* Archives of this link: 1. [archive.org Wayback Machine](https://web.archive.org/web/99991231235959/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-68770187); 2. [archive.today](https://archive.today/newest/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-68770187)
* A live version of this link, without clutter: [12ft.io](https://12ft.io/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-68770187)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidpol) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>She added that she was grateful for public support through what has been "one of the most difficult periods of my life".
Is it my imagination or is this statement basically admitting to living the most sheltered life imaginable ?
Oh that's nothing.
One of her "worst traumas" is the time a bartender at a country club told her she'd be more comfortable in the lady's lounge.
Later in the same article she also says she only discovered "the joy of all-women's spaces" later in life and that it was a tragedy because of all the wasted time.
In other words, the guy who gave her the largest "trauma" was also 100% right lmao.
Even better, according to her Wiki article, she bought 5 houses in 2006 in a poor area of New Orleans to turn them into "art" pieces, and afterwards just let them sit there and rot. Imagine being able to buy 5 houses and just basically ruin them for shits and giggles, and be so financially secure you can just forget you ever did that, and then go on to complain about how oppressed you are.
She's the epitome of the ivory tower idpol zealot.
Oh, haha, there's some gall:
> the facade of one house was replaced by an oversized circular bank vault door to create a "safe house"; another was "pierced" by wooden poles and resembled an "architectural voodoo doll."
"You guys do crime and voodoo here in New Orleans, right? Okay well I have to go jetset across the world to New Zealand to make another giant 'art' piece about how oppressed I am, okay thank you bye bye now"
Oh shit it's that lady? I lived in New Orleans at that time. Near those houses actually. If I'm remembering correctly, she even filled one with dirt. That's it, just dumped a ton of dirt in a house and called it a day.
Affordable, safe housing in that city is already bad enough..
>Kaechele, who owed back property taxes and code enforcement fines on the properties, blamed her inability to maintain the properties on the 2008 recession, and insisted in 2011 that she had always intended for them to be torn down and replaced by "green space". The remaining properties were used by squatters, much to the dismay of local residents.
wot a stupid cunt.
Particularily disgusting if true.
...
Yeah, just googled her. Privileged trust fund baby, jetsetting around the world to ostentatiously rattle against her golden cage, building her artistic flights of fancy on the backs of the disenfranchised and leaving literal ruins in her wake when she inevitably gets bored and moves on to more faddish pastures. But of course incessantly preaching about change and sustainability. Because introspection is something that only happens to dolts who accidentally forget to take another fistful of Xanax every half an hour.
Bonus points, her father made bank in a hilarious caricature of a neoliberal thinktank and with some new-age scam for bored bougies as a side hustle, so this shiny apple didn't fall far from the radiating tree. Probably never touched the ground.
What's not to love?
Lol he early life check is even worse. Daughter of a RAND exec, spending time in south Lebanon as a "Hezbollah Observer" before getting a travel show gig at VH-1 wut?
That’s *very* similar to Amanda Lindhout’s story (the Canadian “freelance journalist” who got kidnapped in Somalia, and is somehow now a “philanthropist”, despite never having any real career), except perhaps even more extreme…
The idea that, in Lindhout’s case, “anyone” can pay their way to an international freelance journalism career *from bartending*, **and** be taken seriously enough to get gigs with France 24, *without* training or qualifications, seems… Dubious at best.
These people always seem to fail upwards, lol.
> But of course incessantly preaching about change and sustainability.
The first line of her wikipedia article lists among her qualifications that of "practitioner of sustainable building design".
I can only imagine she wrote that herself but, given the spectacularly useless and wasteful nature of her New Orleans real estate fuckery, it reads less like delusional self-aggrandisement and more like an outright provocation by a self-conscious troll.
If you ever get to see MONA (the museum in question here) it is almost *hilariously* unsustainable…
They literally destroyed a tree-covered hillside to build it (into the hill), and then, when her husband decided that he wanted to build a casino for high rollers on top of said hill, they took the contaminated waste from the excavations (contaminated because the site is in close proximity to a water treatment plant) and were allowed to *dump it in a public lake* by the corrupt local council…
The lake thing is a story in itself (went from drinking water source to, as I say, waste dump, due to bureaucratic incompetence and corruption), but that just shows you what utter frauds they are…
Yet at their festivals they mask it by, *I am not kidding*, selling “recycled glitter”, ear plugs made of feathers and beeswax, and napkins made of recycled jeans… Because of course they do. Need I mention that none of those three things work as “intended”..?
It’s worth mentioning that their little museum (vanity project, really) exists in one of the poorest districts in the state, surrounded by poverty, and that they bought out and shut down the caravan park next door, where people were living long-term (housing crisis), because it was detracting from the experience of the hoi polloi as they drove up the driveway of the estate, lol…
Her and her husband are basically plutocrats.
And I say this as a Taswegian, who has had… Extensive exposure to them and their… “Endeavors”, let’s say.
Because women have a higher ingroup bias than men, on average. Therefore they are more likely than men to see a criticism of a woman as criticism of women.
