Is this student abusing the woman's right to choose?
Definitely!!!
100%
[ 7 ]
No, art is art.
0%
[ 0 ]
Total Votes : 7
Author
Message
Marianne0558
Supporter
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 Posts: 1743 Location: Charleston, SC USA
Thanks: 50
Thanked:6
Schvarts art exhibit Posted: 04-17-08 13:48pm
Aliza Shvarts, a Yale art major, has done
something different for her senior art
project this year.
The "artist" has documented herself
throughout a 9 month process where she
artificially inseminated herself and then
periodically took abortifacient drugs in
order to induce miscarriages.
The exhibit, which will begin next
Tuesday, will include video recordings of
the forced miscarriages.
It will also include preserved samples of
the blood during the process.
According to Shvarts, her goal was to
"spark conversation and debate on the
relationship between art and the human
body."
Students have expressed shock upon hearing
of the exhibit. [Rightfully so!]
Shvarts insists that her art isn't for
shock value. Liar. She says, "I hope it
inspires some sort of discourse. 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."
As for the "donors", she claims they were
not paid for their "services". She also
claims to have required them to
periodically take tests for STDs, though
did not want to disclose the number of
sperm donors used.
As for the medical risk related to
multiple abortions, Shvarts says she was
not worried. She said the abortifacient
drugs she took were herbal and legal, and
decided she didn't need to consult a
doctor.
As for the actual exhibit, Schvarts will
feature a large cube hanging from the
ceiling. Wrapped around that cube will be
hundreds of feet of plastic sheeting which
will be lined with her blood from the
miscarriages. The old blood will be mixed
with vaseline to prevent it from drying.
She will also project the recorded videos
of herself, showing the miscarriages she
had in her bathtub, onto the sides of the
cube.
Similar footage will also be projected
onto the walls of the room.
Shvarts adds, "It was a private and
personal endeavor, but also a transparent
one for the most part. This isn't
something I've been hiding." Adding, that
she believes "strongly that art should be
a medium for politics and ideologies, not
just a commodity. I think that I'm
creating a project that lives up to the
standard of what art is supposed to be."
|
coliejo
Supporter
Joined: 19 Mar 2008 Posts: 603 Location: East Lansing, MI
Thanks: 45
Thanked:44
Posted: 04-17-08 14:26pm
That is disgusting! why would anyon ein
their right mind put themselves through
that much. It is one thing to get an
abortion, but to make yourself pregnant
just so u can have an abortion and then do
it all over again.... com on now! and
without the help of doctors at that. I do
not know why anyone would want to go look
ather "art exibit" if thats what you want
to call it
|
Marianne0558
Supporter
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 Posts: 1743 Location: Charleston, SC USA
Thanks: 50
Thanked:6
Posted: 04-17-08 14:31pm
IMO, she didn't mean for this to be art.
She probably just wanted to create a
controversy and have people talking about
her. It worked, here we are.
|
coliejo
Supporter
Joined: 19 Mar 2008 Posts: 603 Location: East Lansing, MI
Thanks: 45
Thanked:44
Posted: 04-17-08 14:40pm
true, she is gettign what she wanted i am
sure. this is definately not art or any
kind. I have a feeling there are going to
be some major pro-life people trying to
shut her exibit down when more people find
out about this
|
manuftw82
Supporter
Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 364 Location: Vestal/LI, NY USA
Thanks: 7
Thanked:3
Posted: 04-17-08 14:44pm
I was just about to post this..its
disgusting.
|
Marianne0558
Supporter
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 Posts: 1743 Location: Charleston, SC USA
Thanks: 50
Thanked:6
Posted: 04-17-08 14:49pm
I'm sure there WILL be plenty of
pro-lifers protesting with their baby
dolls and stuff....
They protest at clinics where women are
there for serious reasons, not just for
the fun of it
|
rainstorm
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 12 Mar 2008 Posts: 68
Posted: 04-17-08 15:14pm
I wonder how many pro-life people will be
expecting to see full term fetuses in her
art exhibit?
|
Reptar
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 24 Oct 2007 Posts: 389
Thanks: 44
Thanked:13
Posted: 04-17-08 17:35pm
Okay, tally now goes:
Women who have abortions for real reasons
: all -1
Women who have abortions for art : 1
This isn't going to help the pro-choice
argument.
|
Marianne0558
Supporter
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 Posts: 1743 Location: Charleston, SC USA
Thanks: 50
Thanked:6
Posted: 04-17-08 18:58pm
It wasn't meant to help the pro choice
argument.
It was obviously meant to stir
controversy-which worked.
No decent pro-choice person would condone
this "art."
I am pro-choice and it turns my stomach.
|
Reptar
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 24 Oct 2007 Posts: 389
Thanks: 44
Thanked:13
Posted: 04-17-08 19:04pm
I'm not saying it was to HELP the
pro-choice argument. I'm saying that
people like Yoda go around pretending like
some girls have abortions for fun, and we
all say "No they don't!!!". But apparently
there are some sick freaks that do them in
the name of art. We try to assure people
that women don't abuse the choice, but we
see that they do. That's what I'm talking
about.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 04-17-08 21:39pm
That is disgusting. To kill, repeatedly,
your own offspring is HORRID, evil, and
she should be forced to have a
hysterectomy in my opinion. She has abused
her body, potentially could have KILLED
herself, and completely abused the process
of life. She is one heck of a sick woman
and needs psychiatric help.
|
jujujellybean
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 15 Apr 2008 Posts: 133 Location: , US
Thanks: 0
Thanked:4
Posted: 04-17-08 22:17pm
rainstorm
wrote:
I wonder how many pro-life
people will be expecting to see full term
fetuses in her art
exhibit?
