Gruesomely killing your children now an art form

No, this is not an abortion story; those tend to fall flat.

Instead, renowned political endorser and bizarre sex tip promulgator Cosmopolitan elected last week (link here) to show us the true function of art: to serve as a vehicle for fantasizing about murdering one's spouse and (born) children.

Per Cosmo, actress, photographer, and apparently reluctant mother Susan Copich has put together a series of photos titled Domestic Bliss, featuring images of herself strangling the family dog, caressing the abdominal muscles of a faceless man as her children watch, and brandishing a plugged in hair dryer while sharing the tub with her two little girls.

Cosmo calls the photos "Stepford Wife-esque and said, but that's the point" – the point being that "'personal, social and cultural pressures" make homicidal thoughts against one's family prime humor fodder, and constitute "What It's Really Like to Be a Mother."  The artiste herself says, "I dwell in the dark thoughts and recesses of my mind to create character and subject, in order to project them into a frozen moment of time, allowing the story to continue to unfold bilaterally for the viewer."

Neither Cosmo nor the PetaPixel article Cosmo cites mentions whether the two little girls featured in this macabre photo session are Copich's own.  Regardless, there are shades of little girls dropping F-bombs for feminism here.  What will participation this series teach these girls about femininity and motherhood, and especially about the role of their father and other men in their lives?  What will they think when they look back on photos of their mother miserable?  How will Yes, honey, I placed you like a prop in my photo series so I could demonstrate how I daydream about killing you go over when these girls are teenagers, or married and expecting?  Isn't that funny, dear?

There is a difference between censorship and exposing poor (and destructive) taste.  Copich has every right to manipulate her kids this way – and her husband has every right to be okay with how he and they are depicted – but it's worth mentioning what a bad and misleading effect so-called art like this has on people's impression of marriage and motherhood.

This is the sort of thing that should go without saying, but the haut nez art world seems to need to hear it: portraying yourself in a murder-suicide with your kids is bad.  Portraying your husband as your enemy is bad.  And if you have to use real children to indulge the "dark thoughts and recesses of [your] mind to create character and subject," maybe it's better to pursue something more constructive and less exploitative, like Pilates or dance.

Drew Belsky is American Thinker's deputy editor.  Contact him at drew@americanthinker.com, and follow him on Twitter @DJB627.

No, this is not an abortion story; those tend to fall flat.

Instead, renowned political endorser and bizarre sex tip promulgator Cosmopolitan elected last week (link here) to show us the true function of art: to serve as a vehicle for fantasizing about murdering one's spouse and (born) children.

Per Cosmo, actress, photographer, and apparently reluctant mother Susan Copich has put together a series of photos titled Domestic Bliss, featuring images of herself strangling the family dog, caressing the abdominal muscles of a faceless man as her children watch, and brandishing a plugged in hair dryer while sharing the tub with her two little girls.

Cosmo calls the photos "Stepford Wife-esque and said, but that's the point" – the point being that "'personal, social and cultural pressures" make homicidal thoughts against one's family prime humor fodder, and constitute "What It's Really Like to Be a Mother."  The artiste herself says, "I dwell in the dark thoughts and recesses of my mind to create character and subject, in order to project them into a frozen moment of time, allowing the story to continue to unfold bilaterally for the viewer."

Neither Cosmo nor the PetaPixel article Cosmo cites mentions whether the two little girls featured in this macabre photo session are Copich's own.  Regardless, there are shades of little girls dropping F-bombs for feminism here.  What will participation this series teach these girls about femininity and motherhood, and especially about the role of their father and other men in their lives?  What will they think when they look back on photos of their mother miserable?  How will Yes, honey, I placed you like a prop in my photo series so I could demonstrate how I daydream about killing you go over when these girls are teenagers, or married and expecting?  Isn't that funny, dear?

There is a difference between censorship and exposing poor (and destructive) taste.  Copich has every right to manipulate her kids this way – and her husband has every right to be okay with how he and they are depicted – but it's worth mentioning what a bad and misleading effect so-called art like this has on people's impression of marriage and motherhood.

This is the sort of thing that should go without saying, but the haut nez art world seems to need to hear it: portraying yourself in a murder-suicide with your kids is bad.  Portraying your husband as your enemy is bad.  And if you have to use real children to indulge the "dark thoughts and recesses of [your] mind to create character and subject," maybe it's better to pursue something more constructive and less exploitative, like Pilates or dance.

Drew Belsky is American Thinker's deputy editor.  Contact him at drew@americanthinker.com, and follow him on Twitter @DJB627.