Grayson Perry's Art Club' Exhibition

[BitMuch]

www.channel4.com/programmes/graysons-art-club. I really enjoyed watching this series during lockdown because the amateur artists are very diverse and it showcases some interesting work. In this week's episode, for the final exhibition of their work, Grayson Perry dressed up in a way he is open about being very sexually aroused by. He has these clothes specifically designed to hide an erection. He didn't dress this way in any of the previous episodes. I found this totally disrespectful of him, especially when he was talking to the amateur artists who travelled to Manchester for the event despite covid, including a 17 year old girl and a young man with autism. The programme was primarily about the members of the public and showcasing their art. It's a nice pre-watershed family-friendly programme that has children on it, like a young 12 year old boy who made a collage of his twin brother who passed away.

Why does Grayson act out his fetish in events he attends that are not remotely 'adult' in nature?

Grayson went to a a primary school event with the Duchess of Cambridge and decided to wear his fetish gear to that so I have no idea where he draws the line. This is so accepted by society at large but I cannot feel comfortable with it. He seems so Jekyll and Hyde. Would a man wearing a gimp suit be invited along with a royal to speak with children in a primary school?

Also, his wife Phillipa Perry was the joint presenter and she made art too so I don't know why her name was missing from the title. It would have been more accurate to be called 'Grayson and Phillipa's Art Club'.

[Datun]

"Challenging his motivation for wearing them". It's still demanding that he only wears them if he meets some sort of radical feminist purity of thought test.

Disagreement with a man wearing the clothes of a little girl in order to become sexually aroused isn't a purity test.

Perry waxes lyrical about his sexual motivations for dressing up as Claire, a little girl. The fact that you don't see a difference between clothing becoming nongendered, and impersonating a child in order to be aroused, is odd.

[DidoLamenting]

@RozWatching

Dido Sure, but why describe it as a woman's outfit? Doesn't that undermine the idea that anyone can wear anything?

What else would he call it? Calling it the father of the bride would be meaningless.
It's a descriptor.

[DidoLamenting]

@Datun

"Challenging his motivation for wearing them". It's still demanding that he only wears them if he meets some sort of radical feminist purity of thought test.

Disagreement with a man wearing the clothes of a little girl in order to become sexually aroused isn't a purity test.

Perry waxes lyrical about his sexual motivations for dressing up as Claire, a little girl. The fact that you don't see a difference between clothing becoming nongendered, and impersonating a child in order to be aroused, is odd.

The clothes pictured here aren't little girls' clothes. Neither are the Claire dresses really. I have no interest in policing what Grayson Perry wears.

[StillWeRise]

he's not impersonating a little girl though is he?
He wasn't dressed as a little girl at the exhibition, nor apparently when he was awarded the CBE. Even when his clothes might be read as 'little girl' its more some image of what some girls wore 50 years ago, which looks deliberately ridiculous on a gangly middle aged bloke.

[Bronzino]

I loved Art Club during lockdown, but I do find it peculiar to see someone exhibit their ‘sissy’ fetish so publicly.

[Datun]

I have no interest in policing what Grayson Perry wears.

What's that got to do with it? He has said he dresses up as a little girl. That's his kink. She's called Claire.

I'm not inventing it. He's perfectly upfront about it.

He finds dressing as a little girl sexually arousing, and goes out in public in order to be further aroused by the public's reaction to his fetish.

He's a very charming and charismatic man, which is why the public seem to overlook it.

I don't overlook it.

I don't tend to separate my opinion of people who involve an unwitting public, including children, in their fetish into those who have charm, and those who don't.

[Lettera]

I find the idea of a man dressing or presenting in a particular way in order to provoke a reaction from me that will sexually arouse him, without my knowledge or consent, completely objectionable. I have no idea if this is what Grayson Perry is doing but I don't want to be unwittingly co-opted into anyone's sissy fantasy.

[Lettera]

Datun

Cross posted!

[StillWeRise]

Datun what about women who wear clothes they find arousing?

[Datun]

@StillWeRise

Datun what about women who wear clothes they find arousing?

Autogynephilia, as far know, (and I'm not sure what the child version of it is), is a male paraphilia.

Women don't seem to have paraphilias of this nature.

