Do we need both Chest + Pectorals as tags?

The tags

Chest tag:
Chest refers to the (often exposed) anatomical region below the neck to the abdomen of males.

Pectorals tag:
Pictures that prominently show or emphasize the upper chest muscles of a male.
Use the tag in the same way you'd tag cleavage if seen with cleavage-revealing clothing.
Please use breasts or any of its variants when referring to females.

Discussion

Both of these tags refer to mostly the same thing and have wikis that are vague.

I would like to discuss if both of these tags are necessary to exist at the same time and whether or not they could be renamed and updated to be clearer.

In topic #17323 we briefly discussed this and @blindVigil summarized it in forum #172294:

At least as far as their current use goes, the two are nearly redundant.

If chest is meant to be the male counterpart to breasts, then just like breasts it should be for any visibly distinct male chest, whether clothed or not. This means all posts tagged with pectorals should also be tagged chest. Chest is also vague as a name, men and women both have chests. Using the term exclusively for males is silly, even if it hasn't caused any problems yet.

Pectorals under its current usage is completely redundant. There's no need for a tag specifically for shirtless males, because shirtless already exists for that exact purpose. It's not needed for muscular males either because muscle already exists.

Suggestion:

I suggest chest be replaced by pectorals, to make it more readily apparent as the male counterpart to breasts, and pectoral focus should be made as a proper counterpart to breast focus, since that's what pectorals was seemingly intended for to begin with.

I agree with the suggestion personally, but I wanted to open a discussion about it to discuss it properly with everyone so we can go through with the updates.
I would assume pectoral_focus would be used with tags such as pectoral_docking and pectoral_grab. In that case, should we implicate pectorals and pectoral_focus to all variations of those tags?

Summary:

• Rename chest into pectorals.
• Rename pectorals into Pectoral_focus (with updated wiki)
• Implicate pectorals + Pectorals_focus to tags such as Pectoral_docking, pectoral_grab etc...

My thoughts on the renames are already present, so I'll cover follow-up implications if the renames go through:

• Pectoral focus should implicate pectorals

• I don't know if pectoral docking should implicate pectorals. Symmetrical docking, asymmetrical docking, and breast press don't implicate breasts. I assume one reason is that symmetrical docking could be two flat chests, and thus wouldn't be tagged breasts, but this reasoning wouldn't apply to pecs.

• Pectoral grab shouldn't implicate pectorals or pectoral focus, it's possible for someone to be clearly grabbing someone's chest, but for the chest to not be visible to the viewer, same as with breast grab.

• Possibly create chest as a disambiguation page for breasts, pectorals, treasure chests, and whatever other types of chests there are.

I agree with your first 3 points.

But regarding point 4, wouldn't a tag like that just be a mess? I think chest_(furniture) was just made and I think that's enough along with the gender specific tags for chests.

CuteBara said:

But regarding point 4, wouldn't a tag like that just be a mess? I think chest_(furniture) was just made and I think that's enough along with the gender specific tags for chests.

It would only exist to list the different types of chests, like the recently made quetzalcoatl page, it wouldn't be used as an actual tag.

Also, we already had treasure chest for what it seems like chest (furniture) is intended for, are we replacing it?

I like that idea about the chest tag. I haven't actually seen anything like that before. My bad.

Treasure chest is only for chests with treasure in them. The chest_(furniture) tag is intended to be for any chest that contains anything else like weapons (or if it was empty) from what I recall.

CuteBara said:

Summary:

• Rename chest into pectorals.
• Rename pectorals into Pectoral_focus (with updated wiki)
• Implicate pectorals + Pectorals_focus to tags such as Pectoral_docking, pectoral_grab etc...

Agree with everything here.

+1 on both renames

I would like more input from others if possible before I go ahead with the requests.

+1

Can we talk more about what "pectoral_focus" would include?

At first I assumed it would include anything that involved interacting with the pecs. Like a pectoral_grab, pectoral_docking or pectoral_press. But that doesn't seem to be the case for breast_focus.

