closetphone said:
Can there be a male version as well please? Like with a dick?

This is the male version. It's slit penetration. @u@

I also thought it was female until my brain told me, a female version is not possible, so I looked at the tags and realized that it was so, now I am confused, holy shit! I love this :O

Extremely cute :D

sparuc said:
I also thought it was female until my brain told me, a female version is not possible, so I looked at the tags and realized that it was so, now I am confused, holy shit! I love this :O

How exactly did your brain come to the conclusion that a female version is not possible? post #1697732 certainly has that.

sparuc said:
I also thought it was female until my brain told me, a female version is not possible, so I looked at the tags and realized that it was so, now I am confused, holy shit! I love this :O

Allow me to introduce you. 63? Sparuc. Sparuc? 63.

malikfoxen said:
Allow me to introduce you. 63? Sparuc. Sparuc? 63.

It's not even R63, most Digimon can be either gender. While there are some exceptions, like Angemon, Gabumon aren't.

furrin_gok said:
It's not even R63, most Digimon can be either gender. While there are some exceptions, like Angemon, Gabumon aren't.

"By nature, Digimon don't have gender." - Renamon

rara said:
"By nature, Digimon don't have gender." - Renamon

But, that means they only have anus?

rara said:
"By nature, Digimon don't have gender." - Renamon

That one was the season where they were literally video game monsters that somehow got into the physical world. Other seasons might have them as aliens from another dimension (Cyber Sleuth, the game, definitely does), in which case they could.

Any reason why this was changed to female/male?

thetundraterror said:
Any reason why this was changed to female/male?

Probably e621's stupid ass "tag what you see" rule even though the artist said it's slit DOCKING and thus male.
It's also tagged as male on FA.

I like her plumpy chest)

rakushun said:
Probably e621's stupid ass "tag what you see" rule even though the artist said it's slit DOCKING and thus male.
It's also tagged as male on FA.

I mean, they can say that. But as far as the viewer is concerned. This just M/F. There isn't any identifiable feature that shows that this is a male.

faggotoven said:
I mean, they can say that. But as far as the viewer is concerned. This just M/F. There isn't any identifiable feature that shows that this is a male.

Artist intent trumps judging a characters gender based on what genitals you think you see.

sparuc said:
I also thought it was female until my brain told me, a female version is not possible, so I looked at the tags and realized that it was so, now I am confused, holy shit! I love this :O

It's male despite e621's incessant intent on "I think I see a vagina, so it's female."

faggotoven said:
Ok, fair enough.
On an unrelated note, could you rate my helicopter drawing here?

If it's good enough, I'd like to submit it to the helicopter art enthusiasts' club.

Your helicopter comment is already always ridiculous, but it's even more ridiculous since some male animals just have slits and it has fuckall to do with transgenderism and thus your little "I identify as a helicopter" joke is completely irrelevant. The point you completely missed is that it's silly to apply human standards of genitals to gender when it's a drawing of a fictional monster, and it goes from silly to dumb to FORCE it in tags when artist intent says otherwise. I don't see anything wrong with tagging on a case by case basis. I shouldn't have to take off a vagina and female blacklist just to see what's supposed to be a male slit. This isn't the first time this has happened.

rakushun said:
Your helicopter comment is already always ridiculous, but it's even more ridiculous since some male animals just have slits and it has fuckall to do with transgenderism and thus your little "I identify as a helicopter" joke is completely irrelevant. The point you completely missed is that it's silly to apply human standards of genitals to gender when it's a drawing of a fictional monster, and it goes from silly to dumb to FORCE it in tags when artist intent says otherwise. I don't see anything wrong with tagging on a case by case basis. I shouldn't have to take off a vagina and female blacklist just to see what's supposed to be a male slit. This isn't the first time this has happened.

Helicopter thing was a little on the nose wasn't it? I chose it for the cliché (was gonna go with truck first), transgenderism has nothing to do with the topic (as you have mentioned). Though in getting hung up on the helicopter joke you missed my point.

If it looks like a bicycle, looks like it would ride like a bicycle, but the author said that it's a truck (happy?) doesn't mean it's going to be searched for by truck enthusiasts.

I like slit play (it's hot shit, esp when room is cramped in there), but there is absolutely nothing in the above picture that shows that. If the artist had put a tip of the slit penis coming out, or an X-ray of the mosh-pit then there'd be no question about it.

And precisely because this is a fictional monster, it can be whatever, and is beholden to how well the artist displays his or her vision. A person who black-listed slit wouldn't be upset from seeing the above animation.

