Skip to content

Yale Student’s Abortion Performing Arts Project a Hoax? Does it Matter?

April 19, 2008

  When I first heard the story of the Yale student who was artificially inseminating herself and then aborting the babies for her senior art project I was mortified. As I think any clear thinking, normal individual would be. Now Yale has called the project a hoax. However after reading several articles about this student and of the school’s “apology” I thought the story still deserved to be written about because there is a mentality here that is scary. This is what another art major had to say about the project when he thought it was real. And by the way, the student still insists it is real:

Art major Juan Castillo ’08 said that although he was intrigued by the creativity and beauty of her senior project, not everyone was as thrilled as he was by the concept and the means by which she attained the result.

“I really loved the idea of this project, but a lot other people didn’t,”

 He was intrigued by the beauty of the project. Wow! I will describe some of that beauty a little latter on. Is this the type of mindset that is infiltrating American society? Has the value of life reached such a low point in culture that this type of “project is acceptable? Remember, Juan thought the project was real at the time that he made those statements and observations.

 Yale didn’t really apologise for this either, claiming that is wasn’t real but called it performing arts.

“The entire project is an art piece, a creative fiction designed to draw attention to the ambiguity surrounding form and function of a woman’s body,” said Yale spokeswoman Helaine Klasky.

 So the question remains, did one of the nation’s leading institutions condone this activity? And are they just now trying to cover their asses? According to Shvarts, that is the case.

Shvarts stood by her project and claimed that administrators had backed her before the planned exhibition attracted national condemnation

I’m not going to absolve them by saying it was some sort of hoax when it wasn’t, she said. I started out with the University on board with what I was doing, and because of the media frenzy they’ve been trying to dissociate with me. Ultimately I want to get back to a point where they renew their support because ultimately this was something they supported.

She said if Yale puts out a statement saying she did not do this, she would say Yale was doing that to protect its reputation,” Klasky said.

  So Yale may have known about, and approved of her project. This is what still bothers me about this story, the mindset of the school and the students. Because now that the school has apparently dissassociated itself from Shvarts other students are upset with the school because they feel that this is a first amendment issue. They believe free speech is being repressed because, well I can’t even figure out how they can possibly come to that conclusion. It is just how far left some of these universities and students have turned. So left in fact, that Shvarts’ intent was to show that there is no difference between an abortion and normal menstruation.

“The most poignant aspect of this representation—the part most meaningful in terms of its political agenda (and, incidentally, the aspect that has not been discussed thus far)—is the impossibility of accurately identifying the resulting blood,” she said.

  Remember that while this is being called a hoax, Shvarts did in fact inseminate herself and take the drugs to induce an abortion, so in that regard this project is not a hoax. The intent was there, and she may have infact aborted a baby. We just don’t know because she never took a test.

Beacuse she has admitted that she never took a pregnancy test so she can’t say with certainty that she was ever pregnant she makes the point that blood is blood and it is indistinguishable. So who has the right to say which blood was life and which never was? This is sick. Now it is up to the individual to determine what is life and what isn’t? Life is in the eyes of the beholder?

 When did we get to this point in this country? In a country where is is acceptable to induce labor and birth a baby up to it’s neck and then suck it’s brains out as it’s little arms and legs quiver during it’s last moments of LIFE I suupose I shouldn’t be shocked by this. It is just the next logical step.

 This is so far left that even NARAL found this wrong, now that is saying something!

Ted Miller, a spokesman for NARAL Pro-Choice America, called the concept offensive and “not a constructive addition to the debate over reproductive rights.”

 Now let’s look at the presentation of the project so we can see what Juan above, and others I am sure, thought was so beautiful.

The display of Schvarts’ project will feature a large cube suspended from the ceiling of a room in the gallery of Green Hall. Schvarts will wrap hundreds of feet of plastic sheeting around this cube; lined between layers of the sheeting will be the blood from Schvarts’ self-induced miscarriages mixed with Vaseline in order to prevent the blood from drying and to extend the blood throughout the plastic sheeting.

Schvarts will then project recorded videos onto the four sides of the cube. These videos, captured on a VHS camcorder, will show her experiencing miscarriages in her bathrooom tub, she said. Similar videos will be projected onto the walls of the room.

Shvarts, sometimes naked, sometimes clothed, alone in a shower stall bleeding into a cup

 Sounds lovely, doesn’t it?

 I know I have been all over the place in this post, but I just can’t wrap my arms around this story. I can’t for the life of me understand how anything like this could be considered acceptable by anyone. Hell, I can’t even understand how anyone could even think something like this up.

 That is why I think that this story deserves to be written about whether it was a hoax or not. Hoax is the wrong word, she carried out the acts of insemination and abortion inducement, we just don’t know if she was pregnant. It shows us how far people are willing to go to push an agenda. It shows us the mindset ot the far left. It shows us the mindset that is acceptable in our most prestigious higher learning institutions. These are supposed to be the smartest students among us and this is how they think. These students are our future. I fear for the future of our country.

 And that is why I had to write about this.

 

9 Comments leave one →
  1. Net's avatar
    April 19, 2008 11:35 am

    AND Aliza Shvarts was valedictorian of Buckley School, 2004. Imagine that?

