I've been slowly working on a very well worded case to make for my stance on the issue with testimonials from as many people as possible with both positive and negative points to my proposal.

Which is why I haven't really posted in this thread too much lately but.

It baffles me that Ivè gained so much hate and vitriol from people that someone felt they needed to make an alt account just to personally attack me??

K.

Anyway. I'm still working on this and trying to come up with a valid answer that is mutually beneficial to all parties.

My favorite part of this thread is how every couple pages another person crops up trying to claim that they aren't slurs, or that people should just grin and bear it, or any number of other things that people have moved on from days or weeks prior. It was so bizarre reading "Here's a lot of sensible discussion about what would make for better tags." interspersed with "Well I'm not offended, so you shouldn't be!

I think it's impressive that you managed to keep from going insane and giving up this long, and I wanted to say I hope you're able to make a change to something that's less objectifying and derogatory. :)

MonstruousDesires said:
My favorite part of this thread is how every couple pages another person crops up trying to claim that they aren't slurs, or that people should just grin and bear it, or any number of other things that people have moved on from days or weeks prior. It was so bizarre reading "Here's a lot of sensible discussion about what would make for better tags." interspersed with "Well I'm not offended, so you shouldn't be!

I think it's impressive that you managed to keep from going insane and giving up this long, and I wanted to say I hope you're able to make a change to something that's less objectifying and derogatory. :)

Why are you bumping a dead thread?

FoxFourOhFour said:
Why are you bumping a dead thread?

Better than making a new one. I'm still trying to figure out a good way to handle this without disrupting what's already working.

FoxFourOhFour said:
Why are you bumping a dead thread?

It's okay to bump threads as long as you aren't disruptive and are contributing to the thread.

GDelscribe said:
I'm still trying to figure out a good way to handle this without disrupting what's already working.

This is my main concern here. It's a massive set of tags and correcting all that if something goes wrong can be quite a mess. :/

MonstruousDesires said:
"Well I'm not offended, so you shouldn't be!

Changing things because someone is offended is a very bad precedent to set.

Beanjam said:
Changing things because someone is offended is a very bad precedent to set.

Yes, especially when offense is the only reason given for wanting change. Though in this case, consistency (among other reasons), is a good cause for updating old tags.

parasprite said:
It's okay to bump threads as long as you aren't disruptive and are contributing to the thread.

This is my main concern here. It's a massive set of tags and correcting all that if something goes wrong can be quite a mess. :/

Right now in all honesty it's looking like making the tags change to intersex_female/male respectively by body type is the best and easiest way to handle it.

Its what we already do since they're under the bracket and its lit no different from what we're already using except:
It's more consistent by design
Gets rid of the slurs themselves
Its cleaner to look at

Beanjam said:
Changing things because someone is offended is a very bad precedent to set.

Maybe so but there's a big difference between "someone is offended" and "a massive number of people actively agree these terms are outdated and bad to use and go out of their way to remove them even when they apply to the character because they don't want a goddamn slur on their character that is a literal representation of themselves."

A tag is an issue when people actively remove it because they do not like it and do not want to see the TAG when it is what fits the image.

Its like the recent bestiality topic that cropped up.

Beanjam said:
Changing things because someone is offended is a very bad precedent to set.

depends, if its just one person or many of the demographic that the descriptions/names/tags are applied to...

Mascul-intersex or masculine-intersex (cuntboys)
Femin-intersex or feminine-intersex (dickgirls)
Fem-herm (herm, this means removing the implication) or herm-intersex (this wouldn't mean removing the implication)
Male-herm (maleherm) or maleherm-intersex

(If you don't get the shortened words, masculine intersex and feminine intersex.)

There would be the emphasis that they are intersexes with the masculine or feminine body, making intersex a bit more of a gender tag and a bit less of an umbrella tag.

All males have masculine traits and all females have feminine traits, as primary traits for determining gender. From there, you can argue that intersexes possess the same, but are separate genders. This can also include tomboy (I don't know why but I don't like that term) and girly as to declare the secondary gender traits (cuntboys that are girly would be mascul-intersex & girly). This, specifically, is because ambiguous genders can also have girly or tomboy.

Im actually exceedingly happy with using masculine-intersex and feminine-intersex because it literally, by our tagging rules, can't be mistaken.

Siral_Exan said:
Mascul-intersex or masculine-intersex (cuntboys)
Femin-intersex or feminine-intersex (dickgirls)

and feminine_intersex (with underscores, not hyphens) sound quite good and usable to me. The abbreviations are a little cheesy, though.

Siral_Exan said:
Fem-herm (herm, this means removing the implication) or herm-intersex (this wouldn't mean removing the implication)
Male-herm (maleherm) or maleherm-intersex

This confuses me. What implication? herm --> intersex? Why would that need to be removed? Also, for symmetry, maybe change them to feminine_herm and masculine_herm.

There are a couple ways I can see the implications going here. Which one makes more sense?

• intersex
• masculine_intersex (aliased from cuntboy)
• masculine_herm (aliased from maleherm)
• feminine_intersex (aliased from dickgirl)
• feminine_herm (aliased from herm)

OR

• intersex
• masculine_intersex (aliased from cuntboy)
• feminine_intersex (aliased from dickgirl)
• masculine_herm (aliased from maleherm)
• feminine_herm (aliased from herm)

The first one makes more sense to me, but it would make searching exclusively for herms/maleherms more difficult.

Maleherm implies herm. I literally do not know why... using a female term for herm means the implication should be removed.

Siral_Exan said:
Maleherm implies herm. I literally do not know why... using a female term for herm means the implication should be removed.

Ah. Yeah, that implication doesn't make sense, especially if we're revamping everything.

Maxpizzle said:
masculine_intersex and feminine_intersex (with underscores, not hyphens) sound quite good and usable to me. The abbreviations are a little cheesy, though.

This confuses me. What implication? herm --> intersex? Why would that need to be removed? Also, for symmetry, maybe change them to feminine_herm and masculine_herm.

There are a couple ways I can see the implications going here. Which one makes more sense?

• intersex
• masculine_intersex (aliased from cuntboy)
• masculine_herm (aliased from maleherm)
• feminine_intersex (aliased from dickgirl)
• feminine_herm (aliased from herm)

OR

• intersex
• masculine_intersex (aliased from cuntboy)
• feminine_intersex (aliased from dickgirl)
• masculine_herm (aliased from maleherm)
• feminine_herm (aliased from herm)

The first one makes more sense to me, but it would make searching exclusively for herms/maleherms more difficult.

the latter would be preferable as *_intersex would be based on actual visible genitalia while *_herm is limited mostly to secondary characteristics of the body figure when differentiating between masculine and feminine. Also to prevent herms from being harder find the latter is also akin to the order that we presently have so switching over would be easyer on that one. PS: concerning herms what whould be done with androgynous and mixed forms, not always is it possible to decide if its masculine or feminine from the avialible secondary characteristics, one could have breasts or teats but otherwise have a almost completly masculine form or no traits what so ever outside of genitalia.

