Unalias: shota, loli from young tag. Change it to implication.

Reason:
More accurate search.
Less tags needed in search.
They're used widely on other sites. (like gelbooru - 25367 posts with shota)
<Insert here any other argument which was used for Pinkamena tag that I forgot.>

And when this is done we can go further and revive tags like straight_shota.

I dunno about straight_shota.
Shota and loli ought to be tags though imo, referring specifically to human young male/female characters.

Halite said:
Shota and loli ought to be tags though imo, referring specifically to human young male/female characters.

On gelbooru shota seems to be used for both human and furries. I don't see a reason why here it should be treated differently.

Halite said:
I dunno about straight_shota.

How about <number>girls tags? Also from gelbooru. They end up on 6+girls tag.

I agree, but perhaps not have it include furry characters, as we can divide it up with cub

Edit- I see this going two ways

We leave it be and that's the end of it

We bring them back and use loli and shota for tagging young males and females that are human, and use cub for young furries, and not be consistent because one will have a gender based tag and one will not

Or we could even have loli and shota apply to furry characters as well but then probably not need cub anymore (I think, maybe?)

Rainbow_Dash said:
I agree, bu perhaps not have it include furry characters, as we can divide it up with cub

If it's not going to include furry characters then how people can search for female cubs? It's rather important search, and for sure much more important than, for example, pinkamena. If definition include cubs then search for female cub is loli cub, and for female not cub is loli -cub. Though it's still not perfect (pictures with both cub, and human child).
Maybe you want to make 4 tag - shota, loli, furry_loli, furry_shota?

If that's the case then fine by me - the more the merrier.

P.S.
Previous part was written before you edited your post.

Or we could even have loli and shota apply to furry characters as well but then probably not need cub anymore (I think, maybe?)

I don't see how existence of cub tag has anything to do with gender. This tag is for people who want to see furry/feral young characters, not only human ones. Division on gender is separate issue.

'cub' is the catch-all for all animals' young that have names that differ from the main species- kittens to cats, foals to horses, puppies to dogs, and the rest. 'young' is for any image that contains someone that either is or looks young (pre-teen), by human standards (oesn't matter that a vampire is several hundred years old, if she was 10 when she was afflicted and looks 10, she'd be tagged young). 'loli' and 'shota' should be reserved for the sexualization of said young characters.

At least, that is what it is to my knowledge and what it should be if we do unalias them, in my opinion.

Personally, I don't think that loli and shota should be unaliased at all, unless it is for the explicit purpose that any image that could be so noted should be scrubbed from the site, but that's me. The fact that it's a legal grey area as well doesn't help.

We've done just fine without using fake-foreign subfetish tags so far. I don't see these aliases causing any problems.

ippiki_ookami said:
We've done just fine without using fake-foreign subfetish tags so far. I don't see these aliases causing any problems.

We have plenty of sub-fetish tags.
We even have foreign ones, like bukkake.

ippiki_ookami said:
We've done just fine without using fake-foreign subfetish tags so far. I don't see these aliases causing any problems.

We've done just fine without silly fandom tags like Pinkamena so far. Yet it's valid tag now even though it has about 1000 instances. Number of pictures that falls under loli meant as young female is much greater than that number.

If you don't like japanese tags, then we can name it young_female or something.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
If you don't like japanese tags, then we can name it young_female or something.

that's covered sufficiently by "young female".

123easy said:
that's covered sufficiently by "young female".

No it isn't. Searching for young female gives you also pictures like post #432601
where young character is a male. It's like saying we could replace pinkamena tag by searching pinkie_pie straight_hair.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
Searching for young female gives you also pictures where young character is a male. It's like saying we could replace pinkamena tag by searching pinkie_pie straight_hair.

That's exactly waht annoyed me when the tags first got obliterated. I had actually been using them for that purpose, and then one day I got an impersonal "fuck off" and completely lost the ability to search those pictures by gender.

This site has so many things about it that can really grind the gears, including "the site technology doesn't support per-character tagging"+"we don't combine tags that let you overcome that technological restriction". You guys act as if there's some sort of property tax on having too many textual strings in a database somewhere.

Honestly I think I'd be perfectly fine restoring the loli and shota tags, and having them imply "young". This was a change that, from what I can tell, wasn't discussed with any users beforehand, and it was a pretty major change.

The forum thread where it was discovered that the loli and shota tags had been aliased away is here: https://e621.net/forum/show/38123 ippiki mentioned that the tags were being misused, but if they were, I don't really recall how they were being misused, or why we wouldn't be able to manage it properly now.

