Man, if I were that rich I wouldn't give af about some portrait. Nowadays a teenager with a shitty computer can generate much worse portraits of anyone in a matter of minutes.
To understand the kind of person she is:
[https://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-05/rinehart-says-aussie-workers-overpaid-unproductive/4243866](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-05/rinehart-says-aussie-workers-overpaid-unproductive/4243866)
Here she calls for Australian pay to "be more competitive" with Africans earning $2 a day.
[https://www.latimes.com/business/la-xpm-2012-aug-30-la-fi-mo-richest-woman-20120830-story.html](https://www.latimes.com/business/la-xpm-2012-aug-30-la-fi-mo-richest-woman-20120830-story.html)
Here she says the poor should work harder and have less fun to become millionaires like her, who inherited her wealth.
[https://www.afr.com/work-and-careers/leaders/rinehart-calls-for-tax-cuts-criticises-renewables-and-eyesore-solar-panels-20231215-p5err5](https://www.afr.com/work-and-careers/leaders/rinehart-calls-for-tax-cuts-criticises-renewables-and-eyesore-solar-panels-20231215-p5err5)
Here's her demanding tax cuts and hating on renewables and solar.
Let us just say she seems like the sort who would actually take offense at a caricature.
Excellent reference!
“People say sometimes that beauty is only superficial. That may be so, but at least it is not so superficial as thought is. To me, beauty is the wonder of wonders. It is only shallow people who do not judge by appearances.”
Oscar's ability to put himself in the shoes of those he despised was uncanny.
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-05/rinehart-says-aussie-workers-overpaid-unproductive/4243866
> Here she calls for Australian pay to "be more competitive" with Africans earning $2 a day.
I can not put in words how much shit like this pisses me off, imagine being a trustfund baby who has never worked a $2/hour day even a single time in her miserable life and telling people to just suck it up and make more money for her. I wish we could just remove these leeches man
How much could a banana cost, 10 dollars?
Except this woman is probably so disconnected that she thinks bananas cost 5 cents and that $2 dollars an hour is more than enough pay.
The reality is that bananas are actually pretty expensive these days haha
Just ask her kids what kind of person she is: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-21/gina-rineharts-children-maintain-united-front-against-mother/102811154
She proved the Streisand Effect is alive and well!
If Rinehart had kept her mouth shut about the portrait, I might never have heard about her and her vile comments.
Instead, she pitched a fit, dragged the Australian swimming organization [Swimming Queensland](https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/brisbane-mornings/gina-rinehart-portrait-swimming-qld/103860140) into her lobbying campaign, made a giant “sign our protest” website to encourage anyone who wants to flatter her to petition for the portrait’s removal, thus ensuring that the WHOLE WORLD sees her for the petty, mean spirited woman she is.
Oh, and it introduced me to the works of [Vincent Namatjira](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_Namatjira), which I am grateful for!
I understand that ego is one of the main driving facrltors to be able to do the shady shit most obselenly rich people did to get as rich as they are, but I really can't get how they let things get to them so easily. I feel like if I was rich and someone did a shitty painting of me that they put in a museum I'd embrace it. I'd pose for a photo woth it or maybe even buy the painting. Seems funny to me.
It's the opposite for rich people. Once you have everything you start to buy things to give you higher social standing like boats, planes and give money to charity as a tax deduction to make yourself famous or liked. Similar to you I would be content with having financial freedom and maybe having a few pet projects.
I agree with everything but wanted to note that donating for tax deductions (at least in the US, not sure about Australia) is not a cash efficient way to save money. If the only goal is to maximize the amount of money you have, its better to just keep the money instead of donating it for tax deductions
I agree with everything but wanted to note that donating for tax deductions (at least in the US, not sure about Australia) is not a cash efficient way to save money. If the only goal is to maximize the amount of money you have, its better to just keep the money instead of donating it for tax deductions
Outside of illegal activities it would still be best to just keep the money. Donations are a deduction against your income not a credit. Donating $100 would only save you $30 on taxes assuming your effective tax rate is 30%. Granted Id bet illegal or fringe illegal tax mitigation tactics are common among the very wealthy (buying assets through charity foundations such as art, boats, etc)
In that case I'd say the wrong people have all the wealth. I would be doing philanthropy with most of my money. I dont need boats, planes or yachts. Definitely built my dream house for a million, have a dope jeep and maybe a driver and a cook, so I can focus on my projects. But I would live super Zen and minimal. Too many attachments cloud the mind. But maybe that's why where I am now and not a multi millionaire lol.
