PDA

View Full Version : Ratings



Nix
10-16-2012, 05:02 PM
...Hollywood can put nipples in a PG13 movie, but i can't put them in a Mature picture? there's nothing wrong with nipples in non-sexual pictures. it's artistic nude. and bit-less/"barbie"-nude is PG. the guidelines for "Mature" ratings on Weasyl says that "The content depicted is suitable for users age thirteen and over only". i know these guides vary by time period and organization, but...have you seen what they put in PG13 movies these days? Nipples shouldn't be a problem on an ART site, and i wouldn't call them "Explicit" content >.<

Vine
10-16-2012, 05:19 PM
I can't think of a single PG13 movie that has female nipples.

Nix
10-16-2012, 05:31 PM
if you google it, you'll find quite a few. MPAA guidelines are okay with brief full nudity of full-back nudity, but a lot of movies have gotten away with more with no problems.

Vine
10-16-2012, 05:40 PM
I googled and had trouble finding any where female nipples shown, mostly they're underboob or low cleavage.
Not denying there might be a few, but they're very far and few in-between. It is a rarity and would probably be nothing more than brief half-second glances. An image is unmoving, so it would always be showing the female nipples for an infinite amount of time unless it's a gif.
Female nipples are not a regular standard for PG13 movies.

Nix
10-16-2012, 05:43 PM
well...i googled "PG13 movies with nipples" specifically, with safe search off, and got a bunch of lists. but i'm mostly going by guidelines, by what i've seen, and by general society trends.

Vine
10-16-2012, 05:50 PM
Again, like I said, even if a PG13 movie did have female nipples it would be an extremely brief view, which I severely doubt would last more than a second.
An unmoving image would always have nipples shown, so it is a different playing field.

Fay V
10-16-2012, 06:38 PM
The MPAA ratings system is not a perfect reference when trying to consider ratings for an art site, as mentioned they are separate mediums.
Something to note about MPAA ratings, it is a parental guide, which means that the parents are giving guidance and permission to minors. A website does not have that same assumption. MPAA also mentions, specifically that it is "brief' nudity, brief being a concept that does not exist in artwork.

It's common in American culture and policy that any viewing of a nude figure by a minor is with parental consent (and even then there must be the idea of artistic value in the object). Again, websites can't really make the same assumption.

Finally there is the problem of drawing a line between what is artistic, and what is obscene. There isn't a solid line to do so, the famous line being "I'll know it when I see it". We can not allow minors to view pornography, and rather than spend a lot of time, arguing over the artistic value of a piece (an argument still present over ancient masterpieces) we chose to create an objective line. Including visible genitals, or visible female nipples is where we have chosen to draw our line. It is one in which we do not need to argue if an image is too pornographic.

We are not making a judgement on the value of a person's art if it contains nipples, the fact of the matter is we are attempting to run an art site, something that needs solid limitations, and we chose something objective to base our decisions on rather than attempt to argue sexual or artistic features for each nude study.

Meii
10-16-2012, 07:14 PM
Face it, nipples are considered taboo, even if they're not.

hezbellah
10-16-2012, 11:02 PM
Just a question (no snark; legitimate curiosity): what about male nipples?

Meii
10-16-2012, 11:36 PM
Just a question (no snark; legitimate curiosity): what about male nipples?

I'm not an admin but I don't see an issue with male nipples since male nippils aren't sexualized like female breasts and nipples, so I'd imagine they're ok.

It's kinda like how males can walk around shirtless, no matter the chest size, but if a female does it's considered 'indecent exposure'.

Again, I'm not saying any of this is fair, but I'm just explaining how it is :/

Unburnt Daenerys
10-17-2012, 10:56 AM
I'm not an admin but I don't see an issue with male nipples since male nippils aren't sexualized like female breasts and nipples, so I'd imagine they're ok.

It's kinda like how males can walk around shirtless, no matter the chest size, but if a female does it's considered 'indecent exposure'.

Again, I'm not saying any of this is fair, but I'm just explaining how it is :/

It's actually legal in many places for women to be topless in public. Only three states in the US outlaw female toplessness and it is legal in most Canadian provinces.

Meii
10-17-2012, 12:45 PM
It's actually legal in many places for women to be topless in public. Only three states in the US outlaw female toplessness and it is legal in most Canadian provinces.

From what I'm reading, three states have banned it, you're correct. However, 14 states (including mine, NJ) have ambiguous state laws, so take that as you will. It also says that despite the laws being placed, even if a top free law is firmly in effect, the police can still arrest you under the pretense of "disorderly conduct". Sure, you can sue the city but I'd imagine that can take a lot of money/time some people don't have.

