The tag implication #63092 jack_and_jill -> both_sexes_in_same_situation has been rejected.

Reason: Tag description implies a male and female will be in the same situation, maybe even alias.

EDIT: The tag implication jack_and_jill -> both_sexes_in_same_situation (forum #405584) has been rejected by @slyroon.

Neither of the tag names seem particularly clear for what it's referring to, and the wiki descriptions don't seem to indicate they are the necessarily related. "jack_and_jill" seems to apply to a take_your_pick scenario where one is male and the other is female (which isn't at all clear since Jack and Jill is a nursery rhyme about the titular characters going up a hill to get water and fall back down the hill), while both_sexes_in_same_situation is for.. well, "both sexes" finding themselves in the same predicament. jack_and_jill doesn't necessarily mean both sexes are in the same situation, it doesn't say what they're doing or what situation they're in, just that there's an apparent choice for the viewer to pick one or the other.

I don't like either of these tags in either case, since it only deals with male and female characters leaving out intersex and ambiguous characters (e.g. a female+ambiguous or andromorph+male). IMO, they should both be renamed and expanded if they're to be kept.

This came up in another discussion elsewhere, I prefer cross-sex_mutuality as a name. We have more than two sexes for the purpose of tagging, and I could very well see people having interest in male/andromorph_mutuality, male/gynomorph_mutuality, female/gynomorph_mutuality, etc.

Reddit calls it "side bi side", so there's another possible option.

https://reddit.com/r/SideBiSide (Warning: it's a porn subreddit, obviously)

Though that could also be a theoretical typo since Y and I aren't too far apart on the keyboard.

does this even need a specific tag? take_your_pick m f should be enough.

dba_afish said:
does this even need a specific tag? take_your_pick m f should be enough.

I think you can have instances where this wouldn't be take_your_pick, such as a male and female both performing fellatio?

nimphia said:
I think you can have instances where this wouldn't be take_your_pick, such as a male and female both performing fellatio?

kind of an overly broad tag at that point, honestly.

nimphia said:
I think you can have instances where this wouldn't be take_your_pick, such as a male and female both performing fellatio?

Depends on which tag you're talking about. jack_and_jill is expressly "A variation of the take-your-pick threesome" (although that's confusingly described since take_your_pick isn't a threesome and isn't sex, it only needs two characters visible for the viewer to "pick" between; at best it may be imminent_sex if there's a POV character where sex is apparently imminent, but that's not needed). Though it wouldn't be reliable for other reasons anyway, if there's additional characters (e.g. a male_pov with a take_your_pick of two female characters, or a non-pov with a take_your_pick of two male characters and a female visible elsewhere in the image).

As for both_sexes_in_same_situation, I don't like that also because it's vague. What is a "situation"? Would collaborative fellatio really be a "situation"? I don't think it should count simply for two characters doing the same activity, since it would then apply to menial things like a male and female standing around talking to someone, or sitting at a dinner table on a date with each other. At best it could be for an unexpected or undesired predicament for both of them, but even that's not very clear.

The tag implication jack_and_jill -> both_sexes_in_same_situation (forum #405584) has been rejected by @slyroon.