hiekkapillu said:
https://e621.net/wiki/show/uploading_guidelines
"Any submission before 2015 has been grandfathered in and does not need to reflect our current or future guidelines. In fact, there is a substantial amount of old art that would be deleted under the current guidelines, the existence of those old submissions do not validate or invalidate anything on this list."

ah it does say that
and i thought he meant in general like they never allowed that which means before 2015 but that's not fair of me to assume that

Shyster5 said:
ah it does say that
and i thought he meant in general like they never allowed that which means before 2015 but that's not fair of me to assume that

And that's why it's underlined and at the very top of the uploading guidelines, guidelines which are linked in both front page of wiki as well as in big letters on top of upload form so that people would read it.

It just feels more and more that majority of complains or arguments still stem from not understanding how things are operated or how the software we use works.

I would almost feel like we need to crowdfund someone to be full time old post cleaner at some point, but nobody is willing to pool up thousands of euros just for someone to go trough old gifs from literally ifunny of real life dogs twerking in pantyhose times couple thousand.
post #374878

Shyster5 said:
Oh and the thing about reddit you got other admins in this very thread saying it's not a porn site, but then you come along and say it is? who do i believe?

The argument is already kinda ass backwards.

Twitter is social media site. Tweets can contain porn, many people use twitter exlusively for looking porn.
Imgur is image hosting and sharing site. Images can contain porn, many people use imgur exclusively to share porn.
ebay is platform to sell and buy goods. Items can be sex toys and many use the site exclusively to buy sex toys.

Trout is a fish. Fish is not necessarily a trout.

Only major difference we have is that we do not lock the explicit material behind account requirement and allow bots like google to crawl the content freely. It's either having to cater to all audiences or own it and go full on 18+ even with safe content to be able to host all everything.

Anonomn said:
Page 9: Myself (In direct response to Mario);
"I just want to repeat that 'suggestion' was still a hyperbole on my part and wasn't remotely intended to be a serious suggestion, given that would throw a massive monkey wrench into the tag system that's already held together with bubblegum and a prayer in the more precarious parts."

I'm assuming you meant me, because mario hasn't done anything in 8 years.

This wasn't suggestion from you of why I said what I said, I have heard this suggestion from couple other people as well. Because we are at the point where apparently the terms used and how they are applied do not fit for anyone from the sounds of it, so tagging masculine body with masculine and penis with penis, can't get more objective. The only negative would be that we would need more tags to make tagging characters more properly now and we would need to expand the amount of tags in search significantly if someone wants to search posts with character that was previously tagged with simply male for example. (at which point overall majority of our userbase would obviously be pissed off)

Mairo said:
This wasn't suggestion from you of why I said what I said, I have heard this suggestion from couple other people as well.

Ah, I wouldn't of been privy to any such suggestions outside the context of this thread, and my ire has been specifically to any reference to it in this one, which so far, aside from your comment now apparently, had been in direct reference to my non suggestion.
Which all of it should go without saying, regardless of me not suggesting it or anyone else seemingly genuinely suggesting it, an absolutely terrible idea that should never be taken seriously for hopefully a myriad of pretty blatantly obvious reasons.

Mairo said:
And that's why it's underlined and at the very top of the uploading guidelines, guidelines which are linked in both front page of wiki as well as in big letters on top of upload form so that people would read it.

It just feels more and more that majority of complains or arguments still stem from not understanding how things are operated or how the software we use works.

I would almost feel like we need to crowdfund someone to be full time old post cleaner at some point, but nobody is willing to pool up thousands of euros just for someone to go trough old gifs from literally ifunny of real life dogs twerking in pantyhose times couple thousand.
post #374878

Okay? how am I supposed to respond to airing of grievances?
but all i can say is you can't delete the past or else that's revisionism

The argument is already kinda ass backwards.

Twitter is social media site. Tweets can contain porn, many people use twitter exlusively for looking porn.
Imgur is image hosting and sharing site. Images can contain porn, many people use imgur exclusively to share porn.
ebay is platform to sell and buy goods. Items can be sex toys and many use the site exclusively to buy sex toys.

Trout is a fish. Fish is not necessarily a trout.

Only major difference we have is that we do not lock the explicit material behind account requirement and allow bots like google to crawl the content freely. It's either having to cater to all audiences or own it and go full on 18+ even with safe content to be able to host all everything.

I think you're agreeing with me on how those sites I listed are not porn sites. I just listed those sites because they would qualify under the overly simplified argument of "They have at least one porn" NotMeNotYou used to try to discredit me

and that major difference is what qualifies e621 as a porn site

NotMeNotYou said:
We neither allow fursuits, nor statues, nor con pictures, nor similar.

W a i t ,   y o u   d o n 't   a l l o w   f u r s u i t s ?  
A r e   t h e s e   a l l   e x c e p t i o n s   t o   t h a t   r u l e ?   I f   s o ,   w h y ?

I'm genuinely confused, but I'm sure they'll come up with a reason to ban me regardless.

abscondler said:
W a i t ,   y o u   d o n 't   a l l o w   f u r s u i t s ?  
A r e   t h e s e   a l l   e x c e p t i o n s   t o   t h a t   r u l e ?   I f   s o ,   w h y ?

I'm genuinely confused, but I'm sure they'll come up with a reason to ban me regardless.

This has been explained already: posts before the quality standards were stricter (I believe 3-4 years ago) are grandfathered in, making them immune to the new rules. Most grandfathered posts are to be ignored and only acknowledged as a relic of the site's old rules.

They're pretty literal, and it's hard to say that their textual implications really differ substantially from the current andromorph, gynomorph.

What?! Really, seriously?? They are night and day in terms of both general and specific descriptiveness! The difference is literally in orders of magnitude! The original terms are explicit in their nature and context, while the new ones aren't even arguably implicitly descriptive in their role!

ie. I'm not optimistic about 'non vulgarity' because the word is still being used for what it was previously used for. The history of the words 'idiot -> moron -> retard -> special -> autistic' is a good example of how the new, theoretically inoffensive term becomes the latest slur.

which's why the only reasonable, sane and responsible thing to do is NOT play the game to begin with! Use what's best for the task (not the feel-feels or sense of sophistication) and say fuck all.

