As we've mentioned here this thread will be to consolidate all known "lore" tags so we can properly change them once the page goes live, as well as to find new tags we may want to add. If you know any tags we've missed please point them out below and we'll add them to the pile

If you want to suggest transgender related tags, please do so in the dedicated thread for those here instead.

Current Lore Tags:

• incest
• mother, father, son, daughter, grandson, granddaugther, grandmother, grandfather, aunt, uncle, nephew, niece
• mother_and_son, father_and_son, parent_and_son, grandfather_and_grandson, grandmother_and_grandson, mother_and_father, father_and_daughter, mother_and_father, parent_and_daughter, aunt_and_nephew
• son_dom_father_sub, father_dom_son_sub
• adopted_son, stepson, stepmother, stepfather, adoptive_mother
• stepparent_and_stepson, stepmother_and_stepson, stepfather_and_stepson, stepmother_and_stepchild, stepmother_and_stepdaughter, stepfather_and_stepchild, stepfather_and_stepdaughter
• mother_and_child, mother_and_son, mother_and_daughter, grandmother_and_granddaughter, father_and_child, grandfather_and_granddaughter
• mother-in-law

EDIT: The bulk update request #11 (forum #) has been approved by @NotMeNotYou.

EDIT: The bulk update request #12 (forum #) has been approved by @NotMeNotYou.

EDIT: The bulk update request #16 (forum #) has been approved by @NotMeNotYou.

What makes Lore tags so special?

Lore tags will not follow TWYS;NWYK at all, but instead rely on "word of the author/character owner". As such they will not be replacing any TWYS tags, but are purely complementary in nature.
As they're purely complementary they will not affect current tagging practices at all, and can be ignored if they're irrelevant. But to anyone who is interested they'll be able to be used like any other tag.
As such, they can also be blacklisted just fine.

What about gender identity?

All existing sex tags (male, female, andromorph, gynomorph, herm, maleherm, neuter) will be getting a lore tag counterpart, which can then be used independently from the TWYS counterparts.

What about characters with established canon lore being changed by artists?

In the cases where an established character is changed by an artist, the artist's changes override canon, and all lore tags would then have to follow the artist's new lore.
As an example Sonic the Hedgehog is drawn by an artist as a female character instead of a male as per Sega's canon. If we can't see that the character is female under TWYS, but we know the artist intended for Sonic in this case to be female, the lore tag added should be female_(lore) instead.
This is on an per-image basis, too, meaning it will change on whether the artist intended to draw the character one way or another for every single image.

Can I add my own Lore tags?

Nope. Only admins can move tags into the lore tag category, and only lore tags in their proper category are sanctioned to "break" TWYS. However, if you propose a lore tag that we think is useful we will absolutely make it official.
This is also what this thread is about, any tag in the past we've denied because it wouldn't be able to follow TWYS is potentially useful now, so feel free to suggest tags we've been apprehensive towards in the past.

How do I propose new Lore tags?

You make a forum post in this thread, make your case, and we will judge it.

Does "Incest" include brother_sister, sister_sister, brother_brother, stepbrother_stepsister , etc? As I see 'father_daughter' etc and that's incest too.

Also see 'father_dom_ ..." and "Father_sub_ ..." but not "Mother_dom ... " or "Mother_sub" , where a son / daughter dominates their mother or vice versa. Nor any of the _daughter variants, just father_dom_son_sub and father_sub_son_dom . Nor do I see father_in_law. Nor anything with 'Aunt" or "Uncle" or "Nephew" or "Niece" . How are we suppose to add Lore tags to Donald Duck and his three nephews pictures? =^.^=

cousins should be added to this list, I guess. Currently 650+ posts there, most of which are lore based.

Also crossgender

savageorange said:
cousins should be added to this list, I guess. Currently 650+ posts there.

Oh yes, didn't think of stuff like 'kissing cousins' :D

Roseroar said:
Does "Incest" include brother_sister, sister_sister, brother_brother, stepbrother_stepsister , etc? As I see 'father_daughter' etc and that's incest too.

Also see 'father_dom_ ..." and "Father_sub_ ..." but not "Mother_dom ... " or "Mother_sub" , where a son / daughter dominates their mother or vice versa. Nor any of the _daughter variants, just father_dom_son_sub and father_sub_son_dom . Nor do I see father_in_law. Nor anything with 'Aunt" or "Uncle" or "Nephew" or "Niece" . How are we suppose to add Lore tags to Donald Duck and his three nephews pictures? =^.^=

That's the thing, I did a quick search through the tag list and tried to basically just throw in anything into the above post as a base. Many of those variations either don't exist, weren't in the first 10 pages of results, or are possibly redundant.

Those sister_sister and brother_brother tags will also be added. I haven't had the chance to go through everything yet, I'll likely go scrounging for more tags that are already flying around later today.

• ftm_crossgender, mtf_crossgender, basically all crossgender tags

Unlike gender transformation, these tags aren't based on visual indication of the character's original sex. They all depend on lore knowledge of the character's original sex (violating TWYS), and being depicted differently. For example, male Krystal. If there's any visual indication they were a different gender, gender_transformation and implied_transformation would be more appropriate.

