Alias intravaginal_futanari -> futa_without_balls

BUR #56632 has been rejected.

create alias intravaginal_futanari -> futa_without_balls

Can be hard to tell if penis actually begins inside vagina, includes slightly more in cases were vagina is not the origina of the penis, and futa_without_balls is slightly more intuitive to search.

post #5005321
futa_without_pussy no_testicles

post #4932323
intravaginal_futanari testicles

post #10631785
no_testicles pussy (not intravaginal)

てはいさ said in forum #424917:

post #5005321
futa_without_pussy no_testicles

post #4932323
intravaginal_futanari testicles

post #10631785
no_testicles pussy (not intravaginal)

The tag definition for intravaginal_futanari specifically calls out having no testicles as a requirement. I would ask that it be updated to remove that statement if it has approved exceptions like post #4932323.

I believe many posts marked intravaginal are similar to post #10631785 which is itself marked intravaginal. This is why I believe originating from the pussy is too vague for the tag.

Also thank you for commenting, it's nicer when someone says why they disagree rather than just disagreeing .

In fact, quite a few posts show the penis in place of the clitoris, or right next to it. I thought this tag was meant for posts where the penis is sticking out of the vaginal opening, but there are plenty of posts with this tag where that's not the case. I'm not sure anymore.

The bulk update request #56632 (forum #424914) has been rejected by @nonamethanks.

Changed the wiki.

nonamethanks said in forum #424966:

Changed the wiki.

Perhaps it would also be useful to clarify whether this refers to the vaginal opening or any part of the female genitalia.

I see this tag has been created?

futa without balls

BUR #56735 has been approved by @nonamethanks.

create implication futa_without_balls -> no_testicles
create implication futa_without_balls -> futanari

The current wiki says that:

A futanari character without balls, intravaginal or otherwise. Often accompanied by no_testicles and pussy.

But I think it should probably be required. I can't imagine how someone can have testicles and not have them at the same time.

I wanted to object to its existence, but thinking about it, I'm not so sure that the reason we don't have it holds true anymore.
it might have been true 20 years ago that futas without ball were the normality, but nowadays I think they might actually be the exception.

In before we create traditional_futanari for testicle-less futas.

The bulk update request #56735 (forum #425325) has been approved by @nonamethanks.

nonamethanks said in forum #425508:

I wanted to object to its existence, but thinking about it, I'm not so sure that the reason we don't have it holds true anymore.
it might have been true 20 years ago that futas without ball were the normality, but nowadays I think they might actually be the exception.

Sadly it became rare...I mean I can count active artists who releases doujin or takobon regular with only one hand...

I understand the taste change too (and people less commission it too)... but I remember few years ago how people on x or pixiv... whenever someone posted without balls, the first ten comments where like "it's good but with balls would be better" or something similar...and some artists got it on every post... and some gave up and started to draw with balls because they got annoyed that there wasn't many positive comments! So there was a campaign against the traditional futanaris!