• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

So many bastards, so little time.

A consequence of cucumbers

The words do not have to be perfect.

Fani Willis claps back at Trump chihuahua, Jim Jordan.

“Why isn’t this Snickers bar only a nickel?”

Putin dreamed of ending NATO, and now it’s Finnish-ed.

Is it irresponsible to speculate? It is irresponsible not to.

Stop using mental illness to avoid talking about armed white supremacy.

“Cheese and Kraken paired together for the appetizer trial.”

You can’t attract Republican voters. You can only out organize them.

This really is a full service blog.

The new republican ‘Pastor’ of the House is an odious authoritarian little creep.

The media handbook says “controversial” is the most negative description that can be used for a Republican.

Nancy smash is sick of your bullshit.

Wake up. Grow up. Get in the fight.

He really is that stupid.

An almost top 10,000 blog!

Balloon Juice, where there is always someone who will say you’re doing it wrong.

Accused of treason; bitches about the ratings. I am in awe.

The line between political reporting and fan fiction continues to blur.

Republicans: The threats are dire, but my tickets are non-refundable!

Narcissists are always shocked to discover other people have agency.

“In the future, this lab will be a museum. don’t touch it.”

Republicans want to make it harder to vote and easier for them to cheat.

Mobile Menu

  • Four Directions Montana
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2024 Elections
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Popular Culture / Not Helpful

Not Helpful

by John Cole|  April 17, 200812:53 pm| 131 Comments

This post is in: Popular Culture, Assholes, General Stupidity, Outrage

FacebookTweetEmail

Look, if your goal is to promote “discourse” about abortion, this is just not helpful:

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 goal in creating the art exhibition, Shvarts said, was to spark conversation and debate on the relationship between art and the human body. But her project has already provoked more than just debate, inciting, for instance, outcry at a forum for fellow senior art majors held last week. And when told about Shvarts’ project, students on both ends of the abortion debate have expressed shock — saying the project does everything from violate moral code to trivialize abortion.

But Shvarts insists her concept was not designed for “shock value.”

“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.”

I really, really hope this is a fraud for so many different reasons. If not, I propose a death match between her and Randall Terry. Regardless the outcome, society comes out a winner.

*** Update ***

Yep, a fake. Enjoy your 15 minutes.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « No More Rove
Next Post: Hillary Was In Her Element »

Reader Interactions

131Comments

  1. 1.

    Dennis - SGMM

    April 17, 2008 at 12:56 pm

    The Shvarts is strong in this one.

  2. 2.

    BFR

    April 17, 2008 at 12:57 pm

    I don’t think there’s anything that could make me want to disown my kids but this would come pretty close for me.

  3. 3.

    pharniel

    April 17, 2008 at 12:59 pm

    wow. that’s pretty fucked up right here. and i was cool with the piss jesus and jizzz necklace

  4. 4.

    rawshark

    April 17, 2008 at 1:00 pm

    If the NEA was involved this will get ugly.

  5. 5.

    Zifnab

    April 17, 2008 at 1:02 pm

    There is no way on god’s green earth this will be healthy. Listen, I’m all for creativity and conversation, but… that’s like shooting yourself in the foot to talk about gun violence. I mean, what – exactly – are you trying to prove, other than how badly you can mangle your internal organs.

    This woman has just become the poster child for the case against letting a woman have control over her uterus.

  6. 6.

    4tehlulz

    April 17, 2008 at 1:04 pm

    >>But Shvarts insists her concept was not designed for “shock value.”

    She manages to make Piss Christ look like the height of class. That is a very difficult feat to accomplish.

  7. 7.

    John Cole

    April 17, 2008 at 1:07 pm

    If the NEA was involved this will get ugly.

    If the NEA was involved, it SHOULD get ugly.

  8. 8.

    The Moar You Know

    April 17, 2008 at 1:07 pm

    I know I’ll be in the minority here, but I think her project is awesome.

    It’s sure getting a reaction and publicity, sparking discussion, and that’s the whole point of art.

  9. 9.

    BFR

    April 17, 2008 at 1:07 pm

    Rare is the day when I find myself in agreement with the NRO. That is an outrage in itself.

    It’s more likely that her senior art project is to see how many people she can upset with a hoax. If it’s a hoax, it’s an abhorrent and disgusting one. If it turns out to be true, it’s of course all the more so and far worse. Either way, where are the adults at Yale?

  10. 10.

    Svensker

    April 17, 2008 at 1:08 pm

    that’s like shooting yourself in the foot to talk about gun violence. I mean, what – exactly – are you trying to prove, other than how badly you can mangle your internal organs.

    This woman has just become the poster child for the case against letting a woman have control over her uterus.

    She may not realize all the fun problems that can come from miscarriage. On the other, if she makes herself infertile I wouldn’t necessarily call that a bad thing.

  11. 11.

    ThymeZone

    April 17, 2008 at 1:08 pm

    At a private showing, the artist will fart in your face as a gesture of goodwill.

  12. 12.

    BFR

    April 17, 2008 at 1:10 pm

    It’s sure getting a reaction and publicity, sparking discussion, and that’s the whole point of art.

    Taking a carload of puppies into Times Square and lighting them on fire would also spark discussions. Just sayin.

  13. 13.

    charles

    April 17, 2008 at 1:11 pm

    Um, it’s her body–she can do whatever she wants with it. Not that I want to hear about it…

  14. 14.

    laneman

    April 17, 2008 at 1:12 pm

    This is so wrong on soooooo many levels.

  15. 15.

    zzyzx

    April 17, 2008 at 1:13 pm

    Why is this bad? If you believe in the Age of Discernment theory of Heaven (anyone too young to decide for Jesus gets to go to Heaven) like most good wackos, all she did was create a few more people who get to hang out with Jesus for all eternity!

    OK, that might be too far even for snark.

  16. 16.

    Jen

    April 17, 2008 at 1:13 pm

    I’m no doctor, but that doesn’t sound terribly healthy. It also doesn’t sound like it would spark a discussion about abortion. (Hell, we did that pretty decently just the other day by John posting a thread on an entirely different topic. Mission Accomplished!) It sounds like it would spark a discussion on the statutory requirements for involuntary commitment.

  17. 17.

    Bubblegum Tate

    April 17, 2008 at 1:13 pm

    The Shvarts is strong in this one.

    Har! My first reaction was “it sounds like her name was made up by Mel Brooks.”

  18. 18.

    rawshark

    April 17, 2008 at 1:13 pm

    John Cole Says:

    If the NEA was involved this will get ugly.

    If the NEA was involved, it SHOULD get ugly.

    I see you still have that republican reflex.

  19. 19.

    DougJ

    April 17, 2008 at 1:14 pm

    This is screwed up, but people do screwed up things all the time.

  20. 20.

    Zifnab

    April 17, 2008 at 1:14 pm

    On the flip side, while this takes the “reproductive rights” argument to a rather absurd conclusion, there is nothing actually – ethically – wrong with what she is doing, from my point of view.

    She is doing multiple times in a short period what any other woman would only hope to experience as infrequently as possible – but what occurs every day on countless occations. She is not doing anything illegal, or even amoral. Gross, perhaps. But, when I passed the 20ft tall “Abortion BAD” banners with fetus scrapings publicly on display put on by the anti-choice crowds, I can’t see how this is significantly different.

    People love to discuss abortion as some abstract concept that happens to other vague, indistinguishable humans and proto-humans. Shvarts is making it all very real and personal. We’ve been having this discussion for 40 years now in a relatively sterile environment. I just can’t bring myself to actually object to the girl’s piece. And I’m a bit annoyed that the louder objections aren’t going to come from the truly pro-life or pro-sanity crowd, but simply from the anti-“ew” crowd that can’t stand bloody, sticky, icky things.

  21. 21.

    laneman

    April 17, 2008 at 1:15 pm

    Um, it’s her body—she can do whatever she wants with it.

    Of course.

    But to attempt to integrate art and the abortion debate this way is, uh, actually, I have no words here.

  22. 22.