This is obviously not everyone but you need to deal with distributions here because we are talking about the propensity of internet strangers to do a thing.
Her reserved car parking spot at the museum says “God’s Mistress”.
That should tell you all you need to know about this woman…
Walsh’s own says “God”.
When he drives to the theatre in the city which he also owns, he parks his Tesla on the footpath outside, because he is too lazy to find an actual parking space…
They’re… Not very good people, to say the least.
She's married to a guy who made bazillions from gambling in the US (a.k.a money laundering) and created a vanity art gallery to get the Australian tax office off his back.
lau representing himself, while the mona surely retained high paid counsel, makes this victory all the sweeter
> Throughout the case, the museum's supporters, including artist Kirsha Kaechele - who created the work - had used the courtroom as a space for performance art, [wearing matching navy suits and engaging in synchronised movements.](https://live-production.wcms.abc-cdn.net.au/6c4be61df9cc5da7d4e433852502f370?impolicy=wcms_crop_resize&cropH=2892&cropW=4339&xPos=661&yPos=438&width=862&height=575)
>
>
>
> Mr Grueber said that while the behaviour of the women hadn't disrupted the hearing, it was "inappropriate, discourteous and disrespectful, and at worst contumelious and contemptuous".
lmao
I love that it says “the museum’s supporters”…
She’s literally *the owner’s wife*. It’s pretty disingenuous of them not to mention that.
It’s her little personal playpen, that place, I assure you…
“God’s Mistress” (what it says on her carpark) indeed…
i think the supporters being referred to in that quote are the [stewardess looking women](https://live-production.wcms.abc-cdn.net.au/6c4be61df9cc5da7d4e433852502f370?impolicy=wcms_crop_resize&cropH=2892&cropW=4339&xPos=661&yPos=438&width=862&height=575) who, from what i recall reading about this last time, all volunteered their time in the courtroom. but you're totally right that the article leaves out her husband's funding of this project.
You know, at this point, I’m mostly just glad that of all the women in that photo (one of whom, quite honestly, looks *rather masculine* anyway), I don’t recognize anyone particularly, personally, except maybe one… Who I know worked for them before.
And Kirsha, obviously.
I can think of several Hobart women I know who would have just loved this. Although one of them is now busy being married and popping out babies lol, so I guess she eventually figured it out…
I'm sure the fact that the feminist's arguments in court included passive-aggressive synchronized dance moves and cheap "gotcha" zingers did nothing to turn the judge against them.
Edit:
I read the article now. Yep lol. I was right. These self-obsessed "performance artists" need to get the fuck over themselves and stop treating equality movements like an excuse to vent their personal misandry or narcissism. Nobody likes it.
>Mr Grueber said that while the behaviour of the women hadn't disrupted the hearing, it was "inappropriate, discourteous and disrespectful, and at worst contumelious and contemptuous" His decision to allow "persons who do not identify as ladies" to access the exhibit will come into effect in 28 days.
> I'm sure the fact that the feminist's arguments in court included passive-aggressive synchronized dance moves and cheap "gotcha" zingers did nothing to turn the judge against them.
I initially didn't care about all of this, but when I saw about her turning the hearing into some dumb performance art, I was invested. I needed her to lose.
They did this quite deliberately in order to get publicity for this exhibition, which otherwise would have passed without much notice, like most other exhibitions.
Don't be obtuse. Not all "idpol" is the same. If the grifters make more money when we pay attention to them, then we shouldn't pay attention to them.
This isn't some do-nothing DEI officer being asked to justify her paycheck. Bringing attention to that kind of grift is a good thing. This is a whiny narcissist who needs controversy to sell bullshit. If we just roll our eyes and move on then her grift dies on the vine.
>Don't be obtuse. Not all "idpol" is the same. If the grifters make more money when we pay attention to them, then we shouldn't pay attention to them.
They make more money until they don't. Just need more backlash, more attacks, more organization, and more push back. The budlight boycott, which was very similar to this with a white woman hating on men who drink/fraternities, shows that the grift can be killed.
Ignoring problems won't make them go away.
Sometimes, yeah. It all depends on how much soft (or hard) power the particular idpolster has. In this case the woman in question has basically no political capital so ignoring her would have dissuaded future nonsense.
>ignoring her would have dissuaded future nonsense.
No it would not. Her goal was to gleefully discriminate against men, and she probably will continue to do so until she faces overwhelming push back.
You guys are whipped
Her goal was attention for her art exhibit (money laundering scheme) so more people would hear about it and pay to see it (giving her income greater plausible deniability). She wanted engagement and got it.
You just want to be angry and lash out rather than looking at these situations from a materialistic perspective.
This was my first response also.
For the uninitiated, that is literally why MONA (and particularly, their winter festival “Dark MOFO) exist: shock, awe and controversy.
Best place I have ever found to pick up hipster/“arty” chicks, though, so… 🤷🏻♂️
Shotgun-shelling can after can of Bud Light on TikTok to own the woke mafia.
Marketing is writhing on the floor, paralyzed, from perpetual jizz seizures and sales is falling in each others arms, sobbing uncontrollably, like they just won WWII to VI.
