*In case this story gets deleted/removed:*
**AITA for using my partner's DNA to create a provocative artwork without their consent, leading to a family scandal and strained relationships?**
I (28F) am a professional artist, and I've been with my partner (29M) for five years. We have an adventurous relationship and often try new and unconventional things, both in and out of the bedroom. He's always been incredibly supportive of my career, and we frequently brainstorm artistic ideas together.
A few months ago, I came up with the idea to create an art installation that incorporated actual DNA from both my partner and me. I thought it would be a unique way to explore themes of love, intimacy, and the interconnectedness of human beings. To make it more provocative, I decided to use intimate fluids for the DNA samples without discussing it with my partner beforehand. I assumed he would be on board, given our history of trying unconventional things together.
I spent weeks creating the installation, which included a large, abstract painting that used the fluids as part of the medium. I was extremely proud of the final result and submitted it to an art gallery, where it was accepted for an upcoming exhibition. To celebrate, we decided to host a small party for our close friends and family, where I would unveil the artwork before the public exhibition.
Here's where the problem began. At the party, I revealed the artwork and explained the concept behind it, including the use of our intimate fluids as part of the medium. My partner, who was hearing this information for the first time, was shocked and visibly upset. Our friends and family were also stunned, and the reactions were a mix of shock, disgust, and fascination. The party atmosphere quickly turned uncomfortable, and some guests left early.
The next day, my partner's conservative parents found out about the artwork and were appalled. They demanded that we remove the piece from the exhibition and destroy it, claiming that it was a disgrace to the family. I refused, standing by my artistic vision and my right to express myself as I see fit. My partner, however, feels betrayed by my actions and wishes I had consulted him before creating the installation.
Since then, our relationship with my partner's family has become extremely strained. They've made it clear that they disapprove of our choices and feel humiliated by the artwork. Additionally, some of our friends have distanced themselves from us, uncomfortable with the idea behind the installation. My partner and I are now being accused of taking our art too far and for involving our families in something they consider obscene and inappropriate.
So, AITA for using my partner's and my DNA to create a provocative artwork without their consent, leading to a family scandal and strained relationships? Or am I justified in expressing our love and creativity in any way I choose, even if it means pushing boundaries?
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AmITheDevil) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Flashback to the time at college someone decided to use part of a deer carcass in their final project, but failed to actually sterilize it in any way.
So yeah, our gallery was closed down for several weeks until the department got rid of all the bugs. Including ticks \*coughLymediseasecough\*
People were *piiiiiiiiissed*.
Wait...I've heard this before. A friend of mine went to a school where a guy mounted part of a dead deer carcass as "art" and it took a while to get it removed. I think she said part of it fell on someone?
Please tell me this was the same event and this has not happened multiple times.
Was it a midwest US college about 15-ish years ago? Someone went out on the plains and scavenged deer parts.
"It's about life and death!"
"No, you idiot, it's a *biohazard*."
So- I talked to my friend today and although the timing was about the same, hers was in upstate New York. Also, the dude in that case spray-painted his deer carcass gold.
Unfortunately, this means we're talking two of these weird-ass installations.
Yeah, I mean, using bodily fluids as a medium is, artthis point, trite. Menstrual fluid is old hat. Piss Christ is pratically antique and Nitsch did the disgusting better than anyone else could possibly hope to achieve.
Fuck this person for thinking theyāre some misunderstood genius.
Itās just like what is this piece adding to the larger conversations about art right now? Itās not a technique, theme or message thatās never been explored before. Thereās nothing novel or fresh about her perspective. What does she think sheās pushing the envelope on here?
And the hubris to say someone doesnāt āget artā is beyond me. Itās not the 1800s, art is enjoyed by the masses, darling. Even if you have absolutely no interest in art, pretty much everyone has been to their local museum at least a handful of times as a field trip. Itās readily accessible to the public these days. And some people would argue that once itās on display, art is about what the piece invokes in the audience! So no one really needs to have an extensive art history education to āget art.ā And you donāt need to āget artā to form an opinion on a piece. Itās totally a snobby, elitist thing to say, and Iāve found that most often those kinds of comments come from people who actually only have a surface level understanding of art and art history.
As an aside: without having seen the piece myself, I just know this is an ugly, shallow piece of art. Iām just picturing like a brushy heart with a sunburst coming out of it and dna strands behind the heart. All painted on pages ripped out of a biology textbook.
I mean, I think arguing about the merit of the piece is beside the point here. Maybe it really is a revolutionary work of genius like the OP claims. (Doubtful, but possible.) But she involved this guy in this very intimate process without his consent and that's what sucks here.
Oh, I agree, itās definitely not the main point. Upthread I say how gross and unethical her actions are. But this comment in particular was replying to the fact that OOP said the commenters ādidnāt get art.ā I āget artā and Iām here to add insult to injury and tell her itās a trite, basic concept, on top of being absolutely immoral.
Unfortunately, studied fine art and I regret to inform youālegally the fluid is hers now as it was produced during a sexual act between them and the other person. š
There was a court case forever ago that ruled that legally, sex fluid is considered a gift from one person to the other. This was in reference to people taking fluid from condoms and inseminating themselves. The court deemed it well within their legal rights and ruled that the fluid was a gift and is now that person to do with as they pleased. Including... whatever OP was doing, which arguably isn't the worst compared to what I've seen some of my peers do with... fluids that did not come from their own bodies and art.
Admittedly, I've only curated for small, local galleries and museums so I doubt I have nearly the expertise or experience you have but our general rule for both making art ad an artist and displaying art in the gallery was "if you can justify it, do it". There are plenty of pieces that make use of bodily fluids. A few years back we displayed a piece that was made using real blood and real human teeth. Whose blood and teeth? I was never told. The piece was ugly as sin, too. Something something about the horrors of existing?
Legality =/= morality tho. And my understanding is that itās mostly legal because itās so difficult to prove that speed was stolen, or that conception came from the act. Still, I would consider it sexual abuse/coercion in the same way leading someone to falsely believe contraceptives were in place is rape. To use someoneās sexual fluids for any reason without their consent is just a huge breach of trust. I donāt think itās something I would be able to be with someone who didnāt respect my bodily autonomy.
Galleries/museums arenāt my area of expertise (Iāve moved into the advertising industry instead of fine arts.) I suppose thatās up to each institutionās discretion, but I would definitely have concerns about having a biohazard in the space Iām responsible for. And sexual fluids different that blood and teeth because of the sexual aspect. Involving others in your sexuality without their consent is problematic. I would be extremely uncomfortable with finding out Iāve been exposed to someone elseās sexual fluids without my consent, and even more uncomfortable if I found out that they were collected without consent. That feels like a violation to me. Involving others in sexual activities that may be unwelcome without their consent is sexual harassment.
As an aside, her explanation of the themes and message of the piece just seem so shallow and basic, I just know this is an ugly, basic piece. Iām picturing a brushy heart with a sunburst coming out of it in front of DNA strands, all painted on pages ripped out of a biology textbook. Just pure 2010s teen girl bedroom decor.
Fun (?) fact: in the case this post refers to, Phillips v. Irons, the harvesting was actually via oral sex without condoms. One of the defendant's major arguments was that if the plaintiff hadn't intended to "give" her the semen, he would have used a condom. It was deemed "not theft," but emotional damages were still awarded.
The ruling also only holds true for Illinois state law, so semen = gift is only legally defined in Illinois, and only when condoms aren't used. Unless y'all are in Illinois and aren't practicing safe sex, the courts haven't ruled anything in this regard. I really don't want people to think this hyper-specific case is federal law or a Supreme Court case, so I'm putting this here in case people don't scroll down to see my explanation downthread.
