Halite said:
The #1 positive in my opinion: no more complaining about "gay" tag, or lack thereof on any images.
We can now simply state, unequivocally, that we don't tag sexuality, we just tag the visible interaction between the characters.

I just wish there was a simple way to do the same with gender tags.

If you think there won't still be complaints, you're nuts. We could say that before and people were apparently too dumb to understand. Why we're catering to morons, I have no idea.

Granberia said:
There was (and still is since it's not aliased yet) dickgirl_on_male tag. And other tags like that. Only straight lesbian and gay didn't have *_on_* form.

I always saw those as unofficial, and poorly used.

Duffin said:
I am on the side of not changing this, for the record. This is only going to confuse things further. How does it work with more than two characters? What if it's two guys and a girl? I certainly hope we're not going to have a different combination for every possible threeway, too. And if you're keeping the "bisexual" tag, then it's not exactly equal that the others had to change. This is only going to make tagging an absolutely nightmare and no one is going to do it when they upload images.

The meaning didn't change, the tag name did, and at this point there are no plans on doing combinations like male/male/female, dickgirl/male/female/female/female, herm/female/dickgirl/male etc. as it only concerns whether the act is present in the picture.

Examples:

• Bisexual with 2 males and 1 female:
• Old system: bisexual, usually gay and possibly straight sometimes.
• New system: bisexual, male/male, male/female
• 2 males and 3 females, one of the females is interacting with both a male and a female:
• Old system: straight and probably lesbian. Occasionally it would get tagged bisexual.
• New system: bisexual, male/male, male/female
• 10 males 10 females, all having an orgy with eachother:
• Old system: Might get tagged gay/lesbian/straight, but at this point people are almost afraid to touch it.
• New system: bisexual, male/male, male/female, female/female
• 2 males getting raped by tentacles, but aren't touching OR 1 male masturbating anally:
• Old system: gay until somebody notices and changes it...until someone adds it again...arguments in the comments...then admin gets involved and threatens the banhammer.
• New system: No confusion, because just the name "male/male" implies some sort of interaction.

In my opinion, if you're too stupid to understand that the gay tag meant the act itself and not the character's orientation, then you shouldn't be allowed to tag, period.

The admins have done this in the past for heavy offenders that refused to change, but it doesn't fix the issue. Most are willing to change when you explain it to them, but this takes patience and time out of our (and the admins') day. What this change does is bypass that confusion entirely and gives the admins more time to focus on other projects, get caught up on the queues, help people out, etc.

Peekaboo said:
I always saw those as unofficial, and poorly used.

They are less "unofficial"and more "very new and only the most recent posts are consistently tagged with it", and with this dickgirl/male will have the same problem until we get caught up. I've been working at it a little bit at a time but there's still a lot that needs to be sorted out.

Hopefully this change should help encourage tagging a bit. :3

parasprite said:

• 2 males getting raped by tentacles, but aren't touching OR 1 male masturbating anally:
• Old system: gay until somebody notices and changes it...until someone adds it again...arguments in the comments...then admin gets involved and threatens the banhammer.
• New system: No confusion, because just the name "male/male" implies some sort of interaction.

Wait, so a single male masturbating in a way that involves anal is now going to be listed as male/male? That doesn't make sense. Someone who only wants to see that is going to find a crap ton of gay images as well if that is the case.

Duffin said:
Wait, so a single male masturbating in a way that involves anal is now going to be listed as male/male? That doesn't make sense. Someone who only wants to see that is going to find a crap ton of gay images as well if that is the case.

No actually, just the opposite. We've always had a huge problem with those images getting tagged gay because of the stigma associated with male anal masturbation. This makes it more clear that they shouldn't get the tag.

Edit: Funny place for there to be confusion though. lol

Granberia said:
There was (and still is since it's not aliased yet) dickgirl_on_male tag. And other tags like that. Only straight lesbian and gay didn't have *_on_* form.

This is another reason why it's good to have this gender tagging revision: by abolishing 'gay', 'straight' and 'lesbian' (or rather, just renaming them,) you're giving intersex/* pairings the same amount of attention as traditional genders. Before, people didn't really tag intersex as gay or straight or anything, and rarely bothered with, say, "dickgirl_on_female", but now we're going to have folks learning to tag things as male/male, male/female, etc. This means dickgirl/female, dickgirl/male and assorted tags will hopefully be more routinely applied.

Bisexual (for binary genders) and polysexual (for intersex) should still exist, IMO, since tagging something "male/male, male/female, bisexual" would better communicate the content of the post than just "male/male, male/female" or "bisexual" alone.

parasprite said:
No actually, just the opposite. We've always had a huge problem with those images getting tagged gay because of the stigma associated with male anal masturbation. This makes it more clear that they shouldn't get the tag.

Edit: Funny place for there to be confusion though. lol

Okay, I was reading the wrong. Looking at it again, I see what you were saying. I still am not sure it won't add more confusion, but I guess time will tell.

