Talk by Jamila Adeli, Internationales Künstlerhaus Büchsenhausen, Innsbruck, Austria, May 2015
Photo credit: Jamila Adeli, Installation shot at Pepper House, Kochi-Muziris Biennale, India
The contemporary art world appears to be quite a utopian – as in ideal – place: no more nation-state borders, no more identity issues, and no more language problems. Artists, curators, artworks, texts and audiences seem to flow with ease through different cultural fields. And the ongoing expansion of biennials and art fairs give the impression of a truly global map of contemporary art.
When critically thinking about these global flows and how they compose a global map of art, we unquestionably need to look a considerable bit deeper. The contemporary art world is not a product of flat trajectories of globalization – as it is often alto hastily assumed. It is a complex social space, which is in the process of becoming translocal. At the example of the practice of contemporary curating, I aim to “ground” these global flows and to identify how they encounter in order to make sense of what “being translocal” could mean for the contemporary art world.
My presentation introduces and combines two types of interfaces, which are linked through their most distinguished characteristic: a practice that constructs meaning at specific locations where global flows of the contemporary art worlds intersect.
Curating produces meaning through the accompanied production, selection and juxtaposition of artworks or artistic movements in order to demonstrate specific moments or phenomena in time. It also developed into a practical and academic tool to analyze historical and contemporary artistic practice, to create order and new perspectives within the aesthetic matters.
Photo credit: Jamila Adeli, advertisement of Kochi-Muziris Biennale in Creative Brands Magazine
Biennials, on the other hand, are large-scale exhibitions, which are held to visualize and discuss the present state of contemporary fine art. Since Biennials are hosted in a city that had encounters with global flows, they are a true interface: contact zones of „local“ and „global“, of „center“ and „semi-periphery“, of institutional art theory concepts and day to day cultural life. They are not only interfaces of global art flows but also form hubs within a network of cultural urban centers. A Biennial certainly places a city, region or nation on the global map of art (Charlotte Bydler), and they are important meeting points for local and international artists, curators, critics and audiences.
The presentation exemplifies its main arguments at India’s recent Kochi-Muziris Biennale. Inaugurated only in 2012 by the Government of Kerala and the two artists, Bose Krichnamachari and Riyas Komu, the Kochi-Muziris Biennale is already being considered as the new Biennial format of the 21st century – not only from the specific local viewpoint of India: both editions were perceived as a truly translocal experience of contemporary culture, and hence an experience that highlights not only decisive localization processes but also how such processes connect to global flows of knowledge and aesthetics.
Gastvortrag von Nina Khan am Institut für Indologie und Zentralasienwissenschaften der Universität Leipzig, 05.05.2015
Der Vortrag führte zunächst in das Forschungsfeld der „Neuen Geber“ in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit (EZ) ein und zeichnete aktuelle Entwicklungen und Debatten nach. Dabei wurde der langsame Umbruch der globalen Entwicklungshilfearchitektur – laut Woods (2008) eine „stille Revolution“ – skizziert und dessen Bedeutung nicht nur für strukturelle Veränderungen (wie z.B. die Diversifizierung der Geberlandschaft und die daraus resultierende größere Wahlmöglichkeit und stärkere Position der Nehmer) sondern auch für eine normative Pluralisierung der EZ konstatiert, die sich in Entwicklungsdiskursen wiederspiegelt.
Drei Grundannahmen bildeten den Hintergrund der folgenden Diskussion aktueller Kernthemen des staatlichen indischen Entwicklungsdiskurses. Erstens, dass die Beziehungen der Nord-Süd-EZ nach wie vor von asymmetrischen, rassifizierten Machtbeziehungen gekennzeichnet sind, die durch Entwicklungsdiskurse gestützt werden. Zweitens, dass der Neue Geber Indien als ehemals kolonisiertes und weiterhin Empfängerland, das als solches lange Zeit als „unterentwickelt“ und „rückständig“ kategorisiert wurde, nicht dieselbe Entwicklungsrhetorik der traditionellen Geber des Globalen Nordens verwenden wird. Drittens, dass alternative, eventuell gleichberechtigtere Entwicklungsdiskurse einen Einfluss auf die Machtbeziehungen in der EZ haben können.
