Hmm, today I’ve stumbled upon an interesting, and common, and interestingly common mistag. I’ve seen
human male on mare
tagged on things where the “male” part is not really present at all (e.g.
>>6670–explicit, obviously). In the same style, there’s also
>>2968387 (also explicit, like the rest of images I will be linking)
Now, I can understand it for pics like
>>2938512 since the hand is clearly more male than female, however that does bring up the issue because imo the hand in
>>6670 is quite unambiguously female.
Then there’s
>>1646783, where the anon implication is quite clear. However, given that femanon
is a thing, I’d argue that this should be irrelevant, and instead I’d argue that Tag What You See applies.
In general, I’d argue that TWYS always overrides artist intent when it comes to things like sexuality (so that you can’t have an artist showing two males going at it, tagging it “lesbian”, and then going “but they’re transmares!!1”)
I’ll read up on your replies tomorrow. It’s 1am and I have to get up at 6.