I should have probably clarified as well that I'm talking about within the U.S, where besides NY and a few nude beaches, I've never heard the laws regarding it (until now). What I do know is the fact that if laws have been placed, I've yet to see them be followed, but that's the U.S for you... :/ What few rights we have left are still taken from us.

RadioCatastrophe
10-17-2012, 01:17 PM
From what I'm reading, three states have banned it, you're correct. However, 14 states (including mine, NJ) have ambiguous state laws, so take that as you will. It also says that despite the laws being placed, even if a top free law is firmly in effect, the police can still arrest you under the pretense of "disorderly conduct". Sure, you can sue the city but I'd imagine that can take a lot of money/time some people don't have.

I should have probably clarified as well that I'm talking about within the U.S, where besides NY and a few nude beaches, I've never heard the laws regarding it (until now). What I do know is the fact that if laws have been placed, I've yet to see them be followed, but that's the U.S for you... :/ What few rights we have left are still taken from us.

Reminds me of the law we (Florida) passed what last year? About bestiality, up until November it was legal because whenever we tried passing a law to outlaw it folks would add in more little titbits that had nothing to do with the subject of bestiality (such as doing drug tests on families wanting to apply for food stamps or other government help programs). But that's another story, I do agree that the whole sexualized thing about the female form is something that needs to be looked on again but I'd prefer Weasyl to be on the safe side of things especially now since they're rather small and possibly low on funds considering how new the site is.

Meii
10-17-2012, 01:26 PM
Reminds me of the law we (Florida) passed what last year? About bestiality, up until November it was legal because whenever we tried passing a law to outlaw it folks would add in more little titbits that had nothing to do with the subject of bestiality (such as doing drug tests on families wanting to apply for food stamps or other government help programs). But that's another story, I do agree that the whole sexualized thing about the female form is something that needs to be looked on again but I'd prefer Weasyl to be on the safe side of things especially now since they're rather small and possibly low on funds considering how new the site is.

Lol wat, really? Damn Florida, you really are a crazy place. And yes, it's very stupid that the female body is sexualized the way it is. That being said, I agree with Weasyl covering their tracks. I'm sure the majority of us can agree that they shouldn't have to, but it is what it is sadly.

RadioCatastrophe
10-17-2012, 01:49 PM
Lol wat, really? Damn Florida, you really are a crazy place. And yes, it's very stupid that the female body is sexualized the way it is. That being said, I agree with Weasyl covering their tracks. I'm sure the majority of us can agree that they shouldn't have to, but it is what it is sadly.

Yeah.. learned about it in my gov class when I was still in school xD
Was a.. uh.. "touchy" subject to discuss with certain groups of classmates

PMoss
10-17-2012, 10:09 PM
The MPAA isn't the best source for comparison.
I think with art we should use art as a comparison.
There are hundreds of paintings, classical to modern that show nudity in a non sexualized sense that are hung in public.
While statues were censored during the dark ages classical art is not considered pornography nore even Mature by society standards.
On the Strictest google search setting when searching classical paintings quite a few had nude figures.
We are taught art history in middle and high school and taken to museums on field trips where stuff like this is mainstay.
I think that non sexualized nudity should fall under mature.
Many artist who draw nudity on a non sexualized manner are offended that their art be lumped with porn on the adult only catergory.
I wouldn't willingly want figure drawings marked adult just because a nipple is showing. They are not porn nore do I want them associated with porn .

Fay V
10-17-2012, 10:24 PM
We're actually rewriting the ratings system right now to take a lot of feedback into account.

One thing though. Something substantial about the classical paintings and those created by the masters are they have inherent artistic value. The history, the techniques, the imagery. There is artistic value there determined by history and experts. It's not as if they hang bar napkin scribbled on a wall.
We're not here to determine if something has artistic value or not. we're not here to make a moral judgement on pornography, because frankly, there is pornography hung in art museums. Not modern edgey stuff. Take a look at Italian Renaissance painters and you'll find a fair amount of female masturbation. The work is still amazing and top quality, it is a study of the body and sexuality.

Anyway point is, the ratings are being redone and we will have an announcement soon, do not feel morally outraged if certain things are considered adult. we do need to try and protect ourselves both legally, and with the businesses that we are using to host our services.

