This topic is locked.


treos said:
ಠ_ಠ "section" DText... for some reason, any post i come across that happens to be overly lengthy has this in the quote but otherwise it fails to work properly. not sure if it's an issue on my end or something else.

on topic: huh, could've sworn there was a flat_chested_female (or something similar) tag. as for the "breasted_boys" idea...that sounds stupid. sounds more like what someone would say when teasing a person or something.

Fair enough but The point makes sense though right?

Breastboy does sound awful though doesnt it yeah? Thats what cboy and dgirl sounds like to us. Its stupid and arbitrary.

As to your other comment. I get that too! But only on desktop. Doesnt seem to happen when Im on mobile tho?


GDelscribe said:
Fair enough but The point makes sense though right?

Breastboy does sound awful though doesnt it yeah? Thats what cboy and dgirl sounds like to us. Its stupid and arbitrary.

As to your other comment. I get that too! But only on desktop. Doesnt seem to happen when Im on mobile tho?

Breastboy sounds like a superhero name. Saves the town by smashing villains with prehensile size changing boobs.


Chaser said:
Breastboy sounds like a superhero name. Saves the town by smashing villains with prehensile size changing boobs.

Fund it.


Ko-san said:
Wut?

You mean like someone who is born male, gets a sex change but still identifies as male?

I knew a guy who was born a guy but had his penis turned into a vagina and still identified as a guy, a cis guy with a vagina. His mangina.


PhallusFantasy said:
I knew a guy who was born a guy but had his penis turned into a vagina and still identified as a guy, a cis guy with a vagina. His mangina.

heh, funny...guess the word, mangina, has multiple meanings now.


PhallusFantasy said:
I knew a guy who was born a guy but had his penis turned into a vagina and still identified as a guy, a cis guy with a vagina. His mangina.

I know someone (though we had a bit of an unfortunate falling-out) who was born, biologically, female, but with some issues with her genitals that make her appear male. She was raised as a male, and eventually transitioned to female (thus in some sense she was a female-to-female transgender individual).

I also know of a somewhat famous case where someone's genitals were injured during, I believe, a botched circumcision, so they were surgically altered to appear female, and yet always still identified as a male.

Not very common, but interesting cases like this do exist.


So. Anyway back on topic. Are there any legitimate reasons other than "were used to them" not to change the tags.

Especially when there are other options that are presented which are better.


GDelscribe said:
So. Anyway back on topic. Are there any legitimate reasons other than "were used to them" not to change the tags.

Especially when there are other options that are presented which are better.

Characters drawn with mismatched parts (breasts + penis, no breasts/pecs + vagina) are not automatically trans. This has been the issue the last several times this matter has been brought up.


Ontologically, 'we are used to them' is actually a fairly strong argument. If people don't understand the tags quickly, then they are bad tags.

However, I personally think that titanmelon's proposed ontology is an improvement on what we've got; consistent and simple. I think if they could manage to restrain themselves from being so verbose, its chances of actually being implemented would improve a lot.

I think Ratte's latest reiteration is because you haven't been very clear on precisely what change we should make. I interpreted you as supporting Titanmelon's proposal, but you mix a bunch of other issues in there too which sabotages your case.


Well, I still think the minor altering to penisgirl/pussyboy would work relatively well, if we wish to remove derogatories.

I would continue with my character_alias:, but I recently "realized" that the majority of the artists will come from sites that let you purposely have tags, or don't put them, because it's artist choice (they can choose what tags are on a post). As such, we can deal with assholes who do the no ifs, ands, or buts, for tagging their character, and character_alias would not help there, and times when artists/COs cannot be contacted. This means the Character_alias tag would have to be maintained by the public over the artist, even if we imply it with a character.

In shorthand for Character_alias: : the tag would not work because posters have fucked over tags to get X, or avoid X, on other sites and have tried bringing that here; and making a completely new tag that has vague meanings to the artist and their audience wouldn't help the character. The public would have to maintain it, because both the Character_Alias tag may be forgotten, or it could be an forgotten character name / identical character.


Ratte said:

Thank you for completely ignoring every point ive made outright.

As stated earlier. If these characters are not trans or otherwise why are they not simply called flat chested female or male with breasts.

