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?

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

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.

This isn't tumblr OP.

Actually wait, yes it is. I'm still salty about the 'slightly_chubby' tag being used to describe morbidly obese characters lol

slyroon said:
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.

I think you're overcomplicating this. Gynomorph and Andromorph would be identical in usage to the current dickgirl and cuntboy tags. The wiki would clarify this.

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.

I'm curious who you're talking about here. I think most people have been on topic, and the entire thread has remained rather on topic overall.

I'm curious if you considered my discussion of real-life intersex characteristics off-topic?

Dragonlayer said:
This isn't tumblr OP.

Actually wait, yes it is. I'm still salty about the 'slightly_chubby' tag being used to describe morbidly obese characters lol

The chubby was meant for slightly chubby characters since the beginning. It was, however, used on much fatter characters, and so it was aliased to slightly_chubby to clarify its intended usage. It is not meant to describe morbidly obese characters, and if you see it tagged for those, you should change it.

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.

Well, no one is addressing their concerns either. For the record I agree with Slyroon, they are less descriptive than what we have and the current should for that reason not be changed just because the tags might offend people who do not understand what they are used for. As a note I have no problem using dickgirl or cuntboy when tagging, but I'd have a hard time calling a real human being that (probably even if they wanted me to say it).

That said I understand if some people might take offense and I am not opposed to change. I just believe in that change should not undermine the purpose of the thing you want to change (unless the purpose is the problem, but please don't say that).

The only suggestion I can think of at the top of my head is to use some kind of purely descriptive "base words" like the following (possibly removing "_bodied"):

male:   male_bodied_with_penis /   male
          female: female_bodied_with_pussy / female
         cuntboy:   male_bodied_with_pussy/vagina
        dickgirl: female_bodied_with_penis
            herm: female_bodied_herm
        maleherm:   male_bodied_herm
ambiguous_gender: ambiguous_sex

In addition you would use ftm, mtf, or any other similar tags as we already try to do for visible indiction of such traits.

Or if that's too uptight Chaser's suggestion actually works better than any trans/morph/alter/demi/semi/etc words ever could. Any terms that contains the words "half"/"looking"/"over"/etc doesn't work because they are ambiguous, we have to use descriptive terms not something that says "it looks like x or y or z as long as 123" which most of those terms actually do. They can without almost any effort be broadened and you can't argue against it without going to a specific definition, that shouldn't be needed because that's what causes tagging problems, and with such widely used tags they need to be well defined and easy to understand without that specific definition. Of course you can teach people to learn a definition but it might be a lot more hassle than it's actually worth.

Changing to a "morph" tag would then just be aesthetic sugar but at the same time compromise descriptive capabilities. That's why I don't like them, not because I'm against being PC (when it is relevant), I just feel strongly about tags and their true purpose.

If the problem is simply vulgarity then Siral Exan example of replacing words with their more scientifically accepted variants should work fairly well.

On a side note I also have a vague idea for these complementary tags, not in exchange for what we're discussing, but basically it would allow (hopefully) both more detailed and wide searching:

• ambiguous_male, i.e. androgynous male looking
• ambiguous_female, i.e. androgynous female looking
• ambiguous_cuntboy, cuntboy but maybe just flat chested female
• ambiguous_herm,
• ambiguous_maleherm
• ambiguous_dickgirl
• ...

Not saying we need these but some might be quite interesting, as it could e.g. be used as a middle road between herm and dickgirl, i.e. tag something dickgirl and ambiguous_intersex and you'd have a female bodied character with male genitalia but obscured female genitalia. It's messy and not overly specific but I'm just throwing ideas around.

Anyway I just wanted to stir up the conversation a bit as it seemed to be going down a single fork in the road (a fork I found slightly lacking). Feel free to disagree.

Furrin_Gok said:
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.
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?

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.

No people haven't been unanimously about adapting gyno/andromorph. People have, understandably been and are divided on this.

Maybe I'm just a word-purist. But i don't think we should change the meaning of a word. Just so it fits another word. When another word might exist to cover it. Or can be created at least.

slyroon said:
Gynomorph and andromorph 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.

Clawdragons said:
I think you're overcomplicating this. Gynomorph and Andromorph would be identical in usage to the current dickgirl and cuntboy tags. The wiki would clarify this.

Dickgirls and cuntboys fits the description of being Gynomorph and Andromorph. But so do these man-boobs, pseudo-penis, girly males, manly females, flat-chested girls, male pregnancy, drag queen/king etc. These are all examples of Gynomorphing and Andromorphing. As "Gender"-morphing is one sex given or taking another sex's characteristics and applying them to themselves. nothing states that it have to be only about male and female genitalia.

slyroon said:
Dickgirls and cuntboys fits the description of being Gynomorph and Andromorph. But so do these man-boobs, pseudo-penis, girly males, manly females, flat-chested girls, male pregnancy, drag queen/king etc. These are all examples of Gynomorphing and Andromorphing. As "Gender"-morphing is one sex given or taking another sex's characteristics and applying them to themselves. nothing states that it have to be only about male and female genitalia.

The wiki would state that, clearly and unambiguously. These tags would be synonymous.

Theoretically a handjob could refer to knitting,, because it's a job done with one's hands, but to argue that "handjob" is meaningless because if you specifically ignore the information which narrows down it's usage you could pretend it is applicable in other contexts is, I think, rather ridiculous.

What you are arguing, to my mind, is no different from arguing that we should do away with the handjob tag because it might mean knitting.

Clawdragons said:
The wiki would state that, clearly and unambiguously. These tags would be synonymous.

Theoretically a handjob could refer to knitting,, because it's a job done with one's hands, but to argue that "handjob" is meaningless because if you specifically ignore the information which narrows down it's usage you could pretend it is applicable in other contexts is, I think, rather ridiculous.

What you are arguing, to my mind, is no different from arguing that we should do away with the handjob tag because it might mean knitting.

Hey, digital transcribing (Typing written letters into digital format) is a handjob too!

Clawdragons said:
The wiki would state that, clearly and unambiguously. These tags would be synonymous.

Theoretically a handjob could refer to knitting,, because it's a job done with one's hands, but to argue that "handjob" is meaningless because if you specifically ignore the information which narrows down it's usage you could pretend it is applicable in other contexts is, I think, rather ridiculous.

What you are arguing, to my mind, is no different from arguing that we should do away with the handjob tag because it might mean knitting.

There is a difference between words having multiple meanings and subtracting meaning from a word.