Ruku said:
PS: concerning herms what whould be done with androgynous and mixed forms, not always is it possible to decide if its masculine or feminine from the avialible secondary characteristics, one could have breasts or teats but otherwise have a almost completly masculine form or no traits what so ever outside of genitalia.

It sounds like that would have to be handled case-by-case. Do you have any example posts?

Beanjam said:
Changing things because someone is offended is a very bad precedent to set.

i wish i could upvote forum posts but here, settle for a +1 instead.

Maxpizzle said:
It sounds like that would have to be handled case-by-case. Do you have any example posts?

let see my OC darou post #939757 post #948786 or Ryken post #834818, maloo post #842324 among others as well as many feral herms post #916275 post #673457 that have no defining traits at all outside of just genitalia

f-herm and m-herm would have to have a middle ground just like there is semi-anthro between feral and anthro...

Ruku said:
f-herm and m-herm would have to have a middle ground just like there is semi-anthro between feral and anthro...

Hm. How's androgynous_herm sound?

Maxpizzle said:
Hm. How's androgynous_herm sound?

That works.

What exactly would herm mean then? If someone searched for herm, what do you think he should find?

^ Maxpizzle's post defines that as 'feminine_herm'. So far, no one has objected to this. Personally I think it's quite reasonable currently, given the relative frequency of herm (94.2% / 7684 posts) vs maleherm (5.8% / 471 posts).

To clarify, the wiki currently defines herm as "Female's body, with both a pussy and a penis." That's why it makes sense for herm to be aliased to feminine_herm under the proposed system - for backwards compatibility.

Eventually, after people get used to the proposed system, we might be able to change what "herm" means. Maybe it could be an umbrella tag for feminine_herm, masculine_herm and androgynous_herm. But taggers would first have to stop typing herm where they mean feminine_herm, and that can only come with time.

Laziness (which is one of the more frustrating arguments against this change) is always going to be one of the big enemies of a good tagging base and system.

Same with ignorance. And we're always gonna have bad tags or mistagged posts.

But honestly I like how this could work out. Just using herm as it's own umbrella and then specifying with sub tags.makes it easy to find all the art you're into all at once and then blacklist what you specifically don't want. True it might not always work out but over time as people learn it the system could be much better than it even is now

NotMeNotYou said:
Just because it's only about 5% of our users that might have a problem with the current tags doesn't mean we need to rub our dicks all over their faces while yelling how their problem is imagined.

For context, I invite NotMeNotYou look at the tags used on F-list. Lotsa "cuntboy" and "dickgirl"/"futanari"/etc. there. That's what they're gonna use to search on here. Should we insist on a weird system just to appease 5% of the userbase? If so, why does the opinion of one of the 5% users count more than mine or anyone else's?

Furrin_Gok said:
That seems to go oddly against
But then again, that happened two years ago: forum #29136. Looking over the tags aliased to invalid_tag, I do not see any guns, so apparently that has been undone.

The admins should have just left well enough alone--let us gun nuts worry about the gun tagging, and if you don't know the model don't bother with or worry about it. Tagging the fetishes, species and physical descriptors in the pic is what's important. Who gives a flying fuck if there's ranged_weapon in the tags? You can leave that stuff out entirely.

In both cases, the admins should have just ignored things and let us do what we want.

DSR1337 said:
For context, I invite NotMeNotYou look at the tags used on F-list. Lotsa "cuntboy" and "dickgirl"/"futanari"/etc. there. That's what they're gonna use to search on here. Should we insist on a weird system just to appease 5% of the userbase? If so, why does the opinion of one of the 5% users count more than mine or anyone else's?

it would not impact searching in any way because of aliases. the old terms will be aliased to new terms and the old terms can still be used in tagging and searching normally. like gay is aliased to male/male and searching for gay will show male/male results and putting gay in tags will replace it automatically with male/male. only thing it will affect is what words show up in post's tag lists

I completely disagree with OP and any attempt to add these or similar tags as aliases or even acknowledge them.

As far as I'm concerned it's best to not even humor this train of thought because it only leads to more people whining about more perceived insults.

We don't need to humor people complaining about other people maybe being possibly offended by a tag, this site and its policies have far more pressing REAL problems to deal with.

Problems such as the inability of staff to fully agree upon irrelevancy, problems such as staff being afraid of deleting old content to suit new standards because it'd punish users that uploaded said old content when there's a very obvious way to prevent such cleanup from affecting said users.

Probems like DNS attacks, problems like memory usage, problems like how to pay the bills, problems like.. well, you get it. REAL problems, not made up problems thought up by someone in an effort to appease someone that doesn't exist - that nonexistent person being the person that isn't named Aurali and still actually finds these terms GENUINELY offensive.

AnotherDay said:
I completely disagree with OP and any attempt to add these or similar tags as aliases or even acknowledge them.

As far as I'm concerned it's best to not even humor this train of thought because it only leads to more people whining about more perceived insults.

We don't need to humor people complaining about other people maybe being possibly offended by a tag, this site and its policies have far more pressing REAL problems to deal with.

Problems such as the inability of staff to fully agree upon irrelevancy, problems such as staff being afraid of deleting old content to suit new standards because it'd punish users that uploaded said old content when there's a very obvious way to prevent such cleanup from affecting said users.

Probems like DNS attacks, problems like memory usage, problems like how to pay the bills, problems like.. well, you get it. REAL problems, not made up problems thought up by someone in an effort to appease someone that doesn't exist - that nonexistent person being the person that isn't named Aurali and still actually finds these terms GENUINELY offensive.

Stop saying this is just a "Percieved insult." We've lost a lot of good artists over the very usage of these tags, it's a real problem.

AnotherDay said:

snip

I completely disagree with OP and any attempt to add these or similar tags as aliases or even acknowledge them.

As far as I'm concerned it's best to not even humor this train of thought because it only leads to more people whining about more perceived insults.

We don't need to humor people complaining about other people maybe being possibly offended by a tag, this site and its policies have far more pressing REAL problems to deal with.

Problems such as the inability of staff to fully agree upon irrelevancy, problems such as staff being afraid of deleting old content to suit new standards because it'd punish users that uploaded said old content when there's a very obvious way to prevent such cleanup from affecting said users.

Probems like DNS attacks, problems like memory usage, problems like how to pay the bills, problems like.. well, you get it. REAL problems, not made up problems thought up by someone in an effort to appease someone that doesn't exist - that nonexistent person being the person that isn't named Aurali and still actually finds these terms GENUINELY offensive.