Pretend I'm the artist of this piece: https://e621.net/posts/2415419
I declared that Krystal's fanny is actually a slit with a tentacle dick hidden inside, and the above image is gay porn. It still looks like a hotdog in a taco, and I get into a Kerfuffle with the mods over what tags should be placed.

faggotoven said:
Helicopter thing was a little on the nose wasn't it? I chose it for the cliché (was gonna go with truck first), transgenderism has nothing to do with the topic (as you have mentioned). Though in getting hung up on the helicopter joke you missed my point.

If it looks like a bicycle, looks like it would ride like a bicycle, but the author said that it's a truck (happy?) doesn't mean it's going to be searched for by truck enthusiasts.

I like slit play (it's hot shit, esp when room is cramped in there), but there is absolutely nothing in the above picture that shows that. If the artist had put a tip of the slit penis coming out, or an X-ray of the mosh-pit then there'd be no question about it.

And precisely because this is a fictional monster, it can be whatever, and is beholden to how well the artist displays his or her vision. A person who black-listed slit wouldn't be upset from seeing the above animation.

Pretend I'm the artist of this piece: https://e621.net/posts/2415419
I declared that Krystal's fanny is actually a slit with a tentacle dick hidden inside, and the above image is gay porn. It still looks like a hotdog in a taco, and I get into a Kerfuffle with the mods over what tags should be placed.

Slit play is slit play, and some male animals have slits. Despite how incredibly verbose your response is, absolutely nothing in your post at all changes anything I said, and in the end it's still a drawing of a male lizard monster having its cloaca fucked, despite what e621 says, which is not the authority. The tag rule only exists because they can't be fucked to put in the extra effort to tag on a case by case basis. It really has nothing to do with target audience like you're trying to imply, because the intended target audience is people who like male monsters with cloacae, and that's what people who search for it should find by all the rules of basic logic.
Luckily, e621 did add the (lore) thing recently, so at least things aren't bad as before, but I still have to make special tags for that, and it's not super consistent.

rakushun said:
It really has nothing to do with target audience like you're trying to imply, because the intended target audience is people who like male monsters with cloacae, and that's what people who search for it should find by all the rules of basic logic.

So... it does have something to do with a target audience? OK, let me flip it around for you. The Above gif has nothing identifiable for for people who like male monsters with cloacae. Unless they would make exceptions for lizards with a vagina too.

If you need to explain what it is then something's wrong then right?

Also, pedantry time! She's got an anus, ergo not a cloaca.

There's a stronger case for an "ambiguous gender" tag here, what with all the "intellectual debating" we've been having about what's between its legs.

faggotoven said:
So... it does have something to do with a target audience? OK, let me flip it around for you. The Above gif has nothing identifiable for for people who like male monsters with cloacae. Unless they would make exceptions for lizards with a vagina too.

If you need to explain what it is then something's wrong then right?

Also, pedantry time! She's got an anus, ergo not a cloaca.

There's a stronger case for an "ambiguous gender" tag here, what with all the "intellectual debating" we've been having about what's between its legs.

"She" is not real. Not only is he not real, but he's not even based on a real animal. It's a fictional monster. Thus, he is whatever the artist says by any measure. Word of God trumps your baseless knowledge of fictional monsters kiddo. The very fact that it was created and directly said to be a male monster with a cloacae (and anus, who gives a shit if it has both, it's not real) is what makes it identifiable as a male monster. That's how I, you know, identified it as such?

rakushun said:
"She" is not real. Not only is he not real, but he's not even based on a real animal. It's a fictional monster. Thus, he is whatever the artist says by any measure.

lol I knew you'd get into a pissy over "she", what an easy bait.

And "He" is no more a "he" than it is a "she", because it is a fictional monster.
And it can be anything the viewer deems it to be.

rakushun said:
Word of God trumps your baseless knowledge of fictional monsters kiddo.

God is dead, and you're the one drudging up that idiotic fIcTiOnAl MoNsTeR kNoWlEdGe point over, and over, and over, and over again. I'm barely humoring you about it my guy.

rakushun said:
The very fact that it was created and directly said to be a male monster with a cloacae (and anus, who gives a shit if it has both, it's not real) is what makes it identifiable as a male monster. That's how I, you know, identified it as such?

The very fact that it is a drawing, that is beholden to viewer interpretation means it can be whatever it is in the drawing. If the artist is hell-bent on proving that this is a male then he or she should have made it more clear.

rakushun said:
(and anus, who gives a shit if it has both, it's not real)

Your high school teacher for one. But you're right, who gives a shit... which is why I called it pedantry... you land mine.

faggotoven said:
lol I knew you'd get into a pissy over "she", what an easy bait.