A similar case could be made for:

• alternate_species, ponification, anthrofied, furrification, humanized, humanoidized, dragonification

They depend on lore knowledge of the character's original form or species, and being depicted differently without any visual indication of a change. Similar to above, if there's any visual indication they were a different form or species, species_transformation/transformation and implied_transformation would be more appropriate.

If familial relations are being included, relationship status should probably be shoved under lore too.

• husband
• wife
• boyfriend
• girlfriend
• infidelity

Lafcadio said:
If familial relations are being included, relationship status should probably be shoved under lore too.

• husband
• wife
• boyfriend
• girlfriend
• infidelity

Eh. I agree with all but Infidelity. That's getting into the realm of morals and, like the 'bad_parenting' tag, doesn't belong. Some of the pics are done in different worlds / universes / places / parallel dimensions / alternate timelines / etc where our morals / laws don't apply or exist. Maybe in the artist's universe spouses can sleep with others without it being infidelity? You never know.

NotMeNotYou said:
That's the thing, I did a quick search through the tag list and tried to basically just throw in anything into the above post as a base. Many of those variations either don't exist, weren't in the first 10 pages of results, or are possibly redundant.

Those sister_sister and brother_brother tags will also be added. I haven't had the chance to go through everything yet, I'll likely go scrounging for more tags that are already flying around later today.

• nods * Cool. I know there is an anime, wish I could remember the name of, where it was just that, a trans boy raised as a girl (so forced trans? Dunno, they never explored that AFAIK or remember) , and her sister dominate their adopted Mother and break her, making her their sex slave, and the Dad was cool with it, he was away most of the time on business trips. One of the few times where even the Japanese release was blurred out due to the scene with two dogs having fun with their adopted Mother.

Oh! Looking back I also don't see brother_sister in the list, plenty of that. :D

What about some sort of spoilers tag for artwork that depicts events that occur or information that is revealed near the end of an existing work? It may be preferable in certain cases to only want to blacklist spoilers for certain copyrights but not the entirety of said copyright.

ForThePlot said:
What about some sort of spoilers tag for artwork that depicts events that occur or information that is revealed near the end of an existing work?

Could be an issue for comics that get posted here. For someone who hasn't read a given comic yet, all but the first page would technically be a spoiler.

More generally, different places have different standards that they consider for when something should no longer be a spoiler, e.g. X amount of weeks or months after release, and/or there being some arbitrary point in the story after which is always spoiler (such as the latter half or the last few chapters). You also have issues with regional release dates, which themselves can be months apart. Then there's the issue of remakes and remasters, which some places take to mean it should all reclassify as spoilers again for new people being introduced to it, where it goes through the same process again.

Then you have individual users having different standards for what's a spoiler. It is absolutely the case that some official pre-release info can spoil the ending of a movie or game, so not even that's safe. Speculation and rumors can also classify for some people, since it could be right, and even if it's ultimately wrong it can influence expectations. For some, anything beyond the title is considered a spoiler until they experience it themselves, whenever that may be.

Watsit said:

ForThePlot said:
What about some sort of spoilers tag for artwork that depicts events that occur or information that is revealed near the end of an existing work? It may be preferable in certain cases to only want to blacklist spoilers for certain copyrights but not the entirety of said copyright.

Could be an issue for comics that get posted here. For someone who hasn't read a given comic yet, all but the first page would technically be a spoiler.

More generally, different places have different standards that they consider for when something should no longer be a spoiler, e.g. X amount of weeks or months after release, and/or there being some arbitrary point in the story after which is always spoiler (such as the latter half or the last few chapters). You also have issues with regional release dates, which themselves can be months apart. Then there's the issue of remakes and remasters, which some places take to mean it should all reclassify as spoilers again for new people being introduced to it, where it goes through the same process again.

Then you have individual users having different standards for what's a spoiler. It is absolutely the case that some official pre-release info can spoil the ending of a movie or game, so not even that's safe. Speculation and rumors can also classify for some people, since it could be right, and even if it's ultimately wrong it can influence expectations. For some, anything beyond the title is considered a spoiler until they experience it themselves, whenever that may be.

I'd imagine that things could be tagged as spoilers regardless of how recently they were released. That way, it'd be up to individual users to blacklist the spoilers that they'd rather not see, even if it's to a movie from the '80s (for example) that most people wouldn't consider spoilable.

ForThePlot said:
I'd imagine that things could be tagged as spoilers regardless of how recently they were released.

In that case, anything related to any third-party property could be a spoiler. Even Samus Aran's sex/gender, which was a well-kept secret before the release of Metroid in the 80s, yet has become part of promo material for later games and such that she appears in. It's not something someone starting fresh in the series would know if they haven't already been spoiled on it, so taking a just-in-case stance would classify many common things like this as spoilers.

Made worse by the fact that not every media release (movie, game, comic, etc) related to a property is uniquely tagged. There's purposely no tags for Pokemon Black/White, or PMD: Gates to Infinity, for example. So if you wanted to avoid spoilers for all games, comics, movies, and TV seasons based on later generations, what would you do? You could only avoid the pokemon or pokemon_mystery_dungeon series as a whole.

