AIBooru

Loli/shota check thread

Posted under Tags

user 1154

Thank you for the thread. It might be a good idea as well to add examples of what is/is not loli/shota to their respective wikis since those posts are not hidden to the general public unlike on Danbooru.

Exactly 751 out of 1969 explicit posts of flandre_scarlet on Danbooru are tagged loli, so this seems like a good post to start a check with.
post #5615 - No breasts, no hips, and a char often seen as a loli. I'm leaning simply petite because of the longer torso and smaller head, thoughts?
post #5614 - Since I mentioned its sister post, I may as well list it as well, especially because it seems more clear cut to be what I presume is not loli.
post #2775 - Take away the explicit rating and mark as child or just nothing?

post #10491 & post #10485 - I can see the former as petite due to the body, but the latter is more questionable.

post #10287 - This one really make me uncomfortable, the face looks pre-adolescent. Maybe it is just the realism getting me. Is the consensus that it is petite?

post #8997 & post #8996 - Not loli right? Should probably have the petite tag added for both eventually still though.

post #6113 - The very large head to body ratio on a petite body, but there are breasts. More an unintentional result of early outputs.

post #6037 - Loli, toddlercon, or just overly rendered chibi? post #6034 hints the intention, but still...

post #5047, post #5051, post #5055 - all loli? post #5052 makes me realize that some characters clearly shift age drastically thanks to different outputs, something you don't really see in non AI art.

post #3760 - Petite?
post #3757 - Loli?

post #3503 - Clearly meant to be a 17 year old petite catgirl, but NAI spit out short limbs and a big head. I don't think its loli, but questionable enough for a second look I guess.

Reply
Lyren

Baperb said:

post #5615 - No breasts, no hips, and a char often seen as a loli. I'm leaning simply petite because of the longer torso and smaller head, thoughts?
post #5614 - Since I mentioned its sister post, I may as well list it as well, especially because it seems more clear cut to be what I presume is not loli.
post #2775 - Take away the explicit rating and mark as child or just nothing?

post #10491 & post #10485 - I can see the former as petite due to the body, but the latter is more questionable.

post #10287 - This one really make me uncomfortable, the face looks pre-adolescent. Maybe it is just the realism getting me. Is the consensus that it is petite?

post #8997 & post #8996 - Not loli right? Should probably have the petite tag added for both eventually still though.

post #6113 - The very large head to body ratio on a petite body, but there are breasts. More an unintentional result of early outputs.

post #6037 - Loli, toddlercon, or just overly rendered chibi? post #6034 hints the intention, but still...

post #5047, post #5051, post #5055 - all loli? post #5052 makes me realize that some characters clearly shift age drastically thanks to different outputs, something you don't really see in non AI art.

post #3760 - Petite?
post #3757 - Loli?

post #3503 - Clearly meant to be a 17 year old petite catgirl, but NAI spit out short limbs and a big head. I don't think its loli, but questionable enough for a second look I guess.

My own thoughts on each post:
post #5615 post #5614 longer torso is a good point but I am still learning towards loli for both.
post #2775 it doesn't always have to be Q/E for loli, so rating:s loli would be my tagging for this one.
post #10491 no not loli at all, just petite - post #10485 Longer body than with the Scarlet pics mentioned above as well as thick thighs so I would say petite.
post #10287 as mentioned in DMs own opinion is petite and not loli due to body shape.
post #8996 no, post #8997 is inching closer to loli but I would say no. Petite for both.
post #6113 Just petite in my opinion. Very tall girl.
post #6037 never tagged toddlercon but I am leaning towards it with this post.
post #5047 post #5055 yes, and for post #5051 most likely oppai loli tag as well.
post #3760 leaning towards loli I'd say
post #3757 yes loli
post #3503 I would say loli for this one too.

Reply
Lyren

antlers_anon said:

Need help with post #12655 not a loli but looks rather young? Is this petite? I checked the wiki and other posts tagged with the tag but I don't really understand what should be tagged, sorry.

Given the fact that this image is upper body and we don't even see the legs - breasts, shoulders and arms are the indicators here which tag to use and based on those body parts I would not give this image petite either.

Updated

Reply
antlers anon

Hey, it's me again. With loli problems again. I checked the search results for realistic loli and the only results that are not banned (btw why are the banned ones marked as "Active Banned" and not just "Banned"?) are my uploads. I don't consider them lolis and that's why I uploaded them in the first place but if we're calling them lolis shouldn't they get removed too? I don't mind removing them at all, in fact I don't like being the sole exception to the no realistic loli rule.