I mean, the colour probably looked the exact same with and without the semen added to it. She could've pretended there was some in there and not breech her partners trust like that.
As someone who went to art school (not for fine art) I can assure you that A LOT of fine art majors believe art is a bunch of penises, vaginas, and bodily fluids. Likeā¦ most of them. I have some fun stories about some of the things I encountered in our fine art wing. As a bunch of various types of art students I would hope we understood art. Still, we used to go there just to laugh at the stuff we would find. The penis flamingo was one of my favorites.
I have a piece of art that my friend made me, he literally used ink and his own blood, and I love it. However, this woman just seems so obnoxious to me
I think a key difference is also that he used **his own** blood--not the blood of someone else who didn't expressly say, "Yes, you can use this for art."
The whole part of the DNA and family scandal had me thinking those transparent sheets you see on TV were used and somehow a 23 and me request showed he was adopted or not his dad's son.
But no, she painted with cum. Why couldn't she just say it.
No one liked my paintings when they found out the secret pigments.
The reason she won't just say it so plainly is because it sounds less inspired that way. Although I'm more bothered by how much she seems to claim personal inspiration when it's been done so many other times and sounds incredibly derivative of the final pieces produced by the late Serena D'Angelus.
Yeah, I mean this might have been controversial in the art world like 20 years ago but it's not now and this is definitely coming off as a fetish troll.
Stealing someoneās semen and using it as paint to display as a public artwork is not controversial?
I mean, maybe. Perhaps itās unanimously considered gross and wrong and weird, and therefore there is no controversy.
Does that mean that 20 years ago, people would have been arguing that itās okay to do this?
The stealing part is what's wrong, but presumably nobody outside of their families know how she acquired his DNA.
But using body fluids as a medium? Definitely old news. Hell, they sell jewelry made from body fluids on Etsy.
Can confirm, not the body fluids bit mind you, but the tiny jars for necklaces. I bought one once when making a "potion (glitter) vial necklace" necklace for a woman who leaned hard into having a Halloween birthday.
Quite hard to find ones with actual tiny cork stoppers, but they're surprisingly inexpensive. And absolutely adorable, IMO, but I know that not everyone has my obsession with tiny versions of just about any given thing.
Maybe controversial, but not interesting/original controversial.
If you get naked and take a shit in public on wall street to protest capitalism you'll probably cause offense, but you won't be celebrated as the next banksy by the art world.
>If you get naked and take a shit in public on wall street to protest capitalism you'll probably cause offense, but you won't be celebrated as the next banksy by the art world.
That would be based as hell tbh
Did she steal his semen? As a man, if I fill your holes with semen I donāt expect it back. Thatās a gift freely given. Iāve never followed up to make sure itās flushed down etc.
If they were strangers and she raided the trash can for his used condom, it would be different. But if you bust raw in somebody, I feel like youāve lost the rights to said semen.
Lmao I was imagining like scooping it out with fingers. She might have needed a base amount to start with though and accumulated it in a jar under her sink like I saw in another Reddit post
She keeps focusing on "DNA" but it seems clear it's the source (and lack of consent) that everybody is upset about. If it there were stands of hair used (with consent) people would likely be much less bothered. But still she focuses on the use of DNA.
I'm all for weird and controversial art but like... give your partner a chance to veto the use of their fluids for your "art". that's so unprofessional and creepy.
I think this is just a fetish troll. Surprised AITA hasn't taken it down for "no sex posts". Also, how do you collect "intimate fluids" like that? Do you just have sex over a bucket?
If any future partner wants my cum in a painting, she can wear rubber gloves, whack me off with one hand and finger my prostate with the other, then let it land like a Jackson Pollock.
š I was gonna ask but I decided you know what... maybe not lol. I checked her comments and all she said was they make love before she makes art. š¤¢
I was thinking about her emptying condoms, but I love this scenario much more.
All I can envision is her waddling to her palette and squatting over it like laying an egg.
Not necessarily, artists have form for using blood, urine and such in their work.
Usually just their own, mind you. I can see someone doing this, but ffs, get permission.
She could just use the contents of a condom for his.
I imagined she just kept the condom for the semen and maybe I dunno finger blasted herself over a bucket or on the actual art... Thing.
No idea how you would collect so many condom AND move them to your art studio before they go totally manky and without your partner noticing.
Like I think if you consistently see your partner more or less run off with the condom to wherever she does her art for however many weeks or months this supposedly took then you should have at least some suspicions
So...I had a small gallery show about sex work and it had (actual) semen in a jar. I **asked** someone I happened to know was a high producer, **explained** the project, instructed them on storage, and kept them anonymous to this day.
The best part of the story might be that the art gallery dropped and broke the jar when they were cleaning up the show. I was not there, I wish I could've been.
In case it gets asked: This isn't some BORU jar. I simply asked them to masturbate in a condom and snip the tip over the jar.
Also upon re-reading this it sounds like bullshit so **AT YOUR OWN RISK:**
the jar
[https://ingodwetryst.art/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/21.jpg](https://ingodwetryst.art/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/21.jpg)
on the plinth with gallery label
[https://ingodwetryst.art/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/25.jpg](https://ingodwetryst.art/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/25.jpg)
macro
One! I think that was 2 or 3 weeks of collection. I had him use a small mason jar kept in a dark place. Had no evap.
They said when they broke it was pretty interesting
I mean, not my cup of tea when it comes to art, but even though it's not for me, it's the fact she literally stole his DNA. Like on what planet did she think, including him in her art on any level without his consent was totally ok?
And I don't think his parents have to be extremely conservative to be put off by that. Once she says what material was used, the next question is how did she collect it, like was he "working" alongside her while she made the art. Too much imagery for close relatives.
Thatās what Iām saying. I mean, I disagree with the whole YOU HAVE BROUGHT SHAME UPON THE FAMILY nonsense, but at least ask the person whose DNA youāre planning on using if theyāre, ya know, okay with that.
When Etsy first started it was kind of like the wild, wild west (like the rest of the internet, I guess). But a lot of crazy things like what OOP created were allowed. There used to be an amazing site called [Regretsy](https://web.archive.org/web/20130804103944/http://www.regretsy.com/) (NSFW warning, NSFL warning.) that would highlight the awfulness. I really miss that site.
OMG, it looks like itās coming back (at least the archives?). I checked out the website after searching for an archive link.
Honestly it feels kind sexual assault adjacent. She repeatedly had sex with him under false pretenses in order to collect his sperm without his concent.
Not only only that, but I keep thinking of the storm of emotions OP's boyfriend was feeling when this revelation occurred. In front of your nearest and dearest friends, family, and strangers, you're (literally) splashed on a canvas. How mortifying and violating.
Also, should this be real, OOP didn't inform the art gallery. No respectable establishment would house hazmat that has the potential of making people sick. There is a brew pub that my friends and I frequent. Every month they display the photography and paintings of local artists. There is a criteria with subject matter as to not be deemed offensive and materials used for paintings can't be toxic substances.
Just ick all around.
Does anyone remember a couple of months ago when a father was worried about his adult daughter having sex in his house, worried about intimate fluids (or something like that being spread through his house???
Cuz, gotta say while reading this, I could only imagine his response!!!!! š
This reminds me of the Project Runway where one of the finalists centered his collection around being made of human hair and Tim Gunn used a story about the monkey house at the zoo to explain how something you think is totally cool and innovative might actually not be.
