bear in mind, this is my opinion, and I offered it as a comment on the page for the new Ava-policy "your comment has been sent, but it will be shown after moderator approval" soo, I figured I'd lodge this one in my brain by making a journal about it...

just a note, given society, I find it hard to believe that "bouncing boobs" and "jiggling butts" are really TOO suggestive...By this way of thinking, any general-tagged piece of artwork could be considered sexually charged simply because of a female character having a BUST...hell, the very concept of furry females is "offensive" to a lot of non-furs... by that token, what workplace would someone get in trouble in for looking at a community page where someone has a (clothed) "bouncing boob" ava, but wouldn't get in trouble for just browsing otherwise? as a member of plenty of other forums and community groups, I would like to point out there are for more "suggestive" things used as avas on there without people getting their panties in a wad...

to explain, you go to a lot of forums, things such as... car forums, for example... I remember back in my days of browsing honda forums, I would see anime girls with bouncy boob avas, and their shirts were honda shirts... people thought they were cool... this comes back to the concept of "furry is unacceptable" because most people don't have a problem with human characters in that kind of pose or jiggling their jumblies... or the other side of the issue, which is RL sexual in nature...the idea of a woman getting offended by the avatar some person umpteen-hundred miles away uses as their avatar... and then going home and watching television without even a shred of understanding of the irony of the situation...

bottom line... its just another example of the fact that people USUALLY only get offended at a person, not at something like a name or avatar... it happens in online shit ALL THE TIME, even on here...person A doesn't like person B, so person A finds some textbook i that didn't get dotted, and QQs about it to get person B in trouble... maybe it is a character/guild/team name in WoW, and you PK'd the douche that reported you and he got butthurt... or maybe someone just doesn't like you on FA and so they dog your gallery looking for a reason to get you in trouble (which I have seen happen) but I just think sometimes people really need to lay off the cheez its and just think for a second about where the line really is...

[edit] something else that just occurred to me, that can fall into one of two schools of thought, either the "you know, you're right" school, or the "wah wah, too bad so sad" school... if I were an admin, I would really try to refrain from anything that involved banning avatars that had reached widespread use simply due to the fact that people actually pay money for artists to make good quality ones, especially the animated ones...naturally if you can find a damn good reason to ban it, then yeah, but I would think that wouldn't have been a grey area in the first place...and it should have been dealt with AS it was becoming popular, not months down the road, after probably hundreds or possibly thousands of dollars have shifted hands... one must always remember, if you go around and piss off large clusters of people at a time, eventually you go the way of atari... sega... or Bleem...

further curiousity... i'm guessing "calvin peeing" style avatars are banned too, which falls into what degree of socially acceptable? because calvin peeing stickers have been in widespread use for almost 20 years and are about as offensive as as...well...not very offensive thing... "NO FEAR" stickers are more offensive than them... lol... actually, I'm a christian and I am more tolerant of calvin peeing stickers than calvin praying stickers, but thats just a bit of digression...