Implicating anatomically_correct_pussy, anatomically_correct_anus, anatomically_correct_penis → anatomically_correct
Link to implication, anatomically_correct_anus, anatomically_correct_penis&implied_to=anatomically_correct

Reason:

there are 1314 posts tagged anatomically_correct_pussy but only 1116 posts tagged anatomically_correct. this shouldn't be acceptable since the latter is logically a superset of the former.

meanwhile, there are 761 posts tagged anatomically_correct without specifying the manner in which they are. this implication would encourage posters to use only the more specific tags but still allow viewers to search for the generic tag.

I'd say alias them all. anatomically_correct penis will find the latter, as anus and pussy replacing penis in the search will find the former.

I still believe that anatomically_correct attached to furries is a joke :P

I'm in favour of implications, not aliases.

CamKitty said:
I still believe that anatomically_correct attached to furries is a joke :P

You're right, maybe we should rename these to less_anatomically_bizzare_than_usual_*

I kind of agree with CamKitty.
Couldn't we just, I dunno, maybe alias anatomically_correct_penis/pussy to animal_genitalia?

123easy said:
I'd say alias them all. anatomically_correct penis will find the latter, as anus and pussy replacing penis in the search will find the former.

I agree with this.

Genjar said:
I kind of agree with CamKitty.
Couldn't we just, I dunno, maybe alias anatomically_correct_penis/pussy to animal_genitalia?

anatomically correct is used for more than just animal genitalia, thus why aliasing it to that and then searching for them via anatomically_correct + genitalia tag equates to effectively the same thing.

I'm in favor of using implications. Aliasing really just decreases tag flexibility, and with all of them aliased it would be hard/impossible to sort truly by the type of animal genitalia presented.

123easy said:
anatomically correct is used for more than just animal genitalia,

Isn't then "anatomically correct" a mere synonym of "feral"?

123easy said:
I'd say alias them all. anatomically_correct penis will find the latter, as anus and pussy replacing penis in the search will find the former.

Well, there are instances where there is an anatomically correct genitalia, but other parts are...well not...
Like if there is a penis in there, but the thing that is anatomically correct is something else in the picture, such as the anatomically correct pussy/anus, the searcher doesn't satisfy their craving of realistic horse dongs even when typing something like "anatomically_correct penis", because as long as there is something anatomically correct in the image, and some sort of penis, the search still includes that, I request a implication rather than alias.

Rainbow_Dash said:
Aliasing really just decreases tag flexibility, and with all of them aliased it would be hard/impossible to sort truly by the type of animal genitalia presented.

But what about the canine_penis, canine_pussy, horsecock, and other such tags?

It just feels kind of redundant to have those, plus both the animal_genitalia and all the anatomically_correct_* tags.

Genjar said:
But what about the canine_penis, canine_pussy, horsecock, and other such tags?

It just feels kind of redundant to have those, plus both the animal_genitalia and all the anatomically_correct_* tags.

This might be enough of a distinction to warrant aliasing them all to anatomically_correct, the only problem I would see in this is; are all animal pictures tagged with their respective anatomies? In other words, is there (and should there be) a species/type of animal genitalia for every anatomically correct genitalia presented? Or would be be satisfied with just having the basics such as horse, feline, canine, and maybe a few others?

Genjar said:
But what about the canine_penis, canine_pussy, horsecock, and other such tags?

It just feels kind of redundant to have those, plus both the animal_genitalia and all the anatomically_correct_* tags.

This. Alias does not always result in lack of search flexibility. We have animal genitalia already in their various forms. we don't need to super-specify it down further. This is yet another case where keeping it 'flexible' is isntead pandering to people too lazy to look through the gallery after searching for terms that are all-encapsulating without excluding potentially desired images.

Once again I quote Kl0hound on this:

KloH0und said:
Get as close as you can with a search without excluding possibly desirable results, then rifle through the individual posts to find what you want.

The tag system is just a tool, and like any tool it has its limitations. You still have to do certain things yourself.

Once again I'll respond that aliasing several tags into one always does result in a lack of search flexibility. If a picture were tagged with pussy, penis, and anatomically_correct, you would have no way of separating which genital was anatomically correct through the search system, and would be forced to rifle through posts manually.

That Kl0hound quote explains how to deal with an imperfect tool, but it doesn't give a reason to make the tool any more imperfect than it needs to be. It is not a justification for removing any search flexibility.