As a word can have a multiple meanings, however it's used. that doesn't invalidate its use. It just makes it more useful. But limiting a term that can mean many different things. to only a selected few. Makes the original meaning invalid.

Using a vaguely defined word. To only describe small parts of it's original meaning. Is kinda silly to me. I would rather see a new word be made. Than using a term so selectively, to describe something so specific.

Siral_Exan said:
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...

Pussyboy and etc are lit just as bad so please no.

But anyway the fact that this topic has come up multiple times again and again is more than enough of evidence of the fact that people are clearly unhappy with the issue.

slyroon said:
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.

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.

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.

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.

We literally cant leave it as is. Just cause you think its /fine/ does not make it fine and youre intentionally misusing the terms to be intentionally obfuscative.

You and I both know thats not the intention here.

And yes. Sometimes a slur is a slur. Again like I said before. We dont tag dark skinned humans with ebony or the N word. So no. A slur is a slur and it doesnt matter if you are personally ok with it. The fact is there are many many MANY people who are very not ok with it.

Theres nothing functionally wrong with gynomorph and Andromorph. Ratte gave a functioning wiki definition here.

Theres no issue outside of you dont wanna change it cause youre personally fine with continuing to use slurs. Thats great and all But as a community we cant be doing that.

There are trans people in the furry community. Can we stop insulting them? Please?

And as to the fox whisper guy. YES. People do find these incredibly demeaning so please drop the anti-pc crusader act.

Chessax said:
Well, no one is addressing their concerns either. For the record I agree with Slyroon, they are less descriptive than what we have and the current should for that reason not be changed just because the tags might offend people who do not understand what they are used for. As a note I have no problem using dickgirl or cuntboy when tagging, but I'd have a hard time calling a real human being that (probably even if they wanted me to say it).

That said I understand if some people might take offense and I am not opposed to change. I just believe in that change should not undermine the purpose of the thing you want to change (unless the purpose is the problem, but please don't say that).

The only suggestion I can think of at the top of my head is to use some kind of purely descriptive "base words" like the following (possibly removing "_bodied"):

male:   male_bodied_with_penis /   male
          female: female_bodied_with_pussy / female
         cuntboy:   male_bodied_with_pussy/vagina
        dickgirl: female_bodied_with_penis
            herm: female_bodied_herm
        maleherm:   male_bodied_herm
ambiguous_gender: ambiguous_sex

In addition you would use ftm, mtf, or any other similar tags as we already try to do for visible indiction of such traits.

Or if that's too uptight Chaser's suggestion actually works better than any trans/morph/alter/demi/semi/etc words ever could. Any terms that contains the words "half"/"looking"/"over"/etc doesn't work because they are ambiguous, we have to use descriptive terms not something that says "it looks like x or y or z as long as 123" which most of those terms actually do. They can without almost any effort be broadened and you can't argue against it without going to a specific definition, that shouldn't be needed because that's what causes tagging problems, and with such widely used tags they need to be well defined and easy to understand without that specific definition. Of course you can teach people to learn a definition but it might be a lot more hassle than it's actually worth.

Changing to a "morph" tag would then just be aesthetic sugar but at the same time compromise descriptive capabilities. That's why I don't like them, not because I'm against being PC (when it is relevant), I just feel strongly about tags and their true purpose.

If the problem is simply vulgarity then Siral Exan example of replacing words with their more scientifically accepted variants should work fairly well.

On a side note I also have a vague idea for these complementary tags, not in exchange for what we're discussing, but basically it would allow (hopefully) both more detailed and wide searching:

• ambiguous_male, i.e. androgynous male looking
• ambiguous_female, i.e. androgynous female looking
• ambiguous_cuntboy, cuntboy but maybe just flat chested female
• ambiguous_herm,
• ambiguous_maleherm
• ambiguous_dickgirl
• ...

Not saying we need these but some might be quite interesting, as it could e.g. be used as a middle road between herm and dickgirl, i.e. tag something dickgirl and ambiguous_intersex and you'd have a female bodied character with male genitalia but obscured female genitalia. It's messy and not overly specific but I'm just throwing ideas around.

Anyway I just wanted to stir up the conversation a bit as it seemed to be going down a single fork in the road (a fork I found slightly lacking). Feel free to disagree.

See this is all valid. And we could use mtf and ftm tags but every time Ive suggested the use of a trans* label I get shot down.

Id be more than fine with people calling "dickgirl" mtf and "cboy" ftm because from my perspective and the perspective of a lot of other people theyre functional.

I will repeat. Nobody is being directly harmed by using trans tags. Yet theres some reason some sort of push to not have them be a thing?

As to the issue. The problem is a double issue. Its one thing that the words cunt and dick are in themselves rude. As well we cant just use penisgirl vaginaman, as one theyre equally bad for sizable reasons but a big main one is people basically dont want to be called sometjing that is literally genitals*gender. Like.. if i called you a penisgirl or vaginaman does that sound any better to you than dickgirl or cuntboy? Yeah the "bad" worda are gone but it still comes off as an insult or slur. But theres a whole other can of worms involved in these specific terms that leads to people being really uncomfortable with them. If you wouldnt call someone it to their face. Why use it to describe their character?

If our fursona is an extension of us as artists and commissioners. And we post our trans* characters only to have people put labels like dickgirl or cuntboy on them?

In essence I suppose I can understand the rigidity in your defense against not using andromorph and gynomorph. But the fact stands that the only argument against them from slyroon comes from a completely /gender/ based stance. Which is why they said we couldnt use trans* tags earlier.

We needed something that describes sex.

Gynomophic. From the dictionary.

gynomorph (Greek: γυνόμορφ) (gyno– "woman" + morph "shape", literally "female-like shape") is a Greek word used to describe a male who possessed distinctly feminine features.

It means nothing different from saying mtf, or using dickgirl and its a functional /sex/ based tag.

Same with Andromorph in reverse.

And the only argument against these are slyroon intentionally misusing the word.

slyroon said:
Using a vaguely defined word. To only describe small parts of it's original meaning. Is kinda silly to me. I would rather see a new word be made. Than using a term so selectively, to describe something so specific.

Again, I don't see how those are vaguely defined.
Andromorph and gynomorph literally mean 'male-shaped' and 'female-shaped', and their usage in the medical and zoological fields is identical to our usage of dickgirl and cuntboy.

The wikipedia article muddles the definition by mixing it with gynandry, mostly because the primary source is David Hillman's book. Which he self-published through Ronin Books: http://www.roninpub.com/. I don't think I need to say more about that.