[CuriousaboutSamphire]

He has worn infantilising clothing, Shirley Temple dresses not baby clothes! But big, covering.

And it still seems on par with the more 'glamorous' women who wear far less clothing and have much more make up and body modification to elicit a similar response.

[CuriousaboutSamphire]

Sissy fantasy? Not sure that poster has understood cross dressing!

[CuriousaboutSamphire]

Interesting about the lack of women with paraphilia....not sure that's true, they may just present differently. But I'm not sure sexual masochism is something to be discussed here... given some lamentable recent legal decisions.

[Datun]

@CuriousaboutSamphire

He has worn infantilising clothing, Shirley Temple dresses not baby clothes! But big, covering.

And it still seems on par with the more 'glamorous' women who wear far less clothing and have much more make up and body modification to elicit a similar response.

Perry has a fetish where he dresses as a little girl to become sexually aroused. It's not complicated. The exact sartorial configuration of his dresses is irrelevant.

Presumably it's the vulnerability and helplessness of a child that he's fetishising. In the same way that a man with AGP fetishises the perceived passivity and submissiveness of women.

It's a very unhealthy kink.

[Lettera]

It is a very unhealthy kink, but my principal objection is involving others who are entirely unaware that their reaction (shock, even just a double-take) is part of the fetish.

[Scout2016]

I thought AGP was fetishing yourself and imagining yourself to be female and fantasing about being a woman? There was a lad did a youtube video about it and that's how I thought he explained it. That his sexual attraction has got miswired and was now on himself.
Whereas I think Grayson gets a thrill from feel of the clothes on him, the taboo nature of dressing up, and people's reactions to it. Like if you enjoy the feel / smell or whatever of rubber and enjoy the responses wearing it might provoke.

[Beamur]

I think we should be wary of interpreting GP's feelings or motives beyond what he has publicly stated himself.
This thread will get pulled otherwise.

[Datun]

There are reams and reams of articles about Grayson Perry, with him explaining where his transvestism comes from, why it's a fetish, why he inhabits the persona Claire. Tons of it. It's not secret.

[DidoLamenting]

@Lettera

It is a very unhealthy kink, but my principal objection is involving others who are entirely unaware that their reaction (shock, even just a double-take) is part of the fetish.

What about punks, goths, skinheads, people who dress like Victorian or Edwardian dandies such as Sebastian Horsley, the people who attended Horsley's funeral, women in 50s bomb shell style or anyone else who looks a bit out of the ordinary. Do you propose policing all of them as to what their motives are for provoking a reaction?

[Defaultname]

@CuriousaboutSamphire

He has worn infantilising clothing, Shirley Temple dresses not baby clothes! But big, covering.

And it still seems on par with the more 'glamorous' women who wear far less clothing and have much more make up and body modification to elicit a similar response.

Graham Greene had quite a bit to say about Shirley as Lolita (though it was pre-Nabaokov)-and got into trouble over it: www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-06-22-ca-20446-story.html

[Scout2016]

Ok I suppose what I meant was that although transvestitism is a feature of AGP, there's an additional dimension to AGP.

[thinkingaboutLangCleg]

I don't tend to separate my opinion of people who involve an unwitting public, including children, in their fetish into those who have charm, and those who don't.

Good point, Datun. And experience has made me a bit wary of charming men. I know GP isn’t a sex predator, and there’s never been any suggestion that he is. But charm is, in my experience, a very useful skill for a man who wants to slip pleasantly through boundaries.

[CatsCantCatchCriminals2]

Dressing as a punk, goth or skinhead is a sexual fetish like what Grayson does?

Flipping heck!

[DidoLamenting]

@CatsCantCatchCriminals2

Dressing as a punk, goth or skinhead is a sexual fetish like what Grayson does?

Flipping heck!

I didn't say that. I'm just wondering at what point anyone dressing in an extreme or outlandish way , particularly one intended to shock or provoke second looks, will pass the rad fem purity test of acceptable clothes.

[Datun]

I didn't say that. I'm just wondering at what point anyone dressing in an extreme or outlandish way , particularly one intended to shock or provoke second looks, will pass the rad fem purity test of acceptable clothes.

When they actually say upfront that it's a sexual fetish. It's not hard.