Right, glad you see it my way.

So struggling with English and basic logic. That is very sad.

It's a logic issue. I can't be proven wrong about the future when I have made no claims about the future. Just like saying it's 100% impossible to be a widow who has never married or a very tall short person or whatever else.

It would be impossible for a new chapter to "prove me wrong" since I am only stating what has been provided by author up till this point.

"1. MC is not biologically malei
Is not true cause you don't know that, only the author do and that's why I'm talking about what's the author intents are with the artist."

What we know is MC is a tree, it is in the title. And trees don't have sex. Your conjecture based on art is just that, conjecture. You don't know anything more than I do. Also aside from it being pure conjecture, it is also irrelevant.

"2. MC has not identified as any gender. "master appearances is so handsome""

Sorry, I thought you natively spoke English. See if a person identifies as a gender, those words have to come from the person. Someone who identifies as female for example, it doesn't matter how masculine other people around them find them, it matters what they think. If MC says "I am male" or "I am female", then MC would be choosing a gender identity. Till something like that happens, MC has not identified as a gender.

Your conjecture is meaningless.

1. MC is not biologically male, even if in the form of a male. You can't say "oh because MC was in the form of a male then MC identifies as a male" It could just be a convenient form to take without MC giving it any thought at all.
2. MC has not identified as any gender.

None of what you said even touches either of these iron clade points that MC has no gender. What you did do is show me that you weren't giving any thought to what you were replying to by saying "You really wants mc to be female." Amazing show of ignorance/stupidity by saying that.

Also again gender or lack of gender is completely irrelevant to the story, why do you need MC to be thought of as "male" so badly?

But what you typed doesn't cover any new ground. It is completely irrelevant what she says or thinks to this topic.

I've already covered this, got anything new?

It doesn't matter what the author intended, it matters what the author wrote. Also you don't know what the author intended! Maybe the author intended MC to be explicitly female! What if the author came to you in person and said "Hey, MC is female, that is what I intended", you would change your mind? Or let's say that the author said that woman who merged with the plant was intended to be male, you would refer to that character as male from then on since the author has explicitly expressed their intent?

As far as form, I was talking about all the forms before last. But let's say this actually fully humanoid form is male, that still doesn't change-
1. MC is not biologically male, even if in the form of a male. You can't say "oh because MC was in the form of a male then MC identifies as a male" It could just be a convenient form to take without MC giving it any thought at all.
2. MC has not identified as any gender.

The end.

Nope. You subjectively decide X appearance is male, that isn't a objective "fact". And you talking about MC's preferences, acting like you can mind read a fictional character in a story is exponentially more subjective and projecting your opinions on the story.

MC doesn't have muscles, it's wood. Where do you even see the pattern of muscles in these drawings? https://i.postimg.cc/MG2Cddth/i.png Also females can be buff. Not that how much wood resembles muscles makes any difference.

I don't guess as to what the author intended, I go by what's present. That is no biological sex or gender identifying. The end.

Why do you even care so much? MC's gender or lack thereof has zero impact on the story.

Not saying that there isn't such laws in this world, saying we don't know that is the case since the story hasn't explained.

In the past, "poaching" can be as simple as hunting on land that only nobility is allowed to hunt on. Like it's the dukes land to do with what they wish and anyone else hunting on that land is "poaching" AKA "stealing".

"kept on" this is the first time MC has taken on a truly humanoid appearance. Previously it's only been a giant ent form with MC not indicating any particular preference.

Regardless of what forms MC has taken, that doesn't nullify my point that MC has no sex biology and has not identified as a gender. That is all the proof I need.

The point was this isn't Earth etc.

No, you are saying "mc wants to be identified as a male", not me. At no point in the comic has this happened, you are inventing stuff not present in the comic. Making fan fiction?

But past life isn't present life. And form isn't substance, still is a tree even if in humanoid form. Just like MC is not a wolf or a serpent despite taking both those forms.

There are two ways to assess gender/sex.

Biologically, and MC is not biologically any sex even if MC was in a completely different life with a completely different body.

And identity, if you say you are male or female, you are, "gender" wise, no matter what genitalia you have (or don't have). MC has not identified as male or female or cared one bit about gender signifiers.

Thus MC is genderless/sexless. If you want we could use a gender neutral pronoun instead, is that what you want?

You're right, MC has no gender/sex being a tree who has not self identified. But calling MC "her" is just as valid as calling MC "him". which you did.

What comic is that reference from?

I'm talking about her, the MC

I don't know if there is enough evidence to support such a conclusion.