Rant: Is exploitation creative? Is rape art?

Recently I have come across many articles covering the response to a number of t-shirts being sold at Roger David, a menswear store in Australia.

The shirts, which feature a woman with a gag in her mouth, and two semi naked women with a strip over their eyes, are a part of a clothing line that prints artwork on their t-shirts.

A backlash amongst the uneasy coalition of feminists and conservatives has erupted on Facebook and elsewhere, designating the t-shirts as exploitative, and claiming they mock rape.

In a written response to the backlash, a spokeswoman for the brand said, ''Art is meant to inspire and educate, and the meaning and interpretation is left in the hands of the viewer.'' In an article at TheAge.com she is also said to have suggested they would spark debate.

Argh. What are we suppose to be debating, exactly? Whether exploitation is cool? Who the female body belongs to? What are these images supposed to inspire? I'm only getting anger. I thought we'd had the rape debate out already, and came to the only sane conclusion: rape is not ok, exploitation of women wrong.

Some have suggested that as the word "hollywood" is written across the gag it should be considered an artwork commenting on the influence of film and the media. Assuming one was to look hard enough at the shirt to realise the word was there, this point may be somewhat valid. Although, given artists (and the rest of us) have been decrying white American cultural hegemony since the 80s, its hardly a point that is creative, original, or likely to start debate.

There has also been suggestion that as the prints are based on original artworks, they should be uncensored. I am all for the rights of artists to free expression as long as they don't cause harm. The image, within the elective space of a gallery, or an art magazine or website, would be able to "educate and inspire" whomever chose to see it. However the same image, on the street, has a very different audience, and it causes harm.

How do we measure the harm done when this image is viewed by young boys and girls, who get the message that exploitation and violence are cool? Or that its okay to look at women, so long as they don't look back? Or the damage done to rape survivors who are forced to recall their won experience? Or other women, who are once again made to feel objectified, less equal in a public space?

Roger David have removed the t-shirts from their website, but not from their shelves. You can contact Roger David at their website, and tell them exactly what you think. I have done so, and will publish the reply, should I receive one.

You can also contact Blood is the New Black, the brand that printed the t-shirts, at press@bloodisthenewblack.com.