The tag implication #50483 foot_fetish -> feet has been approved.

Reason: Foot fetishism is a sexual fetishism for the feet and their participation in suggestive, risque, and/or sexual perspectives/acts.

What if someone is just talking about a foot fetish.. although I'm not sure how many people would be tagging foot_fetish in that situation

baxter_semen said:
What if someone is just talking about a foot fetish.. although I'm not sure how many people would be tagging foot_fetish in that situation

I think that would be a "in-picture text contradicts what is visually happening" situation, so the text shouldn't be taken into account for tagging in this case.

baxter_semen said:
What if someone is just talking about a foot fetish.. although I'm not sure how many people would be tagging foot_fetish in that situation

contents of dialogue should only ever be taken into account for dialogue-based general tags (stuff like: good_girl, profanity, mommy_kink, etc.), visual-based general tags like this are always only tagged based on the contents of the image and dialogue is ignored.

darryus said:
contents of dialogue should only ever be taken into account for dialogue-based general tags (stuff like: good_girl, profanity, mommy_kink, etc.), visual-based general tags like this are always only tagged based on the contents of the image and dialogue is ignored.

Reading the wiki page for foot_fetish, it does kinda seem to suggest that this tag does take into account dialogue and it doesn't really explicitly state that feet have to be present in the post. This post: post #3554353 would be mistagged if this implication went through so I think what needs to be decided is whether or not there need to be feet in a post for foot_fetish to apply, and if the answer is yes the wiki probably needs to be changed to more clearly reflect this.

Suprised that it wasn't already implied.