Interesting optical illusion – it reminds me of the picture we all have seen with the two profiles facing each other that form into a wine glass.  By the way, I applaud your guts MSNBC.  I’m sure you are going to get a lot of guff on this board from people who think our society needs to be more politically correct.

I've seen "more controversial" art, this it tame compared to other "stuff" that passes off as "art".

I've never ben sure of why a person could be offended by the thing they lived in for 9 months. It it weren't for a women's "nethers", nobody would be alive to complain!

If you are going to do a piece about an Erotic Art Festival then show what it's all about. Portray it for what it is and not be PC about it. If you need to be PC, then don't do an article about an Erotic Art Festival.

I see nethers, but hey I'm a dude.  Illusions in a naked woman probably isn't the first thing we would see. Thanks for pointing that out.  Besides, it's art...from an erotic art festival.  Can't understand why anyone would be offended.  

Bravo MSNBC!  Nobody has any right to criticize your handling of this lovely picture.   Smooth.

Personally, I do not see anything lude about it. In any European country this would be nothing, however, it seems in the US we cannot see simple nudity as nothing but sexual or threatning

I'm failing to see what is controversial about this image.  Our society is so unbelievably ashamed of the human body.  This is not some spread eagle shot or vulgar in any way.  Unreal that someone would have a problem looking at this.

Why is nudity so ofensive?  Apparently nobody has been to Europe, where it is common to see your local meteorologist disrobe on live tv.  Commercials feature naked men and women all the time.  Unless it is a child, or forcing somebody or exploiting somebody in some way what's the problem?  

I think that if I had a body like that I would let someone make a picture out of it too.  It is a beautiful picture and I think that anyone who fails to see the art in it needs a lesson on reality.

I fail to see why it was necessary for MSNBC to issue a
"WARNING!GRAPHIC CONTENT" message prior to viewing this image. For crying out loud! What is wrong with Americans? What a bunch of prudes.

Don't forget, we live in the same anal retentive country/society where the idiot Attorney General covered up the Justice statues breasts because he was ashamed to be seen in front of them.

And we wonder why this country is in the violently dysfunctional state that it's in.

Nudity?  What nudity?  All I see is a wine glass....

Nude women's lower body......next picture.

Interesting ... That piece came from a respected "mainstream" gallery here in Seattle.

Domenic Rouse was one of our invited artists. He shows internationally and is not considered to be an erotic artist.

I doubt that the piece would raise an eyebrow if not viewed in the context of an erotic art festival.

Aristic and TAME.

I agree with the above comments that this is not an offensive picture and that our country, in comparison to the rest of the Western world, is very prudish in regards to nudity and sexuality. In my opinion, it would do a great deal for the maturity of our nation to learn to respect the human body in all its forms- clothed, naked, big and small.

I find it sad that every day, with no warning, we see pictures and videos of death, destruction, hate, and pain.
But show a naked body...

Those who felt this image to be "controversial" should not be working as editors.  Groups like Focus on the Family in Colorado Springs can put these people to work.  But I am disgusted to know that these people have anything to do with what I see and read.

Regarding the comment that it's not a spread eagle or vulgar shot, if I'm interpreting it correctly, then Americans' taboos against nudity are silly but our taboos against sexuality are legitimate?  I'm personally not sure where the line is between those two.  Unfortunately I don't think anyone bent on banning or regulating "erotic" content is sure either.

The body looks as if it belongs to a young girl.Not a fully matured women.Maybe that could be why itis vulgar.Is the female pictured of legal age?Just a thought.

Sex is used to sell everything, just not nudity. Sexuality is ok, just not nudity. Vulgarity is ok, just not profanity, open  and bleeding wounds or sores, emaciation or nudity. EVERYTHING else is fair game, even violence. Welcome to America, land of the free, as long as its in the moral majority's favor, which isn't that free at all.

This country will always need balance to prosper and have some sort of decency, so I welcome others hesitation and suspicion. However, there is nothing wrong with simple nudity and this is as simple as it gets. I bet if this photoblog was on Foxnews.com they would not show the picture and then talk about how it is irresponsible and that we need to search for our moral compass. I guess keep the pictures coming.

I think it's beautiful, the female body that is.  

I just want to know....where is her pubic hair? Now let's discuss that.

interesting

Hotttt

A women's 'nethers' and a martini... I suppose a women's 'nethers' could be addicting to some men... like martinis are to me :)

And both can lead to GREAT emotions, or really negative emotions...

