The Huffpo article says they are "better than Banksy" (which I think is kind of a dumb way to frame it - more below). But anyway, take a looksy. I lurve them all, specifically the work of Miss Van, Maya Hayuk, and ESPECIALLY faith47.

And now, a fairly unnecessary feminazi rant:

I don't like that they say "better than Banksy." I get it: it's Huffpo, and a headline that grabs the attention of people who may not want to read an article that just says "10 awesome female street artists" because everyone has heard of Banksy. But the idea that we have to like them better than Banksy, or Banksy better than them not only is a dipshit simplistic way to think about art, but also requires us to use the male street artist as a basis for comparison. All these women, with vastly different techniques and styles, are to be compared as a unit to one male artist?

Why can't it be, "10 awesome female street artists less famous than Banksy?" Why can't I appreciate both Banksy and some of these artists? I love when female artists are highlighted and celebrated - but I hate when their only value is how they compare to male artists.

Also, Banksy is a different type of art because his is done in secret, and must be executed quickly and with stencils. They are small forms of guerrilla graffiti; these women clearly had time and permission (probably) to do their murals - WHICH IS FINE - but it doesn't make for the same kind of product. So, in conclusion, the headline is a dumb idiot way to discuss art and is not doing these female artists any favors.