Posted under Tags
Icecreaminafire said:
Why not Pre-Strive and Strive character tags for Bridget?
Isn't this just Guilty Gear Strive + Bridget (Guilty Gear) merged into one tag?
I mean the BUR that started this thread is changing the gender tag for Strive, nothing else. I think you can see how that's going...
Making a whole new character tag seems a bit excessive.
nonamethanks said:
I am still against this BUR because nobody actually answered the problems that evazion raised in forum #222668.
• Keeping pre-Strive depictions of Bridget as male by default is fine; But any strive depiction should be tagged female by default regardless of rating, unless unambiguously depicted as male (like breasts actually looking like pectorals instead of small but definitely feminine puffy breasts), basically the reverse of current policy of only unambiguously and visibly trans depictions to be tagged female. This means that almost, if not all G posts of bridget will be tagged female unless the artist clearly signifies this is a male depiction. Transgender (MtF) for posts that show anything trans-related like a flag or text refering to it, just Newhalf tag on posts that don't but are showing a dick. Not something i saw you say personally, but the common argument of breasts not being big enough is never going to be a valid argument and also poses issues of consistency anyway, as anyone can find depictions of futas with breasts similar to many posts of bridget currently tagged as 1boy, where it can't be refuted of affirmed if they're full-package futanari or newhalf that are still tagged futanari and 1girl, because it still looks like a girl with a dick and the artist doesnt specify that it's an otoko no no.
• Again, I dont think the trans tag specifically should be tagged on depictions that don't show or mention anything about being trans, but Transgender (MtF) is fine as a tag name (as well as it's counterpart Transgender (FtM)), i'm just one person on the internet, but i never saw anyone trans argue that "mtf" as a term is transphobic, it is descriptive enough and as neutral as it gets in personal judgement.
• It would be nonsensical to keep otoko no ko on the depiction of a character tagged as female, or as transgender, the two concepts are mutually exclusive by essence (again, fine to keep it on pre-strive posts though)
• Treatment of the yaoi and yuri tags is to be in accordance with the rest of the system i am arguing in favor of. See previous points. But as an example, a post that doesn't fall under newhalf of Bridget kissing May should be tagged yuri, a post of brigdet ejaculating while getting creampied in the ass by a man is to be tagged newhalf with male, unless the chest actually looks like pectorals, or even if it's puffy breasts but the artist does something like putting a mars symbol or whatever for disambiguation.
• Same for other male-gendered tags. See previous points; but as an example: if post #1260884 was a strive depiction but with nothing else changed, things like male pubic hair would still apply, while post #5605404 should not, only trap fetish logic (which relies on canon) says that those breasts can exist on a male body without going through medical transition (more precisely hormonal), natural male breasts don't look like this when they have volume that doesn't come from muscle, even when the man in question has naturally lower-than-average testosterone levels (I am tempted to make an "unrealistic beauty standards" joke for men but i'm not inspired for one that's actually funny)
I'm also against not being able to search for traps with otoko no ko/crossdressing just because of canonical reasons.
The whole concept of "traps" relies on canon anyway though? The whole reason G posts of characters like Astolfo and Felix, who just sound and look like flat-chested anime girls, get tagged as male is because canon says they're boys, they would just be like any flat-chested anime girl if it weren't for themselves or someone else in canon saying they're boys. That's the concept of otoko no ko for any G post. (And let's not talk about the gigantic can of worms that is the case of Ruka). If canon allows that, it must also allow a canon trans woman to be tagged accordingly.
Also your otoko no ko searches will be fine, artists will keep drawing bridget as one for the same reasons she's been debated about so much both here and everywhere else.
Just because someone is trans doesn't mean they're not crossdressing or an otoko no ko.
It does, though. If once a year you shave your legs and put on a wig and skirt to go to a con dressed as Miku, then go back to a normal man's life, that's crossdressing; If you commit to long-term changes to your appearance and how you stand socially to the point of it changing how you live your life both in private and in public, it stops being crossdressing, you can go from one to the other, but you can't be both at the same time unless you're a trans woman cosplaying as a male astolfo.
Now for the BUR, although i'm 100% in favor of the tagging policy update of bridget, this BUR is not properly filtering out false positives, so i can't vote in favor of it.
