There's something bothering me about cloaca.

To be precise, I don't think this tag should exist at all. Or at least not in its current state.

Why?

• It goes against TWYS.
• Just because you don't see an anus, it doesn't mean it's inside the genital_slit. So this tag can't serve its purpose to begin with. You're tagging something you don't see.
• It makes things complicated and harder to find.
• cloaca is basically an anatomically_correct pussy or penis that may or may not be or contain an anus
• Any image with cloaca could be described with a combination of penis / pussy / anus / genital_slit, which would be simpler and easier to find.
• It's causing a lot of mistagging.
• It relies on species knowledge and character canon.

If I search for cloaca -male -pussy -anus, I'm going to find a lot of images which, in my opinion, should've been found if I was searching for pussy or anus. Because to me, those openings look like something that could very easily serve as a pussy or anus. Well, I guess it depends on several factors. If the character is not male, if the cloaca is open, if it's more stretchy, if the cloaca is positioned higher on the crotch, if the cloaca is vertical/horizontal, etc.

• Users who search for pussy, will want to find images that contain a genital opening that resembles a pussy. In most (no-penis) cases, a cloaca is CloseEnough.jpg
• Users who search for anus, will want to find images that contain a genital opening that resembles an anus. In most cases, the cloaca is also CloseEnough.jpg to be assumed as an anus.

So, in my opinion, the cloaca should be removed, and replaced with a combination of penis / pussy / anus / genital_slit
EDIT: In my opinion, images with cloaca should include pussy and/or anus where it's reasonably likely to assume that cloaca shares such functions.

A few examples:
post #879607
Should be: pussy + anus

post #983882
Should be: pussy + anus

post #853104
Should be: pussy

post #905212
Should be: pussy

post #869756
Should be: anus

post #979676
Should be: anus

And if people want to find cloaca, then they can do so through anatomically_correct + species.

EDIT: Crossed out the unreasonable things.

Sometimes you have to make an assumption. If there's no direct evidence it's a pussy (ie no visible anus), then just assume it's a cloaca.

So far the cloaca tag is pretty useful. It's a distinctive look in most cases. There have to be some TWYK on this site, else nothing would be tagged. I also think TWYS should be a little flexible.

-1 to this.

Otherwise you end up with a bunch of dudes tagged with "pussy" when its clearly a cloaca or vent. It has a specific look to it.

Any legitimate cloaca mistags are caused by a misunderstanding of what a cloaca is (example - cloaca tagged on an image with a penis coming out of a genital slit).

None of these examples listed are mistags - they are cloacas. I see no ambiguity.

Yeah, no. For the reasons already stated.

Also:

And if people want to find cloaca, then they can do so through anatomically_correct + species.

Anatomically_correct doesn't apply to fictional species such as dragons. So... no, they can't.

well i could see where the confusion in the peafowl would come from, but the others are all clearly cloacas and replacing one tag that works perfectly and correctly describes the anatomical feature for a 4 tag combination that is anatomically incorrect in description to find the same thing is just ridiculous.

PS: concerning that insectoid, that orifice at the tip of the insect abdomen is likly to actually be its ovipositor, not an anus or cloaca

Arguments that you guys wrote:
- It's easy for (experienced) taggers to tag a cloaca
- It's a distinct feature on an image
- Mistags are not the tag's fault
- Anatomically_correct does not apply in all cases
- 4 tag combination would be anatomically incorrect

The first three arguments, I would agree with. Altho..

cloaca tagged on an image with a penis coming out of a genital slit

As far as I'm concerned, cloaca is correct tag in such cases.

Anatomically_correct doesn't apply to fictional species such as dragons

The genital_slit wiki clearly states that you're wrong :)

4 tag combination that is anatomically incorrect

First of all, it's 1-2 of those tags. And secondly, as per definitions of those tags, there's nothing wrong in using them in cases of cloaca.

Ok, ok. You guys are right. Cloaca can stay. However, please help me with the following problems:

• I think that long name for cloaca would be cloaca-shape genitals (on this site, anus is considered a sex organ ;) ). So the tag is just a specific case of genitals tag. So technically, people who search for cloaca are searching for genitals. And logically, if such people exist, then there also exist people who would want to find other types of genitals. However, we currently have no genitals umbrella tag, which would encompass all types of genitals, and make it possible to find all images that contain genitals. Do you suppose such tag should be added?
• The main reason which I made the topic for. There's a lot of posts which I can't find if I searched for pussy simply because the genitals have the shape of cloaca. As mentioned above, a lot of the posts that the search cloaca -male -pussy returns, in my opinion, should be found if I searched for pussy. How do you explain this and how could it be corrected? If it should be corrected at all.

cloaca tagged on an image with a penis coming out of a genital slit

As far as I'm concerned, cloaca is correct tag in such cases.

