P: Generated images violate user guidelines

I keep receiving a pop up that my generatrive fill violates user guidelines when attempting to change shoes on a photo I took. This is without typing any prompt into the box and just having it generate automatically.

the generative Fill isn't working when there's some scantily clad person in the scene. Even if I just want to take a stain off the wall, it doesn't work because there's a naked person in the scene. Can you fix that ? I work with artistic nudity...but i need to retouch the ambient...   

I've read the guidelines and user information and am familiar with what this entails and consists of. While using generative fill, the "Guidelines" box will pop up during reasonable and non-violating prompts. Even on something simple, like matching something in my original image to fill the rest of the space, the guidelines box pops up. I would be able to currently accomplish this task with PS, anyway. I'm concerned that this constantly popping up indicates a bug or glitch of some sort. I understand the necessity in the case of ill-advised material or abuse of the program, but it shouldn't pop up during such innocent prompts & phrase/words.

using the Generative fill on newborn photos to fill the background or smth is useless .. it always gives  "the generated images were removed (violate user guidelines)"
one way to do it is to cover the baby's body first with a brush .. then use generative fill.

Beta 24.6

and still have the mouse problem sometimes the mouse won't let when you grab something like selection  

I'm messing around with generative fill, and I'm getting warnings about violating guidelines when doing things that are clearly not guidline-violating. For example, when I select the nose on a portrait and try to use generative fill to create alternative noses, I am warned about violating guidlines and not given any images.

It seems that the sensitivity of these warnings is excessively high. 

In my opinion, the guidelines for generative fill are too strict, but can also easily be abused. So I feel for Adobe on this one. 

I am in the early stages of testing, but here is what I have found out. 

Here is the scenario: I was trying to create a mermaid image and by asking for a bra I get told it cannot be done due to violation, however, asking it for a mermaid tail actually created images in underwear and no fish tail. 

If I have an image and I ask the tool to change the bra colour, it will tell me this violates guidelines. I personally disagree that a bra is in itself pornographic. However, you can ask it to change the top to a bralette and it will generate bra's not bralettes. This allows it to be exploited if it is being strict for a reason and I do understand it can be used in a pornographic setting, which is why I emphasise with Adobe here. 

I respect Adobe are in a horrible position here as reducing how strict terms like "bra" are, can easily create room for abuse, but by restricting it you're ruining its ability to be used in harmless creative images. 

I thought this could be an interesting controversial discussion topic on what can be done and if you agree the guidelines are too strict.