Of course I'd prefer if we dropped the rule and only left it at forbidding photorealistic loli/shotas but if that's not possible, my question is if post #13182, post #10413, post #9832, post #9809, post #8609 and post #6222 really are realistic lolis. If someone can confirm, then I'll remove them right away and upload something else instead.

Reply
user 2

antlers_anon said:

(btw why are the banned ones marked as "Active Banned" and not just "Banned"?)

The Banned flag is in addition to other status flags. Active Banned just means it's both active (approved) and banned. It could also be Deleted Banned, Pending Banned, Appealed Banned.

Reply
user 1154

redjoe23 said:

post #13463

The whole set is realistic loli, right?

I wouldn't call that realistic, even squinting from a distance it looks very stylized. As far as loli goes, post #13467 looks like it could perhaps match AIBooru's definition of loli, maybe post #13468 too, but the rest are probably just petite. Considering the prompt contains toddler though, I would certainly say they were trying. Always interesting to read some prompts here.

Reply
antlers anon

amagaeru said:

Sorry.
Did I violate the posting rules?
I was careless in thinking it was not "photorealistic".

I'd say you're safe. The only thing discussed here is whether it should be tagged as loli or not. Lolis are allowed as long as they're not realistic and wouldn't say yours is.

Reply
Yradnegerar

Lyren said:

loli or female_child or neither? post #23065 - it's S due to a lot of skin but it's not exactly lewd either.

I think it should be female_child and that would need to automatically give it the tag child(dont know of it does) also i dont think it has brown_background but that's up to you

Reply
Mintboard

Anju_the_Elegant_Kitsune said:

I'd say it's probably good to upload. It doesn't really stand out as something looking akin to a real child to me.

Thanks for the response.
On that note, I uploaded post #38849 (https://www.pixiv.net/en/artworks/109697169, first image), but it was deleted as being "realistic loli", but if you ask me, it looks pretty comparable in body type to post #34875, that is, more petite.
If I had to put an age on it (going by the wiki definition for loli, that is, appearing to be around 3-12), I'd put the body type as being more like 14 or 15.
Sidenote, I know the fingers are meshed together, but the rest of the image is so exceptionally good (imo) that for AI, I'd personally be willing to overlook it as far as approval goes, but obviously it's not my call. Thoughts?

Reply
ANJU

Mintboard said:

Thanks for the response.
On that note, I uploaded post #38849 (https://www.pixiv.net/en/artworks/109697169, first image), but it was deleted as being "realistic loli", but if you ask me, it looks pretty comparable in body type to post #34875, that is, more petite.
If I had to put an age on it (going by the wiki definition for loli, that is, appearing to be around 3-12), I'd put the body type as being more like 14 or 15.
Sidenote, I know the fingers are meshed together, but the rest of the image is so exceptionally good (imo) that for AI, I'd personally be willing to overlook it as far as approval goes, but obviously it's not my call. Thoughts?

The post didn't get deleted, it got hidden because posts tagged realistic loli aren't visible to anyone below approver-level iirc (kinda like how loli is blocked on Danbooru for anyone who isn't a Gold+ user). Anyway, while I'm definitely not a perfect judge, I agree that the post isn't realistic loli either so I've taken the tag off.

Reply
antlers anon

Anju_the_Elegant_Kitsune said:

I was looking through realistic loli posts because I was comparing some of those posts to an upload in the queue and came across a small set of posts I want opinions on; post #23890, post #28796, post #28801, post #28802, post #28804, and post #28805.

I really don't feel that they should be tagged as realistic loli, but I fully admit I'm not a great judge of this so I don't know if the tag is appropriate for any of the above or not.

for post #23890 it's borderline loli, I vote not but I'm not sure. For the remaining ones I'd say female_child and not realistic_loli

Reply
Xovaryu

noppersnop said:

i tagged
post #58981
and
post #58986
as loli just to be safe, but i am not sure.
i used (loli) as a metadata tag but the resulting girls look older than general loli tag IMO

And this is precisely why I think that some kind of "soft" loli tag like teenage_loli or whatever would be very, very sane, and why Danbooru's system is just completely out of touch.
I totally see why you would tag these images that way as they just seem a little spicy and questionable, and certainly qualify for "I need some ID before you can enter the club" so people might want to have that still blacklisted... but "roughly between the age of 3 to 12"...? That's roughly a very hard no if we're being serious, ain't it?

