O.o

BDSM would probably be a better choice :P

ahhhh... that's what I meant >.<

This implication already exists.

But since we're on the topic, I think it's worth discussing. Bondage is a fetish that falls under BDSM. HOWEVER. On this site, I don't know of any tags we have for characters bound against their will, leading to images like post #80384 being tagged as BDSM, even though BDSM is between consenting individuals. I think either BDSM needs to be unaliased from bondage, or else we need a new tag for those bound against their will. True, that one is tagged as both bondage and rape, indicating that it is, but the bdsm tag is still there because "bondage" is.

rape is kind of subjective honestly. maybe she wanted to be there, maybe she volunteered. you know? it's hard to tell just by the context of a picture... the quetion is 'if someone enjoys bdsm, would they enjoy the images tagged with 'bondage'?

Rape isn't really subjective. Nonconsensuality can be determined by a number of factors, the most obvious of which is the facial expression- If they're grimacing in pain or hate, or crying, you can generally assume that it's nonconsensual, and thus it's rape. That said, I actually have to agree. Perhaps BDSM implies bondage instead of the other way around?

Except some people have rape fetishes and roleplay. Some people enjoy rough sex, and part of the idea of SOME parts of BDSM is pain, and or submission.

so while a BDSM session IS concentual, the things that go on within it may appear to be non-con. A degree of pain, fear, or tears is kinda expected and desired.

Fear, no. It is entirely non-con if there is fear involved. Trust is THE number one currency in BDSM. If there isn't trust, if theres fear or worry, it doesn't happen. If it doesn't, it's not BDSM. That trust is the main factor in the submissive allowing the dominant that control.

I will admit there's also the rare tear that's from things like a first time or a tight fit,- that's why I listed it with pain and hate, because there's an entirely different look to that form of crying- the Anarchy pool is a good example of that (the rape crying I mean).

And even if there is pain involved, it's not often that you'll see pain as the only emotion- If the sub has progressed in trust to the point of allowing pain as part of their repeitoire, that's because the sub has come to enjoy it as well.

Fear is a label of an emotion. How is fear different from aniticipation?

there's a big difference between "oh god he's raping me, now what will he do" and "Oh god, I've never taken a dildo/cock that huge, I don't know if I can take that." or "Oh, that really hurt. I don't know if I can take any more... but I don't want to disappoint him" or "is she really going to hit me with that? Oh nononononono!"

As I understand it, for some, it's a matter of pushing boundries. of being forced to do something you wouldn't normally want to (within limits).. trust, yes, trust is there, trust MUSt be there, but trust doesn't make the sudden expression of "oh god, I don't know who this other man is and why is he taking off his pants" any less. Trust is what makes the next few thoughts "it's okay, he won't let them hurt me. He will keep me safe"...

but fear isn't rational.

ANYWAY... anarchy's a good example of rape, yes.

Aaaand... bondage impying bdsm should stay as far as I'm concerned...

post #81442 fear, crying, looks unwilling, no intent is being made to show that this is consensual = rape.

post #105404 trepidation, possible fear but no crying, spreading himself, could be forced sex that he's determined to get damaged the least he can in, or could be consensual- But it LOOKS consensual.

post #8655 shows fear, bondage, crying, no pain or actual rape (though she seems to be looking with fear at someone or something just over the viewer's left shoulder). Looks forced, nonconsensual = imminent rape.

Pushing boundaries goes very slowly, nothing like you see or hear in porn. It starts at zero at best, or negative at worst- either because you have to break them in or because you have to untrain them first; it can take months of training slowly but surely before you can get anything near what you might see in some BDSM videos. BDSM does NOT exist if there's the hint of the thought of "oh god, I don't know who this other man is and why is he taking off his pants". That's nonconsensual and rape. You would NEVER take a sub and just introduce him or her to some random male for a good stranger-fucking without them already willing and prepared. You'd start off with introducing a third person, getting your sub to know them, starting small with petting and fondling and working from there. Once they've become used to dealing with a relative stranger that has been introduced to them, seually, you can then step it up, perhaps add a blindfold so they can't see them, but feel everything. There is a small- VERY small- subsection of subs that are what are known as 'true subs' who have an innate trust with their partner so training goes much faster, but still- You don't just hop into strangers fucking without building that trust in that regard.

Bondage can happen WITHOUT BDSM occuring. post #140319 and post #81790 are not BDSM, just bondage- also the link that RedOctober gave. There are others. Bondage should not imply BDSM. BDSM shouldn't necessarily imply bondage either, as not all submissive/dominant pictures (which should fall within the purview of BDSM) use bondage.

the first looks like rape to me also, the second seems willing to me and the third I could go either way on.

