The tag implication #41131 taker_pov -> receiving_pov has been rejected.

Reason: same thing, I feel taker pov is more commonly used off this site so this should help

EDIT: The tag implication taker_pov -> receiving_pov (forum #315692) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

ra2or said:
Reason: same thing, I feel taker pov is more commonly used off this site so this should help

I think taker_pov should be invalidated. It's used randomly for penis_focus, receiving_pov, and having a penis pointing at the (unseen) viewer. Either way though, definitely not all of them are receiving_pov. The POV shots are intended for first person views, and as the wiki states, that's

When the perspective is from the view of one of the characters, as if you are that character. The character should be a part of the picture. See pages on unseen_character (unfitting for first person view) and solo_focus (fitting in some instances) for further guidance.

If there is no other person and the character is just looking at the viewer/fourth wall, use looking_at_viewer instead.

but many posts tagged with the taker_pov tag do not have the viewer character in the image, so should not get a pov tag. Though it does look like first person view needs some clearning up, as there are posts where you can't see the first-person character getting tagged with first person view.

Also, I think receiving_pov should be renamed penetrated_pov for clarity. Many of those posts seem to be of imminent penetration of the viewer, who is not yet "receiving" anything, so having the tag be penetrated_pov would clarify that the viewer character should actually be penetrated/receiving instead of imminently so.

watsit said:
Also, I think receiving_pov should be renamed penetrated_pov for clarity. Many of those posts seem to be of imminent penetration of the viewer, who is not yet "receiving" anything, so having the tag be penetrated_pov would clarify that the viewer character should actually be penetrated/receiving instead of imminently so.

+1, plus it'd pair well with penetrating_pov

Taker_pov is a tricky one, and the wiki's description "not to be confused with fellatio_pov" complicates things since that's the main focus.

Most sites use this to prevent tag clutter, and using less search terms to cast a wide net on submissive material.
It implies submissive_pov, receiving_pov (fellatio_pov/blowjob_pov), and "imminent receiving" (penis_towards_viewer/presenting_penis).
I've also seen it be used for pov of the viewer taking dick, tongue, or fingering via anal/vaginal.
penis_focus isn't exclusively a submissive, low angle pov. So taker_pov works as a substitute for those seeking that specific kind of focus.

Aliasing taker_pov to submissive_pov or receiving_pov (assuming penis_towards_viewer/presenting_penis applies to these tags) are the best options.

yotty said:
Most sites use this to prevent tag clutter, and using less search terms to cast a wide net on submissive material.
It implies submissive_pov, receiving_pov (fellatio_pov/blowjob_pov), and "imminent receiving" (penis_towards_viewer/presenting_penis).

Being a receiver/penetrated doesn't imply being submissive. Penis_towards_viewer and presenting_penis also don't necessarily mean "imminent receiving", nor that the viewer is submissive. As it is, 'submissive' is heavily over-used to imply someone is or wants to bottom, even though it's supposed to be the counterpart of 'dominant', as in BDSM stuff. But often it's used for characters simply having sex, maybe rough, or even just presenting.

yotty said:
Aliasing taker_pov to submissive_pov or receiving_pov (assuming penis_towards_viewer still applies to these tags) are the best options.

Considering how often it's used on posts that aren't even a first-person POV shot, I think it would be better to just invalidate it, with a wiki explaining that the POV tags need some part of the viewing character visible, and a list of tags that would be more appropriate (penis_towards_viewer, presenting_penis, penetrated_pov, etc).

watsit said:
Being a receiver/penetrated doesn't imply being submissive. Penis_towards_viewer and presenting_penis also don't necessarily mean "imminent receiving", nor that the viewer is submissive. As it is, 'submissive' is heavily over-used to imply someone is or wants to bottom, even though it's supposed to be the counterpart of 'dominant', as in BDSM stuff.:/posts/2904391.

I understand that tags like receiver/penetrated isn't exclusively for submissive people. Images are always open to interpretation. What I was trying to say is that people who want to find specific kinds of material can benefit from taker_pov because it contextualizes images within these tags that don't always warrant something like maledom, intersex_domination ect, (casting wide net on submissive material; subjectively speaking).

Considering how often it's used on posts that aren't even a first-person POV shot, I think it would be better to just invalidate it, with a wiki explaining that the POV tags need some part of the viewing character visible, and a list of tags that would be more appropriate (penis_towards_viewer, presenting_penis, penetrated_pov, etc).

Ehh, the first_person_view vs pov feels like splitting hairs. Most people coming here for pov porn don't really give a shit about that.
Aliasing taker_pov would be best, especially for new-comers who want to contribute to tagging images, but I'll accept whatever happens.

yotty said:
Ehh, the first_person_view vs pov feels like splitting hairs.

I didn't mean to draw a distinction between first_person_view and pov. I actually meant the opposite, that the POV tags are intended for first_person_view images, that they're the same (the _pov tags just being a bit more precise about what the state the viewer character is in; a number of POV tags already implicate first_person_view, and the others can be made to implicate it too). The issue is, for tagging purposes, an image is only considered first-person if you can see parts of the character the view is from. For example, post #2875525 would not be considered first_person_view since there's no indication it's from the point of view of a character, and so also shouldn't be tagged receiver_pov, submissive_pov, taker_pov, etc. In contrast, post #1818721 is considered first_person_view since you can see the character's legs and submissive_pov since the legs are bound, but not receiver_pov since there's no penetration. Or post #2631232 is considered first_person_view since you can see the character's breasts, and maybe receiver_pov/penetrated_pov if the penis could be shallowly penetrating the "viewer's" mouth, but not submissive_pov since there's no apparent dominance/BDSM stuff going on.

The way taker_pov is getting used is a random mix between penis_focus, penis_toward_viewer, submissive_pov, and receiving_pov/penetrated_pov, so can't be aliased to any one if people are going to keep trying to tag it on the others, as posts would get mis-tagged as a result. It also can't stay as it is since it's not being used properly as a POV tag, and it covers separate less-distinct concepts while also being inconsistently applied, making it not useful for searching (it'd miss a ton of relevant stuff) or blacklisting (lots of things would get through that shouldn't). The remaining alternative is to invalidate it, which lets people know it's a bad tag and allows for providing information about what may be used instead depending on what's depicted in the image.

The tag implication taker_pov -> receiving_pov (forum #315692) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.