As far as animal anatomy terminology is concerned, this is incorrect.

Anatomically_correct doesn't apply to fictional species such as dragons

The genital_slit wiki clearly states that you're wrong :)

The anatomically_correct wiki clearly states in its "Not Anatomically Correct" section:

It can't be anatomically_correct if you cannot define which genitalia is even supposed to be correct in the first place.

In addition, the genital slit wiki mentions nothing about dragons or any other mythical creatures.

Though the idea of genitals as an umbrella tag implicated by all genitalia tags sounds technically correct, searching rating:explicit solo -penis (plus any specific species) would probably return the same results you are looking for. So it would be a redundant tag.

We're not renaming cloaca.

If our wiki pages are not enough to distinguish cloaca and genital_slit usage, and this entire thread is based on a personal whim, then I suggest reading up on real life examples of genital anatomy before continuing this discussion any further.

Knotty_Curls said:

The anatomically_correct wiki clearly states in its "Not Anatomically Correct" section:

In addition, the genital slit wiki mentions nothing about dragons or any other mythical creatures.

Though the idea of genitals as an umbrella tag implicated by all genitalia tags sounds technically correct, searching rating:explicit plus any specific species would probably return the same results you are looking for. So it would be a redundant tag.

We're not renaming cloaca.

If our wiki pages are not enough to distinguish cloaca and genital_slit usage, and this entire thread is based on a personal whim, then I suggest reading up on real life examples of genital anatomy before continuing this discussion any further.

I do agree that the wiki pages should be updated because I'm not really sure which genital tag I should tag for mystical creatures like dragons.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I personally use genital_slits to tag slit-like genitalia(that somewhat resemble those of a cetacean) on dragons , except now it's scalie. I only use cloaca if there isn't an anus present separately.

You're right, it's decided case-by-case.

There's still no one here who could explain why there's 500 posts with cloaca tagged, but without any actual genital tags. There's 500 posts that are missing pussy and/or anus tags. I think this is a problem. I think all such posts need to be deported and a wall built around them. Just kidding :D. Tho it's still a problem. Perhaps users think that if they tag cloaca, that they described the image perfectly and that they don't need to add any other genitals anymore?

Knotty_Curls said:

cloaca tagged on an image with a penis coming out of a genital slit

As far as I'm concerned, cloaca is correct tag in such cases.

As far as animal anatomy terminology is concerned, this is incorrect.

If you're saying that the cloaca cannot hold a penis then perhaps you're the one that needs a bit more education.

Knotty_Curls said:

There's a lot of posts which I can't find if I searched for pussy simply because the genitals have the shape of cloaca

rating:explicit solo -penis

This search string would not work at all. "Explicit rating" does not guarantee the image showing genitals, "solo" only works for solo images, and "-penis" will not work on images containing both penis and cloaca.

While pussy is commonly tagged with females with a cloaka, you can't tag any genitals for males unless their penis is showing. One way to assume someone is female is to see if they are aroused. We all know male arousals tends to end up in erections. And how do you expect to have a genital tag if we can't see the internal bits? The outside of a cloaca covers the genitals quite well.

Yep. From what I've seen, users who search for 'pussy' do not want to see cloacas among the search results. Which is why those are separate.

Sorrowless said:
While pussy is commonly tagged with females with a cloaka, you can't tag any genitals for males unless their penis is showing. One way to assume someone is female is to see if they are aroused. We all know male arousals tends to end up in erections. And how do you expect to have a genital tag if we can't see the internal bits? The outside of a cloaca covers the genitals quite well.

That's why this specific tag is very tricky to use, and very ambigious. So some additional guidelines would need to be defined on when to use it and in combination with which other tags. I think the solution I proposed below would solve this problem.

BismuthGalaxy said:
People who want to search for cloacas probably appreciate having a single tag.

Yes, that's fine. I already said that I'm ok with cloaca staying, as it is a unique feature on an image. However, it can't be used as a replacement for pussy.

Genjar said:
Yep. From what I've seen, users who search for 'pussy' do not want to see cloacas among the search results. Which is why those are separate.

Well, that's wrong.

First of all, users who search for pussy and don't want to see a cloaca, can always add -cloaca to their search. However, it's wrong that people like me, who do want to see cloacas resembling a pussy, to be unable to find such posts.

And secondly, cloaca logically cannot be a replacement for pussy because the tag is only a feature of genitals.

There's nothing wrong with an image having both cloaca and a pussy on it. But it is wrong if it has only cloaca. At least in my opinion.