Rainbow_Dash said:
This might be enough of a distinction to warrant aliasing them all to anatomically_correct, the only problem I would see in this is; are all animal pictures tagged with their respective anatomies? In other words, is there (and should there be) a species/type of animal genitalia for every anatomically correct genitalia presented?

Good point. I had assumed so, but I browsed through the anatomically_correct_penis and noted that there seems to be no tag for raccoon penes. Just about everything else is already covered. Including echidna_penis and porcine_penis.

But calling them 'anatomically correct' tends to lead to arguments. I've seen several comment squabbles about whether the image is actually anatomically correct or not. I believe that animal_genitalia would be a better base tag for those *_penis and *_pussy tags.

Anyway, there's one problem with the potential anatomically_correct_* -> anatomically_correct alias/implication:
post #308712 post #427840

Hybrids and such. Those tend to get tagged with anatomically_correct_*, but aren't exactly anatomically_correct.

Wyvrn said:
Once again I'll respond that aliasing several tags into one always does result in a lack of search flexibility. If a picture were tagged with pussy, penis, and anatomically_correct, you would have no way of separating which genital was anatomically correct through the search system, and would be forced to rifle through posts manually.

We don't have either "male_equine" or "anal_penetration_to_female". Why should we have then "anatomically_correct_penis"?

There's definitely a line that needs to be drawn on what tags are acceptable, I'm not saying tags like anal_penetration_to_female should be adopted.

I'm just saying that 123easy is wrong, aliasing tags together tags does reduce search flexibility, and that Kl0hound quote offers no reason why this would be a good thing.

Lizardite said:
We don't have either "male_equine" or "anal_penetration_to_female". Why should we have then "anatomically_correct_penis"?

That is taking it too far and is not a good point for a counter argument. Some things really are too specific and would not further tagging any more.

In this case however, I feel that aliasing away more tags would only make the system more restrictive as to what can be separated in a search, which is the goal. I don't think we should have the individual species genitalia any more than right now (meaning just the basic most ones being tagged such as horsecock, canine_penis, feline_penis) because it leads to problems with hybrids as genjar mentioned and also it would be a daunting and hardly rewarding task to tag every single species and sub species genitalia.

I think our best course of action is somewhat of a compromise: Have those three originally suggested tags implicate anatomically_correct, and alias animal genitalia to anatomically_correct (because by tagging anatomically_correct, we are assuming it is animal genitalia as I'm not sure how human genitalia could be otherwise) and have the three or four somewhat specific tag categories for each genitalia (such as horsecock, etc, etc) but not have those narrowed categories implicate anything (let me explain why)

This way we have our broad term (anatomically correct)
Three gender categories for it (anatomically correct penis, vagina, anus)
And have our species categories (horsecock, etc^2)
We can mix and match the species and gender based ones to further tagging and it won't be overly specific either.

Let me know what you think!

post #100877 post #431933

Human penis, definitely not anatomically correct.

That said,

This way we have our broad term (anatomically correct)
Three gender categories for it (anatomically correct penis, vagina, anus)
And have our species categories (horsecock, etc^2)
We can mix and match the species and gender based ones to further tagging and it won't be overly specific either.

Good except for the anatomically correct penis/vagina/anus specificity. Just use penis, anus, or vagina. Having anatomically correct_(organ) is just redundant beyond a paltry few images.

123easy said:
post #100877 post #431933

Human penis, definitely not anatomically correct.

That said,

Good except for the anatomically correct penis/vagina/anus specificity. Just use penis, anus, or vagina. Having anatomically correct_(organ) is just redundant beyond a paltry few images.

I'd still consider that anatomically correct even though the proportions are very exaggerated. Might need to change that though to consider if hyper is no longer anatomically correct ---> opinions wanted

So if we just used penis, vagina, anus, then added anatomically_correct and the three species anatomically correct tags, that would suffice? hmmmm, I'm trying to think if there would be any problems with this

Hyper, Anatomically Correct, Doug Winger.
Does more need to be said?

edidaf said:
Hyper, Anatomically Correct, Doug Winger.
Does more need to be said?

laughing my fucking ass off. trouble breathing. Might die. *GASP*

edidaf said:
Hyper, Anatomically Correct, Doug Winger.
Does more need to be said?

Well when you put it that way! *aliases*