Topic: How can I convince e-hentai to add a tag for the ancient_egyptian aesthetic?

It vexes me that they have tags for nonsense like nipple birth and soft vore and yet when I argued for making a tag for one of the most romanticized and recognizable aesthetics on planet earth they made a bunch of bad faith arguments against it ranging from "Just search for characters like Anubis lol" and "You can't create a description of the aesthetic perfect enough to satisfy me so there" to "Google Shadow Futaba Sakura, you say? I googled Futaba Sakura and I have no idea what you're talking about, she's not wearing Egyptian clothing at all. Oh, the word Shadow is important? Well she isn't always wearing the aesthetic so it doesn't exist so there".

How do I improve my argumentation for this topic so I can convince even the most irrationally hostile bigots alive Egyptian culture is real and worth preserving and worth tagging because so much art and porn uses it?

edit: I want to clarify this thread is about improving debate skills and refining arguments for the tag, it's not a call to action to try and yell the site into changing this.

I quite enjoy the Egyptian aesthetic, Egyptian mythology, & many characters derived from, adapted from, & inspired by Egyptian culture. That being said, if it's anything like e621, we don't really make tags for aesthetics, & when we do, they're broad to the point I can see others finding it futile. Search through our wiki pages & tags, & you don't really see much of that. We specifically disallow subjective tags like cute & sexy (we've aliased these to invalid_tag), & tagging a style/aesthetic would likely be either almost entirely subjective or require sufficient background knowledge to a degree that the average user won't be able to objectively tag them properly. Even though we do have an egyptian(/ancient_egypt) tag, it's so broad that it still doesn't achieve what you are describing. As it says:

Egyptian describes posts with Ancient Egyptian elements. This tag may apply to elements directly connected to Ancient Egyptian culture, such as depictions of Ancient Egyptian gods, or scenes set in Ancient Egypt, as well as characters wearing Egyptian clothing.

Alternatively this tag more loosely applies to posts that feature Ancient Egyptian aesthetics, such as fashion or costumes inspired by Ancient Egypt, patterns, symbols, art styles, and even whole character designs.

See also:

• egyptian_clothing
• egyptian_mythology

In order to be objectively taggable for the average user, images featuring Horus drawn in Egypt using an Egyptian-inspired style have to share a tag with an Animal Crossing character. If that's what you are looking for, then perhaps use e6 as a point of reference? I don't know that site, I don't understand how it operates, so I don't even know if they use tags in a way conducive to what you suggest.

If you want advice for discourse, I'd say if you're acting under the assumption that the people you're discussing with are doing so in bad faith, you're putting yourself at a wild disadvantage, as you'll naturally be adverse to attempting to understanding their views & arguments, therefore crippling your ability to point out the elements of your position that would appeal to their values & counter their dissent as well as blinding you to deficiencies with either the core of your position, the arguments you use to support it, or your presentation of both.

I really hate people assuming others are arguing in bad faith, especially when you're not divulging what you said to them to illicit these (unflatteringly paraphrased) responses.

"Just search for characters like Anubis lol"

If you only mentioned characters, that's not an unreasonable response, & certainly doesn't reach towards bad faith.

"You can't create a description of the aesthetic perfect enough to satisfy me so there"

If you can't describe to someone what you're proposing, then how can they understand the value in the proposition? It's not a bad thing to have trouble explaining things to people, but you don't get to say they're being insincere because of it. Even if they are just genuinely being stupid (& that's a big if), that in no way equates to malice.

"Google Shadow Futaba Sakura, you say? I googled Futaba Sakura and I have no idea what you're talking about, she's not wearing Egyptian clothing at all. Oh, the word Shadow is important? Well she isn't always wearing the aesthetic so it doesn't exist so there"

Again, I'm not fond of this framing; it's prefacing anything approaching a substantive point with an implication they're dumb for confusing Shadow Futaba Sakura & Futaba Sakura (wow, who could have made that mistake? Not all of us have played the Persona games, & not all of us are as through in online discussions to ensure they're the same). As for the actual point, just like it's possible some or all of these individuals genuinely had trouble understanding your argument, it's equally possible that you misunderstood theirs. I don't know, & your presentation is not giving me confidence this is an accurate enough summary of the counterarguments to make that call, let alone draw conclusions about the people making them. If so, it doesn't mean you're dumb, it just means you have to work harder to understand them, with the reward being a better understanding of what they value, allowing you to more clearly fashion an argument that appeals to them.

Lol good luck...I remember the fucking journey a guy with a glove fetish had to make their tag getting approved.

I can understand someone hearing "Google the character Shadow Futaba Sakura" and googling "Futaba Sakura" and getting confused, or googling "Sakura" and getting the Naruto character and getting more confused, but I had already posted a screenshot of google images with Shadow Futaba Sakura in the search bar and many image results of the Japanese chick in Egyptian clothing. The guy's response (posting google image results of Futaba Sakura without the word Shadow) was logically incoherent and got worse when his logical error was explained to him because he doubled down on it with "well she isn't always wearing that so that doesn't exist".

To argue "The Egyptian aesthetic doesn't exist because this chick isn't always wearing it" is a self-defeating argument. If you can codify the ancient egyptian aesthetic to recognize when Futaba is and isn't wearing it, it exists, it objectively demonstrably exists to you and you've admitted it, and whether Futaba always wears it or not is irrelevant because it's not a character tag for Futaba Sakura's internal projection of denied truth and her own repressed feelings, it's a tag for the aesthetic worn by many characters including her.

It's like arguing the colour blue doesn't exist anywhere because not all Pokemon are blue. Even if that was a valid argument (and it's obviously not) it's not proof blue doesn't exist. Pokemon is not the whole world, just as Futaba Sakura is not the only character in existence. And if you can tell not all Pokemon are blue, you can tell what is and isn't blue therefore the colour blue exists. A site with a valid debate culture would have called out that nonsense argument. I hate websites that make me feel like I'm the only one with a brain and everyone else on the enemy side dogpiling me for being an outsider just doesn't care if their arguments are logically sound or not. It's why I left LessWrong.

I made definition after definition for what the Ancient Egyptian Aesthetic tag and description could be, and it was never good enough for those hostiles. And they're just hostiles blatantly hostile to the idea of it. And when I made the new thread proposing the tag once everyone was satisfied with the description and name it got ignored anyway.

I can understand coomers being lazy. I can understand them making logically unsound arguments in bad faith to support the status quo so they never feel anyone has to do anything or change. But they kept at it like they had a grudge against Ancient Egypt. What the hell did Egypt do to them?