The bulk update request #3837 is pending approval.

create implication consensual_cuckold (0) -> cuckold (5050)
create implication consensual_cuckquean (20) -> cuckquean (1049)

Reason: consensual_cuckold is described as a consensual variant of cuckoldry where there's no humiliation aspect, and consensual_cuckquean seems to be used similarly. If we're keeping these tags, they might as well imply the corresponding "main" tag for the fetish, right?

crocogator said:
Reason: consensual_cuckold is described as a consensual variant of cuckoldry where there's no humiliation aspect, and consensual_cuckquean seems to be used similarly. If we're keeping these tags, they might as well imply the corresponding "main" tag for the fetish, right?

If cuckold has a humiliation, cheating, or otherwise non-consensual aspect, I don't think people searching cuckold would like to find consensual, non-cheating activity along with it. Or that people who blacklist cuckold would like consensual activity also blacklisted.

Though I don't see how "consensual cuckoldry" would even be any different than just having one or more extra partners? It also looks like many uses also seem to violate TWYS, since several uses have no indication of anyone in a relationship while having sex and are sometimes just a plain old threesome or foursome. Or cases like post #3711441 where the background picture actually suggests a fourth character that's not present having sex.

crocogator said:

consensual_cuckold is described as a consensual variant of cuckoldry where there's no humiliation aspect, and consensual_cuckquean seems to be used similarly.

The cuckold page doesn’t imply humiliation by a partner; in fact, it mentions that cucks often help out with the whole process. I’d argue that cuckoldry by this definition is inherently consensual, that these implications should actually be aliases, and that anything else falls under just infidelity and voyeurism.

NOTE: For the purposes of this comment, I'm using the term "cuckold" (or "cuck") as a shorthand for "cuckold or cuckquean".

watsit said:
Though I don't see how "consensual cuckoldry" would even be any different than just having one or more extra partners? It also looks like many uses also seem to violate TWYS, since several uses have no indication of anyone in a relationship while having sex

In furry porn, there's often no indication of relationships, so it can be tricky to define what a cuckold is for this site. For tagging, you sorta just have to assume characters are in a relationship whenever it seems to make sense. To be cuckoldry for this site, I'd say the following conditions need to be met:

• 2+ characters having sex (or imminent_sex, after_sex)
• 1 character watching them (or listening to them, or remotely texting them), not participating in the sex
• Sometimes that character is shown to be completely unaware, but perhaps that should just be tagged infidelity instead?
• It's reasonable to assume the character who is watching knows at least one of the characters who are having sex (or imminent_sex, after_sex). If the characters are all together in the same bedroom, that's a pretty reasonable thing to assume. If it's a picture of public exhibitionism where a random passerby happens to see them, it would not be a reasonable thing to assume.
• NOTE: When there's text or dialogue, it's often possible for the some of these characters to be offscreen or be the viewer: post #3716168 post #3154900 post #3594417 post #3506041

(Looking through the cuckold posts after writing this, a LOT of them don't meet these requirements. I'd argue the main reason is there are a lot of mis-tags.)

Honestly, despite suggesting this implication, I'm not entirely sure if we should keep consensual_cuckold, since it can be difficult to define. However, I definitely get the motive of whoever made the tag: I'm sure a lot of people out there aren't into humiliation, but are into these sort of "consensual voyeurism" scenarios that the consensual_cuckold tag is trying to cover. Actually the consensual_cuckold tag might be useful for blacklists too, so these people can blacklist cuckold -consensual_cuckold. Therefore, I don't necessarily want to nuke the tag, but I also realize it might be necessary to alias it away.

If we keep the tags, I'd argue for a "consensual" cuckold (in addition to the above conditions) there should also be evidence that the interaction is consensual, that the cuckold is not participating in the sex (technically a requirement for the humiliation kind of cuckoldry too), and that the cuckold is enjoying the interaction:

• It's consensual, not spying (that would just be voyeurism for watching, or eavesdropping for listening)
• If it's a walk-in, it should be a casual non-surprised non-offended interaction (otherwise, that's not really consensual either)
• There's evidence that the non-participant truly is not participating (sitting far away from the action, still fully clothed, etc.)
• wearing a chastity_device would also indicate non-participation
• NOTE: Evidence of non-participation is a requirement for the humiliation kind too, but for that, the evidence is often the humiliation stuff itself.
• The non-participant is enjoying the interaction (a voyeur)
• The non-participant isn't crying, angry, trying to break free from being bound, frustrated by a chastity_device on them, etc.
• The characters having sex aren't saying rude or humiliating things to the non-participant

...So, if we define things like this, consensual_cuckold is essentially non-spying voyeurism where the voyeur is watching sex (or imminent_sex, after_sex). In theory, most if not all the posts should be tagged voyeur.

I'm half-asleep right now as always, so I hope this long-ass comment is coherent.

ssterling said:
The cuckold page doesn’t imply humiliation by a partner; in fact, it mentions that cucks often help out with the whole process. I’d argue that cuckoldry by this definition is inherently consensual, that these implications should actually be aliases, and that anything else falls under just infidelity and voyeurism.

Honestly, I wasn't aware of the infidelity tag when I created this implication, but it seems to be very commonly used. That might also be valid way to handle this, but I'm too tired to think about this in-depth.

crocogator said:

• 1 character watching them (or listening to them, or remotely texting them), not participating in the sex
• Sometimes that character is shown to be completely unaware, but perhaps that should just be tagged infidelity instead?
• It's reasonable to assume the character who is watching knows at least one of the characters who are having sex (or imminent_sex, after_sex). If the characters are all together in the same bedroom, that's a pretty reasonable thing to assume. If it's a picture of public exhibitionism where a random passerby happens to see them, it would not be a reasonable thing to assume.

That seems to be quite the jump. Characters having sex and being watched doesn't seem to me to be reason to assume there's a relationship between the one watching and one (but not both) of the characters having sex, even if they're in a bedroom. There's a whole lot of alternative options, such as a polyamorous relationship, just a purely sexual thing for everyone, perhaps a couple is giving a friend a show, or maybe siblings instead of a married or otherwise involved couple.

crocogator said:

• It's consensual, not spying (that would just be voyeurism for watching, or eavesdropping for listening)

voyeur doesn't require spying, it can be completely consensual:

This can range from consensual, such as a romantic couple allowing a friend to watch them have sex ...

watsit said:
That seems to be quite the jump. Characters having sex and being watched doesn't seem to me to be reason to assume there's a relationship between the one watching and one (but not both) of the characters having sex, even if they're in a bedroom. There's a whole lot of alternative options, such as a polyamorous relationship, just a purely sexual thing for everyone, perhaps a couple is giving a friend a show, or maybe siblings instead of a married or otherwise involved couple.

voyeur doesn't require spying, it can be completely consensual:

Hmm... Both good points. As I look into this more, from what I can tell, posts like what I described for "consensual cuckold" are perhaps more likely to be tagged voyeur anyways. I guess if the tag I described existed, maybe it would have to be called consensual_voyeurism rather than consensual_cuckold, since the relationship between the cuck and one of the other characters can't necessarily be shown, and if we have a tag called consensual_cuckold, it would perhaps require dialogue to show the relationship or be a lore tag. Though, it is worth noting that cuckoldry can occasionally be sorta implied by BDSM stuff without any indication of the cuck being upset post #3370625.

...Also, the more I look into cuckold and consensual_cuckold, the more I realize both of these tags are a mess.