The bulk update request #11345 is pending approval.

create alias muscle_tone (2502) -> muscular (500809)

Reason: I don't see a difference between these two.

Wiki definition and distinction are pretty clear to me.

Can't say I really see a difference. The wiki says it's meant for "the tension in muscles", which sounds like it means flexing of some sort, though it also says "even at rest", so not flexing, which makes it sound like it just means having muscular definition, i.e. muscular. I don't see anything in its uses that separate it from muscular, at any rate.

watsit said:
Can't say I really see a difference. The wiki says it's meant for "the tension in muscles", which sounds like it means flexing of some sort, though it also says "even at rest", so not flexing, which makes it sound like it just means having muscular definition, i.e. muscular. I don't see anything in its uses that separate it from muscular, at any rate.

Read the muscular wiki then
It clearly states that it's just there for being a generalizer, with other tags being specifics.

only divided on this because some form "muscle tone" does present itself under both athletic and muscular , about 1/5th of all the submissions are tagged under this are athletic...

Muscle Mass
Definition: Refers to the total amount of muscle tissue in the body.

Muscle Tone
Definition: Refers to the firmness or tension of muscles at rest. It is the continuous and passive partial contraction of muscles, which helps maintain posture and readiness for action.

If you want it super simplified you could say it's lean vs bulk

nin10dope said:
Muscle Mass
Definition: Refers to the total amount of muscle tissue in the body.

Muscle Tone
Definition: Refers to the firmness or tension of muscles at rest. It is the continuous and passive partial contraction of muscles, which helps maintain posture and readiness for action.

muscular depicts both. I also note that toned has already been aliased to athletic.

only divided on this because some form "muscle tone" does present itself under both athletic and muscular , about 1/5th of all the submissions are tagged under this are athletic...

The dividing line between muscular and athletic is already very wobbly and subjective, honestly.

Regardless, I still don't see the point of this tag. It can be invalidated if you don't think it's fully synonymous with existing tags, but I don't see a value in keeping it.

There's an unspoken joke about furries on pornfurry art archives not understanding the intricacies of musculature
The thing with tone is that you don't have to be muscular for it to apply, just have extremely little-to-no bodyfat between them and the skin.
Like how actors in movie roles like Hugh Jackman being Wolverine purposely dehydrate themselves before filming shirtless scenes to really expose the tone.

In all honesty just googling the difference will result in a truckload of information and images explaining it because it's so well documented and culturally important

nin10dope said:
The thing with tone is that you don't have to be muscular for it to apply, just have extremely little-to-no bodyfat between them and the skin.
Like how actors in movie roles like Hugh Jackman being Wolverine purposely dehydrate themselves before filming shirtless scenes to really expose the tone.

So it serves the same purpose as my proposed chiseled_muscles tag? That's really not clear from the wiki description; it doesn't say what level of tone is needed to warrant the tag. In practice virtually every muscular post is going to show muscle tone because, well, that's how you show a character has muscles.

beholding said:
In practice virtually every muscular post is going to show muscle tone because, well, that's how you show a character has muscles.

For the tagging purpose that is absolutely incorrect. Anybody who is stocky or more rounded like bara are very likely to not have muscle_tone

nin10dope said:
For the tagging purpose that is absolutely incorrect. Anybody who is stocky or more rounded like bara are very likely to not have muscle_tone

Okay, virtually every muscular post that isn't musclegut. (And sometimes even then, since musclegut characters can have toned arms and chests.)

Can you provide an example of what you're talking about? Because this still sounds like it's just describing all muscle types that aren't musclegut.

This one's a good example.
post #5529650

nin10dope said:
This one's a good example.
post #5529650

I wouldn't say muscular is wrong for the blue one. He's not like uber-musculed, but he's got some fair muscle on him.

watsit said:
I wouldn't say muscular is wrong for the blue one. He's not like uber-musculed, but he's got some fair muscle on him.

That would be a mistag.
Having a bicep flexing because you're putting weight on the elbow is nowhere near muscular lmao

nin10dope said:
That would be a mistag.
Having a bicep flexing because you're putting weight on the elbow is nowhere near muscular lmao

No, his bicep is pretty big even considering it's flexed, and his chest looks muscular as well. I'd tag it athletic rather than muscular, but it's not a counterexample to what I'm saying.

If this tag is just "sometimes muscles have tone", then it's too ubiquitous in the same vein as previously-invalidated tags like legs and hands.

beholding said:
No, his bicep is pretty big even considering it's flexed, and his chest looks muscular as well. I'd tag it athletic rather than muscular, but it's not a counterexample to what I'm saying.

If this tag is just "sometimes muscles have tone", then it's too ubiquitous in the same vein as previously-invalidated tags like legs and hands.

That bicep is a strawman lol just look at the other guy for your example.
And that funny quote of sometimes muscles have tone just shows that you're not listening or willing to research what muscle tone is.

You are being weirdly hostile about this and I don't know why. I'm sorry, but the example you gave does not demonstrate your point and you have to accept that. If you have other evidence for why this alias would be a problem, show us that instead of making personal attacks.

This is all from one page and I cherry-picked just for you
post #5442847 post #5405670 post #5418337 post #5416707 post #5405655 post #5609736 post #5452325 post #5397651 post #5397688

That guys chest that you described as muscular is actually the wrong adjective. The correct term is toned.

nin10dope said:
This is all from one page and I cherry-picked just for you
post #5442847 post #5405670 post #5418337 post #5416707 post #5405655 post #5609736 post #5452325 post #5397651 post #5397688

Literally every single one of these posts is tagged athletic.

nin10dope said:
That guys chest that you described as muscular is actually the wrong adjective. The correct term is toned.

Which has been aliased to athletic, yes.

muscular is for large muscles
muscle_tone is for defined/always visible muscles

beholding said:
Literally every single one of these posts is tagged athletic.

Which has been aliased to athletic, yes.

You're alias target isn't athletic so you're arguing against your own request there

Here's one that isn't athletic either
post #4731258
That stomach area is muscle tone. They don't have an athletic build either.

This entire argument happened because you wanted it aliased to athletic and not muscular? Why on Earth didn't you just say that?

Regardless, I already proposed that option earlier in the thread:

It can be invalidated if you don't think it's fully synonymous with existing tags, but I don't see a value in keeping it.

Propose an invalidation if you would prefer that.

beholding said:
This entire argument happened because you wanted it aliased to athletic and not muscular?

No, I didn't say that.

nin10dope said:
No, I didn't say that.

Then I have no idea what you are saying, because when asked to provide supporting evidence for your argument all you've done is show athletic images over and over again.

nin10dope said:
Here's one that isn't athletic either
post #4731258
That stomach area is muscle tone. They don't have an athletic build either.

If this is your point -- that the tag should be used when muscle tone is shown separate from a muscular or athletic overall figure -- then... well, we're going to need to do major cleanup of this tag, because like 99% of its current usage is just redundant tagging of athletic and muscular figures. I'd rather just tag the muscle group itself (soft_abs in this case).

muscle_tone is not mutually exclusive from the build tags
All of those examples were given because you wanted this

beholding said:
Okay, virtually every muscular post that isn't musclegut. (And sometimes even then, since musclegut characters can have toned arms and chests.)

Can you provide an example of what you're talking about? Because this still sounds like it's just describing all muscle types that aren't musclegut.

Now you've moved the goalpost to athletic

Ultimately this alias request feels overly arbitrary and unnecessary

nin10dope said:
muscle_tone is not mutually exclusive from the build tags

What exactly do you mean by this?

beholding said:
What exactly do you mean by this?

Like muscle build i.e. muscular or athletic
You can be both or only one or neither