What is the typical Irish Family? Britain = Two single mothers, one heavily pregnant.

RDM_83 again

SparkySpitfire wrote: »

Most likely because there aren't any around? Fathers scarpered/unknown, grandfathers dead, and brothers have their own families? This isn't a representation of a typical family as Srameen has said, it's a picture of a "real" family, and it is indeed that.

This a piece of public and publicly funded art, its not simply enough to say "its a real family" and leave it at that, this pieces context and message are open to examination.
You could put up a picture of an overweight woman in a tracksuit with a can of beer in one hand with a fag hanging out of her mouth slapping her wailing child and justify it as it represents a real family (this example is loaded with class stereotypes but hey its real) and I'd bet you wouldn't be saying since its a real it doesn't matter.

Like any piece of art we see different things. I see the absence of the male or father in family life and as a role-model something that is in an issue in the UK today, you don't.
Its like a woman noticing that all the sports people in a magazine spread are men and no women, I might be oblivious to this but does it make the criticism any less valid.
I'd like to pull up two of your other points, (1) You mention the role of teachers serving as role-models, do you think a teacher who is limited simply to one setting and for fairly short period of time can actually serve as a real model, additionally its likely till these kids reach 2nd level the vast majority of their teachers will be woman (2) Why do you presume the fathers are "scarpered/unknown", isn't that a very judgmental view point to jump too.

SparkySpitfire

RDM_83 again wrote: »

This a piece of public and publicly funded art, its not simply enough to say "its a real family" and leave it at that, this pieces context and message are open to examination.
You could put up a picture of an overweight woman in a tracksuit with a can of beer in one hand with a fag hanging out of her mouth slapping her wailing child and justify it as it represents a real family (this example is loaded with class stereotypes but hey its real) and I'd bet you wouldn't be saying since its a real it doesn't matter.

Like any piece of art we see different things. I see the absence of the male or father in family life and as a role-model something that is in an issue in the UK today, you don't.
Its like a woman noticing that all the sports people in a magazine spread are men and no women, I might be oblivious to this but does it make the criticism any less valid.
I'd like to pull up two of your other points, (1) You mention the role of teachers serving as role-models, do you think a teacher who is limited simply to one setting and for fairly short period of time can actually serve as a real model, additionally its likely till these kids reach 2nd level the vast majority of their teachers will be woman (2) Why do you presume the fathers are "scarpered/unknown", isn't that a very judgmental view point to jump too.

I actually don't get what point you're trying to get across with the other hypothetical example? It would also be a representation of a real family. An uncommon one, but I don't doubt such a thing exists.

It's a piece of art, it's meant to make you think; I think it's surely done its job here! I don't really get the sports magazine analogy. It's not something that would ruffle my feathers anyway.

1. Yes, I do. Having experienced it myself. Some people, no matter how long they're in your life, can make a really lasting impact whether positive or negative. I've definitely found a role model in at least one teacher in my time at school, I still think about her today in certain situations.

2. It wasn't a presumption it was one of a myriad of possibilities. You asked why, I gave some examples seeing as you weren't bothered to pluck any out of the air yourself to a fairly straightforward question. Maybe they died? But then you might have said that was a morbid conclusion to jump to. :rolleyes:

Recondite49

My family started out as small and nuclear.

Then my Mum cheated on my Dad, left him for another man, and remarried.

Dad remarried twice, then divorced. Now he's in a Civil Partnership with another man.

My brother and I feel that our family is as valid as it always was.

Is there an objective standard against which we should measure the moral worth of the family unit in any case? I thought we'd moved beyond that era.

