And there I was, thinking that the ignorami who thought that this was about the word “vagina” had all crawled back to wherever in hell they go to avoid natural light.
Read the fucking thread.
Are you saying telling the girls not to use the a non-profane and appropriate word from a well-known play, for fear of upsetting audience members, was brave? I would say not. And frankly, it’s nonsense censorship anyway: it makes no sense to let them perform the piece and not say “vagina” while allowing them to mention rape and say “I am here, I am hot.”
That’s a platitude people love to say, but rarely put into practice. It seems to me that they were treated like children, then told they should’ve acted like adults after they didn’t do what they were told.
And now that you’re an adult, does someone else make those determinations for you, or are you allowed to make them on your own, based on experience?
Spic-O-Rama is a great show. If it’s being offered by DSeid as an example of something nasty and racist, then either he doesn’t know the show and grabbed it off a website based solely on the title, or he does know it but he’s hoping we don’t, and that we accept it without question.
Bingo. The girls defy authority and renege on a presumed agreement (which is what GLWasteful et al. are arguing is the point) and they highlight just how stupid and ridiculous the authority’s demanded agreement was (which is what Marley23 et al. are arguing is the point). Both are true. It is only by taking their (deserved) lumps for the former that the latter gets underlined. The two are inseparable.
Can’t all our vaginas just get along?
No, not at all. What it was, though, is what high school principals do. They cover their asses because there will always be one asshole parent who will claim, erroneously, that their precious little Hortense was scarred and will remain so for life. Frankly, if I were in the principal’s position, I would probably not have allowed it based on the anticipated composition of the audience. That the principal in question did so, even though insisting/requesting that the word “vagina” not be used considering the anticipated audience, says that he trusted these girls further than many high school students are trusted.
Well, then, you need to pay attention. They were treated like students (which they are), then punished (to the best of my knowledge, nobody IRL is saying that they should have acted like grownups; I know I am, but don’t consider myself that important) after they didn’t do what they were told. And as a platitude, it gets one helluva real-life workout in my school district. And y’know what? Usually the students step up and act like adults. The honors students do, the students who have parole officers do, and the students who fall in between those two extremes do. Not always, it’s true, but when they don’t live up to their end of the bargain, they are punished. Astonishing system, 'tis true.
Depends on whether I’m reporting to the halfway house or not. You?
Actually, I’ve said from the beginning that the school was acting in a ridiculous fashion. But as a wizened (and therefore wisened) old bastard I’m also saying that tailoring a performance to an audience is not, automatically, a bad thing. Well, and as a rule, I like seeing schoolgirls be punished.
But that’s a kink for another thread. . .
Trying again after several hampster attacks … short this time.
Spicorama is a great show and a great show that includes some words that in other contexts are racial epithets. It was chosen as an example of something appropriate in some but not all venues and crowds.
Of course it is censorship. The question is if you believe that there should be any censorship by a school of what kids present to families invited in or not. If you believe “not” then all material is open, whether you like the political POV or not, whether you find it offensive or not. If “yes” then the question becomes one of who gets to decide and how it is handled when students ignore that decision. Letting every student decide what is appropriate? Putting it up to a community vote each time? Make sure the national talking heads will like your choice first?
My WAG (considering GLWasteful’s post) is that this was a principal who actually likes to push the envelope and that it backfired on him. An adminstrator who is trying to get challanging material in the curriculum and dealing with some resistance from certain community elements. He knew that presenting a bit from The VM would be pushing it a bit already and felt that allowing them to say “vagina” be a step too far and would galvanize those opposing forces. My experience, as a father on my second High Schooler, and as a pediatrician aware of practices in several townships, is that most principals would have said “no” to anything out of The VM, or anything else at all controversial or politically charged in anyway for that sort of crowd. Period. In fact not even for anything that parents are there for. Classroom only. Anyone else know of other High Schools performing acts with featured references to genitalia? Even in the political activist seventies doing “The Crucible” was pushing it. (I played the evil merchant.) He took a chance. He trusted them. “No good deed …” as they say.
The girls disrespected someone who gave them some credit. He trusted them and they betrayed that trust. They should be ashamed of themselves, not proud.
Well, I’ll challenge your WAG with an IMHO: If your WAG was correct, he would have explained his reasoning to the girls. Something along the lines of “Girls, I’m with you on the pushing boundaries thing, so let’s do an excerpt from The Vagina Monologues. But because of the uptight people, we’re gonna have to omit the word vagina from the poem you’ve chosen…instead, let’s insert a meaninful pause. I believe that would get the following points across…”
I don’t think there’s anything to support the principal giving the girls credit and then being betrayed.
