Posted under Tags
pornography is just for erotic material, doesn't have to be hardcore porn. A playboy magazine would qualify for the tag as well.
There's a lot of things in yaoi (object) that don't look like pornography to me. Since we use yaoi to refer to both sfw and nsfw works, there's a mix of both in the yaoi (object) tag. post #1502502, post #3924560, post #1147420.
I would argue all of those examples fall under pornography. If you look at the tag you'll find plenty of similar examples. Stuff like post #7416736, post #7390940, post #7355684, etc.
This tag is more about characters' interaction with pornography than the content itself, it's for generic indecent material.
The bulk update request #25321 (forum #277267) has been approved by @nonamethanks.
But the thing is - you cannot reasonably call every in-universe drawing or doujin or DVD or whatever pornography. Sometimes it'll be obvious even if the cover isn't indecent, for instance using R18 marks, but sometimes... it just ain't. The aforementioned post #1147420 is the tamest picture of two boys kissing (and the reason for embarrassment can be just that her art is being looked at, or even that her work displays homosexuality in the first place, rather than any kind of indecency). If that's pornography then so is post #7454116.
If, in turn, we consider any instance of in-universe M/M media to be inherently pornographic, then we might as well make it a policy to rate all homosexual content S+. Since it's so pornographic and sexual.
Updated
It seems to me that you don't understand what the pornography tag is for. It's not just "porn". It's a tag for depiction of indecent material in-world. That post qualifies for the same reason that a Playboy magazine or something like post #6689506 or post #2468951 would qualify, despite there not being any sex visible. Even just a book with a male and female symbol is enough. It's not about the porn being visible, it's about the content being indecent in-world.
Updated
nonamethanks said:
It seems to me that you don't understand what the pornography tag is for. It's not just "porn". It's a tag for depiction of indecent material in-world. That post qualifies for the same reason that a Playboy magazine or something like post #6689506 or post #2468951 would qualify, despite there not being any sex visible. Even just a book with a male and female symbol is enough. It's not about the porn being visible, it's about the content being indecent in-world.
It sounds to me like KagayuShiningGate does understand what pornography is for. They acknowledged that porn won't always have an indecent cover but could still be considered as such based on certain visual clues. For example, post #6689506 and post #2468951 both show the R-18 tag, which is obvious evidence KagayuShiningGate specifically mentioned before. The point that was made for post #1147420 is that the sketch lacks these visual clues. The only thing that fits is the artist's reaction to her sketch being seen. It's certainly possible (and I'd even say likely) that it's being treated as smut in-universe, but it's still ambiguous. Same with post #6755186; is she reading porn or a romance novel?
What if that sketch were hung up on a wall in a public place such as a museum? In that context, it definitely wouldn't be considered indecent material. Could something like that still be tagged as yaoi_(object)? If so, then the implication is inappropriate because it would be treating a SFW image treated as SFW in-universe as NSFW material. If this implication is going to work, we'll need to narrow the use of yaoi_(object) only to those works that are NSFW or implied to be NSFW in-universe. However, I think most taggers are likely to apply yaoi_(object) to any in-universe fictional depiction of yaoi regardless, so I think manually gardening the tags would've been better in this case.
I disagree it doesn't matter if it's a bodice ripper, hardcore porn, or two girls staring longingly into each others eyes for the purpse of pornography they are all the same thing and that level of granularity doesn't matter for tagging purposes. What matters is two people are engaged in a relationship of a physical/romantic nature and another character is reading/watching it.
I don't think seperating sfw vs nsfw is meaningful here otherwise I would have made two tags yaoi and shonen_ai. The main goal is so people can blacklist or search for this specific type of media.
zetsubousensei said:
I disagree it doesn't matter if it's a bodice ripper, hardcore porn, or two girls staring longingly into each others eyes for the purpse of pornography they are all the same thing and that level of granularity doesn't matter for tagging purposes. What matters is two people are engaged in a relationship of a physical/romantic nature and another character is reading/watching it.
I don't think seperating sfw vs nsfw is meaningful here otherwise I would have made two tags yaoi and shonen_ai. The main goal is so people can blacklist or search for this specific type of media.
The point I was trying to make in my second paragraph is that part of the reason the pornography tag would be applicable to in-universe images we'd consider SFW is because the characters are treating them as NSFW. In post #1147420 and post #6755186, it's not clear whether the sketch or book would be considered pornography in the real world, but the reactions of shame/arousal still imply it's being treated as somewhat indecent in-universe. Those I don't really have a problem being tagged with pornography.
The issues with the implication come into play when images that are SFW both by our standards and in-universe standards are tagged with yaoi_(object), thus resulting in them also being tagged with pornography. For example, post #2878039 is tagged with yaoi. If this is accurate, than the sketch in that post could be tagged as yaoi_(object). However, with the implication in place, it would also be tagged with pornography despite it not being used for that purpose. On the other hand, if yaoi_(object) only applies to material treated as indecent (the wiki description sort of implies that is its primary purpose, but not exclusively), then the implication works and the SFW sketch would not get either tag.
The main question is what things qualify for yaoi_(object). Do we tag any in-universe drawn media of a yaoi couple as yaoi_(object)? Or do we only limit it to what is treated as indecent in-universe and/or in real life?
The tag is called pornography because it'd be silly to have a tag name called in-world erotic material. You really don't need to overthink this. A sfw doujinshi or drawing can still be erotic in nature. The alternative is having pornography and romance object (terrible name, can't think of an alternative right now) and split nsfw and sfw objects, but that's a level of granularity that I'm not sure we need.
post #2878039 is the only example so far that actually skirts the line, but I don't think I'd tag that as yaoi (object) because it looks more like a sketch inset, it's not being treated as an in-world object.
If it was a sketch drawn by one of the characters in question then I'd absolutely consider it something that belongs in this tag.
nonamethanks said:
The tag is called pornography because it'd be silly to have a tag name called in-world erotic material. You really don't need to overthink this. A sfw doujinshi or drawing can still be erotic in nature. The alternative is having pornography and romance object (terrible name, can't think of an alternative right now) and split nsfw and sfw objects, but that's a level of granularity that I'm not sure we need.
My concern was more about things that were never intended to be seen in that way getting the tag rather than the difference between SFW and NSFW, but I did look through the yaoi_(object tag and it seems to be used only for the "shameful" stuff. Again, I have no problems with the implication if the scope is limited to those kinds of things.
I think "erotica" might work as an alternate term to pornography; it seems to cover a slightly broader range.
nonamethanks said:
post #2878039 is the only example so far that actually skirts the line, but I don't think I'd tag that as yaoi (object) because it looks more like a sketch inset, it's not being treated as an in-world object.
If it was a sketch drawn by one of the characters in question then I'd absolutely consider it something that belongs in this tag.
Even if there were another character shown drawing it, I would still say it would only fit if it were similar to post #1147420, in which the artist is clearly feeling ashamed with the implication of seeing it as romantic/sexual material. If the artist appeared more neutral about it, I would assume it's just a regular sketch of two people not intended for sexual gratification.
