Question about spread legs

Has there been any discussion about making some kind of m_legs or m-shaped_legs tags before? I'm referring to the Pixiv equivalent of M字開脚 which is currently linked to the spread legs wiki. M legs (or M-shaped legs) would refer to spread legs where the knees are bent so that the shape of the legs resembles an M (post #3753487, post #3758199). Of course there would have to be guidelines since things like cropping and image perspective would affect how the legs are shown.

I had been considering suggesting a v_legs/v-shaped_legs tag (V字開脚), but it looks like folded (and by extension piledriver) covers that already. It would have referred to such an extreme fold of the person's body that the legs would look like a V (post #3713837, post #1308676), but with those existing tags, I felt it would be redundant to describe the shape of the legs as well.

I'm just wondering since there are letters associated with other body parts like V arms, X arms, W arms, X fingers and V (peace sign). V-shaped legs are dubious to me, but I think M-shaped legs has some validity since spread legs has so many posts. What do you guys think?

Seems fine to me. Go ahead and make it. I wouldn't be opposed to v-shaped_legs either. In Pixiv's V字開脚 tag the legs are straight out, while in folded they're usually bent.

I'll start with m_legs and v_legs for now, and if the *-shaped tags are preferred, I can always change it. It's just a little confusing since *-shaped tags tend to be the standard for describing a particular shape (like with symbol pupils or hair ornaments), yet letters used to describe body parts are often the exception.

Just not sure if M legs would apply to squatting, or if it would just be for when someone is lying on their back or sitting like the spread legs wiki suggests.

So what exactly is the difference between v legs and folded? The wiki doesn't make it clear and v legs is already being used on images like post #3266696 and post #2367438 where the legs do not look like a v and which are a long way from what is described in the original post.

skylightcrystal said:

So what exactly is the difference between v legs and folded? The wiki doesn't make it clear and v legs is already being used on images like post #3266696 and post #2367438 where the legs do not look like a v and which are a long way from what is described in the original post.

This is why I was dubious about making the V legs tag in the first place, but I've been going by how extremely far back the legs are bent over the upper body so that it makes a distinct V shape. Folded is a more general term for the person's posture and doesn't describe how far back the legs actually are. Granted, I'll have to clean up some of the posts I added to V_legs since it's a brand new tag and is rather ambiguous at the moment. M legs are easier to distinguish since it's more comfortable for a person to bend their lower legs in that position. Sometimes the legs are bent in such a way that you can't attribute either of these tags to them though, like post #1917261 or post #2240452 (NSFW).

Speaking of which, I also created the wide spread legs tag to account for poses like post #246211 (NSFW) or post #1559001. They didn't fit the criteria for M legs, and I didn't see a tag for legs that are that spread out wide. Again, it might be as ambiguous as V legs, but I think there is a visible degree between regular spread legs and those that are spread out wide.

And what's the difference between wide spread legs and just plain spread legs, which are for when the legs are spread wide apart?

And if v legs is to exist as a tag it should really only be for images where the whole of the character's legs would (or would as far as can be seen - which should probably necessitate going to at least the knee on at least one leg) actually resemble a v shape if looked at from above (assuming the character is on their back which they are in most cases. Stuff like post #3278259 or the post #1308676 mentioned in the initial post of this thread. Stuff like post #3252046 might be okay as well. These are only a small minority of the images that the tag has been added to.

(note: all posts linked are NSFW)

skylightcrystal said:

And if v legs is to exist as a tag it should really only be for images where the whole of the character's legs would (or would as far as can be seen - which should probably necessitate going to at least the knee on at least one leg) actually resemble a v shape if looked at from above (assuming the character is on their back which they are in most cases.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking too. Things like post #3688670, post #3031048, or post #1415132, where the legs are pointed straight out in a literal V-shape. I wouldn't use it when the knees are bent more than a very small amount.

Likewise, I think m legs should be for when the legs look like a literal M-shape. Feet around butt level, knees around chest level, and legs spread to the sides such that if you traced them you would get something close to the letter M.

I've edited the wiki from:

A subset of spread legs where the legs are bent backwards so much that they form a V shape over the upper torso. This can be seen when a character is on their back or when jumping and kicking both of their legs up for a split second.

The knees can be partially folded, but not so much as in M legs.

to:

A subset of spread legs where both legs are bent so as to form a V shape over the upper torso. This is most common when a character is on their back or when jumping and kicking both of their legs up for a split second.

Note that the knees should be either minimally bent or not at all, so that the full length of the leg forms a V shape, not just the lower legs.

This tag should not be used for when the character is standing - in this instance use legs apart instead.

If there are no objections to this change (and noone does so before I get around to it) then I will remove the images that this does not apply to at some point over the next few days.

skylightcrystal said:

I've edited the wiki from:

to:

If there are no objections to this change (and noone does so before I get around to it) then I will remove the images that this does not apply to at some point over the next few days.

Sorry for my late reply, I was busy yesterday.

Yes, those changes are perfect. Thanks for taking care of that, and my apologies for adding images that didn't apply.

skylightcrystal said:

And what's the difference between wide spread legs and just plain spread legs, which are for when the legs are spread wide apart?

I was going by the extreme degree that the legs were spread apart, to the point that the upper legs appeared horizontal. Of course, if wide spread legs is too ambiguous, then I can always nuke it. I made it due to noticing a trend with the degree of how spread out the legs were while populating m legs and v legs.

