The type of argument made by Bobby should not be taken seriously
"As a gay man, artist X sees the male physique as a lived phenomenon, which accounts for the unsettled tension between poetics and politics in his works."
"As a gay man, artist X has a disinterested conception of the female body, which allows him to capture the purity of its aesthetics"
"As a straight man, artist Y imbues his female nudes with a fervent passion."
"As a straight man, artist Y is able to abstract the formal possibility of the male nude, seeing the similarity between the male physique and a mountain range."
All these statements, common in art books and exhibitions, are terribly post-hoc and should be ridiculed.
Regardless, no matter which way you swing, I doubt you can esthetize these:
View attachment 2278767
View attachment 2278770
View attachment 2278765
I almost though the ones sitting on the ground are Chris's kids. They are not.
View attachment 2278771
View attachment 2278776