No idea why it's allowed to exist.

a 5-minute video

https://kraut.zone/w/3qDRm34m3wh88Jb6sYxR7z

One Twitter rando called these pics "highly sexualized"

Is that any different from "very sexy"?

#SeriousQuestion #NeedInfo #Puritan #PuritanRevival #SexPhobia #SexNegative #SexualRevolution #Sexualized #Prude #CounterRevolution #NeoPuritan #Victorian #Sexualize #Sexualization

We taught Gen Z that "sexualization" is a bad thing. So obviously being asexual is good. So much propaganda about grooming and trafficking. The fear-mongering really fucked-up their minds.

#PuritanRevival

"sexualization" is 100% bullshit

The entire concept is crap. Like totally absurd.

Mandrills have colorful noses. We have beards and boobs. Exactly the same function. We are sexual. We have sexual bodies with sexual body parts.

#Monkey #Peacock #Sex #Sexual #Sexy #Hot #Cute

the model? the boss? the viewer? all of the above?

https://tube.xy-space.de/w/4VXopGRiVAMskgqVpSeVU2

wait! didn't nature make her sexual?

Sexualisation is hardly new - nor is it a dogma. A dogma is an insistence about certain things being unequivocally and unquestionably true - "sexualisation" isn't something that can be true or false since it's an abstract concept.

tl;dr: THE QUESTION: what context am I missing in regards to sexualisation as a "new and odd dogma?" Why?

If someone says Pamela Anderson was sexualized in that movie

the connotation is that she is not naturally sexual, and thinking of her as sexy is bad.

Sexualize and sexualized are always viewed negatively.

We used to say sexy and sexual, and it could be positive or neutral.