Reply
Lopi999

io said:

japan has increased age concent from 13yo to 16 years old.

someone who can change the wiki , change the loli description please

Why would it need to be changed just because of that? Also I'm fairly certain that the "age of consent is 13 in Japan thing" has always been more complicated than it was for the longest while, because last I recall, when that law was actually that way, it meant moreso that 13-17 year old can consent to 13-17 year olds, and not any older or younger than that.

Reply
io

Lopi999 said:

Why would it need to be changed just because of that? Also I'm fairly certain that the "age of consent is 13 in Japan thing" has always been more complicated than it was for the longest while, because last I recall, when that law was actually that way, it meant moreso that 13-17 year old can consent to 13-17 year olds, and not any older or younger than that.

the 16yo age law be made is im sure one of the reason is because some east asian women still look child even in 20 years old.

also not all girls that already in 1st middle school automatically gonna have adult minded and adult body

Reply
Lopi999

io said:

the 16yo age law be made is im sure one of the reason is because some east asian women still look child even in 20 years old.

also not all girls that already in 1st middle school automatically gonna have adult minded and adult body

The "some east asian women still look child even in 20 years old. " is literally why the definition for loli applies if the character looks like they're physically a child, so that things like "10,000 year old fairy" are marked as loli as well if they appear that way. This is approached from a western perspective, and to western audiences, they are about around the age range that the wiki says it is.

Reply
jurassicparklionkingfan

io said:

japan has increased age concent from 13yo to 16 years old.

someone who can change the wiki , change the loli description please

Loli is a fictional body type, it has no thing to do with age.

Also, The age of consent in Japan at the federal level was 13, but pretty much every prefecture raised that to 16 or older, so the law change is more of getting it up to standard of the rest of the country.

Reply
strong hand

dien_rann said:

For post #40545 & post #18840 - is this female child a loli because her mother has large breasts?

No, and why is that post even rated sensitive? There's nothing in the image to warrant that.

Edit: Ok, post #18840 does have cleavage, so that would count as sensitive, but I still don't see why the child should be tagged as loli. It is my understanding that the character would have to either be shown in an erotic manner, or be involved in some erotic/sexual activity for them to be tagged that. If it's something as mild as cleavage, I don't see why we should be tagging the child as loli.

Reply
Lyren

strong_hand said:

No, and why is that post even rated sensitive? There's nothing in the image to warrant that.

Edit: Ok, post #18840 does have cleavage, so that would count as sensitive, but I still don't see why the child should be tagged as loli. It is my understanding that the character would have to either be shown in an erotic manner, or be involved in some erotic/sexual activity for them to be tagged that. If it's something as mild as cleavage, I don't see why we should be tagging the child as loli.

forum #2258

Reply
Sirius fw

Penance said:

If that doesn't look loli to you, please stop uploading loli. @Sirius_fw Stop removing loli from posts like that.

@Penance, I really don’t care if this tag is there or not, I just wanted to understand the situation.
Here in Wiki it is written that “loli” is from 3 to 12 years.
Do you seriously think that this girl looks 12 years old or younger?
post #76314
It’s just that in my opinion she looks at least 15 years old; in fact, I would say that she looks between 15 and 20 years old.
Is it really just because a girl is skinny and flat-chested that she must be a loli? Even if she doesn't look like a child?

Updated

Reply
user 2

I don't know why you're fixating so hard on that. It's a guideline, not a hard requirement. Look at other loli posts and use that as a baseline to determine whether or not something qualifies. The reason age is mentioned at all is to prevent people tagging loli on characters that look like the average teenage anime girl, which clearly does not fit this situation. Remember that loli is hidden by default so you are expected to be vigilant when tagging/uploading it, or anything that could be considered it. A flat-chested clearly underage character is still within the bounds.

Reply
Sirius fw

Penance said:

I don't know why you're fixating so hard on that. It's a guideline, not a hard requirement. Look at other loli posts and use that as a baseline to determine whether or not something qualifies. The reason age is mentioned at all is to prevent people tagging loli on characters that look like the average teenage anime girl, which clearly does not fit this situation. Remember that loli is hidden by default so you are expected to be vigilant when tagging/uploading it, or anything that could be considered it. A flat-chested clearly underage character is still within the bounds.

