Rating tags general

@saby  
She has rubies embedded in her eyeballs and she’s crying blood.
 
e: and yes, I know what twinkle ponies are, in case you mention it. This is obviously meant to be a horror twist on their origin story.

@Archonix  
But unless you know the artists’ intention, there’s no way to distinguish from a normal twinkle-eyed pony crying a dark liquid. And even if the gore factor’s evident enough, shouldn’t the picture be tagged per gore, not horror?
 
_{Not trying to be a crank, this issue perplexes me.}

@saby  
A de-cartoonified origin story for the twinkle ponies is that they had crystals embedded in their eyes while working as mine slaves. Add her crying “a dark liquid” to that, blood and scarring around the crystals on her eyeballs, her general expression, the description implying blindness, and the overall dark scheme of the image, and you pretty much get a poster for a horror movie.
 
On top of which, it’s rated mature at the source.

@Rainboom Dash  
I think it should generally be Questionable. Grinding is a bit of an odd case for ratings in general because it’s non-visible possible genital stimulation.
 
@saby  
If you look closely at the eyes, there’s details that make it look like they’re rather injured, not just unusual in the shape of the pupils, so I think Semi-grimdark is correct here.

Is this indeed safe, not suggestive?  
>>2374503

@Background Pony #4230  
I don’t think so, given the nipple outline.

@Background Pony #4230  
And the “hands-free milkshake challenge” pose/action exists to put focus on breasts.

 
Here to confirm that this picture should be “suggestive”, not “safe”.

Wait if “sex” is explicit but “sex” (gender) is safe, why is same sex safe?

@Background Pony #91Z0  
I think you’re very confused about different meanings of a word.

@Background Pony #91Z0  
You write “same sex” but link “safe sex”.
 
Words have different meanings in different contexts. “Safe” in the phrase “safe sex” means that the sex is practised with precautions to prevent unwanted pregnancies, transmittance of STIs, etc. “Safe” in the context of the rating tag here on Derpibooru means the picture has no such content that wouldn’t be okay to show to children.
 
There are many more seeming contradictions. The same image can be tagged “good clean married sex” (it’s “good and clean” because it’s between married partners) and “filthy dirty married sex” (it’s “filthy and dirty” because it’s kinky, but it also happens to be between married partners).

@saby  

 
And there’s been a longstanding problem with this site where there’s been tons of images rated safe that aren’t okay to show to children, such as ones containing swearing, drugs, and so forth.

 
Safe? And if the butt focus isn’t enough for a “suggestive”, should “ass” and “butt” be tagged? (Why do we have those two as separate tags anyways…)

@saby  
I think so. Ass is for butts that are on more human-like creatures. It’s probably good to tag here, though it is a bit tenuous being that there’s barely any hint of a crack.

 
Uploaded as Suggestive, then changed to Questionable. Which is more appropriate?

@Background Pony #B065  
Bit of a tricky one, but I think it’s fine at Suggestive, since there’s not much detail about what her hand is actually doing.

I changed this to safe as I don’t really see anything suggestive about it >>2475315

>>2492422 (NSFW)  
Should the rating be kept Questionable or be re-rated to Explicit?  
Twi’s crotch is shown, but I can’t see if her vulva is visible

@Panko Pai  
I don’t think there’s any sign of a vulva there.

 
There’s some discussion in the comments about the rating of this picture because there’s some very low-detail balls visible. It went from safe to suggestive to explicit now. IMO this should be suggestive at most.  
(Also, not sure if this actually needs those (casual) nudity tags, but I guess they kinda apply.)

@Yoshimon1  
Agree with “suggestive” at most.
 
balls, suggestive precedents
 
We also have a whole bunch of similar low focus low detail sheaths tagged as “safe”, including original G1 show footage.
 
If any hint of recognisable testes is ruled to be non-safe, one of my own pieces will also be affected (there’s also a similarly presented ponut):  

@Yoshimon1  
Not sure on it overall, but Explicit is odd for a partial outline, and Suggestive makes more sense.
 
@saby  
Most of that is references or clothing outlines (many of which even look like they need rerating). >>603011 and >>10417 are the only clear cases of actual balls being Suggestive-rated at the moment, and >>1718613 is arguable. Definitely not much as far as precedent; you’ll find a lot more looking at Questionable, which has the most comparable image:  

 
Sheaths and especially anuses might get similar theoretical treatment, but they aren’t a good point of comparison because their very nature is mild (close to the body and simple in shape). For >>1612273, it doesn’t even quite qualify for the “anus” tag because it can’t be clearly seen to be distinct from the fur on both sides.

@Background Pony #CB95  
Oh it’s you again