How do I tag this?

Posted under Tags

Flopsy

I replaced futanari with yuri on post #8086693, Wilfriback undid this. There's nothing in the image itself indicating that either character is a futa. Should it be tagged that way anyway strictly by contextual clues (child post is futa, artist draws a lot of futa_with_female, etc.)? I'm personally in favor of a quite strict post-by-post "tag what you see" policy based on wiki definitions, since that restrains subjective interpretations and is most relevant for searches (e.g. If you're looking for yuri, does it matter that the child post isn't?), but some other users clearly aren't.

Edit: rm redundant copula

Updated by Flopsy

Reply
wakaba hiiro

Flopsy said:

I replaced futanari with yuri on post #8086693, Wilfriback undid this. There's is nothing in the image itself indicating that either character is a futa. Should it be tagged that way anyway strictly by contextual clues (child post is futa, artist draws a lot of futa_with_female, etc.)? I'm personally in favor of a quite strict post-by-post "tag what you see" policy based on wiki definitions, since that restrains subjective interpretations and is most relevant for searches (e.g. If you're looking for yuri, does it matter that the child post isn't?), but some other users clearly aren't.

Suspended congress usually implies a penis.

Reply
wispydreamer

wakaba_hiiro said:

Suspended congress usually implies a penis.

In this case though it doesn't look particularly concrete if sex is even happening in that image or just a lewder version of the pose in post #7900460 without the child post. Personally, I would tag it as implied futanari but I don't know if there's any concrete rulings on implied futanari and yuri being used together.

Reply
Oosaki-m

Flopsy said:

I replaced futanari with yuri on post #8086693, Wilfriback undid this. There's is nothing in the image itself indicating that either character is a futa. Should it be tagged that way anyway strictly by contextual clues (child post is futa, artist draws a lot of futa_with_female, etc.)? I'm personally in favor of a quite strict post-by-post "tag what you see" policy based on wiki definitions, since that restrains subjective interpretations and is most relevant for searches (e.g. If you're looking for yuri, does it matter that the child post isn't?), but some other users clearly aren't.

Artist tagged it as futanari on Pixiv. I personally believe that the artist's vision is very important when you're tagging a picture. It needs the futanari (or implied futanari) tag.

Reply
CoreMack

Flopsy said:

I replaced futanari with yuri on post #8086693, Wilfriback undid this. There's is nothing in the image itself indicating that either character is a futa. Should it be tagged that way anyway strictly by contextual clues (child post is futa, artist draws a lot of futa_with_female, etc.)? I'm personally in favor of a quite strict post-by-post "tag what you see" policy based on wiki definitions, since that restrains subjective interpretations and is most relevant for searches (e.g. If you're looking for yuri, does it matter that the child post isn't?), but some other users clearly aren't.

I would encourage everyone above to read the essay I wrote addressing exactly these issues: forum #272717

In the case of this image, there's a sex position that's very strongly associated with penetrative sex. However, no plap-plap or thrusting motion is present. The artist tagged it as futa, and the child post is an identical variant except with the penis made visible. It's in a grey area, but weighing everything, I would tag it as implied_futanari and futa_with_female.

The most important considerations are that it's a typical penetrative sex position and that the otherwise identical child variant shows the penis explicitly, making clear how the parent is intended to be interpreted. The "artist's vision" is only relevant when the picture itself is ambiguous, and it is the factor of least importance when the image itself is clear. Plenty of artists simply use tags like futa and yuri differently than we do, so what they call their art is very often irrelevant.

Tagging problems such as these are always subjective and require interpretation. That's a necessary element in accurate, effective tagging. Assuming that there's 2 vaginas there instead of a vagina and a penis is equally subjective interpretation. We look at what the image tells us, we make reasonable inferences based on what we see, and we tag accordingly.

Reply
Oosaki-m

CoreMack said:
The most important considerations are that it's a typical penetrative sex position and that the otherwise identical child variant shows the penis explicitly, making clear how the parent is intended to be interpreted. The "artist's vision" is only relevant when the picture itself is ambiguous, and it is the factor of least importance when the image itself is clear. Plenty of artists simply use tags like futa and yuri differently than we do, so what they call their art is very often irrelevant.

I completely agree with your post and it's how I tend to tag any ambiguous picture (I'm a fellow yuri autist, for the record). I only mentioned the artist's tags because it seemed to me that some (one?) people were unsure about this case (or at least the version that doesn't 100% show penetration). I always check tags to make sure I'm understanding what's going on correctly, but I do agree that some artists don't have the same standards (=will tag anything with two girls as yuri, no matter if one or more penises are clearly present), so some situations need to be considered differently. "Use your brain" seems like the best approach, even when it's not about yuri vs. futa.

Reply
Blank User

argentb said:

Perhaps a new pool: "You're Doing It Wrong"

You're doing it wrong is already a tag, but I don't think this would qualify. It's unrealistic, but it looks like she could fire an arrow from that stance if you use some suspension of disbelief. I think it would have to be a more fundamental error to count such as holding the bow backwards or using it to launch herself instead of the arrow.

Reply
1 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 639