mammary intercourse
Enable an agent to recognise and describe mammary intercourse as a sexual activity, distinguish it from neighbouring acts, and record consent and uncertainty without inferring unreported details.
Research draft, second pass
A second pass drafted this model: the structure a model of this thing needs, and what is known about it in the world. The line under this one says how the second half was obtained - researched against sources, or recalled without web access, in which case nothing here was read anywhere and every claim is a lead to verify. Unreviewed either way.
recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read
Researched by: Codex
Purpose and description
Enable an agent to recognise and describe mammary intercourse as a sexual activity, distinguish it from neighbouring acts, and record consent and uncertainty without inferring unreported details.
Mammary intercourse is a nonpenetrative sexual activity in which a penis is stimulated through contact between a partner's breasts.
It can be Classify a non-graphic activity description when defining contact is sufficiently clear.; Distinguish mammary intercourse from other breast-related sexual activities.; Record participant roles and expressed boundaries without inferring identities.; Flag missing or withdrawn consent information without treating silence as agreement.; Link separately described co-occurring activities to their own models.; Request minimal, non-graphic clarification when terminology or occurrence is ambiguous..
Distinguishing features
The description identifies sexual contact involving both a penis and a partner's breasts; breast contact alone is insufficient.
Manual or oral breast stimulation without the defining anatomical contact belongs to neighbouring activity models.
The activity label does not by itself establish vaginal, anal or oral intercourse.
A mention, fantasy or depiction of the activity is distinguishable from a report that it occurred.
Classification concerns the activity rather than the participants' gender, relationship or sexual orientation.
Scope
+ The anatomical contact that identifies the activity
+ Participant roles without assumptions about gender or relationship
+ Distinction between the activity and other breast-related sexual contact
+ Activity-specific consent, boundaries and changes in willingness
+ Evidence supporting classification of a reported activity
- Breast anatomy and physiology as independent subjects
- Other sexual activities occurring before, during or after this activity
- Sexual orientation, gender identity and relationship classification
- Individual medical assessment, diagnosis or treatment
- Erotic depictions and instructions for performing the activity
Characteristics
- Reported contact configuration
- Defining contact explicitly reported | ambiguous breast-related contact | other contact | unspecified Supports recognition without treating every sexual interaction involving breasts as this activity.
- Participant role
- Participant associated with penis contact | participant associated with breast contact | unspecified Describes involvement without substituting gender labels for anatomical roles.
- Occurrence status
- Mentioned | proposed | reported ongoing | reported completed | reported stopped | unknown Separates discussion of the activity from evidence of its occurrence.
- Activity-specific consent record
- Explicitly reported agreement | explicitly reported refusal | explicitly reported withdrawal | unclear | unrecorded Prevents agreement to another sexual activity from being treated as agreement to this one.
- Reported boundaries
- Participant-linked permissions, exclusions and stop conditions | unrecorded Preserves the scope of each participant's expressed agreement.
- Terminology basis
- Participant wording | source-defined term | description-based classification | unresolved Distinguishes use of a label from evidence that its defining features are present.
- Co-occurring activities
- Links to separately identified activities | none reported | unknown Keeps a mixed encounter from being reduced to a single activity label.
Also called
Where this came from
wikidata · CC0 1.0
Drafted structure
Bundle to layer to finding to question, as the second pass will find it: 5 bundles · 9 layers · 12 findings · 20 questions.
Activity identity The defining contact and terminology used to recognise mammary intercourse.
The registry has no definition, so recognition requires an explicit provisional boundary.
Defining contact
Identify the anatomical relationship that separates this activity from broader breast stimulation.
Contact-based recognition
Use reported penis-breast sexual contact as the provisional recognition criterion, retaining ambiguity where the description is insufficient.
- Does the description explicitly identify sexual contact between a penis and a partner's breasts? definition
- Could the description instead refer only to manual or oral breast stimulation? boundary
Term interpretation
Separate the registry term from colloquial labels and source-specific meanings.
Label and description
Retain the original wording and distinguish a source's label from the agent's classification.
- Who used the term, and did that source define its meaning? provenance
- Does the reported contact support the label, or is classification based solely on the label? boundary
Participants and consent Participant involvement and agreement specific to the identified breast-related activity.
