male_with_breasts

zetsubousensei said:

I didn't think we did? Last I checked it was inconsistent but not overwhelmingly male_focus? That doesn't seem right but there's no wiki rule. I still maintain male_with_breasts and cuntboy either should be 1other or 1boy but not have male_focus.

I disagree but let's save that for another thread :p (I did search back and see topic #25568 which had no final decision)
But back to the task at hand, I didn't see anything in Dragona Joestar that looked like pectorals. But tagging that character was actually the tipping point that made me finally write this thread. I necro'd the thread for that, it's at topic #24036 if you're interested.

gfz said:

I disagree but let's save that for another thread :p (I did search back and see topic #25568 which had no final decision)
But back to the task at hand, I didn't see anything in Dragona Joestar that looked like pectorals. But tagging that character was actually the tipping point that made me finally write this thread. I necro'd the thread for that, it's at topic #24036 if you're interested.

Ah yes, that's what I'm poorly remembering thank you! Shame there was no set in stone conclusion, I'd love a tagging rule. Though I guess as @wispydreamer says as blacklist in makes sense, though I certainly don't think triple Ds belong in the male_focus tag.

As for Dragona post #6083078, post #6199787, and post #6727294 all realistically look like they could be pecs to me, especially since a lot of Jojo characters have such exaggerated proportions. I haven't read the manga though so I don't know anything about this character.

zetsubousensei said:

Ah yes, that's what I'm poorly remembering thank you! Shame there was no set in stone conclusion, I'd love a tagging rule. Though I guess as @wispydreamer says as blacklist in makes sense, though I certainly don't think triple Ds belong in the male_focus tag.

As for Dragona post #6083078, post #6199787, and post #6727294 all realistically look like they could be pecs to me, especially since a lot of Jojo characters have such exaggerated proportions. I haven't read the manga though so I don't know anything about this character.

I honestly don't see it for any of these. IMO, the defining characteristic of pectorals vs breasts is that pecs are flat and wide, extending across the entire chest. post #7683004 is a good example, but you can see it in pretty much everything in pectorals. post #6083078 (and breasts in general) are smaller, round, and extend much further from the chest relative to their overall size. The other two are more ambiguous because she's wearing more clothing, but I still think they look more like breasts.

On second thought, while I still fully oppose the deletion of the tag I'm not too against the idea of using 1girl or 1other tags on these posts so as male characters with breasts that aren't strictly buff or super masculine in appearance are still searchable or still able to be blacklisted for those who don't want to see them. Let's say these posts were moved to 1girl and male with breasts was deprecated or repurposed into pectorals. pittori's unnamed characters for example would become unsearchable. By this thread's standards something like post #6708223 (Q) would probably classify as 1girl and without male with breasts it would essentially get lost in a sea of 1girl + gigantic breasts. Perhaps my view of this topic is more biased for the fact that I hang around artists who contribute to this niche but making male with breasts completely unsearchable/unblacklistable doesn't sit right with me.

"But why not just search futanari + genderswap (mtf) if you want to see males with breasts that much?" - That would be an option, sure, but if you exclude the characters that already look like girls (otoko no ko) 90% of those posts are characters turned into female futas (e.g. post #4341058, post #3302691 (E)). As for otoko no ko characters I have mixed feelings because I can see why people wouldn't want a character like Namine Ritsu under 1boy and to some extent I agree but at the same time no one really refers to Ritsu as a female. And I know we tend to disregard canon but tagging every Ritsu post where he has breasts as 1girl is the same as if every Astolfo post where his dick isn't visible was tagged as 1girl. But idk I'm probably missing the point of the whole thread. A tl;dr would be that it would mess up both searches and blacklists.

Zundamonium said:

pittori's unnamed characters for example would become unsearchable. By this thread's standards something like post #6708223 (Q) would probably classify as 1girl and without male with breasts it would essentially get lost in a sea of 1girl + gigantic breasts. Perhaps my view of this topic is more biased for the fact that I hang around artists who contribute to this niche but making male with breasts completely unsearchable/unblacklistable doesn't sit right with me.