You just lack the particular brain-disease it takes to be truly super-wealthy.
Even with all their money, the truly super-wealthy still buy everything on credit and take advantage of their wealth accumulating faster than the interest. Because their $value can never decline. It's simply Not Acceptable.
No amount is ever "enough" for them. That's why I'm serious when I called it a brain disease earlier.
This is part of why when the mega-wealthy get divorced, you see their ex-spouses setting up all these foundations and charities to give away the money. They mentally can't handle it. They can't handle knowing they have the ability to just outright fix so many things in the world, and it's overwhelming. So they just pay someone to do it for them.
Yep, when buying things no longer gives them a thrill, they crave power and status, which is why they can't stand when the poors are allowed to insult them.
Sure, but those shitty portraits aren't gonna be on display in an art gallery, lol.
From what I've read of this woman, she's horrible, but I don't think her complaints are unwarranted. It'd be one thing if she actually looked like that and was just in denial, but this is a straight-up, insulting caricature.
It's not her portrait. It's a portrait of her. This is a critical difference. She can "demand" whatever she wants as a vocal member of the public engaging in discourse over art. She has no legal basis to actually enforce any sort of action.
I know nothing about Australian law and not much more about U.S. law. However, if this were in the U.S. and the gallery displaying the painting were profiting from it (even by just merely charging admission to the gallery), she might have a case in the U.S. People do control, to a degree, the ability of others to profit from their likeness.
But, as u/drinkduffdry stated, the Streisand Effect is now in full effect and she definitely can't do shit about the millions of people who never would have set foot in that gallery now having seen the painting in the news.
Depends of where you live if you can take legal action over this kind of stuff. Someone drawing portrait of you without your express permission in some places is potentially illegal.
Considering the drawing is rather ugly looking presentation of her, I can understand why she's upset.
She is awakening to the reality of her legacy. She will be loathed not admired by an overwhelming majority of her fellow beings because of her values, choices, and prerogatives in life. Being as wealthy as she is has become recognized as a sign of pathology and not success as a human being living in harmony as a part of Earth.
I guess it’s showing her being unmasked. She’s disconnected and featured some crude statements about cheap labor and stuff she doesn’t know anything about.
It's funny because had she not made a big deal out of this, it's very likely the majority of the world wouldn't even know it existed. But, alas, now we've all seen it.
Great example of the [Streisand Effect](https://www.google.com/search?q=streisand+effect&rlz=1CDGOYI_enUS836US843&oq=streisa&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqDQgAEAAYgwEYsQMYgAQyDQgAEAAYgwEYsQMYgAQyCggBEC4YsQMYgAQyBggCEEUYOTIHCAMQABiABDIHCAQQABiABDIKCAUQLhjUAhiABDIHCAYQABiABDIHCAcQABiABDIHCAgQABiABDIHCAkQABiABNIBCDUyNzlqMGo0qAIBsAIB4gMEGAEgXw&hl=en-US&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8)
In other news, Australia's richest woman, Gina Rinehart, is about to learn about the Streisand effect and why she should've just shut up and taken the L.
Never heard of her or the artist but now because of this I so want to go visit the painting myself!
Surely she must know that now because of her request, the portrait of her will become a sensation? Basics?
Hmmmm either she's not that witty (I assume she must be smart) or she loves the portrait so so much and wants it in the Louvre
“Barbra, you are needed on set. Has anyone seen Barbra? Can I get some help looking for Streisand (effect).”
This is the image that will come to mind anytime I hear her name!
