Topic: Tag Alias: imminent_penetration -> imminent_sex

Aliasing imminent_penetration → imminent_sex
Link to alias

Reason:

imminent_penetration seems to be an underused tag, but i still can't shake off that imminent_penetration has a broader approach than imminent_sex.

Since the wiki states that penetration includes not only penises but tails,dildos,other insertions.

Its still complex to define if its better to try and make imminent_penetration a commonly used tag or just dispose of it.

I'm fine with an implication chain of imminent_insertion → imminent_penetration → imminent_sex, but there is clearly the need for some some sort of relation here.

Circeus said:
I'm fine with an implication chain of imminent_insertion → imminent_penetration → imminent_sex, but there is clearly the need for some some sort of relation here.

If imminent_insertion is implied to imminent_penetration (which it probably should be (assuming it saw any use), considering the insertion → penetration implication), it would be necessary to not imply imminent_penetration to imminent_sex, for the same reason that penetration doesn't imply sex: an image with a solo character and a dildo can easily require the penetration (or imminent_penetration) tag, but, since there is only one character, cannot properly be tagged sex (or imminent_sex).

I've been thinking about the implication imminent_sex -> imminent_penetration. But i still can't decide all possibilities, so i'd rather ask your opinions.

Oral sex is still sex, but not generally tagged penetration.

Snowy said:
Oral sex is still sex, but not generally tagged penetration.

That makes me even more unsure of what to do with oral_penetration.

Weren't we doing away with all the immanent_* tags?

Tokaido said:
Weren't we doing away with all the immanent_* tags?

I've only really ever used Imminent_vore because it's likely to still have connotations that people probably still find practical for blacklisting.

Imminent_rape on the other hand is about on par with rape_face for being pretty much up to the tagger at that particular moment to define.

parasprite said:
That makes me even more unsure of what to do with oral_penetration.

We could possibly use it as an umbrella tag for oral_insertion, fellatio, and sucking on other body parts (possibly excluding fingers/hands/arms, given the fingering/fisting/penetration split for every other oriface)...but having an oral_penetration tag that shouldn't imply penetration feels really damn weird. Maybe come up with a different name for such a tag and alias oral_penetration to the new name.

Alternately, we could use it to cover things in the mouth that don't fall under finger_in_mouth, oral_insertion, or fellatio (so things like tails or tentacles)...but it still feels really damn weird having a *_penetration tag that shouldn't imply penetration.

I think that we need to figure out what the heck we want to use the tag for, and then come up with a new name that doesn't involve penetration. Either that, or consider using penetration for "something is going into any orifice" instead of "something is going into any orifice other than the mouth" (in which case we could just use oral_penetration as the umbrella tag and have it imply penetration).

Tokaido said:
Weren't we doing away with all the immanent_* tags?

I still say they aren't TWYS because it's not tagging what's in the image, it's assuming what happens after the image.

Snowy said:
We could possibly use it as an umbrella tag for oral_insertion, fellatio, and sucking on other body parts (possibly excluding fingers/hands/arms, given the fingering/fisting/penetration split for every other oriface)...but having an oral_penetration tag that shouldn't imply penetration feels really damn weird. Maybe come up with a different name for such a tag and alias oral_penetration to the new name.

Alternately, we could use it to cover things in the mouth that don't fall under finger_in_mouth, oral_insertion, or fellatio (so things like tails or tentacles)...but it still feels really damn weird having a *_penetration tag that shouldn't imply penetration.

I think that we need to figure out what the heck we want to use the tag for, and then come up with a new name that doesn't involve penetration. Either that, or consider using penetration for "something is going into any orifice" instead of "something is going into any orifice other than the mouth" (in which case we could just use oral_penetration as the umbrella tag and have it imply penetration).

I'd written the link into a bunch of wikis when I started out not really thinking about it's use, but I kind of stopped short of actually figuring out what it was for and never managed to get back to it.

Anyways...the only thing I've figured out as far as logical implications is this:

• oral_penetration insertions + penis
• fellatio Just penis
• oral_insertion Just insertions

Which doesn't really seem like a worthwhile addition to everything tagged fellatio. However implicating oral_insertion to oral_penetration without having fellatio included just seems a little bit...well you pretty much just end up with 2 insertion tags.

On the other hand, if it implies insertion, that would imply penetration anyways, so we're back to square 1.

I'm for renaming it or reworking it, but I don't think the reworked version has room for both unless we get rid of fellatio (which seems silly imo). Renaming seems the best option out of these (rather than redefining penetration/insertion for this one use), but I'm not sure what I'd call it either.