casual incest is currently a general tag despite incest itself being a lore tag. What should be done about this?
Posted under Tag/Wiki Projects and Questions
casual incest is currently a general tag despite incest itself being a lore tag. What should be done about this?
This is just equivalent to casual_sex incest_(lore). I recommend aliasing it away, possibly to casual_sex to not screw the autocomplete
The bulk update request #10098 has been rejected.
create alias casual_incest (278) -> casual_sex (2776)
Reason: Reasoning given above
EDIT: The bulk update request #10098 (forum #435705) has been rejected by @SNPtheCat.
Updated by auto moderator
snpthecat said:
The bulk update request #10098 has been rejected.create alias casual_incest (278) -> casual_sex (2776)
Reason: Reasoning given above
only issue i see is that not all of them are sex, as just kissing your relatives passionately would be incest but not sex
Kill it.
It's not being used in a way that's distinct from incest_(lore), so it ought to just be aliased away. There are tags for casual public sex and voyeurs which can be used instead.
The bulk update request #10099 is pending approval.
create alias casual_incest (278) -> incest_(lore) (54467)
Reason: Alternate to bulk update request #10098.
@Lust Demon Laz, you're the only downvote after 14 days. Would you like to make an alternate proposal?
This sounds like a concept people might want to be able to search for, so I'm not sure why you would want to rush into getting rid of the tag just because it doesn't fit neatly into the current tagging system.
Casual incest seems like a pretty well defined tag, so it seems kinda weird that the default course of action should be to nuke it ASAP. If you can't come up with a way to make this concept searchable without this tag existing then you should probably just leave it be until someone else comes with a solution. And if you believe this concept shouldn't be searchable, or already is searchable through a combination of valid tags. Then you should make some kind of argument for that.
beholding said:
The bulk update request #10099 is pending approval.create alias casual_incest (278) -> incest_(lore) (54467)
Reason: Alternate to bulk update request #10098.
The issue with this alias request is that it is built on a different alias request that was built on a flawed understanding of what the tag casual_incest actually is supposed to entail. The issue with casual_incest including things other than sex, is not that it makes the target tag of casual_sex a bad target, but rather that it kinda invalidates the idea that it should be aliased away in the first place.
If we can't have a general tag for situations or concepts that depend on lore tags then casual_incest should probably be made into a lore tag. Or you need to make an actual argument for why the concept of casual_incest shouldn't be a searchable tag.
The bulk update request #10098 (forum #435705) has been rejected by @SNPtheCat.
smallgreybird said:
This sounds like a concept people might want to be able to search for, so I'm not sure why you would want to rush into getting rid of the tag just because it doesn't fit neatly into the current tagging system.Casual incest seems like a pretty well defined tag, so it seems kinda weird that the default course of action should be to nuke it ASAP. If you can't come up with a way to make this concept searchable without this tag existing then you should probably just leave it be until someone else comes with a solution. And if you believe this concept shouldn't be searchable, or already is searchable through a combination of valid tags. Then you should make some kind of argument for that.
The issue with this alias request is that it is built on a different alias request that was built on a flawed understanding of what the tag casual_incest actually is supposed to entail. The issue with casual_incest including things other than sex, is not that it makes the target tag of casual_sex a bad target, but rather that it kinda invalidates the idea that it should be aliased away in the first place.
If we can't have a general tag for situations or concepts that depend on lore tags then casual_incest should probably be made into a lore tag. Or you need to make an actual argument for why the concept of casual_incest shouldn't be a searchable tag.
I don't often vote on these things, but I do agree with SmallGreyBird here. The tag itself isn't the problem, as it covers different things than the tags that the alias would turn it into. The issue is just the tag category. Some instances of casual_incest are not casual_sex + incest_(lore), as there is no actual sex. Removing it would make those unsearchable. There are many other incest lore tags and it let's people fine tune their search into a subject that's extremely broad, the solution is to change the category so people can search for it.
It isn't well defined. It's vague and really doesn't seem to narrow down anything. What makes any of this distinct from just incest:
post #4136757post #4834316post #4893577post #5246301post #5008963
regsmutt said:
What makes any of this distinct from just incest:
post #4136757post #4834316post #4893577post #5246301post #5008963
Maybe the riolu/lucario image could qualify, as they're watching a movie while also having sex. But casual_sex would also apply in that case. But the others, yeah I wouldn't call them "casual", neither casual_incest or casual_sex.
EDIT:
I am having difficulty thinking of a scenario where two related characters are being casually incestuous that wouldn't involve sex. Aside from sex, what could two related characters do casually that would also be incestuous?
Updated
watsit said:
Maybe the riolu/lucario image could qualify, as they're watching a movie while also having sex. But casual_sex would also apply in that case. But the others, yeah I wouldn't call them "casual", neither casual_incest or casual_sex.EDIT:
I am having difficulty thinking of a scenario where two related characters are being casually incestuous that wouldn't involve sex. Aside from sex, what could two related characters do casually that would also be incestuous?