THAT ASIDE, since you clearly dont want to discuss the issue. Again im reiterating the suggested tags.

Lets pretend that its not an issue at all.

Gynomorph and Andromorph work perfectly fine. Ive gotten support for those tags.

Whats the issue with changing to those tags.

savageorange said:
Ontologically, 'we are used to them' is actually a fairly strong argument. If people don't understand the tags quickly, then they are bad tags.

However, I personally think that titanmelon's proposed ontology is an improvement on what we've got; consistent and simple. I think if they could manage to restrain themselves from being so verbose, its chances of actually being implemented would improve a lot.

I think Ratte's latest reiteration is because you haven't been very clear on precisely what change we should make. I interpreted you as supporting Titanmelon's proposal, but you mix a bunch of other issues in there too which sabotages your case.

Yeah. Im just frustrated because the issue is getting danced around when there shouldnt be an argument about it to begin with??

Weve offered alternative tags. I agree with the proposal...

But it seems theres a lack of listening going on and I feel like Im talking at a brick wall.

My statement. If you all need a clear one.

Dickgirl should change to Gynomorph and Cboy change to Andromorph.

Theyre generally innoffensive. They dont cause issues with people who are unwilling to call the characters trans. They dont cause tag issues cause theyre simple. Theyre short singe word tags with utilitarian purpose.

If there is something Im missing then please tell me.


GDelscribe said:
Thank you for completely ignoring every point ive made outright.

As stated earlier. If these characters are not trans or otherwise why are they not simply called flat chested female or male with breasts.

THAT ASIDE, since you clearly dont want to discuss the issue. Again im reiterating the suggested tags.

Lets pretend that its not an issue at all.

Gynomorph and Andromorph work perfectly fine. Ive gotten support for those tags.

Whats the issue with changing to those tags.

Because this has been done to death and the result has been the same.

We cannot judge intent, only portrayal. Character canon is irrelevant when tagging, only the character's physical appearance matters. If people want to see males, they want to see typical males. If people want to see females, they want to see typical females. Flat chested is not the same as having pecs just like having breasts is not the same as having manboobs.

I would not mind andromorph and gynomorph provided tags are properly aliased as not to impede searches.

Ultimately tagging is not dependent on your feelings, only the image and what it shows.


Ratte said:
Because this has been done to death and the result has been the same.

We cannot judge intent, only portrayal. Character canon is irrelevant when tagging, only the character's physical appearance matters. If people want to see males, they want to see typical males. If people want to see females, they want to see typical females. Flat chested is not the same as having pecs just like having breasts is not the same as having manboobs.

I would not mind andromorph and gynomorph provided tags are properly aliased as not to impede searches.

Ultimately tagging is not dependent on your feelings, only the image and what it shows.

Then lets change it to Andromorph and Gynomorph.

Weve had more positive than negative. And theyre not harmful.

Aliasing shouldnt be hard. People can keep searching for it as they have. But the word would be replaced when tagging the same way foreskin is replaced with uncut (which should be the other way round I must add but. Thats a different can of worms for a different time.)


Ratte said:

Characters drawn with mismatched parts (breasts + penis, no breasts/pecs + vagina) are not automatically trans. This has been the issue the last several times this matter has been brought up.

That's why we've suggested alternate tags, like Andromorph and Gynomorph. I'm not seeing any negative responses to those two tags.


Furrin_Gok said:

That's why we've suggested alternate tags, like Andromorph and Gynomorph. I'm not seeing any negative responses to those two tags.

See above.


Andromorph and Gynomorph just mean boy and girl respectively. I don't see how they could possibly serve as replacements unless you're proposing revamping gender tagging so those are the only two gender tags.


Beanjam said:
Andromorph and Gynomorph just mean boy and girl respectively. I don't see how they could possibly serve as replacements unless you're proposing revamping gender tagging so those are the only two gender tags.

No they don't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynomorph

In biology, a gynomorph is a male that resembles a female, whereas an andromorph is a female that resembles a male.

"Morph" means that something "appears" as another thing. An andromorph would be a cuntboy and a gynomorph would be a dickgirl, going by current tag terms.


