I think we need to sit down and hash this out and come to a definitive answer to the problem of female charr and how the cuntboy tag relates to them.

Currently, the Tag What You See system requires us to tag cuntboys if the following conditions are met:

Does it have a visible pussy? Yes.
Does it have breasts? No.
*VERY IMPORTANT MODIFIER TO THE PREVIOUS TWO REQUIREMENTS*Does it have other feminine traits (curved hips, feminine eyes, slim figure, etc.)? No.

Then it gets tagged cuntboy.

However, with female charr, this becomes a difficult thing to do as the standard right now is to tag female charr as, well...female charr, despite the fact that they are typically portrayed as flat-chested and moderately muscular.

See:

post #314923

post #306313

post #281017

post #297615

Further compounding this issue is that there are several images of female charr on this site that could be legitimately tagged as female, due to the presence of feminine traits:

(obviously, the breasts make it female; the eyes are a giveaway as well)
post #307081

(gentle swell of chesticles, high cheekbones, feminine eyes and leg structure)
post #304990

(breasts again)
post #291068

(swelled chest, dainty eyes, dem hips and thighs)
post #249055

And many others. Now, we have a few solutions to this.

1) Tag all female charr as cuntboy. (Patently stupid, as evidenced by the female-appearing charr in the images above.)

2) Tag all female charr as female charr. (Why have the TWYS rule when you just make exceptions to it? Cuntboy makes sense for the first set of images I linked.)

3) Tag female charr on a case-by-case basis. (Best solution, in my opinion. Female-appearing charr get the female tag, male-appearing charr get the cuntboy tag. Character owners have a fit and fall into it when their character gets tagged cuntboy, but that happens on a daily basis for a multitude of non-charr characters as well.)

You can't just say 'all X get tagged X' in this case, because the visual evidence doesn't bear this out. I'm all for female charr getting tagged female if they have visual characteristics that warrant it, but if a character is flat-chested, wide-shouldered, with no distinguishing female characteristics past their pussy, then it should, by the rules that have been established for tagging on this site, be tagged cuntboy.

Otherwise, why bother having the rule in the first place?

Oh, God, here comes a shitstorm.

Renard_Queenston said:
Oh, God, here comes a shitstorm.

ALready been one. Here comes another. The last time, it got so ridiculous on EVERYONE's part (not just the regular users) that I completely gave up giving a fuck about tagging at all on this site. So I just browse and comment.

Have fun, folks.

Didn't we already go over this?

tag what you see.. If it's got no boobs.. BUT has other female characteristics, it's still a girl. a cunt boy is a BOY with a cunt.. not a girl with missing boobs. There is a difference people! XD

Foobaria said:
I completely gave up giving a fuck about tagging at all on this site. So I just browse and comment.

It's your duty...as a citizen user of america e621...to do your part in the ever growing threat of facism mistaggings. So be a proud patriot furfag and buy war bonds fight for proper tagging. For the good of a nation site, is a good for all.

Aurali said:
tag what you see.. If it's got no boobs.. BUT has other female characteristics, it's still a girl. a cunt boy is a BOY with a cunt.. not a girl with missing boobs. There is a difference people! XD

Except we've got admins mistagging these images as well. There seems to be this common agreement that all female charr get tagged female, whether they qualify for cuntboy or not.

DK,

The problem you have here is that you think the same rules that apply to HUMAN cuntboys, should also equate to anthropomorphic flat chested females.

If we were to follow your stringent TWYS rules, half of the female canines and felines would have to be changed to cuntboy (ok.. maybe not half, but a good amount as they are drawn with more animal then as human traits, and thus don't have huge human breasts)

And I quote from the WIKI: http://e621.net/wiki/show?nordirect=1&title=cuntboy

A cuntboy is a theoretical individual who is entirely masculine in appearance, but has female genitalia instead of a penis and scrotum. *SNIP* As they are rather easy to mistake them as flat chested females or, in the case of non-mammals, breastless females,*SNIP*

If you can't understand that simple distinction, then you shouldn't have the privilege to partake in these debates or have tag changing abilities -- its already CLEARLY written out in the wiki FFS...

Murmillos said:
DK,

The problem you have here is that you think the same rules that apply to HUMAN cuntboys, should also equate to anthropomorphic flat chested females.

If we were to follow your stringent TWYS rules, half of the female canines and felines would have to be changed to cuntboy (ok.. maybe not half, but a good amount as they are drawn with more animal then as human traits, and thus don't have huge human breasts)

And I quote from the WIKI: http://e621.net/wiki/show?nordirect=1&title=cuntboy
If you can't understand that simple distinction, then you shouldn't have the privilege to partake in these debates or have tag changing abilities -- its already CLEARLY written out in the wiki FFS...

Theirs one major flaw in your logic thanks to being in the furry fandom, Girly bois. {fucking kill me now I HATE that word.} Primarily, guys who look so much like girls you would easily mistake them FOR girls because, yeah, the artist wants to fuck a girl but is still pretending to be gay or something, dunno what the logic is but there ya go. Their entire assistance throws everything out of whack because, oh, its guys who look extremely effiminent.