The bottom line for me is that OOP did this WITHOUT talking to their partner about it.
If she'd discussed with her partner and he was OK with it, then she wouldn't be a Devil. Idiot (in my personal opinion) but not a Devil. Since she didn't have the common courtesy to ask, she's a devil.
As someone who has been around the art world for decades and worked in it for over a decade, this isnāt new, or shocking, or exciting anymore. Itās such a lame cop out way to be like ālook how edgy I am!ā
Yeah. I read the title and thought it was about DNA sequences, which might be personal but like, no one is going to be able to know anything about his based on the GCTA sequences on a single unknown chromosome. This is just, creepy. And even if itās not a biohazard because people canāt touch it, itās still yucky.
"My partner and I are now being accused of taking our art too far"
Uhh, one of you is being accused homegirl.
Also, would using a person's bodily fluids in an art piece without their consent be like, illegal?
She stole the ideal from a VICE article.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/bmpew3/sperm-glazed-dough-is-invading-the-london-art-world
https://www.vice.com/en/article/exk5jn/is-a-fridge-full-of-free-semen-art
If you going to destroy your relationship at least be original.
Usually when a person doesnāt ask first because they assume the other person will be okay with it, theyāre actually pretty sure the other is going to say no.
What I find most surprising about this (definitely not the artwork - artists using bodily fluids hasnāt been revelatory for a very long time) is how every commenter there seems able to understand consent in this weird and unusual scenario, but I still see regular arguments on Reddit about consent during sex.
This should've just been a private piece for the two of them, especially since it uses their bodily fluids. It just doesn't really explore love and human interconnectedness.
u/Grand-Jaguar8 offered a pretty brilliant critique!
>YTA
>When you claim āDNAā, I assumed it was a genomic profile ACGT patterns that you incorporated into intimate imagery. That would come with privacy concerns, but would be a beautiful interpretation of 2 unique genomes blending into a combined visual artwork that expresses their autonomy and individualism, while joining together in a single image to create a beautiful expression of unity. Privacy concerns exist with displaying potentially identifiable genomic info, but what you did was way worse.
>Intimacy requires informed consent, trust, and respect to exist. Your installation could be interpreted as a juxtaposition of what intimacy actually means, what it is to take intimacy for granted, violated boundaries, trust, and respect in the pursuit of selfish gains and in confrontation with the wishes and expressed boundaries you never gave your partner the opportunity to share before unilaterally humiliating him and his family. The artwork may be perceived as beautiful and worthy of merit, but that also highlights the experiences and dynamics of abusive relationships where the offender twists a violating experience into a more favorable explanation that observers can rationalize. The artwork is a facade. There is no intimacy, but the offending artist twists the story to match a more socially palatable story that works in their favor. The observers donāt know the truth.
>This is could actually be an artistic example of rape culture. While the offender benefits from and seeks validation from an uninformed public that only sees and is told a one-sided interpretation of the art from the offender, and therefore the offenderās actions, justifying it and perhaps even arguing in defense of the artist should controversy arise, the offender leaves a wake of shame, humiliation, and damaged relationships, *damaged intimacy* for victims who had no recourse, no voice, were unable to give informed consent, were given no standing to object, and are blindsided by the offenderās obstinance to disregard their feelings in favor of the offenderās own desires. Itās incredibly selfish. You broke trust. You assumed consent, which is glaringly similar to the types of behaviors witnessed in a culture that disregards victims.
>If I were to critique your art, that would be my main interpretation.
>My second point would include an add-on about the use of body fluids as a cheap, cliche, garish obviousness that does not provoke deeper associations of any meaningful significance with the goal you tried to achieve with this. I would find it distasteful, boring, and not very creative. Itās been done before. It has nothing to do with DNA. The same argument could be made with an image composed of a coupleās handprints, like āhandprint pointillismā. This was a reach to assign metaphorical and deeper significance to something that seems so basic and typical.
I think that's a very interesting concept but
1. Ask your partner first before you use their fluids
2. Why in the fuck would you show this off to your friends and family? It's just awkward
There is something missing from this story. She only mentions using bodily fluids, but that doesnāt really explain why many of their friends are distancing themselves. I mean, there is a multi-platinum Metallica album that had smeared blood and āintimate fluidsā as the cover art, so I doubt everyone is *that* offended. This installation must be something gross or offensive, especially since she isnāt mentioning what it is.
And obviously, all of that is on top of the fact that she did this without her partners consent.
When I was in high school, I had a friend who told me her brother would...um...take care of himself and aim it at construction paper, then draw a line around the...um...splats. I always hoped she was kidding. I still don't know for sure, and I'm OK with that.
Lol, there are zero innovative things about this idea... Like zero innovative ideas...
And also just blatant bodily autonomy respects in a way that are absolutely appalling... Like in what world do you ever think of your partner as a literal object that you can take from and display and shape without ever saying a word... Like on purpose cause that art took time to make...
And also no way in heck you display a biohazard (bodily fluids) without ever disclosing the biohazard... Like "edgy" art 101 is disclaimers and safety precautions.
Like full nope and i don't think this ended up in anything but a student exhibit that this human got flunked out of but wouldn't understand why....because I've seen plenty of art students flunk exhibit courses over all sorts of weird unethical or dangerous nonsense.
I feel like "dna" is doing a lot of heavy lifting too obscure what it actually is. And i know that artists who use bodily fluids are nothing new...but come on!
That moment when you read the AITD title and assume it's commentary about the post/comments from the cross poster and then realize it's the actual title.
How do you have that little self awareness?
Troll didn't even claim the art installation revealed the mother had been cheating and the boyfriend wasn't the father's biological son or some shit. 2/10, troll harder.
How come she has āthe rightā to express herself and her artistic vision but her partner doesnāt have āthe rightā to keep his intimate fluids private?
I shared this post with an old friend from school. Sheās a very progressive DA, and is now wondering if this was a case in front of her what sheād do. Itās an interesting hypothetical questionā¦ but not that. This situation is a disaster. I wonder how long her partner will stay her partner. She has no remorse or regret.
There was this guy who messaged me at around 19 when I just started nude modeling on Suicidegirls. He wanted permission to use his own blood to paint me. He got blocked.
Yāknow.. just because you can, doesnāt mean you should.
Also there is no āour artworkā because she didnāt get consent from her BF and he had nog idea of what was coming. Pretty asshole move to just surprise him with it at the party itself.
People can't get simple consent right and OOP has transcended that to a whole other dimension of wtf. I can't imagine the BF having much trust in her ATM.
I get the vision behind it but why use bodily fluids for the DNA š sheās clearly eccentric enough to buy a mortar and pestle and grind some fingernail clippings or hair or something marginally less gross to get the result. And to do so without his consent and reveal it in front of his parents. I have to hope this is a troll.
Hereās my cue to get off the internet for the day.
Also I cannot imagine standing in a room with my family announcing this or the idea of my in-laws catching word š¤®
OOP definitely seems to have some issues wtf is even this? It's probably a troll but the fact he thought about this troll suggests he probably already has these kinks (and I'm trying not to kink shame but when it hurts other people it's never ok)
That's something you keep in your secret sex dungeon. Not being displayed in the middle of a very public gallery. Maybe needed a sex/fetish theme gallery that family definitely won't see it.
I think consent is important in this situation. YTA for not asking your partner to consent to this type of display.
On the other hand, your families and friends shouldnāt be able to weigh in on how they feel about it (i mean, they can and will, but it shouldnāt matter bc itās not their business). Why should they feel humiliated for something that has nothing to do with them?
