Cheeseburger, I could not have said it better myself.

Art is always such a controversial thing, isn't it? Often, it has me thinking back to one of my favourite childhood stories, Hans Christian Andersen's "The Emperor's New Clothes". Someone who's supposedly knows about art, says it's 'art', so then it's art.

I think too, much of it has to do with how much publicity an artist is able to generate for their work.

It's like last September when British artist, Marc Quinn's winning plinth sculpture of his friend, eight months pregnant Alison Lapper - who was born without arms and with shortened legs was unveiled in Trafalgar Square. Well, Quinn, who came to prominence in 1991 with a cast of his head made with nine pints of his own blood, sure hit the jackpot with this one. People were talking about him and his 'art' for months later. It seemed like everyone in the media and art world was raving about it. It was like no freaking idiot would dare to critise him or it for fear of offending Alison Lapper, or disabled people generally. That damned hunk of marble had people everyone bending and falling over themselves in an effort to seen as being politically correct.

Personally, I think Marc Quinn is simply brilliant, however, as an artist, he's much like many.

And, Ozme52, getting back to your original post, I'm wonder if you, as an hetrosexual male, would still class that picture as "more than just a risque photo" if it featured a naked man instead of a naked woman?