The Vagina Monologues 1996 (left) vs later editionWell I guess I don't have to worry about Amherst Regional High School ever doing another sanctioned performance of the Vagina Monologues on public school property now that the bastion of PC feminism Mount Holyoke College has mothballed VM because it's not "inclusive" enough to include transsexuals.
As some of you may sadly remember ARHS was the only high school in the nation to allow VM back in 2004, only five years after being the only entity in history to ban a performance of West Side Story.
After Principal Mark Jackson was soooooo impressed with an off campus production put on by the kids in 2007 he allowed VM back at the ARHS in 2008, but not since then.
My main complaint with the work of "art" is the repeated use of the C-word (rhymes with bunt).
Ensler claims she wanted to "reclaim" the word. And we see how well that has worked out over the past two decades. Right up there with reclaiming the N-word, although the hipper 5-letter version does actually gets used way more often than it should these days.
And the monologue, ‘The Little Coochie Snorcher That Could’ glories sex between an adult and underage girl after the minor had consumed vodka.
In the original version published, in 1998, the girl is only 13 and the monologue closes with her gushing:
“Now people thought that it was a kind of rape. I was only thirteen and she was twenty-four. Well, I say, if it was a rape, it was a good rape then, a rape that turned my sorry-ass coochi snorcher into a kind of heaven.”
Yikes! Can you imagine if a white, middle aged, Republican had authored that?
Yes I did attend the 2004 showing at the high school because Fox News paid for my ticket and requested I attend. And no, I did not try to record it.
Obviously it's not a First Amendment violation for the public schools to ban taking pictures of minors on school property (although you have to question the wisdom of the schools allowing those minors to perform R rated material).
Calvin Terrell, Amherst Regional Middle School last week
And the schools fulfilled the requirement of copyright law by posting public notice a week before the event that VM was off limits to recording. Also, unlike Calvin Terrell's "performance" at the Middle School last week, a fee was charged at the door.
Maybe when Terrell returns to perform next academic year he can dress up as a vagina, just for old time sake.
39 comments:
And the monologue, ‘The Little Coochie Snorcher That Could’ glories sex between an adult and underage girl after the minor had consumed vodka.
It doesn't matter if she's 30 years old, if she's drunk -- it's rape because she can't knowingly consent, doesn't have the ability to consent.
And what I have yet to figure out, having prosecuted numerous young college boys for inappropriate actions with their lady friends [NB: I know children are reading this] is exactly why this would be enjoyable when said lady friend is unconscious -- passed out drunk even if something like "Roofies" weren't put into her drink.
And why are none of the feminists nor the rape survivors nor the "violence against women" folk coming out and saying what I'm sure they know: Getting a girl drunk so you can have sex with her is WRONG!!! And as I see it, it doesn't matter what kind of sex you want to have with her, or your anatomy -- it's wrong.
Of course this reminds me of the last Smith College dance I went to -- I was the adviser to the actual Republican Club (not the CR chapter that CSD replaced it with) and when the club was invited, I considered it wise for me to go as well -- as evidenced by the one time I didn't.
Well, in the corner where all the coats were tossed I noticed a guy all over his girlfriend, who clearly wasn't interested and was having a really hard time staying awake. It was dark but I could tell he was wearing a sweatshirt & jeans -- and physically was quite a bit larger than her. (Width of shoulders, height of torso and body mass, someone almost my size & weight.)
He wasn't one of the young men I was responsible for, but it's always the friend-of-someone who causes the problems, and this was really egregious behavior that (I only later understood) why everyone else was ignoring. Usually just being visibly present stops stuff, this was getting worse in front of me and I kinda had to do something.
So I go over to the guy (who is "all over" the girl and hence facing away from me) and say something to the effect of "You're embarrassing her in front of her friends and that's not good -- how about we start looking for her roommate and such?"
Remember, he was "all over" her and hence I was addressing this to the back of a head with short hair and the back of a sweatshirt that would fit *me*. And one inevitably "sees" what one expects to see, and as part of various student affairs jobs, I'd been to more than a few trainings on "date rape."
"I AM HER ROOMMATE!" I was told in a voice below the Alto octave.....
Now I got myself out of that mess but I still ask one question: Exactly what difference does it make if it is a guy or a lesbian?
If a woman is clearly not interested, clearly drunk and on the verge of passing out -- if she clearly is not able to consent to sex (and appears to be resisting as best she can) why is it not rape?!?!?
How is it any different?
How is it any less a violation of her body?
...“Well, I say, if it was a rape, it was a good rape then..."
How can there *be* such a thing as a "'good' rape" and where the hell are all the feminists and everyone else in saying that?!?!?!