So far, the only arguments against the change is "It's not offensive and the current tags work just fine." Slyroon is trying to argue that the terms are too vague, but they're such out-there terms that nobody would use them for any other purpose here to start with. Does anybody else have problems with the -morph tags? (Or do you, Slyroon, have any problems aside from your disagreed with "Too vague" argument?)

Chessax said:
The only suggestion I can think of at the top of my head is to use some kind of purely descriptive "base words" like the following (possibly removing "_bodied"):

male:   male_bodied_with_penis /   male
          female: female_bodied_with_pussy / female
         cuntboy:   male_bodied_with_pussy/vagina
        dickgirl: female_bodied_with_penis
            herm: female_bodied_herm
        maleherm:   male_bodied_herm
ambiguous_gender: ambiguous_sex

If we really need to avoid the "Vague" terms, why not use these? That's a comfortable change, and with aliases, we don't need to type out the whole thing. "Cuntboy" autocorrects to "Male_bodied_with_pussy" or "Male_with_pussy" depending on how we set the tags.

GDelscribe said:
Id be more than fine with people calling "dickgirl" mtf and "cboy" ftm because from my perspective and the perspective of a lot of other people theyre functional.

That is not the intended purpose of the tags, Delscribe. Male To Female tag is only used for transformations, not even transgender, but where the actual transformation is displayed.

GDelscribe said:
See this is all valid. And we could use mtf and ftm tags but every time Ive suggested the use of a trans* label I get shot down.

Id be more than fine with people calling "dickgirl" mtf and "cboy" ftm because from my perspective and the perspective of a lot of other people theyre functional.

I feel like part of the reason people shoot down the usage of trans* tags instead of just sticking with a pure biological gender association is the confusion it causes.

Dickgirl and Cuntboy don't stand for the same things that mtf and ftm stand for. They might be seen as slurs for those things in real life but these characters are, at best, extensions of someone and exist in a fantasy form. It would be silly if someone could tag one of my penis-bequeathed ladies (who just happens to not have a vagina) as being mtf, because she is not.

I can agree with a need to find a tag that works but at some point, but it's a legitimately hard battle to win on a site meant as an image gallery where brevity is prized in tagging.

Genjar said:
Again, I don't see how those are vaguely defined.
Andromorph and gynomorph literally mean 'male-shaped' and 'female-shaped', and their usage in the medical and zoological fields is identical to our usage of dickgirl and cuntboy.

The wikipedia article muddles the definition by mixing it with gynandry, mostly because the primary source is David Hillman's book. Which he self-published through Ronin Books. I don't think I need to say more about that.

Thank you!

Furrin_Gok said:
.

That is not the intended purpose of the tags, Delscribe. Male To Female tag is only used for transformations, not even transgender, but where the actual transformation is displayed.

Apologies thats my bad. I sometimes forget about the TF fetish and thats an error on me. Sorry.

Kyvinna said:
I feel like part of the reason people shoot down the usage of trans* tags instead of just sticking with a pure biological gender association is the confusion it causes.

Dickgirl and Cuntboy don't stand for the same things that mtf and ftm stand for. They might be seen as slurs for those things in real life but these characters are, at best, extensions of someone and exist in a fantasy form. It would be silly if someone could tag one of my penis-bequeathed ladies (who just happens to not have a vagina) as being mtf, because she is not.

I can agree with a need to find a tag that works but at some point, but it's a legitimately hard battle to win on a site meant as an image gallery where brevity is prized in tagging.

I guess its wierd for me cause I dont understand the confusion. Trans* is short for transition but it also means transitive or changed/altered. Trans*girl could easily be construed to mean the same as dickgirl because its functionally changed girl. Or alternate girl. Do you see my meaning?

That said. I understand the need to have characters. Especially personal ones tagged correctly. I dont want to step on toes. Its part of the reason Ive started the thread to begin with.

GDelscribe said:
I guess its wierd for me cause I dont understand the confusion. Trans* is short for transition but it also means transitive or changed/altered. Trans*girl could easily be construed to mean the same as dickgirl because its functionally changed girl. Or alternate girl. Do you see my meaning?

That said. I understand the need to have characters. Especially personal ones tagged correctly. I dont want to step on toes. Its part of the reason Ive started the thread to begin with.

"Changed" is exactly the problem. They weren't changed or altered, they were born like that. And it's not abnormal among their species, it's perfectly common for people to be born with those traits in those species.

Furrin_Gok said:
"Changed" is exactly the problem. They weren't changed or altered, they were born like that. And it's not abnormal among their species, it's perfectly common for people to be born with those traits in those species.

I can understand that. As I have many characters and species who are like this.

I have a squirrel esque species who functionally have outside genitals regardless of sex and from an outsiders perspective. It looks like they both are male. They both posess scrotums. One has ovum in it one has testicles. The female's "sheath" is their vagina.

How do tou propose to tag that like?

Hyena's are like that too. They have pseudopenises and pseudoscrota.

My species the Ulri,

This is the female
Ulri female

This is the male,
Ulri Male Flaccid/Sheathed

Ulri Male Erect

From a glance youd probably mistag the male as "cuntboy" or something like that.

I understand the issue of gender and changing sex as an archetypal problem with the sex vs gender tag system.

Technically it would be inappropriate to call them trans* but its still more functional and less offensive overall because as long as we go by our binary male/female system were always gonna have issues like that.

In the end however its the main reason Im going For the andromorph gynomorph tags.

Theyre functional and useful. Theyre not too vague and they get the point across.

Furrin_Gok said:
So far, the only arguments against the change is "It's not offensive and the current tags work just fine." Slyroon is trying to argue that the terms are too vague, but they're such out-there terms that nobody would use them for any other purpose here to start with.

I don't think they are any more 'out there' than, say, 'canine' or 'anthro' (which is of course short for 'anthropomorphic', a word which any furry fan should know). Words like 'gynecology' and 'androgynous' are well known enough to provide some context here.

But admittedly I'm a bit of a language geek.

GDelscribe said:
I have a squirrel esque species who functionally have outside genitals regardless of sex and from an outsiders perspective. It looks like they both are male. They both posess scrotums. One has ovum in it one has testicles. The female's "sheath" is their vagina.

How do tou propose to tag that like?