As for what you say, I'm just gonna say that every relationship is different... and that this isn't really relevant to the discussion at hand.

I do see the point, though, in those images that you've linked with bondage lacking BDSM

so, preior statement retracted. these SHOULD be unimplied. :)

I'd also say that domination/dominatrix/female_domination/submission all should imply BDSM.

Or, we can keep bondage linked to BDSM, and develop a new tag for bondage-that-isn't-BDSM.

123 knows what he's talkin about :p

Good post, I agree fully with it. And post #140319 is probably the best example yet. I really doubt that guy wants to be tied up by sword-wielding skeletons.

Yes, there are rape fetishes, yes some people want to be thoroughly used and abused. Showing pain is one thing, but fear is another entirely. I really can't add to what Easy said, he put it all out. Spot on with "trust is the number one currency in BDSM." So far the only posts I've seen that have what really looks like rape but is later clearly not is the "Horse With No Name" pool. However, if it LOOKS like rape, we tag it rape. There was one comic...ah! Found it. http://e621.net/pool/show/487 The green character clearly does not want it. He resists, he continuously asks to be let go, etc. I know, I know, sometimes that's part of a rape roleplay and is why you set up safe words. But here, it's fairly clear that what's going on is not consensual. There is a lot of bondage, but no BDSM.

the bottom line is correct, anyway. tag what one sees, especialyl with something like rape.

I've deleted the implication :)

I assumed bondage was the B of BDSM? Like Bondage/Domination/Sadism/Masochism?

yes, but just like you can enjoy hurting someone without it being BDSM, you can be tied up or bound without BDSM being present.

just like there are BDSM images that do NOT involve bondage.

they should both OFTEN be on the same image, but not always.

I assumed they all would imply that tag, being a part of it... maybe bdsm just don't mean what I thought it was supposed to >_>

BDSM means Bondage and Dominance (BD) Domination and Submission (D/s) and Sadism and Masochism (SM). Thus, BDSM. The thing is while bondage is offten used in BDSM play, it's also just as frequently not part of BDSM play, or even sexplay- You wouldn't, for example, call a woman hanging in medieval strappado bondage under the BDSM terms, but bondage under torture terms. Bondage itself stays pretty much the same in meaning- being bound physically- but the implications of the bondage can change drastically- As seen between a willing sub bottoming for his master, against a frightened wolf/lucario getting an electrical shock through his urethra by skeletons.

...That is a sentence I never thought I'd say.

Anyways: Not all bondage, dominance, submission, sadism, or masochism falls under BDSM. only the consensual variants practiced safely (unless somehow you managed to get a willing inexperienced bottom with an amateur top, but the likelyhood of that happening and going anywhere is slim to nil).

123easy said:
I'd also say that domination/dominatrix/female_domination/submission all should imply BDSM.

Or, we can keep bondage linked to BDSM, and develop a new tag for bondage-that-isn't-BDSM.

Bah. Should have refreshed before posting.

I agree with the first sentence, and but only partially with the second. I'd be in favor of keeping the link and developing a new tag for non-consensual character-in-a-state-of-being-bound (how does one say that without using the word "bondage?" lol) except that this would bring about a need for extra tag policing, as the average user probably won't know about the new tag and will just continue to upload things as "bondage," even if what it needs to be tagged as is the new "being bound" or whatever the hell it might be. So I think personally that it's best to unlink the two, that way "bondage" can be used for any bound characters, while "BDSM" will only be used in non-rape images. Well, and ones where there's no sex. I mean, if a character is captured and bound because that's what you do with captured people, "BDSM" isn't really an appropriate tag.

123easy said:
but the implications of the bondage can change drastically- As seen between a willing sub bottoming for his master, against a frightened wolf/lucario getting an electrical shock through his urethra by skeletons.

...That is a sentence I never thought I'd say.

Rofl. And kudos to you for having the fortitude to say it XD

123easy said:
I'd also say that domination/dominatrix/female_domination/submission all should imply BDSM.

I would argue not for that honestly. the words can all apply withouth BEING BDSM, just like bondage. One person taking control, or another submitting doesnt' mean that they are suddenly in a BDSM relationship, or that it would be what someone looking up BDSM is wanting to look at.

The only exception is a dominatrix.. and even them I'm iffy--could it really be bdsm if it's a cheesecake pinup like post #114768 or post #136487 ?