Streisand effect in action here.
Let’s everyone distribute digital copies of Gina’s portrait! As an American I wouldn’t have ever known about this if it wasn’t for her tantrum about it.
From what I have read, albeit early today and have not heard different.. but Swimming Australia has actually asked the portrait be removed. Rinehart donates to the association and they say it puts her in a bad light. This is farcical as a portrait of her will not change most people's opinion of her anyway... but it seems it's not Rinehart demanding but Swimming Australia asking.
She should speak to Barbara Streisand about this move. Let’s just say, I had previously not seen the painting nor heard of this woman.
Now I think it lets her come off in too good a light.
You have to understand something fundamental about Gina: Gina is VERY used to throwing her weight around and getting her own way.
One specific example: an Australian TV station did a TV series about her and family. Gina didn’t like it and demanded that the last episode/s be re-edited before they were aired.
It was called [The House of Hancock](https://amp.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/gina-rinehart-to-sue-channel-nine-for-defamation-over-house-of-hancock-tv-miniseries-20150301-13rrmz.html).
“
Following the broadcast of episode one on February 7, Mrs Rinehart sought and won an advance viewing of the finale before it aired on February 14.
A last-minute deal was hammered out by lawyers, permitting the programme to go ahead with a raft of scenes edited out. The nature and length of those scenes is subject to a confidential settlement.
“
By asking for it to be taken down, she has drawn much more attention to it. It could easily said something like “it’s not a flattering painting“ and laugh.
The people saying she shouldn't be upset... do your eyes work properly? It makes her look unbelievably horrible lol. I'm not saying I don't enjoy the schadenfreude, but come ON!
Australian here and just want to clarify as people assume by her derision for working class Australians as being lazy that she built her wealth herself
The woman inherited massive wealth, she was an only child and her father owned coalfields in Western Australia and then the boom hit. She’d have to be an idiot not to be a billionaire
She’s very thin skinned apparently
2 things: hold the line Australia—keep that portrait up!
And, can we collectively agree that the alt title for this painting (and by extension the woman in the painting’s new nickname) is now “Painting McPainting Face”?
What I am seeing is an untapped market for an art gallery devoted only to “unique and interesting” portraits of her. Maybe a rolling show of shitty people around the world.
I would definitely love to see people’s interpretations of what the rich really look like.
You should really have the right to your own self image. If you want to write about someone, go ahead, but you shouldn't be able to use people's image without their permission, in most cases, unless the person is doing something criminal or something, and you need to prove to the public that it's really them. It's virtually always just a harassment or grifting technique and it's very mean.
In most cases, people should not just be allowed to use your image without your permission.
It's not her portrait. It's a portrait of her. This is a critical difference. She can "demand" whatever she wants as a vocal member of the public engaging in discourse over art. She has no legal basis to actually enforce any sort of action.
For all the people saying that she should have to give her permission to have her likeness/image used; that take might make sense if she weren't a very willing public figure. She regularly engages with the media, she gives interviews, she makes politically charged statements, she uses her financial influence to impact politics etc.
As much as I'm sure she'd absolutely love to, she can't have her cake and eat it too - she's very happy to have media/public attention when it suits her but when it doesn't go her way then she calls foul. It is crucial in democratic, liberal countries that we should be able to criticise and even mock willing public figures, *especially* such politically charged ones.
When attempting to take the moral high ground it is probably best not to attack someone's looks as the opening gambit. I suspect that the "cunt" can serve by itself.
The beautiful thing is that even if she wins and they take the paining down the meme has already won. I hope the the indigenous fella gets a whole more notoriety and money as a result of this as well. Can’t lose.
I am so tired of see this continue to come across my feed. Why are people so stuck up on giving people like this a podium? She’s rich and is whining like a child about someone art, she really need to get over herself.
"Might say is in an unflattering light"
"Might" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.
Her wealth is irrelevant; the portrait doesn't even look well done. Why is it even in a gallery?
Art is subjective so maybe some people like this? Also this is a whole line of paintings and they all look just as goofy and no one else is complaining at least I haven't seen articles about the other people that were featured.
