Posted under General
I count no less than 10 images on the first 3 pages of anal that are not sex.
Did you even bother to look at the images or do you just submit implications based on wikis?
Read this post. It applies to you just as much as it applied to the user I was actually responding to. forum #67036
Updated
Log said:
I count no less than 10 images on the first 3 pages of anal that are not sex.Did you even bother to look at the images or do you just submit implications based on wikis?
OK, forum #67036 is good advice. I'll keep that in mind.
However, even after double-checking, I actually don't see as much images of anal that are not sex.
Possibly, my understanding or treatment of "sex" is more comprehensive than yours. Maybe you don't want images of tentacle sex and fist penetration to be tagged sex?
If we're going to call everything involving female genital manipulation sex we first need to readdress forum #49326 for the fifth or whatever time.
I know I've been coming off like a dick lately on the forum but when I keep having to post the same thing over and over it feels like being nice is futile.
Log said:
If we're going to call everything involving female genital manipulation sex we first need to readdress forum #49326 for the fifth or whatever time.
As a result of this thread, I'd like to edit the wiki of anal to be very comprehensive (like vaginal), but it's locked, so I couldn't.
The tag sex is still a big mess: if, ideally, it should be used only when a penis is penetrating, then the searches sex tentacles, cunnilingus sex and anal -sex have many wrong results; and can be improved in the future.
Log said:
I know I've been coming off like a dick lately on the forum but when I keep having to post the same thing over and over it feels like being nice is futile.
That wouldn't be the case nearly as often if wikis were less vague and the help files were updated/useful, but I suppose the former is up to us.
OOZ662 said:
That wouldn't be the case nearly as often if wikis were less vague and the help files were updated/useful, but I suppose the former is up to us.
I can help with that.
Please someone unlock anal, if possible. I don't see any strong reason to keep it locked, especially since the wiki is inaccurate, to begin with.
I have experience in editing wikis (as my record says), so I can simply rewrite that misleading reference to anal sex, and make a short better text, directly.
Updated
Dogenzaka said:
What about aliasing sexual positions to sex, like doggystyle, cowgirl_position, and such?
No, I don't think so. Some people are drawn in these positions without actually having sex. Let me see, specifically, the search cowgirl_position -sex...
Many results don't depict any penetration at the moment, for various reasons. Examples:
Some others are the very beginning of a penetration:
Some others have penetrations that are unseen due to the camera angle or the clothes; I'm not 100% sure about what to do with them. But I believe they'd fit even a very restrictive tag sex perfectly.
MINOR EDIT: I've rewritten my first paragraph a little.
Updated
Danielx21 said:
No, I don't think so. Some people are drawn in these positions without actually having sex. Let me see, specifically, the search cowgirl_position -sex...
The wiki for cowgirl position kinda implies that penetration needs to be happening: "You can substitute a futanari, a woman with a strap-on, or whatever for the man, of course."
Dogenzaka said:
The wiki for cowgirl position kinda implies that penetration needs to be happening: "You can substitute a futanari, a woman with a strap-on, or whatever for the man, of course."
The whole conclusion of the initial subject of this thread is that wikis can be wrong. :)
Anyway, we have these options to achieve perfect WPC (wiki/posts consistency) for cowgirl position:
1. De-tagging all the posts that don't depict sex.
2. Editing the wiki to allow any pair in that position, having sex or not.
I choose the latter because it is very convenient. (among a number of other reasons) The searches "cowgirl+sex" and "cowgirl -sex", naturally, should cover all the possibilities of lack or presence of sex.
Updated
Arrei said:
So somewhat related, if the sex tag is then only for penises, is sex involving tentacles then not supposed to be tagged with sex? If so, then don't we need some sort of "tentacle sex" tag to differentiate between images that just contain a tentacle and images that involve tentacles doing the nasty?
Yes. The creation of tentacle sex seems perfectly appropriate.
The paragraphs that follow are my critique of the subject as a whole.
My conclusion is that the tag sex is inherently flawed. Its nuances of restrictions and permissions are too counterintuitive. Many posts that comply to the rules are not tagged there; and vice-versa. It's natural that many people would have different views on what is taggable sex; many people would want to add tentacle sex to it and many would not.
If we need to tag specifically vaginal sex and anal sex (where a penis is always doing the job), then a better idea would be having vaginal sex and anal sex. They would be subsets of vaginal and anal. This way...
Other alternatives of accurate and self-explanatory tags would be some more formal ones: sexual intercourse, copulation and coitus. These could, perhaps, be aliases to vaginal sex.
Updated
I just had an important second thought. My message above is too big, so I won't edit it, because people might miss the revised version:
The creation of the tag tentacle sex might be perfectly appropriate, because it's a common theme that people are expected to search every once in a while. However, it's not inherently necessary, because a search for tentacle penetration (the tags tentacle and penetration together) should suffice.
I'm not sure that would work, actually, for two reasons:
First off: the penetration wiki specifies that it's for objects not typically used to penetrate - given that tentacle sex is a rather common theme, I'm not sure penetration would fit for tentacles.
Second, there exist tentacle sex images that contain no penetration whatsoever, such as post #992915. In addition, penetration does not seem to apply to fellatio, and there exist tentacle images with fellatio, but no penetration.
Arrei said:
I'm not sure that would work, actually, for two reasons:First off: the penetration wiki specifies that it's for objects not typically used to penetrate - given that tentacle sex is a rather common theme, I'm not sure penetration would fit for tentacles.
Second, there exist tentacle sex images that contain no penetration whatsoever, such as post #992915. In addition, penetration does not seem to apply to fellatio, and there exist tentacle images with fellatio, but no penetration.
OK. I tagged your example (post #992915) tentacle sex.
Notably, penetration still has many penetrations of tentacles and vines, that are common in hentai but uncommon in the real-world. (or so I hope) Anyway, penetration is not much consistent anyway: many images there are penetrations of penises and dildos.
Originally we had "sex" (implying vaginal sex) "oral" (implying oral sex) and "anal" (implying anal sex). I created the "vaginal" tag to make the meaning more explicit since the sex tag was often misused.
IIRC I debated over using vaginal_sex and decided the two separate tags was more flexible (and remember there were less tools back then, no mass editing, tag scripts, implications etc and only one admin)