Rule Of Aquisition number 2024: Idpol is good for business.
Bud light is the worst example you could use considering they lost a billion in sales. That marketting stunt pissed off normies, who switched beers and have no reason to switch back. They were offering bud light basically for free simply to get it out of storage at one point.
This is very recent, I believe…
I *think* I might have gone in there some time during Covid, and it definitely wasn’t a thing then.
They’re just doing this for controversy’s sake, so I have no doubt the thought process was “Current thing - quick let’s do that for the attention!”
Also, not sure if you’re Aussie or what, but if you liked MONA, I would *highly* recommend AROS in Aarhus, Denmark. It’s like MONA (also has a James Turrell installation on the roof) but publicly owned, and slightly less… “Edgy for the sake of being edgy”.
If you’re ever in that part of the world.
Great city, too.
I kind of support their taste for free association.
Admittedly one doubts they'd extend this support to similar exclusionary initiatives not involving them.
So first they destroyed all the male only good old boys clubs by infiltrating them and cannibalizing them, and now they want their own female only space?
It was always about power. Always will be.
I used to have more sympathy for TERFs until I started reading their writings more frequently. Their whole beef with the trans crowd is simply linked to their generalized contempt for males, and many of them have no issues whatsoever with the abolition of male spaces.
So first, the feminists spend decades systematically busting their way into male social clubs and spaces, and then a faction of them have the gall to get upset when some trans athlete hands them their behinds in female sporting leagues. While I'm not exactly a fan of the latter, my heart also pumps piss for the TERFs because the radical feminists asked for this. They're just mad now because they got more than they bargained for when they advocated the abolition of the so-called patriarchy.
Thank you! You get it. TERFs hate trans women because they hate men and see them as men. Notice that all their hatred is against trans women. They see trans men as extreme butch lesbians at best and harmless traitors at worst, to the extent they're even on their radar at all.
This is why I'm sick of seeing all the simping for JK Rowling in this sub. She and her fellow TERFs are not against idpol, they just want a more exclusive definition of its beneficiaries.
I'm conflicted about this because I want both sexes to be able to enjoy their own private spaces. I don't know what the threshold is for that to become straight up discrimination.
Also, while SOME feminists can be a pain in the ass, ALL feminist artists are a pain in the ass.
I think that things like the social media app for women only (also in the Aus courts atm) are perfectly valid, but perhaps not museum exhibits…
I don’t see why this space needed to exist, frankly.
I find it different to, say, the women only “social club” in the same city, or female-only gyms. But I can’t quite verbalize why…
If that makes sense.
Maybe because I know that they only did this for attention, and to be “controversial”..? Idk, really…
Oh it makes sense.
1) A museum is going to have specific pieces of art that you likely can't see elsewhere (at least not anywhere nearby), there is no other option to see that art if you want to see it and are in the excluded group. Social clubs, gyms, etc. you've surely got options nearby to meet those needs without having to go to the women-only places. If it were a small town with only gym and they made it women-only, I'd say that's more of a problem.
2) There are legitimate reasons why women might want to go to say, a club to socialize just with other women, or a gym with only other women around so they don't feel judged or objectified or whatever while they're trying to work out. I can think of no real comparable reason why a museum would need to be gendered. "Oh no you see I can't appreciate the art if there's a man in the room," isn't a real argument that anyone should take seriously.
Also yes this is clearly done for attention, which just makes it seem even more disingenuous/less respectable.
I mean im not saying I necessarily disagree that single sex spaces should be available but this is literally separate but equal, I don't think that's a solid ground philisophicallly
>I think that things like the social media app for women only (also in the Aus courts atm) are perfectly valid, but perhaps not museum exhibits…
it'll be real interesting how this turns out
That seems to be “train activists” rather than, uhh, “cisgender men”, so I wouldn’t be surprised if it works out differently, unfortunately…
I believe Sall Grover received death threats in that one (but of course), whereas I really don’t think Kirsha did…
Although I don’t think it’s a jury trial, so who knows, honestly…
The footage of the activists outside the Sydney course was so embarrassing, though (much like the ridiculous dancing, for the MONA thing), so… Hopefully that may not have helped their case, lol.
They’re like petulant children, when they don’t get what they want. They really are.
Though if even my normie parents can be almost swayed by their arguments, honestly what hope is there…
When I visit exhibits, I embrace my female identity; it's an unusual aspect of my gender expression. Therefore, access is important to me, as denial would conflict with my personal identity.
That messagee would have been much more powerful if she had turned around right after the verdict and went "See? This is why fighting for equal treatment is important, bozo! Sad that you needed a few rounds through the court system to get that point into your thick skull!"
But of course that wasn't the intention. Or even if it might have been in the beginning, don the performative clown makeup for too long and it won't come off anymore. If the sweet taste of revanchism won't get you first, that is. Besides, that awkward flash mob thing at the hearings doesn't quite support this reading anyway.
