But as we also know many women who are sick of being sexualised and sexually harrassed, maybe not having statues of naked women all over the place would be a respectful thing for society to consider?
It’s a nice thought but the power imbalance is still too great for this not to have a negative impact.
The bodies of women, intersex and trans folk are not considered neutral, so displaying them as naked statues doesn’t and isn’t going to illicit neutral responses from people.
Art, in every single iteration it has, always tried to elevate civilization and thought.
The Venus of Willendorf, although crude, is perhaps the earliest representation of a feminine figure, most probably a fertility goddess. There is no way to avoid pointing how potentially sexualized the sculpture is/was yet the first considered theory on it points not to an objectified woman-figure but to a superior entity materially embodied in every single woman in existence.
If such a concept does no service to empower women, none does.
In the same line of thought, after that statuette, many other representations of women have been created that do not reduce the woman but instead elevates her. It’s the culture surrounding those representations that - including the present day one - try to label such images as negative.
People often overlook the message. Or ignore it for immediate satisfaction.
I remember reading an article on a bromze statue of a fishmonger woman, in Ireland, if memory serves me well, where the woman os seen pushing her cart along the street, with a very low cut breast dress, which almost exposes her breasts. For some reason, it took on an urban legend that stroking the statues breasts brought good luck and tourists - of all people - made it a thing to do. The local counsel, very disturbed, tried to remove the statue arguing maintenance, then echoing the complaints of citizen groups that argued the statue shed bad light on the town’s image. It took historians to explain why the statue was as it was, down to period clothing and even child care!
The statue had stood in its place for decades with no ill coming its way until puritans decided they had to be bothered on behalf of others. That alone should tell us a good deal.
Maybe we should bring back Egyptian and Greek classical statuary. Naked people, half human/half animal representations, ambiguous sexuality and morphology… Force the dialogue a bit.
But as we also know many women who are sick of being sexualised and sexually harrassed, maybe not having statues of naked women all over the place would be a respectful thing for society to consider?
I’m with you on that last bit though.
The problem isn’t “naked” statues.
The problem is a society that views sex, sexuality and, by extent, any show of body as harmful.
Sexual harrassement is a separate issue and it is rooted much deeper into social precepts, in my understanding.
Viewing women as decorative sexualised objects is harmful and promotes sexual harrassment.
Having a bunch of statues around of naked women, promotes what perceptions?
I propose we make more naked statues of not just women, but men as well. Hell let’s so some intersex ones as well. Of course keep the women ones too
It’s a nice thought but the power imbalance is still too great for this not to have a negative impact.
The bodies of women, intersex and trans folk are not considered neutral, so displaying them as naked statues doesn’t and isn’t going to illicit neutral responses from people.
One day maybe though, in an ideal world.
🤨 I’d get aroused at some femboy statues, equally aroused. So totally neutral in a way
Art, in every single iteration it has, always tried to elevate civilization and thought.
The Venus of Willendorf, although crude, is perhaps the earliest representation of a feminine figure, most probably a fertility goddess. There is no way to avoid pointing how potentially sexualized the sculpture is/was yet the first considered theory on it points not to an objectified woman-figure but to a superior entity materially embodied in every single woman in existence.
If such a concept does no service to empower women, none does.
In the same line of thought, after that statuette, many other representations of women have been created that do not reduce the woman but instead elevates her. It’s the culture surrounding those representations that - including the present day one - try to label such images as negative.
People often overlook the message. Or ignore it for immediate satisfaction.
I remember reading an article on a bromze statue of a fishmonger woman, in Ireland, if memory serves me well, where the woman os seen pushing her cart along the street, with a very low cut breast dress, which almost exposes her breasts. For some reason, it took on an urban legend that stroking the statues breasts brought good luck and tourists - of all people - made it a thing to do. The local counsel, very disturbed, tried to remove the statue arguing maintenance, then echoing the complaints of citizen groups that argued the statue shed bad light on the town’s image. It took historians to explain why the statue was as it was, down to period clothing and even child care!
The statue had stood in its place for decades with no ill coming its way until puritans decided they had to be bothered on behalf of others. That alone should tell us a good deal.
Maybe we should bring back Egyptian and Greek classical statuary. Naked people, half human/half animal representations, ambiguous sexuality and morphology… Force the dialogue a bit.
if you can’t control yourself because of some statue, the statue is not the problem.
One statue in Denmark.
All over the place.
Sure.
Are you under the impression that this is somehow the only public statue of a naked woman?
After a slight bit of research it looks like there are around 60. Still not enough to be all over the place.
60 in Denmark?
Not just in Denmark. They are actual all over the place. Oh! I see what you did there. You certainly got me, didn’t you?