But you clicked anyway, didn’t you. Shame on you. And shame on 17-year-old Liz Bierendy, who painted a disgusting mural on the wall of her Rhode Island high school. Thankfully, the authorities swooped in and, after they failed to persuade Bierendy to alter her repugnant piece of “art,” they took the sensible act of covering it up lest it offend anyone.
In the interests of accurate journalism, the Tatler has made the difficult editorial choice to display Bierendy’s offensive painting. We do this not to titillate, but to educate. This is what our children must be prevented from thinking about, even at the cost of their freedom of expression.
You were already warned about it in the headline; your failure to heed that warning is your own fault.
This is the image that Pilgrim High School fought and then covered over.
It may be tough to pick out the most offensive aspect of this disgusting “art,” so here is a detail of the section that earned destruction.
A man and woman — who are married to each other — with their — gasp — child. Who seems to be doing well in school, if you go by the arbitrary and probably racist rubric of “grades,” anyway.
You can’t say that you weren’t warned.
Update: The school is allowing the mural to be painted as planned.
I can’t believe pjmedia was so irresponsible to show this offensive picture. I’m scarred for life now, and demand compensation!
/sarc
Why are these “authorities” so heterophobic?
You left out the most disgusting part. The woman is pregnant with another child, ergo she did not exercise her “reproductive freedoms” properly. Rather than use contraception or abort her fetus she is allowing a foreign growth of flesh to invade and occupy her body. That, more than anything else, is a disturbing, offensive message; that it is acceptable to want to experience that part of life and do so repeatedly.
You’re quite right. Shame on me.
Not only that, but she’s physically smaller than the man. That will not do! In addition, she’s dressed casually, not in a business suit in her rightful role as CEO-scientist-astronaut “You can have it all” Wonder Woman.
Can we assume that NAMBLA objected to the inclusion of the mother/wife?
We need to bring the smug bastards portrayed in this painting down a peg, so that they’ll understand their guilt against the collective. Only then, will we have a “better” world. /sarc
If I were the young artist’s parents I would be awfully proud. I would also be calling a lawyer.
I think this is where Prof. Reynolds says “tar. feathers.”
Thank you for the link to the original article.
It’s written in Northkoreanish, the new language that we will soon all be compelled to learn if we want to survive.
Read the article, you will get scared.
The people are all white, too! How do you think that makes the black, Asian, and hispanic students feel? Pretty darn left out, I should think.
Young Ms. Elizabeth definitely needs a few weeks at sensitivity camp to get her mind straight.
Ditto to the lawyer. I’d be suing this school for enough to fund my kid’s college education with a nice, comfy lifestyle if this were my daughter.
What in the hell is wrong with these people?
One hopes that this criminal child will be clapped into prison forthwith where she can get the psychiatric counseling that she so clearly needs…
Brian,
I’m confused. The headline says the mural was covered. In the text it says that the mural was painted over. At the end of the text it says that the school allowed the artist to complete the work as she had envisioned it.
I think the article and the headline are poorly written, confusing and possibly internally inconsistent.
Can we get the real story?
See, all you people are jumping to conclusions again! Covering up the mural had nothing to do with the depiction of a normal family. Nope, it was those damn purple Crocs…
Brian,
Please direct readers to the home page of the station.
I called the reporter who wrote the article and there are updates:
(1) part of the original mural was changed
(2) when the controversy took place, the school decided to let the artist change the mural back to her original vision
(3) the mural has been changed by the artist and now depicts the original content (father, mother and child).
We can all put out the fire in our hair.
Can’t rest just yet, Paul. Remember: there should never have been any controversy whatsoever. Period.
Roger that, Mr Fish.
What’s sad is this mural depicts a more moral and normal family that we should all ascribe to be, but so many children do not even know this is how it should be. To me, that is the crime and shame of it all by glorifying a one-parent family many children will never know the security of a two-parent family home.
– me and make me do your tax returns.
I personally find that bald spot on Momma’s head to be utterly offensive.
OMG, a lot of you people are stupid. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that girl’s art. It is not like she drew Terrorism, or African Americans getting hanged. She drew someone else’s life. She believes that person is going to have a loving family and a good life.
Art is another form of language, and people read it/hear it differently than other people because no one is the same. If you don’t like what you see/hear, then don’t look/listen. Art doesn’t kill.
Uh, Clarissa? Look up “sarcasm” in the dictionary…
I’ve (alas) never been married. This mural shows the guy eventually getting married and having a family, both of wish I regret I have not done. My feelings are hurt; the mural should not only be taken down, it should be burned or I will find the internet a hostile environment.
Besides, this girl is presenting heterosexuality as “normal,” which is privileging that status. Only 90 to 95% of the population is hetero, so how on earth can this kid think that it’s “normal.”