https://e621.net/post/show/1546674/all_fours-ambiguous_penetration-animated-anthro-an

Here.

I should hardly have to say anything to continue this discourse, and no, I have no intention of letting go. Either allow the artist to change their tags or unlock it, and _the users that you claim this site is oriented towards WILL decide what is in the image._

Unless this is a site for moderators, and moderators only.

Lackwit said:
https://e621.net/post/show/1546674/all_fours-ambiguous_penetration-animated-anthro-an

Here.

I should hardly have to say anything to continue this discourse, and no, I have no intention of letting go. Either allow the artist to change their tags or unlock it, and _the users that you claim this site is oriented towards WILL decide what is in the image._

Unless this is a site for moderators, and moderators only.

That image is considered male/female, whats so hard to understand

Did you know you can state the canonical genders in the description

Edit: and if you're slick about it, you can format it in a way that's searchable.

Double edit: forum #256236

dude. this is an archive. its like a library. the library doesnt give a crap if author says that their comic is high fantasy comic that is just meant to look like sci-fi in every aspect except for the fact that some characters can use magic. it goes to the sci-fi section if it looks like sci-fi.

people looking into high fantasy section are not interested into reading stuff that definitely looks like sci-fi, but the author keeps saying that its actually high fantasy that just looks like sci-fi

-1
I really don't feel like going trough 1 500 000+ posts manually and asking around artists (some which are dead or left online precence) what they feel like their characters identify as, in the process breaking working system, because of handful of posts out of all everything making couple people mad.

Mairo said:
-1
I really don't feel like going trough 1 500 000+ posts manually and asking around artists (some which are dead or left online precence) what they feel like their characters identify as, in the process breaking working system.

It's not a matter of identification. It's that the character is literally male.

Yes, let's ruin the experience for every user who wants to find content reliably and with a standardized system just because some people dislike said system. An absolutely genius idea, I'm sure it can't backfire or does not exist anywhere else.

Lackwit said:
It's not a matter of identification. It's that the character is literally male.

What if artist said that this was male? Would you want to tag it as male?
post #1402744
If your answer was that no, because krystal is clearly female, then how about this?
post #107219

Mairo said:
What if artist said that this was male? Would you want to tag it as male?
post #1402744
If your answer was that no, because krystal is clearly female, then how about this?
post #107219

HO0W DARE YOU THE ARTIST SAid ITs male sO ITS MALE THe WeBSITE DOESN'T OWN THE ART TheARtIsTdOES YOu MUST ReSPECT THE artISTS INTENTIONS111!!!1!!1

Lackwit said:
It's not a matter of identification. It's that the character is literally male.

you cant just tear open and rearrange entire site's core rules that have been in place for years just for one image. you need to individually go through all the other posts too and apply the new rules to them too. this site uses standardized tagging, which means that whenever large scale changes are made, everything needs to be revisited and fixed to keep up the standardized tagging.

IUseArchBtw said:
HO0W DARE YOU THE ARTIST SAid ITs male sO ITS MALE THe WeBSITE DOESN'T OWN THE ART TheARtIsTdOES YOu MUST ReSPECT THE artISTS INTENTIONS

You forgot some 1s and !s

Siral_Exan said:
You forgot some 1s and !s

Ebin :D thanks for noticing

For me, it's not so much the absence of the 'male' tag as it is the presence of the fallacious 'female' tag, because there's substantial evidence supporting the fact that he isn't female.
If it had been 'ambiguous,' I doubt this would have blown up like it did.
But the fact that a character who is obviously not female is being tagged as such is a much more infuriating mistake.

I don't actually have any major issue with TWYS as a concept; it's the errors that come about as a result of incorrect judgement or subjective ideas conflicting with known factual information.
TWYS is good, for the most part, because (in theory) it's a very objective way of tagging, but the problem lies with things like traps or feminine males that lead to conflicts like this.

If TWYS was really meant to help people find things they want, and avoid things they don't, then it becomes that much more important to CORRECTLY tag things like femboys/traps, which isn't what's happening.

There needs to be reform in TWYS to better accommodate things like traps/girly males, as well as sexual dimorphism in species like Pokemon. I distinctly remember a similar conflict over a Pokemon that was being tagged as 'ambiguous' when it was the male variant of a species.

Maybe you should read ambiguous_gender, Vibrant. It's not for hinge cases, it's for when there are no clues present. A feminine body is not ambiguous.

Siral_Exan said:
Maybe you should read ambiguous_gender, Vibrant.

*Vibrant-kun.

Also the thread title is inflammatory.