    I liked this line of your post:

    “Hell, I can’t even understand how anyone could even think something like this up.”

    Do you think Yale would have accepted her idea if she instead chose to have three three-month pregnancies, showing the “remains” of her abortions in plexiglass cubes? Now THAT would not have been “art” either, but it sure would have told a story.

    I agree with your blog’s title, Wake up America indeed!

    Net
    http://cathlete.net

    Like

  2. Henk Campher's avatar
    April 20, 2008 11:29 pm

    Art. People will do anything and try and call it art. Thinking that “shocking” us will somehow make it acceptable. In this same week we had a guy called Vargas from Costa Rica call his starving dog art. He caught a stray and put it in a cage with no food and water. And wanted to put it in a major show for people to see. And last year an “art” student got arrested at Logan in Boston for wearing something that looked like a bomb. But it was “art”.
    Stupidity. I don’t know. I have a pretty open mind. But people. I don’t know. People maybe just don’t always deserve the benefit of the doubt.
    This is a new low. Like you say – even thinking about it is just wrong.

    Like

  3. Deb's avatar
    Deb permalink
    April 21, 2008 8:35 am

    Some psychologists have said that liberalism really is a mental disorder, this woman seems to be proving it beyond a shadow of a doubt. Disgusting.

    Like

  4. Constitutional Lawyer's avatar
    Constitutional Lawyer permalink
    April 21, 2008 1:17 pm

    Yes! Why on earth would anyone attend an impeachment rally for a president who lied this country into a war? Why would anyone want to impeach an administration that has repeatedly lied about torture and yet approved its use? (Until caught in an investigation). Why impeach a president who has thumbed his nose at international law and has called the Constitution “just a piece of paper.” Why impeach an administration that has been more secretive than any other administration in history? An executive branch that has eroded the civil liberties of American citizens? Why impeach a president that has allowed fraud, waste and abuse in Iraq (and has personally used his influence to win no-bid contracts corporations who are fleecing the US Treasury?) Why impeach a president who, in an effort to divert funds to defense contractors (not the troops on the ground), has gutted such programs as social security, fuel assistance, and prescription drugs for the elderly and poor? And, why impeach a president who personally lobbied for Medicare D – the largest windfall for big Pharma? I guess you’d have to be a real idiot to want put back into the hands of the people. Further, regarding marriage for gays. It was illegal in the US for whites to marry blacks until 1967, until the US Supreme Court struck down the Racial Integrity Act in Loving v. Virginia. As constitutional lawyer, I get extremely uneasy when I hear someone touting states’ rights – as you do re: Roe vs. Wade. States’ Rights is a code used by many to sugar coat denying minorities equal rights under the law. It took the US Supreme Court (federal court) to put an end to the eugenics laws in this country. Few dispute the legitimacy of that decision. The Court made its decision regarding reproductive rights – it is the law of the land. The US Supreme Court acts to safeguard the rights of those who lack the power held by the majority. The federal government can set the minimum protection afforded to a person; the states can act to extend more protection than the federal government – not less. Let’s not go back to the bad old days when states could dictate what goes on in our bedrooms. We have precious little right to privacy left – let’s keep what little bit we still have.

    Like

  5. Steve Dennis's avatar
    April 21, 2008 4:42 pm

    Constitutional Lawyer, I have a “why” question for you. Why would you post this comment on this post? It has nothing to do with the topic.
    The founding fathers were leary of a central government with too much power. One of them, Jefferson I think, I’m sorry I don’t remember which one, was even against the idea of a supreme court because he felt it would take rights of the states as sovereign away from them.
    Please don’t call me a racist if I believe that the states don’t have the power that they were intended to have. That is just stupid.

    Like

  6. you don't say...'s avatar
    April 21, 2008 9:39 pm

    I saw this last Friday and posted about it on my blog. Then took it down when I saw it was a hoax. I don’t want to give that student any more attention. I took art history and am really disappointed that making any kind of statement, no matter how deranged it is, can be considered “art” today.

    What this student did or “thought about” doing is really really disturbing. I’m surprised no one has suggested putting her in a mental institution because she really sounds like a sociopath. Imagine if she has kids. What would she be willing to do for the sake of “art”?

    Like

  7. Steve Dennis's avatar
    April 21, 2008 10:22 pm

    When I first saw this, it was in the morning before I went to work. I had a post about half written in the morning, when I got home and found out it was a hoax I still felt I had to write about it. I threw out my original post and started again. She still calims that it is real, but that she doesn’t really know if she was ever pregnant.
    As far as how far someone will go for “art” just look at the example AA provided. Starving a dog for “art” is about as low as you can go.

    Like

  8. you don't say...'s avatar
    April 22, 2008 10:07 pm

    wow. The person who starved a dog for art should be…ok, I won’t say what I wanted to say. That person should rot in jail! And be placed in the same mental ward for sociopaths as the yale student.

    Like

  9. Camcorders's avatar
    March 10, 2009 11:10 am

    Some very interesting and insightful thoughts. I like this.

    Like

Leave a reply to Net Cancel reply