That would be none. Most abortions aren't
in the third trimester, its true, but some
are and its gross. I just don't see why a
few months difference makes a huge deal???
Its still a baby just a little older. Some
people here are older than me. Does that
make them have more rights than me?
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 04-17-08 22:21pm
jujujellybean
wrote:
rainstorm
wrote:
I wonder how many pro-life
people will be expecting to see full term
fetuses in her art
exhibit?
That would be none. Most abortions aren't
in the third trimester, its true, but some
are and its gross. I just don't see why a
few months difference makes a huge deal???
Its still a baby just a little older. Some
people here are older than me. Does that
make them have more rights than
me?
Here I can argue, because although
viability isn't what makes you HUMAN, it
is what gives you more of a right to life
in my opinion.
If the fetus is capable of surviving
outside of the mother, then there is
absolutely NO excuse to kill it. If she
doesn't want it inside of her anymore they
can now remove it and it will survive; the
excuse available during early terms of
"it'll die anyway" doesn't apply anymore.
|
jujujellybean
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 15 Apr 2008 Posts: 133 Location: , US
Thanks: 0
Thanked:4
Posted: 04-17-08 22:24pm
Tylanas
wrote:
jujujellybean
wrote:
rainstorm
wrote:
I wonder how many pro-life
people will be expecting to see full term
fetuses in her art
exhibit?
That would be none. Most abortions aren't
in the third trimester, its true, but some
are and its gross. I just don't see why a
few months difference makes a huge deal???
Its still a baby just a little older. Some
people here are older than me. Does that
make them have more rights than
me?
Here I can argue, because although
viability isn't what makes you HUMAN, it
is what gives you more of a right to life
in my opinion.
If the fetus is capable of surviving
outside of the mother, then there is
absolutely NO excuse to kill it. If she
doesn't want it inside of her anymore they
can now remove it and it will survive; the
excuse available during early terms of
"it'll die anyway" doesn't apply
anymore.
But newborns are COMPLETELY dependent on
their mothers; do you agree that a woman
could leave her child with nothing and let
it die with no one to care for it? Deny it
milk? It's her body, after
all....seriously, people do admit that.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 04-17-08 22:27pm
A newborn is NOT completely dependent on
its mother. ANYONE could care for that
baby.
|
Darkmoon
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 08 Dec 2007 Posts: 414 Location: ,
Thanks: 87
Thanked:51
Posted: 04-17-08 22:33pm
Any woman that would put her body through
that on purpose is in serious need of
psychological help. It's not good for her
physical health and she obviously has
problems with her mental health already.
|
Marianne0558
Supporter
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 Posts: 1743 Location: Charleston, SC USA
Thanks: 50
Thanked:6
Posted: 04-18-08 07:01am
Reptar
wrote:
I'm not saying it was to
HELP the pro-choice argument. I'm saying
that people like Yoda go around pretending
like some girls have abortions for fun,
and we all say "No they don't!!!". But
apparently there are some sick freaks that
do them in the name of art. We try to
assure people that women don't abuse the
choice, but we see that they do. That's
what I'm talking
about.
Well there are sick freaks out there that
do more things than just abort repeatedly
for the sake of "art."
More things like pedophilia, homicide,
rape, torture, etc etc.
Just goes to show that people can and will
do anything for attention/infamy.
|
Reptar
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 24 Oct 2007 Posts: 389
Thanks: 44
Thanked:13
Posted: 04-18-08 07:13am
I don't see what that has to do with
abortion.
|
Marianne0558
Supporter
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 Posts: 1743 Location: Charleston, SC USA
Thanks: 50
Thanked:6
Posted: 04-18-08 07:33am
She is repeatedly aborting to cause a
ruckus....
The larger the ruckus, the more people
come to her "show."
The more people come to the show, the more
"famous" she will become...
People do crazy things for fame/money...or
simply because they ARE crazy.
Charles Manson.
That guy who shot up the mall and left the
note that he just wanted to be
famous..somewhere in the midwest... (his
plan didn't work very well)...
It doesn't have anything to do with
abortion.
She probably chose abortion as the means
to cause the biggest ruckus.
Anyone out there following what I'm trying
to say?????
|
Darkmoon
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 08 Dec 2007 Posts: 414 Location: ,
Thanks: 87
Thanked:51
Posted: 04-18-08 07:41am
Evidently this is just a hoax.
Quote:
Ms. Shvarts is
engaged in performance art. Her art
project includes visual representations, a
press release and other narrative
materials. She stated to three senior Yale
University officials today, including two
deans, that she did not impregnate herself
and that she did not induce any
miscarriages. The entire project is an art
piece, a creative fiction designed to draw
attention to the ambiguity surrounding
form and function of a woman’s body.
She is an artist and has the right to
express herself through performance art.
Had these acts been real, they would have
violated basic ethical standards and
raised serious mental and physical health
concerns.
