All of my leftist progressive relatives took political science courses in college. They think I'm dumb because I don't get Marxism.
I don't care what you study. That painting is not art.
Okay, I’ll bite. The way I judge art is not about how “realistic” it is. I suspect that is your criteria, and that of many FReepers. I did a series on Art Appreciation on this site years ago, trying to open some minds.
The criteria I use is whether the form (what it looks like) and the content (the meaning) is any good. I know the history of how de Kooning re-interpreted the female figure. He saw women as strong and goddess-like, as seen in his Woman I series. They are no longer sex goddesses, which we’ve seen for hundreds of years in Western art, painted by men for men to enjoy. In this work, the breasts are very strong, but not necessarily sexual. I like the way they emerge from the deep darkness, in a primeval way, almost cave-like. It helps to know the series and how his work evolves. It is fresh and different.
I’m sick of tacky “impressionist” crap that goes for art nowadays. Not the real Impressionists, but the Sunday art fair stuff. De Kooning has something to say (content) that is dark and deep and more meaningful than just another pretty landscape.