Ko-san said:
If you got a handjob from your partner before marriage, would you consider that premarital sex? If you used a dildo/onahole while your partner kissed you, would you consider that sex? I wouldn't.

Scientifically, sex is short for sexual intercourse which includes penetration through vaginal, anal or oral stimulation with the partner's genitalia. Other forms of sexual actvity may sometimes be called "outercourse" or foreplay but are not considered "real sex".

We're just humble peasants here... we tend to follow a looser definition of such things.

Ko-san said:
If you got a handjob from your partner before marriage, would you consider that premarital sex? If you used a dildo/onahole while your partner kissed you, would you consider that sex? I wouldn't.

Scientifically, sex is short for sexual intercourse which includes penetration through vaginal, anal or oral stimulation with the partner's genitalia. Other forms of sexual actvity may sometimes be called "outercourse" or foreplay but are not considered "real sex".

Strictly scientifically sexual intercourse is only penis in vagina, since all other activities don't have a chance to create babies. The exception being different genital setup like cloacas and stuff.

And the definition only started to accept penis in different hole lately, as people have become more open about sexuality in the last 40 years or so.

And even wikipedia lists 'outercourse' as sexual intercourse.

Wikipedia said:
Non-penetrative sex acts, such as non-penetrative forms of cunnilingus or mutual masturbation, have been termed outercourse, but may additionally be among the sexual acts contributing to human bonding and considered sexual intercourse. The term sex, often a shorthand for sexual intercourse, can mean any form of sexual activity. Because people can be at risk of contracting sexually transmitted infections during these activities, though the transmission risk is significantly reduced during non-penetrative sex, safe sex practices are advised.

And I'm okay with this since it seems strange to say that lesbians would never be able to have sex with each other, while they miss a penis they aren't missing anything else in the relationship.
Marriage can be for lesbians, why not sex as well?

I would say that generally speaking if someone is putting something inside of someone else, that's sex.
I would probably make an exception to that for fingers though.

If it looks gay, then it should probably be tagged with gay

titanmelon said:
If it looks gay, then it should probably be tagged with gay

What does gay look like? Different people interpret it differently, that's why there's guidelines.

I've never understood tagging a solo male as gay, regardless of cum/no cum, toy/no toy. To me, both gay and lesbian should require two+ individuals present - and not just be the aftermath of something that could have been.

post #332600

if a guy is lookin' at another guy and fappin' it but nobody is touching and nobody is there to see it

is that gay?

null0010 said:
if a guy is lookin' at another guy and fappin' it but nobody is touching and nobody is there to see it

is that gay?

If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to get wood from it is that still...
um...
Crap. I don't know where I was going with that.

Magmagan said:
Sorry, pretty new here. A solo male should receive the 'gay' tag?

I agree because I am a solo gay male and think that there should be a tag

Wolfwrangler98 said:
I agree because I am a solo gay male and think that there should be a tag

That's not how tags work here.

Nyteshade said:
What does gay look like? Different people interpret it differently, that's why there's guidelines.

I've never understood tagging a solo male as gay, regardless of cum/no cum, toy/no toy. To me, both gay and lesbian should require two+ individuals present - and not just be the aftermath of something that could have been.

Possibly could be tagged that way if there was heavy dialog to suggest otherwise, but that's really just splitting hairs (that and I can't think of anywhere where this could be the case).

Wolfwrangler98 said:
I agree because I am a solo gay male and think that there should be a tag

They have this it's called "solo male"; adding "gay" doesn't add anything more. Furthermore it wrecks easy blacklisting for those want to see males but are against seeing homosexual behavior (morally or personal preference).

Remember that guys aren't the only ones that browse this site. >.>

What I mean is it would be easier to find posts with a gay tag sorry I worded my previous post wrong

Wolfwrangler98 said:
What I mean is it would be easier to find posts with a gay tag sorry I worded my previous post wrong

male ~solo ~gay

This will find all "male" posts that are also tagged "solo" or "gay". This is essentially the same as doing a search for male solo and male gay at the same time.

Alternately you can use male ~solo ~gay -female to eliminate posts tagged "gay" that also happen to have females in them. However, by the sound of it you are only really interested in males anyways. I would recommend adding the following to your blacklist:

female
breasts
-male

The first hides anything tagged female
The second is a backup in case something isn't tagged female (and also hides intersex/dickgirl/etc.)
The last means "hide everything that isn't tagged male"

If you need any help with blacklists check out the wiki (help:blacklist). Feel free to PM me if you have any questions.