    Scrutinizer

    April 17, 2008 at 1:15 pm

    Why is this bad? If you believe in the Age of Discernment theory of Heaven (anyone too young to decide for Jesus gets to go to Heaven) like most good wackos, all she did was create a few more people who get to hang out with Jesus for all eternity!

    Is it bad that this made me laugh hysterically?

  23. 23.

    Jen

    April 17, 2008 at 1:17 pm

    Interestingly, intent to harm yourself or others is pretty much the statutory requirement for involuntary commitment, ’round these parts.

  24. 24.

    Andrew

    April 17, 2008 at 1:17 pm

    Comment from over at gawker:

    Tie a starving dog to her and give her a C+

    Is it wrong that I laughed my ass off?

  25. 25.

    TenguPhule

    April 17, 2008 at 1:17 pm

    Exibit MIIV for why people are the stupidest fucking creatures on Earth.

  26. 26.

    John Cole

    April 17, 2008 at 1:18 pm

    I see you still have that republican reflex.

    I wanna clear up some confusion here- when you switch parties, you do not have a personality transplant. In other words, John Cole is still the same jackass you have always known, just with a (D) after his name instead of an ( R ).

    And I really fail to see how it is an uber Reich wing response to not want the NEA funding abortion art, if for no other reason than the right-wing noise machine.

  27. 27.

    JC

    April 17, 2008 at 1:20 pm

    It seems to me, that most people who are against abortion aren’t very serius about reducing – drastically – the abortions that actually exist.

    One that would help reduce abortions drastically, without fundamentally altering current rights:

    a. Hand out things like RU486, as often as you hand out fliers. Seriously, create an overabundance of the various improved pregnancy prevention drugs, so they become as ubiquitous on a bathroom shelf as toothpaste.

    Also, if it was important enough – and I’m only thinking this through –

    What about, at a doctor’s visit, if a female would be asked, “do you intend on having a baby in the next year?”. And if the answer is “no”, the doctor strongly advises to get one of those time release things implanted, where she can’t get pregnant for a year?

    My memory here is sketchy – but this was an issue awhile ago, with some women who were having child after child, and also on drugs (a very very small group, but it got some play in the media).

    At that time, I believe that the time release (I want to call it capsule, but it’s something else), lasted 5 years.

    If it is now LESS, than if the technology has gotten better, it seems that would be a very mild form of interference, like a one year – or maybe two year – UID.

    Perhaps I’m putting too much faith in technology – but if this were in every 16 year old woman for two years, and there were no bad effects – immediately, no more child pregnancies, right?

    I’m just thinking this through – thoughts? Certainly, for all those who think aborting a pregnancy is death, these options should seem self-evident, right?

    The thing is, I do wonder if whether very religious voters do single issue voting on abortion. If so, and it’s handled smartly, the abortion issue can be drastically reduced if not eliminated.

    And the other religious issues – the Jesus issues – favor Democrats, and progressives.

  28. 28.

    trollhattan

    April 17, 2008 at 1:34 pm

    Why “artificially inseminate…” herself? Couldn’t get a date?
    Jess axin’

    As often as possible?
    “Hello donorboy, it’s Aliza.”
    “Leave me alone, I’m exhausted.”
    “I’ll get you fresh pron!”
    “Oh, alright.”

    What a flake. In sum it just seems like a different take on self-mutilation, a more…medical version. Yawn.

  29. 29.

    rawshark

    April 17, 2008 at 1:36 pm

    John Cole Says:
    And I really fail to see how it is an uber Reich wing response to not want the NEA funding abortion art

    The Reich doesn’t want the NEA. This exhibit is part of how they sell it to people who normally wouldn’t give a fuck (like you). With all the economic issues we have and all the deficit spending do you want your tax dollars go towards the funding of ‘trash’? Al Qaeda is on the loose, jobs are being lost and the lieberals want to use your tax dollars to fund abortion propaganda art. Hear Sean Hannity explain the issue and tell you who to hate today live on KRIT, your home for conservative thoughts you think are your own.

  30. 30.

    Scrutinizer

    April 17, 2008 at 1:36 pm

    From Zifnab:

    People love to discuss abortion as some abstract concept that happens to other vague, indistinguishable humans and proto-humans. Shvarts is making it all very real and personal. We’ve been having this discussion for 40 years now in a relatively sterile environment. I just can’t bring myself to actually object to the girl’s piece. And I’m a bit annoyed that the louder objections aren’t going to come from the truly pro-life or pro-sanity crowd, but simply from the anti-”ew” crowd that can’t stand bloody, sticky, icky things.

    From the Yale Daily News:

    The display of Schvarts’ project will feature a large cube suspended from the ceiling of a room in the gallery of Green Hall. Schvarts will wrap hundreds of feet of plastic sheeting around this cube; lined between layers of the sheeting will be the blood from Schvarts’ self-induced miscarriages mixed with Vaseline in order to prevent the blood from drying and to extend the blood throughout the plastic sheeting.

    Schvarts will then project recorded videos onto the four sides of the cube. These videos, captured on a VHS camcorder, will show her experiencing miscarriages in her bathrooom tub, she said. Similar videos will be projected onto the walls of the room.

    Well, Zifnab, you make a point, you do—but all the same, “Ewww!”

  31. 31.

    charles

    April 17, 2008 at 1:37 pm

    …intent to harm yourself or others is pretty much the statutory requirement for involuntary commitment…

    Where do you draw the line? Drugs, genital piercing, sunbathing, liposuction? I would consider those things to be harmful to my body, but I can’t tell other people not to include them in some disturbing feat of self-expression.

  32. 32.

    Wilfred

    April 17, 2008 at 1:37 pm

    Before this post I was still dealing with this Yahoo News Headline:

    Pope admits sex abuse by priests caused ‘indescribable pain’

    Years ago in San Fran I saw an art exhibit where a .38 was pointed at a chair. It was randomly programmed to fire at head level, I forget the odds but you had to sign a waiver freeing the artist of responsibility. As you sat in the chair, a device was triggered that took a Polaroid of your face; the wall was covered with them. I don’t know if anyone was ever killed. I thought it was a brilliant example of art and the human body.

    This abortion thing is too didactic. But if abortion is meaningless then what difference does it make? If it isn’t meaningless, if there’s some important moral and ethical function involved, then how it can it be reduced to mere legalese?

  33. 33.

    Zifnab

    April 17, 2008 at 1:40 pm

    And I really fail to see how it is an uber Reich wing response to not want the NEA funding abortion art, if for no other reason than the right-wing noise machine.

    I’d like to see how much of this is being funded by the taxpayers and how much is just coming out of her tuition anyway. How many college students – Yale attending or otherwise – should get their scholarships revoked because they had an abortion, John? Because, omg, the money they save on tuition is totally letting them run out and kill their babies.

    Yeah, its gross and ugly, but what are you really objecting to? The public funding of abortions or the public funding of gross art?

  34. 34.

    scarshapedstar

    April 17, 2008 at 1:42 pm

    Sounds like the Anti-Juno.

  35. 35.

    frogspawn

    April 17, 2008 at 1:44 pm

    On the other, if she makes herself infertile I wouldn’t necessarily call that a bad thing.

    Sounds like a Darwin Award Honorable Mention to me.

  36. 36.

    Tsulagi

    April 17, 2008 at 1:48 pm

    If not, I propose a death match between her and Randall Terry. Regardless the outcome, society comes out a winner.

    I’d go with that. Not sure who I’d be rooting for. Could hope for a tie.

  37. 37.

    BFR

    April 17, 2008 at 1:48 pm

    there is nothing actually – ethically – wrong with what she is doing, from my point of view.

    If nothing else, this person is mocking the values system of the millions of people who oppose abortion while mocking the plight of those who are infertile. At the very least, it’s incredibly insensitive and classless.

    I’m interested in seeing Yale’s response to this – even if it were a hoax, I can see this costing them an ungodly amount in alumni donations if they don’t come out firmly and harshly against it.

  38. 38.

    General Disorder

    April 17, 2008 at 1:49 pm

    What a freak show. Let’s see, if I put enough creative thought into it, maybe I could come up with something even more outrageous. I must outdo her!