Lance_Armstrong said:
*Vibrant-kun.

Also the thread title is inflammatory.

How is it inflammatory?

If you haden't said it's m/m I wouldn't have thought it's something other than m/f.

I can see where the mix up happened. To those of us who dont know that character, if that picture was our first time seeing him, to us he looks like a flat chested female with very long eyelashes and it doesnt help we cant see his penis unless hes a cuntboy.
I am curious as to why the tags locked so fast when it was posted just 2 days ago. Minus the explicit tag.

Lance_Armstrong said:
*Vibrant-kun.

Also the thread title is inflammatory.

Wait, inflammatory? Incapable of setting fire?

Siral_Exan said:
Probably a derogatory reference to a site standard? IDK, I see this as yet another great salt mine.

I wouldn't exactly say it's derogatory. It pretty clearly conveys the point of the discussion; one of the rules is inherently flawed, and consistently leading to ridiculous arguments, so it needs to be changed to stop problems like that from happening.

Just because things are a certain way doesn't mean they can't be improved.
TWYS has always had problems dealing with girly male characters like Reggie, and that makes it all the more difficult to actually find art of traps and the like.
If the system is consistently hitting snags on a certain thing, then that's a sign that the system needs to be reworked to solve the issue.

I wish I could say I knew the magic solution to that problem. I realize that what I'm basically doing is the same thing liberals do, where they complain about something needing 'reform' but not elaborating on how to bring about reform.
What that means is that we need discussion on the matter to happen, and come up with an actual solution together.

The solution is not to just have mods come in and say; "Alright, everyone shut up or you get banned."

VibrantLordiction said:
I wouldn't exactly say it's derogatory. It pretty clearly conveys the point of the discussion; one of the rules is inherently flawed, and consistently leading to ridiculous arguments, so it needs to be changed to stop problems like that from happening.

Just because things are a certain way doesn't mean they can't be improved.
TWYS has always had problems dealing with girly male characters like Reggie, and that makes it all the more difficult to actually find art of traps and the like.
If the system is consistently hitting snags on a certain thing, then that's a sign that the system needs to be reworked to solve the issue.

The solution is not to just have mods come in and say; "Alright, everyone shut up or you get banned."

I hid that comment, since I misread what I said. He said it's inflammable... which is true, all things considered.

Siral_Exan said:
Wait, inflammatory? Incapable of setting fire?

That would be Un.

VibrantLordiction said:
I wouldn't exactly say it's derogatory. It pretty clearly conveys the point of the discussion; one of the rules is inherently flawed, and consistently leading to ridiculous arguments, so it needs to be changed to stop problems like that from happening.

While we're at it, we might as well remove borders and money, they make problems too, a lot more.

Mairo said:
What if artist said that this was male? Would you want to tag it as male?
post #1402744
If your answer was that no, because krystal is clearly female, then how about this?
post #107219

What a sad, sad little strawman you've constructed. Image 1 is female, image 2 is male. The differences between the two are STAGGERING. Of course, one is a female -version-. But, here's the thing.

That's the intent.

And if one can NOT figure out what's what... Then it's ambiguous gender. Or, is that too hard to really get a hold of?

Lord_Eggplant said:
you cant just tear open and rearrange entire site's core rules that have been in place for years just for one image. you need to individually go through all the other posts too and apply the new rules to them too. this site uses standardized tagging, which means that whenever large scale changes are made, everything needs to be revisited and fixed to keep up the standardized tagging.

Then use ambiguous.

VibrantLordiction said:
For me, it's not so much the absence of the 'male' tag as it is the presence of the fallacious 'female' tag, because there's substantial evidence supporting the fact that he isn't female.
If it had been 'ambiguous,' I doubt this would have blown up like it did.
But the fact that a character who is obviously not female is being tagged as such is a much more infuriating mistake.

I don't actually have any major issue with TWYS as a concept; it's the errors that come about as a result of incorrect judgement or subjective ideas conflicting with known factual information.
TWYS is good, for the most part, because (in theory) it's a very objective way of tagging, but the problem lies with things like traps or feminine males that lead to conflicts like this.

If TWYS was really meant to help people find things they want, and avoid things they don't, then it becomes that much more important to CORRECTLY tag things like femboys/traps, which isn't what's happening.

There needs to be reform in TWYS to better accommodate things like traps/girly males, as well as sexual dimorphism in species like Pokemon. I distinctly remember a similar conflict over a Pokemon that was being tagged as 'ambiguous' when it was the male variant of a species.

That's just it. There's so much to support the character being male. But the mods REFUSE to let that be the case, no matter how many times it's said otherwise.

