What you described is the crossdressing tag. The androgynous and trap tags have rather conflicting meanings. One means to pass as female (contrarily to only crossdressing, where the passing as female isn't necessary) and the other means ambiguity. Character in post #3582277 has an apparent adam apple, and is clearly male.

Don't we tag what we can see? Drawing a mars symbol on top of a canonically newhalf's head won't make her male. While I agree that this is a past/present thing, and that you can see the "past" self, the "present" self (which has breasts and feminine look) is still there, showing mainly.

The character is clearly trying to pass as female, hence the makeup, clothes, posture and webcam in the background. The character visibly being male and having an adam's apple doesn't enter into it. The adam's apple tag has only 141 odd entries while there are over a hundred pages of images tagged with both trap and androgynous, and over 300 with trap and crossdressing, these tags not being mutually exclusive. Neither tag excludes any specific male features, be it visible genitals or adam's apples. Your personal feelings about adam's apples and passing don't override the artist's and the booru's word.

Just "trying" does not make it happen. Crossdressing and trap tags aren't synonymous. Look it up.

Yes it does, as well as the fact that he does not look female. And I don't know about the adam's apple tag (I wasn't even referring to the tag, but the visible adam's apple) but even nowadays new tags are still being made and added to old posts.

There are people who just automatically slap the androgynous tag on every trap post with redundancy without even truly understanding what it means, or even when the character just look normal. And there are over thousands of old mistagged posts. It'll be a lot of work fix all these, so of course there are still such tagged posts remaining.

Crossdressing does not automatically make you appear female. Again, look it up. And I never mentioned anything about genitals.

Which is something you'd need to tell yourself, except that actually, what the artist says does not factor in a character's appearance. And yes, trap means passing as female. No personal feelings.

You claim that everyone else tags these images wrong and that they all need to be fixed, but the only official source i.e. the wiki disagrees. So does the artist, the originator of the work. To my knowledge you are not a tag gardener so your word has as much weight as mine.

The entry of the tag trap reads:
"Refers to persons of male biological sex who have taken on the appearance and/or identity of the female gender."

and crossdressing:


"Wearing clothing traditionally reserved for the opposite gender.

This is distinct from trap, which is specifically a male in female clothing. The crossdressing tag [bold]also[/bold] handles females in male clothing. The tag also should not be applied to futanari."

Notice that trap is included in the definition of crossdressing, hence the overlap

androgynous:

"Androgynous can apply to both men and women and simply refers to possessing physical traits associated with both sexes (not usually in terms of genitals, but rather facial features and build)."

Traps by the definition given are feminine and use feminine dress and mannerisms, fitting the image in question. Your objection that the subject does not look feminine is completely arbitrary and at odds with both the artist and most previous examples in the trap tag. Same goes for androgynous, your claim that the subject doesn't resemble a woman in the least doesn't hold water.

You seem to have missed the point. The crossdressing tag applies, clearly. I never said the contrary. Trap do most often implies crossdressing. But crossdressing does not automatically implies a character passing as female (trap).

Character in question does not look entirely feminine. At best has androgynous traits. Tag it as androgynous if you want.

You misunderstood me. The definition of trap is a subset of crossdressing, being the specific case of male appearing as female, which applies to the image. Your contention that the subject of the image does not look entirely feminine is again arbitrary and at odds with the tag; it has no caveat that the subject has to look "entirely" feminine. You seem to hold the view that the character has to pass thorough evaluation based on your personal judgement to be granted the tag. The subject is as feminine as the average example of the trap tag, and the image has been tagged as such several times and only you seem to disagree.

I'd like an actual gardener's opinion on the matter.

Trap has actually nothing to do directly with crossdressing. A character can pass as female even with male clothes or unisex clothes. It is not a subset or anything like that.

The trap tag means the character has to be convincingly feminine. It has always been. And let me tell you what: we even used to remove the trap tags from trap posts with penis showing (we don't anymore). The crossdressing tag only applies because the character is crossdressing (and it has always been that way). While doing so he still looks male (adam's apple, etc), and therefore does not pass as female.

No.

No. Just a guy with boyish hair, flat chest, big adam's apple dressed in girl's clothes.

I just tag accordingly to the tags definitions. I'm being very impartial about it.

I'm going purely by the wiki definitions on this very site which I trust more than your judgement. Definitions which you claim to follow but don't say what you claim they say. There is no "we" in this situation, your only backing is your own judgement, and you're being absurdly pedantic.

Again, I want a gardener to clear this up.

If you actually went by the wiki definitions, you wouldn't spend your time here arguing them.

Where? When? I've just told you the truth.

(Searches for the time I've said "we", because I didn't get any of what you said) ...We used to do that and it was like that. Deal with it.

And this judgment is based on the facts.

Says who.

I literally pasted the wiki definitions given on this site a few posts up and they include nothing that you claim they say. Your judgement is not based on any facts available to my perusal.