The latter entirely subsumes the former, but is slightly more general. Both tags have relatively frequent usage, but covering_crotch has almost three times the posts.
If we decide covering_pussy's specificity is sufficient to keep it separate, there ought to at least be an implication.
Looking over and trying to consolidate and link things in the wiki, we might also want to consider our use of the umbrella tag covering (right now it is only used for covering intimate parts), and perhaps set implications for the related tags as well.
I'd say we should probably have at least implications for the first group to covering, and depending on if we want to enlarge the definition of covering to mean "volitional covering of body parts", the second as well.
Frequency of usage is unfortunately not a good argument with the cover_crotch tag right now, since nearly 100% of the images under the tag right now were tagged by myself when I created the tag and it's usage hasn't caught on yet. The vast majority still just use covering for those images.
Anyways I have no real opinion if covering_pussy should or shouldn't be aliased. When I defined covering_crotch I did attempt to make it coexist with covering_pussy, since people were using that tag but it didn't seem to cover at all depictions of clothed individuals trying to cover their crotch.
I think I prefer the idea of just having a single gender neutral covering_crotch. I don't think covering_pussy particularly needs to be a separate tag. Anyone else have input?
I will implicate the intimate group to covering, we can discuss the non-intimate ones more before I do anything.
jxh2154 said: I think I prefer the idea of just having a single gender neutral covering_crotch. I don't think covering_pussy particularly needs to be a separate tag. Anyone else have input?
I think I have used covering_pussy a few times in the past, but covering_crotch looks better and I like that it is gender-neutral too. I think it should be aliased.