You are absolutely right to be concerned.
There are many people who defend this but they also defend the indoctrination of children which takes what should be a straightforward rejection of sex based stereotypes and turns it into a pathway towards a lifetime of medication and elective surgery.
The image is not great - just on the edge of plausible deniability (a frequently used tactic) - and along the same lines as the children’s book that featured mastectomy scars and references to paedophile slogans.
The thing to remember with people defending and denying these things is that normally, if you pointed out that a product for children had inadvertently used a well known paedophile slogan (as a real world example), you would be horrified and remove it immediately. You would not expect to find a wider community defending it.
There are a number of threads on the mission creep of Pride marches which also highlight the ways they are vulnerable to exploitation by people with bad intentions. I looked into it after someone on a thread shared a list of 8 Pride officers or founders who had convictions for child sex offences. For context, there are 270 Pride marches in the UK with an average of 5-10 officers for each. This is way above the rate for the general male population.
I would also like to know who the + represents and more importantly given the safeguarding issues mentioned above, who they wish to exclude.