I think its a good idea because instead of getting 200 prudes complaining about a work, they get one and can go take a look.

I also think much of the problem is in the TOS itself though.

TOS 1. says depictions of arousal or sexual activities are in violation

Okie, Ill go that but how can anyone look at a females genitals and decide the character is aroused (less excretions). Is pink the color? Is it swollen?

To keep artists safe from Trolls and moderators less busy perhaps TOS 1 should become:

TOS 1: The showing of genitals (male or female) and/or pubic hair is in violation. Cover the crotch.

TOS 2: No sex acts or situations of any kind including traditional and oral or fondling the groin and/or breasts. Cant touch this.

Period, nothing more to add, very clear, no guesses, nobodys offended, nobody gets censored and angry, feelings arent hurt.

This policy should be extended into the stores as well which at this time appears not to be in some instances and give the wrong impression of what is acceptable art and what is not here.

Conversely, if an image is flagged nudity then those offended by such should not look at it and offend themselves. If an image is flagged nudity then anything should be allowed with the exception of traditional illegal activities such as rape and pedophilia.

Just the lowly input from one banned I accidentally showed the pink in a marked nudity work. It was decided that the character on the far left was "aroused" though in an emotionally lamenting piece of work. The correspondence in emails from judgmental Trolls caused the piece to be ripped from my gallery and threat of suspension or banning.

The correspondence was cordial. Unfortunately requesting an account be deleted gets one banned too I have discovered.

The piece is named Piece Treaty and is on display at Thralldom.org under the name of Lakota.

Maybe as PinkLips, we can work together to fix this problem.

Sarah