RSACi Ratings Dissected


[ Site Index ] [ Rant Index ] [ Feedback ]


From: charles@fma.com (Charlie Stross)
Newsgroups: uk.net,uk.misc
"Well", thought I, "if we're going to have to succumb to censorship^W^W^W accept a voluntary rating scheme, I might as well see what it looks like now rather than cry into my tea later." So I toddled over to www.rsac.org and poked around. As an exercise, I rated my own personal web pages (http://www.antipope.demon.co.uk/).

Several things became apparent fairly rapidly.

Firstly, the RSAC have spent a LOT of effort in designing an interface (CGI/form based) to let you self-certify your own site. You can use it on a per-file, per-directory-tree, or per-website basis. You answer a series of questions (on different forms) and it finally emits a large HTML tag to be included in the section of all your HTML files. (Then it pesters you by email until the tags appear.)

Leaving aside the technical issue of whether it would be more convenient to provide an implementation of their rating system as a JavaScript or Java applet for those of us with industry (sub)standard browsers and lots of files to certify, I was struck by some puzzling assumptions about the rating scheme.

Firstly, there's a marked cultural bias towards those pushbutton panic-items that get the censorious, the religious, or the prudish uptight -- specifically, the American censorious, religious, and prudish lobby. There should be no surprise about this; but questions like 'Does your web site contain profanity?' where Profanity is defined as 'References to God or Jesus used as swearing: God, Jesus, God-damned, Jesus Christ' are not exactly going to help the average Mullah, and I was somewhat bemused by most of their definitions of strong language and vulgarity.

Although there's a 'country' field on the registration form, no use of it is made later in the rating system in order to localize or internationalize the ruleset applied to the site. This is, fundamentally, an America-only rating system.

Secondly, there's a marked bias towards the visual, combined with a gross inability to distinguish between documentary and fantasy. This confusion over the nature of the medium (essentially hypertext with embedded graphics, not some kind of video-on-demand) and context (is it a fact? is it an entertaining story?) can lead to all sorts of weird consequences. It's almost as if they're designing a rating system for a functionally illiterate audience who can't tell fact from fiction:

For example, Violence question #1 asks: 'Does the internet content depict aggressive violence?' where 'aggressive violence' is defined as:

Aggressive Violence is the existence of a Credible Threat, or the actual carrying out of a Credible Threat, or outright actions which directly or indirectly cause, OR IF SUCCESSFUL would cause, physical harm, Damage, destruction, or injury to a Sentient Being or Realistic Non-sentient Object.

Aggressive Violence INCLUDES the visual Depiction of the RESULTS of aggressive violence including, but not limited to dead bodies, Damage, Audio Distress, etc., even if the violent act itself is not shown.

EXAMPLES of AGGRESSIVE VIOLENCE:

  • Any use, whether by Sentient Being or Non-sentient Object, of an item which shoots something potentially harmful or destructive including, but not limited to rays, objects, projectiles, arrows, fluids, sound, etc.
  • Any use of non-shooting objects in a manner which is, or which would be if successful, harmful or destructive including, but not limited to fists, feet, elbows, clubs, acid, knives, chairs, whips, chains, poisons, etc.
  • Any use of bombs, mines, explosive devices, pungi sticks, etc.
  • Lex Luther CAUSING an earthquake through the use of Hydrogen Bombs.
  • Arguably this means that 'aggressive violence' refers to either (a) real-life death threats (note; it's got to be credible!), or (b) visual depiction of the consequences of such threats. So the News at Ten gets it in the neck for all those photographs of mass-graves in Bosnia, but the average schlock horror novel is home and dry.

    Thirdly: it's bizarrely easy to hoax the rating system. Far as I can tell it's entirely voluntary; the only way to get caught is for someone to complain that the pages don't correspond to their rating.