• Male when genitals are visible but not visibly differentiated.
• Male for the male sex when penis is clearly apparent
• Intersex (not female) for the female sex when the vagina is clearly apparent. (because balls are also apparent. You might make a case for 'herm', but this is contrary to the current use of herm, so a separate tag to indicate 'balls + vagina' might be needed?)
• ambiguous_gender* when the genitals are not visible or implied (eg. via bulge)

This is all covered fairly clearly by TWYS, and I guess the most key point is that balls are tagged as balls if they look like balls, regardless of any 'species' canon on what is actually inside.

Species canon, as I understand it, can only enter into tagging when ambiguous_gender* would otherwise be applied.

\* or ambiguous_sex. I think we're currently using ambiguous_gender, but I get a little confused because I know that is incorrect/inaccurate usage of language.

Sex =/= Gender.
Sex tags:
cuntboy - Male body, but with a pussy instead of a penis.
dickgirl - Female body, but with a penis instead of a pussy.
herm - Female's body, with both a pussy and a penis.
maleherm - Male's body, with both a pussy and a penis.
intersex - covers all this shit and is the fallback when sex isn't immediately evident

The transgendered physical tags are already there:
mtf - "male to female" gender reassignment.
ftm - "female to male" gender reassignment.
crossgender - rule 63, specifically a male/female character drawn as the other sex
ambiguous_gender - when you don't actually know what is what (it is being used improperly though, should be ambiguous_sex)

Now andro/gyno morph were brought up to replace dickgirl/cuntboy but they don't in any way mean the same thing. Andro - male, morph - change, it means changing to male. Gyno - female, morph - change, changing to female. These MIGHT be able to be used in place of ftm/mtf but because of the craziness of furrydom they'd actually be best used to better specify gender transformation. You know the images where men actually transform into women and women actually transform into men.

Now after reading everything posted it seems that the only thing the op would be happy with is killing off all the tags refering to sex or using improper/confusing/overly complicated tags. The thing I don't seem to understand is what the mind-blowingly offensive and triggering thing about the tags is. Is it the dick/cunt? Is it the boy/girl? Every alternative such as penisgirl/vaginaboy and the like seem to have been shot down. Why is sex+organ offensive? I'm serious here. If you want to get rid of dickgirl/cuntboy then give a tag that isn't too complicated for the average user and is actually descriptive of the aspect being tagged.

Also, the complaint that the tags are reducing things to a fetish/kink.. that's kind of the entire damn point of the tagging system. You can search for, or block, the fetish of your choice. Don't like boobs? Block em! Don't like penises? Block em! This is porn tagged specifically to find your kink/fetish. More specifically porn of IMAGINARY characters specifically designed for you to fetishize and fap/shlick to. If that is a problem, then the whole porn thing may not be for you.

WhiteStarPony said:

Now andro/gyno morph were brought up to replace dickgirl/cuntboy but they don't in any way mean the same thing. Andro - male, morph - change, it means changing to male. Gyno - female, morph - change, changing to female. These MIGHT be able to be used in place of ftm/mtf but because of the craziness of furrydom they'd actually be best used to better specify gender transformation. You know the images where men actually transform into women and women actually transform into men.

The fact is we posted the literal dictionary definition earlier. No thats not how the word is used.

Im not vying for "killing off all the tags" to put in "confusing" ones. Theres no confusion here to be met.

My girlfriend just explained the situation much better than I could and since she has to wait three days to post on the forum asked me to post her explanation in her behalf.

Judy, (who is trans I might add.)
"Reading through this thread, I think one point of confusion for people is that they don't realize that the politics behind gender identity don't exist in a vacuum separate from the rest of society. So like, for example, while it may not always be ideal to see incongruous gender presentation and genitalia and label it "trans-", a large portion of society still labels gender entirely based on parts, so it's not exactly as if a female person with a penis could stand naked in front of a randomly chosen group of people and have everyone unanimously identify them as a female, because the existence of transgender as a grouping to some degree hinges on the fact that the greater part of society will still insist on fitting you into a cisgender mold based on your parts unless you insist otherwise. Additionally, the idea that transgender must inherently distance an individual from their genitalia simply applies the same flawed logic. Parts do not determine gender, and many trans people are perfectly happy with the genitals they were born with (myself included), incorporating them into their own personal expressions of masculinity, femininity, or other presentations.

Another frequent issue I've seen is that, yes, while characters in fantasy settings can be born with gender presentation and sex characteristics incongruous with our current understanding of them (cis male with vagina, cis female with penis, etc.), this website and its tags still exist in the real world and as such should have a tagging system comprehensible by our own history of language and experience, where greater society has historically shoved people into predetermined gender molds based on their genitalia. If people are going to continue to push back against "trans-" terms because they push their characters into undesirable predetermined boxes, they should realize the current existing cboy and dgirl terms do the same for those who do wish for their characters to be identified as "trans-", as it necessitates them to be associated with a slur many "trans-" individuals and, by extension, their characters, are uncomfortable with.

That being said, I'd personally be happy with the replacements "andromorph" and "gynomorph", seeing as how they would have functionally the same meaning and usage on this site and are much less likely to offend. It wouldn't be a difficult change to make and wouldn't make tagging any more difficult, so i see no reason not to implement it other than stubborn unwillingness to change."

Dont be intentionally ignorant just to be contrary.

Its not yeah the tags have an issue with reducing people to a kink. So will andromorph and gynomorph technically but theyre not offensive.

Please dont put words in my mouth. Im looking to change a clear problem to something less awful. Thats all.

Lastly as savage orange explained in a way that should be impossible to misunderstand.

savageorange said:
I don't think they are any more 'out there' than, say, 'canine' or 'anthro' (which is of course short for 'anthropomorphic', a word which any furry fan should know). Words like 'gynecology' and 'androgynous' are well known enough to provide some context here.

But admittedly I'm a bit of a language geek.
.

GDelscribe said:
If people are going to continue to push back against "trans-" terms because they push their characters into undesirable predetermined boxes,

There are some people saying that. But we mostly-don't-want trans* tags because they can't into TWYS.

Here (not furry, offsite link) is a rare example of something that would warrant 'transgender' tag under TWYS (assuming for the sake of argument that it was OK to post it here). Unmistakably references transness and connects it with a visible character. 'transman' or 'transwoman' would not be valid under TWYS though, as this -isn't- made unambiguous by dialog or character. Most other strips featuring this character would not warrant trans* tags, for exact same reasons (dialog + graphics do NOT add up to an unambiguous conclusion)

To be clear, I'm not criticizing any of the rest of your post, including the rest of her quote, I think it is accurate. But this one point keeps on coming up and AFAICS -it- is not accurate.

savageorange said:
There are some people saying that. But we mostly-don't-want trans* tags because they can't into TWYS.

