D4rk said:
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

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.

ambiguous_gender is not used that way. FFS people, read the wiki. https://e621.net/wiki/show/ambiguous_gender

We see a feminine body and no genitals. Regardless of external knowledge, those two combined makes female, there is no lack of details or heavily conflicting details and the feminine details outweigh any supposed masculine details.

Siral_Exan said:
ambiguous_gender is not used that way. FFS people, read the wiki. https://e621.net/wiki/show/ambiguous_gender

[...]when there are mixed signs as to whether the character is male or female (wide hips plus broad shoulders, etc.) [...]

The white mouse shares the same shoulder "structure" with the male, also the chest seems to be formed more manly.
Female characteristics are the eyeleashes and the round ass.
That's what I mean with "open to interpretation" - there are mixed indicators without the precise sign of genitals

Don't want to argue here, just want to explain the thinking behind my opinion

D4rk said:
[...]when there are mixed signs as to whether the character is male or female (wide hips plus broad shoulders, etc.) [...]

The white mouse shares the same shoulder "structure" with the male, also the chest seems to be formed more manly.
Female characteristics are the eyeleashes and the round ass.
That's what I mean with "open to interpretation" - there are mixed indicators without the precise sign of genitals

Don't want to argue here, just want to explain the thinking behind my opinion

You believe there are mixed indicators when there is not. And bringing this up in a thread meant to argue the gender decision, deciding against the current gender decision to voice your own, is opening up an argument.

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!!!

Actually, In transformational geometry, Any enclosed shape is a circle.

Knotty_Curls said:
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.

To be honest, I think your solution has merit, but the issue is that there's just no standardization, nor is there any consistency for what gets mentioned in descriptions, so for searching purposes, in practice it just doesn't work.

It's one of those "in an ideal world" solutions that would be great if we could get it to a functional state, but no one seems willing to put in the effort.

Maybe I'm wrong. I'd love to be wrong about this, actually.

FoxFourOhFour said:
Actually, In transformational geometry, Any enclosed shape is a circle.

How dare you not respect my wishes!
I demand you do as I say!

Siral_Exan said:
You believe there are mixed indicators when there is not. And bringing this up in a thread meant to argue the gender decision, deciding against the current gender decision to voice your own, is opening up an argument.

The first time I saw it I wasn't sure if the mouse is male or female. As uploader I would have choosen the ambiguious tag. Easy as that.
I see a mouse getting fucked in the ass and I can't make out if it's male or female, as for me s/he shares both characteristics when I look at the picture.

You can say that s/he looks more like a female because of the eyeleashes while somebody else sees a girly male by looking at the chest. Depends on individual perception.
Sure, this may look like an argument about TWYS at all, which I don't wanted to bring up nor wanted to start at all.

(And also no - stating an opinion and taking part in arguing are different things. But most people see conflicts were one just says what he thinks). To actually discuss a topic is a dying art

As an uploader, choosing to tag an obviously female character as ambiguous will only lead to a more active tagger going to correct you.
You use tagme if you do not want to try tagging genders, ambiguous_gender is a gender of it's own and is not used to bridge gaps or to request assistance on a gender decision.
Hello individual perception, meet standardized tagging. I can see these two getting along quite well...

And, to the last two, if you don't want to introduce an argument, phrase your opinion as a question. Any statement that goes against another statement, opinion or otherwise, opens the doors to an argument, and intent or lack thereof is irrelevant. You may not wish to argue, but disagreeing with someone else begins one nonetheless.

Siral_Exan said:
As an uploader, choosing to tag an obviously female character as ambiguous will only lead to a more active tagger going to correct you.
You use tagme if you do not want to try tagging genders, ambiguous_gender is a gender of it's own and is not used to bridge gaps or to request assistance on a gender decision.
Hello individual perception, meet standardized tagging. I can see these two getting along quite well...

And, to the last two, if you don't want to introduce an argument, phrase your opinion as a question. Any statement that goes against another statement, opinion or otherwise, opens the doors to an argument, and intent or lack thereof is irrelevant. You may not wish to argue, but disagreeing with someone else begins one nonetheless.