    Fourthly: I was extremely disappointed that, after having built this wonderfully complex and useful filter mechanism, the only thing RSAC could think of to do with it was to turn it into a V-chip for the web. For example, one would think that a decision tree based on the Dewey Decimal Catalog (or similar) would be a really cool addition to the system; you could identify precisely what section of the library shelf your web pages belong on, on a per-page basis, and the various web search engines could subsequently be used to filter out content based on a rigorous library catalog definition, rather than a semi-random keyword search. The PICS system is good for a lot more than rating the tit count on a web site, and it's a shame to see the first major deployment of it being so badly implemented.

    However. That's as may be. My conclusion (after having played with the RSACi system for a while) is that it's fundamentally broken. It doesn't take into account national preferences and/or variation, is biased towards a view of the web as television-on-demand or computer-game- distribution rather than hypertext, can't distinguish between factual and fictional content (for which very different criteria may apply), and despite having lots of promise as a general-purpose library index for the web doesn't really add anything except a 'DANGER: IMPURE THOUGHTS!' sign for people who can't read the word 'God' without shouting 'hallelujah'!

    Enclosed below, for your edification, are ALL the questions (with their definitions of terms) from the RSACi rating scheme. The categories are volence, nudity, sex, and language. Note that they're presented as a decision tree, by way of a non-bayesian expert system (I believe a forward-chaining one). What do you think?


    Violence

    In order to determine the level and type of violence in your content, you will be asked to answer from two to 16 very specific questions about whether and how violence or its consequences are depicted. Definitions and examples are provided for all terms which you need to understand in order to make the determinations necessary to answer the questions. The definitions are highly specific, and the objectivity of the system depends on using them carefuly and correctly. You are urged to review the Definitions link underneath the question before submitting your answer.


    Definitions

    Aggressive Violence

    Aggressive Violence is the existence of a Credible Threat, or the actual carrying out of a Credible Threat, or outright actions which directly or indirectly cause, OR IF SUCCESSFUL would cause, physical harm, Damage, destruction, or injury to a Sentient Being or Realistic Non-sentient Object.

    Aggressive Violence INCLUDES the visual Depiction of the RESULTS of aggressive violence including, but not limited to dead bodies, Damage, Audio Distress, etc., even if the violent act itself is not shown.

    Aggressive Violence DOES NOT INCLUDE psychological attacks. It is limited to physical harm, damage, destruction, and injury.

    Aggressive Violence DOES NOT INCLUDE Acts of Nature/Accidental Violence.

    Examples OF aggressive violence

  • Any use, whether by Sentient Being or Non-sentient Object, of an item which shoots something potentially harmful or destructive including, but not limited to rays, objects, projectiles, arrows, fluids, sound, etc.
  • Any use of non-shooting objects in a manner which is, or which would be if successful, harmful or destructive including, but not limited to fists, feet, elbows, clubs, acid, knives, chairs, whips, chains, poisons, etc.
  • Any use of bombs, mines, explosive devices, pungi sticks, etc.
  • Lex Luther CAUSING an earthquake through the use of Hydrogen Bombs.
  • A fight in a hockey game.
  • A boxing or karate game.

    EXAMPLES of what AGGRESSIVE VIOLENCE is NOT

  • An earthquake, while violent, is not Aggressive Violence.
  • A football, or hockey, or soccer game is not Aggressive Violence.
  • A dam breaking, flooding the valley below, sweeping away Sentient Beings is not Aggressive Violence, HOWEVER the program will still receive a violence rating of some kind because Sentient Beings die or are Damaged. See the section on Manifestations (Types) of Damage.

    Acts of God and Natural/Accidental Violence

    Acts of God and Nature are defined as what a reasonable person would consider normal "acts of nature" or "acts of God" such as flood, earthquake, tornado, hurricane, etc., unless the act is CAUSED by Sentient Beings or Non-sentient Objects in the game or where the game includes a character playing the role of "God" or "nature" and the character caused the act.

    Accidental Violence Aggressive Violence is violence that a reasonable person would consider as unintentional and not purposeful, but, rather, as accident. Violence as the result of the carrying out or mistaken carrying out of a Credible Threat is not accidental.

    EXAMPLES Of Acts of God and Nature/Accidental Violence

  • The Depiction of a hurricane or the results of a hurricane.
  • The Depiction of an unintentional automobile accident or the results of an automobile accident.

