• Full Story

Men banned from art exhibition in Lower Hutt

Email
Print

Men banned from art display

3News NZ

The work features women getting ready for a wedding without wearing hijabs, or veils (AAP)

The work features women getting ready for a wedding without wearing hijabs, or veils (AAP)

Men will be banned from watching a video display at a Lower Hutt art gallery that shows Muslim women without veils.

The Dowse Art Museum, which is run by the Hutt City Council, next month will host the world premiere of the art installation despite advice from the Human Rights Commission that excluding men could be seen as sexual discrimination, media have reported.

The work, by Qatari writer and film-maker Sophia Al-Maria, is called Cinderazahd: For Your Eyes Only. It features women getting ready for a wedding without wearing hijabs, or veils.

Dowse director Cam McCracken said Al-Maria's work would be off-limits to men in keeping with the artist's wishes. "I haven't seen the work, and I won't.

"I've bought into the fact that we take this work on the proviso that no men see it. We respect the artist and the privacy of the women who are portrayed."

It will be part of an exhibition from September 8 that features 17 artists and is called In Spite of Ourselves: Approaching Documentary.

Al-Maria said in a statement that images from the film were from exclusively female zones inside a home. "They, like this work, should be treated as privileged and private, for women's eyes only."

Mr McCracken said the work was likely to be screened in a small curtained-off area behind the gallery's reception, not usually open to the public.

He was confident reception staff would be able to handle the situation. "I'll gladly discuss any issues anyone might have."

In an internal memo to Hutt City councillors, Mr McCracken raised the exhibition as a potential issue.

"We are aware that this may be subject to a complaint to the Human Rights Commission, as we are preventing access to a sector of the public based on gender."

A commission spokeswoman said it had advised the Dowse that there was "an arguable case" for sexual discrimination under the Human Rights Act.

NZN

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

6/09/2012 1:41:47 a.m.

Dean wrote:

The fact that this has even been considered, let alone going ahead, just goes to show how insane our modern era has become. Forget 'spokeswomen' claiming an arguable case; this is quite simply ILLEGAL! When will we be rid of this insanity that is Political correctness? And, have NO doubt that the loony left PC crowd are very much in control here, I see Transvestites are to be allowed in...God (or Allah) forbid we persecute a homosexual...just our good old whipping boy, the poor old hetero male! The 'art exhibition' MUST be removed (under NZ law) and i suggest the artist gets on a plane and takes their division and hatred back to their homeland...we don't want it here!

5/09/2012 7:43:58 p.m.

Robert Shariff wrote:

I believe the Muslim sisters who took part in this production, did so with the trust that they can share their experiences with other women in the community. It's their world from their perspective. It's their human rights! Is it too much to ask to respect these women and their culture, or do we dishonor ourselves by breaching their trust? Wassallam (Be in Peace) Robert Shariff

5/09/2012 3:14:11 p.m.

atrout wrote:

@Nick... if you read the article again with a little more care, you would find that it is you who is wrong.

4/09/2012 4:40:10 p.m.

Nick wrote:

This article is incorrect. Men are not banned from the exhibition, they are only prohibited from viewing a particular work within the exhibition.

29/08/2012 10:50:27 a.m.

john wrote:

Would a man go into a woman toliets and ask to watch? have respect for other religion, sex and race.

There is no point getting worked up about human rights and discrimination when its just a exhibit, who cares!

go-online if you want to meet Muslim woman.freaks

28/08/2012 11:56:55 a.m.

Lynn wrote:

I'm not sure how the Dowse intends to decide who is eligible to view the exhibit. Do we have to undergo a chromosome test? What about intersex or transgender people? This exhibition professes to be about the limitations of documentary. They've made their point - a documentary that only half the population is eligible to see. Most of us have parts of our lives that are not for public view and we would never consider having made into a documentary. We don't need a pointless, divisive and unlawful exhibit to make this clear.

27/08/2012 12:52:16 p.m.

LB wrote:

There is no point getting worked up about this men's rights and discrimination against men is ignored in this country so its just best to let this one go.

25/08/2012 5:27:11 p.m.

katrina wrote:

If these women value their privacy so much, why have an exhibtion on that topic at all? I can't say it interests me and I would not be going to see it. Getting ready for a wedding is a personal thing, why would you want it open to the public?

25/08/2012 5:05:21 p.m.

Miss Virgo wrote:

Especially since the hijab isn't actually a compulsory element of Islamic faith -- it is optional (this is a little-known fact). Of course, it's been adopted by cultures as a means of controlling and objectifying women even further.

25/08/2012 4:51:54 p.m.

Matt wrote:

This is sexism. People stating that we should be accepting of all cultures and religious views are clearly not thinking straight. Why should I be tolerant of a religion (based on nothing but delusions) that is intolerant of others? The punishment for apostasy is death, and Shariah law is disgusting, unethical and inhumane. Not to mention the terrible womens ill treatment record of Islam. It's time we got rid of intolerant religions, grown adults should not continue to believe in fairy tales. Anti-gay Christians included.