Catachan said:

Bisexual (for binary genders) and polysexual (for intersex) should still exist, IMO, since tagging something "male/male, male/female, bisexual" would better communicate the content of the post than just "male/male, male/female" or "bisexual" alone.

I never really knew what to do with that tag. Probably one of those "seemed like a good idea at the time" tags that nobody really bothered to hash out. I think having male/male, etc. will make defining this a lot easier at the very least. It's possible that there might be some room for another tag (something like "3+ genders interacting with each other" or "a bisexual tag that includes combinations with intersex characters"), but we'll have to see. Whatever it is would have to be both clear and common enough to be worth tagging. I think the "bisexual for intersex" tag might have a little more chance of getting tagged, but I'm definitely not sure what I'd call that (that would clarify meaning and minimize confusion).

At this point, I'd like to see how bisexual fits into this new scheme before thinking about adding anything new, but I'm going to keep this one in mind.

if where gona keep this at least confirm that its been implicated or something?! i use the "drawn out" tags. ive always used them, never the / tags, MOST other sites that activly tag stuff dont use / tags either so this is going to be interesting....
if its been implicated (where entering one tag replaces it with the "correct" version) it wont be so bad, if it hasnt been....well... look out below.

honestly no offence, those for this are... crazy. to me its increadibly confusing, increadibly messy looking and im now considering just fliping the desk metephoticly and removing all my tag list for editing and leaving the sites tags for the vulchers, i activly edit and clean THESE tags, the ones that have been edited. when im able to i try to keep order in the intersex departments and other genders when i do come across them. this isnt some small change, it opens the doors for many other types of tag changes and can possibly level e621 and turn it down the path of bad archiving, like r34......

Esme_Belles said:
if where gona keep this at least confirm that its been implicated or something?! i use the "drawn out" tags. ive always used them, never the / tags, MOST other sites that activly tag stuff dont use / tags either so this is going to be interesting....
if its been implicated (where entering one tag replaces it with the "correct" version) it wont be so bad, if it hasnt been....well... look out below.

They're all being aliased so that you can still use the dickgirl_on_male for --> dickgirl/male, "gay" for --> male/male. It's just taking a day to get them all done because aliases aren't instantaneous and the bigger ones always take a little processing time. Most of the major ones are done now, and the last of them should be done by tonight.

furrypickle said:
They're all being aliased so that you can still use the dickgirl_on_male for --> dickgirl/male, "gay" for --> male/male. It's just taking a day to get them all done because aliases aren't instantaneous and the bigger ones always take a little processing time. Most of the major ones are done now, and the last of them should be done by tonight.

well thats good at least, though i still stand by what i said about it being confusing and messy... :/

parasprite said:
The admins have done this in the past for heavy offenders that refused to change, but it doesn't fix the issue. Most are willing to change when you explain it to them, but this takes patience and time out of our (and the admins') day. What this change does is bypass that confusion entirely and gives the admins more time to focus on other projects, get caught up on the queues, help people out, etc.

parasprite said:
No actually, just the opposite. We've always had a huge problem with those images getting tagged gay because of the stigma associated with male anal masturbation. This makes it more clear that they shouldn't get the tag.

There's one problem with this idea though: male/male has a gay alias.

I have no doubt that there are still going to be people (unaware newcomers mainly) tagging a male + solo upload with gay, because of anal masturbation or "my character is gay!", who will then just leave without checking the created tag list long enough to notice their tag suddenly turned into a nonsensical male/male.

Of course, this new variation will probably keep most of the incidents that would've happened with the old tag from happening, but as long as that old tag still aliases to the new one, the mistagging will not simply stop. It's a start, but perhaps not as waterproof as you'd think.

Jugofthat said:
There's one problem with this idea though: male/male has a gay alias.

I have no doubt that there are still going to be people (unaware newcomers mainly) tagging a male + solo upload with gay, because of anal masturbation or "my character is gay!", who will then just leave without checking the created tag list long enough to notice their tag suddenly turned into a nonsensical male/male.

Of course, this new variation will probably keep most of the incidents that would've happened with the old tag from happening, but as long as that old tag still aliases to the new one, the mistagging will not simply stop. It's a start, but perhaps not as waterproof as you'd think.

Of course, but it will at least prevent the tag war aspect of it. They can't fight "my character's gay I'm tagging it gay" when the gay tag no longer shows up in the sidebar. Same for tentacles etc. (though penis_tentacles will always get tagged penis, so it may not prevent some of those). If it wasn't used for as long as it was I'd just say to invalidate it, but I don't think it's a practical option (plus it would break a lot of blacklists).

Nothing is going to be waterproof, but we can at least make the best out of the transition and minimize cleanup.

Esme_Belles said:
well thats good at least, though i still stand by what i said about it being confusing and messy... :/

It's mostly just new. The old format was split between two different formatting systems (gay/straight/lesbian vs dickgirl_on_herm, cuntboy_on_male, etc) and both of those two systems were constantly causing mistags because the name of those tags was commonly misinterpreted. They did the job, but they also caused a lot more work than they needed to (correcting the repeated confusion they caused people).