    EXAMPLES Of What Acts of God and Nature/Accidental Violence are NOT

  • A gun going off during a robbery (a Credible Threat) regardless of whether it was accidental or not.
  • An earthquake CAUSED by one of the characters in the game.

    Sentient Beings

    Anything (being or object) Depicted in the program as FEELING and/or THINKING and/or SELF-AWARE.

    EXAMPLES of SENTIENT BEINGS

  • Animals or objects Depicted as animals
  • Space aliens.
  • Cartoon characters: Bugs Bunny, Wyle E. Coyote, Elmer Fudd.
  • Rocks that speak or show feelings.
  • A blob from space that speaks, shoots, and dies.
  • ANY form of intelligent life.
  • R2/D2 (Star Wars).

    Realistic Objects

    A Non-Sentient Object Depicted in the context of the program exactly as its true-life counterpart or what a reasonable person would consider as true-to-life. A building, airplane, car, truck, ship, street, road, tree, forest, mountain, river, ocean, island, alien space ship from mars, etc. showing proper proportions, details and features which a reasonable person would consider as a realistic Depiction of the object. Items of detail are depicted and shown in proper proportion so as to make a reasonable person think that the object is realistic.

    EXAMPLES of REALISTIC OBJECTS

  • An airplane or missile-bombing game that shows, or zooms in on, realistic Depictions of bombed-out buildings and/or streets and/or vehicles, is Depicting Realistic Objects.
  • The buildings and vehicles in the cartoon version of "Batman."
  • The houses in the cartoon, "The Three Little Pigs."
  • A toy truck Depicted as a toy truck.

    Blood and Gore

    To differentiate in quality and quantity minor visual depictions of blood from the depiction of Blood and Gore as defined below. To define the difference between a Human being shot and displaying a trickle of blood around the wound and a Human being shot resulting in an exploding chest and spraying the room with blood.

    DEFINITION: Visual Depiction of a great quantity of a Sentient Being's blood or what a reasonable person would consider as vital body fluids, OR a visual

    Depiction of innards, and/or dismembered body parts showing tendons, veins, bones, muscles, etc., and/or organs, and/or detailed insides, and/or fractured bones and skulls.

    The Depiction of blood or vital body fluids must be shown as what a reasonable person would classify as flowing, spurting, flying, collecting or having collected in large amounts or in pools, or the results of what a reasonable person would consider as a large loss of the fluid such a body covered in blood or a floor smeared with the fluid.

    To be classified as Blood and Gore, there must be MORE than just a small amount of blood. It must be more than the depiction of very small quantities and what a reasonable person would classify as a trickle or droplets.

    To be classified as Blood and Gore, there must be MORE than just simple dismemberment; the dismemberment would have to be accompanied by tendons, veins, bones, muscles, etc.

    EXAMPLES of BLOOD AND GORE

  • A Sentient Being is thrown in a tree-chopper and is spewed out as hamburger.
  • A Sentient Being is shot with a bazooka and explodes in pieces showing pools of blood, innards, etc.
  • A Sentient Being looses an arm showing parts of the bone, oozing fluids, tendons and veins.
  • A Sentient Being has its heart ripped from its chest and shown to it.
  • A Human is shot in the head and blood and brains fly in all directions.

    EXAMPLES of what is NOT BLOOD AND GORE

  • Wyle E. Coyote is flattened or singed all over after an explosion.
  • Dismemberment if all that is shown is the dismembered part without blood, bones, veins, etc.
  • John Wayne is shot in the shoulder and a trickle of blood is shown, but not flowing or spurting.
  • A skinned knee with a trickle of blood.
  • A head bandage with a spot of blood.

    Damage; Shows Damage: Sentient Beings

    Sentient Beings Show Damage via a change in normal and expected appearance in response to Aggressive Violence such as showing holes, dismemberment, showing a lump on the head, showing cracking and crumbling apart, showing disfigurement of any kind, including (but not limited to) showing a Sentient Being, burned to a crisp, flattened, twisted into a pretzel shape, etc.

