It seems like you still don't understand what I'm trying to say. I'm trying to tell you to engage people earnestly instead of attacking them.
Trudge
You countered by finding the worst argument possible. That doesn't seem good faith to me. Maybe it does to you.
If you didn't understand what I'm talking about, why didn't you say that instead of misinterpreting me to the point of absurdity? Were you engaging in good faith?
I'm calling it a bad faith interpretation because I haven't said a single thing about their clothing. Why did you think I was talking about clothing "ankles, lol" when I didn't mention it at all?
I was extending your argument to its natural conclusion
There isn't significantly less clothing in OP's art compared to the one I presented. Explain how it is not a bad faith interpretation.
By flanderizing my statement as if I was talking about the clothing. Hence, ankles, lol. Explain what you meant by that then.
You purposefully mischaracterize what I'm saying by arguing "ankles, lol" because you don't actually even believe in what you are saying
Another poster already made an extensive comment about exactly how it is sexualized.
In the OP yes, in mine, no.
Women's bodies aren't sexual if that's what you mean. You have some learning to do.
America's definitely benefiting alright. The gains aren't going to trickle down to the American public however.

How is that a reasonable interpretation when my image has similar levels of exposure as OP's image? It's not a reasonable interpretation, and I've been trying to point that out this whole time. That was my problem with you.
Now that you are engaging without trying to somehow "win" an internet argument, here's my take - flushed faces, contortion of spine and the body and direct "eye contact" with the viewer taken together seem to be suggestive to me.
You may choose to disagree with me, and honestly, I do not care for the topic strongly. What I do care strongly about is your manner of hostile argumentativeness which is why I bothered responding for such a long time.