So apparently e621 has an ejaculating_cum tag with over 2k posts. Since we have various cum-related tags, I was planning on making an implication/alias request. However I’ve come across a dilemma (or rather a trilemma) on what request to make.

At first I was thinking of implicating ejaculating_cum to the ejaculation tag, since (as the name suggests) it’s a form of ejaculation. This would also fit well with the pussy_ejaculation and cloaca_ejaculation implications.

Then I noticed that e621 has a a cumshot tag, which according to the wiki is “A character in the process of ejaculating cum”. So I was planning on aliasing ejaculating_cum with cumshot, but then I realised that cumshot is only used for “external use only” (also stated in the wiki). What if cum is ejaculated inside something?

Basically, I’m stumped. Which is why I’d like to ask you: What should we do with the ejaculating_cum tag?
Should it imply ejaculation? Should it be aliased to cumshot? Or should it remain as it is?

Perhaps you have a better idea?

I'd alias it to ejaculation. I'd also argue that cumshot should be reserved for when the cum is in the air.

zenith-pendragon said:
At first I was thinking of implicating ejaculating_cum to the ejaculation tag, since (as the name suggests) it’s a form of ejaculation. This would also fit well with the pussy_ejaculation and cloaca_ejaculation implications.

If you want parity with pussy_ejaculation and cloaca_ejaculation, then the tag would be penis_ejaculation (or do penile_ and cloacal_, but vaginal_ would be incorrect). We don't actually have a penis-specific tag for ejaculation. Ejaculating penises have always just been tagged ejaculation. We could do better.

Then I noticed that e621 has a a cumshot tag, which according to the wiki is “A character in the process of ejaculating cum”. So I was planning on aliasing ejaculating_cum with cumshot, but then I realised that cumshot is only used for “external use only” (also stated in the wiki). What if cum is ejaculated inside something?

The cumshot wiki literally gives instructions for cum_inside. But perhaps you want a 2022-23 solution instead of using instructions from 2016 when things were simpler and worse. I don't really care about what we thought was correct in the past when we have current issues that could be solved--if they are indeed issues needing solving--and the old thinking gets in the way of progress. I'm sure tags like cumming_inside, internal_cumshot (self-contradicting name), and cum_while_penetrating are aliased to cum_inside to reduce bloat, but you'd want to collect those tags and instead alias them to a new tag for cumming inside. Penis_ejaculating_inside or just ejaculation_inside and assume that it's cum. Even at 144K uses, ejaculation is severely undertagged (see sex cum_inside -ejaculation), so any handy combo tags that help tag it via implication are good.

Basically, I’m stumped. Which is why I’d like to ask you: What should we do with the ejaculating_cum tag?
Should it imply ejaculation? Should it be aliased to cumshot? Or should it remain as it is?

Perhaps you have a better idea?

If you follow what I said above, then the alias would be to a new penis_ejaculation tag.

My vote to [ Alias: ejaculating_cum > ejaculation ]

For me it does sparkle some questions at par, mostly on "Why does the tag exists on the first place?" given that the tag is kinda redundant and has no real counterparts (besides one single entry for ejaculating_fire and maybe those two entries on ejaculating_testicle)
I might be a dum-dum tho since not a native so it can fall on linguistics and such, or I might be thinking it all wrong. Who knows

I, too, think it should just be aliased to ejaculation.

However, abadbird brings up multiple great points. The wikis of the several related tags involved in this mess should be clarified, and we should see what we can do to make sure ejaculation in general is better tagged, starting with the obvious first step: reevaluating it's implications.

LOL, as compared to what, milk and coffee?

Yeah, this is one of THOSE tags. It's just a redundant way of saying ejaculation.

I thought a large part of male ejaculation not being it's own tag, was TWYS and practicality? With animations and certain art styles, it's kind of obvious though.

Very valid points there, abadbird. There should definitely be some kind of revision on how ejaculation tags are defined. However, it may be a bit difficult to redefine them all, since it could affect many of the over 144k ejaculation posts currently on e621. Not many users would be willing to retag a large number of posts.

Why is there such a superfluous tag to begin with? Who ejaculates anything other than semen?

This tag was first proposed for removal two years ago in topic #28154. Despite the scuffed nature of that alias, I can't see a single person who thinks this tag isn't redundant.

+1 to ejaculation for me. If people want to see anything else, they can continue to search for unusual_cum instead.

The bulk update request #4121 has been rejected.

create alias ejaculating_cum (0) -> ejaculation (195379)

Reason: Redundant. See above discussion

EDIT: The bulk update request #4121 (forum #357277) has been rejected by @Cloudpie.

The bulk update request #4121 (forum #357277) has been rejected by @Cloudpie.

already aliased :)