The tag implication #47329 feral_penetrating_human -> feral_penetrating_anthro has been rejected.

Reason: I mean humans are anthros aren't they? Unless there is some unspoken need to not call humans anthros this seems like an obvious implication.
Just to be clear I'm saying that feral_penetrating_human should implicate feral_penetrating_anthro, not the other way around, this form is a little vague.

EDIT: The tag implication feral_penetrating_human -> feral_penetrating_anthro (forum #348813) has been rejected by @bitWolfy.

hdkk said:
The tag implication #47329 feral_penetrating_human -> feral_penetrating_anthro has been rejected.

Reason: I mean humans are anthros aren't they? Unless there is some unspoken need to not call humans anthros this seems like an obvious implication.
Just to be clear I'm saying that feral_penetrating_human should implicate feral_penetrating_anthro, not the other way around, this form is a little vague.

Nevermind, I stand corrected. Read the anthro page. Now feel dumb.

hdkk said:
Nevermind, I stand corrected. Read the anthro page. Now feel dumb.

Just as a heads-up, you can "retract" your own alias/implication suggestions by going into the implication details (i.e., implication #47329) and clicking the "Reject" command.

The tag implication feral_penetrating_human -> feral_penetrating_anthro (forum #348813) has been rejected by @bitWolfy.