Futa tag

The site currently defines Futa as…  
futa (10711) +  
Short description:Feminine (even just having mare-shaped heads) beings with penises including hermaphrodites.  
Aliases:futanari
 
Which is close, but not really what Futa is…  
Today, the term commonly refers to fictional (drawn), female looking, hermaphrodite characters. Futanari is also used as the term for a specific genre within hentai related media (pornographic anime or manga) that depicts such characters.
 
However on derpi it has also come to mean a mare with a dick…  
Maybe to save tags space? this is an understandable mistag for those of us unfamiliar to the meaning of the Japanese term… Still… I draw a lot of rule 63 characters… And it’s frusterating to have people come in and tag my work with “Futa” when that’s not what the image is meant to be.
 
Usually the response is “you can’t see so it COULD be”
 
Well twist might be hiding in every image behind what is featured… Does that mean we should tag every image with twist?
 
I’m loosing focus… Can we change the Futa tag guidlines? What would it take to do such a thing?

A futa tagging thread?
 

 
Have fun reading through the last time this was discussed on the forum (nevermind the hundreds it was discussed on random images).

I’d argue people tag it futa so they don’t feel they’re liking something that could possibly even slightly make them seem gay.
 
But I’m a cynical person, I don’t like the tags are currently either, but the damage is too far done for too long to be reversed now. Sucks, but it’s hard to hammer something like this into literally thousands of heads.

@Background Pony #247E  
Retagging the images isn’t that much of a problem; it’s barely over 10k, and we have some pretty motivated taggers.
 
The problem is just getting everyone that’s into this sort of content (put in a very general sense, characters that display traits of both sexes) to sit down and agree on what’s what and what to call things. And then get those people to keep tagging consistent on new images, without more arguments breaking out.

@The Smiling Pony  
Isn’t the meaning of a word relegated to its meaning? So far the arguments I have gotten consist of “merica” and “wikipedia is not a relivent source”. (It actually is these days)
 
 
It’s really frusterating having people insist your art has something in it that it doesn’t. Especally when it’s something you don’t generally enjoy.
 
“Nope! There is definitely a vag in there, not gay!”

@Background Pony #2C55  
Mate, I don’t know and I gave up a long time ago. I was a proponent of using “androgynous male” for certain images where you couldn’t see any female genitalia, for example, and people raged out at me for daring. This isn’t content I have an interest in, and after my meek attempt at some semblance of discussion or order I gave up, as I believe did other mods.
 
If you want to spark another discussion on this, go ahead. Just be ready to be met with several brick walls. I’d personally like to have better tagging on all this stuff, and I’m sure there are a lot of people that would like that for searching and filtering, but I only have so much energy and time, and I’ve learned to pick my battles.
 
I don’t want the straw that breaks my back and burns me out to be “poor futa tagging”.

@Background Pony #247E  

 
That’s a pretty big and wild assumption to make.
 
Most people probably don’t know about the differences between “futa”, “herm”, “dickgirl”, etc, or they’re like me and just don’t care.
 
If it looks like a girl and has tits and a dick, I tag it “futa”. I’m not pedantic enough about my porn to care about subtle differences like that.

@NostalgiaSchmaltz  
I meant the difference between all collective herm tags versus just male.  
I figured I was being clear. :/

@Background Pony #2C55  
I’m sure I passed by countless great art of non-futas that are just really girly males because taggers insist on them being female in some way.
 
Even if it very clearly doesn’t have a vag and is pretty much just a guy with boobs or a female face…

@Background Pony #247E
 
People get worked up about it, and in the end what should be a quiet thing becomes a screaming fit. I had an extended argument with someone on one of my works. He insisted that sinse everybody was wrong, it must be right… Which is not the case in my opinion. I dislike that.

@Killian_Joy  
If an artist clearly states whet they drew and intended, people shouldn’t debate about it or try and justify some other answer. If they want to believe it’s different than what the artist said, fine, but they shouldn’t try and make it out as fact.

@Background Pony #247E  
Ah, but tags aren’t just “information”, are they? Their primary use if for search and filtering. If you say “we should have more concrete tags for these images”, people will bitch that they have to filter more, or that they have to search for more terms (that they may not be aware of).
 
Basically ugh. But I’m repeating myself here. I had my go at it, I’m out. If you want to campaign for something different, go ahead, maybe get some momentum to merit a site poll or whatever.
 
Imma go back to my ice cream.

@Background Pony #247E  
If people are mistaking your rule63 for futa, then you’re not drawing them “rule63” enough, putting it simply. You’re not making it clear enough that they’re male.
 
…or you’re not tagging it “rule 63” yourself. If people remove “rule63” and add “futa”, then they’re being retarded.

@NostalgiaSchmaltz  
I imagine they’re talking about effeminate males, canon (ie. r63) or no. As for your “not making them r63 enough”, that shouldn’t even begin to apply to images where there’s explicitly no female genitalia at all.
 
Like, say, this  
 
No vagina, no crotchtits, no nothing. Tagged “futa” because…?
 
