Implicating erection_under_clothes → bulge
Link to implication

Reason:

If there's a hint of a penis under the clothing, it's a bulge.

Unless it's penis_outline, -1

MyNameIsOver20charac said:
Unless it's penis_outline, -1

penis_outline implies bulge. +1.

EDIT: Maybe not. Is this a "bulge"?

post #1397671

Used to be that bulge was only tagged if penis is not visible, but looking at the posts, either that's changed or it's gotten extremely messy.

Also, the erection_under_clothes wiki might need some work. The clearly hints that way through expressions, dialogue, or gestures-part definitely doesn't count as bulge.

Genjar said:
Used to be that bulge was only tagged if penis is not visible, but looking at the posts, either that's changed or it's gotten extremely messy.

Also, the erection_under_clothes wiki might need some work. The clearly hints that way through expressions, dialogue, or gestures-part definitely doesn't count as bulge.

I feel like that definition is in line with pointing at an apple and saying it's an orange. If there's no actual erection under the clothes visible, should we really be tagging it?

Maxpizzle said:
penis_outline implies bulge. +1.

EDIT: Maybe not. Is this a "bulge"?

post #1397671

Hmm, might need to be a tagging project then, unless there's something else we can move posts like that under.

Furrin_Gok said:
I feel like that definition is in line with pointing at an apple and saying it's an orange. If there's no actual erection under the clothes visible, should we really be tagging it?

Agreed. There doesn't seem to be a good reason here to break the general rule of dialogue not counting.

Furrin_Gok said:
Hmm, might need to be a tagging project then, unless there's something else we can move posts like that under.

In this case it's also penis_in_shirt and erection_under_shirt. But if that post can't count as erection_under_clothes, I don't see the point of the tag.

Maxpizzle said:
Agreed. There doesn't seem to be a good reason here to break the general rule of dialogue not counting.

In this case it's also penis_in_shirt and erection_under_shirt. But if that post can't count as erection_under_clothes, I don't see the point of the tag.

If we go for specifics with the shirt we could also go for that with pants, skirts, and underwear.

DiceLovesBeingBlown aliased erection_under_clothes to erection_under_clothing. No implication to bulge was made, but I haven't received an official reason for that. Is it for the shirt reasoning?

Furrin_Gok said:
DiceLovesBeingBlown aliased erection_under_clothes to erection_under_clothing. No implication to bulge was made, but I haven't received an official reason for that. Is it for the shirt reasoning?

Yeah, thanks to the shirt argument, I'm unsure as to if bulge would apply to it, so I just left it alone for now.

If I change my mind or am swayed by a valid argument for it, I could think about implicating it, but for now I'm hesitant.