I've noticed a possible grey area here.
There are posts where it's is obvious which tag to use..
disembodied_penis:
post #569593 post #568035 post #565851

faceless_male:
post #572093 post #570037 post #563176

But what about pics like these...
post #574065 post #566115 post #565310
where there is clearly more drawn than just the penis but not much else. So far I've been considering these to be faceless_male but recently I can't help but feel that there isn't enough of the character drawn for the tag to be accurate, to me they just look like a disembodied penis plus a little extra.

Is there another tag we can use for these?

Here's a link to a forum where the matter was raised a while back... https://e621.net/forum/show/129616

Disembodied means not attached to a body.
So, if there's a body, it's not disembodied.

Halite said:
Disembodied means not attached to a body.
So, if there's a body, it's not disembodied.

Yeah I agree, it's the wiki entry for faceless_male where the confusion comes from. The definition seems to focus on males where the character's face is off-screen, not drawn or hidden by another aspect of the piece (behind the female, etc).

Also, it mentions that there needs to be evidence that the character in question has enough of the body drawn to be sure it's not a herm or dickgirl but also that enough of the body is drawn to make disembodied_penis incorrect.

All 3 of those would be faceless_male.

1. Kind of a borderline case, but there's enough of a line to show where the legs would be and that is enough to push it into faceless_male. If that line wasn't there it would probably be disembodied_penis.
2. You can see a pubic region and thighs. faceless_male
3. You can see the torso. faceless_male

Disembodied penis + something extra is pretty much where faceless_male starts (the only exception is the balls). Note that the something extra has to be drawn attached to the penis; in the 1st example, the disembodied_hands wouldn't count because they aren't attached to the penis.

DragonFox69 said:
Yeah I agree, it's the wiki entry for faceless_male where the confusion comes from. The definition seems to focus on males where the character's face is off-screen, not drawn or hidden by another aspect of the piece (behind the female, etc).

Also, it mentions that there needs to be evidence that the character in question has enough of the body drawn to be sure it's not a herm or dickgirl but also that enough of the body is drawn to make disembodied_penis incorrect.

Think of the herm/dickgirl part as more like exclusion criteria:

• Do you see a pussy/breasts attached to the character? If yes don't use faceless_male.

parasprite said:
All 3 of those would be faceless_male.

1. Kind of a borderline case, but there's enough of a line to show where the legs would be and that is enough to push it into faceless_male. If that line wasn't there it would probably be disembodied_penis.
2. You can see a pubic region and thighs. faceless_male
3. You can see the torso. faceless_male

Disembodied penis + something extra is pretty much where faceless_male starts (the only exception is the balls). Note that the something extra has to be drawn attached to the penis; in the 1st example, the disembodied_hands wouldn't count because they aren't attached to the penis.

Think of the herm/dickgirl part as more like exclusion criteria:

• Do you see a pussy/breasts attached to the character? If yes don't use faceless_male.

Cool. That's pretty much what I thought the usage was but for some reason I had a doubt in my mind about it that I couldn't shake. Thanks for the info parasprite. :)