Isn’t that a bit of a sexist logo...?
First is that the woman's pose derives from images of 'feeble' femininity (e.g. old Marilyn Monroe films; sexy, innocent, willing). I don't think there's any need to hark back to such absurd stereotypes.
Second, it assumes my preferred aesthetic isn't, for example, big bearded men. They are equally capable of giving or blowing a kiss. The logo could have been more generic, if it was appealing to the intimate.
Third, I don't really like sexualised or intimate imagery mixed with productivity tools. It's jarring and distracting.
At the end of the day, it's just a logo, though it made me switch off.
Yes, it's a stereotype, but not an arbitrary one - and no less absurd than a bearded man blowing a kiss.
Or maybe it's just a silly logo that's not worth deconstructing.
Edit: that's a yes. Because apparently that isn't obvious to some folks around here
I think there is a strong arguement for objectifying, but still think it's more "sexual" than "objectifying", and definitely those two way more than it's "sexist".
Sexism is discrimination based on sex. Discrimination is different treatment based on a characteristic.
[1]https://www.theatlantic.com/notes/all/2016/10/the-sexism-of-...