Ok so me and Genjar are needing a ruling on what constitutes as the amazon position and what doesn't. this is not a very well known sexual position so we have run into a bit of confusion.

the way the amazon is normally achieved is when the man lies down, lifts his knees to his chest while the woman straddles him and pulls his penis down and inserts it into her.

this move can however be done with male/male or even female/female giving that there is a strap on.

the following are common examples of the position

post #836236 post #733118 post #825181

this is the reverse Amazon

post #727441

there are also variants of the amazon that aren't shown on this site, one example is where the woman kneels with one of the mans legs on her shoulder while she straddles him.

here is where I am not so sure of myself.

post #814863

these two characters are in the exact position to achieve the amazon. But there is no penetration. I don't know if this should be considered correct.

and then there's this one that Genjar tagged.

post #804513

this one is in the amazon position but it has the person on top doing the penetrating. I thought this was missionary but Genjar assured me that they both had to be lying down for that to be true.

I am not sure if the one being penetrated from the bottom or the one penetrated from the top is more important or if it even need penetration at all to be considered the amazon position.

I would really appreciate some help on this.

the whole point of amazon position is that it would look like the female is the one who is penetrating. i would not tag it on female/female images or the ones where male is topping.

No idea what the lesbian version is called (does a lesbian Kamasutra exist? Maybe they have a name) but the last one is "just" a legs-up missionary position. The dude's hips also aren't fully over hers, but are actually slightly behind hers. A different perspective illustrates this a little better: post #706773

So this wouldn't be tagged as amazon...
post #799979
...simply because they're using a double dildo? Even though the position itself is an exact match and we have nothing else to tag that as.

That definition seems too narrow, for an already uncommon position.

NotMeNotYou said:
but the last one is "just" a legs-up missionary position.

That's what the anvil_position is for, though. Whereas missionary_position is tagged for images where both characters are lying down face-to-face, instead of standing or kneeling.

Genjar said:
So this wouldn't be tagged as amazon...
post #799979
...simply because they're using a double dildo? Even though the position itself is an exact match and we have nothing else to tag that as.

That definition seems too narrow, for an already uncommon position.

well. I would call that amazon. well reverse amazon anyway. It does have the top one being penetrated by the bottom. and the bottoms legs are being held in the right positions.

NotMeNotYou said:
No idea what the lesbian version is called (does a lesbian Kamasutra exist? Maybe they have a name) but the last one is "just" a legs-up missionary position. The dude's hips also aren't fully over hers, but are actually slightly behind hers. A different perspective illustrates this a little better: post #706773

If he were a female and the one on the bottom was a male would you say the same thing? and also for missionary you have to be lying down.

The missionary definition I know only specifies that the upper bodies are mostly parallel to each other and both partners are facing each other, doesn't matter what the legs are doing, doesn't matter if the top is laying on their legs, kneeling, or even standing (when the bottom is propped on something like a desk).
Also, if they keep that position and switch the male with a female there is simply no intercourse going on, the penis is simply nowhere near the vagina for that to happen. Again if we use the example I posted the penis on Paralee (that worgen bitch) would be laying on her stomach and connected to the pelvis above her clitoris, while Arun's (the shadow) vagina is below the penis, so way too far away to insert anything. In order to theoretically mount Paralee Arun would have to move completely on top of paralee, at which point it becomes the Amazon position since suddenly the hips are above each other.

NotMeNotYou said:
The missionary definition I know only specifies that the upper bodies are mostly parallel to each other and both partners are facing each other, doesn't matter what the legs are doing, doesn't matter if the top is laying on their legs, kneeling, or even standing (when the bottom is propped on something like a desk).

Not how they're tagged here, though.
Are you suggesting that we get rid of anvil_position, table_lotus_position etc and merge those into missionary_position?

Genjar said:
Not how they're tagged here, though.
Are you suggesting that we get rid of anvil_position, table_lotus_position etc and merge those into missionary_position?

Not for tagging purposes. Also, I was actually wondering what the hell the specific tag for that position was, but got bored and ignored it. Going to have to add that.

NotMeNotYou said:

Hip Placement

The missionary definition I know only specifies that the upper bodies are mostly parallel to each other and both partners are facing each other, doesn't matter what the legs are doing, doesn't matter if the top is laying on their legs, kneeling, or even standing (when the bottom is propped on something like a desk).
Also, if they keep that position and switch the male with a female there is simply no intercourse going on, the penis is simply nowhere near the vagina for that to happen. Again if we use the example I posted the penis on Paralee (that worgen bitch) would be laying on her stomach and connected to the pelvis above her clitoris, while Arun's (the shadow) vagina is below the penis, so way too far away to insert anything. In order to theoretically mount Paralee Arun would have to move completely on top of paralee, at which point it becomes the Amazon position since suddenly the hips are above each other.

of course I see. The amazon can't be done if the two partners hips are horizontal. they have to be vertical to one another. duh, I'm so dumb I should have caught that sooner =P

but does this work for female to female without penetration? like the jelly girls showed before? the position is supposed to give control to the top and the female/female version does that but I don't know if penetration is needed. I don't think it is though.

NotMeNotYou said:
The missionary definition I know only specifies that the upper bodies are mostly parallel to each other and both partners are facing each other, doesn't matter what the legs are doing, doesn't matter if the top is laying on their legs, kneeling, or even standing (when the bottom is propped on something like a desk).
Also, if they keep that position and switch the male with a female there is simply no intercourse going on, the penis is simply nowhere near the vagina for that to happen. Again if we use the example I posted the penis on Paralee (that worgen bitch) would be laying on her stomach and connected to the pelvis above her clitoris, while Arun's (the shadow) vagina is below the penis, so way too far away to insert anything. In order to theoretically mount Paralee Arun would have to move completely on top of paralee, at which point it becomes the Amazon position since suddenly the hips are above each other.

You know what I take what I said back. This is wrong. I've seen irl versions of the amazon where that DID work. Nacho Vidal is the pornstar who has the most videos of it. And there was one where the chick (Brooklyn Lee) DID have her hips behind his. She even STOOD up and it looked like she was the one thrusting into him.

I hope giving the pornstars names aren't too much like real life porn links. I just want you too see a good example of what I'm saying.

NotMeNotYou said:
No idea what the lesbian version is called (does a lesbian Kamasutra exist? Maybe they have a name)

Somewhat off-topic, but there are F/F and M/M sections of the kamasutra, so if there was a name/variant, it'd be under the relevant section

Melkor said:
the whole point of amazon position is that it would look like the female is the one who is penetrating. i would not tag it on female/female images or the ones where male is topping.

This is a good point

titanmelon said:
Somewhat off-topic, but there are F/F and M/M sections of the kamasutra, so if there was a name/variant, it'd be under the relevant section

This is a good point

actually I think that's only half right. I think the point is that the one on top is being penetrated by the one on the bottom. I don't think it matters if it's a boy or girl.

and as for female on female I think it should be allowed too because they are still in the same position.