    This reminds me of a former “artist” friend who once did an “installation” which featured used condoms embedded in plaster on pie plates. As much as I tried, I didn’t get it. Still don’t.

    Someone, please send a few tabs of LSD to that struggling art student. She needs it.

  39. 39.

    Ivan Ivanovich Renko

    April 17, 2008 at 1:50 pm

    If nothing else, this person is mocking the values system of the millions of people who oppose abortion

    And this is inappropriate… how?

  40. 40.

    Shygetz

    April 17, 2008 at 1:52 pm

    Yeah, its gross and ugly, but what are you really objecting to? The public funding of abortions or the public funding of gross art?

    The latter. Also, the public funding of abortion as a recreational activity (and here I’m not using that as a euphemism for glorious promiscuity; I mean it quite literally)–just as I wouldn’t want public funding of someone intentionally repeatedly slicing open their hand and then going to get stitches because they enjoy the sensation.

    If it was not publically funded, then I find it distaseful and demeaning to a considerable portion of the population that has serious moral conflict regarding the issue, but calling her an asshole would about cover the damages.

  41. 41.

    Z

    April 17, 2008 at 1:53 pm

    Yes, thank you Aliza Shvarts. People like Coulter were becoming increasingly irrelevant, and now you have given them a new poster child for the ‘evils’ of liberalism. Fucked up crap like this are the shiny objects that keep us from having focused intelligent conversations about the actual issues. Instead, they provoke the kind of emotional responses that encourage people to demonize the other side.

    So, again, thanks. If you’ve made yourself infertile, then there is justice in the world.

  42. 42.

    Ninerdave

    April 17, 2008 at 1:54 pm

    I honestly am not sure what to say about this. Maybe: Hell it’s your body do what you want, but if you think this is going to create any meaningful conversation about abortion, you’re high. Oh and you’re a sick fucker.

  43. 43.

    Krista

    April 17, 2008 at 1:57 pm

    It IS thought-provoking, though. I’m very much pro-choice. But I also don’t think that abortion is something that should be entered into lightly, and I do think that our society needs to work towards the “safe, legal and rare” ideal. There are likely some who are pro-choice who agree with the “safe” and “legal”, but figure that the rarity of it is not my business nor anybody else’s. I guess it’s a matter of how one views abortion — as a sin, as an occasional sad necessity, or as the mere disposal of a clump of cells.

    However, I don’t think that Shvart’s work will provoke any sort of thoughtful discussion on this issue. Or if it does, it’ll be utterly drowned out by a maelstrom of anger, distaste, defensiveness, and finger-pointing.

    Because of that, I think that her art has failed. Shock value is only truly effective if discussion results after the initial shock has worn off. With regards to this, I think that after the shock wears off, Shvart will simply be dismissed, and we’ll all go back to our regularly scheduled bickering.

  44. 44.

    Justin

    April 17, 2008 at 1:57 pm

    It’s sure getting a reaction and publicity, sparking discussion, and that’s the whole point of art.

    Getting a reaction is not the point of art. Getting publicity is not the point of art. And as for ‘sparking discussion’, what, abortion was the great silent shame of America before this? Abortion was something that no one was discussing? The topic of abortion was something that had fallen off the public radar?

    Notwithstanding her protests, shock value is all that this piece has. Sensationalism is the lowest form of content.

  45. 45.

    John Cole

    April 17, 2008 at 1:57 pm

    Look- I hate the zero tolerance bullshit when it comes to schools and marker sniffing and other shit, so I am also free to hate the notion that I have to tolerate everything if I support NEA funding most things.

    This is fucking disgusting, offensive, not art, and I don’t want the NEA funding it. Sue me.

  46. 46.

    Shygetz

    April 17, 2008 at 1:57 pm

    And this is inappropriate… how?

    Believe it or not, not every person who is against abortion on demand is a mouth-breathing fundie. Some happen to think that the defining characteristic of a person is not simply location inside or out of a womb. Such thoughtful people are unfortunately drowned out by the fundie assholes, but they do exist.

  47. 47.

    Cyrus

    April 17, 2008 at 1:57 pm

    And I’m a bit annoyed that the louder objections aren’t going to come from the truly pro-life or pro-sanity crowd, but simply from the anti-”ew” crowd that can’t stand bloody, sticky, icky things.

    Imagine the art project involved repeatedly slitting her wrists and using the blood in inkblots. To demonstrate, I don’t know, the fragility of life and horror of suicide or something. She would bandage herself up in between each cutting episode, of course, but not talk to a doctor or avoid doing the project in the first place.

    I don’t think it’s grounds for involuntary commitment, but I don’t know; I’m neither a lawyer nor a psychiatrist. It would almost definitely be legal. Is it ethical? Well, the bloody inkblots certainly don’t hurt anyone except the artist herself, who could stop any time, it’s intended to provoke discussion and enlightenment on an important issue, and it’s merely a common event being done intentionally and to an extreme in this case. So it can’t be that immoral. All that being said, I wouldn’t hesitate to say that the woman was not right in the head. An extreme case of masochism? Desperate for attention? An urge to punish herself? Who knows, but it’s probably the result of one of those or something equally unhealthy, and I’d say the same whether the artist was a female college senior or a 30-year-old man.

    Here, it looks to me like we have exactly the same situation, except she is doing it in way that’s almost definitely going to galvanize the anti-choice side without actually inspiring any meaningful thought. Yay her.

  48. 48.

    Martin

    April 17, 2008 at 2:00 pm

    It’s only shocking because we have a fit for general consumption threshold that a whole shitload of stuff never crosses and as a result we don’t know exists. I’ll just drop this puppy in your laps and grab some popcorn. The internet lets this long tail stuff come through more often. That’s bad news for conservatives because all the shit that they want to deny exists slowly becomes more and more general knowledge and mainstream.

  49. 49.

    ed

    April 17, 2008 at 2:03 pm

    But Shvarts insists her concept was not designed for “shock value.”

    “I hope it inspires some sort of discourse,” Shvarts said.

    If she can lie that easily, in the face of reality that everyone else can see, I envision a great career ahead as John McCain’s press spokesperson!
    Republican credo: “We make up our own reality.”

  50. 50.

    Mr Furious

    April 17, 2008 at 2:03 pm

    Quick! Somebody schedule another debate on ABC, I need Charlie and George pinning the Democrats down on this!

  51. 51.

    Ivan Ivanovich Renko

    April 17, 2008 at 2:04 pm

    Believe it or not, not every person who is against abortion on demand is a mouth-breathing fundie. Some happen to think that the defining characteristic of a person is not simply location inside or out of a womb. Such thoughtful people are unfortunately drowned out by the fundie assholes, but they do exist.

    Not every anti-abortion zealot is a “mouth-breathing fundie” (though they are generally); but so what. They’re still nosey fuckers mucking about in things which are none of their damn business.

  52. 52.

    Krista

    April 17, 2008 at 2:05 pm

    I’ll just drop this puppy in your laps and grab some popcorn.

    That is seriously wacky stuff, Martin.

  53. 53.

    BFR

    April 17, 2008 at 2:07 pm

    That’s bad news for conservatives because all the shit that they want to deny exists slowly becomes more and more general knowledge and mainstream.

    I’m gonna wager that this stuff isn’t going to be ‘mainstream’ anytime soon.

  54. 54.

    Ivan Ivanovich Renko

    April 17, 2008 at 2:09 pm

    This is fucking disgusting, offensive, not art, and I don’t want the NEA funding it. Sue me.

    Then what you’re really saying is that you’re against any art being funded by the NEA– unless you are the arbiter of what’s disgusting and offensive and what isn’t.

    (as an aside– yeah, yeah, yeah, this project idea sounds just out-and-out nasty. I don’t hold myself out, though, as someone who can declare that it is not art.)

  55. 55.

    jeff

    April 17, 2008 at 2:09 pm

    There is a major strain in art to try to do realize the most repellent ideas in the flesh. This is mistaken for depth or though-provocation. It’s nihilism and boredom with the world…same thing that makes for serial killers.

