Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Yale “miscarriage artist” confesses to hoax? Update: I don’t know if I miscarried or not, says “artist”

posted at 7:27 pm on April 17, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view

Well, who knows. It’s not like anyone’s going to sift through the evidence to make sure.

“Ms. Shvarts is engaged in performance art,” a Yale spokeswoman, Helaine Klasky, said. “She stated to three senior Yale University officials today, including two deans, that she did not impregnate herself and that she did not induce any miscarriages. The entire project is an art piece, a creative fiction designed to draw attention to the ambiguity surrounding form and function of a woman’s body.”

Ms. Klasky went on to suggest that Yale would not have permitted a project of the sort described in the student newspaper. “Had these acts been real, they would have violated basic ethical standards and raised serious mental and physical health concerns.”

Some commenters were skeptical right off the bat this morning, on the theory that it’s hard to generate much “proof” of multiple miscarriages in a school year. To miscarry three or more times in so short a span, you’d have to do it each time at a sufficiently early stage that the result would be hard to distinguish from normal monthly output. Which is what this probably was/is.

I guess she showed the heteronormative patriarchy a thing or two about overreacting to, um, serial abortion as a form of highbrow entertainment.

Update: Sounds like Shvarts didn’t do much sifting through the evidence either. The intent was there, but maybe not the result. Nuance:

Shvarts stood by her project, calling the University’s statement “ultimately inaccurate.”…

Shvarts reiterated Thursday that she repeatedly use a needleless syringe to insert semen into herself. At the end of her menstrual cycle, she took abortifacient herbs to induce bleeding, she said. She said she does not know whether or not she was ever pregnant.

“No one can say with 100-percent certainty that anything in the piece did or did not happen,” Shvarts said, “because the nature of the piece is that it did not consist of certainties.”

This afternoon, Shvarts showed the News footage from tapes she plans to play at the exhibit. The tapes depict Shvarts — sometimes naked, sometimes clothed — alone in a shower stall bleeding into a cup.

How loathsome is she? Follow the link to see who provided this quote: “This ‘project’ is offensive and insensitive to the women who have suffered the heartbreak of miscarriage.” The Church, you say? Not quite.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

I guess what it reveals, given the hysteria about this in the righty blogosphere today, is the bottomless depths of credulity on the right about the evil secular humanists of the left.

Grow Fins on April 17, 2008 at 9:16 PM

Maybe you spoke too soon. The woman is standing by her original statement.

It still leaves room for doubt, considering she’s offering no proof that she was ever pregnant, but her intention, unless she’s lying now, was to impregnate herself for the purpose of aborting a fetus.

What are the odds that someone suggested that she confess to this “hoax” before someone in the DA’s office decided to charge her with multiple counts of pre-meditated murder?

If the woman who shot herself in the stomach the day she was supposed to give birth for the sole purpose of terminating her pregnancy wasn’t charged with murder, then this woman too will suffer no consequences.

Esthier on April 18, 2008 at 9:43 AM

Isn’t the term monkeyfishing?

funky chicken on April 18, 2008 at 9:50 AM

I still want to know if she created a biohazard.

TexasDan on April 18, 2008 at 9:39 AM

No, it seems she did not reproduce.

RDuke on April 18, 2008 at 10:28 AM

I still want to know if she created a biohazard.

TexasDan on April 18, 2008 at 9:39 AM

No, it seems she did not reproduce.

RDuke on April 18, 2008 at 10:28 AM

Heh!

4shoes on April 18, 2008 at 10:30 AM

And just where did all of the viable semen come from?

It’s not like she collected it once and used it time and again. She would need a new batch within a couple hours prior to “self fertilization”.

Did she give some guy a free “handy” every time she needed some batter?

Whoever provided it needs to be more careful with his boys. I have had plenty of mine go down the drain or toilet, but just handing them out can get you into trouble 9 months down the road.

thomashton on April 18, 2008 at 10:38 AM

Holy Crap, I just read this and couldn’t believe who said:

“This ‘project’ is offensive and insensitive to the women who have suffered the heartbreak of miscarriage.”

NARL, wow, they do have souls!

Torch on April 18, 2008 at 10:41 AM

How much does a Yale degree cost these days? Mr. and Mrs. Shvarts must be so proud.

Bugler on April 18, 2008 at 10:51 AM

She should be on 24 hour watch in Bellvue. If the nuthouse won’t take her, the F.B.I should have a room ready.

Tazz 55 on April 18, 2008 at 10:53 AM

This chick is so fugly it’s no wonder she had to use artifical means – no way she’d get it straight from the natural source.

Lehuster on April 18, 2008 at 11:26 AM

I guess what it reveals…

Her educators told her to STFU and swallow their spin story.

SHE is the lowest bottom feeder of the most affluent opportunistic social system. She hasn’t the self determination to carry through with her own bloody project. SHE wanted discourse, but fails to deliver!

maverick muse on April 18, 2008 at 12:02 PM

NARL, wow, they do have souls!
Torch on April 18, 2008 at 10:41 AM

Nah, it’s CYA. Mustn’t make the connection between groups like NARAL trivializing/politicizing abortion and the logical result in this POS “art.” I seem to remember a parade with women walking down the street wearing “I Had An Abortion” T-shirts, but I guess that wasn’t offensive to women who had miscarriages.

I’ll bet NARAL doesn’t want you to remember that right now — generalized disgust just might hurt their fund-raising or lobbying efforts.

Nichevo on April 18, 2008 at 3:36 PM

Monstrous!

The Book of Enoch (which was once cannonized and repeatedly quoted by Jude in the NT), describes how abortion was taught to mankind via the fallen angels:

“And the fifth was named Kasdeja: this is he who showed the children of men all the wicked smitings of spirits and demons, and the smitings of the embryo in the womb, that it may pass away

It is a tragedy that all of us who do not believe in the official state religion of secular humanism, do not have anyone representing us this election!

Mccain needs to change his position on the Human Life Amendment or he will not get my vote.

If not, the republican party deserves to lose this year for nominating Mccain and throwing our principles out the window!

SaintOlaf on April 18, 2008 at 3:46 PM

“Does not consist of certainties”…meaning she made it up, but doesn’t want to call it a prank.

“Ambiguity about the Form and function of a woman’s body”… go back to physiology class.

Capitana on April 18, 2008 at 5:07 PM

Heck, I figured it was a hoax when I saw her photo… she’s too ugly to get pregnant… even by artificial insemination.

Texas Nick 77 on April 18, 2008 at 5:38 PM

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

Excuse me? There’s “ambiguity” surrounding the female body? And this chick went to Yale?

Honey, take a basic physiology course. Then you’ll know what the form & function of the female body is. There is no ambiguity!

Of course, physiology is usually taught from a “heteronormative” point of view. :)

March Hare on April 19, 2008 at 1:08 PM

You know if Shvarts had put the Shmekus in her Tukus we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

pc on April 20, 2008 at 1:39 PM

Oink, oink said the little pig.

RobCon on April 20, 2008 at 4:14 PM

Comment pages: 1 2


You must be logged in to post a comment.