Shyster5 said:
I think you're agreeing with me on how those sites I listed are not porn sites.

Which is the point. "Tweets can contain porn, many people use twitter exlusively for looking porn," just like e621. "Imgur [...] images can contain porn, many people use imgur exclusively to share porn," just like e621. e621, being a furry image archive site, has images containing porn, and some people use it exclusively for porn. Unlike pornhub, however, e621 doesn't explicitly advertise itself as a place for porn over non-porn, and it doesn't encourage uploading porn over non-porn.

So if Twitter and Imgur don't count as porn sites, neither should e621 on the same grounds. If e621 does count as a porn site, so should Twitter and Imgur on the same grounds.

and that major difference is what qualifies e621 as a porn site

Porn not being locked behind an account requirement is what makes e621 a porn site? Then Imgur and Twitter still qualify. I can go to those sites without an account, and aside from Twitter giving me a click-through warning about sensitive material, I can see the porn just fine as a guest.

Anonomn said:
For #### sake, that was absurdist hyperbole on my part because no matter what you do someone's going to be upset. As has been stated every time it's been brought that would be both impractical, and would only serve to make the site actively less usable as trying to specify male/female without tags is a logistical nightmare.
Guess I'll say again for all the people who can't be bothered with reading through the 18 pages so far, I myself am not a huge fan of the chosen terms as they're for all intents and purposes completely arbitrary terms unless you happen to know (ancient?) greek fluently that have zero meaning to any average person who comes across them here, not to mention because of their original use cases, it's not truly entirely applicable as being used here.
While strictly speaking this suggestion isn't as non-jankey as the chosen terms, male_with_pussy and female_with_penis not only serves the exact same function as cuntboy and dickgirl without any ambiguity, it also doesn't require happening to know some form of literal greek to do so. And to add to conversation that's happened since the initial suggestion, it's literally impossible for any amount of mutated "vulgarity" to come around those terms because they're literally nothing more than a literal description, and without the 'punchiness' required for swear words to develop either.

Penisgirl and Vaginaboy?

ImpidiDinkaDoo said:
This has been explained already: posts before the quality standards were stricter (I believe 3-4 years ago) are grandfathered in, making them immune to the new rules. Most grandfathered posts are to be ignored and only acknowledged as a relic of the site's old rules.

That's odd, but I guess it makes sense. Thanks for the explanation.

Drkfce0 said:
Penisgirl and Vaginaboy?

just sounds silly, and for reasons of;

hiekkapillu said:
...vagina means ONLY the inner tube connecting vaginal opening to uterus ... Pussy tag covers both vagina and vulva, and there really isn't any "proper" term that would cover same parts.

(Quote from page 7)
It'd have to be 'pussyboy', which has entirely unrelated, but still negative, connotation.
If it wasn't for that, strictly speaking yes that would work. Even if I couldn't guarantee we're just gonna wind up in the same boat as with dickgirl and cuntboy in the future if they were to gain wider spread use.

Back on topic, I feel that no matter what terminology is decided upon, it'll always be considered slang or vulgar given enough time.

So the real question is, do we want to continue going down this path of continually updating our tags to be less vulgar every time the trends change? And at what point do the new tags become so different and generalized that their meanings no longer match the original tags?

Gynomorph and Andromorph are already dangerously vague to the point that newcomers may not understand that they're aliases for dickgirl and cuntboy. Going by literal definition, it could be argued that tomboys and femboys should inherit these respective tags. Or hell, even just ambiguous characters that have some feminine/masculine traits might be given these tags instead of gender tags.

Watsit said:
Which is the point. "Tweets can contain porn, many people use twitter exlusively for looking porn," just like e621. "Imgur [...] images can contain porn, many people use imgur exclusively to share porn," just like e621. e621, being a furry image archive site, has images containing porn, and some people use it exclusively for porn. Unlike pornhub, however, e621 doesn't explicitly advertise itself as a place for porn over non-porn, and it doesn't encourage uploading porn over non-porn.

So if Twitter and Imgur don't count as porn sites, neither should e621 on the same grounds. If e621 does count as a porn site, so should Twitter and Imgur on the same grounds.

Porn not being locked behind an account requirement is what makes e621 a porn site? Then Imgur and Twitter still qualify. I can go to those sites without an account, and aside from Twitter giving me a click-through warning about sensitive material, I can see the porn just fine as a guest.

Imgur does have to have an account to view porn without searching for it
https://help.imgur.com/hc/en-us/articles/205291935-Enable-or-Disable-Mature-Content-Browsing
Twitter is not majority porn
like let's say there's like 3 million porn images on twitter
but there is 60 million active users on that site most of whom are not posting porn
and if you search "porn on twitter" on google you can see there is surprise and shock about that
and if you don't want to view porn they have that 18+ filter, but on e621 your pretty much obligated to come here to view porn because you can't avoid explicit images unless you blacklist them

Shyster5 said:
on e621 your pretty much obligated to come here to view porn because you can't avoid explicit images unless you blacklist them

Tack rating:s onto any search you make on e621 and you'll only get safe-rated images without even touching the blacklist feature.

So yeah, you can avoid the porn even as a guest.

Ninosi said:
Tack rating:s into any search you make on e621 and you only get safe-rated images without even touching the blacklist. So yeah, you can avoid them, even as a guest.

You can also browse the sister site, e926.net, which is the same exact website with a permanent rating:s applied to it, so only safe rated posts show. It's quite literally a site that automatically adds rating:s to searches

Shyster5 said:
on e621 your pretty much obligated to come here to view porn because you can't avoid explicit images unless you blacklist them

There exist some admins here who hate furry NSFW content and have explicit content constantly filtered, and I'm sure some users may feel this way too. This isn't entirely out of left field, some furries are like this and just don't like/are made uncomfortable by/despise NSFW and utilize the mostly safe sections of content here.

abscondler said:
That's odd, but I guess it makes sense. Thanks for the explanation.