Also, everyone knows the wiki is 100% accurate 100% of the time despite easily being edited by anyone and everyone, including trolls who consistently edit it with fake information just to fuck with people :D

Murmillos said:
stuff

Jesus, who lit the firecracker on your tampon? I'm going to break your tirade into easily digestible parts.

The problem you have here is that you think the same rules that apply to HUMAN cuntboys, should also equate to anthropomorphic flat chested females.

It doesn't matter if we're talking human or furry characters here, as the decision of whether something gets tagged cuntboy or female never hinges on whether it's human or furry, only on the evidence presented in the image.

If we were to follow your stringent TWYS rules, half of the female canines and felines would have to be changed to cuntboy

These aren't 'my stringent TWYS rules', they're the rules set forth by the administration of this site and, presumably, agreed to by the members here when the topic was first introduced. This isn't me trying to push my own personal views on the subject, this is how the rules have been written by the people who run this site.

ok.. maybe not half, but a good amount as they are drawn with more animal then as human traits, and thus don't have huge human breasts)

lolk

And I quote from the WIKI: http://e621.net/wiki/show?nordirect=1&title=cuntboy[/quote]

I'm going to quote the rest of that passage, and then something I said in my OP. Hopefully you actually read it this time.

The Wiki goes on to say:
A cuntboy is a theoretical individual who is entirely masculine in appearance, but has female genitalia instead of a penis and scrotum. They do not have breasts. Since they have only female genitalia, they are not considered hermaphrodites.

As they are rather easy to mistake them as flat chested females or, in the case of non-mammals, breastless females, the main criteria to spot one should be the shoulder-to-hip ratio, or simply the width of the character's hips. Overall musculature may also be a good indicator, but a girly cuntboy should be tagged as female.

And I said in my OP:
Currently, the Tag What You See system requires us to tag cuntboys if the following conditions are met:

Does it have a visible pussy? Yes.
Does it have breasts? No.
*VERY IMPORTANT MODIFIER TO THE PREVIOUS TWO REQUIREMENTS*Does it have other feminine traits (curved hips, feminine eyes, slim figure, etc.)? No.

Then it gets tagged cuntboy.

I'm very well aware that feminine-appearing characters meeting these requirements get tagged as flat-chest females, and I'm fine with that. But when images like post #314923, post #306313, and post #297615 are getting tagged as females despite wide shoulders and a complete lack of distinguishing female characteristics, then we're not doing our job as good taggers, admins included.

If you can't understand that simple distinction, then you shouldn't have the privilege to partake in these debates or have tag changing abilities -- its already CLEARLY written out in the wiki FFS...

As Celestia said before, because the Wiki has never been wrong. In addition, had you quoted the entirety of the wiki instead of cherrypicking only those passages that support your claim, you'd see that the wiki supports my point. If anyone shouldn't be partaking of tagging or tagging discussions on this site, it's someone like you with a blatant disregard for the rules and how they apply to images and characters you really like, but that's neither here nor there.

Bump.

Digital_Kindness said:
Except we've got admins mistagging these images as well. There seems to be this common agreement that all female charr get tagged female, whether they qualify for cuntboy or not.

Admins aren't robots (even though robots would probably do a worse job. If they are mistagging, fix it. if they continue to, report them. Admins and mods aren't above the law here.

Aurali said:
Admins aren't robots (even though robots would probably do a worse job. If they are mistagging, fix it. if they continue to, report them. Admins and mods aren't above the law here.

I would suggest that the user first ask the admin directly about it rather than getting into a tag war with the admin. :x

Aurali said:
Admins and mods aren't above the law here.

an admin's User Info says:
I like to put the sources of my posts as the artists' user pages. If I catch you changing the sources on my uploads, I will end you.

Not implying anything: Just saying, I find the juxtaposition of those two statements to be mildly amusing. Especially since my own personal opinion/taste differs from that behaviour.

Aurali said:
Admins aren't robots (even though robots would probably do a worse job. If they are mistagging, fix it. if they continue to, report them. Admins and mods aren't above the law here.

Sure thing, I'll just go ahead and get into a tag war with Ippiki. It's not like I need my anus or anything, right?

Char said:
I would suggest that the user first ask the admin directly about it rather than getting into a tag war with the admin. :x

Well yeah, don't get into a tag war! IF it's a mistake, fix it. but if they change it back, ask why, and never ever ever accept the cold cut genitals + boobs approach. A gender that doesn't make.

Digital_Kindness said:
Sure thing, I'll just go ahead and get into a tag war with Ippiki. It's not like I need my anus or anything, right?

Ippiki's a pansy, if he gives you any troubles you come talk to me.. (no not really... GOD people take me too seriously here T.T)

I still don't believe in something called a "cuntboy". It's simply a girl.

Ko-san said:
I still don't believe in something called a "cuntboy". It's simply a girl.

Is that so (NSFW, in case anyone here is crazy enough to expect links here to be SFW)

Snowy said:
Is that so (NSFW, in case anyone here is crazy enough to expect links here to be SFW)

Clearly a big, flat chested dwarf woman.

NotMeNotYouMobile said:
Clearly a big, flat chested dwarf woman.

Clearly.