I had a discussion a few weeks ago about the lack of a proper tag for characters with overtly masculine facial features and large breasts. One was recently created, but there wasn't a Wiki definition for it and I figured it might help to discuss it here.

It seems misleading to simply tag characters like that as "female" based solely on whether or not they have a visible penis. The "trans_woman_(lore)" tag doesn't always apply either because these types of characters rarely identify as women, making the "lore" part of that tag inaccurate (and a little unfair to their creators).

To get an idea of what I mean, here's an example:

post #2360750

Most reasonable people would say that this is a dude, just with a woman's body. He's got a beard, short hair, short eyelashes, thick facial structure - basically nothing above his neck implies "female" whatsoever and the character still identifies as a man in spite of what their body looks like. But there's no tag for this kind of character, and there are lots of people who would rather not see them when looking for women / would appreciate them being easier to find.

This combination is becoming less niche these days, too. It seems like a good idea to hash out a proper tag before it becomes *too* popular and the lack of one becomes a problem. Plus, there's already hundreds of pics on the site that would benefit from it! :D

Considering the existence of maleherm this seems appropriate.
As far as trying to define it goes, I really would default to just "male but with obvious non-pecs".
I seem to recall walter_sache having a few examples that border on this.

lafcadio said:
Considering the existence of maleherm this seems appropriate.
As far as trying to define it goes, I really would default to just "male but with obvious non-pecs".
I seem to recall walter_sache having a few examples that border on this.

That's a good point, I didn't even think of that! If we've already got "maleherm", why not "male_gynomorph"? Though admittedly, it might also confuse people since "gynomorph" is supposed to also include a penis.

post #2596868

Here's another good example of an obviously male character with large breasts from DracoJeff (their entire library has loads of stuff themed around this XD ). In this example, despite him having a vagina, the picture itself refers to him as a guy and also suggests that other guys do the same thing - get breast surgery. Every picture of Phyco with a descrption from DracoJeff (the character's creator) also refers to Phyco as a guy, as does the game he's from; ExGender. The character also has obvious facial stubble, a thick jawline and short hair.

Despite all that, some people seem to believe that the "busty boy" tag doesn't apply to Phyco just because he doesn't have a penis. That really seems disrespectful to the artist's intentions and it's... well, it's plain to see that he's *meant* to look male.

I added a wiki description to the tag that says, "a character possessing large breasts and masculine facial features, or a large breasted character that identifies as male."

I think that fits well! I only added the part about their breasts being big because the tag's name includes "busty" though. x-x

Do you think I should make a clarification that the character doesn't necessarily have to have a penis for them to count? It seems to be a point of contention, and I think it's a limiting and misleading one at that.

killah_zillah said:
That's a good point, I didn't even think of that! If we've already got "maleherm", why not "male_gynomorph"? Though admittedly, it might also confuse people since "gynomorph" is supposed to also include a penis.

post #2596868

Here's another good example of an obviously male character with large breasts from DracoJeff (their entire library has loads of stuff themed around this XD ). In this example, despite him having a vagina, the picture itself refers to him as a guy and also suggests that other guys do the same thing - get breast surgery. Every picture of Phyco with a descrption from DracoJeff (the character's creator) also refers to Phyco as a guy, as does the game he's from; ExGender. The character also has obvious facial stubble, a thick jawline and short hair.

Despite all that, some people seem to believe that the "busty boy" tag doesn't apply to Phyco just because he doesn't have a penis. That really seems disrespectful to the artist's intentions and it's... well, it's plain to see that he's *meant* to look male.

I added a wiki description to the tag that says, "a character possessing large breasts and masculine facial features, or a large breasted character that identifies as male."

I think that fits well! I only added the part about their breasts being big because the tag's name includes "busty" though. x-x

Do you think I should make a clarification that the character doesn't necessarily have to have a penis for them to count? It seems to be a point of contention, and I think it's a limiting and misleading one at that.

"male_gynomorph" for Phyco wouldn't really apply since, the definition of the gynomorph tag is breasts + male genitals.

