# Guidelines for Categorizing as Mature or Adult?



## feroaxes (Feb 3, 2009)

Is there any way that there can be established a guideline of what is considered General, Mature and Adult?

I've seen many, many blatantly sexual pictures, with exposed genitalia, and even erect penises that due to the fact there was no penetration occurring, it wasn't labeled as Adult.

I use as an example Huskie666's most recent piece:
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/1956178/
(Not singling her out, she's merely the most recent example I've seen of it)

Here we have an obviously sexual picture, and even by the title it's merely between positions in a sexual session, with fully bared vulva and fully erect penis....

And yet because there is no penetration occuring.... It's labeled as Mature, not Adult.


I've seen many, many cases of that situation.  As well as pussycat pinups (Blatantly sexual pinup, showing off the vulva) and whatever the male equivalent is (Where the male is sporting and showing off a full erection). 



I'm merely suggesting that in the submission page, there be a simple guideline next to the radio buttons of "General, Mature, Adult" more than "Suggested for X audience".


For Mature, I personally would categorize it as anything showing nudity, or excessive violence.   For Adult, I would personally say that involves any obviously sexual nudity, in which genitalia are displayed.


A simple, unobtrusive, not preventing anyone from being able to upload anything, just help those rare people who don't want to see porn be hit with porn because "They're not actively having sex!" or something along that lines.


----------



## Poetigress (Feb 3, 2009)

Since there's currently no way to filter Adult work out without also filtering out Mature, I'm not sure what the practical purpose of the guidelines would be.


----------



## Bokracroc (Feb 3, 2009)

Poetigress said:


> Since there's currently no way to filter Adult work out without also filtering out Mature, I'm not sure what the practical purpose of the guidelines would be.


^ This.
Until there's a way to filter Adult out, Guidlelines for Mature/Adult are a waste of time considering both show up with the Filter on/off/whatever.


----------



## Stratelier (Feb 3, 2009)

Bokracroc said:


> ^ This.
> Until there's a way to filter Adult out, Guidlelines for Mature/Adult are a waste of time considering both show up with the Filter on/off/whatever.


Don't act as if it's going to stay that way forever.  If you don't draw the line now, a Mature-instead-of-Adult piece is going to be reported as a _real_ violation later.


----------



## feroaxes (Feb 4, 2009)

Stratadrake said:


> Don't act as if it's going to stay that way forever.  If you don't draw the line now, a Mature-instead-of-Adult piece is going to be reported as a _real_ violation later.




I agree on that.  Plus... How hard would it be to expand the one line text description for the "Mature" and "Adult" radio buttons in the submission window to something other than "For X Audiences."  It's not like it's going to be a big Admin hassle and whatnot.  Just a simple text change for now.

And to be honest....   Everyone says that it wouldn't make a difference anyway....  Then let me rearrange that statement:

What difference would it make?  Why not do it?  It's not even changing code, merely text, and it won't intrude on anyone's ability to submit anything that they were allowed to submit priorly

Nobody would get upset at this point, and who knows, maybe by the time there is a way to filter Adult from Mature, people will accept that switch far easier.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Feb 4, 2009)

Hmm.  Only problem is that everyone's views on what is adult and what is mature are different.

But I suppose guidelines would be a good idea.  Certainly would help define what is mature, that way some mature items wouldn't be mistakeningly marked as general audience.


----------



## Stratelier (Feb 4, 2009)

The FA wiki *used to have* stated guidelines defining what constitutes "Mature" or "Adult".
>>> http://forums.furaffinity.net/showthread.php?t=29306#post646886

Can we propose some new guidelines to be officially incorporated into the AUP/wherever, then?


*General* - This label is intended for submissions that are generally acceptable for all ages (e.g., "kid-friendly"), which either contain no offensive content whatsoever (e.g., depictions of nudity, violence, etc.) at all, or for which content is only mildly offensive and would _not_ require a 'Mature' or 'Adult' warning as defined below.


*Mature* - This label is for submissions that contain some offensive content or themes but which does not mandate an 'Adult' label (defined below).  A Mature label _must_ be issued for submissions that involve or depict nudity in an artistic (non-sexual) manner, depictions of blood and/or serious violence, racist or nonexplicit sexual themes.  Alternatively, the submitter can at their discretion apply the Mature warning to any submission not requiring an Adult label, regardless of its content, if they wish to restrict the availability of the submission and who is allowed to view it.