I like the fact that you brought stuff, problems both in reality and not, to a thread that is completely irrelevant to anything you gave as an example. All of the participating users here are working together, whether it looks like it or not, to solve a problem. A problem that is just as real as the ones that aren't in reality, and may have partial influence on reality.

If you don't want to participate in this, go start banging your head to solve your problems, while we work together to solve our own. But if you think you can help, then please do so. An extra hand can definitely used here.

Okay, so lemme see if I understand this correctly... only 5% of the userbase of this website are offended by the terms cuntboy and dickgirl, so we have to throw the baby out with the bathwater? It's unnecessary to change something that doesn't need to be changed.

Lemme remind everyone who's anti-"slur-tags" that they seem to be the only one's offended by this. Literally 95% of the e621.net userbase are fine with this tagging scheme. Any further attempts would be counted as moot points (aka, shouting into the void).

When people say these terms are "problems", I just cringe.

Linicks said:
Okay, so lemme see if I understand this correctly... only 5% of the userbase of this website are offended by the terms cuntboy and dickgirl, so we have to throw the baby out with the bathwater? It's unnecessary to change something that doesn't need to be changed.

Lemme remind everyone who's anti-"slur-tags" that they seem to be the only one's offended by this. Literally 95% of the e621.net userbase are fine with this tagging scheme. Any further attempts would be counted as moot points (aka, shouting into the void).

When people say these terms are "problems", I just cringe.

Its likely far more than 5%. FAR far more. OTHERS are afraid to speak up about it because of backlash from people like yourself who act like it's a non issue.

It is.

We just had another artist get banned after changing tags on artwork of theirs to remove the slur tags.

They are a legitimate problem.

There are many artists who outright refuse to use this site because of this among other reasons.

Nobody is being hurt by changing the tags to something less offensive. WE have nothing to lose and only more artwork to gain by resolving this.

It's a huge problem. And people need to stop acting like everything that doesn't "immediately affect them personally" is a non issue.

Linicks said:
Okay, so lemme see if I understand this correctly... only 5% of the userbase of this website are offended by the terms cuntboy and dickgirl, so we have to throw the baby out with the bathwater? It's unnecessary to change something that doesn't need to be changed.

Lemme remind everyone who's anti-"slur-tags" that they seem to be the only one's offended by this. Literally 95% of the e621.net userbase are fine with this tagging scheme. Any further attempts would be counted as moot points (aka, shouting into the void).

When people say these terms are "problems", I just cringe.

keep in mind the only userbase we can account for in the most part are those frequenting the forum and that is about 40 regulars out of a couple thousand that frequent this website activly but chose not to perticipate at all on the forum and so arnt account for in the poll that was done a couple months ago. more then 90% of those dont deal with tagging or uploading so unless they are the owner they are likly not to have a opinion for ether direction just that they find and get their images easily and this change would not effect that. What is fact is that these slurs are established as actual derogatory terms irl for the demographic we are applying them to. Also considering the double standard, males and females are not tagged as dicks or cunts so why should forms of intersex? Its also fact that this site being outdated on nomenclature for forms of intersex is a real factor in keeping many artists from posting or allowing their art to be posted here.

GDelscribe said:
Its likely far more than 5%. FAR far more. OTHERS are afraid to speak up about it because of backlash from people like yourself who act like it's a non issue.

It is.

We just had another artist get banned after changing tags on artwork of theirs to remove the slur tags.

They are a legitimate problem.

There are many artists who outright refuse to use this site because of this among other reasons.

Nobody is being hurt by changing the tags to something less offensive. WE have nothing to lose and only more artwork to gain by resolving this.

It's a huge problem. And people need to stop acting like everything that doesn't "immediately affect them personally" is a non issue.

That's the thing. It's really not an issue. If artists don't like the rules of this website, then good. Gives them more time to explore other options. e621 is not the end-all, be-all of furry art.

And I don't appreciate being painted as a "big bad wolf" type who'll huff and puff until my opinion is the only one that matters. If they really want to express their outrage (or whatever) about this "issue", then by all means. But either people are really as docile as you make them out to be, or you're just full of shit.

Why should admins have to waste their time making these changes to a fundamentally-sound tagging method? This website has far more issues that a handful of artists/people getting offended by a term (in comparison to the amount of people who are against making changes to it). By your logic, we should just destroy everything that makes this website unique and rebuild it so that a very small amount of the userbase won't get triggered.

Well, 5% is still more than 0%. If we can easily have 0%, then why not?

A lot of stuff has been said in this thread and the issue has been sidetracked several times.

• We don't need to change tag hierarchy because the current one works just fine so the problem should be solved with simple aliasing
• Using "trans" in the name is bad. Because it's not specific enough
• Using "intersex" in the name is bad. Because it's not specific enough
• Using "morph" in the name is bad. Because it's not specific enough
• Using latin in the name is also bad. Because it's confusing (Is that something that appears with a female body or just female genitals?)

The best solution is sometimes the simplest one and it's the one that Siral_Exan proposed early in the thread which is:
cuntboy -> pussyboy
dickgirl -> penisgirl

Linicks, honestly, could you just stop?

Have you not even bothered to look at how this thread has gone so far? Everything you are mentioning has been brought up before, and has not convinced anyone. What you are doing right now is not productive.

At the very least, if you're going to do this, come up with a new argument. Otherwise, honestly, you're just wasting time.

Delian said:
Well, 5% is still more than 0%. If we can easily have 0%, then why not?

A lot of stuff has been said in this thread and the issue has been sidetracked several times.

• We don't need to change tag hierarchy because the current one works just fine so the problem should be solved with simple aliasing
• Using "trans" in the name is bad. Because it's not specific enough
• Using "intersex" in the name is bad. Because it's not specific enough
• Using "morph" in the name is bad. Because it's not specific enough
• Using latin in the name is also bad. Because it's confusing (Is that something that appears with a female body or just female genitals?)

The best solution is sometimes the simplest one and it's the one that Siral_Exan proposed early in the thread which is:
cuntboy -> pussyboy
dickgirl -> penisgirl

No. No no holy piss no those are way worse.
We already use intersex as an umbrella tag. Intersex_male and intersex_female are perfectly good tags that work just fine among tons of other suggested tags that work just fine. THERE is no lack of detail or information there.

Linicks said:
That's the thing. It's really not an issue. If artists don't like the rules of this website, then good. Gives them more time to explore other options. e621 is not the end-all, be-all of furry art.

And I don't appreciate being painted as a "big bad wolf" type who'll huff and puff until my opinion is the only one that matters. If they really want to express their outrage (or whatever) about this "issue", then by all means. But either people are really as docile as you make them out to be, or you're just full of shit.

