Searching the forum for "newhalf", the last any discussion occurred was over a year or two ago. Recently got into conversation with another user, so wanted to see where things lie on whether newhalf can be treated as a sub-tag of futanari and relevant derivatives (futa_with_*, namely).
For my current piece, I'd say "yes", in that I'd suppose searching for "futanari" means "any feminine body with male genitalia present"; and "newhalf", in what-you-see use, is a specification of the former. (However, I don't suggest implication, for images which confirm "newhalf" status, but are not explicitly focused on showcasing anatomy.) My discussion brought up the distinguished Pixiv tags, which lead to the application of full-package_futanari to Pixiv-"futanari"-tagged images that do not visually confirm female genitalia, under logic that "newhalf" would have been used if female genitalia was not implied by the artist. In considering a counterpoint to futa_with_*, there is currently only the newhalf_with_male tag, with 25 active posts. And, as the futanari wiki currently reads, newhalf is listed with other futanari qualifiers, though its own wiki currently begins with, "Similar to futanari, but".
tl;dr - "Dickgirls" is the crass spirit of the futanari tag, and segregating newhalf images on a civilized technicality complicates matters. (But let's not default "futanari" onto images that approach "newhalf" status with some respect.)
My opinion on the matter now is very solid that newhalf is closer related to trap/otoko_no_ko and should be by default considered "male," thus making it completely different from how I feel we should use the futanari tag where the assumption is the character by default is "female." We don't require visual confirmation for tagging genders, and newhalf is a form of gender, which is why the visual requirement on it should be dropped and the characters for it should be tagged as if we'd tag normally for gender, which is based on whatever information we know of the character.
As for my reasoning, it is because we have characters that exist like Mariandale, which even from the point of view of the show the character is considered "male" (yet people have gone through and tagged the character as a female, removing male affiliated tags). The characters gender in the series is not disputed once it is confirmed they completely lack a vagina. Another example, though no images of it, is Lucy MK 3.5 from Yuria 100 Shiki, where the character (an android) has the upper half of a female and the lower half of a male, as such the character by others is completely treated as male. Newhalf for our tagging should be the recognition that the character is male.
Tagging newhalf as male seems fine to me. But for tagging simplicity I'd say that, in sexual situations, they should be tagged futanari and use the futa_with_* tags rather than inventing a new set of newhalf_with_* tags.
Tagging newhalf as male seems fine to me. But for tagging simplicity I'd say that, in sexual situations, they should be tagged futanari and use the futa_with_* tags rather than inventing a new set of newhalf_with_* tags.
If you're properly treating them as male, then if they're with a male it is yaoi and if it is with a female its just regular sex.... so futa need not apply at all.
If you're properly treating them as male, then if they're with a male it is yaoi and if it is with a female its just regular sex.... so futa need not apply at all.
Well, I skip both futanari and yaoi images, so I don't really care but...
Would most people who have futanari blacklisted but not yaoi want to see newhalf images?
Would most people who have yaoi blacklisted but not futanari want to see newhalf images?
I'd guess the answers would be "no" and "yes", which would suggest that tagging newhalf as futanari would be more useful. But maybe I'm wrong.
lkjh098 said: Would most people who have yaoi blacklisted but not futanari want to see newhalf images?
So this is me, more or less, and I don't pretend to speak for anyone but myself, but no I wouldn't want to see newhalf stuff if I was searching for futanari. I would think that this isn't an uncommon sentiment, but I could be wrong.
See, but once you're tagging them as futanari you're putting them back under a tag where the default assumption is the character is female. When these characters are not, which is why they need a separate tag from futanari to begin with.
Also if they've learned to blacklist one tag, they're not so dumb as to fail to be able to apply a new tag under their blacklist.
I can see why one would want to tag newhalfs as male since they have the cock but no vagina, but why is tagging them futanari making them female? Just because futa have vaginas doesn't mean they lose their cocks, so they're just as much male. And if it's a lack of testicles, are full-package futas female as well?
Personally I'd rather have futa and newhalf tied together since when I look for one I look for both; IE a character with a cock but with female body features like breasts, little to no body hair, no facial hair, and a more curvy female body structure. Whether there's a vagina under the cock usually doesn't enter into it. That's just personal preference though.
Would be really nice if there were more than two main genders. Something like male, female, then intersex for all the the variations betwen would be great. But that's just idle musing since that would be impossible that I know of.
From what I've learned about real-life MTF transgender, they really prefer to be treated as women. So, I would suggest that we keep treating fictional newhalfs as women too.
From what I've learned about real-life MTF transgender, they really prefer to be treated as women. So, I would suggest that we keep treating fictional newhalfs as women too.
Well I'd agree in treating them in whatever manner they wish to be treated as, for tagging purposes this and that are two completely different things. That is a matter on their social or mental gender, this should strictly be a matter on the character's biological sex or more accurately to identify their primary and secondary sex characteristic as used for tagging. Girl/Female identifies that they have primary (and potentially secondary) female sex characteristic(s); male identifies that they have primary (and potentially secondary) male sex characteristic(s); futanari identifies that they have female primary and usually secondary sex characteristics, as well as (potentially incomplete) primary male sex characteristics (ie a penis); Newhalf identifies that the character has female secondary sex characteristics and male primary sex characteristics.
Using the gender they identify with just muddies the water, as then you have to start arguing over where traps/otoko no ko belongs, since some of them do identify as females while others don't.
