Implicating pegging → anal_penetration
Link to implication

Reason:

Because there is no pegging if there is no anal penetration.

Technically it would be anal_insertion.

The only issue I can see with tagging it this way is the odd image that is tagged with pegging because the strapon is lined up with the anus ready-to-go. Then again, I've seen things get tagged anal_penetration for a similar reason...so I'm not exactly sure how much this breaks, if anything.

post #200351 post #263732

I... I think that there has to actually be pegging happening for it to be tagged as such, and that those two images are mistagged? But at the same time, someone looking for pegging would want to see those as well, so... Hmmm

Tokaido said:
I... I think that there has to actually be pegging happening for it to be tagged as such, and that those two images are mistagged? But at the same time, someone looking for pegging would want to see those as well, so... Hmmm

I wasn't sure what to do with it either. I haven't touched it pretty much because of the reasons you've described.

Isn't lesbian vaginal sex with a strap-on pegging too?

Jugofthat said:
Isn't lesbian vaginal sex with a strap-on pegging too?

I don't know, I would assume so, but I don't know if pegging is strictly an anal thing.

Jugofthat said:
Isn't lesbian vaginal sex with a strap-on pegging too?

Well, the wiki is very clear on the matter : "pegging is an entirely heterosexual act"
I also did some research, and yes, pegging is used only for female on male act.

Jugofthat said:
Isn't lesbian vaginal sex with a strap-on pegging too?

pegging implies male, so not at this moment, no.

I'm fairly certain that it has to be a female using a stap on to do a male, as that's the only way I've ever heard it used. All sources I can find seem to agree, our own wiki (not a great source, since its kinda circular logic), urban dictionary, reddit, porn sites, etc.

Jugofthat said:
Isn't lesbian vaginal sex with a strap-on pegging too?

No, not even a little bit.

M'kay then.

Alright, changed to be implicating pegging to --> anal_insertion and then approved.

Note:
I know there are a few images like the two Parasprite linked, where the insertion is imminent and implied that it's going to happen in the next second but not-literally-happening-quite-yet. When it comes to the sex, penetration, insertion tags, sometimes all-but-doing-it is close enough to get the tag. It's a grey area throughout this whole set of tags when it comes to sex acts (where it still gets tagged with pegging when it's inches away from being inserted, or oral when the mouth and genitals aren't touching but there's saliva strings between them and it's obvious it's been happening and will most likely continue, or tagged sex when they may be in the process of guiding it in or they're rolling a condom onto a penis in front of a spread ass). There isn't an easy solution for that stuff. Going ahead and tagging it seems to keep it easy for searchers to still find what they're looking for though. So on a functional level it seems to still work despite being technically debatable. We have some imminent_* tags but those are when it's more vaguely headed-that-direction-but-still-not-that-close/not-completely-conclusive-either. They're not really meant for when it's inches from being inside and blatantly obvious the act is just one second from being literal.

I know normally we don't keep things loose on whether or not a tag applies. That's because in most cases having any wiggle room would create a giant tag mess. But for this set of tags (sex, *_penetration, *_insertion), there's a little bit of a technical grey area for all of them, yet these still seem to function surprisingly well for searching and tagging. So based on that, that's why this implication is getting approved (even though there are a few images where the insertion is second-away-from-happening but not inside yet.) Maybe someday we can improve the accuracy even further, but for now I think this implication will function at least as well as the related tags do.