I know this has been debated over and over again, but I really don't see why gender can't be considered lore. Gender is arguably the most basic lore there is since it's a big part of most characters' identities.

Look at mikhaila_kirov, for example. Despite the fact that Tsampikos has made it abundantly clear that Mikhaila is 100% female, there are still 50+ pics of her tagged with andromorph, solely because she's flat-chested.

dangitusernames said:
I know this has been debated over and over again, but I really don't see why gender can't be considered lore. Gender is arguably the most basic lore there is since it's a big part of most characters' identities.

Look at mikhaila_kirov, for example. Despite the fact that Tsampikos has made it abundantly clear that Mikhaila is 100% female, there are still 50+ pics of her tagged with andromorph, solely because she's flat-chested.

Because those gender tags are about the body, not about identity.

However, I did forget to mention we will also be adding lore version of all gender tags (male, female, andromorph, gynomorph, herm, maleherm, neuter) in addition to the already existing ones.

Edit: Added that we will be doing that to the FAQ post, thank you for pointing it out.

What about a character's canonical "age group"? IE TWYS cubs when they're not "actually" cubs?

We actually already have a spoiler tag, it just seems to be underutilized at the moment (and lacks a wiki page at that.)
But it seems like a good lore tag candidate.

I don't know if I understood well the gender identity part, but for example, can I say that I want my character ''Sifyro'' always tagged as female on content that doesn't show genitals and stuff?

blitzdrachin said:
I don't know if I understood well the gender identity part, but for example, can I say that I want my character ''Sifyro'' always tagged as female on content that doesn't show genitals and stuff?

Well, the way I think of it would be like Shayla the pink mouse, if you saw her clothed you'd think she's a boy. So TWYS you'd tag her as male but lore / canon she's female. Actually in the comic that happened, she picked up a guy for a one night stand who wound up being gay and thought she was a guy. Then he went off on her about not wearing more feminine clothing, like a skirt or something, so she shoved his head into a garbage disposal. :D EMTs were having a laugh when he told his story. :D

blitzdrachin said:
I don't know if I understood well the gender identity part, but for example, can I say that I want my character ''Sifyro'' always tagged as female on content that doesn't show genitals and stuff?

It seems that way, from what NMNY said:

All existing sex tags (male, female, andromorph, gynomorph, herm, maleherm, neuter) will be getting a lore tag counterpart, which can then be used independently from the TWYS counterparts.

I don't think it'll be "female" specifically, since it already exists as a general tag and the same tag can't be in two separate categories (e.g. you can't have a character tag "sifyro" and an artist tag "sifyro"; the artist tag would need to be "sifyro_(artist)" to distinguish it), but there will be a tag for non-visible biological sex.

Watsit said:
It seems that way, from what NMNY said:
I don't think it'll be "female" specifically, since it already exists as a general tag and the same tag can't be in two separate categories (e.g. you can't have a character tag "sifyro" and an artist tag "sifyro"; the artist tag would need to be "sifyro_(artist)" to distinguish it), but there will be a tag for non-visible biological sex.

The idea is to have all lore tags appended with _(lore) to distinguish them from the regular ones. This would mean that female and female_(lore) would both exist at the same time, and can be used independently.

For any tags that won't have a non-lore counterpart, for example incest, we'll be aliasing both tags together for ease of use.

..that sounds like you might want to add a little bit of javascript that 'folds' lore tags and non-lore tags together, in the case where each lore tag in a particular logical category has a corresponding non-lore tag.

This is because I expect character tags would normally be setup to have implications to lore tags such as female_(lore), and a lot of characters are drawn only in their canonical sex, so otherwise the "female female_(lore)" combination will effectively be adding visual noise even considering the sorting by category. And this noise is multiplied if there are multiple characters each drawn in their canonical sex.

Folding the 'lore' section by default might be a reasonable alternative option.

I think it'd be good to have lore tags for things like robots/androids that look human, and maybe a "shapeshifter" style tag as well, for characters can change their appearance.

Then with species being defined mostly by TWYS, with a little leeway, it could be worth adding species tags as lore tags as well, for where the character doesn't look too much like the intended species.

It might also be worth adding a rule that lore tags don't count towards the minimum amount of tags on upload, to try and avoid posts only being tagged with the lore version of sex and species as well.

Would "selfcest" count as a lore tag? I don't see it in the list here.

Yes there should be species lore tags. Like when a character looks like a fox but the owner insists it's a werewolf dragon hybrid.

Should invented species be lore tags? natani is clearly an anthro wolf, but if you know the lore, they're also a keidran. Is keidran a meaningful tag? It really just indicates an anthro mammal. It doesn't fit with TWYS. If the author draws an anthro lion today no one knows for sure if it's a keidran or not.

Another example, my invented species, the leonone, looks exactly like a lion but breathes fire and can teleport and his mom thinks he's really cool. Current e6 rules are that you can't even tag this character as a lion even though that's exactly what TWYS implies. Maybe we should just tag it as a lion and make leonone a lore tag?