Incidentally a shout out to any fellow Brummies on boards - alroite mates? :-D

Ave Sodalis

nokia69 wrote: »

because its easier to raise children with a good father, at a certain age young males won't listen to women, thats why mothers will sometimes say "wait till your father gets home"

single parent familes are not a good idea, thats the simple truth, but the truth is not always popular

Not a good idea? Have you ever seen what happens when a child comes out of an abusive family environment because of the idea that single parents aren't a good idea? Have you ever seen a child from a dysfunctional family? Single parents are a great idea when the alternative is abuse, witnessing abuse or a serious lack of love between parents.

nokia69

sup_dude wrote: »

Not a good idea? Have you ever seen what happens when a child comes out of an abusive family environment because of the idea that single parents aren't a good idea? Have you ever seen a child from a dysfunctional family? Single parents are a great idea when the alternative is abuse, witnessing abuse or a serious lack of love between parents.

a stable 2 parent family is better than a stable 1 parent family

I know its controversial but thats all I'm saying

SparkySpitfire

nokia69 wrote: »

a stable 2 parent family is better than a stable 1 parent family

I know its controversial but thats all I'm saying

Well, you're entitled to your opinion.

bodice ripper

nokia69 wrote: »

a stable 2 parent family is better than a stable 1 parent family

I know its controversial but thats all I'm saying

yeah, I am willing to bet that you don't think a stable 2 parent family with two men is better than a single parent affair...

eviltwin

nokia69 wrote: »

a stable 2 parent family is better than a stable 1 parent family

I know its controversial but thats all I'm saying

I agree but its one of those things you can't say without people assuming you are anti lone parents. I know plenty of lone parents doing an amazing job but even they would say they wish they had a partner. Its not just the male/female influence, its having a person there to take over and give you a break when you need it. Parenting is hard work when you have a partner, its a tough slog when its just you trying to do it all on your own. A happy, relaxed person who has time off to do their own thing is a much better parent than one who is trying to do it all by themselves.

RDM_83 again

SparkySpitfire wrote: »

I actually don't get what point you're trying to get across with the other hypothetical example? It would also be a representation of a real family. An uncommon one, but I don't doubt such a thing exists.

It's a piece of art, it's meant to make you think; I think it's surely done its job here![/QUOTE]

My point is that this family is more than just a "real family", its a real family with a symbolic message.

Yes it made me think, looking at it initially I'd presume its of a lesbian couple, knowing the context I think "where are the men in this picture".

I'm not arguing that non traditional families are inherently worse, I'm saying that in a culture where the absent fathers and the lack of role-models for young men/boys is an issue, the absence of the male presence in a piece of public art like this says a lot more than just look at the happy kids in that statue.

SparkySpitfire wrote: »

I don't really get the sports magazine analogy. It's not something that would ruffle my feathers anyway.

So you've never came across people noticing an absence of media role-models of a gender and considering it a problem?

SparkySpitfire wrote: »

1. Yes, I do. Having experienced it myself. Some people, no matter how long they're in your life, can make a really lasting impact whether positive or negative. I've definitely found a role model in at least one teacher in my time at school, I still think about her today in certain situations.

They can make an impact in an intellectual/educational sense but there is a massive amount of life that they can't and shouldn't have to serve as a role-model for.
Your ignoring the part about the massive gender imbalance in primary school teachers though?

SparkySpitfire wrote: »

2. It wasn't a presumption it was one of a myriad of possibilities. You asked why, I gave some examples seeing as you weren't bothered to pluck any out of the air yourself to a fairly straightforward question. Maybe they died? But then you might have said that was a morbid conclusion to jump to. :rolleyes:

Well I'd consider that maybe they have some sort of visitation rights, a father absent from the primary home doesn't mean they don't exist.

SparkySpitfire

My point is that this family is more than just a "real family", its a real family with a symbolic message.

Well, I think everyone will take something different from it. Your view is no less valid than mine and I daresay we'll have to agree to disagree.
Yes it made me think, looking at it initially I'd presume its of a lesbian couple, knowing the context I think "where are the men in this picture".

So you've never came across people noticing an absence of media role-models of a gender and considering it a problem?

Yes, but I don't always consider it a problem myself depending on the issue.

They can make an impact in an intellectual/educational sense but there is a massive amount of life that they can't and shouldn't have to serve as a role-model for.
Your ignoring the part about the massive gender imbalance in primary school teachers though?

You're being tiresomely argumentative here. This is my anecdotal experience you can't disprove it, and frankly, I don't care what you have to say about it.

Well I'd consider that maybe they have some sort of visitation rights, a father absent from the primary home doesn't mean they don't exist.

Yes that's one option also.

