Topic: Tag Implication: poképhilia -> bestiality

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

Not all Pokemon are animal-like uh. I'm pretty sure that screwing a Klinklang lolbadpun wouldn't be something I would call bestiality

Updated by anonymous

Neitsuke said:
Not all Pokemon are animal-like uh. I'm pretty sure that screwing a Klinklang lolbadpun wouldn't be something I would call bestiality

Although practically, it wouldn't be, but techically, according to the E621 definition of bestiality, it would be as long as the Klinklang is feral.

The Wiki said:
Sexual activity between feral and non-feral characters (including human, anthro, taur, naga, etc.).

Updated by anonymous

Genjar

Former Staff

mrnotsosafeforwork said:
Although practically, it wouldn't be, but techically, according to the E621 definition of bestiality, it would be as long as the Klinklang is feral.

I have hard time imagining feral Klinklang. It looks like a bunch of gears instead of an animal, so the closest form tag we have for that is... probably inanimate, unless I'm forgetting something.

In any case, bestiality is only tagged for feral on non-feral, and there's plenty of Pokemon that aren't feral.

Like I've mentioned before, I'm not even convinced that we need the bestiality tag anymore: there's constant arguments in comments about what should count as bestiality, the current implications lead to weird tagging (anthro pokemon + feral pokemon = bestiality), and the anthro_on_feral and human_on_feral are now so widely tagged that you get pretty much the same results by searching for those.

Updated by anonymous

I agree that it would be nice to get rid of the tagging issues sometimes caused by anthro x feral implying bestiality (which I guess is why I never tag anthro_on_feral on a pokémon x pokémon image, because calling that bestiality just doesn't feel right), but you'd be surprised how many people will tag bestiality while leaving out anthro_on_feral, human_on_feral or other clarifications. In general, on any kind of post.

That behavioural problem aside, it's such a widespread term that you can't really blame people for going with it whenever they can, and simply invalidating it would cause a ton of confusion.

Updated by anonymous

  • 1