I'm posting this in the Geek Out Zone because the Wonder Woman movie is coming out next week, I'm actually kind of excited about it, and I want to head off a particular line of critique that I'm getting somewhat tired of that will surely be disingenuously applied to this movie.
Some conservatives, and also probably some well-meaning-but-misguided feminists (not likely most feminists, but a few), are bound to point out the fact that Wonder Woman wears corset armor and a mini-skirt and be all "this is sexual objectification" simply because of that. It's not that simple. The fact that a fantasy character is intended to be sexy doesn't by itself imply that she is being sexualized, i.e. reduced to her sexuality. There is a difference! Since this is the Geek Out Zone and we're talking about what's bound to be kind of a geeky movie here, let me illustrate the difference between the two with images from/about classic '90s video games that I grew up with, just to be as dorky in approach as I possibly can:
SEXY:
sexy 1.jpg
SEXUALIZED:
sexualized 1.jpg
SEXY:
sexy 2.jpg
SEXUALIZED:
sexualized 2.jpg
(Yes, it's true: I've always hated Duke Nukem 3D.)
The question of whether a character is sexy or sexualized isn't a matter of how many layers of clothing they typically wear, but rather comes down to the context. The characters in the "sexy" category that I've shown are treated similarly to their male counterparts, with their strength and ability being defining parts of their sex appeal. They are also playable characters with fighting roles in the beat 'em up fighting games that they're in, much like their male counterparts. By contrast, the women in the "sexualized" category I've shown are non-playable characters whose sexuality is tied to their victimization or exploitation: to being controlled by male characters, in other words. That is part of what the presumed male player is supposed to find appealing about them. The latter category of female characters are, in other words, reduced to their sex appeal. They have no other role in the game but to be scantly clad victims (and incidentally, victimized as much by the player as by villains in these cases, as you typically "save" the damsels in Duke Nukem 3D by shooting them, for instance). This removal of their humanity is what makes them sex objects.
Of course, fantasy characters can be objectified in many different ways. For example, the villains in these games are rather one-dimensional as well, really just existing to be destroyed by the player. But there's nothing particularly gendered about that form of objectification. Sexual objectification is distinguished by its gendered nature: by the fact that it tends to one-sidedly happen to female characters in our media and girls and women in real life. That gender-based general difference in treatment is what makes it sexist.
There are also more subjective cases than the obvious types I've highlighted above. For example, the lead character Bayonetta from the more modern hack and slash fighting game franchise of the same name could be argued to be a sex object despite being the game's lead character and a highly capable fighting character in as far as all of her "fighting" moves are also stripper moves, and thus her sexuality is, in a sense, the only thing important about her. In recent movies, Harley Quinn from Suicide Squad falls into the same category of subjective cases for a number of reasons, not least of all being her infantilization. Still, you get the basic difference between the concepts of sexy versus sexualized here.
I worry that sometimes conservative-minded people (including some more conservative feminists) conflate sex appeal as such with sexualization and think that that will probably be done vis-a-vis this movie. Sexy female characters can be empowering, helping to promote a certain sense of self-confidence in girls and women. Sexualized female characters, by contrast, are demeaning, being meant to promote male entitlement mentality at the expense of girls and women. I don't know yet because I haven't yet seen the movie (obviously), but my strong impression from all the trailers, commercials, and other promotional material surrounding the upcoming Wonder Woman movie that I have seen is that Wonder Woman will fall easily into the first category as a character. Like other superhero movies, Wonder Woman appears to be basically a power fantasy. The main difference between it and other movies from the genre lies in that this one is centrally a power fantasy for girls and women. Methinks that that is precisely the real problem that some may have with it: the fact that the lead character in this movie is a kick-ass woman with visible arm and leg muscles rather than a muscle-bound man who rescues damsels in distress. In any event, the sample size for solo female superhero films being one as of June 2nd (the same as the sample size of superhero films directed by women), I think we should avoid going out of our way to find fault.