I find furless nether regions attractive so I think there should be a tag for furless genitalia on furred/haired/feathered creatures. We could make three tags "furless_genitalia," "featherless_genitalia," "hairless_genitalia" and perhaps connect them to each other. Or we could make a simple tag to encompass them all like "Bald_Genitalia" or "Naked_Genitalia." It might have to be able to cover images that are rated questionable though since although no genitalia may be visible in the image, the regions surrounding them may be such as in example 3. If anyone can come up with an even better tag to refer to furless nether regions feel free to suggest. Maybe "Naked_Crotch" or "Naked_Groin?"

Examples:
post #930293 post #901564 post #526860

Just need to make sure people don't start tagging penises in general with this :P (though I doubt it's a real problem). Also reminded me of furry_penis.

IMO *_crotch/*_groin tags might be slightly better (whichever is what, always forget...). Or would we want even more specific tags, like "furless_labia", "furless_balls" and similar? Just pitching...

Chessax said:
Just need to make sure people don't start tagging penises in general with this :P (though I doubt it's a real problem). Also reminded me of furry_penis.

IMO *_crotch/*_groin tags might be slightly better (whichever is what, always forget...). Or would we want even more specific tags, like "furless_labia", "furless_balls" and similar? Just pitching...

I think crotch/groin tags might be better since some posts have furless crotch/groin areas with no visible genitalia like in example #3.

Couldn't you just add -pubes to your search? From what I've seen, the vast majority of the porn of here is already pube-free.

Peekaboo said:
Couldn't you just add -pubes to your search? From what I've seen, the vast majority of the porn of here is already pube-free.

but this bald crotch thing is a bit different. very often the crotches of furries match their fur color meaning that their crotch is most likely fur covered, but still doesnt really fit under pubes tag
post #918075
(the character's skin color is clearly pink but her crotch is white like her fur)

but with bald crotch you can see very clearly that the furry character doesnt have any hair there at all
post #930293

Ah right.
I'm not against some tag for that as long as it can be easily defined and tagged.

Bald_crotch seems better.
Since naked_crotch would likely be mistagged for generic nudity, and crotchless clothing.

extreme_brazilian

Maxpizzle said:
extreme_brazilian

yo let's keep the Olympics outta this

Alright, so how would we go about implementing the bald_crotch tag?

Abacusion said:
Alright, so how would we go about implementing the bald_crotch tag?

If a consensus is reached (has it?) and no admin complains, then you start tagging. Preferably creating an accompanying wiki page as well, describing both what is to be tagged and in case of any ambiguity what is not to be tagged.

I see absolutely no harm with this tag, bald_crotch would also be fairly hard to confuse with something else, so I'd personally say go for it. Besides it would be pretty easy to undo (not sure why we'd want to do that) or rename the tag afterwards.

Chessax said:
If a consensus is reached (has it?) and no admin complains, then you start tagging. Preferably creating an accompanying wiki page as well, describing both what is to be tagged and in case of any ambiguity what is not to be tagged.

I see absolutely no harm with this tag, bald_crotch would also be fairly hard to confuse with something else, so I'd personally say go for it. Besides it would be pretty easy to undo (not sure why we'd want to do that) or rename the tag afterwards.

As long as you aren't removing a tag, Admins don't care if you start adding a new one.

I tagged the examples posted in this thread and I've set up a basic wiki page. Improvements are welcome. In particular, we might need to clarify how the tag works with scalies.

Other than that, all that's left is to look for suitable posts and tag them.

Furrin_Gok said:
As long as you aren't removing a tag, Admins don't care if you start adding a new one.

Oh, yeah, that's probably very true, as long as you don't add pure spam tags or very large and maybe not useful enough tags. I guess I just worry too much about people doing work in vain.

Maxpizzle said:
In particular, we might need to clarify how the tag works with scalies.

Dang, I didn't even think about that, that's probably 95% of all scalies. I glanced through the bald tag and it's used somewhat to tag traditional scalies. Although I doubt it will be that much of a problem, but it might be nice to mention on the wiki. And if it wasn't clear I don't think we should use this tag for such scalies and the like, i.e. only tag it on characters which otherwise have fur. Objections?

Chessax said:
Oh, yeah, that's probably very true, as long as you don't add pure spam tags or very large and maybe not useful enough tags. I guess I just worry too much about people doing work in vain.

Dang, I didn't even think about that, that's probably 95% of all scalies. I glanced through the bald tag and it's used somewhat to tag traditional scalies. Although I doubt it will be that much of a problem, but it might be nice to mention on the wiki. And if it wasn't clear I don't think we should use this tag for such scalies and the like, i.e. only tag it on characters which otherwise have fur. Objections?

Can't we just specify in the wiki that the tag is to be used only with characters who clearly have fur/feathers/hair/etc on the rest of their body?

Edit: Nevermind, it has already been handled.

Abacusion said:
Can't we just specify in the wiki that the tag is to be used only with characters who clearly have fur/feathers/hair/etc on the rest of their body?

Edit: Nevermind, it has already been handled.

What about where the scales (or smooth colorful "skin") segue into pink flesh?

Furrin_Gok said:
What about where the scales (or smooth colorful "skin") segue into pink flesh?

I suppose it could be used for that, as long as people don't start overusing it. If so then I think I'm fine with it, even though it might not be the best terminology in that case.

sounds like the best suggestion so far, IMO
Since it might be the least likely to get tagged 'incorrectly'

There's also darkened_genitals (-> darkened_genitalia?)

-

• Added to tag group:anatomy

Related: forum #202365 - Genitalia colo(u)r discussion: Light/dark contrasts (Jul. 2016)