Why should admins have to waste their time making these changes to a fundamentally-sound tagging method? This website has far more issues that a handful of artists/people getting offended by a term (in comparison to the amount of people who are against making changes to it). By your logic, we should just destroy everything that makes this website unique and rebuild it so that a very small amount of the userbase won't get triggered.

I didn't spend 20 pages arguing against people with he same ridiculous "you mad bro" points as you to have you come out of nowhere to dredge this up and paint it as a non issue. I'M sorry but no.

THREE things. Stop being alarmist. Nothing is getting destroyed. Nothing will be made worse by doing this nothing else is being changed. JUST one thing that literally pushes away tons of artists.

I mean if you're fine with that by all means but many people have expressed that more art == better. And I agree wholesale. WE dont want to push people away. And your "this is our club and they can stay out" mentality helps nobody.

Lastly, you've proven my point. You have no interest in any actual civil discussion. AND a lot of others in the thread so far have been exactly the same way. there are a lot of people who don't use the forums at all. I was here for a long time before I even knew the place HAD a damn forum. Factor in the amount of people who don't know there is a forum. And the people who are non confrontational, or quiet or lurkers, then factor in the amount of people who are staying quiet because they don't want to deal with 20 pages of pure and utter bull over something that should be a simple discussion over the best Avenue not arguing about how "oh no these babies are all triggered kek"

Also 5% is much bigger than you think. Take the population of America for example. Do you know how many people that is? 5% of the population is 16205939.

Thats still 16 million people. 16. million.

The estimated number of non closeted individuals in the us is only 3.8

Thats big enough to change laws in the country and that's WAY LESS than 5%.

so no.

GDelscribe said:
No. No no holy piss no those are way worse.
We already use intersex as an umbrella tag. Intersex_male and intersex_female are perfectly good tags that work just fine among tons of other suggested tags that work just fine. THERE is no lack of detail or information there.

Explain to me how intersex_male provides more information than pussy_male.

Wondering if something like feminine_intersex and masculine_intersex might be better options than the female/male_intersex since it may describe overall body appearance more whereas male and female tends to make people focus on genitals in particular.

It's a thought.

Delian said:
Explain to me how intersex_male provides more information than pussy_male.

The tags are based on body type not genitals, thats a big part of the motivation for changing them in the first place.

Ratte said:
Wondering if something like feminine_intersex and masculine_intersex might be better options than the female/male_intersex since it may describe overall body appearance more whereas male and female tends to make people focus on genitals in particular.

It's a thought.

Thats actually way way better, yeah!
I can get behind that and it goes along with the other really well recieved idea of using the masculine_with etc tags, so yeah Id like to go with that personally. Thank you Ratte!

Stop being alarmist. Nothing is getting destroyed.

I'm not being an alarmist. This kind of talk about change (to something that doesn't need to be changed, mind you) drills open a hole for other unnecessary change. The moment we try to change an already rusty system is the moment it starts to fail.

And your "this is our club and they can stay out" mentality helps nobody.

Thank you. Thank you for putting words in my mouth. Thank you for attempting to make my arguments seem childish. This website has nearly 1 million pictures. I don't think a few butthurt artists is really going to make an impact on this website.

You have no interest in any actual civil discussion.

Oh, is that correct? I'm just here to kek it up, am I? Maybe you're ideas are so convoluted that you refuse to see any value in anybody else's opinions. Maybe you're so militant in your beliefs that you always play the victim card when people are trying to reason with you.

There are a lot of people who don't use the forums at all.

If they feel so strongly about an issue, why don't they stand up about it? Just like voting, if you don't share your opinion about something, people can only assume you don't have one.

Factor in the amount of people who don't know there is a forum.

No, people know we have a forum. It's right there in the navbar. People who try to claim that they didn't know we have a forum simply weren't looking for it. It's really hard to miss.

Also 5% is much bigger than you think.

No, not really. 318.9 million exist in the United States alone. 5% of that is just pocket change.

...because they don't want to deal with 20 pages of pure and utter bull over something that should be a simple discussion over the best Avenue...

So you shouldn't have asked if you weren't looking for a confrontation. Simply consulting with admins via Dmail would've saved you the trouble.
Also, don't you know you can blacklist users who you don't want to hear from? I had you blacklisted for the longest time.

Ratte said:
Wondering if something like feminine_intersex and masculine_intersex might be better options than the female/male_intersex since it may describe overall body appearance more whereas male and female tends to make people focus on genitals in particular.

It's a thought.

Honestly I think those are pretty good solutions, the more I think about it.

Particularly because I seem to recall a thread not too long ago about possibly changing the term we use to refer to herms away from "intersex", because it's not accurate for them. I don't really know about that, and I don't know if that's a good idea or not, but if there is some potential for that, that would solve the singular issue that the masculine_intersex and feminine_intersex tags might have (that is, being applied to herm characters as well).

GDelscribe said:
The tags are based on body type not genitals, thats a big part of the motivation for changing them in the first place.

You didn't answer my question.

So again, I would like to ask you to provide proof that the word intersex provides more information and is more specific than the word pussy.

And the same goes to you Ratte. Prove how feminine provides more information than female. Because if you can do that then, congratulations, you have proven that we should alias female to feminine.

Delian said:
You didn't answer my question.

So again, I would like to ask you to provide proof that the word intersex provides more information and is more specific than the word pussy.

And the same goes to you Ratte. Prove how feminine provides more information than female. Because if you can do that then, congratulations, you have proven that we should alias female to feminine.

"Feminine" provides more clarity in this case, because in the case of cuntboy and dickgirl, both have characteristics associated with females, but only one of the two has characteristics that would be associated with feminine.

This does not mean that female should be aliased to feminine because the two terms have different meanings and uses. Providing more information doesn't mean that one tag is better than another, and indeed the opposite may hold true. female_lizard unarguably provides more information than female, but is not a useful tag, where as female is.

You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what makes a tag worthwhile. "Provides more information" is not the relevant criteria here. At all.

Clawdragons said:
"Feminine" provides more clarity in this case, because in the case of cuntboy and dickgirl, both have characteristics associated with females, but only one of the two has characteristics that would be associated with feminine.

Feminine features include pussy. So saying that cuntboy does not have feminine features is you know.

Or are you talking about non-genital feminine features? In this case, you are also you know. Because then your statement about both terms being associated with females is no longer valid.

Clawdragons said:
"Provides more information" is not the relevant criteria here. At all.