"Gay" would be mistagged (as you probably already know) on everything from solo males masturbating, to girly males, to rainbow pride symbols, to "my fursona is a gay guy so he should get the tag because that's his identity" etc, or even just because something was lame/stupid="gay". Constantly correcting those mistags was an ongoing problem for years now. We needed something with less alternate meanings, something that is more for the action between the two parties instead of an orientation identity or a slang term for stupid.

The format *_on_* was tried for awhile (for the intersex tags), but also was running into repeated problems: people mistaking [gender]_on_[gender] format for meaning who was on top in a sex position, or who was dominating their partner in sex, or reading meaning into the order they were listed, or being confused when it was on an image that either didn't have topping, didn't have domination, or didn't have explicit sex in it. So again, it mostly worked. But it was also constantly causing confusion and problems because of the wording.

The problems these two sets of tags cause has come up countless times, and the only reason why we've stuck with those older tag names for so long was because most of the alternative tag names had just as many problems with them. (Tags like *_and_* would have been tagged for "total number of that gender in the picture" for instance [like a "2guys" "3girls" type of a tag, which we don't do].) And as discussed earlier in the thread, */* doesn't have these downsides, being both an improvement and a way to standardize this set of tags to all use the same format.

So yes, it is new and different to see the */* format in the tags. It's strange since most of us have been trying to correct nonstandard gender tagging for so long, that to see a-different-name-for-the-tag triggers an automatic instinct to correct it. But that will become easier as the new tag names become familiar. And all of these are aliased, so you don't even have to change how you tag (since none of the meanings have changed, just the names of them). Many of these are just flipping an existing alias, since people have always tried to use this format and it made redundant tags. Additionally, tags like m/m/m have always been a problem (that one was aliased away to gay originally several years ago by riversyde). So having to alias tags like that away is as old as the site itself, not a new issue.

Jugofthat said:
...to notice their tag suddenly turned into a nonsensical male/male. Of course, this new variation will probably keep most of the incidents that would've happened with the old tag from happening, but as long as that old tag still aliases to the new one, the mistagging will not simply stop. It's a start, but perhaps not as waterproof as you'd think.

No tag solution is 100% waterproof. And with a tag as big and important as the pairing tags, the tradeoff of keeping it accessible (through the alias) will always be a reason to suffer a few mistags that will trickle through from careless taggers. Aliasing gay to --> male/male means there will be a few who add it and don't notice that it doesn't fit, that's true. But taggers that fail to doublecheck anything are the number one cause of any type of mistag, regardless of the tag involved. That's just a type of tagger that can't be helped. Thankfully most people pay at least a little attention, and people are more likely to notice if it looks like it doesn't belong.

Mostly the improvement will be from making the mistags more apparent for those that do pay attention. And from making the reasons why we don't use the tag for those other meanings more clear. (When the tag was named "gay", too many people would just think of the one of the other meanings for the word "gay" to make sense of why it was there, instead of realising that the tag itself isn't used for that other purpose.) It was always a stretch of the meaning to restrict the word "gay" to such a narrow sub-definition of the word (male/male sex and mating behavior only). To most people, the top use of the word "gay" is primarily as an orientation identity (which is not how we use it), so we've been constantly fighting uphill against that usage. Repurposing words like "gay" and "straight" for the sexual and mating actions only, was convenient because they were already in use from the very beginning, but it unintentionally set us up for chronic misinterpretation and confusion about how those tags should be used on this site. We've always had that problem. So it was about time we fixed it.

This rename also makes learning what to use the tag for a lot more straightforward for newcomers or casual browsers, which is important for such a basic tag. It makes the learning curve less steep.

Hm. Definitely something I'll need to get used to. But I do understand the reasoning behind the change...
The old use of "gay" and the other tags certainly was a deviation from the 'standard' (full) meanings of the words... But as long as you knew how these things worked around here it was a pretty elegant solution.
The new tags look clunkier. e.g. mouseover a thumbnail to see the alt text and it has "male male/male" or "female female/female" in it, the old system had better readability on that... maybe... eh, I dunno.

I'll definitely need to get used to it. Thankfully the aliases are in place so there's no reason to complain just yet. ;)

I've already been trying to navigate this new "male/male, male/herm" system and holy fuck has it been confusing and annoying me. I'm literally having to think technicalities when trying to look for pictures. A good example is a picture of a MALE being anally fucked by a genderless tentacle. This means it's only MALE, TECHNICALLY, even though looking at it feels like it's pretty damn gay.

That and think of how confusing it might be for new taggers. This really isn't "solving" things. It's just replacing one set of technicalities for another. If there's a simple solution to this that doesn't involve 5 new tags then I'd like to know.

HoneyScoot said:
I've already been trying to navigate this new "male/male, male/herm" system and holy fuck has it been confusing and annoying me. I'm literally having to think technicalities when trying to look for pictures. A good example is a picture of a MALE being anally fucked by a genderless tentacle. This means it's only MALE, TECHNICALLY, even though looking at it feels like it's pretty damn gay.

