Personally, I'm more interested in this from a legal perspective than I am from a moral one. I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other, morally, but I'm fascinated to see if the case gets up, what other implications it could have.

But also:

The opportunity to extend the performance aspect of Ladies Lounge was embraced by the artist and 25 female supporters, who entered Tuesday’s tribunal hearing wearing a uniform of navy business attire. Throughout the day’s proceedings, they engaged in discreet synchronised choreographed movements, including leg crossing, leaning forward together and peering over the top of their spectacles. Apart from the gentle swish of 25 pairs of nylon clad legs crossing in unison, the support party remained silent. When the proceedings concluded, the troupe exited the tribunal to the Robert Palmer song Simply Irresistible.

Sublime.

That’s great. Funny, clever. Pretentious as fuck. I love it.

This seems like a lose-lose for the gallery. If they lose in court, it will likely cost them financially. If they win in court, potentially everyone who wants to discriminate will rely on the precedent and claim it's art. I imagine the artist is wealthy and hoping to lose to make a point, at which point she could open it up and it will still have its artistic validity through the story of its history.

Meanwhile in the UK, this old relic is in the news today, remaining men-only despite the law demanding otherwise.

This is the best summary I could come up with:

The creator of an art installation that has become the subject of a formal anti-discrimination complaint says she is “absolutely delighted” that the case has ended up in Tasmania’s civil and administrative tribunal.

The opportunity to extend the performance aspect of Ladies Lounge was embraced by the artist and 25 female supporters, who entered Tuesday’s tribunal hearing wearing a uniform of navy business attire.

Lau argued that denying men access to some of the museum’s most important works (there is a Sidney Nolan, a Pablo Picasso and a trove of antiquities from Mesopotamia, Central America and Africa in the women-only space) is discriminatory.

An experience in a pub on Flinders Island several years ago, when Kaechele and a girlfriend were advised by male patrons that they would feel “more comfortable” retiring to the ladies lounge, inspired the work.

The Californian-born artist was not aware that ladies lounges are a feature of Australia’s recent social history, and that Australian women were not allowed to enter public bars until 1965.

Mona’s lawyer Catherine Scott told Guardian Australia the case was an unusual one because the artwork was both a physical entity – a lounge – and a piece of performance art.

The original article contains 943 words, the summary contains 199 words. Saved 79%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!