Please @ me if you respond, as i can't be 100% sure i will remember to check here in a timely manner (i will still try to)
Now for the BUR, although i'm 100% in favor of the tagging policy update of bridget, this BUR is not properly filtering out false positives, so i can't vote in favor of it.
Agree on this part, just like the last time opinion on this was attempted to be assessed through a flawed bur.
Smolbaka said:
This issue will most likely keep popping up until they get enough bots or burner accounts to change the vote in their favor.
Maybe consider that at least some of the upvoters aren't part of an ominous "they" that use bots and burner accounts, but people that actually lean towards going with this idea or at least a compromise, because they think its important?
Like, its fine to disagree, but categorically talking down one side in an argument, unless you have actual evidence on that this is whats happening, is quite rude.
I have no problem to say that both sides brought forward good arguments in my opinion. Plus, you can just go and check the voters profiles, and the vast majority of them was created long before this argument ever took place.
PS: Smolbaka, just checked your account history. You have exactly 12 Forum posts and every single one of them is on forum regarding bridget. Thats all that your account has ever commented on in the forum, exclusively.
All of your comments under posts are comments under futa pictures expressing your disapproval of trans people.
So, sorry, if I would call something a burner account, it would be yours. Either that or your account is a sock puppet.
Updated
CasualStan said:
Maybe consider that at least some of the upvoters aren't part of an ominous "they" that use bots and burner accounts, but people that actually lean towards going with this idea or at least a compromise, because they think its important?
Like, its fine to disagree, but categorically talking down one side in an argument, unless you have actual evidence on that this is whats happening, is quite rude.I have no problem to say that both sides brought forward good arguments in my opinion. Plus, you can just go and check the voters profiles, and the vast majority of them was created long before this argument ever took place.
PS: Smolbaka, just checked your account history. You have exactly 12 Forum posts and every single one of them is on forum regarding bridget. Thats all that your account has ever commented on in the forum, exclusively.
All of your comments under posts are comments under futa pictures expressing your disapproval of trans people.
So, sorry, if I would call something a burner account, it would be yours. Either that or your account is a sock puppet.
Their account is three years older than the Bridget discourse, and it doesn't matter if Bridget is the only topic they care enough about to engage with. 95% of users just lurk and never say a single word, it's normal.
They also didn't directly accuse anyone of anything, you just kinda made that assumption yourself. The thing they describe is also something that did happen. People from twitter tried to brigade the site during the original Bridget topic, but the admins ignore votes from those kinds of accounts, so it's irrelevant. It was a dumb thing to say, but it's not rulebreaking.
blindVigil said:
Their account is three years older than the Bridget discourse, and it doesn't matter if Bridget is the only topic they care enough about to engage with. 95% of users just lurk and never say a single word, it's normal.
They also didn't directly accuse anyone of anything, you just kinda made that assumption yourself. The thing they describe is also something that did happen. People from twitter tried to brigade the site during the original Bridget topic, but the admins ignore votes from those kinds of accounts, so it's irrelevant. It was a dumb thing to say, but it's not rulebreaking.
Thanks for clearing things up blindVigil - I see that there's some context that I'm missing.
Looking back I might have read to much into it - but I agree, its a dumb thing to say.
Besides everything, I can tell that danboorus admins are doing a great job, in regards to the voting system and other things, so I trust them to make the call whats rulebreaking and what isn't. I probably shouldn't have brought it up either - I honestly just was kinda baffled that such a monothematic account is swinging around such accusations, but I see that its more nuanced than I realised.
We use canon tagging for sex and gender, if the picture does not contradict it. Strive Bridget canonically identifies as a girl, and there is no evidence she is still meant to be seen as a boy, so I support using girl tags on these pictures of Bridget.
The poll in the OP would try to give posts with multiple girls a 1girl tag, so even those who support classifying Strive Bridget as a girl may vote no on the poll. I have not voted on the poll for this reason.
iori98 said:
BUR #23571 has been rejected.
mass update bridget_(guilty_gear) guilty_gear_strive 1boy rating:general -> 1girl -1boy -otoko_no_ko -male_focus -crossdressing
Bridget when not visibly presenting as male should be tagged 1girl in accordance with the change made by the series creator. We did this for testament and tag them according to what their official profile lists when sex isn't shown so the same should apply to Bridget.
