I don''t know when the change from nudity, like having breasts exposed for example, went from 'explicit' to 'questionable'. But I see a lot of them being questionable, so I'm guessing I missed a change notice somewhere? lol.

EDIT: I realized I mentioned breasts, I meant the nipples on the breasts. I always believed that was considered explicit.

I'm not sure how people here specifically tag the ratings on such posts but I normally would tag posts with exposed nipples(on females) with the "questionable" rating if the character has no genitalia shown and is not in a sexually suggestive pose.

Similarly to how some artists on FA tag nude characters that have breasts and nipples exposed but no genitalia shown, with the "mature" rating.

The ratings help page did not specifically mention how exposed nipples should be rated, probably because nipples can also be used with male characters.

I guess it's also bit what culture you are in. I know in some places it's considered mature content if nipple even sligtly shows up, thus why sometimes breasts are kept, just shown in all differend angles (sideboob, underboob, etc.) and nipples either hidden or removed.

But all the differend angles of boob are still considered safe everywhere, unless person is being super suggestive or wearing underwear instead of bikini. I have seen female nipples in so many TV shows and games that are 12 rated as it covers nudity, 16+ covers sexual activity only. So if we go with three scales, female nipples aren't completely safe for work, but they can't be considered as completely mature content either, meaning they fall under questionable.

TheGreatWolfgang said:
The ratings help page did not specifically mention how exposed nipples should be rated, probably because nipples can also be used with male characters.

Questionable for everything in between, such as topless females and suggestive poses,] says checklist on wiki.

Visible nipples are questionable, and that has been the case for years now.

It's possible that the images you were looking at were marked as explicit because there was a barely visible vagina.

Or simply misrated.
breasts -pussy -penis -sex rating:explicit -cum -masturbation -sex_toy finds about 16000 posts, and nearly half of those are misrated. (The rest are usually missing some tag such as pussy.)

Nudity can also fall under nude breasts rating:safe, mostly because there's nothing particularly suggestive about the image.

But something like nudity spreading_legs featureless_crotch would lean precariously over to a rating:questionable tag because the physical posture can sometimes imply sexuality.

GameManiac said:
non-suggestive nudity is safe, suggestive nudity is questionable.

Not to deviate off topic, but you reminded me to ask about post #877877 , an animated gif that's tagged safe, but has a little X anus. I do not know if some ratings can be changed because of the content in the image, so would this be tagged explicit, or remain safe?

Siral_Exan said:
Not to deviate off topic, but you reminded me to ask about post #877877 , an animated gif that's tagged safe, but has a little X anus. I do not know if some ratings can be changed because of the content in the image, so would this be tagged explicit, or remain safe?

Well, I don't really see an anus. I see an "X" where that Flygon's anus should be.

It actually reminds me of of this Zangoose image I recall uploading a couple of months ago.

post #836241

It's most likely rated questionable because of a somewhat suggestive posture, big butt, and being bottomless.

Neither of them are telltale anuses, and certainly not the gaping maws that would outright mark the image as explicit.

GameManiac said:
Well, I don't really see an anus. I see an "X" where that Flygon's anus should be.

It actually reminds me of of this Zangoose image I recall uploading a couple of months ago.

post #836241

It's most likely rated questionable because of a somewhat suggestive posture, big butt, and being bottomless.

Neither of them are telltale anuses, and certainly not the gaping maws that would outright mark the image as explicit.

So then, maybe a rule change that any X anus or O anus, both with the same color under it, can count as safe/questionable? I can foresee these buttholes getting tagged differently on each, because the tagger may say otherwise; a defined rule would keep that on track.

Siral_Exan said:
So then, maybe a rule change that any X anus or O anus, both with the same color under it, can count as safe/questionable? I can foresee these buttholes getting tagged differently on each, because the tagger may say otherwise; a defined rule would keep that on track.

Works for me, assuming of course there are enough images on e621 where that kind of tag is justifiable.

GameManiac said:
Works for me, assuming of course there are enough images on e621 where that kind of tag is justifiable.

That'd be the "hard" part. But, judging that there would be plenty of images that feature X or O for an anus, all someone'd have to do is look for images that don't obviously have an anus by using the anus tag, and check to see if it is an X or O.

I would almost say in that case that cartoony genitals would work as tag. That would also cover dickbutts and such, because I do not consider these to be explicit, even if there is visible drawing of penis:
post #453908 post #530355

I still remember when this got changed to explicit just because there was kid for few seconds with the most cartoony genitals as possible visible:
post #564564

I'm gonna make a seperate thread for this, so we don't clutter up nudity=questionable.