    Sentient Beings which have several normal and expected appearances are deemed to NOT SHOW DAMAGE when they change from one normal appearance to another regardless of the circumstances as in the Game "Super Mario Brothers" when characters have both a big and a little size and experience no other indications of Showing Damage when transforming from one size to the next.

    Sentient Beings, alive or dead, that would usually be encountered in the normal and ordinary course of daily human affairs, whose condition is NOT the result of game play, and that would be of little note or concern to a reasonable person are NOT deemed to show damage. This includes, but is not limited to, animal trophies on walls, stuffed animals, covered bodies in a hospital morgue, patients in a hospital, a Human in a wheelchair or walking with crutches, the herding of cattle, etc.

    EXAMPLES of DAMAGE SHOWN to Sentient Beings

  • A Sentient Being looses an arm in a fight WITHOUT Blood and Gore as defined below.
  • A sentient Being shows a hole when shot.
  • Wyle E. Coyote is singed and blackened all over as a result of dynamite exploding in his hands.
  • A Sentient Being is consumed in fire.
  • A Human gets a black eye upon being hit.
  • Uncle Harry's head mounted on a wall.
  • The eating of Uncle Harry.
  • Pictures of the slaughtering of animals in a packing house.
  • Scenes where Sentient Beings have been impaled on spikes on the walls of a castle. EXAMPLES of NO DAMAGE SHOWN to Sentient Beings:
  • A Sentient Being simply disappears from the screen when shot.
  • A Sentient Being falls to the ground when show with no signs of Damage as defined here.
  • A deer head on a wall.
  • An amputee seen on the street.
  • The eating of a steak.

    Death

    Death refers to an explicit, reasonable indication of cessation of Sentience, regardless of whether the Sentient Being is Human or Non-Human. Death does not imply damage and there can be death without damage.

    Examples of Death

    • A human is shot, falls to the floor, and ceases movement. It MUST be assumed that death has occurred.
    • A being is vaporized, disappears, goes up in smoke, etc. It MUST be assumed that death has occurred.
    • A Sentient Being is blown apart with head severed from the body REGARDLESS of whether the head still talks and the body still walks.

    EXAMPLE of what is NOT DEATH

    • Use of transporters, cloaking devices, invisibility techniques, etc. where it is clear to a reasonable person that in the context of the game these techniques are being used to avoid death or harm.
    • A Human being badly burned in a fire or explosion showing great damage yet which a reasonable person would assume that it is still possible for the being to still be alive and in which the human shows signs of Sentience.


    Questions

    Violence: Question 01
    Your content must be categorized as either depicting or not depicting aggressive violence. Rape and gratuitous violence are specific types of aggressive violence. Does the internet content depict aggressive violence?

    Violence: Question 02
    Although there is no aggressive violence, your content must be further categorized as either depicting or not depicting results of natural/accidental violence, including "acts of god", on sentient beings or realistic objects. Natural/accidental violence itself need not be depicted.

    Does your content depict any of the following as a result of natural/accidental violence: blood and gore, damage or death to sentient beings, or damage to realistic objects?

    Violence: Question 03
    As a result of natural/accidental violence, does your content depict blood and gore, damage, or death, to sentient beings?

    Violence: Question 04
    Does your content depict blood and gore of sentient beings?

    Violence: Question 05
    Does your content depict the death of human beings resulting from natural/accidental violence?

    Violence: Question 06
    Does your content depict death of non-human beings resulting from natural/accidental violence?

    Violence: Question 07
    Your content depicts aggressive violence. It has not been determined if natural/accidental violence is also depicted. The targets of aggressive violence must now be categorized as to the following: sentient beings or realistic objects.

    Is ANY of the aggressive violence in your content directed toward sentient beings?

    Violence: Question 08
    Content that depicts aggressive violence against sentient beings will receive the highest violence rating if either of the following is depicted: gratuitous violence (including when a player is rewarded for the intentional destruction of non-threatening human beings) or rape.

    Does the aggression against realistic objects result in disappearance without damage?

    Violence: Question 09
    Is there an implied social presence associated with the realistic object that has been depicted as disappearing without destruction?