I don't know where I was going with this...

I appreciate that someone with judgement allowed us to opt out of viewing whatever was here--esp. since just wanted to see photos of journalistic value.  A lot of time is spent whining about censorship--further proof that lack of discretion equals immaturity.

Thank you for the warning -- it allows viewers to make a choice.  No one is stopping anyone else from viewing it, but view it or not, it is up to the individual.

A perfectly appropriate image for an erotic art show – titillating and tantalizing – on all levels.  

Dominic Rouse is an international photographic artist, respected for his excellent imagery and printwork.  His work can be found in several mainstream galleries.

As the author of the work under discussion I thought I might add my tuppence.

"Such is the power of the image: it heals only those who know what it is. For everybody else it is an illness."  Roberto Calasso

In over thirty years of making images I have never deliberately set out to create a decent image anymore that I have intentionally sought to produce an indecent image as I do not believe that questions of decency play any part in determining an image's worth. Photographs are either well made or they are not.

Censorship is even more indecent than the vulgarities that it can never prevent.

For reasons that I am never able to fully explain, there are occasions when my work causes some of my fellow human beings to distance themselves for brief periods from the lure of reason. This saddens me and  lures me ever closer to that elysium where only those who know the healing power of images reside.

The world populated by those who consider that images are a form of disease holds no interest for me and I wish to distance myself from it as far as it is humanly possible.

I applaud you guys whole heartedly. It disgust me no end that as an enlightened "nation" we can be so prudish about our own anatomy and its functions. It's as if we have aliens among us whom are not anatomically correct and so there is this effort to keep humans in ignornace. But then that is not the alien's fault but our own for embracing such ignornace and stupidity.
This is such a beautiful picture, I could admire it all day.

It's obviously the body of a young woman, and looks beautifully printed and lit. Yes, perhaps the wine-glass element is a minor one, but it forces a viewer to re-assess their first impressions, and references terms such as "hour glass" and "wine glass" "figures" which are used to refer to women's bodies. Also the way that women's bodies are commonly understood to be "watery". The glass thus serves as what Barthes would call the "punctum" for many viewers, bringing the image alive for them in the context of their own bodies. As such, it deserves to be hung if the artist was invited to show at the festival. Otherwise it's censorship. However; if the selection process was simply an Open Call, and the artist was not specifically invited to show work, then I would call it a matter of prudish taste (which seems a little silly in the context of such a festival) rather than censorship.

What a total insult to a fine photographer. The image is wonderful and in NO way suitable for censure for any age viewer. A photo montage of a martini glass blending into a blurred pubic region. Geezzz. What is wrong with the USA where graphic and gory violence is condoned and any kind of art nudity is forbidden. Sick. Shame on you NBC. Ah, unless you feared the mighty wrath of the FCC god - which is worse.

Obscene!?  War is obscene.  Dictators are obscene.  Starvation is obscene.  The ethical standards of political leaders and lobbyists are obscene.  Hell, the true motivation of many, if not most, religious leaders are obscene.  But one of the most natural of forms in the world, the human body, is potentially obscene!?  I can only wonder if the objectors of this beautiful image are middle aged women that are uncomfortable and ashamed of their own bodies.

this is just a boring photo. what's the point?

Beauty is art. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.  What ones sees as indecent another sees as inspiring.  The creativity of the author and the message recieve in my mind is provocative.  A wine glass holds the sweet nector of a fruit and the woman's "nethers" holds the sweet passage of life: either creating or delivering.  Grow up America!

I find it interesting that this picture, which is nothing more than nude photography, less nudity and sexuality than can be seen at any art museum, is covered by a warning, whereas the previous one, which does not show any genitalia but is a picture of a medical procedure (circumcision) and also has depicted bloody remains from the surgery, has no content warning.

When are we going to accept that we all have naked bodies.  Get Over Yourselves!

What I'm really worried about is the acceptance of fully-clad-in-fatigues dead bodies or drive-by victims.

I think that this is a beautiful drawing. I have to agree that the U.S. is a bit self absorbed and some of us seem to have our heads wrapped around trying to make everything into a big deal. Even if it's just a beautiful drawing of a perfectly natural thing hanging on the wall in an art gallery. Bust out of your set ways and be a little more open minded, it will help the whole world in the long run I bet.

Today, Friday April 5, and the picture is gone. Censorship?

