We don't have to hold any character to artificial beauty standards
We don't have to do the opposite either.
Argumenter is strawmanning disagreers by conflating beauty with sexuality and calling them simplistic horndogs.
Men are made to labor and sacrifice, but as humans they are also selfish beings. Nature requires men to be willing to sacrifice themselves for their women, therefore female beauty necessarily represents in the eyes of men everything that is good in the world; that is, everything that is worth dying for. It transcends mere sexuality. Female beauty is inspiring and sorely needed as an abstract reminder that the sufferings that men must bear are worthwhile because there are good things in the world.
Most healthy people prefer their art beautiful.
They got away with it the first time, why try your luck a second time?
I don't think you understand how desperate stupid money is to get a worthwhile investment. They'll dump millions into anything that has made any profit. Especially in today's Hollywood.
CS2 is apparently pretty buggy.
Cities skylines 2's issues aren't the bugs, but the game design. Cars move around randomly instead of having a destination. Production chains don't matter. The simulation itself is wrong. In fact it's made to fool the player into believing there's a simulation where there isn't one. These aren't bugs: Paradox has stated that they won't change any of that.
Cities Skylines 1, in contrast, is a wonderful game (with mods). Watch some Biffa on YT playing the game to see what the gameplay is like with the popular mods.
W40k has always been pretty non-sexual. Space marines and primarchs are assumed to have the libido of eunuchs.
Even all the Slaneesh excess descriptions tend to shy away from mentioning sexual extremes.