This is my first forum post ever so I apologize for sloppiness.

So on post #2355766

I had a convo with Munkelzahn https://e621.net/users/14377 regarding this kind of prostitution. Where "Prostitution" generally implies a customer paying to top or receive services, but this image is a situation where a customer is paying to bottom. I've seen this kinda thing over time on this site but noticed it didn't have real tag for it. Munkelzahn linked post #190297 which conveys this well and they mentioned this tag has no wiki page.

post #2018171 is the only post on the site that actually has the tag and it's depicting exactly what I'm going for which is customer paying to bottom or at least being the one to give services.

Do you think this tag is appropriate, or do you perhaps have a better name for it? How would a wiki page be added for this?

That's not reverse prostitution. That's just prostitution.
Not really sure if a tag for this situation is necessary.

bitwolfy said:
That's not reverse prostitution. That's just prostitution.
Not really sure if a tag for this situation is necessary.

Yes it's all prostitution but the situation of hiring a prostitute has a the implication of a customer paying to top or receive services. Just as a gangbang implies someone being... well gangbanged, but "reverse_gangbang" exists to denote a single person having their way with the group rather than the group having their way with the single person despite "gangbang" describing both situations. And just like "forced_oral" implies someone is forcing another to give them oral but "reverse_forced_oral" exists to specifically denote someone forcibly giving oral to someone else despite "forced_oral" describing both situations.

starlight~ said:
Yes it's all prostitution but the situation of hiring a prostitute has a the implication of a customer paying to top or receive services.

But it's the standard for male prostitution... Male prostitutes are almost always topping, in both m/f and m/m. Roughly 85% of time, based on the interviews that I've seen. So I'd have hard time calling that 'reverse' prostitution.

genjar said:
But it's the standard for male prostitution... Male prostitutes are almost always topping, in both m/f and m/m. Roughly 85% of time, based on the interviews that I've seen. So I'd have hard time calling that 'reverse' prostitution.

I've not really seen that in my experiences. Most male prostitutes from what I've seen are more feminine and are topped by their customer. Especially in foreign countries where people will travel specifically to top young male prostitutes.

But this could also work for females too, regardless of it's frequency. A female customer could pay a female to offer her services. I mean how often do gangbangs where one guy tops a whole party of people in a single setting happen IRL but we still have the reverse tag for it. Really anything can be depicted on this site, so I'm bringing this up to offer clarity for a specific situation to organize more stuff like this. It's a kink getting a tag to make it easier to find and organize.

If you have another phrase or tag you think fits better, then feel free to mention.

Prostitution doesn't imply anything about anything, other than "Somebody's paying somebody else to have sex with them." There's literally no expectation of what sorts of sexy stuff will happen, other than what the individual customer worked out with that individual prostitute while they were hashing out the price.

I'm generally against tags that imply a "normal", particularly when there isn't one. Reverse tags do this, and thus I dislike them.

clawdragons said:
I'm generally against tags that imply a "normal", particularly when there isn't one. Reverse tags do this, and thus I dislike them.

Well the terminology may be debatable but all those tags are there to describe a very specific act so people can find the things they like. That's why I asked for maybe another phrase that fits better if anyone can think of a better tag name. Because, as I pointed out in a previous comment, forced_oral is just that, but "reverse_forced_oral" was made for people who specifically want to see someone forcibly performing oral on another rather than a character forcing someone to perform oral on them. It's a specific kink.

So maybe "reverse_prostitution" is an odd tag, but just as there are other very specific tags for certain kinks, surely there must be an appropriate one for "paying someone to give them sexual favors" which is what that last image in my original post is. It's a character paying another character so the paying character can give the paid character a blowjob.

So really it's a kink that I think can have its own tag because I've seen this come up here and there, and it was even part of an interactive text game posted here a couple years ago.

When I see "reverse prostitution", I think of someone paying to not have sex. If this sort of tag is necessary and I have my doubts, then something like "bottom prostitution" or "top prostitution" might be more appropriate. Rather than use a questionable "reverse_x" tag which arguably shouldn't apply, try for a term that better references what you want it to represent.

clawstripe said:
When I see "reverse prostitution", I think of someone paying to not have sex. If this sort of tag is necessary and I have my doubts, then something like "bottom prostitution" or "top prostitution" might be more appropriate. Rather than use a questionable "reverse_x" tag which arguably shouldn't apply, try for a term that better references what you want it to represent.

Bottom/top prostitution is... better, but bottom/top as descriptors in general is ambiguous and not very effective for describing the wide range of sexual behaviors which exist. I think penetrating/penetrated are better.

clawstripe said:
When I see "reverse prostitution", I think of someone paying to not have sex. If this sort of tag is necessary and I have my doubts, then something like "bottom prostitution" or "top prostitution" might be more appropriate. Rather than use a questionable "reverse_x" tag which arguably shouldn't apply, try for a term that better references what you want it to represent.

Well findom has its own tag and it's a pretty niche kink so surely this one could work too I think!

clawdragons said:
I think penetrating/penetrated are better.

I like that idea! Thanks for bringing that up

I'm against "reverse_*" tags, too.
Not because calling certain forms of sex "normal" is discriminatory, but because it's not immediately obvious from the tag name which aspect of the sex act is being reversed.
Yes, people can look at the tag wiki, if there is one.
But it's better to have a tag that is self-explanatory, so people only have to look at the tag wiki if they're unsure about special cases.

how about
prostitution_(bottom_pays)
prostitution_(top_pays)

or "penetrator" and "penetratee" :-)

@Starlight~
Until there's a tag, I suggest creating a public set with relevant posts.

munkelzahn said:
I'm against "reverse_*" tags, too.
Not because calling certain forms of sex "normal" is discriminatory, but because it's not immediately obvious from the tag name which aspect of the sex act is being reversed.
Yes, people can look at the tag wiki, if there is one.
But it's better to have a tag that is self-explanatory, so people only have to look at the tag wiki if they're unsure about special cases.

how about
prostitution_(bottom_pays)
prostitution_(top_pays)

or "penetrator" and "penetratee" :-)

@Starlight~
Until there's a tag, I suggest creating a public set with relevant posts.

I like the Bottom_pays and top_pays ideas as tags a lot. I think they fit the best! You've been very very helpful @Munkelzahn, thank you. I'll try making a public set when I get some free time to sift through some posts.