I know this question was raised before in the last BUR, but I believe there needs to be a more critical discussion on the nature of sex positions in artworks and as to how we tag sex on posts as a whole, rather than just accepting that all sexual positions inherently implies sex.

Just a few questions to consider in regards to using sex_position tags:
1) Should non-sexual content be considered for the *_position tags?

• 69_position - post #2746706 & post #410898
• missionary_position - post #767927 & post #2839008

2) Should romantic posts be considered for the *_position tags (particularly when they are still clothed)?

• mastery_position - post #972642 & post #183220 & post #526273
• missionary_position - post #2079811

3) Should imminent_sex or after_sex posts be considered for the *_position tags?

• cowgirl_position - post #42352 & post #2754271
• mastery_position - post #1901887 & post #2785690
• reverse_missionary_position - post #2295619
• stand_and_carry_position - post #89017 & post #2201706

4) From topic #22983, should masturbation on inanimate objects (e.g., sex_dolls, breeding_mounts, plush toys/plushophilia) be considered for the *_position tags?

• cowgirl_position - post #2205402
• doggystyle - post #23750
• missionary_position - post #862507 & post #949943
• mounting - post #1569728 & post #2756677 (masturbation) versus post #996378 & post #1834346 (actual sex)

It's at the least a vehicle for sex to be implied into posts by users who otherwise would not, in an aspect of tagging which is given little administrative oversight
i.e. missionary_position or doggystyle are more useful for making sure sex is present than it is for searching any one specific pose set.

It's probably better to overtag for post-rating purposes and have actually-just-questionable (or otherwise just-explicit, not-sex) posts edited afterward than to trim down on auto-rating explicit art, especially posts which may involve young characters.