Aliasing muscular_female → muscles
Link to alias

Reason:

see: muscular_intersex

Disagree strongly.

Reason for disagreeing?

Wyvrn said:
Disagree strongly.

Explain how muscular_female is notably different from muscular_intersex which was removed as a tag.

The only thing I can think of is that muscular females are uncommon and it's probably very hard to find them if aliased if the male in the picture has muscles as well.

Not my opinion but a point to consider

I'll quote SnowWolf again on this.

SnowWolf said:
I think we should keep this tag... because some gender-specific tags are needed (female_ejaculation, female_domination, male_pregnancy etc) in cases where alternate searches would not produce the same results without a large number of false results.

The muscular tag almost always refers to a muscular male. Muscular females are much more rare, yet they are a a fetish a lot of people have. Just like with male_pregnancy, gender specific tags should be allowed when one gender usually dominates a category and searching for the other gender would be too difficult without a gender specific tag.

I don't think muscular_intersex should have been removed either.

Rainbow_Dash said:
The only thing I can think of is that muscular females are uncommon and it's probably very hard to find them if aliased if the male in the picture has muscles as well.

Not my opinion but a point to consider

Same would be true of muscular_intersex.

Wyvrn said:
I'll quote SnowWolf again on this.
The muscular tag almost always refers to a muscular male. Muscular females are much more rare, yet they are a a fetish a lot of people have. Just like with male_pregnancy, gender specific tags should be allowed when one gender usually dominates a category and searching for the other gender would be too difficult without a gender specific tag.

I don't think muscular_intersex should have been removed either.

But it was removed.
Either we keep both because they're acceptable tags, or both should be removed for being bad tags.
They're basically identical tags, just a different gender.

I agree Halite, muscular_intersex should be treated the same as muscular_female. Unfortunately it seems muscular_intersex was removed even though there was no consensus reached or admin input on its discussion thread. Here is as good a place to continue the discussion as any.

I can agree to delete that alias and put it back in service, all in favor?

Rainbow_Dash said:
I can agree to delete that alias and put it back in service, all in favor?

I wouldn't complain, and if that's the way to go, then locking this and deleting it too would be good.

Rainbow_Dash said:
I can agree to delete that alias and put it back in service, all in favor?

Agreed.

Will do in a few hours, want to let everyone have a chance to weigh in

Let's let 123easy weigh in first. I know he hates gender specific tags.

Out of curiosity, when you undo an alias like that, do you have any way of undoing the effects too, putting the tag back on all the (800+ in this case) images it was removed from?

Wyvrn said:
Let's let 123easy weigh in first. I know he hates gender specific tags.

Out of curiosity, when you undo an alias like that, do you have any way of undoing the effects too, putting the tag back on all the (800+ in this case) images it was removed from?

unfortunately not, but I could get real creative with some tags scripting and maybe do it, and if I know who aliased it, I could revert that chunk of the tag edits

Wyvrn said:
Let's let 123easy weigh in first. I know he hates gender specific tags.

Out of curiosity, when you undo an alias like that, do you have any way of undoing the effects too, putting the tag back on all the (800+ in this case) images it was removed from?

Am I that predictable? Well, I'd be the lone dissenter in this discussion, so does it even matter? I'm surprised that intersex was aliased away though, as to my knowledge it wasn't agreed upon?

123easy said:
Am I that predictable? ...

Sometimes.

123easy said:
Am I that predictable? Well, I'd be the lone dissenter in this discussion, so does it even matter? I'm surprised that intersex was aliased away though, as to my knowledge it wasn't agreed upon?

Even unfavorable opinions carry weight in discussions I read and I always consider them as I do with favorable ones.

Now the reason I think we need it is that there i s literally no other way to find females that are muscular when most of the time muscular would be referring to the male in the picture, and females with muscles is a big turn on for some

Rainbow_Dash said:
Even unfavorable opinions carry weight in discussions I read and I always consider them as I do with favorable ones.

Now the reason I think we need it is that there i s literally no other way to find females that are muscular when most of the time muscular would be referring to the male in the picture, and females with muscles is a big turn on for some

Reasonable... reason. >_> *cough*

However, we've always gone away from allowing tagging of individual characters in an image; is this a desired trend to reverse, so that we can tag "rabbit boy" and "fox girl" and the like, eventually? I ask this because I normally argue from the stance that has been taken throughout the years by administration and people both to create the tagging rules as we have them, for the most part, now. If this is a desired change, it would honestly be one that I would support going forward.

123easy said:
Reasonable... reason. >_> *cough*

However, we've always gone away from allowing tagging of individual characters in an image; is this a desired trend to reverse, so that we can tag "rabbit boy" and "fox girl" and the like, eventually? I ask this because I normally argue from the stance that has been taken throughout the years by administration and people both to create the tagging rules as we have them, for the most part, now. If this is a desired change, it would honestly be one that I would support going forward.

Honestly at some point we might head in that direction as our site gets bigger and we have a better way of tagging in groups, but at this current time we are only going to tag gender based tags that are absolutely essential

I have always asked since coming onboard why we can't just put aesthetics aside and tag gender and species together, and have always been told it's just the way we do things. I will definitely be looking into ways to do this without bloating the system though, but I am definitely speaking for myself here and not e621 or the administration

Rainbow_Dash said:
Honestly at some point we might head in that direction as our site gets bigger and we have a better way of tagging in groups, but at this current time we are only going to tag gender based tags that are absolutely essential

I have always asked since coming onboard why we can't just put aesthetics aside and tag gender and species together, and have always been told it's just the way we do things. I will definitely be looking into ways to do this without bloating the system though, but I am definitely speaking for myself here and not e621 or the administration

This is actually something I would like Varka and Dave to weigh in on, if they don't mind; could you ask them to, if they're willing? Yes tag bloat does need to be taken into account, but the accuracy of being able to tag a male rabbit or a female fox or whatnot in an image with a number of different characters would be a very positive change for the search system, in my opinion.

Rainbow_Dash said:
Now the reason I think we need it is that there i s literally no other way to find females that are muscular when most of the time muscular would be referring to the male in the picture, and females with muscles is a big turn on for some

Yep. And the same can be said about muscular_intersex. Considering how often it was tagged, it must've been a somewhat common kink. I think it should be restored.

(At least searching for 'solo muscles intersex' will locate good chunk of them for retagging...)

As for tag bloat: my opinion is that it's better to err on the side of having too specific tags instead too vague ones.

Genjar said:
Yep. And the same can be said about muscular_intersex. Considering how often it was tagged, it must've been a somewhat common kink. I think it should be restored.

(At least searching for 'solo muscles intersex' will locate good chunk of them for retagging...)

As for tag bloat: my opinion is that it's better to err on the side of having too specific tags instead too vague ones.

Anyone opposed to having it dealiased then?