Implicating foreskin_bite → foreskin_play
Link to implication

Reason:

[foreskin_bite], alongside with [foreskin_pull] and [tongue_in_foreskin], should be aliased to [foreskin_play] seeing how those are all practices related to foreskin play.

EDIT: The tag implication foreskin_bite -> foreskin_play (forum #192661) has been rejected by @bitWolfy.

ok but if someone is actually like biting a piece off someone's foreskin or otherwise damaging penis in the process, foreskin bite would still apply but foreskin play would not.

post #65137

Mutisija said:
ok but if someone is actually like biting a piece off someone's foreskin or otherwise damaging penis in the process, foreskin bite would still apply but foreskin play would not.

post #65137

eeek that was worse than I expected ._.

I've made the following changes:

• Implication: foreskin_bite -> foreskin_play (pending)
• Implication: foreskin_pull -> foreskin_play (pending)
• Implication: tongue_in_foreskin -> foreskin_play (pending)

I think the two latter ones make enough sense, but I'm unsure about the former. Thoughts?

The tag implication foreskin_bite -> foreskin_play (forum #192661) has been rejected by @bitWolfy.