Macnarsandlove
Well-known member
i cant believe how sick this is. i AM pro choice but that b*itch is crazy! thanks for the reminder that this would is disgusting and full of nuts and other crazy ppl
Abortion = Art? Okay... what?
- Thread starter blindpassion
- Start date
athena123
Well-known member
Quote:
I know my last post said it would be my last post but this really IS my last post on this subject honest!
I concur completely with you MW and yeah, I think the "hoax claim" is hoax. Yale is trying to cover this up and make the uproar go away.
Edited to add: I reviewed my comments in this thread and WOW! While I stand behind my comments 100%, I didn't mean to come off sounding like such a freakin' bitch. I'm usually the calm, rational one but this one really struck a nerve go figure. Still hoping she flunks...
Originally Posted by MAC_Whore
So it's all fantasy land, eh? What sick fuck thinks of this? A serial killer? When people do shit like this in an attempt to "make you think" about an issue......I'll be honest, I get so annoyed by their tactics that it totally eliminates any "thinking about the issue". Their behaviour totally overshadows their "statement". So, to Ms. Shvarts I say: Thanks, douche, I can consider abortion issues on my own without your bloody vaseline fantasy land. I can weigh reproductive rights/issues in my own head without your "art". Good Lord. Another consideration - I wonder if it is true and people are now trying to hush it up? |
I know my last post said it would be my last post but this really IS my last post on this subject honest!
Edited to add: I reviewed my comments in this thread and WOW! While I stand behind my comments 100%, I didn't mean to come off sounding like such a freakin' bitch. I'm usually the calm, rational one but this one really struck a nerve go figure. Still hoping she flunks...
blindpassion
Well-known member
Quote:
I 100% agree.
| Originally Posted by athena123
I know my last post said it would be my last post but this really IS my last post on this subject honest!
|
I 100% agree.
blindpassion
Well-known member
For everyones reading pleasure, Ms. Shvarts ATTEMPTS to explain herself.
After reading this article, it's clear that it isnt a hoax, she did artifically inseminate and she did take abortion inducing drugs. Shes just saying that it could have "just been her period" that was the bleeding, so everythings magically supposed to be okay. She still did all of this, shes just trying to cover.
Quote:
After reading this article, it's clear that it isnt a hoax, she did artifically inseminate and she did take abortion inducing drugs. Shes just saying that it could have "just been her period" that was the bleeding, so everythings magically supposed to be okay. She still did all of this, shes just trying to cover.
Quote:
| In her own words, by Aliza Shvarts "For the past year, I performed repeated self-induced miscarriages. I created a group of fabricators from volunteers who submitted to periodic STD screenings and agreed to their complete and permanent anonymity. From the 9th to the 15th day of my menstrual cycle, the fabricators would provide me with sperm samples, which I used to privately self-inseminate. Using a needleless syringe, I would inject the sperm near my cervix within 30 minutes of its collection, so as to insure the possibility of fertilization. On the 28th day of my cycle, I would ingest an abortifacient, after which I would experience cramps and heavy bleeding. To protect myself and others, only I know the number of fabricators who participated, the frequency and accuracy with which I inseminated and the specific abortifacient I used. Because of these measures of privacy, the piece exists only in its telling. This telling can take textual, visual, spatial, temporal and performative forms — copies of copies of which there is no original. This piece — in its textual and sculptural forms — is meant to call into question the relationship between form and function as they converge on the body. The artwork exists as the verbal narrative you see above, as an installation that will take place in Green Hall, as a time-based performance, as a independent concept, as a myth and as a public discourse. It creates an ambiguity that isolates the locus of ontology to an act of readership. An intentional ambiguity pervades both the act and the objects I produced in relation to it. The performance exists only as I chose to represent it. For me, the most poignant aspect of this representation — the part most meaningful in terms of its political agenda (and, incidentally, the aspect that has not been discussed thus far) — is the impossibility of accurately identifying the resulting blood. Because the miscarriages coincide with the expected date of menstruation (the 28th day of my cycle), it remains ambiguous whether the there was ever a fertilized ovum or not. The reality of the pregnancy, both for myself and for the audience, is a matter of reading. This ambivalence makes obvious how the act of identification or naming — the act of ascribing a word to something physical — is at its heart an ideological act, an act that literally has the power to construct bodies. In a sense, the