Tagging dispute:Yuri and cum

Lately I've been taking part in a sort of "edit war" about whether pics such as post #2757450 should be tagged yuri or bisexual_(female). I personally think that if a post would normally be tagged yuri then the prescence of cum should not disqualify it, specially because in most cases the cum doesn't really have an "origin", it's just there because the artist thought it would be hot. I also think that bisexual_(female) should only be used when there are multiple people of different sexes participating and girls swapping should not qualify for the reason I just mentioned.

The only discussion about it is from over 6 years ago (topic #5842), and in it it was decided that it was okay to tag cum pics with yuri. Should that still apply or should we change the tag definitions a bit?

The depiction of cum is a hetero element. So it shouldn't be tagged Yuri then.

Still since we cant test the "cum" with a microscope it could also be poorly drawn pussy juice, syrup or some other substance. Im not saying we shouldnt tag them wit cum but taging it with bisexual when there are only two people in the image seems counter intuitive.

Chiera said:

The depiction of cum is a hetero element. So it shouldn't be tagged Yuri then.

If someone has a problem with cum in their yuri search results, they should either blacklist cum or search for yuri -cum instead. The image linked above is two women and no men, so it's obviously yuri. Removing the tag from posts like these is straight-up tag vandalism.

Also, "hetero element" is meaningless. Did you read the older thread? Cum is an object, not a person.

ion288 said:

Still since we cant test the "cum" with a microscope it could also be poorly drawn pussy juice, syrup or some other substance. Im not saying we shouldnt tag them wit cum but taging it with bisexual when there are only two people in the image seems counter intuitive.

Maybe it's kefir.

iridescent_slime said:

If someone has a problem with cum in their yuri search results, they should either blacklist cum or search for yuri -cum instead. The image linked above is two women and no men, so it's obviously yuri. Removing the tag from posts like these is straight-up tag vandalism.

What's the point of bisexual_(female) then?

Chiera said:

What's the point of bisexual_(female) then?

You mean a tag where >85% of uses involve at least one of 1boy, multiple boys and penis?

kuuderes_shadow said:

You mean a tag where >85% of uses involve at least one of 1boy, multiple boys and penis?

More like post #2858451.

Chiera said:

More like post #2858451.

As I'm reading it, the argument is that it wouldn't be used on images like that one. That doesn't make it any less valid a tag for its other uses, though.

Chiera said:

The depiction of cum is a hetero element. So it shouldn't be tagged Yuri then.

The problem with considering cum a hetero element is that it assumes that it can only come from a male when it can just easily have come from a futa, an animal or tentacles. Like I said before it may even be there just for fetish purposes and it may not even be cum at all.

If there's nothing in the picture that directly suggests there's a male involved, then tagging it yuri should be correct according to the "tag what you see" rule.

Chiera said:

More like post #2858451.

That post is just another example of the tag vandalism I mentioned.

I haven't seen the posts mentioned in this thread before, but they doesn't strike me as anything other than bisexual. The presence of male sexual fluid necessarily implies that the girls consented to the presence of a male partner - most likely a surrogate for the viewer - which is something I can't imagine a strict lesbian ever doing. Characterizing this point of view as "vandalism", especially when OP was the one who first started inserting "yuri" in posts already tagged as bisexual, strikes me as disingenuous.

At the same time, though, I can understand some reluctance to add the "bisexual" tag to a picture where the other partner isn't clearly present. Why not create a implied bisexuality tag? Implied yaoi covers similar cases with cum or suggestive fluid on solitary male characters.

feline_lump said:

I haven't seen the posts mentioned in this thread before, but they doesn't strike me as anything other than bisexual. The presence of male sexual fluid necessarily implies that the girls consented to the presence of a male partner - most likely a surrogate for the viewer - which is something I can't imagine a strict lesbian ever doing. Characterizing this point of view as "vandalism", especially when OP was the one who first started inserting "yuri" in posts already tagged as bisexual, strikes me as disingenuous.

At the same time, though, I can understand some reluctance to add the "bisexual" tag to a picture where the other partner isn't clearly present. Why not create a implied bisexuality tag? Implied yaoi covers similar cases with cum or suggestive fluid on solitary male characters.

