Danbooru

Proposal: Labia (after nuke) and its derivatives

Posted under Tags

In my mind labia has always meant labia_minora which we could tag just like we do it with clitoris. If it's drawn, we can tag it.

Another proposal in forum #207518 was long_labia which could be tagged on quite a lot of posts depending on what the "cutoff" length is.
What is considered "long"?

I've tried to compose a short list of labia sorted by their length, each asking a question or introducing a measure/point:

Examples of long_labia by @Hyozen from the original thread:

Moving the discussion from forum #207518 to here:

Thayol said:

We have an inner conflict of meanings:

  • dark_labia says: "As with labia, use this tag for images where the labia is fully visible."
  • labia says: "Don't use it when there's no clothing covering the vulva"

I'd like to remark that I just changed the labia wiki to put more emphasis on what was already written, without fully changing its meaning. That said, it's possible to see that the dark labia wiki was written way after the first person defined labia to not be used when there's no clothing. An outer labia could be fully visible regardless of clothing, as it happens with wedgies.

Personally I think who wrote dark labia could have accidentally overlooked the part it says to use pussy instead when it's fully visible. This tag could be used with long labia in the future if we ever care to distinguish between different types of labia instead of using an unintuitive and open to different interpretations tag like labia. I can't say much about defining a cutoff lenght for it at the moment, though.

Hyozen said:

I can't say much about defining a cutoff lenght for it at the moment, though.

I believe we can start tagging very long ones as it must be pretty intuitive for most. We can write the wiki and the exact specs later.

I've been pertty trigger-happy with tagging so it'd be nice if we decided on a cutoff length/shape.

An objective measure would be nice like for breast sizes. I feel like currently I'm more likely to tag long_labia on smaller "bat wings" like post #4943302.
Take post #3663129 for example where I think there's "more labium" but at first sight I wouldn't recognize it as "long."

Update: another example of "bat wings": post #4353956

Updated

Having a tag called "labia minora" just risks people tagging every single post of a spread pussy with it. I don't see the point in something like that.

If you want a way to search for "outie" vaginas, I think the name of the tag should reflect that it's for the thing as a whole, not an anatomical part of it. That's at least how I've always heard it referred to as.
We already have outie_navel so I don't see an issue with creating a corresponding tag for vaginas if you want to populate it, though I'll admit outie pussy sounds crass as fuck. outie vagina is a better term for a tag imo. It's contrary to our existent pussy but then again we only use that term for legacy reasons, and we have other non-standardized tags like partially visible vulva, so it wouldn't be much of an issue.

I agree with nonamethanks, that's the same issue with the labia tag and mons pubis, names like that, if taken literally, will make the tag be used for whatever post they're minimally visible, instead of being used only in the utmost examples where they're distinct enough. A name like outie_* will make the tagger at least open the wiki if they want to add it (I hope so).

For the second question, I prefer aliasing the informal terms to the scientific term instead of the opposite, whoever searching for the scientific term doesn't need to be redirected because they know what they're searching for. Of course, the opposite being done wouldn't make any difference for the people who already search using the informal terms, but you can have many informal variations of one scientific term, so it's more logical to alias the former to the latter.

The alias wouldn't make much difference anyway because innie pussy was only used once and people weren't really creating tags to mean cleft of venus, this just doesn't seem to be very known among the taggers, which is good, because it's less likely it'll be polluted in the future.

Cleft of venus, in essence, is just the space between the labia majora, it's another generic term that falls into what I wrote in the first paragraph, in practice, it's mainly being used for pussies with thin slits and as an antonym of spread pussy. Unless that's really a thing, I don't think we need an antonym for spread pussy and if we do, I can't think of a good name for it, so let's keep using cleft of venus for it, I'll try writing a better wiki for it. The fact just a few people know about it prevents the tag being used to the letter and turning into another case of labia.

I'm more concerned about sorting out fat mons and mons pubis, mons pubis is another unneeded generic anatomy tag that should only be used for the extreme scenario: a fat mons, we already have that tag but it's being heavily used for another concept. It's probably easier removing the few posts with fat mons that contain real fat mons and saving them in a favgroup (for findability), aliasing fat_mons -> fat_labia or whatever name we agree with and then unaliasing, since that tag is almost entirely used for fat labia anyway, I'll try doing that soon.

Thayol said:

While I was cleaning labia tags I noticed that some posts were tagged because of large labia majora that made a "bulge" but I couldn't find a better tag than fat mons which should be fat_mons_pubis but it isn't...

My only problem with fat_labia is that we have examples of fat (or swollen) labia minora. Unfortunately I can't think of a better name.

Probably not necessary to go that far, my sole objective with all of this is getting rid of redundant or meaningless tags, as it was with labia and it is with mons pubis, differentiating between fat labia majora and fat labia minora goes completely in the opposite way. Personally, I'm not even sure how the partially_visible_* tags are different from *_peek, we don't have partially visible penis for example. Besides, I think partially visible genitals tags should implicate the genital tag itself, so anyone searching for -pussy/-anus/-penis wouldn't accidentally find one because it's tagged with partially_visible_* or *_peek, but not with the genital itself. I'll try this implication for anus peek.

Hyozen said:

The bulk update request #9777 has been approved by @nonamethanks.

create implication anus_peek -> anus

As above, pussy peek and penis peek already imply pussy and penis, respectively.

Why not add partially_visible_anus too? It's just a different visibility level to anus_peek if we compare the wiki descriptions.

I personally don't see a difference but it doesn't seem to include any tags where the anus itself it not (partially) visible. (Compare and contrast with partially_visible_vulva which is commonly tagged on posts that you wouldn't want to tag pussy on.)

Adding it would only make the problem of having two redundant tags worse, if they're really the same concept. I prefer keeping the *_peek tags because the name is simpler and they cover all the 3 possible scenarios and already have the implication, while partially_* only covers 2 scenarios and we'd need to make the implication for them also.

1