I thought about how to solve this problem, and I think the solution would be, to fix the wiki of cloaca and implement the following guidelines:

• If cloaca can be assumed to contain a penis, but the penis isn't visible, then it should be tagged with both cloaca and genital_slit
• If cloaca is depicted in a way where it could serve as vaginal entrance, then it should be tagged with both cloaca and pussy
• If cloaca is depicted in a way where it could serve as an anal entrance, then it should be tagged with both cloaca and anus

Words have meanings. Cloaca doesn't mean what you think it means.

If we are wrong, then please provide some credible sources proving that your personal definition of cloaca is correct.

Either way, these suggested ways on how to deal with cloaca as a tag are so unwieldy, they will not be implemented. I can promise you that.

This thread has zero discussion value.

BismuthGalaxy said:
Well, that's rude.

I'm sorry if I came off as rude, but let's not flame each other, shall we? While I am expressing my opinion, I'm also trying to be reasonable and objective, while weighting all the pros and cons.

~pussy ~cloaca won't work because ~cloaca will return images with only penises in it. And ~pussy ~cloaca -penis won't work because it won't return posts that contain both penis and pussy.

As for your other argument, tag clutter, I would say that this argument is inconsistent with itself. This is because cloaca is a "could be" tag, because, as mentioned in the first post, you can't open it to confirm if it really serves as an anus, and that, in fact, it actually is a cloaca. And if you have one "could be" tag, then you would also need the other "could be" tags to be consistent (if it could be a cloaca, then it could also be a pussy/anus). Besides, it's better to have more tags than fewer, unless the tags have no searchability/filter value. In this case, the value is quite obvious.

Knotty_Curls said:
Words have meanings. Cloaca doesn't mean what you think it means.

If we are wrong, then please provide some credible sources proving that your personal definition of cloaca is correct.

My personal definition is, that it's an opening on the body which serves as a vagina (in females) or penis sheath (in males), while at the same time serving as an anus.

Wikipedia definition: a cloaca is the posterior orifice that serves as the only opening for the digestive, reproductive, and urinary tracts (if present) of certain animals.

An image of duck cloaca
An image of male crocodile cloaca anatomy

I'm sorry if any of my previous generalizations of cloaca have caused confusion. But be assured, I know what a cloaca is. If there's something that I said that you're confused about, please, do say so.

Did you bother to check your tag search? The ones with -penis are missing the penis tag...

Delian said:
My personal definition is, that it's an opening on the body which serves as a vagina (in females) or penis sheath (in males), while at the same time serving as an anus.

[...]

I'm sorry if any of my previous generalizations of cloaca have caused confusion. But be assured, I know what a cloaca is.

Apparently you don't, if you think that a cloaca serves as a penis sheath for males.

Plenty of animals with a cloaca do not have penises. This includes the vast majority of birds.

On the topic of birds, in birds which do have a penis, it's actually an extension of the cloaca wall, so... Not a sheath in that circumstance either.

It would be preferred to tag anus if we can actually see it. It is usually covered by the cloaca similar to how the labia covers the vagina. It's also common for the anus not to be drawn on cloaca pics.

Clawdragons said:
Apparently you don't, if you think that a cloaca serves as a penis sheath for males.

Plenty of animals with a cloaca do not have penises. This includes the vast majority of birds.

On the topic of birds, in birds which do have a penis, it's actually an extension of the cloaca wall, so... Not a sheath in that circumstance either.

Actually in monotreme and some marsupials (kangaroo) the sheath is a cloaca vent so technically in some cases it IS correct

GDelscribe said:
Actually in monotreme and some marsupials (kangaroo) the sheath is a cloaca vent so technically in some cases it IS correct

I could, perhaps, have been a bit more clear: Wasn't say that that it was never accurate, so much as I was saying that's a poor way to think about it and is often, though not always, inaccurate.

BismuthGalaxy said:
Why not try searching "female ~pussy ~cloaca" or "ambiguous_gender ~pussy ~cloaca"? That way, you ensure a non-male is involved, without precluding results that happen to have a male? I don't think that any tag system change will let you get more granular than that.

Hmm. This is close but, it's not perfect. The problem being that, the "female cloaca" and "ambigious_gender cloaca" combinations will return posts that happen to have both female/ambigious and male characters on them, and it's possible that the cloaca belongs to the male character. And the other problem being the need for two searches. Unfortunately the search and tagging system isn't powerful enough.

Well, there's plenty of options where you could get more granular. For instance, separating cloaca into male_cloaca and female_cloaca. But that would be kinda weird.

Clawdragons said:
Apparently you don't, if you think that a cloaca serves as a penis sheath for males.

Plenty of animals with a cloaca do not have penises. This includes the vast majority of birds.

On the topic of birds, in birds which do have a penis, it's actually an extension of the cloaca wall, so... Not a sheath in that circumstance either.

