Anonymous commented at 2014-04-23 00:00:13 » #1523541

Why does this have "breasts" as a tag? Because she's female and they are there? Why not tags for "eyes" and "nostrils"? They're covered, and it isn't supposed to be erotic. You might as well put "breasts" on every picture of every female. Why not put "beard" or "testicles" on the picture of every male? It's a little derogatory to label a picture with "breasts" just because it is of a woman and she has a pair, don't you think? Kind of 19th century?

9 Points Flag

Daijin commented at 2014-04-23 00:04:45 » #1523545

Actually there is criteria for the breasts tag From the wiki entry:

"If breasts are at all present, even when clothed, and are the main/secondary focus of the image, then the breasts tag is required."

I don't believe her breasts to be the main or even secondary focus of the image, so I will remove the tag. Another moderator may disagree and re-add it though.

7 Points Flag

KhightMare commented at 2014-04-23 07:30:28 » #1523643

Good on you Daijin, I agree there shouldn't be a breast tag simply because its a woman in the picture.

On a sidenote, can I say how nice the artwork is for this picture. I like how she actually has some muscle/tone. Very nice for a girl who is supposed to be Special tactics.

5 Points Flag

Mr_Mojo_Risin commented at 2015-02-04 09:39:22 » #1682331

I really like this picture. I agree with above poster. I like that slight muscle tone. So sexy.

0 Points Flag