The children go through the coming of age ceremonies for the opposite sex, and the Sadaijin presents his daughter as a man to the court, and his son as a woman.

The siblings are worried that they will be exposed, and so Naishi no Kami is even shyer than most ladies of the court, and the Chūnagon more aloof than is seemly.

[3] Because of the tengu's conversion to Buddhism, as the siblings resolve to swap roles and dress in the clothes of their physical sex, they become content.

Saishō never learns what became of the former Chūnagon, the princess barely notices the change in her female companion, and the siblings live happily ever after and have many children with their new spouses.

Rosette F. Willig, who translated it into English, considers the version she used, Ima Torikaebaya, to have been written between 1100–70, and suggested that some elements of the tale may be autobiographical.

[5] Meiji period critics were particularly repulsed by the tale,[3] calling it part of the decline of the aristocracy,[8] and due to this reputation, it received little study even as recently as 1959.

[13] Rohlich says that Torikaebaya is "clearly not meant to be comic", despite the plot deriving largely from "ironic misunderstandings" about the switch, "all else" in the tale, such as the relationships and the pursuits are "familiar stock-in-trade" from the monogatari genre.

[1] The Princeton Companion to Classical Japanese Literature says that Torikaebaya has several "delightful comic touches", such as the Chūnagon being thoroughly surprised when her wife Shi no Kimi becomes pregnant.

[6] Hayao Kawai considers the "alchemy" of the tale to be the "double existence" of the siblings, which drives the plot from beginning to end.

[1] The Companion considers Torikaebaya to deal with issues of sex, sexuality and gender "more profoundly" than William Shakespeare or Ben Jonson.

[6] The princess's acceptance of the male Naishi no Kami as a female and a lover has been variously described as either that she is very sheltered, or that sexual relationships were common between court ladies at the time.

The father of the children initially considers their condition to be preordained as "retribution" for something they did in their past lives, as part of a Buddhist worldview.

[17] Margaret Childs believes that in love relationships in ancient Japan, showing vulnerability was highly prized and erotic, unlike in modern American society.

Childs contrasts the different ways that Naishi no Kami, Shi no Kimi and the female Chūnagon resist the overtures of Saishō.

[18] The ending has been called "surprisingly dark" by The Princeton Companion to Classical Japanese Literature,[19] although it does not expand on this line of thought.

[20] Gatten describes the ending as being happy,[13] and The Companion notes that the former Chūnagon achieves great things as Empress, as the Yoshino Prince predicted.

[1] Even after she returns to living as a woman, she uses her experience as a man to control her emotions, unlike other ladies of the court, who easily give into despair.

Kawai says that although her desire for independence is "normal" to a modern Western audience, in Heian Japan it was an "extremely difficult" decision.

Iphis, (a unisex name) is raised as a boy from her infancy, and when she comes of age, her father arranges a meeting with Ianthe.

[7] Kawai regards the author's intent in Torikaebaya as pursuing an aesthetic, rather than writing "a sentimental story spiced with erotic scenes".

Kawai suggests that the author of Torikaebaya sought to improve on the aesthetic of The Tale of Genji by imbuing their characters with "the virtues of each sex".

[7] Pflugfelder describes the siblings as "quasi-divine", drawing a parallel with the Dragon King’s daughter from the Lotus Sutra, who by her devotion to Buddhism transforms into a man and begins to teach the Dharma.

He also notes that Heian-era clothing had many layers,[15] which Cavanaugh says in the tale is revealed to both "identify gender and mask sex".

This and subsequent translations led to the tale being rehabilitated from its Meiji period reputation of immorality by Tsuneo Morioka, Hiromichi Suzuki and Sen'ichi Hisamatsu in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

[13] Her translation is based on an annotated edition of the tale by Hiromichi Suzuki, published in 1973 by Kasama Shoin as Torikaebaya Monogatari no Kenkyu.

[13] Thus, before the siblings switch, Willig's translation refers to the character by their assumed sex, leading to such structures as the Chūnagon feeling confined by "his pregnant condition".

[3][13] The introduction to the story makes many generalisations about Japanese literature, some of which are "misleading",[13] especially the categorisation of Torikaebaya as a "giko monogatari" (imitation epic tale).

[28][29][30][31] Toshie Kihara adapted the story into a one-volume manga called Torikaebaya Ibun (とりかえばや異聞) (ISBN 978-4-09-191221-3) which was published in February 1998.

[32] Torikaebaya Ibun was then adapted as a Takarazuka Revue play staged in 1987,[33] starring Mine Saori (峰さを理), Minakaze Mai (南風まい), Hyuuga Kaoru (日向薫) and Shion Yuu (紫苑ゆう).

[1] The characters of Maria-sama ga Miteru by Oyuki Konno perform a bowdlerised version of Torikaebaya in the 19th book of the series, published in 2004.