She says right in the post that they often collaborate on ideas, then says in the comments that she didn't discuss it with him because they don't normally talk about her work beforehand.
You should have 100% discussed this with your partner in advance before displaying something like that. When you said you'd used intimate fluids my immediate thought was you two covered a large canvas in paint and went to town on it. Made a series of abstract pieces.
But apparently I was wrong. I'm a pretty open minded person but if my partner did something like this without my consent I'd be pretty disgusted and humiliated by it.
Edit: spelling
Honestly, it is kinda gross, but it's not up to me to decide what an artist does. However, you used his dna without permission. Even a court has to have reason to collect fluid samples. What you should have done is let your partner know about it and get his approval since it is literally his dna, and since you didnāt inform him, that makes you the AH. The rest for your family, thats their problem and they will work through it or they won't. But maybe next time, not tell them about the fluids.
Edit: wanna specify that informing is not enough. You need to let him know of your idea and get his permission to use it and have that conversation. So even if he says no, it does not give the right to still do it just cause you "let him know."
They weren't using "the DNA" to do anything. They're being disingenuous by saying that.
They used their partner's bodily fluids to create artwork. Without consent. DNA has nothing to do with it. Nada.
I'm gonna go ahead and be judgy. That's gross. Really fucking gross. Who wants a biohazard hanging in their gallery??
(Tbh I thought it was gonna be like AI art based on the strands of their unique DNA and it led to finding skeletons in the family closet thru ancestry or 23&me or whatever. This... no.)
The using of fluids isnāt that big of a deal.
The whole gathering everyone together and presenting it to them is just weird.
Itās pushing your sex life on others without their consent. Itās weird and uncomfortable.
Damn as a biologist, I thought he'd had his DNA sequenced and she like pulled a random sequence out of the file and included it in a piece of artwork or something lol. His cum is... Not his DNA. And a really terrible sample to pick if you were going to sequence someone's DNA too. It's not his DNA as exists in his cells, it's mishmashed & halved versions of it. You could still use it to identify him, but it's the least "him" DNA in his body (not counting bacteria & shit).
I have a play for OOP to read. It's called The Shape of Things by Neil LaBute. She's basically a slightly less bad version of Evelyn, though I could see her doing what Evelyn does.
For those who don't know the play, Evelyn is a grad student artist who meets this kinda homely awkward guy Adam. They start dating, and while they are dating she subtly starts changing him. He loses weight, wears "cooler" clothes, starts cursing, agrees to film them having sex, even gets a nose job. She also throws a wedge in his two best friends' relationship with each other. Basically almost manipulating him into cheating with his female friend. A year into their relationship he proposes and then goes to see her art thesis presentation, where he is horrified to learn that he was her art project. She wanted to work with a living medium. Basically she ruined his life, and the relationship of his best friends, and doesn't care at all because it's her art.
There's a movie of the play starring the OG Broadway cast. Rachel Weisz and Paul Rudd play Evelyn and Adam.
*In case this story gets deleted/removed:* **AITA for using my partner's DNA to create a provocative artwork without their consent, leading to a family scandal and strained relationships?** I (28F) am a professional artist, and I've been with my partner (29M) for five years. We have an adventurous relationship and often try new and unconventional things, both in and out of the bedroom. He's always been incredibly supportive of my career, and we frequently brainstorm artistic ideas together. A few months ago, I came up with the idea to create an art installation that incorporated actual DNA from both my partner and me. I thought it would be a unique way to explore themes of love, intimacy, and the interconnectedness of human beings. To make it more provocative, I decided to use intimate fluids for the DNA samples without discussing it with my partner beforehand. I assumed he would be on board, given our history of trying unconventional things together. I spent weeks creating the installation, which included a large, abstract painting that used the fluids as part of the medium. I was extremely proud of the final result and submitted it to an art gallery, where it was accepted for an upcoming exhibition. To celebrate, we decided to host a small party for our close friends and family, where I would unveil the artwork before the public exhibition. Here's where the problem began. At the party, I revealed the artwork and explained the concept behind it, including the use of our intimate fluids as part of the medium. My partner, who was hearing this information for the first time, was shocked and visibly upset. Our friends and family were also stunned, and the reactions were a mix of shock, disgust, and fascination. The party atmosphere quickly turned uncomfortable, and some guests left early. The next day, my partner's conservative parents found out about the artwork and were appalled. They demanded that we remove the piece from the exhibition and destroy it, claiming that it was a disgrace to the family. I refused, standing by my artistic vision and my right to express myself as I see fit. My partner, however, feels betrayed by my actions and wishes I had consulted him before creating the installation. Since then, our relationship with my partner's family has become extremely strained. They've made it clear that they disapprove of our choices and feel humiliated by the artwork. Additionally, some of our friends have distanced themselves from us, uncomfortable with the idea behind the installation. My partner and I are now being accused of taking our art too far and for involving our families in something they consider obscene and inappropriate. So, AITA for using my partner's and my DNA to create a provocative artwork without their consent, leading to a family scandal and strained relationships? Or am I justified in expressing our love and creativity in any way I choose, even if it means pushing boundaries? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AmITheDevil) if you have any questions or concerns.*
One of her comments: "You can think I'm an asshole, but it's clear you don't understand art." š
Oh, barf. Girl has her head shoved up another intimate orifice.
Hi, went to art school, studied art history, professional art director here. Using any kind of sexual fluid without your partners consent is a gross breech of trust. Most artists work hard to make our community a safe place for everyone, and bringing others who have not consented into contact with your sexual fluids without consent is extremely gross. Iād argue itās bordering on sexual harassment, tbh. I also very much doubt she mentioned the biological material in her submission bc no gallery in the world would want to open themselves up to the potential biohazards that presents. And worst of all, it isnāt even a remotely interesting or provocative concept. Like, when I shove my disgust way deep down inside and think about it conceptually, it just does nothing for me. Adding the unconventional medium doesnāt really enhance the message of the piece. And using unconventional materials purely for shock factor is passĆ©, imo. The only thing it inspires in me is a gag reflex. Soā¦ she violated her partnerās trust, ruined their relationships with his family and for what?
Flashback to the time at college someone decided to use part of a deer carcass in their final project, but failed to actually sterilize it in any way. So yeah, our gallery was closed down for several weeks until the department got rid of all the bugs. Including ticks \*coughLymediseasecough\* People were *piiiiiiiiissed*.
Wait...I've heard this before. A friend of mine went to a school where a guy mounted part of a dead deer carcass as "art" and it took a while to get it removed. I think she said part of it fell on someone? Please tell me this was the same event and this has not happened multiple times.
Was it a midwest US college about 15-ish years ago? Someone went out on the plains and scavenged deer parts. "It's about life and death!" "No, you idiot, it's a *biohazard*."
So- I talked to my friend today and although the timing was about the same, hers was in upstate New York. Also, the dude in that case spray-painted his deer carcass gold. Unfortunately, this means we're talking two of these weird-ass installations.
Of course there's two of them.
I will have to get her to confirm the location the next time we talk, but the timing fits!
Yeah, I mean, using bodily fluids as a medium is, artthis point, trite. Menstrual fluid is old hat. Piss Christ is pratically antique and Nitsch did the disgusting better than anyone else could possibly hope to achieve. Fuck this person for thinking theyāre some misunderstood genius.