Here (not furry, offsite link) is a rare example of something that would warrant 'transgender' tag under TWYS (assuming for the sake of argument that it was OK to post it here). Unmistakably references transness and connects it with a visible character. 'transman' or 'transwoman' would not be valid under TWYS though, as this -isn't- made unambiguous by dialog or character. Most other strips featuring this character would not warrant trans* tags, for exact same reasons (dialog + graphics do NOT add up to an unambiguous conclusion)

To be clear, I'm not criticizing any of the rest of your post, including the rest of her quote, I think it is accurate. But this one point keeps on coming up and AFAICS -it- is not accurate.

Thank you very much!

It makes a lot of sense when you put it that way.

Please don't argue about that "we're not getting rid of cuntboy, it's still there", that's not the point. I don't have some irrational love for the words we use now, I like them cause they work for their intended purpose. To be honest they work really well and unless you can give me a word that describes their purpose as well I'm going to argue against it (I've already given probably the only thing I'd be as happy with as keeping what we have now).

GDelscribe said:
Im not vying for "killing off all the tags" to put in "confusing" ones. Theres no confusion here to be met.

Let's for a moment say I don't know the exact definition of andromorph and gynomorph but I understand what base words mean. I have the following sex configurations to choose from that I may or may not put into those categories: cuntboy, herm, dickgirl, maleherm

An andromorph suggests a male shape, well then clearly cuntboy is an andromorph... But they also have the primary sex characteristics of a female, that's a fairly big deal, so maybe they're not fully andromorphic, maybe they're instead gynomorphs, no wait they're gynadromorphs...

The dickgirl generally has a female body shape, so that sounds gynomorphic, but then again they most often have obvious and exaggerated male genitalia (which isn't uncommon in the furry art in general). In addition they doesn't have to be expressed with overly feminine secondary sexual characteristics either, so maybe they're just andromorphic.

...

I know very well that I'm exaggerating quite a bit, but I just want you (not "you" but people in general advocating them) to admit that those terms aren't perfect. To be honest they're not even bad, in fact they're almost good, just far from as good as what we have. The only thing that is better about them is that they are not socially loaded words (to me that's irrelevant but I fully understand why, in general, it is not). Any other trans or morph terms have the same limitation.

And I know I'm stubborn and maybe even nitpicking, but I'm stubborn for what I believe is the right thing, to be descriptive.

GDelscribe said:
[Judy's thoughts among other things]

You're treading very close towards gender, and while most of those points are valid for gender struggles and equality, gender is pointless in a place like this because it is impossible to determine, maintain or uphold. The only things that matter here are appearances. What the character might identify as is not only impossible to use here, but would cause a multitude of much worse problems than the issues here (like the ones brought up by Judy).

What happens if the sex of a character is incorrectly tagged? You change it (of course not taking gender into account). What happens if a character's gender is incorrectly tagged? You can't do anything because only the character's owner knows that, which makes it impossible to use on a site where tagging is done almost entirely by the consumer and not the artist/commissioner/owner.

I just wanted to make that a firm statement, we might have the incorrectly named ambiguous_gender, but it has nothing to do with gender (and never should). So even arguing about gender is about as useful as running head first into a wall. Arguing about that the compound words "cuntboy" and "dickgirl" contain "cunt" and "dick" or might be offensive, is fine.

Chessax said:

I know very well that I'm exaggerating quite a bit, but I just want you (not "you" but people in general advocating them) to admit that those terms aren't perfect. To be honest they're not even bad, in fact they're almost good, just far from as good as what we have. The only thing that is better about them is that they are not socially loaded words (to me that's irrelevant but I fully understand why, in general, it is not). Any other trans or morph terms have the same limitation.

To be fair youre intentionally playing devils advocate and over exaggerating.

No theyre not perfect but neither are dgirl or cboy for many many reasons the fact that theyre slurs is only one of them.

Ok. Theyre "technically" idiotproof. Great. Lets take it for a second and go hyperbole as you were. Dickgirl, is that a really pissy rude woman? Is that an anthro penis with boobs and a vagina? Is it a dick wearing a dress?

I can take a word and distort its meaning too. It doesnt mean im right.

Andromorph and Gynomorph arent perfect. They never will be. But theyre not confusing. Theyre fairly straightforward. Theyr not loaded and they get the job done.

In the end. Again I will reiterate it doesnt matter if people dont /care/ or if it "doesnt matter." To someone that theyre socially loaded.

The fact this has come up multiple times here again and again means that theres a need for change.

We need to make a change.

This is a long thread.

Ko-san said:
This is a long thread.

With strong feelings and determination comes big arguments, it's just natural. The interesting thing is just that it's not derailing completely which these topics can do very quickly (hopefully I won't be the cause of that).

GDelscribe said:
To be fair youre intentionally playing devils advocate and over exaggerating.

No theyre not perfect but neither are dgirl or cboy for many many reasons the fact that theyre slurs is only one of them.

Ok. Theyre "technically" idiotproof. Great. Lets take it for a second and go hyperbole as you were. Dickgirl, is that a really pissy rude woman? Is that an anthro penis with boobs and a vagina? Is it a dick wearing a dress?

I can take a word and distort its meaning too. It doesnt mean im right.

Andromorph and Gynomorph arent perfect. They never will be. But theyre not confusing. Theyre fairly straightforward. Theyr not loaded and they get the job done.

In the end. Again I will reiterate it doesnt matter if people dont /care/ or if it "doesnt matter." To someone that theyre socially loaded.

The fact this has come up multiple times here again and again means that theres a need for change.

We need to make a change.

Fair enough, I admit I might have went too far with that.

I only wanted to make people think about how other people interpret the meaning of words, kind of like the same thing that you are doing. It's not always the definition in the encyclopedia that will pop up in people's heads, as you might understand. That's why I suggested using descriptive base words as an alternative which are hard(er) to misinterpret. The big problems with such constructs are that they sometimes sound awkward and/or are tedious to write due to being long and unnatural in speech and hence usually only meant for some sort of formal written media.