But I'll give you a chance to figure it out by yourself first :P

I'm not at all about to read through the last twenty-one pages because I get the impression from this page, that I'd need to use every bit of my migraine meds to get through it all, but, can someone, anyone, explain to me, WHAT EXACTLY a 'Slur tag' is? I mean, when I think of a slur, I think of an epitaph along the lines of the N-word, or 'faggot', or other racially, or sexuality-driven epitaph, but for some reason, 'Cuntboy' and 'Dickgirl' just doesn't strike the same impression as N-word, or such. Maybe I'm biased because some of the best sex in my life have stemmed from FtMs who verbally identified themselves as 'cuntboys', or maybe because its like how my boyfriend and pet [IRL] are MtFs, and refer to themselves as dickgirls often, that I've come to think of both terms as a casual term, in the same regard of casuality as saying 'cop' instead of police officer, or in my profession, saying paragod instead of paramedic, etc. Neither of those terms are associated as being 'bad' or 'slur' level, and are just a more evolved way of conversational pieces.

I can't help but to feel that this is just another attempt to change what isn't broke, and is a free and fair ideal, into something that suits the sort of people who believe in wage-gaps, and first world oppression of those whom are born with mammaries.

Going by the very definition of the word 'feminine', is to have female qualities, without being strictly female. Such as a male who is feminine, being they may prefer to wear female clothing, or beauty creams/facial paint, or talk in a manner that suggests the opposite of masculine traits. So no, Female should not be an alias for feminine, in that doing so, would also cause words to be the alias of broader words, on the level of taking fox, and aliasing it to Felid, because foxes do have some feline traits, but are not themselves, felines, but because they have feline qualities, we'll just call them felines.

I'm of the opinion that 'cuntboy', and 'dickgirl', are perfectly fine, and don't need to be changed, on the basis that what works for the gander, works for the goose. Whenever a large community decides to play to a very, VERY, slim margin of people, at the expense of the vast majority, then the only things to come of it, are droves of people who will do everything and anything, to fight against what is being doing. Not to drag in politics, or other things into the mix, but for an example of a governing body playing to the cries of a few, against the majority, you can look to every nation and their respective history, to see the outcome of it, and how it has affected them.

Just my two pence, though.

Marflebark said:
I'm not at all about to read through the last twenty-one pages because I get the impression from this page, that I'd need to use every bit of my migraine meds to get through it all, but, can someone, anyone, explain to me, WHAT EXACTLY a 'Slur tag' is? I mean, when I think of a slur, I think of an epitaph along the lines of the N-word, or 'faggot', or other racially, or sexuality-driven epitaph, but for some reason, 'Cuntboy' and 'Dickgirl' just doesn't strike the same impression as N-word, or such. Maybe I'm biased because some of the best sex in my life have stemmed from FtMs who verbally identified themselves as 'cuntboys', or maybe because its like how my boyfriend and pet [IRL] are MtFs, and refer to themselves as dickgirls often, that I've come to think of both terms as a casual term, in the same regard of casuality as saying 'cop' instead of police officer, or in my profession, saying paragod instead of paramedic, etc. Neither of those terms are associated as being 'bad' or 'slur' level, and are just a more evolved way of conversational pieces.

I can't help but to feel that this is just another attempt to change what isn't broke, and is a free and fair ideal, into something that suits the sort of people who believe in wage-gaps, and first world oppression of those whom are born with mammaries.

Going by the very definition of the word 'feminine', is to have female qualities, without being strictly female. Such as a male who is feminine, being they may prefer to wear female clothing, or beauty creams/facial paint, or talk in a manner that suggests the opposite of masculine traits. So no, Female should not be an alias for feminine, in that doing so, would also cause words to be the alias of broader words, on the level of taking fox, and aliasing it to Felid, because foxes do have some feline traits, but are not themselves, felines, but because they have feline qualities, we'll just call them felines.

I'm of the opinion that 'cuntboy', and 'dickgirl', are perfectly fine, and don't need to be changed, on the basis that what works for the gander, works for the goose. Whenever a large community decides to play to a very, VERY, slim margin of people, at the expense of the vast majority, then the only things to come of it, are droves of people who will do everything and anything, to fight against what is being doing. Not to drag in politics, or other things into the mix, but for an example of a governing body playing to the cries of a few, against the majority, you can look to every nation and their respective history, to see the outcome of it, and how it has affected them.

Just my two pence, though.

Oh, trust me. After I made my latest comment, nobody here who's pro-tag-change wants to listen to the voice of reason. It's pretty much shouting into the void at this point.

Delian said:
Feminine features include pussy. So saying that cuntboy does not have feminine features is you know.

No, it doesn't.

Delian said:
And the same goes to you Ratte. Prove how feminine provides more information than female. Because if you can do that then, congratulations, you have proven that we should alias female to feminine.

Um, how? Feminine/girly is used on male characters (as in, with a penis and a flat chest/pecs) who appear feminine. Using feminine_intersex to describe a dickgirl sounds like it's doing what it's supposed to be doing.

As it is, we make considerations for overall bodytype and body features when discerning a character's gender in an image, otherwise we would have to apply ambiguous_gender to anything that doesn't expose genitals. While "feminine features include pussy" that is not the only thing that it means, otherwise tags like cuntboy and dickgirl wouldn't be in use at all in the first place.

Delian, first off, there is absolutely no need for such an attitude. I am disappointed in you right now. Very much so, actually.

I honestly don't even want to dignify you with a response, given that attitude, but I probably ought to anyway, to have it on record.

Let's start here:

Delian said:

Clawdragons said:
"Provides more information" is not the relevant criteria here. At all.

You know.

But I'll give you a chance to figure it out by yourself first :P

I'll ask again: Which tag provides more information: female_lizard or female?

There is a correct and obvious answer. female_lizard provides more information.

So tell me, ought we alias female to female_lizard, since it provides more information?

The answer is no. And I don't need to play games about it either. The answer is absolutely, unequivocally no. One of these tags provides more information than the other, but it is the worse tag.

The core of your argument is wrong.

Honestly, the very fact that we have an implication tool on this site proves your premise wrong. If one tag is implied to another, it means that it provides all the information from that tag, and then some. If an image includes a charmander, you know it contains pokémon, hence why charmander implies pokémon. But you'll note we've not aliased the two terms.

So on that note, have 350 pages of examples as to why you are incorrect about this.

Also, Ratte did a quite good job explaining the difference between the usage of feminine/girly and female, so I'm leaving it here.

Clawdragons said:
Delian, first off, there is absolutely no need for such an attitude. I am disappointed in you right now. Very much so, actually.

Haha, I'm sorry. Please forgive me.