Nix
10-17-2012, 10:38 PM
i understand your legal things, but i hope you realize that even though you're "not here to determine if something has artistic value or not", you just made it sound like nothing uploaded has artistic value simply because it hasn't been around for a couple hundred years, because it MIGHT be a scribbled-on napkin, even though in reality it could be likened to the masters. it's insulting. it's an art site. i'm going to assume that's not what you meant, but that's what it sounded like.

in a not-really-related note on the topic of scribbled-on bad napkins...have you SEEN what's hanging in galleries these days? i went to a university with a very avant garde art program, and was taught that and worse is "the epitome of artistic beauty". THAT, i don't agree with. but it's there...hanging in galleries....

Fay V
10-17-2012, 10:47 PM
i understand your legal things, but i hope you realize that even though you're "not here to determine if something has artistic value or not", you just made it sound like nothing uploaded has artistic value simply because it hasn't been around for a couple hundred years, because it MIGHT be a scribbled-on napkin, even though in reality it could be likened to the masters. it's insulting. it's an art site. i'm going to assume that's not what you meant, but that's what it sounded like.

in a not-really-related note on the topic of scribbled-on bad napkins...have you SEEN what's hanging in galleries these days? i went to a university with a very avant garde art program, and was taught that and worse is "the epitome of artistic beauty". THAT, i don't agree with. but it's there...hanging in galleries....

That's not actually how I feel at all. taking off my mod hat for a moment, I actually feel there is quite a lot with artistic value. The classics do get a pass in terms of content over modern works from what I have seen legally. That isn't to say there are not amazing works out there, just no one argues the value of classical works, because holding throughout history was enough. If that makes sense. It means for us, if some legal authority were to come in and demand we defend it, we're attempting to argue if it is artistic enough to not be obscene.

Honestly the reason I don't actually want to sit down and say what has artistic value is because a lot does. Just someone trying to learn how to draw has value, and on an art site like this we need to protect that. That is why we are trying as hard as we can to make solid, objective rules.
It isn't meant to be an insult, it's meant to be a legal cover. Our mature rating is not 18+ like other sites. so some things can be artistic, non-sexual nude, but in the eyes of the law they don't want minors seeing genitals.
So, regardless of how you feel about adult work, the adult category does not remove the value from the piece. It just means that our services and legal authorities can't come after us because little Jimmy saw a man's peepee.

Nipples are being reworked so you'll see what we did with that in just a bit.

Syntharia
10-17-2012, 10:49 PM
Titanic?

Kajoken
10-18-2012, 06:57 AM
Nipples are being reworked so you'll see what we did with that in just a bit.

What about sheath? Are those more porn, than female nipples just because they are on males? Sheath don't show anything at all.

I don't see why I should post an image under Adult, that by the way is two years on FA as mature, that shows absolutely nothing.
The image is not porn and I won't stand this. And no site I know of has +18 as mature. I call bullshit on this.

Mature and Adult is mostly to seperate tasteful nudes from porn. What you are trying to do here, is putting everything nude under porn and that's not ok at all.

Fay V
10-18-2012, 12:12 PM
What about sheath? Are those more porn, than female nipples just because they are on males? Sheath don't show anything at all.

I don't see why I should post an image under Adult, that by the way is two years on FA as mature, that shows absolutely nothing.
The image is not porn and I won't stand this. And no site I know of has +18 as mature. I call bullshit on this.

Mature and Adult is mostly to seperate tasteful nudes from porn. What you are trying to do here, is putting everything nude under porn and that's not ok at all.

I know, for a fact, on FA you must be 18 or older to view mature material. Here is an excerpt from the TOS of FA concerning their mature tag.

The ability to view adult artwork is disabled by default. By enabling the Mature flag, you agree that you are of legal age (18+) to view the material. Users found lying about their age to view mature artwork may have their aged locked or terminated without warning, depending on the account's history.
What that says is that a user is agreeing they are at least 18 to view mature works. The difference between mature and adult on FA is literally that one is porn and the other is not.

Weasyl does not have that distinction. We are not FA, we do not have a rating system like FA, we are not going to mirror FA.
On FA there is General (all ages) and Mature & Adult which require you to be 18
On Weasyl we have General (all ages) Mature/Moderate (13+) and Adult (18+). We literally can not mirror FA and allow everything that they put into mature in our mature category because it requires two different age groups.

Again, many sites require you to be 18 in order to view mature work, which is why the distinction is different.
Furaffinity, as shown above.
Inkbunny, You must agree you are 18 or older to view mature content
Deviantart, which does not allow porn, you must agree to be 18 or older to view mature content.

requiring people to be 18 for mature works is not new. Since we only have one 18 category, there are some things that are labelled mature on one site that will be adult here. It's based on age, not how we feel about the content.

