fluffy softness is neither harmless nor naiv. fluffy softness mainpulates you to feel with your most vulnerable skin.
Exploration Experiment to detect patriarchal structures
Monument: Dr. Anton Schneider Statue
in Bregenz, Austria
The text-based paintings resulted from my reflexive writing processes about the overpaintings and movie making. The text performs a specific form, either the form of the FEMonumental idea it reacts to (like the size and form of the overpainting, or of the projection of the movie), or the form of the monument it reacts to. Through painting the words with acrylic colour and brushes onto paper or canvas, the words appear ‘alive’ and personal and get the same importance and space like the FEMonumental ideas themselves. The text-based paintings add a layer of reflexive thought to the FEMonumental ideas and trigger further imagination about them on the audience’s side. The photos were taken at the PPS Graduation Exhibition in Tilburg.
The text-based painting that belongs to the fluffy softness movie is based on reflexive writings about my own patriarchal thoughts towards the movie. These writings entail the imagined voice of a little patriarch sitting in my head, the patriarchally-shaped thought of myself towards my work and the feminist answers towards it. I painted the reworked text onto a big canvas that resembles almost the size of the projection of the movie. The audience should be able to read the text while watching the movie to reflect on their own internalised patriarchal thoughts that are triggered by the FEMonumental practice.
What if the monuments of our leaders would truly serve the people?
What if our leaders would truly serve the people?
Overpaintings
Creation of FEMonumental practices
Monument: Dr. Anton Schneider Statue
in Bregenz, Austria
Movie Making - Creation of FEMonumental practices
Monument: Dr. Anton Schneider Statue
in Bregenz, Austria
Serving the people. Conni Holzer 2023. Acrylic colour and pencil on art print (Hahnemühle William Turner paper), 30x40 cm. Photograph by Nina Lyne Gangl.
Reflexion
Exploration experiment N°2
Dr. Anton Schneider Monument in Bregenz (provincial capital)
14.02.2023, 14:30-16:00
The statue stands on a pedestal, pedestal and statue each about 2,5 m high. It is located in the middle of a square green island, with a big tree in each corner. The grass is surrounded by streets, which are mostly used as parking and to access a bigger parking. Pedestrians use the roads to cross between the buildings, but it is no main route for pedestrians. The statue faces the main road along the lake, behind the road the promenade with the harbour and the Lake of Constance. Behind the statue is the backyard of a restaurant, on its right side the main post office, on the left side the Kunsthaus (museum for contemporary art). From the monument, you see the sides and backsides of the surrounding buildings, no entrances.
It is an odd place, this green island with this statue, surrounded by streets and parking cars. It is a non-place where people pass through. I wonder, if this is the original place of the monument or if it has been moved here from somewhere else. There is “Anton Schneider Street” nearby, maybe it stood there originally.
It is a cold and cloudy day, with a grey sky and the branches of the trees are empty. I observe the place and the monument. I circle around it and watch it from different perspectives. I read the inscriptions. Anton Schneider appears as an elderly man, half-bold, well-fed, dressed well (1800 fashion) with a long coat, in one hand what appears to be a piece of paper. It looks as if he is about to hold a speech, or give commands. He is looking down on us normal people, from his elevated position in his power-demonstrating posture. There are no arms. But the inscriptions on the pedestal let me guess, that this monument was built to commemorate war actions. The male names on the pedestal are accompanied with military titles and on the back of the pedestal is written “erected to the brave sons of our fatherland”. There are only male names on the monument.
I do not know, who Dr. Anton Schneider was. I never heard something about him in school. I doubt that many people know who he was. I could test that on a day with more by-passers. He is an old white, chubby man on a pedestal. I didn’t really notice him before I did my project about monuments. It seems as if he has been left here, a relic of history, in which no one is interested much nowadays. He is still there on the pedestal, looking down on me. I don’t like what he stands for. He stands for (old) men who rule and command. He reminds me of chubby elderly patriarchs who do not take me serious, watch me with lewdly gazes, interrupt me, do not listen to me and talk loudly. We still have politicians like him. They do not command soldiers to go to war (not in Austria), but they do everything to keep the old, conservative, catholic, patriarchal system going. Do I do him (Anton) wrong, judging him on his looks like that? It is not only how he looks, but the posture and the fact, that he stands on a pedestal. He lived around 1800, so I guess he didn’t take women seriously, because no one did in public live (women were not part of the political public sphere).