And "He" is no more a "he" than it is a "she", because it is a fictional monster.
And it can be anything the viewer deems it to be.

God is dead, and you're the one drudging up that idiotic fIcTiOnAl MoNsTeR kNoWlEdGe point over, and over, and over, and over again. I'm barely humoring you about it my guy.

The very fact that it is a drawing, that is beholden to viewer interpretation means it can be whatever it is in the drawing. If the artist is hell-bent on proving that this is a male then he or she should have made it more clear.

Your high school teacher for one. But you're right, who gives a shit... which is why I called it pedantry... you land mine.

And you ignored my Krystal example, tisk tisk, too hard for you to argue against?

That's a really long way of just using "viewer interpretation" as an excuse to be wrong. You interpreted incorrectly, case closed.

rakushun said:
That's a really long way of just using "viewer interpretation" as an excuse to be wrong. You interpreted incorrectly, case closed.

As opposed to using "but the artist said!" (when the helicopter is clearly a bicycle) as a rebuttal, Which is itself flawed.
Well, since you don't have a proper rebuttal and just leaving, then that just supports my point. Case closed, you're wrong.

faggotoven said:
As opposed to using "but the artist said!" (when the helicopter is clearly a bicycle) as a rebuttal, Which is itself flawed.
Well, since you don't have a proper rebuttal and just leaving, then that just supports my point. Case closed, you're wrong.

Gobumon is an old romance for me so this pic is hot. I don't really like dong so it makes this pic even more fun for me. It's a fun simple animation in a cute style for that face.

That being said, this just looks to me like another case of "people who like gay stuff are fine with a female being made male but if you dare make a male into a female (or even dare to mistake a male for female) then they lose their potatoes".
No more or less. I'm also seeing a lot of "attempting to project my personal gender ideas onto characters to feel validated", so when a character in a cartoon says the word "genderless" they hop off the couch whooping and throwing popcorn/beer like a bunch of dads watching a football game.

ganador said:
Gobumon is an old romance for me so this pic is hot. I don't really like dong so it makes this pic even more fun for me. It's a fun simple animation in a cute style for that face.

That being said, this just looks to me like another case of "people who like gay stuff are fine with a female being made male but if you dare make a male into a female (or even dare to mistake a male for female) then they lose their potatoes".
No more or less. I'm also seeing a lot of "attempting to project my personal gender ideas onto characters to feel validated", so when a character in a cartoon says the word "genderless" they hop off the couch whooping and throwing popcorn/beer like a bunch of dads watching a football game.

I don't really care what gender Gabumon is in this pic, I'm just defending the "tag what you see" argument and getting a ride out of that rakushun character.

"attempting to project my personal gender ideas onto characters to feel validated"
Nope, just trolling (unless you mean that other guy or girl). Although, while we're at it. Gabumon here really does have more of a visual excuse to be either female or ambiguous_gender. Doesn't have any feature to be categorically considered male.

faggotoven said:
I don't really care what gender Gabumon is in this pic, I'm just defending the "tag what you see" argument and getting a ride out of that rakushun character.

"attempting to project my personal gender ideas onto characters to feel validated"
Nope, just trolling (unless you mean that other guy or girl). Although, while we're at it. Gabumon here really does have more of a visual excuse to be either female or ambiguous_gender. Doesn't have any feature to be categorically considered male.

It's still male.

faggotoven said:
I don't really care what gender Gabumon is in this pic, I'm just defending the "tag what you see" argument and getting a ride out of that rakushun character.

"attempting to project my personal gender ideas onto characters to feel validated"
Nope, just trolling (unless you mean that other guy or girl). Although, while we're at it. Gabumon here really does have more of a visual excuse to be either female or ambiguous_gender. Doesn't have any feature to be categorically considered male.

Let me try being more clear: The Gobumon in this animation looks female. If the artist says "it is actually male and this is docking" then that is fine, but, the fact that said clarification is even needed proves the helicopter point.
Some people get mad that anyone would even mistake it for female, those are the people I mentioned that lose their potatoes.
I, personally, enjoy the animation pretending it is female. If that makes anyone mad they can go kick rocks.
If you are "getting a ride" out of rakushun, or anyone for that matter, or "just trolling" as you call it, then it only robs your words of any weight, whether they have a valid point or are a complete dummy.