I feel like this is mostly stuff that we should handle with lore tags. in Phyco's case at least, posts containing the female-body version of the character should probably be tagged male_(lore) or something. a lot of them are currently tagged trans_woman_(lore) but I'm not really sure I'm comfortable having a character that was born male, and identifies as male with that tag.

but having a "bustyboy_(lore)" tag exist might also be helpful in any case.

EDIT: also, Phyco's not from ExGender, he's existed for quite a while before that game was in development.

darryus said:
"male_gynomorph" for Phyco wouldn't really apply since, the definition of the gynomorph tag is breasts + male genitals.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking too! Though "busty" implies having large breasts, which might be a bit misleading or uninclusive. Maybe people would still use the tag on boys with smaller breasts though? Maybe male_gynomorph can be its own separate tag... I dunno!

I feel like this is mostly stuff that we should handle with lore tags. in Phyco's case at least, posts containing the female-body version of the character should probably be tagged male_(lore) or something. a lot of them are currently tagged trans_woman_(lore) but I'm not really sure I'm comfortable having a character that was born male, and identifies as male with that tag.

but having a "bustyboy_(lore)" tag exist might also be helpful in any case.

I 100% agree that allowing the tag to be used on characters without penises is much more fair and accurate than labeling them all as "women". As it is right now, every single character without a dick is labeled a woman if they have breasts, even when they openly prefer being called men and have obvious masculine facial features. The "busty boy" tag can help characters like Phyco get found by people interested in them!

Hell, until now, the only tag you could use on characters like that was "trans woman (lore)" -- but characters like these rarely ever refer to themselves as women, so calling that a part of their lore doesn't fit at all! If this caveat gets added to the definition, the tag would really make things easier for people who enjoy handsome faces being attached to feminine figures, and give people who dislike it something to blacklist (which might lower the chances of a gender argument happening in the comments too?).

EDIT: also, Phyco's not from ExGender, he's existed for quite a while before that game was in development.

Yeah, but the game's almost entirely about him and his origins, so it feels appropriate to say that he's "from" it. Kind of like how some people's personal characters become so deeply engrained into a story that they end up synonymous with it, even though they started out as their own thing. X3

While I can understand your sentiment, Busty_Boy is not the appropriate tag for Draco's characters. With most artist I interact with, they all agree a "busty boy" is a Character who is Biologically male and identifies as he/him, who also just happens to have breast. Draco characters, while identifying as he/him, are not biologically male, and do not fall under that category. The best I can describe them is as being "Post_MtF_TF" or "Partial_MtF" but those may be a bit of a mouthful

-tyrone1991- said:
While I can understand your sentiment, Busty_Boy is not the appropriate tag for Draco's characters. With most artist I interact with, they all agree a "busty boy" is a Character who is Biologically male and identifies as he/him, who also just happens to have breast. Draco characters, while identifying as he/him, are not biologically male, and do not fall under that category. The best I can describe them is as being "Post_MtF_TF" or "Partial_MtF" but those may be a bit of a mouthful

Still, requiring a visibile dick also makes it harder to tag characters who actually do fit that description, due to the "tag what you see" rule.

post #3442454

For example, this pic doesn't have PB's junk in the shot. Under your suggested redefinition - where a guy's not a guy unless he has a cock - the busty boy tag wouldn't be applicable here. Every other picture of PB from the waist down proves that he is, but simply because there's no visibile dick in this picture of him, the tag wouldn't work.

The current definition allows him to keep that tag because it's less strict. Simply having big breasts and stating that he's a boy is enough to justify it.

Keeping the penis requirement out not only has the previously discussed upsides, but also sidesteps this kind of issue entirely, allowing ALL boys with boobs to keep the tag they deserve! ^u^

killah_zillah said:
Still, requiring a visibile dick also makes it harder to tag the characters who actually *do* fit that description.

post #3442454

For TWYS, intersex tags do require visible genitalia. Text stating something doesn't count, since it doesn't have to be true. Just like a gynomorph can't be tagged as such without a visible penis (or bulge indicative of a penis) and breasts, and a herm can't be tagged without seeing a pussy and penis/balls. A gynomorph without visible breasts would be a girly male, and a herm without a visible penis/balls/bulge would be a female.

killah_zillah said:
Every picture of PB from the waist down proves that he is, but simply because there's no visibile dick in *this* picture of him, the tag wouldn't work.

