Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions
The bulk update request #12156 is pending approval.
create alias embarrassed_naked_male (56) -> embarrassed (67025)
create alias embarrassed_naked_female (7) -> embarrassed (67025)
create alias embarrassed_naked_andromorph (0) -> embarrassed (67025)
create alias embarrassed_naked_gynomorph (0) -> embarrassed (67025)
create alias embarrassed_naked_herm (0) -> embarrassed (67025)
create alias embarrassed_naked_maleherm (0) -> embarrassed (67025)
Reason: Same old same old
The bulk update request #12157 is pending approval.
create alias embarrassed_male (752) -> embarrassed (67025)
Reason: embarrassed_female is aliased to embarrassed
I agree with Donovan DMC that those tags are unnecessary.
Hm. I agree the gendered tags are unnecessary, but I do wonder if there is validity to an "embarrassed from being naked" tag. A combo search of embarrassed nude doesn't guarantee the nude character is the one who's embarrassed.
beholding said:
Hm. I agree the gendered tags are unnecessary, but I do wonder if there is validity to an "embarrassed from being naked" tag. A combo search of embarrassed nude doesn't guarantee the nude character is the one who's embarrassed.
Yeah, that's why I meh'd the first BUR of topic #20995, but everyone else seems to be against that.
I would also argue that the subject shouldn't have to be fully nude, just exposed in a way they're uncomfortable with.
errorist said:
I would also argue that the subject shouldn't have to be fully nude, just exposed in a way they're uncomfortable with.
"embarrassed by exposure" maybe? Bit of a mouthful though.
beholding said:
"embarrassed by exposure" maybe? Bit of a mouthful though.
exposure has its own meaning that's not always aligned with being nude, creating the reverse issue. You can be embarrassed by being nude without being exposed, if you're covering yourself for example.
Although exposed is a bit confusing; "a character's genitalia is showing, but not actively presented or in use", but its own examples show it being presented with both seemingly accidental and forced/assisted exposure. forced_presenting even implies exposed. So then if it only applies to genitalia that's "visible, not in use", that would be the majority of "genitals" posts and be largely redundant. But I've always taken the tag to mean when you can see they're wearing clothing or whatever that's supposed to cover the genitals, but it's been moved aside (not fully removed) or ripped, allowing the genitals to be visible to others. exposed_penis has been aliased away to penis because of this conflation of "exposed" as simply meaning "visible", along with most other exposed_* tags for likely similar reasons, where exposed_breasts and exposed_nipples have been so far spared, with descriptions that fit the 'wearing clothing that's been moved aside or ripped' idea.
Interestingly, exposed_genitals was aliased to genitals, while exposed is specifically for exposed genitalia (not exposed breasts/nipples or other body parts, which don't implicate it).
beholding said:
Hm. I agree the gendered tags are unnecessary, but I do wonder if there is validity to an "embarrassed from being naked" tag. A combo search of embarrassed nude doesn't guarantee the nude character is the one who's embarrassed.
Just stumbled on this thread, suddenly realizing I'm in the minority / working against site tradition
If we're not going to get gendered tags, I do agree that some sort of "embarrassing_nudity" / "embarrassing_exposure" tag would be really appreciated. Trying to search for ENF/ENM content is not great without dedicated tags. Searching "embarrassed nude male" does not yield ENM; it is functionally equivalent to just searching "embarrassed."
Trying to restrict the search to ENM by adding "-female" (or even the more restrictive "-pussy -breasts" etc.) removes a ton of valid ENM content, in addition to being very cumbersome. The inverse is all true when trying to find ENF.
It seems pretty clear that this isn't in line with the site's tagging philosophy, and that's fine; just throwing my hat in the ring: it would be nice if we could tag what we see and use those same tags to search for what we want to see.
Updated
fek said:
Just stumbled on this thread, suddenly realizing I'm in the minority / working against site traditionIf we're not going to get gendered tags, I do agree that some sort of "embarrassing_nudity" / "embarrassing_exposure" tag would be really appreciated. Trying to search for ENF/ENM content is not great without dedicated tags. Searching "embarrassed nude male" does not yield ENM; it is functionally equivalent to just searching "embarrassed."
Trying to restrict the search to ENM by adding "-female" (or even the more restrictive "-pussy -breasts" etc.) removes a ton of valid ENM content, in addition to being very cumbersome. The inverse is all true when trying to find ENF.
It seems pretty clear that this isn't in line with the site's tagging philosophy, and that's fine; just throwing my hat in the ring: it would be nice if we could tag what we see and use those same tags to search for what we want to see.
Yeah, searching embarrassed nude male will give you a lot of content that's not "male that's embarrassed for being nude". You kinda have to remove tags that would suggest it's a non-male that's nude or the embarrassment is not about the nudity:
embarrassed nude male -breasts -vulva -caught -exhibitionism -sex -diaper <- something like that...
embarrassing_nudity and embarrassing_exposure tags would be appreciated.
crocogator said:
Yeah, searching embarrassed nude male will give you a lot of content that's not "male that's embarrassed for being nude". You kinda have to remove tags that would suggest it's a non-male that's nude or the embarrassment is not about the nudity:
Exactly - and in doing so, you lose a ton of legitimate ENM content where those elements are present. Any sort of "-[female anatomy]" tag is going to cull scenarios where a guy ends up in the wrong locker room, or is suddenly exposed at a clothing-optional beach, both of which are classic ENM scenarios. Any sort of "-[they're not just naked, they're having sex or something]" tag is going to cull scenarios where a couple is unexpectedly revealed having sex, or where someone accidentally shows a sex tape in public, two more classic ENM scenarios. And, once again: trying to load up your search query with twenty negative filters instead of using a single, concise, well-defined tag feels so clunky.
Anyway, it seems "embarrassed male" and "nude_male" are both on the table; I'll start using those instead, alongside embarrassing_exposure/embarrassing_nudity
Updated
fek said:
Anyway, it seems "embarrassed male" and "nude_male" are both on the table; I'll start using those instead, alongside embarrassing_exposure/embarrassing_nudity
I wouldn't recommend creating new tags just yet, especially when there are a lot of ways it could be phrased. It's good to get some consensus early so that we can avoid problems down the line, and also create implication trees etc. to make the tags more functional.
