Doing various searches through the forums I've found almost nothing directly on this subject, and most of that was from non-admins.

At what point does genitals being visible through clothing become explicit? At what level of detail is a penis_outline detailed enough for the move from questionable to explicit. The same for camel_toe.

A lot of the comments I found state directly or imply that being covered by clothing, at all, instantly makes it questionable regardless of how skin-tight (so long as it's not directly see-through or otherwise qualifies for explicit from other aspects of the image).

The ratings help page doesn't clear things up signficantly:

Explicit
Any image where the vagina or penis are exposed and easily visible.

This could be interpreted to mean directly visible (no clothing), or clearly visible even through clothing.

The clearest admin statement I could find on the matter was in this forum thread which states:

NotMeNotYou_Mobile said:
Explicit: Anything showing genitals or of adult content (gore and adultery, even if not directly visible).
This also includes easily visible genitals through clothing, penis bulges and cameltoes specifically.

Granted that was from two years ago, but I've also seen user records as little as a year ago chastising an individual for taking explicit rating off of images where genitals were visible through clothing.

I'd really like to hear from the admins what the currently enforced policy is on this, because by either definition there's likely plenty to be fixed...and I'm pretty sure I've contributed to the mess a little in either direction as well.

If it's a penis bulge like a jeans would make it's okay to have it as safe, if it's hugging like tight underwear questionable, and if it's plastered on the skin like a wet swimsuit it's explicit.

At least that is how I deal with that.

In other words, the more detailed the genitalia the higher the rating, when behind clothing.

I brought it up before (can't find the thread though) but yeah this is probably the most difficult thing to consider when adding in a rating...

My issue was the line between safe and questionable though, not questionable and explicit.

Last time I mentioned it the general consensus was that you also have to consider context. For instance, if it's a shirtless guy in his underwear posing seductively on a bed with a barely noticeable bulge... still probably questionable. But if it's a guy standing at a beach with a barely noticeable bulge in his swim trunks, it's probably okay. Hard to draw the line, though.

Here's samples in each category that I'm curious about: (All currently rated questionable.)

Camel Toe Samples:
post #690250 post #683058 post #681861 post #675216 post #673125
The last is more a case of the cloth hardly bothering (or not bothering at all) to cover the outer lips.

Penis Outline Samples:
post #761695 post #513526 post #546743 post #634765 post #282784

Additionally, is the anus considered a genital for the case of rating and, if so, how visible does *it* need to be:

Covered Anus Samples
post #135088 post #687280 post #338287 post #333963 post #768143

I'm also having trouble with those.
There's a lot of posts under penis rating:questionable that I don't know how to rate. Many look like they might warrant an explicit rating, but without guidelines, it's hard to know how to properly rate them.

Surely post #513526, at least, is explicit? And what about the animated penis throb in post #781266? And blatant erections, such as in post #303305?

That second camel toe example looks explicit to me.

I'd think that the overall pose/situation of the character should also impact how explicit it should be rated like for post #722330 where the bulge is clearly visible but the pose itself has nothing explicit at all, so I ended up rating it safe

Neitsuke said:
I'd think that the overall pose/situation of the character should also impact how explicit it should be rated like for post #722330 where the bulge is clearly visible but the pose itself has nothing explicit at all, so I ended up rating it safe

you can literally see his penis bulging through the pants. that makes it questionable. like if it was just uniform bulge then it would be safe but when theres separate additional bulge to show his penis, its questionable.

Yeah I know that, but, like I said, the pose itself has nothing suggestive and it's not like he's getting that erection pushing against those shorts.

To me it should be seen like breasts. You don't jump on the questionable rating because you see them bulge against the shorts, unless the pose or cleavage is very provocative

Neitsuke said:
Yeah I know that, but, like I said, the pose itself has nothing suggestive and it's not like he's getting that erection pushing against those shorts.

To me it should be seen like breasts. You don't jump on the questionable rating because you see them bulge against the shirt, unless the pose or cleavage is very provocative

penis is a sex organ. breasts are not. sex organ poking through pants is questionable. and if i have understood correctly, nipples bulging through shirt gets questionable rating.

I mean the round shape in general and the pose and context. Wet shorts or those tight latex ones would be understandable to be rated questionable, but where the pose has nothing sexual and the bulge being visible because we males happen to have testicles just seem to be over the line to call the rating questionable, but fine by me then

Still find it a bit funny post #135088 is supposedly Questionable.

Peekaboo said:
Still find it a bit funny post #135088 is supposedly Questionable.

..you can see her anus so it should be explicit?

Neitsuke said:
I mean the round shape in general and the pose and context. Wet shorts or those tight latex ones would be understandable to be rated questionable, but where the pose has nothing sexual and the bulge being visible because we males happen to have testicles just seem to be over the line to call the rating questionable, but fine by me then

The pose doesn't have anything to do with the rating, Only the genitals. If the bulge isn't detailed, then it's safe. If the bulge is detailed, then questionable, and if you can literally see their junk, regardless of any material over them, then it's explicit.

Ratings are still something of a mystery to me. Every now and then I'll come across like post #535665 which I think is questionable but apparently it's safe and locked to that rating. I mean would you feel comfortable viewing that in public?

Ko-san said:
The pose doesn't have anything to do with the rating, Only the genitals.

That is completely incorrect, and would leave very little under questionable. Sexual poses are not rated as safe, and genitals don't need to be visible for a post to be rated as explicit.

Genjar said:
That is completely incorrect, and would leave very little under questionable. Sexual poses are not rated as safe, and genitals don't need to be visible for a post to be rated as explicit.

Examples? Especially for those rated explicit without genitals.

Ko-san said:
Examples? Especially for those rated explicit without genitals.

image gets explicit rating if its clear that there are sexual activities going on even if there are no genitals visible

Ko-san said:
Examples? Especially for those rated explicit without genitals.

Sex, sex toys sticking out of unseen orifices, poses that imply masturbation, bodily fluids such as cum, extreme gore, certain hardcore kinks, etc. There's whole lot more to explicit than just genitals.

Genjar said:
Sex, sex toys sticking out of unseen orifices, poses that imply masturbation, bodily fluids such as cum, extreme gore, certain hardcore kinks, etc. There's whole lot more to explicit than just genitals.

I meant actual pictures but seeing as their are thousands of pictures mistagged and rated, that'd be a rather simple task. Though it goes without saying that a dildo popping out from behind someone regardless of viewpoint clearly shows masturbation and cum after or during sex shows, well, sex but something just being kinky shouldn't be rated explicit if it's not explicit and the same goes for gore, though it will likely be tagged as such anyway because of how excessive it is.

Mutisija said:
image gets explicit rating if its clear that there are sexual activities going on even if there are no genitals visible

If it's clear than genitals are implied.

leomole said:
Ratings are still something of a mystery to me. Every now and then I'll come across like post #535665 which I think is questionable but apparently it's safe and locked to that rating. I mean would you feel comfortable viewing that in public?

This is pretty much the reason why I prefer to leave ratings unlocked.

parasprite said:
This is pretty much the reason why I prefer to leave ratings unlocked.

Locking is useful for keeping topless females from being rated as explicit, though.

As for safe posts, yeah, there's always something that needs to be fixed. Whenever I take a look at rating:safe pose order:random, there's always something... For instance, just noticed that this was rated safe:
post #284724