I'm done with this talking in circles. We don't agree and I don't want to waste anymore time on a pointless debate.

Ave Sodalis

nokia69 wrote: »

a stable 2 parent family is better than a stable 1 parent family

I know its controversial but thats all I'm saying

Actually, I was addressing the fact you said single parent families are not a good idea. You never differentiated.

bodice ripper

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I'm not arguing that non traditional families are inherently worse, I'm saying that in a culture where the absent fathers and the lack of role-models for young men/boys is an issue, the absence of the male presence in a piece of public art like this says a lot more than just look at the happy kids in that statue

Pretty much every other piece of public art is a man standing on his own. Oddly, that doesn't seem to be a problem.


I tell you, I am getting pretty sick of the White Dude Aged 18-35 Feels Underrepresented meme.

And the burgeoning Little Boys Can't Learn From Women meme. That one is parochial little backwater thinking.

Annasopra

nokia69 wrote: »

I'm not sure if its the threat of violence exactly, but it seems that young children behave better around their fathers, just my observation

my mother would sometimes have to use the wooden spoon but my father just had to say stop

How do you know your experiences are the exact same as everyone elses?

Lapin

bodice ripper wrote: »

Pretty much every other piece of public art is a man standing on his own.

Come off it.

The most famous statue on the planet is arguably the Statue of Liberty in New York.

The most photographed statue in Dublin is of Molly Malone.

There are frigging statues of the virgin Mary all over the country.

The most famous landmark in Copenhagen is The Little Mermaid.

The biggest statue in London is the Queen Victoria Memorial on the Mall.

And as the Tour de France swings into the Champs Elysées every year for its ceremonial laps in the final stage, millions of viewers worldwide are familiar with the camera shots of the golden statue of Joan of Arc on horseback facing the cyclists as the race emerges from the Louvre tunnel.

And speaking of the Louvre, the most famous exhibits inside are the Mona Lisa and the statue of Venus de Milo.

I could go on.

SparkySpitfire

Lapin wrote: »

I could go on.

Yes, the cherries are quite ripe at this time of year.

:rolleyes:

RDM_83 again

bodice ripper wrote: »

Pretty much every other piece of public art is a man standing on his own. Oddly, that doesn't seem to be a problem.

They tend to be historic and/or of a famous or noteworthy individual but sure thats exactly the same thing as this.

bodice ripper wrote: »

I tell you, I am getting pretty sick of the White Dude Aged 18-35 Feels Underrepresented meme.

Right on sister, lets not listen to anything those patriarchs say because they are just mansplaning sure its easier than actually thinking about an issue.

bodice ripper wrote: »

And the burgeoning Little Boys Can't Learn From Women meme. That one is parochial little backwater thinking.

Thats a nice way of explaining away how the lack of positive male role models can potentially have a negative impact: Your a black American right? Are the countless members of your own the African American community and academics who point to a lack of positive role-models as a partial cause of the problems faced by black male youths just narrow minded hicks too?

At no point did I say I thought that non-traditional family units were a negative but I guess you just have to get those SJW digs in anyway, sure you can be guaranteed you'l be thanked by the usual suspects.

bodice ripper

I'm black! Does Mom know?!

bodice ripper

And I couldn't be less SJW if I tried. But the lamenting of the lack of male presence in public sculpture is hilarious.

nokia69

bodice ripper wrote: »

And I couldn't be less SJW if I tried. But the lamenting of the lack of male presence in public sculpture is hilarious.

eh I don't think that what he was doing

he just pointed out how wrong you were

bodice ripper

Lapin wrote: »

Come off it.

The most famous statue on the planet is arguably the Statue of Liberty in New York.
not a person, an allegory

The most photographed statue in Dublin is of Molly Malone.

There are frigging statues of the virgin Mary all over the country.
mythical figure

The most famous landmark in Copenhagen is The Little Mermaid.
fairy tale

The biggest statue in London is the Queen Victoria Memorial on the Mall.

And as the Tour de France swings into the Champs Elysées every year for its ceremonial laps in the final stage, millions of viewers worldwide are familiar with the camera shots of the golden statue of Joan of Arc on horseback facing the cyclists as the race emerges from the Louvre tunnel.

