This seems to be triggering responses in people due to their particular cultural, gender or religious bias and 'judging' whether the picture is 'right' or 'wrong' from their particular moral standpoint (which is relative) rather than
whether it works or not.
I think the issue is not whether you like it or not, or whether it 'exploits' women (sic - only one woman gave her sanction for this and presumably it suited her agenda) and shows them in a bad light and sexualises the female form (God forbid the female form becomes asexual, the race would die out).
The issue is very simple and clear cut. Did the picture work? Did it achieve its objective? Did it communicate the message the subject and photographer wanted to convey?
On all counts I believe it did (partly because it has hit some raw nerves with people who find it offensive for its very effective communication of its message
).
For a moment put aside your prejudices and
ask yourself, is this an effective, memorable and iconic image of a Hollywood sex symbol?
And that's my final word on this subject
because we'll never agree if we're discussing things through a cultural, religious, or gender agenda (I am proud to say I don't have
a gender agenda - I only said it because I like the play on words)
Nigel
...now what about that TV commercial break, Fahim? There must be some art to watch there