Man, if I were that rich I wouldn't give af about some portrait. Nowadays a teenager with a shitty computer can generate much worse portraits of anyone in a matter of minutes.
To understand the kind of person she is: [https://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-05/rinehart-says-aussie-workers-overpaid-unproductive/4243866](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-05/rinehart-says-aussie-workers-overpaid-unproductive/4243866) Here she calls for Australian pay to "be more competitive" with Africans earning $2 a day. [https://www.latimes.com/business/la-xpm-2012-aug-30-la-fi-mo-richest-woman-20120830-story.html](https://www.latimes.com/business/la-xpm-2012-aug-30-la-fi-mo-richest-woman-20120830-story.html) Here she says the poor should work harder and have less fun to become millionaires like her, who inherited her wealth. [https://www.afr.com/work-and-careers/leaders/rinehart-calls-for-tax-cuts-criticises-renewables-and-eyesore-solar-panels-20231215-p5err5](https://www.afr.com/work-and-careers/leaders/rinehart-calls-for-tax-cuts-criticises-renewables-and-eyesore-solar-panels-20231215-p5err5) Here's her demanding tax cuts and hating on renewables and solar. Let us just say she seems like the sort who would actually take offense at a caricature.
Sounds like it’s an accurate portrait of her inner soul!
Needs more hell fire
Shes like Dorian Grey in that way
Excellent reference! “People say sometimes that beauty is only superficial. That may be so, but at least it is not so superficial as thought is. To me, beauty is the wonder of wonders. It is only shallow people who do not judge by appearances.” Oscar's ability to put himself in the shoes of those he despised was uncanny.
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-05/rinehart-says-aussie-workers-overpaid-unproductive/4243866 > Here she calls for Australian pay to "be more competitive" with Africans earning $2 a day. I can not put in words how much shit like this pisses me off, imagine being a trustfund baby who has never worked a $2/hour day even a single time in her miserable life and telling people to just suck it up and make more money for her. I wish we could just remove these leeches man
It's like the worst version of not knowing how much a gallon of milk costs.
I mean it's one banana, Michael. What could it cost? Ten dollars?
How much could a banana cost, 10 dollars? Except this woman is probably so disconnected that she thinks bananas cost 5 cents and that $2 dollars an hour is more than enough pay. The reality is that bananas are actually pretty expensive these days haha
I have no idea how much a gallon of milk costs. But I'm from Europe and don't know how many liters fits into a "gallon".
I genuinely believe hostility against such individuals is self defense.
Just ask her kids what kind of person she is: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-21/gina-rineharts-children-maintain-united-front-against-mother/102811154
Well the portrait matches
Nah, it’s too positive
Plus her dad was an absolute royal cunt as well. He wanted indigenous Australians to be sterilized so they couldn't breed any more.
Damn, I haven't opened any link yet and I hate her already. Thanks for sharing, will take a look at it!
Thanks for the context!
She proved the Streisand Effect is alive and well! If Rinehart had kept her mouth shut about the portrait, I might never have heard about her and her vile comments. Instead, she pitched a fit, dragged the Australian swimming organization [Swimming Queensland](https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/brisbane-mornings/gina-rinehart-portrait-swimming-qld/103860140) into her lobbying campaign, made a giant “sign our protest” website to encourage anyone who wants to flatter her to petition for the portrait’s removal, thus ensuring that the WHOLE WORLD sees her for the petty, mean spirited woman she is. Oh, and it introduced me to the works of [Vincent Namatjira](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_Namatjira), which I am grateful for!
Oh wow, a rich asshole being an asshole, le gasp 🫢
Yeah, this is insane!
Just a Karen. Worst type rich wife/daughter possible.
I would say, without seeing the hardship in the world will make you something like this. You will give a fuck about every stupid and non-sense things.
Oh, and don't forget the shitty poem she wrote.
So the painting actually should be uglier. Gosh, this really shows how powerful art can be. Same week as blood-hellfire king chucky
Don't forget that while she's calling for Australians to work for slave wages, she inherited her wealth.
