Aliasing aftermath to after sex.

Reason: Same thing.

I pretty much agree.

But that doesn't really imply sex, does it? It could be among other non-sexual things.

For instance, a cherry pie sploded on starfox's face. Not secks.

Gayteensex said:
It could be among other non-sexual things.

no.

Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh man. I kind of agree with The Kid. It could be used to describe post #99111. Definitely aftermath, and just as definitely not after sex. Unfortunately, it's got after_sex stuck onto it, because aftermath implies it. Similarly, post #23056 shows an aftermath of something, without being after sex. I feel like aftermath is a pretty heavy word, and generally shouldn't be applied to after_sex images, unless things are quite messy, gaping, characters are passed out, etc, and that it's a perfectly legitimate tag for those two images there. Especially the first one, that looks like a tornado (i.e. the cat-thing) tore through there.

Posts like post #99111 could be tagged with messy if it didn't already have sexual connontations. And post #23056 wouldn't get the aftermath tag, since it's just someone unconscious. Aftermath doesn't need to be applied to everything done after the fact. If that was the case, I could tag almost all scat and watersports images with it, since they depict the "aftermath" of someone pissing or shitting.

Ultima_Weapon said:
Aftermath doesn't need to be applied to everything done after the fact. If that was the case, I could tag almost all scat and watersports images with it, since they depict the "aftermath" of someone pissing or shitting.

Actually, that sounds reasonable. I agree it shouldn't be tagged on everything where there's a consequence. It also shouldn't be tagged on images where the action is still going on, so if the character is actively dumping, no aftermath tag. If, on the other hand, the character just blew a month's worth of crap over the couch and is looking sheepish about it, aftermath. It should be used on images where there is...well, aftermath!

RedOctober said:
Actually, that sounds reasonable. I agree it shouldn't be tagged on everything where there's a consequence. It also shouldn't be tagged on images where the action is still going on, so if the character is actively dumping, no aftermath tag. If, on the other hand, the character just blew a month's worth of crap over the couch and is looking sheepish about it, aftermath. It should be used on images where there is...well, aftermath!

That's not reasonable, as we could have the aftermath of:

Pissing
Shitting
Making food
Eating
Getting dressed
Getting undressed
Having sex
Cleaning something
Giving birth
Any competition
Vehicle accident
Falling down stairs
It keeps happening
Telling someone about stairs

You get the idea.

Ultima_Weapon said:
That's not reasonable, as we could have the aftermath of:

Pissing
Shitting
Making food
Eating
Getting dressed
Getting undressed
Having sex
Cleaning something
Giving birth
Any competition
Vehicle accident
Falling down stairs
It keeps happening
Telling someone about stairs

You get the idea.

The ones I put in bold are the only ones I felt we wouldn't have "aftermath" from. Sure, there would be results, but results and consequences aren't always "aftermath." That word has the connotation of chaos and disaster. Sure, the total mess after bukakke isn't a disaster, but shit if it isn't chaotic. Quite the mess. Vehicle accidents definitely have aftermath. So does giving birth. I think that if an image depicts a chaotic/messy/disastrous result of something, then it can be tagged aftermath. I mean, fuck, if there's a comic where Artica Sparkle tells Lupine Assassin about stairs, and the next panel shows everything exploding as a result, by fuck tag it aftermath!

Aftermath cares no connotations of disaster on its own; It simply means "after the events". Also, if you look at Aftermath, the given after-cooking picture is one of the rare few; most are after sex pictures. As such, they should be removed and retagged something else more appropriate, and aftermath aliased over.

The common use is aftermath of sex; the only use of it not as sex is the exception, not the rule. Thus, 'Gayteensex' is off the mark once more.

ExplosiveBlaziken said:
The common use is aftermath of sex; the only use of it not as sex is the exception, not the rule. Thus, 'Gayteensex' is off the mark once more.

Disagree. And quit backseat modding like you're perfect or soemthing. :/

Gayteensex said:
Disagree. And quit backseat modding like you're perfect or soemthing. :/

That's right.

Telling you you're wrong again is backseat modding.

Yup, that's totally true.

Gayteensex said:
Disagree.

Agree. 90% of the images i've seen tagged with aftermath deal with sex.

