The tag implication #52235 accidental_exposure -> unwanted_exposure has been rejected.

Reason: If it was done on accident, they weren't intending for it to happen

EDIT: The tag implication accidental_exposure -> unwanted_exposure (forum #380397) has been rejected by @slyroon.

dxballman said:
Reason: If it was done on accident, they weren't intending for it to happen

I question the validity of unwanted_exposure. If anything, it sounds like a merge of accidental_exposure and assisted_exposure.

The word "assisted" in assisted_exposure means any exposure is not done by oneself; e.g., stripped by someone voluntarily/forcefully, by magic, by inanimate objects.
So, for someone to have an unwanted exposure, it would have to either be forcefully done upon them by someone else (i.e., assisted_exposure forced), by accident (i.e., accidental_exposure), or by clothing failure (i.e., wardrobe_malfunction).

The tag implication accidental_exposure -> unwanted_exposure (forum #380397) has been rejected by @slyroon.