Abstract

From anime forums in 2007 to video platforms in 2026, weiniang (伪娘) and nanniang (男娘) left overlapping but historically distinct trails across the Chinese internet. Verifiable archives show that by 2007–2010, weiniang already functioned as an established ACG character category: forum users applied it to feminine male characters in animation, manga, games, and light novels, and organizers used it as a category in popularity polls and recommendation threads. In the following decade, live performance, cosplay, televised talent shows, streaming, and danmu video expanded the objects of these labels from fictional characters to real people. By the late 2010s, nü zhuang dalao (女装大佬, literally “cross-dressing expert/big shot”) increasingly encoded audience admiration for styling skill and visual transformation. From roughly 2022 through 2026, nanniang became a highly visible label in Bilibili series titles, creator descriptions, technical-community jokes, and cross-regional ACG discussion.

The strongest conclusion is therefore a shift of communicative center inside a layered field of coexisting terms, rather than a clean lexical replacement. Forum-era weiniang was especially useful for classifying ACG characters and for audience-side naming. Platform-era nanniang more readily appears beside real-person creation, self-description, series branding, and search/discovery. Nü zhuang dalao continues to perform a somewhat different action: it often praises technique, visual effect, and contrast. This chronology reconstructs change using five fields—date, platform, speaker, object, and communicative function—and deliberately separates the earliest verifiable record from later diffusion and from shifts in usage. That separation gives editors, researchers, creators, translators, and agents a reproducible way to read old forum posts and current videos without collapsing two decades of media history into a single glossary definition.

Keywords: weiniang; nanniang; nü zhuang dalao; Chinese internet language; ACG; Bilibili; platform culture; lexical change

1. The central answer: one timeline, three shifts in emphasis

It is tempting to summarize the history as “weiniang became nanniang.” The archive points to a more useful structure: three shifts in emphasis.

The first is visible in the late 2000s. Chinese ACG forums used weiniang in character-property discussions, work recommendations, and “moe” classification. The second is visible through the 2010s, when televised performance, cosplay, streaming, and video platforms made feminine presentation by real people increasingly available as something audiences could watch, rate, imitate, and discuss. Nü zhuang dalao flourished in that environment as an audience-side compliment centered on styling skill and striking visual transformation. The third shift accelerates in the 2020s, when nanniang enters creator titles, profile-like descriptions, serial content, technical-community humor, and everyday self-reference.

These are changes in what the label is doing, not only changes in spelling. A forum user in 2007 calling an anime character weiniang was primarily sorting a fictional character into a recognizable ACG property. A Bilibili title in 2018 using nü zhuang dalao invited viewers to watch a real creator’s styling, stream persona, or transformation skill. A 2024–2026 creator using nanniang in a title or series name places the term much closer to account identity, search discovery, audience recognition, and contemporary content classification. Research on lexical emergence and semantic change is useful here because new forms spread through changing frequency, social networks, and function at the same time; platform ranking, tagging, and visibility can then amplify some forms over others (Grieve, Nini & Guo 2017; Keidar et al. 2022; Duffy, Poell & Nieborg 2019).

The archive supports a relatively firm lower bound. By 2007–2010, weiniang was already mature enough in Chinese ACG spaces to appear without explanation in thread titles, event rules, and category discussions. Public video records around and after 2022 show nanniang becoming a recurring production label and then spreading across real-person creators, technical communities, and wider Chinese-language ACG discussion. Current evidence supports coexistence with different centers of gravity. Establishing a single inventor or a single borrowing event would require a denser chain of earlier primary records than the surviving public web currently supplies.

2. Method: separate “earliest visible,” “became common,” and “how it works now”

This entry combines public web archives with current platform samples. For the historical layer, priority goes to forum pages that preserve original posting dates, contemporaneous discussion threads, and early community polls. For the platform-transition layer, evidence includes public Bilibili videos, technical forums, PTT/Disp discussions, and creator pages. Recent Japanese material from note is used to understand adjacent uses of 男の娘 (otoko no ko), 女装子, and 女装; it does not substitute for Chinese community evidence. Academic work supplies frameworks for lexical diffusion, platformization, danmu communities, digital identity, and Japanese cross-dressing culture. Dictionaries and encyclopedias are secondary aids rather than discovery engines.