Wikipedia has much more examples for this actually: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandfather_clause

Let's say that you had permission to do a graffiti on city wall. Now 5 years later it's now been banned to do graffiti on any city wall so you get letter in mail where you are being asked to pay for cleaning of the wall as it's no longer allowed, even if you had written permission to do so 5 years ago.

Same here. Our guidelines did allow fursuit photographs in past, so users obviously simply did exactly that, because it was allowed. Now we have changed our guidelines to no longer allow these, deleting these would not only sound weird to those who uploaded them 5 years ago, but also would negatively effect their accounts, possibly make their upload count 0 making it impossible for them to upload at all. Also users who know the content was here and it no longer was can be confused.

But also now instead of one city wall, we have over half a million of walls and nobody is being paid to handle those and we get thousand more walls a day. Not even Trump can handle all these walls.

Shyster5 said:
Okay? how am I supposed to respond to airing of grievances?
but all i can say is you can't delete the past or else that's revisionism

I think you're agreeing with me on how those sites I listed are not porn sites. I just listed those sites because they would qualify under the overly simplified argument of "They have at least one porn" NotMeNotYou used to try to discredit me

and that major difference is what qualifies e621 as a porn site

..wat?
Like, are we arguing the same thing here anymore, am I translating this incorrectly in my head or something else?
If reddit is not pornsite regardless of absurd amounts of porn specific subreddits, how is e926 any more of a pornsite when it has no porn at all?

ImpidiDinkaDoo said:
You can also browse the sister site, e926.net, which is the same exact website with a permanent rating:s applied to it, so only safe rated posts show. It's quite literally a site that automatically adds rating:s to searches

Yep! I know about e926. Just figured I'd mention rating:s since it makes the porn easily avoidable even without going to the sister site.

"just go to e969 if you don't want to view porn"
"if you don't want to view porn on pornhub just go to another site"
okay
but we're talking about e621 here and if you have to have to go to another site to avoid porn on it, that doesn't make sense to not call e621 a porn site
"just browse rated:s images"
okay
but there is porn avatars and they can be on those rated:s images
"just blacklist them"
same thing as just go to another site

"I'm calling e969 a porn site"
No i said that in my very first post here

Shyster5 said:
well if this site was made to host what furries draw.-> a porn site is made to be a host for porn -> furries draw predominately porn. -> this site was made to host porn-> e621 is a porn site -> e969 was made for the safe images of e621 -> e969 is not a porn site

e621 is marketed as a porn site. it was bought by BAD DRAGON a store for SEX TOYS
pornhub can also host not porn but that doesn't means it's not a porn site
and also why is it so bad for e621 to be called a porn site to you?

Shyster5 said:
"just go to e969 if you don't want to view porn"
"if you don't want to view porn on pornhub just go to another site"
okay
but we're talking about e621 here and if you have to have to go to another site to avoid porn on it, that doesn't make sense to not call e621 a porn site
"just browse rated:s images"
okay
but there is porn avatars and they can be on those rated:s images
"just blacklist them"
same thing as just go to another site

"I'm calling e969 a porn site"
No i said that in my very first post here

e926 is literally the same exact site as this one. It uses the same login info, same blacklist, same EVERYTHING. It just has a permanent rating:s filter on all content including avatars. Its home page is literally just a permanent search of rating:s on here but just in a convenient form where the site does it for you.

Also, incorrect, you CAN have your blacklist effect avatars. That is an option you can turn on or off in your settings.

Shyster5 said:
Imgur does have to have an account to view porn without searching for it
https://help.imgur.com/hc/en-us/articles/205291935-Enable-or-Disable-Mature-Content-Browsing[/quote]
These would disagree .

Twitter is not majority porn

First it was knowingly allowing a lot of porn, which would mean places like DA and Twitter are porn sites too (funfact, DA was a lot more lax about porn in its early days and is where a lot of furries would post their art; places like FA sprung up when they started cracking down on the hardcore stuff, although it still allows softcore). Then it was being advertised as a site for porn, which it's not (no more than non-porn, at any rate). Then it's because it doesn't lock porn behind having an account, which other sites like Twitter don't either. Now it's because the majority of posts are porn, and it's not behind warnings?

I'm not going to play a game with moving goalposts.

ImpidiDinkaDoo said:

There exist some admins here who hate furry NSFW content and have explicit content constantly filtered[...]

Shouldn't one of the qualifying factors for admins be being comfortable and accepting of NSFW content, especially when 90% of the content of this website is not SFW? Unless they're moderating e926, completely avoiding NSFW posts would severely limit their ability to moderate the website as a whole, not to mention being a recipe for bias if they're ever asked to handle something that's NSFW or taking place on an NSFW image/topic.

Anyway, this "e621 is not a porn site" argument is getting a bit silly. It all comes down to your definition of what qualifies as a porn site. e621 is as much of a porn site as Inkbunny is. That can be interpreted in a couple of different ways.

ImpidiDinkaDoo said:
e926 is literally the same exact site as this one. It uses the same login info, same blacklist, same EVERYTHING. It just has a permanent rating:s filter on all content including avatars. Its home page is literally just a permanent search of rating:s on here but just in a convenient form where the site does it for you.

Also, incorrect, you CAN have your blacklist effect avatars. That is an option you can turn on or off in your settings.

e969 is functionally a different site because it has different content
e969 has a different experience to anonymous users
what if i'm a first time user and I don't know what a blacklist is?
what if i'm an anonymous user and I can't blacklist?
How can i avoid explicit images then?

even if I was an experienced internet user who does know how to blacklist you first have to see something to know you need to blacklist it

Shyster5 said:
but there is porn avatars and they can be on those rated:s images
"just blacklist them"
same thing as just go to another site

I don't agree that utilizing the blacklist function is the same thing as "going and browsing another site". It's a function that lets people get the content they want while avoiding the content they don't.

If porn is content you want to avoid just put -rating:s on its own line in the blacklist and tick 'Apply blacklist to avatars'. Then you'll only ever see safe posts.

A couple of alternatives would be:

You can untick 'Show avatars' in the user settings.

You can also not show comments at all by unticking 'Show comments', which is located just above the avatar options.