I know some things can be offensive, but the source of my "antagonism" (if that's what it is interpreted as) is that some people nowadays seem to look for offense where no offense was given and it's first when some single individual brings it to attention people go "oh yeah that's horrible" when in it isn't really that big of a deal. I'm not saying this isn't, just that I've become a skeptic when people take offense to words and not intents. However offense cannot truly be taken, only given (quite controversial, I know), and even then one can choose not to take offense for various reasons. Sometimes I even feel like I could take offense to people taking offense, however I can't use that as an argument because it's both illogical and no offense was given in the first place.

Also I apologize for sounding crass, it's one of my sometimes less attractive properties, in combination with being stubborn I sometimes sound a lot more critical and nitpick more than inteded. I will not cry if we ever change the tags to something I'm not happy with, but that doesn't mean I won't argue before that happens.

But to finalize: No, we don't need to introduce a change, it would be nice if we did, but we don't need to do it. Compared to other problems in our society the name of our tags is a problem almost not even worth batting an eye for.

I agree with your final statement, chessax .

Naming tags should not be the main concern, what I will say is a main concern, for this site, is fixing tags. The intersex ones alone are the worst ones, since they (the posters) use background information and will ignore the change suggested, or do not put genders on the appropriate characters. The others than can come onto list, mind you, are the */* tags, since they are meant to imply sex two or more, and not the specific sexuality of the character, and *_penetration.

Or, in shorthand: this change from one set of tag names to another may not help the site. People (and I just dealt with one post) can forget to put gender tags, or choose to use background information and will ignore the intersex tags we have. What can help the site more is fixing tags using TWYS and knowledge of what the tags mean.

GDelscribe said:

We need to make a change.

No, there doesn't not need to be a change. There will never be enough change for culture warriors like you, there will always be some other "offensive" tag that must be changed (it is [CURRENT YEAR GOES HERE] after all) if the admins cave in on this one.

Beeseverywhere said:
No, there doesn't not need to be a change. There will never be enough change for culture warriors like you, there will always be some other "offensive" tag that must be changed (it is [CURRENT YEAR GOES HERE] after all) if the admins cave in on this one.

yeah!! lets keep using blatant transphobic slurs as tags! it gives such a good image of our site! and it definitely makes trans people feel welcome here!

What mutisija said.

And like Ive said time and time again. Especially to cis people who arent personally harmed by them its not the place to say "hey its ok to use these words we should keep doing it cause it doesnt matter to me"

It does need to be changed. Its making people uncomfortable. Its making people want to leave the site/never join/have their art removed.

Thats just it. Why are you all fighting to keep a noninclusive part of our community? When what Im proposing will help our community.

GDelscribe said:
Why are you all fighting to keep a noninclusive part of our community? When what Im proposing will help our community.

Because your basing it on misinformation. Cuntboys/Dickgirls are not the same as being a trans-person.

slyroon said:
Because your basing it on misinformation. Cuntboys/Dickgirls are not the same as being a trans-person.

yes but the issue here is that cuntboy and dickgirl are real slurs that are used about real trans people in insulting manner in real life.

Mutisija said:
yes but the issue here is that cuntboy and dickgirl are real slurs that are used about real trans people in insulting manner in real life.

I thought the start of the thread clarified that they aren't really used in real life as slurs, which was agreed to?

Mutisija said:
yes but the issue here is that cuntboy and dickgirl are real slurs that are used about real trans people in insulting manner in real life.

That's no excuse for changing it. When it's used properly, on here.

Someone should create Cuntboy and Dickgirl superhero characters, and force us to alias the tags.

slyroon said:
That's no excuse for changing it. When it's used properly, on here.

Yes. It is. Please stop acting like its a non issue just because it doesnt bother you. Actually the fact that you're fighting so hard against it is confusing and curious.

Ive presented no such misinformation and done absolutely nothing to any effect of ill will.

The words are a problem and just covering your ears and going "im right" doesnt make it ok to use them.

Im asking specifically to have the tags changed to usable functional tags, Andromorph and Gynomorph which are completely harmless and functional and the only reason you seem to not want to change them is. Actually. You havent presented a legitimate reason outside of "you dont want to."

slyroon said:
That's no excuse for changing it. When it's used properly, on here.

Its every reason to change it. Its more than a reason to.

Im sorry for upsetting you but the fact is people are negatively impacted by these tags. Its not your place to say to people they should "just get over it" when users are clearly negatively impacted by this.

Ko-san said:
I thought the start of the thread clarified that they aren't really used in real life as slurs, which was agreed to?

Yeah. They are and no that was never said.

Not only that but theyre used in porn as slurs as often as things like shemale trap and tranny so in every instance they are used in negative contexts.

Again to post whats important:

Mutisija said:
yes but the issue here is that cuntboy and dickgirl are real slurs that are used about real trans people in insulting manner in real life.

The last I saw about that in this thread was someone stating that the terms are not historically used as slurs to which nobody argued otherwise. Regardless this entire thread seems pointless as it boils down to either destroying the fundamental building blocks of twys by forcing the use of outside information, using ambiguous or overly drawn out terms that you claim are, in your own words, still offensive but "better", or, as you claim to be the "best course of action", to not tag sex at all not to mention your notion of not tagging gender as we don't do that anyway. As it stands, the most logical, and neutral decision that can be made is simply not to play. Tags are there to label subjects for classification in an attempt to make a streamlined system that anyone can thoroughly utilize to it's fullest extent.

Now then. Perhaps if this was approached scientifically, not taking into account your or anyone else's feelings and realizing that gender and sex are two separate subjects, we could come to a conclusion. I have no suggestions other than something much too long to make a good tag, but perhaps, approaching this without even thinking about how you feel and without sabotaging the highly successful tagging system already in place, you could think of something completely neutral and descriptive.

Since andromorph and gynomorph don't seem to tickle the fancy of some of the people here, and are mildly confusing(although definitions are helpful to correct that.) I would like to reiterate two suggestions made earlier. Going back to the issue that we are tagging sex, and not gender.

"Vagentleman" and "Phalady"

They are short, unambiguous as to what they are presenting, and relatively easy to understand without a definition.

I am not sure if it is possible to address the primary issue that the terms are focusing on the physical features of the character they are being attached to within the TWYS system.

@ko-san

As Ive stated over 20 times now. Ive auggested two tags that work incredibly well and have no problems with them.

Your post is sensationalist and ridiculous. Im not here to "tear down" structures. Stop acting like Im trying to make some sort of attack on you.

Im here to get rid of two words which are harmful to an entire community of people who are part of the fandom by suggesting alternative tags which are nonharmful and functional.

@kiranoot
That is fundamentally why Im focusing on andromorph gynomorph in the first place. Theyre sex tags specifically not gender tags.

