Underaged character in sexualized settings

why exactly is this picture here  
>>1824485  
not against rule 5.  
but this one here was  
>>1814777 (deleted)
 
all characters in both pics are underaged and clearly in a sexualized setting.

Rule 5 is supposed to only cover revealing outfits, nudity, and sexual acts; not e.g. suggestive for foot fetish, bondage shackles, or implied later sexual acts. The wording has never really been fully correct on it (currently, it at least somewhat makes it clear that an image of anthro Spike looking at naked Equestria Girls Mane 6 isn’t covered).
 
The second image is arguably showing a sexual act.

@SnoopyStallion  
The rule in question:  

Former:  
✗ sexualized scenario  
- sexualized depiction  
✔ look underage  
✔ look human or human-like
 
Latter:  
✗ sexualized depiction  
✔ sexualized scenario  
✔ look underage  
✔ look human or human-like

so it is ok to have pics here that show underaged characters in a sexualized setting. just without showing genitals or having sex. what could happen afterwards is up to the imagination of the viewer. got it.
 
then with those points. the diamond tiara and silver spoon pic was clearly wrongly deleted considering those points. they are fully dressed, nothing to see and they only have dirty talk like snips and snails. what happens after the pic is again up to the viewer. same setting as the snips and snails pic. can you undelete it or do we have to reupload it?

@SnoopyStallion  
It’s a bit broader than just having sex or showing genitals. That image is very…borderline.