  56. 56.

    rawshark

    April 17, 2008 at 2:11 pm

    John Cole Says:

    Look- I hate the zero tolerance bullshit when it comes to schools and marker sniffing and other shit, so I am also free to hate the notion that I have to tolerate everything if I support NEA funding most things.

    This is fucking disgusting, offensive, not art, and I don’t want the NEA funding it. Sue me.

    Relax man, I wasn’t trying to piss you off, I’m just trying to start the discussion.

  57. 57.

    Jen

    April 17, 2008 at 2:13 pm

    Uh, thanks, Martin. And here I was thinking those guys turning themselves into cats and lizards and whatnot were the strangest people on the planet.

    We’ve got some genital work planned that’s pretty exciting

    This seems unlikely.

  58. 58.

    BFR

    April 17, 2008 at 2:13 pm

    They’re still nosey fuckers mucking about in things which are none of their damn business.

    Our views as a species on abortion v. murder aren’t actually static in any sense of the word – some other societies placed the boundary at different points; witness the concept of infant exposure in some earlier societies – undersireable infants were abandoned out in the wilderness. Hansel and Gretel ring a bell?

    Point being, there really isn’t a black and white line on this stuff. Thus, it’s pretty easy to understand how what you view as a minor medical procedure can appear as genocide to someone else. We’d all be better off if we refrain from shitting all over someone else’s moral code in the name of ‘art.’

  59. 59.

    Jen

    April 17, 2008 at 2:14 pm

    I don’t hold myself out, though, as someone who can declare that it is not art.

    I’ll step up to the plate on that one.

  60. 60.

    matt

    April 17, 2008 at 2:19 pm

    I’m a little unclear about what she was doing. Was she taking RU-486 illegally, or was she taking the morning after pill? I pressume it’s the latter, but I thought the morning after pill prevents implantation, so why would there be a miscarriage?

  61. 61.

    charles

    April 17, 2008 at 2:22 pm

    Martin:

    *mind blown*

    Mission Accomplished.

  62. 62.

    Dennis - SGMM

    April 17, 2008 at 2:23 pm

    This is great news for artists! I’m using a nail gun to nail our dog to the ceiling. I’ll then take pictures of him as he suffers, dies and decomposes to spark conversation and debate on the relationship between art and animal abuse.

    Now where’s that NEA Payment Request Form?

  63. 63.

    Zifnab

    April 17, 2008 at 2:25 pm

    Imagine the art project involved repeatedly slitting her wrists and using the blood in inkblots. To demonstrate, I don’t know, the fragility of life and horror of suicide or something. She would bandage herself up in between each cutting episode, of course, but not talk to a doctor or avoid doing the project in the first place.

    Right, I can tell you why that’s a bad idea. And I can tell you why I wouldn’t be interested in looking at it. But I can’t really give you a reason – beyond self-preservation – why you shouldn’t be allowed to have all the fun you want.

    And if you’re an art student performing this project at a state funded school using a Pell Grant while living off of food stamps, I still can’t come up with a good reason to stop you or even to strip you of funding.

    Listen, life is an experiment. People routinely do crazy stupid things. If we decided to cut all funding to all students who did stupid shit, UT would not have a 50k student population – I promise. This is merely a subset of the crazy stupid shit that happens on college campuses and in corporate offices and on US military bases and in suburban living rooms every day. But until it becomes some sort of minor epidemic, I say let the girl have her art.

    When no one comes – or when large numbers of people show up to protest (also their right) – Shvarts will have learned that her little experiment is a failure and hopefully grow as an artist and as a person. And her NEA funding will have served its purpose.

    Now, if you want to lay down some serious standards – no making art with bodily fluids, cut funding to all students suffering from sado-massicism, outlaw abortofatents on campus – we can talk. But shouting “that’s gross” is what lead us to outlaw Stem Cells and save ourselves from the Manimals. And screaming “that’s stupid” is what gave ID scientists such a big foot in the door. So, after a lifetime of hearing about how we just can’t do things because other people might hear about it and have their delicate sensibilities disturbed, I’ve had my limit of “no”.

    Let the NEA be its own judge of what it wants to spend money on until you can honestly present a clear deliniation of what everyone’s tax money is spent on. If it makes you feel better, just tell yourself that “my” tax dollars are going to Shvarts while “your” tax dollars are going towards whatever batshit crazy thing you believe that I disagree with.

  64. 64.

    jake

    April 17, 2008 at 2:26 pm

    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..

    OK, I assume she gets the baby gravy from friends although “as often as possible.” But how is she getting the drugs? I read somewhere that there’s no non-prescipt drug that will cause an abortion after implantation.

    How the hell does she know she’s preggers?

    Methinks the entire point of this art project is to show how credible people are when you throw the words Art Project into the mix.

  65. 65.

    Dennis - SGMM

    April 17, 2008 at 2:29 pm

    OK, I assume she gets the baby gravy from friends although “as often as possible.”

    But, but, but, this means they’re just a bunch of jerk-offs.

  66. 66.

    trollhattan

    April 17, 2008 at 2:29 pm

    If this gets media traction it WILL spawn (pun intended) a South Park episode, which means we all win.

  67. 67.

    Krista

    April 17, 2008 at 2:30 pm

    Was she taking RU-486 illegally, or was she taking the morning after pill? I pressume it’s the latter, but I thought the morning after pill prevents implantation, so why would there be a miscarriage?

    From the original item:

    while periodically taking abortifacient drugs

    That may have been RU-486, but she could also have been taking very specific doses of brewer’s yeast, vitamin C, wild carrot, black cohosh, slippery elm, pennyroyal, nutmeg, mugwort, papaya, vervain, common rue, or tansy. Under any circumstances, she was playing a very dangerous game and could easily have died. Abortifacients, be they pharmaceutical or herbal, are nothing to play around with.

  68. 68.

    Zifnab

    April 17, 2008 at 2:32 pm

    If this gets media traction it WILL spawn (pun intended) a South Park episode, which means we all win.

    See, there’s your art. What are you all complaining about.

  69. 69.

    Dennis - SGMM

    April 17, 2008 at 2:34 pm

    I understand that her art collective calls itself The Aristocrats.

  70. 70.

    Martin

    April 17, 2008 at 2:37 pm

    Not every anti-abortion zealot is a “mouth-breathing fundie” (though they are generally); but so what. They’re still nosey fuckers mucking about in things which are none of their damn business.

    Actually, that’s not fair. Based on polls, about 1/3 of the country is anti-abortion and is also pro-choice. You might not call them zealots, but I assure you that some of them are – just in a different way. Some are just smart enough to realize that legislation isn’t the solution to the issue in this country and instead push education, access to doctors and birth control, etc. but they push very hard indeed.

    The abortion debate is at a stalemate precisely because the entire spectrum of positions have been boiled down to two extreme caricatures and everyone in the middle is ignored. Continuing to reinforce those caricatures doesn’t do anyone any good.

  71. 71.

    Blue Raven

    April 17, 2008 at 2:39 pm

    If this gets media traction it WILL spawn (pun intended) a South Park episode, which means we all win.

    Please, oh, please, oh, PLEASE let it involve Cartman’s mother!

  72. 72.

    Shygetz

    April 17, 2008 at 2:40 pm

    They’re still nosey fuckers mucking about in things which are none of their damn business.

    Not so fast there, chief. The definition of “person” is a political question, and as such is entirely their business. Once we come to a consensus as to when a fetus becomes a person, then I will whole-heartedly agree with you that what goes on before then is none of their damn business. Whether what goes on afterward is their business or not is another question altogether, as you now have the rights of two people to try to balance.

  73. 73.

    Blue Raven

    April 17, 2008 at 2:41 pm

    I understand that her art collective calls itself The Aristocrats.

    OK, this gave me the best cynical smile I’ve had all day. It’s a thing of beauty, and also makes me realize that joke still had somewhere else to go even after Bob Saget got through with it.

  74. 74.

    Punchy

    April 17, 2008 at 2:43 pm

    Someone needs to tell her that you cant inseminate yourself that way. Stomach acid kills everything.

  75. 75.

    Ninerdave

    April 17, 2008 at 2:44 pm

    I’ll just drop this puppy in your laps and grab some popcorn.