Definition of AFTERMATH

1: a second-growth crop —called also rowen
2: consequence, result
3: the period immediately following a usually ruinous event

As given by Merriam-Webster. I don't post that to be like "look, see, I'm right," just to support my opinion. To me, it definitely connotes some kind of catastrophe. True, one definition is simply "consequence." But I've never, ever, heard or read the word "aftermath" without thinking things are disastrous. If you said to me "I saw the aftermath of Jimbob vacuuming today." I'd assume that Jimbob fails at vacuums and managed to end up with it up his ass and the dirt of a thousand shoes is on the couch. I wouldn't think you meant that you saw a clean room.

Also, if it didn't carry connotations of mess, why would anyone bother putting it on images? after_sex would do just fine, and so in fact the alias ought to be the other way around. No, it's used on images where it's after_sex but also is usually messy/gaping/someone passed out from the fun.

ExplosiveBlaziken said:
The common use is aftermath of sex; the only use of it not as sex is the exception, not the rule.

Ultima_Weapon said:
Agree. 90% of the images i've seen tagged with aftermath deal with sex.

I agree that that's the common use here. And yes, almost all of the images are sex-related. That is why I'm arguing for a change in the use of the tag. Or the creation of a new tag. I'd like for there to be something for those images where something non-sexual occurs and chaos ensues. Like the cooking pic. I think that needs a tag, and honestly aftermath fits the bill perfectly. Here's my idea:

Option 1: Accept the usage of aftermath on all pictures with...well, with aftermath, sexual or not. Simply include the after_sex tag on those images where it's...after sex. Remove the aftermath->after_sex implication so that images of other disastrous results can be tagged with aftermath but not after_sex.

Option 2: Create a new tag for those after_sex images where there is also aftermath, so that aftermath will alone be used for non-sexual destruction.

Option 3: Just let after_sex and messy, gaping, or any other end-result descriptors handle the job on sexual images, so that again aftermath is just for other things going boom. I think this one is the best, personally. The aftermath->after_sex implication again would have to be removed.

Option 4: Create a new tag for images where something crazy went down and there's chaos or mess afterwards, while aftermath is used only for images of after_sex mess. I don't personally like this option, but if it's the consensus, fine by me.

Well then someone needs to go through and manually remove the aftermath tag from every picture and start over tagging it right, a mod could mass delete the tag so we could start over, or we could just go ahead with aftermath -> after sex.

RedOctober said:
stuff

Option 1: I'd rather not have to use two tags for an image where we only need one.

Option 2: Rather not make a new tag to replace after_sex, as after_sex is clear enough not to need another tag to help define it.

Option 3: Maybe.

Option 4: Rather not make new tags when we have existing tags to cover the spot.

Yes, the third definition does allude to usually ruinous events, BUT aftermath is not a term that is definitively always in reference to ruinous events. it even states as much right there in the third definition; usually, not always. And then there is the second definition which is still rather commonly used. I mean, if you eat a pizza, you can correctly state that the aftermath is the pizza box and crumbs and such you left over from said pizza. It's as simple as that.

If you want to use it for images that showcase ruinous events, apply a more unambiguous tag than aftermath for the usage; like, say, destruction (which already has 95 images associated with it) or disaster (which has 5; On a related note, Disaster and Destruction should be merged, IMO). The vast majority of images are used to indicate the end result of sex, or the after sex situation. thus it should be rolled into after_sex and the stray images that don't fit be retagged.

123easy said:
Yes, the third definition does allude to usually ruinous events, BUT aftermath is not a term that is definitively always in reference to ruinous events. it even states as much right there in the third definition; usually, not always. And then there is the second definition which is still rather commonly used. I mean, if you eat a pizza, you can correctly state that the aftermath is the pizza box and crumbs and such you left over from said pizza. It's as simple as that.

If you want to use it for images that showcase ruinous events, apply a more unambiguous tag than aftermath for the usage; like, say, destruction (which already has 95 images associated with it) or disaster (which has 5; On a related note, Disaster and Destruction should be merged, IMO). The vast majority of images are used to indicate the end result of sex, or the after sex situation. thus it should be rolled into after_sex and the stray images that don't fit be retagged.

Right, I know it says that it isn't always after ruinous events. That's why I said it carries the connotation, not the explicit definition. I know how it can be used, I'm just saying that it's rarely used in a fashion that doesn't involve a disaster.

As for destruction and disaster, they should not be merged. Disasters aren't always destruction.

Disaster:
1. an occurrence that causes great distress or destruction
2. a thing, project, etc., that fails or has been ruined

One could argue that while it does have a second definition, it does heavily carry the connotation, though not the explicit singular definition of destruction.... <trollface.jpg>