Aliasing erotic_asphyxiation → breath_play
Link to alias

Reason:

Same thing, wordier name.

EDIT: The tag alias erotic_asphyxiation -> breath_play (forum #248058) has been rejected by @NotMeNotYou.

Depends. I've always thought the latter was consensual while the former didn't require the person being choked to have the fetish. The former doesn't imply consent. In fact forcefully suffocating an unwilling victim is a fetish that shows up a lot that the first fits but not the second.

kamimatsu said:
Depends. I've always thought the latter was consensual while the former didn't require the person being choked to have the fetish. The former doesn't imply consent. In fact forcefully suffocating an unwilling victim is a fetish that shows up a lot that the first fits but not the second.

I'd argue that this is not intuitive.

My first encounter with this idea was, as many people's, finding out some celebrity had hung himself in his hotel room and maybe it was suicide, but maybe it was auto-erotic asphyxiation. ...so, obviously, he's consenting, so it seems weird for it to be non-consenting when you remove the auto-part.

Does that make sence? I dunno.

Anyway, I'd also argue that for things like choking/AE/Breath Play that it would be hard to determine consent visually.

That said, if it were me:

erotic_asphyxiation = chocking someone else
autoerotic_asphyxiation = chocking yourself

both imply breath_play...

HOWEVER, it seems like breath_play is the preferred word for 'strangling your partner while sexing, lovingly or otherwise'.. so it just gets messy.

asphyxiation is a tag that's used for breath play as well as other forms of drowning and suffocation, so I think it's important to keep around as is. (as, that's totally some people's fetish. ...and some people's trigger.)

kamimatsu said:
Depends. I've always thought the latter was consensual while the former didn't require the person being choked to have the fetish. The former doesn't imply consent. In fact forcefully suffocating an unwilling victim is a fetish that shows up a lot that the first fits but not the second.

If you'd rather erotic_asphyxiation get set up as an umbrella term and leave breath_play for specifically consensual situations, that's fair, but here's my reasoning-
The wiki offers erotic asphyxiation as a synonym for breath play. While I'm not involved in the community, this seems to be a consistent usage from what I'm seeing. The breath_play tag seems to not currently take consent into consideration- I'm seeing a lot of images where consent is hard to determine or it appears non-consensual. Because it does involve pain and kinda... unpleasant facial expressions, consent is going to be tricky in the tag in general.

Violet_Rose said:
+1, autoerotic_asphyxiation is its own tag and should remain that way, but erotic asphyxiation specifically is just another way people refer to breath play. Also, to me, neither imply consent, that would just become non-consensual (forced) breathplay as long as the intent is still to effectively "edge" breathing rather than kill someone.

Obviously, all should imply asphyxiation.

They aren't always. I've seen comics exclusively on killing through forced asphixiation as a fetish. I think it was called Death Games. Not my thing, but it exists.

I would rather see a lot of the "play" tags punted from the site for ambiguity and replaced with more specific tags. One person's idea of *play often does not align with another's. In this case, I feel there's too much of a logical leap from the "play" in breath_play to bodily harm from non-consensual or "unintended" suffocation and death. One character's "play" shouldn't involve the harm, death, or imminent_death of another.

abadbird said:
I would rather see a lot of the "play" tags punted from the site for ambiguity and replaced with more specific tags. One person's idea of *play often does not align with another's. In this case, I feel there's too much of a logical leap from the "play" in breath_play to bodily harm from non-consensual or "unintended" suffocation and death. One character's "play" shouldn't involve the harm, death, or imminent_death of another.

I... y'know, this is an exceptionally good and fair point.

I"m sure there are problems with it, but I do agree with this principal, especially when there are simple alternatives.

abadbird said:
I would rather see a lot of the "play" tags punted from the site for ambiguity and replaced with more specific tags. One person's idea of *play often does not align with another's. In this case, I feel there's too much of a logical leap from the "play" in breath_play to bodily harm from non-consensual or "unintended" suffocation and death. One character's "play" shouldn't involve the harm, death, or imminent_death of another.

That's fair. There's also a lot of iffy territory with sexual and non-sexual versions of the same tags and there's a lot of images that don't look inherently erotic or necessarily like they have sexual intent tagged with the kink/sexual version of the tag.

What I think happens a lot is a combination of people tagging whatever term they're familiar with for a kink and people also not really being able to prove intent. They also might have outside knowledge about the intent or else are tagging it sexually because they think an image would be appealing to people with that kink. If there's a significant portion of people tagging things based on "this might appeal/be relevant to x kink" without in-image evidence that it's intended to be sexual (and there seems to be), it doesn't take long for distinctions between kink/non-kink tags of the same theme to become useless.

Bumping this for further discussion (before it gets nuked in the 2017 purge) - a lot of concerns seemed to be about breath_play being ambiguous but 5 years later the tag still exists and is heavily used, with implications and aliases applied to it.

I personally think this one might be just fine.

The tag alias erotic_asphyxiation -> breath_play (forum #248058) has been rejected by @NotMeNotYou.