apartment therapy changing the world, one room at a time

creepy and sexist

Oh yuck.. and definitely not dishwasher friendly!

What's with all of the female disembodied body parts lately? It's really tacky.

ditto all :(

I like it. Good for a laugh. Wouldn't buy one, but it's funny, and good grief, what in the world is "sexist" about it - nothing in my opinion.

OMG, a pair of legs! Gasp! You sexist pig! Please.

If you want something to gripe and moan about try this watering can. LOL

http://www.cribcandy.com/all/e6d0ddf8febb76cce0f18b0e42a29885&pageoffset=216

I agree with Dia De Los DIY. The disembodied legs definitely come across as misogynistic (since they objectify female body parts) and violent. That equals creepy and sexist to me. I think the artist should try something else to get her idea across.

I am fond of both stuffy tea parties and stag party gag gifts, but put them together and you get something stupid. Trying way to hard to raise eyebrows, and who would actually spend money on a joke that would grow stale that quickly?

You know, you could put someone's eye out with that cup.

Uh, and wouldn't that be kind of hard to hold?

Not to mention looking rather uncouth while holding it, gripping it like a motorcycle handlebar thingie.

These would go well with that "Major Award" lamp.

Apartment Therapy really seems to be developing a taste for this type of thing. wonder why

if it were something most people would go for, it wouldn't fall into the hot or not type of post. they just want an opinion

Really, guys? This has provoked a more serious and somewhat hostile response than it seems to deserve.

No, I don't particularly like the design, in the sense that I wouldn't buy/use it. I don't think it would be practical as a useful object or particularly durable as a conversation piece.

However.

This is not misogyny or objectification; it is, in fact, a commentary. Who are traditionally and implicitly associated with the "high tea," the fine china tea sets and the whole associated ritual? Ladies, of course, both rich and upper class. (I, for example, think particularly and automatically of Victorian sensibilities.) And as "ladies"--in all senses of the word--these women were supposed to be angels of the household, divorced from the sensual, sexual, economic realms and public spheres, mere receptacles for their husbands and homes. What better way to make a point about the situation than by juxtaposing something horribly unladylike onto the emblem of that ritualized womanhood?

My apologies for the rant, but I think this piece is being condemned for the wrong reasons. Call it a stupid--or ugly or impractical--design, but don't damn it as misogynistic without trying to understand it as a piece of art.

OMG! Boomer that watering can is so funny. I wouldn't have it on my porch. What would the neighbors think? Still funny though. I think the cups are cute. Not my taste though. Heck, they had all kinds of stuff like this in the olden days. I remember my great grandmother having ladies head and hand vases. And the lamp in " A Christmas Story" was actually an idea from a real lamp.

Couldn't have said it better myself katiebug.

Not hot!!! A little campy for my taste! ew!

I like them.

To me, too, this seems misogynistic.

Katiebug's reading of the work is really interesting, but I wonder why, if these pieces are meant to juxtapose something horribly unladylike onto an emblem of ritualized womanhood, they use women's legs--in high heels, no less. High heels are quite ladylike, even if the legs are bare. Also, if the legs are supposed to seem sensual/sensuous/sexual, why do they seem like they belong to a woman dead or in distress? (The creamer is especially disturbing, as it seems a woman is being crushed beneath it.) If that death and distress is meant to communicate something about women locked into roles and performances that are concomitant with tea (by the way, I think Katiebug means afternoon tea, and not high tea), then those ladies should perhaps be wearing the appropriate garments.

If sexuality/sensuousness/sensuoulity is the goal (as opposed to that death/distress thing), then why not use the whole nude body intead of legs severed from it? And because women, as has been pointed out, are associated with tea, wouldn't it be more unladylike for women to be touching the nude bodies/body parts of men, or both men and women?

Because of these questions, and others, I'm led to believe that either 1) these pieces, as art pieces, lack direction, or 2) these pieces, as as art pieces, are using a tired gimmick to express a worthwile sentiment in a tired way. Whatever the case, and whether these pieces are trying to be fine or applied art, or trying stradle both, I find them to be failures.

Katiebug,
Disimbodied lady parts are sexist end of. I know it's trying to hearken back to the days of tea parties, high tea etc. but this is a product for mass consumption not high art. Just because we are desensitized to female body parts being stuck on things to make it kitsch or more "arty" does not mean it's not misogynistic. Are we just supposed to shrug and give a pass to anything that claims to be art? Like urinals that are the shape of womens mouths or sinks that look like a woman bending over in mens restrooms at posh hot spots? "Oh that's just art tee hee." If it indeed is some sort of cometary it's a pretty over done and trite one at best.

Oh Jesus.
This is starting to sound like a serious message board overrun by obnoxious, self-righteous crazy people who probably don't like Sex and the City. And I hate those.

Katiebug is obviously right. And normal. And not a blowhard who spent too much time in her Women's Studies classes.

Ok... are these really any worse than the leg lamp from A Christmas Story? A lot of art is based on the female form, yes, some of it crosses the line into sexist, or crude... but personally I don't think this does. I think they're kind of interesting, but I probably wouldn't buy them.

Help! I've fallen and I can't get up!

i love them, but i'm fond of hand vases, tea parties, and doll head planters, so that probably explains it.

I'm a guy and even I find these cliche, misogynistic and creepy. Some people including women are ok with that and that's fine for them but don't pretend that it not.

as for the comments about Katie being normal and people be abnormal for pointing it out. grow up.