Each key item is read through five fields: date, platform, speaker role, labeled object, and function. Date fixes the point on the timeline. Platform describes the distribution environment. Speaker role distinguishes audiences, creators, journalists, and researchers. Object separates fictional characters, real creators, community members, and platform labels. Function distinguishes classification, admiration, joking, self-description, search/discovery, and public controversy. This method follows a broader lesson in online-language research: a single viral item can create a misleading impression of general change, while repetition by independent actors and movement across platforms are stronger evidence of social diffusion (Zhang, Zhao & Xu 2016; Rogers & Giorgi 2023).

Digital archives also preserve unevenly. Old forums move domains, search engines lose pages, mirrors detach content from its original context, and editing timestamps may diverge from first publication. Archive research therefore treats provenance and preservation environment as part of the evidence (Jo & Gebru 2020). The main chronology uses pages that still expose a usable date and enough surrounding context to identify the language action being performed. For current platforms, titles, descriptions, and series names are generally more stable evidence than personalized recommendation counts.

3. 2007: weiniang was already doing real classification work

Several surviving 2007 pages put weiniang in a surprisingly mature position. On August 29, the NewWise (壬天堂世界) forum’s “2007 First China Moe Tournament” included “popular weiniang” in its participation categories. The wording presupposed that the intended audience could recognize the category. On October 13, a Yamibo (百合会) thread used weiniang directly in its title while comparing male-to-female and female-to-male character patterns. On October 25, another Yamibo discussion treated weiniang as a “moe element” and developed long exchanges around character setup, BL, pseudo-yuri, and cross-dressing. By the end of the year, Popgo-related annual animation polls also included “most charming weiniang” style categories.

The value of these pages is not merely that the word appears. They show that the word works without having to be invented inside the post. Participants can put it in a title, rule, or poll category and proceed directly to examples and disagreement. In sociolinguistic terms, this resembles part of an enregisterment process: a form, a set of typical objects, and a recognizable community image become sufficiently linked that the label can circulate as shared shorthand (Agha & Frog 2015; Blommaert & Rampton 2015).

The object structure is equally important. Most of the surviving examples concern anime, manga, games, and character archetypes. The speakers are primarily viewers and fans naming characters. Occasional extensions to real people already appear, but the center remains ACG classification. This becomes the baseline against which later real-person and creator-side uses can be measured.

4. 2008–2011: a character label expands into retrospective canon-making and real-person circulation

By January 2008, a Yamibo thread asking about the “earliest ACG weiniang” shows community members using the new label retrospectively: older works are reorganized under a newer category. A September 2008 Popgo discussion applies the label directly to Alto from Macross F. In 2009, a long Popgo thread about Japanese novels featuring feminine male characters debates the relationship among weiniang, BL, character properties, and work categories.

This retrospective use matters because it can make the cultural object appear older than the label itself. A feminine male character may have existed long before Chinese-speaking fans used weiniang to classify that character. The chronology therefore separates the history of the represented character type from the documented history of the Chinese label. The former can extend much further back; the latter requires actual Chinese-language evidence.

Around 2010–2011, real-person circulation becomes much more visible. Cosplay groups, campus performance, talent shows, entertainment reporting, and local forums bring feminine male presentation outside work-centered ACG discussion. A 2011 Putian local-forum thread, for example, applies weiniang to a real person encountered on a shopping street. Media coverage surrounding performers such as Liu Zhu also helped move the word into broader public frames involving entertainment, education, psychology, youth culture, and gender norms. Later scholarship reviewing the public “weiniang phenomenon” records the durability of some of those moralizing and educational frames (孙炜、刘大年、蒋月华 2020).

The result is an expansion of objects and speakers. Fictional characters remain; real people become more common. Fan audiences continue naming; news headlines and general audiences also name. Research on Taiwanese cross-dressing communities likewise shows that weiniang can take on meanings tied to real-world dressing, bodily practice, and community space that differ from a purely two-dimensional ACG property (罗盘针 2021). “Expansion from ACG classification into real-person public circulation” therefore fits the surviving evidence better than a single abrupt semantic flip.