    The BME crowd is always good for a “holy shit!” moment.

  76. 76.

    4tehlulz

    April 17, 2008 at 2:44 pm

    >>On the other, if she makes herself infertile I wouldn’t necessarily call that a bad thing.

    I’ll bet that in 10 yrs she’ll be taking fertility drugs and wondering why she can’t get pregnant.

  77. 77.

    Dennis - SGMM

    April 17, 2008 at 2:46 pm

    OK, this gave me the best cynical smile I’ve had all day.

    I had to do something to atone for my post at the top of the thread.

  78. 78.

    Dork

    April 17, 2008 at 2:47 pm

    Someone needs to tell her that you cant inseminate yourself that way

    I wonder how many turkey basters she went thru for this project. Those things aint cheap.

    I also wonder how many potential boyfriends she’s just lost.

  79. 79.

    Martin

    April 17, 2008 at 2:50 pm

    mind blown

    But Shvarts doesn’t seem quite so out there now, does she?

    I’m gonna wager that this stuff isn’t going to be ‘mainstream’ anytime soon.

    Non-traditional piercing is pretty mainstream now. That was out there not so long ago and also viewed as being dangerous to self, and whatnot.

    I’m not saying that this type of thing will be commonplace, rather that people won’t be as shocked by it as they see these kinds of things more often. The internet does that. It gets harder and harder to blame non-traditional things for the downfall of society when there is always something weirder out there to shove the strange shit closer to the traditional line.

  80. 80.

    Dennis - SGMM

    April 17, 2008 at 2:50 pm

    I’ll bet that in 10 yrs she’ll be taking fertility drugs and wondering why she can’t get pregnant.

    I’ll bet that in ten years she’ll be putting some therapist’s kids through college.

  81. 81.

    Martin

    April 17, 2008 at 2:53 pm

    I wonder how many turkey basters she went thru for this project. Those things aint cheap.

    $20 says she’s been funding the whole thing by hosting Pampered Chef parties in her dorm.

    (There’s a lot to work with there, make the most of it.)

  82. 82.

    theturtlemoves

    April 17, 2008 at 3:00 pm

    My wife still hasn’t really gotten over her miscarriage after over a decade. This chick is seriously fucked up and is trivializing something that is really, really painful for a lot of people. And I’m sorry, but I have to back up John on this one, public money shouldn’t fund crap like this. In this instance, it seems very unlikely that it is, but this kind of moral relativism taken to its extreme is the reason I voted for Bush I as an undergrad. The only way to rebel against hippie burnouts with PhDs is to get stupid conservative for a year or two.

  83. 83.

    Gerald Curl

    April 17, 2008 at 3:01 pm

    I agree with Krista’s point that abortion should not be entered into lightly. Anything that trivializes a woman’s choice to have an abortion makes it harder to keep it legal. One of the no-abortions crowd’s favorite tactics is to create the abortion equivalent of the mythical welfare queen driving the Cadillac: the carefree woman who has several abortions every year. Now the airheads on the news channels and wingnut blogs have someone they can point to as an argument against abortion for the next 20 years (e.g., Serrano and Mapplethorpe as arguments against public funding of arts in toto).

    When I was younger I was in favor of limit-free artistry and shock value as a way of getting people to talk. Now I know that, especially in this 5 second soundbite world, you only end up shocking people and that’s all they talk about. There’s no dialogue about the underlying issue. You don’t get to explain why you did it or what it means or how it fits within the history of art. They just don’t give a shit beyond you providing a platform for them to pontificate.

    The worst part for her if she was simply seeking notoriety as an artist is that none of the members of the media are going to bother to remember her name. She’ll always be that woman that did that thing.

  84. 84.

    dr. luba

    April 17, 2008 at 3:01 pm

    I am a doctor, and an OB/GYN to boot. I’d like to see some facts to back up these claims.

    As best I can tell, this “artist” was turkey basting herself regularly with donated sperm, and then taking some herbal concoctions to induce abortion.

    No evidence is provided that she ever actually conceived…..or aborted. All we have is a bunch of vaseline-admixed blood that she has spread on plastic sheets and video of her bleeding in a bathtub.

    Most exposures to sperm do not result in conception.

    Most conceptions do not result in viable pregnancies.

    “The abortifacient drugs she took were legal and herbal, she said, and she did not feel the need to consult a doctor about her repeated miscarriages.”

    If herbal abortifacients really worked well, we wouldn’t need RU-486 or abortion clinics.

    This is either a hoax, and we have a record of her menses to look at, or she is really and truly an idiot, and contender for a Darwin award.

  85. 85.

    MNPundit

    April 17, 2008 at 3:02 pm

    Well it appears she just screwed over women in several states as this project will be brought up again and again in a massive propaganda victory which can tip the balance in states like South Dakota into total abortion perma-bans.

  86. 86.

    Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop

    April 17, 2008 at 3:05 pm

    Hey, she did this project for one reason and one reason only: to get notoriety and, hence, money.

    If only Degas and Rembrandt and Vermeer and Caravaggio had known that Elite True Art is all about smearing around various bodily fluids and grossing people out! What they could’ve accomplished if they hadn’t relied on talent! Instead, all we got out of those plebes were paintings and sculpture… what a ripoff.

  87. 87.

    BFR

    April 17, 2008 at 3:08 pm

    Non-traditional piercing is pretty mainstream now. That was out there not so long ago and also viewed as being dangerous to self, and whatnot.

    I’m not saying that this type of thing will be commonplace, rather that people won’t be as shocked by it as they see these kinds of things more often.

    Dunno, seems like there’s a healthy difference between non-traditional piercings (which are only non-traditional from our cultural perspective) and attaching another dude’s arm to your chest – I’m no anthropoligist, but I’m guessing that’s generally new.

    Also, non-traditional piercing is reversible and doesn’t really have much of an impact on quality or life expectancy. Having an extra arm or being short an arm seems like it would really be a pain in the ass and I’m guessing these guys shortened their life expectancies by a good decade or two based on the stress on the body from adding & removing major components.

  88. 88.

    Zuzu

    April 17, 2008 at 3:08 pm

    I find the story implausible for the simple reasons that: (1) it’s hard to “impregnate yourself” multiple times over a nine-month period – ask anyone who’s tried it the usual way – much less immediately after a miscarriage; and (2) if I’m not mistaken, most abortifacients that can be taken early enough to minimize the health risks amount to something close to a morning-after pill, meaning you can’t be certain you’re pregnant, no matter what the pee-stick says.

    On the other hand, if the story is true…what in the HELL was going through her advisor’s mind? Laying aside the morality question, any advisor who approves a project so potentially injurious to a student’s health ought to have her qualifications questioned.

  89. 89.

    Zuzu

    April 17, 2008 at 3:11 pm

    Just saw dr. luba’s post. I agree.

  90. 90.

    Punchy

    April 17, 2008 at 3:11 pm

    I’m a little unclear about what she was doing. Was she taking RU-486 illegally, or was she taking the morning after pill? I pressume it’s the latter, but I thought the morning after pill prevents implantation, so why would there be a miscarriage?

    She probably took Cytotec (misoprostol). Used for stomach reflux issues, but doubles as a progesterone blocker. Ergo, causes spontaneous menstration at high enough doses.

  91. 91.

    Gerald Curl

    April 17, 2008 at 3:13 pm

    The problem is that even if this is a hoax, it’s already “true” for the anti-abortion groups. Like MNPundit says, it is a propaganda victory. This is going into every anti-abortion mailing and email for a very long time.

  92. 92.

    Sock Puppet of the Great Satan

    April 17, 2008 at 3:15 pm

    “If herbal abortifacients really worked well, we wouldn’t need RU-486 or abortion clinics.

    This is either a hoax, and we have a record of her menses to look at, or she is really and truly an idiot, and contender for a Darwin award.”

    Yup, I had the same reaction when I read she was using herbal abortifacients. This is a *Yalie* art student folks – she’s not gonna risk a knocking herself up for a student project.

    “Schvarts will then project recorded videos onto the four sides of the cube. These videos, captured on a VHS camcorder, will show her experiencing miscarriages in her bathrooom tub, she said. Similar videos will be projected onto the walls of the room.”

