You initially loved the painting. I am curious as to what you saw? I have also been curious about the idea of male fantasy and art, where male writers, for example, have dominated and where women and Blacks have complained about a lack of representation. Aren't we leaving a time, when men paid for families, we're the bread winners? Things are changing and who has the money will dictate what is valuable. Your very article is an indication of change and a point of view that creates value and acts as an art historian’s judgment. But, the male gaze is in effect a cathartic reality for those who consumed art, a wry presentation of self on the wall of an affluent male. You are affecting change and criticism. That's art too. But, men still have these fantasies, and I guess that's what art is--a thinly veiled or filtered or mediumized presentation of self?