Nach einer Einführung in die Geschichte, Struktur und den Umfang indischer EZ erfolgte ein Einblick in eine exemplarische Analyse des staatlichen indischen Entwicklungsdiskurses. Diese ergab mehrere wiederkehrende Themen, die anhand von Zitaten aus Artikeln des Indischen Außenministeriums, Aussagen indischer Politiker_innen sowie Webseiten und Publikationen staatlicher Entwicklungsprogramme veranschaulicht wurden. Kernthemen sind dabei Reziprozität, die Abgrenzung von traditionellen Gebern sowie Geber-Nehmer-Beziehungen, die Betonung einer Entwicklungspartnerschaft und der eigenen Erfahrungen als „Entwicklungsland“, eine geteilte Kolonialgeschichte sowie eine propagierte Süd-Süd-Solidarität.
Abschließend aufgeworfene Fragen beinhalteten die Kongruenz von staatlicher Rhetorik und EZ-Praxis, das Potential alternativer Diskurse für diskursive Verschiebungen im globalen Kontext, eventuell abweichende Diskursstränge je nach Nehmerland bzw. –Region und die Auswirkungen diskursiver Verschiebungen auf die tatsächlichen Machtbeziehungen in der EZ.
Max Arne Kramer
Am 22.04.2015 fand in den Räumen der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin eine von Dr. Sanaa Alimia und der Berlin Graduate School Muslim Cultures and Societies (BGSMCS) gemeinsam organisierte Filmvorstellung zum Kaschmirkonflikt statt. Der Film „Bring Him Back“ (2015) behandelt den politischen Einsatz von Shamli Begum, der Mutter des 1984 in Indien gehängten kaschmirischen Seperatistenführers Maqbool Bhat. Seit über dreißig Jahre kämpft sie für die Rückführung des Leichnams ihres Sohns in das leer stehende Grab auf dem Märtyrerfriedhof Srinagars, der Sommerhauptstadt des indisch-verwalteten Teil des umstrittenen Gebiets. Die Zuschauer wurden durch Fahad Shahs Film mit der biopolitischen Dimension des Kaschmirkonflikts konfrontiert: er zeigt, wie nicht nur der Mobilität der Lebenden in einem militärisch besetzten Land enge Grenzen gesetzt sind, sondern auch, dass durch die Bewegung eines Leichnams aus der Sicht staatlicher Entscheidungsträger unkontrollierbare politische Passionen unter der Bevölkerung ‚entflammen‘ könnte. Es folgte eine Diskussion mit dem Filmemacher und Medienschaffenden Fahad Shah, Herausgeber des bekannten kaschmirischen Online-Journals „The Kashmir Walla„. Shah betonte die Notwendigkeit für die kaschmirische Jugend, auf allen Ebenen des medialen und kulturellen Ausdrucks aktiv zu werden. Sein Film, so Shah, sei eine wichtige Ressource der Erinnerungspolitk seiner Generation, der sich immer mehr Kashmiris bedienen, um „die orientalistischen Bilder des indischen Kolonialismus anzufechten“.
Eine neuere Publikation von Shah „Of Occupation and Resistance“ präsentiert Essays vorwiegend junger Kashmiris aus der Generation der ‚Kashmiri Intifada‘ (ab 2010), die ihre Erinnerungen an die Kindheit in einem Konfliktgebiet durch verschiedene Formen zum Ausdruck bringen.
Alexa Altmann
An ad recently published in The Hindu for the luxury brand Kalyan Jewellers has sparked a controversy over colonialism, racism, child-labour and slave-fantasies as well as over public image projection and accountability. The depiction of movie-star Aishwarya Rai Bachchan in the fashion of a European colonial-era aristocrat, bejeweled, poised and shaded from the sun by an undernourished black child-slave, has prompted the outrage of several feminist and child rights activists as expressed in an open letter to Rai Bachchan and Kalyan Jewellers. The authors equally draw attention to the racist implications of the slave fantasy depicted in the advertisement by referencing the colonial heritage of comparable historic portraitures and to the romanticisation of child servitude. While Kalyan Jewellers promptly issued an apology and withdrew the image, Rai Bachchan’s publicist declared the final layout featuring the black child-slave was edited without the actress’ knowledge and consent and thus only the responsibility of the brand’s creative team. The activists countered by questioning this statement and Rai Bachchan’s alleged lack of control over her own public image. They demand Rai Bachchan to take a clear stand, both as an icon and in her role as UN Ambassador, against racism and the trivialization of servitude as well as take full responsibility for the commercialization of her public image projection.
