I've noticed a lot of inconsistencies when it comes to the ratings of omorashi posts.
This forum post will be 90% examples, so if you don't like looking at omorashi/urine, I'd suggest not clicking on the post links here.
Anyway, let's get into it!

---

post #1545108
I posted this as explicit, but someone later changed it to questionable.

post #1543320
I posted this as questionable, but someone later changed it to explicit, despite them wearing clothes unlike the character in the former image.

---

post #1493597
This character, with a noticeable bulge is wetting himself. Questionable.

post #1493597
This one, of a character doing pretty much the same thing, is rated explicit, despite the character's crotch area being completely covered by their hands.

---

post #1478682
Explicit

post #1478678
Questionable

So urine is less explicit when it's depicted in a bladder meter?

---

post #1410817
Isabelle is wetting herself, questionable.

post #1410818
Isabelle is wetting herself more, explicit.

The fact that there's more urine on-screen makes it explicit?

---

post #1445643
Naked lucario urinating, questionable.

post #1459888
Fully clothed canine wetting himself, explicit.

---

post #1459912
Fully clothed... thing wetting himself in a bathroom, explicit.

post #1476127
Isabelle wetting herself from a worm's-eye-view showing her underwear, also explicit.

post #1435369
Dog in only his underwear wetting himself, genital bulge visible, questionable.

---

And there are plenty more things like this that I haven't touched.
I think it goes without saying that we need some sort of clear line between explicit/questionable here, because this is just complete anarchy.

Used to be that urine, peeing, and accidental wetting were questionable, while actual watersports was explicit. But judging by the rating changes to those posts, I guess it's all explicit now.

Were any of those actually locked? It's possible that this is just a matter of users disagreeing on ratings.

Sounds like it depends on the context of the picture.
This one was posted two years ago and is questionable.
https://e621.net/post/show/803928/2016-accident-age_difference-angry-anthro-bed_shee

Jinx_Jackal said:
Sounds like it depends on the context of the picture.
This one was posted two years ago and is questionable.
https://e621.net/post/show/803928/2016-accident-age_difference-angry-anthro-bed_shee

That seems to be falsely tagged. I see no urine in it.

Furrin_Gok said:
That seems to be falsely tagged. I see no urine in it.

We were talking about fluid in general? The subject is Cream wetting her bed sheets in that picture.

Jinx_Jackal said:
We were talking about fluid in general? The subject is Cream wetting her bed sheets in that picture.

There's nothing to suggest that's actually the case though. Just a sheet hanging with spots on it. Did somebody ejaculate onto it? Spilled their soda? Wet the bed? We can't tell.

Furrin_Gok said:
There's nothing to suggest that's actually the case though. Just a sheet hanging with spots on it. Did somebody ejaculate onto it? Spilled their soda? Wet the bed? We can't tell.

Not directly, but I see a mother scolding her 6 year little girl next to hanging wet sheets which would suggest Cream wet her bed. Though this most likely isnt what the OP is trying to figure out.

Jinx_Jackal said:
Not directly, but I see a mother scolding her 6 year little girl next to hanging wet sheets which would suggest Cream wet her bed. Though this most likely isnt what the OP is trying to figure out.

Or, a mother scolding her child for drinking in and spilling their beverage on the bed. Correlation is not causation.

Siral_Exan said:
Or, a mother scolding her child for drinking in and spilling their beverage on the bed. Correlation is not causation.

While that is true, Cream did indeed wet the sheets in that picture.
https://inkbunny.net/submissionview.php?id=1005429

Jinx_Jackal said:
While that is true, Cream did indeed wet the sheets in that picture.
https://inkbunny.net/submissionview.php?id=1005429

No, she didn't, because there's no urine in that picture. Tag What You See, not what the artist claims or what occurred in another image.

Jinx_Jackal said:
While that is true, Cream did indeed wet the sheets in that picture.
https://inkbunny.net/submissionview.php?id=1005429

And gets scolded for that? Sheesh. If it were more evident by twys, I'd be tempted to tag that as bad_parenting.

Furrin_Gok said:
No, she didn't, because there's no urine in that picture. Tag What You See, not what the artist claims or what occurred in another image.

I understand the part about tagging what you can see. You cant tell directly thats piss in the picture. It could be just water.
That being said, I still believe it if the artist said so. They drew it and they wanted the picture to depict a young child pissing the bed.

Jinx_Jackal said:
I understand the part about tagging what you can see. You cant tell directly thats piss in the picture. It could be just water.
That being said, I still believe it if the artist said so. They drew it and they wanted the picture to depict a young child pissing the bed.

what artist says doesnt matter in tagging or image rating

Lord_Eggplant said:
what artist says doesnt matter in tagging or image rating

I know. I was just saying in general.

Also interested in answers to this thread.

One of my omorashi pictures was changed from Questionable to Explicit a while back and it made me wonder what exactly that line was (link: https://e621.net/post_tag_history/index?post_id=1346976 )

It would be nice to know the line for future uploads :)

If it's visible that the urine is "used" as part of a fetish it becomes explicit.
In more concrete terms if the process of wetting themselves is the focus, exaggerated, or otherwise given importance it's explicit.

Basically if you look at an image and think "this is made for the fetish" it's explicit.