    Because, y’know, herbally-induced miscarriages come right on schedule when you’ve got your camcorder charged and ready. My money’s on a hoax…err ‘purely conceptual’ project, folks. Let’s hope she comes clean about it before some Operation Rescue eejit firebombs her dorm.

  93. 93.

    theturtlemoves

    April 17, 2008 at 3:16 pm

    After reading the eminent dr. luba’s take on the sordid affair, I have to assume this girl was surprised to find that she kept having “miscarriages” every month right around when she’d normally have her period. So, like the good doctor said, this is either a hoax or this is one stupid woman. Given my experience as a theater minor with the “art crowd”, I’m going for the latter choice. Those folks were stupid and pretentious at a state college in the Midwest. I’d hate to meet the Yalies.

  94. 94.

    Martin

    April 17, 2008 at 3:16 pm

    Hey, she did this project for one reason and one reason only: to get notoriety and, hence, money.

    If only Degas and Rembrandt and Vermeer and Caravaggio had known that Elite True Art is all about smearing around various bodily fluids and grossing people out!

    You do realize the only reason a lot of the masters painted religious pieces and composers requiems and such is because they were paid to. That’s not meant to be a defense of Shvarts, but we don’t need to reject reality to distance Shvarts from the norms for art. And let’s not kid ourselves about grossing people out – we’ve got entire TV series dedicated to that shit now.

  95. 95.

    Brachiator

    April 17, 2008 at 3:18 pm

    The goal in creating the art exhibition, Shvarts said, was to spark conversation and debate on the relationship between art and the human body.

    She’s just another weak-ass performance artist who misses her Dada.

    Apart from the typically tedious abstract bullshit of “wanting to spark a conversation … ” Shvarts is derivative and a bit of a lightweight in the performance art game. Consider (Extreme performance art):

    Franko B

    Apprehension was probably to be expected. At last year’s Fierce!, the West Midlands’ annual performance festival, nine people fainted, overwhelmed by the stench of TCP and the sight of Franko B siphoning blood from his veins. The year before, Franko had launched the same festival with I Miss You, silencing audiences with his “action painting”, parading his punctured body down a canvas catwalk, trailing a Pollock-like design of bloody drips behind him. Yet, however excruciating he was to watch, on both occasions spectators had at least enjoyed the reassurance of a large audience. This year there would be no such comfort, no hiding behind the tall guy at the back, no closing your eyes or rushing off to the loo to avoid the issue altogether. For his show Aktion 398, Franko B had arranged to meet his audience in a terrifyingly intimate series of one-to-one encounters.

    Yang Zhichao

    He attempts to raise social issues through his performances and has achieved notoriety through extreme actions such as branding his ID number on his body, planting grass on his back, and surgically implanting objects in his leg and stomach. His work is concerned with the body, and how, in an age of science and technology, our bodies no longer belong to ourselves but to society and the state. He has exhibited both in China and abroad, including the famous “Fuck off” show at the Eastlink Gallery, Shanghai, the Guangdong Museum of Art Contemporary Art, Guangzhou, 2003, the Dadao Live Art Festival, Beijing, 2004 and a tour of eight major institutions in the UK organised by Beijing-based curator Shu Yang in 2006.

    Bob Flanagan

    In 1993 he also appeared in the video for the Danzig song “It’s Coming Down”. In the uncensored version of the video, Flanagan hammers a nail through the head of his penis before urinating on the lens of the camera recording him.

    He also had a bit part in Godflesh’s Crush my Soul video, as a suitably blasphemous, upside-down suspended Christ, hoisted on to the ceiling of a traditional-looking church by his wife Sheree Rose.

    While some of his performances were notable for acts of extreme masochism (on at least one occasion he hammered a nail through his penis, while cracking jokes), he also wrote rather clever, humorous songs, many of them intended as much for children as adults.

    His latest posthumous piece by Sheree Rose entitled Bobaloon, was shown in Japan, featuring a 20 foot tall inflatable Flanagan complete with pierced penis, ball gag and straitjacket.

    This kind of stuff is why I am all for the NEA funding institutions, but am less enthusiastic about the NEA funding individual artists, although I don’t strongly object. But I don’t have any problems with the NEA being arbitrary and saying, “No, I don’t think so,” to a particular artist.

    Some performance artists don’t have a problem getting private funding for some of their “works,” e.g. Andrea Fraser:

    In her “Untitled” videotape performance (2002), Fraser recorded a commissioned sexual encounter with a private collector in a hotel room, as an act of artistic prostitution. Though the piece represents a scathing commentary on the relationship between artist and patron, there was considerable backlash from its presentation, particularly from feminists and female artists.

    As always, your mileage may vary.

  96. 96.

    Martin

    April 17, 2008 at 3:21 pm

    Most exposures to sperm do not result in conception.

    Tell that to my wife.

    The problem is that even if this is a hoax, it’s already “true” for the anti-abortion groups. Like MNPundit says, it is a propaganda victory. This is going into every anti-abortion mailing and email for a very long time.

    Actually, I suspect it is a hoax and a deliberate one. If the anti-abortion crowd can’t discern the difference between an early first-trimester miscarriage and a menstrual cycle and use this to advance their case and then are called on their mistake, it actually makes a fairly distinct point.

  97. 97.

    eric jung

    April 17, 2008 at 3:23 pm

    Just what I was thinking, John.

    The lieberals hate human life! etc. So much for the “abortion as a solemn and terrible choice” paradigm.

  98. 98.

    Gerald Curl

    April 17, 2008 at 3:26 pm

    The Kirby Dick documentary about Bob Flanagan was pretty good. Flanagan seemed like a vibrant, nice guy who was dealt a bad card (cystic fibrosis) and reacted against it in a non-traditional way.

  99. 99.

    Ivan Ivanovich Renko

    April 17, 2008 at 3:27 pm

    Based on polls, about 1/3 of the country is anti-abortion and is also pro-choice.

    Dude.

    Nobody is “pro-abortion.”

    What we are is “pro-choice.” Those who are “anti-abortion” but are still “pro-choice” recognize that it ain’t none o’ their damn business what a woman does with her own body. And if they are not anti-sex crusaders (as are most “anti-abortion” types) and support reason and science based education and contraception– well, we ain’t got no argument.

  100. 100.

    Zuzu

    April 17, 2008 at 3:28 pm

    Actually, I suspect it is a hoax and a deliberate one.

    Come to think of it, that would be a pretty in- your- face kind of art project. Documenting the reaction then becomes the uhm, “artistic statement.”

    Of course the Internet nutties will have already left the barn.

  101. 101.

    theturtlemoves

    April 17, 2008 at 3:29 pm

    So, now that we’ve analyzed the plausibility of the exhibit and I’ve stepped back from the edge of total outrage…

    You think the “herbal” concoction she was using was organic? Cause if it wasn’t and pesticides were used in its production, that’s just one step too damn far.

  102. 102.

    peach flavored shampoo

    April 17, 2008 at 3:34 pm

    Make this into a reality TV series. Stat.

  103. 103.

    Ivan Ivanovich Renko

    April 17, 2008 at 3:38 pm

    Not so fast there, chief. The definition of “person” is a political question, and as such is entirely their business.

    Yep, you got a point there.

    Funny thing, though; this “political” question always seems to manifest in a religous context.

    And for that matter, only in a Christian context (and “fundamentalist”/charismatic Christian at that.)

    In the meantime, I present the REAL, THINKING, BREATHING, ARTICULATING HUMAN WOMAN who deserves control of HER body. The Jew/Hindu/atheist/agnostic/fill-in-the-blank in me sez “let that woman alone, she’s got enough on her goddamn plate without having to hear sanctimonious claptrap from someone who probably doesn’t even share the same beliefs?

    Discount the religious argument (Ceiling Cat sez mind yo’ own damn bidness!) and what you have is nosey-ass busybodies mucking about in someone else’s personal difficulties.

  104. 104.

    theturtlemoves

    April 17, 2008 at 3:49 pm

    Discount the religious argument (Ceiling Cat sez mind yo’ own damn bidness!) and what you have is nosey-ass busybodies mucking about in someone else’s personal difficulties.

