The tag implication #42315 astolfo_(fate) -> male_(lore) has been rejected.

Reason: because he's male and looks like a chick. Trap boys should get Male_(lore) tag.

I love animeeeeeeeee!

EDIT: The tag implication rider_of_black -> male_(lore) (forum #319141) has been rejected by @bitWolfy.

As with the other thread, characters can be drawn in a way that's different from what they normally are. Such a character drawn as a female should not be tagged male_(lore), and male_(lore) shouldn't be tagged when he's clearly male and tagged as such already.

watsit said:
As with the other thread, characters can be drawn in a way that's different from what they normally are. Such a character drawn as a female should not be tagged male_(lore), and male_(lore) shouldn't be tagged when he's clearly male and tagged as such already.

that's not what male_(lore) tag says about the matter.

closetpossum said:
that's not what male_(lore) tag says about the matter.

The gender lore tags should only be used when the image shows otherwise (i.e., tagged as female or ambiguous_gender, but canonically male_(lore)).
It should not be added when it is not necessary and the image depicts their canon form (i.e., tagged as male already, no need to tag male_(lore) again).

Edit: Sorry for repeating the previous points, but the intent of the tags can be seen here. Additionally, artist's depicted lore supersedes the established franchise lore (i.e., original canon is male, but the artist can make them crossgender).

The tag implication rider_of_black -> male_(lore) (forum #319141) has been rejected by @bitWolfy.