@Penance, I wouldn't say that I'm "fixing so hard on that".
I really just wanted to understand the logic behind this tag.

Well, in short, I still don’t clearly understand how this tag works. But okay, if someone tags my post as “loli”, then I won’t remove it.

P.S.
Probably we just have different views on things. For example, I have seen many times how my posts were rated “Sensitive”, although in my opinion they are absolutely definitely “General”...

Reply
strong hand

Sirius_fw said:

By this logic, why aren’t these arts tagged with the “loli” tag, but my art should be tagged?
post #74923
post #75965
post #67463
post #64743
post #33593
post #8261

As for my post (post #75965), I guess it was the waistline as well as the other images in the same set (e.g. post #75966, post #75952) with seemingly wide hips and (again) pronounced waistline that made me think of her as just petite, and not a loli.
As for the others:
post #74923 - should porbably be tagged loli,
post #67463 - preadolescent kids don't have those body proportions and are most definitely not the same height as a truck,
post #64743 - borderline loli,
post #33593 - could be loli, but has a tomboyish look and the torso is kinda elongated, which is probably why it doesn't immediately strike me as one,
post #8261 - slightly wider hips, as well as the overall body proportions make her look more adolescent than loli.

Reply
Sirius fw

strong_hand said:

As for my post (post #75965), I guess it was the waistline as well as the other images in the same set (e.g. post #75966, post #75952) with seemingly wide hips and (again) pronounced waistline that made me think of her as just petite, and not a loli.
As for the others:
post #74923 - should porbably be tagged loli,
post #67463 - preadolescent kids don't have those body proportions and are most definitely not the same height as a truck,
post #64743 - borderline loli,
post #33593 - could be loli, but has a tomboyish look and the torso is kinda elongated, which is probably why it doesn't immediately strike me as one,
post #8261 - slightly wider hips, as well as the overall body proportions make her look more adolescent than loli.

@strong_hand, suppose...then, based on these criteria...why is it "loli"?

post #76756
post #75627
post #74697
post #74799
post #74736
post #74640

Reply
strong hand

Sirius_fw said:

@strong_hand, suppose...then, based on these criteria...why is it "loli"?

post #76756
post #75627
post #74697
post #74799
post #74736
post #74640

Well, I feel like there are always several factors that go into it, it's hard to tell why one image might come across more like a petite teen/adult while another looks like a loli. I personally wouldn't tag post #74697, post #74799 and post #74640 as loli. post #74736 also doesn't necessarily strike me as a prepubescent, but I guess people tag it based on the character.
As for why post #76756 and post #75627 are lolis, I would say it comes down to the head-to-body ratio in those cases.

Edit: Actually, post #75627 also doesn't seem to have a waistline and the torso generally looks like that of a child.

Updated

Reply
Sirius fw

strong_hand said:

Well, I feel like there are always several factors that go into it, it's hard to tell why one image might come across more like a petite teen/adult while another looks like a loli. I personally wouldn't tag post #74697, post #74799 and post #74640 as loli. post #74736 also doesn't necessarily strike me as a prepubescent, but I guess people tag it based on the character.
As for why post #76756 and post #75627 are lolis, I would say it comes down to the head-to-body ratio in those cases.

Edit: Actually, post #75627 also doesn't seem to have a waistline and the torso generally looks like that of a child.

@strong_hand, hah, well, I mean, I still understand almost nothing)))

It seems as if this tag is being tagged simply according to one’s own opinion, without any precisely defined criteria. Some may think it's a loli, others may not.
So I think it won’t be a problem if I continue tagging my art as I think correctly. And if anyone corrects the tags, I won’t pay attention.

Reply
Sirius fw

maimaimai said:

@Sirius_fw
You almost only do loli generations and now you say that you can't tell if it's loli or not... This is funny.

@maimaimai
Well I can usually tell.

But sometimes there are difficulties.

Well I just thought that
"loli" = "child"+"rating:s/q/e"

Well, for example, in my opinion this girl
post #76314
at least 15 years old in appearance, somewhere between 15 and 20 years old.
So she is clearly not "child" and definitely not "loli".

Well, in general this is not a very common situation, these are the posts where the girls seem to me to be too old to be “loli”.
post #76314
post #76387
post #76311
post #58831
post #57212
Well, that is, there are only 5 pieces of art out of my 250 where I disagree with this tag.

Reply
1