I think tags like these 2 would be nice
Femboy_as_tomboy would be a guy that dresses, specifically like a tomboy
And as you might expect Tomboy_as_femboy is a girl that dresses specifically like a femboy
Topic: Femboy_as_tomboy and Tomboy_as_femboy tags
Posted under General
Those two tags should never be close to each other in the first place.
Femboy is strictly used for male-bodied characters who look feminine, whereas tomboy is strictly used for female-bodied characters who look masculine.
If you want to compile such posts to display or for personal use, I would suggest using e621:Sets instead of adding these tags onto posts.
thegreatwolfgang said:
Those two tags should never be close to each other in the first place.
Femboy is strictly used for male-bodied characters who look feminine, whereas tomboy is strictly used for female-bodied characters who look masculine.
If you want to compile such posts to display or for personal use, I would suggest using e621:Sets instead of adding these tags onto posts.
Tags are for searchablity and this is really hard to search for normally. Just looking for examples I had to search femboy+ sportswear and I wouldn't even say that's 100% accurate to what I was looking for
"Dresses like a tomboy" and "dresses like a femboy" are pretty subjective concepts. Tags should be as objective as possible and easy for everyone to understand and use consistently, requiring no knowledge the image itself doesn't provide. That's why the femboy and tomboy tags are relatively broad; their definitions are more objective and TWYS-compatible. Seconding that a set would be much more suitable for something like this.
eightoflakes said:
"Dresses like a tomboy" and "dresses like a femboy" are pretty subjective concepts. Tags should be as objective as possible and easy for everyone to understand and use consistently, requiring no knowledge the image itself doesn't provide. That's why the femboy and tomboy tags are relatively broad; their definitions are more objective and TWYS-compatible. Seconding that a set would be much more suitable for something like this.
Sets are not tags but more subjective, they are not a suitable replacement. Also the whole point of tags is for search, imo they should really prioritize searchablity over objectivity when necessary
abbyditto said:
Sets are not tags but more subjective, they are not a suitable replacement.
You can also use sets for objective qualities that may or may not be suitable for a tag; there's nothing stopping you.
abbyditto said:
Also the whole point of tags is for search, imo they should really prioritize searchablity over objectivity when necessary
That leads to people mistagging things more & more frequently, which ruins the searchability of the tags. If there isn't a consistent & objective ruleset to their use, they will be misused.
Wouldn't a tomboy that dresses like a girl... just be seen as "normal" or "traditional" girl things to do??? There's really no need for a "tomboy dressing like a girl" tag
I've seen it recommended before that sets can be used to assemble images that you think deserve a new tag.
It might be a bit of a pain, but if you can get enough together so that other people can see what you're trying to describe it can maybe help your argument that this deserves a new tag, or maybe people can find a pattern of tags that gets what you want.
aacafah said:
You can also use sets for objective qualities that may or may not be suitable for a tag; there's nothing stopping you.
That, has nothing to do with my point, my point was sets can't replace tagging, I can't search with a set, I can't blacklist a set, and while anyone can add an accurate tag to their post, if I created a set I have to individually add everyone I want to be able to add to it, which if I want it to act as closely to a tag as possible would be, everyone who might use it, can you see how that isn't viable
That leads to people mistagging things more & more frequently, which ruins the searchability of the tags. If there isn't a consistent & objective ruleset to their use, they will be misused.
What's your point here exactly, a tag that exists is infinitely more searchable then a tag that isn't, and it won't exactly effect other, and if you don't like how the tag works just don't use it, it literally effects no one but the people that'd use it
Like you're right lacking objectivity can hurt a tags usefulness when searching, but you can only increase form nothing
If no one can agree on what a tag means then that tag is useless. Unless you can come up with an objective TWYS-compatible definition for what counts as dressing like a femboy or dressing like a tomboy your tags will contain an essentially random selection of images that random people on the site thought were gender-non-conforming enough, according to their own personal sensibilities. If everyone takes a tag to mean what they assume it means then it will never mean what you want it to mean.
The best place to start would be to define what you actually mean by dressing like a femboy or tomboy. What articles of clothing are femboy-ish or tomboy-ish?
eightoflakes said:
If no one can agree on what a tag means then that tag is useless. Unless you can come up with an objective TWYS-compatible definition for what counts as dressing like a femboy or dressing like a tomboy your tags will contain an essentially random selection of images that random people on the site thought were gender-non-conforming enough, according to their own personal sensibilities. If everyone takes a tag to mean what they assume it means then it will never mean what you want it to mean.The best place to start would be to define what you actually mean by dressing like a femboy or tomboy. What articles of clothing are femboy-ish or tomboy-ish?
Does anyone actually care about slight variance in how a tag is used, as long as people don't actively troll it's at least gonna be a little useful
Can you, in simple terms, explains what separates a femboy-presenting tomboy as a femboy, tomboy, or more typical man/woman, and what separates a tomboy-presenting femboy as a femboy, tomboy, or more typical man/woman?
If you can't provide clear examples and counterexamples I don't think these concepts have any business being tags.
abbyditto said:
Does anyone actually care about slight variance in how a tag is used, as long as people don't actively troll it's at least gonna be a little useful
abbyditto said:
I can't search with a set
I genuinely have no idea what you're trying to say with that. I assume you know that you can literally enter a set into the post search & search using it, so I really don't know what you're talking about with this.
abbyditto said:
[...]if I created a set I have to individually add everyone I want to be able to add to it, which if I want it to act as closely to a tag as possible would be, everyone who might use it, can you see how that isn't viable
It seems to be the general opinion of this thread that with the number of users expected to find value in this proposed tag, that'd absolutely be viable. No one else seems to really intuitively grasp what you're proposing, and from what we do understand, we don't find valuable. That's the classic use case for a set.
abbyditto said:
What's your point here exactly, a tag that exists is infinitely more searchable then a tag that isn't, and it won't exactly effect other, and if you don't like how the tag works just don't use it, it literally effects no one but the people that'd use it
Like you're right lacking objectivity can hurt a tags usefulness when searching, but you can only increase form nothing
You said that tags should prioritize searchability over objectivity, & I was countering that objectivity is in aid of searchability. I personally had made no claim that not having a tag is better than having a bad tag.
That said, if a tag is extremely subjective & poorly defined, to the point that only a handful of users feel they know the ""correct"" way to use it, then maybe a set is better suited for that than a tag. Tags aren't for subjective attributes.
abbyditto said:
Does anyone actually care about slight variance in how a tag is used, as long as people don't actively troll it's at least gonna be a little useful
You're making an assumption about how large the variance would be.
Anyways, what you describe is literally just normal men and women.
A tomboy that dresses girly defeats the point(visually at least).
Femboy is a bit different since some still make distinctions between crossdressing or not but I don't think it'd matter in this context
Perhaps you should reconsider the tags you're searching. Body type(such as femboy or athletic), clothing, crossdressing(maybe consider looking at crossgender stuff? Seems adjacentish), etc
There is also the problem of using established terms & definitions in a different or unexpected way.
The name of the tags by themselves are confusing to say the least, especially with how femboy and tomboy are currently defined as per what I said earlier.
If you want to convince people to use your new tag, you need to provide some concrete objective examples and not one based on vibes.
You should also perhaps consider a better name for the tags if you're being serious.
If it is strictly just the way they are dressed, focus around a term that describes their fashion sense instead (e.g., androgynous_fashion).