So, Feminism

[Derec]

And those torsos on the table look like sex toys for men. They seem to be popular:

Did you notice in the OP photos one of the kids was fingering that torso doll. While snickering.

 

[RavenSky]

Staff Notice

Is there political content in the OP article?

Because if it's just about a school field trip to an art exhibit, that probably belongs in the Media & Culture Gallery.

Well the political content would be about the political agenda of the art exhibit and about the wisdom of taking a bunch of snickering teenagers to a rather risque exhibit.

Who says there's a political agenda? Did someone say it in the OP article?

If there's no political content in the linked article, why is it posted in this forum and not the one for the arts?

Yeah, this definitely belongs in M&PC - there's no political content here at all.

Though it's not particularly inspiring art for me. It seems a bit lost - an attempt to confront, but too little, too late for confrontational feminist art. Perhaps Estonian audiences missed this wave the last time around, so maybe it's fresher in that local context.

It certainly seems like an odd thing to share on this forum - which in itself could be considered rather more interesting as art in its own right. An art installation that superficially is an OP about another, almost completely dissimilar, art installation; a strange self-referential object that simultaneously refers clearly to something far outside itself.

I'm with Arctish here. This doesn't belong here. It belongs in Media and Culture because this is a discussion of society and culture and representations of persons within that culture.

/mod

 

[Arctish]

I do still observe that there is no political content in the OP.

The translation of some of the text linked to in the sixth post in the thread is political. But no attempt was made by the OP to introduce political discussion - links to a page written in a language few people here read, with only pictures and no (translated) quotes copied into the post itself, imply that it's the images, and not the political discussion they inspire, that is the purpose of the OP.

As an attempt to start a political discussion, the OP is remarkable for its unsuitability for that task. If indeed that was its intended purpose.

Regardless of Trausti's objectives or motives, we have the translation, and the article is political. Art is a secondary interest, In fact, it's negligible.

A thread's topic is outlined in the OP and discussion is based on it, at least initially.

The person who started this thread didn't mention the artist or anything to do with Estonia. In fact, the only bit of text provided was "School kids in Estonia went to a feminist art exhibition called “Naine ja naine” (“Woman and Woman”)", so it appears the thread topic is either the art itself, or the politics of the field trip.

Is that what the OP is about? The politics of taking kids to an art exhibit that presents the human body in artistic form and challenges social norms? Is so, what's the issue with that? They're teenagers. At that age they should be prepared to examine social constructs and how an artist presents/critiques them. A trip to an art exhibit like that can expand a kid's horizons.

I'm in favor of it.

 

[bilby]

I do still observe that there is no political content in the OP.

The translation of some of the text linked to in the sixth post in the thread is political. But no attempt was made by the OP to introduce political discussion - links to a page written in a language few people here read, with only pictures and no (translated) quotes copied into the post itself, imply that it's the images, and not the political discussion they inspire, that is the purpose of the OP.

As an attempt to start a political discussion, the OP is remarkable for its unsuitability for that task. If indeed that was its intended purpose.

Regardless of Trausti's objectives or motives, we have the translation, and the article is political. Art is a secondary interest, In fact, it's negligible.

I couldn't agree less. Art is far more significant and vastly more interesting than politics.

Almost nobody today knows or cares about the political views and activities of Francesco di Bartolomeo di Zanobi del Giocondo; He was active in the Florentine Signoria, and was even arrested for a while, so doubtless he had strong political views. But even though those political views are lost in the mists of time (and if known would be of little relevance today), everybody knows of the portrait he commissioned of his wife.

 

[Arctish]

Feminist art:

(NSFW)

Show

 

[WAB]

I do still observe that there is no political content in the OP.

The translation of some of the text linked to in the sixth post in the thread is political. But no attempt was made by the OP to introduce political discussion - links to a page written in a language few people here read, with only pictures and no (translated) quotes copied into the post itself, imply that it's the images, and not the political discussion they inspire, that is the purpose of the OP.

As an attempt to start a political discussion, the OP is remarkable for its unsuitability for that task. If indeed that was its intended purpose.

Regardless of Trausti's objectives or motives, we have the translation, and the article is political. Art is a secondary interest, In fact, it's negligible.

I couldn't agree less. Art is far more significant and vastly more interesting than politics.

Almost nobody today knows or cares about the political views and activities of Francesco di Bartolomeo di Zanobi del Giocondo; He was active in the Florentine Signoria, and was even arrested for a while, so doubtless he had strong political views. But even though those political views are lost in the mists of time (and if known would be of little relevance today), everybody knows of the portrait he commissioned of his wife.

Jesus H Christ - I meant art is a secondary interest in reference to this news item! I'm not even that into politics. I write poetry and play music.

You sure love to argue for no reason.

 

[bilby]

I couldn't agree less. Art is far more significant and vastly more interesting than politics.