Question: I dont have a good answer on implementation but Alternative_Species as a tag feels ripe for this system to deal with differently maybe? I dunno. The tag always sat in a really wierd place for me. Also things involving original_character

The reason this came to mind is. Even thougg I dont think theres any art of it. In league of legends lore. Different skin lines like Project are there Own reality and a literally different person. Apparently. Say for the case of PROJECT: warwick and regular warwick interacting... maybe this is the wrong thread for it but how are alternate forms of characters meant to be handled in regards to these new lore tag options

story_in_description doesn't so much "tag" the lore per se, but it does inform the viewer that they can learn more about the lore in the description box. So it might make sense to make it a lore tag.

What about things like mentor and apprentice? You can't tell that sort of thing from just looking. Or would that sort of lore be opening up a can of worms into more complex relationships you don't want to apply this system to? Other examples include coworkers, classmates, pokemon trainer and their pokemon... where do you draw the line?

I have to admit, searching things like "trainer_and_pokemon + role_reversal" sounds fun and useful.

CrocoGator said:
story_in_description doesn't so much "tag" the lore per se, but it does inform the viewer that they can learn more about the lore in the description box. So it might make sense to make it a lore tag.

having another separate section for meta-type tags might also be useful include tags like that as well as stuff like translation_request and translated

darryus said:
having another separate section for meta-type tags might also be useful include tags like that as well as stuff like translation_request and translated

Meta tags are one of the new types of tags alongside lore tags on the beta site.

ImpidiDinkaDoo said:
Meta tags are one of the new types of tags alongside lore tags on the beta site.

Ah, cool! I guess story_in_description would make more sense as a meta tag then.

Forced, rape, and related tags (other than explicitly_stated_nonconsent) are most often lore.

kyuuuuu said:
Forced, rape, and related tags (other than explicitly_stated_nonconsent) are most often lore.

They're not, since the rape and other forced-related tags depend on the unwillingness being apparent in the image. Ways that this is usually done includes a character being visibly afraid or in severe distress, or one character overpowering another as the other tries to fight back, get away, or otherwise stop it. There's even a separate questionable_consent tag for situations where the unwillingness isn't apparent but something in the image still suggests it may not be entirely willing. The current forced-related tags are TWYS, and don't need to be lore. Ironically, while the current forced tags do fall under TWYS, explicitly_stated_nonconsent itself should not because the meaning of text/dialog is supposed to be treated as external information.

A thought I just had:

How about for things like rape or not_rape? I'm not sure if it's ever caused a debate over tags or not, but I'm sure we've got many posts tagged rape when they aren't actually. And perhaps the other way around too.

SnowWolf said:
How about for things like rape or not_rape? I'm not sure if it's ever caused a debate over tags or not, but I'm sure we've got many posts tagged rape when they aren't actually.

I'd be surprised if tags like that have never been the subject of heated debate.

It does make me wonder though, what is the intended purpose of lore tags? Because calling it "lore" makes me think it's tags related to the background or history of characters. rape_(lore) for instance makes no sense to me because it's not background information relating to the characters, but rather a situational act that just may not be visually apparent. So is the purpose of the lore tags to provide extra background info about characters, or as a way to tag any non-visual information?

And in the latter case, who would dictate when it applies? For instance, a not_bestiality_(lore) tag for situations where it may look like a human and feral animal going at it, but the feral actually has the mind of a human and/or is really a machine that just looks like a biological animal. Different artists have different interpretations of what they consider to be bestiality/zoophilia, as some consider human-on-anthro to be, while some consider only sentient-on-non-sentient (misunderstanding that they actually mean sapient/non-sapient) to be. Who would determine when an act is or isn't occurring by lore?

just thinking about things that I've seen end up with tag wars other than what seems to be discussed further up in this thread, I'd say that having lore tags for age would probably be useful, stuff like not_underage_(lore) for example.

Various posts said:
not_rape, not_bestiality, not_underage, ...

I'm starting to see an issue here. Tags like this seem to be designed to distance the artist/creator away from the implication that it may be tagged otherwise. Like, "the tags may say it, but it's not, really, I swear!"

Two problems arise here, one with knowing when a tag applies (again, different people have different standards for what counts as bestiality for their characters, different jurisdictions have different standards for what's underage that also depend on what you're doing, etc), but also the fact that the tags don't directly associate with characters. Okay, so you have a not_underage_(lore) tag because that character is really a centuries-old vampire or witch. But if there's an actual underage character in the picture too, it becomes misleading. Essentially, every not_x tag would need a corresponding x tag, inherently doubling the number of these kinds of tags, and it would leave no way to tell which applies to who/what, just leaving noise in the tag list.

I'd like to suggest the "inter_generational" tag for the incest category that covers all forms that aren't siblings, etc. That way those of us that are offput by that stuff but enjoy, for example, twincest, can block everything except the little bit we enjoy with only a single added tag to the blacklist.

-edit-
And before anyone suggests it, no, "age_difference" isn't sufficient as it is too vague. Case in point- a younger and older sibling would fall under age_difference but not inter_generational.

Would lore tags for pairings be a possibility at all? For the instances where TWYS would rule one character in the image as androgynous or something different based on what's visible/hidden.

Implicating them to their corresponding gender lore tag could be useful as well.