SCROLL.IN, 04 May, 2015
Ranjona Banerji
Social media and TV news in India have turned Nepal’s tragedy into a display of self-aggrandisement.
Over the weekend, the hashtag #GoHomeIndianMedia was the top trend on Twitter. The message came from the people of Nepal, who were sick of the way the Indian media was covering the earthquake of April 25.
In many ways, this was an international relations disaster waiting to happen and was foreseen by many. Almost as soon as the Indian media heard of the earthquake, bad journalism began. It started on Saturday morning with many anchors finding it difficult to fathom that an earthquake cannot be covered like a cricket match or a film release. It needed a bit of serious thinking and planning. But true to form, it became a contest between two impulses: to say “India is the greatest” and “I’m a better channel than you”.
The Indian government was indeed prompt to respond to the plight of Nepal, a neighbour and a very old friend with a shared heritage. The Indian Armed Forces is experienced in relief and rescue operations. But having done that, Indian nationalism on social media and on TV news went into chest-thumping overdrive. The focus was on the enormity of the Indian rescue effort and the personal involvement of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The implication was twofold: India was doing everything and Nepal was incapable. Add to that shoddy and sensationalist reportage, especially on television, where grieving survivors and their families were asked how they felt about the deaths they had witnessed or had heard about. As one person pointed out, earthquake victims felt they were being treated like characters in an Indian soap opera.
Geopolitical battle
The Indian media also took huge umbrage to the fact that Pakistan had sent Nepal either beef or packets of beef masala as part of their aid package. It did not occur to any of our televangelists that it was up to Nepal to be offended or grateful. We just cornered the problem as our own, decided that Nepal was upset because it was a “Hindu nation”. This, in the eyes of many Nepalis, turned their tragedy into our geopolitical battle.
But it was on social media that the nationalistic triumphalism was on full display. The fact that India had helped Nepal now had several subtexts. India had helped because of Modi’s efficiency. India had never helped anyone before Modi was sworn in. No other nation was helping so generously ‒ unsaid but by implication. The Indian Armed Forces were the greatest and more in the same vein. The Indian prime minister did not help by saying that his Nepalese counterpart had learnt about the earthquake from Modi’s Twitter account (although he did say that India felt Nepal’s pain).
For a person of Nepali origin, watching the aftermath of the earthquake on Indian television, the message was clear: Nepal would be finished if it wasn’t for India and Modi. Many TV channels had the Indian prime minister permanently on their screens as a backdrop. The backlash therefore was strong, with almost 60,000 tweets, according to some reports, carrying the hashtag #GoHomeIndianMedia.
Big Brother attitude
The reaction to this phrase in India was even more intriguing. Those who had warned that Indian self-congratulation on the aid to Nepal was trumping India’s generosity felt justified ‒ even if they had been slammed, threatened and abused roundly on social media at the time. Initially, a few right-wing social media regulars felt quite happy at this shaming of the media ‒ which they often categorise as “paid” or “presstitutes” and agents of every party but the Bharatiya Janata Party.
However their satisfaction soon turned to rage. The criticism of the media was seen as a criticism of India itself, which is oddly amusing given how the media is usually abused. But it was soon evident that the #GoHomeIndianMedia demand elliptically referred to India’s aid effort as well. Nepal’s editorials pointed out that many of the Indian rescue efforts were aimed at getting Indians to safety. The Indian media rode on Armed Forces vehicles when that space could have been used to help the people of Nepal. The anger harked back to Nepal’s old and simmering discontent about India’s patronising “big brother” attitude in the neighbourhood.
The right-wing on Twitter – which had in no small measure contributed to making India seem like an ungracious bully – now turned on Twitter itself and the people of Nepal. Some users wondered how the people of Nepal, under siege, managed to find the time and the internet connections to tweet their anger. The head of Twitter India was offensively and aggressively interrogated about where the hashtag originated from. The conspiracy theorists of the right-wing had returned to the same old bogey: it was evil, anti-national paid media Congress agents who had started this trend to malign Modi and his hard work. Thus, they denied the people of Nepal even that inalienable right to be angry when they wanted to. If any of these worthies had bothered to read any of Nepal’s newspapers or websites, they might have got an inkling of the mood in that country.
