Interspecies wiki page: Not to be confused with bestiality.

Also interspecies wiki page: human_on_feral implicates this tag.

Okay, but WHY, though? Human on feral action is literally bestiality!

You're missing a lot of context. "A good rule of thumb is if they can realistically breed offspring this should not be used.", from the interspecies wiki. An anthro wolf and a feral wolf would fit under this quote, so bestiality would not be tagged; unless there are feral humans, any species that looks feral would not be tagged human, so human on feral action would always be interspecies.

interspecies
human_on_feral

But the line "Not to be confused with bestiality" implies that the interspecies tag isn't supposed to be used on images of bestiality. Which human-on-feral absolutely is.

jacob said:
But the line "Not to be confused with bestiality" implies that the interspecies tag isn't supposed to be used on images of bestiality. Which human-on-feral absolutely is.

What does interspecies mean to you, and what does bestiality mean to you?

siral_exan said:
What does interspecies mean to you, and what does bestiality mean to you?

I really don't see what that has to do with anything.

Since you asked, interspecies, to me, means "sex between two non-humanoid animals of different species;" and bestiality, to me, means "sex between a sapient creature and a non-sapient creature." (So, yes, sex between an intelligent creature of a non-humanoid body-MLP ponies for example-and a human would NOT count as bestiality to me, but sex between a creature with an anthro-style body, but no intelligence, WOULD count, to me.)

But, again, that has literally nothing to do with this discussion. I am perfectly aware that how I, personally, define the terms, has nothing to do with how they get applied as tags. This discussion is about what the tag's wiki says it should or should not be applied to.

jacob said:
I really don't see what that has to do with anything.

Since you asked, interspecies, to me, means "sex between two non-humanoid animals of different species;" and bestiality, to me, means "sex between a sapient creature and a non-sapient creature." (So, yes, sex between an intelligent creature of a non-humanoid body-MLP ponies for example-and a human would NOT count as bestiality to me, but sex between a creature with an anthro-style body, but no intelligence, WOULD count, to me.)

But, again, that has literally nothing to do with this discussion. I am perfectly aware that how I, personally, define the terms, has nothing to do with how they get applied as tags. This discussion is about what the tag's wiki says it should or should not be applied to.

Your wrong about your interpretation. Interspecies is between any two species, the wiki literally says that in the sentence. Bestiality can be between two species, with one feral and one not, such as a human and any other feral animal. If a human fucks anything other than a human, it is interspecies, and there is no such thing as a feral human. The implication is correct. Sapience is irrelevant to feral creatures for bestiality.

siral_exan said:
Your wrong about your interpretation. Interspecies is between any two species, the wiki literally says that in the sentence. Bestiality can be between two species, with one feral and one not, such as a human and any other feral animal. If a human fucks anything other than a human, it is interspecies, and there is no such thing as a feral human. The implication is correct. Sapience is irrelevant to feral creatures for bestiality.

Had a feeling you'd completely ignore the third paragraph of my last post. Thank you for not disappointing.

Also, I really don't get why you keep bringing up the fact there's no such thing as a feral human-what does that have to do with anything? I'm just saying that the way the interspecies tag's wiki is worded, it sounds like it's only supposed to apply to feral-on-feral stuff where the two (or more) ferals are different species. So, human-on-feral wouldn't count...but also anthro-on-feral wouldn't, either.

Here's the link to the wikis, I can't change how you think but what you are interpreting from them is incorrect:

bestiality
human_on_feral
interspecies

Point out, with quotations straight from these wikis, why you interpret it with what you answered. But bestiary is tagged when a creature is fucking another creature, with one that is feral and one that is not. A human is a nonferal creature that is acting upon a feral creature. Interspecies is an interaction between any two creatures that don't share the same species. Ergo, a human having sex with a feral animal is always interspecies and always bestiality.

It literally says these all in the first sentence in all of the wikis, why are you interpreting them differently? Sapience is irrelevant. A human fucking a feral creature is absolute. It doesn't matter whether they're humanoid or not.

You are totally overthinking this. human_on_feral is both bestiality and interspecies, but this does not mean that interspecies is equivalent with bestiality. It is that simple.

siral_exan said:
Point out, with quotations straight from these wikis, why you interpret it with what you answered.

I already did: "Not to be confused with bestiality" Granted, the wiki also went on to add "or hybrid" in that same sentence, but that's irrelevant to this thread.

siral_exan said:
But bestiary is tagged when a creature is fucking another creature, with one that is feral and one that is not. A human is a nonferal creature that is acting upon a feral creature.

Which has nothing to do with anything, because I never claimed that human-on-feral shouldn't be bestiality. Just that it shouldn't count as interspecies.

siral_exan said:
Interspecies is an interaction between any two creatures that don't share the same species.

Now you're making stuff up. The tag's wiki does not say that anywhere. It says "sexual or mating activity," not "any interaction."

jacob said:

I already did: "Not to be confused with bestiality" Granted, the wiki also went on to add "or hybrid" in that same sentence, but that's irrelevant to this thread.

Which has nothing to do with anything, because I never claimed that human-on-feral shouldn't be bestiality. Just that it shouldn't count as interspecies.