Most of these posts had already been tagged as yuri when first posted, I merely added it back. In fact some posts had been tagged with yuri and cum for years but someone lately has been taking out the yuri tag from everything with cum. In post #242987 they took out the cum tag which had been there for almost a decade, so may be we should change the cum in these pictures to suggestive_fluid?

And like I said in my previous post, cum in hentai is not necessarily a "male" fluid.

feline_lump said:

I haven't seen the posts mentioned in this thread before, but they doesn't strike me as anything other than bisexual. The presence of male sexual fluid necessarily implies that the girls consented to the presence of a male partner - most likely a surrogate for the viewer - which is something I can't imagine a strict lesbian ever doing. Characterizing this point of view as "vandalism", especially when OP was the one who first started inserting "yuri" in posts already tagged as bisexual, strikes me as disingenuous.

If the posts linked above are bisexual, then why isn't every 1girl solo cum image tagged hetero? The yuri/yaoi/hetero/bisexual tags are for romantic/sexual interactions, not the messy aftermath of those interactions. As it was put in forum #50017:

Just because a man masturbated on these women (possibly even had sex with them), there is no man doing ANYTHING with these women at that moment.

Also, when a debate over tag usage has been settled for six years, and a single user resolves that the status quo is wrong and begins removing tags en masse without any explanation, even in spite of those changes being reverted, that is precisely what I call tag vandalism. It's one person attempting to unilaterally enforce their own rules for this site regardless of prior convention. If this isn't tag vandalism, nothing is.

SSJG said:

Most of these posts had already been tagged as yuri when first posted, I merely added it back. In fact some posts had been tagged with yuri and cum for years but someone lately has been taking out the yuri tag from everything with cum. In post #242987 they took out the cum tag which had been there for almost a decade, so may be we should change the cum in these pictures to suggestive_fluid?

iridescent_slime said:

Also, when a debate over tag usage has been settled for six years, and a single user resolves that the status quo is wrong and begins removing tags en masse without any explanation, even in spite of those changes being reverted, that is precisely what I call tag vandalism. It's one person attempting to unilaterally enforce their own rules for this site regardless of prior convention. If this isn't tag vandalism, nothing is.

The post cited in the OP shows two users replacing "yuri" with "bisexual", and there's at least one other user (myself) who agrees with the logic leading up to that decision. The point at hand here is that this is a larger issue than just one person acting out.

Adding suggestive fluid and leaving yuri seems as though it would be an acceptable compromise for some posts, but neither of the posts in this thread per se: post #2757450 is a followup to post #2755624, making its intentions quite clear, and post #2858451 heavily implies viewer participation.

SSJG said:

like I said in my previous post, cum in hentai is not necessarily a "male" fluid.

I find it's generally best to assume the most common case for a scenario until proven otherwise. A significant amount of people might enjoy otoko no ko characters, for example, but we don't have to question the gender of every clothed character with a flat chest. Nor do we have to remove hetero from disembodied penis posts just because there's nothing stopping you from imagining that they involve futa.

iridescent_slime said:

If the posts linked above are bisexual, then why isn't every 1girl solo cum image tagged hetero? The yuri/yaoi/hetero/bisexual tags are for romantic/sexual interactions, not the messy aftermath of those interactions.

Exactly why I suggested implied bisexuality. There could be an implied hetero tag as well, but I'm not sure how practically useful that would be.

What about implied futanari like in post #2685162? There would be many mistags and hard to judge cases.

feline_lump said:

Exactly why I suggested implied bisexuality. There could be an implied hetero tag as well, but I'm not sure how practically useful that would be.

I think I can get behind the idea of a new tag. Otherwise searching for these kind of pictures is a mess (bisexual_female -1boy -multiple_boys -penis, etc). But I still stand by what I said and was also said in the older thread: even if the girls explicitly had sex with a man before, there isn't a male present right now so tagging it yuri is honoring the "tag what you see" rule, and those who don't like it should really just blacklist cum.

ion288 said:

What about implied futanari like in post #2685162? There would be many mistags and hard to judge cases.

implied_futanari is much simpler. In post #2685162 not!Madoka obviously has a penis due the prescence of cum AND ALSO the sex position which implies penetration, so it should be tagged futanari. But in several cases (such as post #1910056) there is just enough left to the imagination to think there could be a dildo in there or it could be just grinding or dry_humping or even some truly awkward tribbing. In such cases I think is fair to tag it as yuri.

feline_lump said:
Adding suggestive fluid and leaving yuri seems as though it would be an acceptable compromise for some posts, but neither of the posts in this thread per se: ... and post #2858451 heavily implies viewer participation.

