Posted under Tag/Wiki Projects and Questions
I've been posting here for a while but I'm not very sure if my tags are ok.
I tagged atlas_(milkbubbles) as andromorph but should I tag him as female?
Like this one I'm trying to post
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/31367674/
I'm not sure if I should tag female or andromorph.
I appreciate it if anyone can give me some advice!
Check out howto:tag_genders, especially the flowcharts.
In my experience the example you linked is the sort of thing where it can get kinda hairy (no pun intended); moobs often aren't very visually distinct from breasts, especially when they're lactating (lactating isn't necessarily an indicator of a female character, though). No genitals are visible, so you could make a case for either male or female. Tbh I would probably tag it as ambiguous gender and let someone else edit it if they have a problem with that.
i see that as a male with gynecomastia.
and andromorph only counts if there is a presence of vulva on masc-bodied character
I personally think that should be tagged as male. Andromoroh definitely does not apply, because it inherently requires some kind of visual proof that character has a vulva.
The character literally has a vulva in the next image of them on the site. I still am baffled why this system hasnt been in some way improved by any imaginable stretch in years, but here we are.
Itterly deranged to me that we still are having these debates on whether to intentionally misgender someone's character bc the site even now still refuses to acknolwedge transness as intrinsic.
howto:tag_genders has an excellent flowchart for this. Using the horizontal flowchart, that pic has no visible genitals, so it would fall into "unk". It has visible breasts, so it would be tagged female, since body type isn't taken into account in that branch.
demesejha said:
The character literally has a vulva in the next image of them on the site. I still am baffled why this system hasnt been in some way improved by any imaginable stretch in years, but here we are.Itterly deranged to me that we still are having these debates on whether to intentionally misgender someone's character bc the site even now still refuses to acknolwedge transness as intrinsic.
This was most recently discussed in topic #60625. The general tags are concerned with visual body forms rather than gender identity, where the lore tags take over.
eightoflakes said:
Check out howto:tag_genders, especially the flowcharts.
Thanks! Maybe I'll go with male this time as others suggested.
demesejha said:
The character literally has a vulva in the next image of them on the site. I still am baffled why this system hasnt been in some way improved by any imaginable stretch in years, but here we are.
I have to think which to tag every time... kinda bothering.
bitez said:
i see that as a male with gynecomastia.
and andromorph only counts if there is a presence of vulva on masc-bodied character
Oh I'll tag it too. Thank you!
demesejha said:
The character literally has a vulva in the next image of them on the site. I still am baffled why this system hasnt been in some way improved by any imaginable stretch in years, but here we are.Itterly deranged to me that we still are having these debates on whether to intentionally misgender someone's character bc the site even now still refuses to acknolwedge transness as intrinsic.
This is exactly the reason why we have the lore tags now.
It's worth noting that it'd be more accurate to refer to the "gender tags" as sex tags; the reason why we don't is because of the inherent confusion it'd cause if people thought it referred to stuff like sex. Obviously, going by TWYS, it's basically impossible to tag a character's actual gender; you can only tag their sex.
Biological sex is nebulous and nuanced enough that I would say the gender tags don't really describe it either. They're more like shorthand for various combinations of primary and secondary sex characteristics (e.g. male = masculine genitals + no breasts). Either way they're not intended to make any statement on the depicted characters' gender. Actually, none of the general tags are intended to state the "objective" truth. TWYS inherently requires interpretation.
I said it would be more accurate, not perfectly accurate. Yes, we're dumbing it down so that it both can be tagged fairly reliably & had practical usage to users; it's still a far closer analog to describing sex than gender identity.
eightoflakes said:
Actually, none of the general tags are intended to state the "objective" truth. TWYS inherently requires interpretation.
I mean, I guess if you're referring to color-blindness (or I suppose more accurately atypical color perception; colors technically aren't real after all) green_body is an interpretation and not an objective observation, but I don't see much value in splitting that hair, especially considering how confused users already get; at some point, you have to say an image objectively shows something or it doesn't if you want there to be any general tags whatsoever. TWYS is inherently meant to minimize interpretation; you don't tag what you think is there, you tag what's directly observed. The point is that, for experienced users who won't get confused, it's better to think of gender tags as describing physical sex than gender identity.
You're not wrong, I just like being pedantic :y
I'm not sure how exactly it would be designed but I do think more tutorialisation of e6's tagging system could be useful. e6's tag system can be fairly unintuitive sometimes. Of course there are already plenty of wiki pages but if you're new they can be difficult to find.