    Sorry, don’t buy that. Even outside a religious framework, it is possible to at least debate at what point during pregnancy a viability threshold is crossed. You could very easily argue that there’s a big fuck difference between an embryo at two weeks gestation and a fully formed infant at 24 weeks that could potentially survive outside the womb, even if in neonatal care.

  105. 105.

    The Other Steve

    April 17, 2008 at 3:58 pm

    Some people who think they are trying to spark a debate, should have their lips sown shut.

    This is a perfect example.

  106. 106.

    JR

    April 17, 2008 at 4:02 pm

    I don’t know, this could be a chance for me to draw a bright line between me, as a liberal, and whatever pro-abortion extremists that this student just became the stereotype of.

    It might just bring us all together, right and left … in disgust.

  107. 107.

    JR

    April 17, 2008 at 4:02 pm

    I don’t know, this could be a chance for me to draw a bright line between me, as a liberal, and whatever pro-abortion extremists that this student just became the stereotype of.

    It might just bring us all together, right and left … in disgust.

  108. 108.

    Martin

    April 17, 2008 at 4:06 pm

    Nobody is “pro-abortion.”

    Sure there are. Anyone who gets one or is open to getting one (pro-abortion is your term, not mine). I’m not suggesting they are pleased about having to make that decision, nor that they wouldn’t wish that something happened differently to prevent that decision, but let’s not overcharge our words here – that’s all I’m referring to.

    There are people that think women should have the choice but they personally could not choose. Some of them have very strong viewpoints on the nature of that choice but don’t run down the legislation aisle to affirm them. There is simply no way to label these people in the current debate because pro-life and pro-choice are not exclusive terms. As a result we’ve come to think that they don’t exist, when they absolutely do exist. This group reminds us that the moral decision and the legal right are distinct things – which is what the anti-choice crowd doesn’t want us to focus on. And if they were recognized, Obama would be less likely to say semi-stupid stuff like he did on CNN the other day that people need to be reminded that there is a moral dimension here.

    And you are correct that they are NOT the anti-sex crusaders, but they can still make a moral argument, can’t they? Right now they’re totally drowned out in the noise. If you have a term for this crowd, I’d be happy to adopt it.

  109. 109.

    Martin

    April 17, 2008 at 4:10 pm

    Come to think of it, that would be a pretty in- your- face kind of art project. Documenting the reaction then becomes the uhm, “artistic statement.”

    Correct. And one that the student’s advisor could possibly support as well. Yale is a pretty in-touch and responsible place. I have a hard time seeing this happening for 9 months without the faculty getting clued in somewhere. An exhibit doesn’t happen in a vacuum.

  110. 110.

    binzinerator

    April 17, 2008 at 4:12 pm

    But Shvarts insists her concept was not designed for “shock value.”

    Oh sure. Just like claiming you didn’t design the bullet to kill because it’s the hole that’s fatal. If she’s this disingenuous about her own art, they ought to wash her out of the program. Dishonest artists do not produce art. They produce propaganda.

    I think of Shvarts’ schtick like I do of Chris Burden’s shit. It’s really more about the self-aggrandizement. Claiming it’s ‘designed’ to ‘inspire’ some discourse or dialog on the nature of art, life, philosophy, the human condition yadda-yadda-yadda is just a handy art-for-art-sake 5 lb. sack a clever narcissist can stuff 10 lbs. of herself into while doing what it is she really loves to do: Look at me! Look at me!

    I recall that Laurie Anderson wrote her song “It’s not the bullet that kills you (It’s the hole)” for Chris Burden, because he devised this bit where he had someone shoot him in the arm with a rifle. Or maybe it was the self-electrocution stuff he did. Oh well, same diff. You can claim it’s not the 10,000 volts that kill you, it’s the cardiac arrest. And it’s not even the cardiac arrest, it’s the lack of oxygen to the brain. Which reminds me of Shvarts again.

    “I hope it inspires some sort of discourse,” Shvarts said.

    Shvarts’ name will certainly get mentioned a lot, which was the whole point. And there undoubtedly will be some sort of discourse, yes indeed. But it won’t be the civil or productive sort, either for reproductive rights or for art.

  111. 111.

    RodeoBob

    April 17, 2008 at 4:13 pm

    Hoax. I’ve said so elsewhere, and I say so here.

    *She never says how many miscarrages she’s had. So ‘zero’ is a very real possiblity.

    *She never consulted with a doctor. So there are no medical records. Any other medical records (regular check-ups, emergency room admissions) are also absent.

    *She refuses to discuss the ‘donors’ whatsoever.

    *She claims to have used “herbal” options, which means no perscriptions or other records to document purchase & use.

    *Her videotapes were recorded in private, in her bathroom, edited, and even if they were shot in exacting, gynocological detail, I’m not sure most folks could tell the difference between a 1st trimester miscarrage and regular menstrual flow.

    *The ‘blood’ on display is behind plastic, at a distance, and admittedly mixed with something else to change its consistency and other properties.

    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Instead, we get no evidence whatsoever, and deliberate weasel-words from the claimant. What’s more insulting is that the Yale news ran with essentially a press release without doing any actual reporting. A single call to a gynocologist, or even a general practitioner, would have added some much needed background and information.

    This is a hoax, and a blatantly obvious one on its face. The artist might well have had one miscarriage, and been inspired, or maybe only have read about miscarriages. The story has a nice ring of truthiness to it, tailor-made to appeal to certain biases about liberal education and abortion.

  112. 112.

    jrg

    April 17, 2008 at 4:14 pm

    Look, if your goal is to promote “discourse” about abortion, this is just not helpful

    /launches into a thread about abortion…

  113. 113.

    steve davis

    April 17, 2008 at 4:29 pm

    Jesus Christ, this makes the story about the art student starving the dog to death as part of the exhibit seem pretty trivial. I’m going to create an art exhibit next month where I round up hundreds of Jews, strip them down naked, and then have them gassed in a chamber while onlookers are allowed to view the proceedings through a heavy glass window. Does anyone know if it’s too late for me to get NEA funding?

  114. 114.

    Zuzu

    April 17, 2008 at 4:30 pm

    It’s only shocking because we have a fit for general consumption threshold that a whole shitload of stuff never crosses and as a result we don’t know exists. I’ll just drop this puppy in your laps and grab some popcorn. The internet lets this long tail stuff come through more often. That’s bad news for conservatives because all the shit that they want to deny exists slowly becomes more and more general knowledge and mainstream.

    Just noticed that the page was posted on April 1st.

    April Fools!

  115. 115.

    Zifnab

    April 17, 2008 at 4:40 pm

    Nobody is “pro-abortion.”

    Sure there are. Anyone who gets one or is open to getting one (pro-abortion is your term, not mine). I’m not suggesting they are pleased about having to make that decision, nor that they wouldn’t wish that something happened differently to prevent that decision, but let’s not overcharge our words here – that’s all I’m referring to.

    It’s a medical procedure. No one is more “pro-abortion” than they are “pro-chemotherapy”. And that’s where things get lost in the shuffle. Whenever people read the latest Partial Birth Abortion Bill and point out that there’s no recourse for women suffering an ectopic pregnancy or otherwise at a risk to birthing the child, they get shouted down as anti-baby, as though the mother’s life doesn’t even enter the equation.

    Now there are certainly differences between the pro-necessary-abortion crowd and the pro-recreational-abortion crowd, but even these differences are blurred when faced with the anti-birth-control and anti-sex-before-marriage crowd.

    The scary thing is that while I can’t name anyone (with the apparent exception of Shvarts) who wants to get pregnant just to have an abortion, I can name a great number of people who think “barefoot and pregnant” should be some sort of legal standard. And these people – despite being in the slim minority – have hijacked the discussion on how to deal with child birth in America.

    So, while there are many nuanced views on abortion, they are rarely expressed in anti-abortion legislation. And telling me that you’ve got this niche view on when abortion should or should not be allowed doesn’t make me feel better when you run off and vote for some blanket universal ban.

  116. 116.