act of conception occurs when the viewer assigns the term “miscarriage” or “period” to that blood. In some sense, neither term is exactly accurate or inaccurate; the ambiguity is not merely a matter of context, but is embodied in the physicality of the object. This central ambiguity defies a clear definition of the act. The reality of miscarriage is very much a linguistic and political reality, an act of reading constructed by an act of naming — an authorial act. It is the intention of this piece to destabilize the locus of that authorial act, and in doing so, reclaim it from the heteronormative structures that seek to naturalize it. As an intervention into our normative understanding of “the real” and its accompanying politics of convention, this performance piece has numerous conceptual goals. The first is to assert that often, normative understandings of biological function are a mythology imposed on form. It is this mythology that creates the sexist, racist, ableist, nationalist and homophobic perspective, distinguishing what body parts are “meant” to do from their physical capability. The myth that a certain set of functions are “natural” (while all the other potential functions are “unnatural”) undermines that sense of capability, confining lifestyle choices to the bounds of normatively defined narratives. Just as it is a myth that women are “meant” to be feminine and men masculine, that penises and vaginas are “meant” for penetrative heterosexual sex (or that mouths, anuses, breasts, feet or leather, silicone, vinyl, rubber, or metal implements are not “meant” for sex at all), it is a myth that ovaries and a uterus are “meant” to birth a child. When considering my own bodily form, I recognize its potential as extending beyond its ability to participate in a normative function. While my organs are capable of engaging with the narrative of reproduction — the time-based linkage of discrete events from conception to birth — the realm of capability extends beyond the bounds of that specific narrative chain. These organs can do other things, can have other purposes, and it is the prerogative of every individual to acknowledge and explore this wide realm of capability." |
blindpassion
Well-known member
SO shes saying more crap and apparently the university is lying about it being a hoax, etc...
Source: Perezhilton.com
and
Yale Daily News - University calls art project a fiction; Shvarts '08 disputes Yale's claim
Quote:
Source: Perezhilton.com
and
Yale Daily News - University calls art project a fiction; Shvarts '08 disputes Yale's claim
Quote:
| Abortion Girl has spoken to the Yale Daily News and is denying claims from her own University that her self-induced miscarriages as an art piece is an elaborate prank. Here are some of the LOWlights from her rebuttal: - Shvarts stood by her project, calling the University’s statement “ultimately inaccurate.” - But Shvarts reiterated Thursday that she repeatedly used a needleless syringe to insert semen into herself. At the end of her menstrual cycle, she took abortifacient herbs to induce bleeding, she said. She said she does not know whether or not she was ever pregnant. - “No one can say with 100-percent certainty that anything in the piece did or did not happen,” Shvarts said, “because the nature of the piece is that it did not consist of certainties.” - Shvarts showed the News footage from tapes she plans to play at the exhibit. The tapes depict Shvarts — sometimes naked, sometimes clothed — alone in a shower stall bleeding into a cup. |
*Stargazer*
Well-known member
Quote:
Someone needs to explain to this moron the difference between "purpose" and "use." Sure, I could take someone's skull and "use" it as a pencilholder but it's "purpose" is and always will be to protect the brain.
The "purpose" of female reproductive organs is and always will be reproduction. We're at a point in history where we can generally choose to use them at will for their "purpose." And sure, again, you can probably come up with some other "uses" for them if you try, but their purpose will never change.
| These organs can do other things, can have other purposes, and it is the prerogative of every individual to acknowledge and explore this wide realm of capability |
Someone needs to explain to this moron the difference between "purpose" and "use." Sure, I could take someone's skull and "use" it as a pencilholder but it's "purpose" is and always will be to protect the brain.
The "purpose" of female reproductive organs is and always will be reproduction. We're at a point in history where we can generally choose to use them at will for their "purpose." And sure, again, you can probably come up with some other "uses" for them if you try, but their purpose will never change.
*Stargazer*
Well-known member
Quote:
Whoa. Why did that change from the letters "P" and "R" to the words "Page" and "Ranking" ? I didn't type that.
| Originally Posted by *Stargazer*
Here's guessing his phone is off the hook today and any email sent to him gets an "out of office" reply. What a Page Ranking nightmare. |
Whoa. Why did that change from the letters "P" and "R" to the words "Page" and "Ranking" ? I didn't type that.