You know what, as I wrote in my first text I seriously don't care how it's tagged as long as I get the search results Im looking for. (TWYS works so I don't complain about it)
Im currently not bored enough for more simple explainations of my opinion tho.

Usually the later is the standard way on the internet as most people open the door to an argument rather than knocking on it first.

You are not the first. You most certainly won't be the last.

e621 is fortunate to have so many patriots with the time and energy to come here and tell our site how to run.

In the spirit of Strongbird's poll suggestion, I've read through the thread and tallied where folks seem to sit so far. Without naming names:

Distinct people so far: 26 people.
In favor of TWYSNWYK: 16 people.
In favor of TWYSNWYK, but gender criteria could be improved: 3 people.
Against TWYSNWYK: 3 people.
Ambiguous/off-topic/could not categorize: 4 people.

(Not counting myself, but to be clear: I am in favor of TWYSNWYK, but would entertain suggestions to improve sex tagging in cases where only secondary traits are available.)

Clawdragons said:
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.

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?

Could you BE more reductive in your arguments? I'm really not sure you can.

Fuck it, this site's tagging system is stupid, and it constantly mistags stuff and pretends it's right. Quite frankly, it's fucking pretentious.

Lackwit said:
Could you BE more reductive in your arguments? I'm really not sure you can.

I feel like "I don't like TWYS" pretty much has been your entire argument. And you never really gave any remedies that weren't essentially having it work like the sites we're trying to be better than. If you prefer those sites than go there, TWYS is literally the backbone of e6, removing it would be pretty insane.

I'd personally prefer a 'Tag what you know, else tag what you see' system. It may not be as simple, but it's annoying that the 'girly' tag is worthless unless genitalia is showing.

Lackwit said:
Fuck it, this site's tagging system is stupid, and it constantly mistags stuff and pretends it's right. Quite frankly, it's fucking pretentious.

"I can't win so fuck everyone"

https://imgur.com/a/djUk2HG

Shatari said:
I'd personally prefer a 'Tag what you know, else tag what you see' system. It may not be as simple, but it's annoying that the 'girly' tag is worthless unless genitalia is showing.

That would cause more tag wars than we have already.

I love how my response is completely ignored. Does that mean my argument was too perfect to debate and so I won by default?

Lackwit said:
Fuck it, this site's tagging system is stupid, and it constantly mistags stuff and pretends it's right. Quite frankly, it's fucking pretentious.

again, the tags are NOT for tagging the characters actual gender or sex or anything like that. the female tag does not exist to label characters as female. it does not exist to categorize female characters. it exists only to say that the character appears to have set of specific physical traits that we have assigned for the female tag. its only labeled as female for sake of simplicity.

To make that even more explicit, "The character AS DEPICTED IN THIS PARTICULAR POST appears to have..".

Anyway, to accuse e621's tagging system, which leans as far as practically possible towards strict objectivity, of being pretentious, is so precisely the reverse of reality that I don't exactly see why anyone needs to entertain such silly arguments.

They're more a confession of ignorance than anything else.

Lackwit said:
Could you BE more reductive in your arguments? I'm really not sure you can.

Fuck it, this site's tagging system is stupid, and it constantly mistags stuff and pretends it's right. Quite frankly, it's fucking pretentious.

I'm literally not even making an argument. I'm asking you to explain your position, and how you would deal with potential conflicts similar to the ones I presented.

So let me ask a fourth time: How would you deal with the conflicts I described? Repeating that you don't like TWYS is not an answer. Even if we decided TWYS should go, we couldn't possibly replace it with your system, because you have thus far refused to explain what your system would even be.

Lackwit said:
Could you BE more reductive in your arguments? I'm really not sure you can.

Fuck it, this site's tagging system is stupid, and it constantly mistags stuff and pretends it's right. Quite frankly, it's fucking pretentious.

So you're ignoring every single argument presented to you explaining why TWYS is correct and the better option?

For someone who felt the need to let us know they were a moderator at some unspecified place and lecture us on "professionalism" you sure aren't showing any of that professionalism here.

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

Just one, the middle one.

Lackwit said:
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?

Lackwit said:
Could you BE more reductive in your arguments? I'm really not sure you can.

