On other news about another beauty queen, Miss Universe Dayana Mendoza has been caught in a scandal after nude photos from her past hit the internet.

Well, not really. In fact, Miss Universe Organisation officials insisted that they’re “artistic in nature, and they don’t have an ounce of pornographic content to them“.

Now I wonder. What’s the limit between artistic and pornographic today? If any nude ad is artistic at all, why are they banned on national TVs? Eva Mendes, anyone?

Why was it inappropriate when Britney showed what’s underneath her skirt for free? On the other hand, it’s artistic when Kate Moss flaunted her assets on the runway — for some money, that is.

Perhaps it’s considered artistic when you go naked for what-so call good cause like those PETA campaigners?

Anyway, 90% of Hollywood have done those things that are “artistic” in nature. Of course, they were not really naked, because they’re just acting. But hey, you’ve got my point.

Related Posts:
Today’s Quote: Putri Raemawasti
Miss Universe 2005: When English Proficiency Becomes a Blunder
The Controversy over Artika Sari Devi: the Show is Over