The bulk update request #1904 is pending approval.

Reason: Rape is indisputably a contentious and upsetting topic, a prime candidate for blacklists. However, I have noticed that many tags that use "rape" or otherwise imply rape do not imply the rape tag, which is consternating to people who wish to filter such content.

Also, I'm suggesting that tags for rape with a particular organ, such as tentacle_rape, should be aliased instead to tags saying (organ)_sex and to add the rape tag separately if the penetration is done non-consentually.

I am unsure about how to deal with tags for situations that have non-consensual sexual contact but are not penetrative, i.e. forced_frottage.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to take a shower.

lonelylupine said:
create implication attemped_rape -> rape
create implication imminent_rape -> rape

imminent sex doesn't imply sex, imminent vore doesn't imply vore, imminent death doesn't imply death, therefore having imminent rape imply rape would be inconsistent (at the very least).

lonelylupine said:
create implication after_rape -> rape

Even if rape happened, that tag doesn't depict it. It doesn't make sense to me to imply it.

It should also be noted that after_sex doesn't imply sex either. None of the after tags imply the preceding act.

lonelylupine said:
create implication forced_partners -> rape

The wiki description of this leaves room for questionable_consent as well as rape

Two or more partners are physically forced or otherwise coerced into performing sex acts with one another, and at least one of them is reluctant or otherwise would not choose to do it. In this situation, none of these partners is the one in control. This can be the result of bondage, machinery, or a controlling third party who may also be engaged in sexual activities, but does not need to be.

strikerman said:
imminent sex doesn't imply sex, imminent vore doesn't imply vore, imminent death doesn't imply death, therefore having imminent rape imply rape would be inconsistent (at the very least).

I bounced back and forth on this before I added it for this reason, but since the goal of this BUR is to make it easier for people to blacklist undesirable content, I believe that it would be a good idea.

lonelylupine said:
I bounced back and forth on this before I added it for this reason, but since the goal of this BUR is to make it easier for people to blacklist undesirable content, I believe that it would be a good idea.

They can blacklist *rape then. Whoops, that doesn't work, but

rape
imminent_rape
post_rape

is a very simple blacklist.

furrin_gok said:
They can blacklist *rape then. Whoops, that doesn't work, but

rape
imminent_rape
post_rape

is a very simple blacklist.

Why have tag implications at all, then?

lonelylupine said:
Why have tag implications at all, then?

To have tags applied based on the fact that it needs to be present if another tag applies. E.g. shirt implicates topwear, because a shirt is topwear, so if a shirt is present topwear must also be present. This isn't how it works with tags like rape or sex or vore. though. Rape and the others are only tagged if the act is currently happening. After rape and imminent rape are used when rape already did or is about to occur, but not when it is currently happening.

watsit said:
To have tags applied based on the fact that it needs to be present if another tag applies. E.g. shirt implicates topwear, because a shirt is topwear, so if a shirt is present topwear must also be present. This isn't how it works with tags like rape or sex or vore. though. Rape and the others are only tagged if the act is currently happening. After rape and imminent rape are used when rape already did or is about to occur, but not when it is currently happening.

Little problem: topwear is useless because nobody uses that in a search. It exists only to satisfy people who are so jaded that porn ceases to engage them anymore, and alleviate their boredom by sorting the porn into vague and counter-intuitive categories just because they can.

Rape, however, is a very useful tag, specifically to people who want as little to do with it as possible and so would blacklist it. If you want people to use their blacklists, make it easy to use and effective; don't make it a pain to use that needs to be fine-tuned and continually updated to get adequate coverage because we thought it was more important to please fastidious semantic nerds instead.

People who don't want to see rape art really don't want to see rape art, and it doesn't harm people who want to or are indifferent to consuming that artwork because they can always leave it off their blacklists. Do you want people to use their blacklists? Then make the blacklist actually work.

lonelylupine said:
Little problem: topwear is useless because nobody uses that in a search. It exists only to satisfy people who are so jaded that porn ceases to engage them anymore, and alleviate their boredom by sorting the porn into vague and counter-intuitive categories just because they can.

I can think of reasons why someone would want to use topwear. Like they're looking for something and don't remember much about the top. Maybe they're not picky and just looking for someone wearing a specific colour for whatever reason.

lonelylupine said:
Rape, however, is a very useful tag, specifically to people who want as little to do with it as possible and so would blacklist it. If you want people to use their blacklists, make it easy to use and effective; don't make it a pain to use that needs to be fine-tuned and continually updated to get adequate coverage because we thought it was more important to please fastidious semantic nerds instead.

Blacklisting is already extremely easy. You can even edit your blacklist from any image, you don't need to go to your settings. The only way it could possibly be easier is if the blacklist was already open upon loading.

You might not blacklist everything you want to at once but it's pretty inaccurate to say you need to continuously update them. But even adjustments are just someone being unfamiliar or inexperienced with the tags or encountering rarely used ones.

lonelylupine said:
People who don't want to see rape art really don't want to see rape art, and it doesn't harm people who want to or are indifferent to consuming that artwork because they can always leave it off their blacklists. Do you want people to use their blacklists? Then make the blacklist actually work.

It does though. It pollutes the rape tag by adding things which don't actually meet the tag's definition. That harms the searchability of the tag. Someone looking for the act itself doesn't necessarily want to see the pre and post images.