    Violence: Question 10
    Does your content depict gratuitous violence OR portray rape?

    Violence: Question 11
    Does your content depict gratuitous violence AND portray rape ?

    Violence: Question 12
    Does your content depict gratuitous violence?

    Violence: Question 13
    Does your content portray rape?

    Violence: Question 14
    It must be determined whether there are depictions of blood and gore that result from aggressive violence. small amounts of blood may not qualify as blood and gore (see definitions). Depictions of blood and gore resulting only from natural/accidental violence should not generate a yes answer to this question.

    Does your content depict blood and gore resulting from aggressive violence?

    Violence: Question 15
    Content with aggressive violence that depict no blood and gore must be further categorized as to whether the player is rewarded for inflicting certain types of damage against victims of a particular stance.

    Is the player rewarded for causing or inflicting damage to non-threatening human beings?

    Violence: Question 16
    Is the player rewarded for causing or inflicting death (with or without damage) to non-threatening non-human beings?

    Violence: Question 17
    It must be determined whether there is a depiction in your content of the death or damage of threatening human beings resulting from aggressive violence. Such a death could be inflicted by either the player or another character in your content.

    Does your content depict the death of threatening human beings?

    Violence: Question 18
    It must be determined if there may be aggression against non-threatening human beings for which the player is not rewarded. Aggression by the player that is not rewarded is considered unintentional (i.e., No points awarded, or no gain towards accomplishing a goal within the internet content). Aggression by a character other than the player is also considered a depiction for which the player is not rewarded.

    Are there, or could there be, depictions of damage or death to non-threatening human beings, for which the player is not rewarded, including damage inflicted by a character other than the player?

    Violence: Question 19
    Is the player rewarded for causing or inflicting damage to non-threatening non-human beings?

    Violence: Question 20
    Does your content depict aggression by the player, or another character, against threatening human beings that results in no apparent damage or death?


    Nudity

    In order to determine the level of nudity, if any, in your content, you will be asked to answer from 1 to 5 very specific questions about how nudity is portrayed. Definitions are provided for all terms that must be understood to make the determinations necessary to answer the questions. The definitions are highly specific and the objectivity of the labeling system depends on using them correctly.


    Definitions

    Revealing Attire

    Any Portrayal of a Human/Humanoid that does not Portray Nudity, yet Portrays outlines through tight clothing, or clothing that otherwise emphasizes male or female genitalia, female nipples or breasts (including the display of cleavage that is more than one half of the possible length of such cleavage), or clothing on a male or female which a reasonable person would consider to be sexually suggestive and alluring.

    Nudity

    Any Portrayal of a Human's buttocks (other than the exception below), genitalia, or female breasts, or of Humanoid genitalia or female breast(s), including such Portrayals as 'see-through' blouses, the 'pasties' of a topless dancer, or other types of clothing which do not prevent exposure of those parts of the body.

    An EXCEPTION is made for Portrayals of the buttocks of characters which a reasonable person would consider as BOTH (a) something OTHER THAN a true human being or representation thereof, AND (b) a character that normally is expected to be unclothed and whose natural state is 'undressed.' If the Portrayal is such that it would not cause a reasonable person to comment upon or take notice of the exposed buttocks, then, for this one exception, the characters require no rating for Nudity.

    This definition also includes Nudity in widely recognized works of art and nudity in documentary context.

    Examples of Nudity:

  • Exposed buttocks of zombies or Frankenstein's monster
  • Exposed buttocks of Bart Simpson or Elmer Fudd
  • Exposed buttocks of early cave men
  • Exposed buttocks of Klingon's or Romulins (Star Trek)
  • Exposed buttocks of Data (Star Trek)
  • Exposed buttocks of male or female Human Beings
  • Exposed breast or breasts of any of the above who are female
  • Exposed genitalia of any of the above. Examples of what Nudity is NOT:
  • Exposed buttocks of Chewbacca (Star Wars)
  • Exposed buttocks of C3P0 (Star Wars)
  • Exposed buttocks of ape-like, alien creatures when it is clear that their normal appearance is unclothed


    Questions

    Nudity: Question 01
    Does your content portray revealing attire and/or nudity?