V15U4L_3RR0R
Well-known member
Well it's certainly...interesting.
lipstickandhate
Well-known member
In her own words, by Aliza Shvarts:
"For the past year, I performed repeated self-induced miscarriages. I created a group of fabricators from volunteers who submitted to periodic STD screenings and agreed to their complete and permanent anonymity. From the 9th to the 15th day of my menstrual cycle, the fabricators would provide me with sperm samples, which I used to privately self-inseminate. Using a needleless syringe, I would inject the sperm near my cervix within 30 minutes of its collection, so as to insure the possibility of fertilization. On the 28th day of my cycle, I would ingest an abortifacient, after which I would experience cramps and heavy bleeding.
To protect myself and others, only I know the number of fabricators who participated, the frequency and accuracy with which I inseminated and the specific abortifacient I used. Because of these measures of privacy, the piece exists only in its telling. This telling can take textual, visual, spatial, temporal and performative forms — copies of copies of which there is no original.
This piece — in its textual and sculptural forms — is meant to call into question the relationship between form and function as they converge on the body. The artwork exists as the verbal narrative you see above, as an installation that will take place in Green Hall, as a time-based performance, as a independent concept, as a myth and as a public discourse.
It creates an ambiguity that isolates the locus of ontology to an act of readership. An intentional ambiguity pervades both the act and the objects I produced in relation to it. The performance exists only as I chose to represent it. For me, the most poignant aspect of this representation — the part most meaningful in terms of its political agenda (and, incidentally, the aspect that has not been discussed thus far) — is the impossibility of accurately identifying the resulting blood. Because the miscarriages coincide with the expected date of menstruation (the 28th day of my cycle), it remains ambiguous whether the there was ever a fertilized ovum or not. The reality of the pregnancy, both for myself and for the audience, is a matter of reading.
This ambivalence makes obvious how the act of identification or naming — the act of ascribing a word to something physical — is at its heart an ideological act, an act that literally has the power to construct bodies. In a sense, the act of conception occurs when the viewer assigns the term “miscarriage” or “period” to that blood.
In some sense, neither term is exactly accurate or inaccurate; the ambiguity is not merely a matter of context, but is embodied in the physicality of the object. This central ambiguity defies a clear definition of the act. The reality of miscarriage is very much a linguistic and political reality, an act of reading constructed by an act of naming — an authorial act.
It is the intention of this piece to destabilize the locus of that authorial act, and in doing so, reclaim it from the heteronormative structures that seek to naturalize it.
As an intervention into our normative understanding of “the real” and its accompanying politics of convention, this performance piece has numerous conceptual goals. The first is to assert that often, normative understandings of biological function are a mythology imposed on form. It is this mythology that creates the sexist, racist, ableist, nationalist and homophobic perspective, distinguishing what body parts are “meant” to do from their physical capability. The myth that a certain set of functions are “natural” (while all the other potential functions are “unnatural”) undermines that sense of capability, confining lifestyle choices to the bounds of normatively defined narratives.
Just as it is a myth that women are “meant” to be feminine and men masculine, that penises and vaginas are “meant” for penetrative heterosexual sex (or that mouths, anuses, breasts, feet or leather, silicone, vinyl, rubber, or metal implements are not “meant” for sex at all), it is a myth that ovaries and a uterus are “meant” to birth a child.
When considering my own bodily form, I recognize its potential as extending beyond its ability to participate in a normative function. While my organs are capable of engaging with the narrative of reproduction — the time-based linkage of discrete events from conception to birth — the realm of capability extends beyond the bounds of that specific narrative chain. These organs can do other things, can have other purposes, and it is the prerogative of every individual to acknowledge and explore this wide realm of capability."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This "explanation" is just word salad, loaded with a bunch of pretentious words she assumes will cow her readers into accepting her intellectual superiority. It means absolutely nothing. If she's so proud of her work, why the hiding? Why did she immediately have her advisor take down her "Federal Hall Soapbox" riot grrrl rant? Why did she disconnect her phone?
If she wants to facilitate "dialogue" the very least she could do is start talking herself. And do so without constantly attempting to dictate the terms of when, where and what happens when she speaks.
