For the longest time, I had assumed that the one that's dominant (typically the one using their penis or penis-like device) was on the X side of the Title... However, when I looked at the images with the tags "herm_on_male" or "male_on_dickgirl", it's apparently the exact opposite.

For example: one image with the tag "male_on_dickgirl" depicts a male with his head and arms bound in stocks being anally penetrated by a herm (here) and one with the tag "herm_on_male" depicts a male forcing a bound herm to fellate him (here)

and this is not an isolated case, because nearly all imagines with either tag have this... I almost want to call it a joke... but is there something I'm missing? something I'm not understanding?

beirirangu said:
For the longest time, I had assumed that the one that's dominant (typically the one using their penis or penis-like device) was on the X side of the Title... However, when I looked at the images with the tags "herm_on_male" or "male_on_dickgirl", it's apparently the exact opposite.

For example: one image with the tag "male_on_dickgirl" depicts a male with his head and arms bound in stocks being anally penetrated by a herm (here) and one with the tag "herm_on_male" depicts a male forcing a bound herm to fellate him (here)

and this is not an isolated case, because nearly all imagines with either tag have this... I almost want to call it a joke... but is there something I'm missing? something I'm not understanding?

The tags do not denote dom/sub relationship.
They only label what genders are having sexual contact.
Think of it as the equivalent of the straight, lesbian, gay, and bisexual tags, but for genders that don't have specific words for those relationships.

I thought this was handled this already :I

TheHuskyK9 said:
I thought this was handled this already :I

A few times.
This.

Halite said:
The tags do not denote dom/sub relationship.
They only label what genders are having sexual contact.
Think of it as the equivalent of the straight, lesbian, gay, and bisexual tags, but for genders that don't have specific words for those relationships.

then they all would have the exact same tag, since the relationship is between a herm/dickgirl with a male... but for some reason, in EVERY picture with male_on_dickgirl, I see the male catching, and on the herm_on_male, I see the male pitching... it's not a matter of which genders because they BOTH have the SAME genders

the problem is that utilizing "on" indicates one on the other, one being aggressive to the passive. I've stated this multiple times.

beirirangu said:
then they all would have the exact same tag, since the relationship is between a herm/dickgirl with a male... but for some reason, in EVERY picture with male_on_dickgirl, I see the male catching, and on the herm_on_male, I see the male pitching... it's not a matter of which genders because they BOTH have the SAME genders

Herm and dickgirl are separate gender tags.

Herm on male means a herm and male having sex, regardless of which is in what position.
Dickgirl on male is the same, but with a dickgirl, as are herm on female, dickgirl on female, dickgirl on herm, etc.

123easy said:
the problem is that utilizing "on" indicates one on the other, one being aggressive to the passive. I've stated this multiple times.

How about we change it to something like "herm_and_male"?

That way, users can't assume which is dom or sub

beirirangu said:
then they all would have the exact same tag, since the relationship is between a herm/dickgirl with a male... but for some reason, in EVERY picture with male_on_dickgirl, I see the male catching, and on the herm_on_male, I see the male pitching... it's not a matter of which genders because they BOTH have the SAME genders

Ah, I see part of what's causing confusion. On this site, herm and dickgirl are not the same gender:
herm means you can see both a penis and vagina on the same character.
dickgirl means you can see a penis and a pair of breasts on the same character, but no vagina.

And like Halite said, [gender]on[gender] doesn't have any dom/sub meanings on this site. If there's bdsm stuff going on in the picture, those are tagged separately.

TheHuskyK9 said:
How about we change it to something like "herm_and_male"?

That way, users can't assume which is dom or sub

That's been suggested before but always has the problem that people will inevitably use it to tag when there is a male AND a herm in the picture, regardless if they are even touching. It'll get used as a "total in the picture" type tag instead of referring just sex acts. That makes ___on___ marginally better, even if prone to misunderstandings. I don't think we've hit on the right balance yet for an alternative.

Yeah...
x_on_y has its problems, but x_and_y would be mistagged more frequently.

Why not just choose an x_on_y, and then alias the y_on_x to that?

There are lots of pictures that don't even have a clear dom and sub. That doesn't mean that x_on_y can't be used.

furrypickle said:
That makes ___on___ marginally better, even if prone to misunderstandings. I don't think we've hit on the right balance yet for an alternative.

The only ones I could think of would be x_with_y or x_/_y
probably not better than AND though.

SirAntagonist said:
Why not just choose an x_on_y, and then alias the y_on_x to that?

Already aliased. Most of them, anyway.
There might be some uncommon combos that are still missing aliases.

Genjar said:
Already aliased. Most of them, anyway.
There might be some uncommon combos that are still missing aliases.

Now that I'm looking at them, I can't see any missing an alias.

I'm ok with X_on_Y though. We could change it to with/and/etc., but "on" is already widely in use. I don't think there's any sub or dom implied by it, and I'd imagine that most users wouldn't be confused by it.

I've thought of something: how about using a plus mark?

It doesn't have the pairing/shipping connotation of a 'x/y'. It doesn't have the top/bottom/dom/sub connotations of 'x_on_y' (which I think a percentage of people read as "x_on top of_y" and I know other communities do use that as a top/bottom formula). It doesn't sound automatically like a "total genders in the picture" tag like 'x_and_y' would be. But a plus mark would still indicate that the two genders aren't separate and are doing something significant together in the picture - [aka. sex].

I can see a few different formatting possibilities:
male+dickgirl or
male_+_dickgirl or
male_plus_dickgirl

The male+dickgirl version is the cleanest to read and the shortest for typing in my book. Underscores in this case seem to distract from it visually, but that could just be me.

Anyway, I've seen this topic come up several times but we haven't been able to come up with an alternative. I think this one is actually a possibility. So I thought I'd throw it up there to see what people thought. I think it could work.

I have solved this very difficult and apparently recurring problem.

furrypickle said:
I've thought of something: how about using a plus mark?

It doesn't have the pairing/shipping connotation of a 'x/y'. It doesn't have the top/bottom/dom/sub connotations of 'x_on_y' (which I think a percentage of people read as "x_on top of_y" and I know other communities do use that as a top/bottom formula). It doesn't sound automatically like a "total genders in the picture" tag like 'x_and_y' would be. But a plus mark would still indicate that the two genders aren't separate and are doing something significant together in the picture - [aka. sex].

I can see a few different formatting possibilities:
male+dickgirl or
male_+_dickgirl or
male_plus_dickgirl

The male+dickgirl version is the cleanest to read and the shortest for typing in my book. Underscores in this case seem to distract from it visually, but that could just be me.

Anyway, I've seen this topic come up several times but we haven't been able to come up with an alternative. I think this one is actually a possibility. So I thought I'd throw it up there to see what people thought. I think it could work.

...I like this suggestion.