Forced pregnancy as celebrity porn
Sometimes, when I look at the Times in the morning, I wonder if my coffee has been laced with a generous helping of mescaline. Witness this article:
Britney Spears is probably not the likeliest muse for a work of art promoting an anti-abortion message. Yet hard as it may be to imagine her inspiring such meditations, it is no stretch at all to imagine that a gallery show including a politically tinged likeness of Ms. Spears is apt to draw a bit of attention.
That appears to be the strategy, anyway, behind a life-size clay sculpture by a 40-year-old Connecticut artist, Daniel Edwards, that depicts Ms. Spears giving birth.
The sculpture, titled "Monument to Pro-Life: The Birth of Sean Preston," depicts Ms. Spears on her knees and elbows giving birth atop a bearskin rug. It will be shown publicly at an exhibition that is opening on April 7 at Capla Kesting Fine Art gallery in Williamsburg, Brooklyn.
When asked how he chose Ms. Spears as his subject from among the thousands of women who give birth each day, Mr. Edwards said, "She's the highest profile," and added: "She was the best choice. I couldn't come up with anybody that matched her."
And yes, that is the sculpture in question depicted above.
Unbefuckinglievable, huh? Pro-forced pregnancy celebrity porn, spread-eagled on a bearskin rug. Exploitative? Crass? But of course; and that, in a nutshell, is why this piece symbolizes the forced pregnancy movement better than anything its opponents could have dreamed of. The symbolism of the pose is simply stunning; is she giving birth, or acting out a porn fantasy? Take a good look, females of the species; that's exactly how they want to see you; on your knees, pushing out that baby, begging for more.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
Art | Breaking News | Forced Pregnacy | Motherhood | Pornography | Theocracy
» Michael Bouldin's blog | add new comment | email this blog | printer friendly version | 16235 reads
That sculptor is an idiot, as well as a pornographer.
Submitted by Ginger (not verified) on 3 April 2006 - 1:16pm.
FYI, Britney Spears had a C-section.
I'll take a look in person...
Submitted by Michael Bouldin on 3 April 2006 - 3:59pm.
... when the show opens on Thursday. What I really want is the rear view, where the baby's head comes out of her vajayjay. I am so going to photograph that.
What an Education.
Submitted by JJ Ross on 3 April 2006 - 4:19pm.
. . .you guys provide! All of this would have passed me by without CK.
And now that you have me mulling the subject of idiots, I have yet another suspension of disbelief problem. Even if this "art" is only Britney's face but not her IRL delivery, and the sculptor's design dynamics are supposedly representional of Everywoman's ideal generic home birth (yeah, right) -- wouldn't this particular position be unscientific and unproductive, as in anti-gravity??
Don't know, but...
Submitted by Michael Bouldin on 3 April 2006 - 8:58pm.
...wouldn't it also be a god-awful mess to give birth on a bear-skin?
What Would Colbert Say?
Submitted by JJ Ross on 3 April 2006 - 10:32pm.
Maybe why Steven Colbert keeps "Bears" at the top of his threat-down list?
Dominionist Dom Daddies.
Submitted by Bob King (not verified) on 2 May 2006 - 10:44am.
A few ironies in this from my own perspective. "Forced Pregnancy Porn" indeed exits, but I think actual scupture is a first.
But then, I don't have anything against porn, nor do I have any remaining belief that I've any way of predicting what anyone will think about an image with sexual content.
But is this crass, commercial, intentional porn presented in a way that gets a whole bunch of right-wing bluenoses to pay for it.
I find that to be hysterical.
Graphictruth: This Britney Spears Bootleg is somehow OK?
I've been meaning to comment on this post
you just captured exactly what i could not say. it's pornography and not of the good kind either. it's like a snuff pic --nasty fetish taken to the extreme. this guy gives whores --and i don't mean sex workers-- a bad name. seriously.