Twitter outrage over college statue shows how deep and fast society has changed
05-29-2015, 11:16 AM![[Image: CFpJgJVWgAALNB0.jpg]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CFpJgJVWgAALNB0.jpg)
http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womeninthewor...n-twitter/
Here you see a statue from the early 1990s that stands on the campus of the University of the Incarnate Word in San Antonio, Texas. It is called "Friends" and depicts a normal conversation between classmates in the 1980s/90s between a young man and a young woman.
Innocent you say? Not so to the new generation of feminist SJW crazy mob:
https://twitter.com/SadDiego/status/601874324757282816
Quote:Quote:
“The sculpture just screamed mansplaining,” Hernandez said in an email to Women in the World. She had to snap a photo of it, she said, but since she wasn’t allowed to bring electronic devices into the testing facility, she was forced to run back to her car to grab her smartphone.
And what does the local artist have to say who created the sculpture?
Quote:Quote:
If the folks at UIW were dismayed to learn about the mansplaining interpretation, Paul Tadlock, the artist who sculpted the bronze piece almost a quarter-century ago, was mildly amused. Tadlock, 79, told Women in the World in a telephone interview, “That [sculpture] was [done] in the early 1990s when my daughter was a student at the University of the Incarnate Word. In fact, that’s her. I sculpted her.”
Tadlock is familiar with Twitter, but “not on it” and, until his conversation with Women in the World, had not been aware of the concept of mansplaining, a word that entered the lexicon sometime between 2008 and 2010. After learning about the concept, Tadlock agreed that the phenomenon is common.
“That’s generally the case. The ladies know more,” he said. “Because guys, young guys particularly, love to tell everything they know to impress the girls, and the truth is most of the girls know it already.”
However, Tadlock said that the mansplaining concept was not an intended meaning behind the sculpture.
“It was two students visiting, talking … implying nothing beyond that,” Tadlock insisted even when asked if he was possibly expressing the idea of mansplaining on a subconscious level.
No surprise - it was just two student talking.
But I know of course how those crazies tick. The statue shows a man in a healthy male body position and a woman at ease listening to him. She is relaxed and enjoys the conversation while she herself displays typical feminine body language.
The statue is less about "mansplaining" than about seeing normal behavior of men and women. The current SJW marxists don't like that. They either want to see the men harmless, inferior to women, weak or at least they want women to be as masculine or warrior-like as men. The funny thing is that when I saw the statue, I thought that it was created in the 1950s. Society has been social engineered so much from the 1990s, that normal inter-sexual behavior sparks outrage.
Recently feminists in France were also outraged by this statue commemorating D-Day:
![[Image: kiss_sculpture_3069210b.jpg]](http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03069/kiss_sculpture_3069210b.jpg)
Sexual harassment and rape it is of course.
What will spark outrage in 2040? Any depiction of a healthy masculine man?
Will they demand the removal of Atlas on Wallstreet because it depicts a muscular potentially threatening man?
![[Image: 48-statue-goZOOMA-6235.jpg]](http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000pC1Ze9so2e0/s/600/48-statue-goZOOMA-6235.jpg)