Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for February 16th, 2007

I’m amazed each time I read something like this:

Cross is Offensive BUT sex show is art.

The cross in the Wren Chapel had to go because it offended an unspecified (and undocumented) number of people on the William and Mary Campus. However, on the 12th of February the school hosted the “Sex Workers Art Show.” This from the current issue of the Flat Hat:

The Sex Workers’ Art Show is a cabaret-style production featuring nine performers who also happen to be employees or former employees of the sex industry. The artists present a live art exhibition that includes spoken word, burlesque and multimedia performances.

Sex-related issues and awareness of the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender community are addressed in the show.

Several professors are requiring students in their classes to attend the show. All students enrolled in Introduction to Women’s Studies and in music professor Sophia Serghi’s Performance Art Ensemble are among at least 100 students required to attend the show.

The appeal of the show is that it creates a forum for students to embrace the idea of sexual art forms and dismiss any qualms about the topic. “It’s a sex-positive event – pro-woman, pro-queer – and it brings sex issues to the forefront,” Barker said.

Some Have Hats comments on the subject:

Well, that’s good to know, because when I was in college, no one ever mentioned sex. (Right.) And it’s important to keep sex issues in the “forefront,” otherwise students might get distracted by thoughts of history, philosphy, economics, government or, may the Force forbid it, religion.

I think I do not have to comment this…

You can sign a petition for saving Wren Cross. (image below).

Gateway Pundit has more on the subject.

[It’s another sign that there is no respect for religion in general. When they speak about respect for Islam -example, Mohammed cartoons-, there is nothing but fear of being beheaded by some foolish Islamists].

This affair reminds me something I read over at Fausta’s blog when commenting the Vagina Monologues.

The Monologues defines healthy sexuality as the selfish pursuit of sexual pleasure and encourages audiences to become connoisseurs and voyeurs of all manner of sexual experience. In doing so, the play champions the very commodification of sex that endangers women – including those trapped in a sex trade driven by our culture’s insatiable appetite for unlimited and instant sexual gratification. Ensler may have intended to extol the best virtues of women, but she wound up imitating the worse vices of men.

That is, pr√™t-a-porter sex, just as Kleenex or clothes or shoes… It is a good reflection for post-St. Valentine’s day (in Egypt, Prophet Muhammad’s Day, Eurabians should be considering that change in the calendar, after the clothes’ change ūüėČ ).

Traducci√≥n: En un campus americano, William and Mary campus, quitaron una cruz porque ofend√≠a a una serie de personas (sin decir qu√© personas o qu√© n√ļmero de personas), pero despu√©s est√°n obligando invitando a los alumnos a acudir a un evento en el que empleados o antiguos empleados de la industria del sexo realizar√°n representaciones de cualquier tipo de acto sexual. Incluso habr√° proyecciones multimedia. Dicen que es un evento pro-mujer y pro-diversi√≥n.

Me quedo a cuadros… A m√≠ no me parece nada pro-mujer. A m√≠ me parece m√°s pro-industria del sexo… Otro evento muy desinteresado, por lo que veo. Es un signo m√°s de que frente al Islam no existe respeto, existe miedo frente al deg√ľello.


Technorati : ,

Read Full Post »

So after Al Gore

profetising about the climate change, there comes Tony Blair -after leaving Downing St, of course-…

Well, he does. There is a far-advanced, detailed plan for his life after Downing Street, which he hopes will keep him in the spotlight and save his reputation. It has been quietly worked on for 18 months. Key meetings this very week will take it forward. But what, you may ask, is so momentous that it has the faintest chance of blurring, if not eradicating, the appalling and bloody disaster that has been Iraq? What is bigger than that? Africa? Northern Ireland?

No, the answer is climate change. Blair has told friends he will embark on a mission to save the world from global warming. Some of those close to Blair have urged him to devote his time to earning huge sums of money making speeches and sitting on corporate boards. But he has decided instead to use his personal contacts, his reputation in America, his undoubted energy and his experience in compromise-broking to help bring world leaders to “Kyoto 2”, the carbon emission treaty needed to replace the partial and deeply flawed first attempt, which runs out in five years’ time. It will be “Tony saves the world”.

[…]

The idea is that as soon as Blair has finally left office in Britain, he will begin travelling. He remains popular in the US where he will be speaking to the likes of Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama and the rest of the developing Republican and Democratic field. Though Blair will never criticise his old friend Bush in public, his friends say he is well aware that the end of the “big oil” presidency is an opportunity to be grabbed. Whoever the next president is, it won’t be a Texan oilman.

[…]

Those working with Blair on “the legacy” say that there are other things he still wants to do. He has not given up hope on personal work on the Middle East peace process, and wants to be remembered for Northern Ireland, too. On domestic policy, he has decided to do nothing that will be seen as a personal attack on Gordon Brown – though the diaries of some of his inner circle could still rock a boat or two.

So what do we make of all this? There will be hoots of derision in many quarters. Can some diplomatic shuffling in the US on “Kyoto 2” really make up in any way for the horror of Iraq? Isn’t this just his attempt to mimic Al Gore‘s climate change reinvention, with a whiff of Clinton thrown in? Can we so soon forget Blair’s stickily close relationship with the oilmen’s president, however much he publicly repeats that they disagree on climate change? And, most crucially, if the beginnings of a deal really are formed among various US, Chinese and Indian politicians, won’t it really be their show, not Blair’s? Isn’t it, in short, mere grandstanding?

Lucrative subject, eh? I would believe that they really believe in climate change the day they are not travelling in huge jets, driving expensive -and polluting- limousines/cars, etc. But I bet this people are the ones who throw the used batteries down the WC..


Technorati : ,
Del.icio.us : ,
Ice Rocket : ,

Read Full Post »