I recently came across the male_rape and female_rape tags, and I assumed that they applied to rape of male and rape of females, respectively. However, after looking through them, I found that there was a mixture of both those interpretations and the interpretations of rape by males and rape by females, respectively.

To resolve this ambiguity of interpretations, I think it could be a good idea to alias both to just rape, and then to create a group of tags in the line of <gender>_raping_<gender>, with appropriate <gender>_raping and <gender>_raped tags to go along with them.

Any thoughts?

according to the wiki of the female related, it's used when the female is the rapist. As far as I'm concerned though these tags are incredibly vague and unclear, this forum being a good example of that and should just be aliased to the rape tag. Considering that by your counts the content isn't even falling under any organizational standard if it was determined that these types of classifying tags would be useful I think that it would be more simple just to use tags such as male_rapist, female_rapist, intersex_rapist ext. Though I don't think the aforementioned tags above should be aliased to these ones.

Do we need x_raping_y or x_rape tags? I feel like, say, male_penetrating_gynomorph rape would accomplish the same thing.

The presence of images being tagged "male_rape" when the victim is male, and "female_rape" when the victim is female, is nothing more than examples of improper tagging.

Personally, I think the current system works well enough as-is, but if we're going to create a new one, we'd need to make sure to include new tags for the various forms of intersex raping/being raped, because-although uncommon-images with such content absolutely exist.

strikerman said:
Do we need x_raping_y or x_rape tags? I feel like, say, male_penetrating_gynomorph rape would accomplish the same thing.

It really wouldn't, though. Because that specific set of search parameters would pull up both images where a male is raping a gynomorph, and ones where a gynomorph has done something to make a male hard against his will, and is riding his cock without his permission.

jacob said:
The presence of images being tagged "male_rape" when the victim is male, and "female_rape" when the victim is female, is nothing more than examples of improper tagging.

Contrary to your statement, as noted above, the wiki for female_rape says it is to be used if the female is the rapist, and if we were to continue using that definition, male_rape would refer to when the male is the rapist. You've fallen victim to the same ambiguity I pointed out.

Yep, the names are extremely ambiguous. These tags shouldn't have been created without discussion.
I'm not sure if these are even needed. Combos such as dominant_female rape work well.

komuros said:
Contrary to your statement, as noted above, the wiki for female_rape says it is to be used if the female is the rapist, and if we were to continue using that definition, male_rape would refer to when the male is the rapist. You've fallen victim to the same ambiguity I pointed out.

I don't think you read my reply as well as you think you did.

jacob said:
I don't think you read my reply as well as you think you did.

Oop, I didn't. Forgive me.

I think that aliasing <gender>_rape to <gender>_raping or <gender>_rapist is a good way to disambiguate. I cannot support <gender>_raping_<gender> as this creates at least 25 new tags while being heavily redundant with existing information.