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
    0
    ·
    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
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      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
        0
        ·
        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
          0
          ·
          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
            1
            ·
            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.

    • ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      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.