Siral_Exan said:
Maybe you should read ambiguous_gender, Vibrant. It's not for hinge cases, it's for when there are no clues present. A feminine body is not ambiguous.

Neither are other images supporting the character as male.

Other images are irrelevant, only the contents of the one image is relevant to the post. If a post has a feminine body and no genitals or breasticles, it's female and flat_chest.

AoBird said:
That would be Un.

Inflammable is proper. unflammable is informal, but both would mean the same thing.

Going back to the image this started on, the bottom looks female. Ambiguous means theres no clues pointing to either gender. Genitals don't always mean gender, if that was the case every single sfw image would be ambiguous.

Lackwit said:
Then use ambiguous.

that. is. not. what. ambiguous. gender. tag. is. for.

its not compromise tag. its for characters with little to no gender indicators. almost hyper emphasized eyelashes and round ass and wide hips are all feminine traits. having those is not "little to no gender indicators". the tag is not for for characters like that.

I'm not sure I even understand your point of view here. So let me ask you about a few hypothetical situations:

First, someone draws a character with a masculine body, penis, and no feminine characters. Think something like this. However, the artist says "this character is female, and should be tagged as such."

Should that image be tagged as male or female?

Second, let's take the example of characters. Let's say that exact same image of Reggie was created by someone other than Whygena. Whygena steps in and says "The character is male, this is how I've always drawn them in my own artwork, and there are no deviations from the base character in this image. He should be tagged as male." However, the artist says "I'm the artist, and I say that I intended to draw the character as female."

Who's word takes precedence here? The artist, who drew the image, or the person who created the character?

If you think the character designer takes precedence, then what would you say about an image like this? Obviously, Nidoking is a 100% male Pokemon, but in this case the artist has drawn the Pokemon as a female. Should it be tagged as male, in deference to the character designer?

If you think the artist has the final say, what would you do in the case of edits? Someone draws a character, and they say the character is female. Another person edits a penis onto the character, and says they're male now. Does the editor take precedence over the original artist? What if they made a less substantial edit - say that they colored in the linework by the other artist.

Your position seems to be entirely based on this one single image, and it doesn't seem like you've addressed any other possible complications or scenarios.

Lore tags the thread version 200

IUseArchBtw said:
Lore tags the thread version 200

You forgot a '!' again. Though in this case, not for emphasis, but for factorial.

Clawdragons said:
You forgot a '!' again. Though in this case, not for emphasis, but for factorial.

oof xD

Siral_Exan said:
Inflammable is proper. unflammable is informal, but both would mean the same thing.

inflammable means flammable

darryus said:
inflammable means flammable

*sigh*... chalk that up to iPhone dictionary fail. I really need to get that old, out of date dictionary app, it would be better than this POS.

TWYS is staying because it works.

If you want to work on possibly reworking the gender flowcharts for further clarification, that's a wonderful idea.

If somebody wants work on finding controversial posts and labeling the canonical gender(s) in the descriptions, that's an even better idea (as long as it's based on the original source, character refs, etc.)

I feel like everybody skipped my first post and underestimates the power of searching with both standardized TWYS and "Description Tags." I've lamented about the lack of lore tags in the past, yet we've had the capability to add them all along.

And why stop at genders? We can add species, character names, or even come up with a standardized system for gendered species and who's doing what to whom. People have been suggesting similar ideas for YEARS.

If this is standardized, we're golden. But we're NOT removing the one thing that separates e621 from the fucking animals. TWYS works. Description Tags can work. Make it happen.

Siral_Exan said:
*sigh*... chalk that up to iPhone dictionary fail. I really need to get that old, out of date dictionary app, it would be better than this POS.

The word that would mean not flammable is "nonflammable" I've never heard "unflammable"

Knotty_Curls said:
I feel like everybody skipped my first post and underestimates the power of searching with both standardized TWYS and "Description Tags." I've lamented about the lack of lore tags in the past, yet we've had the capability to add them all along.

And why stop at genders? We can add species, character names, or even come up with a a standardized system for gendered species and who's doing what to whom. People have been suggesting similar ideas for YEARS.

The main problem is we don't really have that many dedicated taggers and we have a lot of posts, doing this kind of thing would take actual ages.

Edit: I guess you could just have character tags that imply canonically_z tags

IUseArchBtw said:
Lore tags the thread version 200

Lore you say? Ok.
In universe 1 known as Tumblr Reggie is, a while gay mouse.
In Universe 2 known as E621, Reggie [Regina for short] still looks the same as in Universe 1, but was born a female.
No? Ok I'll see my self out.

