The bulk update request #9452 has been rejected.

remove implication after_rape (2736) -> after_sex (73022)

Reason: Using this BUR to ask whether rape should imply sex rather than necroing topic #25221 (and/or topic #2392, topic #6951, topic #1336). The implication request only got rejected during the purge so I would consider that the question hadn't been truly resolved.

Should rape always be sex, and forced be the umbrella to catch everything else that doesn't fall under rape?

EDIT: The bulk update request #9452 (forum #421760) has been rejected by @spe.

Kinda iffy on removing the implication when most of what I've seen so far under the after_rape tag depicts the aftermath of a rape sex.

If removing the implication doesn't remove the after_sex tag from existing posts, I'd say go for it then next step is to do a manual cleanup to remove after_sex from the non-applicable posts.

spuriouszabaione said:

If removing the implication doesn't remove the after_sex tag from existing posts, I'd say go for it then next step is to do a manual cleanup to remove after_sex from the non-applicable posts.

Removing an implication just means the tag wouldn't imply it in the future, it won't remove previous instances that came about because of the implication.

Well, as I'm sure I've stated before in one of those threads or somewhere, I'm of the opinion that rape is exclusively sex and everything else should be tagged forced.

I think the wiki article on rape is rather good. It opens in this way:

Images or animations depicting at least one character forcing at least one other character to engage in sexual activities of any kind against their will.

If we agree that rape refers to forced sexual activities, including non-penetrative sex (e.g., frottage or thigh sex), then after rape refers to any scene after forced sexual activities, including non-penetrative sex.

Since after rape includes non-penetrative sex, and after rape implicates after sex, then it follows that after sex should be used to describe scenes after sexual activities including non-penetrative sex.

The only source of tension here is that the after sex wiki article uses the word "intercourse", as though to imply that the only kind of sex is penetrative sex:

Images or animations which infers the characters shown have just had sex. Usually, cum is found on the characters who have had intercourse.

(Side note: the wiki entry for sex is quite clear about the many options for non-penetrative sex.)

I would be happy to edit the wiki to make clear on the after sex entry that "sex" is not just "penetration".

The bulk update request #9466 is active.

create implication rape (52153) -> sex (1121063)

Reason: The other choice

Is rape equivalent to forced + sex? Are there any forced sexual activities that don't/shouldn't fall under rape?

If rape is equivalent to forced + sex, should we reroute the implications of tags such as forced oral, reverse forced oral and forced autofellatio from forced to rape?

<sub>forced autofellatio makes a good jumping off point for my miscellaneous questions.
1. Does/should forced require the presence of another character (or tentacles) in the image? Answer: No
2. If a character assists someone in masturbating themselves, is that sex? (For example, something like post #3679140) If it is, how do we resolve the forced_autofellatio -> autofellatio -> masturbation implication (it seems I was under the impression that masturbation was exclusive with sex))EDIT: The bulk update request #9466 (forum #421875) has been approved by @spe.EDIT: The bulk update request #9466 (forum #421875) has been approved by @spe.</sub>

snpthecat said:
1. Does/should forced require the presence of another character (or tentacles) in the image?

If a post depicts someone waking up strapped to some machine that then does something obviously nonconsensual, I'd say its forced.

snpthecat said:
The bulk update request #9466 is active.

create implication rape (52153) -> sex (1121063)

Reason: The other choice

I support this implication, since both the wiki entries for sex and rape are written as though rape is a type of sex. (On the wiki entry for sex, under the section, "Positions, number characters and mood", rape is listed as a tag about sex.)

That being said, I am open to reconsider if anyone can bring in examples of posts in which rape is depicted whilst sex is not depicted.

snpthecat said:
Is rape equivalent to forced + sex? Are there any forced sexual activities that don't/should fall under rape?

If rape is equivalent to forced + sex, should we reroute the implications of tags such as forced oral, reverse forced oral and forced autofellatio from forced to rape?

Regarding these three questions, depictions of forced+sex don't always depict rape, and vice-versa. For example, force_feeding sex -rape brings up several images involving forced and sex, but not rape. Additionally, there are surely some situations in which an insertion is too big, and thus has to be forced against the submissive partner's protests, even if there's consent.

Forced autofellatio in particular provides several strong counter-examples. post #4455733 depicts forced autofellatio, which clearly is not rape. (For starters, it is a solo image.)

monroethelizard said:
Regarding these three questions, depictions of forced+sex don't always depict rape, and vice-versa. For example, force_feeding sex -rape brings up several images involving forced and sex, but not rape.

Should probably have worded it better. I was asking if all forced sexual activities are equivalent to rape, where "sexual activities" means any actions that would merit the post the sex tag. In what I believe is your counterexample, forced is referring to the non sexual activity, and wouldn't be either forced sexual activity nor rape.

I'll be interested in how you'll argue vice versa for "depictions of forced+sex don't always depict rape, and vice-versa."

Additionally, there are surely some situations in which an insertion is too big, and thus has to be forced against the submissive partner's protests, even if there's consent.