As if liking a tv show is good judge of someone's worth and this from someone who's never taken a women's studies class.

well, I guess in this "postfeminist" world, disembodied female parts are now just "commentary"--all I can say is, thank god mysogyny is dead! The planter is the antidote for me--if it's really a free for all, lets have male disembodied parts, scantily clad pretend dead guys in ads, etc.
oops, that became a bit of a rant.

There is no "right" or "wrong" interpretation of art, folks, so stop insulting each others opinions. Art is about communicating in a manner which allows the viewer to attach interpretation to the piece, not for the artist to dictate exactly what it means. If the artist were interested in conveying a precise message, he'd be a writer and spell it out.

As for these items, I find them unattractive and peculiar-looking. It's one thing to stick body parts cleverly in a place where they supplant a functional portion of the design effectively and quite another to shoehorn them in where they are neither clever nor functional.

And I'm also tired of seeing female body parts sticking out of objects. There's a reason women's bodies are the objects of much art and it's a reflection of the fact that male artists are generally regarded more highly than female ones and they have a primary interest in female subjects.

I'm hoping to see less of this sort of 'here's an ugly item, what do you think?' post on AT as the comments always bring about ad hominem attacks and it cultivates a hostile and defensive community.

Pardon me, TheoJ.
" . . . I hate those messageboards." not those people who don't like S&tC.

Yuck. Disembodied female parts are offensive. These are not "art".

I've never taken a womens' studies class in my life, but I get the feeling that a few people here could use one if they really and truly have no idea why this might be offensive.

I never said it couldn't be considered offensive. If you're an uptight person who wants to get ultra serious about teacups. On a website about interior design.

About Tina Tsang: "Inspired by the obscure and uncanny in life she tries to breathe life into everyday objects to create an unconscious dialog between the object and user. The aim of her design is to enthrall the user and give a sense of other worldliness to everyday life. Tina Tsang is a graduate of Central Saint Martins college of art in film and illustration which has also been a major influence in designing her products. She also runs her own manufacturing agency trading with china in garments and does freelance fashion styling."

She also designs lingerie and purses.

I detract the "uptight". Let there be peace on this messageboard about couches.

I'm calling them ugly, stupid and impractical.

I started to like these, you know, objectively. They're not really my style, but they're funny. But they just look kind of creepy the more I looked at them. I would still recommend them if that's your style, but had to change my vote to not. Rather than being cute/sexy little handles, it looks like the women have been eaten, drowned or run over, or possibly stuffed in a hurry somewhere.... it's the expression of the legs that tells it.

TO EACH THEIR OWN

I followed the link to see "the rest of the set" - some of it is not yet pictured, so there isn't a lot more. The dessert stand is the weirdest. The next to bottom tier is support by a vacant doll head, and the legs sort of look like they were there just to be a part of the theme. Reminds me of Art Frahm's stuff actually.

Look it up.

this tea set is a big hit in Europe - it's been around for a while and seems to sell quite well there.
:-P

yeah, it looks like the lady is hurt. It looks quite disturbing. It doesn't feel sexist to me though. Just not my cup of tea....oh gosh i hate puns...

I love how "theserovingeyes" dismissed the misogyny by the glib "oh you're just uptight" and then "detracts" the "uptight comment" yes...if you really wanted to detract it you should of just deleted the comment before you posted. Just because this is an interior design blog doesn't mean people aren't going to express their views.
And as them being a "big hit in Europe." Uh, so what? Is that supposed to make them good?
:-P

So, they're weird. I voted "hot", but I'm weird. I really liked the 3-tiered server with the head, but I'm not disturbed by random body parts! I also got a chuckle out of that watering can, I would so use this! Surrealisim rules!

I dislike this rather intensely.

Can you imagine how much uglier these would have been if they had used man legs? Honestly.

Anyways, they don't in any way appear "dead," in fact the first one sort of reminds me of a woman in a bath with her legs sticking out. But then, why is she wearing shoes?

Don't get your "panties," or gender-unidentified-undergarments, in a twist.

boomer -

That watering can is hilarious, but it's the Gyre lounge that I'm seriously loving if it's made of something good.

Meanwhile, what I like least about this is not whatever misogyny it may hold, but how vulnerable and breakable those legs are; that's what scares me most. But also, it's not legible enough as a teacup handle.

And I think the creamer is actually kind of awkwardly shaped and just not pretty. The sugar bowl is the least bad of the lot, but I don't quite love it, either.

And as them being a "big hit in Europe." Uh, so what? Is that supposed to make them good?
:-P
posted by noah* on 2008-06-12 03:12:34

Uh, noah*, do you really believe my saying they're a big hit in Europe is just an attempt to make this tea set design good? C'mon you can do better than that.
:-P

Sexuality is a part of life; we wouldn't exist as a species without it. Why pretend it doesn't (or shouldn't) exist?

I'm female, and I'll happily admire a man's sexy legs. I can still appreciate men as a living, breathing persons, however. There's nothing mutually exclusive about it.

I don't particularly care for these, but I'm more interested in WHY AT is showing so many designs that are based off women's legs/bodies in the Hot or Nots these days - that chair by Pharrell Williams, the other chair, the recycled mattress chair (which was called the Madame Rubens, I believe), now this?

It seems excessive and a little obsessive. I'm sure it's different bloggers posting them, but it's still a weird run.