Posted under Tags
Kayako said:
While I agree that having a counter for non-humanoid characters would be useful, I don't think that we should have counter tags that combine them with humanoid characters.
Something like 1creature/multiple_creatures would be better, in my opinion.
I agree completely.
I would like to echo Kayako. Other isnt offensive in it self. Im sure someone will get offended but that is frankly unavoidable even if we do nothing.
Kayako said:
While I agree that having a counter for non-humanoid characters would be useful, I don't think that we should have counter tags that combine them with humanoid characters.
Something like 1creature/multiple_creatures would be better, in my opinion.
Where do we draw the line for non humanoid? There are plenty of humanoid Pokemon for example and plenty of quasi humanoid ones as well.
ion288 said:
I would like to echo Kayako. Other isnt offensive in it self. Im sure someone will get offended but that is frankly unavoidable even if we do nothing.
Where do we draw the line for non humanoid? There are plenty of humanoid Pokemon for example and plenty of quasi humanoid ones as well.
Pokemon have the pokemon_(creature) tag.
Besides, there is a "humanoid" egg-group pooling Pokémon together that ressemble humans the closest. It's not great, but it exists. But before getting sidetracked, Pokémon have this tag for a reason.
Mind that I'm not the most up-to-date on pogeymans anymore, but from what I've seen, even most of the "humanoid" ones are distinct enough from humans that there shouldn't be an issue in separating them.
Since this conversation has gone on a while, here's a rough summary of our 'to-do' list from this thread so far:
- cleanup of androgynous and ambiguous gender tags and wikis to match our general consensus of their usage now that the latter tag exists.
- implementation of a genderless tag for characters with no canon or apparent gender.
- implementation of a counter for characters that don't fit into binary gender categories (with *others being the leading suggestion so far).
- maybe implementation of a counter for non-humanoid characters as per the most recent suggestion (I think this might need further discussing, not necessarily in this thread)
ion288 said:
Where do we draw the line for non humanoid? There are plenty of humanoid Pokemon for example and plenty of quasi humanoid ones as well.
The line is pretty much the same between what would be tagged as furry and creature/animal or between monster girl/monster boy and just plain monster. There are likely arguable cases with any of them.
Kayako said:
- implementation of a counter for characters that don't fit into binary gender categories (with *others being the leading suggestion so far).
I think this is one we can go ahead and get started with. Cleanup on androgynous should be done very carefully. I'd put the focus on where it was tagged for canonical reasons, but should remain where there are visual reasons for it.
EB said:
The line is pretty much the same between what would be tagged as furry and creature/animal or between monster girl/monster boy and just plain monster. There are likely arguable cases with any of them.
I think this is one we can go ahead and get started with. Cleanup on androgynous should be done very carefully. I'd put the focus on where it was tagged for canonical reasons, but should remain where there are visual reasons for it.
nonamethanks said:
For now, that seems to be what was decided on. I suggested person/people in the original post because I remember seeing it said here before that "other(s)" could be seen as offensive, but I'm not sure I would prefer it since it's potentially confusing. We can always just alias to something else if it's seen as problematic.
EB said:
For now, that seems to be what was decided on. I suggested person/people in the original post because I remember seeing it said here before that "other(s)" could be seen as offensive, but I'm not sure I would prefer it since it's potentially confusing. We can always just alias to something else if it's seen as problematic.
Obviously I can't speak for every nonbinary person, but to be perfectly honest, just *having* a tag for this would be a step up for the site as far as I'm concerned and ease my own searching (I like seeing characters that are like myself, go figure). I don't think a lot of people are going to be too picky about language here, unless they're the sort of person who just likes to start arguments anyways.
With that in mind, I'd say just go with whatever's the least ambiguous. On my end, 1other fits that bill pretty well, unless anyone's got a better idea.
tapnek said:
I'm having doubts about the usage of the 1other, etc. tags. Yes, it's here to fix an existing problem but I'm having the feeling that it's not gonna be on a lot of posts and will be forgotten unless someone enforces use of it.
*raise hand*
I'm not here a lot, but it's one of those things I'm anal enough about that I'll definitely contribute to use of it. (Kind of like what I do with transparent_background and scenery. If I get annoyed enough that I can't find something I become a gardener of it, evidently.)
Also, wouldn't all of the gems from houseki no kuni qualify? (At least, unless the image is one where they've been given sex characteristics) Considering that's a currently popular series, usage there alone might be enough to cement the tag in peoples' minds for the future.
edit: If we use this to count futanari characters as well, which given that they're nonbinary physically I believe we should, that's definitely something that people would notice.
Kayako said:
Also, wouldn't all of the gems from houseki no kuni qualify? (At least, unless the image is one where they've been given sex characteristics) Considering that's a currently popular series, usage there alone might be enough to cement the tag in peoples' minds for the future.
Yeah, Houseki no Kuni is pretty popular right now so it would be the best place to start with populating the tag. There is also chevalier d'eon (fate/grand order) who is said to be canonically undefined. I think I will work on that today, as most posts depict him or her rather effeminately and so androgynous is misused.
EB said:
Yeah, Houseki no Kuni is pretty popular right now so it would be the best place to start with populating the tag. There is also chevalier d'eon (fate/grand order) who is said to be canonically undefined. I think I will work on that today, as most posts depict him or her rather effeminately and so androgynous is misused.
