Not sure if post #8158772 should be Questionable or Sensitive. Any thoughts?
Posted under General
Not sure if post #8158772 should be Questionable or Sensitive. Any thoughts?
alphashitlord said:
Not sure if post #8158772 should be Questionable or Sensitive. Any thoughts?
Q. somewhat detailed upskirt pantyshots usually are, but also the aerolae is alluded to.
santander said:
Is this one Q
https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts/5632290?q=bob_cut+otoko_no_ko+rating%3Ageneral+
It's definitely at least S, there's no good reason for a bulge that prominent to be in G
does overt clothed ass-shaking like this fall under blatantly sexual enough for Q?
S or Q? (And should this be tagged guro?)
Knowledge_Seeker said:
S or Q? (And should this be tagged guro?)
S. According to The Rating Manual, S rating can be used for:
Mildly disturbing violence (blood or injury that is not G-rated).
Also, no, not guro. The violence in the image is not extreme enough to fulfill the criteria of the tag, because according to its wiki, it must be extreme graphic violence.
SlaughteredMelon said:
S. According to The Rating Manual, S rating can be used for:
Mildly disturbing violence (blood or injury that is not G-rated).Also, no, not guro. The violence in the image is not extreme enough to fulfill the criteria of the tag, because according to its wiki, it must be extreme graphic violence.
Yeah, that's what I thought. But I wanted to double check. "This doesn't feel extreme enough for guro, but I've thought that and been corrected before, so..."
Knowledge_Seeker said:
Yeah, that's what I thought. But I wanted to double check. "This doesn't feel extreme enough for guro, but I've thought that and been corrected before, so..."
Even if you are a little desensitized of the violence, keep in mind that an amputee ear with an hemorrhage is vastly different from (For example), a little girl with the torso open, the guts extracted, and somebody replacing her guts with a dead octopus; I think this last description could perfectly fit under the guro tag if we had a comic with such scene.
SlaughteredMelon said:
Even if you are a little desensitized of the violence, keep in mind that an amputee ear with an hemorrhage is vastly different from (For example), a little girl with the torso open, the guts extracted, and somebody replacing her guts with a dead octopus; I think this last description could perfectly fit under the guro tag if we had a comic with such scene.
True true. I was leaning towards "no", btw. Also, her head is detached but not bleeding, so it was a lot of other elements I notice that made me unsure, not just the ear.
SlaughteredMelon said:
S. According to The Rating Manual, S rating can be used for:
Mildly disturbing violence (blood or injury that is not G-rated).
The woman is holding the man's severed ear in her mouth. That is definitely not mild. Look at the guideline for Q:
Graphic or disturbing violence (death, major blood or injury, ryona, CBT, serious abuse).
and for E:
Guro, scat, extremely graphic violence (gore, dismemberment, etc), and NSFL content.
A major injury like this is definitely graphic enough for Q. Technically, it could be classified as E due to the dismemberment, but it's not as gratuitous as it could be, so I think Q is high enough. But S is too low. In general, I believe we should rate things no more than one higher or lower than what the guidelines say depending on the mitigating factors present.
Also, no, not guro. The violence in the image is not extreme enough to fulfill the criteria of the tag, because according to its wiki, it must be extreme graphic violence.
I think leaving off guro is reasonable. However, tags like severed ear still need to be added to make it easier to blacklist.
Updated
Blank_User said:
The woman is holding the man's severed ear in her mouth. That is definitely not mild. Look at the guideline for Q:
and for E:
A major injury like this is definitely graphic enough for Q. Technically, it could be classified as E due to the dismemberment, but it's not as gratuitous as it could be, so I think Q is high enough. But S is too low. In general, I believe we should rate things no more than one higher or lower than what the guidelines say depending on the mitigating factors present.
I think leaving off guro is reasonable. However, tags like severed ear still need to be added to make it easier to blacklist.
I don't think losing an ear is a "major" injury. It's not a very graphic piece, either. Rating it E would be absurd. I think it's fine in S, Q seems a little excessive. When the guidelines say "extremely graphic violence" they don't mean this.
blindVigil said:
I don't think losing an ear is a "major" injury. It's not a very graphic piece, either. Rating it E would be absurd. I think it's fine in S, Q seems a little excessive. When the guidelines say "extremely graphic violence" they don't mean this.
How is losing an entire body part not a major injury? And I'd say it's still graphic, just not to E levels. I only pointed the E guidelines out to show the baseline while acknowledging it would be too high in this case.
If a realistic depiction of someone losing an ear and bleeding heavily isn't enough for Q, then what does it take for violence to meet the requirements for Q without going into E?
blindVigil said:
I don't think losing an ear is a "major" injury. It's not a very graphic piece, either. Rating it E would be absurd. I think it's fine in S, Q seems a little excessive. When the guidelines say "extremely graphic violence" they don't mean this.
Any injure that you would call 911 over is basically a major injury, now if you had your ear sliced off, would you call 911?
Freshblink said:
Any injure that you would call 911 over is basically a major injury, now if you had your ear sliced off, would you call 911?
You could call emergency services over a particularly nasty cut, but I wouldn't group tha with losing an ear or a hand under "major injury"
Blank_User said:
How is losing an entire body part not a major injury? And I'd say it's still graphic, just not to E levels. I only pointed the E guidelines out to show the baseline while acknowledging it would be too high in this case.
If a realistic depiction of someone losing an ear and bleeding heavily isn't enough for Q, then what does it take for violence to meet the requirements for Q without going into E?
You can't see the wound or the damaged side of the ear. The blood is the only thing that even makes the image graphic, and by anime standards it's not even a lot of blood. You don't see the act of the dismemberment, there no violence. All we see is a disembodied ear and blood, which definitely wouldn't be enough for Q on its own.
ANON_TOKYO said:
You could call emergency services over a particularly nasty cut, but I wouldn't group tha with losing an ear or a hand under "major injury"
Either of these can cause death by bleeding out or sepsis if not quickly treated.
But I guess if you're defining major injury as one that involves buckets of gore and it is very clear that the person will die shortly after from the injury, for example stepping on a landmine, then it doesn't qualify.