EDIT: And now I have a question of my own concerning m legs. Would it could if the lower legs are pointing toward the viewer, like in post #2808578 or post #3545446 (NSFW)?

Benit149 said:

EDIT: And now I have a question of my own concerning m legs. Would it could if the lower legs are pointing toward the viewer, like in post #2808578 or post #3545446 (NSFW)?

The first shouldn't be - the legs shouldn't be touching. The second... I would lean towards no as well but not bothered about the fact that you've added the tag to it. In general, though, I don't see any reason why an image shouldn't have one of the legs directly towards the user, and/or both legs generally in the user's direction (but not pointing directly at them). Something like post #1021735 having the tag is absolutely fine by me.

I've done some tag gardening to remove m legs from cases where:
- The character is just sitting normally with their legs apart (eg. post #2887051 and all relatives)
- The two legs are together at any point (eg. post #1960261)
- The feet are together or almost together (mostly footjob pictures like post #1920534)
- The lower legs bend straight under the upper legs in a fairly typical squatting posture (eg. post #3402263)
- Where the legs are going outwards, and not or not notably up (eg. post #3580279)
(plus a handful of other odd cases like the legs being at completely different angles, etc.)

As none of these are m legs. Far lower proportion wanted removing than from v legs, though.

I didn't touch stuff I have blacklisted this time (unlike with v legs) so there are likely to be some left beyond the level of things I just didn't spot.

All linked posts nsfw.

edit: also added wariza to the list of things not to use the tag on. There weren't any added yet but it's only a matter of time...

skylightcrystal said:

I've done some tag gardening to remove m legs from cases where:
- The character is just sitting normally with their legs apart (eg. post #2887051 and all relatives)
- The two legs are together at any point (eg. post #1960261)
- The feet are together or almost together (mostly footjob pictures like post #1920534)
- The lower legs bend straight under the upper legs in a fairly typical squatting posture (eg. post #3402263)
- Where the legs are going outwards, and not or not notably up (eg. post #3580279)
(plus a handful of other odd cases like the legs being at completely different angles, etc.)

As none of these are m legs. Far lower proportion wanted removing than from v legs, though.

I didn't touch stuff I have blacklisted this time (unlike with v legs) so there are likely to be some left beyond the level of things I just didn't spot.

All linked posts nsfw.

edit: also added wariza to the list of things not to use the tag on. There weren't any added yet but it's only a matter of time...

It’s tough to populate a new tag when the guidelines aren’t fully established yet, so thanks for reviewing what I’ve done so far. And I have purposely stayed away from wariza for that purpose, though it was a harder call with footjob since M-shaped legs are also possible there.

Would just plain squatting be acceptable though, or would that create too much tag noise?

Only a small proportion of squatting posts are actual M legs - from what I looked at, if you're tagging even a tenth of the posts with the squatting tag with M legs you're probably heavily overusing the latter (the outer edge of the knees and inner edge of the feet should both really be further apart than the outer edges of the butt, and the feet should be no closer together than the knees). As such I'd say it's fine to tag them where they definitely are.

And I don't think that a footjob m_legs combination is actually possible unless only one foot is being used to give the footjob.

skylightcrystal said:

Only a small proportion of squatting posts are actual M legs - from what I looked at, if you're tagging even a tenth of the posts with the squatting tag with M legs you're probably heavily overusing the latter (the outer edge of the knees and inner edge of the feet should both really be further apart than the outer edges of the butt, and the feet should be no closer together than the knees). As such I'd say it's fine to tag them where they definitely are.

And I don't think that a footjob m_legs combination is actually possible unless only one foot is being used to give the footjob.

I’ll be sure to scrutinize them carefully when I get around to it. In real life, it would be difficult to shape one’s legs into an M shape while squatting since the legs need to keep the heavier waist/butt area balanced. Therefore, there probably won’t be many posts that fit the criteria.

EDIT: Tackling missionary -m_legs -v_legs to find missionary posts with v legs. Came across some odd instances where I wasn't sure about adding the tag, so I didn't. Please look them over and see what you think.

post #660955 (pretzel pose)
post #1230710, post #1598712, post #1592782, post #1857177 (both legs slightly bent)
post #1226193 (one leg slightly bent)

I think it would help if we discerned how far the lower legs are allowed to be bent to gauge whether or not it counts.

EDIT #2: Pausing the missionary search for now, and went through footjob to find m legs. Along the way, I realized that two-footed footjob was sorely underpopulated, so I will take care of that.

post #1226193, post #1230710 and post #1857177 are too bent IMO. The other two are close to borderline.

As for pretzel pose pics... my instinct would be to leave the tag out as the legs/feet tend to come back together again at the top, which isn't really what you want. I'm willing to concede for relatively moderate cases if someone thinks otherwise, though.

Shouldn't wide spread legs imply spread legs? It currently doesn't.

And maybe jack-o' challenge should imply both.

BUR #12645 has been approved by @nonamethanks.

create implication wide_spread_legs -> spread_legs

I agree with meatwagon on this

Caenbet said:

BUR #12645 has been approved by @nonamethanks.

create implication wide_spread_legs -> spread_legs

The second line is redundant because that implication already results from the other two.

Caenbet said:

BUR #12645 has been approved by @nonamethanks.

create implication wide_spread_legs -> spread_legs

I agree with meatwagon on this

post #5267682 has no spread legs despite being a jack-o' challenge.

The bulk update request #12645 (forum #223341) has been approved by @nonamethanks.