Note that since we are a furry site and many submissions feature animal-based subjects, "nudity" is generally accepted as the representation of exposed genetalia (e.g. penis or 'sheath', vagina, and anus) and/or exposed breasts, regardless of the depicted subject's species, gender, or natural state of dress or undress.


*Adult* - This label is for submissions that may contain patently offensive themes or content, which would be clearly unacceptable for users under the age of 18 to view.  An Adult label _must_ be issued if the submission involves or depicts explicit sexual nudity or activity (e.g: male erections, semen, intercourse, use of sexual objects or toys); alternatively, since this is the highest level content warning in our system, the submitter may at their discretion voluntarily apply an Adult label to any submission regardless of its content, or whether an Adult label would otherwise be required.


----------



## feroaxes (Feb 4, 2009)

Actually... I don't think there should be much confusion on what Mature and Adult are....    

General:  PG-13 Rated movie content or less.

Mature:  R Rated movie content.

Adult: NC-17 Rated movie content.



You can see boobs, and even full frontal nude (male and female) in R rated movies.  You can even see sex scenes where the genitailia are hidden.  You'll never see nude erect penises, or a spread leg shot of a vulva, or graphic sex.  Those are reserved for porno movies.


----------



## Stratelier (Feb 4, 2009)

feroaxes said:


> Actually... I don't think there should be much confusion on what Mature and Adult are....
> 
> General:  PG-13 Rated movie content or less.
> 
> ...


Right, but try phrasing it in a way that _isn't relative to someone else's system_.

(Did you know that the "PG13" was originally introduced merely as a halfway point between "PG" and "R", literally a "too strong for a PG, but doesn't deserve an R" ?)


----------



## Valerion (Feb 4, 2009)

Stratadrake said:


> Right, but try phrasing it in a way that _isn't relative to someone else's system_.
> 
> (Did you know that the "PG13" was originally introduced merely as a halfway point between "PG" and "R", literally a "too strong for a PG, but doesn't deserve an R" ?)



Agreed.  It's hard to relate to a ratings system if you're not familiar with it, and not all of us lives in the US  

I would suggest some examples would be good to add to the wiki.  Users could then be referred to that from the submissions page for more information.


----------



## kamperkiller (Feb 4, 2009)

looks like a few of you have a case of shut the hell up. look there are plenty of thing on this site that you or I don't like but this is the world of technology. like with TV if you find something you don't like the move on, change the channel. all your doing is trying to screw it up for the rest of us. you dont like what you see then hit back on you keyboard or even if you are to lazy for that instal a parint filter. when it reads the content of the page it removes it from view.

if that's too much for you go here: http://www.disney.com


----------



## Stratelier (Feb 4, 2009)

kamperkiller said:


> looks like a few of you have a case of shut the hell up.


Go take your own advice.

Now, back on topic...  the thing about MPAA ratings system is that it's been established for a long time in the US, it's become a part of US film culture.  There are so many examples of each rating that you can look at a given film and guess what it should be, even without stopping to consider the exact criteria that define what the rating is.

With something like FA's GMA classification, what guidelines we _used_ to have were not particularly specific.  Pretty vague, actually.  The trouble with assuming that people "know" what should constitute a given rating is that you wind up with something like Loki's wager:  Staff can't particularly enforce a rule when nobody's bothered to actually define it.

On the other hand, when you _do_ have specific guidelines, draw clear lines between General/Mature/Adult, you'll always get two or three jerks who want to put just one toe over that line to see if you'll react.

I will only briefly mention this, guidelines for content advisories on the site Fanart Central.  I hate it.  Hate it hate it hate it.  Ironically, I'm the one who wrote them in the first place (and maybe that's why).  They're horribly convoluted, bipolar (too detailed, too vague), some of them are not even defined and/or said definitions are not even enforced.

Ideally, rules and guidelines should satisfy 90% of the userbase, be clear and concise and without ambiguity or loopholes for trolls to exploit, and when new rules/guidelines are formed, should not be a specific change from the previous rules/guidelines.  That's hard to do, and the results frequently suck.

(Also, the Fanart Central site originally did have a rating box with options labelled 'G', 'PG', 'PG13', 'R', 'NC17', the upside being that staff never had to define those labels, but the downside being that they weren't technically allowed to use those labels (film labels are, _in fact_, trademarked by the MPAA) and as such the labels were dumped in the site's v2.0 upgrade.


