The tag implication #46756 body_in_mouth -> oral_vore has been rejected.

Reason: When someone is in a mouth, it is "oral_vore". So "body_in_mouth" implies "oral_vore".
It should be an implication and not an alias because it could be oral_vore and not body_in_mouth if it's before the prey is fully in the mouth or if the prey is already a bit further.

Edit : I changed my mind. Hungrymaple has shown that if someone goes into a mouth and then descends without being swallowed, there is "body_in_mouth" without "oral_vore".
I cancel the submission.

EDIT: The tag implication body_in_mouth -> oral_vore (forum #343795) has been rejected by @Mikael_the_D.

Someone's body can be in another's mouth without being vore.

mikael_the_d said:
The tag implication #46756 body_in_mouth -> oral_vore has been rejected.

Reason: When someone is in a mouth, it is "oral_vore". So "body_in_mouth" implies "oral_vore".
It should be an implication and not an alias because it could be oral_vore and not body_in_mouth if it's before the prey is fully in the mouth or if the prey is already a bit further.

Oral vore is when someone is being or has been consumed orally.

A character catching, holding, carrying a smaller creature/character in their mouth, or having them sit on their tongue, or the character is partially in their mouth for sexual reasons isn't (inherently) vore, conflating the two tags only makes it less specific and less useful.

hungrymaple said:
Oral vore is when someone is being or has been consumed orally.

If oral_vore mean being consumed, then if later there is regurgitation or full_tour then it is not oral_vore.
I don't agree with this but I get that there must at least be swallowing at some point for being oral_vore.

The tag implication body_in_mouth -> oral_vore (forum #343795) has been rejected by @Mikael_the_D.