Why are stockings aliased!?

When I made ammedments to the Wiki for stockings, thigh highs, pantyhose, corset and bustier's they were all discarded and changed back to their original definitions a few hours later. Obviously a few of you saw the wiki entries I made which were much more detailed that what is currently there.

While stocking and thigh highs are (generally) the same length, and their tops are mid thigh; thigh highs cannot be considered stockings by definition, only by relative placement on the body. A thigh high has an elastic band at the top in which to keep tension around the leg making them self supportive. They are worn without a garter belt or any other garment that has garter straps.

Stockings on the other hand don't have this elastic band, rather a thicker material (than the rest of the stocking) to attach the garter clasp to. Without a garter belt, corset or bustier to attach a garter to the stockings, they will just fall down the leg as they have no means of supporting themselves. Despite their similar appearance, they are two completely different types of hosiery.

I can understand the alias of stockings -> thighhighs from an administrative point of view; distinguishing between the two can be tough if one doesn't know the differences. Conversely as an user it is frustrating that in order to find any images w/stockings the only way is to use the garter_belt tag (which is frequently missed or ignored). For accuracy's sake a thighhigh != stockings, if the alias is removed I wouldn't mind personally going through all the thighhigh tags and correctly labeling them (I have an abundance of free time). Since panties also have subsets: thong, g-string, and bikini; why can't hosiery have the same level of distinction?

Going with what Fencedude said, the way we're using thighhighs right now is as a visual element and indication of length, not a specific unique item. So while some can argue that they're different pieces of garments, the way we've defined thighhighs is not of a specific garment but any piece of clothing that covers the leg from the foot up to the mid-thigh. So I think before we go with arguing this whole tag a is for garment a and not garment b, we should first stop and agree on what the definition of the thighhighs tag is.

NWF_Renim said:
So I think before we go with arguing this whole tag a is for garment a and not garment b, we should first stop and agree on what the definition of the thighhighs tag is.

A thigh high is a single piece of hosiery that covers the feet up to the mid thigh of the leg. They are made of a sheer material (generally nylon) in various colors and thickness. The defining feature of thigh highs is that they are able to stay in place without the use of a garter belt (or any other article of lingerie that has garter straps for that matter) due to a tight band at the top. The band is elastic, but firm enough to secure its position on the legs without the need for added support. Once in place, thigh highs will stay in place, just like normal socks do.

While this band may not be depicted in an image as in post #157019 it is indeed there otherwise they would fall down (just like stockings). post #172402 clearly shows the elastic band atop the thigh high that is used to keep them in place. Without the band (often omitted in artwork) thigh highs would have no way to stay in place and just fall down the legs. Though thigh highs accurately describe their position on the leg, they are a relatively new creation; stockings have been around for well over 100 years which would account for the different naming convention, and the confusion in that stockings and thigh highs are roughly the same length and end at the same spot on the leg, yet they are distinctly difference garments.

I love it when people whose accounts are less than 30 days old argue using dictionary definitions.

So what, if they know what they're talking about? There was a question of "how do you define X?", and those are perfectly acceptable answers. Doesn't mean we need to apply them precisely in tagging, but it's not like people with 30 day old accounts are 30 day old themselves.

It was more an observation than something pertaining to this particular discussion, I don't really care here because I don't see the point in making separate tags so I was staying out of it. I don't really care if they are separated especially if hazuki's going to babysit the tags.

Typically accounts over a month old have figured out that danbooru doesn't give two shits about what the dictionary says.

I think I made this change months ago because garter_belt + thighhighs is usually the same thing.

I can reverse it to the implication. But I share Ruri's concern that few people will appreciate the difference. I'm curious as to where you got your definitions because Wikipedia and various GIS searches give ambiguous answers. Your definitions are basically the inverse of the meanings Danbooru used to use.

Log: Please don't belittle users because of how little they've been using the site, especially when they took the time to write an intelligent and reasoned response.

I feel like thighhighs has way, way too much inertia behind it for us to change the meaning much now, particularly if the distinction is somewhat subtle.