----------



## TakeWalker (Feb 5, 2009)

Is it really that difficult to look up what the various film labels mean? You've got this big thing called the internet just sitting, waiting for you to use it.


----------



## Stratelier (Feb 5, 2009)

TakeWalker said:


> Is it really that difficult to look up what the various film labels mean? You've got this big thing called the internet just sitting, waiting for you to use it.


True, but that's not even the point.  Sure, we can say "comparable to [MPAA rating]", but for sake of clarity and completeness, the _actual definitions_ need to be worded in non-relative terms.

The "M" in MPAA is for "motion" after all, whereas most submissions to FA are still images. 

Additionally, as a rebuttal to kamperkiller, since FA's userbase already has a loose understanding of what the GMA labels mean, the only thing that actually needs to be defined is that that 'understanding' is.  I.e. the labels receive definitions that already match how most people use them in their submissions.


----------



## Rhainor (Feb 6, 2009)

Stratadrake said:


> The FA wiki *used to have* stated guidelines defining what constitutes "Mature" or "Adult".
> >>> http://forums.furaffinity.net/showthread.php?t=29306#post646886
> 
> Can we propose some new guidelines to be officially incorporated into the AUP/wherever, then?
> ...



^  I like this.


----------



## Stratelier (Feb 7, 2009)

Rhainor said:


> ^  I like this.


I don't   My sense of self-criticism must have kicked in early....


----------



## Rhainor (Feb 10, 2009)

Stratadrake said:


> I don't   My sense of self-criticism must have kicked in early....


lol.

Seriously, though, I think it's damn near perfect.


----------



## Firehazard (Feb 10, 2009)

Stratadrake said:


> (film labels are, _in fact_, trademarked by the MPAA)


Which makes me wonder how whoever decides the ratings for TV shows (the FCC, perhaps?) is able to use "TV-G" and "TV-PG."


----------



## TehSean (Feb 10, 2009)

Always pick Adult to be safe.


----------



## TakeWalker (Feb 10, 2009)

Firehazard said:


> Which makes me wonder how whoever decides the ratings for TV shows (the FCC, perhaps?) is able to use "TV-G" and "TV-PG."



Because those are entirely different labels. They have "TV-" in the front. And I'm being 100% serious.


----------



## Stratelier (Feb 11, 2009)

Firehazard said:


> Which makes me wonder how whoever decides the ratings for TV shows (the FCC, perhaps?) is able to use "TV-G" and "TV-PG."


What TakeWalker said.  You may as well ask why Taco Bell doesn't sue the pants off of Taco Time because of the word "taco".

A.k.a. *only* the G, PG, PG13, R, and NC17 labels are MPAA trademarks. TV-G et al. are not.  Did you know that the old "X" rating (since replaced by NC17) was never trademarked?  The MPAA thought that allowing film producers to self-apply the X label would be a good thing.  However, the exploitation/pornography market snagged on to it and wouldn't let go, which is why "X-rated" is now synonymous with porn flicks.

As it stands, FA can't just ripoff the MPAA's labels with something like "FA-X", "FA-R", and "FA-G".  (I hope the reason should be obvious!)


----------



## Xaerun (Feb 11, 2009)

Stratadrake said:


> What TakeWalker said.  You may as well ask why Taco Bell doesn't sue the pants off of Taco Time because of the word "taco".
> 
> A.k.a. *only* the G, PG, PG13, R, and NC17 labels are MPAA trademarks. TV-G et al. are not.  Did you know that the old "X" rating (since replaced by NC17) was never trademarked?  The MPAA thought that allowing film producers to self-apply the X label would be a good thing.  However, the exploitation/pornography market snagged on to it and wouldn't let go, which is why "X-rated" is now synonymous with porn flicks.
> 
> As it stands, FA can't just ripoff the MPAA's labels with something like "FA-X", "FA-R", and "FA-G".  (I hope the reason should be obvious!)



Shame really. I'd quite like to see some "FA-G" rated art.


----------



## Adrimor (Feb 11, 2009)

Um. Since you can't choose to show only Mature art and not Adult anyway, you're basically just playing ducks and drakes here.

You might as well be arguing whether a block of code should be Private or Protected if it's only going to be commented out anyway.


----------



## Stratelier (Feb 12, 2009)

AdriNoMa said:


> Um. Since you can't choose to show only Mature art and not Adult anyway, you're basically just playing ducks and drakes here.


Nope.  Especially since the recently-revived Search feature can individually target General, Mature, and/or Adult pieces.


----------