Or this  

 
 
But are tagged in the same way as  

 
or  

 
 
And how exactly does one look at an image like this  

 
and clearly see that the most logical tagging is to assume Pinkie Pie is “futa” and not “genderbent”?

@The Smiling Pony  
The non-logic is baffling.
 
@NostalgiaSchmaltz  
Who says a rule 63 of a female character needs to look as male and masculine as possible?

@The Smiling Pony  
“images where there’s explicitly no female genitalia at all.”
 
Not what I was talking about. For “making it look more r63”, I meant things like using more stallion-like anatomy. Larger bodies, more square-shaped snouts, etc. etc.
 
And I know that just cock/balls and no vag = not futa. Though to play devil’s advocate, if it looks female and has just a dick, that could still fall under the “futa” tag as it could be considered “dickgirl”.
 
If people are mistaking r63 for futa, then you’re not making it clear enough that it’s r63 and not futa. And if you’re drawing an “effeminate male” with no visible genitalia, then you can’t really be mad at people for thinking it’s female because there’s no indication that it’s male.
 
Just tag it r63 to avoid confusion.

@NostalgiaSchmaltz  
The vast majority of males on FiM don’t have larger bodies; it’s only “big guys” like Big Mac, Blue Blood, the train pullers, etc., and they’re offset by “big girls” like Sapphire Shores or Fleur-de-Lis (whose body proportions aren’t much different from Flim & Flam or Trender Hoof!). The entire point of something like an “effeminate male” is that facial features and demeanour can look like that of a female, while sporting 100% genuine male genitals and nothing more. Instantly classing that as “dickgirl”, ie. a girl with a dick makes no sense.
 
As for “just tag it r63 to avoid confusion”, the problem is people will still argue about it, even retag it.
 
The entire topic is a huge fucking mess and near everyone involved is more interested in imposing what they think is right than in any actual discussion or solution that pleases everyone. Some people want futa because “it’s what’s easy and I’m used to”, some people want more granularity because “these things are more varied and complex than just a ‘third sex’”; and people in that last group also have different opinions on what’s what and what terms to use.
 
 
_{^{/The Smiling Pony remembers when the booru had 4k images, maybe 10 of those explicit, and there wasn't even have Safe tag because non-safe content was so rare}}

@The Smiling Pony  

 
Well that’s kinda the nature of this kind of material. It’s sort of like a Schrodinger’s Cat paradox: It could be simultaneously considered “dickgirl” and “effeminate male” until the artist explicitly states which one it is.
 

 
Nothing we can do about internet stupidity.

@NostalgiaSchmaltz
 
My only beef is that the Futa tag is being applied to things that are not Futa. Futa means female with both a female genitals and male genitals. There just seems to be a bit of confusion about that. It is understandable, but it is still confusion.
 
Ultimately I think if the artist says its Futa (and you can’t see) then it’s futa. If the artist says its futa (and it clearly is not) then there is a miscommunication, easily fixed.
 
But in a conversationi had earlier, which started all of this, someone said that the meaning of Futa was just feminine looking with a penis. That’s simply not the case, but it seems to be how it is defined here.
 
I’m just wondering if we can add in the destination of both male and female genitals so that we are in line with the actual meaning of the word.

@Killian_Joy  

 
Though in practice, “futa” has evolved into a blanket term for “female with a dick”. I don’t mind it being used that way, because there are lot of times where the distinction between “herm” or “dickgirl” or “cuntboy” is ambiguous. (And I don’t particularly care for the different terms anyways, I just like me some chicks with dicks)
 

 
Yeah, it has become a kind of slang term…there’s a word for this I’m sure, but it’s kind of like how “Hacking” has evolved into a very negative word, when it originally meant something good. “Futa” has evolved into a blanket term, when in reality it means something specific.
 
There do exist “herm” and “dickgirl” tags, but most people don’t really care and just use the “futa” tag.

@NostalgiaSchmaltz
 
If you don’t care about it, that’s your bussiness. However using it as a blanket term is annoying because if your gay, and do not like vagina, then you don’t like Futa. However if your gay and enjoy femboys, then Futa becomeing a blanket term is very frusterating.
 
If you don’t care, the. Why not just let it be a precise term for its intended meaning?
 
Let Futa be female both Gentiles  
Cunt boy be male body with female genitals  
Crossdressers or trap be a female body with a cock but no vagina  
Here be just both genitiles  
And so on?
 
I know it’s easy to say that words meaning change, but the point of words having a meaning is to help people know what you are talking about. In tagging it makes it easier too.
 
A lot of people may not care… That’s fine… I guess I kinda do… if we refined the tagging definitions just a tiny bit then things would be easier to find rather than blanket terms for hit or miss themes.

I care, I don’t like seeing vaginas with my dicks. But I am only one person, I can’t do much.

@Background Pony #247E  
Most homosexual men, or bisexual men with a specific fetish would care too I think… I care. It would settle so many issues.

@Background Pony #2C55  
Or you know, the elusive straight female that people forget exists.

@Background Pony #247E  
Sorry :P  
Your welcome for brunch any time as a gesture of apology
 
Anyways we should fix the Futa tag to aid more refined searches