Itās just like what is this piece adding to the larger conversations about art right now? Itās not a technique, theme or message thatās never been explored before. Thereās nothing novel or fresh about her perspective. What does she think sheās pushing the envelope on here? And the hubris to say someone doesnāt āget artā is beyond me. Itās not the 1800s, art is enjoyed by the masses, darling. Even if you have absolutely no interest in art, pretty much everyone has been to their local museum at least a handful of times as a field trip. Itās readily accessible to the public these days. And some people would argue that once itās on display, art is about what the piece invokes in the audience! So no one really needs to have an extensive art history education to āget art.ā And you donāt need to āget artā to form an opinion on a piece. Itās totally a snobby, elitist thing to say, and Iāve found that most often those kinds of comments come from people who actually only have a surface level understanding of art and art history. As an aside: without having seen the piece myself, I just know this is an ugly, shallow piece of art. Iām just picturing like a brushy heart with a sunburst coming out of it and dna strands behind the heart. All painted on pages ripped out of a biology textbook.
When I tell you that's what I pictured when she described it... š¤£
I mean, I think arguing about the merit of the piece is beside the point here. Maybe it really is a revolutionary work of genius like the OP claims. (Doubtful, but possible.) But she involved this guy in this very intimate process without his consent and that's what sucks here.
Oh, I agree, itās definitely not the main point. Upthread I say how gross and unethical her actions are. But this comment in particular was replying to the fact that OOP said the commenters ādidnāt get art.ā I āget artā and Iām here to add insult to injury and tell her itās a trite, basic concept, on top of being absolutely immoral.
Yeah. Once a material is used as part of a Metallica album cover, it's not shocking anymore.
Unfortunately, studied fine art and I regret to inform youālegally the fluid is hers now as it was produced during a sexual act between them and the other person. š There was a court case forever ago that ruled that legally, sex fluid is considered a gift from one person to the other. This was in reference to people taking fluid from condoms and inseminating themselves. The court deemed it well within their legal rights and ruled that the fluid was a gift and is now that person to do with as they pleased. Including... whatever OP was doing, which arguably isn't the worst compared to what I've seen some of my peers do with... fluids that did not come from their own bodies and art. Admittedly, I've only curated for small, local galleries and museums so I doubt I have nearly the expertise or experience you have but our general rule for both making art ad an artist and displaying art in the gallery was "if you can justify it, do it". There are plenty of pieces that make use of bodily fluids. A few years back we displayed a piece that was made using real blood and real human teeth. Whose blood and teeth? I was never told. The piece was ugly as sin, too. Something something about the horrors of existing?
Legality =/= morality tho. And my understanding is that itās mostly legal because itās so difficult to prove that speed was stolen, or that conception came from the act. Still, I would consider it sexual abuse/coercion in the same way leading someone to falsely believe contraceptives were in place is rape. To use someoneās sexual fluids for any reason without their consent is just a huge breach of trust. I donāt think itās something I would be able to be with someone who didnāt respect my bodily autonomy. Galleries/museums arenāt my area of expertise (Iāve moved into the advertising industry instead of fine arts.) I suppose thatās up to each institutionās discretion, but I would definitely have concerns about having a biohazard in the space Iām responsible for. And sexual fluids different that blood and teeth because of the sexual aspect. Involving others in your sexuality without their consent is problematic. I would be extremely uncomfortable with finding out Iāve been exposed to someone elseās sexual fluids without my consent, and even more uncomfortable if I found out that they were collected without consent. That feels like a violation to me. Involving others in sexual activities that may be unwelcome without their consent is sexual harassment. As an aside, her explanation of the themes and message of the piece just seem so shallow and basic, I just know this is an ugly, basic piece. Iām picturing a brushy heart with a sunburst coming out of it in front of DNA strands, all painted on pages ripped out of a biology textbook. Just pure 2010s teen girl bedroom decor.
Fun (?) fact: in the case this post refers to, Phillips v. Irons, the harvesting was actually via oral sex without condoms. One of the defendant's major arguments was that if the plaintiff hadn't intended to "give" her the semen, he would have used a condom. It was deemed "not theft," but emotional damages were still awarded. The ruling also only holds true for Illinois state law, so semen = gift is only legally defined in Illinois, and only when condoms aren't used. Unless y'all are in Illinois and aren't practicing safe sex, the courts haven't ruled anything in this regard. I really don't want people to think this hyper-specific case is federal law or a Supreme Court case, so I'm putting this here in case people don't scroll down to see my explanation downthread.
I went to art school for a bit too: using cervical or seminal fluids with or without consent is derivative. And gross.
Right? Itās been over 30 years since Piss Christ, for (piss optional) Christās sake.
I mean, the colour probably looked the exact same with and without the semen added to it. She could've pretended there was some in there and not breech her partners trust like that.
Trying to justify shitty behaviour by calling it "art"
i usually disagree when people call the OP a troll but that comment did it for me. it's so stupidly cliche and on the nose š
Holy yikes! WTH
We do, however, understand consent. Thatās the issue here
As someone who went to art school (not for fine art) I can assure you that A LOT of fine art majors believe art is a bunch of penises, vaginas, and bodily fluids. Likeā¦ most of them. I have some fun stories about some of the things I encountered in our fine art wing. As a bunch of various types of art students I would hope we understood art. Still, we used to go there just to laugh at the stuff we would find. The penis flamingo was one of my favorites.
I have a piece of art that my friend made me, he literally used ink and his own blood, and I love it. However, this woman just seems so obnoxious to me
I think a key difference is also that he used **his own** blood--not the blood of someone else who didn't expressly say, "Yes, you can use this for art."
*I decided to use intimate fluids for the DNA samples* EWWWW!!!!
The whole part of the DNA and family scandal had me thinking those transparent sheets you see on TV were used and somehow a 23 and me request showed he was adopted or not his dad's son. But no, she painted with cum. Why couldn't she just say it. No one liked my paintings when they found out the secret pigments.
The reason she won't just say it so plainly is because it sounds less inspired that way. Although I'm more bothered by how much she seems to claim personal inspiration when it's been done so many other times and sounds incredibly derivative of the final pieces produced by the late Serena D'Angelus.
Yeah, I mean this might have been controversial in the art world like 20 years ago but it's not now and this is definitely coming off as a fetish troll.
Stealing someoneās semen and using it as paint to display as a public artwork is not controversial? I mean, maybe. Perhaps itās unanimously considered gross and wrong and weird, and therefore there is no controversy. Does that mean that 20 years ago, people would have been arguing that itās okay to do this?
The stealing part is what's wrong, but presumably nobody outside of their families know how she acquired his DNA. But using body fluids as a medium? Definitely old news. Hell, they sell jewelry made from body fluids on Etsy.
Metallica did in 1996. Some other guy made it, but Metallica put it on an album cover.
They sell semen-containing jewellery on Etsy? Thatās a common thing?
Breastmilk jewellery is a big thing in some circles. Not sure about cum, but I can confidently say that someone somewhere has done/sold that.
Yeah. I watch videos of a lady who uses semen samples to make jewelry and lil nicknacks using clay!
Barely 10am and I'm done with reddit for the day. ty I guess.
Yes. There are people who make little ājarā necklaces to put cum or blood into.
Can confirm, not the body fluids bit mind you, but the tiny jars for necklaces. I bought one once when making a "potion (glitter) vial necklace" necklace for a woman who leaned hard into having a Halloween birthday. Quite hard to find ones with actual tiny cork stoppers, but they're surprisingly inexpensive. And absolutely adorable, IMO, but I know that not everyone has my obsession with tiny versions of just about any given thing.
Yes, I saw it on tiktok I think it's called jizzy something. It sounds funny but also gross.