That's how it works. Each image is taken on its own for tagging, since characters can be depicted differently in different pictures. If you don't see a character with a penis, you don't assume they have one without other visual clues (e.g. a bulge). You would use lore tags if the artist says a character is a certain way which can't be tagged with TWYS.

watsit said:
For TWYS, intersex tags do require visible genitalia. Text stating something doesn't count, since it doesn't have to be true. Just like a gynomorph can't be tagged as such without a visible penis (or bulge indicative of a penis) and breasts, and a herm can't be tagged without seeing a pussy and penis/balls. A gynomorph without visible breasts would be a girly male, and a herm without a visible penis/balls/bulge would be a female.

That's how it works. Each image is taken on its own for tagging, since characters can be depicted differently in different pictures. If you don't see a character with a penis, you don't assume they have one without other visual clues (e.g. a bulge). You would use lore tags if the artist says a character is a certain way which can't be tagged with TWYS.

Right, that's why I pointed that out - it's an example of why the current definition should stay! It allows for stated genders to be enough, as well as masculine facial features. As it is, the tag works well as an umbrella term for all boys with boobs, regardless of their crotch accessories.

Maybe busty boy should be changed to a "lore" type tag, since it's not meant to be strictly about the character's appearance, only mostly? The thread's goal is to make it easier to find / blacklist these types of characters, since the way things were was making it really difficult. Having a solid, general term for boys with breasts streamlines things.

If the definition changes and pics requires dicks, then the tag should be renamed "male_gynomorph" to reflect that. It'd become a misleading term otherwise, since simply being a boy who is busty wouldn't be enough to count. Their face / gender preference would be the only difference between them and the typical female gynomorph.

killah_zillah said:
Right, that's why I pointed that out - it's an example of why the current definition should stay! It allows for stated genders to be enough, as well as masculine facial features. Maybe busty boy should be changed to a "lore" type tag?

Stated gender is never enough for TWYS, since printed text doesn't have to be true. PB's design makes him physically a gynomorph, as he has a female body type with breasts and a penis. If you don't see his penis, he would be tagged female (possibly with gynomorph_(lore)), and if you do see his penis/bulge and breasts, he would be tagged gynomorph.

killah_zillah said:
As it is, the tag works well as an umbrella term for all boys with boobs, regardless of crotch accessories.

No, it doesn't because it doesn't fit TWYS, since without seeing his crotch accessories, he looks like a female. PB calling himself a boy doesn't change TWYS tags.

Similarly, when you do see a character's genitalia, their face or body type doesn't change the tag. A character with a flat chest and a penis is tagged male; giving them a feminine body or face may make them girly, but still male, not a dick_girl or something else. So someone like Phyco
post #2596868
has breasts and a vagina to be tagged female. Having a masculine face (some apparent stubble, at least) won't stop them from being tagged female if their breasts and genitals can be made out.

As it is, busty boy is not a valid tag. bustyboy has been purposely aliased to intersex, and trying to get around the alias by tagging busty_boy with a space instead can be taken as tag vandalism. If you want to change the state of it, make your case and try to get the admins on board, but until then, I'd avoid trying to tag it.

watsit said:
Stated gender is never enough for TWYS, since printed text doesn't have to be true. PB's design makes him physically a gynomorph, as he has a female body type with breasts and a penis. If you don't see his penis, he would be tagged female (possibly with gynomorph_(lore)), and if you do see his penis/bulge and breasts, he would be tagged gynomorph.

No, it doesn't because it doesn't fit TWYS, since without seeing his crotch accessories, he looks like a female. PB calling himself a boy doesn't change TWYS tags.

Similarly, when you do see a character's genitalia, their face or body type doesn't change the tag. A character with a flat chest and a penis is tagged male; giving them a feminine body or face may make them girly, but still male, not a dick_girl or something else. So someone like Phyco
post #2596868
has breasts and a vagina to be tagged female. Having a masculine face (some apparent stubble, at least) won't stop them from being tagged female if their breasts and genitals can be made out.

