Implicating mikhaila → female
Link to implication

Reason:

People keep confusing Mikhaila's gender very frequently so to solve this problem, I'm implying her name to the female tag

-1, Absolutely not.

This will go directly againts TWYS. Also many posts have tags locked that you cannot even add female in them even if you want to.

Mario69 said:
-1, Absolutely not.

This will go directly againts TWYS. Also many posts have tags locked that you cannot even add female in them even if you want to.

Wait, ever since when can you lock tags?

Mario69 said:
-1, Absolutely not.

This will go directly againts TWYS. Also many posts have tags locked that you cannot even add female in them even if you want to.

And what is TWYS?

Lilac_Sash said:
Wait, ever since when can you lock tags?

Relatively recently, don't remember exact date. You can see locked tags when editing post and they can only be modified by admins right now.

Lilac_Sash said:
And what is TWYS?

Thing you should know about if you do anything with tags.
https://e621.net/wiki/show/tag_what_you_see
https://e621.net/wiki/show/e621:tag_what_you_see_(explained)

TL;DR is that DO NOT tag what you know of the character, but only what you can see on the image. Especially with this character, if their lore is that they are female, if they look more like cuntboy, they should be tagged as cuntboy.

Mario69 said:
Relatively recently, don't remember exact date. You can see locked tags when editing post and they can only be modified by admins right now.

Thing you should know about if you do anything with tags.
https://e621.net/wiki/show/tag_what_you_see
https://e621.net/wiki/show/e621:tag_what_you_see_(explained)

TL;DR is that DO NOT tag what you know of the character, but only what you can see on the image. Especially with this character, if their lore is that they are female, if they look more like cuntboy, they should be tagged as cuntboy.

Thanks for your help. I'm new here BTW

-1

I've actually run into similar cases where there was a female character who just looked like a boy who was really girly. Even though I knew the character was female, TWYS says they get tagged under male and girly. You have to remember you are tagging from the point of view of something trying to find (or avoid) something who might not know the background.

There's also the matter of characters drawn as the gender opposite the one they are in Canon. R63 aka Crossgender means that we have to account for this. We do this for species too. Implications mean the second tag must exist on all images, but what if someone were to draw mikhaila as a guy?

Finally, we have to account for other characters with the same name. "Mikhaila" is a name that exists in real life (it's a variation of "Michael", specifically the variation "Mikael") which means it is more likely to be a name for more than one character.

I like how passionate the fans are about Mikhaila being female. As much as I myself like her as one even the artist stated that Mikhaila is androgynous.

Sorrowless said:
I like how passionate the fans are about Mikhaila being female. As much as I myself like her as one even the artist stated that Mikhaila is androgynous.

Feminine name form, of a name that in this spelling is usually masculine-only. And a visible lack of male parts.

"The artist stated" goes under lore and got to be ignored per TWYS.

hslugs said:
Feminine name form, of a name that in this spelling is usually masculine-only. And a visible lack of male parts.

"The artist stated" goes under lore and got to be ignored per TWYS.

Even the name wouldn't be enough anyway, since people can draw characters as something other than what they are in Canon. It's something that would have to be determined for each post individually.

kamimatsu said:
It's something that would have to be determined for each post individually.

Well yeah of course.
-1 to implication, stuff like that should never be implicated.

But tbh I don't think cuntboy should be used for this character either.
Like ten times out of ten it's androgynous or ambiguous_gender at most.

hslugs said:
Well yeah of course.
-1 to implication, stuff like that should never be implicated.

But tbh I don't think cuntboy should be used for this character either.
Like ten times out of ten it's androgynous or ambiguous_gender at most.

It should be male if there are no genitals displayed, yes.

Furrin_Gok said:
It should be male if there are no genitals displayed, yes.

Maybe, but androgynous or ambiguous_gender would be a better compromise.

Furrin_Gok said:
It should be male if there are no genitals displayed, yes.

That was actually what happened in the example I referred to. The character was female, but that was TWYK information, so the image was tagged male girly. Technically not correct, but to someone searching by what they see, the closest to something helpful.

Sorrowless said:
Maybe, but androgynous or ambiguous_gender would be a better compromise.

Depends on the ambiguity.

Furrin_Gok said:
It should be male if there are no genitals displayed, yes.

That's more like "no" really. On a scale of female-ambiguous-male, I'd put it somewhere in-between female and ambiguous. So one more reason for ambiguous_gender over anything else. Also highlights the problem with Y in TWYS.

kamimatsu said:
Depends on the ambiguity.

Very.

hslugs said:
Also highlights the problem with Y in TWYS.

Well, if there are two or more people clashing opinions on what they see, you can simply go get a staff member or make a ticket asking a gender decision. No matter how many "yous" there are or how many genders (or lack thereof) thrown around, these arguments are better when resolved than defaulted. This should be intuitive on a site that requests accurate tagging, but I give the benefit of doubt.

Frankly, I don't understand the arguments for this character being "ambiguous": they are of a humanoid body build, and since they aren't drawn with (many, in vital areas) patches of fur so using a human for reference is plausible, if not acceptable. They usually have a stock body (neither fat nor muscles when relaxed), so their bones and the skin lines from it give evidence to their gender. Regardless of if they're drawn male or female, you can find an identical human reference to determine whether their body is of a man's or a woman's build. This means, ignoring intersex and considering that they are nude, you can determine that they are male or female and not ambiguous. You can also use the gender chart if you so desire.

I do grant exceptions to the above, no system is perfect, but this system allows you to prove against them being tagged ambiguous gender for most cases.