Image
Comments
| CodenameOne #1457145 3 weeks ago |
There should be a tag for all the damn skin colors for humanizations, but there isn't, because the users here are morons that don't want to be construed as racists for implementing one fucking tag. This site probably isn't even known enough to get that kind of attention. |
| ProfessorOfHoers #1457163 3 weeks ago |
Actually, much more of a concern to me is that if you look up hoof_fetish or hoof related tags you get lots of nasty human feet. :( |
| RepentantAnon #1457183 3 weeks ago |
are there even that many pastel skin humanizations? |
| AshesOfSaturn #1457188 3 weeks ago |
I propose colored_people |
| benger #1457194 3 weeks ago |
i propose KILL_IT_WITH_FIRE |
| CottonTales #1457230 3 weeks ago |
how about show_accurate_humanization...I don't know what else you would call it |
| AshesOfSaturn #1457240 3 weeks ago |
We already have horned_humanization and winged_humanization. I think we might have something for humanizations with pony ears, too.
Maybe show_colored_humanization or color_accurate_humanization or just show_accurate_colors, since there's gonna be a humanization tag in there anyway. |
| BigMax #1457251 3 weeks ago |
 |
| LurkerPony #1457253 3 weeks ago |
WHY IS THIS SO IMPORTANT?
It's just a fucking color. |
| RepentantAnon #1457257 3 weeks ago |
^well maybe people wanna search for a purple human twilight :D |
| TheLoneLampman #1457260 3 weeks ago |
pony_colored_skin maybe? |
| Edudl2 #1457263 3 weeks ago |
I thought these fell into the category of "anthro" since without realistic human skin colors these types of humanizations fail to be true, full humanizations.
If we do need a tag, I'll go with Ashes just because of how ridiculous that sounds as a tag. Also, @CodenameOne Stop bitching about it and do it yourself if you want it to get done. |
| Saint_Braeburn #1457303 3 weeks ago |
@CodenameOne
Honestly your the one who clicks on the image's thumbnail.You have only yourself to blame. And no OP, we are are not segregating the humanization pics. |
| Anonymous #1457311 3 weeks ago |
@Saint
Thats a stupid argument. If I have protection, I have to click it to see. If I have open images, I can still see it from the thumbnail. Either way I end up seeing the image. IF I upped the picture of a decaptated dog, even if you didn't click on it, you would knew it was a decapitated dog. |
| Saint_Braeburn #1457354 3 weeks ago |
^
>Comparing an image of a humanized character who has a skin color they don't like to a picture of a decapitated dog. Really? I mean for god's sake, how much can a White/Black/Asian/Hispanic/Arab/Other humanization picture piss you off? Honestly some you people take humanizations far to seriously, |
| Anonymous #1457361 3 weeks ago |
@Saint
Don't be a smartass. You know that was an example. And who are you to define what's piss people off? |
| CodenameOne #1457380 3 weeks ago |
As long as I can see it I have a right to 'complain' as morons put it. Make at the very least a black_Twilight' tag, and then maybe I'll think about shutting up. |
| Saint_Braeburn #1457397 3 weeks ago |
^
NO. If it bothers you that much you probably should seek therapy. |
| Anonymous #1457413 3 weeks ago |
@Saint
No? That's it? No? And ends with an attack. Seriously. |
| Saint_Braeburn #1457464 3 weeks ago |
^
I don't see any justification for the segregation of humanized pictures. It seems unneeded and rather offensive. And if you see a serious problem with a fictional pony character being humanized with black skin, then yes in my opinion you should see someone about that. |
| Anonymous #1457475 3 weeks ago |
@Saint
It's offensive that people don't enjoy what you like? Seriously. And like you are an authority to see who has a problem or don't. But if you are really so against it, okay. We will keep whining everytime we see a picture we don't like, and you can keep getting butthurt about people who whine. We don't need to resolve the problem, we can keep doing like it was before. I don't have any problem with it. |
| Dysons_Fear #1457490 3 weeks ago |
You should stop being a trolling anon, anon. |
| Saint_Braeburn #1457494 3 weeks ago |
@Anon475
It's offensive that people think we should separate things because of there race. You segregationist prick. |
| Anonymous #1457496 3 weeks ago |
@Dyson
I have three hours until time to sleep. I have to do something to kill time. |
| Anonymous #1457509 3 weeks ago |
@Saint
Why we shouldn't? I don't want to see nothing that was to do with asians, per example. Why? Because I do. It's not offensive. Ha, you hurt my feelings. |
| Saint_Braeburn #1457526 3 weeks ago |
@Anon509
....... That's some poor obvious trolling there. 
And you were doing so well before. :( |
| Saint_Braeburn #1457532 3 weeks ago |
And your ability to form coherent sentences is really going down the drain.
You probably should go to bed now. |
| Anonymous #1457533 3 weeks ago |
@Saint
"You segregationist prick." Ahh, don't act like I didn't rustle your jimmies. |
| Saint_Braeburn #1457563 3 weeks ago |
@Anon533
I'll admit my jimmies were indeed somewhat rustled. Now if you excuse me, I need to do something......  |
| Posey #1457640 3 weeks ago |
We have tags for winged humanizations, earred humanizations, humanizations with tails.. Why not ones that have the skin tone of the characters fur/scales? |
| Shad #1471588 2 weeks ago |
No.
Because it'll only lead to ((more))racism and fights over the tag, and more arguments about racism. It's not that important, and I already have to patrol the "humanization" tag for racist content between slogging through the report queue. There's literally no good reason to make separate tags for skin color other than deep inground racism. |