I'll explain everything :P
You mention female_lizard, and you're correct that female_lizard provides more information than female. It also provides more information than lizard. In fact, female_lizard provides more information (in current tagging system) than the sum of female + lizard, because it tells us that both tags appear on the same character, while the two tags separately would not. The crucial fact here is the image. An image is an analog model of reality. Using sub-models that are tags, with the purpose to have the sum of sub-models create a digital model as close as possible to the analog one. Ignore the last two sentances.
We can only use female to tag an image that contains females. Similarily we can only use female_lizard if the image actually contains a female lizard. The point is, if there was an image of a female lizard, then using female_lizard would be a much better tag than female, or lizard, or both tags combined. In this case, we can unarguably say that female_lizard is a better tag than female because the tag provides more information.

As for the whole aliasing thing, you totally misunderstood that. What I meant there was that, if a tag's name has a more specific meaning, but still applies to all the same images that the other tag does (female does not apply to all the same images that female_lizard does, whereas feminine could apply to images with female), then it would've been a better tag.

intersex is less specific than pussy, and feminine is less specific than female. So logically they're worse than the existing tag.

Sorry again for the mind games ;)

By your logic, it would follow that on an image, say, my profile picture, female_feral_samurott_with_open_mouth_panting_while_vaginally_penetrated_by_a_penis would be an excellent tag.

Do you really not see how that's not the case, despite being packed full of information?

If you really don't understand why that would be a bad tag, then honestly I can't help you.

Delian, what is missing from your definition is 'well factored'. More specific information that is well factored is good, because if it's well factored it should be a) easy to apply, b) easy to search, c) easy to understand -- obvious, ideally.

A well factored solution for your case would be "[ female lizard ]" -- that is, a) implement tag grouping, and b) create a group in the post's tags, containing both 'female' and 'lizard'.

Beyond that I'll just say that my opinion of concatenation hacks ("female_lizard") is they are hacks.

Clawdragons said:
If you really don't understand why that would be a bad tag, then honestly I can't help you.

The tag you mentioned is definitely bad. It's totally useless. :D

You see, up above, we weren't talking about an absolute value of a tag, but a relative one. Comparing one tag to the other, and only short tags. If we talk about an absolute value of a tag, then other factors become apparent, such as character length, probability distribution, readability, etc.

The tag you mentioned loses a lot of value due to length, and due to too low probability. On the topic of character length, cuntboy - masculine_intersex, I think the last one loses quite a bit of points here :P

One last thing. If your tag was aliased to something short, let's say cd, and you were looking for only a single post, the one in your avatar. One-in-a-million. In this case, one could say that your tag was perfect, because it would allow you to find the exact one post you were looking for.

We've got a bit off topic now.

savageorange said:
a) implement tag grouping, and b) create a group in the post's tags, containing both 'female' and 'lizard'.

I know. I specifically mentioned "in current taggin system", where reliable factorization is impossible.

Delian said:
The tag you mentioned loses a lot of value due to length, and due to too low probability. On the topic of character length, cuntboy - masculine_intersex, I think the last one loses quite a bit of points here :P

Yep, and that'd make some tags kind of awkward.
Feminine_intersex/masculine_intersex, feminine_intersex_domination, masculine_intersex_on_feral,...

Delian said:
I know. I specifically mentioned "in current taggin system", where reliable factorization is impossible.

That's a pretty pessimistic interpretation IMO. Current system is quite capable of good factorization ("female" + "lizard"), it just can't capture grouping of tags.

Which would be nice but from what I've seen, isn't that important -- we have things like huge swathes of basic tags (sex, sex act, species, (zero_pictured|solo|duo|group), (animated|video|..)) missing that are a far more serious obstacle to appropriate search results.

Certainly not important enough to try to emulate it via hacks.

Why is it that every single time I come back to peep this thread, some other person has trotted out 'oh, these are terms that other people are used to, what happens when they search it and find nothing'? If one thing has been made abundantly clear in this thread, it'd be done via aliasing. People will still search dickgirl and cuntboy and find what they're looking for. Hell, I will still type that, out of habit if nothing else.

I mean, come on. I can get not wanting to read 20+ pages. But assuming the people suggesting the change are as dense as concrete and that your objection hasn't been brought up multiple times before and worked around in a flash nigh-instantly is pretty much a sign you shouldn't even bother replying.

ForbiddenFruit said:
Why is it that every single time I come back to peep this thread, some other person has trotted out 'oh, these are terms that other people are used to, what happens when they search it and find nothing'? If one thing has been made abundantly clear in this thread, it'd be done via aliasing. People will still search dickgirl and cuntboy and find what they're looking for. Hell, I will still type that, out of habit if nothing else.

I mean, come on. I can get not wanting to read 20+ pages. But assuming the people suggesting the change are as dense as concrete and that your objection hasn't been brought up multiple times before and worked around in a flash nigh-instantly is pretty much a sign you shouldn't even bother replying.

I'm in full agreement. I get that people might be used to the existing tags but I mean I (and I'm sure everyone else) was used to the "gay" and "lesbian" tags, and even though they've changed you can still search under those tags and see what you want. Making this change would only help the site keep from driving away artists who find the existing terms offensive and hurts absolutely nobody, I don't see why it shouldn't happen.

GDelscribe said:
Its likely far more than 5%. FAR far more. OTHERS are afraid to speak up about it because of backlash from people like yourself who act like it's a non issue.

It is.

We just had another artist get banned after changing tags on artwork of theirs to remove the slur tags.

They are a legitimate problem.

There are many artists who outright refuse to use this site because of this among other reasons.

Nobody is being hurt by changing the tags to something less offensive. WE have nothing to lose and only more artwork to gain by resolving this.

It's a huge problem. And people need to stop acting like everything that doesn't "immediately affect them personally" is a non issue.

I don't care to use them, but I'm not actively affronted by them despite reasons some might think I should be in today's world. Some folks these days are afraid to speak up that they're not offended by things, because of the often quick and crude reactions that ammount to "If you're not offended by this, you support it and are the enemy". I don't speak up on it myself as much anymore because I'm tired of hearing the same Us Versus Them mentality from people who think they can shame others into changing their opinion or joining the angry cult.

I personally say that if a solution is settled on, then go for it; I would appreciate not having to keep the terms in my vocabulary because I can understand why some of my more reasonable friends and acquaintances are uncomfortable hearing them. But it needs to work; you don't make progress by taking a sledgehammer to the foundations, you create instability.

Ratte said:
Wondering if something like feminine_intersex and masculine_intersex might be better options than the female/male_intersex since it may describe overall body appearance more whereas male and female tends to make people focus on genitals in particular.

It's a thought.

I recall something like this being proposed earlier in this.......heated debate, and as I said then I'll say now, I can see that working.