How do you know the viewer is male?

Blossop said:

How do you know the viewer is male?

Not that I ultimately share the argument, but it's clear that the image is drawn for a male audience and there is stuff like cum.

feline_lump said:

The post cited in the OP shows two users replacing "yuri" with "bisexual", and there's at least one other user (myself) who agrees with the logic leading up to that decision. The point at hand here is that this is a larger issue than just one person acting out.

This may be beside the point, but one of the individuals removing yuri from that post (user #387607) has a long history of messing with this tag for no apparent reason (see post #2373361, post #2586714) to the extent of earning a negative record. Probably not someone you'd want to use as an example.

Adding suggestive fluid and leaving yuri seems as though it would be an acceptable compromise for some posts, but neither of the posts in this thread per se: post #2757450 is a followup to post #2755624, making its intentions quite clear, and post #2858451 heavily implies viewer participation.

Strongly opposed to tagging posts based solely on related images. Posts should be tagged based on their content alone, as once you begin tagging based on other pages, you've drifted from "tagging what you see" into "tagging what you know". Besides, post #2757450 and post #2755624 aren't a comic or sequence; they work just as well as standalone images.

As for post #2858451, I don't have any argument with removing yuri from images where the women appear to be focusing on the (presumably male) viewer rather than on each other, especially when they are presenting themselves or each other. The response @evazion gave in forum #50049 holds just as true today.

Regarding implied bisexuality, this seems like just another solution in want of a problem. What purpose would this tag serve, apart from replacing a yuri cum search?

SSJG said:

But I still stand by what I said and was also said in the older thread: even if the girls explicitly had sex with a man before, there isn't a male present right now so tagging it yuri is honoring the "tag what you see" rule, and those who don't like it should really just blacklist cum.

I suppose that's the crux of the disagreement. I think that if you can see that a man is or was involved in the scene, it's fair game for tagging, even if the person himself is out of frame. Blacklisting yuri cum (assuming you didn't just mean cum, which obviously raises problems) isn't a foolproof solution, since posts like post #553439 also exist.

SSJG said:

implied_futanari is much simpler. In post #2685162 not!Madoka obviously has a penis due the prescence of cum AND ALSO the sex position which implies penetration, so it should be tagged futanari. But in several cases (such as post #1910056) there is just enough left to the imagination to think there could be a dildo in there or it could be just grinding or dry_humping or even some truly awkward tribbing. In such cases I think is fair to tag it as yuri.

For that image in particular I would lean towards the futanari side of things, since based on experience, that position really isn't reasonably suited for most of the things you suggested. It's probably best just to leave most if not all implied futanari pictures alone and let viewers draw their own conclusions.

iridescent_slime said:

Strongly opposed to tagging posts based solely on related images. Posts should be tagged based on their content alone, as once you begin tagging based on other pages, you've drifted from "tagging what you see" into "tagging what you know". Besides, post #2757450 and post #2755624 aren't a comic or sequence; they work just as well as standalone images.

I don't think this sort of thing violates the "tag what you see" rule. If something is actually drawn into an image, but it's ambiguous as to what it is, and another statement or drawing by the artist clears it up, then I would consider it fair to tag it. Similarly, I'm fairly certain that a lot of comics are tagged based on context anyway - for instance, you wouldn't know which character was in post #1867439 without the full-body shot in post #1867428.
(post #2757450 and post #2755624 are a sequence, as made clear by the commentary, even if they aren't currently linked by a parent-child relationship or pool.)

iridescent_slime said:

Regarding implied bisexuality, this seems like just another solution in want of a problem. What purpose would this tag serve, apart from replacing a yuri cum search?

It would do much the same as what the other "implied X" tags are doing now: holding all "grey area" posts and preventing conflicts over differences in interpretation, as well as providing content for people who like bisexual girls but don't want to look at penises.