First I'd like to point out that if we were to retag pittori's characters, they would end up in tomboy + gigantic breasts which is actually very searchable. I think this would cover what you're thinking of (masculine women with large breasts). Let me ask the inverse: What about makes post #6708223 worthy of its own special tag, that separates it from, say post #6660171? If you want to make a collection of posts based on their creator's views of gender, that should be a pool, not a tag.

gfz said:

First I'd like to point out that if we were to retag pittori's characters, they would end up in tomboy + gigantic breasts which is actually very searchable. I think this would cover what you're thinking of (masculine women with large breasts)

What I'm thinking of is strictly male characters with breasts. Not tomboys, not futas, not newhalves. Men, whether it's bara looking characters or literal shotas with breasts like the example above. I can't search for "1boy + breasts" because I'd just get images of male characters with female characters. I can't search "futanari + genderswap (mtf)" for reasons I mentioned above and just like I said earlier in that same post, it'd get lost within the 1girl search results, making it impossible for someone who's specifically trying to find male with breasts to find exactly that. You can make the argument that since it's a shota it looks like a girl and should be tagged as such, but you could make the same argument for flat futa tomboys – do you really want those tagged as 1boy?.

Finally I also don't see a point in deprecating cuntboy for the same reasons. It acts as a reverse futanari of sorts.

Zundamonium said:

What I'm thinking of is strictly male characters with breasts. Not tomboys, not futas, not newhalves. Men, whether it's bara looking characters or literal shotas with breasts like the example above.

I don't think you understood my question. What about post #6708223 makes it a male with breasts and not a woman? If you define "male characters" as "anything the artist says is male" it's a useless tag. You don't have a better tag for it because there is no actual criteria. What you're saying is "I need a tag to distinguish these specific characters based on the artist's intention." That is not a good criteria for a tag. Again, I encourage you to make a pool or favgroup for these!

gfz said:

What you're saying is "I need a tag to distinguish these specific characters based on the artist's intention." That is not a good criteria for a tag.

Not to go off-topic but is that not quite literally the purpose of the otoko no ko tag? What makes a safe-for-work drawing of a character like Felix Argyle not a woman? Sure, the character is intended to be a male but if we're going by "tag what you see" then the same flaw is presented.

I'm not against the creation of a pool but I still have mixed feeling about a complete removal of the tag.

nonamethanks said:

If it's obvious that it's breasts and it's not just ambiguous clothing folds I'd say just move those posts to 1girl/futanari unless the face is actually masculine. It's ridiculous that something like post #7345723 or post #6708223 is currently under 1boy.

I have the feeling that 1boy is not a useful and important tag. Especially when it is dubious, e.g. for male with breasts, it doesn't really matter if it's 1boy or not.

wispydreamer said:

Also to complicate this more we already had a male with breasts tag that long predates this one. Manboobs.

This isn't that complicated actually, as this had already been discussed in topic #22122, and affirmed in topic #24031.

gfz said:

I don't think you understood my question. What about post #6708223 makes it a male with breasts and not a woman?

The dialogue in the image says directly that the character is a boy. All of this artist's posts are fetish scenarios based on the characters being male. With so many bad examples in the tag, it's strange to me that we're debating unambiguous male with breasts fetish images, because that strikes me as the main type of content that people would want to search for or avoid seeing.

Of course, the biggest ongoing issue with the tag is people using it not for the image's contents or even character information, but simply their own opinion. I think tightening the rules would help a lot: the character should be clearly and unambiguously male, and ideally, that should be referenced in the image. Gender-ambiguous or frequently debated characters should especially be discouraged from using this tag unless it's directly referenced. That alone would eliminate a lot of problem characters in this tag (particularly Bridget, Dragona Joestar, Satan; probably also Namine Ritsu). Disambiguation with breast padding and puffy nipples on male characters would also be helpful, since that confusion seems to have affected a few posts.

I suppose if it's directly referenced in the post it's reasonable to include. I still don't think it's great but it's not my biggest issue with this tag.

I added another favgroup for pectorals and moved some posts over from the "keep" set:
favgroup #32948
Based on Zundamonium's sentiments earlier.

nonamethanks said:

If it's obvious that it's breasts and it's not just ambiguous clothing folds I'd say just move those posts to 1girl/futanari unless the face is actually masculine. It's ridiculous that something like post #7345723 or post #6708223 is currently under 1boy.

I tagged post #7345723 with it because of the mars_symbol next to the character's name/health bar. I don't really care what the proper tags should be, I just wanted to make sure you didn't miss that.

gfz said:

Following up on my previous post, I made a set of every post in male with breasts. Here are my suggestions:

• favgroup #32909 has posts that are 1girl + futanari/newhalf.

Something to note on this grouping of images, which is a major flaw with doing your suggestion with this group is the fact that it's not that uncommon to draw otoko no ko/trap characters with a slight amount of breast. It might be odd, but it's a common enough practice that simply deciding to retag them all as female seems very problematic when that isn't the intent of the work. For example post #6251289 is the cover art for what appears to be just an outright regular yaoi doujin going from the sample images, couldn't find the full copy but if all the sample images are plain yaoi then it's guaranteed that is the primary type of manga it is.

