Nuke Gendered Pokemon

BUR #45956 has been rejected.

nuke magikarp_(male)
nuke magikarp_(female)
nuke wooper_(female)
nuke wooper_(male)
nuke combee_(male)
nuke combee_(female)
nuke shinx_(male)
nuke shinx_(female)
nuke snover_(male)
nuke snover_(female)
nuke cacturne_(male)
nuke cacturne_(female)

Someone is going through and making new tags for Pokemon with extremely minor gender differences. Look at post #8135468 can you tell which one is male and which one is female? It's the whiskers, male Magikarp have yellow, the white one is female. Several Pokemon have very small indicators like that Wooper another who has been tagged

The number of frills it has are slightly different.

Immediately one must ask, does this actually matter for searching? We have tags for pokemon with serious design altering gender differences already like Nidoran (Male) and Nidoran (Female), we also have the tag for sexual dimorphism if it's the focal point of the post. Several Pokemon were given small changes starting in gen IV like the two above but most if not all art of them are drawn "male" by default including most official art making pokemon_name_(male) the more redundant tag but I would argue both are unneeded and not what anyone is seriously searching for outside of again, sexual dimorphism art which can be tagged as such.
As a funny aside artists also don't even care post #1440389 would be pikachu_(male) if we had that tag

@klorpa tagging you since these are your tags and I think you should have input. In the future I'd also suggest taking stuff like this through the forums first since it will both save you time in case we don't want them, and for tags like this with MAJOR franchise tagging implications they should go through the forums anyway.

I do think the argument could be made that gender tags for Combee are warranted, since the difference is relatively noticeable (at least compared to something like Wooper), as well as the fact that only female Combee evolve into Vespiquen, so it's at least noteworthy in that regard. I'm not against nuking it, but I'm not against keeping it either. As for the others, I agree they should be nuked.

I don't want a world where we're tagging male_pikachu for generic cosplay and determining the exact generation an image depicts for if we use sexed Eevee tags (Eevee dimorphism coming significantly later than everything else).

I'm going to be a little contrarian and say I think we should be tagging the uncommon case. For example, most posts of shinx are of the male version, so shinx_(female) is useful to filter down posts, especially since these tags all have many hundreds of results each.

I may be a bit biased, but I've mantained a living pokedex for a few years now and I can definitely see why someone would want to search for any of these.

agreed with op. pokemon gender difference tags shld be reserved for mons with major differences (such as meowstic and indeedee), tagging the minor differences feels redundant

(sorta dead thread, srry) what i will say though is that i think some gender diffs are common/distinct enough to have a tag for the "non-default" version alone? for example, having pikachu_(female) but no male equivalent since the male is the one in the sugimori art and most official media, i'm not sure how many mons this wld apply to tho

Pikachu_(female) would catch every single Cosplay Pikachu excluding artists who are unfamiliar with difference. Though that is certainly the exception.

I already said that _(female) is less redundant for 99% of Pokemon but I still don't think this is a good standard for Pokemon tagging as the differences are so minor it's not even relevant outside of sexual dimorphism.

If we do start tagging only _(female) a concern I would have is people applying it to any porn of the character regardless of depicted "gender" post #8735430 is a "male" shinx being drawn with female anatomy as is every piece sexualizing Shinx in shinx rating:e. That might be outside of the scope of the OP though.

It took until Gen V when they actually started to try to make real differences.

The problem with much of these minute differences is that in fanart the variety of artstyles and personal preferences will make it even harder to tell them apart. For example the only difference about a female Hypno is that it has more collar fur, but someone could have just drawn an extra fluffy Hypno and be none the wiser, and someone will still tag it as _(female), which seems a bit silly.

The only Pokemon I can see an argument for is Pikachu, as it being the mascot it's female form get's a fair amount of mileage and the heart on the tail is distinct to the naked eye without much need for squinting. Though be warned that this may also cause a ton of mistagging if a Pikachu is depicted in having female genitalia and people may still tag it _(female) even if no heart tail is present.

Outside of Hippopotas, Hippowdon, Unfezant, Frillish, Jellicent, Pyroar, Meowstic, Indeedee, Basculegion, and Oinkologne I don't really believe anything else warrants a new tag, but perhaps there should be other ways to track them. Maybe a pool? A new general tag?

There's no reason to make a general tag or pool when a chartag suffices. We are not running out of tag space.

nonamethanks said:

I'm going to be a little contrarian and say I think we should be tagging the uncommon case. For example, most posts of shinx are of the male version, so shinx_(female) is useful to filter down posts, especially since these tags all have many hundreds of results each.

I may be a bit biased, but I've mantained a living pokedex for a few years now and I can definitely see why someone would want to search for any of these.

I also have an (albeit incomplete) living dex, and to me these tags are pure fluff. It's fun to see there's a difference in the actual Pokédex and flip between the genders to find out what it is, but as Danbooru tags they do nothing for me, especially with how minute some of the differences are. A female Steelix, for example, has one less fang. Many other gender differences are just slightly smaller/larger body parts, which will undoubtedly be very difficult to concretely categorize when artistic license is taken into account.

These tags remind me of the incredibly granular gun tags we used to have, where rifles with a few less notches were tagged as a different model despite being essentially identical. We should not be looking to replicate that.

nonamethanks said:

There's no reason to make a general tag or pool when a chartag suffices. We are not running out of tag space.

It's not exactly the same, but I don't see how that would be much different than how we handle Shiny Pokemon. Shiny versions could be their own character tags too.

This bulk update request is pending automatic rejection in 5 days.

This bulk update request has been rejected because it was not approved within 45 days.

The bulk update request #45956 (forum #377739) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.