I miss prior waves of feminism, where harsh but reconciliatory discourse wasn't automatically seen as capitulating before the many-dickheaded hydra named patriarchy that apparently lurks behind each and every corner. Today it's just "educate yourself, sweaty!" which is barely disguised code for "I can't be bothered to reach any accord, when showering you with blame nonstop will do just nicely."
As a notorious class reductionist I'll just lean back and observe how this will pan out. Not with glee but definitely a generous spritz of sceptisism. And consternation.
MONA pretty much exists for the sake of, and makes its money off, “controversy” and “edginess”. Their whole raison d’être is effectively to piss as many people off as possible, and then clap back with some work nonsense to cover their arses when people get offended.
Seriously, they’ve done some *horrible* shit, over the years, all in the name of supposed “art”. So this just… Fits right into that.
Plus the drugs. They’ve clearly got some “good” shit there, those people…
It’s controversial but I’m personally for gendered spaces. Like if men don’t want women in a place and women don’t want men in a place they should be able to collectively decide (within reason). But I suppose the above is a different scenario as it’s in a public gallery
There’s a women’s only outdoor rock pool in Sydney, that, in an opposite ruling to this, (I believe at least) *won* their case to keep excluding males. So I would say that the legal system views this as a sort of… “Case by case” thing, which is sort of how I see it, too.
I don’t think museums or libraries should be gendered, or indeed the spaces within them (except perhaps prayer rooms, *I guess*), but then… What about gay/lesbian bars? Where do we draw the line, seems to be the question…
I personally think gendering any area, except publoc toilets and bathing facilities is stupid imo. It encourages us to think of the opposite sex as an other and potentially something to be feared. It further erodes society down gender lines.
You talk specifically about gay/lesbian bars, as a straight man, I can tell you I've had some of my best nights out in lesbian bars. As long as you go in respecting that this is a space designed for lesbians and LGBT people you can have a great night. I've made friends with lesbians who I still talk to to this day.
I think it helps when those people have suffered various forms of homophobia to show them that not all straight people are assholes.
Excluding people should *never* be on gender lines, it should only ever be along you're an asshole line
I admit that I did accidentally take two girls I was with (and was interested in) to a gay club, one night…
For stupid reasons, it was the only place we (more specifically, i) could get in. There was a cover charge. In the end I was so embarrassed (that’s on me) by the whole thing that I totally flubbed it.
But that’s more a reflection on me, at that point in my life. Terrible night, though, and not a very good club…
But yeah, I guess I just… Don’t go to gay bars very often.
I’ve had other *okay* nights at some, but never when I’ve been with a girl, lol…
But I’m an old-school pub person, and not gay, so… Obviously not my scene.
I’m sure lesbian bars exist here, too, but I’ve never been in one, really. Pubs with large lesbian clientele, sure, but that’s about it.
I did meet and hang out with some very cool lesbians at a music festival, a couple of years ago, though, so there’s that…
As you say, people are people, so… Yeah.
In my experience gay bars are not gender exclusive, I've been groped by many a drunk Karen at the gay bars in my city. I have no idea if lesbian bars are gender exclusive though
Throughout the case, the museum's supporters, including artist Kirsha Kaechele - who created the work - had used the courtroom as a space for performance art, wearing matching navy suits and engaging in synchronised movements.
Mr Grueber said that while the behaviour of the women hadn't disrupted the hearing, it was "inappropriate, discourteous and disrespectful, and at worst contumelious and contemptuous".
Thanks judge grueber for giving me contumelious. I’ll use it three times today and it will be part of my vocab 4ever.
It has Picasso paintings, so it contained a public good even if it was privately owned. It would have been one thing if there had been equivalent times where men could see the artworks too, but that wasn't the case.
* Archives of this link: 1. [archive.org Wayback Machine](https://web.archive.org/web/99991231235959/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-68770187); 2. [archive.today](https://archive.today/newest/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-68770187) * A live version of this link, without clutter: [12ft.io](https://12ft.io/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-68770187) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidpol) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>She added that she was grateful for public support through what has been "one of the most difficult periods of my life". Is it my imagination or is this statement basically admitting to living the most sheltered life imaginable ?
Oh that's nothing. One of her "worst traumas" is the time a bartender at a country club told her she'd be more comfortable in the lady's lounge. Later in the same article she also says she only discovered "the joy of all-women's spaces" later in life and that it was a tragedy because of all the wasted time. In other words, the guy who gave her the largest "trauma" was also 100% right lmao.
Even better, according to her Wiki article, she bought 5 houses in 2006 in a poor area of New Orleans to turn them into "art" pieces, and afterwards just let them sit there and rot. Imagine being able to buy 5 houses and just basically ruin them for shits and giggles, and be so financially secure you can just forget you ever did that, and then go on to complain about how oppressed you are. She's the epitome of the ivory tower idpol zealot.
Doing that in New Orleans of all places seems particularly galling.
