I found these topics at the disembodied_hand wiki and wanted to ask if they still hold true as they're pretty old:

• forum #134072
• forum #150900

Some said it should be genderless and not tagged at all, others said that we should be able to at least tell the difference between a male hand or a female hand, but also what about the other body parts like legs, feet, lips and etc? Sometimes we should be able to tell the difference, but ehhh... I don't think it will be consistent. I wanted to do a project tagging gender/gender and found this problem. So... any thoughts?

sieghelm_lockayer said:
I found these topics at the disembodied_hand wiki and wanted to ask if they still hold true as they're pretty old:

• forum #134072
• forum #150900

Some said it should be genderless and not tagged at all, others said that we should be able to at least tell the difference between a male hand or a female hand, but also what about the other body parts like legs, feet, lips and etc? Sometimes we should be able to tell the difference, but ehhh... I don't think it will be consistent. I wanted to do a project tagging gender/gender and found this problem. So... any thoughts?

IMO, most cases should probably be ambiguous_gender unless the hand is sufficiently detailed to clearly determine gender, which is sometimes the case. Same for the others. Most of human anatomy is affected by sexual dimorphism, so it should be possible to make the distinction in most detailed cases. Usually, though, disembodied parts are not given a whole lot of detail.

Bumping this since this topic has been on my mind for a while now.
Here's what I think: while tagging ambiguous_gender for disembodied_hand may be technically correct I think it's probably better to just leave the gender of the hands untagged since people looking for ambiguous_gender probably aren't looking for what will often be male_focus or female_focus images. To put it another way, for the ambiguous_gender tag to apply I think the ambiguous character should be more present in the image than just hands, they should have some kind of body that is at least somewhat visible in the image beyond floating bits and pieces. Even for images where the disembodied hands are detailed enough to appear masculine or feminine (which, to be clear, is probably a very small minority) it might be a bit of a slippery slope to try and tag them with a gender (for example: who's to say if a hand with slender fingers and painted nails belongs to a female, or a feminine presenting male?). And people would probably start endless debates about what constitutes a male hand or a female hand.

Once this matter is settled I think we should be sure to update the wiki pages for ambiguous_gender and disembodied_hand with the decided upon clarifications. And if people generally agree with me, I think it would be nice to start a tagging project to remove ambiguous_gender from images that only contain disembodied hands with no other distinguising characteristics or body parts associated with the character the hands belong to.

lonely_fox_89 said:
Bumping this since this topic has been on my mind for a while now.
Here's what I think: while tagging ambiguous_gender for disembodied_hand may be technically correct I think it's probably better to just leave the gender of the hands untagged since people looking for ambiguous_gender probably aren't looking for what will often be male_focus or female_focus images. To put it another way, for the ambiguous_gender tag to apply I think the ambiguous character should be more present in the image than just hands, they should have some kind of body that is at least somewhat visible in the image beyond floating bits and pieces. Even for images where the disembodied hands are detailed enough to appear masculine or feminine (which, to be clear, is probably a very small minority) it might be a bit of a slippery slope to try and tag them with a gender (for example: who's to say if a hand with slender fingers and painted nails belongs to a female, or a feminine presenting male?).

Once this matter is settled I think we should be sure to update the wiki pages for ambiguous_gender and disembodied_hand with the decided upon clarifications. And if people generally agree with me, I think it would be nice to start a tagging project to remove ambiguous_gender from images that only contain disembodied hands with no other distinguising characteristics or body parts associated with the character the hands belong to.

counterpoint: topic #41059

I don't believe that we should continue to conflate the disembodied_* and faceless_* character tags anymore.

currently/untill recently the two tags were kind of treated as mutually exclusive, faceless_* was for when a fair amount of the character was visible (around enough for them to be tagged with a form but their head was obscured/off-camera), and disembodied_* was for was for when only a single piece of a character's anatomy was visible. for single-angle, non-aninated, post this is generally fine to have these like this but the problem is that a whole lot of posts are more complicated than this, we have posts where a character is depicted as a full body with all their gender signifiers visible in one shot and just their penis in the next. while, as a rule, TWYS does treat every individual post separately, it does not do the same for every panel of a comic or frame of an animation, we have to assume some amount of continuity between them or stuff like transformation or impregnation would be essentially untaggable.

Create a new topic if you wish to discuss this, don't nercro topics that have been dead for 2 years.