I've seen in topic #29126 and topic #32207 that there is a bit of confusion concerning the insemination_request and impregnation_request tags. Both forums suggest aliasing insemination_request to impregnation_request, but this would leave us with a tag that only applies to situations involving cum_in_pussy and not instances of, say, male/male penetration.

I'd like to propose an entirely new tag to remedy this: "internal_ejaculation_request". Or "cum_inside_request" if that's too robotic. This would encompass all scenarios, regardless of gender, in which one character expresses their desire for another character to, well, ejaculate inside them. The insemination_request tag, now aliased to impregnation_request, would be for "make me pregnant" etc. only, whereas this new tag would be for any instance of "cum inside me" etc.

assuming this gets put into place, both this tag and impregnation_request could then imply cum_request, which is severely underpopulated.

i'm hesitant to say that impregnation_request should imply this new tag for reasons brought up in topic #32207, being that a character may request impregnation without explicitly mentioning insemination or cum.

Another thing. If this comes to pass, then I can have the aforementioned request tags imply "request" which I previously suggested in topic #33877.

i hate to bump my own topic, but this is still very much an issue that i would like to see resolved.

garfieldfromgarfield said:
Another thing. If this comes to pass, then I can have the aforementioned request tags imply "request" which I previously suggested in topic #33877.

On second thought, I will not pursue the above. "request" has already been aliased as an invalid tag.

My primary issue would be with people taking instances of characters wanting sex as them also wanting cum from their partner (potentially then also extended to characters presenting themselves to the viewer; some people like treating an unseen viewer as a character and tagging based on how they feel themselves to be in the image; submissive_pov and receiving_pov are rife with mistags because taggers felt submissive or ready to receive for themselves in the image, and not because you could actually see a character in a submissive or receiving position, and not because it's an actual pov shot/first-person view).

I'm also not sure what the deal is with insemination request and impregnation request, since that's primarily dictated by dialog, when we're not supposed to tag based on information in the text (it's considered outside information).

watsit said:
I'm also not sure what the deal is with insemination request and impregnation request, since that's primarily dictated by dialog, when we're not supposed to tag based on information in the text (it's considered outside information).

we have quite a few general tags that are specifically related to dialogue, stuff like profanity, daddy_kink, explicitly_stated_nonconsent, and stated_homosexuality. so, it seems like we're fine having tags related to dialogue but they're kind of tagged with a diffrent standard than visual tags. if we wanted we could move them all to lore, but I'm not sure if that's necessary.

watsit said:
My primary issue would be with people taking instances of characters wanting sex as them also wanting cum from their partner (potentially then also extended to characters presenting themselves to the viewer; some people like treating an unseen viewer as a character and tagging based on how they feel themselves to be in the image; submissive_pov and receiving_pov are rife with mistags because taggers felt submissive or ready to receive for themselves in the image, and not because you could actually see a character in a submissive or receiving position, and not because it's an actual pov shot/first-person view).

I'm also not sure what the deal is with insemination request and impregnation request, since that's primarily dictated by dialog, when we're not supposed to tag based on information in the text (it's considered outside information).

if this is an issue, we could dictate in the tag's wiki under what circumstances it should be used.
for example, we could differentiate between wanting sex and wanting cum, like you said, as well as restrict the tag to explicit mentions of cum or ejaculation as opposed to more vague demands ("cum in me" vs. "fuck me" etc.).
if a character wants sex, then we have the propositioning tag (which desperately needs a wiki update and is rather underpopulated, i know).
i think letting more people know about this tag could pose a potential solution to the problem you mentioned.

i also agree with darryus about how these would be dialogue-based tags. they are spoken requests, after all.

Well, as long as it won't be prone to mistags, I don't really see a problem with something like cum_request. Given that those other tags do exist, have a separate tag that's for only cum request rather then impregnation requests makes sense.

I would be curious how to handle cases like a male saying "breed me". Since "breeding" is actually a term for impregnation/reproduction and fits as an impregnation request just fine for female/herm/andromorph characters, but males will sometimes use it for kinky talk as a request for sex/cum instead of literal impregnation. But at the same time, m-preg and anal impregnation aren't unheard of in art...