That and think of how confusing it might be for new taggers. This really isn't "solving" things. It's just replacing one set of technicalities for another. If there's a simple solution to this that doesn't involve 5 new tags then I'd like to know.

That wouldn't have been tagged gay either.
I'm not sure what your point is here?

HoneyScoot said:
A good example is a picture of a MALE being anally fucked by a genderless tentacle. This means it's only MALE, TECHNICALLY, even though looking at it feels like it's pretty damn gay.

That's how it's been for a while (a year, at the very least), and was one of the huge issues with it being named gay since people would frequently mistag those.

By the way, you can still use gay in searches if it helps (since it's aliased it will pull up male/male content).

Emserdalf said:
Hm. Definitely something I'll need to get used to. But I do understand the reasoning behind the change...
The old use of "gay" and the other tags certainly was a deviation from the 'standard' (full) meanings of the words... But as long as you knew how these things worked around here it was a pretty elegant solution.
The new tags look clunkier. e.g. mouseover a thumbnail to see the alt text and it has "male male/male" or "female female/female" in it, the old system had better readability on that... maybe... eh, I dunno.

I'll definitely need to get used to it. Thankfully the aliases are in place so there's no reason to complain just yet. ;)

I'm in a similar boat, but I agree with the change, and here's why. Some of the most vociferous and angry complaints we got about e6's tagging system were about these "sexual orientation" tags. People would complain that two males having sex didn't make them gay. In a way they were right of course, two men having sex could conceivably both be bi, but they didn't realize that we were just using the term "gay" for simplicity's sake. It took some people a lot of time to understand that's how it worked here, and it turned a lot of people away because they assumed that the site was at best uncaring about non traditional gender views, or at worst actively against them. Yes, it worked well and made sense to those who knew the system, but for new users and certain groups of people it caused a bit of confusion and some needless drama. I think that the change to this system will make it more obvious that it's not trying to label characters with sexual orientation, but just to tag the physical sexes of the characters having sex in the image.

There are other reasons to change the tags of course, but for me these are the biggest reasons that I support it. There's no reason to upset people and invite drama if there's a very simple solution that just requires us to change the way we label certain tags. I'm more than willing to tag male/male instead of gay if that'll keep people from visiting the forums and spouting ridiculous vitriol.

Searching female all the time makes me immune to this change.

I support the change and with the alias system I don't even have to update my uploaded tags.

Honestly I feel that this is taking the TWYS to a way too literal way, to the point it is less usefull than it is.

Honestly I think this is going to be get out of control soon, eventually we'll get to fix tags that will have too complex combinations because that's what is seen and it will be more fitting.

I'm totally agaisnt it because far way too technical, because I find outrageous the complaints about gender, sexuality and similar other drama that constantly appear, I agree to some degree that engaging on a homosexual act doesn't mean at all that a character is homosexual on it's enterity, but raging about it on a porn site of all sites isn't helpful, and now that we are going full technical:

male/male has more characters than gay
female/female has more characters than lesbian
It will make searching for tags a bit more difficult if you misspell one and slower since one has to type more, in software desing it is suggested that users don't enjoy at all typing more when they could type less, making their experience not as good as expected.

NoctemWerewolf said:
Honestly I feel that this is taking the TWYS to a way too literal way, to the point it is less usefull than it is.

So this is it? do the people that ALWAYS complains that a male having sex with a male is not gay have won? Is there no return point?

What? They are factually correct. It is accurate to say that male x male may not imply at least one party is gay. Whether the complaint is made from good motives or bad, it criticizes an error that is real -- gay is simply an incorrect tag to use for male/male sex.

People who actually tag gay can tell you about the problems this has been causing. In this very thread, they do so.

Honestly I think this is going to be get out of control soon, eventually we'll get to fix tags that will have too complex combinations because that's what is seen and it will be more fitting.

You can calculate the number of combinations mathematically.

(ambiguous, male, female, herm, dickgirl, cuntboy) -> 6 terms. The amount of possible combinations equals 6+5+4+3+2+1 = 21 tags. Truly outrageous, indeed.

I'm totally agaisnt it because far way too technical

It's *less* technical than before -- the number of total words the tagger needs to know has dropped, as has the number of idiomatic words (gay, lesbian) involved.

It will make searching for tags a bit more difficult if you misspell one and slower since one has to type more, in software desing it is suggested that users don't enjoy at all typing more when they could type less, making their experience not as good as expected.

The solution to that is have a better interface incorporating autocompletion, not use inaccurate tags because they happen to be shorter. A good implementation of this allows the selection of a specific tag, no matter how long it is, with 5 or less keystrokes. From personal experience, 2 or 3 is more typical.

