gender tagging on cosplay photo

AngryZapdos said:

Does post #8642409 look like a man in a dress? No, but we tag it that way anyway because that's what it is. We always have, and that shouldn't change just because it's a photo.

But it already does change because it's a photo:

Plus, we already don't tag the respective *_(cosplay) tags for cosplay posts, instead tagging it as if the cosplayers are the characters themselves.

forum #335158

I don't want to get ridiculously pedantic, but this practice already seems to imply we treat the cosplayer as the "medium" with which they depict the character.

nobody is objecting the post being tagged as incest despite there being no indication on the cosplayers being blood relatives in real life. why are we treating genders differently?

I originally thought that tagging the gender of the cosplayer was common-sense because of posts like post #3129889, but it is a valid point that we already tag real cosplayers as though they are the characters (not using cosplay tags, using incest, etc.). I don't disagree with a policy of tagging the character's gender by default, and simply applying a genderbent tag if the cosplayer's gender is clearly different from the character's. This would also enable users to specifically search for those joke cosplays, and it allows us to tag what we see rather than digging through social media accounts for clues, which is not very practical.

blindVigil said:

If we know a female appearing subject is actually male (yes, this contradicts twys), then we tag them as male unless we have a good reason to do otherwise.

We very explicitly do not know that the subjects are actually male. Somebody went and assumed they were male from old social media photos, despite other evidence to the contrary from their social media.

It should be pointed out that redtails has gone and uploaded two more pictures of these cosplayers, tagged as 2girls yuri. They will need to be updated depending on the results reached here.

fubuki128 said:

We very explicitly do not know that the subjects are actually male. Somebody went and assumed they were male from old social media photos, despite other evidence to the contrary from their social media.

That's just not true. tkns's twitter bio talks about HRT, and it takes literally 2 seconds to scroll down until you find a tweet with a bunch of crossdressing/transvestite tags, from 2 weeks ago. Another 2 seconds of scrolling and you find an image of transition timeline with a photo of tkns as a young, clearly male boy, no translation needed. For cai233QAQ, literally the pinned tweet on their twitter is a joke about scaring people in the male washroom at conventions. They are both quite openly and unquestionably biologically male, and it takes about 10 seconds to confirm it.

ANON_TOKYO said:

I don't want to get ridiculously pedantic, but this practice already seems to imply we treat the cosplayer as the "medium" with which they depict the character.

sinfulporcupine said:

nobody is objecting the post being tagged as incest despite there being no indication on the cosplayers being blood relatives in real life. why are we treating genders differently?

post #320, post #654143, and post #3129889 were already mentioned as examples of cosplayer gender being tagged, rather than character gender. You can write those off as jokes, but there's tons more "serious" precedent to suggest that we tag cosplayer gender over character: post #1313206, post #1175961, post #1313201, post #329068, post #1313204, post #214588 and post #429858. And let's not forget post #6675872, where redtails himself insisted should be tagged as 1boy, solely on the basis that his femboy spidey sense was tingling.

fubuki128 said:

By all accounts, the photo in question does not depict men.

ANON_TOKYO said:

Does post #8825295 look like men in dresses? If people care so much about what's in the cosplayer's (under)pants they should go to different sites where those parts are actually shown. I don't think it should be of concern to us what those people think.

Freshblink said:

They always say, tag what you see, not what you know.

While we do already make exceptions for stuff like "siblings" or "cousins". Personally I don't think it matters, just go with the visual depiction.

Zapdos and BlindVigil have already answered this, but I'll say it again. Please see post #2888404, post #2222116, post #5707255, etc. TWYS is always subject to canonical sex when genitals aren't visible. That's the way it has always worked. There are thousands of characters that present as one gender and are in fact the other, and we always tag what they actually are. That is often quite literally the whole appeal of the character. Do you think Astolfo would be as popular as he is if people didn't care what was in his pants? Or pre-Strive Bridget? We've always tagged otoko_no_kos as their canonical sex, and we always will, both for the benefit of the people who think "looks like a girl but has a dick" is super hot, and for those who think it's a turn off.

"But the yaoi fans don't want to see this in their search." The otoko_no_ko yaoi fans absolutely want to see this. This is, actually, a perfect example of their whole fetish. The bara yaoi fans are all very used to excluding and blacklisting otoko_no_ko already, since they've had to do that with Astolfo et. al. for decades.

CoreMack said:

it takes literally 2 seconds to scroll down until you find a tweet with a bunch of crossdressing/transvestite tags

Weird how this is definitive proof for you but the fact that they also use a bunch of yuri and lesbian tags isn't.

They are both quite openly and unquestionably biologically male, and it takes about 10 seconds to confirm it.

Ah, there it is, the argument is culture warrior nonsense that is quite out of place on a site with 34,000 images of girls with dicks tagged as girls. Danbooru's tagging is objectively based on gender, not genitals. Otoko-no-kos are not girls, not because of what's in their pants but because dressing in women's clothes is not the source of gender identity any more than genitals are. Astolfo is not tagged as a girl because he does not identify as a girl. You bring up Bridget, and somehow omit that we tag Bridget's Strive design as a girl, because she does identify as a girl in Strive whereas she had previously identified as a boy.

fubuki128 said:

Weird how this is definitive proof for you but the fact that they also use a bunch of yuri and lesbian tags isn't.

