What do you think of them, Do you have them blacklisted like me?

I just see them as shemales that dry-humped a pizza cutter personally >.>

Is there more to them than (seemingly) distasteful OCs that want to fufil all their fetishes with one character?

boopboop said:

shemales that dry-humped a pizza cutter

These are words I never thought I'd see put together in this way.

JoeX said:
These are words I never thought I'd see put together in this way.

Hopefully it's not the last :P

Hawt (in most cases).

Except when they're constantly being referred to as 'shi' and 'hir', that is off-puttingly stupid. But the idea itself I'm entirely not opposed to.

Herms? Best of both worlds.

It's like a supreme-toppings pizza: why not just have everything?

boopboop said:
What do you think of them, Do you have them blacklisted like me?

I just see them as shemales that dry-humped a pizza cutter personally >.>

Is there more to them than (seemingly) distasteful OCs that want to fufil all their fetishes with one character?

If you like shemales, why not herms?

Would whitelist if there was a whitelist. Find them comforting (cause gender is as incredibly fucked up as religion is), sexy, and silly. I just skip over any OCs that are too excessive.

With balls is best, even though that might seem sillier it's definitely sexier.

Also what furrypickle said.

Yes, logically, the anatomy doesn't really work out, but since when has that stopped furries ? ;)

I do find it a tad bizarre that you seem to be AOK with dickgirls but not with herms.

Anal > Vaginal I guess, it even looks better most of the time :x

Idk, I just visualise the vag as like some sort of wound when it's between a cock and a butt >.<

I think there's a term for when your taint/gooch splits (afaik) but I've forgotten what it is :p

let's face it, an unsavory vagina is the stuff of nightmares >.> (by experience)

savageorange said:
Find them comforting (cause gender is as incredibly fucked up as religion is).

Idk man, you either have a penis or you don't. You can choose a religeon, you can't (realistically) choose a gender.

I don't really care as to the gender, I just care whether or not there's at least one full female quality. Also, two words: Artica Sparkle.

boopboop said:
Idk man, you either have a penis or you don't. You can choose a religeon, you can't (realistically) choose a gender.

What you have between your legs (sex) != societal expectations/roles (gender). Herms defy that simpleminded gendering.

savageorange said:
What you have between your legs (sex) != societal expectations/roles (gender).

What if I have a beer? Not that I drink... just curious... :P

furrypickle said:
Herms? Best of both worlds.

It's like a supreme-toppings pizza: why not just have everything?

This, emphasizing that they have the best of both worlds. Like, they can be bored and do it with one or the other or just plain do this:

post #493347

Peronally, I think that herms are cool!

Edit: "Gooch", such a funky word...

boopboop said:
Idk man, you either have a penis or you don't. You can choose a religeon, you can't (realistically) choose a gender.

There are already vagina implants that allow the receiver to have normal sex and climax through said vagina, so technically speaking, it should be possible once you sort out how to move the corpus spongiosum and shit around, since you kinda need that functioning normally.

NotMeNotYou said:
There are already vagina implants that allow the receiver to have normal sex and climax through said vagina, so technically speaking, it should be possible once you sort out how to move the corpus spongiosum and shit around, since you kinda need that functioning normally.

So imagine what we could achieve before 2020 - maybe it'll be possible to completely and seamlessly change somebody's physical sex.

Xch3l said:
What if I have a beer?

That all ends in tears and yeast infections. Not necessarily in that order.

Kämpfer said:
I'm not even going to try to figure out why you brought that up

That's okay, I'll tell you anyway: because gender bullshit is literally everywhere, including here on E621.

@NotMeNotYou:
Huh. news to me. I'm sort of ambivalent about how sensible changing round a person's physical sex can turn out to be, but anything that reduces the suffering involved seems positive.

Kämpfer said:
I'm not even going to try to figure out why you even brought that up.

Because oh ehm gee gender pronouns as so offensive? >.>

boopboop said:
Because oh ehm gee gender pronouns as so offensive? >.>

Just like the phrase 'boopboop' is, right? or 'the'? or the letter 'a'?

Words don't mean shit. Behaviour is what I'm talking about.

Considering herm is REALLY high up the blacklist I'm surprised how many people are on the herm-boat 0.o

Kämpfer said:
No. I was talking about how you brought up religion, which has *nothing* to do with everything else you were talking about.

Oh? Religion is not traditionalistic, of dubius moral value, and can be found nearly everywhere?

News to me.

To be fair, religion at least is mostly not found on e621.

@ Boopboop
Is there a recent list of sitewide most blacklisted tags you're looking at, that you can link? Last I heard one was compiled (semi-manually?) by one of the mods, at request.

Kämpfer said:
Oh, so you’re just prejudiced against religious people. Glad you explained that.

It sounds more like he's prejudiced against religion iself, not the people who participate in it.