LLoxie said:
I'd like to suggest the "inter_generational" tag for the incest category that covers all forms that aren't siblings, etc. That way those of us that are offput by that stuff but enjoy, for example, twincest, can block everything except the little bit we enjoy with only a single added tag to the blacklist.

-edit-
And before anyone suggests it, no, "age_difference" isn't sufficient as it is too vague. Case in point- a younger and older sibling would fall under age_difference but not inter_generational.

I disagree:

I assume, you wouldn't be interested in siblings in intercourse, if the age difference between the siblings would be, for example, 20 years, and the other one would be tagged young. Technically, at least, that would still be intergenerational (or at least suffer from vagueness, at least as badly as age_difference).

The description of age_difference is less vague than that, stating: "A clear difference exists in the age groups of the individuals interacting." – not even just "age", but "age groups". This does include mature with young incest, but not young with young, or mature with mature incest.

You may run into age_difference tagged pairs of 40's with 80's, but what you want to do there is combine young with the age_difference. Of course, the problem here is that age_difference hasn't spread so widely yet, so blocking young -age_difference still brings a mass of pictures, where age_difference _should_ be tagged, but isn't yet.

This has now fallen rather far out of topic here. Apologies.

I'll allow myself to mix those parts up, and answer to the extent i understand LLoxie's proposal.

urielfrys said:
but what you want to do there is combine young with the age_difference.

absolutely not.

urielfrys said:
The description of age_difference is less vague than that (...) This does include mature with young incest, but not young with young, or mature with mature incest.

...yes, it includes those things, duh. however, it's absolutely not "less vague" - it relates to the perceived age of the characters, which obviously is a highly subjective issue in some cases.
the proposed tag, on the other hand, depends on precise outside knowledge of whether given characters are in fact siblings or not. that makes it less vague than age_diff.

urielfrys said:
I assume, you wouldn't be interested in siblings in intercourse, if the age difference between the siblings would be, for example, 20 years, and the other one would be tagged young. Technically, at least, that would still be intergenerational (or at least suffer from vagueness, at least as badly as age_difference).

no. that's clearly the issue LLoxie was trying to solve.
to use your example, siblings with 20 years of age difference may seem like they're of different generations, sure, but since we know they're siblings it means they're literally not of different generations, while still having age_difference. that's why blacklisting age_difference isn't enough as LLoxie wrote there.

proposed tag would be simply implied by all of (grand)?(father|mother)_and_(grand)?(son|daughter) etc.

also, not sure if "I assume, you wouldn't be interested in siblings in intercourse" is supposed to be an example that goes nowhere, but it seems to be exactly the thing they're interested in.

Copyright tags for software often get mis-tagged, being applied to posts that were made with that software rather than only when the UI or logo is shown in the post, so it'd be nice to have lore tags specifically for when a program was used to create the post, such as SFM and Blender.

Someone mentioned a tag for internal testies on the discord and I thought it could be a lore tag. I'm sure there'll be similar anatomical things like that, where you can't see by looking, but can't think of any at the moment.

Maybe one for prosthetic limbs?

As far as relatives tags go, I think that forum #210386 should be considered.

Lafcadio said:
If familial relations are being included, relationship status should probably be shoved under lore too.

• husband
• wife
• boyfriend
• girlfriend
• infidelity

What would you use for genderless/intersexual in place of boy/girlfriend ?

@Kamril:

significant_other is a pretty cumbersome tag name, but I don't see any alternative to it in that case.

NotMeNotYou said:

What makes Lore tags so special?

Lore tags will not follow TWYS;NWYK at all, but instead rely on "word of the author/character owner". As such they will not be replacing any TWYS tags, but are purely complementary in nature.
As they're purely complementary they will not affect current tagging practices at all, and can be ignored if they're irrelevant. But to anyone who is interested they'll be able to be used like any other tag.
As such, they can also be blacklisted just fine.

What about gender identity?

All existing sex tags (male, female, andromorph, gynomorph, herm, maleherm, neuter) will be getting a lore tag counterpart, which can then be used independently from the TWYS counterparts.

Can I add my own Lore tags?

Nope. Only admins can move tags into the lore tag category, and only lore tags in their proper category are sanctioned to "break" TWYS. However, if you propose a lore tag that we think is useful we will absolutely make it official.
This is also what this thread is about, any tag in the past we've denied because it wouldn't be able to follow TWYS is potentially useful now, so feel free to suggest tags we've been apprehensive towards in the past.

How do I propose new Lore tags?

You make a forum post in this thread, make your case, and we will judge it.

This little FAQ page is missing a question: How did the "Lore" tag category get its name?

What would be the thoughts on lore tags for "vague" species tags like alien, demon, spirit, or deity/demigod? So we could have the current species tags for obvious, visual cases, and a lore variant for cases where it's not obvious? Since I've seen cases that don't necessarily fit with TWYS. Hell, I'd argue "deity" especially should be a lore tag anyways, since that's usually not something you can depict unless it's from real world mythologies, like Anubis.

I'd argue that at times, werecreatures/lycanthropes also are vague at times--something that's especially noticeable whenever the wiki for "werewolf", itself, states that it "tends to be at odds with the tagging system." Granted, I won't ask for every were- tag to receive a lore variant (there's so many of those tags already), but maybe at least one umbrella tag? "were_(lore)", I suppose, if you want to keep it in line with how the species tags currently are.