Shyster5 said:
what if i'm an anonymous user and I can't blacklist?
How can i avoid explicit images then?

A guest user who cannot or will not make an account and finds content they don't want to see would have to rely on: tweaking their searches, ignoring thumbnails they don't like, and simply ignoring the avatars. E926 is always an option if they don't like anything above rating:s.

This still doesn't mean e621 is strictly a porn site. It just means that if a user wants finer control over their browsing experience of an all-inclusive (as far as content, not quality) furry art archive, they should make an account and tweak the settings.

Shyster5 said:
e969 is functionally a different site because it has different content
e969 has a different experience to anonymous users
what if i'm a first time user and I don't know what a blacklist is?
what if i'm an anonymous user and I can't blacklist?
How can i avoid explicit images then?

'rating:safe'

Watsit said:
These would disagree .

First it was knowingly allowing a lot of porn, which would mean places like DA and Twitter are porn sites too (funfact, DA was a lot more lax about porn in its early days and is where a lot of furries would post their art; places like FA sprung up when they started cracking down on the hardcore stuff, although it still allows softcore). Then it was being advertised as a site for porn, which it's not (no more than non-porn, at any rate). Then it's because it doesn't lock porn behind having an account, which other sites like Twitter don't either. Now it's because the majority of posts are porn, and it's not behind warnings?

I'm not going to play a game with moving goalposts.

"fine then e621, twitter imgur and deviantart are all porn sites"
"yo have to actively search for porn so that makes google a porn site"

what do you mean i have moving goalposts I've been saying the "it's majority porn" thing since my very first post here

Shyster5 said:
e969 is functionally a different site because it has different content
e969 has a different experience to anonymous users
what if i'm a first time user and I don't know what a blacklist is?
what if i'm an anonymous user and I can't blacklist?
How can i avoid explicit images then?

e621 = e926.
Exactly the same accounts, exactly the same posts. You can even reply to this forum post from there.

Also owo, what's this?
https://puu.sh/DNvws/c8948f3b54.png

Also this is the reason why I made forum #270434

Can we just fucking stop with arguing about semantics in thread where it doesn't belong?

Let's just agree that e621 is a mature image board/booru with the purpose of archiving furry artwork. Whether or not you call it a/use it as a porn site is up to the individual and isn't really relevant to this thread anymore.

Okay. At the end of the day what you want to think of e621 as has nothing to do with the thread, you want to think or use it as a porn site fine. But drop the completely off topic argument ya? It holds no use in a thread which is focused around new tag names.

Mairo said:
Can we just fucking stop with arguing about semantics in thread where it doesn't belong?

Yeah, I feel like the thread been derailed pretty hard.

I think the original point was "Why try to reduce vulgarity on a porn site." and the semantics of "porn site" took over.

Cleaning up the tags to look more professional while at the same time removing a slur, which has alienated many users from the site, from being prominently displayed is not a bad move to make. This being regardless of the content of the site.

oh. you agree with me that it's okay to call e621 a porn site.
that's what i wanted in the first place but then i lost focus, sorry

Shyster5
and also why is it so bad for e621 to be called a porn site to you?

Ninosi said:
Cleaning up the tags to look more professional while at the same time removing a slur, which has alienated many users from the site, from being prominently displayed is not a bad move to make. This being regardless of the content of the site.

I think my counter-argument got lost in the porn site banter, so I'll repost it:

abscondler said:
Back on topic, I feel that no matter what terminology is decided upon, it'll always be considered slang or vulgar given enough time.

So the real question is, do we want to continue going down this path of continually updating our tags to be less vulgar every time the trends change? And at what point do the new tags become so different and generalized that their meanings no longer match the original tags?

Gynomorph and Andromorph are already dangerously vague to the point that newcomers may not understand that they're aliases for dickgirl and cuntboy. Going by literal definition, it could be argued that tomboys and femboys should inherit these respective tags. Or hell, even just ambiguous characters that have some feminine/masculine traits might be given these tags instead of gender tags.

Shyster5 said:
oh. you agree with me that it's okay to call e621 a porn site.
that's what i wanted in the first place but then i lost focus, sorry

The only reason anyone had any objection to the term "porn site" is because the definition is too narrow. Since e621 accepts and hosts much more than just pornographic content, calling it only a porn site is misleading to uploaders, artists, and general users alike.

If a user uses it as strictly a porn site, then that's their choice and perfectly fine, but that doesn't define the whole site.

Now, anything to add about the new tags and how they're being used?

Ninosi said:
The only reason anyone had any objection to the term "porn site" is because the definition is too narrow. Since e621 accepts and hosts much more than just pornographic content, calling it only a porn site is misleading to uploaders, artists, and general users alike.

If a user uses it as strictly a porn site, then that's their choice and perfectly fine, but that doesn't define the whole site.

Now, anything to add about the new tags and how they're being used?

well i did have the idea about switching gynomorph and andromorph to cuntboy and dickgirl respectively because people keep saying gynmorph is feminine male and andromorph is masculine female and complaining about that

abscondler said:
Let's just agree that e621 is a mature image board/booru with the purpose of archiving furry artwork. Whether or not you call it a/use it as a porn site is up to the individual and isn't really relevant to this thread anymore.

It's very common for art archive websites to ask their users to treat the mods with the same respect they have for their renamon sex toy.

abscondler said:
Gynomorph and Andromorph are already dangerously vague to the point that newcomers may not understand that they're aliases for dickgirl and cuntboy.

IMO e621 provides a pretty robust way for someone to figure out aliasing took place -- search results. Just click on the tag in the sidebar (which is a much more obvious thing to do than clicking the ? wiki link) and look at the commonalities in the search results.

Additionally, if they are uploading, it's kind of difficult to miss that different tags are present on the created post than the tags you gave when uploading.

It's also not exactly clear why these newbies would even need to know, since you can search and tag using the old terms just fine.

The other points you made (femboy, tomboy, ambiguous) are much more solid than this AFAICS, and I'm surprised I don't remember seeing these arguments in the 37-page thread that NMNY mentions.

abscondler said:

Back on topic, I feel that no matter what terminology is decided upon, it'll always be considered slang or vulgar given enough time.

