Transgender Bridget posts being tagged 1boy now

nonamethanks said:

But there's no difference between this post and a post of, for example, Astolfo or any other "draw a girl call it a boy"-type otoko no ko character sucking a dick. Why should one get the tag and the other not? Someone searching for it would want to see both and someone who doesn't want to see one wouldn't want to see the other either.

The transgender discussion is barely tangential here, as there's no real indication that this is post-op Bridget save for pronouns that are given to pretty much any instance of the character no matter if the dick's out or not. Let's be real here, this is the same artist that made post #5879649.

It's also the same artist of post #6648751 (which, again, is tagged lgbt +transgender on Newgrounds).

nonamethanks said:

But there's no difference between this post and a post of, for example, Astolfo or any other "draw a girl call it a boy"-type otoko no ko character sucking a dick. Why should one get the tag and the other not? Someone searching for it would want to see both and someone who doesn't want to see one wouldn't want to see the other either.

The difference is, of course, that modern Bridget is a trans girl and Astolfo is a boy. As we've found out previously, the question of whether trans girls are in scope for the otoko no ko tag is actually pretty divisive, since some people will consider "being called a boy" to be a key characteristic and others won't. That's why the most bipartisan suggestion ended up being placing trans-related tags alongside old tags rather than fully replacing them, so no one who's fine with the status quo has to do anything.

Of course, "hetero is for 100% gold star straight pictures, but we may as well have girls-called-boys and straight up girls in yaoi" is a double standard that I feel we should address more, but that's the compromise that doesn't involve addressing that issue.

post #5879631 has been flagged twice in a day.

🤔🤔🤔

punished K said:

The artist deliberately added the "transgender" tag on Newgrounds

Looking at the wiki and evazion's forum post prior to his BUR, I see nothing stating that we can use tags or commentary on other websites as justification for tagging Bridget as a girl. Both describe visual evidence in the image itself as being a requirement. This makes sense because a transgender person is still transgender whether or not they physically change their sex, and a significant number of artists will try to be respectful of gender identity regardless of appearance. For example, Yamato has been referred to with male pronouns by some One Piece fans despite looking 100% female because they believe the character is a trans man (whether or not that's actually true is beside the point). This means we can't use artist tags or commentary as a reliable method of determining Bridget's biological sex (which is what will determine the tags in most cases, especially in NSFW cases) in any given post.

For the above reasons, it makes sense to tag post #5879631 as 2boys. Bridget's build seems more on the masculine side to me, with the chest being the only thing making me even slightly doubt that assessment. Regardless, it still doesn't seem like sufficient evidence on its own to tag as 1boy and 1girl.

There are two other posts that were subject to fairly recent tag warring that I think make more sense to tag Bridget as a girl.

post #5657956
A fairly SFW post with a Bridget with a more feminine-leaning appearance and small breasts. No bulge is present. This seems to meet the criteria for tagging as 1girl, with the only counterevidence being the commentary, which says "Bridget-kun." If the commentary is being used as the reason for reverting the 1girl edits, then that would be going against the standard of visual evidence, right?

post #6273418
A NSFW post that is part of a variant set. Some have penises while others have vaginas, and this seems to be the determining factor for whether a post in this set is tagged 1boy or 1girl. However, the upper body is exactly the same in all posts, with Bridget having breasts. The post in question is even tagged male with breasts. And the first two results in that tag are post #6719761 and post #6719843, both Bridget posts with a feminine body. I am confident anyone who knows nothing about the character would tag both of these, as well as the variant set posts with penises, as 1girl futanari. I think this comment sums it up best:

iridescent_slime said:

And which do you think is more likely: that the artist intended to draw a woman with a dick, or a man with gynecomastia?

• Hint: One appears in tens of thousands of posts on Danbooru, whereas the other is practically unheard of in anime fetish art.
• Hint 2: Apart from the genitals, this Bridget is identical to the ones in post #5715634 and post #5843576, and no one seems to seriously think that either of those is a man.

Understanding the current tagging ruling, bridget_(guilty_gear) rating:general posts are not bound to the "tag according to anatomy" sensibilities. Given as the tags being reverted (to 1boy, male_focus, otoko_no_ko, etc.) are on posts which feature the androgyne_symbol, it must be assumed that these depictions of this character are in standing with the canon established by the media in which this appearance debuted, which has been reiterated as to the character being female. Given as none of those posts indicate the character to be intended as male, contrary to the canon, the feminine tags are appropriate. Is this accurate?