Edit: Some further thoughts on the divisions
Male = Male Primary Sex Characteristic (genitals)
Female = Female Primary Sex Characteristic
Futanari = Female Primary and Secondary Sex characteristics + Male Primary Sex Characteristic
Given it features both primary and secondary sex characteristics of a female and the male primary sex characteristic can be incomplete, it seems more logical to place this under "female" despite having both male and female primary sex characteristics. Even if you remove the secondary characteristics, the characters are usually treated female first with male attachment, than as a male character. So even though they're essentially in the middle between the two, they're inherently treated as female over the other (and in a lot cases the characters were by default fully female to begin with before the male part was attached on). For male characters becoming a futanari is also typically considered a "genderswap," so for whatever reason in terms of weight it is usually vagina > penis.
Newhalf = Male Primary Sex Characteristic and Female Secondary Sex Characteristics
Given that the characters only have male primary sex characteristics it is more appropriate to put them under "male" grouping because the female secondary characteristics, while defining the body shape and the like isn't actually our primary reason for tagging "male" or "female." Immature characters lack the secondary characteristics, but they are placed under one or the other because of their primary sex characteristic alone. Furthermore otoko_no_ko characters can possess female secondary characteristics and still get classified as "male," so unless you wish to muddy things further, Newhalf more appropriately falls under the "male" heading. Additionally we'd still tag a character who is so muscle bound to be indistinguishable between male or female, but if they had female genitals we'd still classify the character female regardless of the secondary characteristics that look more in line for a male character.
/edit
Saduharta said:
I can see why one would want to tag newhalfs as male since they have the cock but no vagina, but why is tagging them futanari making them female? Just because futa have vaginas doesn't mean they lose their cocks, so they're just as much male. And if it's a lack of testicles, are full-package futas female as well?
In the case of futanari it is more female than it is male, so by lumping Newhalf under it you're by default giving them more weight as being "female." A futanari is pretty much saying you have a 100% female with a penis (going with my sex characteristics definition lets count that as 50% male then), so 100% female + 50% male or to get the percents at 100%: 67% female and 33% male. Newhalf is 50% female (female form, but no genitals) and 50% male (male genitals but not form). Whether a futanari has testicles or not changes nothing in that the weight still leans more toward them being "female."
Saduharta seems to reflect my viewpoint the best, and if there is a viewer implication of "if futa, then female", I could support intersex becoming the umbrella tag, and futanari becoming a subset thereof (defined as "female features with vagina/vulva and penis and/or testicles", with the no_testicles qualifier and full-package_futanari sub-tag, though if the "futanari" tag is redefined, one or the other of these might become moot, or at least "no_testicles" becoming much more situational, such as for male characters). This would lead to replacing futa_with_* to intersex_with_*, as well.
As for newhalf qualifying the male tag, I say no. Just as intersex characters don't qualify either yuri or yaoi, the presence of definably female bodily features should disqualify "newhalf"; I see these all as "defining the seen" rather than "defining the character's character". However, depending on the latter per character, I haven't a problem including "newhalf" in *boys/*girls counts, since those are more lenient (as proven in "futanari" inclusions...unless we'd really want to start a *intersex series alongside).
As for newhalf qualifying the male tag, I say no. Just as intersex characters don't qualify either yuri or yaoi, the presence of definably female bodily features should disqualify "newhalf"; I see these all as "defining the seen" rather than "defining the character's character". However, depending on the latter per character, I haven't a problem including "newhalf" in *boys/*girls counts, since those are more lenient (as proven in "futanari" inclusions...unless we'd really want to start a *intersex series alongside).
Well my primary focus when I was saying they're defined as male is more in reference to the usage of the #gender tags (there is no female tag, so the male tag has no counterpart unlike the #girls tags being counterpart to the #boys tags, so you can't place something under a "female" tag). As for the usage of the male tag itself, given that trap/otoko_no_ko characters can display a good amount of female secondary sex characteristics (body shape and even some level of breasts without padding), I find it hard to allow them to fall under the male tag and not allow newhalf to also qualify. If you're going to accept those characteristics for one, it's kind of silly imo to say its a no go for the other.
Males don't have birthing hips and full-blown breasts needing a bra.
In real life, sure, but that has never stopped artists from doing whatever they've wanted (post #390306, post #427046, post #1363177, post #1318034). I don't have an example for the breasts, but I do recall a few times where in the comments it was questioned if the character wasn't female because of what appeared to be breasts (small though, but quite pronounced), but the artist clearly tagged those images with the trap tag.
I wasn't talking about traps, I was talking about your suggestion to lump newhalfs into male, which is pure noise for no other reason than semantics.
And I was talking about how there isn't any real difference in features present in traps and newhalf (outside of degree for breasts), so what are you getting at? It's not noise if the features are those that are the same as those found in traps which are tagged male. You can remove the traps from the male tag if you want to also keep out the newhalfs, but including one and denying the other just seems like a line you can't draw given the overlap between newhalfs and traps.
Are you being deliberately obtuse now? Take a quick gander at newhalf and see how many of them have large/huge breasts. Not even the most extreme trap have breasts, unless you're one of those insufferable canon taggers.
Take a quick gander at newhalf and see how many of them have large/huge breasts. Not even the most extreme trap have breasts, unless you're one of those insufferable canon taggers.
We forgetting about characters like Tieria Erde and the nice mess he's made between genderswap and trap?
Are you going by using the newhalf tag based on tagging by what you see or treating it as you would gender and tagging them character based on known information of the character? Because what I've been trying to push is that they are treated just like we'd treat male or female, in that we'd tag based on knowledge of the character, not based alone on visual cues (unless that is the only information available). The current population of the tag should be predominantly based on a tagging by visual cues approach, so I think that argument of using what is currently under the tag to be a poor argument.
Given an unknown or original character which clearly has breasts and a penis, but presence or absence of a vagina is not obvious, should it be tagged newhalf or futanari or both?
If later on knowledge indicates that the character is in fact newhalf, does that mean the futanari tag should be removed if present?
