Bestiality, as we know, is on pictures where there is a character engaged in sexual activities with an "animal"--animal being defined as "unintelligent" animals, AS WELL as with 'feral' formed "intelligent" creatures.

This distinction is in place because it's not always possibly to tell how intelligent an 'animal' is just based off of the image.

"bestiality" similarly seems to cover animal and human (or elf, or similar) interactions.

We have another tag called anthro_on_feral that is designed to cover an anthropomorphic character having sex with an animal character, as defined above.

I believe both of these tags should exist and exist separately.

But I wonder if anthro_on_feral should imply bestiality?

It doesn't, at the moment.

but the fact that it has not been done makes me wonder if it hasn't already for some reason....

Hmm, I think it should, honestly. Anyone that's looking for bestiality specifically with humans can just add the human tag to their search.

Sounds good to me.

If you consider an anthropomorphic character having sex with a feral character to be bestiality, then yes, an implication would fit.

Rainbow_Crash said:
If you consider an anthropomorphic character having sex with a feral character to be bestiality, then yes, an implication would fit.

well, they're both the same kind of idea. Biped and feral engaging in sexytimes.

the'rs no suggestion that post #234099 and post #229661 are any different than post #237568 or post #231566 ... jsut, anthro_on_feral has a few more instances of "obviously smart" ferals like post #232902 or post #237385

Char said:
Hmm, I think it should, honestly. Anyone that's looking for bestiality specifically with humans can just add the human tag to their search.

or bestality -anthro_on_feral

Then I'd say implicate dat right dar

Well anthro on feral used to be anthro_bestiality but it was changed. I don't remember the reasoning, but I recall there being a lengthy discussion on it beforehand.

I think it had to do with pulling out dictionaries and "bestiality" being pretty specifically between human and animal, and furry characters are not human. I think they should definitely both exist. In my mind, there is a subtle but real difference between a bestiality image and an anthro_on_feral image. I am not always interested in one when I search for the other.

I don't see any strong arguments for or against this implication, to be honest. It will be fine either way.

SnowWolf said:
I believe both of these tags should exist and exist separately.

But I wonder if anthro_on_feral should imply bestiality?

I do agree with you about them existing separately Snow

With regards to the latter, that depends on if you count anthro characters as human, as Red mentioned, since bestiality is used formally and informally for human x feral (which are all separate tags)

But, if everyone thinks there's a good reason to make the implication, and it would not conflict with the current system of character-type identification, that's fine too

RedOctober said:
I think it had to do with pulling out dictionaries and "bestiality" being pretty specifically between human and animal, and furry characters are not human.

That's fair enough, but then, trolls, orcs, ogres, elves, draenei, aliens, satyrs, angels etc shouldn't be under the bestiality tag either :P

The "real" definition seems to be for 'closely human' species, often with smooth skin, rather then scales or a pelt, with no muzzle, etc.

I think they should definitely both exist. In my mind, there is a subtle but real difference between a bestiality image and an anthro_on_feral image. I am not always interested in one when I search for the other.

in /general/ there actually is a difference. anthro_on_feral has a lot more "intelligent" sort of ferals, rather then the 'mindlessly humping animal' sort of feral. But both types exist in both tags and there are are whole lot of 'ambigulously intelligent' ferals as well.

The over complicating side of my brain says that this is the time for human_on_feral and demihuman_on_feral and and and..

I don't see any strong arguments for or against this implication, to be honest. It will be fine either way.

well, the biggest arguement I can think of is that if someone blacklists bestiality because thye don't like the idea of sexytimes with feral critters, they won't be happy to see anthro_on_feral pictures.

That's like saying Scooby Doo having sex with a everyday wolf is bestiality.

KiwiPotato said:
That's like saying Scooby Doo having sex with a everyday wolf is bestiality.

That is? What's that? there's been a lot of things in here said. Which one says that?

SnowWolf said:
That is? What's that? there's been a lot of things in here said. Which one says that?

But I wonder if anthro_on_feral should imply bestiality?

also

or bestality -anthro_on_feral

That would mess up stuff like comics that have multiple scenarios per upload and stuff.

KiwiPotato said: That is? What's that? there's been a lot of things in here said. Which one says that?

But I wonder if anthro_on_feral should imply bestiality?

AH. then, no, anthro on feral is bestality in the same way that goofy fucking pluto is bestality.

Scooby is feral. Anthro is a body type. Feral is a body type. It says nothing about intelligence. Scooby and a common wolf would be feral_on_feral. Scooby and Shaggy is bestiality. the question is, is scooby and Goofy bestality? I think so.

That (bestiality -anthro_on_feral) would mess up stuff like comics that have multiple scenarios per upload and stuff.

In a few cases, but only if it's all on the same page, as each page ought to be tagged individually, not 'every page' with 'everything' --that really throws off searches. and, if someone doesn't want anthro_on_feral images, then they probably won't care about missing one or two humanoid on feral images because they contain the stuff they didn't want to see.

AH. then, no, anthro on feral is bestality in the same way that goofy fucking pluto is bestality.

I have no idea who they are. lol

In a few cases, but only if it's all on the same page, as each page ought to be tagged individually, not 'every page' with 'everything' --that really throws off searches. and, if someone doesn't want anthro_on_feral images, then they probably won't care about missing one or two humanoid on feral images because they contain the stuff they didn't want to see.

Still though, there's still stuff like pics with more than a few people having sex that.....well are entities and have nothing to do with eachother.

KiwiPotato said:
I have no idea who they are. lol

o.O
kids these days.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goofy and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto_(Disney)

Still though, there's still stuff like pics with more than a few people having sex that.....well are entities and have nothing to do with eachother.

well, here's the thing. by adding -anthro_on_feral means "I don't want to see anthro_on_feral" So you don't. At all. If you're willing to see anthro_on_feral, then you just search bestiality.

This is the same principal as, say.. gay -female. you're interested in gay pictures, but want to see no women. if you're interested in orgies with women present as long as there is gay activity, you can search gay.

.... admitedly this is a little more black and white then that.

we COULD make things humanoid_on_feral and anthro_on_feral and such, and have all imply bestiality, but... the LITTLE bit of gray area of images that contain both human-on-feral and anthro-on-feral... isn't really worth it, I think. anthro_on_feral human has 13 images in it. a few of them are mistagged (bestiality, not anthro_on_feral) most are "human observer" pictures, a few 'transformation' pictures, with only a single iamge where the human is partipating, and honestly, post #18415 looks like a human and 2 anthros (or ferals?)to me.

bestiality anthro human has 17 pictures... several are anthro-on-human, several are jsut bestiality (no anthros involved), and several 'human observing' and similar as above. the only human/anthro/feral sex picture found was the human-and-2-anthros above, and one 'where's waldo" ish picture with about 50 tiny characters on it displaying a vast number of kinks. There may or may not be a anthroxferalxhuman picture in here somewhere but I'm mostly seeing human_on_feral action here. and no one is gonna fap to this. seriously.

tl;dr, I don't see this as an issue, really.

SnowWolf said:
well, the biggest arguement I can think of is that if someone blacklists bestiality because thye don't like the idea of sexytimes with feral critters, they won't be happy to see anthro_on_feral pictures.

Sounds reasonable. Granted, you can just put both tags in the blacklist, just as I can put two tags in the search bar.

added~