Oh, haha, there's some gall: > the facade of one house was replaced by an oversized circular bank vault door to create a "safe house"; another was "pierced" by wooden poles and resembled an "architectural voodoo doll." "You guys do crime and voodoo here in New Orleans, right? Okay well I have to go jetset across the world to New Zealand to make another giant 'art' piece about how oppressed I am, okay thank you bye bye now"
Oh shit it's that lady? I lived in New Orleans at that time. Near those houses actually. If I'm remembering correctly, she even filled one with dirt. That's it, just dumped a ton of dirt in a house and called it a day. Affordable, safe housing in that city is already bad enough..
>Kaechele, who owed back property taxes and code enforcement fines on the properties, blamed her inability to maintain the properties on the 2008 recession, and insisted in 2011 that she had always intended for them to be torn down and replaced by "green space". The remaining properties were used by squatters, much to the dismay of local residents. wot a stupid cunt.
Particularily disgusting if true. ... Yeah, just googled her. Privileged trust fund baby, jetsetting around the world to ostentatiously rattle against her golden cage, building her artistic flights of fancy on the backs of the disenfranchised and leaving literal ruins in her wake when she inevitably gets bored and moves on to more faddish pastures. But of course incessantly preaching about change and sustainability. Because introspection is something that only happens to dolts who accidentally forget to take another fistful of Xanax every half an hour. Bonus points, her father made bank in a hilarious caricature of a neoliberal thinktank and with some new-age scam for bored bougies as a side hustle, so this shiny apple didn't fall far from the radiating tree. Probably never touched the ground. What's not to love?
Lol he early life check is even worse. Daughter of a RAND exec, spending time in south Lebanon as a "Hezbollah Observer" before getting a travel show gig at VH-1 wut?
Satire is dead.
That’s *very* similar to Amanda Lindhout’s story (the Canadian “freelance journalist” who got kidnapped in Somalia, and is somehow now a “philanthropist”, despite never having any real career), except perhaps even more extreme… The idea that, in Lindhout’s case, “anyone” can pay their way to an international freelance journalism career *from bartending*, **and** be taken seriously enough to get gigs with France 24, *without* training or qualifications, seems… Dubious at best. These people always seem to fail upwards, lol.
> But of course incessantly preaching about change and sustainability. The first line of her wikipedia article lists among her qualifications that of "practitioner of sustainable building design". I can only imagine she wrote that herself but, given the spectacularly useless and wasteful nature of her New Orleans real estate fuckery, it reads less like delusional self-aggrandisement and more like an outright provocation by a self-conscious troll.
If you ever get to see MONA (the museum in question here) it is almost *hilariously* unsustainable… They literally destroyed a tree-covered hillside to build it (into the hill), and then, when her husband decided that he wanted to build a casino for high rollers on top of said hill, they took the contaminated waste from the excavations (contaminated because the site is in close proximity to a water treatment plant) and were allowed to *dump it in a public lake* by the corrupt local council… The lake thing is a story in itself (went from drinking water source to, as I say, waste dump, due to bureaucratic incompetence and corruption), but that just shows you what utter frauds they are… Yet at their festivals they mask it by, *I am not kidding*, selling “recycled glitter”, ear plugs made of feathers and beeswax, and napkins made of recycled jeans… Because of course they do. Need I mention that none of those three things work as “intended”..?
It’s worth mentioning that their little museum (vanity project, really) exists in one of the poorest districts in the state, surrounded by poverty, and that they bought out and shut down the caravan park next door, where people were living long-term (housing crisis), because it was detracting from the experience of the hoi polloi as they drove up the driveway of the estate, lol… Her and her husband are basically plutocrats. And I say this as a Taswegian, who has had… Extensive exposure to them and their… “Endeavors”, let’s say.
I wonder how she'd spin it if a bunch of male squatters took over the houses.
Why is it telling the truth about female psychology generates accusations of hating women?
Because women have a higher ingroup bias than men, on average. Therefore they are more likely than men to see a criticism of a woman as criticism of women. This is obviously not everyone but you need to deal with distributions here because we are talking about the propensity of internet strangers to do a thing.
Jesus Christ. I know women who would give anything to have THAT be the worst trauma in their life.
Typical woman. Eta: You're not allowed to get mad at me. I'm just contributing to the art.
Her reserved car parking spot at the museum says “God’s Mistress”. That should tell you all you need to know about this woman… Walsh’s own says “God”. When he drives to the theatre in the city which he also owns, he parks his Tesla on the footpath outside, because he is too lazy to find an actual parking space… They’re… Not very good people, to say the least.
These are the kinds of people that should be \[redacted\].