I consider this a patriarchal monument, because it shows a “patriarch”. Additionally it talks only of men and of their duties and bravery to the fatherland and no word about what women did to enable all of that patriarchal war shit. What is the fatherland and would be a motherland? What is the difference of these two terms?
I want to research about Dr. Anton Schneider, who he was and why there is a monument about him in Bregenz. I want to know, who the artist was who made it and by whom it was commissioned. I want to know the origins and uses of the words “Vaterland” (Fatherland) and “Mutterland” (motherland). I want to know who the other men were whose names are on the pedestal. I want to know, if this monument was erected on that spot, or if it was moved there. I want to ask others, if they know something about this man, if he is someone “important” that I should have known, or if he is unknown to most people who pass by his monument.
I took the posture of Anton while I was there, I stood on the small step in front of the pedestal, right under Anton and stood there like him, looking over to the lake. I felt powerful, about to give a speech or command. I also felt a lot of pressure and a strange alienation. I felt separated and far from the citizens. Like a ruler, who stands above them and needs some distance to be able to make decisions. Decisions over live and death of this subjects.
I really like the coat of Anton. There is something safe, warm, soft and playful about that coat. I am thinking about turning Anton into a woman, putting a female head onto his body, adding breasts. And to change the names on the pedestal into female names, the “sons” into “daughters” and the “fatherland” into “motherland”. This would be great to do with a 3D scan, but the programme didn’t work today. I have to try it on a sunny day. I can also do it as an overpainting. I could also create performative counter-statues with women.
The statue seems to be easier than the chapel. I also feel more free with the statue. The chapel as sacred space has so much more rules and restrictions, is so much more sensitive to critique. A statue is also easier than a whole building. Maybe this may change along the process…
The space of the second monument is much more public than the chapel. I am being watched from all sides, there is traffic right next to it, some office windows looking down to it, and pedestrians are walking by. Still I feel freer in my movements and actions than at the chapel.
found patriarchal structures:
Men are imporant, women are not.
Sons are important, daughters not.
Only the male are worthy.
Only the brave are worthy.
Men lead, men rule, men decide.
This is a father's land.
Men don't need to be pretty to be put on a pedestal.
Men have to be strong and brave fighters.
"the others" are the enemy.
This man stands above us.
Men rule over nature.
The fatherland is stable.
Mens rule is stable.
War is worthy.
Only the white old man is worthy.
Women are unimportant, uninteresting.
Women are ignored.
Big old men tell us what to do.
Women are not taken seriously.
I used the results from the Exploration Experiment to create the protocol for the Transformance. I created an audio collage out of the patriarchal statements, to use in the Transformance.
All the knowledge and ideas gained in the first two performative experiments and in all visual explorations were merged together to create the Performative FEMonument, the third part of the performative exploration line.
The text-based paintings that belong to the overpaintings are painted with acrylic colour on paper of the same size as the overpaintings. The texts emerged from the painting process, where I used writing to elaborate on the FEMonumental ideas. They ask the audience to imagine to be in the overpaintings, to imagine how a world around these FEMonumental practices would look like.
The critical patriarchal thoughts towards the fluffy softness were further used in the Text-Based Paintings and in the Performative FEMonument.
Parallel to the Movie Making, I started to elaborate on the FEMonumental idea of monuments lying on the ground through Overpainting photographs of the Transformance.
The documentation materials (videos, photographs) and FEMonumental ideas from the Transformance were then used for the visual Explorations. I started with Movie Making and further explored with it the idea of fluffy soft monuments.
The writings about the overpaintings were further used for the Text-Based Paintings.
The FEMonumental ideas of the visual Explorations were used in the Performative FEMonument.
Documentation
I was well prepared and in a good mood. I prepared everything on Friday. I chose this pink second-hand overall as a costume, because it gives me a feeling of confidence. I wore it the whole morning to get a feeling for it. It helped me to prepare and plan the Transformance, because I felt very strong in it, like a feminist fighter, but also playful. I think it is going to be my Transformance-suit, as a tool to get into the role of “The Transformer”. I packed other female second-hand clothes to take them with me, to have something to experiment with during the Transformance.
I watched the video of my Exploration and read my notes. I recorded the patriarchal structures/statements and layered them to create an audio file to use for the deconstruction part of the Transformance.
