Ha, you’re probably right. I guess you aren’t supposed to talk to the driver, but I imagined they would see and hear from a lot of the city’s community members, might know people’s lives more?

Maybe not, like you said, just keep your eyes and the road and don’t interact wouldn’t offer much perspective.

Edit, maybe more empathy when people take issue with road conditions and traffic! 😋

You mean because it’s public transit and might need more subsidy to raise wages and thus probably becomes political?

Automation and driving

People are really apprehensive of that still. I agree, but we’re going to need more people becoming accepting.

I’m not arguing with the job shortage. I just can’t get my head around the migration.

There were always people filling lower paying job (I’m not advocating for less than deserving compensation). Now there isn’t?

Maybe the same jobs exist, but new higher paying jobs have appeared that weren’t around before (new technology, more corporate,.etc), so people just skilled up, moved up, and left the lower jobs vacant?

I think most developed countries where this happens just replace these less desirable jobs with immigration (not advocating for an idea of a lesser population)?

Maybe there’s not as much immigration in some of these places?

I didn’t see pay listed in the article.

How else do we explain worker shortage? Where did all the people go? Rapture?

On the other side, what better way for a social worker to see real issues and people while studying?

It has to pay well enough for students to be willing to distract from studying.

mentioned penny exhibit

Wow, that’s a good one, thanks for the mention.

I do agree both things are wrong. Meaning discrimination.

I think one person’s art in this case might be described as another person’s stunt.

Edit, as for whether it’s beneficial, not sure. I guess we’ll see.

https://mander.xyz/comment/9083214.

I’ll edit this, I can’t read the other stuff on the mobile version while responding.

Edit, I mentioned that because the whole place was male only until '65. I don’t think there was that much outcry? (It didn’t look it up, I assume that poster did).

It would be now in 2024 though.

Didn’t a couple of people mention that was all of it before a certain year?

I also had no idea museums might have had gender restrictions.

I initially had some of these thoughts, reflection changed my mind a bit. I’m not trying to change yours, but I think some people will benefit from this.

I am not much into art and most of it is lost on me, but the more I considered the feeling I had thinking about the restriction, the more I appreciated the fact that she can cause affects across without boundaries just by the stunt.

This would probably be less cool if it wasn’t intended to be about a civil rights awareness thing. There’s a limit for me on how far you can go before the justification isn’t enough for the negative affects of the action, but I don’t think anyone will really be hurt by this exhibit.

I hope the court room shenanigans don’t actually distract from the validity. People tend to get distracted easily from thinking about something challenging.

Agreed. I’m not a chess player, but I view it as an intellectual sport or challenge. There’s no reason not to eliminate all gender specific separation IMO.

I think it’s fun to see people in competition and achievements where we don’t have to care about the person’s physical attributes.

When I first read it, the thought that came to mind was how stupid it is in this age to do anything that is restricted by gender when the rest of the world is trying to eliminate that.

Once I read the part about the feelings, emotion, and experience the restriction brought was the actual art and not just the paintings, that’s when I thought it was clever. The definition of art seems to be ambiguous now, but I understand what she’s trying to to do and it’s still a clever in that it illicits an effect whether you wanted to visit the museum or not.

I think people say they understand or empathize, but don’t really know what it means in a specific context until they experience it IMO.

they can’t be used

Right, by anyone except the US.

Just that one time. And then that one other time. But that’s it…

I find it understandable, but a bit ironic that we lead anti proliferation efforts.