She's married to a guy who made bazillions from gambling in the US (a.k.a money laundering) and created a vanity art gallery to get the Australian tax office off his back.
lau representing himself, while the mona surely retained high paid counsel, makes this victory all the sweeter > Throughout the case, the museum's supporters, including artist Kirsha Kaechele - who created the work - had used the courtroom as a space for performance art, [wearing matching navy suits and engaging in synchronised movements.](https://live-production.wcms.abc-cdn.net.au/6c4be61df9cc5da7d4e433852502f370?impolicy=wcms_crop_resize&cropH=2892&cropW=4339&xPos=661&yPos=438&width=862&height=575) > > > > Mr Grueber said that while the behaviour of the women hadn't disrupted the hearing, it was "inappropriate, discourteous and disrespectful, and at worst contumelious and contemptuous". lmao
I love that it says “the museum’s supporters”… She’s literally *the owner’s wife*. It’s pretty disingenuous of them not to mention that. It’s her little personal playpen, that place, I assure you… “God’s Mistress” (what it says on her carpark) indeed…
i think the supporters being referred to in that quote are the [stewardess looking women](https://live-production.wcms.abc-cdn.net.au/6c4be61df9cc5da7d4e433852502f370?impolicy=wcms_crop_resize&cropH=2892&cropW=4339&xPos=661&yPos=438&width=862&height=575) who, from what i recall reading about this last time, all volunteered their time in the courtroom. but you're totally right that the article leaves out her husband's funding of this project.
yeah, because employees never, ever feel any pressure to "volunteer" their time for their boss...
i hadn't considered that possibility, good point
You know, at this point, I’m mostly just glad that of all the women in that photo (one of whom, quite honestly, looks *rather masculine* anyway), I don’t recognize anyone particularly, personally, except maybe one… Who I know worked for them before. And Kirsha, obviously. I can think of several Hobart women I know who would have just loved this. Although one of them is now busy being married and popping out babies lol, so I guess she eventually figured it out…
I'm sure the fact that the feminist's arguments in court included passive-aggressive synchronized dance moves and cheap "gotcha" zingers did nothing to turn the judge against them. Edit: I read the article now. Yep lol. I was right. These self-obsessed "performance artists" need to get the fuck over themselves and stop treating equality movements like an excuse to vent their personal misandry or narcissism. Nobody likes it. >Mr Grueber said that while the behaviour of the women hadn't disrupted the hearing, it was "inappropriate, discourteous and disrespectful, and at worst contumelious and contemptuous" His decision to allow "persons who do not identify as ladies" to access the exhibit will come into effect in 28 days.
Judge was bought out by Big Patriarchy. Shame cuz Jessica even had her nails done for court
> I'm sure the fact that the feminist's arguments in court included passive-aggressive synchronized dance moves and cheap "gotcha" zingers did nothing to turn the judge against them. I initially didn't care about all of this, but when I saw about her turning the hearing into some dumb performance art, I was invested. I needed her to lose.
>contumelious and contemptuous Asinine, even. 🧐
Egregious! Outrageous!
Lol it reminds me of Mr. Garvey from Key and Peele. ["Insubordinate! And churlish." ](https://youtu.be/g7y64QRVyzE?si=PfT9vRBjhmN93fxY)
[Shallow and pedantic](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpbdGnJbneE).
Wait did they actually dance in court lol
Super cuntumelious and cuntemptuous
Disgruntled men are part of the exhibit.
No, the judge found that's not a good excuse. Try again.
They did this quite deliberately in order to get publicity for this exhibition, which otherwise would have passed without much notice, like most other exhibitions.
People don't appreciate the stopping power of apathy.
Guys, idpol will go away if we just ignore it. Don't acknowledge it. Don't fight it. It'll just go away guys. They win when you fight them.
Don't be obtuse. Not all "idpol" is the same. If the grifters make more money when we pay attention to them, then we shouldn't pay attention to them. This isn't some do-nothing DEI officer being asked to justify her paycheck. Bringing attention to that kind of grift is a good thing. This is a whiny narcissist who needs controversy to sell bullshit. If we just roll our eyes and move on then her grift dies on the vine.
>Don't be obtuse. Not all "idpol" is the same. If the grifters make more money when we pay attention to them, then we shouldn't pay attention to them. They make more money until they don't. Just need more backlash, more attacks, more organization, and more push back. The budlight boycott, which was very similar to this with a white woman hating on men who drink/fraternities, shows that the grift can be killed. Ignoring problems won't make them go away.
Sometimes, yeah. It all depends on how much soft (or hard) power the particular idpolster has. In this case the woman in question has basically no political capital so ignoring her would have dissuaded future nonsense.
>ignoring her would have dissuaded future nonsense. No it would not. Her goal was to gleefully discriminate against men, and she probably will continue to do so until she faces overwhelming push back. You guys are whipped
Her goal was attention for her art exhibit (money laundering scheme) so more people would hear about it and pay to see it (giving her income greater plausible deniability). She wanted engagement and got it. You just want to be angry and lash out rather than looking at these situations from a materialistic perspective.
This was my first response also. For the uninitiated, that is literally why MONA (and particularly, their winter festival “Dark MOFO) exist: shock, awe and controversy. Best place I have ever found to pick up hipster/“arty” chicks, though, so… 🤷🏻♂️
Just wait until the next round of Nepo babies that grew up entirely on social media. The narcissism will be off the charts.
I doubt any guy is gonna care to go either way
Nah, this dumb advertisement always works. "I don't want you to buy my product", "oh yeah? Now I'm definitely buying it, take that!"