I understand that any of these things can happen without it being the focus (so an implication is out of the picture).
However, what I had in mind is stuff like post #4068525 post #4042543 post #4075697 post #3285394

These could be potentially tagged with Pectoral_focus, right?

CuteBara said:

Can we talk more about what "pectoral_focus" would include?

At first I assumed it would include anything that involved interacting with the pecs. Like a pectoral_grab, pectoral_docking or pectoral_press. But that doesn't seem to be the case for breast_focus.

I understand that any of these things can happen without it being the focus (so an implication is out of the picture).
However, what I had in mind is stuff like post #4068525 post #4042543 post #4075697 post #3285394

These could be potentially tagged with Pectoral_focus, right?

Well, the thing is that with bara anatomy, pecs are almost always prominent, of the if we were to go with a definition of them being emphasized or being the focus of the image I'd say all but the first example you posted could qualify for the tag.

CuteBara said:

post #4068525 post #4042543 post #4075697 post #3285394

I personally wouldn't tag any of these as pectoral_focus. Being grabbed or pressed against something isn't enough to me, otherwise breast focus would apply to a lot more images. The point of calling it "focus" is that the artist is trying to specifically direct your attention to that thing more than anything else in the image, either by zooming in, or creating a situation that says, "Look here!", and I don't get that feeling from any of those examples.

post #4099907 post #4097340 and post #4093620 are a few things I would say qualify.

But well, this tag isn't for me, bara isn't my thing. I'm only sharing my perspective, maybe I'm being too strict.

Mexiguy said:

Well, the thing is that with bara anatomy, pecs are almost always prominent, of the if we were to go with a definition of them being emphasized or being the focus of the image I'd say all but the first example you posted could qualify for the tag.

Yes they're almost always prominent but being just prominent is not enough to qualify. If I were to define it in my vision it would be posts that clearly focuses on the pecs (upper body and zooming in like breast_focus) or interacting directly with the pecs and it being the main theme of the post (like most posts under pectoral_grab, between_pecs etc).

blindVigil said:

post #4099907 post #4097340 and post #4093620 are a few things I would say qualify.

But well, this tag isn't for me, bara isn't my thing. I'm only sharing my perspective, maybe I'm being too strict.

No worries, thank you for sharing your point of view.

I guess I was just personally hoping there would be a tag that would include almost all the various pectoral_* tags since there aren't too posts under each. Making the pectoral_focus tag as strict as the breasts one would just leave us with yet another tag that wouldn't be that populated (and personally I don't see those posts under one tag to be that interesting, but that could be just me).

But I suppose it's the correct way of going about it for consistency. Maybe I can suggest creating a tag that fills the role I described later (Pectoral_play or something maybe?)

CuteBara said:

Yes they're almost always prominent but being just prominent is not enough to qualify. If I were to define it in my vision it would be posts that clearly focuses on the pecs (upper body and zooming in like breast_focus) or interacting directly with the pecs and it being the main theme of the post (like most posts under pectoral_grab, between_pecs etc).

No worries, thank you for sharing your point of view.

I guess I was just personally hoping there would be a tag that would include almost all the various pectoral_* tags since there aren't too posts under each. Making the pectoral_focus tag as strict as the breasts one would just leave us with yet another tag that wouldn't be that populated (and personally I don't see those posts under one tag to be that interesting, but that could be just me).

But I suppose it's the correct way of going about it for consistency. Maybe I can suggest creating a tag that fills the role I described later (Pectoral_play or something maybe?)

I don't know if such an umbrella tag would be desirable, unless we are gonna start adding *_play for every single body part.

IMO pectoral_focus should be for images where the pecs are a main focus of the image like with every *_focus tag

Mexiguy said:

I don't know if such an umbrella tag would be desirable, unless we are gonna start adding *_play for every single body part.

IMO pectoral_focus should be for images where the pecs are a main focus of the image like with every *_focus tag

Yes I agree. I don't see a nice way to grant my small wish. For now I'm OK with it being just like the other *_focus tags.

Hopefully I'll make the BUR to reflect this soon.