Way I saw the tag, futa_on_male was just a shorter way of expressing "futa_sexually_engaged_with_male". However, the wiki currently redirects to male_on_futa, distinguishing the portrayed dominance of such engagement.

I'm thinking this is unnecessary.

(This brought to light when I went to add "ふた×男" to the futa_on_male wiki.)

Someone wanted a distinction between the male penetrating the futanari girl and vice versa.

I would tend to lump such pictures together personally, but I do see the difference as significant enough to merit separate tagging as the two have very different sexual overtones and may appeal differently to people.

It's definitely a distinction I've thought about tagging. I can't really think of any tag combinations that could replace the tag either.

Maybe we can just spread femdom onto it? We'd end up with femdom -futanari and futa_on_male femdom (which itself reads redundantly, given the current separation), but right now the relevant images don't seem numerous enough for it to be much of a problem.

Then again, maybe just implicate male_on_futa -> futa_on_male, resulting in futa_on_male -male_on_futa searches for less masculine-dominant images?

...I'm really at a loss here, with how the tags are phrased.

EDIT: Unless we're talking about male penis in futa pussy. But then, wouldn't futa_on_male vaginal suffice for that? Would pegging qualify on futa penis in male anus images?

T5J8F8 said:
Maybe we can just spread femdom onto it?

Femdom implies domination specifically in the BDSM sense, according to the Wiki.

Then again, maybe just implicate male_on_futa -> futa_on_male, resulting in futa_on_male -male_on_futa searches for less masculine-dominant images?

But then how do you separate images where there's clearly a one-way relationship from one where it goes both ways?

EDIT: Unless we're talking about male penis in futa pussy. But then, wouldn't futa_on_male vaginal suffice for that?

What about images in which a guy is going anal on a futa girl? Or images in which it's impossible to tell from perspective?

Would pegging qualify on futa penis in male anus images?

Yes. The wiki for the tag already states that.

---

The problem for me with these tags is that some images simple don't make it clear which way the relationship goes, particularly images in which sex hasn't started yet or in which other sexual acts like fellatio are involved.

e.g.

• post #23172, submissive shota & submissive girl about to have sex
• post #225572, completely equitable

Other issues are images in which penetration and domination aren't synonymous. e.g. post #72227, submissive woman on top getting sucked off by guy.

Personally, I think the whole system needs to be replaced. I propose the following:

Three tags to denote partners without describing who's "on top":

• futa with female (alias futa on female to this)
• futa with futa (alias futa on futa to this)
• futa with male (alias futa on male and male on futa to this)

Two tags to note the futanari girl's role in the relationship:

• futadom
• futasub

Both tags should explicitly note that they do not imply bdsm, just sexual roles. (Edit: They also shouldn't apply to futa-only images.)

Yeah, I think "with" would be a better phrasing.

Did:
create alias futa_on_female -> futa_with_female
create alias futa_on_futa -> futa_with_futa
create alias futa_on_male -> futa_with_male

Do futadom and futasub work as ways of distinguishing the sexual role of the futanari girl, or does anyone have a better idea (for example, to avoid confusion with femdom)?

male_on_futa is still standalone. Whether there should be an alias or not, I just want a "yea" or "nay".

Alright, outright request for:

Aliasing male_on_futa -> futa_with_male
Aliasing female_on_futa -> futa_with_female

That second has no posts, but either case could be handled, as suggested by BTI, new dom/sub tags. However, I feel the pairings themselves would best work grouped with their kin.

Also, would futa_x_male/futa_x_female ("futa cross ___") be better/worse/worth alias?

Wouldn't the "cross" naming scheme be identical to the "on" naming scheme? From my understanding the "cross" system's general form is <Dom> X <Sub>, which would make it identical to the <Dom> on <Sub> naming.

Ah, didn't know that. I was just thinking of the "Street Fighter x Tekken" (and its...reciprocal?).

Street Fighter x Tekken and Tekken x Street Fighter are actually great examples of what NWF is talking about.

Did
create alias male_on_futa -> futa_with_male
create alias female_on_futa -> futa_with_female