Fuck it, this site's tagging system is stupid, and it constantly mistags stuff and pretends it's right. Quite frankly, it's fucking pretentious.

Reason why I didn't fixate on your strawman comment in the first page was because you didn't seem to get my point. My point was that what is your point?

Recall my comment on the post which got you so angry, calm down.
Nobody is taking your arguments seriously because you are failing to listen to them, because you are angry and want the thing you see wrong to be right so much it's blinding you. That makes you seem ignorant. It makes you seem like troll that succeeded as you continue further with the hate, where artist is going like welp.

This is once again difference between artist tagging their own work or you keeping your private collection, with these you can easily refine the tags to reflect more on knowledge and lore. However here, we have thousands, technically millions of posts that are being handled, by thousands of users and over time by multiple staffs. This should be discussion of site as whole rather than individual post you seem to be fixating on.

Right now if I'm reading your arguments, you want female looking characters to be tagged as male if the artist says that they are male? This was my counterpoint, where do you draw the line with this? What if the character looks so female that nobody believes they are male and artist gets extremely angry it being tagged as female when they are clearly male to them? With this particular animation you are fighting over, it's easier to make the argument you are making because the character can be seen as either/or and many know the character to be male because of earlier posts.

But you have to also remember that we have to apply same enforcement on all posts. What if there wasn't any posts before that one animation? What if artist didn't tell the gender of the character anywhere? What if the artist was japanese so majority wouldn't notice them saying it's male?

Then we get to argument of character being male, so it should default to male tag. But then we have bunch of characters who are constantly changing their gender by themselves or by third party editors.

My point wasn't being strawman, my point really was what is your point that you are trying to make. We cannot just favor one artist, one character or one post, just because "it's wrong". We would need to have change in rulings and guidelines, which would effect ALL AND EVERY post. This would be not only massive undertaking for every single one, but it would also need to be something that avoids constant missunderstandings and wars with taggers and regular users who only browse.

Even with ambiguous we come to same thing, even if we didn't change ruling on TWYS, we do also have rulings on all tags on where they should be used, we have disambiguations and aliases to lesser situations where tags are used againts it's primary usage. Ambiguous gender right now is used for characters where you cannot see any traits at one way or another. When character can be seen as girly male or female, then it's tagged with either/or and if there's tag war over it, staff gives out their ruling to one and that's it. This is to make our blacklisting and search engine still work even on these edge cases. If all females where you cannot be sure if they are male or female get tagged with ambiguous, this would make searching for ambiguous gender far less useful and seacrching for characters which were either girly or female impossible (~girly ~female).

And what this pretty much seems to boil down to is certain individuals fail to understand difference tagging system from artists descriptions and characters bios. I'm certain that nobody here is arguing that character isn't in fact male and that shouldn't be the argument. No tagging system is perfect, but this one has worked so far and changing to another system would require ridiculous amount of work with most likely no massive benefits. Tagging system is just way to search material from computer software, it's not factual statement for things and it's not changing reality and sadly sometimes artists themselves don't seem to grasp on this concept. Tags are there for all everything, they aren't there to be indication of single posts.

Everything what I just said have already been explained and you have ignored, which makes you the ignorant, rather than me the strawman.

darryus said:
That would cause more tag wars than we have already.

Not really. If the source doesn't back it up then the image is simply 'Tag what you see'.

Alternatively, have a tag for what the art genders the character as if, there's some disagreement.

Shatari said:
Not really. If the source doesn't back it up then the image is simply 'Tag what you see'.

Alternatively, have a tag for what the art genders the character as if, there's some disagreement.

Introduce any optional tag system that people will prefer, they will use it over the mandatory system. AKA: introduce TWYK, and they'll ignore TWYS.

The familiarity of associating a character to a particular set of "tags" off-site would be brought over to here; off-site tags represent the image, not the post, whereas here it is vice versa. Tagging female here does not mean that the character is female, it means that one or more characters meet the criteria for the female tag. Every tag has some criteria to be met, and if it is not it does not get tagged. So, if there are no characters meeting the criteria for female, yet the artist swears there is one, it does not get tagged.