(Lighthouse provides an example. Percol is another. DMenu is the quintessential example but I couldn't find an animated image showing it well)

NoctemWerewolf said:
...
male/male has more characters than gay
female/female has more characters than lesbian
It will make searching for tags a bit more difficult if you misspell one and slower since one has to type more, in software desing it is suggested that users don't enjoy at all typing more when they could type less, making their experience not as good as expected.

If they're aliased, can't you still just search for gay anyway? I mean, the search will just change gay to male/male anyway, same with lesbian to female/female

But also, I suppose we could alias m/m --> male/male, that way it's literally the exact same number of characters as gay, and f/f would be less than lesbian too.
Thoughts?

NoctemWerewolf said:
male/male has more characters than gay
female/female has more characters than lesbian

Incorrect. There's 345 pages of male/male and gay, and 93 pages of female/female and lesbian.

Tokaido said:
If they're aliased, can't you still just search for gay anyway? I mean, the search will just change gay to male/male anyway, same with lesbian to female/female

But also, I suppose we could alias m/m --> male/male, that way it's literally the exact same number of characters as gay, and f/f would be less than lesbian too.
Thoughts?

I don't in principle object to it, except that typos may be confusing (since m/m would result in male/male, but m/n would result in.. well, m/n, which doesn't mean shit to anyone who's not aware the aliases exist). That would use the 'alphabet' of 'a c d f h m', in total, I guess.

male/female is an unacceptable tag. It should be aliased to female/male since f comes before m in the alphabet. The current male/female ordering reinforces the patriarchy.

(je suis satire)

Lance_Armstrong said:
male/female is an unacceptable tag. It should be aliased to female/male since f comes before m in the alphabet. The current male/female ordering reinforces the patriarchy.

(je suis satire)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EC21NF5rbSk

Lance_Armstrong said:
male/female is an unacceptable tag. It should be aliased to female/male since f comes before m in the alphabet. The current male/female ordering reinforces the patriarchy.

(je suis satire)

What about the alphabetriarchy? There are more natural ways to sort things than alphabetically, we should sort things in a way that makes sense for each individual case rather than mindlessly conforming to this dogmatic one-size-fits-all policy. I propose sorting by how complicated the description is, instead (ambiguous < male == female < herm < dickgirl == cuntboy).

;)

HoneyScoot said:
I've already been trying to navigate this new "male/male, male/herm" system and holy fuck has it been confusing and annoying me. I'm literally having to think technicalities when trying to look for pictures. A good example is a picture of a MALE being anally fucked by a genderless tentacle. This means it's only MALE, TECHNICALLY, even though looking at it feels like it's pretty damn gay.

That and think of how confusing it might be for new taggers. This really isn't "solving" things. It's just replacing one set of technicalities for another. If there's a simple solution to this that doesn't involve 5 new tags then I'd like to know.

The old tags still work, and the meaning of the tags has not changed, we have just changed how they're displayed.

I found it odd when I noticed the "gay" and "lesbian" tags magically disappearing.

I need a heads up, since this has got me thoroughly confused by now: a disembodied penis fucking a male. Gay or not?

post #605507

Lots of disembodied_penis + male/male posts says yes, but I've seen conflicting opinions about it in the past, not to mention the rules concerning cum_in_ass + solo that constantly seem to change, most recently in this very same thread. And that one's sort of related, since if cum can theoretically have come from non-males, a penis can belong to a non-male too.

In fact, to quote Furrypickle there:

And the pairing tag can only be added if there's a second character of the required gender for it in the image

Required gender. See, that's exactly what's confusing me, is a disembodied penis considered a male just because it implies one? I'd like to think so, but I'm just not sure if that's what the staff thinks.

I simply want to make sure I'm still tagging things right.

Jugofthat said:
I need a heads up, since this has got me thoroughly confused by now: a disembodied penis fucking a male. Gay or not?

post #605507

Lots of disembodied_penis + male/male posts says yes, but I've seen conflicting opinions about it in the past, not to mention the rules concerning cum_in_ass that constantly seem to change, most recently in this very same thread. And that one's sort of related, since if cum can theoretically have come from non-males, a penis can belong to a non-male too.

I'd just like to make sure I'm still tagging things right.

disembodied_penis implies male, so it's gay.

You're right on that (and why the hell didn't I look that up first? Though I could've sworn I did not too long ago), but wikis can sometimes be outdated, so I'd still like to see some confirmation from an admin.

Granberia said:
disembodied_penis implies male, so it's gay.

Actually it's not gay(that's kinda the point), it is, however, male/male.

Granberia said:
disembodied_penis implies male, so it's gay.

Yup, disembodied_penis both counts as male and a character, same with faceless_male.

While we're on the subject, if anyone is interested penis_tentacles/tentacles will probably need some minor cleanup as well since they aren't actually characters (unless they are attached to one) but have been occasionally tagged straight or (more commonly) gay for solo posts and posts with penis_tentacles.

Come to think of it, I should probably do a write-up for the tagging projects thread.

Thanks! And I'll see if I can help.

parasprite said:
Yup, disembodied_penis both counts as male and a character, same with faceless_male.