And theyre not that confusing really. Most of the people who seem against it are also people who seem to be against /any/ suggestion made regardless of logic or reason simply because "its how it is."

And tags like Vagentleman and Phalady are still fundamentally bad for pretty much the same reason as the existing tags.

Its not hard to create terms or use terms that arent offensive that still fit within the twys system and are usable and functional.

As it was explained earlier Im fairly certain that everyone whos old enough to be looking at porn here would at least have an understanding of the terms anthropomorphic. Andro (male) and Gyno (female).

Its really really simple stuff and theres yet to be a legitimate reason not to use the terms except over exaggerated situations which are unlikely at best.

And we circle back to square one.

Let the minority group rants come to full circle.

Theres no circling here. Are you even reading the thread?

Did you read what I had to say at all?

This isnt some sort of attack on your freedom. This isnt a personal attack on you.

This is a valid and important discussion and if youre gonna just ignore everything whats the point?

GDelscribe:
Before you completely discount my opinion on the matter about the terms you picked being confusing, please let me better explain why I find them confusing, and why I have trouble picking them as my first choices, despite my desire to see change occur.

I personally see a woman, with a penis and testicles, or a man with a vagina. That is how I mentally recognize and associate the words with the imagery. When I read the definition of gynomorph, "A male with distinctly feminine features." I thought first of a man with a vagina. I later realized than this was the incorrect line of thinking. Mentally I can see gynomorph applying to both, just as I can see andromorph(A female with distinctly masculine features.) applying to both, however incorrect that is.

I personally would incorrectly use these tags more than once, despite knowing the association and definition of them because of how my though process and recognition of composite sexual attributes works.

Unfortunately this personally eliminates one of your primary points for those terms, which is that they are universally understood without confusion. That is why I presented the alternatives listed before, despite knowing that you would object to them. The compromise being that those terms do not appear to have the same level of stigma attached to them, but addressed my personal confusion with your presented terms.

KiraNoot said:
GDelscribe:
Before you completely discount my opinion on the matter about the terms you picked being confusing, please let me better explain why I find them confusing, and why I have trouble picking them as my first choices, despite my desire to see change occur.

I personally see a woman, with a penis and testicles, or a man with a vagina. That is how I mentally recognize and associate the words with the imagery. When I read the definition of gynomorph, "A male with distinctly feminine features." I thought first of a man with a vagina. I later realized than this was the incorrect line of thinking. Mentally I can see gynomorph applying to both, just as I can see andromorph(A female with distinctly masculine features.) applying to both, however incorrect that is.

I personally would incorrectly use these tags more than once, despite knowing the association and definition of them because of how my though process and recognition of composite sexual attributes works.

Unfortunately this personally eliminates one of your primary points for those terms, which is that they are universally understood without confusion. That is why I presented the alternatives listed before, despite knowing that you would object to them. The compromise being that those terms do not appear to have the same level of stigma attached to them, but addressed my personal confusion with your presented terms.

Thank you very much for elaborating. I suppose I can definitely understand that as presentably it almost feels they should be reversed when you put it that way.

Hmm. Do you know any other terms which would be easier to understand? Or better yet, do you think theres a way we could shorten or alter the proposed terms to decrease that possibility for confusion.

Though I personally still find them extremely straightforward I can understand that they could be misconstrued in that way.

To be honest I had initially thought on the same way as you about them and was going to suggest them being used in reverse for that reason as it felt like a more prompt logical response to the criteria.

Still. Considering the nature of the terms that we have in use...

That said. The description of the words themself do make it easy to remember.

gyno– "woman" + morph "shape
Andro- "man" + morph "shape"

If you put it that way its easy to remember gynomorph is woman body with penis.

And andromorph is male body with vagina.

Just a personal assessment.

In the end I do want words that are going to do as little harm as possible while still being functional. And if aliased, we a lot of people will also learn the new word through association as it will come up in the tags of every image featuring that.

I still say Vagentlemen and Phallady is pretty reasonable. Despite what's been said I don't think the vague similarity to the word "fallacy" is going to be a problem - at least, no more so than the flak dickgirl gets.

Clawdragons said:
I still say Vagentlemen and Phallady is pretty reasonable. Despite what's been said I don't think the vague similarity to the word "fallacy" is going to be a problem - at least, no more so than the flak dickgirl gets.

When I read that, 'fallacy' wasn't the word my mind brought up, rather 'malady'. OTOH using the word 'malady' isn't that common.

(personally, I think they are hilarious, and even more superhero-esque than dickgirl and cuntboy)

By asserting your feelings over neutrality, playing the victim and portraying me as sensationalist, you made no progress. That is where we circled back. By attempting to sympathise with the issues prescribed by Kira, you are making progress. This has nothing to do with me and shouldn't have to do anything with you or anyone else. This discussion should be entirely focused on the platform that is being addressed, e621 itself. I won't be affected by the decision made here. I rarely use the tags in question and the ones I am used to will be aliased regardless. But this thread has carried on for much too long with no progress and something needed to be said.

Back on topic, going through latin phrases, I've come up with-
Andropars/Gynopars (partly man/partly woman)
Androcunnus/Gynophallus (pretty much literal translation for current terms)

I also noticed semi, which might be useful.

savageorange said:
When I read that, 'fallacy' wasn't the word my mind brought up, rather 'malady'. OTOH using the word 'malady' isn't that common.

(personally, I think they are hilarious, and even more superhero-esque than dickgirl and cuntboy)

The Adventures of Phallady and Vagentleman!

Fund it.

Ko-san said:

Back on topic, going through latin phrases, I've come up with-
Andropars/Gynopars (partly man/partly woman)
Androcunnus/Gynophallus (pretty much literal translation for current terms)

I also noticed semi, which might be useful.

Gynopars and Andropars do sound really good. Androcunnus and Gymophallus definitely seem better on a surface level as well but suffer from the same problem sort of.

Ill definitely be talking with people about your suggestions.

I do say I have to say Gynopars and Andropars do work as alternatives for people who dont the /morph/ tag and this is a step in the right direction but is there any way do you think we could clarify further or simplify even further?

I have an idea or two like Gynohom and Androfem that Ill also be bringing up and maybe that could help.

Ko-san said:
Back on topic, going through latin phrases, I've come up with-
Andropars/Gynopars (partly man/partly woman)
Androcunnus/Gynophallus (pretty much literal translation for current terms)

Then why use Latin at all?
You can't simply tack two words together to make a combination, that's not languages work... None of those are actual words. And if we're going to make up new words, then I think it's better to stick to English.

