The tag implication #67309 child_grooming -> manipulation has been rejected.

Reason: Self evident, (child)grooming is a form of manipulation

EDIT: The tag implication child_grooming -> manipulation (forum #448100) has been rejected by @Nin10dope.

Already suggested by the BUR at topic #56226.

beholding said:
Already suggested by the BUR at topic #56226.

True but the BUR in it's entirety is contested and full of unsure votes. This specific one is an easy connection.

It should really be suggested as part of topic #56226, even as a separate BUR.

Is it? child_grooming doesn't have to have apparent manipulation (at least, not without stretching the word so thin that it's basically useless), since it covers acts to build trust and an emotional bond, which aren't necessarily manipulative visually. Though honestly, it looks like child_grooming is completely misused with all the posts depicting the sex, with the young character being naive or confused about what they're doing, the result of potential grooming rather than the grooming itself.

watsit said:
it covers acts to build trust and an emotional bond

That's textbook manipulation.

watsit said:
Is it? child_grooming doesn't have to have apparent manipulation

It is. Removing absolutely all contextual background defeats the purpose of every tag that isn't painstakingly shoved in the viewer's face. By definition of child grooming, all of the acts are inherently manipulative.

thegreatwolfgang said:
It should really be suggested as part of topic #56226, even as a separate BUR.

I guess, I thought making this an individual post would make Approving it easier from admins since they wouldn't have to go through nearly as potentially long and contested of a forum as that one.

beholding said:
That's textbook manipulation.

Not necessarily, and this is part of my problem with the tag in general:

In psychology, manipulation is defined as an action designed to influence or control another person, usually in an underhanded or unfair manner which facilitates one's personal aims.

It depends on the intent of the person, someone can influence another person's behavior to the same effect without intending to. To fit TWYS, the manipulation would need to be visualized to tag it, and those acts may not be a guarantee that visual element is also present. And there's no real limit to what constitutes manipulation; being led around on a leash is a form manipulation, as is being nice. The tag would just get used on what a given person thinks it should be used on, rather than any definable visual element.

I think you're being overly anal about a literal tag what you see by desiring the ability to understand every single tag with no ability to come up with context for any given image.
That ability is inherent and important for every adult in order to see and understand what is actually happening by putting all of the information together.
You have to remember that the purpose is to show people what they're looking for. And if someone wants to browse images containing manipulation (and isn't blacklisting anything with children in it) then child grooming fits perfectly into that category.

nin10dope said:
You have to remember that the purpose is to show people what they're looking for.

And for that, a tag needs a firm definition, which can be verified by anyone looking at the post. Manipulation is a broad concept predicated on a character's state of mind, something you can't inherently see, which can only be inferred by other visual elements. This isn't necessarily a problem, if there was a clear definition that won't be prone to heavy misuse by people using their own personal definition or using external knowledge rather than what's seen in an image, and I don't think manipulation as a general concept is clear enough for that.

nin10dope said:
I guess, I thought making this an individual post would make Approving it easier from admins since they wouldn't have to go through nearly as potentially long and contested of a forum as that one.

Not really, it is actually much harder for admins to go through multiple threads to look at the multiple long arguments and weigh everybody's opinion on the matter.

You can manually reject this request now by the way, @Beholding added it onto his BUR #10899 on the other topic, so there is no need to continue two separate threads for arguments.
You may continue your arguments there if you want to add on with anything.

thegreatwolfgang said:
Not really, it is actually much harder for admins to go through multiple threads to look at the multiple long arguments and weigh everybody's opinion on the matter.

You can manually reject this request now by the way, @Beholding added it onto his BUR #10899 on the other topic, so there is no need to continue two separate threads for arguments.
You may continue your arguments there if you want to add on with anything.

Sounds good :P
Thanks for the insight for this scenario

The tag implication child_grooming -> manipulation (forum #448100) has been rejected by @Nin10dope.