While we're on the subject, if anyone is interested penis_tentacles/tentacles will probably need some minor cleanup as well since they aren't actually characters (unless they are attached to one) but have been occasionally tagged straight or (more commonly) gay for solo posts and posts with penis_tentacles.

Come to think of it, I should probably do a write-up for the tagging projects thread.

While doing the "add missing straight/bisexual/lesbian tags" project, I noticed that a lot of people tagged a solo character getting dicked by tentacles as sex.

Peekaboo said:
While doing the "add missing straight/bisexual/lesbian tags" project, I noticed that a lot of people tagged a solo character getting dicked by tentacles as sex.

Noted. I never really paid much attention to that tag but I'm definitely going to have to add that to my list of future projects. There are probably loads of implications (fellatio, for one) that probably got in the way of this as well that need to be looked into.

Peekaboo said:
While doing the "add missing straight/bisexual/lesbian tags" project, I noticed that a lot of people tagged a solo character getting dicked by tentacles as sex.

I have to say, I'm not sure what is wrong with that. Should they be tagged penetration but not sex? It seems like individual pictures vary on whether tentacles are treated as sex organs. Of course, in the case where they are, that would imply solo was an incorrect tagging and duo was correct.

Iunno. The way tentacles are handled is a bit irregular.

savageorange said:
I have to say, I'm not sure what is wrong with that. Should they be tagged penetration but not sex? It seems like individual pictures vary on whether tentacles are treated as sex organs. Of course, in the case where they are, that would imply solo was an incorrect tagging and duo was correct.

Iunno. The way tentacles are handled is a bit irregular.

Tagging-wise just treat them like dildos; they have no gender, they get inserted* into orifices, and, unless it's a character with large dildo-arms, you aren't going to tag it as if it were a character.

_{*Insertion is used fairly inconsistently, but technically speaking that's what they are.}

It's certainly not masturbation, and we tend to tag images featuring penetration as either that or sex. It is a bit odd to have a single tag that's an exception to that.

Genjar said:
It's certainly not masturbation, and we tend to tag images featuring penetration as either that or sex. It is a bit odd to have a single tag that's an exception to that.

Is fisting sex?
Because that's pretty much the equivalent of an octopus sticking a tentacle in someone.

Halite said:
Is fisting sex?
Because that's pretty much the equivalent of an octopus sticking a tentacle in someone.

idk better ask jeeves

Wow, today on unnecessary changes . . .

Ah well as long as the old way aliases to whatever is supposed to be happening in here I don't care lol

just my two cents on the latest rounds of aliasing: it seems that whoever is pushing the button on this is trying to please everyone and i think it's only serving to confuse.

yes, when i type 'lesbian' it changes to 'female/female' and i've learned something about how the tagging system works. fine. but if the rationale behind it really is "oh, well some people argue that this isn't <orientation X> because <rationale Y>", well, that's too bad. there should be a set of conventions that define how this is broken down (tag what you see, and modern english applies), and if that flies in the face of some special snowflake's worldview, well, too bad.

i like e6's adherence to categorization, but i think trying to split the meaning of tags from their use in conversation is harmful and doesn't make sense. let people make mistakes and tag male solo masturbation as gay; it should be up to the community to fix it and leave a short comment on the page explaining why that is wrong. aliasing is a band-aid.

bot2 said:
just my two cents on the latest rounds of aliasing: it seems that whoever is pushing the button on this is trying to please everyone and i think it's only serving to confuse.

yes, when i type 'lesbian' it changes to 'female/female' and i've learned something about how the tagging system works. fine. but if the rationale behind it really is "oh, well some people argue that this isn't <orientation X> because <rationale Y>", well, that's too bad. there should be a set of conventions that define how this is broken down (tag what you see, and modern english applies), and if that flies in the face of some special snowflake's worldview, well, too bad.

i like e6's adherence to categorization, but i think trying to split the meaning of tags from their use in conversation is harmful and doesn't make sense. let people make mistakes and tag male solo masturbation as gay; it should be up to the community to fix it and leave a short comment on the page explaining why that is wrong. aliasing is a band-aid.

guys jacking off isn't gay unless your a guy jacking off to the guy jacking off

bot2 said:
just my two cents on the latest rounds of aliasing: it seems that whoever is pushing the button on this is trying to please everyone and i think it's only serving to confuse.

yes, when i type 'lesbian' it changes to 'female/female' and i've learned something about how the tagging system works. fine. but if the rationale behind it really is "oh, well some people argue that this isn't <orientation X> because <rationale Y>", well, that's too bad. there should be a set of conventions that define how this is broken down (tag what you see, and modern english applies), and if that flies in the face of some special snowflake's worldview, well, too bad.

i like e6's adherence to categorization, but i think trying to split the meaning of tags from their use in conversation is harmful and doesn't make sense. let people make mistakes and tag male solo masturbation as gay; it should be up to the community to fix it and leave a short comment on the page explaining why that is wrong. aliasing is a band-aid.