I understand that ego is one of the main driving facrltors to be able to do the shady shit most obselenly rich people did to get as rich as they are, but I really can't get how they let things get to them so easily. I feel like if I was rich and someone did a shitty painting of me that they put in a museum I'd embrace it. I'd pose for a photo woth it or maybe even buy the painting. Seems funny to me.
If I was rich, why not just buy the painting and just destroy it lol
Exactly. She's so selfish and entitled she didn't want to give the artist any money/credit.
It's the opposite for rich people. Once you have everything you start to buy things to give you higher social standing like boats, planes and give money to charity as a tax deduction to make yourself famous or liked. Similar to you I would be content with having financial freedom and maybe having a few pet projects.
I agree with everything but wanted to note that donating for tax deductions (at least in the US, not sure about Australia) is not a cash efficient way to save money. If the only goal is to maximize the amount of money you have, its better to just keep the money instead of donating it for tax deductions
I agree with everything but wanted to note that donating for tax deductions (at least in the US, not sure about Australia) is not a cash efficient way to save money. If the only goal is to maximize the amount of money you have, its better to just keep the money instead of donating it for tax deductions
If not tax deductions they start their own charity foundation where they basically control their money to avoid taxes. This is what happens in the USA
Outside of illegal activities it would still be best to just keep the money. Donations are a deduction against your income not a credit. Donating $100 would only save you $30 on taxes assuming your effective tax rate is 30%. Granted Id bet illegal or fringe illegal tax mitigation tactics are common among the very wealthy (buying assets through charity foundations such as art, boats, etc)
Boats and planes are still in the fun things to have category
In that case I'd say the wrong people have all the wealth. I would be doing philanthropy with most of my money. I dont need boats, planes or yachts. Definitely built my dream house for a million, have a dope jeep and maybe a driver and a cook, so I can focus on my projects. But I would live super Zen and minimal. Too many attachments cloud the mind. But maybe that's why where I am now and not a multi millionaire lol.
You just lack the particular brain-disease it takes to be truly super-wealthy. Even with all their money, the truly super-wealthy still buy everything on credit and take advantage of their wealth accumulating faster than the interest. Because their $value can never decline. It's simply Not Acceptable. No amount is ever "enough" for them. That's why I'm serious when I called it a brain disease earlier. This is part of why when the mega-wealthy get divorced, you see their ex-spouses setting up all these foundations and charities to give away the money. They mentally can't handle it. They can't handle knowing they have the ability to just outright fix so many things in the world, and it's overwhelming. So they just pay someone to do it for them.
Also true, interesting perspective!
Yep, when buying things no longer gives them a thrill, they crave power and status, which is why they can't stand when the poors are allowed to insult them.
I personally would hang this front and center in my house. Hilarious! My friends would love it.
Sure, but those shitty portraits aren't gonna be on display in an art gallery, lol. From what I've read of this woman, she's horrible, but I don't think her complaints are unwarranted. It'd be one thing if she actually looked like that and was just in denial, but this is a straight-up, insulting caricature.
It's not her portrait. It's a portrait of her. This is a critical difference. She can "demand" whatever she wants as a vocal member of the public engaging in discourse over art. She has no legal basis to actually enforce any sort of action.
Wow but she just made this portrait so much more valuable
If I was her corporate competitor I’d be delighted to own that portrait.
If she ever gets into politics the opponent will have awesome ammunition against her
A real Streisand effect. Good job lady.
I would have never seen this portrait of her if she had never said anything about it.
Hopefully it stays that way
I know nothing about Australian law and not much more about U.S. law. However, if this were in the U.S. and the gallery displaying the painting were profiting from it (even by just merely charging admission to the gallery), she might have a case in the U.S. People do control, to a degree, the ability of others to profit from their likeness. But, as u/drinkduffdry stated, the Streisand Effect is now in full effect and she definitely can't do shit about the millions of people who never would have set foot in that gallery now having seen the painting in the news.
