Topic: Tag Implication: condom_in_mouth -> object_in_mouth

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

Genjar

Former Staff

Might as well, though the tag itself seems worthless.
It's only been tagged for 300 posts after a few years, and most of those were added by the same user.

Which is pretty low, considering that (for instance) most of smoking would need the object_in_mouth tag.

Updated by anonymous

Genjar said:
Which is pretty low, considering that (for instance) most of smoking would need the object_in_mouth tag.

Maybe not most. Many of them have the cigarette, cigar, etc. in their hand.

mouth_hold is used a lot more than object_in_mouth is (1131 vs. 319). It also makes more sense to claim they're holding the condom with their mouth as oppose to placing the condom in their mouth.

Updated by anonymous

Genjar

Former Staff

BlueDingo said:
Maybe not most. Many of them have the cigarette, cigar, etc. in their hand.

Fair enough. Gag might've been a better example.
In any case, it's only been tagged to a small fraction of applicable posts.

mouth_hold is used a lot more than object_in_mouth is (1131 vs. 319). It also makes more sense to claim they're holding the condom with their mouth as oppose to placing the condom in their mouth.

I've been wary of using that one, mostly because it doesn't seem to differentiate between objects and living things.

post #699927 post #1068088

Updated by anonymous

Genjar said:
Fair enough. Gag might've been a better example.
In any case, it's only been tagged to a small fraction of applicable posts.

Not all types (ball_gag, yes. bit-gag, mostly no) and even then, only if a character is gagged.

Genjar said:
I've been wary of using that one, mostly because it doesn't seem to differentiate between objects and living things.

post #699927 post #1068088

We don't have a living thing equivalent, do we? mouth_carry might work, provided it doesn't get confused with body_in_mouth.

Updated by anonymous