The problem was that it was flying in the face of modern English, not some special snowflake's world view.

yeah it also doesn't fit in with vore. Just cause a giant snake is a dude eating a dude doesn't make that gay vore but it makes it male/male (not to say that male vore preds dont do gay stuff to dudes their eating sometimes but still)

memeboy said:
yeah it also doesn't fit in with vore. Just cause a giant snake is a dude eating a dude doesn't make that gay vore but it makes it male/male (not to say that male vore preds dont do gay stuff to dudes their eating sometimes but still)

I'm fairly certain those still shouldn't be tagged male/male, etc. as the gender/gender tags are more of a "romance/sex" thing than a "these people are interacting" thing.

If there are <3's in the pic though then all hope is lost.

But isn't vore generally a fetish, i.e. people get off to it etc., so it is in fact sexual interaction? Doesn't most vore stuff get treated as explicit / like porn? (Sorry if I'm wrong here, I don't come across vore often)

Emserdalf said:
But isn't vore generally a fetish, i.e. people get off to it etc., so it is in fact sexual interaction? Doesn't most vore stuff get treated as explicit / like porn? (Sorry if I'm wrong here, I don't come across vore often)

It is a fetish and should be at least rating:questionable in most cases (swallowed whole? blood? gore?). Whether or not I'd tag it with something like male/male really depends on what's going on. I'd say no more often than yes, but there are a lot of context clues you need to look at (just as with any other post).

• Is there some kind of clear romantic attraction between characters? (e.g., hearts in the air, bedroom eyes, etc.)
• How naked are the characters? Are there any genitals showing? (e.g., if one or both characters had erections)
• Does it look like the characters are getting off to it? (masturbating, in "come hither" poses, etc.)
• If the characters were replaced with anthro and feral, would you tag it with bestiality?

Again, it's heavily dependent on context, so I can't really say "always tag it if there's an erection", but this should at least give you some idea of when to tag it.

Disclaimer: These aren't official guidelines or anything, just how I personally look at it.

post #610002

female/female?

Lance_Armstrong said:
post #610002

female/female?

I would. It looks like her hands are bound behind her back and the artist is going for more of a foot fetish/forced masturbation sort of thing. Penis dildos aren't penises for tagging purposes anyways so I definitely wouldn't use male/female if that's what you're asking.

Lance_Armstrong said:
post #610002

female/female?

Yeah, it looks like bondage, domination and toying, so the image falls under female/female.

--------

Vore is tricky. Sometimes it can overlap with sexual/mating behavior and therefore need a pairing tag. But it can also be because of revenge, because of predation, because of humor, horror, etc. So it doesn't automatically get a pairing tag, it has to depend on other factors. Do not confuse the fact that some of the people viewing the image may be getting of to it vs whether or not the characters are getting off to the vore. People also get off to tight clothing and solo images, which don't get a pairing tag either.

-----

Tentacles are always a challenge when it comes to tagging. They don't count as a person (unless coming from a visible creature, such as an octopus) so they don't get tagged with a pairing tag (male/male, male/female, etc). However, I do think that when they're inserting in orifices, simulated sex acts, stimulating privates and putting fluids everywhere that they should probably still be tagged with sex. It's a grey area because it's not masturbation and it's not sex with a partner, but it's still very much sex in most ways of measuring it. And otherwise tags like tentacle_sex, tentacle_rape don't make any sense if it's not considered to be sex at all.

What tag will be for homosexual kissing for example lesbian?

Yveltallover said:
What tag will be for homosexual kissing for example lesbian?

female/female

Lance_Armstrong said:
Incorrect. There's 345 pages of male/male and gay, and 93 pages of female/female and lesbian.

'characters' here meaning 'letters', not people

Catachan said:
'characters' here meaning 'letters', not people

g o d d a m n
i failed

Peekaboo said:
female/female

Why? Beacause of two females? And if they won't be kissing it won't be tagged female/female?

Yveltallover said:
Why? Beacause of two females? And if they won't be kissing it won't be tagged female/female?

it's a female doing something to another female duhhhhh dude.

Yveltallover said:
Why? Beacause of two females? And if they won't be kissing it won't be tagged female/female?

Pretty much. You tag "gender/gender" for romance/mating behavior/sex of all pairs involved. There are likely to be exceptions and a lot of nuances to it, but in general that is how those tags are used.

parasprite said:
Pretty much. You tag "gender/gender" for romance/mating behavior/sex of all pairs involved. There are likely to be exceptions and a lot of nuances to it, but in general that is how those tags are used.

How about bringing back 'gay' and 'lesbian' tags, while leaving 'gender/gender'? That way there will be less confusion.

Yveltallover said:
How about bringing back 'gay' and 'lesbian' tags, while leaving 'gender/gender'? That way there will be less confusion.

