This is an otoko no ko? Breasts, wide hips, no sign of a bulge. Pixiv tags make no mention of this character's gender.
The title of the thing, with おとこの娘 - while spelled a bit differently than normal (which messes up autoTL - but is still otoko no ko) - indicates that he's an otoko no ko.
I'd like to ask the question, why they aren't considered futanari? I mean they have breasts and I can see a bulge if I squint your eyes really hard.
Because the artist said they're a boy. We ordinarily operate under the rule of Tag What You See, but this is a glaring exception. An artist can draw a character who looks identical to any other woman, but if they say she's actually male, then so go the tags. Yes, even if she's drawn with wide hips and obvious breasts. Try not to think about it too hard.
An artist can draw a character who looks identical to any other woman, but if they say she's actually male, then so go the tags. Yes, even if she's drawn with wide hips and obvious breasts.
That is not true at all. A character drawn with breasts and other obviously female features should always be tagged as a girl, the artist's headcanon is irrelevant.
The commentary does suggest it's breast padding, not actual breasts, and I guess that's plausible, but I would still tend to say this image is tagged wrong.
This is package art for an IRL padded bra intended for use by male crossdressers. Seems like a pretty effective advertisement if it's caused this much confusion.
That is not true at all. A character drawn with breasts and other obviously female features should always be tagged as a girl, the artist's headcanon is irrelevant.
The commentary does suggest it's breast padding, not actual breasts, and I guess that's plausible, but I would still tend to say this image is tagged wrong.
"Headcanon" does not apply when the person who drew it is the one creating the canon. Disregarding the artist's intent is completely missing the point and by doing so you're detracting from the general quality of Danbooru's uploads.
It is not a mistag if the artist tagged it himself. If you don't want to follow the tags of creators you should not be tagging here in the first place because you don't understand how tagging works.
If you don't want to follow the tags of creators you should not be tagging here in the first place because you don't understand how tagging works.
ok random blue user with 12 uploads.
If an artist tags their ffm_threesome as yuri, do we defer to their tagging? If an artist their incest as "they're not related in this image," do we follow their tagging? I hope you realize that "all characters are depicted above the age of 18" isn't always true.
If an artist draws a girl, with breasts and a vagina, then says "this is a boy" we do not tag it as a boy. We never have. Tag What You See trumps canon and artist intent. We can defer to artists and canon knowledge when it isn't clearly contradicted by what's in the image, but we do not tag apples as oranges.
This image is fine tagged as it because it's plausible that that is a padded bra on a man. But the general principle that slime stated is wrong. If the bra was gone, and the character had visible breasts, we would tag it as a girl, regardless of what the artist said.
This image is fine tagged as it because it's plausible that that is a padded bra on a man. But the general principle that slime stated is wrong. If the bra was gone, and the character had visible breasts, we would tag it as a girl, regardless of what the artist said.
I'd say it's really only partially wrong. The truth is that gender tagging is one of the messier issues the site has to deal with, and there's a lot of exceptions to TWYS where gender is concerned. There are both characters that are tagged as they appear regardless of canon, and characters that are tagged as they're stated regardless of appearance.
The truth is that gender tagging is one of the messier issues the site has to deal with, and there's a lot of exceptions to TWYS where gender is concerned.
It is messy, but it's just ultimately a case-by-case, contextual determination. Every image has a unique combination of canon context, artist commentary, and visible details. I think my statement is more accurate, but broad, general rules only get you so far.
The whole reason I'm even making an argument out of this is that this:
iridescent_slime said:
if [the artists] say she's actually male, then so go the tags. Yes, even if she's drawn with wide hips and obvious breasts. Try not to think about it too hard.
is a potentially very misleading statement. I don't want less experienced users (like the one who just told me I shouldn't be tagging here) to see this and think it's an accurate final statement on how we tag.
Because the artist said they're a boy. We ordinarily operate under the rule of Tag What You See, but this is a glaring exception. An artist can draw a character who looks identical to any other woman, but if they say she's actually male, then so go the tags. Yes, even if she's drawn with wide hips and obvious breasts. Try not to think about it too hard.
And is this rule applied uniformly? Or is there a character they make an exception for?
If an artist tags their ffm_threesome as yuri, do we defer to their tagging? If an artist their incest as "they're not related in this image," do we follow their tagging? I hope you realize that "all characters are depicted above the age of 18" isn't always true.
If an artist draws a girl, with breasts and a vagina, then says "this is a boy" we do not tag it as a boy. We never have. Tag What You See trumps canon and artist intent. We can defer to artists and canon knowledge when it isn't clearly contradicted by what's in the image, but we do not tag apples as oranges.
This image is fine tagged as it because it's plausible that that is a padded bra on a man. But the general principle that slime stated is wrong. If the bra was gone, and the character had visible breasts, we would tag it as a girl, regardless of what the artist said.
At the point where you find yourself pivoting between bad-faith arguments, it's better to cut your losses. You already know you're wrong and arguing for bad reasons people don't like
It is messy, but it's just ultimately a case-by-case, contextual determination. Every image has a unique combination of canon context, artist commentary, and visible details. I think my statement is more accurate, but broad, general rules only get you so far.
If multiple users can't agree on what sex is shown in the picture, or whether a character with a penis is a boy or a futanari, then maybe we should have a dedicated thread in the forum to hash these out. I can't say with complete confidence it won't go up in flames, but it would be better to have a thread to discuss this than edit-warring these posts.
Leave a comment