The tag implication #42349 non-mammal_vulva -> vulva has been rejected.

Reason: a type of pussy should imply pussy

EDIT: The tag implication non-mammal_pussy -> pussy (forum #319868) has been approved by @bitWolfy.

If it's non mammal wouldn't it be a cloaca? Or just a non vagina reproductive organ which the tag is used as?

faucet said:
Reason: a type of pussy should imply pussy

non-mammal_pussy says:
External mammalian pussy on any non-mammalian species.

That sounds like a misnomer of a tag. Unlike humanoid_pussy, which means a humanoid-style pussy regardless of what it's on, non-mammal_pussy means a mammalian-style pussy on a non-mammal.

watsit said:
That sounds like a misnomer of a tag. Unlike humanoid_pussy, which means a humanoid-style pussy regardless of what it's on, non-mammal_pussy means a mammalian-style pussy on a non-mammal.

It’s meant to follow the format of non-mammal_breasts and non-mammal_balls and so on. But, yeah, this one sounds confusing.

To my knowledge, however, there is no such thing as a non-mammal pussy in nature, just like there are no non-mammal breasts or balls, all of these being features exclusive to mammals. So… the tag makes sense, it just sounds confusing.

I would have though non-mammals do have pussies. You should be referring to the shape, not class.

furrin_gok said:
I would have though non-mammals do have pussies. You should be referring to the shape, not class.

I don’t know of any that don’t have a cloaca or something instead.

The tag implication non-mammal_pussy -> pussy (forum #319868) has been approved by @bitWolfy.