The tag implication #47328 penisjob -> cockjob has been rejected.

Reason: Both have the exact same description, separation does not seem necessary. I assume since cockjob has more posts to it, it would be the one to "take over" the two.

EDIT: The tag implication penisjob -> cockjob (forum #348806) has been rejected by @Kez_the_Moth.

Do you mean for this to be an alias?

Yes, for an alias. And maybe vice versa because it's less slangy. + a frottage implication.

strikerman said:
Do you mean for this to be an alias?

Right, sorry, new to this. Do I just delete this and post again as request alias?

kez_the_moth said:
Right, sorry, new to this. Do I just delete this and post again as request alias?

Don't hide the thread. That won't delete anything, but will irritate people. Just click on implication #47328 and you should be able to reject your implication request there. You can then request alias as you'd intended, although I agree with DubsTheFox that cockjob should alias to penisjob.

Is this technically a form of frottage?

faucet said:
Is this technically a form of frottage?

Yes, both should be aliased to that probably.

demesejha said:
Yes, both should be aliased to that probably.

I wouldn't say so. Penisjob adds the factor that one of them is twisting their penis around another one. I can see that some people want to search for this specifically.

The tag implication penisjob -> cockjob (forum #348806) has been rejected by @Kez_the_Moth.