[posting this here as a summary of the above basic points raised above]

GDelscribe said:
What we need are tags that are still straight and to the point falling under the twys guidelines.

That's a great idea, agreed.

Noticed that most of your suggestions are also very similar to the ones I made before as well:
forum #184506 - Physical Gender Tag aliases/discussion (Oct. 2014)

TL;DR

Male body:
    cuntBOY = ANDROmorph
 
Female body:
    dickGIRL = GYNOmorph
 
 
Female body:
    (female)herm = GYNOherm
 
Male body:
    MALEherm = ANDROherm
 

Long version

* ambiguous
** [[ambiguous_gender]]
 
* binary
** `female` ([[female]])
** `male` ([[male]])
 
* hermaphroditic 
** `androherm` ([[maleherm]])
** `gynoherm` ([[herm]])
 
* [[intersex]]
** `ANDROmorph` ('[[cuntBOY]]')
** `GYNOmorph` ('[[dickGIRL]]')
 
* neuter
** `neuter` (???)
 

Not to mention that the aliases still work both ways, i.e.

- Tagging something as cuntboy still works, but the tag is renamed to andromorph

- Tagging something as maleherm still works, but the tag is renamed to androherm

etc.

KiraNoot said:
"Vagentleman" and "Phalady"

As hilarious as those may sound, I honestly think it's a huge step forward

If people despite their supposed infatuation with 'science' and objectivity find it difficult to wrap their minds around the existing scientific/established terms, then your suggestions are a great compromise - being both informal and non-derogatory

Genjar said:
Then why use Latin at all?
You can't simply tack two words together to make a combination, that's not languages work

Yes, you can, and yes, they do. There is even a word just for describing such words: portmanteau.

Ideation, foodgasm, guesstimate, bromance, polyamory, accidentalied ...

(whether it is a good idea or not is another question, but if you go looking for purity in natural languages you're definitely gonna be disappointed.)

titanmelon said:
As hilarious as those may sound, I honestly think it's a huge step forward

If people despite their supposed infatuation with 'science' and objectivity find it difficult to wrap their minds around the existing scientific/established terms, then your suggestions are a great compromise - being both informal and non-derogatory

We're not really talking about science at all here. Cuntboy and dickgirl are not, surprisingly, scientific terms. I don't know why you'd bring it up except to attempt to take a jab at those who try to draw a distinction between biological sex and gender, but this really isn't the place for that.

I think that was in reference to andromorph and gynomorph.

titanmelon said:
[posting this here as a summary of the above basic points raised above]

That's a great idea, agreed.

Noticed that most of your suggestions are also very similar to the ones I made before as well:
forum #184506 - Physical Gender Tag aliases/discussion (Oct. 2014)

TL;DR

Male body:
    cuntBOY = ANDROmorph
 
Female body:
    dickGIRL = GYNOmorph
 
 
Female body:
    (female)herm = GYNOherm
 
Male body:
    MALEherm = ANDROherm
 

Long version

It seemed to be well received enough to not be dismissed completely. At the very least, we could use it as a base for better, more intuitive + less derogatory names instead

• ambiguous
• ambiguous_gender

• binary
• female (female)
• male (male)

• hermaphroditic
• androherm (maleherm)
• gynoherm (herm)

• intersex
• andromorph ('cuntboy')
• gynomorph ('dickgirl')

• neuter
• neuter (???)

raw dtext version for easy quoting

* ambiguous
** [[ambiguous_gender]]
 
* binary
** `female` ([[female]])
** `male` ([[male]])
 
* hermaphroditic 
** `androherm` ([[maleherm]])
** `gynoherm` ([[herm]])
 
* [[intersex]]
** `ANDROmorph` ('[[cuntBOY]]')
** `GYNOmorph` ('[[dickGIRL]]')
 
* neuter
** `neuter` (???)
 

One possible issue with the intersex tags though (andromorph/gynoherm), is the possible initial confusion that could arise from people forgetting whether the prefix refers to the genitalia or the appearance (i.e thinking the andro- prefix refers to the genitals, when they actual refer to the body shape and vice-versa)

-
That said however, once the tags are populated enough, and with a wiki entry which lists examples + usage, the vast majority of taggers are much less likely to make that mistake. Since people can look at the existing tag examples via a search or something

Not to mention that the aliases still work both ways, i.e.

- Tagging something as cuntboy still works, but the tag is renamed to andromorph

- Tagging something as maleherm still works, but the tag is renamed to androherm

etc.

Thia post in entirety is basically something I'm siding with directly.

As long as people understand gyno is female body and andro is male body there is no issue nore need to worry about confusion.

So yeah Im sticking with Andromorph and Gynomorph yet again. 90% of the folks I talked to on the subject who are trans are 100% fine with these terms.

Theyre short. To the point. And serve as a good repair job and replacement to the bad tags we have.

Mutisija said:
yeah!! lets keep using blatant transphobic slurs as tags! it gives such a good image of our site! and it definitely makes trans people feel welcome here!

Oh right, because hosting 50,000 images of MLP characters shoving other MLP characters up the asses of other MLP characters has given e621 an image worth defending. It's meant to be a furry art archive not some community safe space.

e621 isn't the place to fight your attempt at thought molding by the use of language.

Please remain civil and on point everyone.

GDelscribe said:
And tags like Vagentleman and Phalady are still fundamentally bad for pretty much the same reason as the existing tags.

No, they aren't. We're tagging based on the sexual organs present, if you cannot wrap your head around that, then we'll have another user who decides to leave the site, big whoop. The problem with "Cuntboy" was "Cunt" is a derogatory term and "Boy" suggests immaturity. Vagina is not a derogatory term, and "Man" suggest maturity on the subject. Same for Phallus and Lady.

Furrin_Gok said:
No, they aren't. We're tagging based on the sexual organs present, if you cannot wrap your head around that, then we'll have another user who decides to leave the site, big whoop. The problem with "Cuntboy" was "Cunt" is a derogatory term and "Boy" suggests immaturity. Vagina is not a derogatory term, and "Man" suggest maturity on the subject. Same for Phallus and Lady.

This is the second time now youve essentially implied that I should remove my art/leave the site.

:/

That aside. Yeah they are. The problem with cboy and dgirl extends beyond just the rude words that make up them.

Vagentleman sounds cute on a surface level but its still just as objectifying demeaning and etc.