    Martin

    April 17, 2008 at 4:48 pm

    April Fools!

    Sweet. Worked on me. :)

  117. 117.

    Shinobi

    April 17, 2008 at 4:56 pm

    This is possibly the only valid example I have ever heard of “frivolous” or “recreational” abortion. Most women who chose to have abortions for non medical reasons do so after much thought. (Which is why mandatory waiting periods are so infantilizing.)

    But this, this is just disgusting. To create life only for the purpose of destroying it. That’s like… the definition of evil.

  118. 118.

    Martin

    April 17, 2008 at 5:10 pm

    So, while there are many nuanced views on abortion, they are rarely expressed in anti-abortion legislation. And telling me that you’ve got this niche view on when abortion should or should not be allowed doesn’t make me feel better when you run off and vote for some blanket universal ban.

    Except that there are a lot more people opposed to changing RvW than the anti-choice set let on. The problem is that group has defined the terms by which we label folks and done it in such a way that they look like they have more support than they do.

    What I’m saying is that by playing into the caricatures that the anti-choice crowd have set up, including the one that the anti-abortion folks are all anti-sex fundies, doesn’t help matters. The pro-choice crowd would do better to acknowledge and promote the spectrum because it would yield overwhelming support for early-term termination, necessary procedures, and so on and marginalize the anti-choice crowd there.

    But while those nuanced views are rarely expressed in legislation, they are equally rarely expressed in pro-choice arguments. I think it was Jen who pointed out in the other thread some of the stupid shit things NARAL had done, and I agree. They have at times advocated for an absolute view and take all of those that are pro-choice but offended by the absolute view and cast them aside when they should be strong allys for women’s choice. That’s just stupid politics and gives the anti-choice crowd more ammunition to play with. Playing into the stereotypes only causes that to happen more often.

    I’ll state that my mom falls in this middle group. She’s strongly pro-choice, but votes Republican in part because she doesn’t see RvW under threat and doesn’t see moderation on the left on the issue. She sees a moral position on the right that she agrees with and a legal position on the left that she does. Until that legal position is in real jeopardy, she’s gonna keep voting with her moral allies. Now, she’s mistaken that she thinks that there is no moral support for her on the left, but all she sees out there in the midwest are arguments for the absolute view – that abortion is like going in for a pedicure. That’s not a mainstream view on the left, but it is too loudly argued at times because the left is often times afraid to acknowledge a moderate, mainstream moral position out of fear of risking the legal fight. More than anything this is Democrats allowing them to be defined by the right and it’s infuriating.

  119. 119.

    binzinerator

    April 17, 2008 at 5:21 pm

    If the anti-abortion crowd can’t discern the difference between an early first-trimester miscarriage and a menstrual cycle and use this to advance their case and then are called on their mistake, it actually makes a fairly distinct point.

    It’s not a question of can’t. It’s one of won’t.

    And it’s for the same reason a lot of that crowd won’t discern that a book written by a number of authors, each sometimes pursuing multiple agendas and using metaphor, parable and allegory to describe a mythology that is often contradictory, is the exact same book that they say is the literal and inerrant Word of God.

    So do you think an art piece that intentionally pushes every button on these people will make a fairly distinct point to anyone but the people who already knew the anti-abortion crowd can’t discern the difference? It isn’t going to change the minds of any of the anti-choice people. I think it will only reinforce their views.

    Incidentally, if it makes a fairly distinct point only to the ones who already know what that point is, I’d say it serves only to reinforce their views too.

    It’s a polarizing piece. And that gives the lie to the artist’s claim that it is supposed to inspire a discourse.

  120. 120.

    binzinerator

    April 17, 2008 at 6:07 pm

    I’m going to create an art exhibit next month where I round up hundreds of Jews, strip them down naked, and then have them gassed in a chamber while onlookers are allowed to view the proceedings through a heavy glass window.

    Polarizing. Case in point. Even when this observation has already been pointed out:

    No evidence is provided that she ever actually conceived…..or aborted. All we have is a bunch of vaseline-admixed blood that she has spread on plastic sheets and video of her bleeding in a bathtub.

    Nope, no longer matters. Whatever she did was akin to the gassing of hundreds of people. This is the kind of thing the fundies love. Gets them all righteously pissed, and the inner visions of nazi mass murders arise spontaneously. And for some it no doubt fuels their justification in putting a bomb in a Planned Parenthood clinic. Or a bullet into a nurse. It adds to their certainty of knowing who Jesus would assassinate.

    Yeah, Shvartsie girl, it just may inspire someone somewhere…

  121. 121.

    Echo without Bunnies or Men

    April 17, 2008 at 6:13 pm

    I don’t believe this story for one minute. This is pure bullshit.

  122. 122.

    charles

    April 17, 2008 at 6:23 pm

    Martin,
    The fact that an April Fool’s story about artistic elective arm transplants sounds utterly plausible to so many people just proves what you were saying all along!

  123. 123.

    SmilingPolitely

    April 17, 2008 at 6:28 pm

    Yep, it turns out the bitch made it up.

  124. 124.

    BFR

    April 17, 2008 at 7:05 pm

    The fact that an April Fool’s story about artistic elective arm transplants sounds utterly plausible to so many people just proves what you were saying all along!

    I have to admit, it never occured to me that it was a hoax. In retrospect it does but I suppose it’s only a matter of time before someone does it for real – it’s not that far of a leap from the guy who was having his face altered to look like a cat after all.

    In terms of the Yalie artist – that it’s fake only makes it slightly less reprehensible to me. It’s such a sensitive subject for most of the population it just is galling to see someone trivilaizing it to this degree.

  125. 125.

    D-Chance.

    April 17, 2008 at 7:06 pm

    Eh, much ado about nothing, even if it had been real. Her body, her choice. Fuck everyone else. The whole exercise was nothing more than a chance for the loonies from both extremes to remind everyone that they’re still “relevant”, whether it be the Bible-thumpers on the right or the Christophobes on the left.

  126. 126.

    jake

    April 17, 2008 at 8:14 pm

    *** Update ***

    File under D, for Duh.

  127. 127.

    chopper

    April 17, 2008 at 8:49 pm

    after the starving dog thing turned out to be faked, you’d think people would think twice the next time.

    i guess people really like being outraged by artists.

  128. 128.

    Sirkowski

    April 17, 2008 at 8:50 pm

    Official: IT’S A HOAX.

  129. 129.

    Sirkowski

    April 17, 2008 at 8:50 pm

    Shit, beaten by not much.

  130. 130.

    LiberalTarian

    April 17, 2008 at 10:58 pm

    You know, for any woman who has had a miscarriage, this is not art. It is exploitation. Her whole bit about abortion? I thank God my kids were never this insensitive, or this immoral.

  131. 131.

    Mike G

    April 17, 2008 at 11:45 pm

    Yep, a fake. Enjoy your 15 minutes.

    And yet the Forced Childbirth religio-crazies, many knowing it was a hoax, will be repeating for years as “True” to dupe low-information droolers. They believe a lot stupider shit than this.
    Very few people will hear that it was a hoax; damage done.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • lowtechcyclist on Take the Fucking Win (Apr 15, 2024 @ 3:33pm)
  • WaterGirl on Henry Would Like His Lunch Right Now, Please (Open Thread) (Apr 15, 2024 @ 3:33pm)
  • smith on Henry Would Like His Lunch Right Now, Please (Open Thread) (Apr 15, 2024 @ 3:32pm)
  • zhena gogolia on Henry Would Like His Lunch Right Now, Please (Open Thread) (Apr 15, 2024 @ 3:31pm)
  • Ruckus on Henry Would Like His Lunch Right Now, Please (Open Thread) (Apr 15, 2024 @ 3:31pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning
Proposed BJ meetups list from frosty

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8
Virginia House Races
Four Directions – Montana
Worker Power AZ
Four Directions – Arizona
Four Directions – Nevada

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
Positive Climate News
War in Ukraine
Cole’s “Stories from the Road”
Classified Documents Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Political Action 2024

Postcard Writing Information

Balloon Juice for Four Directions AZ

Donate

Balloon Juice for Four Directions NV

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2024 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!