Well it's of course extra difficult since this is a drawing, so their appearance is a choice made by their creator, but maybe this will help:
Pretty people are attractive. Showing attraction to women could be if you as an artist generally chose to only depict women with features you found attractive. This isn't inherently negative, but it probably has potential to be.

Drawing people in ways that make them attractive to you would not be sexualising them though.

Sexualisation occurs when you present people in a framework that indicates sex. I don't know how to English good, but what I mean is you make them or their actions be about sex or sexual acts in some way.

This can both be done voluntarily and involuntarily. Like taking sexy photos of yourself would be sexualising yourself - you are presenting yourself in a sexualised framework.
As an artist drawing people you could sexualise them by making them do obviously suggestive poses, wear skimpy or no clothing (though nude people aren't inherently sexual either - it's confusing! You can be nude for many reasons, like taking a shower. Likewise revealing clothing isn't inherently sexual either. The lines get blurred when it is a drawing, because a creator might have decided to dress a character provocatively to sexualise them, despite the character itself not sexualising itself.) You could also place them in a sexual environment - like a sex dungeon.
You could also make them do sexual acts.

An involuntary example could be one of a person exercising by doing squats and you then going "I wouldn't mind standing behind her right now" or saying "oh yeah when they wear that outfit it's because they want to fuck" or "that outfit is fucking sexy. It leaves nothing up to the imagination, I can see her nipples" or "yeah she's working out so her man can get a real ass to grab.".
You are in a way reframing the world to be a sexual one - the person exercising was already wearing tight-fitting clothes, but they weren't doing it for a sexual reason. The person was doing a movement that could be suggestive, but they weren't being suggestive - that was just you deciding it was suggestive despite another framework being present. The person was doing an exercise that would make them more conventionally attractive, but they weren't in the moment doing this for any sexual reason, you decided they were exercising in order to be more pleasant to the eye of their sexual partner.

When there's talk of sexualising the women in this thread, it is because the women aren't doing anything sexual. They are attractive, but there is nothing inherently sexual about them or their actions. They aren't being suggestive, and they aren't presented how a creator would typically present a character they would want to sexualise - Ie. By clothing or environment or actions being sexual. People get confused though, because all of the characters are conventionally attractive, which is a way some creators sexualise their characters (ie all attractive characters are inherently sexual in that creators work. This is however very rarely if ever anything anybody but pornographic and erotic creators do.).
Others will say that they are posed suggestively, or that they are presented in a sexual manner. Maybe they're right, maybe they're wrong, maybes there's no clear answer, maybe there is, it's not something I can definitely say.

I hope this helps!