SnowWolf said:
I would argue not for that honestly. the words can all apply withouth BEING BDSM, just like bondage. One person taking control, or another submitting doesnt' mean that they are suddenly in a BDSM relationship, or that it would be what someone looking up BDSM is wanting to look at.

The only exception is a dominatrix.. and even them I'm iffy--could it really be bdsm if it's a cheesecake pinup like post #114768 or post #136487 ?

very valid points all around. I suppose the implication just doesn't fit.

Point. Ignore that implication suggestion then. Just realized that the same thing I'm arguing for bondage also applies to the other aspects- That's what I get for not getting enough rest and hanging around the forums..

Here's a thought (I feel silly for not having it sooner). Why don't we have "bondage" implies "BDSM" and "bound," and then just "bound" is also used for situations where the character is bound but not participating in bondage? "Bound" is already a tag on here, it looks like it's mostly used in bondage images, but with a little wiki edit we can make it clear that "bondage" is not for use regarding non-consensual binding.

Here's the problem with that--it's a really GOOD idea, and i LOVE the idea of 'bondage' referring to 'kinky' tying up and bound referring to 'clap her in irons' and stuff. BUT, will people actually use it the right way when typing in tags?

SnowWolf said:
Here's the problem with that--it's a really GOOD idea, and i LOVE the idea of 'bondage' referring to 'kinky' tying up and bound referring to 'clap her in irons' and stuff. BUT, will people actually use it the right way when typing in tags?

That's my worry, too. I really don't want to be constantly cleaning up bondage/bound tags. Ideally, YES. Realisitcally, no. However, if you find an image with a bound character that is not participating in BDSM bondage, fix the tags and send a very polite PM to whomever put the tag on it indicating that the usage has changed, just for their future reference. We don't need to do this to current images, as they're tagged correctly according to current usage, just to new uploads. I don't think it will be that big a deal, as most images uploaded with bound characters are bondage, rather than non-consensual binding. I for one browse bondage-type images fairly regularly anyway, it would be a pretty simple matter to keep an eye on it.

After re-reading your post, Snow, I want to make sure we're clear on what each other means. I mean that all characters who are bound in any way are to be tagged bound, not that it's only for non-con binding. After all, a fox who asked to be tied up is still tied up and should be tagged thusly. So it's only SORT of separate. Under my proposal it would be on all images with binding, but non-consensual would lack the "bondage" tag. So all bondage is binding, not all binding is bondage. If that was clear to begin with, sorry for all that :p

Edit: When I said that we didn't need to do it with current images, I meant the contacting the tagger bit, not fixing the tags >.<

I did a fair bit of that 'posting when exhausted' thing this morning ^^;

but yes, I.. comprehend the idea, even if I didn't say it before. ^^;

If you're willing to go through and do it, and adjust the wiki pages, then go forth and do it :) I don't think anyone can really object to this, and it'd be easily reversed later if ample reason's brought up.

SnowWolf said:
I did a fair bit of that 'posting when exhausted' thing this morning ^^;

but yes, I.. comprehend the idea, even if I didn't say it before. ^^;

If you're willing to go through and do it, and adjust the wiki pages, then go forth and do it :) I don't think anyone can really object to this, and it'd be easily reversed later if ample reason's brought up.

Wikis adjusted/made. Can we go ahead and get "bondage" to imply "bound," then? Searching/adjusting tags now...

Edit: It's actually a lot more difficult than I thought, precisely because of what you said way earlier, Snow. It is so often difficult to actually tell if it's consensual or not. Especially with images drawn in a very anime style, because hentai does so often portray women having sex with the most pained expressions on their faces, even if they're the ones doing the raping. I've started making edits, but I'm going to bed just now. I'll keep at it in bits and pieces, it's more time-consuming than I expected x.x

RedOctober said:
Wikis adjusted/made. Can we go ahead and get "bondage" to imply "bound," then? Searching/adjusting tags now...

done :) or, it will be as soon as I tell it to get started on all these.

[/quote]Edit: It's actually a lot more difficult than I thought, precisely because of what you said way earlier, Snow. It is so often difficult to actually tell if it's consensual or not. Especially with images drawn in a very anime style, because hentai does so often portray women having sex with the most pained expressions on their faces, even if they're the ones doing the raping. I've started making edits, but I'm going to bed just now. I'll keep at it in bits and pieces, it's more time-consuming than I expected x.x
[/quote]

It's a tough one :( at least with most things, it's a little more black and white, but this one is REALLY subjective :(

But, keep at it <3

I've got a to do list a page long, but I've got something in mind that might make this a bit easier. <3

I thought I'd start out easy and just go through those tagged both "bondage" and "rape," thinking it'd be obvious that most, if not all, could have the "bondage" tag removed. But nooo. Mostly because I was really iffy on whether or not the images actually depicted rape, and so I followed my rule of thumb of: when it doubt, leave it the fuck alone.

