Yale Art major Aliza Shvarts '08 wants to make a statement.
Beginning next Tuesday, Shvarts will be displaying her senior art project, a documentation of a nine-month process during which she artificially inseminated herself "as often as possible" while periodically taking abortifacient drugs to induce miscarriages. Her exhibition will feature video recordings of these forced miscarriages as well as preserved collections of the blood from the process.
The artist said, "I hope it inspires some sort of discourse," Shvarts said. "Sure, some people will be upset with the message and will not agree with it, but it's not the intention of the piece to scandalize anyone."
Good thing she said that because we wouldn't want to mistake her intent. Trivialize surely but not scandalize. Oh, no, we wouldn't want to mistake her message. BTW, I love how they said "forced miscarriages". What's wrong? Are we having trouble saying ABORTIONS? Does it sound nicer to call it "forced miscarriages"? Yeah, probably but I'm not falling for it. There is nothing "nice" about this "art" project.
It's disgusting, disturbing and does nothing to advance the argument that women have abortions because they "need them" and they don't do them lightly. They wouldn't have abortions for trivial reasons like birth control or FUCKING ART PROJECTS.
No, clearly, this woman had "health issues".
R.I.P. Steven Malcolm Anderson
And yes, she hit my button!
Sounds more like a molehill post.
What's the issue?
That people doing something to get right-wingers enraged is enraging right-wingers.
P.S. great answer.
...but then, when you have a movement that refuses to even address life issues in the issue of abortion this is what happens, I suppose.
Discourse on art and the human body, or a discussion of the inherent value of human life, or hoaxes in a mass-media age. Something like that.
Am I missing something here?
Who goes to these things anyway -- besides the reporters who get the press release?
People who hear about it from irate bloggers?
Otherwise, I wish people would stop classifying neurotic, theatrical showboating as 'art'. Art is the use of a real skill used to produce some kind of aesthetic result. Calling excretory displays of mental illness 'art' makes the whole term worthless.
Well, there goes Andrew Lloyd Webber...
Next stop would be an interview with
Dr. PhilOprah, then Larry King, then Dr. Phil.Is that about right?
How about a slide-show of cattle-branding abortion doctors with swastikas on their winkie-covered asses and calling that "art." That okay, Rose?
Do you ever get past your own ego long enough to actually say something ?
Sure, that's fine.
Oh and I don't have to channel my holocaust surviving relative ... I live with her. And if I actually typed what she wanted me to type in response - you'd still be blushing. She didn't get your "humor" but I explained that you were trying to teach me a lesson. Keep at it...you play angry nutty liberal with such flair!
Your mother is a Holocaust survivor? Which death camp was she in?
Uh ... yep.
But true learning comes from good questioning, which is why the art of cross-examination is the high point of so much dramatic television.
The wisdom comes from asking, and asking well. The trick is to know what to ask.
Your question, however, ... well, keep trying.
They missed?
McK:
Uh, yep ... I say stuff.
But true wisdom comes from good questioning, which is why the art of cross-examination is the high-point of so much television drama.
Only the wisest ask the best questions, getting wiser still. The trick is knowing what to ask, knowing that the act of questioning itself is revealing.
Your question, however ... well, keep trying.
My question of you, therefore, is do you think I'm egotistical because you think I think I'm wise, or is my wisdom revealed by saying things in such a way you cannot comprehend due to your lack of wisdom as revealed by your question?
If your initial instinct is to answer, "huh?" you are on the road to enlightenment, but you're not a grasshopper yet.
;)
so guillable u ares
its whack.
prospective olympians used blood-doping for years and years.
its like Che.
rightside ppl get ever so worked up about Che, but to my gen he's just a cool t-shirt.
;)
ur ona roll,
bt he hu is,
somtim, lft,
erst still,
wacki ego,
kiss
me.Zee Beggaahr who sit in marketplace, izz deaf to song of mocking bird.
Somebody needs to tell Howard Dean to go fuck off.
You're delegated as senior leftist around here.
Left ?
its whack."
fru, not lik she cut off an ear r sumpin.
(Just trying to return the favor)
Hey, Wa happ'd to that really cool crooked cross thingy Rose had on her side bar. Now she's got sum stuff looks like a dummy lawyer wrote.
Hmmm
Good for you Rose. A bit late, but better than never.
How much were they paying you for that ad anyway?
More than I'm getting for child support...
Yeah, I suppose, although there isn't enough money in the world that would be worth putting a swastika on my front page.
Manipulating SOME people. Others identified it as fake immediately.
You might need.
In fact, if you read the article you'd see that the "lefties" (if you think that way) were outraged as well.
Did you miss this part:
Any reasonable person thinks this way. I'm sure if her project involved needlessly splattering pheasant against bumper tied canvases at 80 mph then not only PETA but hunters would be upset about it.
Oh, BTW. Extremely offensive, Mark, bad form. Extremely bad form.
is that ok?
was the abortion hoax really IQ-baiting?
Its Science and Academe vs the religious right, ben stein, the sandwichboard guys and the patriarchial daddies of the FLDS.
i know which side i'm on.
Socio-Economic Status.
or education-differential baiting?
man, that's awkward.
a little help guyz?
man, that's awkward.
a little help guyz?
A "stupid tax," like the lottery which is a tax on people who can't do math.