It’s once again time to hack our way through the deep artistic underbrush of Sandrine Schaefer. Specifically, her 2012 performance piece Ambulation, shared below in sadly abbreviated form, and in which Ms Schaefer presents her buttocks to the world and shifts her weight from heel to toe, while her shoes emit the sounds of her “travels in Mexico.”

Hey, I’m just reading what it says here.

Apparently, the sounds coming from her footwear are “a reward for the curious witnesses that neared her body.”

Mary Katharine Ham on woke scolds and public pushback: 

Here’s how the removal of the [painting, Hylas and the Nymphs] went down — in the most eye-rollingly woke, modern-art-professor way possible. A professor and five members of a “drag collective” walk into an art gallery to talk about viewing art in a non-binary way. Stop me if you’ve heard this one before.

Amy Wax on sinking standards and The New Unsayable: 

An open letter published in the Daily Pennsylvanian and signed by 33 of my colleagues… condemned and categorically rejected all of my views [on the importance of bourgeois values]. It then invited students, in effect, to monitor me and to report any “stereotyping and bias” they might experience or perceive. This letter contained no argument, no substance, no reasoning, no explanation whatsoever as to how our op-ed was in error… To students and citizens alike I say: Don’t follow their lead by condemning people for their views without providing a reasoned argument. Reject their example. Not only are they failing to teach you the practice of civil discourse —the sine qua non of liberal education and democracy— they are sending the message that civil discourse is unnecessary. 

This, remember, is the University of Pennsylvania Law School. For background, see the first items here and here. 

And Andy Ngo on the “social justice” Sturmabteilung: 

Pong for the feet. || Forbidden love. || Flushing decisions. || Meet your new neighbours. || Windows of San Francisco. || One way to do it. (h/t, Obo) || The ice is singing. || Two salaries. || For the ladies, some Russian gangster glamour. || Young Romance, 1949. (h/t, Holborn) || Every reason for Dr Banner Hulking-out in the 70s TV series. || The cost of light. || Look closely and you’ll see the light from a single excited strontium atom. || Escaping the lab while the humans sleep. || Wine glasses of note. || Equality now. || He does this better than you do. (h/t, Tim) || Decorative and slightly dangerous. || And finally, “The former Chief of Staff of Iran’s armed forces said that Western spies had used lizards which could ‘attract atomic waves’ to spy on the country’s nuclear programme.”

In The Baffler, Jessa Crispin writes: 

His desire for stockings and earrings and a flattering skirt did not change his critical stance against capitalism, but it did complicate his view of what socialism or communism could be. “Will there be lipstick under communism?” Yes, [sociology lecturer, Colin] Cremin writes in a new book, Man-Made Woman — but only if men are wearing it, too… A truly progressive man, then, would be one who rejects the social and economic advantages that come from hegemonic masculinity and patriarchal conformity. A “feminine flourish,” as Cremin puts it, of perfume or lipstick or a silk blouse, would undercut a man’s power immediately in both the workplace and on the sexual market. 

Via Ben Sixsmith, in a thread where it’s noted that when many men favoured stockings and beauty spots, this didn’t immediately result in communism or a toppling of “hegemonic masculinity.”

Dr Cremin, of course, has been noted here before. 

Attention, all white women. You and your “whiteness” are “causing real harm and violence.” You are, to put it bluntly, “a perpetrator of harm.”

And so, obviously, what you need is a workshop, where you can “confront your participation in the oppression of others,” which is to say, “confront white womanhood,” and thereby be in “true solidarity” with beings of colour, who are flawless, downtrodden and inherently more noble. Given your own vile and corrupting nature, interaction with beings of colour must only be attempted after following the guidance of suitably enlightened instructors. Instructors who will bestow intersectional epiphanies by steering you to the works of these lofty, selfless warriors, and also to articles published in that high-minded journal for troubled women, Everyday Feminism. 

For a mere $20, you could be stewing in the wisdom of, among others, “artist and activist” Heather Marie Scholl, who was famously interviewed by Gavin McInnes, and whose creative efforts “examine white women’s roles in the establishment and maintenance of white supremacy through… embroidery techniques.” When not toppling the patriarchy with unattractive needlework, or “approaching social justice issues with a productive emotionality,” Ms Scholl boasts of her “BA from The Evergreen State College in Race, Gender and Sexuality.”

So, ladies. Sunday March 4 is the date for your diary. Book early.