Jinx_Jackal said:
Lore you say? Ok.
In universe 1 known as Tumblr Reggie is, a while gay mouse.
In Universe 2 known as E621, Reggie [Regina for short] still looks the same as in Universe 1, but was born a female.
No? Ok I'll see my self out.

>wait that mouse is a guy

IUseArchBtw said:
>wait that mouse is a guy

it looks female to me

darryus said:
The main problem is we don't really have that many dedicated taggers and we have a lot of posts, doing this kind of thing would take actual ages.

A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single pea screaming at everybody

IUseArchBtw said:
>wait that mouse is a guy

I know. I just said Regina because it fit the female joke.

Jinx_Jackal said:
I know. I just said Regina because it fit the female joke.

no i meant like, i didn't know it was a guy

IUseArchBtw said:
no i meant like, i didn't know it was a guy

Yep. It's guy according to the artist which is what all the fuss is about.

Jinx_Jackal said:
Yep. It's guy according to the artist which is what all the fuss is about.

Meh, same difference, thought people were just bitching that its not tagged ambiguous or something, didn't actually think it was a male, looks female

IUseArchBtw said:
Meh, same difference, thought people were just bitching that its not tagged ambiguous or something, didn't actually think it was a male, looks female

And that's why we use TWYS. We don't need to know the character's canonical gender(s) to search for them or keep those in mind for searching/blacklisting purposes, we can just use the tag and find what we're looking for.

Siral_Exan said:
*sigh*... chalk that up to iPhone dictionary fail. I really need to get that old, out of date dictionary app, it would be better than this POS.

I agree. iphone apparently has no idea what words mean. Especially since the original word you were questioning, inflammable, is correctly used. In this case it's the second definition.

in·flam·ma·to·ry
inˈflaməˌtôrē/
adjective
adjective: inflammatory
1.
relating to or causing inflammation of a part of the body.
synonyms: provocative, incendiary, inflaming, inciting, agitating, stirring, rousing, provoking, fomenting, rabble-rousing, seditious, subversive, mutinous; More
2.
(especially of speech or writing) arousing or intended to arouse angry or violent feelings.
"inflammatory slogans"
synonyms: provocative, incendiary, inflaming, inciting, agitating, stirring, rousing, provoking, fomenting, rabble-rousing, seditious, subversive, mutinous; fiery, passionate; controversial, contentious
"neither senator condemned the inflammatory language that had been used"

It sucks when you can't trust something that tells you that you can trust it. Especially when it's something as simple as a dictionary. :\

Frankly, after looking at the character I feel like "girly" and male would be a better fit. A slim torso and a fat ass, to put it bluntly, is pretty much what girly males on this site are in terms of anthros. If there were even the tiniest hint of tits, even exposed nipples, I could see a stronger argument for female.

Yet as it stands I feel like female is only there because people forgot that "girly" is a tag.

I mean I feel like girly male fits better than female overall, it's ambiguous penetration, if it weren't for the eyelashes it would be entirely ambiguous gender, and girly works perfectly for the body type and the sort of personality that'd have those sort of eyelashes.

Knotty_Curls said:
TWYS is staying because it works.

Except that it doesn't, because you guys tagged it the wrong gender, so it doesn't show up in the searches it's supposed to.

What's so hard to understand about this? If you're ever tagging a character as the wrong gender, you're mistagging. If that mistagging is in line with a site protocol, then the site protocol is wrong and needs to be updated.

I love that bullcrap about "a feminine body isn't ambiguous". Obviously it is, since you're mistagging genders based on it and all

FibS said:
Except that it doesn't, because you guys tagged it the wrong gender, so it doesn't show up in the searches it's supposed to.

What's so hard to understand about this? If you're ever tagging a character as the wrong gender, you're mistagging. If that mistagging is in line with a site protocol, then the site protocol is wrong and needs to be updated.

I love that bullcrap about "a feminine body isn't ambiguous". Obviously it is, since you're mistagging genders based on it and all

i think that you have really misunderstood the gender tags on this site. despite of what they are called, they are not for tagging character's gender. they are more like "what set of physical traits this character appears to have in this picture" tags, but its easier to just call them "male", "female" etc instead of stuff like "feminine bodied and / or faced character who might have breasts and might have a vagina or not depending on situation and purpose of drawing or character that otherwise fills enough physical traits of what is traditionally viewed as a woman". and they are doing that job p damn functionally.

That's why I like to point out the term 'sex' whenever an opportunity comes up. Yes, it's ambiguous vs 'sex act' tags, possibly, but IMO using the term sex rather than gender gives a more accurate representation of what the tags male/female/herm/etc are actually trying to indicate -- primary and secondary sexual characteristics.