A TWYK system would directly harm TWYS as we are now. Barring stricter uploaded-tag requirements and harsher enforcement of the Tagging Abuse rule, neither of which is optimal, people will ignore TWYS if they can give themselves the excuse as per the optional system and "forgot" to add valid tags. And since there is already a problem with people neglecting to tag or further tag posts, a TWYK system right now would the topping of a metaphoric shit cake.

And don't even get me started about how many people will wail and whine that the TWYS tags are different from TWYK, this thread is the proof of one person not liking TWYS.

Long story short: do you like people not tagging, removing, and complaining about tags? Because this is how you get that.

So what about a second gender tag for what the artist genders the character as? Does that sound like a more doable alternative? Then the 'girly' tag could still be applied to girly characters and artists wouldn't be offended at have their character misgendered, and the 'Tag what you see' rule wouldn't be affected.

Shatari said:
Not really. If the source doesn't back it up then the image is simply 'Tag what you see'.

that really is not a solution to reduce the amount of shitstorms

post #1224239
this character is a man. im the artist and the character owner, im not gonna go into details about why he has tits because its a long story, but he is entirely a man. allowing me to tag this as male would definitely cause people get pissed because not everyone is entirely happy with finding tits while looking up male content

Shatari said:
So what about a second gender tag for what the artist genders the character as? Does that sound like a more doable alternative? Then the 'girly' tag could still be applied to girly characters and artists wouldn't be offended at have their character misgendered, and the 'Tag what you see' rule wouldn't be affected.

We have a place for those. It's called a description field, and users can search for specific descriptions via desc:male (for example). And oh look! The posts Lackwits argued about shows up on there!

Doing that gets you all of the images with 'male' in the description. I'd like the ability to have the artist defined gender as a searchable tag, that way the girly tag could be applied even if the admins think the character is female.

So from what I understand. The artist has confirmed the character to be female, but refuses to change it? So by extension people will be searching for females and find a male instead?

And this site hates artists, but likes to steal their art, but take all control away from them?

T0XiiCPANDA said:
So from what I understand. The artist has confirmed the character to be female, but refuses to change it? So by extension people will be searching for females and find a male instead?

And this site hates artists, but likes to steal their art, but take all control away from them?

Well aren't you a pleasant bag of sunshine. Got anything to substain those claims?

Shatari said:
Doing that gets you all of the images with 'male' in the description. I'd like the ability to have the artist defined gender as a searchable tag, that way the girly tag could be applied even if the admins think the character is female.

There can't be a system that supports that, I already suggested the closest. I tried harder to implement a similar system, I believe it was adding the prefix TWYK: or suffix _(TWYK) in the description, but the illusions of there being an official system is hazardous to our standard system.

Siral_Exan said:
Well aren't you a pleasant bag of sunshine. Got anything to substain those claims?

I'm not claiming anything. Except that when people search for females they ARE going to find a male. That part is fact. The rest is my understanding.

Lord_Eggplant said:
that really is not a solution to reduce the amount of shitstorms

post #1224239
this character is a man. im the artist and the character owner, im not gonna go into details about why he has tits because its a long story, but he is entirely a man. allowing me to tag this as male would definitely cause people get pissed because not everyone is entirely happy with finding tits while looking up male content

Looks like a female to me.

And I fap to what I see, not to what characters think they are in their heads.
When I am searching for something, I search for what I want to see, not what someone else thinks they think it is.
With everyone tagging everything however they want you wouldn't be able to find anything, search function would be pointless.
TWYS > ALL.

T0XiiCPANDA said:
I'm not claiming anything. Except that when people search for females they ARE going to find a male. That part is fact. The rest is my understanding.

I'm talking about stealing art and hating artists. Are you just blinded by angst against this site, or do you want to prove it, as we have tools explicitly for artists and character owners that help stop stealing art and allow the artist to control the art on this site.

Those claims are unsubstantiated.

Siral_Exan said:
There can't be a system that supports that

Sure there can. Just have a 'Word of God' tag, so 'WOG:Male', 'WOG:Female', etcetera. In this example you could still have the admin defined 'female' tag, but have a 'WOG:Male' tag and the 'girly' tag on as well, so that everyone interested finds what they're looking for. And at the end of the day, finding what you're looking for with as few a steps as possible is the goal of the tag system in the first place.