I did try to avoid stuff that was clearly casual_sex, distracted_sex, or public_sex because, well, those all have existing tags. As far as I can tell the rest of it is just 'without force' or with porn logic.
As for the second question- idk, post-sex cuddling or clearly romantic/sexual kissing would count. If there's a pda tag then those would likely fit there.
regsmutt said:
As for the second question- idk, post-sex cuddling or clearly romantic/sexual kissing would count. If there's a pda tag then those would likely fit there.
If it's being done casually, then it wouldn't have a romantic or sexual atmosphere. It'd just be a random normal thing, like having a cup of water or relaxing with a TV on. Family can cuddle and even kiss without being incestuous, but once it becomes sexual cuddling and kissing, it's no longer casual cuddling and kissing.
watsit said:
If it's being done casually, then it wouldn't have a romantic or sexual atmosphere. It'd just be a random normal thing, like having a cup of water or relaxing with a TV on. Family can cuddle and even kiss without being incestuous, but once it becomes sexual cuddling and kissing, it's no longer casual cuddling and kissing.
From my understanding casual incest would include things like siblings making out in front of their parents, which is generally seen as taboo in society, but with the parents treating it as completely normal. "Casual" here just refers to the idea that something that would generally be frowned upon in our society, is being treated as if it were completely acceptable or normal. The wiki also has the definition for casual sex baked into it for some reason, which does seem redundant because I don't think casual sex that includes incestuous themes should automatically be considered casual incest. Not all casual incest is casual sex but I also don't think all casual_sex incest should be tagged casual incest.
Additionally I think the casual sex tag might have distracted sex baked into its wiki as well, which might also be redundant.
smallgreybird said:
From my understanding casual incest would include things like siblings making out in front of their parents, which is generally seen as taboo in society, but with the parents treating it as completely normal. "Casual" here just refers to the idea that something that would generally be frowned upon in our society, is being treated as if it were completely acceptable or normal.
That sounds like it would include almost every incest image in which there's no one appearing to disapprove (similarly, vanilla adult-on-adult sex would count as casual_sex as it would be treated as a completely normal act by society). "Casual incest", like "casual sex", to me means the people in the act are treating it casually, as if it's a completely humdrum activity like watching TV or going for a walk, regardless of how anyone else responds to it. A guy could be giving his brother a handjob in public while they have a completely inane conversation about their day, and someone in the background looks at them in shock or disgust, for example, would count as casual incest to me since the brothers are being casual about their sexual relations. In contrast, making out isn't a casual act, it's an activity the people involved focus on doing, so siblings making out aren't being casual about their relations even if their family are okay with it. A family being okay with two (or more) members banging hot and heavy while talking dirty wouldn't be "casual", it just means other people don't care (or are themselves into it).
I feel this is bumping up against a related problem, which is that "casual" is a very subjective and ill-defined term.
If we can't have a general tag for situations or concepts that depend on lore tags then casual_incest should probably be made into a lore tag.
I would be fine with this if it has appropriate consensus.
The bulk update request #10312 is pending approval.
create alias casual_incest (278) -> casual_incest_(lore) (0)
change category casual_incest_(lore) (0) -> lore # missing
create implication casual_incest_(lore) (0) -> incest_(lore) (54467)
Reason: Alternate to above requests.
I'm really not understanding what casual incest even entails, unless it means incest occurring without stigma in a situation where you might expect it, but that doesn't seem to be how it's used (at least, not exclusively). Could someone explain casual incest as opposed to other forms of incest? Otherwise I'd just support it being aliased away to incest.
leafdapple said:
I'm really not understanding what casual incest even entails, unless it means incest occurring without stigma in a situation where you might expect it, but that doesn't seem to be how it's used (at least, not exclusively). Could someone explain casual incest as opposed to other forms of incest? Otherwise I'd just support it being aliased away to incest.
There are, as far as I can tell multiple uses. The first is incest paired with casual_sex, distracted_sex, and/or public_sex. Then there's the use that you describe- except this is very hard to tag under twys, especially in scenes that are in private, so it ends up being cases where all parties seem to be participating happily/consensually.
post #2758196post #3449629post #1965239
How do you know if there's no stigma and this is normal? How do you know that there IS stigma so they're private? Some of them include lines of encouragement but where is the line between porn logic/dirty talk and 'incest is normal in this setting'?
Then there's just the wildcard uses. Like I could not tell you how this fits at all:
post #2591149
regsmutt said:
There are, as far as I can tell multiple uses. The first is incest paired with casual_sex, distracted_sex, and/or public_sex. Then there's the use that you describe- except this is very hard to tag under twys, especially in scenes that are in private, so it ends up being cases where all parties seem to be participating happily/consensually.
post #2758196post #3449629post #1965239
How do you know if there's no stigma and this is normal? How do you know that there IS stigma so they're private? Some of them include lines of encouragement but where is the line between porn logic/dirty talk and 'incest is normal in this setting'?
Then there's just the wildcard uses. Like I could not tell you how this fits at all:
post #2591149
Yeah, this tag seems kind of useless.