The tag implication #51990 son_penetrating_father -> father_penetrated has been rejected.

Reason: as the tag name suggested

EDIT: The tag implication son_penetrating_father -> father_penetrated (forum #378185) has been rejected by @slyroon.

A note on father/son lore tags: Not always males, for gender tagging purposes. Just a reminder if someone wants to post the naively obvious implications. It doesn't always imply male penetrating male.

Hmm, I wish more people would put some reasoning in comments on these. I mean, it's obvious that a huge problem with this one is lore situation, but watchdog22 deserves some explanation for the logic behind why it got rejected.

alphamule said:
Hmm, I wish more people would put some reasoning in comments on these. I mean, it's obvious that a huge problem with this one is lore situation, but watchdog22 deserves some explanation for the logic behind why it got rejected.

oh, I guess I forgot to actually post the comment I had typed up.

but it's mostly because staff has stated that continuing to create x_<verb>_y tag families beyond the standard form or gender penetrating tags was seen as unfeasible. -topic #36869

alphamule said:
A note on father/son lore tags: Not always males, for gender tagging purposes. Just a reminder if someone wants to post the naively obvious implications. It doesn't always imply male penetrating male.

Hmm, I wish more people would put some reasoning in comments on these. I mean, it's obvious that a huge problem with this one is lore situation, but watchdog22 deserves some explanation for the logic behind why it got rejected.

Why son_penetrating_father doesn’t mean male on male? It’s not a lore tag and based on twys if you can tell they are father and son while looking at the post, what make them not all male?

Btw, after seeing the explanation post, are those tags going to retire? Don’t quite understand the new naming conventions but how would we search for father penetrated then…? Im confused

watchdog22 said:
Why son_penetrating_father doesn’t mean male on male? It’s not a lore tag and based on twys if you can tell they are father and son while looking at the post, what make them not all male?

There are a couple issues at play here.

Familial relations aren't exactly twys, but is instead twyk. Whether or not they're father and son depends on the artist.

Then there's the problem where the son and/or father can be any of the 3 "male" "genders" masculine roles: male, maleherm, and andromorph.

watchdog22 said:
Why son_penetrating_father doesn’t mean male on male? It’s not a lore tag and based on twys if you can tell they are father and son while looking at the post, what make them not all male?

Btw, after seeing the explanation post, are those tags going to retire? Don’t quite understand the new naming conventions but how would we search for father penetrated then…? Im confused

You can search for father penetrated (since you didn't specify son, i'll use child) by
father duo ~male/male ~male/female male_penetrated larger_penetrated if you don't want intersex

The tag implication son_penetrating_father -> father_penetrated (forum #378185) has been rejected by @slyroon.