Now you're making stuff up. The tag's wiki does not say that anywhere. It says "sexual or mating activity," not "any interaction."

Really? What part of "interaction" doesn't include "sex", or is sex suddenly not a form of interacting with someone else? What is a human to you, and what part of "other species" do you not understand? What does "confuse" mean to you, even, since you seem to be confused.

You interpret interspecies as "sex between two non-humanoid animals of different species", tell me exactly where that is in the wiki. You interpret bestiality as "sex between a sapient creature and a non-sapient creature.", point out exactly where that says in the wiki and notice that the wiki excludes sapience.

This shouldn't be an argument at this point. You are using your opinion, not what the site uses in the wiki, to assume how the tag implication should go. The wikis are right, what they say is what they mean on this site.

siral_exan said:
You interpret interspecies as "sex between two non-humanoid animals of different species", tell me exactly where that is in the wiki. You interpret bestiality as "sex between a sapient creature and a non-sapient creature.", point out exactly where that says in the wiki and notice that the wiki excludes sapience.

You're STILL ignoring the third paragraph of my post where I defined what the terms mean to me:

jacob said:
But, again, that has literally nothing to do with this discussion. I am perfectly aware that how I, personally, define the terms, has nothing to do with how they get applied as tags. This discussion is about what the tag's wiki says it should or should not be applied to.

siral_exan said:
[snip]You are using your opinion[snip2]

NO, I am NOT. I'm using what the wiki page says. The expression "Not to be confused with [X]" means "This is DEFINITELY NOT [X] and should, in no uncertain terms, definitely NOT be treated as [X], despite the fact it sounds similar to [X] on the surface." And the interspecies wiki explicitly says "Not to be confused with bestiality."

My entire argument this whole time, was that the wiki says "interspecies=/=bestiality," and also "human_on_feral=bestiality," therefor it doesn't make sense that the wiki also says "human_on_feral=interspecies."

jacob said:
You're STILL ignoring the third paragraph of my post where I defined what the terms mean to me:

NO, I am NOT. I'm using what the wiki page says. The expression "Not to be confused with [X]" means "This is DEFINITELY NOT [X] and should, in no uncertain terms, definitely NOT be treated as [X], despite the fact it sounds similar to [X] on the surface." And the interspecies wiki explicitly says "Not to be confused with bestiality."

My entire argument this whole time, was that the wiki says "interspecies=/=bestiality," and also "human_on_feral=bestiality," therefor it doesn't make sense that the wiki also says "human_on_feral=interspecies."

But they are interspecies. A human is not a wolf. A human is not a cat, it is not a fish, it is not anything that can be feral. How is that hard to understand. A human fucking a cat is interspecies, the cat is not a homo sapien. It is interspecies. A human cannot be feral, they are always human. The wiki is not conflicting itself since the behavior between interspecies and bestialty are individual, or that one is not always the other. That is what they mean by confused, as in you do not misinterpret them as one and the same. That the definitions are different on this site between the two.

Ergo, a human fucking anything feral, absolutely anything, is both interspecies and bestiality. A human is not feral, the animal is feral, the animal cannot be human, and they are having sex. How is that hard to understand? You are reading too deeply into that, you got exactly confused by your interpretations. But no, tell me how a human fucking a cat is not interspecies, or bestiality.

Tags, on this site, do not always follow the exact definition of the words used in them. For example, the "partially_clothed" tag DOES NOT mean "a character is wearing some clothing, but not fully dressed." Instead, it means "a character is wearing an article of clothing that's somewhere in between on and off." Therefor, your assumption that the name of the tag "interspecies" automatically implies the tag means "sex between two different species, end of story" is faulty. What the wiki says overrules what the words mean. And the wiki explicitly states that the interspecies tag should not be used to define any pairing that classifies as bestiality.

And I still don't get where you got the idea I'm trying to claim a human fucking something non-humanoid shouldn't be tagged bestiality. I've literally been saying the exact opposite this whole time.

jacob said:
But the line "Not to be confused with bestiality" implies that the interspecies tag isn't supposed to be used on images of bestiality.

No it doesn't, it means interspecies and bestiality are not inherently linked (by this site's definitions) and shouldn't be confused with each other, not that they can never apply at the same time.

An anthro wolf fucking an anthro cat -> interspecies, not bestiality
An anthro wolf fucking a feral wolf -> bestiality, not interspecies
An anthro wolf fucking an anthro wolf -> not bestiality, not interspecies
An anthro wolf fucking a feral cat -> bestiality, interspecies

In this case, a human fucking a feral anything is implicitly bestiality and interspecies, but not all cases of interspecies are implicitly bestiality and vice-versa.

The "Not to be confused with line" is there to inform users of tags that are similar, but are not the same thing.

It does not state that the tags shouldn't be used for the same post.

Sexual or mating activity between different species.

This is exactly what interspecies should mean IMO. Humans should count as a species, and feral humans don't exist under our definition of "feral". Thus any pairing between a human and a feral will be activity between two species. It's clear, intuitive, and I don't think it needs to be changed.