Is it wrong to identify as something you aren’t?

Oh well Wyllow if you're unwilling to answer the questions I've asked (which is entirely your right) I'll leave it at that, but will draw my own conclusions as to why that is (as is my right).

Oreo

I suppose it was a bit of fantasy that went too far.He had quite a prestigious past didn’t he and maybe in retirement he needed to continue to be admired? Am certain he really regrets it, not a big fine really but it’s the shame of it that will haunt him.

He had quite a prestigious past didn’t he

? No.

He's a retired teacher.

Not just a victim or sexual assault, Rosie, but also an escape from a co-ercively abusive marriage.

Glad to announce that hasn't affect my brain or made me hate men to the extent that I don't understand transgressive art and its place in discussions.

And there is absolutely nothing wrong with using specialist knowledge to contribute to a discussion -

because as I've said it's often been women historically who have produced very controversial art on sex and sexuality. they are a delight and raise so many questions on gender issues of many kinds.

They have done so in climates where they are challenging a traditional view in the art work of the female or gay body as "object"and I see Perry as a male contributing to this tradition with a particular view - not a damaging one. As I say, the real life behaviour of someone like Izzard, is utterly different.

WyllowI note you haven't addressed the question in my post of 13:32:25?
As for Grayson Perry's art are you saying that the man himself is a walking art exhibition that entitles him to display his fetish in public? That would be a great excuse for every pervert out there, just declare yourself an artist displaying your 'living art'. A painting, sculpture, photograph is not the same as a person walking around exhibiting a dildo. Why are there age limits on certain exhibitions as being unsuitable for people under a certain age I wonder. Surely not just pearl clutching prudishness?
I think you are very confused about the term 'terf' which is a pejorative term used to abuse people who are biologically literate and know that there are two sexes, and your sex is set at the moment of conception, and it's impossible to change it. My knowledge of biology is probably as equally extensive as your knowledge of art.

Or of course both.

And happily for him, lovers of his art will support him.

Mayb he’s a gifted artist.

Or maybe he’s a man who gets kicks from waving a penis in front of children.

How do you tell the difference?

No rosie, most certainly not, it was addressed generally in order to compare the actions of terfs (which I wholly condemn) and compare them with artists who explore sexuality explicitly. In the case of Perry, it's only part of his work.

There is such a rich history of women artists going back to the surrealists (1940's, 50's and the likes of Louise Bourgeois, (same time)

then later in the 1970's as part of the feminist movement who explore sexuality very explicitly and richly, and includes work such as aging and sexuality too:

that discussing and condemning such images as the specific one work (of many) by one artist seems - well - just taken out of the context of all the work in this field.

And just to be clear Wyllow is your "aggressive terf" comment addressed to me? I am well trained in safeguarding, something you obviously have not been. Red flags are red flags. Call me what you will, but as a victim of a sexual assault I'd expect you to be more aware about the dangers of endorsing public displays of private fetishes.

I started to type a long reply to Wyllow but get that she's incapable of understanding that celebrating the public display of a fetish such as GP does nothing to curb the entitlement of men to indulge whatever sexual fantasies they like in public, including inappropriate touching. Would she apply the same 'giggle, giggle, let's discuss penises' attitude if instead of a dildo GP had displayed his own erect penis? If not, why not, both are sexual predatory behaviour.

I am not sure GP is pretending to be a woman, he has a fetish which he displays in public.

He’s pretending to be a woman, Carley was pretending to be a rear admiral.
One offends some women who believe you can’t change sex, so claiming/pretending to be a woman is wrong.
The other offended a man and people who believe that a man claiming /pretending to be something he isn’t, is wrong.
If you upset a man by doing that, you get taken to court and fined £500.
If you upset a woman by doing that, you get told he is a superb artist.
It’s either wrong or it isn’t.

Oreo

Of course I don’t ‘have the benefit of a fine art training’ maybe thankfully in this case.

Do you know, I’m sitting here ( eating cheese and crackers) and trying to think of something I’ve had “the benefit of training’ in. and I can’t think of anything really.

