>>35794331If they're covered there's literally nothing wrong with the image. Would you say a picture of any woman ever with tits is by default nsfw? Also, no nipples. And Braixen normally doesn't have visible nipples to begin with, so there's a question of if the image would even be NSFW if the bikini top was off. Because for all we know it's just fur anyway.
If I took a photo of a dog in a bikini and posted it online, it would be weird. But the only reason anyone would think it was NSFW is if the person viewing it felt sexually attracted in some way to the dog despite it literally wearing more and covering up more than it usually does. It's like...the implication of something to cover by wearing clothing shouldn't be enough to make an image NSFW because the implied nudity and sexuality is on the viewer, not the image. Especially in relation to something like this. If (god forbid) I draped condoms over that dog (this is going pretty far, but hear me out) the sexuality would STILL be on the viewer not the image, by the way.
And just o that we're clear: the image had the Braixen wearing more clothing than most of the pokegirls get in threads on here. She had a bikini top, but also shorts. Lingerie is far more revealing.
