Topic: Question regarding ratings

Hi all.

I have two question regarding ratings; I am unsure if I understand this right using what I've found in the help pages or the forum search.

1) Revealing clothing
According to the wiki-entry, an image is "questionable/mature" in case of "revealing clothing with obvious erotic or teasing intent"
What if the teasing is not due to revealing clothing? Like: It is simply a choice of clothing in hot weather? Or what if the clothing is historically accurate?

For example:
post #6149600 is currently marked as "questionable/mature", however
post #6150865 is currently marked as "safe" .
Both images imply a certain degree of teasing - but not because of the choice of revealing clothing

2) Fighting and drowning someone
Fighting and pushing someone's head under water and keeping it there - while not necessarily a fetish, the mere act seems to be "explicit (adult)". Or is it?
Example: post #6156921 is currently marked as "questionable/mature"

Thanks for helping me understand!

A good rule of thumb for choosing between Safe & Questionable is to consider whether or not the artworks are safe enough to show to your friends or display in public without people judging you.
The line between Questionable and Explicit should be pretty straightforward, as far as sex & nudity goes. Other explicit themes will need to be considered case-by-case.

• post #6149600 & post #6150865: Both should be Safe.
• While it does technically fall under what e621:ratings describes as "characters wearing revealing clothing", I do not believe it is shown "with obvious erotic or teasing intent", or at the very least, not too much teasing to the point it is suggestive or arousing.
• I do not believe a character's choice of clothing due to weather or cultural reasons have a great impact on how we determine the post's ratings. You have to consider the underlying message/intent/vibe of the artwork in question.
• For example, the above posts differ quite significantly with other more Questionable posts of the character, such as post #5000443, post #5049448, post #5212206, & post #5262586, which includes more mature elements such as partially_clothed or undone clothing, flashing_breasts, and suggestive posing.
• post #6156921: It can be either Questionable or Explicit. However, I'd personally tag it as Explicit.
• Based on e621:ratings, it does not describe themes of violence adequately, so it wouldn't be wrong if people had different interpretations for the above post.
• It could be Questionable if you strictly consider "realistic blood" (but "without gore") and "exposed female breasts with nipples" (but without sex or genitals). The act of asphyxiating/drowning someone is not inherently Explicit in nature, except for cases of erotic_asphyxiation.
• It could also be Explicit if you considered it as "content with obvious "extreme" fetish purposes". In this case, both characters being nude and wounded throughout their bodies with fresh scratches & bruises and the dominant_female being eager to drown someone (i.e., sadism) suggests a heavy BDSM/snuff element in the post.

The first example seems to be rated questionable because of the under boob, the outfit reveals quite a lot of the breasts in a sexual manner, that makes it "revealing clothing with obvious erotic or teasing intent". In the second image, the under boob is not visible.
Where did you get the idea that fighting and drowning someone should always be explicit?
For subjective requirements like this, you need to use your own judgement, but don't worry too much about it. If it's wrong, someone else can correct it.

iseekstowin said:
Where did you get the idea that fighting and drowning someone should always be explicit?

Usually content where characters are depicted being actively killed do tend to warrant explicit rating.

thegreatwolfgang said:

• post #6149600 & post #6150865: Both should be Safe.
• While it does technically fall under what e621:ratings describes as "characters wearing revealing clothing", I do not believe it is shown "with obvious erotic or teasing intent", or at the very least, not too much teasing to the point it is suggestive or arousing.

I'd say the second one should certainly be a Questionable rating, since they're posed in a teasing manner with revealing clothing. They're bent slightly forward provocatively, and while the butt may not be visible, they're showing as much leg as possible before seeing it. Along with minimal topwear to cover just their breasts and the looking-back-and-winking face, it does look like they're teasing the viewer.

watsit said:
I'd say the second one should certainly be a Questionable rating, since they're posed in a teasing manner with revealing clothing. They're bent slightly forward provocatively, and while the butt may not be visible, they're showing as much leg as possible before seeing it. Along with minimal topwear to cover just their breasts and the looking-back-and-winking face, it does look like they're teasing the viewer.

I wouldn't disagree with that interpretation and applying the Questionable rating based on it wouldn't be unreasonable.

From my point of view though, she doesn't seem to be stationary and deliberately teasing the viewer. It is more of circumstance and how she is normally dressed.
She looks like she is in motion and walking away from the viewer, based on the position of her legs and how her clothes "flutter" in the air.
Coincidentally, due to how skimpy her outfit is, it exposes more skin than if she had stood still. Though it did not expose too much to the point you could see her genitals or butt.

I'd say this would be no different than any "non-suggestive artwork containing characters in underwear or swimwear" or like how Marilyn Monroe's dress gets lifted up by a gust of air.
The character involved is not deliberately teasing the viewer due to how they are normally dressed, which is why I did not believe it was done "with obvious erotic or teasing intent".

thegreatwolfgang said:
A good rule of thumb for choosing between Safe & Questionable is to consider whether or not the artworks are safe enough to show to your friends or display in public without people judging you.

That is nice mnemonic, thegreatwolfgang . Very memorable and helpful, thanks!

ISeeksToWin said:
Where did you get the idea that fighting and drowning someone should always be explicit?

It was about the purposeful intention (drown someone to win a fight); the act of 'actively killing' as Ruppari put it.

ISeeksToWin said:
For subjective requirements like this, you need to use your own judgement, but don't worry too much about it. If it's wrong, someone else can correct it.

Good to know that posts are reviewed and people can change it if was a misjudgment.

Thank you for your explanations and input, guys! I greatly appreciate that! 👍