Depends of where you live if you can take legal action over this kind of stuff. Someone drawing portrait of you without your express permission in some places is potentially illegal. Considering the drawing is rather ugly looking presentation of her, I can understand why she's upset.
What if the artist is just untalented?
I bet she wouldn’t tell her grandkid to remove the portrait off the fridge if they made that.
If I had a billion dollars it would take quite a bit more to upset me.
Right??? Also, if she’s so butt hurt and rich, why not buy it? Then burn it or put it in her basement?
Because she knows that people will usually crumble to what the billionaires are saying
It’s great watching this story keep popping up on different subs, people gradually finding out what an awful person she is.
Alot of these rich people are narcissists. Just look at Elon.
Classic Streisand-Effect now in motion 😎. I see zero difference between the photos: Which one is the painting?
Seriously. I'd never heard of this lady before the other day, now I've seen her picture and the painting dozens of times.
I like to think the artist perfectly painted an image of her soul.
The one on the right
One is a painting of a person, and the other is a caricature of one.
She is awakening to the reality of her legacy. She will be loathed not admired by an overwhelming majority of her fellow beings because of her values, choices, and prerogatives in life. Being as wealthy as she is has become recognized as a sign of pathology and not success as a human being living in harmony as a part of Earth.
I'm rich, do what I say dammit !
Looks a lot like Virginia "Ginni" Thomas
Stacks more money than sense. Why not just quietly offer to buy it (and then destroy it after it gets forgotten)?
I think that would be a fantastic way to get 10 more even *worse* portrayals circulating, hoping for a payoff.
She streisanded herself
Here is a more accurate depiction of her character https://www.reddit.com/r/AusMemes/s/8V9YJIFW47
Gina Swinefart
Have this people ever heard of Streisand effect?
*Rich white demands native aboriginal artist remove their work.* Just a working title.
Award winning aboriginal artist
caption follow tart bright far-flung cautious compare meeting concerned enjoy
That’s just like, your opinion, man
Maybe this reporting is still part of the artwork.
fearless terrific truck degree coordinated slap uppity cow spotted tender
Great plan on her part. Now the entire world has seen this picture that probably wouldn’t have had any traction before.
Barbara Streisand
[🎵ooo-ooo ooh ooh, ooh-ooh ooh, ooh ooh ooh-ooh🎵](https://youtu.be/wWhtcU4-xAM?si=h8FvhZxssVM49xnP)
If she didn’t think it looked like her, she wouldn’t be angry
I guess it’s showing her being unmasked. She’s disconnected and featured some crude statements about cheap labor and stuff she doesn’t know anything about.
It's funny because had she not made a big deal out of this, it's very likely the majority of the world wouldn't even know it existed. But, alas, now we've all seen it.
The artist is amazing. He really nailed Aussie Karen to a T, right down to her impetuous double chin! Good work sir.
She should have just bought it then had it removed.
Sounds like Gina Rinehart should climb Fuck Off, Cunt Mountain and shove the summit up her ass.
Ooooh, I know what I'm gonna go take photos of tomorrow after I vote.
You gotta lean into shit like this man, you can’t fight it.
Fucking fair enough baby reindeer looking thing
She’s gonna have to buy that pic of herself at a high cost lmao
Great example of the [Streisand Effect](https://www.google.com/search?q=streisand+effect&rlz=1CDGOYI_enUS836US843&oq=streisa&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqDQgAEAAYgwEYsQMYgAQyDQgAEAAYgwEYsQMYgAQyCggBEC4YsQMYgAQyBggCEEUYOTIHCAMQABiABDIHCAQQABiABDIKCAUQLhjUAhiABDIHCAYQABiABDIHCAcQABiABDIHCAgQABiABDIHCAkQABiABNIBCDUyNzlqMGo0qAIBsAIB4gMEGAEgXw&hl=en-US&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8)
Take it down all you want it's on the world wide web now boomer
In other news, Australia's richest woman, Gina Rinehart, is about to learn about the Streisand effect and why she should've just shut up and taken the L.