THE VERY PEOPLE WHO CLAIM TO CARE ABOUT WOMEN ARE THE ONES WHO ACTUALLY PROMOTE THIS GARBAGE!
I often wonder if all of this stuff is nothing more than a thinly-veiled hatred of men and all things male. I challenge anyone to explain why what that young woman was doing to her drunken girlfriend at Smith was acceptable when it would not have been were she a young man.
>"In the original version published, in 1998,"
The initial title of which was just one word consisting of four letters -- as Jane Fonda stated live on network TV a few years back -- "a play called "----."
"the girl is only 13 and the monologue closes with her gushing:
“Now people thought that it was a kind of rape. I was only thirteen and she was twenty-four. Well, I say, if it was a rape, it was a good rape then, a rape that turned my sorry-ass coochi snorcher into a kind of heaven.”
Yikes! Can you imagine if a white, middle aged, Republican had authored that?"
Larry, one word: NAMBLA.
The NAtional Man/Boy Love Association....
Apparently "tolerance" means we have to accept those schmucks -- but can anyone imagine the outcry were there ever to be a "Man/GIRL" equivalent, an organization intended to help middle-aged men find ways to have sex with underaged girls?
NAMBLA largely destroyed the Boy Scouts -- they did a lot of damage in the late '70's and early '80's -- and less than half the predators were ever caught.
The rest are still out there, and more than a few became active in the GOP -- they became "middle-aged White Republicans."
"GOPRIDE" comes to mind....
And this is the flip side of the question I asked above -- why is it appropriate for middle-aged males to say things about (if not do things with) young boys that they would never be permitted to say (do) with equally young girls?
It was one thing when "homosexuality" was defined as a "mental illness" (as it was in the DSM-I and DSM-II) and homophobia was a legal mandate --- the Smith College professors arrested in 1064 for "suspicion of homosexuality."
But now that we consider all sexual orientations not only legitimate but equal to the traditional male/female one, why do we not also equally apply the restrictions on undesired advances/activities? Why does our definition of "consent" and ability to consent not applied equally?
Why aren't the NAMBLA folks considered the perverts that they, well, ARE....
For forty years the gay community has pushed and pushed to make being gay seem normal. They got most of what they demanded. Now it's not enough.
Sorry that's not a vagina, it's a surgically sown piece of foreskin and other parts of the external male genitalia. That's slightly different than what the creator had in mind.
Funny that Mt. Holyoke found it not 'inclusive' enough. Lol. As though being completely inclusive is some kind of law.
Want more pf this garbage? Vote Hillary in. Just as during the Obama administration everything became about race, under a Hillary administration everything will become about sexism. Imagine how much fun that'll be.
Based on the 2013 NHIS data [collected in 2013 from 34,557 adults aged 18 and over], 96.6% of adults identified as straight, 1.6% identified as gay or lesbian, and 0.7% identified as bisexual. The remaining 1.1% of adults identified as “something else[]” [0.2%,] stated “I don’t know the answer[]” [0.4%] or refused to provide an answer [0.6%].
Why all the fuss?
Anon 6:31 it's also funny that so sexist a piece of...theater would be allowed in a town where most isms are frowned upon.
I hope the high school will cosider premiering my latest play the "The Penis Dialogues" a hilarious spoof on the LGBTQ community.
The Vagina Monologues also present gay and straight sex in different lights. Monologues regarding sex between two women are positive depictions of satisfying consensual sex. While straight sex is depicted as non-consensual, unsatisfying, or oppressive. The idea that sex between a man and a woman can be pleasurable and consensual is simply ignored.
Speaking of inclusion, Happy MLK Jr. b'day. The only man other than Jesus Christ whose birthday celebration is a nayional holiday. Lincoln and Washington used to have their birthdays remembered in that way. Not anymore, though. Anyway--pretty good company you're there Martin!
Reductio ad absurdum -- I'm actually glad that Mt Holyoke is engaging in this foolishness because it shows just how foolish the whole damn thing is.
MHC is a lovely campus, has a lovely library, lovely chapel, it is the type of college that I wish I could have attended. And now they are letting men in as long as the men say that they think they actually are women inside.
Hey, to be able to go there -- and likely for free -- I'd be willing to say that I was a Martian inside. It's only four years, and what do you think that LUGgies are and do?
They're only lesbians until graduation, at which point they discover boys. Boys with money...
But lesbians are still accepted and welcomed at MHC, aren't they? Well who says that one must have been born a woman to be a lesbian? Isn't that "TransPhobic" or something?
I know there are children reading this which is why I am not going to put the next paragraph in here -- but what are they going to say when some young man does that...
Wow. Somebody took too many hate pills today. Feminists do not condone female on female rape. Let's get real here: all of these hate filled sweeping generalizations should be tossed out of the window.