So the real question is, do we want to continue going down this path of continually updating our tags to be less vulgar every time the trends change? And at what point do the new tags become so different and generalized that their meanings no longer match the original tags?

You bring up an interesting point. I love studying language drift and meanings changing over time, so I did think about andromorph and gynomorph eventually being used as slurs.

I think the fact that the full terms are fairly clunky means they'd be unlikely to fill a slur role. I could see them being shortened to "gyno" or "andro" to be used a slur. Time will tell if that happens or not.

abscondler said:

Gynomorph and Andromorph are already dangerously vague to the point that newcomers may not understand that they're aliases for dickgirl and cuntboy. Going by literal definition, it could be argued that tomboys and femboys should inherit these respective tags. Or hell, even just ambiguous characters that have some feminine/masculine traits might be given these tags instead of gender tags.

This brings me back to language drift. The definitions of andromorph/gynomorph can be interpreted different ways, but the general idea is: "Appears like the opposite sex, but isn't." This is a pretty vague definition, but it's the context the terms are used in that will clarify what they're being used for.

Users will see the new tags when searching the old aliased terms which should give them a hint to their meaning. Gynomorph/male and the like would give them a hint that it's being used as a "gender" tag.

Finally, if all else fails, users can also always click the ? next to the tag if they're wondering what it is.

abscondler said:
Back on topic, I feel that no matter what terminology is decided upon, it'll always be considered slang or vulgar given enough time.

That's kind of how language works, and you've got two options. One is you can update with the times. The other is that you can dig in your heels and refuse.

Plenty of people do the latter, and they are the old people you see still throwing out n-bombs and complaining "that's just what they were called back in the day!"

Choosing the second option is saying "yeah I'm fine with being that person."

Personally, to me, I don't think it's a big deal to occasionally change my vocabulary. I do it all the time in other contexts. I'm sure you do too. That's just what language does, and if that's something you're unhappy with, you can go learn latin or something - dead language, isn't changing anymore.

Short of that, your vocabulary is going to adapt. You are going to start using new words and stop using old words, for a myriad of reasons. But if you, through a deliberate act of will, refuse to change the words you use to refer to some group, while so many other aspects of your speech patterns are changing... Well, I hate to say it, but that does make you a bit of a jerk.

Let's go back to those old folks tossing n-bombs around. Listen to the rest of their language. You will hear them using plenty of new words. They are familiar with all sorts of slang that came into being throughout their lives, and probably use a fair chunk of it themselves.

That's why I described it digging in your heels. Because it takes effort. Look how much effort people have put into this thread here! They've put way more effort into refusing to accept these words than it ever would have taken to just adjust. Well, it's their right, but I'm going to notice where they're willing to put their effort, and where they aren't, and that might lead me to draw some unfavorable conclusions.

Clawdragons said:

That's kind of how language works, and you've got two options. One is you can update with the times. The other is that you can dig in your heels and refuse.

Plenty of people do the latter, and they are the old people you see still throwing out n-bombs and complaining "that's just what they were called back in the day!"

Choosing the second option is saying "yeah I'm fine with being that person."

Personally, to me, I don't think it's a big deal to occasionally change my vocabulary. I do it all the time in other contexts. I'm sure you do too. That's just what language does, and if that's something you're unhappy with, you can go learn latin or something - dead language, isn't changing anymore.

Short of that, your vocabulary is going to adapt. You are going to start using new words and stop using old words, for a myriad of reasons. But if you, through a deliberate act of will, refuse to change the words you use to refer to some group, while so many other aspects of your speech patterns are changing... Well, I hate to say it, but that does make you a bit of a jerk.

Let's go back to those old folks tossing n-bombs around. Listen to the rest of their language. You will hear them using plenty of new words. They are familiar with all sorts of slang that came into being throughout their lives, and probably use a fair chunk of it themselves.

That's why I described it digging in your heels. Because it takes effort. Look how much effort people have put into this thread here! They've put way more effort into refusing to accept these words than it ever would have taken to just adjust. Well, it's their right, but I'm going to notice where they're willing to put their effort, and where they aren't, and that might lead me to draw some unfavorable conclusions.

I don't think I could have put it better myself. I'll just add that many words change meaning over time. It just depends on who uses them, in what way, and how frequently.

Currently normal words can evolve into cruel slurs used against groups of people, that many find unacceptable to even mention. Currently nasty slurs can transform into normal, everyday words that you'd hear at polite family get-togethers.

That's just language for you.

Anonomn said:
Penisgirl just sounds silly
'pussyboy'

Penisgirl and her sidekick, Pussyboy, fight against villains who seek to control the world through enforcement of the traditional gender binary.

Shyster5 said:
even if I was an experienced internet user who does know how to blacklist you first have to see something to know you need to blacklist it

Is anyone really an experienced internet user before they've been Goatse'd a few times?

Awesome, I'm glad to see these tags change away from offensive words!
Thanks mods!
Any chance we'll see this with the "herm" tag in the future, as well? For same reasons?

Afterglow said:
Any chance we'll see this with the "herm" tag in the future, as well? For same reasons?

That'd be a good thing to start a new thread about. Y'know, gather any suggestions for alternate tags and see if you can gather support for the word being enough of a problem to justify a change.

I personally have no problem with herm since it contains no obvious vulgarity and is already based on the scientific term hermaphrodite. I have no doubts it's been used as a slur, like many things, but time will tell if it's a big enough problem for a change or not.

Afterglow said:
Any chance we'll see this with the "herm" tag in the future, as well? For same reasons?

Herm is not offensive in the way cuntboy/dickgirl were to where they have "cunt" or "dick" in it. It is a shorted version of hermaphrodite, which is a greek word, and used in biology and science.
The answer is no.

> You can find out what the tags are being used for with enough digging
Sure, but aren't tags supposed to be clear, unambiguous, and to-the-point? Someone could've wrote down a weirdly specific definition for the 'cute' tag, but ultimately, it was removed because it's too ambiguous.

>Language changes and everyone adapts to using more acceptable terms
Sure, and that works (somewhat) for conversational language. But tags should be consistent, not something that changes every few years. If you're implying that we should keep changing tag names to keep it up-to-date with popular vocabulary, then I strongly disagree.