FibS said:
Except that it doesn't, because you guys tagged it the wrong gender, so it doesn't show up in the searches it's supposed to.

What's so hard to understand about this? If you're ever tagging a character as the wrong gender, you're mistagging. If that mistagging is in line with a site protocol, then the site protocol is wrong and needs to be updated.

I love that bullcrap about "a feminine body isn't ambiguous". Obviously it is, since you're mistagging genders based on it and all

Exactly. They genuinely can't get they're tagging things incorrectly, it's baffling isn't it?

Looks like it was pointless to even try having a discussion.
Pretty much nothing but "Da rules r g00d thy dun need fix".
"ur idea es stooped da rules r da best".

Not sure what's worse. The people running this site.
Or those running FA. Now that they've cucked out and started banning any and everyone right leaning.

It's honestly sad to look at.

Lackwit said:
Exactly. They genuinely can't get they're tagging things incorrectly, it's baffling isn't it?

did you read at all what i and savageorange wrote or are you here only to slander the site

The point of TWYS is so that people who are finding it not from the artist's source will be able to locate it based on how it looks, not by how it doesn't look at all. If you were to find that on InkBunny, you'd find it by male/male and go all grossed out because "omg gurlz in muh geis" and completely ignore it (or worse, block the artist for bad tagging!), but here you'd find it with male/female and go "Huh, that's a great one!" The people who don't mind knowing that it's male/male then can search the artist's tag, whygena because hey, those are some cute guys.
Those that do mind can either use their imagination and believe what they want (It's just an image, so nobody's getting their feelings hurt), or they can blacklist that artist for what their art legitimately is, rather than what they thought it was.

Going only by TWYS, the post in question looks like M/M to me. I don't know why Ratte sees it as M/F given the flat chest and super common 'girly male' face and body type, but I'll agree to disagree with administrative decision in this instance.

However, this thread does not seem like the next logical step. A constructive approach would be to create a poll that politely asks, "Do you see this image as M/M or M/F with no outside information?" Once you have tallied votes, you can use the results to determine what the userbase thinks and settle a dispute more democratically.

In the event that M/M is the dominant vote, then it would be rational given hard evidence on user first impressions to reverse the tagging decision. If not, leave the lock in place to cater to majority perception, even if it rubs you the wrong way. That's just my two cents, however, and there is no guarantee that a majority seeing M/M in visual isolation would be sufficient to sway Ratte's opinion.

Edit:
For further context on why I see M/M, text from a user record Knotty Curls gave out: "Eyelashes are not female exclusive." "These characters have a visible lack of breasts and should be tagged male." -- These contradict the reasoning given for locking the tags on the specified post.

For fuck's sake.

TWYS isn't a perfect system but tagging stuff based on what the artist says is literal hell for searching. And most artists I've seen on FA barely or don't even try to tag their stuff.

Lackwit said:
Exactly. They genuinely can't get they're tagging things incorrectly, it's baffling isn't it?

I asked you to elaborate on some of the issues the system you seem to be proposing might lead to, and you completely ignored the questions.

You are failing to provide any coherent solution of your own. You are acting condescending and rude to people who disagree with you. You are ignoring everything everyone has to say on the issue, failing both to answer questions about what system you'd prefer more, and to address anything anyone has to say regarding the current TWYS policy.

Why even make this topic if you aren't going to engage in a discussion about it? Claiming loudly that you are right and everyone who disagrees is stupid is not going to get any policies changed.

Is this how you act when you don't get your way in person? Or have you just not realized yet that etiquette applies regardless whether the other person is with you in person or talking to you through the Internet?

I've been on this site for 10 years now and these threads still make me want to blow my brains out.

krystalius said:
Looks like it was pointless to even try having a discussion.
Pretty much nothing but "Da rules r g00d thy dun need fix".
"ur idea es stooped da rules r da best".

Not sure what's worse. The people running this site.
Or those running FA. Now that they've cucked out and started banning any and everyone right leaning.

It's honestly sad to look at.

Yeah it's... Overall a bad situation.

Lord_Eggplant said:
did you read at all what i and savageorange wrote or are you here only to slander the site

I read it.

But gender identification doesn't really come into tagging. More often than not, Sex does.

And hey, go figure, Reggie identifies as a male. Revolutionary, I know.

Clawdragons said:
I asked you to elaborate on some of the issues the system you seem to be proposing might lead to, and you completely ignored the questions.

