Topic: [REJECTED] Tag implication: oral_autoknotting -> oral_knotting

The tag implication #70340 oral_autoknotting -> oral_knotting has been rejected.

Reason: EDIT: I've explained this better two comments below. Oral knotting is ambiguous refering to context as it can be used both in situations with a partner and in solo (or not) masturbation situations with sex toys that have knots, so it is not exclusive to sex. Again, see below for further explanation with examples.

EDIT 2: After further discussion I'm adding this request to the BUR of topic #60398 and cancelling the individual request here.

The tag implication oral_autoknotting -> oral_knotting (forum #471944) has been rejected by @UrizRead.

Usually the auto[act] tags don't imply the [act] tag, usually because [act] is sex and auto[act] is masturbation

Though there are cases such as autopenetration, which implies penetration.

The question is whether oral_knotting is a sex act (which would preclude oral_autoknotting since it would count as masturbation), or if it is a more general descriptor.

In the former case, it would be best to keep the two tags entirely separate, and in the latter the question is whether it is too specific for a tag, and can be replaced by oral knotting + penis_in_own_mouth

snpthecat said:
Usually the auto[act] tags don't imply the [act] tag, usually because [act] is sex and auto[act] is masturbation

Though there are cases such as autopenetration, which implies penetration.

The question is whether oral_knotting is a sex act (which would preclude oral_autoknotting since it would count as masturbation), or if it is a more general descriptor.

In the former case, it would be best to keep the two tags entirely separate, and in the latter the question is whether it is too specific for a tag, and can be replaced by oral knotting + penis_in_own_mouth

I've just made a similar BUR for other implications in topic #60398 and since this and that one are related I've also explained there what I'm going to write now:

You are right that some acts that imply fun with others, like fellatio, don't have similarly named tags used for masturbation like autofellatio implied to it but instead are implied to oral_masturbation; and this case would technically follow the same logic if it weren't because the act of knotting is more open to be interpreted in more ways than sex, like knotting a toy, a pumpkin, yourself (ouch my spine!)... Heck even using a dog dildo to do all this would still use the knotting tag, and the oral_knotting if you did your (or others) mouth. Look at examples like knotting sex_toy solo or oral knotting sex_toy solo.

By all this I still defend oral_autoknotting should imply to oral_knotting.

The tag implication oral_autoknotting -> oral_knotting (forum #471944) has been rejected by @UrizRead.