before i begin, i will say this is a first post for me. but i have been on the site for a good while. now what i wanted to say.

for a while now i have seen pictures where the type of picture will be questionable, but will have breasts with the nipples out. and will then see a similar style picture (just breasts with nipples out) as explicit. is there circumstances that follow in order for a picture to be labeled as either of this? id personally think pictures with just breasts should stay as questionable, until we start seeing dicks or pussies, then it should be labeled as explicit. but then again im not a mod or anything and am just stating a personal opinion/prefence.

Seeing as many states allow women to walk around top-free, this isn't really an issue. Mind you, the use of breasts also happen to be for nursing children.

So, my personal feeling are as such.

Just breasts (including nips) = Questionable
post #324690
Breasts + pussy/penis = Explicit
post #324619
post #321419

seeing as im thinking tundra is actually helping to prove a point, im going to let his comment slide. since otherwise i dont know what the hell hes talking about, all im saying is, logically if nothing sexual is going on and we just see breasts, it should be questionable instead of some pictures having explicit when the twins are showing.

I regard breasts to be no different than the male pectorals. If men can go around topless without it being considered taboo, then women should be able to do the same.

Safe: Pictures you could show your boss and grandma without them thinking you are a goddamn pervert.

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.

Questionable: Anything not in the above. Visible nipples, nude people, crude humor, moderate violence and gore, adult humor, etc. .
As a rule of thumb I'd say anything you could show your friends without them thinking you're weird but definitely unsuited for your smaller brother/sister/niece/nephew/cousin.

NotMeNotYouMobile said:
Safe: Pictures you could show your boss and grandma without them thinking you are a goddamn pervert.

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.

Questionable: Anything not in the above. Visible nipples, nude people, crude humor, moderate violence and gore, adult humor, etc. .
As a rule of thumb I'd say anything you could show your friends without them thinking you're weird but definitely unsuited for your smaller brother/sister/niece/nephew/cousin.

More to the point:
My rule of thumb is "if you can't decide between safe and explicit, set it as questionable." If you can't tell right away if it's safe or explicit and feel like you need a second to call it: questionable.

I would imagine that almost all instances of this should be questionable rather than explicit, but might still need an admin to verify some of them.

But yes, if there are no genitals showing (or obviously implied), I'd think it's most likely to just be questionable (besides exceptions like gore and such).

Char said:
I'd think it's most likely to just be questionable (besides exceptions like gore and such).

I think that you need to change this page. Until now I thought that rating is only for sexual themes, not for gore, and violence.

Char said:
I would imagine that almost all instances of this should be questionable rather than explicit, but might still need an admin to verify some of them.

But yes, if there are no genitals showing (or obviously implied), I'd think it's most likely to just be questionable (besides exceptions like gore and such).

thank you for agreeing with me, or atleast being nice enough to also state a similar preference. as ive said earlier i have seen many such pictures rated as explicit, but then had come to realize that some artists might consider the pictures explicit due to some thought. and for anyone else thank you for...not being total assholes, i was wary to make a post in the light of being called an idiot or something, which i still fear will happen, or a troll will come onto this page.

flamethehedgehog said:
thank you for agreeing with me, or atleast being nice enough to also state a similar preference. as ive said earlier i have seen many such pictures rated as explicit, but then had come to realize that some artists might consider the pictures explicit due to some thought. and for anyone else thank you for...not being total assholes, i was wary to make a post in the light of being called an idiot or something, which i still fear will happen, or a troll will come onto this page.

Nah, if you have a genuine question and ask said question in a well mannered way then nobody will make fun of you.
We have discussed way more stupid things in a completely calm manner before.

How about if its OBVIOUSLY a sensual or otherwise sexual interpretation of the picture with breasts (such as a pin-up or otherwise similar post) it is Explicit. But if there is any sort of gray area, it goes into the questionable bin.

Breasts WITHOUT Nipples = ???
Breasts WITH Nipples = XXX-Rated
=======================
Rating?
Explicit is used for posts that show the lower genitals (penis, vagina etc.), sex acts (see the Naughty Activity section), or various body fluids (Naughty Activity).
Safe is used for pictures that can be viewed in public without (much) uproar. Usually includes no genitals, sexual activity, or questionable activity in general.
And the Questionable rating for everything in between (mostly used for posts depicting topless females). Note that the rating system is used primarily for sexual content, as opposed to gore, or other extreme themes. Scat and watersports, which commonly fall under extreme sexual fetishes, are always tagged as explicit. Not to be confused with fæces and peeing respectively.

TheHuskyK9 said:
Just breasts (including nips) = Questionable
post #324690

umm...
I've seen breasts without nipples, shouldn't that be questionable instead?

Mario583 said:
umm...
I've seen breasts without nipples, shouldn't that be questionable instead?

sally_acorn was guilty of this so many times. Even on tv and she is Still Questionable here
post #323513 post #313620

Mario583 said:
umm...
I've seen breasts without nipples, shouldn't that be questionable instead?

They are both questionable if the lower regions aren't present

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
I think that you need to change this page. Until now I thought that rating is only for sexual themes, not for gore, and violence.

Yeah I'm not sure why there's no mention of violence or gore in there at all. Will need to update that so people have a better idea. Still, overall e621 users seem to have a pretty good grasp on what rating an image should get.

When it comes to violence/gore, it can be a bit subjective (more so than nudity/suggestiveness usually). I don't think there's ever been any policy nailed down regarding gore and violence actually, other than simply relying on our users' common sense and administrative intervention every once in a while. Fortunately gore pictures aren't uploaded terribly often. :P (one every couple of days or so).

See, I dont get e6 (users); on one hand, uploading images with exposed breasts and areolas are a rating of Explict, but on the other hand, breast and nips that ARE visible has a rating of Questionable.

/Rating System in a nutshell

post #231097 - Explicit
post #324690 - Question

Both of those should simply be questionable.

NotMeNotYou said:
Both of those should simply be questionable.

Maybe because tits is a no-no word?