I think I’ve just picked stuff up as I went and bumbled through😬

Guess that’s why my opinion doesn’t really amount to much😬

I just laugh at pearl clutching. I sometimes think I should detail my life and work experience, and then I just think oh I can't be bothered. But a decade in Hiv work tends not to lead to much naivety.

Of course I don’t ‘have the benefit of a fine art training’ maybe thankfully in this case.

Well, some kids I guess. We’ve always been rather matter of fact about penises and vulvas in our families, so haven’t really had that prurient giggling.

When does expressing an opinion, saying that you’re shocked or find something distasteful- become shutting down a discussion? Surely that’s taking part in the discussion?

Whereas sneering at that opinion and demeaning the person who expressed it, has nothing to do with the art and everything to do with trying to render the person and their opinion of no value and therefore excluding them - shutting them down.

Doodledog

Galaxy

Just so we can be clear on his art. He is wearing a dildo to a childrens charity fundraiser.
I have a different interpretation to his art that is all.

Yes. I think GP is a good artist, and his TV programmes are intelligent and thought-provoking. All well and good. But his behaviour when it comes to dressing like that in front of children is not acceptable, and it is behaviour that matters when it comes to the law.

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree, for I see Izzard as completely different to Grayson Perry, would never, ever, put them together.

Wyllow3

That's kids for you, Lathyrus "giggle giggle" was what I suggested of kids not adults.

Pearl clutching, if it occurs, is an attempt to shut down discussion due to a prudishness I don't think particularly valuable when it comes to benign sexual art.

Maybe drop your own attitude Wyllow3 and there’s nothing benign about the way that GP was dressed for a children’s charity fundraiser, it was disgusting and not funny or thought provoking or anything else.The man , like Izzard is simply a self obsessed weirdo.
Just because a man is a good actor or artist doesn’t make a shred of difference.

That's kids for you, Lathyrus "giggle giggle" was what I suggested of kids not adults.

Pearl clutching, if it occurs, is an attempt to shut down discussion due to a prudishness I don't think particularly valuable when it comes to benign sexual art.

But surely the whole point if his art s to provoke opinion and discussion.

So trying to shut down that discussion, with pejorative terms like ‘Pearl-clutching” is the very antithesis of what GP intends in his work.

Myself, I’ve never really got the “ let’s have a giggle about penises” attitude to body parts.🤔

Think Shiele, Picasso, Tracy Emin, Betty Tomkins, (US) Helen Beard (UK) and many more.

Have just consulted DS re "whats OK" re 13,9, 7 yrs old: he doesn't have a problem, for it's discussed contextually. We really have to get less anxious because sex is involved. Discussion can open doors to understanding, and I believe his work to be benign.
I have the benefit of Fine Art training, and know of many art works that interrogate the sexual aspects of our beings. Other cultures - like the ones who celebrate sex and sexuality (think Hindu gods and goddesses hard at it) just don't have this attitude.

Galaxy there is the world of difference between an aggressive terf and an artist like Perry.

He's making us think not forcing a view on us in any harmful way.
And his art is wonderful, featuring as it does the everyday often of working class lives and contemporary life in general like his own in his wonderful textile murals.

aonk

Of course people can dress as they choose but not in uniforms which they’re not entitled to. This gives a false impression to others. Imagine what could happen if someone impersonated a police officer or a doctor and a member of the public put their trust in them. Also Carley appeared in the uniform at a Remembrance ceremony which was an insult to veterans, serving officers and their families.

Exactly my point in my post at Fri 09-Jan-26 11:13:28.

A naval uniform identifies a naval officer to anyone who sees it, and the uniform of a rear admiral identifies a high ranking officer whose orders are to be obeyed by any member of the navy who is subordinate to him. Ignoring this man's wearing of the uniform when he is no longer entitled to wear it is creating a precedent which could suggest to a traitor to dress up as a senior officer and order actions that would endanger the security of the country.

Galaxy

Just so we can be clear on his art. He is wearing a dildo to a childrens charity fundraiser.
I have a different interpretation to his art that is all.

Yes. I think GP is a good artist, and his TV programmes are intelligent and thought-provoking. All well and good. But his behaviour when it comes to dressing like that in front of children is not acceptable, and it is behaviour that matters when it comes to the law.