So here we are. A wonderful opportunity for selfless help in keeping with our high image of ourselves lies shattered around us. Each little shard mocks us for our failed attempt at self-aggrandisement. A little generosity of spirit would have served us a bit better, perhaps.
Read more at: #GoHomeIndianMedia was an international relations disaster waiting to happen
Mette Gabler
Recently, a video has gone viral again. This time it is caught in a triangle of consumerism, gender and change, and set off a debate on feminism, gender equality, class and empowerment. The advertisement “My Choice” selling the magazine and brand Vogue as well as the idea of empowerment was produced as a collaboration between director Homi Adajania and Indian actor Deepika Padukone. This advertisement is part of the social awareness initiative of Vogue India, #VogueEmpower. Deepika Padukone’s voice carries the message, based on a piece written by Indian screenwriter Kersi Khambatta, and begins with the words “My body, my mind, my choice”. The black-and-white film cuts between images of female faces and bodies of 99 people of different ages, religions and belonging, including film critics, directors, and other figures of the so-called ‘glamour’ industry, as well as Deepika Padukone herself. The lines address a wide range of topics relevant in feminist discourses, from body image, gender norms, sexuality, and reproductive rights, as well as love, romance and relationships. It ends with the statement “Vogue Empower. It starts with you”, which reflects the aim of the advertisement, to “encourage people to think, talk and act in ways big or small on issues pertaining to women’s empowerment. The message is simple: It starts with you” given on Vogue’s YouTube channel alongside the video.
The intentions, content and implementation of the message are currently discussed on social media and in various forms of national and international online press. Voices include private individuals, activists, journalists, representatives of right wing politics, and film celebrities.
Vogue Empower seems to convey the idea that it is up to each individual to engage, get involved on their own account but potentially also beyond, because it might “start with you” but where does it go after that? The understanding of empowerment, in particular, is now under grave scrutiny and criticised in various ways. The debate ranges from the question which ideas are valuable to address to what empowerment can be, and if this form can at all be a vehicle for empowerment. Deepika Padukone’s own perspective on empowerment is shared on Vogue’s YouTube Channel: “I’ve always been allowed to be who I want to be. When you’re not caged, when you don’t succumb to expectation, that’s when you’re empowered.”
Although some have supported the messages and see it as a celebration of women “not in a way that society expects them to be but in way of her being an individual, a separate entity, one who can make choices of her own and live life on her own terms.” (http://www.scoopwhoop.com/inothernews/celebrating-women/) and being truly feminist (http://www.thehindu.com/trending/deepika-padukone-in-my-choice-video-of-vogue/article7056615.ece), the debates that followed strongly questioned whether empowerment conveyed in the video was relevant or useful.
Several strands of critical voices point out that the issues addressed in the video only target a privileged minority of the population in India. Accordingly, the issues of clothing, bodily integrity and authority are a matter of personal choice and therefore would not qualify as topics of female empowerment (/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/MyChoice-Twitterati-cheer-for-Deepika/photostory/46753891.cms). This critique seems to create a division between one group of people, privileged and not in need of empowerment and another underprivileged group, who benefit from empowerment. The juxtaposition of personal choices is in many articles posed against issues of public concern such as female foeticide, abuse, access to education, domestic violence, rape, harassment at workplace, equal leadership opportunities, the pay gap, financial independence, the intrusive male gaze, and everyday sexism (http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/wanted-less-style-more-substance/article7058383.ece). In this I see a certain hierarchical setup between issues that according to these critiques are worth addressing and issues that can be dismissed as privileged luxury problems.
Some of the critical stances seem to contradict each other. One on side, the dilemma of potential dangers or repercussions as unwanted consequences of the choices made beyond what is expected and set as the norm is considered. On the other side, this campaign is regarded for its potential harm is could do to the existing feminist movements. It is seen as a appropriating of women’s rights movements and branding feminism into a slick, cool and glamorous package instead of acknowledging the hard work that goes into it. In my opinion, one kind of struggle for feminist ideals is thereby romanticised while the other is thought of as easy. While surely the activism and work done in the history of women’s movements has not only been important but also dangerous and full of hardship, making the choices addressed in the video could also be a source of struggle.
