She’s in a fashion magazine and not a business meeting. Fancy dresses for women often show that amount of skin and no-one thinks anything of it. I agree that there is too much focus on what women in the public eye wear, but this is just another example of that. So she’s not wearing a bra. Lots of fancy dresses are worn without a bra. She’s clearly a small-breasted woman who probably doesn’t even need one. Why should she have to wear one to conform to some made-up standard of what women should be like in order to be “proper”? Again, she wasn’t attending a cabinet meeting dressed like that. It was a fashion mag.
Human bodies are not inherently sexual unless we make them that way. I’ve spent plenty of time in clothing-optional spaces and so I know that from first-hand experience. And why doesn’t shirtless Putin count, or someone who is swimming? The context of showing more skin either counts or it doesn’t. You can’t have it both ways.