Wiki: https://e621.net/wiki/show?title=male

"-or is otherwise in some way visibly male (mane, horn, or other male characteristic as befits the species)-"

According to the wiki page, a pikachu with a normal lightning bolt shaped tale would be tagged male, but there's also a precedent where the gender of some pokemon (pikachu) cannot be tagged by their tail.

The wiki was last edited 2 years ago, which would seem to be outdated but I'm also pretty sure the pikachu tail gender rule has existed that long too. I would go ahead and change it but I want an actual staff to decide here

Pikachu didn't always have gender differences for one; gender differences only existed in gen 4 and beyond, and pokemon content has existed long before then. So judging a Pikachu's gender by such standards is a bit silly.

Not to mention this male characteristics rule ONLY applies to real life animals. It doesn't apply to fictional species, as that info is from an outside source and not clearly visible or well known to non-fans. For example, pretty much everyone will see a feral lion with a mane and assume male.

So honestly yeah... don't tag pikachu gender by the tails, honestly.

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
Not to mention this male characteristics rule ONLY applies to real life animals. It doesn't apply to fictional species, as that info is from an outside source and not clearly visible or well known to non-fans. For example, pretty much everyone will see a feral lion with a mane and assume male.

source pls

FurryMcFuzzball said:
source pls

I can't seem to find it atm, but there was discussion of this by a mod somewhere. It involved tagging the gender of feral peafowl, and since males only carry the distinct colorful plumage that tagging them (when no genitals are involved, aka rating:s or q content) as male is fine.

I'll see if I can find this again, or perhaps someone might find it before I do.

fictional sexual dimorphism is irrelevant in gender tagging. only irl sexual dimorphism matters. this is because fictional sexual dimorphism is not common knowledge, but while for example lion sexual dimorphism can be considered common knowledge.

Yep, what eggplant said.

Also I don't think this was the source I was looking for, but here's an old forum post discussing of this subject. Though it in itself says that tagging pikachu female if heart tailed and rating:s is fine, which honestly a lot of people disagree with as that's tagging from outside information and not well known, establish gender dimorphism

Eggplant said:
fictional sexual dimorphism is irrelevant in gender tagging. only irl sexual dimorphism matters.

But sexual dimorphism for feral MLP characters are tagged based on the muzzle shape, I mean that's how we can have feral dickgirls that's "fictional sexual dimorphism" (NMNY on that subject. I mean, real ponies don't have wildly different looking faces. The difference here is that MLP characters have always had this difference, as far as I know but female pikachu started having the cleft tail ~7 years in.

Honestly I'd be in favor of cleft tails being taken into account for gender tagging but only in the case where a cleft tail is a +1 to female but a non-cleft tail isn't a +1 to male, since, in theory, a cleft tail pikachu would always be feminine but a not cleft tail pikachu isn't necessarily masculine because of that 7 year gap.

Pseudo-edit:

Eggplant said:
this is because fictional sexual dimorphism is not common knowledge, but while for example lion sexual dimorphism can be considered common knowledge.

Is pikachu sexual dimorphism not common knowledge to the audience that's going to be looking at pokemon stuff, though? That's kinda what matters, right? It's been around for over a decade and a half; I can't imagine that the kind of people who are looking at pokemon smut wouldn't know what a female pikachu looks like.

darryus said:
But sexual dimorphism for feral MLP characters are tagged based on the muzzle shape, I mean that's how we can have feral dickgirls that's "fictional sexual dimorphism" (NMNY on that subject. I mean, real ponies don't have wildly different looking faces. The difference here is that MLP characters have always had this difference, as far as I know but female pikachu started having the cleft tail ~7 years in.

Honestly I'd be in favor of cleft tails being taken into account for gender tagging but only in the case where a cleft tail is a +1 to female but a non-cleft tail isn't a +1 to male, since, in theory, a cleft tail pikachu would always be feminine but a not cleft tail pikachu isn't necessarily masculine because of that 7 year gap.

Pseudo-edit:Is pikachu sexual dimorphism not common knowledge to the audience that's going to be looking at pokemon stuff, though? That's kinda what matters, right? It's been around for over a decade and a half; I can't imagine that the kind of people who are looking at pokemon smut wouldn't know what a female pikachu looks like.

ponies are not tagged for gender dimorphism, they are tagged based on if their face looks masculine or feminine like any other ferals. more angular faces are more masculine.

also pikachu sexual dimorphism is still not common knowledge so it doesnt matter in tagging. if someone wants to especially look for pikachus with or without cleft tails, we have a tag for that.

FurryMcFuzzball said:
source pls

forum #239784 - Sexual Dimorphism and Tagging Sex: Hyenas, Charrs and Pokemon

You can tag sex based on sexually dimorphic features (like antlers and manes) but only for real species (with a few exceptions).