Thanks a lot! Yes, all images are made by myself. With the help of my models...

No, not officially. But I love cozy furs, I also like to pet four-legged pussies :-) and, I like women who don't just do something because “everyone” is doing it. Independence and autonomy are attractive to me and unshaven women are often freer and more likely to know what they (don't) want. 😊

Oh yes! :-)

I'd very much prefer if it was a movie - I could fast-forward to the happy end :-)

Things like that you could easily do using the GIMP. It's free, open source software without Adobe's absolutely outrageous business model, where you no longer own the expensive software, and it's less hardware-intensive.
www.gimp.org

Truly frustrating is that this malfunction of bluesky’s AI (I stands for idiocy) seems intentional, because even free open-source AI can distinguish quite accurately. The settings should simply distinguish between “naked/not naked,” as the other settings are obviously useless.

They not only tag is as "adult", but as "sexually explicit". Appeals are ignored. I fully support accurate tagging and, of course, it's okay to tag my explicit images as such, but not the non-sexual ones. This means, that you must accept "sexually explicit" if you want to see non-sexual art nudes.

This is my "Moderation"-Settings page of bluesky. I thought, it's a really good idea that one can fine-tune what kind of content one wants to see or not. But of course, it becomes absurd if everything is tagged as explicit. This simply renders the settings meaningless.

Initially, I also tagged my posts myself, either as explicit or non-sexual. But a second tag, “sexually explicit,” was always added, so I stopped tagging them myself—it's pointless.

You could see it that way. But then what's the point of the “fine” settings on bluesky, where you can distinguish between “sexually explicit,” “sexually suggestive,” and “non-sexual nudity”? What could “non-sexual nudity” be if ALL nudity is tagged as sexually explicit?