Some articles debate the messages itself as hypocritical, in more than one way. According to this point of view, the choices “sold” in this ad stem from an industry riddled with stereotypical definitions of beauty and femininity thereby only supporting one kind of choice and freedom, one that fits within the frame of these definitions. Moreover, some saw the video as sexist in that the same demands of freedom to choose sexual partners “outside of marriage”, which was by many read as promotion of adultery, bigamy, and indifference, could not be claimed by the male part of the population. All these viewpoints illustrate that the video has definitely created a debate with diverse perspectives.
The debates continues to also inspire creative media output. While for example Amul, an Indian dairy cooperative based in Gujarat known for commenting on current popular, political, social and cultural events, incorporated the debate in its campaigning, by focusing on the divided opinions, others created responses delivering their own point of view: several examples of a male version of “My Choice” (here is one arguing that the Vogue ad is sexist : http://www.ndtv.com/offbeat/beer-belly-is-my-choice-spoof-of-deepika-padukones-vogue-video-751043), a dog version, and other spoofs e.g. incorporating the images of the “My Choice” video into other advertisements to highlight the sales of products over the social message (http://indianexpress.com/article/lifestyle/feelings/can-you-spot-the-hidden-ads-in-deepikas-mychoice-video/).
The reactions to the video must be said to be as diverse as the potential audiences, as the people voicing the critiques and reacting to the messages are all part of the audience (for another text on the critical viewpoints visit: http://kafila.org/2015/04/09/being-empowered-the-vogue-way-is-there-anything-left-to-be-said/). Each view contributes opinions, setting up a debate and potentially creates new perspectives in the feminist movement on gender equality, and what empowerment should mean. In light of this, the campaign has definitely proved successful in the goal to “encourage people to think, talk and act in ways big or small on issues pertaining to women’s empowerment”.
And I wonder, is being critical not also a sign of being privileged? There is a certain literacy that comes with the possibility of being part of the audience, first of all accessibility but also usage of a technical devices with a screen. Second, to be able to react to the issues mentioned in the short film one must not only understand the English language but also have an idea or understanding of empowerment as a concept, as well as being versed in debates on gender and the women’s rights movements. While for many the message of the “My Choice” advertisement is selling both a product and an idea, catering to a small group of people, is it not a crass assumption, that no one can be inspired by it in other ways than simply disagreeing? Sparking creativity beyond finding what is wrong with it, but potentially how it is relevant to some, affecting some part of their realities, or by simply inspiring some to get more information, and challenging some norms and expectations? Because, in the end, why is it a question of either or? And not a statement of all, everywhere, all the time? If the voices in reaction to this advertisement are diverse, why not also the possible impact? Debate being the source of movement and change.
See also: transgender-version of ‚My Choice‘
Judith Gasch
Abstract:
Die folgende Forschungsarbeit stellt eine Analyse der indischen Fernsehtalkshow Satyamev Jayate unter Gesichtspunkten der Medienereignistheorie dar. Als Strategie, um im ‚hyper-kompetitiven‘ indischen Fernsehmarkt Erfolg zu haben, vermarktet sich die Sendung Satyamev Jayate aktiv selbst als Medienereignis, indem sie sich im Fernsehen und in sozialen Medien als Akteur sozialen Wandels darstellt und darüber hinaus Medienanalisten anstellt, um die Auswirkung der Sendung in den Medien zu beobachten. Satyamev Jayate inszeniert sich so selbst als Medienereignis, um durch diesen Status sozusagen als ‚self-fulfilling prophecy‘ noch mehr Aufmerksamkeit zu generieren. Sie wird dadurch zu einer neuen Art von Medienereignis – in der Arbeit wird hierfür der Begriff „populäres Medienereignis 2.0“ vorgeschlagen.
Film celebrates 50 years of Satyajit Ray’s sleuth
Perhaps few other characters in Bengali fiction stir as much feelings in the young and the old alike as Feluda, the detective personality created by Satyajit Ray. Feluda who came to life through a story in a children’s magazine in 1965, ‘turns’ 50 this year. A documentary tells his story. Text: Indrani Dutta/Suvojit Bagchi
The first short story of Feluda, with sketches by Ray was published in 1965-66 in Sandesh, a children’s magazine. The maiden Feluda novella titled ’Badshahi Angti’ (The Emperor’s Ring) with more sketches by Ray appeared the same year. The magazine was launched in 1913 by Ray’s grandfather– writer, painter, printer Upendrakishore Raychowdhury. The editor’s mantle was donned later by Ray’s father, poet, illustrator and playwright, Sukumar Ray. (Courtesy: Ray Society)(Source: The Hindu, April 18)
Reader comment by Koel (The Hindu, April 20):
“Feluda – irreplaceable. I think he is the greatest tribute to the literary and intellectual middle class Bengali psyche”.
