Topic: The numerous (and wacky) erection-related tags

The bulk update request #6478 is pending approval.

Reason: While doing some work to define and clean up the arousal-kink niche, I noticed a few redundant tags popping up under the subject of becoming erect, of which only one or two have been aliased with becoming_erect. Upon further searching, I found that there are in fact many random erection-related tags, and most of them are nearly pointless; just erection with an adjective appended. Erections are surprisingly underserved (heh). I combed through and picked out a couple that seemed the most problematic.
Most of these should speak for themselves, but let me go over some to justify.

• risky_erection looks like it's mostly homoerotic exhibitionism..? I'm not too confident but I think they meant public_erection which has over 800 posts so I'm going with that.
• powerful_erection.. just lol. Redundant erection tag for hyper_penis and similar, safest alias seems like erection.
• unexpected_erection seems close enough to unwanted_erection in usage, and on the same note I'm throwing in surprise_erection, inconvenient_erection, embarrassing erection and inappropriate_erection.
• painful_erection surprisingly doesn't contain visibly painful erections and may as well just be erection if it has no application.

..And some of them are a whole other can of worms I'm not ready to open here, as I'm still sort of a noob and I want to keep this straightforward and agreeable.. but since it's all on-topic I'll mention them for the sake of awareness.
Those include:

• magic_erection, which looks like it has more to do with shoes and underwear..? Used primarily for a hyperspecific kink that I can't name. Could otherwise possibly be aliased with magic_penis.
• involuntary_erection and spontaneous_erection (pretty weak tags) along with empty sudden_erection seem like they should all be aliased to the same thing (not necessarily unwanted_erection?) but I'm not confident on what it would be.
• cum_while_flaccid and ejaculation_without_erection need a single alias, but I'm not aware yet if an existing tag would apply or if they need to merge.
• laying_down_erection probably has a proper name but I can't place it so I'm not touching it.
• multi_erection, double_erection, multi_flaccid, double_flaccid and even erect_and_flaccid, all 2_penises variants that I imagine need better tags.

I hope this seems reasonable and not like an overstep lol. I just want to make tagging for cocks a little less broken.

I doubt double_erection and double_flaccid need their own tags. erect_and_flaccid is certainly a fun one though. It needs a name that makes it clear its for multi_penis and not multiple characters or something.

I don't think risky_erection should necessarily be considered a public_erection. It could refer to genital_danger_play, where the erection risks harm to the penis, or where the penis risks harming something else. Or it could refer to someone risking being caught by someone in either a public or private setting.

I also don't think implied_erection is a good tag, and should be invalidated. Either you see it (directly, or as erection_under_clothing, tenting, penis_outline, etc), or you don't, and if you don't you can't say if there is one or not. If their crotch is well and fully covered, it's just an opinion on whether the character popped one or is managing to keep it down.

catskill said:
I agree they don't need their own tags per-se. And I'm no expert on multi-penis stuff.
But maybe (assuming this doesn't already have a solution in place) double_erection and double_flaccid could be aliased with their multi_* counterparts (and used more often tbh because it is a good TWYS), while also prohibiting getting numbers involved so we don't end up with 1-through-9_erections and flaccids. lol.
erect_and_flaccid could also be a good TWYS once renamed. I encourage multi-penis enthusiasts to figure that one out.

You make two good points and I wholly agree.
Again, risky_erection was hard to place, I'm not familiar with all correct exhibition and danger-related terms. I wouldn't complain about this being fixed in whatever way seems right.

As for implied_erection, I should have given that more thought, because no, it's not TWYS. This brings up an entirely new issue. Therefore, it really should either be invalidated, or aliased (along with possible_erection) to something such as aroused, which is probably what they should have used instead (if they used it "correctly").

I'll revise these once a clear decision can be made.

Thank you both for the feedback. ^^

The implied tags can be useful to determine what's happening on a picture based on contexts (and why implied_transformation has 2 thousands posts), but aliasing this one to aroused would be better, for this tag at least.

catskill said:
In place of possible_erection is implied_erection, which will be invalidated because its usage is inconsistent with much of anything and goes against TWYS.

