Yes, I had a similar initial reaction, before it was pointed out to me that the story is much ado about nothing, and I decided to dig a little deeper. In reality, very few are offended by the statue, but the overwhelming response to the absurdity over the notion of someone being offended by it is actually a signal that people are so NOT offended by it, that the idea of it being offensive is a global controversy. In that sense, it’s a positive sign! However, it really says something about the media and its tendency to blow up nonissues, while denying real issues they’re due coverage. It’s a contest for clicks.
I think you’ve got a real point about David’s long held status as a controversial icon being due to the fact that he’s male. Far from the first nude male statue, I think it’s also that it is larger than life and was so public as a work of art for so long.
I’ve got to respectfully disagree with you there. You’re entitled to your opinion of course but mine is that these topics are not equivalent. All of this press around David is an overreaction to a non-issue. The fact is that the trans population is being openly persecuted and much of the legislation being considered and passed at the state level amounts to nothing less than genocide. If anything, the truth of this is way underrepresented in the media, which has a strong anti-trans bias.
While the media might have misrepresented the cause of the uproar, what has followed has nonetheless followed that mis-lead and focussed on the nudity aspect, once again pointing to the high quality of clickbait that nudity provides. It’s also once again focussed attention on the prurient attitudes of so many (particularly, it seems, in the US) towards the human body. Hopefully the resulting furore will result in a loosening of the moral straitjacket trying to envelope our naked bodies!
It is interesting to see the story spun into something more exciting and controversial than it really is. There’s still something off-putting about requiring parental consent to show a statue like this to students, the school having already decided the art was problematic before the complaints even rolled in… but it is a private Christian school and that kind of hyper-sensitivity to nudity and vice is par for the course, speaking from experience.
Yes I think the parent led curriculum discussion is honestly more interesting and relevant as it relates to the whole story. But that headline doesn’t generate clicks.
Yes, I had a similar initial reaction, before it was pointed out to me that the story is much ado about nothing, and I decided to dig a little deeper. In reality, very few are offended by the statue, but the overwhelming response to the absurdity over the notion of someone being offended by it is actually a signal that people are so NOT offended by it, that the idea of it being offensive is a global controversy. In that sense, it’s a positive sign! However, it really says something about the media and its tendency to blow up nonissues, while denying real issues they’re due coverage. It’s a contest for clicks.
I think you’ve got a real point about David’s long held status as a controversial icon being due to the fact that he’s male. Far from the first nude male statue, I think it’s also that it is larger than life and was so public as a work of art for so long.
I’ve got to respectfully disagree with you there. You’re entitled to your opinion of course but mine is that these topics are not equivalent. All of this press around David is an overreaction to a non-issue. The fact is that the trans population is being openly persecuted and much of the legislation being considered and passed at the state level amounts to nothing less than genocide. If anything, the truth of this is way underrepresented in the media, which has a strong anti-trans bias.
While the media might have misrepresented the cause of the uproar, what has followed has nonetheless followed that mis-lead and focussed on the nudity aspect, once again pointing to the high quality of clickbait that nudity provides. It’s also once again focussed attention on the prurient attitudes of so many (particularly, it seems, in the US) towards the human body. Hopefully the resulting furore will result in a loosening of the moral straitjacket trying to envelope our naked bodies!
It is interesting to see the story spun into something more exciting and controversial than it really is. There’s still something off-putting about requiring parental consent to show a statue like this to students, the school having already decided the art was problematic before the complaints even rolled in… but it is a private Christian school and that kind of hyper-sensitivity to nudity and vice is par for the course, speaking from experience.
Yes I think the parent led curriculum discussion is honestly more interesting and relevant as it relates to the whole story. But that headline doesn’t generate clicks.
Dr. SHIVA Ayyadurai, MIT PhD . . . Elon Musk is a Scumbag - The Ultimate Agent of Government Censorship . . .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KOXvsmQvTQ