Should we tag humanoid Pokémon with gender tags?
I believe that for some, we should. Designs for Pokémon such as Gardevoir, Gothitelle and Lopunny feature a particularly feminine form, and designs for Pokémon such as Machoke, Incineroar and Lucario sport an inherently masculine appearance. Applying the site-wide rule of "tag what you see", on-model posts for such Pokémon should be tagged with 1boy/1girl.
A recent discussion on Discord revealed that some users think no - regardless of how masculine or feminine the Pokémon's design might be, because it's a Pokémon it shouldn't be tagged with a gender unless visible sexual traits such as breasts or genitalia are present. However, this directly contravenes the "tag what you see" policy by introducing an element of canonical tagging, and making an entire franchise some huge exception to this for no other reason than "oh, it's Pokémon" is ridiculous.
Why should we tag a Pokémon differently from some other character just because it's a Pokémon? If you showed Incineroar to someone who had no idea what Incineroar is, they could easily imagine it to be some bara artist's original furry character. Excluding these kinds of Pokémon from gender tagging on nothing more than the basis that it's a Pokémon is akin to tagging a character with student on nothing more than the basis that they go to
a school. Whether it's never adding applicable tags or always adding junk tags, both of these examples are opposite extremes of canon tagging, which we should strive to avoid at all costs.
It was also brought up that posts such as post #4664636 and post #4667670 should not be tagged 1boy/1girl regardless. This is something I agree with; in such cases there is not nearly enough to make any conclusions.
(To clarify: this discussion is about default designs. Personifications and the presence of sexual traits obviously qualify for gender tagging.)