Siral_Exan said:
I'm talking about stealing art and hating artists. Are you just blinded by angst against this site, or do you want to prove it, as we have tools explicitly for artists and character owners that help stop stealing art and allow the artist to control the art on this site.

Those claims are unsubstantiated.

Again, I didn't claim anything. I stated my understanding. But from what I can see here artists don't have control of their art on here. The artist themselves tried changing the tags, but people kept changing it, mods locked the tags, and refuse to comply with the artist when they tell them what the tag should be. That is how I got my "This site hates artists" 'claim'. And I don't understand why you jump immediately into insulting me. Why can't we keep this civil?

Shatari said:
Sure there can. Just have a 'Word of God' tag, so 'WOG:Male', 'WOG:Female', etcetera. In this example you could still have the admin defined 'female' tag, but have a 'WOG:Male' tag and the 'girly' tag on as well, so that everyone interested finds what they're looking for. And at the end of the day, finding what you're looking for with as few a steps as possible is the goal of the tag system in the first place.

Didn't I just say "...but the illusions of there being an official system is hazardous to our standard system."? We can't use suffixes or prefixes, people will try to actually tag them in the tag section.

T0XiiCPANDA said:
Again, I didn't claim anything. I stated my understanding. But from what I can see here artists don't have control of their art on here. The artist themselves tried changing the tags, but people kept changing it, mods locked the tags, and refuse to comply with the artist when they tell them what the tag should be. That is how I got my "This site hates artists" 'claim'. And I don't understand why you jump immediately into insulting me. Why can't we keep this civil?

So, it's normal for a user with 6 months of inactivity and no history of using the forum, to "state their understanding" as blindly as possible?

Here's the facts for you: the site has takedowns that give the power to literally take down images hosting an artist or character owner's art. The post is separate from the image, it otherwise hosts the image unless they requested it to be taken down. The artist or character owner has the power to create a wiki or use the description field to say anything about their character, and the site does not condone the vandalism of these systems. A user can get punished for vandalizing such systems.

The artist or character owner has more power than a regular user here because a regular user cannot request an image to get taken down.

But I repeat, you instead declare that the site steals art and hates the artist. Why would you say this and where is the support for your "understanding", because both accounts are wrong.

If you mean that some people aren't going to tag images correctly, then yeah, that already happens and will always happen. Having a second system that only comes into play when the main system is unsatisfactory isn't going to add to the problem, and it eliminates a lot of the problems we're having now.

And if you mean that that people will try to tag the artist's preference over what the admins think the gender is, then that is already what is happening and the whole basis for the problem. Having a tag they should use instead should actually reduce that problem.

Shatari said:
If you mean that some people aren't going to tag images correctly, then yeah, that already happens and will always happen. Having a second system that only comes into play when the main system is unsatisfactory isn't going to add to the problem, and it eliminates a lot of the problems we're having now.

And if you mean that that people will try to tag the artist's preference over what the admins think the gender is, then that is already what is happening and the whole basis for the problem. Having a tag they should use instead should actually reduce that problem.

I've already said this, though, when I said that we would have to increase the severity of the rules to compensate for the people's lack of tagging. We don't need another system for people to either neglect or prefer over our official one. The fact that people tag the artist's preferences over TWYS will be worsened by the illusion of an official TWYK system. The fact that these are problems means they need to be dealt with first, as these negatively effect the site and shouldn't be tolerable and neglected for a new system.

Siral_Exan said:
I'm talking about stealing art and hating artists. Are you just blinded by angst against this site, or do you want to prove it, as we have tools explicitly for artists and character owners that help stop stealing art and allow the artist to control the art on this site.

Those claims are unsubstantiated.

Please excuse my French but shut the fuck up, Siral.

If you want to pour oil into a fire do that in your own kitchen.

Maybe instead try explaining that the artist uploaded it themselves and that the artist's lore tags clash with our rules on how something must be tagged if it's uploaded here and go from there. You know, a civil explanation.

Shatari said:
If you mean that some people aren't going to tag images correctly, then yeah, that already happens and will always happen. Having a second system that only comes into play when the main system is unsatisfactory isn't going to add to the problem, and it eliminates a lot of the problems we're having now.