At the very least I think having a discussion on it here in this thread is good, so we can have the pros and cons out in the open where they can actually be referenced later if needed.

The first issue that comes to mind of course is the fact that these would be gender-specific tags, when we've had a history of not permitting gender-specific tags (like stallion, mare, bitch, buck, etc). And I think one reason why we've avoided gender-specific tags is because they sometimes end up on posts where there simply isn't a good gender-specific name for a character, like what would you call a herm horse? Neither the "mare" nor "stallion" tags would really be accurate, and it certainly shouldn't receive both.

We could potentially run across the same issue with loli and shota, but in my experience I've seen very few images that depicted a young character as anything other than male or female, so maybe this could be managed without too much trouble. I would like a refresher on any problems we were experiencing with these tags before though.

Char said:
Honestly I think I'd be perfectly fine restoring the loli and shota tags, and having them imply "young". This was a change that, from what I can tell, wasn't discussed with any users beforehand, and it was a pretty major change.

The forum thread where it was discovered that the loli and shota tags had been aliased away is here: https://e621.net/forum/show/38123 ippiki mentioned that the tags were being misused, but if they were, I don't really recall how they were being misused, or why we wouldn't be able to manage it properly now.

At the very least I think having a discussion on it here in this thread is good, so we can have the pros and cons out in the open where they can actually be referenced later if needed.

The first issue that comes to mind of course is the fact that these would be gender-specific tags, when we've had a history of not permitting gender-specific tags (like stallion, mare, bitch, buck, etc). And I think one reason why we've avoided gender-specific tags is because they sometimes end up on posts where there simply isn't a good gender-specific name for a character, like what would you call a herm horse? Neither the "mare" nor "stallion" tags would really be accurate, and it certainly shouldn't receive both.

We could potentially run across the same issue with loli and shota, but in my experience I've seen very few images that depicted a young character as anything other than male or female, so maybe this could be managed without too much trouble. I would like a refresher on any problems we were experiencing with these tags before though.

Usage elsewhere would suggest that herm gets the loli tag.
Personally, with the way we deal with gender tagging here, I think loli should be female only, shota should be male only, and either we come up with some form of "young_intersex" tag to go with herm/dickgirl, or we just leave them without their own specific "young version" tag.

Char said:
Honestly I think I'd be perfectly fine restoring the loli and shota tags, and having them imply "young". This was a change that, from what I can tell, wasn't discussed with any users beforehand, and it was a pretty major change.

The forum thread where it was discovered that the loli and shota tags had been aliased away is here: https://e621.net/forum/show/38123 ippiki mentioned that the tags were being misused, but if they were, I don't really recall how they were being misused, or why we wouldn't be able to manage it properly now.

At the very least I think having a discussion on it here in this thread is good, so we can have the pros and cons out in the open where they can actually be referenced later if needed.

The first issue that comes to mind of course is the fact that these would be gender-specific tags, when we've had a history of not permitting gender-specific tags (like stallion, mare, bitch, buck, etc). And I think one reason why we've avoided gender-specific tags is because they sometimes end up on posts where there simply isn't a good gender-specific name for a character, like what would you call a herm horse? Neither the "mare" nor "stallion" tags would really be accurate, and it certainly shouldn't receive both.

We could potentially run across the same issue with loli and shota, but in my experience I've seen very few images that depicted a young character as anything other than male or female, so maybe this could be managed without too much trouble. I would like a refresher on any problems we were experiencing with these tags before though.

I'll make it simple for you. Here's two facts:

1) The greatest strength of this site is the ability to search for what you want.

2) The lack of these tags renders gender-specific search near-useless for *tens of thousands* of images.

What other argument could you POSSIBLY need?

21890 images in young (technically tens of thousands as there are two volumes of ten thousand, but the phrasing of the term usually denotes many more than a sparse pair, so tone down the hyperbole), of which not all will be either loli or shota.

Usage of loli to denote any young female and shota to determine any young male means that any image with them is being tagged for gender twice, with female and then loli or male and shota. This is redundant. Further, it would be the only case in which we allow a specific character to be singled out by a single tag for gender and age, thus providing another precedent to allow more mixed term tags that combine two tags into a single such as muscular_intersex and other similar tags.