I think a lot of them were probably tagged with "rape" because the character was bound and so could not actively prevent sex, but it's really unclear whether or not it actually is rape.

I'm going through all of them now, slowly. No promises I'll catch everything, but I'll do my damndest.

As far as rape goes...

also remember that Rape can be a scary triggering thing for some people, so it's better to err on the side of 'safety' on those pics.

go red! :D you're awesome <3

SnowWolf said:
As far as rape goes...

also remember that Rape can be a scary triggering thing for some people, so it's better to err on the side of 'safety' on those pics.

Oh damn. I'd never even thought of that. Yeah, ok, that's a really, fucking, seriously good point. I'll keep that in mind.

RedOctober said:
Oh damn. I'd never even thought of that. Yeah, ok, that's a really, fucking, seriously good point. I'll keep that in mind.

♥ ♥ ♥ :D

Quick update plus here's a problem I hadn't thought of:

So I'm only getting through about a page, sometimes two pages of posts a day, but I'm on page 18 of 28 (non-comic), so I expect to be done with those within a week. Less if I get super bored one day lol. Then I'll move onto the comics, but there are only three pages of that, so it won't be too bad. Oh shit, I also just realized I've been totally ignoring the animated ones, just out of personal habit. I always ignore animations lol. Hokaaay, so if someone else feels like helping out but doesn't want to deal with the huge part, they can either go through the animated bondage images, or through the comics. If someone does this, though, PLEASE let me know so I don't end up going through them anyway lol.

I regularly check back at recent uploads that get the bondage tag, and I've sent a message or two to the users who have a lot of uploads and tag edits, to keep them up to date with the current usage of it, since there's no way in hell everyone can constantly check the wiki for updates on every tag they use. I've not bothered doing that for users that have like three uploads and a few dozen tag edits, as I figure it won't make a difference. So there's the update.

Here's the problem. If someone decides they need to go and put back the tag on a lot I've removed it from, I won't notice unless I go through the I'll just every now and then check my own tagging history. If I notice that the -bondage is black, instead of red, I'll take a look and see what's going down.

Carry on.

bondage means: 1) being in tenure of service of a serf, a slave
2) being compulsory bound or physically restrained for any reason, e.g. a captive.

Some people reason it to be linked to BDSM because e621 is "porn site"
But, I'm sorry, it's not porn site, though it may have contain posted porn.

May be e621 need conditional implication implemented: like
(safe) bondage - no implication, shibari no implication or alias
(questionable) bondage - no implication, shibari aliased to rope_bondage, impling bondage
(explicit) shibari aliased to rope_bondage, implying bondage, both imply bdsm

But I know it's very hard to implement and poses some problems with search engine logic and really overcomplicates tag system.

My opinion - implication should be removed, because posts with bondage or shibari tags might be (safe) in rating.

Yes, I know, that bDSM pic MAY be safe as well, but in that case it should contain implication as bound and stimulated sub. And this is so special case, that this tag obviously would be added manually.

Swiftkill said:
bondage means: 1) being in tenure of service of a serf, a slave
2) being compulsory bound or physically restrained for any reason, e.g. a captive.

Some people reason it to be linked to BDSM because e621 is "porn site"
But, I'm sorry, it's not porn site, though it may have contain posted porn.

May be e621 need conditional implication implemented: like
(safe) bondage - no implication, shibari no implication or alias
(questionable) bondage - no implication, shibari aliased to rope_bondage, impling bondage
(explicit) shibari aliased to rope_bondage, implying bondage, both imply bdsm

But I know it's very hard to implement and poses some problems with search engine logic and really overcomplicates tag system.

My opinion - implication should be removed, because posts with bondage or shibari tags might be (safe) in rating.

Yes, I know, that bDSM pic MAY be safe as well, but in that case it should contain implication as bound and stimulated sub. And this is so special case, that this tag obviously would be added manually.

Stop it.

This is not a BDSM site, so bumping such an old thread is incredibly unnecessary. I like drag queens, but I'm not out crusading for feather_boa tags or forcing education on the "better" use of certain tags.. Find a speciality site if you're that hung up on BDSM. Now, as has been said, stahp! You're just forcing your own opinion despite being continuously corrected.

Okay again I need to say we are having the conversation already in this forum