NotMeNotYou said:
If it's visible that the urine is "used" as part of a fetish it becomes explicit.
In more concrete terms if the process of wetting themselves is the focus, exaggerated, or otherwise given importance it's explicit.

Basically if you look at an image and think "this is made for the fetish" it's explicit.

NotMeNotYou said:
If it's visible that the urine is "used" as part of a fetish it becomes explicit.
In more concrete terms if the process of wetting themselves is the focus, exaggerated, or otherwise given importance it's explicit.

Basically if you look at an image and think "this is made for the fetish" it's explicit.

Alright, so if the focus of an image is omorashi, but there's no actual urine on-screen, then tag as questionable.

If the image's focus is omorashi, and there is urine on-screen, then tag as explicit, regardless of whether a character is fully clothed, naked, and weather there is a single drop of urine on-screen or a yellow version of the Nile River.

If the only urine on-screen is depicted as a bladder meter, then tag as questionable.

If a character is urinating/wetting, but omorashi is not the intended focus of the image, tag as safe/questionable, assuming nothing else "crazy" is happening in the image.

Would you say that this is a solid list of guidelines?

NotMeNotYou said:
Basically if you look at an image and think "this is made for the fetish" it's explicit.

Pretty much always, then.
On a quick look, I don't see anything in rating:questionable urine that doesn't look like fetish content.

Genjar said:
Pretty much always, then.
On a quick look, I don't see anything in rating:questionable urine that doesn't look like fetish content.

post #1410815 post #1317676
I'd say that if the character appears to be in standard clothing and embarassed about it, it's not fetish. Doubly so if there's a second character who seems disgusted or shocked as well.

Furrin_Gok said:
post #1410815 post #1317676
I'd say that if the character appears to be in standard clothing and embarassed about it, it's not fetish. Doubly so if there's a second character who seems disgusted or shocked as well.

Considering embarrassment and humiliation are part of the omorashi fetish for a lot of people, that actually makes things more confusing. The same with standard clothing. It's a much softer fetish than others.

I'd personally consider both of those images fetish material.

wolftacos said:
Considering embarrassment and humiliation are part of the omorashi fetish for a lot of people, that actually makes things more confusing. The same with standard clothing. It's a much softer fetish than others.

I'd personally consider both of those images fetish material.

I thought NMNY was talking about the watersports fetish, not the omorashi fetish.

Furrin_Gok said:
I thought NMNY was talking about the watersports fetish, not the omorashi fetish.

All urine-related fetishes, I assume. Since the posts in the OP got locked to explicit.

And same goes for some earlier posts. I already undoed all of my own rating locks on questionable-rated wetting (and related) posts a few weeks ago, after noticing that the fetish is getting rated as explicit now.

Furrin_Gok said:
post #1410815 post #1317676
I'd say that if the character appears to be in standard clothing and embarassed about it, it's not fetish. Doubly so if there's a second character who seems disgusted or shocked as well.

So... this is an interesting perspective. Fetish material can be made 'accidentally'. --for example: if I paint my toenails and post the picture my Tweetbook because I was happy with how they looked, someone with a foot fetish can enjoy my image, regardless of if that was my intention or not.

It is also easy to be exposed to someone's fetish-- for example, here's a random youtube playlist, focusing entirely on cartoon characters getting frozen, or characters being swallowed whole by 'monsters'...

With that in mind, without further context, it's hard to imagine that this was created without the fetish in mind.

Discussion/examination of bed/pants wetting (or related) tends to come in a few places:

1) Among parents of children (How to deal with it, what ages are reasonable, doctor intervention...)
2) With kids who still wet the bed (generally, media about not feeling shame about it: Be it a book titled "Oops! I wet the bed" or an episode of sesame street)
3) Astronauts (SCIENCE!)
4) Among people who find bed/pants wetting (or related) interesting/arousing.
5) a tiny percentage of "other' scenarios, typically using the need to pee as a plot device (for example, to move them to the bathroom, to stop the car at the gas station, etc) where the focus isn't on needing to pee, but on something urgent that can't wait. Or as a gag. (Overwhelmed baby sitty! Sissy peed herself!)

So, I think it's pretty comfortable to say that most pictures posted here are fetish material, intended to arouse. As, presumably, any storyline or situation where accidental pants wetting is an plot point, it's because the author/artist wants the humiliation factor.

So.

questionable: all content with slight (but obvious) fetishistic material
Explicit: any content with obvious "extreme" fetish purposes (e.g. heavy BDSM and BDSM toys, hard/fatal vore, scat, watersports, etc...)

So.. I'd say...

1) Omorashi fetish is rating:e if there is urine in the image because there is urine and it is part of the watersports fetish
2) Omorashi fetish is rating:q is there is no urine, but instead just a focus on the potty dance and @_@ facial expressions.

SnowWolf said:
So.. I'd say...

1) Omorashi fetish is rating:e if there is urine in the image because there is urine and it is part of the watersports fetish
2) Omorashi fetish is rating:q is there is no urine, but instead just a focus on the potty dance and @_@ facial expressions.

You've really simplified a good way to discern what goes where. As someone who does art for this fetish, I like these two descriptors as guidelines. I am interested to see if this approved all around as a good guideline!