Showing posts with label gender. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gender. Show all posts

Sunday, January 11, 2009

re.act.feminism – performance art of the 1960s and 70s today




Kate Gilmore: Star Bright, Star Might,  2007, Video Still, Courtesy of the Artist and Smith-Stewart Gallery

Esther Ferrer: Intimo y Personal, 1998 © Esther Ferrer

Verena Kyselka: Nachrichtensprecherin, Performance Stadtraum Erfurt, 1990, Photo: Bernd Hiepe

Antonia Baehr: Lachen, 2008, Photo: Julie Pagnier © Antonia Baehr

Ewa Partum: Poem by Ewa, 1971 © Ewa Partum / VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn 2008

exhibition, video archive, live performances and conference


13. Dezember 2008 – 8. Februar 2009

Akademie der Künste
Hanseatenweg 10, 10557 Berlin


A project by cross links e.V., curated by Bettina Knaup and Beatrice E. Stammer, produced in partnership with Akademie der Künste, Berlin, supported by Hauptstadtkulturfonds, Schering Stiftung and Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung.
info@artberlin-online.de, Web: http://www.artberlin-online.de/

Abbildungen:
Kate Gilmore
: Star Bright, Star Might, 2007, Video Still, Courtesy of the Artist and Smith-Stewart Gallery
Esther Ferrer: Intimo y Personal, 1998 © Esther Ferrer
Verena Kyselka: Nachrichtensprecherin, Performance Stadtraum Erfurt, 1990, Photo: Bernd Hiepe
Antonia Baehr: Lachen, 2008, Photo: Julie Pagnier © Antonia Baehr
Ewa Partum: Poem by Ewa, 1971 © Ewa Partum / VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn 2008

Performance art emerging in the 1960s and 70s was infused with ideas of social emancipation and fundamentally influenced by women artists interested in feminism. Performance art explored the intersection of art and life, of private and public. It offered an ideal medium for examining, deconstructing or reinventing (female) identity moving beyond attributions of femininity in mainstream culture. Moreover, as a new art form, occurring outside the confines of the traditional art space, performance was a medium for collective and social intervention in the public sphere.
re.act.feminism provides an exemplary overview of gender-critical performance art and investigates its resonances in current artistic productions in the form of re-enactments, re-appropriations, new formulations or documentary and archival projects.

Ausstellung
Videoarchiv
Live-Performances und Tagung
Veranstaltungen im Überblick
Projektteam
Presse
Partner
Danksagung

visit the site




Thursday, September 6, 2007

Is There Anything Good About Men?


Roy F. Baumeister
www.denisdutton.com
This invited address was given at a meeting the American Psychological Association in San Francisco on August 24, 2007. The thinking it represents is part of a long-range project to understand human action and the relation of culture to behavior. Further information about Prof. Baumeister and his research can be found at the foot of this page. — D.D.

You’re probably thinking that a talk called “Is there anything good about men” will be a short talk! Recent writings have not had much good to say about men. Titles like Men Are Not Cost Effective speak for themselves. Maureen Dowd’s book was called Are Men Necessary? and although she never gave an explicit answer, anyone reading the book knows her answer was no. Louann Brizendine’s book, The Female Brain, introduces itself by saying, “Men, get ready to experience brain envy.” Imagine a book advertising itself by saying that women will soon be envying the superior male brain!

Nor are these isolated examples. Alice Eagly’s research has compiled mountains of data on the stereotypes people have about men and women, which the researchers summarized as “The WAW effect.” WAW stands for “Women Are Wonderful.” Both men and women hold much more favorable views of women than of men. Almost everybody likes women better than men. I certainly do.

My purpose in this talk is not to try to balance this out by praising men, though along the way I will have various positive things to say about both genders. The question of whether there’s anything good about men is only my point of departure. The tentative title of the book I’m writing is “How culture exploits men,” but even that for me is the lead-in to grand questions about how culture shapes action. In that context, what’s good about men means what men are good for, from the perspective of the system.

Hence this is not about the “battle of the sexes,” and in fact I think one unfortunate legacy of feminism has been the idea that men and women are basically enemies. I shall suggest, instead, that most often men and women have been partners, supporting each other rather than exploiting or manipulating each other.

Nor is this about trying to argue that men should be regarded as victims. I detest the whole idea of competing to be victims. And I’m certainly not denying that culture has exploited women. But rather than seeing culture as patriarchy, which is to say a conspiracy by men to exploit women, I think it’s more accurate to understand culture (e.g., a country, a religion) as an abstract system that competes against rival systems — and that uses both men and women, often in different ways, to advance its cause.

Also I think it’s best to avoid value judgments as much as possible. They have made discussion of gender politics very difficult and sensitive, thereby warping the play of ideas. I have no conclusions to present about what’s good or bad or how the world should change. In fact my own theory is built around tradeoffs, so that whenever there is something good it is tied to something else that is bad, and they balance out.

I don’t want to be on anybody’s side. Gender warriors please go home.


Men on Top

When I say I am researching how culture exploits men, the first reaction is usually “How can you say culture exploits men, when men are in charge of everything?” This is a fair objection and needs to be taken seriously. It invokes the feminist critique of society. This critique started when some women systematically looked up at the top of society and saw men everywhere: most world rulers, presidents, prime ministers, most members of Congress and parliaments, most CEOs of major corporations, and so forth — these are mostly men.

Seeing all this, the feminists thought, wow, men dominate everything, so society is set up to favor men. It must be great to be a man.

The mistake in that way of thinking is to look only at the top. If one were to look downward to the bottom of society instead, one finds mostly men there too. Who’s in prison, all over the world, as criminals or political prisoners? The population on Death Row has never approached 51% female. Who’s homeless? Again, mostly men. Whom does society use for bad or dangerous jobs?

Read More

Roy F. Baumeister

Roy F. Baumeister is Francis Eppes Professor of Social Psychology at Florida State University, in Tallahassee. His email address is baumeister [at] psy.fsu.edu. Further information on his research interests can be found here. The speech that got Larry Summers out of a job as President of Harvard can be read here. Steven Pinker has written a critique of the Summers kerfuffle. It can be read here.