And speaking of the Louvre, the most famous exhibits inside are the Mona Lisa and the statue of Venus de Milo.
allegory

I could go on.

Feel free to go on, dude. Commissioned public sculpture is massively slanted to white guys looking pensive, alone. Which is fine, that's how I like my sculpture. And it definitely beats the hell out of post-modern found-object crap at the side of motorways. Sculpture could definitely use more heavily armed men in marble.


But this weeping and gnashing of teeth over this one out of the ordinary sculpture (so out of the ordinary that we are talking about it when we would be hard pressed to think of another sculpture in the same city) is a stitch. It's all the same SJW, but with testicles.

bodice ripper

nokia69 wrote: »

eh I don't think that what he was doing

he just pointed out how wrong you were

This is the poster who surmised that I am black. Perhaps too much is being read into the sculpture also.

RDM_83 again

bodice ripper wrote: »

I'm black! Does Mom know?!

Apologies for calling you black, actually if I apologize does that make me a racist
Anyway doesn't change the fact that as an American you should be aware of that discourse.

bodice ripper wrote: »

But the lamenting of the lack of male presence in public sculpture is hilarious.

FFS did you even read this thread, its not about sculpture in general its about how representation of a family unit can be missing the 2/3 men and the imagery that portrays at a time when absent fathers or a positive male influence are a growing issue in the UK.

bodice ripper

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Thats a nice way of explaining away how the lack of positive male role models can potentially have a negative impact: Your a black American right? Are the countless members of your own community and academics who point to a lack of positive role-models as a partial cause of the problems faced by black male youths just narrow minded hicks too?

I just wanted to quote this. Cause it's ****ing hysterical.

bodice ripper

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Anyway doesn't change the fact that as an American you should be aware of that discourse.



FFS did you even read this thread, its not about sculpture in general its about how representation of a family unit can be missing the 2/3 men and the imagery that portrays at a time when absent fathers or a positive male influence are a growing issue in the UK.

**** happens. You seemingly haven't read the thread, or I am certain you would have noticed someone pointing out that there is more than one type of family, even if you feel that isn't ideal. We put murders and criminals and liars and racists and dragons and lions and unicorns and most unfortunately giant piles of scrap metal out there as public sculpture all the time.

RDM_83 again

bodice ripper wrote: »

I just wanted to quote this. Cause it's ****ing hysterical.

Yeah its great the way you don't identify with any of the other points raised but sure have at it.

Interesting to note you don't have an issue with Eviltwin saying that having a male presence is important.

Every single one of my posts I've stated that I don't think non-traditional families are worse but you keep trying to pin it on me? Why is that?

Edit: Actually do you just have a personal dislike from some reason? nighty night anyway. http://xkcd.com/386/

bodice ripper

Seriously though, this is just the other side of the same coin with the ultra feminists.

Quick to take offence, reactionary, polarised loons. Spoiling for a fight about how **** you've got it, like you'd give a **** sideways about a sculpture if it wasn't and excuse for more lamentation.


We should all be thankful a Turner Prize winner even made something figurative, and with ANY discernible meaning. Usually public sculpture is formless metal, painted tractor yellow, rusting by the road in a lasting **** you to the tax payer.

bodice ripper

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Every single one of my posts I've stated that I don't think non-traditional families are worse but you keep trying to pin it on me? Why is that

If they aren't worse, what is the problem with representing them in sculpture?

Smidge

Lapin wrote: »

Come off it.

The most famous statue on the planet is arguably the Statue of Liberty in New York.

The most photographed statue in Dublin is of Molly Malone.

There are frigging statues of the virgin Mary all over the country.

The most famous landmark in Copenhagen is The Little Mermaid.

The biggest statue in London is the Queen Victoria Memorial on the Mall.

And as the Tour de France swings into the Champs Elysées every year for its ceremonial laps in the final stage, millions of viewers worldwide are familiar with the camera shots of the golden statue of Joan of Arc on horseback facing the cyclists as the race emerges from the Louvre tunnel.

And speaking of the Louvre, the most famous exhibits inside are the Mona Lisa and the statue of Venus de Milo.