Ah, there it is, the argument is culture warrior nonsense that is quite out of place on a site with 34,000 images of girls with dicks tagged as girls. Danbooru's tagging is objectively based on gender, not genitals. Otoko-no-kos are not girls, not because of what's in their pants but because dressing in women's clothes is not the source of gender identity any more than genitals are. Astolfo is not tagged as a girl because he does not identify as a girl. You bring up Bridget, and somehow omit that we tag Bridget's Strive design as a girl, because she does identify as a girl in Strive whereas she had previously identified as a boy.

Bridget may not be the best example, seeing how his tagging came after a lot of external pressure and years worth of debates.

It's also not true, we only tag him 1girl when there are visible breasts, the default tag, even for the strive design, is 1boy. Hoshikawa Lily is the only character who's sex is male but who identifies as female that we tag as 1girl by default and that is due to the spoiler nature of the reveal.

I still say 2others for that picture, and I still maintain that the cosplayer is what should be tagged. post #429858 shouldn't be 1boy, it's a girl and if it shows up when I'm looking for male cosplay I'd be upset. I also don't think the Flan/Rem one should be tagged incest for that same reason since the two cosplayers are a couple not siblings.

i'd be quite upset if i were blacklisting incest and this post was not hidden because it's a cosplay video

CoreMack said:

That's just not true. tkns's twitter bio talks about HRT, and it takes literally 2 seconds to scroll down until you find a tweet with a bunch of crossdressing/transvestite tags, from 2 weeks ago. Another 2 seconds of scrolling and you find an image of transition timeline with a photo of tkns as a young, clearly male boy, no translation needed. For cai233QAQ, literally the pinned tweet on their twitter is a joke about scaring people in the male washroom at conventions. They are both quite openly and unquestionably biologically male, and it takes about 10 seconds to confirm it.

I actually see the Twitter bio more as a reason to actually tag as girl. It talks about HRT + RLE, so this person appears to be mid-transition, but already looks like, identifies as and goes through life as a girl. There's plenty of OCs floating around that qualify for less than those but still are (and should be) tagged as female. Just because they are open about the transition process, doesn't suddenly mean the rest doesn't count (again, same for those OCs). I find point about otoko no ko very valid, but I actually think the original post specifically does not qualify for that. It's no Astolfo switcheroo, instead they even just consider themselves to be female.

You can write those off as jokes, but there's tons more "serious" precedent to suggest that we tag cosplayer gender over character: post #1313206, post #1175961, post #1313201, post #329068, post #1313204, post #214588 and post #429858.

My personal problem with these is that it's (as shown by this thread) not exactly well-defined what we should do. Over a decade ago some people took a specific approach, and that's basically what stuck. And even if there were extensive discussions back then (I highly doubt that), I think enough has changed to warrant a second look.

And let's not forget post #6675872, where redtails himself insisted should be tagged as 1boy, solely on the basis that his femboy spidey sense was tingling.

See above about it just being what some rando does (with the added femboy spidey sense bit). I don't think this really is any sort of argument (plus redtails seems to lean towards "tag character unless obvious" based on discord discussions, but I could be wrong).

sinfulporcupine said:

i'd be quite upset if i were blacklisting incest and this post was not hidden because it's a cosplay video

While I do very much see CoreMack's point about otoko no ko etc., I think this is also a problem to consider. Although I prefer tagging the characters, as long as it's consistent with its further implications either way works for me. Currently, cosplay photo does not get cosplay and relevant *_(cosplay) tags. This is consistent with the cosplayer being the "medium", and it means related tags like incest, age difference etc. get applied like if they were a drawing. This would extend to character counters. If instead we go the "tag the cosplayer" route, this should also include adding *_(cosplay), and updating character counters.

That said, I still don't see why the original post #8825295 should be tagged anything other than 2girls, regardless of which option is chosen.

+1 to tagging visually / based off the cosplayed character's gender unless there's obvious differences (post #3129889). also, i disagree with bringing fetishes and such into this discussion. we're on a website that explicitly does not allow irl sexual content, if people want to satisfy their urges, they're probably not going to the cosplay photo tag on danbooru.

Kaleidoscoped said:

also, i disagree with bringing fetishes and such into this discussion. we're on a website that explicitly does not allow irl sexual content, if people want to satisfy their urges, they're probably not going to the cosplay photo tag on danbooru.

Fetishes in this context refer to basically anything anyone may want to search for a particular reason, not just the extreme stuff. Otoko no ko definitely falls under the very broad "fetish tag" category, and I'd say it is relevant in this discussion (though not in the original post in question).

ANON_TOKYO said:

Fetishes in this context refer to basically anything anyone may want to search for a particular reason, not just the extreme stuff. Otoko no ko definitely falls under the very broad "fetish tag" category, and I'd say it is relevant in this discussion (though not in the original post in question).

i see, though talking about real people that way is still something i can't really get behind.