On Saturday morning the weather was okay. It was cloudy but not raining. I picked up my friend Nina who accompanied me as my assistant, to take photos and film. I explained to her what I need from her, that she should concentrate more on filming during the Transformance and that we can take photos afterwards, with a focus on my body relating to the monument.
I prepared the equipment, set up the camera, put on my overall and made a body warm up. I started to move around the monument, touch it, explore it, greet it. It was much easier to get into the Transformer-role than at the first Transformance. I was concentrated and focused. I started with measuring and marking the Transformance space, next to the monument. I smoked myself and the space with salvia. I painted my hands and my face with purple colour. I spoke the prayer for love and entered into the space.
The deconstruction
I started to play the audio file with the patriarchal statements (which I extracted in the Exploration of the monument) on my loudspeaker. I listened to it, moved around in the Transformance Space, talked along with it, started to alternate the statements, turn them into opposites, I walked in circles while I did this. I took a cotton cloth, ripped Stripes off it and wrote onto them: “Women rule”, “Women have a lot to say”. I took a big paper and started to write on it alternated, deconstructed and reversed versions of the patriarchal statements. I got up, walked around the paper and repeated what I wrote there. I hanged the pieces of cloth and the paper onto the monument.
The liminal stage
I started with “What if…” to experiment with the new sentences and imagine FEMonumental practices. I lied on the ground and looked up to the monument. What if our leaders would always lie flat on the ground if they spoke to the people? What if all our monuments would show people lying flat on the ground, so that we would look down on them to worship them? What if we used the vulnerability of someone lying on the ground to deconstruct our ideas of power and monumentality?
I picked up a fluffy cardigan from my equipment and started to play with it, wrap myself in it, feel it on my skin. What if we build fluffy and soft monuments? What if we build monuments for things that are human, like liking soft and fluffy things? What if we build monuments that are so soft and fluffy, that people are cuddling with them? What if it was a FEMonumental practice of performers who wear fluffy coats, that are stuffed with soft materials and that are very soft and fluffy. You don’t recognise them as female or male, some are big, others are small, some sit in wheelchairs. You can cuddle with them. It is about sharing love and touching, about embracing softness.
I was supprised, because when I prepared myself for the Transformance, I thought that I would be fighting the monument, but now I wanted to cuddle, wrap it in fluffy stuff.
I thought about dressing Anton Schneider up as a woman, about transforming his coat into a nice dress, adding long hair, putting on some make up.
I looked up at the monument and thought about the men who go to war, who send other men into war and it made me sad. I thought about those men and that if they would have gotten enough love in their childhood, they would not feel the urge for starting wars… Then I thought: I am thinking about men again. But I don’t want to. I want women to be at the centre. What if we build monuments for the women who fight? All those feminists who get killed or experience violence because they are feminists? All the girls and women in Iran who are fighting and risking their lives for their basic human rights? So I started to draw on a piece of cloth and wrote on it “for the women who fight. For the women who keep us all alive. For women. For humanity” and I hanged it onto the monument, covering the names of the men.
Then I started to put my things together and we made photos. I put my body in relation to the monument, I pushed it, I looked at it, turned my back to it, climbed it and hanged the “for the women” piece higher on it, I sat in front of it, lied down to it.
People passed by and watched me, but no one stopped to watch for a longer time. Some people from the restaurant behind the monument came out to see what I am doing and to read the cloth that I hanged on the Monument. But they only watched from the distance.
I had fun, I got into the transformer role well and several ideas for FEMonumental practices came up. By hanging pieces of cloth with statements painted on them onto the monument, I executed one of them.
The photographing after the Transformance was a new practice. We staged pictures. We staged a FEMonumental Practice of female body in a Transformance suit against the Monument. This could be developed further, with more intimate details of body against stone and bronze, with diverse bodies, several bodies.
Thoughts while I am drawing:
the pink flows out of the transforming-suit, flooding the ground, turning the photograph over and with it the statue. A pink and smooth landscape emerges, with a bright blue sky. The statue appears to have fallen – a fallen hero. It is not a statue that was built as a lying statue. This is clear because of the pedestal and the posture of the person/statue.
The figure in the pink suit merges with the ground and grows out of the ground. It could be a statue that is connected and rooted in the ground, partly covered with earth. Or it is the transformer who lies the statue down.
