Topic: [BUR] x_exchange -> x_transfusion

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

The bulk update request #3857 is pending approval.

create alias cum_exchange (556) -> cum_transfusion (0) # duplicate of has blocking transitive relationships, cannot be applied through bur
create alias urine_exchange (45) -> urine_transfusion (0)
create alias milk_exchange (13) -> milk_transfusion (0)
create alias feces_exchange (23) -> feces_transfusion (0)
create alias egg_exchange (3) -> egg_transfusion (0)
create implication cum_transfusion (0) -> bodily_fluid_transfusion (0)
create implication urine_transfusion (0) -> bodily_fluid_transfusion (0)
create implication milk_transfusion (0) -> bodily_fluid_transfusion (0)
create implication blood_transfusion (4) -> bodily_fluid_transfusion (0)
create implication bodily_fluid_transfusion (0) -> transfusion (0)
create implication feces_transfusion (0) -> transfusion (0)
create implication egg_transfusion (0) -> transfusion (0)

Reason: cum_exchange has been around for a while, and while I do find the concept useful to tag, the name has never sit right with me. About 2 years ago (see topic #27963), I made a very confused attempt at formalizing the broader concept (alongside the even more vague "transfer" group, to make things worse) and added a handful of companion tags. This BUR renames them all to use "transfusion" instead.

The idea is that "blood transfusion" is a term that's broadly understood, with a definition along the lines of "you put more blood in someone's blood tubes and now they have more blood". Reusing "transfusion" for what's currently being labeled as *_exchange is meant to convey something more like "you put more blood cum in someone's blood cum tubes and now they have more blood cum".

Alongside this change comes a slight, but significant adjustment to the definitions, making them looser, hopefully for the better. The current definition for cum_exchange reads as follows:

Cumming into someone else's penis and inside their balls, either directly through urethral_penetration (usually penis_in_penis) or through intermediate tubing (possibly a urethral_tube) connecting both penises.

That description puts a restriction where there clearly needs to be two participants, the cum in question is not supposed to come from a "cold source" like some sort of "cum bag" or "cum tank". To avoid confusion, the new description would lift this requirement. The same applies to the other exchange tags. I will be adding a note in the new description that these are "usually done through same-orifice_transfer (urethral_transfer, anal_transfer, nipple_transfer, etc.)" as well, to highlight how that may not always be the case.

I am aware that feces_transfusion and egg_transfusion are both improper, since "transfusion" is only said of a fluid, which is why the real life procedure for the former is called "stool transplant", for instance. This is intentionnal, so I can group them all under the same paret tag without having the name vary across the tag group, but I would be willing to change that if good points are brought up in that regard.

I can't say I like the term "transfusion" here. It makes me think of the medical procedure where stuff is extracted from one person then injected into another with the help of external tools and/or people, not simply X is giving to Y while Y is giving to X. A transfusion can also be one-way, while an exchange is two-way.

watsit said:
A transfusion can also be one-way, while an exchange is two-way.

I believe that's what cum_exchange was trying to cover back when it had 10 posts and no wiki. IIRC it was pretty much all animations showing the cum flowing both ways in succession, but it's been years since it has meant this.

As for the rest, medical instruments aside, "exctracted from one person then going into another" is mostly the correct definition. Exchange currently does not (currently) specify it having to flow bith ways.

  • 1