The tag implication #45574 loose_anus -> loose_orifice is pending approval.

Reason: Self explanatory

Hmm, I figured out how to do BUR today. So, it wasn't staring me in the face, but you can just do BUR and use the script examples they provide in help.

I upvoted these two because I assume that *_orifice is acceptable family of tag variants.

the loose_orifice wiki said:

This tag is for the times when a character's/characters' orifice(s) are DESCRIBED as loose.

hmm... we don't usually do general tags based on dialogue

darryus said:
hmm... we don't usually do general tags based on dialogue

We do actually have some dialogue-based tags like impregnation_request, pet_praise, dirty_talk and begging_for_more. If this was to be kept I'd prefer a more descriptive tag name though, as this will likely just get tagged as the same thing as gaping_anus because nobody actually reads the wiki.

Actually, I can see there's plenty of instances of that already: loose_anus -dialogue

faucet said:
We do actually have some dialogue-based tags like impregnation_request, pet_praise, dirty_talk and begging_for_more. If this was to be kept I'd prefer a more descriptive tag name though, as this will likely just get tagged as the same thing as gaping_anus because nobody actually reads the wiki.

Actually, I can see there's plenty of instances of that already: loose_anus -dialogue

yeah, but most of the dialogue tags are tags that describe the dialogue itself rather than describing something about a character.

-1 because the name is not descriptive enough for what this is apparently supposed to be, like Faucet said.