Posted under General
Aliasing straight_shota -> shota
Reason: I fail to see the point in having this tag to differentiate between straight and gay shota. The "yaoi" tag already exists for this purpose, making "straight_shota" redundant. It makes more sense to do a search such as "shota -yaoi", or perhaps "shota -yaoi -solo", than to have a redundant tag like "straight_shota".
Updated by Log
As one reason for keeping it brought up in forum #15591
abcadeff said:
I would recommend keeping the straight_shota tag, because shota -yaoi could yield a lot of images just consisting of a single boy (unless I misunderstand how the yaoi tag is supposed to be used). I guess you could use shota -yaoi breasts or something, but asdfgasdfgasfg
There are currently 48 pages under a shota -straight_shota -yaoi search, and 120 deleted posts as well.
40 pages do, but there are also plenty of images that might have characters in non sex act situations together.
Also I should point out that we have made in the past tags that more or less can be replicated with 3 tag searches, so removing the tag simply because you can sort of replicate it with a 3 tag search isn't a particularly strong argument for removing the tag imo.
If safe images are appearing in a search for "shota", then they need to have the "shota" tag removed from them, as the "shota" tag is only to be used on images that are sexual in nature.
I am not proposing that the tag should be removed because it can be found easily by other tag searches. I am proposing that it be removed because there isn't any real sense in having the tag. Is there a particular need to separate straight shota and yaoi shota with a tag other than "yaoi"?
I think given the prevalence of other types of images that appear under the shota tag, I think retaining it would be worthwhile. The images under the shota tag seem to belong to 4 categories: straight_shota, yaoi shota, solo shota, and group shota. Both straight and yaoi are defined by a sexual activity, while solo and group may simply involve only sexualization of the characters. If you remove straight shota, you're then pooling it together with solo and group shota with less tags to sort through them. It would be significantly easier sorting through the 4 groups by retaining the straight_shota tag, instead of removing it.
Yes, I know yaoi and straight shota can overlap with "group shota" but you can have an image which sexualizes a group of characters, female and male, without having the image meet the requirements to label them as straight_shota or as yaoi.
Updated
My proposed change would not change the groupings. It would just turn "straight" shota into the default assumption, which would therefore be untagged. "Solo", "yaoi", and "group" shota would be tagged as such to differentiate them from straight shota.
Again, is there a particular reason why anything other than the "yaoi" tag should separate straight content from yaoi content? Let's take the "sex" tag, for example. This can also be separated into several groups: straight vaginal intercourse, straight anal intercourse, yaoi anal intercourse, and, going by the fact that it is considered to be a different gender alltogether, futanari versions of the two. There is not, however, a "straight_sex" tag, though, since "straight" is the default assumption when "sex" is tagged.
You can't default shota to "straight," because the concept of shota is not the same as the sex tag. You're having a great misconception about the shota tag imo.
The shota tag only indicates about an image that a young male is depicted in a sexually provocative way. You can not default that in anyway to "straight" because straight and yaoi are concepts that you can only apply to a relationship occurring between two characters. The shota tag does not provide any information on its own of whether images under it depict a relationship or not, it just indicates that there is at least one character and that character is a young male and is depicted sexually.
You're right, "shota" does not indicate anything other than that a young male is depicted in a sexual manner. It does not imply any sort of orientation, or indeed any other information at all.
However, neither does the sex tag. A more similar comparison would be the "loli" tag. Yet, we do not use a "straight_sex" tag or a "straight_loli" tag to differentiate between straight sex and yaoi sex, or between straight loli and yuri loli. Why? Because unless there is a "yaoi" or "yuri" tag added, there is no reason to assume that the orientation of the image is anything but straight. I'll additionally point out that we also do not use it to differentiate between solo and non-solo loli. For this reason, there should be no reason to assume that the content of "shota" is anything but what it is tagged as. As such, if it is not tagged "yaoi" or "solo", it should not be assumed to be such.
Basically, what it boils down to is this:
We have a tag for yaoi or yuri. We have a tag for solo. We have a tag for group. We do not have a tag for straight. Since this is the only category which does not have a tag, then it is the default assumption if no such tags are present.
Since the yaoi/yuri, solo, and group tags are to be used on all images that they apply to and not just shota, it seems that this can also be globalized to all tags.
Going by the examples set by other similar orientation-neutral neutral tags, like "loli" or "sex", and many, many other examples of sex-related tags, it seems that this is, in fact, globalized to all tags.
As such, if we are to use a tag to be specific that images are of a "straight" nature here, then we are being inconsistent with all of the other tags.
Updated
That may be so, however, on Danbooru "shota" is used to refer to underaged boys represented sexually. In other words, it is a tag that also applies to images tagged straight_shota even if straight_shota remains as a tag.
Also, your personal experience of only seeing it used to refer to man-on-boy is a very small perspective. I have personally heard it used more often instead as a male equivalent of "loli". According to the tag wiki, that is exactly how it is used here.
Ah, I wondered why this thread had such a high post count... Maybe I'm missing something, but is there any real reason shota sex -yaoi is not equivalent?
DschingisKhan said:
Ah, I wondered why this thread had such a high post count... Maybe I'm missing something, but is there any real reason shota sex -yaoi is not equivalent?
I would assume it would have solo shota included as well.
DschingisKhan said:
Ah, I wondered why this thread had such a high post count... Maybe I'm missing something, but is there any real reason shota sex -yaoi is not equivalent?
Because its unintuitive? No one below Privileged can see shota images anyway, so the mere fact that the tag can be mostly duplicated with a three tag search is fairly irrelevant.
No one has yet given a good reason why it shouldn't remain a tag.
Shintear said:
I would assume it would have solo shota included as well.
You might recall sex is "Pictures depicting the act of sexual intercourse. Only use this tag for actual vaginal or anal penetration." If it's solo, it's not sex (though sex with an aeroplane or something may be a corner case here You know, just in case).
Fencedude said:
Because its unintuitive? No one below Privileged can see shota images anyway, so the mere fact that the tag can be mostly duplicated with a three tag search is fairly irrelevant.
Unintuitive....Oh! Haha, good one!
Anyway, I don't particularly care what happens to it, but the fact that a tag only Priv and up can see is involved is precisely why this is superfluous: Privileged users will know how to use the site and are capable of making searches with six tags.
It's the sort of tag that only has relatively niche appeal even within our userbase, but setting aside the content and quality of arguments (historically, I'm pretty sure "it can be somewhat close to replicated with n tags" is the argument upon which a number of these conversations have ended), we have to look at our general methodology.
Suppose it were straight_catgirl or straight_loli or similar; what would you be saying in those cases? Is the basic assumption of sex creating ontological restrictions for forward progress? Are we fine using this as a precedent for other corner cases with similar weights? These aren't rhetorical question intended as some brutish attack on your character-- this is apparently important and I want to be sure we're all at least considering the impact a weird corner case like this can cause.
That's more or less my angle on this.
