Australia’s Mona asked a court to reverse its ruling that allowed men inside a women’s only space.
Archived version: https://archive.ph/oHT6U
Australia’s Mona asked a court to reverse its ruling that allowed men inside a women’s only space.
Archived version: https://archive.ph/oHT6U
I’m gonna need an explanation for how using a word in context with its dictionary definition is “sexist.” Sorry this is unpleasant for you, but I’ve never come across someone with the last name “Chauvin” and been like “oh there goes that chauvinist.” Lots of last names have entered English as descriptors of things, eg sadism from the Marquis de Sade and masochism from Leopold von Sacher-Masoch.
Anyway, the point is Picasso was terrible to women. Many women.
Also, and this is the last I’ll comment, since you brought up ancient dictionary terms. The N word used to be defined as a tool.
But I have better sense than to carry on antiquated offensive words in that way. I’d hope others can learn to try dropping offensive use of words in their modern vocabulary as well.
You’re not wrong though, Picasso and others were a bit pervy. So was Albert Einstein. And yes that’s very disappointing.
You have every right to object to their works if you want. That doesn’t mean that mature people shouldn’t be allowed to view and critique their works in their own way.
I hope we can agree to disagree, but yeah I don’t use the 1800’s definition of a ‘tool’, because it’s 2024 and I have more respect than to refer to antiquated dictionaries for insulting words.
I’ll make one last short response…
Your comments strike me as if you’d be the type to support adding the name “Karen” to the official dictionary as an official insult and ruin the name for more than a century.
Maybe you could reflect on that and actually try to help break that pattern, and help let innocent people have a name that isn’t insulted another century from now.
Or maybe you’d like to bring up Albert and Elsa Einstein? Sure, let’s just not appreciate the works of creative people because they did inappropriate things…
Yes, Nicholas is at the very top of my official knighted family tree. Again, it’s a family name. Should never have been used in any sort of derogatory adjective form, whether back in 1840 or in 1960, or anywhere in between or since.
Believe me, I know my roots, and I know that I don’t agree with the sexism use of my last name. You’re quoting a definition that came up in a very prejudiced era from the 1960s, back when certain people weren’t allowed to do certain things, such as drink from the wrong water fountain.
You sure do seem to know a lot about these antiquated discriminatory words don’t you? Have you considered trying to like not refer to dictionaries written in discriminatory times?
Back on point, yes I’ve gathered that Picasso wasn’t all that great of a dude. Neither was Mozart, he had a shit fetish. Does that stop people from appreciating their artistic works?
I think you have a backward view of what sexism in the 60s looked like, and at this point can’t tell if you’re trolling, since Nicholas Chauvin was a fictional character.
And my god man, I have no beef with Picasso and never said no one should appreciate Picasso’s works. I was arguing with you:
Nicholas was most certainly not a fictional character. Try getting an actual official Chauvin family tree ancestry and read over it. You’ll see.
“Most certainly” according to what source? Every source I see says there’s zero historical evidence he ever existed, and many stories attributed to him have been traced to other actual historical figures.
Responding to your other comment here, I think you’re just completely missing the point. Again, I’m not saying no one should appreciate Picasso’s art. I’m saying that way back in the before-times, when we were talking about an art installation that challenges gender discrimination, you said Picasso would “heavily protest the discrimination,” but based on all available evidence, that’s what the French call “horseshit.”
And Karen is already in the dictionary. I know some Karens who are lovely people and who could care less about its common usage.
Every source you see has also been tainted by Derek’s horrible actions and the nature of the internet to corrupt information.
Like I said, get an official Chauvin family ancestry book (you know, those things made with paper), and read over the family tree, before the era of digital corruption.
My late grandmother had the official ancestry book.
There are other sources of information besides our now half bot/AI corrupted internet.
And of course, the Battle of Schrute Farms was the northernmost battle of the Civil War.
What does that (or even some of my own comments) have anything to do with the price of weed in Colorado? Whether you’re telling me the truth, or just trying to bullshit me, doesn’t matter.
My point is very simple, and nobody seems to be getting it now. Drop the prejudice words already. We don’t live in the 1800s, and honestly none of us ever did.
We’re descendants of our ancestors. We didn’t get to pick where we were born or in what year, or by what family name, but we can try dropping the discrimination of centuries past.
Continuing to use derogatory words and even references from back then only propagate the discrimination.
When any group uses offensive words and tactics against any ‘opposite’ group, they’re just propagating the problem.
My whole point is people should stop doing that, and realize they’re only propagating the problem.
All people are created equal. Men, women, light or dark. All born equal and should generally be treated as such. Yes some grow up to be bad apples, but damn, when they’re long dead, don’t blame their descendants.
Break the cycle.
Edit: My starting point was basically that any and all mature adults should have every right to visit any museum they want. It’s artwork and artifacts, not a brothel.
MICHAEL!