Speaking of chevalier d'eon, that's a good example of why these tags are needed; people keep tagging them as 1boy/otoko no ko or similar even in images where there are no sex characteristics visible. As far as I know, there's still been no official confirmation of a canon gender for this character. Taggers are just assuming based on popular depiction and/or the real-world counterpart (funny in a series where a large portion of the cast are genderswaps....).
Anyway, is this the go-ahead to begin implementation of the counters, or should I wait?
So purely from a tagger's point of view, how exactly is 1other meant to be used to distinguish it from 1girl and 1boy? The current definition is very hazy. 'characters that don't fit into binary gender categories'. What exactly does this mean and how do we identify these characters?
Is it only for when the gender isn't officially known in a copyright and so should only be tagged with the suggested genderless tag? How would this work for original characters?
Is a 'sex characteristic' simply the genitals or the changes one goes due to puberty? If so then shouldn't say post #2931814 be tagged as 1other since you can't tell in the image itself whether 1girl or 1boy should be tagged? Also note that many artist's draw otoko no ko basically the same as their female characters (i.e. with the same body type that would normally be associated with females), so should many of these be considered 1other?
Let's state the actual wiki definition first at least.
kiyah123 said:
So purely from a tagger's point of view, how exactly is 1other meant to be used to distinguish it from 1girl and 1boy? The current definition is very hazy. 'characters that don't fit into binary gender categories'. What exactly does this mean and how do we identify these characters?
Is it only for when the gender isn't officially known in a copyright and so should only be tagged with the suggested genderless tag? How would this work for original characters?
Is a 'sex characteristic' simply the genitals or the changes one goes due to puberty? If so then shouldn't say post #2931814 be tagged as 1other since you can't tell in the image itself whether 1girl or 1boy should be tagged? Also note that many artist's draw otoko no ko basically the same as their female characters (i.e. with the same body type that would normally be associated with females), so should many of these be considered 1other?
Let's state the actual wiki definition first at least.
Here's how I, personally, would define its usage:
Used for characters of ambiguous, mixed, or unknown physical sex, such as:
1) Canon characters that both have no established canon gender and are being drawn without visible sex characteristics (defined here as genitalia, breast tissue, adam's apple, etc.; things like wide hips and hairstyles aren't definitive enough).
2) Original characters that have no creator-confirmed gender and that are drawn ambiguously (appearance that would generally fall under the androgynous and/or ambiguous gender tags).
3) Canon or original characters that have a mixed physical sex presentation. A blatant example would be futanari characters with both male and female genitalia visible in the image.
Open to suggestion, obviously.
Under this definition, it wouldn't apply to images like the example post #2931814, because although the character has no visible sex characteristics and no artist-confirmed gender, they aren't drawn in any way ambiguously; for all intents and purposes, they are presented as and assumed to be female. Like this, we preserve tag-what-you-see except for in special cases of overarching canon, which would be my ideal way of handling it.
The tag would primarily handle ambiguous-looking original characters or genderless/gender-unconfirmed canon characters, such as chevalier d'eon, the houseki no kuni gems, frisk/chara and so forth.
Kayako said:
Here's how I, personally, would define its usage:
Used for characters of ambiguous, mixed, or unknown physical sex, such as:
1) Canon characters that both have no established canon gender and are being drawn without visible sex characteristics (defined here as genitalia, breast tissue, adam's apple, etc.; things like wide hips and hairstyles aren't definitive enough).
2) Original characters that have no creator-confirmed gender and that are drawn ambiguously (appearance that would generally fall under the androgynous and/or ambiguous gender tags).
3) Canon or original characters that have a mixed physical sex presentation. A blatant example would be futanari characters with both male and female genitalia visible in the image.
The first two aren't getting tagged with counters at all at this point, so it should be safe to go ahead and start tagging. #3 would involve removing some tags though, because I think futanari characters have often been counted as "girls". Probably should wait and hear some more opinions before any mass changes in that regard.
EB said:
The first two aren't getting tagged with counters at all at this point, so it should be safe to go ahead and start tagging. #3 would involve removing some tags though, because I think futanari characters have often been counted as "girls". Probably should wait and hear some more opinions before any mass changes in that regard.
Yeah, I completely expect futanari to be a point of contention. It almost always is (though I'm sure this would please that subset that's always complaining about futas not being girls).
The Tomb of the Unknown Gender.
I'm not gonna read this counting needles thread, cos it's kinda tedjous subject except to endocrinologists, but came here on seeing 'ambiguous gender' for the first time ---
I would reserve that for those who are epicene boys or masculine girls, and for those where the sex can't be determined by body or dress simply say: 'unknown gender' as being more specific.
I see these have started being populated, including most of houseki_no_kuni. We'll want implications from all of the 2~6+others tags to multiple_others. And if a tag gardener wants a quick search to tag with *other(s), kuroinyan is canonically genderless, but there should be a quick check to make sure no images are a male or female version, just in case.
Laethiel said:
I see these have started being populated, including most of houseki_no_kuni. We'll want implications from all of the 2~6+others tags to multiple_others. And if a tag gardener wants a quick search to tag with *other(s), kuroinyan is canonically genderless, but there should be a quick check to make sure no images are a male or female version, just in case.
Someone should probably create wiki pages for them too so people know what exactly to use them on.
Unbreakable said:
Someone should probably create wiki pages for them too so people know what exactly to use them on.
That was next on my list of things to do (also hi, I'm the only who tagged all of HnK and Len'en last night), however I've run out of free time for the next day or so so if someone else wants to pick up the mantle, be my guest.
Arguably frisk and chara also still need tagged. Didn't quite get that far.