The lying statue, the fallen statue… what if I decorated it or used it for something? It could be a dining table. He – Anton Schneider could serve the people. He could serve the people not as a fighter or patriarchal leader, but as a table, as a seat, as a symbol for support. A symbol for what leaders should be, what we elect them for: to serve the people, to put the well being of ALL people above their own thrive for power and wealth.
The statue is now below eye level, lying on the ground. He is looking up to the people, serving them food and drinks, worshipping everyone who passes by.
What if of our leaders would serve the people?
I paint food and drinks onto the statue and pedestal, transforming it into a table. I edit the sign on the pedestal and write on it:
“Serving the people
-all people-
As a true leader”
I imagine to be in the overpainting:
I am touched by this picture. It appears to be in an imaginative land with a pink ground, but I can also see the people coming, gathering around it, eating and drinking, sitting on it. A toddler stands up using the head of the statue as a handle. The transformer touches the pedestal with its hand – what happens if she lets go? Does the statue stand up? The foods and drinks fall down, the toddler falls back on his diapered butt, the pink landscape and the bright blue sky disappear and people have to look up high to look into the eyes of Dr. Anton Schneider.
Disappointment and distance. The feeling of not being heard by our leaders, of not being seen, of being ignored spreads within me. But the transformer puts her hand back onto the pedestal, while still lying on the ground. It flips over, the pink floods the ground, spreads out and forms a straight bright horizon. People gather around, a kid puts its finger into the nose of the statue, someone cuts a melon on the pedestal and shares it with everyone. I ask the people: “What if our leaders would truly serve us people?” and their faces light up, their eyes fill with tears while they imagine a truly social and ethical society.
Reflexion
I started with the decision to focus on fluffy softness as FEMonumental practice and I started to create soft fluffy objects to perform with and to install on the monument. While sewing, I thought a lot, I started to perform and move with the objects and tried them out on site with the monument. I tried to figure out, what I want to commemorate of through the fluffy softness as FEMonumental practice. Do I need something “specific”? Should I ask the audience members for what they would use it to commemorate? Or is it simply to honour and represent attributes that are defined and devalued as feminine? I went for the last.
It was a good decision, to not let the audience “do” much, because they were even pretty inhibited and cautious to simply touch and hug the fluffy objects.
After I finished the fluffy soft objects, I created a structure for the performance and had the idea to let the statue talk in the beginning. The statue should explain what it is, what its function as monument is and why it is a patriarchal monument. The second part would be the Deconstruction and Transformation, where the Transformer plays with ideas and opposites. The last idea would be the fluffy soft moving monuments. From there I would start to play and interact with the soft fluffy objects. Then there would be the patriarchal reaction/criticism – I decided to let the statue speak that as well. The End would be “Fluffy Softness is neither harmless nor naïve”, a statement for the unlearning of patriarchal patterns and structures.
I started to write the text for the statue. I recorded it with my own voice, first in German, then in my dialect. But both didn’t fit, so I tried it in German with a strong dialect accent, which worked great, as it sounds like our local politicians. I edited the recording to make it sound like a male voice. I had a lot of fun doing that. I rewrote and edited the text several times and got some feedback from my sister to make it more concise and include parts that explain what patriarchy is. It sounds now, as if the statue mansplains itself to the Transformer and the audience, proud of its patriarchal background.
I had problems with the second part, where the Transformer plays with opposites and FEMonumental ideas – I struggled with what to take in and how to make the process that I went through comprehensible. I left it to think about in the end and continued with the “fluffy softness” part. I recorded text for the “fluffy soft hug”-audio. I used the audio from the Fluffy Softness movie, added parts in German and prolonged it, to have time to play with the fluffy soft objects and install some of them on the statue.
I translated and adapted the patriarchal criticism towards fluffy softness, to record it as the statue’s voice. I recorded it several times, making it more “aggressive” and degrading towards the Transformer.
I rehearsed with the finished audio files and improvised the live-talking parts, to find out what fits and what comes as natural reaction to the statue’s voice. I wrote the ideas down, experimented with them and adapted them several times. It was hard to leave many things out, as I entangled myself in too complex and too many arguments and aspects. I tried to break it down to some essentials.
Again, I failed at cocreating with my menstrual cycle – because I could only do it in this week. So, I got my period on the day of the performance, was VERY tired, had like no energy, couldn’t concentrate well and had cramps. It was okay during the performance, but I forgot some parts of my text.