Ratte said:
No they don't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynomorph

"Morph" means that something "appears" as another thing. An andromorph would be a cuntboy and a gynomorph would be a dickgirl, going by current tag terms.

Im really glad to see this cause like. We have a wiki definition already set up for easy access.


GDelscribe said:
As stated earlier. If these characters are not trans or otherwise why are they not simply called flat chested female or male with breasts.

Because cuntboys and dickgirls are considered their own sexes and, transgender is a gender. which is two fundamentally different things. Also there is more to it, than just breasts. When a distinction need to be made between a man with breast and a dickgirl. The rest of the body need to be taking into account.

GDelscribe said:

Gynomorph and Andromorph work perfectly fine. Ive gotten support for those tags.

GDelscribe said:
Dickgirl should change to Gynomorph and Cboy change to Andromorph.

Theyre generally innoffensive. They dont cause issues with people who are unwilling to call the characters trans. They dont cause tag issues cause theyre simple. Theyre short singe word tags with utilitarian purpose.

If there is something Im missing then please tell me.

gynomorph and andromorph are to vague to be useful. As manboobs, pseudo-penis, manly females, feminine male etc. Would be considered examples of gyno/andromorphism. Since there is no specification, on which part of the anatomy need to be male of female looking.

GDelscribe said:

Whats the issue with changing to those tags.Yeah. Im just frustrated because the issue is getting danced around when there shouldnt be an argument about it to begin with??

Weve offered alternative tags. I agree with the proposal...

But it seems theres a lack of listening going on and I feel like Im talking at a brick wall.

Just because people are disagreeing with you. that doesn't mean people aren't listening to you.

Your whole reason to change this. Was because you think we use dickgirl and cuntboy as offensive terms for trans people. Which we don't. At least here on E621.

If i called a transsexual person a dickgirl or cuntboy. I would not only be offending them. I would also be incorrect. Because those terms, are not meant to used for transgender or transsexual people. It's like calling a straight person gay. In order to offend them.

Transsexual and transgender means that you distance yourself from your biological sex. physically and/or mentally. Cuntboys and dickgirl don't fit this description. Because they don't distance themselves from their biological sex. They are that sex.

As with many cuntboy/dickgirl images, we see on this site. It's impossible to determine, if they fit the description of a trans person. Because we cant see their sexes backstory. We don't know if they are that way because of surgery, magic, born like that etc. so they get the tag dickgirl and cuntboy. Unless there is evidence to anything else in the image.


slyroon said:
*snip*

Ok one. I cant even begin to explain how many of those points are wrong for so many reasons. Your personal "because we dont mean it to be" doesnt make it not that thing.

Just cause you say its not "used as a slur" doesnt make it not a slur.

There are literally people in the thread whove outright ignored the entire body of the thread to derail it with other points etc so. No there are people ignoring the topic and the thread has derailed twice now.

Before it does again however Im going to ask how exactly is there an issue with Andromorph Or Gynomorph because theyre not vague at all.

Do you propose something better?


I think his point is that they are fictional sexes. And he explained how an andromorph and gynomorph are too vague.


slyroon said:
gynomorph and andromorph are to vague to be useful. As manboobs, pseudo-penis, manly females, feminine male etc. Would be considered examples of gyno/andromorphism. Since there is no specification, on which part of the anatomy need to be male of female looking.

The placement of periods throughout your entire post are killing me, but here's the thing: Everybody here is agreeing that Gynomorph and Andromorph would work except for you, man. It's not a word that's very frequently used, so if somebody mixes it up, report them, problem solved.

GDelscribe said:
There are literally people in the thread whove outright ignored the entire body of the thread to derail it with other points etc so. No there are people ignoring the topic and the thread has derailed twice now.

Sometimes, a post references a specific portion of the post because that's the important part, the argument against it is valid, but because they never said anything in regards to the rest of the post you think it's invalid?

Peekaboo
Contributor
11 months ago
ambiguous_gender anthro canine chair drugs fox fur lol_comments looking_at_viewer mammal nightmare_fuel oddly_cute orange_fur plushie real sitting solo stoned stoned_fox taxidermy uncanny_valley unknown_artist what_has_science_done where_is_your_god_now white_fur why

Rating: Safe
Score: 72
User: meanwhile
Date: December 03, 2012

I feel like I've just read an argument between angry people and a brick wall.