The canon at the start of and for most of GGST is male. The androgyne symbol is the male-presenting one. Clothing isn't anatomy, and the hair/face usually doesn't make him a boy, so the current ruling applies.

The design does not change after the story development of the character realizing she is a girl, and that story development was not implemented after the design's in-game debut, but in tandem with it. Ruling that the design should default to "boy" when its was intended and is continued to be used in depicting a girl would only be sensible in consideration of spoilers, for which that point is long since passed, especially if the in-game character bio could be accessed prior to playing the character's story mode.

NeverGonnaGive said:
it must be assumed that these depictions of this character are in standing with the canon established by the media in which this appearance debuted, which has been reiterated as to the character being female. Given as none of those posts indicate the character to be intended as male, contrary to the canon, the feminine tags are appropriate. Is this accurate?

This has been discussed at length in the original BUR thread. The posts you link to are predominantly sourced from Japanese artists, the overwhelming majority of which consider Bridget an iconic otoko no ko and explicitly call him that in the commentary, replies, or tags.

Commentary and replies may have merit, but tags on social media sites are nebulous, given the character's prior implications of those tags lending toward continuous application for visibility. Here, the aim is visual accuracy. For rating:general posts, unless there is visual indications precluding the design's presentation as a girl (the most prominent of which would not be rating:general), then it is reasonable for any viewer the receive such depictions as "a girl", regardless the artist's headcanon. The GGST design has been repeatedly confirmed to depict "a girl", fan arts are consistent with this depiction of "a girl", is it not more consistent to err on the integrity of the original design unless indications within the image or explicit confirmation by the artist indicate otherwise?

NeverGonnaGive said:

Commentary and replies may have merit, but tags on social media sites are nebulous, given the character's prior implications of those tags lending toward continuous application for visibility. Here, the aim is visual accuracy. For rating:general posts, unless there is visual indications precluding the design's presentation as a girl (the most prominent of which would not be rating:general), then it is reasonable for any viewer the receive such depictions as "a girl", regardless the artist's headcanon. The GGST design has been repeatedly confirmed to depict "a girl", fan arts are consistent with this depiction of "a girl", is it not more consistent to err on the integrity of the original design unless indications within the image or explicit confirmation by the artist indicate otherwise?

We've been over this already, Bridget is not the only "draw a girl, call it a boy" character in danbooru, and tagging all other otoko no ko characters as 1girl or 1boy otoko_no_ko depending on the rating and/or the presence of genitalia/bulge/breasts/whatever is a massive pain for both tagging and searching.

The GGST design of Bridget is expressly of a girl, thus "draw a girl, call it a girl." There is something bewilderingly absurd about avoiding calling a spade a spade when nothing within an image indicates it is not a spade. In what way does properly tagging a bridget_(guilt_gear) rating:general image consistent with the GGST "girl" design impede searching for otoko_no_ko? The latter is only relevant when there are visual indicators of the status, whether in model, in dialogue, or in scenario, as otherwise it is identical to headcanon any other androgynous depiction of "a girl" as otoko_no_ko. If the intent is to search for bridget_(guilty_gear), then one would search for bridget_(guilty_gear); if anything, properly tagging the rating:general images would allow the bridget_(guilty_gear) otoko_no_ko search to provide more relevant results, sifting out the non-masculinized depictions.

Bridget is still physically male (by virtue of there being nothing to suggest otherwise), the only thing that's changed is how she identifies, and we don't tag gender identity. If pre-Strive Bridget is still being tagged as a male, despite looking just as much like a girl as Strive Bridget, then it doesn't make sense to treat Strive Bridget, whose identity only formally changes at the end of the story anyway, as an exception to how we've always tagged otoko no kos.

Additionally, the entire point of otoko no ko is that the character is indistinguishable from a girl, or at least could very easily pass for one. People looking for otoko no kos are not looking for boys that look like boys, they're looking for boys that look like girls, so filtering out "non-masculinized depictions" doesn't help people using that tag, because that is exactly what they're looking for.

The design does not change after the story development of the character realizing she is a girl

That's 'cause we gotta wait until Guilty Gear V for a new Bridget outfit. GG doesn't do alternate costumes, so it would be too expensive to create two costumes for one character.
The fact of the matter is that her current outfit is from before the cutoff in which she decided she was a girl, ergo, male Bridget is the default assumption and female Bridget is borderline spoiler territory. We've been over this.

The GGST design of Bridget is expressly of a girl

The design of Bridget has always been that of a girl.