Danbooru

Tag Implication: no_testicles -> futanari

Posted under General

NWF_Renim said:
a male character can be depicted with nothing down there as well and it'd be pretty much the same thing.

My misgiving is that the penis and testicles/scrotum are very visually distinct, whereas the female 'construct' is considered in whole (ex: we use "pussy" for its tag).

When there is nothing down there it all looks the same, there is no point in defining it by something that isn't there. What is being tagged is the lack of something. Visually they're identical when they're missing.

If they have neither, it should be no_genitals. A female with nothing but the mound would look no different in that area than a male with neither penis nor testicles.

When there is a penis on a male, it almost always includes testicles (or at least the assumption that they are there, even if they're not visible in the picture, because there's no reason to assume they're not there). They're so obvious that no tag should really be necessary.

Futanari are more often (in my viewing experience, at least) depicted without testicles. Thus, adding the testicles tag would make for narrower search parameters.

I see your point, I guess. But it seems the same as tagging "eyes" or "hands".

Still, if somebody searched "futanari testicles" and got a bunch of futa-on-male or male-on-futa pics where the futa in question has no testes, I don't think they have much to complain about.

I really don't see the point of tagging males with the testicles tag, especially as zealously done as post #492286. It would be better to reserve that for futanari since it's much more common for a futanari to not have them depicted. In that case then no_testicles then could be dumped, and if really needed for a male image then it could be used for the rare chance such an image appears.

As for images where it is only the scrotal sack shown, I still don't see a reason to have it for males since with tags like yaoi or shota or whatever it's given that you're likely going to see it on a character. If it's for finding specific types of depictions of scrotal sacks it'd make much more sense to have a unique tag that is more descriptive of the concept being tagged (such as say "large testicles" or something).

What, no love for eunuchs on Danbooru?

Anyway, I did the latter two but this thread got confusing fast on the first point. Instinctively, I would not think that no_testicles is exclusive to futas. Though that's what the wiki says since its Dec 2008 creation...

jxh2154 said:
What, no love for eunuchs on Danbooru?

Anyway, I did the latter two but this thread got confusing fast on the first point. Instinctively, I would not think that no_testicles is exclusive to futas. Though that's what the wiki says since its Dec 2008 creation...

Obviously it doesn't need to be, but that's just how it's been used.

There's a problem with searching futanari -testicles to get the same results as no_testicles. That's because almost most of the futanaris that have testicles don't have them tagged.
I mean, no_test isn't used in all cases where it applies either, I think neither testicles nor no_testicles are zealously tagged either, on either males or futanaris

Edit:
Question: Should there also be futa_on_futa or does that apply under futa_on_female?

Updated

Godel said:
There's a problem with searching futanari -testicles to get the same results as no_testicles. That's because almost most of the futanaris that have testicles don't have them tagged.

That's a matter of tagging vigilance, not a problem with the tags themselves, per se.
Altering tags or introducing new ones wouldn't fix that.

Edit:
Question: Should there also be futa_on_futa or does that apply under futa_on_female?

I think there should, to fit in with the reasoning behind the existence of the other futa_on_* tags.

1