I'm here to explain the much needed VPL tag; otherwise known as Visible Penis Line. It describes for when in a picture a visible line can be shown in a Bulge of either underwear, pants, shirts, anything that can form an outline that forms an outline around the penis and hence causes a Visible Penis Line; VPL. An implication with the Bulge tag since you can't have VPL without a little Bulge.

It's important to have this own tag since Bulge is just any generic bulge between a guy's legs; even the bulge of muscle in some cases. But VPL would be tagged in images where you can make out exactly where the penis is instead of solely a generic area. It'd also work for outlines of sheaths and balls since some artists draw the underwear a bit too tight.

No one knows what vpl is however, so noone but you would use it. Bulge works just fine.

If you can see it, you can tag it, so you can just tag those images with "penis" in addition to the "bulge tag".

Peekaboo said:
I thought there was a thread a while back where we were discouraged to do so, but maybe I am wrong.
Also, I'd totally use a VPL tag.

Why would you not tag what's visible in an image?

Peekaboo said:
What I got out from the thread was that you just see the bulge, and not the actual penis.
Not saying I agreed with it. Too lazy to find the thread I'm talking about atm.

For bulges, sure, but there's a huge difference between this:
post #478938
Where you can't really see anything but a bulge.

And this:
post #469743
Where you can clearly see the penis.

Here's the old thread: forum #86800.
The bulge argument starts near the bottom of the first page.

Genjar said:
Here's the old thread: forum #86800.
The bulge argument starts near the bottom of the first page.

Nah, that thread's about breasts.

As Halite demostrated with the two images there is a clear difference between any old Bulge and VPL so Bulge doesn't work for that; it'd be like if people made no distinction between jockstraps and boxers and solely put the tag Underwear for them all without including the type. Isn't it important to include detailed tags for more efficient searching? As well it's not unknown, there are entire tumblrs and even sites dedicated to the collection of VPL images.

v--r said:
As Halite demostrated with the two images there is a clear difference between any old Bulge and VPL so Bulge doesn't work for that; it'd be like if people made no distinction between jockstraps and boxers and solely put the tag Underwear for them all without including the type. Isn't it important to include detailed tags for more efficient searching? As well it's not unknown, there are entire tumblrs and even sites dedicated to the collection of VPL images.

Again though, users wouldn't know what the shorthand "vpl" means, thus people would probably remove it (like I did when I first encountered it) and or never use it for anything using BULGE instead.
If users don't know to use it/what it means/how to use it, the tag becomes useless clutter and confusing.

v--r said:
As Halite demostrated with the two images there is a clear difference between any old Bulge and VPL so Bulge doesn't work for that; it'd be like if people made no distinction between jockstraps and boxers and solely put the tag Underwear for them all without including the type. Isn't it important to include detailed tags for more efficient searching? As well it's not unknown, there are entire tumblrs and even sites dedicated to the collection of VPL images.

Except that's exactly what we do. Underwear is underwear.

Esme_Belles said:
Again though, users wouldn't know what the shorthand "vpl" means, thus people would probably remove it (like I did when I first encountered it) and or never use it for anything using BULGE instead.
If users don't know to use it/what it means/how to use it, the tag becomes useless clutter and confusing.

Agreed as well.

Esme_Belles said:
Again though, users wouldn't know what the shorthand "vpl" means, thus people would probably remove it (like I did when I first encountered it) and or never use it for anything using BULGE instead.
If users don't know to use it/what it means/how to use it, the tag becomes useless clutter and confusing.

Can't we just use visible penis line as a tag then and alias VPL to it?

ceti said:
Can't we just use visible penis line as a tag then and alias VPL to it?

It's still just a bulge. No need to differentiate. We don't do "deep camel toe" or anything for detailed outlines of the vulva and clit, for example, nor need to. It's a camel toe all the same.

123easy said:
It's still just a bulge. No need to differentiate. We don't do "deep camel toe" or anything for detailed outlines of the vulva and clit, for example, nor need to. It's a camel toe all the same.

Exactly

123easy said:
It's still just a bulge. No need to differentiate. We don't do "deep camel toe" or anything for detailed outlines of the vulva and clit, for example, nor need to. It's a camel toe all the same.

