...BRB, changing pants.

Verny nice indeed

I'd f**k it

Fuck it? I'd worship it.

HoseDog said:
Fuck it? I'd worship it.

"Worship not false gods, but good steel instead."

Thats your pickup line right there.

changed for same reasons as the others, I have a lot of images to go though to go after their new rule about cuntboys.

Narji said:
changed for same reasons as the others, I have a lot of images to go though to go after their new rule about cuntboys.

So no boobs = not female anymore? The fuck is wrong with people. THIS IS NOT A CUNTBOY This is a female Charr.

Narji said:
changed for same reasons as the others, I have a lot of images to go though to go after their new rule about cuntboys.

Except... it is a female charr... o.0

Narji said:
changed for same reasons as the others, I have a lot of images to go though to go after their new rule about cuntboys.

Its the same rule thats always been in place that you've suddly decided you need to take too far. Most of the images you have "changed" clearly indicate in other artistic measures are not cuntboys (i.e very feminine body stucture/face). Vagina + no breasts does not give you or anybody else a blank check to change all said images to cuntboy.

That being said, and a Guild Wars 2 player, this image falls on the particular fence. The face leans towards the masuline side [I can't use the 'What I Know' on the fluffy tail aspect, which are on females only]. The rest of the body is very masuline, without any type of attention of feminine style. A line of teats is typically enough in the furry world to change a "male" into "female". Given the lack of ANY feminine structures,, nipples and with only a pussy -- this one can be clearly seen as a cuntboy.

Murmillos said:
Its the same rule thats always been in place that you've suddly decided you need to take too far. Most of the images you have "changed" clearly indicate in other artistic measures are not cuntboys (i.e very feminine body stucture/face). Vagina + no breasts does not give you or anybody else a blank check to change all said images to cuntboy.

That being said, and a Guild Wars 2 player, this image falls on the particular fence. The face leans towards the masuline side [I can't use the 'What I Know' on the fluffy tail aspect, which are on females only]. The rest of the body is very masuline, without any type of attention of feminine style. A line of teats is typically enough in the furry world to change a "male" into "female". Given the lack of ANY feminine structures,, nipples and with only a pussy -- this one can be clearly seen as a cuntboy.

They were very clear, just because they don't have BREASTS thats the KEY Word here, they are Males with Pussies. And this so called Femenin body doesn't apply compared to same source since it is "Too masculine" to be a female again according to the mods, we are not allowed in otherwords to go against it and say what is what, I KNOW this is a Female Charr, same as the other images of the Charr, but they didn't accept the answer of the people and even asked people from trying to correct them over what they can't see. So you see it is not about what WE see but what THEY see. So still by the Admins and Moderators of this site THIS IS A CUNTBOY or go and argue against them to change the other images that you clearly just said is NOT Cuntboys because they are wrong.

Narji said:
'words'

This goes to show you just clearly don't understand and have royally missunderstood the admins on this subject.

Again; a body with pussy + no-breasts are not automatic cuntboys if the rest of the image implies femininity; as then they just happen to be females with no breasts. Lack of feminine overtones or a strong pull towards masculinity on the other hand ARE cuntboys.

Narji said:
<stuff>

You can still tag it as female because you know what female charr look like.

The "tag what you see, not what you know" rule only makes sense if you take it as "ignore backstory of the picture while tagging", because otherwise, you'd be completely incapable of tagging it at all.

Every tag is ultimately based on prior knowledge simply because that's how our brain works.

Llollt said:
You can still tag it as female because you know what female charr look like.

o.0 holy crap, you might want to do some light reading hun...
http://e621.net/wiki/show?title=tag_what_you_see

Let us consult the flowchart:

http://e621.net/wiki/show?title=howto%3Atag_genders

Genitalia? Female.
Breasts? No
Body type? Feminine or unknown before masculine.

Changing to female.

Murmillos said:
This goes to show you just clearly don't understand and have royally missunderstood the admins on this subject.

Again; a body with pussy + no-breasts are not automatic cuntboys if the rest of the image implies femininity; as then they just happen to be females with no breasts. Lack of feminine overtones or a strong pull towards masculinity on the other hand ARE cuntboys.

The people who took the rule to far was not me miss hypocrit. Have a problem with it, then go and tell Char, Rainbow_Dash, Aurila, and a few other mods, which said a Female Char was a Cuntboi, when I and many others DEFENDED the picture, where I clearly said that I would go about changing some of their work here then, because it was made so clear in that picture that female charrs overall are cuntbois unless added breasts are there.

That is WHY I and the other people REQUESTED the Modderators and Admins to Clearify the Rule, because some of us got Threatened to be banned for Tagging what WE SAW. Where even the Admins were having a hard time following their own rule.

Llollt said:
You can still tag it as female because you know what female charr look like.

The "tag what you see, not what you know" rule only makes sense if you take it as "ignore backstory of the picture while tagging", because otherwise, you'd be completely incapable of tagging it at all.

Every tag is ultimately based on prior knowledge simply because that's how our brain works.

Acctually no you can't take in backstory into a picture, that goes against the Tag what you See rule. Since we can take a herm for instance, if we don't see that it is a herm, but we know by trademarks of the character that it is a herm, it will still not be tagged herm, because it is not seen in the picture. Which has been explained in the rule many times, the ONLY exception to that rule is Character Name.

Why doesn't the artist just jump in here and tell everyone what the character's gender/title is??