Womanliness therefore could be assumed and worn as a mask, both to hide the possession of masculinity and to avert the reprisals expected if she was found to possess it — much as a thief will turn out his pockets and ask to be searched to prove that he has not the stolen goods. She has to treat the situation of displaying her masculinity to men as a “game,” as something not real, as a “joke.” She cannot treat herself and her subject seriously, cannot seriously contemplate herself as on equal terms with men; moreover, the flippant attitude enables some of her sadism to escape, hence the offence it causes. After reading Womanliness as masquerade I thought about curating an all women exhibition that doesn’t explicitly call out the feminine experience. Exhibiting an all women in a group show automatically links their work to the feminist agenda which should never diminish the conceptual value of their work. Masquerade highlights the works of , all female artists who make exceptional art and their subtle embrace with gender roles. It doesn’t mask the feminine, class, race, religion or technology conflicts. Critical distraction as a mode of reception to dull our perception towards the feminine experience is at play. What is the difference of genuine womanliness and it’s masquerade?