male armor is never sexualized
only female armor

I wouldn't say never, but the issue seems to shift completely when mentioning men and suggestive/issues concerning appearances in armor.
Few examples would include the "male power fantasy", like a kickass knight with a giant sword and sick dragon skin armor.

Pulling out of his imposing, and domineering armor, appears a grizzled norse pillager, come to reap the lamentations of the womanfolk.

Anyways, a common theme of sexualised men is the power fantasy; armor, and big swords? Very involved, if it isn't a power suit (the business-formal kind), nor the nude man with the abdomen of Adonis.

I like to use words.

"Your message contains too many smilies. The maximum number of smilies allowed is 10."

Does that mean 10 in total or a maximum of 10 different smileys?

I believe 10 total.
I don't believe that anyone has a legitimate use for that many smilies, personally.

Fairly certain people have tried though.

And ofc there's more complications around what is enjoyed by or marketed to different groups of people. I think there's a clear difference between Marcus Remix and Edward Cullen but a lot of times it's muddled. A lot of male characters appeal to both men and women, like Link. Furthermore, it's obvious to anybody that glances at a rack of magazines that advertisers use sexualized women to appeal to women too. There's a funny little article from DnD With Porn Stars that I'd link to but I'm on my phone.

But otoh most of the academic articles I've read suggest that the serialization of women in media has clear and consistent negative effects on the way women are perceived. All this leads me to conclude that there really needs to be more lucid public discussion. I know, all of these tumblr feminists and angry backlashers make me sick of hearing about this stuff at all, but it's an important topic. Interesting too if you can get past the dredge.

I really don't think there's anything wrong with sexualization, and think that issues surrounding it stem from bias and insecurities.
Perhaps it also is relevant to the social psychology of men being more visually engaged with sex and women being more kinetically.

<-- Clickable

Video games are finally collapsing upon itself from this all the social oppression people think they need to fight.

This is an exaggeration perpetuated by reactionaries within the fight. The people actually publishing games won't lose any sleep over the drivel that goes on in unprofessional "news" sites. The stagnation of games is mostly the fault of the American legal system which forces game companies to limit new ideas to people within their company maybe a few years at a time, and of course the competitive advertizing and PR that inflated the budget of modern games. It hardly means it's collapsing, but something has to bring in a breath of fresh air in terms of practices.

Though I could have worded it better, this is what I meant.

Last I recall Copyrights last Lifetime + 75 years... Which is complete bull♥♥♥♥.

As far as men and women go, last I recall, women tended towards more written media, than men with images/videos.

And as far as insecurities go, guys can't be all that women desire, and the ads about power fantasies don't much help with their gauge on the expectations.

There's a lot more sex in game journalism than I'd ever thought