The tag implication #49074 food_penetration -> penetration has been rejected.

Reason: Since food is being penetrated, 'food_penetration' should implicate the 'penetration' tag.

EDIT: The tag implication food_penetration -> penetration (forum #354221) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.

is the character going into the food
food insertion is for food going into character

the penetration wiki states that penetration should be used for if a character is being penetrated

Is that food being penetrated, or food doing the penetrating? Would post #3737510 count as penetration?

cutefox123 said:
food penetration is the character going into the food
food insertion is for food going into character

the penetration wiki states that penetration should be used for if a character is being penetrated

So 'diaper_penetration' shouldn't imply 'penetration' even though it currently does?

watsit said:
Is that food being penetrated, or food doing the penetrating? Would post #3737510 count as penetration?

Food being penetrated. I'd count that as penetration but it's probably a grey area when it comes to more open things like that.

monocerus said:
So 'diaper_penetration' shouldn't imply 'penetration' even though it currently does?

I think so, yeah. It's not wrong per se, but it's best to transfer the pentration tag to a valid less vauge penetration_x tag

A diaper could be being penetrated, or... you could be penetrating someone with a diaper, somehow.

I think diaper_penetration is ok, but only if the diapers are being worn. This would make it somewhat a character being penetrated.

Per Watsit's notion, I might go for food_penetration in the use case of food being used to penetration, but at that I think _insertion would be more proper, along the lines of dildo_insertion.

For penetrating food, I'd recommend food_fuck, along the lines of pillow_humping.

urielfrys said:
I think diaper_penetration is ok, but only if the diapers are being worn. This would make it somewhat a character being penetrated.

Per Watsit's notion, I might go for food_penetration in the use case of food being used to penetration, but at that I think _insertion would be more proper, along the lines of dildo_insertion.

For penetrating food, I'd recommend food_fuck, along the lines of pillow_humping.

Yeah 'food_insertion' is already used for food being used to penetrate something/food being inserted. 'food_penetration' is already a separate tag though so it wouldn't make sense for both 'food_insertion' and 'food_penetration' to mean the same thing but be separate tags, right? When I think of 'penetration' I think of something being penetrated. So, 'food_penetration' to me means food being penetrated. It's like how 'anal_penetration' doesn't mean that the anus is doing the penetrating.

'pillow_humping' to me doesn't really imply that the pillow is being penetrated, though, just that the pillow is being humped against.
'food_fuck'/'food_fucking' could work but then why would 'food_penetration' exist as a tag?

I'd suggest food_penetrated if the food is receiving instead, so it's in line with our male_penetrating/male_penetrated standard.

matrixmash said:
I'd suggest food_penetrated if the food is receiving instead, so it's in line with our male_penetrating/male_penetrated standard.

Alright. What is food_penetration used for then?

monocerus said:
Alright. What is food_penetration used for then?

A character penetrating food on their own/another character's orifices?

monocerus said:
Alright. What is food_penetration used for then?

Should probably be aliased away. Either disambiguated, or to food_penetrated or food_insertion, whichever would cause the least headaches for cleanup.

m3g4p0n1 said:
A character penetrating food on their own/another character's orifices?

I'm not quite sure what you mean by that

watsit said:
Should probably be aliased away. Either disambiguated, or to food_penetrated or food_insertion, whichever would cause the least headaches for cleanup.

Well food_insertion is already used for food being inserted, so I guess food_penetrated would be the answer here?

The tag implication food_penetration -> penetration (forum #354221) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.