Exactly.
I don't have a problem with what she's doing apart from it being a transparently contrived stab at causing controversy and ultimately extremely boring.
[/quote]
I dunno. If she were taking pills to make parts of her liver, pop out, or brain, would that raise your red flags?
I went to one of my wife's crits a while back, and this lady art student had baked all these cakes (shaped like soccer balls, etc). She had apparently been ripped on for baking the cakes in an earlier crit, and so in this one she kind of was made up like a zombie housewife, and then she proceeded to demolish the cakes (kicking them, etc.) This one critic on the panel, who was this kind of tall, hideous frankenstein looking dude, said that she should have destroyed the cakes by rubbing them on their vagina so that they would "mingle with her juices."
This is a 50 year old, relatively powerful, and horribly unattractive man talking to a 20-something, quite attractive grad student.
Can you imagine that discourse happening in a public space anywhere but in an "art" context?
This poor woman's actions, inducing multiple abortions, is really a statement on what is expected of female artists. Outside of the feminist discourse (which treats women as empowered meat rather than just plain old SPAM) the art world is the creepiest group of misogynistic old bastards this side of Bohemian Grove.
I don't think she's actually making that statement with her work (which I will say I find absolutely repulsive. It is not only dangerous to her body, but makes a mockery of any reasonable opinion of abortion and abortion rights, IMHO) but the fact that she felt that she should/could use her body, and exploit the most natural and definitively "female" function that there is, to garner attention/praise/etc., seems not to come from any level of empowerment, but the supreme degradation that is inherent to the patriarchal art world.
Fuck it.
Well done, art fag, well done.