5. The late 2010s: nü zhuang dalao foregrounds platform spectatorship and skill

Video and livestream platforms changed the action around these labels. Public Bilibili videos from 2018 use nü zhuang dalao prominently. One title described “the most chuunibyou nü zhuang dalao on all of Bilibili”; another ranked Bilibili nü zhuang dalao creators by views. The named objects are real creators and streamers rather than fictional characters, and the audience is invited to evaluate styling, makeup, clothing, camera presentation, performance, and transformation.

The word dalao adds a strong in-group note of respect or playful admiration. That makes nü zhuang dalao especially effective as a spectator-side action: viewers can praise someone’s competence and the contrast between ordinary presentation and a finished look. This differs from the characteristic work performed by forum-era weiniang, even though the same person or page can sit inside both lexical fields.

Research on Bilibili’s danmu culture helps explain why compact evaluative labels travel well. Danmu turns viewing into a visibly collective performance; repeated jokes, names, and assessments accumulate over the video timeline and create a strong sense of shared participation (Wang 2022; Zhang & Cassany 2019). Work on subtitles, comments, and governance further shows that users and platform mechanisms continuously shape which forms are visible and reusable (Chen 2022; Shang 2025). A short praise label is particularly suited to titles, tags, comments, and danmu.

The broader point is that lexical history and media history move together. Forums privilege longer topic organization and stable category terms. Video platforms privilege titles, tags, comments, reaction language, and creator branding. Nü zhuang dalao became a bridge between feminine male presentation and the platform logic of watching, praising, and sharing a real creator’s work.

6. 2022–2026: nanniang becomes a series label, self-description resource, and cross-community shorthand

By 2022, Bilibili already contains recognizable nanniang-branded series. On July 27, creator minato0-0 published “Nanniang Character Profiles 1 / Asuka Minato.” The description simultaneously said the creator enjoyed “weiniang-related ACGN works.” That co-occurrence is unusually informative: one creator used nanniang as the visible series brand while retaining weiniang for an older ACG interest category. The page itself demonstrates coexistence and functional allocation.

In 2024, “The Road to the Table for a Shandong Nanniang” reached a very large audience and explicitly discussed overlap and difference between nanniang and weiniang. Other creator content used nanniang in tutorial-like framing. In February 2026, a Bilibili response video addressing whether its creator was “a girl pretending to be a nanniang” placed nanniang, nü zhuang dalao, and TS together in its tags. Here the word is part of account content classification and audience recognition rather than only an external dictionary label.

Technical communities copy the form into their own humor. A 2024 Koishi Forum thread asking “Are there any nanniang on the forum?” produced self-labeling, other-labeling, and group joking. GenderLibs’ adjacent research on Nanliang / Xiao Nanliang and the “Turing faction” meme shows how 2026 programmer communities can continue generating secondary labels around the same broader cultural cluster. This is a concrete example of platform practice: labels become entangled with account identity, recommendation, occupational identity, and in-group humor (Duffy, Poell & Nieborg 2019).

Cross-regional Chinese-language ACG discussion points toward coexistence rather than standardization. A 2024 PTT C_Chat thread asking whether nanniang and weiniang had “started to become standardized” attracted contradictory explanations: some commenters treated the words as close synonyms, some separated two-dimensional and three-dimensional uses, and others proposed regional distinctions. Follow-up discussion in 2025 continued to place femboy, nanniang, and weiniang inside the same semantic field. Dense boundary negotiation is itself evidence that multiple forms remain active.

7. Why nanniang fits the platform era so well

Nanniang has several formal qualities that work well in contemporary interfaces. It is only two Chinese characters, inexpensive in titles and tags, and visually combines “male” (男) with “young woman/feminine” (娘). Its written form also visibly echoes the kanji portions of Japanese 男の娘 (otoko no ko), making the association easy for users already familiar with Japanese ACG language.