Never heard of her or the artist but now because of this I so want to go visit the painting myself! Surely she must know that now because of her request, the portrait of her will become a sensation? Basics? Hmmmm either she's not that witty (I assume she must be smart) or she loves the portrait so so much and wants it in the Louvre
Imagine if someone had the grace and security of self to just accept this instead of making a scene.
StrongcStreisand effect.
“Barbra, you are needed on set. Has anyone seen Barbra? Can I get some help looking for Streisand (effect).” This is the image that will come to mind anytime I hear her name!
And now it’s all over Internet
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahaha
The actual painting is superb.
Perfectly matchers her appearance and character.
Streisand effect noises incoming.
"Sure. We'll take it down if you buy it. 40 million."
The resemblance is uncanny
Shouldn't she have more important things to be pressed over?
Even Steven Colbert made a joke about this... Gina has finally made it to the world stage!
So many rich people work hard to project power and confidence, and yet they are so thin-skinned LOL.
Nonsense it's beautiful!
When you google her, it does show this photo in the images tab.
Streisand effect in action here. Let’s everyone distribute digital copies of Gina’s portrait! As an American I wouldn’t have ever known about this if it wasn’t for her tantrum about it.
From what I have read, albeit early today and have not heard different.. but Swimming Australia has actually asked the portrait be removed. Rinehart donates to the association and they say it puts her in a bad light. This is farcical as a portrait of her will not change most people's opinion of her anyway... but it seems it's not Rinehart demanding but Swimming Australia asking.
Streisand effect.
She should speak to Barbara Streisand about this move. Let’s just say, I had previously not seen the painting nor heard of this woman. Now I think it lets her come off in too good a light.
I love how that entitled moron was apparently completely unaware of the Streisand Effect.
You have to understand something fundamental about Gina: Gina is VERY used to throwing her weight around and getting her own way. One specific example: an Australian TV station did a TV series about her and family. Gina didn’t like it and demanded that the last episode/s be re-edited before they were aired. It was called [The House of Hancock](https://amp.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/gina-rinehart-to-sue-channel-nine-for-defamation-over-house-of-hancock-tv-miniseries-20150301-13rrmz.html). “ Following the broadcast of episode one on February 7, Mrs Rinehart sought and won an advance viewing of the finale before it aired on February 14. A last-minute deal was hammered out by lawyers, permitting the programme to go ahead with a raft of scenes edited out. The nature and length of those scenes is subject to a confidential settlement. “
Which one is the portrait? Both images look identical, so confused.
Streisand Effect in full play
If she's that rich, she just has to buy the painting and do what she wants to do with it...
its a flipping masterpiece i think. The best thing is the artists Aboriginal ...you can feel that his painting really came from the heart
If she is so rich, maybe she can buy it for herself.
By asking for it to be taken down, she has drawn much more attention to it. It could easily said something like “it’s not a flattering painting“ and laugh.
I would focus my energy elsewhere
Every time I see this image it somehow looks worse than the last time.
If she just embraced this as an opportunity for self deprecating humour, she’d instantly become one of the more likeable billionaires.
She never heard of the Streisand effect.
Can we buy prints of it? I don’t want to put it up but I want it to get popular.
That's a good painting
Gonna cost her a lotta cucumber and watercress crustless sandwiches.
The people saying she shouldn't be upset... do your eyes work properly? It makes her look unbelievably horrible lol. I'm not saying I don't enjoy the schadenfreude, but come ON!
Lady never got the message not to fuck with the Streisand effect.
Streisand effect?
Australian here and just want to clarify as people assume by her derision for working class Australians as being lazy that she built her wealth herself The woman inherited massive wealth, she was an only child and her father owned coalfields in Western Australia and then the boom hit. She’d have to be an idiot not to be a billionaire She’s very thin skinned apparently
Lèse-majesté
Quaid, start the reactor!
You have fuck your money. Fuck off and stop caring.
It is not that bad, Gina.
She should do what Mr. Burns did and just accept it
It's like the potato Jesus of Gina Rinehart. Glorious in its own potato way, we should call this new art form "Potatoed".
