ProWomanProLife

  • The Story
  • The Women
  • Notable Columns
  • Contact Us
You are here: Home / All Posts / Using babies to discuss evil

Using babies to discuss evil

March 17, 2010 by Andrea Mrozek 6 Comments

I read this article, about how an artist wants to explore the the genesis of evil and did so by dressing her baby girl up as various dictators, and felt distinctly uncomfortable.

What do you think? (And why, because I’m still trying to figure out why I’m so uncomfortable.)

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Filed Under: All Posts Tagged With: Nina Maria Kleivan

Comments

  1. Nicole says

    March 17, 2010 at 12:41 pm

    Wow. Yes. My immediate reaction was anger. You know, the WHAT! They’re making Babies the evil ones!? reaction. Then I actually read the article. And well, her point that people who do bad things could be anyone. It’s the choices we make. Still, the uncomfortable factor for me was the fact that babies don’t actually DO this stuff. But the point I guess, is some babies grow up and then DO this stuff. Scary. Sad.

    Reply
  2. James says

    March 17, 2010 at 1:52 pm

    I was glad to see them use Communists as examples of evil.

    I wish they had included Castro and Chavez and other modern-day socialism/evil fellows

    Reply
  3. Suricou Raven says

    March 17, 2010 at 3:11 pm

    Artists are supposed to make you feel uncomfortable. Getting an emotional reaction is their job.

    Reply
  4. midas says

    March 17, 2010 at 9:01 pm

    A form of child abuse masquerading as art, perhaps? Yes, some kids grow up bad and a theory already exists on how abortion reduces criminality.

    Bottom line: Let’s get rid of those labour intensive, life style cramping, expensive, inconsiderate creatures, and enjoy life to the bitter end!

    (Disclaimer: I did not read the article beyond the first few lines. Pictures sufficed.)

    Reply
  5. Jennifer Derwey says

    March 19, 2010 at 9:45 am

    While the ‘genesis of evil’ is described best by the doctrine of original sin, these photos seem more or less just shock value. I’m not particularly uncomfortable with babies dressed as nazis (for a photo shoot length of time), as the propaganda geared towards children during the second world war was far more sinister. Seeing toddlers give nazi salutes, now THAT’S discomforting. Seeing six year old girls with lipstick and bikinis on saying they look fat and talking about sex, now THAT’S discomforting. The ‘evilness’ lies not with these individuals (who were not exactly just products of their choices, but also their social environments) but with the capacity for ‘evilness’ to masquerade as social norm. If that’s the artists point, that ‘evil’ comes in an innocent loveable package, then I can appreciate that (even if she is exploiting her baby). If it’s just ‘be shocked because I gave my baby a Hitler moustache’, then I’m not impressed.

    Reply
  6. Christy says

    March 19, 2010 at 5:06 pm

    I think my uncomfortableness around it is the idea that the pictures stay around forever (and public, forever). If she ever became famous, the pictures would be dragged out again and again. The last photo, the article said, showed her naked. So there’s a naked photo of her out. Do her junior high classmates all need to be able to see her naked baby pictures? Most naked baby pictures in books don’t have the child’s name attached to it.

    Then there’s just the idea of this child being used. Her body as an art project. In a lot of ways it dismisses her personhood. She’s not a person, she’s a prop.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrssby feather

Notable Columns

  • A pro-woman budget wouldn't tell me how to live my life
  • Bad medicine
  • Birth control pills have side effects
  • Canada Summer Jobs debacle–Can Trudeau call abortion a right?
  • Celebrate these Jubilee jailbirds
  • China has laws against sex selection. But not Canada. Why?
  • Family love is not a contract
  • Freedom to discuss the “choice”
  • Gender quotas don't help business or women
  • Ghomeshi case a wake-up call
  • Hidden cost of choice
  • Life at the heart of the matter
  • Life issues and the media
  • Need for rational abortion debate
  • New face of the abortion debate
  • People vs. kidneys
  • PET-P press release
  • Pro-life work is making me sick
  • Prolife doesn't mean anti-woman
  • Settle down or "lean in"
  • Sex education is all about values
  • Thank you, Camille Paglia
  • The new face of feminism
  • Today’s law worth discussing
  • When debate is shut down in Canada’s highest places
  • Whither feminism?

Categories

  • All Posts
  • Assisted Suicide/Euthanasia
  • Charitable
  • Ethics
  • Featured Media
  • Featured Posts
  • Feminism
  • Free Expression
  • International
  • Motherhood
  • Other
  • Political
  • Pregnancy Care Centres
  • Reproductive Technologies

All Posts

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Copyright © 2025 · News Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in