I beg to differ. It's not just a bulge, it's VPL, a specific kind of bulge.

ceti said:
Can't we just use visible penis line as a tag then and alias VPL to it?

I second this motion.

v--r said:
I beg to differ. It's not just a bulge, it's VPL, a specific kind of bulge.

...You didn't even bother to read my post, did you?

123easy said:
...You didn't even bother to read my post, did you?

I did but there is a difference between a bulge and a VPL.

If there can be a tag for brown_background then there can be a tag for VisiblePenisLine

I would submit that post #469743 is, perhaps, a bad example if you're trying to argue for a "visible_penis_line" tag. It's true that I don't see a bulge in the image, but that's because I see a penis.

It seems really strange to argue "I see a penis, but it shouldn't be tagged with penis because it happens to be obscured by a skin-tight piece of fabric" in the face of TWYSNWYK. I feel like the practical application here is to call a spade a spade, and a penis a penis.

I wish I had a better example to demonstrate my argument than post #369841, because even though it does illustrate an unambiguous level of visible anatomical detail where I'd want to add the breasts tag, in spite of coverings, I'm fairly sure #369841 only includes the "breasts" tag because of the implication "big_breasts -> breasts".

But more generally, there are a lot of results under "female skinsuit breasts -big_breasts", which suggests that either breasts is getting implicated into a lot of posts it shouldn't, or that a lot of people are calling them breasts when there's sufficient anatomical detail visible through the clothing.

And so, if there's enough anatomical detail that you'd call it a penis, and not just a bulge, then I'd submit that it be tagged penis, and not visible_penis_line.

And definitely not vpl, that's just way too obscure. :/

v--r said:
I did but there is a difference between a bulge and a VPL.

If there can be a tag for brown_background then there can be a tag for VisiblePenisLine

... No.

ikdind said:
-snip- if there's enough anatomical detail that you'd call it a penis, and not just a bulge, then I'd submit that it be tagged penis, and not visible_penis_line.

And definitely not vpl, that's just way too obscure. :/

This, basically. If it's not detailed enough, it's a bulge. If it is, that'sapenis.gif

ikdind said:

And definitely not vpl, that's just way too obscure. :/

There are a few posts with camel_tail already.
I only bring it up because it seems we have two tags for the same thing right now.

pc-king said:
There are a few posts with camel_tail already.
I only bring it up because it seems we have two tags for the same thing right now.

Unless this is about the visible penis line tag, please start a new thread.

EDFDarkAngel1 said:
Unless this is about the visible penis line tag, please start a new thread.

I think it is tied to VPL. Camel_tail is being used as opposite of camel_toe, i.e. a clearly outlined penis through clothing, which is what the VPL tag was suggested for.

Holy necromancy! Someone get the shotguns!

Esme_Belles said:
Holy necromancy! Someone get the shotguns!

Eh, 21 days, not that bad.

Esme_Belles said:
Holy necromancy! Someone get the shotguns!

Less than a month old, and I think it's fair enough to resurrect. Currently:

80 tagged vpl
31 tagged camel_tail

Both categories with images tagged such both before and after this thread. It would be useful to get a final ruling so we could either wipe out the tags that are currently there, or to alias one to the other and start seriously applying it.

Nyteshade said:
I think it is tied to VPL. Camel_tail is being used as opposite of camel_toe, i.e. a clearly outlined penis through clothing, which is what the VPL tag was suggested for.

Exactly, it's still on topic. Looking at the two tags, I far and away prefer camel_tail as a tag instead of vpl (which sounds like either a program name or an acronym for some video game and isn't immediately deducable what it means and is for). camel_tail is pretty easy to figure out because it's the counterpart version of camel_toe (which is a very commonly recognised term for the same thing on the opposite gentialia). I'd never heard of it, but it took me all of two seconds to figure it out. Plus it has the irrelevent bonus of being slightly humorous.

