Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Currently Hanging | Civic Fascination »

Thursday, April 17, 2008

A Student Artist Makes Art From Her Self-Induced Abortions

posted by on April 17 at 11:03 AM

Have at it.

RSS icon Comments

1

Damn...

I like art, and I like political statements, but...

Damn...

Posted by gary7 | April 17, 2008 11:05 AM
2

how derivative.... She should stop using Short Bus as her fountain of ideas for her performance art/artistic media

Posted by jackseattle | April 17, 2008 11:07 AM
3

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Posted by elenchos | April 17, 2008 11:07 AM
4

She said she wasn't concerned about the medical effect of the dangerous abortion drug on her body, even though it has killed 13 women worldwide

Oh, boy.

Posted by Darcy | April 17, 2008 11:09 AM
5

I bet this is a hoax.

Posted by notforsalethanks | April 17, 2008 11:11 AM
6

@5: and it's a pretty biased source/article. I'm with you.

Posted by urban | April 17, 2008 11:12 AM
7

New Lede:

YALE STUDENT SAYS "PAY ATTENTION TO ME"

Posted by oh baby | April 17, 2008 11:13 AM
8

Eww...

I wonder, wouldn't there be some kind of public health restriction on how a piece like this could be displayed? I mean, part of the piece made from human bodily fluids - isn't that considered slightly hazardous?

Posted by Hernandez | April 17, 2008 11:13 AM
9

Yeah, I don't believe in this. There's no way she got herself pregnant that many times and then had miscarriages with no complications.

Posted by Sandy | April 17, 2008 11:14 AM
10

@7: haha!

Incidentally, I hear they're looking for real journalists at ABC. You should go for it.

Posted by Ziggity | April 17, 2008 11:17 AM
11

reminds me of this. though serrano at least had a point ready. I wonder if this girl had a method to her madness.

Posted by Cook | April 17, 2008 11:17 AM
12

Snooze. This is about as intriguing as the teenage boys that put Icy Hot on their balls and post it to YouTube.

Posted by Gitai | April 17, 2008 11:19 AM
13

This version of the story says she used herbs, not ru486.


http://www.yaledailynews.com/articles/view/24513

Posted by Sandy | April 17, 2008 11:22 AM
14

If it is real, which I doubt it is, it is fucking awesome. It is a complete nightmare for the anti-choice freaks (who incidentally decided to park themselves in from of Roosevelt High School last week with all their pictures of dead babies.) Maybe they'll all go to Yale now and leave my kid's school alone.

Posted by smp | April 17, 2008 11:27 AM
15

Nasty.

Posted by merry | April 17, 2008 11:29 AM
16

@8 Only if you are planning on coming into physical contact with the work.

Posted by Andre | April 17, 2008 11:30 AM
17

I too, think it is a hoax. 1: Most women don't just become pregnant on the first try and so she would need a steady supply of donor sperm which requires very special handling to remain viable which leads to...2: She states the sperm donors are screened for STDs which means they must know what she is doing which begs the question: How many men would lightly allow their own child to be aborted for art? 3: A very early abortion or miscarriage is pretty indistiguishable form a heavy period, so there is nothing to film but the passage of a small clot, which could be easily faked. 4: RU 486 is not handed out like morning after pills without a prescription. No physician would knowingly involve him or her self with this kind of act.

Posted by inkweary | April 17, 2008 11:32 AM
18

Can we at least link to semi-responsible sources of information? Lifenews.com does not qualify.

Posted by tomcat98109 | April 17, 2008 11:32 AM
19

I imagine this was the offspring of a drunken night where after much moaning about how yale wasn't taking said artist seriously, they had a eureka moment. and a friend in a hollywood fx shop.

Posted by orangekrush | April 17, 2008 11:33 AM
20

@17. question #4: She could've easily planned this out a few months ahead and picked up RU 486 a few different times through different health care providers then stocked up on them.

Posted by apres_moi | April 17, 2008 11:35 AM
21

reminds me of this.

Posted by Jarod | April 17, 2008 11:36 AM
22

Hero.

Posted by Mr. Poe | April 17, 2008 11:38 AM
23

Anybody else just outright not going to click on this?

Posted by The CHZA | April 17, 2008 11:39 AM
24

if she'd used Damien Hirst's sperm we'd be looking at the next Tracey Emin.

Posted by brett | April 17, 2008 11:44 AM
25

Can the pro-life community HONESTLY say they want this woman to procreate?