And if you mean that that people will try to tag the artist's preference over what the admins think the gender is, then that is already what is happening and the whole basis for the problem. Having a tag they should use instead should actually reduce that problem.

The big problem with your idea is that we have nearly no way of figuring out if these word of God tags are actually what the artist said. Imagine if a source page gets deleted, or if the artist doesn't speak English, or if they aren't around anymore to answer our questions. How are we, as staff, supposed to decide if these are actually true or not?
Do remember that most tagging is done by fans of the art not the creators of the art, but the rules are enforced by yet other people.

By only allowing twys we can at least ensure the rules and tagging system are able to be enforced without having to rely on other people. The beauty is that it's an entirely independent and self-contained system, with the benefit that's it's also very objective.

I'm still not seeing your point. Can you give an example on how an optional 'Word of God' system would stop people from using the normal tags? In the instances where it would be needed the only people who would use it would be people who care, which is typically the artist or their fans. In this case, after Ratte pulled rank, Whygena could have added the 'WOG:Male' and 'girly' (which should not have been locked anyways, since the other male isn't exactly the most masculine fellow on Earth) tags to the image, satisfying both parties.

Edit: Sorry, NotMeNotYou. I didn't see your post when I was writing up my reply. When it comes to tagging what you know, all such tags would ideally be initially sourced but would have to be in good faith. Outside of someone trolling though, I don't imagine anyone is going to misuse the tags.

Well, I haven't been involved with the tagging or uploading end of things for very long but I'd like to throw in my 2 cents and say I do like the idea of the WoG tags. I know the current system is meant to be objective and unrelated to the character's actual identity, but I often have a hard time seeing where the line between androgynous and objectively more fitting of one of the gender tags is, and it's implementation really seems to vary on posts. There have definitely been a few pictures I've been hesitant to, our outright decided not to upload because I didn't want to deal with the potential aftermath. I feel like there's more potential benefit to their addition then drawbacks. It would also help when searching for an androgynous character you know but can't remember the name of.

If there's a post with WoG tags and missing or broken sources, then that's safe enough grounds to remove them from a post I'd think. Having a post up without a source is already kind of a problem in and of itself. It may even have the side effect of encouraging users to post sources.

I want desperately to write one of my infamous essay-style responses, but I won't.

To put it simply:

• TWYS has worked exceptionally-well since it's conception on this website.

• If an artist can not respect the rules of this website's tagging system, they are free to use another website (or start their own).

• The amount of users who have a problem with the current tagging system amount to a drop in the bucket. There's no need to bend to the very-vocal minority "just because it goes against the artist's ideals".

I see some arguments here saying if we tag the proper gender as stated by the artist or commissioner, we may be tagging characters with boobs as male or some other crap.

I don't buy it, I think this argument is mostly about supposedly ambiguous images.

Besides, look at people irl, do you think everyone who looks male or female is what you think? Of course not! I think we could be a tad more lenient on this issue.

I found out recently that you can put the actual genders/whatever in the description as "lore tags". I already did that myself on the picture you cited. If you know the TWYS conflicts with the lore, tag it in the description. It's not a perfect solution, but it's a hell of a lot better than the alternatives to ditching TWYS.

PheagleAdler said:
do you think everyone who looks male or female is what you think? Of course not! I think we could be a tad more lenient on this issue.

But whether they look male or female is precisely what searching and blacklisting is concerned with, and whether they "are" male or female is a) a concept with debatable validity in the first place, when applied to fictional characters, and b) something that TWYS explicitly does not care about.

The tagging system also isn't concerned so much with 'how male' or 'how female' they look, but just placing them into the category that their depiction fits most decisively into (for example : equal amount of male and female signifiers, no genitals visible -> ambiguous_gender). ie. female is not an assertion 'character is not male', but a statement that more feminine characteristics are visible in this picture than male ones.

How is leniency, even in theory, possible?

Hi_i'm_new said:
I found out recently that you can put the actual genders/whatever in the description as "lore tags". I already did that myself on the picture you cited. If you know the TWYS conflicts with the lore, tag it in the description.