If we're going to go through all this trouble of calling e621 an 'archive' site, and not retroactively deleting old posts to fit new rules, then why should we retroactively change old tags to fit new societal standards? There's a reason we don't reword legal scriptures to fit current-day vocabulary; it'd be a never-ending process and ultimately isn't that important. If you know the intended usage behind the word isn't to offend people, then you shouldn't be offended by it. Being offended by a tag is extremely idiotic.

>It's offensive because it has the word 'cunt'/'dick' in it, instead of something scientific like 'herm'
It's no more offensive than the word 'pussy', which is another tag that we use. Additionally, hermaphrodite has a much more clear definition and has plenty of history and active usage behind it.

"Gynomorph" and "Andromorph" are not only ambiguous by definition, but nearly unheard of in the English language.

abscondler said:
"Gynomorph" and "Andromorph" are not only ambiguous by definition, but nearly unheard of in the English language.

It's not that big of a stretch to expect people to use their thinky-boxes. Here:

Xenomorph = (Xeno)(morph), alien-form/form of an alien.

Gyno = female, andro = male. I mean, there's a word for in between the two. 'Androgyny'.

Therefore, gynomorph can be assumed to be 'form of a female/female form', and andromorph the same but in a masculine form.

MissChu said:
It's not that big of a stretch to expect people to use their thinky-boxes. Here:

Xenomorph = (Xeno)(morph), alien-form/form of an alien.

Gyno = female, andro = male. I mean, there's a word for in between the two. 'Androgyny'.

Therefore, gynomorph can be assumed to be 'form of a female/female form', and andromorph the same but in a masculine form.

Yeah, that's... exactly my point. The definition itself is too general. Gynomorph can be assumed to refer to a male (or literally anything) with a feminine form. That vague definition can encompass way too many things, whereas something like 'cuntboy' is literal and straight to the point; it can only mean a boy with a cunt.

Edit: I'm already mixing these two terms up because of how vague they are. Gynomorph means something with a feminine figure, but you're using it to mean a girl with a male body part? Look, I'm not completely against changing the tags, but at least pick something that isn't so confusing and vague.

abscondler said:

> You can find out what the tags are being used for with enough digging
Sure, but aren't tags supposed to be clear, unambiguous, and to-the-point? Someone could've wrote down a weirdly specific definition for the 'cute' tag, but ultimately, it was removed because it's too ambiguous.

>Language changes and everyone adapts to using more acceptable terms
Sure, and that works (somewhat) for conversational language. But tags should be consistent, not something that changes every few years. If you're implying that we should keep changing tag names to keep it up-to-date with popular vocabulary, then I strongly disagree.

If we're going to go through all this trouble of calling e621 an 'archive' site, and not retroactively deleting old posts to fit new rules, then why should we retroactively change old tags to fit new societal standards? There's a reason we don't reword legal scriptures to fit current-day vocabulary; it'd be a never-ending process and ultimately isn't that important. If you know the intended usage behind the word isn't to offend people, then you shouldn't be offended by it. Being offended by a tag is extremely idiotic.

>It's offensive because it has the word 'cunt'/'dick' in it, instead of something scientific like 'herm'
It's no more offensive than the word 'pussy', which is another tag that we use. Additionally, hermaphrodite has a much more clear definition and has plenty of history and active usage behind it.

"Gynomorph" and "Andromorph" are not only ambiguous by definition, but nearly unheard of in the English language.

The tags weren't changed just because they were offensive. They are being updated to match the other tags in being less vulgar and more scientific terms.

We use herm which is short for hermaphrodite which is a Greek word as well. Most everyone knows what herm means. People will come to learn and understand gynomoprh and andromorph in time as well.

abscondler said:

Yeah, that's... exactly my point. The definition itself is too general. Gynomorph can be assumed to refer to a male (or literally anything) with a feminine form. That vague definition can encompass way too many things, whereas something like 'cuntboy' is literal and straight to the point; it can only mean a boy with a cunt.

Edit: I'm already mixing these two terms up because of how vague they are. Gynomorph means something with a feminine figure, but you're using it to mean a girl with a male body part? Look, I'm not completely against changing the tags, but at least pick something that isn't so confusing and vague.

The context the terms are used in here is close enough to their definitions to work. Users will pick up on how the terms are defined in the context of the site.

Also, if you need help remembering which is which. Gyno-morph = female-shaped and andro-morph = male-shaped. We're looking at the body type mainly, combined with the fact that their genitals don't match that body type.

abscondler said:
> You can find out what the tags are being used for with enough digging
Sure, but aren't tags supposed to be clear, unambiguous, and to-the-point? Someone could've wrote down a weirdly specific definition for the 'cute' tag, but ultimately, it was removed because it's too ambiguous.

I agree.
But I think it's a problem to overstate the difficulty involved in figuring out a tag. A search is to me both an obvious approach -- learning from example -- and an easy thing (e621 is optimized around searches).

If we're going to go through all this trouble of calling e621 an 'archive' site, and not retroactively deleting old posts to fit new rules, then why should we retroactively change old tags to fit new societal standards?

Sorry, that's a bad argument. Aliasing makes it rather questionable whether any loss of tagging history has actually occurred, and indexing primarily using contemporary terminology is generally going to have the effect that the largest number of people can find what they are looking for.

andromorph and gynomorph are certainly not current contemporary language, but AFAICS admin decisions like this always have to involve a certain degree of educated guessing.

There's a reason we don't reword legal scriptures to fit current-day vocabulary; it'd be a never-ending process and ultimately isn't that important.

.. isn't it more that there would inevitably be loss of subtle but important distinctions?

Tagging is not like this. TWYS is a pretty explicit attempt to avoid subtlety.

Which might be in itself a point against andromorph/gynomorph.

If you know the intended usage behind the word isn't to offend people, then you shouldn't be offended by it. Being offended by a tag is extremely idiotic.