    Nudity: Question 02
    Does your content portray revealing attire and/or nudity. Does your content portray frontal nudity that qualifies as a provocative display of nudity?


    Sex

    In order to determine the level of sexual activity, if any, in your content, you will be asked to answer from 1 to 7 very specific questions about how sex is portrayed. Definitions are provided for all terms that must be understood to make the determinations necessary to answer the questions. The definitions are highly specific and the objectivity of the labeling system depends on using them correctly.


    Definitions

    Passionate Kissing

    Any Portrayal of Sentient Beings kissing that a reasonable person would consider MORE than just innocent kissing. This includes any kissing during which tongues touch (or mouths are obviously open), and any kissing on, but not limited to, the neck, torso, breasts, buttocks, legs.

    Clothed Sexual Touching

    Any Portrayal of any activity or touching between or among Sentient Beings, other than Innocent Kissing and Passionate Kissing, that FALLS SHORT of intercourse (sexual, oral, or otherwise) or masturbation, and that DOES NOT show bare buttocks, female breasts, or genitalia, but that any reasonable adult would perceive as sexual in nature. This includes but is not limited to such things as groping, petting, licking, rubbing. Non-Explicit Sexual Touching does NOT include Non-Explicit or Explicit Sexual Acts as defined below and DOES NOT include masturbation.

    Non-Explicit Sexual Touching

    Any Portrayal of any touching between or among Sentient Beings, that a reasonable person would consider MORE than just Passionate Kissing, including but not limited to such things as groping, petting, licking, and rubbing, that falls short of intercourse (sexual, oral, or otherwise), and that DOES show bare buttocks or female breasts, but DOES NOT show genitalia. Non-Explicit Sexual Touching does NOT include Non-Explicit or Explicit Sexual Acts as defined below and DOES NOT include masturbation.

    Explicit Sexual Acts

    Any Portrayal of sexual activity that a reasonable person would consider as more than JUST Non-Explicit Sexual Activity because it DOES show genitalia.

    This includes any Portrayal of sexual activity by one Sentient Being, or among multiple Sentient Beings, including, but not limited to masturbation and sexual intercourse of any kind (oral, anal vaginal), that DOES show genitalia.

    Non-Explicit Sexual Acts

    Any Portrayal of sexual activity that a reasonable person would consider as more than JUST Clothed Sexual Touching or Non-Explicit Sexual Touching, either by one Sentient Being or among multiple Sentient Beings, including, but not limited to masturbation and sexual intercourse of any kind (oral, anal, vaginal), that MAY show Nudity, but DOES NOT show genitalia. Non-Explicit Sexual Activity INCLUDES sound on an audio track, such as the kinds of groans, moans, and other sounds that to a reasonable person would imply sexual activity was taking place.

    Sex Crimes

    Any Portrayal of unwanted, unauthorized, or otherwise non-consensual sexual acts forced upon one sentient being by another sentient being (Rape). Any Portrayal of Explicit or Non-Explicit Sexual Acts, consensual or not, between a Sentient Being that a reasonable person would consider as being under the age of 18, and a Sentient Being a reasonable person would consider over the age of 18. Any Portrayal of sex, consensual or not, between an animal and a Human/Humanoid (Bestiality).


    Questions

    Sex: Question 01
    Does your content portray any passionate kissing, clothed sexual touching, non-explicit sexual touching, explicit or non-explicit sexual acts, or sex crimes?

    Sex: Question 02
    Your content portrays revealing attire and/or nudity, and the nudity score has been assigned. it has also been determined that your content includes sexual content, which will be categorized in this section.

    Does your content portray sex crimes?

    Sex: Question 03
    Does your content portray explicit sexual acts?

    Sex: Question 04
    Does your content portray non-explicit sex acts?

    Sex: Question 05
    Does your content portray non-explicit sexual touching?

    Sex: Question 06
    Does your content portray clothed sexual touching?

    Sex: Question 07
    Your content portrays revealing attire and/or nudity, and the nudity score has been assigned. it has also been determined that your content includes sexual content, which will be categorized in this section.