I could go on.

Just a quick question......

Who designed/built/painted all of the above?

nokia69

Smidge wrote: »

Just a quick question......

Who designed/built/painted all of the above?

evil white men

the scourge of the planet

bodice ripper

nokia69 wrote: »

evil white men

the scourge of the planet

Aaand nobody said that. Again, the parallels with the feminists are astounding.

SparkySpitfire

nokia69 wrote: »

evil white men

the scourge of the planet

I like to think that the scourge of the planet are ignorant entitled pigs.

Not talented genii.

But maybe that's just me.

Lapin

Smidge wrote: »

Just a quick question......

Who designed/built/painted all of the above?

What has that got to do with the comment I addressed in my post?

bodice ripper wrote: »

Pretty much every other piece of public art is a man standing on his own.

No mention there of the designer/builder/painter....

bodice ripper

SparkySpitfire wrote: »

I like to think that the scourge of the planet are ignorant entitled pigs.

Not talented genii.

But maybe that's just me.

The two are not mutually exclusive. I suspect the generally go hand in hand.

SparkySpitfire

bodice ripper wrote: »

The two are not mutually exclusive. I suspect the generally go hand in hand.

Ah now you can't blame the artists for being born the right sex in the right time period

bodice ripper

SparkySpitfire wrote: »

Ah now you can't blame the artists for being born the right sex in the right time period

Well, no, you really can't. But then, entitled pigs come in both genders, so it makes no odds.

Smidge

Lapin wrote: »

What has that got to do with the comment I addressed in my post?



No mention there of the designer/builder/painter....

It has everything to do with it imo.
You cannot fault the subject nor blame them for the artists decision.

But hey, g'wan with your bad self

Lapin

Smidge wrote: »

It has everything to do with it imo.
You cannot fault the subject nor blame them for the artists decision.

But hey, g'wan with your bad self

I'm not faulting any subject.

Smidge

Lapin wrote: »

I'm not faulting any subject.

Well then, clarify.
You gave examples of women being depicted in the most famous works of art etc.
To what end then if not to say that women were being revered and held "above all"?
And then made it out as that was the fault of women and being used against men as some sort of whip against their masculinity.

Basically, men made nice art of women.
And it's the fault of women

Lapin

Smidge wrote: »

Well then, clarify.
You gave examples of women being depicted in the most famous works of art etc.
To what end then if not to say that women were being revered and held "above all"?
And then made it out as that was the fault of women and being used against men as some sort of whip against their masculinity.

Basically, men made nice art of women.
And it's the fault of women

Where the hell did I say or even imply any of that?

Talk about putting words in my mouth.

I simply listed a few well known examples of statues (and one painting) depicting women to prove the comment below is plainly incorrect.

It doesn't matter if the women being depicted are allegorical, mythical or fictional or who created and designed the work. The fact is they are depictions of women which means this statement is clearly false.

bodice ripper wrote: »

Pretty much every other piece of public art is a man standing on his own. Oddly, that doesn't seem to be a problem.

Nothing more nothing less. Please read back over my posts and make sure you're not confusing me with someone else here before ascribing to me, things I didn't say at all.

SparkySpitfire

Lapin wrote: »

Where the hell did I say or even imply any of that?

Talk about putting words in my mouth.

I simply listed a few well known examples of statues (and one painting) depicting women to prove the comment below is plainly incorrect.

It doesn't matter if the women being depicted are allegorical, mythical or fictional or who created and designed the work. The fact is they are depictions of women which means this statement is clearly false.



Nothing more nothing less. Please read back over my posts and make sure you're not confusing me with someone else here before ascribing to me, things I didn't say at all.

But it didn't prove her wrong at all. It just showcased your own cherrypicking skills and you also ignored the fact she said "every other piece of art is a man" not "every famous piece of art is a man".

So no, you didn't prove anything by it.

Lapin

SparkySpitfire wrote: »

But it didn't prove her wrong at all. It just showcased your own cherrypicking skills and you also ignored the fact she said "every other piece of art is a man" not "every famous piece of art is a man".

So no, you didn't prove anything by it.