The stronger change, however, is the speaker/object structure. Earlier high-density weiniang samples are dominated by viewers classifying characters. Current high-density nanniang samples more often involve real creators, account titles, series labels, community banter, and first-person or near-first-person presentation. Research on digital identity notes that profile labels, tags, following networks, and recommendation systems repeatedly surface self-description as searchable public metadata (Barta & Andalibi 2021; DeVito 2022). In that environment, a label can simultaneously introduce a person and index a content cluster.

This also explains why weiniang remains visible. Old ACG works, old translations, forum archives, and long-standing classification habits continue to surface through search. Current platforms continually generate real-person content and new self-descriptions. These media layers overlap. Register research provides a useful model: connected forms can acquire parallel social distributions across speakers, scenes, and evaluations rather than one erasing the other (Agha & Frog 2015).

8. A four-layer chronology

The first layer is form. From 2007 through the early 2010s, surviving archives make weiniang highly visible; after 2022, nanniang grows sharply in Bilibili and newer communities. Form answers “what characters were written on the page?”

The second is object. Early samples concentrate on manga, anime, and game characters. The middle period adds talent-show participants, cosplayers, streamers, and cross-dressing creators. Recent samples add programmers, lifestyle creators, tutorial authors, and ordinary community members. Object answers “who or what received the label?”

The third is speaker. Forum audiences and media outlets once occupied much of the naming position. Current creators, friends, fans, and platform tags all participate. Speaker answers “who gets to write the label?” Identity language derives much of its force from interactional relations rather than isolated dictionary meaning (Norton & Toohey 2011; Blommaert & Rampton 2015).

The fourth is platform action. Forum titles organize discussion; danmu organizes collective viewing; short-video tags organize discovery; bios organize self-presentation; search terms organize retrieval. A platform changes which function of a word is most valuable. Research on Bilibili repeatedly shows how danmu, platform governance, and visibility systems shape community language (Wang 2022; Nakahara & Cai 2025; Shang 2025). A 2007 “weiniang character” thread and a 2026 creator account using nanniang therefore differ in media logic as well as vocabulary.

9. Competing explanations: Japanese graphic borrowing, evaluative change, and community identity

One common explanation says nanniang derives from Japanese 男の娘 by retaining the two kanji and dropping の. The visual relationship is compelling and appears in contemporary community explanations. The public record is strongest on association and compatibility, while a precise single borrowing event remains harder to document. Chinese ACG spaces already used weiniang heavily in 2007; Japanese 男の娘 became increasingly stabilized through publications and subculture in the 2000s; Chinese nanniang is visibly more frequent in later platform samples. Turning those facts into one first-borrower story would require earlier linked reposts, quoted Japanese originals, and a continuous propagation chain.

A second explanation focuses on evaluation: some users experience the character 伪 (“false/pseudo-”) in weiniang as carrying an external judgment, while nanniang may read as a more neutral or affectionate label. Current self-description gives this account some plausibility because creators choose labels partly for affinity, identity feel, and searchability. Yet 2024–2025 PTT discussions also show many users continuing to use weiniang as an ordinary ACG property with varied affect. The archive therefore supports a broader redistribution of usage scenes in which evaluative preference is one driver among several.

A third explanation treats nanniang as a newly consolidated real-world community identity. Some current creators do use it as self-description and some technical/lifestyle communities treat it as a marker of belonging. At the same time, many pages still apply it to fictional characters, audience labels, jokes, and generic content categories. One form can be a self-label in one interaction and a platform tag in another. The speaker and context decide which action is actually evidenced.

10. The current community scan: stable terms, layered uses, and newer candidates

The August 2026 community scan continues to find nanniang in Bilibili character profiles, tutorials, life records, creator titles, and psychology-adjacent content, while weiniang remains visible in older ACG classification and some real-person spaces. A newer candidate, 雌堕 (cí duò), appears repeatedly in 2026 Bilibili content beside nanniang, TS, and cross-dressing psychology. Its current use spans SFW psychological narration, adult contexts, fiction plots, and personal self-description, so it remains a community-repeated candidate requiring stratified sampling rather than a single definition.