Anatomical involvement does not establish identity, willingness or permission for other contact.
Anatomical roles
Describe the roles needed to identify the act while avoiding unsupported personal attributes.
Roles without identity inference
Represent the reported penis-contact and breast-contact roles independently of gender and relationship labels.
- Which participant roles are explicitly reported for this activity? definition
- Which personal attributes remain unknown and should not be inferred from those roles? boundary
Specific agreement
Track expressed agreement and limits for this activity separately from the surrounding encounter.
Breast-contact permissions
Record whether agreement explicitly covers the identified activity and whether a participant has limited or withdrawn it.
- What evidence records each participant's agreement to this activity specifically? provenance
- Has either participant expressed a boundary or withdrawal that requires the activity to stop or the proposed activity not to proceed? action
Episode and neighbouring acts Distinguish the activity's occurrence and extent within an encounter containing potentially different acts.
An encounter-level label can obscure whether mammary intercourse occurred and which contact belongs to another model.
Occurrence and state
Separate references to the act from reported episodes and their current state.
Mention versus occurrence
A proposal, preference or depiction does not establish that participants engaged in the activity.
- Is this a mention, proposal, depiction or report of an actual episode? boundary
- If an episode is reported, is its state ongoing, completed, stopped or unknown? measurement
Encounter segmentation
Keep the defining contact distinct from other sexual activities in the same account.
Separate activity links
Represent explicitly described neighbouring acts separately rather than importing them into this activity's definition.
- Which reported parts of the encounter satisfy this activity's defining contact criterion? boundary
- Which other explicitly reported activities require links to neighbouring models? action
Evidence and description limits The basis and limits of claims made when applying this sensitive activity label.
A colloquial label or incomplete account can support fewer conclusions than an agent might otherwise infer.
Classification evidence
Track the source and sufficiency of evidence for identifying the activity.
Supported classification
Distinguish explicit description, participant terminology and uncertain interpretation when assigning the registry identifier.
- What source supports assigning vr.tr.mammary-intercourse to this account? provenance
- What minimal non-graphic clarification would resolve uncertainty between this activity and other breast-related contact? action
Unsupported inferences
Limit conclusions about experience and outcomes to what the account actually reports.
Outcomes not implied
The activity label alone does not establish enjoyment, orgasm, ejaculation, discomfort or any medical outcome.
- Which experiences or outcomes are explicitly reported rather than assumed from the activity label? provenance
- Does a requested conclusion require a separate clinical or participant-experience model? boundary
Evidence and external alignment What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.
A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.
Reported evidence
Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.
Check these first
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- The definition reflects the usual narrow meaning; terminology may vary across sources.
- No standardized subtype taxonomy or dedicated identifier is confidently recalled.
- Health risks depend on the specific contact and circumstances; no activity-specific risk estimates are supplied.
- Which of these check these first hold for the sense of mammary intercourse this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Real-world use
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Consensual partnered sexual activity.
- A descriptive category in sexology and sexual-behaviour research.
- Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of mammary intercourse this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Failure modes and hazards
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Friction may cause skin irritation or discomfort.
- Contact can transmit some sexually transmitted infections through exposed infected skin or lesions.
- Lack of freely given, ongoing consent makes the activity nonconsensual.
- Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of mammary intercourse this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Nonpenetrative sex - The broader category includes sexual activities without bodily penetration; mammary intercourse specifies contact between the breasts and a penis.
- Breast stimulation - Breast stimulation encompasses many forms of contact with the breasts and does not necessarily involve a penis.
- Intercrural intercourse - Intercrural intercourse involves contact between the thighs rather than between the breasts.
- Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of mammary intercourse this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
What the second pass must settle
- Which authoritative reference sources define the term, and how consistently do they delimit it from broader penis-breast sexual contact?
- Does established usage require contact involving both breasts, or does it include contact involving one breast?
- How do clinical, survey and colloquial classifications relate mammary intercourse to broader categories such as non-penetrative sexual activity?
- Which alternative names are demonstrably equivalent, and which denote broader or narrower activities?
- Does an existing Vercy world model already cover this concept and therefore need to be linked instead of creating a separate publication?