The tag implication #31757 wearing_diaper -> diaper has been approved.

Reason: Can't be visibly wearing a diaper without a diaper being visible

EDIT: The tag implication wearing_diaper -> diaper (forum #287116) has been approved by @bitWolfy.

The bulk update request #2045 is active.

create alias diapered (0) -> wearing_diaper (17252)
create implication wearing_diaper (17252) -> clothed (1145006)

Reason: Diapered is synonymous with wearing_diaper.
Also, if a character is wearing a diaper, they must be clothed.

EDIT: The bulk update request #2045 (forum #327757) has been approved by @bitWolfy.

Apparently I voted this up before but I'm not completely sure about this, why do we distinguish this for diapers but not anything like wearing_shirt or wearing_pants?

faucet said:
...why do we distinguish this for diapers but not anything like wearing_shirt or wearing_pants?

Wearing a diaper is more fetish-ish then a diaper in the background. And if someone wants to see a character wearing a diaper, why shouldn't we have this tag for it?

What Dubs said is correct I think, though I do wonder what purpose there is in tagging clothing that isn’t being worn. Presumably, anyone searching for pants wants to see characters wearing pants, not pants lying on the floor in the background. I don’t suppose we’ll ever get anyone to stick to that, though.

At any rate, there does seem to be a fetish specifically for characters wearing diapers, while I don’t think there’s a fetish for characters wearing pants or shirts, so having wearing_* tags for those probably wouldn’t be as useful.

Isn't it possible to be visibly wearing a diaper without the diaper itself visible? Such as when they're wearing pants or overalls that outline the diaper, like in post #3239903.

watsit said:
Isn't it possible to be visibly wearing a diaper without the diaper itself visible? Such as when they're wearing pants or overalls that outline the diaper, like in post #3239903.

There's diaper_under_clothing which seems to be for cases like that... yet it implies diaper for some reason anyway.

Maybe another exception for blacklisting reasons?

faucet said:
There's diaper_under_clothing which seems to be for cases like that...

According to Dubs, "Wearing a diaper is more fetish-ish then a diaper in the background", so if the point of the wearing_diaper tag is because wearing a diaper is enough of its own fetish separate from diapers themselves, splitting it between multiple tags would be counter-productive.

As a comparison, erection ("wearing diaper") doesn't imply penis ("diaper"), because the penis doesn't have to be visible for an erection to be apparent. erection_under_clothing ("diaper under clothing") implies erection ("wearing diaper"), because the latter is always the case with the former, but penis ("diaper") isn't tagged with them if it's not directly visible. There is penis_outline for when the shape of a penis is visible under clothing (due to an erection or tight clothing), which is kept separate from penis itself. Perhaps there should be something like diaper_outline for the outline of a diaper under clothing, rather than tagging diaper when it's not visible.

The bulk update request #2045 (forum #327757) has been approved by @bitWolfy.

The tag implication wearing_diaper -> diaper (forum #287116) has been approved by @bitWolfy.