Just my thoughts, at least. Might help remedy situations where it's not visually clear. I might be a bit biased, though, since I have some characters that fall under some of these tags, but visually you wouldn't be able to tell.

I made the following list. I don't know the full intended extent of lore tags, so some of these may be completely off, but I decided to err on the side of caution and include everything that came to mind, so that someone more qualified can pick the one or two sentences that made sense.

Tags such as feral and bestiality depend entirely on appearance and not sapience, which makes sense for TWYS, but means there are no tags to indicate human-level intelligence. Tags such as sapient_(lore), nonsapient_(lore), sapient_on_sapient_(lore), sapient_on_nonsapient_(lore), and nonsapient_on_nonsapient_(lore) might be found useful.

Royalty and even more so tags that implicate it, i.e. emperor, king, pharaoh, prince, princess, queen, are lore tags. Telling apart a queen from a princess or a king from a prince without intimate knowledge of the character seems practically impossible. Usage of those tags so far is fairly arbitrary and generally based entirely on lore, or sometimes simply on someone wearing a crown, enough jewelry, or sitting on a throne, which are already tags, more reliable, and more objective.

Slave and sex slave are tagged somewhat arbitrarily and might be better off as lore tags. Sometimes they appear based on some form of bondage, cage, chain, or shackles, other times no indication at all. The proper TWYS tag for a submissive person in a BDSM relationship already exists and is submissive.

Age tags were brought up but not the two most relevant ones, aged up and aged down, which are entirely lore.

Pictures that show transformation results without showing the transformation itself should generally be lore. Images tagged after transformation more often than not rely on a previous image in the sequence or other external information. Bimbofication is commonly incorrectly tagged on pictures that don't depict transformation and should probably instead receive a bimbofied_(lore) tag. Bimbo itself is currently an invalid tag but could be reinstated as a lore tag. Corrupted and feminized are lore tags corresponding to corruption and feminization.

There is a bad end tag which is undefined and tagged arbitrarily. Sometimes it corresponds to game over, a more established tag with a clear visual cue, but more commonly it's meant to indicate that the depicted situation is somehow permanent, which cannot be inferred from the picture. This may mean demand for lore tags which clarify whether a given state (such as transformation, enslavement, mind control, mind break) is temporary or permanent.

Melanistic, albino, and leucism refer to genetic conditions and are impossible to tag accurately for imaginary characters, especially of imaginary species, so they should receive lore versions.

Infidelity was already brought up so I'll just add cuckold and cuckquean. The wiki definitions require a romantic relationship between characters in order to use the tags, which is generally impossible to determine without external knowledge.

Virgin and defloration are 100% lore. There is no reasonable visual way to determine virginity or loss thereof.

I want to say a lore version of impregnation might be useful, but I suspect it would just end up being tagged on every cum in pussy image, so maybe not.

Judging by the number of results I'm still getting for pictures simultaneously tagged gay and solo, some people really want to indicate the orientation of their characters. Is that in plans? In either case, existing tags relying on orientation, such as orientation play, gay to straight, straight to gay, and bicurious might be lore candidates to some extent.

Some tags do not indicate gender but still rely on gender, such as crossdressing, girly, tomboy, feminization, and flat chested. Those tags should receive lore versions so that e.g. Mikhaila Kirov tagged andromorph can be found by tomboy_(lore) and flat_chested_(lore) tags, which otherwise do not apply.

Some tags are used primarily to indicate the type of media the depicted characters come from, e.g. video games, webcomic, anime, manga, or otherwise require knowledge of the character's original appearance, such as crossover, neither of which can be inferred from looking at the image. I briefly thought they should be lore tags, but I suppose in reality they should probably be copyright tags like folklore and mythology? See also forum #230921 for previous video games tag discussion.

- Cuckold/ing - Many are tagged but look like common sharing. Thus...
- Swimg - ... Should be added too.
- Blackmail - You never know.
- Pseudo_rape - Plenty of that out there.
- Boss/Employee - Not sure if relevant, but... Do believe it also counts like...
- Power_play - ... Does, since it is a common theme as well.
- Quid_pro_quo - More or less the opposite dynamic of "Boss/Employee", wherein it is the employee to suggest.
- Babysitter - Plentiful of entries here.

Just my suggestions. Seem like they belong there.
As an addendum, "Power_play" is pretty much a blanket term for plenty of those, if you people think it will become too niche and separated.

Since it seems the primary use of lore tags is to standardize adding information about character gender, will the threshold for adding standard sex tags change, and if so, to what extent? In lot of (usually but not always Safe) images, characters wear non-revealing clothing and/or lack other details to identify sex (body tone and musculature, breasts or groin area, facial features/facial hair).
Would the likes of post #1328195 or post #1238406, for example, have to be tagged ambiguous_gender from here on out, absent any copyright knowledge? Or even in spite of it?