Recent Japanese note creators continue to use 男の娘, 女装子, and 女装 for everyday experience, makeup, cosplay, and self-description. English SFW discussion in r/feminineboys continues to focus on clothing, family communication, grooming, relationships, and self-expression. Across these language environments, a shared broad movement is visible: real creators place labels inside ordinary practice, increasing the distance between a word’s role as a fictional-character category and its role in lived self-presentation. The words themselves retain distinct histories.

For ongoing editorial work, this chronology suggests a practical rule. Stable old terms move into maintenance unless a new speaker group, platform function, evaluative shift, or real-world consequence appears. New terms first accumulate evidence of independent repetition and cross-platform movement before they become research subjects. That keeps historical preservation and current-language observation in the same workflow without repeatedly publishing glossary-like pieces on already stable vocabulary.

11. How editors and researchers can read the archive

Start with a five-column record: date, platform, speaker, object, action. When a page says weiniang, ask whether it is a 2007 ACG forum classification, a 2010 media label for a real performer, a later video title, or a contemporary community reference. When a page says nanniang, ask whether the speaker is a creator, an audience member, a platform tagger, or a fiction author, and whether the word is functioning as self-description, other-description, character type, joke, or discovery label.

Next, separate earliest verifiable from possibly earlier. Web archives have preservation gaps. A 2007 thread can establish that mature use existed by 2007; it does not by itself identify an invention year. Researchers can continue looking for earlier forums, fansubs, translated texts, public blog mirrors, and surviving chat archives where provenance, date, and context remain verifiable.

Finally, track changes in center of gravity before declaring replacement. Current Chinese-language communities still debate the boundaries of weiniang and nanniang, and some Bilibili creators use both on one page. Those conflicts are informative. Research on lexical evolution shows that changes in frequency and changes in meaning often unfold on different schedules, while new groups and platforms can add functions to older forms or let new forms inherit only part of an older form’s work (Grieve, Nini & Guo 2017; Keidar et al. 2022).

Conclusion

Public Chinese ACG archives from 2007–2010 already show weiniang as a mature character-classification and moe-culture label. Through the 2010s, real-person performance, video platforms, and nü zhuang dalao shifted attention toward visible creation and styling skill. From 2022–2026, Bilibili, technical forums, and wider Chinese-language ACG discussion made nanniang a highly active series name, self-description resource, other-label, and search tag.

The most useful interpretation of “from weiniang to nanniang” is therefore a migration of emphasis within layered coexistence. The older form preserves ACG classification history and early Chinese-internet memory. The newer form sits closer to contemporary platform identity, self-presentation, and discovery. Nü zhuang dalao records an intermediate platform relationship centered on spectatorship and skill. Future research can extend the chronology by locating earlier verifiable Chinese uses, preserving endangered forum records, and tracking what each emerging term lets a speaker do in a specific platform scene.