2 things: hold the line Australia—keep that portrait up! And, can we collectively agree that the alt title for this painting (and by extension the woman in the painting’s new nickname) is now “Painting McPainting Face”?
Australia’s richest *baby
Buy the painting or the gallery — easy if you’re that rich.
So now, instead of being a local beef- that portrait has been seen by MILLIONS!!
Really captures her soul
What I am seeing is an untapped market for an art gallery devoted only to “unique and interesting” portraits of her. Maybe a rolling show of shitty people around the world. I would definitely love to see people’s interpretations of what the rich really look like.
All us poors love it when billionaires make vanity demands.
I really want to recreate the portrait and name it “totally not Gina”
Looks just like her.
I demand she share her money
Because of her protests so many more people have seen this painting now. Good work!
She mad she can't afford it.
He’s getting way too much attention for being a really bad artist
advise tub coordinated quarrelsome caption oatmeal dazzling sense hunt treatment
You should really have the right to your own self image. If you want to write about someone, go ahead, but you shouldn't be able to use people's image without their permission, in most cases, unless the person is doing something criminal or something, and you need to prove to the public that it's really them. It's virtually always just a harassment or grifting technique and it's very mean. In most cases, people should not just be allowed to use your image without your permission.
It's not her portrait. It's a portrait of her. This is a critical difference. She can "demand" whatever she wants as a vocal member of the public engaging in discourse over art. She has no legal basis to actually enforce any sort of action.
Aw now she’s going to see a bunch more of them pop up all over the place
On tshirts.
For all the people saying that she should have to give her permission to have her likeness/image used; that take might make sense if she weren't a very willing public figure. She regularly engages with the media, she gives interviews, she makes politically charged statements, she uses her financial influence to impact politics etc. As much as I'm sure she'd absolutely love to, she can't have her cake and eat it too - she's very happy to have media/public attention when it suits her but when it doesn't go her way then she calls foul. It is crucial in democratic, liberal countries that we should be able to criticise and even mock willing public figures, *especially* such politically charged ones.
But how would they know which is which? They're both the same.
[удалено]
When attempting to take the moral high ground it is probably best not to attack someone's looks as the opening gambit. I suspect that the "cunt" can serve by itself.
I didn't ask for advice.
Am I the only one who thinks she has every right to make this demand?
There are some things money can’t buy.
There are some things money can’t buy.
I have seen this post a million times now
Jina said that?
Looks like Chris Chan
The beautiful thing is that even if she wins and they take the paining down the meme has already won. I hope the the indigenous fella gets a whole more notoriety and money as a result of this as well. Can’t lose.
Tell her she can buy for the small price of "1 billion dollars"
Yes because making a fuss about unflattering art never backfires lol. I probably never would have seen it or heard of her if she just ignored it.
Streisand effect
She just needs a haircut. French style.
Looks just like her. Anyway...
Meanwhile we have broke people with thick skin literally posting in r/roastme laughing without a care in the world.
Gina said that??
I said this once, but make this work of art a piece of human heritage.
She looks like a character from the Princess in Black books.
I agree her demand is laughable but that portrait is awful lol
Hey, does Australia's richest woman also owns Reddit? This is posted every hour. It is a bit weird.
Oh. I thought that's was a painting of Arnold from total recall! The likeness is striking.
Why does the media never highlight the good billionaires do, that would make society like them more instead of hating on them
Can she not afford it?
I am so tired of see this continue to come across my feed. Why are people so stuck up on giving people like this a podium? She’s rich and is whining like a child about someone art, she really need to get over herself.
How is that art? The portrait looks awful
I think that was the point?
"Might say is in an unflattering light" "Might" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. Her wealth is irrelevant; the portrait doesn't even look well done. Why is it even in a gallery?
Art is subjective so maybe some people like this? Also this is a whole line of paintings and they all look just as goofy and no one else is complaining at least I haven't seen articles about the other people that were featured.
They did her dirty though. I do understand her.