Writer and auteur, Satyajit Ray, created many of his characters sitting in this chair in central Kolkata’s Bishop Lefroy Road. One of his char-acters, Feluda, the quintessential Bengali gentleman sleuth, is com-pleting his golden jubilee later this year. (Courtesy: Ray Socie-ty)(Source: The Hindu, April 18)
Den vollständigen Artikel finden Sie auf thehindu.com
SCROLL.IN, 14 March, 2015
Mayank Jain
Inspired by a German artist, students of the University of Delhi and Jamia Millia Islamia are displaying feminist messages on sanitary napkins.
Sanitary napkin sales have been shooting up around colleges in Delhi, thanks to a public art project inspired by German artist Elone. On International Women’s Day on March 8, Elone scribbled feminist messages on sanitary pads and put them up all over Karlsruhe city. Students of various colleges in Delhi have taken up the challenge, and have covered campus walls and trees with statements on gender equality.
An image from Elone’s campaign.
Students of the Jamia Millia Islamia university made the first move on March 12. “We were really impressed with what happened in Germany and decided to do the same thing on our campus,” said a student activist on the condition of anonymity. The campaign hopes to bust taboos about menstruation and target the larger culture of misogyny. The messages include ‘Streets of Delhi belong to women too’, ‘Rapists rape people, not outfits’, and ‘Period blood is not impure, your thoughts are’.
“It’s not just students ‒ educated people, including teachers, tend to view menstruation as something unnatural and despicable,” the activist said. “We want to send a message that sexism cannot and will not be tolerated.”
Easier said than done. Jamia officials took down the pads, which were put up by the students without permission. The students are undeterred, and took the campaign outside the campus and onto the streets of Delhi. “We expected some opposition but this was a shock,” said another student, who had spent a whole day putting up the pads, on the condition of anonymity. “We are going to take the message forward to the city until the hostility ends.”
Meanwhile on Friday, a group of students from the University of Delhi showed their solidarity by putting up similar revolutionary pads across the North Campus area. “We simply want people to understand that menstruation is not a crime and a girl should not be victimised for something so natural,” said Rafiul Alom Rahman, who initiated the campaign at DU. “We put feminist messages on the pads even though we knew that people will not be okay with seeing sanitary pads with red paint.”
DU officials, and possibly some students, also did not approve of the campaign. Some of the pads were found to be torn, while others were pulled off trees. “A security guard pulled a pad out of his pocket and asked me to put it somewhere else,” Rahman said. “We are not going to be cowed down. We are thinking of ways to make this campaign even bigger and involve other universities and students.”
Here are some photographs of the public art campaign from social media.
Read more at: Why are sanitary pads with little notes stuck on trees and walls of Delhi colleges?
You’re a ‘bad girl’ if you fight rapists or go out with boys: New Meme
By: Meghna Malik, The Indian Express
Barely a month after the first ‘bad girl’ meme went viral on the internet, another ‘bad girl’ chart is doing the rounds on social media. The chart comes shortly after Leslee Udwin’s controversial documentary, ‘India’s Daughter’, which is based on the rape and murder of a 23-year-old student in December 2012. This documentary has been banned by the government of India.
Titled ‘Ek Buri Ladki – Rapist Ki Nazar se‘, this satirical chart shows 12 illustrations that depict the qualities of a bad girl, according to a rapist. Going by the chart, in the eyes of a rapist, a girl is a ‘bad girl’ if she roams around after 9 PM, fights the rapist or goes out with boys.
The chart further reads that a girl who talks in English, goes to a pub or files an FIR against the rapist is also a bad girl.
Quelle: http://indianexpress.com/article/trending/youre-a-bad-girl-if-you-fight-rapists-or-go-out-with-boys-new-meme/
Eine größere Version des Posters kann hier angesehen werden: bad-girl31