Almost nobody today knows or cares about the political views and activities of Francesco di Bartolomeo di Zanobi del Giocondo; He was active in the Florentine Signoria, and was even arrested for a while, so doubtless he had strong political views. But even though those political views are lost in the mists of time (and if known would be of little relevance today), everybody knows of the portrait he commissioned of his wife.

Jesus H Christ - I meant art is a secondary interest in reference to this news item!

You sure love to argue for no reason.

No I don't.

 

[WAB]

I do still observe that there is no political content in the OP.

The translation of some of the text linked to in the sixth post in the thread is political. But no attempt was made by the OP to introduce political discussion - links to a page written in a language few people here read, with only pictures and no (translated) quotes copied into the post itself, imply that it's the images, and not the political discussion they inspire, that is the purpose of the OP.

As an attempt to start a political discussion, the OP is remarkable for its unsuitability for that task. If indeed that was its intended purpose.

Regardless of Trausti's objectives or motives, we have the translation, and the article is political. Art is a secondary interest, In fact, it's negligible.

A thread's topic is outlined in the OP and discussion is based on it, at least initially.

The person who started this thread didn't mention the artist or anything to do with Estonia. In fact, the only bit of text provided was "School kids in Estonia went to a feminist art exhibition called “Naine ja naine” (“Woman and Woman”)", so it appears the thread topic is either the art itself, or the politics of the field trip.

Is that what the OP is about? The politics of taking kids to an art exhibit that presents the human body in artistic form and challenges social norms? Is so, what's the issue with that? They're teenagers. At that age they should be prepared to examine social constructs and how an artist presents/critiques them. A trip to an art exhibit like that can expand a kid's horizons.

I'm in favor of it.

I'm not against taking students to any art exhibit of any kind. And I'm sure this was an eye-opener for them.

Nonetheless, the article was brief and was about a feminist artist making a political statement.

I have no problem with the thread being moved. But to deny the political nature of the topic is absurd.

 

[WAB]

I couldn't agree less. Art is far more significant and vastly more interesting than politics.

Almost nobody today knows or cares about the political views and activities of Francesco di Bartolomeo di Zanobi del Giocondo; He was active in the Florentine Signoria, and was even arrested for a while, so doubtless he had strong political views. But even though those political views are lost in the mists of time (and if known would be of little relevance today), everybody knows of the portrait he commissioned of his wife.

Jesus H Christ - I meant art is a secondary interest in reference to this news item!

You sure love to argue for no reason.

No I don't.

Hardy-har.

 

[WAB]

And those torsos on the table look like sex toys for men. They seem to be popular:

Did you notice in the OP photos one of the kids was fingering that torso doll. While snickering.

They could have been placed there as if to say: "See, this is what some men think of women. Pure sex objects. They don't even need a head (or brain). Not even arms or legs (and thereby nothing to defend with). Just a vagina and a pair of absurdly unnatural breasts."

 

[Arctish]

A thread's topic is outlined in the OP and discussion is based on it, at least initially.

The person who started this thread didn't mention the artist or anything to do with Estonia. In fact, the only bit of text provided was "School kids in Estonia went to a feminist art exhibition called “Naine ja naine” (“Woman and Woman”)", so it appears the thread topic is either the art itself, or the politics of the field trip.

Is that what the OP is about? The politics of taking kids to an art exhibit that presents the human body in artistic form and challenges social norms? Is so, what's the issue with that? They're teenagers. At that age they should be prepared to examine social constructs and how an artist presents/critiques them. A trip to an art exhibit like that can expand a kid's horizons.

I'm in favor of it.

I'm not against taking students to any art exhibit of any kind. And I'm sure this was an eye-opener for them.

Nonetheless, the article was brief and was about a feminist artist making a political statement.

I have no problem with the thread being moved. But to deny the political nature of the topic is absurd.

I didn't translate the article. I figured the OP contained the pertinent information to start the discussion (as it should), and the link was just to provide a source.

And those torsos on the table look like sex toys for men. They seem to be popular:

Did you notice in the OP photos one of the kids was fingering that torso doll. While snickering.

They could have been placed there as if to say: "See, this is what some men think of women. Pure sex objects. They don't even need a head (or brain). Not even arms or legs (and thereby nothing to defend with). Just a vagina and a pair of absurdly unnatural breasts."

If so, kudos to the artist. It worked like a charm.

 

[WAB]

I didn't translate the article. I figured the OP contained the pertinent information to start the discussion (as it should), and the link was just to provide a source.

And those torsos on the table look like sex toys for men. They seem to be popular:

Did you notice in the OP photos one of the kids was fingering that torso doll. While snickering.

They could have been placed there as if to say: "See, this is what some men think of women. Pure sex objects. They don't even need a head (or brain). Not even arms or legs (and thereby nothing to defend with). Just a vagina and a pair of absurdly unnatural breasts."

If so, kudos to the artist. It worked like a charm.

No doubt.

And the protesting artist's act of disrobing provides counterpoint: "See, some women have a body like this. And there's nothing wrong with that."

Like I said, I admire her tenacity.