As it is, busty boy is not a valid tag. bustyboy has been purposely aliased to intersex, and trying to get around the alias by tagging busty_boy with a space instead can be taken as tag vandalism. If you want to change the state of it, make your case and try to get the admins on board, but until then, I'd avoid trying to tag it.

Vandalism??? I didn't make the tag and have no idea who did. I saw it on a pic a couple days ago and was like, "it's about time!" There was obvious disagreement on what the tag meant - I even saw a fight break out over it - so I made a thread to figure out a good definition for it. I believe there really should be a fair, generalized tag for these type of characters. They're both common enough now for there to be a need for one, and unique enough that people would want to find more artwork like them / find a way to avoid them.

As for trying to talk to the admins, from what I'm seeing, there's loads and loads of threads specifically for discussing topics that admins will eventually see. I thought that's what these sections of the forum were for. Lots of people have suggested things here that admins agreed with and put into practice shortly afterwards, even me! XD (I'm not bragging, I'm saying that I was surprised anything actually came of it when I tried it a while back. I've tried talking to admins directly multiple times in the past and never got a reply. I wish I COULD talk to an admin or a moderator, I've got a couple questions!)

killah_zillah said:
As for trying to talk to the admins, from what I'm seeing, there's loads and loads of threads specifically for discussing topics that admins will eventually see. I thought that's what these sections of the forum were for.

It is, you were correct to make a thread here about it. But once it's obvious different people have different ideas for what a tag should be like, and a new lore tag may be more appropriate for what you want, it's best to wait for a response from the admins before continuing to use a tag that's a variation of a tag that was aliased away.

darryus said:
in Phyco's case at least, posts containing the female-body version of the character should probably be tagged male_(lore) or something. a lot of them are currently tagged trans_woman_(lore) but I'm not really sure I'm comfortable having a character that was born male, and identifies as male with that tag.

Trans_woman_(lore) doesn't make any sense at all if the character identifies as a man. Trans_man_(lore) would make a bit more sense there.

I don't know Phyco's lore, but for crossgender (i.e. if Phyco is normally by and large depicted as male, but occasionally depicted as female like in that picture), he should not be tagged male_(lore). male_(lore) is supposed to be for characters that are depicted as physically male, but because of TWYS gets tagged as something else. A male-to-female crossgender character depiction should be tagged mtf_crossgender, and not male_(lore). Perhaps mtf_transformation may be more appropriate when there's indications they were male and still identify as one, while now appearing as female (though male_(lore) still wouldn't apply). The applicability of trans_man_(lore) would be an interesting discussion if they still identify as a man when depicted as mtf_crossgender, or after_transformation+mtf_transformation.

watsit said:
It is, you were correct to make a thread here about it. But once it's obvious different people have different ideas for what a tag should be like, and a new lore tag may be more appropriate for what you want, it's best to wait for a response from the admins before continuing to use a tag that's a variation of a tag that was aliased away.

You're saying not to add or remove the tag from anything until the admins give their take on the issue, because it was rejected once before? Makes sense, though I genuinely thought they already did. About an hour after I added a wiki definition, the ability to edit the definition disappeared. I figured that was a way of ensuring nobody could change it again, like an admin saw it and said "yeah it's been discussed enough" to themselves before setting it to a permanent state. Is that just something that automatically kicks in after a wiki page edit?? I was wondering why that happened, it seemed really premature to make that permanent since only two people had discussed it! x-x

watsit said:
Trans_woman_(lore) doesn't make any sense at all if the character identifies as a man. Trans_man_(lore) would make a bit more sense there.

I don't know Phyco's lore, but for crossgender (i.e. if Phyco is normally by and large depicted as male, but occasionally depicted as female like in that picture), he should not be tagged male_(lore). male_(lore) is supposed to be for characters that are depicted as physically male, but because of TWYS gets tagged as something else. A male-to-female crossgender character depiction should be tagged mtf_crossgender, and not male_(lore). Perhaps mtf_transformation may be more appropriate when there's indications they were male and still identify as one, while now appearing as female (though male_(lore) still wouldn't apply). The applicability of trans_man_(lore) would be an interesting discussion if they still identify as a man when depicted as mtf_crossgender, or after_transformation+mtf_transformation.