"Gay" and "lesbian" were the two tags that caused the most confusion out of any of these. For instance, things like this would end up getting tagged incorrectly:

• A solo male anally masturbating with a dildo. (incorrectly tagged gay)
• A model sheet where a character identifies as gay. (incorrectly tagged gay)
• A herm and female having sex. (incorrectly tagged lesbian/straight - more common with older posts).
• Things like post #188501 and post #456903

Unless you mean keeping both lesbian and female/female tags, in which case I'd say that would only increase confusion since they mean the same thing here as we specifically don't tag sexual orientation of the character (a partial exception is stated_homosexuality, which still doesn't get male/male or female/female unless that's actually present in the image, and never got gay or lesbian before the change).

Yveltallover said:
How about bringing back 'gay' and 'lesbian' tags, while leaving 'gender/gender'? That way there will be less confusion.

We don't tag sexual orientation here.

Yveltallover said:
How about bringing back 'gay' and 'lesbian' tags, while leaving 'gender/gender'? That way there will be more confusion.

FTFY. This has been plentifully discussed in earlier posts in this thread.

savageorange said:
FTFY. This has been plentifully discussed in earlier posts in this thread.

Don't do "fix'd" comments, I THINK the site still dislikes them :P

CamKitty said:
Don't do "fix'd" comments, I THINK the site still dislikes them :P

If I remember correctly, there's actually a rule against it.

Tokaido said:
There isn't a rule specifically against that form of comment that I can tell, but it would probably fall under spamming or trolling if done often enough.

Furrypickle explains it pretty well in this thread

Fix'd.

parasprite said:
Fix'd.

Thaaaat's right, we had this discussion and I was misremembering. Derp :B

parasprite said:
"Gay" and "lesbian" were the two tags that caused the most confusion out of any of these. For instance, things like this would end up getting tagged incorrectly:

• A solo male anally masturbating with a dildo. (incorrectly tagged gay)
• A model sheet where a character identifies as gay. (incorrectly tagged gay)
• A herm and female having sex. (incorrectly tagged lesbian/straight - more common with older posts).
• Things like post #188501 and post #456903

Unless you mean keeping both lesbian and female/female tags, in which case I'd say that would only increase confusion since they mean the same thing here as we specifically don't tag sexual orientation of the character (a partial exception is stated_homosexuality, which still doesn't get male/male or female/female unless that's actually present in the image, and never got gay or lesbian before the change).

Okay, but there are many posts tagged male/female where thay are only standing next to each other, or just not doing anything.
Also gay and lesbian were faster to type in.

Yveltallover said:
Okay, but there are many posts tagged male/female where thay are only standing next to each other, or just not doing anything.
Also gay and lesbian were faster to type in.

You can still type lesbian or gay and it would be tagged for female/female or male/male accordingly. That's how aliases work.

Yveltallover said:
Okay, but there are many posts tagged male/female where thay are only standing next to each other, or just not doing anything.
Also gay and lesbian were faster to type in.

It's likely that those are incorrectly tagged and need to be corrected. Over the years a lot of the gender/gender tags (particularly gay/lesbian/straight, and particularly older posts) have been inconsistently tagged and need cleaning up. It's also possible that some taggers may have tried to tag it with a different meaning, such as if they tried to tag "straight face" instead of "straight_face" or other meanings such as a 5-card "straight" in poker (though those are less likely). It's also not uncommon to see an entire comic tagged with something like "anal cat comic feline female human kemono male male/female sex vaginal young rating:explicit" regardless of what is going on in one particular page (i.e., lazy uploaders) which definitely need fixing (by the way, if you happen to see any and don't want to fix them yourself or don't have the time, feel free to send me a dmail and I'd be happy to look into it for you).

Granberia said:
You can still type lesbian or gay and it would be tagged for female/female or male/male accordingly. That's how aliases work.

I know and that's the problem. Instead of sex eg. male/male I get two males standing next to each other.

parasprite said:
It's likely that those are incorrectly tagged and need to be corrected. Over the years a lot of the gender/gender tags (particularly gay/lesbian/straight, and particularly older posts) have been inconsistently tagged and need cleaning up. It's also possible that some taggers may have tried to tag it with a different meaning, such as if they tried to tag "straight face" instead of "straight_face" or other meanings such as a 5-card "straight" in poker (though those are less likely). It's also not uncommon to see an entire comic tagged with something like "anal cat comic feline female human kemono male male/female sex vaginal young rating:explicit" regardless of what is going on in one particular page (i.e., lazy uploaders) which definitely need fixing (by the way, if you happen to see any and don't want to fix them yourself or don't have the time, feel free to send me a dmail and I'd be happy to look into it for you).

I'm fixing them, but there's too much!

Yveltallover said:
I'm fixing them, but there's too much!

No kidding. A good part of the reason that this tag name change us; it makes it more obvious to spot when it is used incorrectly. ;)

Searches like rating:s m/m -romantic -love -kissing -couple might help narrow down a few, but it looks like even that pulls up a lot of couples. You could manually add couple to the ones that have obvious "romantic interest" pairings to help narrow down the search a bit if it helps.