I've been think and changed my mind. I'm actually am against retagging even posts like post #1079776 as 1girl.

If a solo picture of a flat chested woman with a 12inch penis can be 1girl (like post #4238727) then the reverse should be true. Though I think it should still be distinct from male_focus since its clearly not physically male anymore.

zetsubousensei said:

I've been think and changed my mind. I'm actually am against retagging even posts like post #1079776 as 1girl.

If a solo picture of a flat chested woman with a 12inch penis can be 1girl (like post #4238727) then the reverse should be true. Though I think it should still be distinct from male_focus since its clearly not physically male anymore.

This makes me more and more of a skeptic on our usage of 1girl/1boy on intersex characters. Incidentally, gelbooru recently switched to using 1futa without many issues.

nonamethanks said:

This makes me more and more of a skeptic on our usage of 1girl/1boy on intersex characters. Incidentally, gelbooru recently switched to using 1futa without many issues.

I was fully in support of 1futa and 1cuntboy and still am. Though these characters have dicks as well so it doesn't really fit in one or the other right?

GreyOmega said:

Something to note on this grouping of images, which is a major flaw with doing your suggestion with this group is the fact that it's not that uncommon to draw otoko no ko/trap characters with a slight amount of breast. It might be odd, but it's a common enough practice that simply deciding to retag them all as female seems very problematic when that isn't the intent of the work. For example post #6251289 is the cover art for what appears to be just an outright regular yaoi doujin going from the sample images, couldn't find the full copy but if all the sample images are plain yaoi then it's guaranteed that is the primary type of manga it is.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of tagging characters that are supposed to be otoko no ko as futanari just because they have some boob fat, I've always considered male with breasts one of those tags that were supposed to be easy in theory but got completely bogged down by a bunch of clauses to prevent it from overlapping with the already contentious newhalf

Hi, my English is bad, but I will try.
I uploaded most of these works with Bridget, so I feel responsible for explaining why certain tags are put.

post #6180188 and post #6251287 are covers for yaoi manga.
It's a product to sell to a specific audience has nothing to do with futanari

post #6993898 has the appropriate title and tags

ブリジットくん可愛い…！男の娘描くの楽しかったです

Bridget-kun is cute..! It was fun to draw a otoko no ko

It's just fetish art, not sure if it's even breasts, it's probably just the way it's portrayed..It's yaoi art.

The post #7108352 literally in the post has the tag otoko no ko, the comment also indicates a male.

The post on pixiv is also male
https://www.pixiv.net/en/artworks/114972461

I'm thinking of uploading in the future
https://www.pixiv.net/en/artworks/117127998.

And I will tag it with the same tags as the author.

Art hakusyokuto

All his works with Bridget otoko no ko.Recently, the author started drawing femboys with breasts.
Examples are not Bridget
post #7174321 , post #7071644

He also has artwork with pronounced waist and butt examples post #6510745 and post #7174411

The artwork of this artist has a fetish character and has nothing to do with futanari and gendersweep, these works are intended for a specific audience..with specific tastes.
The author puts suitable comments and tags.

For example, post #7519330

Tagged 男の娘 and オス堕ち.

Explanation for the second tag
https://dic.pixiv.net/a/%E9%9B%84%E5%A0%95%E3%81%A1

And also sold accordingly

https://hakusyokuto.fanbox.cc/posts/7846030

I repeat this is fetish art otoko no ko, not futanari or genderswap!

Why do I pay so much attention to pixiv?
The works on pixiv are organized in a structure of extensive tags, which are the basis of the website.
Art authors put tags and want their work to be found through them
I don't see a problem with tagging these posts as otoko no ko and male with breast, given that such art is already on danboru and is intended for the same audience.

Now let me explain a situation that does not affect these posts, but may arise in the future and generally occurs quite often.
For example post #6422299
The original post has the tags
男の娘 otokonoko
ふたなり futanari

This post used to be tagged man with breasts,but I noticed it disappeared and now it's futanari
There are many examples like this and may still have tags:
女装男子
異性装
女装
女装子
And also トランスジェンダー

Most of the time, this kind of art is labeled futanari because of the presence of large breasts,but sometimes there are exceptions.
I think there will be a Bridget post with some controversial tags in the future.

I've uploaded many Brigitte posts that are tagged futanari, transgender flag or genderswap.And I don't think I've mislabeled these posts.
After all, pixiv is not Twitter and it's clear what the author wanted to portray.