If 'every other piece of art is a man' then it inevitably follows that every famous piece of art must be a man too.

And all I did was highlight the fact that this is simply not the case by mentioning a few well known examples.
Not much point in listing obscure ones that few people are familiar with.

You accuse me of cherry picking but seem to have the art of nit picking down to a tee yourself.

SparkySpitfire

Lapin wrote: »

If 'every other piece of art is a man' then it inevitably follows that every famous piece of art must be a man too.

And all I did was highlight the fact that this is simply not the case by mentioning a few well known examples.
Not much point in listing obscure ones that few people are familiar with.

You accuse me of cherry picking but seem to have the art of nit picking down to a tee yourself.

There are a few well known examples, quite right. There are also many many many more examples of males in art.

Don't get annoyed at me because your points aren't holding up.

Smidge

Lapin wrote: »

If 'every other piece of art is a man' then it inevitably follows that every famous piece of art must be a man too.

And all I did was highlight the fact that this is simply not the case by mentioning a few well known examples.
Not much point in listing obscure ones that few people are familiar with.

You accuse me of cherry picking but seem to have the art of nit picking down to a tee yourself.

TBF Lapin, I don't get this mentality at all.
Art is art.
The subject is subjective.

But away from the topic at hand we seem to have drifted.
My opinion on "blended/modern" families?

If you can raise a child to be a decent person, it makes no odds what your parental status has been.
I was raised by women with a male presence(grandfather)in the background. Didn't do me a jot of harm.

Einhard

There's a lot of talk here about how one type of family is intrinsically better than another type, but there's precious little evidence to back up views.

I admit that a nuclear family intuitively seems to be the ideal model to aspire to (that's not at all to disparage other forms of family), but the porblem with intuitition is that it's just that- intuitition, a gut feeling, based on personal observations and little else.

It seems to me that if we're to have a proper debate on what family model "works best", then we need some objective, empirical evidence on which to base the debate. In its absence, all we have is personal musings and they're not much use in such a conversation.

Lapin

SparkySpitfire wrote: »

There are a few well known examples, quite right. There are also many many many more examples of males in art.

Civic statues perhaps, but I dispute that this is the case in art in general.
I would say there are far more depictions of women in paintings, photography, music, poetry than there are of men.

SparkySpitfire wrote: »

Don't get annoyed at me because your points aren't holding up.

I'm not annoyed at all. My points are holding up quite well.

You have already conceded that by back tracking and admitting to this much, "There are a few well known examples, quite right."

Smidge

Are you genuinely debating the fact that more art has been made about women Lapin?
To what end?
I don't get your point.
The majority of famous artists have been men.
Will you argue that they were environmentalists is they made paintings of flowers?

Lapin

Smidge wrote: »

But away from the topic at hand we seem to have drifted.
My opinion on "blended/modern" families?

If you can raise a child to be a decent person, it makes no odds what your parental status has been.

Of course.

But as I said at the start of this thread. I think society should aspire to the concept of the traditional family unit.

Thats not to say any others should be scorned or disregarded.

SparkySpitfire

Lapin wrote: »

Civic statues perhaps, but I dispute that this is the case in art in general.
I would say there are far more depictions of women in paintings, photography, music, poetry than there are of men.



I'm not annoyed at all. My points are holding up quite well.

You have already conceded that by back tracking and admitting to this much, "There are a few well known examples, quite right."

I conceded that there are examples, anyone can see that. You're wrong in thinking there's more female examples than male though. More than that, the majority of famous artists over time have been men. I don't even know why you brought this point up in the first place. I feel like I'm talking to the wall...

Einhard

Lapin wrote: »

Of course.

But as I said at the start of this thread. I think society should aspire to the concept of the traditional family unit.

Thats not to say any others should be scorned or disregarded.

But what if it were t be shown that the traditional family unit performs no better than other forms of the same thing? Would you change your perspective then?

Smidge

Lapin wrote: »

Of course.

But as I said at the start of this thread. I think society should aspire to the concept of the traditional family unit.

Thats not to say any others should be scorned or disregarded.

Aspiration to one method over another will always mean that anything after that will be considered "lesser". Thats the bones of it.