Nix
10-18-2012, 01:08 PM
i think that people should grow spines. not Weasyl and it's admins necessarily. but people in general. "oh, my poor child's eyes!" you know what the odds are that your kid has seen tits if they're over 13? pretty high. whether it's over-sexualization in the media, in real life, or in a health book at school. seriously, i took health in 7th grade (12 years old) with nude drawings of both men and women. "well, that's for learning purposes". so? it's still there, we still learned what it looked like.

now, that's not really a problem with Weasyl, but with the government and media i guess. too bad they don't/can't have forums for this stuff.

RadioCatastrophe
10-18-2012, 01:20 PM
Most state governments have websites and forums actually :P

Vine
10-18-2012, 04:16 PM
Why would you want children to look at your nipple drawings anyway? Most of them aren't mature enough to appreciate the artistic value and will just have the "lol boobs" mentality.
Hormones, and all.

Temrin
10-18-2012, 05:19 PM
I agree with Vine. So much. XD

Meii
10-18-2012, 07:11 PM
Also agree with Vine on that one.

Temrin
10-18-2012, 07:20 PM
heck, some people who ARE be adults and -should- act like it, have the "lol boobs" mentality. >. >

Sooooooo. ^^;

Meii
10-18-2012, 08:16 PM
heck, some people who ARE be adults and -should- act like it, have the "lol boobs" mentality. >. >

Sooooooo. ^^;

It makes me die a little sometimes seeing how some people comment on just boobs on FA...

Hell some are immature on even serious/vent/not boob pieces and it's just like why.

Temrin
10-18-2012, 08:25 PM
yeah. its sad. I wish people would grow up. But humanity is what it is and honestly, i dont think there will ever be a time in humanities existance where all adults will act like adults. :/ Tis a shame

Rhazafax
10-19-2012, 01:15 AM
I'm personally interested to see how the ratings get adjusted. A listing of what subjects do and do not fit within the 'mature' category would be most helpful.

While I believe that the male and female bodies are nothing to get up in arms about, that may not be true for someone else. There are many people - many factions of people, even - who believe that viewing the naked human/anthropomorphized body is offensive to their delicate sensibilities (and I'm not actually being a sarcastic twit here, I'm being genuine). Though, I should think that anyone enabling their account for mature and adult content would, presumably, understand that they would then be able to see such content. The onus is on the individual to decide whether or not to enable their account to see mature or adult material. Perhaps, in light of this discussion, it might be a good idea to accept a poll from the userbase and allow them to help set guidelines for what is mature and what is adult? If the majority believe that female nipples and male sheath/flacid genitalia is 'adult', that might help set the tone for what the other subjects could be viewed as.

You have a decent userbase now, seek their input on what ratings should consider, is my vote.

Kazekai
10-22-2012, 09:11 AM
I have a question about content. One of the drawings I submitted had alcohol references in it, I set it as General because that's all it had in it. What does that actually count as? It's otherwise tame.

Thistle
11-05-2012, 09:03 AM
Have the ratings been reworked in regard to nipples? I'm trying to find an update and having no luck through the forum's search or Tumblr.

I'm asking (partially, anyway; it's been a general 'eh' I've had about the ratings for awhile) because I have a cover image for a piece in which the character's breasts are exposed. She's not focused on them, not sitting in a provocative pose, etc. so by the majority of standards, it falls into "artistic nudity." Basically it's no worse than what you would find in a National Geographic or a figure drawing course. (And it honestly feels a bit odd to pause about bare nipples with a piece that has weapons of mass destruction and talking corpses, haha.)

Fay V
11-05-2012, 02:35 PM
Have the ratings been reworked in regard to nipples? I'm trying to find an update and having no luck through the forum's search or Tumblr.

I'm asking (partially, anyway; it's been a general 'eh' I've had about the ratings for awhile) because I have a cover image for a piece in which the character's breasts are exposed. She's not focused on them, not sitting in a provocative pose, etc. so by the majority of standards, it falls into "artistic nudity." Basically it's no worse than what you would find in a National Geographic or a figure drawing course. (And it honestly feels a bit odd to pause about bare nipples with a piece that has weapons of mass destruction and talking corpses, haha.)
As of right now the ratings have not yet been reworked, exposed female nipples are still considered 18+ content.
This is not to say that the feedback has fallen on deaf ears. We are working on a more dynamic solution that takes the artists views into account, but this requires coding time, which is why there has been a pause. Sorry for the inconvenience.