Man, thaat's mess up. Why would such athing be banned?

P.S. I envy your photoshop skills.

I would have nothing against the spiderwoman with nipples.

But I agree, there is a lot of grey area in things that people will shamelessly attack : /

Talk to Uncia 2000 (or I think thats close to the name). Go to the administrator with 2000 in his name.

Photomanips showing 'secondary sex characteristics' of the actual model (female nipples, genitals) aren't allowed because they are based on photographs, and oftentimes there's no way to verify the age. If they're edited out and totally redone by the artist, then that's getting into a grey area that an admin is going to have to make a decision about. It looks like you edited that image heavily enough that it's not really the model's own body anymore, but more of your own creation.

The TOS says that adult photos aren't allowed, so if people are submitting minimally edited adult photographs (like just changing the skin color and nothing more), that means they're breaking the site rules and should be reported.

Photomanips are legally touchy because they originate from photographs of actual humans. If they are deemed to be sexually explicit (by anyone who decides it is such--not just a FA admin--), and lodges a complaint, the site owner must have a model relase form on file proving the person/s in the photo are of legal age. If not, all kinds of legal trouble can ensue that will make fandom drama seem like a schoolyard shoving match. Any site owner (based in the US as FA is) not following these guidelines, enacted into US law fairly recently, are simply living on borrowed time.

Pure drawings are exempt (so far, per court ruling) because no real humans were/are employed in their production, hence the cubporn brouhaha once the issue was forced by people violating the previous TOS.