You wouldn't believe how many busty boy characters get "trans woman" as their only unique tag. And if you change it, that change gets edited back in a day. It's personally very frustrating; I like these kinds of creative, convention breaking characters and it's really hard to find them unless you bookmark an artist who almost exclusively draws them, like DracoJeff! Regardless of anyone's personal thoughts on gender politics, there's lots of characters with these traits now and finding them / blacklisting them is really hard just because there's no proper tag for them. ><

killah_zillah said:
About an hour after I added a wiki definition, the ability to edit the definition disappeared. I figured that was a way of ensuring nobody could change it again, like an admin saw it and said "yeah it's been discussed enough" to themselves before setting it to a permanent state.

That's odd, the wiki page isn't locked and I can edit it. But I don't know the wiki well enough to know whether it would put a temporary lock on editing for some reason, or if an admin did lock it and then unlock it for some reason. In any case, don't worry too much about it. Mistakes happen, and honest mistakes that are easily cleaned up aren't likely to incur a scolding or anything.

killah_zillah said:
You wouldn't believe how many busty boy characters get "trans woman" as their only unique tag. And if you change it, that change gets edited back in a day.

If the character isn't described as a trans woman by the artist/creator, and someone keeps adding that tag to posts after being told it doesn't apply, you can either report the post for tag vandalism and ask for the tag to be locked off, or report the user if you see it's the same user adding it to multiple posts despite it not being applicable.

watsit said:
That's odd, the wiki page isn't locked and I can edit it. But I don't know the wiki well enough to know whether it would put a temporary lock on editing for some reason, or if an admin did lock it and then unlock it for some reason. In any case, don't worry too much about it. Mistakes happen, and honest mistakes that are easily cleaned up aren't likely to incur a scolding or anything.

I could SWEAR there was a big "edit this wiki page" button right under the tag's name... OMG I just figured it out. On pages where there isn't an existing definition, it *does* display a big edit button. Once you add one, that button is removed and the only way to edit the page is to use the second edit button, but they hid it up next to the help option on the user panel for some reason???

https://e621.net/wiki_pages/show_or_new?title=nervous_smile

Compare this with a page that already has a wiki definition, and there's only ONE edit button there!

watsit said:
he should not be tagged male_(lore). male_(lore) is supposed to be for characters that are depicted as physically male, but because of TWYS gets tagged as something else.

Counterpoint: male_(lore) states

Posts featuring characters who are canonically deemed to be or identify as male by their creator or owner, regardless of the physical or biological sex they are depicted as in the post.

I mean the lore tags were meant to be there for the people who were mad that the TWYS requirements were completely erasing author intent. I'm not sure creator or owner had its wording thought through fully, though, since afaik in practice we're more typically referring to artist/commissioner intent, which is often distinct from creator/owner stated-canon.

Notably for this thread though, howto:tag_genders is either completely unprepared for a character with a male head on a wholly-female body, or telling us to tag 'em female regardless of facial masculinity.

magnuseffect said:
I mean the lore tags were meant to be there for the people who were mad that the TWYS requirements were completely erasing author intent. I'm not sure creator or owner had its wording thought through fully, though, since afaik in practice we're more typically referring to artist/commissioner intent, which is often distinct from creator/owner stated-canon.

I think the "physical or biological sex they are depicted as in the post" is referring to the TWYS result of how they look in the image. The <sex>_(lore) tags have always been described to be for when the general tag applied for the character doesn't match what they're meant to be. Because people kept getting upset for a girly character being tagged female when other pages clearly show they're male, a female character being tagged male or andromorph because they have a flat chest and more masculine body type, or a gynomorph being tagged female because you can't see their junk, or a herm being tagged gynomorph because you can't see their pussy. Someone searching male_(lore) should still be finding male characters, just ones that TWYS doesn't allow to be tagged as male because of unseen or ambiguous details. A character that identifies as a man when it doesn't match their clearly depicted sex would be better tagged as trans_man_(lore), and trans_man_(lore) doesn't imply male_(lore).

magnuseffect said:
Notably for this thread though, howto:tag_genders is either completely unprepared for a character with a male head on a wholly-female body, or telling us to tag 'em female regardless of facial masculinity.

