the artist had this tagged as netorare on their pixiv post
Even if that's true (I can't verify it because the original Pixiv post was taken down), there's no evidence in the image to suggest it's netorare, so the tag doesn't apply according to the wiki.
Even if that's true (I can't verify it because the original Pixiv post was taken down), there's no evidence in the image to suggest it's netorare, so the tag doesn't apply according to the wiki.
then what does that say about rape images that don't have explicit dialogue to suggest it's rape? it still gets the tag. i originally tagged it ntr because the pixiv post was tagged as such, otherwise i would have left it alone.
people say stuff like, 'the blacklist exists bro", when people complain about stuff they don't want to see, but it's useless if things aren't even getting the appropriate tags.
then what does that say about rape images that don't have explicit dialogue to suggest it's rape? it still gets the tag. i originally tagged it ntr because the pixiv post was tagged as such, otherwise i would have left it alone.
people say stuff like, 'the blacklist exists bro", when people complain about stuff they don't want to see, but it's useless if things aren't even getting the appropriate tags.
And how would you know it was netorare without the Pixiv tag, which can't even be seen anymore? At least when it's in the commentary, we can know the artist's intent. All we have is unverifiable claims from you about how it was tagged on Pixiv.
Rape doesn't need dialogue because there are other ways to tell what's going on. And some posts might seem a bit rapey but still not qualify because it's not obvious enough.
I can concur the Pixiv post was tagged NTR, having checked it personally before. But although it's nice to have context from the source, Pixiv tagging is not always what they seem, and can be quite... "colored".
Regaredless of source's tag and commentary, since there's no visual of any NTR, the tag was removed.
Leave a comment