I checked the tag and that's wrong it is not used inconsistently, every post except one is an innuendo.
post #4217149 post #2872067 post #4332834 post #4475682 post #4288119 post #4503899 (read the text)

The only post that's different is this one:
post #4582668

It probably shouldn't be in there and should be removed before aliasing to aroused.

How does this sound?

Meh.

wolfmanfur said:
I checked the tag and that's wrong it is not used inconsistently, every post except one is an innuendo.

There's a lot more than one that doesn't have innuendo:
post #3598908 post #3662268 post #3679430 post #2457083

Some are even tagged erection:
post #3337874 post #2846756

catskill said:
I started off hoping to salvage it by aliasing to aroused, but after actually looking over the posts, I don't think that would be a good idea as it would result in posts improperly tagging as aroused.
As it stands, implied_erection is used on ~97 posts, sometimes for hiding_erection, aroused, but also visible erections. Sometimes an erection is implied by a joke or visual gag. And in some posts, there's nothing that would clearly imply an erection. It's hard to say how usable this tag really is when it's encouraging people to tag improperly and violate TWYS.
Of course, alternatively, all these posts could just be tagged properly and use of the tag limited manually.

I'll omit implied_erection and let it be a seperate topic because it's derailing the point of this update.

I added laying_down_erection in its place, to be aliased erection.

There is another problem with aliasing tags to invalid_tag more broadly-speaking. Admins encourage to not do that because the invalid_tag tag will be removed from most posts without a second thought. It is better to reserve it for tags which are generic like art or pointless (Most slurs fall under that category and so are aliased to this tag since they serve no other purpose than to spam)

If you find any other tag for erections to add to your bur, please don't ever alias any of them to this tag.

catskill said:
..And some of them are a whole other can of worms I'm not ready to open here, as I'm still sort of a noob and I want to keep this straightforward and agreeable.. but since it's all on-topic I'll mention them for the sake of awareness.
Those include:

• magic_erection, which looks like it has more to do with shoes and underwear..? Used primarily for a hyperspecific kink that I can't name. Could otherwise possibly be aliased with magic_penis.
• involuntary_erection and spontaneous_erection (pretty weak tags) along with empty sudden_erection seem like they should all be aliased to the same thing (not necessarily unwanted_erection?) but I'm not confident on what it would be.
• cum_while_flaccid and ejaculation_without_erection need a single alias, but I'm not aware yet if an existing tag would apply or if they need to merge.
• laying_down_erection probably has a proper name but I can't place it so I'm not touching it.
• multi_erection, double_erection, multi_flaccid, double_flaccid and even erect_and_flaccid, all 2_penises variants that I imagine need better tags.

I hope this seems reasonable and not like an overstep lol. I just want to make tagging for cocks a little less broken.

• magic_erection seems to be for when an erection is forced with magic. It's sorta-kinda the opposite of magical_chastity (but not really, since that tags about orgasms, not erections). I'm not sure aliasing/implicating forced_erection would make sense though, since a character could voluntarily use magic to give themself an erection. It definitely should not be aliased to magic_penis though, as that seems to be for when the penis is made of magic or has a magic aura.

• spontaneous_erection seems to mostly be used for spontaneous_ejaculation, with some unwanted_erection thrown in. Sometimes it's tagged for no reason obvious to me. I think it might make sense to nuke most of it and repopulate it with any animations/comics of characters abruptly going from flaccid to erect.

• +1 for alias ejaculation_without_erection -> cum_while_flaccid

I'm not sure if hidden_erection should be aliased to hiding_erection. The former requires no active intent; it could be hidden via convenient_censorship or something similar. (Though the tagged posts are inconsistent about this.) "Hiding erection" implies, to me, that a character is actively trying to hide it.

Most of these tags don't have wiki pages, either, which could stand to be rectified.

Don't hide alias/implication/BUR suggestion posts. And even more important not to hide actively pending ones! This does not cancel anything but it does make it harder to find relevant discussions and reasons why decisions for these tags have been made that way. It also spams the forum by bumping the threads and just makes a mess.