I mean, is it absolutely necessary to require people to use different tags if it's pants, shorts, overalls, swim trunks or any other male bottomwear? Since pants is rarely a tag whose absence will seriously be missed, it seems like we can easily do with a single tag to cover all of

post #689671 post #707160 post #705154 post #209521 post #587334

rather than clinging to a so-called "convenient" implication, which is not at all convenient since people are using pants_down regardless of whether the garments involved are in fact pants (or even in some case regardless of whether they have two legholes: see post #25512), and in the process causing the tag to pop up where it shouldn't.

I think people may be using it as (under)pants_down as well. These tags are kind of all over the place; it might be cleaner if we could condense some or all of them into a single more generic tag that is less likely to break implications (something like bottomwear_down) but we would have to balance convenience over specificity (panties_down, underwear_down, etc.).

Either way, +1 to unimplicating it.

This has been a tagging annoyance to me for so long, yet I haven't brought it up for some reason.

+1000, totally unnecessary implication.

parasprite said:
I think people may be using it as (under)pants_down as well. These tags are kind of all over the place; it might be cleaner if we could condense some or all of them into a single more generic tag that is less likely to break implications (something like bottomwear_down) but we would have to balance convenience over specificity (panties_down, underwear_down, etc.).

Either way, +1 to unimplicating it.

I'm fine with separate tags for panties_down and underwear_down (mostly fine: I could happily see those two merge TBH), it's just that "two-legged bottomwear other than underwear" is too broad a category to make for a convenient split into more specific cases. The best exampl? Speedos are neither underwear nor pants and throw even pants_pull/underwear_pull seriously out of whack!

All sort of tags involving interaction with clothes have similar issues because implications often require things to get increasingly specific (see also post #166380 and post #166381).

Oh yeah, there's a host of clutter concerning other forms of bottomwear. I believe we have seperate (though most are underused) tags for underwear_down, shorts_down, panties_down, bikini_down, swimsuit_down, you name it. It's just so overly specific and makes searching too complex.

Personally, I'd just alias all of them to bottomwear_down and be done with it. Bottomwear_down + panties/shorts/pants/bikini/swimsuit/etc should work fine enough as a search term. While it can potentially mean you get a too broad result, where for example you're looking for someone pulling down their bikini, and there's a guy with his pants down along someone just wearing a bikini; let's be honest, how often is that going to happen?

Perhaps we could allow for one distinction between forms of underwear (probably including bikinis) and forms of stuff you usually wear above underwear. So you'd have a bunch of tags aliased to bottomwear_down (or another more appropriate name I might be unaware of) and a few to underwear_down. Though I do suppose it sounds a bit wrong to call a bikini or swimming speedo underwear...

Deleted implication