I didn’t expect many visitors, I sent out invitations and some friends shared it, but as it is main holiday season many people were on vacation. But there were about 15 people in the audience. Some by-passers watched for some minutes, one joined for the whole performance.
It was very loud, because a busy street is right next to the monument and on the other side was a full terrace from a restaurant. And nearby was a political event. My loudspeaker was loud enough, but I didn’t have a microphone and had to shout.
I was in a strange mood during the performance, not very nervous, but a little anxious about possible reactions. I felt that anxiety also during the preparations. I reconsidered things several times and what words exactly to use and how to explain and justify everything I say with the performance. I think this is what happens as soon as you enter the feminist discussions – there is sooooo much critique from many different sides, but especially from feminists and you have to fear to be attacked for everything you say.
I tried to make it very clear what the performance is about (in the talk of the statue at the beginning). I had to shake that anxiety off and to go back to just do it, just try it, just start somewhere. And that worked. I improvised some parts of the performance, like I started to “fight” the monument during its critique of Fluffy Softness with the soft and fluffy objects, with hugs and cuddling. It got funny and absurd, playful, but kept the serious and concerned tone in the end.
I am okay with how it turned out and think it worked to create a comprehensible condensation of my process. But there are several things that I would rework and improve if I would do the performance again.
Background Information
about the Statue of Dr. Anton Schneider:
The statue was revealed in 1910 on Kornmarktplatz, and was moved in 1939 and stands now between Kunsthaus and the Post, Kornmarktstraße 3, 6900 Bregenz, Austria.
Dr. Anton Schneider was the leader of the uprising against the Bavarian hegemony in 1809. He was a jurist and fought in many battles which brought him the title of a true fighter for the people and the nation. Some considered him the 'Volksheld' (folk hero) from Vorarlberg (like Andreas Hofer from Tirol). But Schneider's achievments are seen contorversial. Some called him a hero, others a traitor. This is due to his approaval of the enlightenment, which contradicted his leadership of the uprising movement that was directed against the reforms of the enlightenment. The erection of his statue took several years as conservatives called him an adulterer and didn't want to have a statue of him. The revelation of the statue was unspectacular, not even the local governor participated.
Most people I have talked to, do not know who Schneider was, they just know that there is a street with his name close by.
source: Burmeister, Karl Heinz (Hg.) -Volksheld oder Verräter? Dr. Anton Schneider
patriarchal reaction within my female body:
You cannot do this. You will be recognised as a girly woman, infantile and naïve. There is too much pink and violet in the movie and all the touching and fluffiness… this is too female to be taken serious. It is too emotional and too sensual, what is ‘scientific’ about this? Shouldn’t it be recognizable as part of artistic RESEARCH?
Is this something just for women? Well then, let them have it. If it helps to make them happy and accept their subordination…
This is not of national or societal importance. It is not worth of becoming a monumental practice in public space. Do you want people to be reminded of what they liked when they were little girls? Grown men don’t want to cuddle with a fluffy moving thing in public space.
reaction to the patriarchal thoughts:
I start to feel small and unimportant, like an imposter. I am discouraged. But… resistance starts to rise within me. The ‘look’ of the patriarch within my mind makes me hesitant. But!
and I collect strength through thinking of all the girls and women that I know.
But: softness is what keeps us together, what we need to show empathy and love, what we need to be tender. It is a ‘female’ attribute and that is why it is subordinated and degraded. My female body is soft. My breasts are soft. They are always soft, no matter how strong my muscles are. The bodies of mothers get softer after pregnancy. And our female bodies create babies with the softest skin and bones and hair. Is this why softness is considered to be female? Or was it just used as the subordinated binary to strength and hardness? Is hardness ‘male’ because of the hard erected penis? But most of the time penises are very soft… that doesn’t make sense. It is a patriarchal definition, it does not need to make sense, it is a vehicle for male domination. It is a definition I want to deconstruct and transform. Women, men, people, animals, plants, stones – there is softness and fluffiness among all of them. (I am not so sure about fluffy stones, but maybe a geologist would know one…)
No one will take it serious! Fluffy and soft reminds me of stuffed animals, unicorns and teddy bears, children clothes, of little girls. This is nothing that concerns grown ups, this has no validation, no one needs soft and fluffy cuddling-monuments! That is something for little girls!