"vpl" on the other hand could stand for anything, could be a typo, could be some artist's username, could be the obscure acronym for a video game copyright tag. And I'd thought that acronyms were generally discouraged for tags in any case. Could be wrong about that. In any case, "vpl" requires previous/outside knowledge to even know what it's doing on a picture. "camel_tail" is actually possible to figure out just looking at the images under the tag. /my two cents

furrypickle said:
Exactly, it's still on topic. Looking at the two tags, I far and away prefer camel_tail as a tag instead of vpl (which sounds like either a program name or an acronym for some video game and isn't immediately deducable what it means and is for). camel_tail is pretty easy to figure out because it's the counterpart version of camel_toe (which is a very commonly recognised term for the same thing on the opposite gentialia). I'd never heard of it, but it took me all of two seconds to figure it out. Plus it has the irrelevent bonus of being slightly humorous.

"vpl" on the other hand could stand for anything, could be a typo, could be some artist's username, could be the obscure acronym for a video game copyright tag. And I'd thought that acronyms were generally discouraged for tags in any case. Could be wrong about that. In any case, "vpl" requires previous/outside knowledge to even know what it's doing on a picture. "camel_tail" is actually possible to figure out just looking at the images under the tag. /my two cents

Really the opposite to camel toe is moose knuckle, but that's not quite what we're talking about here.

furrypickle said:
Exactly, it's still on topic. Looking at the two tags, I far and away prefer camel_tail as a tag instead of vpl (which sounds like either a program name or an acronym for some video game and isn't immediately deducable what it means and is for). camel_tail is pretty easy to figure out because it's the counterpart version of camel_toe (which is a very commonly recognised term for the same thing on the opposite gentialia). I'd never heard of it, but it took me all of two seconds to figure it out. Plus it has the irrelevent bonus of being slightly humorous.

"vpl" on the other hand could stand for anything, could be a typo, could be some artist's username, could be the obscure acronym for a video game copyright tag. And I'd thought that acronyms were generally discouraged for tags in any case. Could be wrong about that. In any case, "vpl" requires previous/outside knowledge to even know what it's doing on a picture. "camel_tail" is actually possible to figure out just looking at the images under the tag. /my two cents

I agree that camel_tail should be used and that vpl is too obscure to be really searched by the common user unless they of course see it in a picture and wonder what it is and end of searching around for it like I did.

Should be ok to alias vpl to camel_toe to prevent it being used as well as make bulge an implication of camel_toe?

Why is bulge not sufficient? We don't tag images of guys with tented pants with erection, we tag those with bulge. Both of these tags seem pointless. However, if we're going to use one, we should use VPL, since it has more posts, but that's just my opinion.

JoeX said:
Why is bulge not sufficient? We don't tag images of guys with tented pants with erection, we tag those with bulge. Both of these tags seem pointless. However, if we're going to use one, we should use VPL, since it has more posts, but that's just my opinion.

It personally doesn't really matter to me, but I think it's too be more descriptive to whats going on in the picture.
Similar as too why we have so many tags to describe the penis, I see nothing wrong with an extra tag to describe the difference between a round lump in the groin area vs a penis shaped one.

In addition if you search for bulge penis the results are ~50% bulge shaped penis or an actual penis sticking out of clothing.
but that's just like my opinion man

Tented pants...
Hm. How about tagging those as pitching_a_tent? That term seems more widely recognized than either vpl or camel tail.

Genjar said:
Tented pants...
Hm. How about tagging those as pitching_a_tent? That term seems more widely recognized than either vpl or camel tail.

that works fine for when it's erect and outward like this post #406227

but what about posts like this when it's more pressed against the body, but you can see an obvious outline, would you still be able to use that tag?
post #458694 post #33511 post #469743

another idea I just thought of is the tag could be detailed_bulge or something similar to that like penis_bulge because it looks like a penis rather than someone stuffed a pair of socks in a speedo.
I only mention it because people still seem to have mixed feelings on what one, if any should/can be used, and this seems more self explanatory then vpl or camel_tail, but it's just a thought.

Apologies for the zombification of this thread, but I found the proper term for bulge in this sense: medectasia, (MED-ek-TAY'-zhee-uh). Admittedly, it doesn't discriminate between bulge shapes (and it's just as obscure as most of the other suggestions here), so the word's more of a curiosity than a help. Sorry.