Not sure if this was already posted.

The article describes the referenced court case, and the artist’s views and intentions.

Personally, I both loved and hated the idea at first. The more I think about it, the more I find it valuable in some way.

  • WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    118
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    8 months ago

    Makes sense. Having a ladies only exhibit that only shows women artists is a positive thing. Not allowing certain visitors into a museum because of their gender is sexist.

    • protist@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      8 months ago

      The museum this exhibit is at only allowed men until 1965. Today, there’s a single, temporary exhibit within this museum that’s only allowing women, with a stated intention to make people reflect on that previous time. That this single exhibit draws international attention speaks volumes to the reality of sexism in western society, and it’s not the sexism you’re talking about

      • WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        36
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        It wasn’t right in 1965, and it isn’t right today. Creating inverse discrimination to draw attention to historical discrimination is still a form of discrimination, even if it is temporary.

        This was just a poorly executed concept that could have been done better.

        • protist@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          18
          ·
          8 months ago

          The fact that it’s not right is the point. That people across the entire planet are talking about this Australian art exhibit and sexism demonstrates this exhibit was executed really well

          • WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            Agree to disagree then—we’re both entitled to an opinion, as is the way with art.

            The execution left me with a negative impression of the event, and has not really broadened my awareness. I hope it had its intended impact on others so it isn’t a total wash. I’m glad you found it more inspiring than I did.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Maybe the museum should take it up with the people still alive in 1965 who created the policy.

        The guy paid to be admitted and they took his money. He gets to see all the art. If they didn’t want to let him see all the art they should have charged him nothing.

    • ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      20
      ·
      8 months ago

      Especially with the context that Australia didn’t allow women in pubs with men until 1965 so women there were literally sent to “ladies lounges,” which were apparently always some shitty side room, that sometimes would sell them a drink (at higher prices) while they waited.

      Turning that on its head as a temporary exhibit at a museum is clearly art to me. It’s not like she did it as a business concept to make money.

          • potustheplant@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Reflection on what? The actions of people that are now senile or dead? And how? By discriminating people? Yeah, really positive.

            • june@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              8 months ago

              Reflection on history. I don’t see that as an inherently negative thing even though it would ostensibly exclude me.

              Do projects that drive us to consider the plights of slaves, Jews in the holocaust, or other groups that were tortured, murdered, or otherwise persecuted en masse elicit this same response to you? If not, why?

              It seems to me that the art is doing what it’s intended to do, illicit a reaction. What you do with that reaction, positive or negative, is up to you.

              • potustheplant@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                No one said that reflection on any given topic is negative. Just that this particular way of doing it is antagonistic and I’d argue is even detrimental to the conversation. I mean, if you actually learned that discrimination is wrong, why do you teach that by actually doing it yourself? It’s like a parent, that got beat up when he was young, beating up his kid to teach him that violence is a bad thing.

    • Gloomy@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      39
      ·
      8 months ago

      So you feel like you are beeing treated sexist because of your gender.

      Wonderful. Now take that feeling. Feel the rage it brings with it, the exclusion, the pure UNFAIRNESS of it.

      And now think how often women experience this. Not on the context of “you may not enter” any more, but in hunders of other ways. You can’t be good at math, you’re a woman. Why wouldn’t you want to stay with the kid for a year or so, you’re a woman?!

      This is, so I belive, why the artist says the feeling of exclusion is the experience for male visitors she is intending. It gives you the possibility to think about how it feels beeing female in a world that is still very much male dominated (tough in a slightly more subtle way than in 1965).

      • WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        I’m not feeling anything personally because I didn’t go to the art exhibit—I’m just a person reading news stories on Lemmy.

        I have been discriminated against for my gender, race, and sexual orientation before. It’s humiliating. I imagine I would also feel a bit humiliated at being turned away from a museum due to my gender.

        In general, making people feel like shit for who they are has no positive function in any public space, and I’d prefer it if we simply left those behaviors in the past entirely.

        • Gloomy@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          8 months ago

          In general, making people feel like shit for who they are has no positive function in any public space, and I’d prefer it if we simply left those behaviors in the past entirely.

          I agree with you in general, but after understanding the idea behind it I think, in the context of said art project, it is a useful tool to get some people to think about discrimination.

          As this thread shows, it also enraged people and makes them scream “feminist are sexist and want males to suffer”, but hey, you can’t reach everybody.

      • redditsuckss@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        8 months ago

        Thanks for proving my point that modern feminists don’t want equality or even equity; they want superiority.

        They think it’s “their turn” to be the abusers and that the world owes it to them.

        • Gloomy@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          8 months ago

          Well, if this is what you took out of what I wrote then I am sorry, but you came here with that opinion and are trying realy hard to have it justified by realy just anything.

          Because, if you’d take the time to understand what I wrote, there’d be no rational conclusion leading to your point. None.