Topic: Why is "heavy bondage", when no sex/implied sex or genitalia/implied is present labeled as explicit content?

The tagging system around bondage is rather confusing for me

for instance this post counts as Explicit: https://e621.net/posts/6122804

And I am just wondering where we cross the line on what "heavy bondage" is and where it's just normal bondage.

Someone in a medieval style gibbet would be heavy bondage but it's not explicit if the character has a featureless design or has pants. With the case of the example post, I am more of assuming its because of the breath play, and while I understand that is detail that would make it explicit, the tagging rules say "any content with obvious "extreme" fetish purposes (e.g. heavy BDSM and BDSM toys, hard/fatal vore, scat, watersports, etc...)"

Perhaps I am reading too much into "tag only what you see" and not counting implied things but thats where I get confused

I am aware that for instance a gag that goes down throat would be a sex toy, but most restraints being determined as a sex toy is still up to interpretation. Rope, tape, or handcuffs aren't sex toys, why would the same thing but made out of a different material like leather automatically make it one?

I feel that the "questionable" tag will not have much use if we keep going this route of determining anything with potential fetish elements as being the same category as messy and sticky hard sex

It was already debated before that a ball gag isn't a sex toy either, unless you make it one as discussed here and therefore shouldn't automatically be explicit: https://e621.net/forum_topics/34167

thoughts?

See the wiki for bondage and bondage_gear.

• bondage: Bondage is usually rated Explicit, except for light bondage (done with common household items and similar) which may be rated Questionable.
• bondage_gear: Usage of any gear that is specifically designed for BDSM should be rated Explicit.

Also, I believe @NotMeNotYou summed it up pretty well?

notmenotyou said:
BDSM gear is fine at questionable, including the ball gag varieties, assuming nothing else is going on. Once things go into gimp suit ranges or vacuum beds it might tip towards explicit depending on what exactly is present, and of course how it's presented. Someone posing wearing a ball gag should probably not be explicit unless something else is going on in addition to that, but should almost certainly be questionable.

Gags made from everyday items or tape would depend on the context on whether it's a sexual situation or not. Your average cartoon damsel in distress on a set of rail tracks will most likely for safe without a second thought, a character mummified in tape with a ball gag visible through the tape will less likely to be safe.

In short, the presence of BDSM gear (excl. sex toys) is not inherently explicit unless they are actively being used.
Paired with what is said on e621:ratings, you have to consider if the post in question contains any "extreme" fetish, i.e., heavy BDSM or "BDSM toys" (being in use).

The cuff_(restraint)/metal_cuffs and collar would not be inherently considered as bondage_gear, but the bondage_gloves/leather_cuffs and the muzzle with blindfold attachment would be considered so.
Moreover, the muzzle used is specifically designed for breath_play purposes (note the small tube in the front, which is usually connected to an internal mouthpiece). It really should be tagged as gimp_mask (assuming that is the proper tag).
Thus, the post you linked would be rightly considered as Explicit.