And by the way, we have President's Day which honors Lincoln and Washington.
"1.6% identified as gay or lesbian, and 0.7% identified as bisexual. "
It's estimated that 10%-15% of the population is Dyslexic. That's a whole lot more than Gays Lesbians and Bisexuals -- COMBINED -- yet which do we hear about?
One woman who came to her senses.
http://rachaellefler.hubpages.com/hub/Feminist-Beliefs-I-No-Longer-Agree-With
Yes but Abe and George used to each have their own day. Now they're lumped in with 42 ( or does Grover Cleveland make it 41) other guys. Only Jesus and Martin.
Quite often libs label anything they don't agree with as hate speech. I'm not feeling the hate...
As males we really should be using the term sexual assault and avoiding any use of the term rape. Rape is a term feminists use to emasculate men and so that they may continue playing victim. It is a term associated with men as aggressors and allows women to remain victims. It is a word that allows male hate groups to get federal funding to perpetuate more myths about men. And it assumes that sexual assault is always a man as an aggressor.
According to a study from the University of Missouri, male victims of sexual assault are often victimized by women: "A total of 43% of high school boys and young college men reported they had an unwanted sexual experience and of those, 95% said a female acquaintance was the aggressor, according to the study published in the APA journal Psychology of Men and Masculinity."
As for rape, while it helps fund many jobs for male hating females in so-called "victim of rape" groups and federally funded organizations, it is a catch word that all a woman has to do is murmur to get attention.
While the federally funded lesbian hate groups like to use false statistics such as the famous "1 in 4 females", a statement long-since debunked
(http://tinyurl.com/femalemyths),
the reality is that sexual assault is dropping dramatically. It's partially due to education, and partially because women are now for the first time, being held accountable for using the term falsely.
http://tinyurl.com/femalemyths
Bottom line, if you are a male and using the term rape over the term sexual assault, you are perpetuating the myth that women are all victims, something the federally funded lesbian hate groups spend a lot of your money teaching people.
"Feminists do not condone female on female rape."
REALLY.....
I don't see them speaking out against it. I don't see them expressing concern about situations that could lead to it happening. And then they cheer the Vagina Monologues....
It's like that infamous incident in New Bedford 30 years ago -- the Big Dan Tavern incident where a woman was gang-raped on a pool table while the patrons reportedly cheered.
While there may not be a legal duty to come to the aid of a woman (or man) being raped, there sure as hell is a moral duty -- and three decent guys did rescue her when she was able to flee out into the street, perps in pursuit.
But as to the patrons who'd cheered the rapists on, they were vilified nationally -- as they should have been. And while the feminists may not be cheering on individual rapes, they are essentially doing it collectively.
"Let's get real here"
Yes, let's. Who stepped up for that drunken Smith girl who clearly was not interested in her roommate's sexual advances.
None of the Smithies spoke up -- and those young women would consider themselves "feminists." At least two were clearly lesbians, doing things not allowed in a high school dance but were eager participants -- as opposed to a girl doing her best to keep someone else's hands out of her pants.
This was a dorm party and Smith College Dorm Staff (I think they're called "area coordinators") was there and she didn't say anything.
I saw what I expected to see -- but I ask again, now is it any different if it is a bigger & stronger *woman* jamming *her* hands into the pants of a smaller and quite drunk woman who doesn't want her doing it?
I don't know about legally, but "being raped", I have no doubt that young lady was that night. There was nothing I could do to stop it and hence I can live with that -- but let's get real -- what safe haven exists when it is your roommate who is trying to rape you?
continued
Cont.
I lost a RD job once because I let a lesbian remain in the dorm -- it was a different time & place and the attitude was that she should not be allowed to remain around other women -- i.e. allowed to remain in the dorm. Because she was a lesbian.
I said "Bulls***!" -- I pointed out that she hadn't *done* anything and I didn't believe in punishing people out of fears of what they *might* do. It was a very different time and place ..
And when I was an undergrad and in the student government, I took the unpopular stand of funding the Wilde/Stein Club because "they have every bit as much right to have a dance as anyone else does." I had no more desire to go to their dance than I did to take a concrete canoe down the Kenduskeag -- but the Civil Engineering students had a right to build concrete canoes and the Gay students had a right to have their dance. It was, after all, a free country...
"all of these hate filled sweeping generalizations should be tossed out of the window."
ziy is you, my dear, wh0 is making these sweeping generalizations. I described a specific incident at Smith.
There are lots of women raped at Smith -- raped by other women and I have yet to hear anyone put her name on saying that is wrong,
I don't know if Smith still has this policy (or if it would even be legal today) but back in the '90s you were required to have a roommate who was either a racial minority or a lesbian. I have been told of some of the consequences of this policy and I believe the stories to be true.
