The bulk update request #10895 is pending approval.

create implication forced_asphyxiation (118) -> forced (101577)
create implication forced_asphyxiation (118) -> asphyxiation (12797)
create implication forced_arousal (92) -> forced (101577)
create implication forced_bondage (650) -> forced (101577)
create implication forced_bondage (650) -> bondage (122625)
create implication forced_spreading (1052) -> forced (101577)
create implication forced_spreading (1052) -> spreading (383959)
create implication forced_spreading_legs (803) -> forced_spreading (1052)
create implication forced_spreading_legs (803) -> spread_legs (320927)
create implication forced_spreading_arms (330) -> forced_spreading (1052)
create implication forced_gag (343) -> forced (101577)
create implication forced_gag (343) -> gagged (29293)
create implication forced_muzzle (212) -> forced (101577)
create implication forced_muzzle (212) -> muzzled (7925)
create implication forced_anal (1645) -> forced_penetration (401)
create implication forced_vaginal (423) -> forced_penetration (401)
create implication forced_fellatio (477) -> forced_penetration (401)

Reason: Creating implications for various forced tags that don't have them. I also have some related BURs in the following posts.

I feel like the "reverse forced" tags should also implicate forced_to_penetrate, but that tag has a very specific definition that doesn't always apply to those circumstances. forced_ejaculation should also logically implicate forced_orgasm, but that tag has similar problems.

The bulk update request #10896 is pending approval.

create implication reverse_forced_anal (61) -> rape (51144)
create implication reverse_forced_oral (1419) -> rape (51144)
create implication forced_oral (12240) -> rape (51144)
create implication forced_penetration (401) -> rape (51144)
create implication forced_to_penetrate (202) -> rape (51144)

Reason: Given that "forced sex" is aliased to rape, I think that forced sex acts should implicate rape (which implicates forced transitively).

The bulk update request #10897 is pending approval.

remove alias forced_to_ride (0) -> forced_to_top (99)
mass update forced_to_top -> forced_to_bottom

Reason: I'm not clear why being forced to be penetrated is called "forced to top"? Isn't a "top" the penetrating partner?

alias forced_to_ride -> forced_to_bottom

beholding said:
Reason: I'm not clear why being forced to be penetrated is called "forced to top"? Isn't a "top" the penetrating partner?

I'm not even sure what the wiki is trying to say:

Someone is in a position where they would normally control how much they are penetrated, but instead they're being forced to move to be penetrated against their will. A female lying on her back doesn't count; the penetrated body part must be moving against its owners' will.

Sounds a bit TWYK-y, what a character "would normally" do can't really be conveyed visually. Is there a big difference between this and forced_penetration?

beholding said:
The bulk update request #10896 is pending approval.

create implication reverse_forced_anal (61) -> rape (51144)
create implication reverse_forced_oral (1419) -> rape (51144)
create implication forced_oral (12240) -> rape (51144)
create implication forced_penetration (401) -> rape (51144)
create implication forced_to_penetrate (202) -> rape (51144)

Reason: Given that "forced sex" is aliased to rape, I think that forced sex acts should implicate rape (which implicates forced transitively).

The only reason I would say no to this batch in particular is that forced_oral has a LOT of posts that aren't conventional rape, they're just really dominant/caught off guard/pushed into the act deeper than they were prepared to go. A good example is throat_swabbing but when they cum, they go all the way in and the recipient is struggling for breath until they pull out. Stuff like that

watsit said:
I'm not even sure what the wiki is trying to say:
Sounds a bit TWYK-y, what a character "would normally" do can't really be conveyed visually. Is there a big difference between this and forced_penetration?

No idea on that wiki's moonspeak, but forced_penetration doesn't denote which person is being forced

nin10dope said:
The only reason I would say no to this batch in particular is that forced_oral has a LOT of posts that aren't conventional rape, they're just really dominant/caught off guard/pushed into the act deeper than they were prepared to go. A good example is throat_swabbing but when they cum, they go all the way in and the recipient is struggling for breath until they pull out. Stuff like that

I'd say that still counts. A partner performing an unwanted sex act during otherwise consensual sex is still rape.

The bulk update request #10910 is pending approval.

remove alias forced_to_ride (0) -> forced_to_top (99)
create alias forced_to_top (99) -> forced_penetration (401) # has blocking transitive relationships, cannot be applied through bur

Reason: Alternative to bulk update request #10897 for those who prefer forced_to_top be retired.

beholding said:
I'd say that still counts. A partner performing an unwanted sex act during otherwise consensual sex is still rape.

Being surprised with an automatic response to breath isn't necessarily unwanted. No more than any other time sex happens with a surprised and/or pained expression anyway, which doesn't automatically count as rape. Though I wouldn't necessarily say that's forced_oral either, as the oral itself wasn't forced, they just went deeper than expected. forced_* tags should only apply when the act is apparently unwanted, not simply using muscular force to accomplish something (e.g. a fully engorged knot being shoved into someone's anus isn't automatically forced_anal/forced, despite the muscular force needed to do it, because it's not necessarily unwanted).

beholding said:
mass update forced_to_top -> forced_to_bottom

Reason: I'm not clear why being forced to be penetrated is called "forced to top"? Isn't a "top" the penetrating partner?

I think this is a good reason to avoid using "top" and "bottom" in the context of penetration, since they can be confused for physical positioning rather than penetration (forced_to_ride, which is aliased to forced_to_top, would mean a character is forced to ride another, while "riding" in the sex position sense means the character is penetrated while on top). forced_to_penetrate is more clearly indicating which way the penetration is going instead of forced_to_top, and maybe something like penetrated_by_force instead of forced_to_bottom.

beholding said:
I'd say that still counts. A partner performing an unwanted sex act during otherwise consensual sex is still rape.

I still have to say a rather hard No to it, because the search of forced_oral and -rape gives 187 pages (50 posts per page)
And also another big factor in the tag's use is literally anytime someone who isn't the person performing oral pushes/pulls said person on the head
So there's thousands of posts that would be erroneously be given a contentious tag. (I think rape is still in that category)

nin10dope said:
I still have to say a rather hard No to it, because the search of forced_oral and -rape gives 187 pages (50 posts per page)
And also another big factor in the tag's use is literally anytime someone who isn't the person performing oral pushes/pulls said person on the head
So there's thousands of posts that would be erroneously be given a contentious tag. (I think rape is still in that category)

Eh, I think I agree with Watsit on this: Those posts shouldn't have been tagged "forced" in the first place. rape is already a bit subjective, since it's often tagged purely based on characters' visual expressions.

beholding said:
Eh, I think I agree with Watsit on this: Those posts shouldn't have been tagged "forced" in the first place. rape is already a bit subjective, since it's often tagged purely based on characters' visual expressions.

That's a fair argument about the existence of forced_oral, but its use is extremely vast. It would tag a massive amount of effort to remove the tag from posts that aren't rape, that's what I was warning about.