this post was submitted on 07 May 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Interesting Global News

2601 readers
497 users here now

What is global news?

Something that happened or was uncovered recently anywhere in the world. It doesn't have to have global implications. Just has to be informative in some way.


Post guidelines

Title formatPost title should mirror the news source title.
URL formatPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefixOpinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.


Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. No social media postsAvoid all social media posts. Try searching for a source that has a written article or transcription on the subject.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

Icon attribution | Banner attribution

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Australia's Mona asked a court to reverse its ruling that allowed men inside a women's only space.

Archived version: https://archive.ph/oHT6U

(page 4) 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago

This BBC World article covers how the artist brought the artwork into the courthouse:

Tuesday started with a large group of women dressed in navy power suits, clad in pearls and wearing red lipstick marching into the hearing to support Ms Kaechele.

As the parties sparred, the museum's supporters were somewhat stealing the spotlight. They had periods of complete stillness and silence, before moving in some kind of subtle, synchronised dance - crossing their legs and resting their heads on their fists, clutching their hearts, or peering down their spectacles. One even sat there pointedly flipping through feminist texts and making notes.

After (Judge) Grueber reserved his decision for a later date, which is yet to be determined, the museum's posse left as conspicuously as it came in - dancing out of the building in a conga line as one woman played 'Simply Irresistible' by Robert Palmer off her iPhone.

Ms Kaechele has indicated she'll fight the case all the way to the Supreme Court if needed, but she says - ironically - that perhaps nothing could drive the point of the artwork home more than having to shut it down.

"If you were just looking at it from an aesthetic standpoint, being forced to close would be pretty powerful."

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (26 children)

Well isn't that about some hypocritical shit?!

From the article...

"The lounge, which contains some of the museum's most-acclaimed works - from Picasso to Sidney Nolan - has been closed to the public since the court's order."

Both Pablo Picasso and Sidney Nolan were both men!

If they're gonna play that 'women only' card, then they should remove all works created by men and move them to a proper open museum.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You're doing the thing the artist intended lol

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Point is, art is art, and a museum is a museum. Anyone mature enough should be allowed to enter any museum they want and view whatever exhibits they want.

That gender specific crap can and does end up going both ways. And it shouldn't be that way, anywhere.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

In a world where there are millions of men who actually believe women are advantaged over men in today's society, it's interesting to see the international uproar occurring over this single exhibit that made that belief actually true. A single exhibit at a sex museum in Tasmania that's literally about gender discrimination.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

A single exhibit at a sex museum in Tasmania

Small point of order: MONA, despite how it sounds when pronounced as an acronym, is not a sex museum. It's the Museum of Old and New Art. You may return to your debate.

Personally, I'm finding the whole thing delicious. As someone who went to university in a building where the post-graduate / staff floor didn't have a female bathroom - likely because when it was built women were only expected to clean and serve tea in that space - I appreciate the artist and museum setting official legal precedent around this topic. And doing so with panache.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

And I find this funny, but in the sad way ☹️

Folks trying to fight sexual discrimination with sexual discrimination... 🤦‍♂️

Those that dispute, fight and argue about such things that way don't even seem to realize that they're just contributing to the problem.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (3 children)

I just have to completely disagree. Art has consistently served to challenge the status quo and provoke thought and discussion, and this exhibit has absolutely excelled in that regard.

Now the artist is moving on to explore existing discrimination exemptions under the law in Tasmania:

In fact the Lounge already possesses many of the redeeming qualities listed in the verdict that would make it eligible for an exemption under section 27 of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1998 (Tas). Where it isn’t already eligible, a number of minor adjustments should bring us into compliance.

The law states that a person may discriminate on the ground of gender:

(a) in a religious institution, if it is required by the doctrines of the religion of the institution; or

(b) in education, if it is for the purpose of enrolment in one-gender schools or hostels; or

(c) in employment, if it is for the purpose of the residential care of persons under the age of 18 years; or

(d) in employment, if it is based on a genuine occupational qualification or requirement in relation to a particular position; or

(e) in accommodation, if it is shared accommodation for less than 5 adult persons; or

(f) in the provision or use of facilities, if those facilities are reasonably required for use by persons of one gender only.

Interviewer: You believe the artwork can continue to operate under a legal exemption? Which of these exemptions will apply?

All of them.

https://mona.net.au/blog/2024/05/interview-with-kirsha-kaechele-about-the-ladies-lounge

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Quoting the law doesn't make the laws right in any regard. I'm pretty sure that if you asked Picasso, if he were alive of course, that he would heavily protest the discrimination and encourage anyone mature enough to view his works.

Same typically goes for almost any artist. They didn't go through the trouble of creating the art only to end up with others saying who does or doesn't get to view it.

Matter of fact, did Picasso or any of the other artists leave a will? Or for any of the artists that might still be alive or with living descendants, do they get a word in about it?

They should.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

She's not saying the law is right...

Also Picasso was a renowned chauvinist and misogynist who had affairs with teenagers as a 70 year old...

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

How does everyone know my last name?

Not all Chauvins fit that stereotype. Would be nice if people would stop using my last name as a broad insult. But hell, I can't expect discriminatory people to leave my family name out of their mouth.

That would be too much like a step in the right direction.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I see you've lost the topic

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Nah not really. I'm almost 42 years old and have heard my last name used as a sexist insult my whole life.

People that use that word in an insulting manner are sexist. You just used that word.

You just did a 2+2. Maybe you should try doing a 2-2, and remove that and other sexist terms from your descriptive vocabulary.

It's not an adjective, it's a family name.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

I'm gonna need an explanation for how using a word in context with its dictionary definition is "sexist." Sorry this is unpleasant for you, but I've never come across someone with the last name "Chauvin" and been like "oh there goes that chauvinist." Lots of last names have entered English as descriptors of things, eg sadism from the Marquis de Sade and masochism from Leopold von Sacher-Masoch.

chauvinism (n.)

1840, "exaggerated, blind nationalism; patriotism degenerated into a vice," from French chauvinisme (1839), from the character Nicholas Chauvin, soldier of Napoleon's Grand Armee, who idolized Napoleon and the Empire long after it was history, in the Cogniards' popular 1831 vaudeville "La Cocarde Tricolore." The meaning was extended to "excessive belief in the superiority of one's race" in late 19c. in communist jargon, and to (male) "sexism" in late 1960s via male chauvinist (q.v.).

Anyway, the point is Picasso was terrible to women. Many women.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yes, Nicholas is at the very top of my official knighted family tree. Again, it's a family name. Should never have been used in any sort of derogatory adjective form, whether back in 1840 or in 1960, or anywhere in between or since.

Believe me, I know my roots, and I know that I don't agree with the sexism use of my last name. You're quoting a definition that came up in a very prejudiced era from the 1960s, back when certain people weren't allowed to do certain things, such as drink from the wrong water fountain.

You sure do seem to know a lot about these antiquated discriminatory words don't you? Have you considered trying to like not refer to dictionaries written in discriminatory times?

Back on point, yes I've gathered that Picasso wasn't all that great of a dude. Neither was Mozart, he had a shit fetish. Does that stop people from appreciating their artistic works?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (6 children)

I think you have a backward view of what sexism in the 60s looked like, and at this point can't tell if you're trolling, since Nicholas Chauvin was a fictional character.

And my god man, I have no beef with Picasso and never said no one should appreciate Picasso's works. I was arguing with you:

I'm pretty sure that if you asked Picasso, if he were alive of course, that he would heavily protest the discrimination and encourage anyone mature enough to view his works.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (25 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›