If I draw a painting of a pretty flower, that does not challenge you. It's just nice to look at.
Creativity !== Art
Is there cultural context? The Victorian Brits encoded messages into flowers; some of those meanings are still current. (Give a friend a red rose, another friend a potted daisy. Do they react differently?) A red poppy is a symbol of one thing, specifically because of culture. Chrysanthemums mean different things in America and Japan.
And if the artist writes a statement: "This is just a painting of a pretty flower." that too is a political statement.
But this definition makes the term "political" meaningless.
If you choose a definition for "political" which has actual use, not all art is political.
> Something is political if it is intended to discuss, share or pomote certain thoughts on topics relating to behaviours or systems within a society.
The most notable difference of this definition to what you appear to understand as political is probably that it has to be intended to be political.
Someone eating meat doesn't intend to make a statement about consumption of animal products? Then them eating meat is not political.
By definition, all art should challenge the participant/consumer of it.
That challenge can be personal, or something else.
But all is not political. It only looks that way because in the current cultural environment The Politics Industrial Complex has over-developed (?) it's position in the hierarchy of the broader culture. It creases unhealthy biases etc to the point that We have forgotten "The government needs us, we don't need it."
Everything is not political. We as individuals still have influence. The PIC's lens isn't working. It's a false god. The sooner we change that, the better.