Think about following scenario:

You have two characters, one ambiguous and one male canine.
Canine is deep inside ambiguous' ass and his member can not be seen. (viewed from behind-side)

Now here is the question.

Scenario has implied knotting, as you can see just a little bit of flesh.
But rules say TWYS and as we can not see knotting(penis or knot) it is only implied and not seen. What is the proper way to tag?

Here's another scenario, view from front of character, you only see his face and shoulders it's is implied or is make by bodily features but you can not see chest or genitalia and you see another character touching him from behind with waist area, again implied anal penetration but not visible. What is the proper way to tag?

I have seen many implied tags added to images, while most images are without them.

It's a real paradox, knotting without the knot being visible.Heh
So we add implied tags or not? Looks like a real Pandora's box.

Edit: another example, no penetration visible, one character says "How it feels, getting tied (or knotted)?".

OK, here's a quick look on an implied anal penetration
post #1010707

Only tag knotting if you can actually see it happening. It's also probably okay to tag it if a character explicitly refers to it in dialogue.

Anything less, and it doesn't make sense to tag knotting. How would you even know it's a canine_penis?

Ok, so by the rule this for example post #979593 shouldn't have knotting tag (though it's not implied as much in it, and sub doesn't have a knot, so bad example).

DelurC said:
OK, here's a quick look on an implied anal penetration
post #1010707

I wouldn't tag anal_penetration due to the position and somewhat the circumstances. If we have a pic of two males and one is doing the other doggystyle but we can't really see it happen, then I'd say it is anal penetration. "Cmon, what are the chances they are not doing it."