:I don't know about the copyvio crap, but...in what way does the depiction of condom usage detracts from scientific value? That just escapes me. In an article about  sexual intercourse (at least the parts focusing on humans), would it not be wise to include depictions of condom usage, given the fact that such contraceptive means are an important part of everyday life for a good percentage of those who are sexually active? And the opinion that shaven genitalia automatically means "porn" is just that - an opinion. "Natural" is not dictated by whether one has an afro springing out of their nether regions. It ticks me off to hear people say crap like "eww u have ur g/f shave her pubes that's unnatural so it means u liek little gurlz u pedo!!!1" and then turn around and call long-haired men weird for not keeping their hair the "standard" male length (if it's unnatural to shave your pubes, so should it be to cut your hair or shave your legs). Bottom line, condom usage and absence of pubic hair don't make the picture any less relevant to the purpose of the article. So unless the pic does in fact violate a copyright standard, I see no reason why it shouldn't be used.