I like feral herms more than anthro herms. However, most of the pictures that I see on the first page when I search for herm have something that "ruins" the pictures for me, as in more than usual. I can tolerate them and will admit that I even find some of them hot, but the save-worthy herm uploads are few and far between.

@ Boopboop
Is there a recent list of sitewide most blacklisted tags you're looking at, that you can link? Last I heard one was compiled (semi-manually?) by one of the mods, at request. [/quote]

I used the old one but let's face it, the biggest moment since then was the advent of MLP afaik (cue obligitory rage)

http://tonyfox.ws/e621/blacklist

I'd like a current one as well to be honest, my blacklist is 2,900 characters xd

Halite said:
It sounds more like he's prejudiced against religion iself, not the people who participate in it.

Thank you Halite, that's a fair description.

boopboop said:
http://tonyfox.ws/e621/blacklist

Interesting. Taking the top 20 items on the list as a sample, herm is blacklisted by roughly 5% of those who blacklist anything.
No, that's incorrect: Of blacklisted terms, 5% are herm.

This 'who blacklist anything' is significant to me. Because if you want what proportion of all users blacklist a tag, you need to divide by count of total users, whereas the pie chart appears to divide by total blacklisted terms.
Getting the total count of users would make those numbers a lot more meaningful.
As it is, we only know relative proportions -- for example, that 4 times as many people blacklist 'scat' as blacklist 'herm'.

TL;DR: the data on that page is good but the pie chart is a lying liar who lies, we need the total count of users (preferably, the total count of users at that time) to get correct statistics on blacklisting frequency of any of those terms.

EDIT: looks like we can get that number using https://e621.net/user/index, if we know what date the chart was generated on. Google suggests March 2011, so I'll go with Mar15'2011. User 32875 is the last user created on that date, and userids are assigned sequentially, which means 32875 is the count of users when that analysis was done.

Therefore, only 5.5% of accounts blacklist scat, 1.4% blacklist herm, and 0.6% blacklist nezumi. At a rough guess, about 80% of accounts blacklist nothing at all.
These numbers should probably be larger (by including only active accounts), but those figures aren't available to me, so this is my best estimate.

Generally I prefer herms, but I know where you're coming from. I just like having the best of both worlds all in one package. I also like shemales, and trannies, etc etc, but I also tend to prefer vaginal sex. So there ya have it

I don't like males in the slightest. Seeing a (what I consider) male with boobs is worse for me than homosexual porn.

Going to be honest here, OP; it seems like your trying to hate monger a bit. I have the whole nine yards blacklisted, but I don't start threads going "omg herms are pretty grody amirite?" Just ignore the stuff.

ZigguratVertigo said:
Going to be honest here, OP; it seems like your trying to hate monger a bit. I have the whole nine yards blacklisted, but I don't start threads going "omg herms are pretty grody amirite?" Just ignore the stuff.

If we wern't allowed to ask questions it would pretty much mitigate the concept of forums. Being inquisitive is human nature, if anything I'd have prefered to have the thread die than have it derailed by the cotton-wool clan >.>

boopboop said:
If we wern't allowed to ask questions it would pretty much mitigate the concept of forums. Being inquisitive is human nature, if anything I'd have prefered to have the thread die than have it derailed by the cotton-wool clan >.>

Yes, because here at e621 we're known across the web as the friendliest hugbox ever.

Expectation: http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/orca-yes.gif

Reality: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2_8cfVpXbo

savageorange said:
Interesting. Taking the top 20 items on the list as a sample, herm is blacklisted by roughly 5% of those who blacklist anything.
No, that's incorrect: Of blacklisted terms, 5% are herm.

This 'who blacklist anything' is significant to me. Because if you want what proportion of all users blacklist a tag, you need to divide by count of total users, whereas the pie chart appears to divide by total blacklisted terms.
Getting the total count of users would make those numbers a lot more meaningful.
As it is, we only know relative proportions -- for example, that 4 times as many people blacklist 'scat' as blacklist 'herm'.

TL;DR: the data on that page is good but the pie chart is a lying liar who lies, we need the total count of users (preferably, the total count of users at that time) to get correct statistics on blacklisting frequency of any of those terms.

EDIT: looks like we can get that number using https://e621.net/user/index, if we know what date the chart was generated on. Google suggests March 2011, so I'll go with Mar15'2011. User 32875 is the last user created on that date, and userids are assigned sequentially, which means 32875 is the count of users when that analysis was done.

Therefore, only 5.5% of accounts blacklist scat, 1.4% blacklist herm, and 0.6% blacklist nezumi. At a rough guess, about 80% of accounts blacklist nothing at all.
These numbers should probably be larger (by including only active accounts), but those figures aren't available to me, so this is my best estimate.

That is excellent. Makes that data a whole lot more usable.