I'm not sure if they should be mutually exclusive, to be honest.

You can re-add the futa-related tags if you want.

I agree, but since I looked up the tags definitions and ones specifically points out that it is not to be confused with the other, I'll respect that.

gelbooru.com/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=1235163

People keep adding the futanari and futanari related tags to this pic when they clear don't have vaginas.

Also a related tag question: since futanari/newhalf is considered its own gender on this site, would tags such as 2girls or multiple_girls apply?

^Title

As do many people. So why can't you leave the futanari tag alone? "Just because she has breasts, a cock and no vagina, doesn't mean shes not futa. All futa doesn't follow that rule." I'm am so sick of people passing off newhalf's as "men with tits". No one at all removed the newhalf tag... Why is that? Once again... ^title. No one is having a tag war.

I've seen many japanese and non japanese artist who put balls on there futa without vags and still mark it as futanari. For one: Sparrow (a non japanese artist) I've seen him put testicles on futa countless times without vags. So I ask for you to remove the lock from that image.

We don't care about what the artists define their work as, though, unless without their definition we can't define the image. For example, if an artist tags a safe image with no genitals visible "trap", we'll take their word for it that it's a trap, since we can't tell otherwise. However, if we can see the genitals, then we use our own tagging criteria, and completely ignore whatever the artist has to say on the subject, since their input at that point is no more valuable than anyone else who may put in their input for Gelbooru's tagging criteria. What we can see takes precedence over what the artist says.

Basically, newhalf is not considered the same as futanari with our current tagging criteria. So, newhalf images should not be tagged futanari.

tl;dr your definition, and the artist's definition, of futa don't matter. Images should be tagged futanari only when they match the site's criteria, regardless of what you think.

Futanari is Japan's closest word for Hermaphrodite. A Hermaphrodite is what you call animals who have both male and female reproductive organs. (There are some animals who only have one set... but can alternate it... I don't know if they are still counted as Hermaphrodites)

Sometimes human beings will somehow have genitals of multiple sexes... but the sex of that person is still male or female. A man would have a working penis and non-working vagina or a woman could have a working vagina and useless penis that cannot erect.

In SCIENCE, a true Hermaphrodite human being is rare... they have both X and Y chromosome which not only often causes them to have ovaries and testicles at the same time... they both work and the sex of that person is (technically) unclassifiable.

In this twisted world of porn we live in... futanari is a vagina and penis. No real science behind what Japan's porn fandom is using it for. That's how I've been told it was for years so I can't imagine why its being fought for now.

Well then... this site is fucked up on that part. I'll search for futa under both tags from now on.

So if someone did a fan art on a female character from a video game, but only gave her a cock, balls and no vagoo... this site's "rules" will mark it under the wrong tag. lol what stupid rules this site has. xD

Edit: @ Jerl

It's not a wrong tag if it fits the site's criteria. Your criteria doesn't make the site's tags right or wrong since this is not your site.

Fact; Many fat guys have manboobs.

Question; Should an image of a fat guy with manboobs have the tag "newhalf"??

Yes SweetSoles is completely wrong. He also needs to spell out vagina, seriously using vag makes you look like an idiot. Anyway since futanari is much more popular I think it should be assumed that an image is futanari without obvious evidence to the contrary, not the reverse as Daijin seems to be doing.


I know it's beside the point, but wouldn't it be non-functional ovaries?