Vulkalu said:
What would be the thoughts on lore tags for "vague" species tags like alien, demon, spirit, or deity/demigod? So we could have the current species tags for obvious, visual cases, and a lore variant for cases where it's not obvious? Since I've seen cases that don't necessarily fit with TWYS. Hell, I'd argue "deity" especially should be a lore tag anyways, since that's usually not something you can depict unless it's from real world mythologies, like Anubis.

I'd argue that at times, werecreatures/lycanthropes also are vague at times--something that's especially noticeable whenever the wiki for "werewolf", itself, states that it "tends to be at odds with the tagging system." Granted, I won't ask for every were- tag to receive a lore variant (there's so many of those tags already), but maybe at least one umbrella tag? "were_(lore)", I suppose, if you want to keep it in line with how the species tags currently are.

Just my thoughts, at least. Might help remedy situations where it's not visually clear. I might be a bit biased, though, since I have some characters that fall under some of these tags, but visually you wouldn't be able to tell.

You're thinking of werecreature.

S-35 said:
Virgin and defloration are 100% lore. There is no reasonable visual way to determine virginity or loss thereof.

Defloration is usually visibly indicated by a hymen breaking

Penguinempire-Dennis said:
Since it seems the primary use of lore tags is to standardize adding information about character gender, will the threshold for adding standard sex tags change, and if so, to what extent? In lot of (usually but not always Safe) images, characters wear non-revealing clothing and/or lack other details to identify sex (body tone and musculature, breasts or groin area, facial features/facial hair).
Would the likes of post #1328195 or post #1238406, for example, have to be tagged ambiguous_gender from here on out, absent any copyright knowledge? Or even in spite of it?

Lore tags are going to be a completely different subset of tags all currently existing tags (and any potential future non-lore tags) will still be tagged and enforced in the same way as they always have been.

Penguinempire-Dennis said:
You're thinking of werecreature.

Unless you mean as a potential term to use for a lore tag variant (should there ever be one), then no. I am thinking of were, as that seems to be the current umbrella tag for all such creatures. Or I might just be misunderstanding what you meant by that, in which case, I apologize.

Watsit said:

• ftm_crossgender, mtf_crossgender, basically all crossgender tags

Unlike gender transformation, these tags aren't based on visual indication of the character's original sex. They all depend on lore knowledge of the character's original sex (violating TWYS), and being depicted differently. For example, male Krystal. If there's any visual indication they were a different gender, gender_transformation and implied_transformation would be more appropriate.

Should there be a separate group of tags for characters whose intended depiction does not match the non-lore gender tag they've been given? Infamously-androgynous characters (e.g. mikhaila_kirov or reggie_(whygena)) tend to not get given crossgender tags, and if we're doing lore tags to keep the people from those situations happy it would make sense to have the same kind of x-to-y subtags as for crossgender or transformation.

MagnusEffect said:
Should there be a separate group of tags for characters whose intended depiction does not match the non-lore gender tag they've been given? Infamously-androgynous characters (e.g. mikhaila_kirov or reggie_(whygena)) tend to not get given crossgender tags, and if we're doing lore tags to keep the people from those situations happy it would make sense to have the same kind of x-to-y subtags as for crossgender or transformation.

, female_appearence?

MyNameIsOver20charac said:
male_appearance, female_appearance?

FTFY (s/ence/ance/g)

I don't understand this suggestion though, it seems like it would simply duplicate the info provided by TWYS.

A suggestion that makes sense to me is cross-presenting. Somewhat awkward because we already use 'presenting' in a slightly different way, but has a connection to the phrases'female-presenting' or 'male-presenting', without actually duplicating TWYS info. eg. female cross-presenting_(lore) would be used in Reggie's case.

I appreciate that people might want to search more 'obviously' for 'male presenting as female'. Personally I don't see how to do that cleanly (magnus's answer below doesn't seem satisfactory IMO)

MyNameIsOver20charac said:
male_appearence, female_appearence?

That might as well just be the non-lore male and female tags
It'd have to be more along the lines of a female_tagged_male or male_tagged_female format, as lore tags.

EDIT:

savageorange said:
FTFY (s/ence/ance/g)

I don't understand this suggestion though, it seems like it would simply duplicate the info provided by TWYS.

A suggestion that makes sense to me is cross-presenting. Somewhat awkward because we already use 'presenting' in a slightly different way, but has the connection to 'female-presenting' or 'male-presenting', without actually duplicating TWYS info.

Something like female_presenting_male/male_presenting_female could work
As for duplicating the TWYS information, just having a lore-gender tag by itself is the same kind of thing as just having crossgender by itself. There are already sub-tags for all crossgender and gender_transformation combinations, so why not this?

savageorange said:
eg. female cross-presenting_(lore) would be used in Reggie's case.

Don't want to double-post but I also don't want to just edit chain in response to edits that were posted during my edits.
To clarify, if you just use female cross-presenting_(lore) the only information you'd have is that there is both cross-presentation and an apparent-female in the image, much like if you had female crossgender in a multi-character image where the crossgendered character is actually ftm_crossgender alongside a character who is supposed to be female.

Right, so we are back at the 'lore tags can't combine cleanly with TWYS half the time because of ambiguous object identity' problem.

In that case, your answer might actually be the better one. If we can't avoid combinatorics, we can't avoid them.

