Monster Sexualization

BUR #52803 has been approved by @evazion.

mass update favgroup:50535 -> monster_sexualization

When gardening the now dead pool #22339 for tag conversion, I noticed an awful lot of solo/multiple views posts were wrongly added to the pool. I cleaned them out, but that got me thinking about how without that pool, these images are really hard to find without getting stuff like post #10517494 when you are looking for something more like post #8068415 or post #7665224. I think people should be able to have a tag for being able to search for this weird blend of horror and erotic. So I rounded up as many of those gardened out posts as are applicable (which is most of them), and stuck them in a favgroup for this purpose.

Damian suggested the name in forum #411044, so that's what I'm going with. Think animal sexualization but for very obviously horror monsters that cannot be put into a separate tag like the aforementioned.

Should monster sexualization imply teratophilia? Because there's stuff in that favgroup like post #8261919 that's just sexual interactions.

nonamethanks said:

Should monster sexualization imply teratophilia? Because there's stuff in that favgroup like post #8261919 that's just sexual interactions.

I don't really know. The pool (and the current tag wiki) says "no disembodied penises", which post #8261919 kinda is. Not to mention all the solo posts in there. I assume it's one of those tags that while it does goes hand in hand with teratophilia, it doesn't always imply if that makes sense.

If we remove the disembodied dick rule, I guess that would make #8261919 an example of both then.

Knowledge_Seeker said:
The pool (and the current tag wiki) says "no disembodied penises",

I've removed that part, it's stupid. I guess if we're following the same definition as animal sexualization then it kinda makes sense to include those posts, but it's really hard to imagine a future where this tag won't just be 99% teratophilia.

nonamethanks said:

I've removed that part, it's stupid. I guess if we're following the same definition as animal sexualization then it kinda makes sense to include those posts, but it's really hard to imagine a future where this tag won't just be 99% teratophilia.

Yeah I think that approach makes the most sense. As monster sexualization is meant to house the solo pics that don't entirely qualify for teratophilia, I imagine there is going to be overlap no matter what. But there are plenty of posts like post #7665224 which doesn't really qualify for teratophilia either, so I think keeping them separate would be better in the long run.

Idk. This is the first time I gave a damn about NSFW tagging lol. Guess it depends on what we want to see from these tags. I operate under the assumption teratophilia is a fucking/action tag, while monster sexualization would be a focus tag.

The bulk update request #52803 (forum #411194) has been approved by @evazion.