Implicating featureless_breasts → breasts
Link to implication

Reason:

featureless breasts are just breasts with no nipples, hence, they should imply breasts.

-1

Methinks this invalidates the purpose of the tag.
featureless_breasts posts tend to get a lot of rating:s, whereas breasts implies a type of nudity that tends to get rating:q(+).

Similarly, the cleavage tag is does not have breasts implied to it, as clothed is mandatory, and should not necessarily be used in conjunction with the breasts tag (although many do tag both).

Sharp_Coyote said:
-1

Methinks this invalidates the purpose of the tag.
featureless_breasts posts tend to get a lot of rating:s, whereas breasts implies a type of nudity that tends to get rating:q(+).

Similarly, the cleavage tag is does not have breasts implied to it, as clothed is mandatory, and should not necessarily be used in conjunction with the breasts tag (although many do tag both).

Uh... what? I tag breasts regardless of if they're clothed or not, because you see breasts through clothing. Breasts = big lumps on a female's chest. Just like you can still see abs and pecs through clothing, and tag them as such because it's TWYS. (You don't always see cleavage when there is a clothed female with breasts.)

And you see breasts despite them being clothed or not. They don't imply questionable ratings at all. In fact, if anything, nipples are what constitute a questionable viewing of breasts.

Also, plenty of the featureless_breasts posts are rating:q regardless.
post #673803 post #673807 post #668721

We don't have a breasts equivelent for bulge, so tagging them with breasts is fine. The implication should also be fine based on this, so +1 from me.

Sharp_Coyote said:

Similarly, the cleavage tag is does not have breasts implied to it, as clothed is mandatory, and should not necessarily be used in conjunction with the breasts tag (although many do tag both).

cleavage should probably imply breasts too based on how the tag is used, but it was never made (see forum #16570 forum #130214).

I went ahead and made a placeholder for this one.

-1

+1, breasts are breasts even if they lack nipples.

Kida said:
Uh... what? I tag breasts regardless of if they're clothed or not, because you see breasts through clothing. Breasts = big lumps on a female's chest. Just like you can still see abs and pecs through clothing, and tag them as such because it's TWYS. (You don't always see cleavage when there is a clothed female with breasts.)

This is reversed from what I was saying: you do not always see cleavage when there is a clothed female, but they way the system is built, you do see clothed when there is cleavage. clothed is implied to the cleavage tag intentionally, and while it may not work in every case, I understand why the powers that be have done it.

post #563888

While this character is nude, I would tag her with cleavage and covering_self, and be left to grind my teeth about the clothed alias.

Kida said:
... you see breasts despite them being clothed or not. They don't imply questionable ratings at all. In fact, if anything, nipples are what constitute a questionable viewing of breasts.

Also, plenty of the featureless_breasts posts are rating:q regardless.
post #673803 post #673807 post #668721

I'd say those examples should probably be rated :s

This was not my point, however. Tagging breasts, be they featureless, the character nude, or the character clothed has always been a bit touchy, and I think so far it has come down to the search function:

If a person were to search breasts, the assumption is that they are looking for bare breasts, and searching cleavage would involve some form of clothing.

I am paraphrasing something that was covered by an admin, albeit 2 years ago in forum #62328:

ippiki_ookami said:
People who search breasts typically don't want to see featureless lumps, so I only use the tag when they're exposed, nipples and all. Tagging breasts when only cleavage is showing is like tagging penis just because you see a bulge. Same goes for when they're fully clothed, in which case breasts should absolutely not be tagged.

From what I remember, Ippiki got outvoted on that since the other admins agreed that trying to keep it tagged that way would be a tagging nightmare. If users see breasts, they tag breasts.

As for the examples, those are clearly sexual and therefore questionable. Except maybe the middle one.

Genjar said:
From what I remember, Ippiki got outvoted on that since the other admins agreed that trying to keep it tagged that way would be a tagging nightmare. If users see breasts, they tag breasts.

I have no problem with a person tagging featureless_breasts and breasts together; I do not do so, yet I can understand why another would. My downvote was for implying them together, making it mandatory. I agree with Ippiki on this one, and would not want to see 'featureless lumps' when utilizing the search function. Simply means I might need to be more specific in my search parameters.

+1

Sharp_Coyote said:
I have no problem with a person tagging featureless_breasts and breasts together; I do not do so, yet I can understand why another would. My downvote was for implying them together, making it mandatory. I agree with Ippiki on this one, and would not want to see 'featureless lumps' when utilizing the search function. Simply means I might need to be more specific in my search parameters.

With most posts tagged as featureless_breasts, 4/5 pages with such results are already tagged with breasts, which means there is roughly an 80% probability rate of a post tagged with featureless_breasts to already have breasts tagged.

To filter them out, a search like breasts -featureless_breasts would work just fine.

I do see your point, however. Most people would be specifically looking for breasts with nipples during a search. Maybe it's just out of preference or my need for consistency, but I think it would still make a lot more sense to implicate this tag as they are still breasts regardless of whether they have features or not (It's even a part of the tag's name, so you'd think it would already be implied). They're still breasts.

rating:s breasts (~17000 posts)

Approved

Edit:

• Implication: cleavage -> breasts (approved)