References

Academic and research sources

  1. Zhang, Leihan, Jichang Zhao, and Ke Xu. 2016. “Who creates Trends in Online Social Media: The Crowd or Opinion Leaders?” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. https://openalex.org/W1810889649
  2. Grieve, Jack, Andrea Nini, and Diansheng Guo. 2017. “Analyzing lexical emergence in Modern American English online.” English Today. https://openalex.org/W2307311961
  3. Keidar, Daphna, Andreas Opedal, Zhijing Jin, and Mrinmaya Sachan. 2022. “Slangvolution: A Causal Analysis of Semantic Change and Frequency Dynamics in Slang.” ACL. https://openalex.org/W4285175869
  4. Rogers, Richard, and Giulia Giorgi. 2023. “What is a meme, technically speaking?” Information, Communication & Society. https://openalex.org/W4320715318
  5. Wang, Rui. 2022. “Community-Building on Bilibili: The Social Impact of Danmu Comments.” Media and Communication. https://openalex.org/W4225166778
  6. Zhang, Leticia-Tian, and Daniel Cassany. 2019. “‘Is it always so fast?’” https://openalex.org/W2971249974
  7. Xu, Yizhou. “The postmodern aesthetic of Chinese online comment cultures.” https://openalex.org/W2548744434
  8. Chen, Xijinyan. 2022. “Taboo Language in Non-Professional Subtitling on Bilibili.com: A Corpus-Based Study.” Languages. https://openalex.org/W4281781653
  9. Zhang, Yi. 2017. “Heteroglossic Chinese Online Literacy Practices On Micro-Blogging and Video-Sharing Sites.” https://openalex.org/W2621090270
  10. Shang, Zheyu. 2025. “Shifting platform governance: examining participatory content moderation on a Chinese platform Bilibili.” https://openalex.org/W4411370827
  11. Nakahara, Junki, and Jing Cai. 2025. “User-generated ‘feminism’ on BiliBili: Nationalism, Internet culture, and platform dynamics in digital China.” https://openalex.org/W4408381431
  12. Duffy, Brooke, Thomas Poell, and David B. Nieborg. 2019. “Platform Practices in the Cultural Industries: Creativity, Labor, and Citizenship.” https://openalex.org/W2983291947
  13. Barta, Kristen, and Nazanin Andalibi. 2021. “Constructing Authenticity on TikTok: Social Norms and Social Support on the ‘Fun’ Platform.” https://openalex.org/W3207106172
  14. DeVito, Michael Ann. 2022. “How Transfeminine TikTok Creators Navigate the Algorithmic Trap of Visibility Via Folk Theorization.” https://openalex.org/W4308792048
  15. Blommaert, Jan, and Ben Rampton. 2015. “Language and Superdiversity.” https://openalex.org/W2520870635
  16. Agha, Asif, and Frog. 2015. “Registers of Communication.” https://openalex.org/W2761922379
  17. Jo, Eun Seo, and Timnit Gebru. 2020. “Lessons from archives.” FAT*. https://openalex.org/W4288083800
  18. Miyazaki, Ayumi. 2023. “Hybrid Masculinities? Reflexive Accounts of Japanese Youth at University Josō Contests.” https://openalex.org/W4366966875
  19. 石井由香理. 2017. 「トランスジェンダーとクロスドレッサーの性の商業化と現状について」. https://tokyo-metro-u.repo.nii.ac.jp/record/5961/files/20003-052-002.pdf
  20. 酒井美優. 2020. 「ライトノベルにおける男性主人公のキャラクター造形にみる女性性への憧憬」. https://www.libra.or.jp/images/gstudy22.pdf#page=66
  21. 罗盘针. 2021. 《偽娘與另類世界的浮現：臺灣扮裝社群的酷兒時空》. https://www.csat.org.tw/userfiles/175%E6%9C%9F%E6%9C%80%E7%B5%82%E6%8E%92.pdf#page=40
  22. 孙炜、刘大年、蒋月华. 2020. 《我国中小学“伪娘”现象频现的文化审视》. https://wkxb.ldu.edu.cn/__local/8/CC/33/20B5B9C1FE1B182A96658835DA3_AF327666_82929.pdf
  23. Pasfield-Neofitou, Sarah, Cathy Sell, and Queenie Chan. “Manga Vision: Cultural and Communicative Perspectives.” https://openalex.org/W2918986672
  24. Baffelli, Erica, and Keiko Yamaki. “Maids in Akihabara: Fantasy, Consumption and Role-playing in Tokyo.” https://openalex.org/W2799830468
  25. Sanguinetti, Manuela, et al. 2022. “Treebanking user-generated content: a UD based overview of guidelines, corpora and unified recommendations.” https://openalex.org/W3097630994