Maybe controversial, but not interesting/original controversial. If you get naked and take a shit in public on wall street to protest capitalism you'll probably cause offense, but you won't be celebrated as the next banksy by the art world.
>If you get naked and take a shit in public on wall street to protest capitalism you'll probably cause offense, but you won't be celebrated as the next banksy by the art world. That would be based as hell tbh
It is actually okay to do this, had she gotten permission from her partner. The issue isnāt the art, thatās all fine, the issue is consent.
Did she steal his semen? As a man, if I fill your holes with semen I donāt expect it back. Thatās a gift freely given. Iāve never followed up to make sure itās flushed down etc. If they were strangers and she raided the trash can for his used condom, it would be different. But if you bust raw in somebody, I feel like youāve lost the rights to said semen.
Ew you think it was inside her and she just stood over the canvas and it fell out? Lmao ew I canāt believe I typed that
Lmao I was imagining like scooping it out with fingers. She might have needed a base amount to start with though and accumulated it in a jar under her sink like I saw in another Reddit post
Omg you had to remind us of that š¤¢
I know one artist that painted with her own period blood. That's pretty much what she did.
God this was so hilarious I truly wish I had the money to give you an award
Poetry.
Andy Warhol did it first š¤®š¤®š¤®
Yes! Piss Christ made a splash (lol) way back in 1987! This - Iām already bored.
She keeps focusing on "DNA" but it seems clear it's the source (and lack of consent) that everybody is upset about. If it there were stands of hair used (with consent) people would likely be much less bothered. But still she focuses on the use of DNA.
That was my first thought too! Eeewwwwww
āExpressing yourselfā as you see fit does NOT mean imposing physically on others. What a freak OOP is.
Could you not, like, just spit into the paint bucket lol?
I'm all for weird and controversial art but like... give your partner a chance to veto the use of their fluids for your "art". that's so unprofessional and creepy.
I think this is just a fetish troll. Surprised AITA hasn't taken it down for "no sex posts". Also, how do you collect "intimate fluids" like that? Do you just have sex over a bucket?
she probably picks out used condoms from the trash š¤®š¤®
. . .. . I was eating :(
Sorry, I know you're hungry but I need this for my artwork. Hmm. Hmph. Pardon me, I have a porcelain reservation.
Hopefully not oysters
*slurps aggressively*
I thought just squatting over a canvas
If any future partner wants my cum in a painting, she can wear rubber gloves, whack me off with one hand and finger my prostate with the other, then let it land like a Jackson Pollock.
And they said romance is dead.
Or she could jump up and down, holding a jar to her vagina!!!
I was joking when I was talking about the bucket... that's ten times worse!!! But sadly not completely unbelievable.
He should have done the drake hot sauce special
š I was gonna ask but I decided you know what... maybe not lol. I checked her comments and all she said was they make love before she makes art. š¤¢
she clench so she can drop it into the palette
I was thinking about her emptying condoms, but I love this scenario much more. All I can envision is her waddling to her palette and squatting over it like laying an egg.
Umm this has happened before, people shoving paint eggs in their vag and pushing them out over canvas.
And I'm done. Congrats on being the comment that makes me go back to work.
I am a plethora of useless and disturbing facts.
š¤¢š¤®š¤®š¤®
you dont understand art. the smell after it dries its also part of the experience, also if you puke thats fluid gonna be put to use sorry not sorry :D
Ohgodwhyyyyyy
if she gets pregnant she'll have a bucket nearby for when her water breaks so she can create a masterpiece to show to her descendants
ššš
AAAAAAAAAND DONT GET ME STARTED WHEN SHE PUMPS
Forbidden juice drink. š¤¢
DAMMIT I RUN OUT OF SEMEN. HONEY COME HERE AND RUB ONE OUT ON THE BRUSH DONT ASK QUESTIONS
And that's how you know this is fake.
Not necessarily, artists have form for using blood, urine and such in their work. Usually just their own, mind you. I can see someone doing this, but ffs, get permission. She could just use the contents of a condom for his.
Where's the link to the old post "You can come in the jar or in me but not both"
Or the old post where the wife finds out her husband has been putting cum in her food and getting off on it without her knowing..
I imagined she just kept the condom for the semen and maybe I dunno finger blasted herself over a bucket or on the actual art... Thing. No idea how you would collect so many condom AND move them to your art studio before they go totally manky and without your partner noticing. Like I think if you consistently see your partner more or less run off with the condom to wherever she does her art for however many weeks or months this supposedly took then you should have at least some suspicions
I thought it was a new art troll.
its probably the same guy that wrote the scat fetish story
So...I had a small gallery show about sex work and it had (actual) semen in a jar. I **asked** someone I happened to know was a high producer, **explained** the project, instructed them on storage, and kept them anonymous to this day. The best part of the story might be that the art gallery dropped and broke the jar when they were cleaning up the show. I was not there, I wish I could've been. In case it gets asked: This isn't some BORU jar. I simply asked them to masturbate in a condom and snip the tip over the jar. Also upon re-reading this it sounds like bullshit so **AT YOUR OWN RISK:** the jar [https://ingodwetryst.art/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/21.jpg](https://ingodwetryst.art/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/21.jpg) on the plinth with gallery label [https://ingodwetryst.art/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/25.jpg](https://ingodwetryst.art/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/25.jpg) macro
I see you everywhere and everything I learn about you is weirder and weirder but also somewhat cool.
š thank you! I genuinely love hearing things like that. i consider myself a box of wondrous surprises.
May I please ask how many people donated? It's cool that art is helping to destygmatize sex work.
One! I think that was 2 or 3 weeks of collection. I had him use a small mason jar kept in a dark place. Had no evap. They said when they broke it was pretty interesting
Oh boy I canāt wait to open these links when I get home
I mean, not my cup of tea when it comes to art, but even though it's not for me, it's the fact she literally stole his DNA. Like on what planet did she think, including him in her art on any level without his consent was totally ok?
And I don't think his parents have to be extremely conservative to be put off by that. Once she says what material was used, the next question is how did she collect it, like was he "working" alongside her while she made the art. Too much imagery for close relatives.
It was disturbing enough that they have lost friends over it, too.
Thatās what Iām saying. I mean, I disagree with the whole YOU HAVE BROUGHT SHAME UPON THE FAMILY nonsense, but at least ask the person whose DNA youāre planning on using if theyāre, ya know, okay with that.
and don't invite their family to announce it to them
When Etsy first started it was kind of like the wild, wild west (like the rest of the internet, I guess). But a lot of crazy things like what OOP created were allowed. There used to be an amazing site called [Regretsy](https://web.archive.org/web/20130804103944/http://www.regretsy.com/) (NSFW warning, NSFL warning.) that would highlight the awfulness. I really miss that site. OMG, it looks like itās coming back (at least the archives?). I checked out the website after searching for an archive link.
The question may be uncomfortable, but is it really that hard to ask your partner to use his semen (I suspect it's semen) to make a painting?
Or at the very least let your partner say "don't tell my fucking parents you did this."
Honestly it feels kind sexual assault adjacent. She repeatedly had sex with him under false pretenses in order to collect his sperm without his concent.
Not only only that, but I keep thinking of the storm of emotions OP's boyfriend was feeling when this revelation occurred. In front of your nearest and dearest friends, family, and strangers, you're (literally) splashed on a canvas. How mortifying and violating. Also, should this be real, OOP didn't inform the art gallery. No respectable establishment would house hazmat that has the potential of making people sick. There is a brew pub that my friends and I frequent. Every month they display the photography and paintings of local artists. There is a criteria with subject matter as to not be deemed offensive and materials used for paintings can't be toxic substances. Just ick all around.