I assume you're arguing this is forced by not rape. So by this example, you believe forced is just a smaller violation of consent (assuming no cnc)? If they repeatedly keep forcing against the submissive partner's protests, would that then become rape?

Forced autofellatio in particular provides several strong counter-examples. post #4455733 depicts forced autofellatio, which clearly is not rape. (For starters, it is a solo image.)

rape and forced both state they require another person. How is this waived for forced but not rape?

anicebee said:
If a post depicts someone waking up strapped to some machine that then does something obviously nonconsensual, I'd say its forced.

Would it be rape if the machine penetrates them?

snpthecat said:
Would it be rape if the machine penetrates them?

It'd be forced_masturbation. This is stated in the aforementioned wiki page.

snpthecat said:
rape and forced both state they require another person. How is this waived for forced but not rape?

Would it be rape if the machine penetrates them?

anicebee said:
It'd be forced_masturbation. This is stated in the aforementioned wiki page.

The possibility of forced_masturbation from a machine, plus examples like post #4455733 showing forced_autofellatio in a solo image, suggest to me that forced should not require another character. That seems more sensible to me than trying to redefine what seems quite apparent at face value: that a machine can force someone to masturbate, and that someone can be forced to autofellate in a solo image.

If forced does not require multiple characters, but rape does, that would resolve the main concerns of SNPtheCat's, I think.

EDIT: Additionally, it also makes sense to me that ghost hands can lead to forced situations, but not rape. (Note: I'm thinking of ghost hands specifically, not disembodied hands. Ghost hands are not characters, whereas disembodied hands count as characters.) This further suggests that forced should not require multiple characters, whereas rape might. Never mind. Ghost hands implicates disembodied hands. I should stop here before I put a ghost foot further into my own mouth. 😜

---

snpthecat said:
I'll be interested in how you'll argue vice versa...

As for the "vice-versa" I wrote above, I'll need to think on it more. I was initially considering scenarios in which a character is drugged and raped without the use of physical force, but on further consideration, I think those should indeed be tagged forced. I'll think on it and see if any good examples come to mind. Otherwise, I retract that opinion. :>

a bit off topic, but molestation on here is used for unwanted sexual advances that isnt rape/sex, like a character forcibly getting their breasts groped by someone else. although this is how users understand and use the term, according to google the word seems to encompass all sexual assault, and is primarily used on cases where the victim is a child. so a new tag for unwanted sexual advances might be needed. maybe one each for unwanted soliciting, sexual contact, and exposure.

monroethelizard said:
The possibility of forced_masturbation from a machine, plus examples like post #4455733 showing forced_autofellatio in a solo image, suggest to me that forced should not require another character.

It already doesn't, really. forced_transformation implies forced, but forced_transformation applies to any unwilling transformations, such as a werewolf changing because of a fullmoon, or a solo character being transformed by interacting with a cursed object.

watsit said:
It already doesn't, really. forced_transformation implies forced, but forced_transformation applies to any unwilling transformations, such as a werewolf changing because of a fullmoon, or a solo character being transformed by interacting with a cursed object.

Good eye!

I shall edit the forced wiki entry now, to clarify this. At the time of my earlier comment, it read:

This tag refers to any work in which a character is made to do something they do not want to do by another character.

Now, the pertinent line reads:

Forced scenarios can occur in solo, duo, or group (including trio) images. For example, forced masturbation might occur from a machine, or forced transformation might occur after touching a cursed object.

anicebee said:
It'd be forced_masturbation. This is stated in the aforementioned wiki page.

monroethelizard said:
The possibility of forced_masturbation from a machine, plus examples like post #4455733 showing forced_autofellatio in a solo image, suggest to me that forced should not require another character. That seems more sensible to me than trying to redefine what seems quite apparent at face value: that a machine can force someone to masturbate, and that someone can be forced to autofellate in a solo image.

If forced does not require multiple characters, but rape does, that would resolve the main concerns of SNPtheCat's, I think.

Ah I see, thanks for the answers, and it has definitely fully resolved one of the questions, but there are still a few remaining.

Is forced sexual activity (by another character), for example forced oral (which implies both forced and sex), is that always rape (and if not, can it be split into solely rape and molestation)?
(And if so, is forced masturbation by another character also always rape?)

Should forced autofellatio imply forced masturbation?

The bulk update request #9468 is pending approval.

create implication forced_autofellatio (233) -> forced_masturbation (242)
remove implication forced_autofellatio (233) -> forced (103708)
create implication forced_oral (12368) -> rape (52153)
create implication reverse_forced_oral (1450) -> rape (52153)
remove implication forced_oral (12368) -> forced (103708)
remove implication reverse_forced_oral (1450) -> forced (103708)

Reason: Let's see how people will vote on it

If the rape -> sex implication passes:
unimply forced_oral -> sex unimply reverse_forced_oral -> sex

oral doesn't imply sex, it also applies to oral_masturbation, so it seems weird that forced_oral would imply rape.

watsit said:
oral doesn't imply sex, it also applies to oral_masturbation, so it seems weird that forced_oral would imply rape.

