I've seen this said indirectly, but I want to ask before I try to change some poorly set tags, or base other decisions on it. For the following I am talking in absolutes (which I rarely do) so feel free to give me counterpoints and/or criticism.

From what I understand herm, dickgirl, maleherm, and cuntboy are all tagged based on visible or heavily implied genitals (bulge/cameltoe).

Genitals (and sexual acts) should always be tagged rating:explicit.

Therefore the following are always true:

• There is no case where it is acceptable for herm, dickgirl, maleherm, or cuntboy to be tagged rating:safe
• There is no case where it is acceptable for penis or pussy to be tagged rating:safe (they should always be rating:explicit)
• There is no case where it is acceptable for bulge or cameltoe to be tagged rating:safe (they should all be rating:questionable or rating:explicit)

I think I would agree with all of this, yes.

Second.

I agree enough that I think this deserves to end up on the wiki under 'rating'

Definitely, and same goes for other explicit tags such as cum: those should never be on safe posts.

I wonder if it'd be possible to somehow tie the tags to the rating? For instance, if the post has penis tag and someone tries to switch the rating to safe, they'd get an error message instead of being able to change it...

I second t- er, fifth the motion. And Genjar's idea would be sweet, seems like this could be easily automated if there was an easy way to implament it.

Images with a crotch bulge are often rated safe, though...

Durandal said:
Images with a crotch bulge are often rated safe, though...

IIRC, that thread ended with defined bulges needing to be rated questionable. If a character that "looks like a boy" has a bulge defined enough to make it clear that they have a vagina or a character that "looks like a female" has a bulge defined enough to make it clear that they have a penis, then the picture should at least have a questionable tag.

An undefined bulge or lack thereof is not evidence of existence or absence.

Durandal said:
Images with a crotch bulge are often rated safe, though...]

And images with a bulge rated questionable have sometime the penis tag, I've seen some of those but I don't have an example ready...

Yyunko said:
And images with a bulge rated questionable have sometime the penis tag, I've seen some of those but I don't have an example ready...

Here they are:

https://e621.net/post/index/1/rating:q%20bulge%20penis

DragonFox69 said:
Here they are:

https://e621.net/post/index/1/rating:q%20bulge%20penis[/quote]

Thank you, its a bit off topic, but I think we aren't supposed to tag penis if we don't see one.

Yyunko said:
Thank you, its a bit off topic, but I think we aren't supposed to tag penis if we don't see one.

You aren't supposed to tag anything you don't see.

The only exceptions (semantically) I can think of are comic and artist names (which aren't always labeled) and certain misc. tags (bigger_version_at_the_source and avoid_posting).

DragonFox69 said:
https://e621.net/post/index/1/rating:q%20bulge%20penis

Yep, those need fixin'.
Most should be tagged as bulge instead of penis, and unless I'm mistaken, posts such as:
post #547568
...should be tagged as tenting. (Or did we come up with a better tag for that?)