Aiasing cum_in_hair to cum_on_hair.

Reason: same thing.

One is worked in, one is just resting atop?

123easy said:
One is worked in, one is just resting atop?

I'm not sure. I could see how the later could be used for the act of jizzing on the hair, and the first is an image where the character already has the spooge in his/her hair. I'm just not really convinced we need that distinction.

In makes more sense. You never say "Oh no, I got ___ on my hair!"

I agree with RedOctober. One if for the act of cumming on someone's hair, the other is for when there's already cum in someone's hair. So there is a difference, but I don't think it's necessary to make that difference.

Wahai said:
I agree with RedOctober. One if for the act of cumming on someone's hair, the other is for when there's already cum in someone's hair. So there is a difference, but I don't think it's necessary to make that difference.

But you wouldn't tag cum_on_hair or cum_in_hair if someone's in the process of getting cum on their hair, it's for if there is cum on their hair. Tag what you see. But since you can't get cum inside your strands of hair, only on them, I say that the alias is good.

Ultima_Weapon said:
But you wouldn't tag cum_on_hair or cum_in_hair if someone's in the process of getting cum on their hair, it's for if there is cum on their hair. Tag what you see. But since you can't get cum inside your strands of hair, only on them, I say that the alias is good.

Generally when we talk about in hair, it means mixed between the strands of hair. Not that we can see that of course.

It's still on the hair though. There really doesn't need to be a difference.

hair in this case is not referring to individual follicles. Trying to make it seem as such is silly at best. Cum_in_hair is the appropriate tag. I made my initial post as a bit of a joke, but seriously- If someone has someone else cumming on their hair, the act of cumming is occuring, but unless the cum is already on the hair it's merely aimed in that direction- Whether it will end up on the hair or not is an unknown factor, and falls outside tag what you see. However, if the cum has already landed on the hair, regardless of if further cum is illustrated as incoming, there already is cum in the subject's hair.

Another, much easier precedent- You say gum in hair, not gum on hair. It's one letter off.

123easy said:
If someone has someone else cumming on their hair, the act of cumming is occuring, but unless the cum is already on the hair it's merely aimed in that direction- Whether it will end up on the hair or not is an unknown factor, and falls outside tag what you see.

How would that possibly fall outside of tag what you see?

Ultima_Weapon said:
How would that possibly fall outside of tag what you see?

Because if they're cumming but it hasn't actually landed, cum isn't on/in the hair. Thus to tag it "cum_on/in_hair" would be false.

123easy said:
Because if they're cumming but it hasn't actually landed, cum isn't on/in the hair. Thus to tag it "cum_on/in_hair" would be false.

I know that it wouldn't be tagged with cum_on/in_hair, but that doesn't really negate tag what you see, since you can see that the cum hasn't touched the hair.

...If you were to tag it cum_on/in_hair, in that situation, being that of cum flying towards said hair but not actually illustrated as landed, it would fall outside tag what you can see. Good lord, do you really lack the ability to make such basic logical progression? >_>

123easy said:
...If you were to tag it cum_on/in_hair, in that situation, being that of cum flying towards said hair but not actually illustrated as landed, it would fall outside tag what you can see. Good lord, do you really lack the ability to make such basic logical progression? >_>

Nope. Tag what you see means that we know that there isn't any cum in or on the hair, so it wouldn't be tagged as such. I'm not sure what you're talking about saying that tag what you see doesn't apply though, since that's generally the rule around here.