Comment on Mona: Australia women's-only museum files appeal to keep men out

• over_clox@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Point is, art is art, and a museum is a museum. Anyone mature enough should be allowed to enter any museum they want and view whatever exhibits they want.

  That gender specific crap can and does end up going both ways. And it shouldn’t be that way, anywhere.

  source

  • protist@mander.xyz ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    In a world where there are millions of men who actually believe women are advantaged over men in today’s society, it’s interesting to see the international uproar occurring over this single exhibit that made that belief actually true. A single exhibit at a sex museum in Tasmania that’s literally about reverse gender discrimination.

    source

    • fiat_lux@kbin.social ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      A single exhibit at a sex museum in Tasmania

      Small point of order: MONA, despite how it sounds when pronounced as an acronym, is not a sex museum. It's the Museum of Old and New Art. You may return to your debate.

      Personally, I'm finding the whole thing delicious. As someone who went to university in a building where the post-graduate / staff floor didn't have a female bathroom - likely because when it was built women were only expected to clean and serve tea in that space - I appreciate the artist and museum setting official legal precedent around this topic. And doing so with panache.

      source

      • protist@mander.xyz ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        I appreciate you! I’ve admittedly never been to MONA and just picked a word from the Wikipedia intro:

        MONA houses ancient, modern and contemporary art from the David Walsh collection. Noted for its central themes of sex and death, the museum has been described by Walsh as a “subversive adult Disneyland”.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • over_clox@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      And I find this funny, but in the sad way ☹️

      Folks trying to fight sexual discrimination with sexual discrimination… 🤦‍♂️

      Those that dispute, fight and argue about such things that way don’t even seem to realize that they’re just contributing to the problem.

      source

      • protist@mander.xyz ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        I just have to completely disagree. Art has consistently served to challenge the status quo and provoke thought and discussion, and this exhibit has absolutely excelled in that regard.

        Now the artist is moving on to explore existing discrimination exemptions under the law in Tasmania:

        In fact the Lounge already possesses many of the redeeming qualities listed in the verdict that would make it eligible for an exemption under section 27 of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1998 (Tas). Where it isn’t already eligible, a number of minor adjustments should bring us into compliance.

        The law states that a person may discriminate on the ground of gender:

        (a) in a religious institution, if it is required by the doctrines of the religion of the institution; or

        (b) in education, if it is for the purpose of enrolment in one-gender schools or hostels; or

        © in employment, if it is for the purpose of the residential care of persons under the age of 18 years; or

        (d) in employment, if it is based on a genuine occupational qualification or requirement in relation to a particular position; or

        (e) in accommodation, if it is shared accommodation for less than 5 adult persons; or

        (f) in the provision or use of facilities, if those facilities are reasonably required for use by persons of one gender only.

        Interviewer: You believe the artwork can continue to operate under a legal exemption? Which of these exemptions will apply?

        All of them.

        mona.net.au/…/interview-with-kirsha-kaechele-abou…

        source

        • -> View More Comments