> From the above post. I realize that "sexualized" is subjective but that's how it looks from my pov.
What, exactly, about this image seems "sexualized" to you?
This is a con badge from a Fairy Tales themed convention. The artist drew my fursona in the style of Little Red Riding Hood--a fairy tale deemed appropriate by most parents for young children.
There are no genitals depicted in this drawing. There's no secondary sex characteristics being emphasized.
No reasonable person would look at this cartoon image and think, "Oh, this is sexualized" UNLESS they had a pre-existing cognitive distortion to assume "furry = sexual". But that's a false equivalence.
but... you had to go looking for that one, skipping over the part where you saw a bunch of waist-up pictures of a cartoon canine and got too hot and bothered to continue reading? it's not linked from the original article
