[girament]

> the violence of men against women.

Why bring gender into this? Why assume without any other indication that this would have been different had the artist been a man? Or if the audience would have been only women?

[AlecSchueler]

I'd say there's a few reasons. First: the very visible recorded gender disparity in the audience reaction within the performance itself. Further: the statistical facts of gender based violence. The reaction in the case of this performance mirrors the reality outside the performance hall, where women almost inevitably face various level of gender based violence throughout their lives.

Lastly I'd also say because I believe (although I could be wrong) the gender divide of HN is unbalanced towards men like myself, so it can be helpful to raise these issues at times where our blindspots might lead us to miss interesting or important elements of the stories shared. In cases where that blindness helps real world violence to thrive I feel it's doubly important that we can discuss it without getting defensive.

> Why assume without any other indication that this would have been different had the artist been a man?

Without any other indicator? Like I say, we have huge indicators in the statistical makeup of violence outside of the performance hall. Women are far more likely to experience sexual violence. Indeed, the likelihood of Marina experiencing sexual assault at work would have already been non-negligible even if she wasn't inviting interaction.

> Or if the audience would have been only women?

Please note: the audience in reality wasn't "only men." it was a basically even mix, but the violence of the reactions was far from balanced.

[EatingWithForks]

I think you're missing the point of an art, especially art where the audience participates. Art is meant to invoke societal concepts, like gender. It makes sense to bring gender into a context such as an art piece where the audience are active participants.