imply unworn_socks -> unworn_legwear

BUR #60152 has been rejected.

create implication unworn_socks -> unworn_legwear
create implication unworn_thighhighs -> unworn_legwear
create implication unworn_pantyhose -> unworn_legwear
create implication unworn_shorts -> unworn_legwear
create implication unworn_pants -> unworn_legwear

Socks, thighhighs, pantyhose, shorts, and pants are all subcategories of legwear

I can't imagine why we need an umbrella tag for this when we did away with most of the other umbrella *wear tags.

Is there a reason why it isn't deprecated? Seems like the other tags are good enough, except maybe in cases where you can't tell what kind of legwear it is?

BUR #60176 has been approved by @evazion.

deprecate unworn_legwear

As above, it would be better to tag it with the specific type of legwear. Also matches the currently deprecated unworn footwear.

There's also unworn headwear and unworn eyewear for consideration. Also unworn neckwear but that has 0 posts

The bulk update request #60152 (forum #441952) has been rejected by @evazion.

The bulk update request #60176 (forum #442011) has been approved by @evazion.

Shorts and pants aren't legwear in any case.