Main thing I do see to be a potential issue, would be the lack of tag interaction beyond consistent and logical tag aliasing; a character that would now be tagged "dickgirl" and has a feminine body with breasts would per my understanding get tagged "feminine_intersex", along with what we tag "herm"; this is less an issue when looking for single-character posts by tossing in "-vagina" but throws off search accuracy when more than one character is in the post, presumably more than it does now when they have varied anatomy.

I honestly don't know if it'd be a big enough concern to worry over, and if it is I don't know of a practical solution for it, since I doubt tags could be made to interact via metatags or metadata IE "[dickgirl/feminine_intersex] female", looking for what we'd tag "dickgirl" now but not able to use "-vagina" since that'd conflict with "female" and throw no results; or "wolf [dickgirl/feminine_intersex] male" where the intersex character *is* the wolf, paired with a male, and not a male wolf with any intersex.....in fact I don't even know if that's possible without some advanced kind of image recognition software. So I'm mostly rambling.

dos_tacos said:
I'm in full agreement. I get that people might be used to the existing tags but I mean I (and I'm sure everyone else) was used to the "gay" and "lesbian" tags, and even though they've changed you can still search under those tags and see what you want. Making this change would only help the site keep from driving away artists who find the existing terms offensive and hurts absolutely nobody, I don't see why it shouldn't happen.

I'd think that the artists that avoid e621 or submit takedowns/DNP requests over tagging disputes are a relative minority compared to those who avoid it/DNP themselves over the widespread view of the site being, to quote more than a few popular artists, "a toxic cesspool", and those who attribute e621 as the source or primary villian behind Patreon leaks and the related. In the former case it's often driven by not being able to heavy hand the comments on their posts like they can on FA, and flagging genuine harassment for moderator action is not something they feel is an option, along with users not being afraid to call them out if they've happened to pull shit elsewhere; the latter is part e621's acquired rep, misleading or not, plus being more known/commonly thought of/spoken of compared to sites like G-EHentai or U18chan along with taking advantage of the fact that they can actually do something about it resulting in them directing all the blame here. Why curse at the sky for raining at you when you can't do anything to make it stop; but you can certainly chew someone out for dumping water on you.

404_ArtNotFound said:
I'd think that the artists that avoid e621 or submit takedowns/DNP requests over tagging disputes are a relative minority compared to those who avoid it/DNP themselves over the widespread view of the site being, to quote more than a few popular artists, "a toxic cesspool", and those who attribute e621 as the source or primary villian behind Patreon leaks and the related. In the former case it's often driven by not being able to heavy hand the comments on their posts like they can on FA, and flagging genuine harassment for moderator action is not something they feel is an option, along with users not being afraid to call them out if they've happened to pull shit elsewhere; the latter is part e621's acquired rep, misleading or not, plus being more known/commonly thought of/spoken of compared to sites like G-EHentai or U18chan along with taking advantage of the fact that they can actually do something about it resulting in them directing all the blame here. Why curse at the sky for raining at you when you can't do anything to make it stop; but you can certainly chew someone out for dumping water on you.

I don't mean to argue that, I could definitely believe that to be the case, but that doesn't mean that those who are affected by the current tags don't exist, and if making this change is something that only serves to satisfy some users and doesn't negatively impact anyone, it just makes sense to do it IMO.

dos_tacos said:
I don't mean to argue that, I could definitely believe that to be the case, but that doesn't mean that those who are affected by the current tags don't exist, and if making this change is something that only serves to satisfy some users and doesn't negatively impact anyone, it just makes sense to do it IMO.

I never said they don't exist; in fact I'm very not okay with the tactic of "erasing" or "invalidating" a demographic just because their existence makes a hole in one's argument.

Like I did say, yes, if a change is found that eliminates or lessens unnecessary issues, and creates little to no new substantial issues for everyone else, then I think it should be considered if not implemented.

404_ArtNotFound said:
I never said they don't exist; in fact I'm very not okay with the tactic of "erasing" or "invalidating" a demographic just because their existence makes a hole in one's argument.

Like I did say, yes, if a change is found that eliminates or lessens unnecessary issues, and creates little to no new substantial issues for everyone else, then I think it should be considered if not implemented.

Ah, sorry then, I might have misunderstood a little, looks like we're on the same page!

dos_tacos said:
Making this change would only help the site keep from driving away artists who find the existing terms offensive and hurts absolutely nobody, I don't see why it shouldn't happen.

Why? If I have seen this correctly, the gender determination on e621 is the problem (TWYS), not the name. If I were an artist, I would probably have a problem when a page says your character is a man, although he is a Maleherm.

Clawdragons said:
By your logic, it would follow that on an image, say, my profile picture, female_feral_samurott_with_open_mouth_panting_while_vaginally_penetrated_by_a_penis would be an excellent tag.

Do you really not see how that's not the case, despite being packed full of information?

If you really don't understand why that would be a bad tag, then honestly I can't help you.

What is your problem? Do you like to annoy users like Delian? I have only read and understood a fraction of the commentary. However, what I read in your comments and arguments, lets me come to the conclusion that you do not even concern the topic. You seem to be only negating the other opinion. Delian has given you a reasonable explanation and your reaction is to make it ridiculous with your word chain. You should know that there are "tag" rules and even if I do not know them all, shows me the fact that we often have only 1 "word" that such long chains are not allowed. For the reason, it is also nonsensical to come up with such a word chain argument. Delian's argument is not wrong, because a "tag" must contain a comprehensible information. Otherwise, we could also introduce the "tag" "something with breasts", which we then take for everything breasts (women, Herm, Dickgirl, machines, ....).

I do not understand the problem with the existing names, even though I think that there are better ones. Even if I do not like, I argue times with the argument of a user, from a different side. There are well-known terms, these are used on almost every page. So why introduce something that nobody knows?

"Cuntboy" says that I have a boy with vagina and besides Pussy_boy I have read nothing which is similar clearly to me what the character is. TWYS is the rule and I see a (man, boy, Anthro, Feral) with labia = kitten, vagina, cunt, or ...... I see something male with intersex, but the same applies to Maleherm too. I do not understand anyhow why one suddenly comes to the idea to link the gender with a superior word, which stands for all Intersex. This is like saying, this is a Snow_leopard_Leopard.

If we want to create a new name, then a general, not like cuntboy and dickgirl which suggest the age with. If we take intersex as a name component, we must also rename all other Intersex. Feminine and masculine are not in question, as also cuntboys and dickgirls can be feminine and masculine. Not for nothing, there is the "girly = feminine man" "tag".

PlüschTiger said:
Why? If I have seen this correctly, the gender determination on e621 is the problem (TWYS), not the name. If I were an artist, I would probably have a problem when a page says your character is a man, although he is a Maleherm.