Genjar
Contributor
11 months ago
2011 annoyed antennae arthropod biped black_markings blue_eyes clear_membrane clothed clothing crossed_arms cute duo feral front_view green_body human insect insect_wings lifting lol_comments male mammal markings moth nisimawari pellucid_hawk_moth portrait quadruped shirt shorts simple_background solo_focus spread_wings standing three-quarter_portrait three-quarter_view traditional_media_(artwork) watercolor_(artwork) white_background wings

Rating: Safe
Score: 231
User: Genjar
Date: May 29, 2013

slyroon said:
gynomorph and andromorph are to vague to be useful. As manboobs, pseudo-penis, manly females, feminine male etc. Would be considered examples of gyno/andromorphism.

Source?

In entomology, gynomorph is identical to our usage of dickgirl: organism that appears to be female, but has male genitalia. And vice versa for andromorph. That's not vague at all.


GDelscribe said:
Ok one. I cant even begin to explain how many of those points are wrong for so many reasons. Your personal "because we dont mean it to be" doesnt make it not that thing.

Just cause you say its not "used as a slur" doesnt make it not a slur.

Saying it's a slur, dosn't make it a slur either. It's about the context. If i call somebody a hat. than i have used the word hat, as a slur. that doesn't mean i can't use the word hat without offending someone.

GDelscribe said:
There are literally people in the thread whove outright ignored the entire body of the thread to derail it with other points etc so. No there are people ignoring the topic and the thread has derailed twice now.

how can people derail the topic by discussing different points. That doesn't make sense. sure some comments have been mildly joking. But far the most has been on topic.

GDelscribe said:
Before it does again however Im going to ask how exactly is there an issue with Andromorph Or Gynomorph because theyre not vague at all.

Gynomorph and androphrph are to vague replacement for cuntboy and dickgirl. Simply because it doesn't specify which part of the anatomy that needs to resemble the other gender.

If a guy, has hands that looks like his moms hands. which would make his hands gynomophic. Because his hands has the morph/shape as a womans. it's sorta like biological cross-dressing. Some part of you looks or have the same looks as the opposite sex. but it doesn't reflects your actual sex.

GDelscribe said:
Do you propose something better?

No, I think cuntboy and dickgirl is fine. Though i understand why these can be interpreted as offensive. Especially if you label trans people with it (and as i explained earlier there is a difference between transsexual and cuntboy/dickgirl). But since there isn't a better alternative to these established tags. I think we should leave it as it is.


Genjar said:
Source?

In entomology, gynomorph is identical to our usage of dickgirl: organism that appears to be female, but has male genitalia. And vice versa for andromorph. That's not vague at all.

In biology it's a little different. it's often refereed to as Sexual mimicry when a male or female take on certain characteristics of another gender. But aren't changing their "true" sex


slyroon said:
But since there isn't a better alternative to these established tags. I think we should leave it as it is.

I repeat: You are the only one who things that these are worse than our current tags. Everybody else has agreed that andromorph and gynomorph are good tags, and would serve as a better alternative.


Furrin_Gok said:
I repeat: You are the only one who things that these are worse than our current tags. Everybody else has agreed that andromorph and gynomorph are good tags, and would serve as a better alternative.

It's more like nobody else cares.


Furrin_Gok said:
I repeat: You are the only one who things that these are worse than our current tags. Everybody else has agreed that andromorph and gynomorph are good tags, and would serve as a better alternative.

Hey, that is not true! I have not yet agreed to this *morph thing, I still believe penisgirl (or now penisfemale) and pussyboy (or pussymale) works...

However, in an effort to try and "solve" this: how about people start thinking of descriptory tag names that are not confusing or derogatory. Shoot in the dark until something hits...


Here we go with more political correctness tripe. If people get offended, let them get offended, no reason why majority should bend its will to the minorities who don't agree. No one else finds these tags to be offensive and "demeaning" and well sometimes people have to bite the bullet and deal with it, the world isn't going to bend backwards or bend over and be dictated by PC terms in order to placate people.