You are failing to provide any coherent solution of your own. You are acting condescending and rude to people who disagree with you. You are ignoring everything everyone has to say on the issue, failing both to answer questions about what system you'd prefer more, and to address anything anyone has to say regarding the current TWYS policy.

Why even make this topic if you aren't going to engage in a discussion about it? Claiming loudly that you are right and everyone who disagrees is stupid is not going to get any policies changed.

Is this how you act when you don't get your way in person? Or have you just not realized yet that etiquette applies regardless whether the other person is with you in person or talking to you through the Internet?

I've made my case elsewhere, and I don't like repeating myself ad nauseum. Once again, I believe TWYS is faulty -entirely- because it -arrogantly- disregards the artist.

In a site that thrives on artist's work, it disrespect's the content creator's wishes.

That's not okay no matter what way you spin it. I'm shocked DNP rules are even enforced here with such flagrant disregard displayed.

Lackwit said:
I've made my case elsewhere, and I don't like repeating myself ad nauseum. Once again, I believe TWYS is faulty -entirely- because it -arrogantly- disregards the artist.

In a site that thrives on artist's work, it disrespect's the content creator's wishes.

That's not okay no matter what way you spin it. I'm shocked DNP rules are even enforced here with such flagrant disregard displayed.

I've read the posts you've made both here and on the image itself, and they don't satisfactorily answer my questions.

"I don't like TWYS" is not an answer to any of my questions. My questions are meant to force you to elaborate on how your own system would work, and how you would address issues that could crop up.

Wouldn't it be so much easier to just set the record straight and explain here, in the relevant thread, what your position on these issues is? Rather than appeal to some answers you made elsewhere, having your position clearly laid out here - ideally edited into the opening post so that it would be visible for all to see - would be the thing I think any honest person would do, if they really felt they had a good solution.

We've all given you the courtesy of repeating our arguments, after all. Do you think this is the first time a TWYS thread has been brought up? Do you think this is the first time the users here have explained why they think the current policy is a good one? Of course not. It is a frequent topic. And yet no one told you "I'm not going to defend the policy because I've done that before you can just go searching through my comment history to find it."

Lackwit said:
TWYS cannot continue: Threads like this are evidence of it.

The only thing this thread is evidence of is the fact that people keep signing up to webpages without even attempting to read their rules.
Our TWYS rule has been established in 2007, we have it written on basically every flat surface that we only use TWYS. We have it written everywhere that the use of TWYS is mandatory, and that we will ban people for ignoring this. Yet people keep signing up and then complain how evil our rules are.

You aren't a martyr trying to fight for the oppressed artists, you're the lunatic yelling in front of a "steak only" restaurant that they need to think of the poor vegans and offer non-steak options.

Lackwit said:
https://e621.net/post/show/1546674/all_fours-ambiguous_penetration-animated-anthro-an

I should hardly have to say anything to continue this discourse, and no, I have no intention of letting go. Either allow the artist to change their tags or unlock it, and _the users that you claim this site is oriented towards WILL decide what is in the image._

Large part of our users don't actually know how to follow TWYS or how to apply it to images. In order to enforce proper application of the rules the people that actually know how the rules are supposed to be used have the power enforce it. Ergo, we lock tags as required under our rules.

Lackwit said:
Unless this is a site for moderators, and moderators only.

So, you're ignoring all the other non-moderators telling you that they like our rules, because they don't share your point of view?

Lackwit said:
It's not a matter of identification. It's that the character is literally male.

That doesn't matter. That has never mattered on our page. You're 11 years too late to have this matter.

Every image is judged as it's own entity, without any influence from outside the image. The image in question has no evidence of it being a male inside the image itself.

VibrantLordiction said:
For me, it's not so much the absence of the 'male' tag as it is the presence of the fallacious 'female' tag, because there's substantial evidence supporting the fact that he isn't female.
If it had been 'ambiguous,' I doubt this would have blown up like it did.
But the fact that a character who is obviously not female is being tagged as such is a much more infuriating mistake.

There needs to be reform in TWYS to better accommodate things like traps/girly males, as well as sexual dimorphism in species like Pokemon. I distinctly remember a similar conflict over a Pokemon that was being tagged as 'ambiguous' when it was the male variant of a species.

Ambiguous gender is only used as a fallback when no other tag fits. This is either because the character is perfectly androgynous, or if there are conflicting body traits.
Using ambiguous gender on an image with rather clear deciding body traits that don't clash with each other would defeat the purpose of the tag.