My god!! its a naked woman who cares??? we all have seen naked people. Its just this uptight united states that is all about cover up your bodies nakedness is bad, bad bad. But its not, and almost everywhere else in the world accepts it like it should be, ie nude/topless beaches and no people do not act crazy either. Its a part of nature, just like oh my god women have breasts and nipples don't show nipples you have to bleep them out, but a guy does too and he can run around topless.

Not as offensive as seeing pics of Brittney Spears and Paris Hilton, climbing out of limos without their underwer!  Now THAT'S disgusting!

When did nudity become offensive?  It has always been portrayed in art as something beautiful, why should that be any different now?  With so many more important things to worry about these days, I can not believe some people choose nudity in tasteful art to be sress added to an already long list.  Americans (I am american myself) could really stand to lighten up!

Before you go tripping all over yourselves praising MSNBC.com for your freedom to view this picture, I had to first refresh the page, then click a warning.  The Puritans are alive, well and in charge.  At least, in the end, I was able to see the shot, so welcome to the land of the sort-of-free.  Of course, I'm still typing and it's yet to be seen whether "the editors" will allow this post.

Why are we, as a society, afraid to show what is natural - the human body naked - but when that human body is missing its head due to a drive-by shotgun blast we are free to post it on every front page in the country?

I fail to see what is wrong with this picture also.  It's a human body, and the artist is toasting it with a glass of wine.  How appropriate....

Being an illusion of a females body parts is one thing.  If it were an illusion or otherwise of a males genitals, people would be outraged.

Of course it seems Americans are the worst at finding the human body offensive.  I wonder why.  On average Americans are out of shape and overweight, no wonder they don't want to look at each other naked.

Perhaps if you find the human body offensive, you need to take a long look at yourself in the mirror.

The truth about the first immigrants landing this country's soil? They were uptight, ultra-prudes who wanted to get away from the rest of the western world because they were BECOMING more free, AND THEY STILL WANTED TO CONTROL THEIR PEOPLE! The statutes put forth then are now the bastions of our society.

Greaqt optical illusion.  It is only obscene if your mind leans that way.

I agree with Chicagowoman!

good thing its not red wine...

Yummy!

big deal seen one seen them all.

I find most human bodies offensive...but not hers.

DPerez...The model is obviously 21+ years old...or else she wouldn't have a wine glass.  ;)

That's one nappy-bottomed ho.

My "wine glass" turned into a beer stine about 3 kids ago.

Shame on you, Margaret...Yer fired!

*I would have been the guy flipping the picture over to take a peek...just in case...

"Excuse me, waiter?  There's a hair in my martini."

God's proof that women age like fine wine.

Britney?

hey, im 17 and i went to an erotic museum in paris. it was amazing art, sophisticated art. why we in america can not appreciate it, i dont understand.

Waiter, "did the bartender make this with Clamato?

I am a female, and personally I find this shot to be very warm and elegant.  Art is about expression.  It is something I would not hesitate to hang in my own living room.

Hmmm.... Have I dined at that restaurant before?

I believe ANYTHING can be art.

I don't see how the same people who are for free speech in public schools (Which i'm for) can be against free art.

elegant and Beautiful

ooo beautiful sexy erotic

Wine glass.............suuuuure! All I see is three perverts.

I just want to know why it's OK to flaunt the female body in public but not male? Pathetic double standard.

Perversion is in the eye of the accuser. ;)

"Excuse me...could you porn me a..I mean, pour me another..."

Is the wine glas half empty or half full?

H D

Oh my lordy, it's nudity!!! Ahhhh! Puritan God-fearing Americans shield your childrens eyes from the handywork of the Devil!

(...shhhh, if you listen carefully you can hear all of Europe laughing at us.)

A.)  With comments like that, we can see why

B.)  Most Americans could care less what Europe thinks about us.

I can't see a wine glass OR a martini glass anywhere

For some reason people are afriand of the human body.  Big deal, it shows a vagina.  All women have one and most men want one.  Even if it were a penis the people in this country need to quit being so prudish, wake up and be comfortable with what God gave us, embrace beauty!!

betty is that you...ah asfkASfjKWJDV O %$#@,,,...

that is just WRONG!!!!!!
people need 2 think about women viewers

Wow, amazing work of art.

My thought when I hear that a person would think this photo is objectionable is that that person must be a misogynist. The body, or illusion of a woman's body is beautiful. How can one be offended?

beautiful photo

Beautiful piece of art. Well done. I applaud it. Why are we so offended by nudity in art?

I don't encourage people to flaunt nude images around but I don't, either, see hoe this picture can be graphic. Why the warning?