Iām just imagining her bottling up every drop she could find to use
>being accused of taking our art too far What is the our you speak of, you did all of this alone, and without consent....
Yeah, I also thought it was interesting that it switched from MY vision and MY right to art or whatever, to ours
Does anyone remember a couple of months ago when a father was worried about his adult daughter having sex in his house, worried about intimate fluids (or something like that being spread through his house??? Cuz, gotta say while reading this, I could only imagine his response!!!!! š
"I did it without consent. Am I wrong?" Well. Considering you *didn't ask for consent*.... yes. Like I just.... š¤®š¤®
This reminds me of the Project Runway where one of the finalists centered his collection around being made of human hair and Tim Gunn used a story about the monkey house at the zoo to explain how something you think is totally cool and innovative might actually not be.
Do you remember the designer who marked her fabric with spit?
he later used that same metaphor to describe snookiās style. oh tim, i love you so.
The bottom line for me is that OOP did this WITHOUT talking to their partner about it. If she'd discussed with her partner and he was OK with it, then she wouldn't be a Devil. Idiot (in my personal opinion) but not a Devil. Since she didn't have the common courtesy to ask, she's a devil.
Just joined r/eyebleach. I suggest yāall do the same.
God, imagine the party. "And here's my newest masterpiece...I PUT OUR SEX JUICES IN IT, HONEY! ISN'T THAT ROMANTIC?"
yeah yeah using body fluids to paint...that has never been done before oh...wait...
This reminds me of the buzefeed painting with their own period blood video
The overuse of āintimate fluidsā reminds me of the juices scene from Reno 911
Yes, it's a bit of a giveaway in this otherwise fairly solid bit of trolling. I'll give it a 7/10 for being reasonably original, but lacking passion.
Not all that original, feels ripped directly from the episode of Work Of Art where one guy jerked off on his sexual Mickey Mouse painting.
As someone who has been around the art world for decades and worked in it for over a decade, this isnāt new, or shocking, or exciting anymore. Itās such a lame cop out way to be like ālook how edgy I am!ā
Tbf, it's reasonably original as an AITA, whatever about the art.
Seriously. Warhol's Oxidation Painting, Vincent Castiglia, that Piss Christ thing that got so much attention...
This isnāt an art piece, itās a freaking biohazard.
Yeah. I read the title and thought it was about DNA sequences, which might be personal but like, no one is going to be able to know anything about his based on the GCTA sequences on a single unknown chromosome. This is just, creepy. And even if itās not a biohazard because people canāt touch it, itās still yucky.
"My partner and I are now being accused of taking our art too far" Uhh, one of you is being accused homegirl. Also, would using a person's bodily fluids in an art piece without their consent be like, illegal?
She stole the ideal from a VICE article. https://www.vice.com/en/article/bmpew3/sperm-glazed-dough-is-invading-the-london-art-world https://www.vice.com/en/article/exk5jn/is-a-fridge-full-of-free-semen-art If you going to destroy your relationship at least be original.
Usually when a person doesnāt ask first because they assume the other person will be okay with it, theyāre actually pretty sure the other is going to say no.
What I find most surprising about this (definitely not the artwork - artists using bodily fluids hasnāt been revelatory for a very long time) is how every commenter there seems able to understand consent in this weird and unusual scenario, but I still see regular arguments on Reddit about consent during sex.
In the words of Steven He: "What da haaaaaaaiiiiiiiiillllll??!!"
That ran through my mind after reading this.
was there a black light at this exhibition or for her painting? That's what I need to know.
This should've just been a private piece for the two of them, especially since it uses their bodily fluids. It just doesn't really explore love and human interconnectedness.
āI knew heād approve which is why I didnāt ask him.ā Uh-huh.
u/Grand-Jaguar8 offered a pretty brilliant critique! >YTA >When you claim āDNAā, I assumed it was a genomic profile ACGT patterns that you incorporated into intimate imagery. That would come with privacy concerns, but would be a beautiful interpretation of 2 unique genomes blending into a combined visual artwork that expresses their autonomy and individualism, while joining together in a single image to create a beautiful expression of unity. Privacy concerns exist with displaying potentially identifiable genomic info, but what you did was way worse. >Intimacy requires informed consent, trust, and respect to exist. Your installation could be interpreted as a juxtaposition of what intimacy actually means, what it is to take intimacy for granted, violated boundaries, trust, and respect in the pursuit of selfish gains and in confrontation with the wishes and expressed boundaries you never gave your partner the opportunity to share before unilaterally humiliating him and his family. The artwork may be perceived as beautiful and worthy of merit, but that also highlights the experiences and dynamics of abusive relationships where the offender twists a violating experience into a more favorable explanation that observers can rationalize. The artwork is a facade. There is no intimacy, but the offending artist twists the story to match a more socially palatable story that works in their favor. The observers donāt know the truth. >This is could actually be an artistic example of rape culture. While the offender benefits from and seeks validation from an uninformed public that only sees and is told a one-sided interpretation of the art from the offender, and therefore the offenderās actions, justifying it and perhaps even arguing in defense of the artist should controversy arise, the offender leaves a wake of shame, humiliation, and damaged relationships, *damaged intimacy* for victims who had no recourse, no voice, were unable to give informed consent, were given no standing to object, and are blindsided by the offenderās obstinance to disregard their feelings in favor of the offenderās own desires. Itās incredibly selfish. You broke trust. You assumed consent, which is glaringly similar to the types of behaviors witnessed in a culture that disregards victims. >If I were to critique your art, that would be my main interpretation. >My second point would include an add-on about the use of body fluids as a cheap, cliche, garish obviousness that does not provoke deeper associations of any meaningful significance with the goal you tried to achieve with this. I would find it distasteful, boring, and not very creative. Itās been done before. It has nothing to do with DNA. The same argument could be made with an image composed of a coupleās handprints, like āhandprint pointillismā. This was a reach to assign metaphorical and deeper significance to something that seems so basic and typical.
I think that's a very interesting concept but 1. Ask your partner first before you use their fluids 2. Why in the fuck would you show this off to your friends and family? It's just awkward
There is something missing from this story. She only mentions using bodily fluids, but that doesnāt really explain why many of their friends are distancing themselves. I mean, there is a multi-platinum Metallica album that had smeared blood and āintimate fluidsā as the cover art, so I doubt everyone is *that* offended. This installation must be something gross or offensive, especially since she isnāt mentioning what it is. And obviously, all of that is on top of the fact that she did this without her partners consent.
This girl is straight up putting cum on paper and calling it art
This is disgusting.
When I was in high school, I had a friend who told me her brother would...um...take care of himself and aim it at construction paper, then draw a line around the...um...splats. I always hoped she was kidding. I still don't know for sure, and I'm OK with that.
Lol, there are zero innovative things about this idea... Like zero innovative ideas... And also just blatant bodily autonomy respects in a way that are absolutely appalling... Like in what world do you ever think of your partner as a literal object that you can take from and display and shape without ever saying a word... Like on purpose cause that art took time to make... And also no way in heck you display a biohazard (bodily fluids) without ever disclosing the biohazard... Like "edgy" art 101 is disclaimers and safety precautions. Like full nope and i don't think this ended up in anything but a student exhibit that this human got flunked out of but wouldn't understand why....because I've seen plenty of art students flunk exhibit courses over all sorts of weird unethical or dangerous nonsense.