This dumbass, briget is a dude. Can't believe the site is full of morons who are gunna change it to a girl.
GuanXiao said:
If we're talking purely about the merits of policy, fine, I'll play this game.
Bridget is clearly in most artwork depicted with male anatomy and at most given a very slight puffy chest. Unless the description of the artwork or a specific tip-off (e.g. notable breast implants) is mentioned, current tagging should remain in place. For OP to harp on one particular girlyboy character is strange when as others pointed out, there are wider systemic policy issues. If Danbooru wants to go the full "confirm pronouns" train I suspect that it will lead to many people leaving the site. Which, I would be amongst those. That probably won't influence decisions, but a ship sinks purely by fractures in the hull.
There.
There are >155k posts of women under the flat chest tag.
Even if we remove the loli posts, that's still >107k posts.
So no argument can exist that (for tagging purposes) women have to have visible breasts.
If what is being shared about Japanese Arc Systems Works is true, than wow, they totally are going all in to please Western wokeness and abandoning their Japanese fans. No wonder the creator of BlazBlue left. In any case my points have been made. I still think there's a conflict of interest going on here.
And, once again, you're arguing (and voting) in bad faith.
Arc Sys also confirmed that Testament is non-binary AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN. No "woke Westerners" forced them do to this.
As for Mori Toshimichi, he left Arc Sys after working there for ~20 years. You're inventing a reason for him to leave in your head.
What is relevant though, is he does not even come out calling himself a girl outside of one possible ending. Also Ishiwatari can say whatever he wants but you know that reveal was poorly received and that most of the artwork coming out resembles the last two decades. It doesn't make sense to assume most actually meant to draw a girl!
g6672D said:
What is relevant though, is he does not even come out calling himself a girl outside of one possible ending.
It's not like any endings in Strive are non-canonical, and Bridget's situation made such a big stink online that even tourists from both sides know about it. Of course I can't speak about how the Japanese side of the fandom handled it, but I'm sure it's not like every Japanese person doesn't know what's up with Bridget now.
It doesn't make sense to assume most actually meant to draw a girl!
I do agree with this take, but considering current tagging policy, all this does is ignore the people who did mean to portray Bridget as a girl (but didn't make it obvious). Despite how you feel about canon, I can't help but find it weird that the people respecting the current canon are the ones being thrown to the side. For example, even official art of Strive Bridget, which is definitely meant to be Bridget as a girl, are tagged with boy and otoko no ko. (even some random girl, Dhana Opini, got hit with the 1boy + otoko no ko beam because she's... cosplaying Bridget in post #6231266??? Hopefully nobody changes my fix :p)
Updated
As I best recall I voted the last time this topic came up but didn't post, so ignoring people who think years old accounts are somehow burners...
> There are >155k posts of women under the flat chest tag.
Okay? There's still differences between a male chest and a female chest, even a "flat one". If you don't understand that as some virgin Japanese artists don't unfortunately, well, look up medical photos of flat chested women? I don't know how to remedy your false equivalency.
> So no argument can exist that (for tagging purposes) women have to have visible breasts.
That's not what I was arguing at all. e.g. means for example, I gave one example. It's not my job to educate you on what makes a male vs a female.
> Arc Sys also confirmed that Testament is non-binary AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN. No "woke Westerners" forced them do to this.
This term, non-binary, is a modern invention. It didn't exist 15 years ago as we understand it. Hell it doesn't exist in most of the world languages exactly. So for them to say this is a hilarious retroactive retcon. As someone who plays the older games it makes zero sense.
> As for Mori Toshimichi, he left Arc Sys after working there for ~20 years.
Are you able to understand a rhetorical statement? Because I don't think you can. Sometimes people make outlandish statements just to prove a damn point that a company is dysfunctional. Maybe understanding when a response to a statement is appropriate would go a long way to improving your social skills online.
Canon on its own is poor justification. A picture of well-endowed Megumin gets alternate_breast_size and the appropriate size tag, not flat_chest. Similarly, all the artists that draw Bridget as trap, it doesn't actually matter if they haven't heard about the reveal or actively reject it, they are drawing a trap.
morriganaensland said:
I do agree with this take, but considering current tagging policy, all this does is ignore the people who did mean to portray Bridget as a girl (but didn't make it obvious).