I certainly agree there - taking tags on a website personally is fucking narcissistic. However admins do have to deal with the social consequences of ignorant offense-taking, including by artists, and PR is unfortunately important for the archiving function of this site. So they don't get to say simply 'fuck your offense-taking'

(to the furry art community as a whole, that is. I get the impression they get to say it plenty to individual chronic whiners ;)

>The tags weren't changed because they were offensive, they were changed to be less vulgar
What?

>They were changed to use scientific terminology
Except they're using the terminology incorrectly, which is misleading people into thinking that Andromorph/Gynomorph are synonymous with Dickgirl/Cuntboy, which they aren't.

>People will come to learn and understand gynomoprh and andromorph in time as well.
And that's a problem within itself. They'll either learn the terms correctly, then see it used incorrectly here and become confused and/or upset. Or they'll learn it from e621, then go around using the terms incorrectly, thus confusing/upsetting other people that know the correction definition.

>Gyno-morph = female-shaped
= has-a-dick...? There's nothing about gynomorph that implies male genitals. If anything, it'd imply the opposite. Dicks aren't exactly a feminine feature. Gynomorph implies a feminine figure overall, sure... but where do male genitals come into play? This tag would be more suited as a replacement for the 'female' tag, or at least a more ambiguous option for the female tag.

savageorange said:
But I think it's a problem to overstate the difficulty involved in figuring out a tag. A search is to me both an obvious approach -- learning from example -- and an easy thing (e621 is optimized around searches).

Sure, it's not hard to figure out what the words are being used for in relation to tagging, but why add that extra bit of work and confusion in the first place?

>"isn't it more that there would inevitably be loss of subtle but important distinctions?"
Possibly; that wasn't a very good example for me to use.

>Tagging is not like this. TWYS is a pretty explicit attempt to avoid subtlety.
>Which might be in itself a point against andromorph/gynomorph.
Agreed.

>"PR is unfortunately important for the archiving function of this site."
Fair enough, but there needs to be a line that's too far to cross just for the sake of being all-inclusive to every single fragile person that complains. Or at least just use a better term to fit the tag that doesn't bastardize the proper scientific meaning behind a scientific word.

abscondler said:
>Gyno-morph = female-shaped
= has-a-dick...? There's nothing about gynomorph that implies male genitals. If anything, it'd imply the opposite. Dicks aren't exactly a feminine feature. Gynomorph implies a feminine figure overall, sure... but where do male genitals come into play? This tag would be more suited as a replacement for the 'female' tag, or at least a more ambiguous option for the female tag.

You're thinking of this in terms of genitals. When we say morph, that means body types. Gynomorph means, in its simplest form, "woman shaped". Gynomorphs are characters with women's bodies but just happen to have penises.

Considering in artwork you can have any character have any genitals you want, changing the terms around just wouldn't make sense and be much more confusing. You'd have it so that "woman shaped" describes a man with a vagina and "man shaped" describes a woman with a penis, which honestly does not make sense. The genitals are not their shape described with the morph suffix, the body structure is. They are morph because of the body types, not genitals.

abscondler said:
>The tags weren't changed because they were offensive, they were changed to be less vulgar
What?

My meaning was that they were being changed to match the other tags, insofar as the other tags weren't as vulgar (cunt, dick), and that they were using more scientific terms (hermaphrodite, male, female).

abscondler said:
>They were changed to use scientific terminology
Except they're using the terminology incorrectly, which is misleading people into thinking that Andromorph/Gynomorph are synonymous with Dickgirl/Cuntboy, which they aren't.

>People will come to learn and understand gynomoprh and andromorph in time as well.
And that's a problem within itself. They'll either learn the terms correctly, then see it used incorrectly here and become confused and/or upset. Or they'll learn it from e621, then go around using the terms incorrectly, thus confusing/upsetting other people that know the correction definition.

As I said, the terms are being used in a way that is close enough to their original definitions here to be fine.

A gynomorph is something that appears like a female of its species, but is actually a biological male.

An andromorph is something that appears like a male of its species, but is actually a biological female.

(Note that appears like refers to body shape and whatever other sexual dimorphism is apparent in that particular species.)

abscondler said:
>Gyno-morph = female-shaped
= has-a-dick...? There's nothing about gynomorph that implies male genitals. If anything, it'd imply the opposite. Dicks aren't exactly a feminine feature. Gynomorph implies a feminine figure overall, sure... but where do male genitals come into play? This tag would be more suited as a replacement for the 'female' tag, or at least a more ambiguous option for the female tag.

is supposed to remind you that it's something/someone with the body of a female, but isn't a biological female. Else, we would just call them "female" and not "female-shaped".

I finally reached page 20! Here's my thoughts:

I learned anthropromorphic, autofellatio, lagomorph, and cunnilingus, I can handle gynomorph/andromorph(gynoid /android, anyone?)

I support trans metadata, but taking into consideration TWYS, I propose the following:

zavros-periculum said:
I finally reached page 20! Here's my thoughts:

I learned anthropromorphic, autofellatio, lagomorph, and cunnilingus, I can handle gynomorph/andromorph(gynoid /android, anyone?)

android

ImpidiDinkaDoo said:
Gynomorphs are characters with women's bodies but just happen to have penises.

If it were that simple, this thread would not have existed. Dickgirls weren't even the problem.
Tagging and locking cuntboy on characters with no boobs was.

Ninosi said:
A gynomorph is something that appears like a female of its species, but is actually a biological male.

An andromorph is something that appears like a male of its species, but is actually a biological female.

"Actually a biological ..." is TWYK not TWYS.
Like, don't get me wrong, but the TWYS rule is in place and the changes being discussed do not address it at all.

"appears like ... of its species" nope, for e6 it's explicitly like human of that gender, not the species in question.

A recent event that lead to this tag change and this thread was about mikhaila being tagged as cuntboy because she didn't look feminine enough. That's a perfectly fine female otter body type, it just lack some characteristics of a human female.

There was a older shitfest featuring yinglets, who are lore-wise sexually dimorphic, but not a in way humans are. Tags were locked with a decision based on human sexual characteristics, lore was ignored as per TWYS, and I think somebody even got banned for arguing against that.

hslugs said:
A recent event that lead to this tag change and this thread was about mikhaila being tagged as cuntboy because she didn't look feminine enough. That's a perfectly fine female otter body type, it just lack some characteristics of a human female.

