Same thing if I played any game with a female avatar. Long story short, I've played most Pokémon games with the female player character because I usually hate the clothes that the boy wears. In BW and BW2, to me it's the opposite, and I prefer Hilbert and Nate's outfits.

I preordered Y and I'll play that first before I buy X. I haven't decided what gender I will be for Y, but I'll be the opposite of that in X.

For most games I play, the specific skills can affect which gender I choose. For example, in Fire Emblem Awakening, the female avatar gets Galeforce, so I play as her. And I have an all-female team because of that one ability that breaks the game, and this game is ridiculously hard anyway. In Harvest Moon, I usually have two save files (one with boy, one with girl).

There's only two - no, three - cases when I'll care about the gender of a Pokemon. One is that I need a specific gender to get an evolution I want (say male Ralts, or female Combee). Another is breeding purposes, although that's not too usual when Ditto is viable.

And the last case is with the Nidoran lines, given they're almost the same Pokemon in some sense. In a recent poison monotype run it occurred to me that I always went with Nidoking's line, so I actively went and got myself the female-only species.

Otherwise, I don't care about the gender for general play. Sometimes weird genders (for us anyways) can be amusing. =p I'm more likely to reject something if it say had the wrong ability.

I was once literally addicted to Dawn, so when I played Diamond for the first time, I wanted to have her exact Pokémon. My party needed to be exactly like hers; the moves, the nature, and the gender. As of today, I don't really care about the gender, except if I'm planning on nicknaming a Pokémon with a female name and I get a male Pokémon instead.

pokemon gender doesn't really matter to me. it seems harder to find female pokemon rather than male pokemon.

Pokémon gender doesn't matter to me either, but I did notice (and like) the fact that my starter Pokémon in Black 2 was female, I guess by the luck of the draw, and it's the only time I've ever gotten a female starter, too.

imo females are better because of breeding
also in game i like to have it where as physical type pokemon are male and special type pokemon ae female(fore stuff like meditite, it dependson the first listed type)

To me, it doesn't really matter what gender my Pokémon are. Some Pokémon are supposed to have a certain gender, but I just don't let it bother me if they don't. Haha. To be honest, all that matters to me are their stats, abilities, movepools, and how well they're able to perform in battles. (:

When facing dat Miltank in HGSS, it matters haha.

I usually don't notice what gender my Pokemon is until I catch it. If you asked me the genders of all the Pokemon in my team at any given point there's no way I'd be able to answer correctly. So it doesn't really make a difference to me.

I tend to base the Pokémon I use around their nature and ability more than what their gender may be. The only time gender really has any importance is when it fits my needs, such as for breeding or evolutionary purposes.

I have been, and to some extent still am, guilty for gender-matching though. If a Pokémon looks more like a female, then I typically try and catch a female and vice versa. I've also noticed that I don't really like it when I have one gender dominating my entire party. Although, that doesn't necessarily mean I try to keep it equally balanced. for example, if I have four male Pokémon in my party, then I try and catch two female Pokémon to round it off.

So I guess while gender does still play a role for the Pokémon I catch, it's not so important as it might have been to me once upon time whereas natures and abilities are.

I really don't see anything wrong with female Pokemon, or any gender for that matter. I used a female Samurott and it's extremely powerful. In my White team 4/6 of my team are female and I found them all to be very useful and stable.

Pokemon are Pokemon in my eyes. I don't like to discriminate Pokemon because of their gender roles. Attract does play a role in some cases but hey, it'll go away eventually. :P

Just recently i started breeding to get a hippowdon. I wanted the female one because the females are black and look much cooler, kinda like a shiny version. So i breeded until i got the perfect nature female hippowdon egg.

I only really care about a Pokémon's gender when breeding, using Attract or a Pokémon's ability with the same effect, facing an opponent I /know/ has such a thing, or when a gender-specific evolution is needed (Burmy and Combee, anyone?)

Yep, I get pretty annoyed when I have a "Masculine" Pokemon as female (Machamp, etc.), and the other way around (Male Gardevoir). I still only care about it for breeding, however.

I usually use males.
And I agree about the Machamp issue.

I used to be like that, as the rumor around here was that Male pokemon were stronger in all stats. It was also said that, once you hit the 200 Hour mark, shiny pokemon would appear, and they would evolve with the Shiny stone.