Ok, let me correct myself. It serves as a penis sheath for the species that have a penis. Sheath in the meaning of "container". And penis in the meaning of "erectile expansion". From wikipedia : "in flaccid state curls up inside the cloaca".

My definition being definition for the use on this site, where majority of posts contain species that have a penis.

Don't you know that humans have cloacas also ? ;)

Sorrowless said:
It would be preferred to tag anus if we can actually see it. It is usually covered by the cloaca similar to how the labia covers the vagina. It's also common for the anus not to be drawn on cloaca pics.

Well, it's on a per-case basis. In some cases, for instance, post #979676 , it would be reasonable to add anus tag.

Anyway..

...

Let's look at the statistics a bit:
(1) There's (100%) 2100 posts with cloaca
(2) There's (45%) 947 posts with cloaca and penis
(3) There's (12%) 245 posts with cloaca and pussy
(4) There's (10%) 217 posts with cloaca, penis, and pussy
(5) There's (10%) 219 posts with cloaca and anus
(6) There's (31%) 656 posts with only cloaca

As you can see, there's a big discrepancy between (2) and (3). It seems that it's easy for users to add penis, where it's a male character with a penis sticking out of a cloaca, but it seems to be very hard to tag pussy where it's female character with a cloaca. The point (6) seems to be the result of this discrepancy. This is something that I wish would be fixed, but I'm not sure how..

Delian said:
Well, it's on a per-case basis. In some cases, for instance, post #979676 , it would be reasonable to add anus tag.

I don't see any anus. Anyone else do? If Spike was drawn masculine then you could assume we're seeing the anus. Then again one could also assume he was female or a cuntboy since the arousal isn't triggering any erection.

Real talk, 'there's something bothering me about cloaca' may be one of the funniest out-of-context sentences I've heard in a while.

Delian said:
As you can see, there's a big discrepancy between (2) and (3). It seems that it's easy for users to add penis, where it's a male character with a penis sticking out of a cloaca, but it seems to be very hard to tag pussy where it's female character with a cloaca.

Uh, yeah. Because cloacas aren't pussies, and pussies aren't cloacas.

Most posts that are tagged as both cloaca and pussy either feature multiple characters, or predate the creation of the cloaca tag group. It's not exactly a top-priority project, so nobody's gotten around to checking them all to make sure they're consistent.

Genjar said:
Uh, yeah. Because cloacas aren't pussies, and pussies aren't cloacas.

Yes, of course cloacas aren't pussies. It would be wrong to say that they are. And it would be absolutely wrong to tag images that have a female character with a cloaca with only cloaca. Because as you said, cloacas aren't pussies. They should have both tags. Pussy to describe the female reproductive entrance and function, and cloaca to describe the vent function.

Genjar said:
Most posts that are tagged as both cloaca and pussy either feature multiple characters, or predate the creation of the cloaca tag group. It's not exactly a top-priority project, so nobody's gotten around to checking them all to make sure they're consistent.

Ok. Though I'm not sure what this argues in favor of. Btw, I couldn't find any forum discussion where it would be written why the tags should be incompatible.

I know, you wrote that people who search for 'pussy' do not want to see cloacas among the search results. But I would argue that's a bit so-so. Some people do, some people don't. Pussy doesn't mean just shape, but also function. It's likely that a fair amount of people (including me) would be using the tag to search for the pussy function and not care about the shape or the fact that it's a part of a vent.

Delian said:
Pussy to describe the female reproductive entrance and function, and cloaca to describe the vent function.

? Pussy doesn't describe the female entrance. It describes a vagina, which a cloaca is not. That would be like tagging a bicycle as a car because they both share the function of getting you somewhere. If you want females and their openings, why don't you just search female ~pussy ~cloaca?

Delian said:
~pussy ~cloaca won't work because ~cloaca will return images with only penises in it.

notnobody said:
? Pussy doesn't describe the female entrance. It describes a vagina, which a cloaca is not. That would be like tagging a bicycle as a car because they both share the function of getting you somewhere. If you want females and their openings, why don't you just search female ~pussy ~cloaca?

I thought it was earlier agreed that the pussy tag covers the outer area, not just the tube that is the vagina.

Delian said:
~cloaca will return images with only penises in it

That should never or almost never happen if you're including the female tag like I said, except where people are tagging wrong, or where the tags refer to different characters, which you wouldn't be solving with this anyway.

Sorrowless said:
I thought it was earlier agreed that the pussy tag covers the outer area, not just the tube that is the vagina.

Vagina and vulva. Saying vagina to mean both is just common slang. Either way, the venn diagram of meanings between all of those come into no contact with cloaca. Totally separate anatomical structure that is shared by non-fantasy species in zero percent of cases.