I think what she misses in her "analysis" of her "art", is that she used art to victimize people without their permission or knowledge of the hoax. That's immoral and it certainly isn't art. To treat the emotions and personal experiences of an entire nation of women as fodder for an undergraduate degree and to propel yourself into the limelight is depraved and cruel. Certainly, to use her own words, art can be used destructively but that isn't its ultimate purpose.
Personally, I would bet little Miss Aliza is mentally ill. I also think to use your free speech rights to do something like this degrades the First Amendment and the intent behind it.
"For the past year, I performed repeated self-induced miscarriages. I created a group of fabricators from volunteers who submitted to periodic STD screenings and agreed to their complete and permanent anonymity. From the 9th to the 15th day of my menstrual cycle, the fabricators would provide me with sperm samples, which I used to privately self-inseminate. Using a needleless syringe, I would inject the sperm near my cervix within 30 minutes of its collection, so as to insure the possibility of fertilization. On the 28th day of my cycle, I would ingest an abortifacient, after which I would experience cramps and heavy bleeding.
To protect myself and others, only I know the number of fabricators who participated, the frequency and accuracy with which I inseminated and the specific abortifacient I used. Because of these measures of privacy, the piece exists only in its telling. This telling can take textual, visual, spatial, temporal and performative forms — copies of copies of which there is no original.
This piece — in its textual and sculptural forms — is meant to call into question the relationship between form and function as they converge on the body. The artwork exists as the verbal narrative you see above, as an installation that will take place in Green Hall, as a time-based performance, as a independent concept, as a myth and as a public discourse.
It creates an ambiguity that isolates the locus of ontology to an act of readership. An intentional ambiguity pervades both the act and the objects I produced in relation to it. The performance exists only as I chose to represent it. For me, the most poignant aspect of this representation — the part most meaningful in terms of its political agenda (and, incidentally, the aspect that has not been discussed thus far) — is the impossibility of accurately identifying the resulting blood. Because the miscarriages coincide with the expected date of menstruation (the 28th day of my cycle), it remains ambiguous whether the there was ever a fertilized ovum or not. The reality of the pregnancy, both for myself and for the audience, is a matter of reading.
This ambivalence makes obvious how the act of identification or naming — the act of ascribing a word to something physical — is at its heart an ideological act, an act that literally has the power to construct bodies. In a sense, the act of conception occurs when the viewer assigns the term “miscarriage” or “period” to that blood.
In some sense, neither term is exactly accurate or inaccurate; the ambiguity is not merely a matter of context, but is embodied in the physicality of the object. This central ambiguity defies a clear definition of the act. The reality of miscarriage is very much a linguistic and political reality, an act of reading constructed by an act of naming — an authorial act.
It is the intention of this piece to destabilize the locus of that authorial act, and in doing so, reclaim it from the heteronormative structures that seek to naturalize it.
As an intervention into our normative understanding of “the real” and its accompanying politics of convention, this performance piece has numerous conceptual goals. The first is to assert that often, normative understandings of biological function are a mythology imposed on form. It is this mythology that creates the sexist, racist, ableist, nationalist and homophobic perspective, distinguishing what body parts are “meant” to do from their physical capability. The myth that a certain set of functions are “natural” (while all the other potential functions are “unnatural”) undermines that sense of capability, confining lifestyle choices to the bounds of normatively defined narratives.
Just as it is a myth that women are “meant” to be feminine and men masculine, that penises and vaginas are “meant” for penetrative heterosexual sex (or that mouths, anuses, breasts, feet or leather, silicone, vinyl, rubber, or metal implements are not “meant” for sex at all), it is a myth that ovaries and a uterus are “meant” to birth a child.
When considering my own bodily form, I recognize its potential as extending beyond its ability to participate in a normative function. While my organs are capable of engaging with the narrative of reproduction — the time-based linkage of discrete events from conception to birth — the realm of capability extends beyond the bounds of that specific narrative chain. These organs can do other things, can have other purposes, and it is the prerogative of every individual to acknowledge and explore this wide realm of capability."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This "explanation" is just word salad, loaded with a bunch of pretentious words she assumes will cow her readers into accepting her intellectual superiority. It means absolutely nothing. If she's so proud of her work, why the hiding? Why did she immediately have her advisor take down her "Federal Hall Soapbox" riot grrrl rant? Why did she disconnect her phone?
