Picasso artworks put in female toilet as part of art gallery response to court ruling

Comments

• tacosanonymous@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I think it’s a problem of enforcement. It states they weren’t letting in people self identifying as ladies.

  I get the point of the exhibit and it’s fair to make the statement. Her point was made and she got international attention. She loses me at the concept of having herself or staff determining genders at the point of access.

  source
• MindTraveller@lemmy.ca ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  “Ms Kaechele described the Ladies Lounge as a response to the lived experience of women forbidden from entering certain spaces throughout history,” Mr Grueber said.

  Fortunately, modern legislation prohibits sex-segregated art displays, so the practices Ms Kaechele is responding to are no longer legal in Australia.

  If Ms Kaechele would like to campaign for a return to sex-segregated art displays, I am certain she would be displeased by the outcome of abolishing sex discrimination laws.

  source

  • TWeaK@lemm.ee ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    No she thinks it’s fair for women to discriminate against men, “for at least 300 years”.

    source

    • Anticorp@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Unfortunately this is what a lot of people who claim to be advocates of equality want. They don’t want actual equality, they want harmful inequality for the group that used to benefit from it. That doesn’t provide justice for anyone, it just perpetuates injustice, especially since many people who never actually benefitted from the previous inequality will be harmed by the reversed situation. We need true inclusivity, not this role reversal bullshit that so many popular ideologies espouse.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • hanrahan@slrpnk.net ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Sex segregated spaces are allowed thogh?, is it just art spaces that aren’t.

    Women’s only gyms, women’s only swimming pools.etc

    Some guy who lived near a ladies only pool in Sydney sued becase he wanted to use it but he lost.

    source

    • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      That’s a shame. Between all the men’s only spaces and the women’s only spaces, nonbinary people lose.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • Kayel@aussie.zone ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      That’s the point of the court ruling right? It recognises the current climate when determining safety and disadvantage, not the past.

      source
• Nougat@fedia.io ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  If your socio-policital point requires the infringement of someone’s rights, I’m immediately inclined to disagree with you.

  source
• Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  and did not recognise how the experience of the Ladies Lounge can promote equal opportunity.

  What a ridiculous argument, I don’t have much respect for the legal system but it got it right this time.

  source
• Bassman27@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Promoting equal opportunity by denying men seems counter productive. I feel sorry for all the young males who may want to see these pieces / who are studying fine art.

  Even more ironic considering they’re paintings made by a male.

  source

  • grue@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    LOL, nah. Demonstrating exactly how hurtful the discrimination is by turning it against the group usually doing it is a very effective strategy. This notion that the historically-oppressed group needs to act all perfectly noble and correct in order to keep the legitimacy of its grievance is nothing but reactionary, pearl-clutching bullshit.

    If those “young males” don’t like it, they should blame the old males who fucked it up for them. Otherwise, the only response a male can have to this that isn’t sexist is “well played.”

    source

    • Bassman27@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      What is there to gain from punishing the current generation who’s more open to the idea of true inequality? If anything you’re just pushing them towards being against the cause…

      Nice try though lmao

      source

      • -> View More Comments