I think that's a potential source of complaint too, but my understanding is the issue here is specifically the terms/slurs used for the current tags, having something that means the same thing but doesn't have the negative connotation cuntboy/dickgirl do would solve that. The issue of tag what you see vs know is a whole other beast, and I understand some artists take issue with that too, but I don't think that's what a lot of people are arguing for here.

PlüschTiger said:
What is your problem? Do you like to annoy users like Delian? I have only read and understood a fraction of the commentary. However, what I read in your comments and arguments, lets me come to the conclusion that you do not even concern the topic. You seem to be only negating the other opinion. Delian has given you a reasonable explanation and your reaction is to make it ridiculous with your word chain. You should know that there are "tag" rules and even if I do not know them all, shows me the fact that we often have only 1 "word" that such long chains are not allowed. For the reason, it is also nonsensical to come up with such a word chain argument. Delian's argument is not wrong, because a "tag" must contain a comprehensible information. Otherwise, we could also introduce the "tag" "something with breasts", which we then take for everything breasts (women, Herm, Dickgirl, machines, ....).

What I used was a tactic called reductio ad absurdum. The gist of it is that if an absurd, clearly false result can be obtained from accepting a premise as true, that premise can't be true.

In this case, Delian's assertion that the significant element, which makes a tag good or bad, is information content. I tried to demonstrate that that was clearly not true.

You and he both seem to be focusing quite a bit on the length, and, yes, that is an element for why the tag is bad, but it is not the only element.

A tag needs several elements to be good:

• A tag needs to have either searching value or blacklisting value.
• A tag ought not be overly specific.
• A tag ought not be too subjective.
• A tag is better when it is easily comprehensible.
• A tag ought not to be derogatory or trollish.
• A tag should generally not be unnecessarily long.
• A tag should not be redundant.
• tags ought not cause too much work for users.

When looking at a tag, these are all factors to take into consideration. There might be some other factors as well.

If we look at the tag I proposed, we can see exactly how it fails. It is ridiculously long, but also, it is so specific that it will not be useful to anyone for searching or blacklisting. You could, theoretically, replace the tag with something smaller, but which means the same. Say, an acronym: ffswompwvpbap. The tag is reasonable in length now, but is incomprehensible, and still overly specific.

Anyway! My point is this: This is how I think tags are judged, in reality. There are a number of factors, and a tag may be fine in some areas but problematic in others. Is masculine_intersex a better tag than pussy_male? Well, that's something we can try to examine, but NOT if we have completely different ideas about what makes a tag good. Delian was focusing exclusively on a factor that I do not think is relevant, so before we could even discuss which tag possibilities are better than others, we had to at least try to come to an agreement on what criteria to use.

Maybe you find that annoying, in which case, feel free to be annoyed.

Does that mean you still think information value of a tag is completely irrelevant? Have my explanations been all for naught? :P

Delian said:
Does that mean you still think information value of a tag is completely irrelevant? Have my explanations been all for naught? :P

Your arguments did not convince me that information value of a tag was directly relevant. I think a tag's information value impacts it's searching and blacklisting value, specificity and subjectivity, and comprehensibility, but the benefit of information cannot be narrowed down to "more information = good, less information = bad". There are times when less information makes for a better tag, and times when more information makes for a better tag, and there are times when both tags of high information and low information content are beneficial.

The purpose of tags is not primarily to reconstruct an image. The purpose of tags is primarily to help users find or avoid images they are looking for.

This has been my position from the beginning, so your explanations have, unfortunately, not convinced me of your point. They may have had some value in that they got me to clarify and elaborate my position, though. Always useful in a discussion like this to have a clear understanding where people are coming from, even if you disagree with them.

No one has posted an answer to a question I put forth a page or two ago; "What is a slur tag?" And because no one has been able to put forth a legitimate answer for what it means, then maybe there should be a change of the forum post to; "I don't like these certain tags, please change them to something that I like"

Marflebark said:
No one has posted an answer to a question I put forth a page or two ago; "What is a slur tag?" And because no one has been able to put forth a legitimate answer for what it means, then maybe there should be a change of the forum post to; "I don't like these certain tags, please change them to something that I like"

Look up the word slur and add the word "tag" to it, and you have your answer (the noun usage, at least). An insulting tag.

Marflebark said:
No one has posted an answer to a question I put forth a page or two ago; "What is a slur tag?" And because no one has been able to put forth a legitimate answer for what it means, then maybe there should be a change of the forum post to; "I don't like these certain tags, please change them to something that I like"

Marflebark said:
"I don't like these certain tags, please change them to something that I like"

This_Thread.jpg

Basically, that's all it really boils down too. Less "slur" and more "someone called me that word in a derogatory manor once, I don't like it, change it."

Siral_Exan said:
Look up the word slur and add the word "tag" to it, and you have your answer (the noun usage, at least). An insulting tag.

A bit broad don't you think? By that definition, coward is a slur tag because it's insulting.

A slur is a term considered offensive due to a stigma placed upon it, especially if the its definition is not offensive in any way. Many common words (eg. cockroach) can fall into this definition while most actual insults (eg. coward) don't because the offensive part lies within the definition itself.

BlueDingo said:
A bit broad don't you think? By that definition, coward is a slur tag because it's insulting.

A slur is a term considered offensive due to a stigma placed upon it, especially if the its definition is not offensive in any way. Many common words (eg. cockroach) can fall into this definition while most actual insults (eg. coward) don't because the offensive part lies within the definition itself.

We are trying to fix one set, the intersex tags. The stigma doesn't need to be on the site if it can be changed! (heavy emphasis there), and just because it does exist and works doesn't mean it should stay. Plenty of negative tags have been aliased away, we intend to make cuntboy and dickgirl follow suit.

Coward shouldn't exist as a tag either, as one person may see the fight-or-flight response, and another may see actual cowardice.

BlueDingo said:
A bit broad don't you think? By that definition, coward is a slur tag because it's insulting.

A slur is a term considered offensive due to a stigma placed upon it, especially if the its definition is not offensive in any way. Many common words (eg. cockroach) can fall into this definition while most actual insults (eg. coward) don't because the offensive part lies within the definition itself.

BlueDingo said:
A bit broad don't you think? By that definition, coward is a slur tag because it's insulting.

A slur is a term considered offensive due to a stigma placed upon it, especially if the its definition is not offensive in any way. Many common words (eg. cockroach) can fall into this definition while most actual insults (eg. coward) don't because the offensive part lies within the definition itself.

slur is more then likely a under statement, vulgar(disparaging/obscene) language would be more apt...
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cuntboy
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dickhead#English
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dickgirl
...

keep in mind that hundreds of people do edit and moderate wikis on wikipedia so they do stand for what the majority of public sees them as. lets put this simply for workplace a insult may get your paycheck slashed by a couple percent but the use of vulgarity may get you axted from your job....