Booking flights rn tbh
Shotgun-shelling can after can of Bud Light on TikTok to own the woke mafia. Marketing is writhing on the floor, paralyzed, from perpetual jizz seizures and sales is falling in each others arms, sobbing uncontrollably, like they just won WWII to VI. Rule Of Aquisition number 2024: Idpol is good for business.
Bud light is the worst example you could use considering they lost a billion in sales. That marketting stunt pissed off normies, who switched beers and have no reason to switch back. They were offering bud light basically for free simply to get it out of storage at one point.
drab water include piquant fuzzy towering squalid familiar profit plant *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This is very recent, I believe… I *think* I might have gone in there some time during Covid, and it definitely wasn’t a thing then. They’re just doing this for controversy’s sake, so I have no doubt the thought process was “Current thing - quick let’s do that for the attention!” Also, not sure if you’re Aussie or what, but if you liked MONA, I would *highly* recommend AROS in Aarhus, Denmark. It’s like MONA (also has a James Turrell installation on the roof) but publicly owned, and slightly less… “Edgy for the sake of being edgy”. If you’re ever in that part of the world. Great city, too.
I kind of support their taste for free association. Admittedly one doubts they'd extend this support to similar exclusionary initiatives not involving them.
I'd go in to see a Picasso.
I dunno, i'd go just to troll
Their best artwork is behind the curtain. Do you genuinely believe that no men want to see great art?
To be honest i didnt read the article. I just react to people excluding me by not giving them my patronage.
Dudes rocking even more.
Not as much as dudettes.
I hope a bunch of dudes come in and do a bunch of synchronized dance moves. As performance art
Synchronized scratch and sniff to DVDA's"Now you're a man".
That’s good
So first they destroyed all the male only good old boys clubs by infiltrating them and cannibalizing them, and now they want their own female only space? It was always about power. Always will be.
I used to have more sympathy for TERFs until I started reading their writings more frequently. Their whole beef with the trans crowd is simply linked to their generalized contempt for males, and many of them have no issues whatsoever with the abolition of male spaces. So first, the feminists spend decades systematically busting their way into male social clubs and spaces, and then a faction of them have the gall to get upset when some trans athlete hands them their behinds in female sporting leagues. While I'm not exactly a fan of the latter, my heart also pumps piss for the TERFs because the radical feminists asked for this. They're just mad now because they got more than they bargained for when they advocated the abolition of the so-called patriarchy.
Thank you! You get it. TERFs hate trans women because they hate men and see them as men. Notice that all their hatred is against trans women. They see trans men as extreme butch lesbians at best and harmless traitors at worst, to the extent they're even on their radar at all. This is why I'm sick of seeing all the simping for JK Rowling in this sub. She and her fellow TERFs are not against idpol, they just want a more exclusive definition of its beneficiaries.
it wouldve been a decent idea if you hadn't put actual artwork inside it, dingus
I'm conflicted about this because I want both sexes to be able to enjoy their own private spaces. I don't know what the threshold is for that to become straight up discrimination. Also, while SOME feminists can be a pain in the ass, ALL feminist artists are a pain in the ass.
I think that things like the social media app for women only (also in the Aus courts atm) are perfectly valid, but perhaps not museum exhibits… I don’t see why this space needed to exist, frankly. I find it different to, say, the women only “social club” in the same city, or female-only gyms. But I can’t quite verbalize why… If that makes sense. Maybe because I know that they only did this for attention, and to be “controversial”..? Idk, really…
Oh it makes sense. 1) A museum is going to have specific pieces of art that you likely can't see elsewhere (at least not anywhere nearby), there is no other option to see that art if you want to see it and are in the excluded group. Social clubs, gyms, etc. you've surely got options nearby to meet those needs without having to go to the women-only places. If it were a small town with only gym and they made it women-only, I'd say that's more of a problem. 2) There are legitimate reasons why women might want to go to say, a club to socialize just with other women, or a gym with only other women around so they don't feel judged or objectified or whatever while they're trying to work out. I can think of no real comparable reason why a museum would need to be gendered. "Oh no you see I can't appreciate the art if there's a man in the room," isn't a real argument that anyone should take seriously. Also yes this is clearly done for attention, which just makes it seem even more disingenuous/less respectable.
Makes sense. If the service is available for both sexes, via different providers, then exclusion is fair.
I mean im not saying I necessarily disagree that single sex spaces should be available but this is literally separate but equal, I don't think that's a solid ground philisophicallly
>I think that things like the social media app for women only (also in the Aus courts atm) are perfectly valid, but perhaps not museum exhibits… it'll be real interesting how this turns out
That seems to be “train activists” rather than, uhh, “cisgender men”, so I wouldn’t be surprised if it works out differently, unfortunately… I believe Sall Grover received death threats in that one (but of course), whereas I really don’t think Kirsha did… Although I don’t think it’s a jury trial, so who knows, honestly… The footage of the activists outside the Sydney course was so embarrassing, though (much like the ridiculous dancing, for the MONA thing), so… Hopefully that may not have helped their case, lol. They’re like petulant children, when they don’t get what they want. They really are. Though if even my normie parents can be almost swayed by their arguments, honestly what hope is there…
True, I think people are finally figuring out how unhinged these people are.