If she wants to facilitate "dialogue" the very least she could do is start talking herself. And do so without constantly attempting to dictate the terms of when, where and what happens when she speaks.
I think what she misses in her "analysis" of her "art", is that she used art to victimize people without their permission or knowledge of the hoax. That's immoral and it certainly isn't art. To treat the emotions and personal experiences of an entire nation of women as fodder for an undergraduate degree and to propel yourself into the limelight is depraved and cruel. Certainly, to use her own words, art can be used destructively but that isn't its ultimate purpose.
Personally, I would bet little Miss Aliza is mentally ill. I also think to use your free speech rights to do something like this degrades the First Amendment and the intent behind it.
V15U4L_3RR0R
Well-known member
I do wonder what her mental state is like since performing those abortions and how she mentally prepared herself to do them.
Girl about town
Well-known member
Quote:
Conceived a child, abortion has its place but this idiot is taking the piss out of it!!!
| Originally Posted by flowerhead
how can you be pro-abortion & get SO offended? and she didn't create life, she conceived. |
Conceived a child, abortion has its place but this idiot is taking the piss out of it!!!
V15U4L_3RR0R
Well-known member
But then at what point do you consider the newly conceived zygote to be a life?
I don't think she's taking the piss though. I think she's done what she's set out to do ans that's getting people to talk about it.
I don't think she's taking the piss though. I think she's done what she's set out to do ans that's getting people to talk about it.
Girl about town
Well-known member
What kind of mentality does this fanny have to think up something so sick,whether its real or not!!! it really is something a psychopath would think of, i hope it is fake!!!! if it isn't im saddened by the world xxx
MAC_Whore
Well-known member
Quote:
True, she has, but I am not of the school of thought that all press (good or bad) is still press. I require substance not just noise.
| Originally Posted by V15U4L_3RR0R
..... I think she's done what she's set out to do ans that's getting people to talk about it. |
True, she has, but I am not of the school of thought that all press (good or bad) is still press. I require substance not just noise.
Obreathemykiss
Well-known member
This chick is pretty sick, I think. It's interesting how Yale is denying everything. I probably seem sick in saying this, but I would really like to see what this project really looks like. While I am disgusted, I feel like the little girl who is told not to watch, but am secretly watching between the space between my fingers. I am also interested to see what she looks like. I do not agree with what she did and I know there are plenty of women out there who have had to suffer emotionally and physically for abortion, and what she is doing is unacceptable. Most o
blindpassion
Well-known member
Quote:
Perez posted a picture of her earlier today, I didnt post it but I will now.
http://perezhilton.com/2008-04-18-she-really-did-it
| Originally Posted by Obreathemykiss
This chick is pretty sick, I think. It's interesting how Yale is denying everything. I probably seem sick in saying this, but I would really like to see what this project really looks like. While I am disgusted, I feel like the little girl who is told not to watch, but am secretly watching between the space between my fingers. I am also interested to see what she looks like. I do not agree with what she did and I know there are plenty of women out there who have had to suffer emotionally and physically for abortion, and what she is doing is unacceptable. Most o |
Perez posted a picture of her earlier today, I didnt post it but I will now.
http://perezhilton.com/2008-04-18-she-really-did-it
lipstickandhate
Well-known member
Quote:
That picture is a still from her youtube "anti establishment" rant that her advisor took down yesterday. The rest of the video, as you can guess, is similiarly hilarious.
I hope she and her advisor get their balls back and put the video up again. Nothing says brave, fearless, and controversial like hiding.
| Originally Posted by blindpassion
Perez posted a picture of her earlier today, I didnt post it but I will now. http://perezhilton.com/2008-04-18-she-really-did-it |
That picture is a still from her youtube "anti establishment" rant that her advisor took down yesterday. The rest of the video, as you can guess, is similiarly hilarious.
I hope she and her advisor get their balls back and put the video up again. Nothing says brave, fearless, and controversial like hiding.
Girl about town
Well-known member
Quote:
Truly hideous boots!!!!
| Originally Posted by blindpassion
Perez posted a picture of her earlier today, I didnt post it but I will now. [URL]http://perezhilton.com/2008-04-18-she-really-did-it[/URL] |
Truly hideous boots!!!!
gracetre123
Well-known member
Im sorry for her body....
sick
sick