As for Pokemon species, blame Nintendo for not adding that in the first generation, and blame the fans for being hard-line "genwunners".
The most famous example is Pikachu. We have tons of fan artwork created before the sexual dimorphism came to be, this has caused that we have "male" Pikachus with female genitalia. If we were to fully enforce sexual dimorphism on Pokemon all of those Pikachus would be cuntboys.
As such lore specific sexual dimorphism is given a far lesser role in deciding the gender of fictional species, to ensure that people need less knowledge about any given universe.

AnotherDay said:
Frankly, after looking at the character I feel like "girly" and male would be a better fit. A slim torso and a fat ass, to put it bluntly, is pretty much what girly males on this site are in terms of anthros. If there were even the tiniest hint of tits, even exposed nipples, I could see a stronger argument for female.

Yet as it stands I feel like female is only there because people forgot that "girly" is a tag.

I mean I feel like girly male fits better than female overall, it's ambiguous penetration, if it weren't for the eyelashes it would be entirely ambiguous gender, and girly works perfectly for the body type and the sort of personality that'd have those sort of eyelashes.

Girly male is not a gender. For something to be a girly male it must be male first. Otherwise any flat chested female that is clothed could feasibly be a girly male.

FibS said:
Except that it doesn't, because you guys tagged it the wrong gender, so it doesn't show up in the searches it's supposed to.

Incorrect. You want the search to give you results it's not supposed to give you. It's not our fault that you want things from the search it's explicitly designed to prevent from showing you.

It's not a bug, it's a feature.

Strongbird said:
Going only by TWYS, the post in question looks like M/M to me. I don't know why Ratte sees it as M/F given the flat chest and super common 'girly male' face and body type, but I'll agree to disagree with administrative decision in this instance.

However, this thread does not seem like the next logical step. A constructive approach would be to create a poll that politely asks, "Do you see this image as M/M or M/F with no outside information?" Once you have tallied votes, you can use the results to determine what the userbase thinks and settle a dispute more democratically.

In the event that M/M is the dominant vote, then it would be rational given hard evidence on user first impressions to reverse the tagging decision. If not, leave the lock in place to cater to majority perception, even if it rubs you the wrong way. That's just my two cents, however, and there is no guarantee that a majority seeing M/M in visual isolation would be sufficient to sway Ratte's opinion.

Edit:
For further context on why I see M/M, text from a user record Knotty Curls gave out: "Eyelashes are not female exclusive." "These characters have a visible lack of breasts and should be tagged male." -- These contradict the reasoning given for locking the tags on the specified post.

The issue here is that the OP wants to use outside information for tagging it. "It must be tagged male because the character is male."

Beyond that, having a poll would only be worth it if people would actually follow our guidelines.
To make matters worse, we already had a poll internally. Ratte simply locked the tags after it was discussed.

As for the record, eye lashes aren't everything, the body of that snake is entirely ambiguous because that's how feral snakes work. The flat chest is a more deciding factor in the other two examples because the body type of the characters in question have a more masculine body type all around.

Lackwit said:
Once again, I believe TWYS is faulty -entirely- because it -arrogantly- disregards the artist.

In a site that thrives on artist's work, it disrespect's the content creator's wishes.

Again, the page was literally designed for this because a large part of artists on FA tag absolute trash, if they tag at all.

And again, you signed up on a page that blatantly states we do this on purpose, with a very concrete goal in mind.
Why would you sign up to a place you dislike how it's run? Why sign up to a place that literally allows you to browse the entirety of it's content as anon just to complain about the existing rules?

Lackwit said:
I've made my case elsewhere, and I don't like repeating myself ad nauseum.

And yet you expect us to argue against you after having had this exact situation dozens of times beforehand simply because people keep signing up while ignoring our rules.

Lackwit said:
That's not okay no matter what way you spin it. I'm shocked DNP rules are even enforced here with such flagrant disregard displayed.

We have been aware that our rigid tagging system is not for everyone. And because we're not assholes we make it as convenient as possible that artists can have their things deleted and not show up on our page.

This is the only compromise we're willing to make on this. If someone doesn't like our rules we help them pack up their things and leave.

It's their art, and thus their choice where it's displayed. But as long as its displayed in our gallery it will have to submit to our rules and guidelines, without exception.

E621 tags are not about what the artist wants, and have never been about what the artist wants, even before E621 started taking TWYS more seriously.

E621 tags are for E621 users to find stuff (and avoid stuff) effectively. "respecting the artist" -- which I am not even slightly convinced that you are actually interested in -- must not get a look in unless the basic functionality is working correctly. That's called 'having your priorities straight'. TWYS is a natural consequence of searchability being a primary priority: tagging must be relatively easy for anyone to perform, and relatively free of the influence of individual whim. It's not an accident or a problem that TWYS doesn't respond to individual artists, it's a central feature.