I think it's the latter. A character with a female head on a male is tagged male, and there's even the girly tag to supplement male characters with certain feminine aesthetics. I guess the issue here is the lack of nuance, there isn't a tag to distinguish a female character from having a feminine body with a masculine head, vs a female character with a masculine body and masculine head. There's also the debate surround the girly/manly tags, as the latter isn't the female corollary of the former male supplemental tag despite seeming like it should be, and they get extra confusing when considering the feminine/masculine tags are aliased to girly/manly respectively.

watsit said:
As it is, busty boy is not a valid tag. bustyboy has been purposely aliased to intersex, and trying to get around the alias by tagging busty_boy with a space instead can be taken as tag vandalism. If you want to change the state of it, make your case and try to get the admins on board, but until then, I'd avoid trying to tag it.

killah_zillah said:
Vandalism??? I didn't make the tag and have no idea who did. I saw it on a pic a couple days ago and was like, "it's about time!" There was obvious disagreement on what the tag meant - I even saw a fight break out over it - so I made a thread to figure out a good definition for it. I believe there really should be a fair, generalized tag for these type of characters. They're both common enough now for there to be a need for one, and unique enough that people would want to find more artwork like them / find a way to avoid them.

I was the one who made the busty_boy tag. And it is a valid tag. As are other tags such as like "cuntboy". Tags like this should exist because putting it under something like "gynomorph" is too broad a category. It makes thing actively harder for people to locate niche things and alienates a lot of users. Not to mention tags are so heavily gate-kept by mod staff, it's pretty much impossible to make a new one without threats of being banned for "vandalism".

If it's such a hassle to make them a regular one, then make them "lore" tags. Bottomline is all other sites and boorus see the tag as valid, so why can't here?

-tyrone1991- said:
I was the one who made the busty_boy tag. And it is a valid tag.

no it's not, a variant of the tag has already been aliased away to intersex, continuing to add a variant while knowing this is tag vandalism. in the tag can only be added by external knowledge, it is not a valid general tag, the fact that you're adding it to posts that don't even visibly contain intersex characters pretty much proves it. see: twys, howto:tag_genders

EDIT: bruh, none of the posts you've even ever added the tag to even have any masculine features at all. I can _kinda_ see wanting to add the tag to posts where the character has breasts and like, a full beard or a mustache or something, but every post is either visibly a normal female or visibly a normal gynomorph.

darryus said:
no it's not, a variant of the tag has already been aliased away to intersex, continuing to add a variant while knowing this is tag vandalism. in the tag can only be added by external knowledge, it is not a valid general tag, the fact that you're adding it to posts that don't even visibly contain intersex characters pretty much proves it. see: twys, howto:tag_genders

Busty_Boy and all variations of it are valid. But fine, make it a lore tag, that doesn't change my point. Putting all of these tags under one umbrella term is limiting and alienating.

EDIT: They are character who are in lore male and have breast. They are busty boys

I mean the face looks pretty feminine to me regardless of what body type they have and the beard.

I think bustyboy should be a valid tag, possibly as a lore tag. There are people out there who like bustyboys but not "regular" gynomorphs, and it doesn't seem unreasonable for them to have a tag to find them. At the very least, we should be more diligent about including male_(lore) on bustyboy posts. (I will say I prefer "bustyboy" to "busty_boy".)

The bulk update request #3771 is pending approval.

create alias busty_boy (0) -> intersex (249879)
create alias busty_boi (0) -> intersex (249879)

Reason: As established in this thread, topic #6254, and previously with the aliasing of the tag bustyboy itself; bustyboy and any permutations aren't valid tags, and can be referring to any number of things like gynomorphs, trans_man_(lore), etc; thus they should be aliased to intersex like the original tag was.

(Also bustyboi was aliased to invalid_tag, maybe that should be changed to alias to intersex to keep it consistent)