Posted by OR Matt | April 17, 2008 11:46 AM
26

23: I wish I hadn't. Not because it is clearly a hoax, but because this "LifeNews" website will get a record # of hits. No one wants that.

Posted by Mike in MO | April 17, 2008 11:50 AM
27

wait til the right wing noise machine gets a hold of this one

Posted by mnm | April 17, 2008 11:50 AM
28

So long as she's not harvesting them for stem cells, it's fair game.

Posted by NapoleonXIV | April 17, 2008 12:01 PM
29

@27, this IS the right wing noise machine. Did you look at the source?

@6, link please :)

Posted by alan | April 17, 2008 12:09 PM
30

@23,

Yes, once I saw it was LifeNews, I decided not to give them more page views.

Posted by keshmeshi | April 17, 2008 12:12 PM
31

No adult male would EVER consent to this. Considering what happens if she would crack and decide to keep the child, leaving male vulnerable etc. etc.

Posted by OR Matt | April 17, 2008 12:30 PM
32

@23: This is the second blog I've seen this story on today, and I haven't clicked on the link yet. This is either a hoax, in which case, shame on whoever is reporting the story, or it's for real, in which case, shame on her. Either way, I really don't care all that much.

Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty | April 17, 2008 12:44 PM
33

This article has an obvious and strong bias ("dangerous" RU486, "killing her own babies", etc). This puts the credibility of the entire article in question, and clearly isn't unbiased journalism. It is an interesting and inflammatory claim, but there is only one side of this story being told, and from a clear bias.

Why the Stranger is paying any attention to it at all, or linking to it, escapes me.

Posted by Reverse Polarity | April 17, 2008 12:49 PM
34

Reminds me of the artist who supposedly recently allowed a dog to starve to death in a gallery...which was a hoax, the dog lived. Lotd of people sure got upset about it though...I did, until I found that it was a hoax.
And no, I'm not saying dogs & "babies"/fetuses are the same thing.

Posted by Becky | April 17, 2008 1:09 PM
35

Yawn.

Posted by Fnarf | April 17, 2008 1:43 PM
36

I hear Erica is on board to purchase the first prints off the line.

This defines modern pathetic feminism.

Posted by ecce homo | April 17, 2008 2:19 PM
37

Here's a link to the Yale paper:

http://yaledailynews.com/story.html


Posted by Dawgson | April 17, 2008 2:27 PM
38

Someone should have discussed this with her, and hopefully stopped her. Did she have a faculty advisor who approved this?

Iím pro-choice but after having read the article I feel like this should be a prosecutable offense.

There are so many people (LGBT, single, infertile) who would love to be parents but canít. Meanwhile, this woman creates and destroys life as ďart.Ē

I think this is sophomoric, immature, and a crime against humanity.

Posted by Dawgson | April 17, 2008 2:31 PM
39

@38 I wouldn't call it a crime against humanity, but most certainly a cry for attention ... or something. I'm seriously surprised a man would trust her with her sperm. What if she decided that she was well ... going to keep the child?

But then again, maybe in this twisted politcal environment, abortion rights have become a use it or loose it thing.

Then again, I don't think she was was using abortion drugs, I think she was using "herbal" remedies which are supposedly worse and well .... what the chinese have been using for hundreds of years.

Funny, in China they have more of an issue with unwed parents than they have with abortions.

I guess the whole point is up to the individual to decide what is more important, quality or quantity of life. But that's just politics, I wouldn't call it "art"

Posted by OR Matt | April 17, 2008 3:12 PM
40

@14: pro-lifers love hanging out outside roosevelt h.s. i went there for my freshman year, and one time they were surrounded by a mob of angry teenagers and beaten with their own giant fetus signs. the security guards did not seem to mind. it was hysterically funny, and i think of it often.

Posted by anna | April 17, 2008 3:20 PM
41

Am I the only one who noticed that the article quotes their own editor

Posted by Anonymous | April 17, 2008 3:48 PM
42

I'm envisioning a Jackson-Pollocky looking thing.

That smells.

Posted by NapoleonXIV | April 17, 2008 3:52 PM
43

Disgusting.

Posted by Greg | April 17, 2008 4:47 PM
44

@34 -- The artist who supposedly starved the dog-- where did you find out about it being a hoax?

I don't know if I believe it or not. Lifenews.com is obviously crap journalism, but Yaledailynews.com? I have a harder time arguing that source.

Posted by saysdivision | April 17, 2008 11:41 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).