TWYS is certainly far from perfect, but any proposed change must be in accordance with e621's priorities, not your priorities. Proposing something that makes tagging harder, slower, more prone to abuse, and more confusing is just not gonna fly.

E621 respects the wishes of artists insofar as they do not interfere with the primary functionality of E621 (image archival and search). DnP and takedowns, for example.

Now take your overwrought outrage elsewhere, please.

I'd like to remind y'all of the Terms of Service for the site.

NotMeNotYou said:
You aren't a martyr trying to fight for the oppressed artists, you're the lunatic yelling in front of a "steak only" restaurant that they need to think of the poor vegans and offer non-steak options.

It's kinda more like someone screaming that the steak that everyone ordered and is eating is actually chicken because that's what the chef said that it was, despite the fact that it looks, smells, feels and tastes like steak.

Also, I feel like the stuff site serves has way more variety than "steak only" but I think I'm looking into this analogy too much...

darryus said:
It's kinda more like someone screaming that the steak that everyone ordered and is eating is actually chicken because that's what the chef said that it was, despite the fact that it looks, smells, feels and tastes like steak.

Also, I feel like the stuff site serves has way more variety than "steak only" but I think I'm looking into this analogy too much...

We only serve steak. That ice cream you're eating? Steak. That coke you ordered? Steak. That chair you're sitting on? WoodSteak.

NotMeNotYou said:
We only serve steak. That ice cream you're eating? Steak. That coke you ordered? Steak. That chair you're sitting on? WoodSteak.

The customers? Steak.

Keeps costs down.

Lord_Eggplant said:
dude. this is an archive. its like a library. the library doesnt give a crap if author says that their comic is high fantasy comic that is just meant to look like sci-fi in every aspect except for the fact that some characters can use magic. it goes to the sci-fi section if it looks like sci-fi.

people looking into high fantasy section are not interested into reading stuff that definitely looks like sci-fi, but the author keeps saying that its actually high fantasy that just looks like sci-fi

Or if Hitler decreed from beyond the grave that Mein Kampf is a romantic coming-of-age novel for young adults.

Strongbird said:
looks like M/M to me.

Looks/ed like a female to me when I saw it.

Lackwit said:
I've made my case elsewhere, and I don't like repeating myself ad nauseum. Once again, I believe TWYS is faulty -entirely- because it -arrogantly- disregards the artist.

I say this is a SQUARE and I dare you to say otherwise!!!

AoBird said:
Looks/ed like a female to me when I saw it.

I say this is a SQUARE and I dare you to say otherwise!!!

How many fingers am I holding in front of this square?

NotMeNotYou said:
We only serve steak. That ice cream you're eating? Steak. That coke you ordered? Steak. That chair you're sitting on? Wood Steak.

Clawdragons said:
The customers? Steak.
Keeps costs down.

Munkelzahn said:
Or if Hitler decreed from beyond the grave that Mein Kampf is a romantic coming-of-age novel for young adults.

AoBird said:
I say this is a SQUARE and I dare you to say otherwise!!!

I get that you're frustrated from repeating yourself, but this is not helping the situation. Mocking the opposition in an argument online is pouring water on a grease fire.
Actually, it's more like throwing additional grease onto a grease fire.
Pissing people off just makes them more likely to keep fighting.

I'm going to repeat myself because I feel like people are only reading the first post before replying.

I've proposed a solution in two posts (forum #256203 and forum #256236), both of which have been conveniently ignored by OP. If done properly, my idea would appease all sides. If the idea is flawed somehow, I'd like to hear it.

So, based on OP's posts and behavior, allow me to jump to my own conclusions:

You didn't make this thread to "fix a broken system." You're here because you want to yell at somebody. My idea would stop the yelling, and that wouldn't be any fun.

Thank you for causing yet another unnecessary shitshow.

When I first saw the post I thought it's female, maybe cub. But I also had in mind that it could be M/M content. In my opinion it should be ambiguous gender as we don't see primary sex parts and it's quite open to interpretation.
I personally don't care as long as my search brings up correct results with 98% accuracy

Lackwit said:
In a site that thrives on artist's work, it disrespect's the content creator's wishes. That's not okay no matter what way you spin it. I'm shocked DNP rules are even enforced here with such flagrant disregard displayed.

Take a look at the comments --> here <-- and tell us if you still think so. You see, if a characterowner or artist has any reason (how ridiculous it may be) for not having it posted here it gets on the DNP list or deleted when asked to.