    Does your content portray passionate kissing?


    Language

    In order to determine the appropriate advisory level for language, you will be asked to answer from 1 - 10 specific questions that ask whether or not your content contains language, expressions, images, portrayals, etc., which some viewers might potentially consider objectionable. Our advisories address two kinds of speech; 'hate speech' and 'objectionable speech', the latter term serving as a convenient shorthand for language ranging from mild expletives, through profanity, to crude, vulgar, and/or obscene statements and gestures.


    Definitions

    Crude Language; Explicit Sexual References

  • Crude references, direct or indirect to intercourse: Fuck, bugger, mother-fucker, cock-sucker, penis-breath, etc.
  • Crude references to genitalia: prick, cock, pussy, twat, cunt, etc.
  • Explicit street slang for intercourse or genitalia.

    Strong, Vulgar Language

  • Strong, but not crude, language for genitalia: asshole, butthole, dork, dong, pecker, schlong, dick, etc.
  • Strong language for bodily functions or elimination: Shit, piss, cum, asswipe, buttwipe, etc.
  • Strong language for sexual functions or intercourse: jerk-off, balling, shtupping, screwing, boffing, cumming, etc.
  • References to genitalia used in a sexual setting including the use of penis, vagina, rectum, semen, etc.

    Obscene Gestures

  • Any visual or described gestures, body movements, such as flipping the bird, mooning, non-verbal indications of sexual insult, etc., indicating any of the above.
  • Any visual or described innuendo, euphemisms, street slang, double-entendre for any of the above.

    Profanity

    References to God or Jesus used as swearing: God, Jesus, God-damned, Jesus Christ.

    Non-Sexual Anatomical References

    Penis, vagina, rectum, semen used in a non-sexual context.

    Moderate Expletives

    The words bastard, son-of-a-bitch, bitch, turd, crap.

    Mild Terms for Body Functions

    Piss and poop not used in a sexual context

    Mild Expletives

  • The words hell and damn,
  • Ass and horse's ass, BUT NOT Asshole, Assface, Asswipe, etc.
  • Butthead and buttface BUT NOT butthole and buttwipe.

    Inoffensive Slang

    No profanity, expletives, vulgar gestures, innuendo, double-entendre, vulgar street slang other than listed below.
  • Inoffensive slang: darn, drat, golly, gosh, dang, rats, sheesh, geeze, gee wiz.
  • Screw to indicate cheated or harmed, BUT NOT screw in any sexual context such as "We screwed until the sun came up."
  • Butt to indicate one's rear end as in "Get your butt out of here, 'or "I'm going to paddle your butt," or "He fell on his butt.," BUT NOT Butthead, Butthole, Buttface, Buttwipe, etc.
  • Ass when referring to the animal, but not "Horse's ass."
  • Dork used in a non-sexual context as in, "He's a dork."
  • Sucks used in a non-sexual contest as in, "That sucks," or "He sucks."


    Questions

    Language: Question 01
    Does your content contain any of the following: crude language or explicit sexual references; strong, vulgar language; obscene gestures; profanity; non-sexual anatomical references; moderate expletives; mild terms for body functions; mild expletives or slang?

    Language: Question 02
    Does your content contain any extreme hate speech, and epithets that advocates violence or harm against a person or group?

    Language: Question 03
    Does your content contain any hate speech or strong epithets against any person or group?

    Language: Question 04
    Does your content contain crude language or explicit sexual references?

    Language: Question 05
    Does your content contain strong language?

    Language: Question 06
    Does your content contain obscene gestures?

    Language: Question 07
    Does your content contain profanity?

    Language: Question 08
    Does your content contain moderate expletives?

    Language: Question 09
    Does your content contain non-sexual anatomical references?

    Language: Question 10
    Does your content contain mild expletives, or mild terms for body functions?


    This list is copyright of RSAC, but is provided by them to the internet community for guidance in use of their rating scheme. It is reproduced here as a linear document rather than a decision tree, to provide web authors with a perspective on the rating system's overall effectiveness.


  • [ Site Index ] [ Rant Index ] [ Feedback ]