We could either remove the implication to sex from the tag, and have it open up to include forced_oral_masturbation and its subtags (forced_autofellatio), or keep it as a sex only tag

I think "rape" kink alway revolves around "forcing" and rougher sex, without consent like "choiceless". So yeah

The bulk update request #9452 (forum #421760) has been rejected by @spe.

The bulk update request #9466 (forum #421875) has been approved by @spe.

The bulk update request #9466 (forum #421875) has been approved by @spe.

snpthecat said:
The bulk update request #9468 is pending approval.

create implication forced_autofellatio (233) -> forced_masturbation (242)
remove implication forced_autofellatio (233) -> forced (103708)
create implication forced_oral (12368) -> rape (52153)
create implication reverse_forced_oral (1450) -> rape (52153)
remove implication forced_oral (12368) -> forced (103708)
remove implication reverse_forced_oral (1450) -> forced (103708)

Reason: Let's see how people will vote on it

If the rape -> sex implication passes:
unimply forced_oral -> sex unimply reverse_forced_oral -> sex

I specifically don't like the idea of forced_oral implying rape because the tag can/is often used in scenarios that are consensual overall, but the receiver just gets a little hands-on or otherwise surprises the giver with a sudden pull or thrust that they weren't expecting. I don't remember what forum topic this discussion was already on, but I believe it was agreed to let that tag be free of the implication despite the potential real-world legality/definition.
Edit: After checking what I described: forced_oral -rape reveals almost 10k results, give or take mistags
Edit2: Wow yeah I said pretty much the exact same thing in the reference topic #56222

nin10dope said:
I specifically don't like the idea of forced_oral implying rape because the tag can/is often used in scenarios that are consensual overall, but the receiver just gets a little hands-on or otherwise surprises the giver with a sudden pull or thrust that they weren't expecting.

Forced tags aren't about physical force, but a character's will to not do something. It can't be consensual if it's against their will. If anything is tagged forced_oral that isn't non-con, it's a mistag.

But there is an issue with having forced_oral implying rape, as rape is sex but forced_oral could be forced_masturbation of the oral variety.

watsit said:
Forced tags aren't about physical force, but a character's will to not do something. It can't be consensual if it's against their will. If anything is tagged forced_oral that isn't non-con, it's a mistag.

But there is an issue with having forced_oral implying rape, as rape is sex but forced_oral could be forced_masturbation of the oral variety.

That's a lot of mistags in your opinion then, cause that's how that one gets used. And I wasn't exaggerating the number either, it was "approx. 9.4k" results that lacked rape

nin10dope said:
That's a lot of mistags in your opinion then, cause that's how that one gets used. And I wasn't exaggerating the number either, it was "approx. 9.4k" results that lacked rape

Not just my opinion, the forced_oral wiki says "A character being forced to perform oral sex against their will," and it implies forced, which states "When a character is forced to do something without having given permission or consent.". Having a lot of mistags doesn't make them not mistags.

watsit said:
Not just my opinion, the forced_oral wiki says "A character being forced to perform oral sex against their will," and it implies forced, which states "When a character is forced to do something without having given permission or consent.". Having a lot of mistags doesn't make them not mistags.

You're not wrong, but it may imply that a change to the tag (or its wiki) in one way or another is warranted

nin10dope said:
You're not wrong, but it may imply that a change to the tag (or its wiki) in one way or another is warranted

No, I think a cleanup is all that's warranted. It could be done if multiple people work at it.

Not replying to anyone specific, but potentially unpopular opinion here.

Since the topic of "how should rape be defined? Just sex or all sexual activity? Is it a theme? What about legally dubious actions? Coercion? Sleep sex?" comes up not infrequently maybe 'rape' should be retired. Alias it to forced or forced_sex. Make the wiki page a list of relevant tags so that people can build their searches and blacklists to match their personal definition.

regsmutt said:
Not replying to anyone specific, but potentially unpopular opinion here.

Since the topic of "how should rape be defined? Just sex or all sexual activity? Is it a theme? What about legally dubious actions? Coercion? Sleep sex?" comes up not infrequently maybe 'rape' should be retired. Alias it to forced or forced_sex. Make the wiki page a list of relevant tags so that people can build their searches and blacklists to match their personal definition.

I will match your assumption with my own: I very much like to think that would be a very unpopular change for people who like the tag and its sub categories.

regsmutt said:
Not replying to anyone specific, but potentially unpopular opinion here.

Since the topic of "how should rape be defined? Just sex or all sexual activity? Is it a theme? What about legally dubious actions? Coercion? Sleep sex?" comes up not infrequently maybe 'rape' should be retired. Alias it to forced or forced_sex. Make the wiki page a list of relevant tags so that people can build their searches and blacklists to match their personal definition.

This has a certain logic to it, but I think the colloquial term is too embedded in popular consciousness for this to work. Especially given it's something so many people want to blacklist, swapping out a well-known term for an arbitrary clinical one seems like a problem.

It'd be great if everyone read the wiki and followed its logic, but such users are clearly in a minority.

The tag implication rape -> sex has been rejected by @spe.