+1

Don't assume that the system can work equally well for all possibilities. It can't. Also, don't play the politician's game "Something must be done! This is something! We must do this!"; you often have to work inefficiently with the current system for a while before you get all the context necessary to figure out a non-broken solution.

TWYS is imporant but the post OP was referring to was incorrectly locked. If you can't see breasts or crotch it's either male or ambiguous

FurryMcFuzzball said:
TWYS is imporant but the post OP was referring to was incorrectly locked. If you can't see breasts or crotch it's either male or ambiguous

So every feral, child and flatchested character in a rating:s or rating:q post is either male or ambiguous. Yeah, no, that's not how TWYS works.

I think FurryMcFuzzball is going by the Vertical gender tagging flowchart.

However, both the horizontal flowchart and Parasprite's simplified flowchart specify, in this scenario, ambiguous_gender as an option, but male as not an option.

Makes sense to me.

(personally, OP image seems like a pretty clear -- and correctly locked case. Contains indicators of femininity + no clear indicators of masculinity. To be precise, the face is feminine and other characteristics are neutral.. -> Female. However, this isn't quite in line with any of the flowcharts)

TWYS fails hard when it comes to cases of gender, are you going to start screaming that ever image that features a penis and less than perfectly flat chest as male? Better get moving changing everything under the girly tag. Is ever image of a flat chested female going to be labeled a cuntboy? You've got a fuck of a lot of work to go on. If not, then the admins need to get their crap together and either change everything, or start being consistent. When I can search a character and half of their images are listed as flat female and half are cuntboy then there's a problem that needs to be solved. And no amount of putting your fingers in your ears and saying "LALALALALA Everything is working fine TWYS is perfect LALALALALA" isn't going to work anymore.

Oh also, tagging is SUPPOSED to help you find what you want to see, but when I search for flat chicks I want my flat chicks, but lately it seems that I'm not allowed to see flat chicks because they keep getting locked as male. This is the opposite of what tags are for, finding stuff. If I search a tag but don't find what I want, it's a fail. Period.

FurryMcFuzzball said:
TWYS is imporant but the post OP was referring to was incorrectly locked. If you can't see breasts or crotch it's either male or ambiguous

This. Really, honestly, this.

T0XiiCPANDA said:
So from what I understand. The artist has confirmed the character to be female, but refuses to change it? So by extension people will be searching for females and find a male instead?

And this site hates artists, but likes to steal their art, but take all control away from them?

Opposite actually.

Lackwit said:
Opposite actually.

Tell that to Tsampikos. Half the images of Mikhaila are tag locked as cuntboy and the other half as female. Hell there are Rainbow Dash images that have been locked as cuntboy. Hell Thicco, who is a male, is listed as female in half the images of him as well instead of as a girly male. If it was consistent I wouldn't give a damn, but even mods don't agree as some have changed the tags on some images based on character and what the artist says when users mistag them, while other will go completely insane for just bringing up the proper gender or artist statements in any form.

WhiteStarPony said:
Oh also, tagging is SUPPOSED to help you find what you want to see, but when I search for flat chicks I want my flat chicks, but lately it seems that I'm not allowed to see flat chicks because they keep getting locked as male. This is the opposite of what tags are for, finding stuff. If I search a tag but don't find what I want, it's a fail. Period.

Then search for flat-chested female -male -intersex. 39 full pages of your flat-chested female goodness all ready for your all-viewing eyes :V

And if you want to see the top quality stuff, slap on "order:score_desc" into the search

FurryMcFuzzball said:
TWYS is imporant but the post OP was referring to was incorrectly locked. If you can't see breasts or crotch it's either male or ambiguous

how many million times this needs to be repeated: breasts (or their lack of) and genitals are not only thing that is used to determinated which gender tag should be used. facial features and body shape counts too. if character looks like girl, it gets tagged as female. vaginas and breasts are not required and never has been required to tag character as female.

post #1485996
or should this be tagged as male or ambiguous?

Lackwit said:
This. Really, honestly, this.

Since OP's idea of a discussion is apparently just saying this to people that agree with him, I've no further desire to keep this thread going.

I'm not entertaining "discussions" where uncomfortable arguments are just ignored.