Additionally, this broad usage would be used (as it was before) erroneously to tag images such as post #404777 simply because of one character being a young female. Frankly, I'm disgusted by lolicon and shotacon, and this is why I have questionable and explicit young images blocked- that image is beautiful in how happy it shows that family together, mother father and daughter. An image like that shouldn't be smeared with the tag lolicon.

Yes, this site is great for letting you search for what you want, but you actually have to take two seconds out of your lazy ass day to sift through them for the exact images that you want. We are an image gallery, not a deliver-to-your-door porn service.

Alright so I'm a bit confused on exactly what everyone wants to be done with these tags.

Do we want them exclusively for humans?
Do we want them for furry (cub) images as well?
Are they exclusively explicit images?

123easy said:
21890 images in young (technically tens of thousands as there are two volumes of ten thousand, but the phrasing of the term usually denotes many more than a sparse pair, so tone down the hyperbole), of which not all will be either loli or shota.

It's in the top 100 tags on the site, that's a lot of tags.
So, not so much hyperbole, particularly because it is in fact accurate.

Usage of loli to denote any young female and shota to determine any young male means that any image with them is being tagged for gender twice, with female and then loli or male and shota. This is redundant. Further, it would be the only case in which we allow a specific character to be singled out by a single tag for gender and age, thus providing another precedent to allow more mixed term tags that combine two tags into a single such as muscular_intersex and other similar tags.

Only if you consider it a gender tag, it's not it's a fetish tag.

Additionally, this broad usage would be used (as it was before) erroneously to tag images such as post #404777 simply because of one character being a young female. Frankly, I'm disgusted by lolicon and shotacon, and this is why I have questionable and explicit young images blocked- that image is beautiful in how happy it shows that family together, mother father and daughter. An image like that shouldn't be smeared with the tag lolicon.

Yes, this site is great for letting you search for what you want, but you actually have to take two seconds out of your lazy ass day to sift through them for the exact images that you want. We are an image gallery, not a deliver-to-your-door porn service.

Personal prejudice =/= good tagging.
Your dislike of loli and shota doesn't make it bad tagging.
Neither does re-implementing the tags hurt your ability to blacklist.
It also improves people's ability to blacklist, if you dislike shota, but not loli, or vise versa, there currently isn't an accurate method of blacklisting those.

Halite said:
...Only if you consider it a gender tag, it's not it's a fetish tag.
Personal prejudice =/= good tagging.
Your dislike of loli and shota doesn't make it bad tagging.
Neither does re-implementing the tags hurt your ability to blacklist.
It also improves people's ability to blacklist, if you dislike shota, but not loli, or vise versa, there currently isn't an accurate method of blacklisting those.

Despite being fetishes, their definitions ARE gender based (and it's easily seen in your last sentence of how it "improves" the blacklist), I gotta agree with 123easy here.

Fluttershy said:
Despite being fetishes, their definitions ARE gender based, I gotta agree with 123easy here.

So, we also get rid of female_domination, female_pov, male_pregnancy, etc?
Those are all gender based fetishes.

Back to my post though, let's first discuss the use, then if we should use gender based tags here

For use, we could adopt a booru-esque usage where it would only apply to questionable and explicit images.
I would keep it to male/female only, leave the herm/dickgirl out of the equation.
I could see human only, or all species, no real preference as to which on my part.

I don't see a problem with definition being based on gender. We have a valid tag which definition is based on whether character hair are straight or not. IMO definition based on gender makes much more sense than definition based on type of hair.

Halite said:
For use, we could adopt a booru-esque usage where it would only apply to questionable and explicit images.

I'm for applying it to all ratings. You can always search for the second definition by loli -rating:s

Halite said:
I would keep it to male/female only, leave the herm/dickgirl out of the equation.

Either that, and making it similar to brother and sister tags, or make young_intersex or more specific tags for intersex young characters.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
I don't see a problem with definition being based on gender. We have a valid tag which definition is based on whether character hair are straight or not. IMO definition based on gender makes much more sense than definition based on type of hair.

I'm for applying it to all ratings. You can always search for the second definition by loli -rating:s

Either that, and making it similar to brother and sister tags, or make young_intersex or more specific tags for intersex young characters.

Please leave the pinkamena thing out of the discussion; it is a done deal at this point and isn't helping here, thank you.

