I have been a regular reader since I was in high school. And NEVER have I encountered, week after week, such sexist bullshit as Fred Camper’s art/photography “reviews.”
Reviewing the work of a recent stamp exhibit [Art, March 13], he referred to the stamps that objectified women, reducing us to a pair of tits, as representing the favorite OBJECT of male desire. Excuse me, Mr. Camper, breasts are not OBJECTS–they’re body parts attached to actual real human females.
Again, Mr. Camper shows his intolerable sexism with his review of Cindy Sherman’s exhibit at MCA [Photography, April 24]. (Why is a man commenting on feminist art in the first place, I might ask? Would a white writer feel qualified to comment authoritatively on an exhibit at the DuSable?) He spent paragraph after paragraph psychoanalyzing Ms. Sherman. Would a male artist be psychoanalyzed in such a way? Or would their work be taken for what it is–perhaps a reflection of the artist’s personality and their take on the world.
He refers to how much better Cukor and Hitchcock represented women, including in Psycho, where “just before Norman murders Marion, we spy on her from his point of view, through a small hole in the wall with jagged, vaginalike edges.” Mr. Camper, you’re such a fucking loser that you may not know this, because it would require getting close to an actual woman, but vaginas don’t have jagged edges.
His contempt for women and COMPLETE lack of understanding of the objectification of women that is escalating every week in our media continued in his closing paragraph, where he condemns Ms. Sherman for not really taking a risk and exposing her “own body completely nude” for all the world to see. If she isn’t willing to become an object of porn, she is not “authentic” and doesn’t exhibit “self-knowledge” according to little dick Fred Camper. How incredibly fucking ridiculous.
This fucking LOSER is in no position to comment on anything pertaining to women. He’s got to go.