(but I really hope we can, because I'm already not a huge fan of X_on_Y etc)

@MagnusEffect @savageorange Yeah, yours' are probably better.

I made a thread for this once upon a time, but this thread feels like a good place to bring this stuff up again, so I'm going to repost this here.

I've noticed some potential improvements that could be made to tags for familial relationships between characters. Posting this in one thread instead of running through the alias/implication suggestion forms multiple times, and because I think it would be better to discuss this stuff in one place.

• grandpa, granddad, grand_dad, and synonyms -> alias to a disambiguation tag, since these have been used to refer to a grandfather, an older male, or in the case of grand_dad and variations, to the 7 GRAND DAD Vinesauce meme (which has shown up on this site).
• Do the same for grandma and synonyms.
• grandfather_and_grandson -> imply grandfather and grandson tags
• grandmother_and_grandson -> imply grandmother and grandson tags
• Imply grandparent from grandmother and grandfather
• daddy -> alias to daddy_(disambiguation) instead of aliasing to father. I've seen posts with only father tagged that also have no clear father/offspring relations going on, neither in the post or the source. This tells me some people are using it for daddy kink situations or for males with a "daddy" body type, neither of which imply incest or familial relationships.
• niece and nephew -> imply nibling. This could be a shaky one, since nibling is mainly used in genealogical circles to talk about nieces and nephews, and doesn't see much common usage. However, we've also switched to officially using taxonomical names for IRL species, so I wouldn't be surprised.
• aunt and uncle -> imply avunculus or pibling. I honestly have a hard time expecting either of these to be taken up since they are even less heard of than nibling, but since we have parent for mother and father, I figured it would be logically consistent. However, it might also be redundant, as nibling would imply either an aunt or an uncle, and we also let parent pick up the slack for the lack of an offspring tag.

Lore tags for pairings might be a good idea, such as Male/Male, Male/Female, Female/Female, as well as intersex related tags.

nevan said:
Lore tags for pairings might be a good idea, such as Male/Male, Male/Female, Female/Female, as well as intersex related tags.

I agree. Here's one currently tagged as male/ambiguous, but canonically (I guess) male/male: post #2159267

There's probably lots of others out there.

watsit said:
I'm starting to see an issue here. Tags like this seem to be designed to distance the artist/creator away from the implication that it may be tagged otherwise. Like, "the tags may say it, but it's not, really, I swear!"

Two problems arise here, one with knowing when a tag applies (again, different people have different standards for what counts as bestiality for their characters, different jurisdictions have different standards for what's underage that also depend on what you're doing, etc), but also the fact that the tags don't directly associate with characters. Okay, so you have a not_underage_(lore) tag because that character is really a centuries-old vampire or witch. But if there's an actual underage character in the picture too, it becomes misleading. Essentially, every not_x tag would need a corresponding x tag, inherently doubling the number of these kinds of tags, and it would leave no way to tell which applies to who/what, just leaving noise in the tag list.

If there is an under age character in the pic then there shouldn't be a not_underage tag. (Or have certain tags like not_underage/not_cub only apply to the "action" ie a couple having fun and their kid or a kid in the background)

Everyone is going on about gender and family lore tags. There are other tags that will be useful for lore tags.

Professions

• tag_group:professions
• magic_user_(lore)
• spellcaster_(lore)
• hero, superhero / villain, supervillain

Positions of Power

• king_(lore)
• queen_(lore)
• princess_(lore)

Wealth

• wealthy_(lore)
• poor_(lore)

Species

• hybrid_(lore)
• custom_species_(lore) or custom_race_(lore)
• Things that don't always follow TWYS
• angel_(lore)
• deity_(lore)
• demon_(lore)

Special Abilities

- Unsure about this

• telepathy
• telekinesis

Personality Traits

• naive
• rebel / rebellious
• religious
• shy
• short_tempered
• tsundere
• yandere

role_reversal would be a nice lore tag. Doms portrayed as subs. Nice characters being mean. Good becoming evil and vice versa.

The tag alias after_incest -> incest has conflicting wiki pages. incest should be updated to include information from after_incest if necessary.

The bulk update request #9 (forum #) has been approved by @NotMeNotYou.

The tag alias after_incest -> incest has conflicting wiki pages. incest should be updated to include information from after_incest if necessary.

The bulk update request #10 (forum #) has been approved by @NotMeNotYou.

The bulk update request #11 (forum #) has been approved by @NotMeNotYou.

The bulk update request #12 (forum #) has been approved by @NotMeNotYou.

Shouldn't year tags be considered lore tags? They're not necessarily related to TWYS. There are many images that are known to be made in so-and-so year, but there's no year written on them. There's also a very small possibility of an artist having written down or watermarked the wrong year when they made it, simply tagging the wrong year because it was made to celebrate a new year (I remember back in late December 2018 of New Year's Day 2019 images being posted on e6 a couple days before 2019 was reached anywhere in the world), or tagging a year because it's supposed to be set in that particular year in the past or future (which arguably would fit better for lore tags, but we have general tags for decades and decade themes for those anyway, like 80's theme, and future is self-explanatory).

I think year tags would make the most sense in the meta group, as they are about the post itself not its content.