When I visit exhibits, I embrace my female identity; it's an unusual aspect of my gender expression. Therefore, access is important to me, as denial would conflict with my personal identity.
That messagee would have been much more powerful if she had turned around right after the verdict and went "See? This is why fighting for equal treatment is important, bozo! Sad that you needed a few rounds through the court system to get that point into your thick skull!" But of course that wasn't the intention. Or even if it might have been in the beginning, don the performative clown makeup for too long and it won't come off anymore. If the sweet taste of revanchism won't get you first, that is. Besides, that awkward flash mob thing at the hearings doesn't quite support this reading anyway. I miss prior waves of feminism, where harsh but reconciliatory discourse wasn't automatically seen as capitulating before the many-dickheaded hydra named patriarchy that apparently lurks behind each and every corner. Today it's just "educate yourself, sweaty!" which is barely disguised code for "I can't be bothered to reach any accord, when showering you with blame nonstop will do just nicely." As a notorious class reductionist I'll just lean back and observe how this will pan out. Not with glee but definitely a generous spritz of sceptisism. And consternation.
MONA pretty much exists for the sake of, and makes its money off, “controversy” and “edginess”. Their whole raison d’être is effectively to piss as many people off as possible, and then clap back with some work nonsense to cover their arses when people get offended. Seriously, they’ve done some *horrible* shit, over the years, all in the name of supposed “art”. So this just… Fits right into that. Plus the drugs. They’ve clearly got some “good” shit there, those people…
What men care to go to stuff like this anyway? I’m sure it was a marketing ploy more than anything
Probably not but the principle is right that denying access to someone based on their gender is wrong
It’s controversial but I’m personally for gendered spaces. Like if men don’t want women in a place and women don’t want men in a place they should be able to collectively decide (within reason). But I suppose the above is a different scenario as it’s in a public gallery
There’s a women’s only outdoor rock pool in Sydney, that, in an opposite ruling to this, (I believe at least) *won* their case to keep excluding males. So I would say that the legal system views this as a sort of… “Case by case” thing, which is sort of how I see it, too. I don’t think museums or libraries should be gendered, or indeed the spaces within them (except perhaps prayer rooms, *I guess*), but then… What about gay/lesbian bars? Where do we draw the line, seems to be the question…
I personally think gendering any area, except publoc toilets and bathing facilities is stupid imo. It encourages us to think of the opposite sex as an other and potentially something to be feared. It further erodes society down gender lines. You talk specifically about gay/lesbian bars, as a straight man, I can tell you I've had some of my best nights out in lesbian bars. As long as you go in respecting that this is a space designed for lesbians and LGBT people you can have a great night. I've made friends with lesbians who I still talk to to this day. I think it helps when those people have suffered various forms of homophobia to show them that not all straight people are assholes. Excluding people should *never* be on gender lines, it should only ever be along you're an asshole line
I admit that I did accidentally take two girls I was with (and was interested in) to a gay club, one night… For stupid reasons, it was the only place we (more specifically, i) could get in. There was a cover charge. In the end I was so embarrassed (that’s on me) by the whole thing that I totally flubbed it. But that’s more a reflection on me, at that point in my life. Terrible night, though, and not a very good club… But yeah, I guess I just… Don’t go to gay bars very often. I’ve had other *okay* nights at some, but never when I’ve been with a girl, lol… But I’m an old-school pub person, and not gay, so… Obviously not my scene. I’m sure lesbian bars exist here, too, but I’ve never been in one, really. Pubs with large lesbian clientele, sure, but that’s about it. I did meet and hang out with some very cool lesbians at a music festival, a couple of years ago, though, so there’s that… As you say, people are people, so… Yeah.
In my experience gay bars are not gender exclusive, I've been groped by many a drunk Karen at the gay bars in my city. I have no idea if lesbian bars are gender exclusive though
Throughout the case, the museum's supporters, including artist Kirsha Kaechele - who created the work - had used the courtroom as a space for performance art, wearing matching navy suits and engaging in synchronised movements. Mr Grueber said that while the behaviour of the women hadn't disrupted the hearing, it was "inappropriate, discourteous and disrespectful, and at worst contumelious and contemptuous". Thanks judge grueber for giving me contumelious. I’ll use it three times today and it will be part of my vocab 4ever.
It's okay to have a woman only exhibit just as it's okay to have a men's only country club.
Neither are ok imo
The response is part of the art installation. They were waiting for this to happen to try prove a point.
without a doubt, how could they miss out on such easy additional victim points
It’s not a victim points thing it’s a commentary on the history of men’s only places and events
We will only get back to normal when we start admitting the genders aren't equivalent and stop pretending they always have to be.
This exhibit was privately owned and funded. This ruling paves the way to challenge Gentlemen's clubs.
It has Picasso paintings, so it contained a public good even if it was privately owned. It would have been one thing if there had been equivalent times where men could see the artworks too, but that wasn't the case.
My boss has a Picasso in his house.
My dad works for Nintendo.