Community, creator, platform, and public-archive sources

  1. 壬天堂世界. 2007-08-29. 《2007首届中国最萌大会》. https://bbs.newwise.com/thread-327425-1-1.html
  2. 百合会. 2007-10-13. 《看多了伪娘,男变女,谁看过伪正太,女变男的动漫》. https://bbs.yamibo.com/thread-63384-1-1.html
  3. 百合会. 2007-10-25. 《魔法伪娘,囧》. https://bbs.yamibo.com/thread-64136-1-1.html
  4. 漫游酷论坛. 2007. 《[活动]票选2007年度最（）动画系列~企划帖》. https://www.wnpk.yeax.com/bbs/read.php?displayMode=1&ordertype=desc&tid=470245
  5. 百合会. 2008-01-15. 《大家说说了解的ACG伪娘哪个最早》. https://bbs.yamibo.com/thread-69523-2-1.html
  6. 漫游酷论坛. 2008-09-25. 《MACROSS F 第一季最终话放送之前》. https://popgo.org/bbs/read.php?displayMode=1&ordertype=desc&tid=495224
  7. 漫游酷论坛. 2009-09-17. 《众多日本伪娘小说的封面》讨论页. https://bbs.popgo.org/bbs/read.php?fpage=178&page=2&skinco=%E7%B4%AB%E8%89%B2%E6%A2%A6%E5%B9%BB&tid=520295
  8. 百合会. 2010-08-31. 《教人變成偽娘的偽娘漫畫》. https://bbs.yamibo.com/thread-124607-1-1.html
  9. 莆仙网. 2011-08-12. 《步行街惊现伪娘！有大图！》. https://bbs.0594.com/thread-74798-1-1.html
  10. Bilibili / 叶洛灵. 2018-05-13. 《全b站最中二的女装大佬》. https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Sp411o7Gj/
  11. Bilibili / 狸子LePtC. 2018-11-09. 《该来来,B站女装大佬播放排行榜》. https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1ob411c7at/
  12. Bilibili / minato0-0. 2022-07-27. 《男娘人物志1/飞鸟凑》. https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1fF411P7Db/
  13. Bilibili. 2022-09-30. 《男娘便女 汉化PC》. https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Ng411v7SD/
  14. Koishi Forum. 2024-02-04. 《论坛有男娘吗》. https://forum.koishi.xyz/t/topic/6695
  15. Bilibili / MHYYYY. 2024-05-11. 《山东男娘的上桌之路》. https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1QE421V7Xi/
  16. Bilibili / 啊嘉Aja. 2024-09-12. 《男娘大课堂丨如何摆脱男像问题，自然美丽不是梦》. https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1mj4zeUEUM/
  17. PTT C_Chat / Disp BBS. 2024-11-16. 《男娘/偽娘 說法開始統一了嗎》. https://disp.cc/b/ACG/hdTw
  18. PTT C_Chat. 2025-01-11. 《Re: 男娘/偽娘 說法開始統一了嗎》. https://www.pttweb.cc/bbs/C_Chat/M.1736528314.A.B0D
  19. PTT C_Chat / Disp BBS. 2025-07-03. 《「小男娘」的客群是偏正太還是偽娘？》. https://disp.cc/b/ACG/hAlr
  20. Bilibili / 黄嘉嘉n. 2026-02-25. 《这下相信我不是女生装男娘了吧！》. https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1EUfxBQEZ1/
  21. Bilibili / 彩虹心理拆拆. 2026-05-30. 《男娘和TS真的只有雌堕一条路吗？》. https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1GZVg6HEp5/
  22. note / リナぁ@男の娘OL. 2026. Creator page and self-description. https://note.com/linalinerd
  23. note / mondeberry. 2026-04-18, updated 2026-07-10. 《初心者男の娘が女装コスプレをするときのメイクと道具》. https://note.com/mondeberry/n/n878ca5834088
  24. note / 青護. 2026-04-15. 《『男の娘』は元々曖昧な言葉 型にはめようとすると争いが起こる》. https://note.com/seigont/n/n627f15986c94
  25. Reddit r/feminineboys. 2026-06-30. “How dangerous are Thigh Highs?” https://hr.reddit.com/r/feminineboys/comments/1ujkk27/how_dangerous_are_thigh_highs/
  26. Reddit r/feminineboys. 2026-06-12. “I FINALLY SHAVED!!!! :D”. https://zh.reddit.com/r/feminineboys/comments/1u44eev/i_finally_shaved_d/
  27. GenderLibs Editorial Team. 2026-08-07. 《从“南梁”到“小南梁”：一个程序员性别梗怎样在平台之间流动》. https://www.genderlibs.org/zh-hans/blog/2026/08/nanliang-xiaonanliang-platform-language/
  28. GenderLibs Editorial Team. 2026-08-08. 《图灵派、冯诺依曼派与 tech femboy：程序员性别梗的场景化翻译指南》. https://www.genderlibs.org/zh-hans/docs/knowledge/turing-school-tech-femboy-translation/