I do think that sometimes a few gender based tags are warranted as sometimes there is no other way to find/filter that content

It would be used for female/male only, and intersex (very rare) would just get the young_intersex tag or what have you. As for further use though, cub included yes or no? If we include it, then we lose our ability to search for human only young characters (which is abig blacklist point for most) and if we exclude it, there is no way to find male vs female young cub images. In my opinion, we should not have it include cub for the advantages of having the blacklist work for many outweighs being able to find male vs female cubs

Rainbow_Dash said:
In my opinion, we should not have it include cub for the advantages of having the blacklist work for many outweighs being able to find male vs female cubs

I agree with this.

Rainbow_Dash said:
Do we want them exclusively for humans? Do we want them for furry (cub) images as well?

No. Yes.
This isn't my area of expertise, but I'm sure I've seen these called loli and shota both in furry doujins and on furry imageboards. It wouldn't make much sense to restrict it only to humans.

Are they exclusively explicit images?

This would be my preference, yes.
Edit: And I'd attempt to explain why, but it's two in the morning and I've already pulled one all-nighter...

Yeah, I think including cub for ease of searching would be preferable.

Genjar said:
No. Yes.
This isn't my area of expertise, but I'm sure I've seen these called loli and shota both in furry doujins and on furry imageboards. It wouldn't make much sense to restrict it only to humans.

This would be my preference, yes.
Edit: And I'd attempt to explain why, but it's two in the morning and I've already pulled one all-nighter...

Agreed. There are many images where there is a furry child that is definitively shota or loli as per hentai standards; arbitrarily excluding them because of species doesn't make sense. It's about the aesthetic and age of the character, not about the species.

Explicit only is, again, my preference. Loli and shota are sexualising fetish tags. Questionable possible if an argument can be made where the significant portion of questionable content that the tags would apply to can be shown to be sexualized. Remember that the concept originated with Lolita itself, wih was entirely about how she was sexualized.

Halite said:
Personal prejudice =/= good tagging.
Your dislike of loli and shota doesn't make it bad tagging.
Neither does re-implementing the tags hurt your ability to blacklist.
It also improves people's ability to blacklist, if you dislike shota, but not loli, or vise versa, there currently isn't an accurate method of blacklisting those.

It does if it's applied to images without concern for sexualization, then it may as well be left as just young, because then it's only denoting if the male or female is young in the image which IS a gender tag, not a fetish tag. If it retains the sexualization aspect, then it is a fetish tag. My dislike of shota and loli is a personal preference and one that I gladly air, but acknowledge in the same breath that it is just that, and address the topic otherwise neutrally. I agree regarding your blacklist attributions, as there isn't a way to more specifically blacklist your drawn kiddy porn dislikes from your wants. :)

123easy said:
Explicit only is, again, my preference. Loli and shota are sexualising fetish tags.

Exactly. If someone searches for those, they're almost certainly looking for NSFW images. Therefore that's how the tag should be defined.

Here's the definition that Gelbooru uses for loli:

This tag implies sexually explicit or suggestive (not safe for work) art works of girls who appear to be preadolescent. Please note it doesn't matter whether the character is canonically of age -- if they look like kids, they are loli for the purpose of tagging; and if they don't look like kids, they aren't.

<snip>

Do not use this tag for rating:safe posts of fully-clothed girls, that is what the child tag is for. By definition, images that should be tagged loli will always have a questionable or explicit rating.

They don't tag furries with it, but that's mainly because furry art is a small niche there and most users don't want to see it mixed up with human art.

Alright so if we expand loli and shota to include cub, do we have either implicate cub itself, and if not, when would cub be used where loli and shota would not? My guess to answer my own question would be that cub could be implicated and used as an umbrella term to include safe rating posts

Rainbow_Dash said:
My guess to answer my own question would be that cub could be implicated and used as an umbrella term to include safe rating posts

Loli and shota should be implicated directly to young. Since there'll be humans mixed in, and they're not tagged as cubs. At least not by the current wiki definition.

Okay so we have loli and shota implicate young, then have them on human and cub images as well?

Sounds right.

Loli and shota should implicate young, cub be added separately if they are furry or not, and should exclude any image where the child is non-sexualized, be it safe, questionable, or explicit (eg. kid walks in on parents fucking, kid isn't immediately tagged loli or shota; kid expresses desire to join in, or just does so? loli/shota). Fair enough compromise?

123easy said:
Loli and shota should implicate young, cub be added separately if they are furry or not, and should exclude any image where the child is non-sexualized, be it safe, questionable, or explicit (eg. kid walks in on parents fucking, kid isn't immediately tagged loli or shota; kid expresses desire to join in, or just does so? loli/shota). Fair enough compromise?

I agree