When I go to post a picture of my chest, which fades darker the further down it goes - thus, never revealing anything below the belly button, it is denied because it is “sexually suggestive”, but another user one mile away has not one, but 2 profile pics where he is completely nude except for a tiny pink thong outlining his package. Another one I have tried to get approved is a picture of a woman walking down the middle of a road with a popsicle stick in her mouth, and that one is denied because it’s somehow “drug related??” I don’t understand how one guy can get away with 2 practically nude profile pics but mine are too much? I’ve attached the 2 pics of the half naked guy and the pic of my girl and her popsicle stick.

The problem that I am facing is that I am well-endowed and have more of a "bulge" than fellow Grindr members. I see fellow Grindr users using similarly photographed underwear shots; yet, the only difference is that their bulges are not as big. This is something that is out of my control as dick size is allegedly genetically determined. There is clear bias in moderation, being that members with smaller "packages" enjoy the liberty of displaying their underwear shots publicly via their profile pictures whereas members with larger "packages" cannot share that same liberty as they are deemed to be sexually suggestive and/or explicit. This is essentially discrimination towards individuals with larger packages. Additionally, by stating that larger packages are more sexually explicit than smaller packages is sexualizing the size of something that cannot be controlled which is problematic. Please allow members who have larger packages to also enjoy the same liberty as members with smaller packages to display underwear shots on their profile regardless of bulge size. As a side note, I have read the rules regarding underwear photos outlined in the blog below and the pictures I attempt to upload do not violate any of them.

https://blog.grindr.com/blog/grindr-allows-underwear-profile-photos

My question is what if somebody that you were interested in...and they were interested in you...blocks you{In a Defensive Way} when both of you were interested?
Is there no recourse? Is there no way to say "hang on. let's talk about this?"

Cuz when you block someone, you can't even go back and check the conversation and realize there was a misunderstanding.
{Like "Oh. Maybe I misunderstood. Or overreacted."}
The "Blocking" was so "thorough" that it seems like there's no way to undo it, or even to go back and verify{on second thought} that there was an actual problem.{not just a misunderstanding}
It's so hard to find someone that seems to work, that when this happens, and things seem to be almost set up to fail... As necessary as the blocking capability can be...I feel like it can cause almost irreparable damage/problems, if jumped to too soon.
There ought to be some way to fix that.

I met one...perhaps 4pm Eastern, or so.{give or take} that blocked me based on a misunderstanding. {GUARANTEE IT. NOT MY IMAGINATION} I had misunderstood something said. I tried to clarify it. That was misunderstood. Then I was blocked.

So the ONLY person that had REALLY gotten my attention{IN A MATTER OF SECONDS} had cut off contact{PERMANENTLY} based on a misunderstanding.

I don't have a solution here. I'm just trying to bring a fucked up problem to your attention.

I was already looking at travel to Orlando. Then a misunderstanding/blocking happened. Permanently, it would seem.
And I guarantee you this person...if they had given things a chance...we would've gotten along wonderfully...

WTF?! Ideas? Do you have any record of who that was? Etc?

How about a "possibility of going back/clarifying" option in the future?
Anything?

Users should have the option to flag a profile as being a fake profile (either spammer, scammer or the type that send pics, arranges to meet and then blocks you last minute),

To combat the risk of malicious or unjust flags, a system should be implemented where X amount of separate flags over X amount of time would be needed to trigger an active flag.

The flagged profile could feature a disclaimer saying something like 'Warning, multiple users have flagged this profile as being suspicious (Fake, Scammer, Spammer).' as either a 'first base' before receiving enough flags to qualify for review by grindr support team, or as a placeholder to warn other users until grindr support team have time to investigate.

New profiles could have a lower threshold of reports before displaying the 'Flagged' badge and/or before reaching the threshold of requiring a review from Support.

This idea has come to me as a few times recently I've got talking to catfish profiles that I'm sure I recognise, but I'm not 100%, then the inevitable happens and after hours of wasted conversation, usually minutes before they (or you) are due to arrive at the door a block is received. Then I remember this is where I recognise them from.

A quick check with local friends will confirm that the same/similar has happened to them yet these profiles remain live for days or sometimes weeks before being banned (or before the catfishes get bored or run out of people to deceive).