I have said all of this. Twice.As a science teacher, the argument that dragonborn should not have boobs because science makes me chuckle. Misunderstanding and misapplication of science to fantasy. Dragons are not lizards, dragonborn are not dragons or lizards (or reptiles). Neither option A (lady dragonborn with boobs) or option B (lady dragonborn without boobs) makes more or less sense from a scientific standpoint. You just look silly when you argue, "Boobs bad, because Science!" (insert "realism" for "science" at any time)
Arguing that lady dragonborn should or should not have boobs because sexism is also very silly. Boobs on fantasy races CAN be portrayed sexist, but is not inherently so. From this thread alone it's obvious that some women find dragon bewbs silly, and others find them identifying. Lady dragonborn boobs are only sexist if you presume to speak for all women. Which is sexist (unless you are a woman, then I'm not sure what it would be, other than exclusionary).
It's also obvious (to me, at least) that a fictional, anthropomorphic race of dragon people (hybrid of humans and dragons), from a story perspective, can be written to not have boobs, or to have them (or to have udders or whatnot) and make perfect sense. We've seen several examples in this thread alone. Even if you accept that dragons are reptiles, and dragonborn are also reptiles . . . why does a human-dragon hybrid race that leans towards the human (with the ladies having boobs) "make no sense"?
Not saying that you have to accept or love dragon boobs, but to make such an unholy fuss over it? Fantasy art definitely has a history of depicting women in a submissive and overly sexual manner, and while we are moving away from that era, we have not truly left it behind yet. But that doesn't make the dragonbewbs "controversy" any less silly or offbase . . . IMO, of course.
Thus has the thread officially come full circle