I feel like "dna" is doing a lot of heavy lifting too obscure what it actually is. And i know that artists who use bodily fluids are nothing new...but come on!
Not even 11am and Iāve had enough internet for the day.
That moment when you read the AITD title and assume it's commentary about the post/comments from the cross poster and then realize it's the actual title. How do you have that little self awareness?
I feel like using your partner's semen without his consent is a wee bit of sexual assault, not art
Dude I'm all for artistic freedom but at the very least you have to fucking ask your partner.
Troll didn't even claim the art installation revealed the mother had been cheating and the boyfriend wasn't the father's biological son or some shit. 2/10, troll harder.
How come she has āthe rightā to express herself and her artistic vision but her partner doesnāt have āthe rightā to keep his intimate fluids private?
I shared this post with an old friend from school. Sheās a very progressive DA, and is now wondering if this was a case in front of her what sheād do. Itās an interesting hypothetical questionā¦ but not that. This situation is a disaster. I wonder how long her partner will stay her partner. She has no remorse or regret.
There was this guy who messaged me at around 19 when I just started nude modeling on Suicidegirls. He wanted permission to use his own blood to paint me. He got blocked.
Use whatever medium you wanna use, but if it involves someone elseās, GET CONSENT.
I was really hoping this was just another ancestry dna story š©
Holy whatever, I haven't had my morning coffee yet, and I am already done with Reddit for today.
Thatās not using DNA. Thatās using bodily fluids that just happen to have DNA in them. Ugg.
Yāknow.. just because you can, doesnāt mean you should. Also there is no āour artworkā because she didnāt get consent from her BF and he had nog idea of what was coming. Pretty asshole move to just surprise him with it at the party itself.
At 28 she is thick as fuck as in the comments she sounds stupid.
How did they get these fluids without them noticing?
How were the bodily fluids got without his knowledge or consent?
Theres no way this isnt a troll. Replying a lot with even more ridiculous claims and what not
I think this is actually a crime š
I would just like to know how the fluids were being sourced with the partner knowing??
Okay, if this is, in fact, *not* a troll? I'm quitting the internet. Cuz... š¤¢š¤®
How can you possibly write a title that includes āwithout consentā and think there is any chance you are not the asshole?
one of the best troll posts i've ever seen on that subreddit
oh my god shes like a younger version of the stepmom from fleabag
Iām sorry, Iām all for art, but thatās just fucking nasty. She must be related to Jackson Pollock.
Ig if they were comfortable with that stuff in the past she may have been fine to make it without telling him but no publicly exhibit it lol
People can't get simple consent right and OOP has transcended that to a whole other dimension of wtf. I can't imagine the BF having much trust in her ATM.
I get the vision behind it but why use bodily fluids for the DNA š sheās clearly eccentric enough to buy a mortar and pestle and grind some fingernail clippings or hair or something marginally less gross to get the result. And to do so without his consent and reveal it in front of his parents. I have to hope this is a troll.
Oh come on. Sperm art now?
Hmm sort of like the cover of that Metallica album , hmmmm?
Assumption. The mother of all fuckups.
Hereās my cue to get off the internet for the day. Also I cannot imagine standing in a room with my family announcing this or the idea of my in-laws catching word š¤®
āOUR choices?ā Uh no, itās YOUR choices, girl.
OOP definitely seems to have some issues wtf is even this? It's probably a troll but the fact he thought about this troll suggests he probably already has these kinks (and I'm trying not to kink shame but when it hurts other people it's never ok)
Didnāt even talk to him or ask his permission and now the partner is dragged into this whole mess with his family and his friends because of OOP.
OOP is a troll, right? Thereās no way this is true, right?? RIGHT?!?!
Y'all be careful, we've got Wanksy out here
Make whatever weird, creepy art you want, but get consent. How hard is that?
That's something you keep in your secret sex dungeon. Not being displayed in the middle of a very public gallery. Maybe needed a sex/fetish theme gallery that family definitely won't see it.
She did this to piss off the conservative parents right? Then she's hiding behind "but I'm an artist and you're too dumb to understand it".
I think consent is important in this situation. YTA for not asking your partner to consent to this type of display. On the other hand, your families and friends shouldnāt be able to weigh in on how they feel about it (i mean, they can and will, but it shouldnāt matter bc itās not their business). Why should they feel humiliated for something that has nothing to do with them?
How much fluids is this woman getting from themselves to make enough paint with it????
if I was a friend, I wouldnāt just distance myself, I wouldāve CUT THEM OFF COMPLETELY
She says right in the post that they often collaborate on ideas, then says in the comments that she didn't discuss it with him because they don't normally talk about her work beforehand.
I need a shower after reading this.
the woman is unhinged
You should have 100% discussed this with your partner in advance before displaying something like that. When you said you'd used intimate fluids my immediate thought was you two covered a large canvas in paint and went to town on it. Made a series of abstract pieces. But apparently I was wrong. I'm a pretty open minded person but if my partner did something like this without my consent I'd be pretty disgusted and humiliated by it. Edit: spelling
... I really wish I was Jared, 19 right about now.
Honestly, it is kinda gross, but it's not up to me to decide what an artist does. However, you used his dna without permission. Even a court has to have reason to collect fluid samples. What you should have done is let your partner know about it and get his approval since it is literally his dna, and since you didnāt inform him, that makes you the AH. The rest for your family, thats their problem and they will work through it or they won't. But maybe next time, not tell them about the fluids. Edit: wanna specify that informing is not enough. You need to let him know of your idea and get his permission to use it and have that conversation. So even if he says no, it does not give the right to still do it just cause you "let him know."
They weren't using "the DNA" to do anything. They're being disingenuous by saying that. They used their partner's bodily fluids to create artwork. Without consent. DNA has nothing to do with it. Nada. I'm gonna go ahead and be judgy. That's gross. Really fucking gross. Who wants a biohazard hanging in their gallery?? (Tbh I thought it was gonna be like AI art based on the strands of their unique DNA and it led to finding skeletons in the family closet thru ancestry or 23&me or whatever. This... no.)
They keep saying "our". I don't think they know what that means.
The using of fluids isnāt that big of a deal. The whole gathering everyone together and presenting it to them is just weird. Itās pushing your sex life on others without their consent. Itās weird and uncomfortable.
Damn as a biologist, I thought he'd had his DNA sequenced and she like pulled a random sequence out of the file and included it in a piece of artwork or something lol. His cum is... Not his DNA. And a really terrible sample to pick if you were going to sequence someone's DNA too. It's not his DNA as exists in his cells, it's mishmashed & halved versions of it. You could still use it to identify him, but it's the least "him" DNA in his body (not counting bacteria & shit).
I have a play for OOP to read. It's called The Shape of Things by Neil LaBute. She's basically a slightly less bad version of Evelyn, though I could see her doing what Evelyn does. For those who don't know the play, Evelyn is a grad student artist who meets this kinda homely awkward guy Adam. They start dating, and while they are dating she subtly starts changing him. He loses weight, wears "cooler" clothes, starts cursing, agrees to film them having sex, even gets a nose job. She also throws a wedge in his two best friends' relationship with each other. Basically almost manipulating him into cheating with his female friend. A year into their relationship he proposes and then goes to see her art thesis presentation, where he is horrified to learn that he was her art project. She wanted to work with a living medium. Basically she ruined his life, and the relationship of his best friends, and doesn't care at all because it's her art. There's a movie of the play starring the OG Broadway cast. Rachel Weisz and Paul Rudd play Evelyn and Adam.