Is this tag really necessary? It seems to just be urethral penetration but with a specific tool (something called a "sound") and even then it seems to be put on any kind of urethral penetration.

I'm pretty certain that sounding is used as the slang term for the entirety of urethral penetration.

At least, that is how I see the term used in other places around the internets.

^ We already have urethral_penetration, though. Should that be aliased to sounding?

(keeping in mind that there are various things in urethral_penetration, eg. insertion of characters whole bodies)

savageorange said:
^ We already have urethral_penetration, though. Should that be aliased to sounding?

No. Urethral penetration is only sounding when the object in use is designed and intended to penetrate the urethra. Pictures like these aren't sounding.

post #541768

post #574240

I think it's specific enough to merit it's own tag. If we don't alias it to urethral_penetration, it should imply urethral_penetration.

It wouldn't work to alias it to urethral_penetration because that penis_in_penis/other fucking of the urethra isn't sounding.

The real-world definition of sounding is actually more specific to using a probe or urethral sound (an extremely specific tool meant for this purpose) but colloquially it works out to "toying of the urethra". It's actually closer to urethral_insertion really, possibly close enough that an alias may be workable with that instead (in either direction), though I'm not sure if it is a good idea or not.

It should probably imply urethral_insertion at least, which should also imply urethral_penetration (based on how the other tags are set up), but neither currently do. If nothing else happens with this, these should probably be done at least:

• Implication: sounding -> urethral_insertion
• Implication: urethral_insertion -> urethral_penetration

I think it may already be implied looking at the wiki page. If we aren't going to alias is though then it really should be cleaned up.

Ko-san said:
I think it may already be implied looking at the wiki page. If we aren't going to alias is though then it really should be cleaned up.

It already implies urethral_penetration, but not urethral_insertion.

The way we define (see note) these tags are basically *_insertion = using an object, and *_penetration = using an object or penis. Insertion should always imply penetration, and it does for anal, vaginal, etc.

Currently the following implications are true:

• sounding -> urethral_penetration, urethral
• urethral_penetration -> urethral

I'm starting to think that urethral_insertion should be the one to be aliased away out of any of these.

(note: the definitions here aren't 100% accurate, but they are probably close enough without making this post a text wall)

parasprite said:
I'm starting to think that urethral_insertion should be the one to be aliased away out of any of these.

(note: the definitions here aren't 100% accurate, but they are probably close enough without making this post a text wall)

Why? I thought we were rather keep to have both *_insertion and *_penetration tags? I can't say I like the idea of causing one of the tags in such a scheme to vanish, so I'd be more eager to see sounding aliased away, but then I like me a nice, symmetric system.

Circeus said:
Why? I thought we were rather keep to have both *_insertion and *_penetration tags? I can't say I like the idea of causing one of the tags in such a scheme to vanish, so I'd be more eager to see sounding aliased away, but then I like me a nice, symmetric system.

I was thinking more based on "sounding is tagged more often", but now that you've mentioned it, it seems like the definition of sounding outside of e6 seems to be getting in the way of being able to come up with a good solution here.

• Sounding = Using a urethral sound or probe (the "medical/official" definition)
• Sounding = Toys, probe, fingers, etc. (porn site definition)
• Sounding = Just objects (our definition)

So... yeah I think you're right. +1 for sounding -> urethral_insertion