The tag implication #45261 cum_in_top's_ass -> versatile has been rejected.

Reason: Seems to fit the definition of "switching between the roles of penetrator and penetrated... in past tense" as stated on the versatile wiki page. Also both these tags are very underused and hopefully this'll get more eyes on them.

EDIT: The tag implication cum_in_top's_ass -> versatile (forum #339063) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.

post #2537257
I mean, couldn't the top just be a dominant catcher? (Admittedly this one is also versatile, but that's beside the point, the top is the one being penetrated here)
post #3317360
Or part of a train.
post #2715404
Or there could be a power bottom.

(Edited to include more examples and thumbnails)

I really dislike the use of "top" and "bottom" in tags, it makes it completely ambiguous if it's referring to penetrating/penetrated or on_top/on_bottom characters.

watsit said:
I really dislike the use of "top" and "bottom" in tags, it makes it completely ambiguous if it's referring to penetrating/penetrated or on_top/on_bottom characters.

I thought top and bottom were for literal positions and dominant/submissive were for which one was in control or not.

furrin_gok said:
I thought top and bottom were for literal positions

Other people do too, but others don't. No way to say which one's right. bottom_pov is a complete and utter mess, not only a mix of bottom-positioned penetrating characters with top-positioned penetrated characters, it's also got plenty of non-penetrating low-angle_views, and even low-angle view that's not a valid _pov use.

furrin_gok said:
and dominant/submissive were for which one was in control or not.

Dominant/submissive is for BDSM stuff, when one is dominating or being dominated, typically as a result of some form of restraint or physical control. That's not the same as simply indicating who's penetrating or penetrated (e.g. post #3317360 isn't dominant (or submissive) because there's not apparent restraint or control, just a guy being DP'd and looking pleasured).

So it sounds like your only objections are to the name of the tag, not to whether the implication is valid or not?

wat8548 said:
So it sounds like your only objections are to the name of the tag, not to whether the implication is valid or not?

Not in my case, see examples above.

furrin_gok said:
Not in my case, see examples above.

All of your examples were based on misunderstanding the name of the tag.

wat8548 said:
All of your examples were based on misunderstanding the name of the tag.

Top is whoever's higher up. If there's a misunderstanding there, that's on you. Edit: Not actually sure where things are on that, it seems obvious to me that top and bottom are directions but that doesn't mean it's the standard here.

Cum_in_penetrator's_ass implying versatile would fit though.

I would disagree on top/bottom being disassociated from penetrator/penetrated pitcher/catcher, since we have tags like power bottom that do work on the definition that bottom merely involves catching, regardless of the sex position being used.

fifteen said:
I would disagree on top/bottom being disassociated from penetrator/penetrated pitcher/catcher, since we have tags like power bottom that do work on the definition that bottom merely involves catching, regardless of the sex position being used.

Just because one use may not have an issue doesn't mean all uses won't have an issue. I've already shown how people easily confuse bottom pov, and we've already aliased away tags like big_top_small_bottom since it's ambiguous.

I feel like this may be the kind of situation that we’ll need to pull an andromorph/gynomorph for; that is, invent terms specific to E621 that aren’t loaded with connotations, forcing people who don’t understand the terms to read the wiki, and invalidating or aliasing away all the more common terms.

I think penetrator/penetrated is fine, as that doesn’t seem to be confused with anything else. Top and bottom need to go. I don’t know what to replace them with, though.

scaliespe said:
I feel like this may be the kind of situation that we’ll need to pull an andromorph/gynomorph for; that is, invent terms specific to E621 that aren’t loaded with connotations, forcing people who don’t understand the terms to read the wiki, and invalidating or aliasing away all the more common terms.

I think penetrator/penetrated is fine, as that doesn’t seem to be confused with anything else. Top and bottom need to go. I don’t know what to replace them with, though.

Hm, I guess disambiguating these with new tags might be for the best. I personally prefer pitcher/catcher to penetrator/penetrated, as the latter sound too formal, and if I'm not mistaken "penetrated" is already in use by some tags.

That would however raise the question of whether thise same terms should be used for things like oral as well, which has slightly different role connotations. "pitching anal" and "pitching oral" are both very well defined when talking about penetration proper, but how about rimming? Who is considered as having which role then?

That's already kind of a problem when using dom/sub or top/bottom (unless e6 has strict guidelines for those, but I usually forget to tag these, so I wouldn't know) where it's usually pretty subjective who has the top role in a rimming situation. That should probably be adressed if new tag names are to be used.

fifteen said:
Hm, I guess disambiguating these with new tags might be for the best. I personally prefer pitcher/catcher to penetrator/penetrated, as the latter sound too formal, and if I'm not mistaken "penetrated" is already in use by some tags.

