Our thanks to Mike for pointing us to a truly woeful piece by a female journalist (what are the chances?) in the Telegraph.
The winter edition of a magazine published by Bonham’s, an auction house, states this:
It is a truth now universally acknowledged that women artists, both dead and living, are woefully undervalued.
Universally acknowledged? I think not.
How would such an analysis work out in another open market, if professional football clubs were required by law to consider female players as well as male players for their teams? The overwhelming majority of players – if not all of them – would be male, and paid (on average) a great deal more than female players (on average). Given a feminist analysis, that pay gap would be an ‘anomaly’ which left female players ‘woefully undervalued’.
The Law of Supply and Demand – it’s a problem, isn’t it?
Here’s an idea. I keep reading that 70-80% of money spent with retailers is spent by women, although women collectively earn less than 30% of income earned in the UK. Where are these women getting the rest of their money from? It’s a mystery, and that’s a fact. Why don’t these women start pooling their money and buying works by prominent female artists, thereby driving the prices up, so those artists are no longer ‘woefully undervalued’? How difficult could that be? More difficult than whining, certainly…
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..
‘Why don’t these women start pooling their money and buying works by prominent female artists, thereby driving the prices up, so those artists are no longer ‘woefully undervalued’?‘
Mike, Mike, Mike. That isn’t how it works. How it works is that men spend the money they earn on any old shit if a woman wants it. That clearly isn’t working well enough, because women don’t want any old shit produced by women, so men must be compelled to buy any old shit if a woman wants to sell it.
See?
You just don’t get this equality thing, do you?
My friend’s 7 year old daughter painted a lovely house in front of a mountain, with a big sun, a tree and some bushes next to it. Why don’t they show it alongside the likes of Picasso and Chagal?
They are so unfair and discriminating ,aren’t they ? We must force some millionaire to pay me half a million USD for it. Otherwise they are ‘DISCRIMINATING’ against this little girl on the basis of gender,I suppose. Mao Tse Tong and Karl Marx would surely agree with me !
The law of supply and demand is indeed a grievous hinderance but, luckily, an solvable one.
What we NEED is a quota for art purchases, backed up by law and vigorously pursued by the police – that’ll do it.
I believe the the policy is employed elsewhere and had been a tremendous success.
I foresee few, if any, problems with this progressive approach, which is fully in keeping with the ethos of the present adminstration and likely to enjoy enthusiastic public support both in theory and practice.