No one will take you serious if you propose this as a monumental practice. It has nothing to do with history or power or war or death or fighting or religion or nationality or science.
feminist reaction to the patriarchal thoughts:
The fluffy softness is a FEMINIST monumental practice, because it doesn’t care about what is considered to be male or female by patriarchal definition. The fluffy softness FEMonument is a FEMonumental practice, a practice beyond the patriarchal hierarchy, where ‘male’ attributes, the state, culture, science, war, power and strength are dominant over ‘female’ attributes like softness, fluffiness, loving, cuddling, nature, peace, weakness, vulnerability and so on. It is a FEMonumental practice because it imagines what could be of importance in a feminist society, in a society without domination based on difference, in a society where love and empathy for all living beings are at the core.
What if our monuments would invite us to be gentle and sensitive, to let go of the patriarchal expectations to be strong and brave?
to the gentle daugthers. Conni Holzer 2023. Acrylic colour on art print (Hahnemühle William Turner paper), 30x40 cm. Photograph by Nina Lyne Gangl.
process:
A photograph of my body lying on the pedestal of the statue. I paint green around the statue to make it appear to be lying in the grass. I change the words on the pedestal. There is written: “Den tapferen Söhnen des Vaterlandes erbaut 1910” (To the brave sons of the fatherland erected 1910) and I change it to “Den sanften Töchtern des Mutterlandes …” (To the gentle daughters of the motherland …). I want handprints on the statue. I want people to touch it and leave their marks. I make a linocut of a tiny handprint and print with it colourful handprints all over the statue.
I look at the overpainting. It appears like a gravestone, a place to mourn with the body lying on it, appearing kind of suffering. The handprints on the statue symbolise that people were paying tribute to the monument, to someone represented by it. I don’t see the man in the statue. Only the feet and part of the cloak are visible, which is gender-neutral or even seems to be feminine. The “new” words on the pedestal make it a monument dedicated to daughters, women, to the motherland, to gentleness. What are “gentle daughters of the motherland”? I associate it with a monument for sensitive women, for daughters who were lost, who suffered because they are too sensitive and gentle for this patriarchal violent world. With the handprints, it symbolises touch – how people touch the monument, connect with it, be soft and gentle with it. The monument stands for support for women and daughters, support for soft, gentle, sensitive people, worshipping soft, gentle and sensitive people.
I imagine to be in the overpainting:
I am lying on the monument and I feel how the cold stone supports me, how it holds my body. I can let go of all the expectations, of the need to be strong and hard, to supress my emotions and to appear as if I am not feeling the emotions of others. I let go of the ideals of a strong human. I let go of the image of the strong and brave man who fights and kills, who defends our fatherland, who supresses his emotions and empathy to function for, to produce for and to defend the fatherland. I feel the allowance to be a soft sensitive gentle woman/human. To feel with everyone, to be overwhelmed by pain, sorrow, happiness, love… to make emotional decisions and to decide from a place of love for all beings, even if this means to lose power and hegemony over other people, places or resources.
Patriarchy says that softness, gentleness and sensitivity are female attributes. That is why I put them on the pedestal together with female nouns. If we praise these “female” attributes, if we allow us to feel, to lie down on our monuments, to let us be carried by our ancestors who were soft, gentle, sensitive and vulnerable, we create a collective gentle power.
We put our handprints on the monument to praise all the soft, gentle daughters, to praise the motherland, to praise mother earth, to feel the sadness that comes from being “too soft, gentle and sensitive” in this society. To make the soft, gentle, sensitive people visible as an important and valuable part of our society. We need them to survive. We need gentleness and sensitivity to stop killing, exploiting and dominating humans, animals and our planet or we are going to go extinct.
What if our monuments would invite us to be gentle and sensitive, to let go of the patriarchal expectations to be strong and brave?
critical thoughts:
With "the gentle daughters" I recreate gender dichotomies and the connection of "gentle" and "soft" with "daughters". This FEMonumental idea does not lie beyond the gender binary system, but it reverses the dominance of male attributes and male experiences. This idea could be further developed into a FEMonumental practice, throgh making it gender neutral, for all gentle, soft, sensitive humans who have suffered from the patriarchal structures, which devalue these as feminine declared attributes. Furthermore, the FEMonumental practice "To the gentle people" would need to represent the plurality of "gentle people".