I do wonder if that would cause any confusion with actual baseball players, whence these terms originated. And anyway, doesn’t that terminology only apply to male/male situations? I’ve never heard it outside of that context. “Female catcher” just sounds odd to me.

That would however raise the question of whether thise same terms should be used for things like oral as well, which has slightly different role connotations. "pitching anal" and "pitching oral" are both very well defined when talking about penetration proper, but how about rimming? Who is considered as having which role then?

I don’t think rimming qualifies as penetration unless it’s deep rimming.

That's already kind of a problem when using dom/sub or top/bottom (unless e6 has strict guidelines for those, but I usually forget to tag these, so I wouldn't know) where it's usually pretty subjective who has the top role in a rimming situation. That should probably be adressed if new tag names are to be used.

Maybe we could use giving/receiving for cases that aren’t penetration or mutual (like tribadism). I think that would apply just fine to things like rimming and cunnilingus which aren’t penetration. I still think fingering/fisting should be penetration though, as their exclusion is very arbitrary.

The penetration tags could even imply giving/receiving, so they could be used for any kind of non-mutual sexual interaction.

scaliespe said:
I still think fingering/fisting should be penetration though, as their exclusion is very arbitrary.

I still can't find a clear consensus on whether dildos count as penetration or not. The penetration wiki page lists dildo_insertion among its hierarchy of tags, but that tag's implication chain extends no further than sex_toy_insertion, whose wiki claims that it is a penetration tag despite no such implication existing. Of the five body part subtags, sex_toy_in_ass implies anal_penetration and sex_toy_in_urethra implies urethral_penetration, but sex_toy_in_pussy doesn't imply vaginal_penetration, sex_toy_in_mouth doesn't imply oral_penetration and sex_toy_in_cloaca doesn't imply whatever the appropriate tag would be there.

Then there is the peculiar case of pegging and its implications. Firstly, it implies sex_toy_penetration, which is not the same tag as sex_toy_insertion, and the wiki page for the former insists that it has been superseded by the latter. On a related note, dildo itself is implied by both dildo_insertion (11.3k posts) and dildo_penetration (63 posts). Secondly, it implies both anal_penetration and male_penetrated, both of which imply penetration in turn. Meanwhile, its close relative strapon_sex implies nothing further than toying_partner, which is also used for penetrable_sex_toys.

wat8548 said:
I still can't find a clear consensus on whether dildos count as penetration or not. The penetration wiki page lists dildo_insertion among its hierarchy of tags, but that tag's implication chain extends no further than sex_toy_insertion, whose wiki claims that it is a penetration tag despite no such implication existing. Of the five body part subtags, sex_toy_in_ass implies anal_penetration and sex_toy_in_urethra implies urethral_penetration, but sex_toy_in_pussy doesn't imply vaginal_penetration, sex_toy_in_mouth doesn't imply oral_penetration and sex_toy_in_cloaca doesn't imply whatever the appropriate tag would be there.

Then there is the peculiar case of pegging and its implications. Firstly, it implies sex_toy_penetration, which is not the same tag as sex_toy_insertion, and the wiki page for the former insists that it has been superseded by the latter. On a related note, dildo itself is implied by both dildo_insertion (11.3k posts) and dildo_penetration (63 posts). Secondly, it implies both anal_penetration and male_penetrated, both of which imply penetration in turn. Meanwhile, its close relative strapon_sex implies nothing further than toying_partner, which is also used for penetrable_sex_toys.

Yeah, it’s a total mess.

I think it’s important to remember that the word “penetration” here specifically means “sexual penetration.” Things such as an abdomen being penetrated by a knife is excluded as it’s clearly not sexual. Therefore, IMO, we should:

• count ALL sexually-oriented insertions as penetration
• that includes all orifices whose penetration is assumed to be sexual. So anything going in a vagina or anus, for example, is automatically penetration. A vagina is a genital organ, so it’s inherently sexual; and the only common inherently non-sexual use of an anus involves what comes out, but nothing going in. Maybe an enema would be an exception, but they’re fetishized often enough that I think including it would be fine. We could also include cloaca and urethra in this category.
• likewise, all penetrating objects that are inherently sexual, no matter what orifice it enters through, are all penetration. Basically, a penis or dildo entering any hole, even something strange like an ear canal counts as sexual penetration because the penetrating object is sexual.
• this system would exclude things like finger_in_mouth as neither object is inherently sexual.
• use insertion for the penetrating object, and penetration for the penetrated object (penile_insertion and dildo_insertion instead of penetration, for example) - this helps clear up the confusion regarding things that could either penetrate or be penetrated - sometimes people confuse penile_penetration for urethral_penetration because it follows the format of vaginal_penetration and anal_penetration, implying that the penis is the thing being penetrated.

How’s this sound?

The tag implication cum_in_top's_ass -> versatile (forum #339063) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.