Æh? I've never noticed us use any kind of an opposite definition. Stockings have always been thighhighs intended to be suspended by either garters or garter belt.

I'm pretty ambivalent about this whole issue, but since I've been here I don't remember ever using or seeing used stockings in that manner. If I saw something like that (perhaps prior to reading this), I'd have tagged it thighhighs garters or thighhighs garter_belt.

albert said:
I'm curious as to where you got your definitions because Wikipedia and various GIS searches give ambiguous answers. Your definitions are basically the inverse of the meanings Danbooru used to use.

I wrote the descriptions from my own knowledge, so didn't even bother looking it up anywhere. Through high school and college my best friend was female, she confided with me a lot of things that most men wouldn't hear about. From those experiences I came up with the explanation drawing from conversations with her, and her getting mad for me not noticing (subtle) differences in many things-one of which was differences between stockings and other thighhighs. Stockings are more elegant and erotic, to call a stocking a thighhigh I found was somewhat of an insult.

While the differences in appearance are subtle, in practice they are very different. A thighhigh will stay in place as one walks, moves around and through their daily tasks. Stockings will not stay in place at all without garters, the top is made of the same material as the rest, but isn't elastic so can't stay up on its own.

There's an easy way to differentiate between the two, if there is any kind of strap coming down from under the clothes, they are stockings. Check out post #451786 & post #456823 the garter belt is obscured by the clothing, but you can still see the strap coming out to attach to the top of the stocking. That is a definitive sign that she is wearing stockings and not thighhighs. No one would ever attach a thighhigh to a garter belt because its unnecessary.

Ruri-451 said:
Through high school and college my best friend was female, she confided with me a lot of things that most men wouldn't hear about.

Huh. I assumed you were female yourself by your username. It's not like girls are some mythical animal or something. So having "secret information from the girl dimension", doesn't really add much weight to your argument. Just sayin'.

So? Stockings are still aliased. When will we get them back?

I don't care if stockings are no longer aliased, but they will need to implicate thighhighs. We need to acknowledge that on danbooru we do not use thighhighs to cover the specific object called thighhighs, but instead use it to refer to the length of a variety of different foot/lower leg wear.

If we're to make thighhighs cover a specific object we'll need to un-implicate thigh_boots to thighhighs (which if we're to go into that matter I'd be siding with keeping the implication), and then clean up the whole thighhighs tag which is a lot harder than simply doing a thighhighs boots search since there are so many thigh_boots that people tag simply thighhighs.

葉月 said: So? Stockings are still aliased. When will we get them back?

I didn't really get the sense from reading the thread that there was a consensus to do so. If done, then like NWF says it'd still need to implicate thighhighs.

I scanned through this thread shortly after I joined, while the alias to me is bothersome (the difference between stockings and thighhighs is night and day, while the visual effect on the legs may be the same; they feel drastically different from each other when wearing them) I've found that's its best to present a possible solution rather than just whine about the problem.

Though this topic popped back up before I've been able to complete my idea, it is still feasible. Danbooru could keep the thighhighs<->stockings alias, BUT if the garter_belt tag is applied the stockings tag gets automatically aliased as well. MoeBoard does the same thing, something can be tagged (upon upload) with only stockings, but both stockings and thighhighs will show up in the tag descriptions. Since (the majority at least) of men never have to deal with the these types of hosiery, distinguishing between them can be cumbersome at best.

If you're wearing a garter belt, stockings will be attached to them 99% of the time (attaching them to thighhighs is redundant in which case you might as well put on stockings instead) the garter_belt tag could be aliased to stockings. IMPE stockings are for formal/special occasions since they can be outrageously expensive, require special care; whereas thighhighs are generally for casual wear.

Azalyn said: while the visual effect on the legs may be the same; they feel drastically different from each other when wearing them

Generally in tagging, the former means everything; the latter means nothing.

MoeBoard does the same thing, something can be tagged (upon upload) with only stockings, but both stockings and thighhighs will show up in the tag descriptions.

That's an implication. And yes we would implicate thighhighs from stockings if we unaliased them.