Can inclusionists at least agree that babies can’t be ace and that the sexualization of children is gross
These are cute! I’d let my baby wear these. I’ve seen babies wearing other LGBTQ+ clothing. By exclusionist logic, a baby can’t be any form of LGBTQIAA+. These are cute ass shirts, and you’re an aphobe. It’s simple. People can let their children wear whatever they want.
…….No. Babies don’t have sexualities. A baby boy cant be a “ladies man”, a toddler can’t be a “gayby” and a little girl can’t be “asexual in the sheets”. They’re babies. Stop giving them ANY discriptors that have to do with sexuality. Good post OP, bad addition antiallospace.
Y’all, I feel like these were auto generated. Come on, a little critical thinking is, well, critical. They look like Redbubble just slapped them on.
But I do think it’s worth pointing out, that in addition the Straights doing this (see “ladies man,” etc)……
…..they have weird, uncomfortable, borderline-gross onesies for literally every sexuality. So no one feels left out!
Can we just leave sexuality as a whole out of baby clothes? They do not have the mental capacity to understand sexuality, much less form a sexual identity
Skorpio's Art 