I extremely doubt that of all things to push a change it would be some really specific character getting tagged cuntboy.

hslugs said:
"Actually a biological ..." is TWYK not TWYS.
Like, don't get me wrong, but the TWYS rule is in place and the changes being discussed do not address it at all.

That's how definitions work, that's also how we tag female and male. And species, and all other tags. Requiring people to know a definition of a word is not a breach of TWYS.

.. I've read the above post 4 times and it still doesn't make sense to me. Are you sure you read hslugs' objection properly?

Genotype is what 'actually a biological X' implies, and AFAIK there are very few cases where genotype is not TWYK. TWYS clearly excludes information about genotype and requires tagging based on phenotype (plus some visual conventions, in the case of female/male).

hslugs objection is, AFAICS, essentially about the same issue as 'don't tag *trans* when it's not absolutely clear in the picture itself' : You can't smuggle in character-dependent lore into the tag definition. "is actually a biological X" is character lore. 'looks like biological X' is not.

A slightly better definition without this particular problem IMO would be

• A gynomorph is something that appears like a female of its species, except for the genitals
• A andromorph is something that appears like a male of its species, except for the genitals

Although I admit that could potentially overlap with herm + maleherm.

I'm not sure genotype is relevant at all because the biological definition of a male is any organism that is capable of producing sperm which fertilizes a bigger ovum. Ovum is produced by the biological female of that species. Hermaphrodites simply can do both.

Our assumption is simply if a set of genitals is visible that that set is functional.

ImpidiDinkaDoo said:
Gynomorphs are characters with women's bodies

Yes,

ImpidiDinkaDoo said:
but just happen to have penises.

but no.

ImpidiDinkaDoo said:
They are morph because of the body types, not genitals.

Exactly. These terms have nothing to do with genitals, so why should they replace genital-specific terms, like cuntboy and dickgirl? It's the equivalent of using "feminine-bodied" and "masculine-bodied" in place of these terms -- it doesn't make sense.

Ninosi said:
A gynomorph is something that appears like a female of its species

Correct.

Ninosi said:
...but is actually a biological male.

Incorrect. It literally just means "something of feminine appearance," which is where the problem lies. It's too generalized to make sense to use as a replacement for these tags.

abscondler said:
Incorrect. It literally just means "something of feminine appearance," which is where the problem lies. It's too generalized to make sense to use as a replacement for these tags.

Well, the biology section of the wikipedia article directly supports our position.

NotMeNotYou said:
I'm not sure genotype is relevant at all because the biological definition of a male is any organism that is capable of producing sperm which fertilizes a bigger ovum. Ovum is produced by the biological female of that species. Hermaphrodites simply can do both.

Our assumption is simply if a set of genitals is visible that that set is functional.

I think I understand your disagreement now. This assumption is not something I was aware of.

NotMeNotYou said:
Well, the biology section of the wikipedia article directly supports our position.

That just says that andromorphs resemble males, like due to color variation,
not anything about genitals

NotMeNotYou said:
Well, the biology section of the wikipedia article directly supports our position.

"In biology, a gynomorph is an organism with female physical characteristics, whereas an andromorph is an organism with male physical characteristics."

That's still... an incredibly broad definition. Just because the example they used happens to support your position, that doesn't mean it's the only way the term can be used. Also, as Shyster5 stated, it has nothing to do with genitals. It can be applied to any feminine subject, regardless of what genitals they have.

Shyster5 said:
Hey it also has a picture of what looks like a dickgirl and they call it a gynomorph
oh wait that what you called dickgirls already, is it?
dang it i got myself confused

Nah, these terms are very clear and not at all confusing or easy to mix up or misunderstand /s

Why can't we just use something straight-forward, like male(pussy) and female(penis)? It has the bonus of being difficult to turn into a slur, since it's a literal description using scientific terms (excluding 'pussy', since they're against using the word 'vagina').

Because with TWYS, they aren't males with vaginas or women with penises.This is as close as they can get without coining a new phrase.

y'know with tag what you see how come there is an incest tag?
isn't that tag what you know by definition?
and it's also used as a like a TWYK, with images that don't have dialogue or environmental story telling like a "#1 dad" mug, they are tagged as incest because they know the lore behind the characters

and also with dialogue couldn't that also be a loophole to adding a trans tag by having trans characters saying that they are trans?

Shyster5 said:
y'know with tag what you see how come there is an incest tag?
isn't that tag what you know by definition?
and it's also used as a like a TWYK, with images that don't have dialogue or environmental story telling like a "#1 dad" mug, they are tagged as incest because they know the lore behind the characters

and also with dialogue couldn't that also be a loophole to adding a trans tag by having trans characters saying that they are trans?

blacklist tags are important

Versperus said:
blacklist tags are important

any tag can be a blacklist tag what are you talking about

Shyster5 said:
any tag can be a blacklist tag what are you talking about

incest is a heavily vetted tag, there would be more discourse if people couldn't blacklist it than there is of the name of what a tag is.

Versperus said:
incest is a heavily vetted tag, there would be more discourse if people couldn't blacklist it than there is of the name of what a tag is.

yeah but some incest images don't even look like incest images
and people find out it's incest Through the tags.

Shyster5 said:
yeah but some incest images don't even look like incest images
and people find out it's incest Through the tags.

your initial question is "why is there an incest tag"

Versperus said:
your initial question is "why is there an incest tag"

okay and i got my answer
so incest started out as a twys blacklist tag but then it morphed into a twyk because of the controversy surrounding it,right?

that just seems like twys gets lax when it suits people
, and that's a good thing

so why the rigidity on the trans tag

Shyster5 said:
okay and i got my answer
so incest started out as a twys blacklist tag but then it morphed into a twyk because of the controversy surrounding it,right?

that just seems like twys gets lax when it suits people
, and that's a good thing

so why the rigidity on the trans tag

doubt it's how it started, but it's still a good reason to have it around.

okay i'm just going to start a new thread for my other questions that i asked here