I'll wager that's less than the opposite case, but I'm not a mind reader either way. Picture content and the character's history is more useful than assuming somewhat recent canon though, particularly for what search returns.
morriganaensland said:
(even some random girl, Dhana Opini, got hit with the 1boy + otoko no ko beam because she's... cosplaying Bridget
Understandable error, it's nearly just a drawing of the character.
GuanXiao said:
> Arc Sys also confirmed that Testament is non-binary AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN. No "woke Westerners" forced them do to this.
This term, non-binary, is a modern invention. It didn't exist 15 years ago as we understand it. Hell it doesn't exist in most of the world languages exactly. So for them to say this is a hilarious retroactive retcon. As someone who plays the older games it makes zero sense.
In a Arc Sys newsletter interview back in 2002, Ishiwatari said this in regards to Testament's gender: "They're androgynous. In fact, they've transcended human existence. Just like me." (「両性具有なんです。まぁもう人間を超越した存在になっちゃってますしね。俺もだけど。」), and Japanese players had long-since accepted that Testament was in a literal sense non-binary, because they were no longer just a man after becoming a Gear. It's why there was little controversy over Testament going from masc to femme when appearing in Strive, affirming it after Testament appeared by calling them agender: "Agender is the best word. Neither male nor female. Testament is Testament." (「無性別ってのが一番。男性でも女性でも無い。テスタメントはテスタメント」)
GuanXiao said:
Are you able to understand a rhetorical statement? Because I don't think you can. Sometimes people make outlandish statements just to prove a damn point that a company is dysfunctional. Maybe understanding when a response to a statement is appropriate would go a long way to improving your social skills online.
And understanding how to rebut an argument (even a faulty one) without peppering said rebuttal with snide insults would go even further. Let's remain civil like NNT said. The last thing this thread needs is another Bridget-centered flame war. And let's not get distracted by allegations of Arc Sys giving in to "wokeness" or whether or not it is good writing. It has nothing to do with how we should tag these images.
Back to the topic of tagging, there is one suggestion I saw in the original threads that did not seem to get much discussion. Instead of tagging SFW Bridget as 1boy or 1girl, we could use 1other. To flesh this idea out further, consider Frisk and Chara from Undertale, who's canonical sexes are unknown. They could be biologically male, female, intersex, anything. However, some artists will interpret them as a boy or girl. In those cases, we simply use 1boy and 1girl. Things like Mars/Venus symbols are usually enough for SFW posts such as post #7038474. We already tag Bridget as 1girl in posts where it is clear from visual evidence she is meant to be seen as a trans girl and there is no physical evidence of her being male (forum #222668). The only real difference between Bridget and Frisk is that Bridget's canonical physical sex is known. If we disregard canon entirely, Bridget would be treated no different from Frisk.
Consider also that we can't really know for sure what proportion of artists see Bridget as a boy or a girl. If there are a significant number of artists that do explicitly depict Bridget as a trans girl in SFW posts, it doesn't make sense to make 1boy the default. We could still use 1boy and 1girl according to artist commentary (in the original language) and artist-added tags if it doesn't contradict visual evidence. Tagging posts as 1other would basically be saying "We have no way of knowing whether this Bridget is meant to be seen as a boy or a girl."
This should work in theory, but I know there are a lot of users attached to this character in particular being classified as an otoko no ko, and labeling posts as 1other would also mean the otoko no ko tag wouldn't apply. I also think some would think we'd be treating Bridget as an exception, but most otoko no ko characters don't have the same issues. The majority of these characters would still be classified as 1boy otoko no ko because we can be reasonably sure the artist is depicting them as boys unless otherwise specified. Regardless, the idea of removing otoko no ko from a lot of Bridget posts would not sit well with some users, and while I think this is worth considering, I also know we need to keep in mind how these changes will affect the user experience.
Bridget also represents only 0.04% of the entire Danbooru archive (Strive!Bridget: 0.29%).
All this talk of "users mass-leaving because of 1 gender change" just feels like a load of internet hysteria, mixed with right-wing talking points (still have not found a definition of "woke") / transgender discrimination.
