Read on Twitter
I know a thing or fifty about statues of women and this is exactly what you get if you let lazy art values come before the politics the statue is meant to represent. It’s a shocking waste of an opportunity that can’t be undone. But hey, tits! https://twitter.com/tabitasurge/status/1326110918980333569
“Why is she naked, mommy?”
“Unfortunately I have no idea but please don’t let the tiny perky-titted massive bush woman atop the giant phallus distract you from her actual legacy, which for some reason this statue doesn’t reflect at all”.
“Unfortunately I have no idea but please don’t let the tiny perky-titted massive bush woman atop the giant phallus distract you from her actual legacy, which for some reason this statue doesn’t reflect at all”.
From The Guardian, “It personifies a spirit, [the artist] hopes, and is a clear contrast to the countless sculptures of stuffy men placed on lofty pedestals” hello there is a very long and grotesque tradition of statues of women being naked and it contributes to sexism.
Statues of named men get to be clothed because the focus is on their work and achievements. Meanwhile, women walking or jogging through parks experience high rates of sexual harassment BECAUSE OUR BODIES ARE CONSIDERED PUBLIC PROPERTY
This is beyond basic. You don’t get to see an artist’s impression of Nelson Mandela’s cock and balls in a park. There is no reason to depict Mary naked unless you are trying to be edgy to provoke debate, in which case show your own tits, not hers.
2016 was a hundred years ago but here’s some data https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/feminism/2016/03/i-sorted-uk-s-statues-gender-mere-27-cent-are-historical-non-royal-women
And here is a podcast I did with Caroline in which I talk about Mary Wollstonecraft’s ACTUAL WORK AND LEGACY and its importance to me as a working class woman: https://mashable.com/article/caroline-criado-perez-tracy-king/
And here’s a viral infographic I made back when this stuff was less obvious (I didn’t include nudity because I didn’t think anyone would be ignorant enough to try and make a nude statue of a feminist icon). http://littleatoms.com/society/infographic-shows-why-britain-needs-suffragette-statue-parliament-square
How can women’s achievements and legacies be taken seriously when we’re being distracted by goddamn tits. For fucks actual sake. MEN DO NOT HAVE TO WASTE THEIR TIME DEBATING THIS SHIT.
“Hey here’s Edward Jenner’s perky ass and ginger pubes, a real starting point for learning about vaccine history”.
And that’s before we even get to the insane ‘flat belly and perfect Babycham-glass tits and no cellulite or excess body fat but she’s scowling because she serious, hope you feel sufficiently represented LADIES’ aesthetics.
Anyway. Maybe one day my legacy will be enough to warrant a naked statue, in which case please make sure to give me a thigh gap, very important. I’m off to write a book.
Oh one last thing: it isn’t empowering if it doesn’t get you any actual power.
Having to pop back to address ‘the naked woman isn’t meant to be Mary, it represents all women’. Hot balls does it. A) ‘everywoman’ is a lazy outdated trope in public art, B) if it’s not Mary then it’s every woman EXCEPT HER lmao in which case C) get her name off it then. Duh.
Still seeing a lot of post-hoc “the naked woman isn’t meant to be Mary” nonsense, as though a campaign literally called Mary on the Green had always promised a statue of literally every woman except Mary, on the green. That defence just makes the failure worse.
Can we have a statue of Mary Wollstonecraft or not? Take her name off the naked everywoman, call that statue A Monument To Everywoman* (Of A Rare Body Type), start from scratch with Mary. But please stop with the “it’s not her” stuff because that’s not the optics AT ALL.
Anyway, enjoy explaining all that to the groups of schoolkids that absolutely nobody is going to take on a field trip to see it
*there is no such thing as the Everywoman
Very amused by my quote in this, which now goes next to the time Guardian edited an article of mine to remove the phrase “legs akimbo”. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/nov/10/insulting-to-her-mary-wollstonecraft-sculpture-sparks-backlash
Thanks for nice comments about Newsnight. One last point I’d like to have made with more time: everyone is adamant the naked woman isn’t Mary. WHY isn’t it? If nudity is good enough for the ‘everywoman’ then why isn’t it acceptable for Mary? Why isn’t she everywoman?
Could it possibly beeee that depicting Mary Wollstonecraft naked is obviously wrong for her but somehow fine for the rest of us, and therefore she’s been put on a far higher Victorian values pedestal than any actual statue of her could ever achieve 
Before I go to sleep I’ll address Bee’s comment on Newsnight that those criticising the statue should get involved with campaigns: massively privileged thing to say. Your right to criticise does not depend on having enough spare time, income, ability or energy to campaign.
I say that as someone who has enough spare time, income, ability and energy to work my ass off for free on lots of campaigns. I don’t, for example, have any childcare or caring responsibilities. Not everyone is able to work for free.
Those who can’t squeeze campaigning into their spare time are still allowed to criticise the naked statue. ‘Everywoman’ has to include those who just want to say the Emperor is naked without also being responsible for covering up his cock.