And I'm not holding my breath for the feminists to say that rape is wrong when women do it...
http://rachaellefler.hubpages.com/hub/Feminist-Beliefs-I-No-Longer-Agree-With
"Feminists reject people who don't agree with the majority on matters such as abortion, taxpayer-funded birth control, patriarchy theory, and people who think like I do about gender being rooted in biological differences between men and women,"
"All sheep and no shepherd
Everyone is the same
Everyone wants to be the same
Anyone who is different goes voluntarily to the madhouse."
As a person, I tend not to listen much to statements that begin with "as a(n)..." As a black woman, as a gay male, as a transgendered group... You know. That kinda thing. Prefer togetherness. Not separateness.
Ed squats on this blog like a 500 pound gorilla.
Dear Dr. Ed,
I cannot explain why what that 'woman' was doing to her 'girlfriend' was being accepted by other onlookers at Smith College other than yourself. Clearly, from what you say, it was not. It would never be--and for some to think it was okay--well--the s.i.c.k.n.e.s.s. of it all has taken a strong hold. My only--simple explanation I can offer. You see--speaking as a woman who has been raped--there is no--'good rape' This is sickening for me to read. This is an outrage--and almost an acceptance of this terrible, violent act. I don't get it--and I do not get how the high school allowed this display of sheer ignorance to go on by showing the Vagina Monologues. Not back then in 2004 or it's replay four years later. This too is disturbingly s.i.c.k. and all I can do is shake my head in disgust as I type my response. But let me leave with saying this--Thank you for stepping in--and I hope the 'roommate' is doing okay today. And I hope she has a better understanding of what engaging in affectionate gestures with someone you love really means.
10:41
Actually, the federal holiday is called "Washington's Birthday".
The state holiday, on the same day, is "Presidents Day" in some states.
Jesus, Martin, George
*This holiday is designated as "Washington’s Birthday" in section 6103(a) of title 5 of the United States Code, which is the law that specifies holidays for Federal employees. Though other institutions such as state and local governments and private businesses may use other names, it is our policy to always refer to holidays by the names designated in the law.
Thank you for that clarification. George is in! What about Abe, that great Republican who emancipated the slaves? Still wish we recognized him (used to be Feb. 12.)
What the hell is a snoochie corcher?? I confess I saw the VM's awhile back on tv. Found most of it forgettable. And simply can't recall the snoochie part.
I believe it is slang for a vagina.
But then, that was 20 years ago so may not still be in the lexicon.
Thanks Larry. Makes sense, of course. There are so many nicknames for our sex organs they could fill a book. Or at minimum an evening at theater. Thank goodness the arts are funded by "viewers like you."
Hi 10:41, 2:01
Lincoln's Birthday was never a federal holiday. It was and still is a holiday in many states, including my native Connecticut. And his birthday is still Feb 12 :)
By the way, "Presidents Day" in Massachusetts is actually on May 29, JFK's birthday.
How many Dems have, over the decades, reversed the stirring phrase from the JFK Inaugural addres. Nowadays it seems we ask (and ask continually) what our country can do for us. Rather few today ask what they can do for their country.
Still wondering whether The Penis Dialogues will be performed in the school. Can't wait. There's a bit called The Big C*** That Couldn't. A hilarious take om impotence.
When confronted by a long-winded Ed rant, remember:
Life is short.
Oh, Anon 4:34 pm
I think you need to look around a little more. There are many people serving their communities but they aren't drawing attention to themselves. The entire Amherst system of boards and committees is made up of volunteers. Check out how much time each Select Board member spends each year for almost no pay.
Take a look at what many college students are doing, after they graduate. We have Peace Corps and other programs.
I know that you want to piss on Democrats today, but please don't suggest to me that all these efforts are being staffed exclusively by Republicans.
Thank you for stepping in-
=Thank you for your kind words -- they mean more than you might realize.
In fairness, I need to say that I can react a LOT faster than most people can and that I don't know what some of the women might have said after I left.
And I know that I do tend to intimidate people -- maybe I was able to convince that woman to "do the right thing" -- but I do thank you for your kind words.
Thank you for your service. I will reserve my comments for those who do unfairly abuse the safety nets and there are plenty of 'em on both sides of the aisle. Incidentally, i'm registered as Democrat.
The problem at MHC is that some of the "women" don't have vaginas...
Who would ever have thought we'd get to this?!?!?
And I know plenty of men who have no balls.
"And I know plenty of men who have no balls"
Right.
Just the way you like em.
-Squeaky Squeaks
p.s. I mean, check out the card carrying castrati keeping Maria Geryk in business.
Lip smacking servants like you ~friggan~ read about.
Post a Comment