@feline_lump

TWYS should apply, artist commentary be damned.

This character has no masculine features other than the face, and even that's debatable.

punished_K said:

@feline_lump

TWYS should apply, artist commentary be damned.

This character has no masculine features other than the face, and even that's debatable.

If an artist said a character was an otoko no ko, we would tag that, why should this be any different?

It's a guy with puffy nipples like the artist always draws. Perhaps it's easy to mistake the pectorals for breasts because of the angle, but that's definitely not what they're going for. Compare post #5266262 and post #4604261.

blindVigil said:

If an artist said a character was an otoko no ko, we would tag that, why should this be any different?

We are having a debate about how an artist will draw & label a character as newhalf / female, yet not apply the tag because YOU don't see it.
Do you not see the hypocrisy?

feline_lump said:

It's a guy with puffy nipples like the artist always draws. Perhaps it's easy to mistake the pectorals for breasts because of the angle, but that's definitely not what they're going for. Compare post #5266262 and post #4604261.

Are you blind or do you not see how this "guy" doesn't have a penis?

Also those are not pecs. They overhang like breasts.

punished_K said:

We are having a debate about how an artist will draw & label a character as newhalf / female, yet not apply the tag because YOU don't see it.
Do you not see the hypocrisy?

You mean to tell me that not all tags are treated equally? What a surprise.

Were you always this short tempered?

punished_K said:

Are you blind or do you not see how this "guy" doesn't have a penis?

Also those are not pecs. They overhang like breasts.

Yes, I know what a cuntboy is, and I know that this angle makes his pecs look like breasts. Are you vandalizing this post just to prove a point? Please don't.

feline_lump said:

Yes, I know what a cuntboy is, and I know that this angle makes his pecs look like breasts. Are you vandalizing this post just to prove a point? Please don't.

Vandalism?

If we're ignoring author intent on other posts & going by TWYS, this does not qualify as a "boy".
Doesn't matter what the author states - they failed to draw a masculine body.

Those are tits.
That is a woman, with a vagina.

If you keep insisting that this drawing isn't "female" you're a hypocrite, plain and simple.

I honestly don't understand "cuntboys." why not just draw a girl or a gender flip?

cd_young said:

I honestly don't understand "cuntboys." why not just draw a girl or a gender flip?

It's basically the opposite of futanari, dude body but with a vagina. It used to be pretty niche but it's gaining a bit of popularity.

punished_K said:

Vandalism?

If we're ignoring author intent on other posts & going by TWYS, this does not qualify as a "boy".
Doesn't matter what the author states - they failed to draw a masculine body.

Those are tits.
That is a woman, with a vagina.

If you keep insisting that this drawing isn't "female" you're a hypocrite, plain and simple.

Literally what are you talking about? You should always take artist commentaries into account when tagging specific scenarios, in order to avoid pointless flame wars like this.

cd_young said:

I honestly don't understand "cuntboys." why not just draw a girl or a gender flip?

I could say the same about futas. But it's dumb to wonder about why artists draw unusual things, which is one of the main points of art in general, to give free rein to imagination without being constrained by logic.