So, I recently found a certain bit of anatomy being forced into another certain bit of anatomy.

Seeing as this act was absent from the tags, I thought:
"Golly gee, what's the proper tag should I use for this? Huh, I'm not sure. Perhaps I'll check the wonderful Wiki!"

Then I discovered these:
large_penetration
large_insertion
huge_penetration
huge_insertion
extreme_penetration
extreme_insertion
hyper_penetration
tight_fit
ridiculous_fit

Now, I understand that there's a seperate element involved (dick v "object"), but there's some crossover in the Wiki entries. Maybe I'm just overwhelmed at this group of tags, but I honestly believe that this many similar tags cannot be necessary (and there may even be more, I honestly don't know).

Going off my current understandings of the them, I say get rid of the "fit" tags entirely? (Though I don't know if aliasing would be useful because whatever's being "fitted" can go either way, depending on image.) And... maybe just two tags for sizes? One for "barely", and one for "they should be dead"?

Or, am I all wrong about this? If so, someone please educate me, so I can wade through this swarm of tags and label more accurately.

Calcoast said:
So, I recently found a certain bit of anatomy being forced into another certain bit of anatomy.

Seeing as this act was absent from the tags, I thought:
"Golly gee, what's the proper tag should I use for this? Huh, I'm not sure. Perhaps I'll check the wonderful Wiki!"

Then I discovered these:
large_penetration
large_insertion
huge_penetration
huge_insertion
extreme_penetration
extreme_insertion
hyper_penetration
tight_fit
ridiculous_fit

Now, I understand that there's a seperate element involved (dick v "object"), but there's some crossover in the Wiki entries. Maybe I'm just overwhelmed at this group of tags, but I honestly believe that this many similar tags cannot be necessary (and there may even be more, I honestly don't know).

Going off my current understandings of the them, I say get rid of the "fit" tags entirely? (Though I don't know if aliasing would be useful because whatever's being "fitted" can go either way, depending on image.) And... maybe just two tags for sizes? One for "barely", and one for "they should be dead"?

Or, am I all wrong about this? If so, someone please educate me, so I can wade through this swarm of tags and label more accurately.

I have a suspicion that the distinction between large/huge and huge/extreme are poorly understood (the limits are certainly not well understood when it comes to body part sizes as far as I can tell).

Tight_fit and ridiculous_fit, however, are specifically relative to the receiver's size (the others only to the size of whatever's being shoved inside), and thus pretty much everything in hyper_penetration should probably be tagged with ridiculous_fit instead.

I should point out it seems likely the insertion/penetration split will be abandoned eventually.

I had a feeling this particular topic would have been brought up at some point before. I suppose I should have searched before I made a new post. Thanks for the link.

Circeus said:
Tight_fit and ridiculous_fit, however, are specifically relative to the receiver's size (the others only to the size of whatever's being shoved inside), and thus pretty much everything in hyper_penetration should probably be tagged with ridiculous_fit instead.

Hyper_penetration isn't tagged much, but yeah, those should be under ridiculous_fit. Should probably be aliased.

Most posts under extreme_insertion don't really seem 'extreme'. And since we don't use any other extreme_* tags (everything else is large < huge < hyper), I think it could be sorted out (to ridiculous_fit and abdominal_bulge) and then invalidated.