Well, except for allowing a reading from The Vagina Monologues at an Open Mic Night. In keeping with what DSeid said, I can’t think of an instance where a high school principal would have allowed it at all. That he did so in the first place, stricken word and all, is pretty forward thinking.
IMHO of course.
Heh, oops. I’d say he miscalculated just a little bit.
Excuse me?
Which part of that do you think I didn’t know?
That’s terrific. Wish it had happened in this case.
Sorry - run that by me again?
It definitely isn’t a bad thing.
Actually, according to this article, I’d say he was spot on.
I’m not at all sure what you’re trying to say here. That there existed nobody who would bitch? The article linked to by Garfield226 certainly indicates otherwise. That his ass isn’t covered? It seems to me that he’s done an adequate job of that. That there are no asshole parents? I think that’s self-evidently not true.
Honestly, I’m at sea here.
Painfully easy, really. You said: “It seems to me that they were treated like children, then told they should’ve acted like adults after they didn’t do what they were told.”
You were wrong. In paying attention you would have noticed as much.
Dunno, you’re the one who stated otherwise.
Yeah, well, kids these days. . .
You ask a ridiculous question, I respond with a ridiculous answer and ask the same of you.
My point.
And in reading the linked article, Bill Drew seems to be quite the shit stirrer. And Eve Ensler is still clueless.
I would advise you to do the same. It appears you missed the fucking point of my post.
Incidentally, it occurs to me that, just as “vagina” is a harmless and non-charged word to describe a perfectly respectable part of the female anatomy, so “fucking” merely describes a normal and natural process without which the species would die out in a generation; and it’s only a good honest Anglo-Saxon expression rather than a Latinate one that, perhaps, effete would-be intellectuals would consider more proper. So let’s all say “fucking” on stage as much as we like - yes, and in front of other people’s maiden aunts too.
Well, in addition to the fact that 5 pages ago we generally agreed that the issue isn’t the word as such - there is the fact that “vagina” is the LEAST offensive and the CLOSEST to biologically neutral term for the item in question - unless you have one we haven’t thought of. “Fucking” is not. “Intercourse” or “coitus” would be ideal, but there’s “relations” or “biblical knowledge” for other options.
I’m sure the textbooks issued by the school contain the word “vagina” more often than “fucking.”
(But, just to stave off the expected “hypocrite” cries…yes, I would indeed cheer their chutzpah for keeping “fucking” in a script, while once again acknowledging their duty to serve out their just punishment for doing so.)
Just so you know, I’m plenty fine with that as well. It’s just a word. If you (general you) are offended by a word…that’s really your problem. It’s nice that many of us worry about your sensibilities and take them into consideration when speaking, but in reality words can’t hurt you. It’s the intent of the speaker that does the damage.
So stretch, by Garfield226’s link we have evidence that my WAG wasn’t so WA’ed. This is a principal who in school venues has really pushed the envelope against strenuous community resistance. Who has put repeatedly his neck out for challanging mature material for his students and who got this as thanks. Fine. That’ll larn him. If I was a principal in another school then this protest would definitely have an effect: High Schoolers aren’t mature enough to handle the resposibility of dealing with adult themes after all; trust them to do it and they’ll burn you; give 'em an inch at your own risk. A shame that such is the lesson to administrators across the country.
Now then back to the more abstract issues.
Am I correct to interpret your position as expressed in your last post that there should be no restrictions on what students say in a school production, even one aimed at an all ages audience?
WhyNot applauds the chutzpah of standing by their interpretation of artistic integrity no matter who it hurts and no matter who it offends (and I assume from WhyNot’s answer that “kike” would be applauded too) so long as they are willing to pay the price. Sure dress against company standards but be prepared to be fired as a result. As an abstract concept I can respect that position, but not others’ protests against them paying the (very small) price. C’mon girls, you made what you felt was a “stand” and screwed over this principal who has been fighting for the very freedoms that you want knowing that there would be a consequence. Have some ovaries and take your wet noodle over the wrist without complaining about it or encouraging others to complain about it on your behalf.
To others who believe that censorship in student shows is, in some cases, appropriate, I still ask: who decides and what should happen if individuals go against that decision once made?
Do you have evidence that they are encouraging others to complain about it or that they are refusing to take their punishments?
I don’t agree that Garfield’s link supports your WAG but whatever.
I’m fine with restrictions on what kids say at school productions–if there is a good reason for that restriction. I believe that the principal, superintendent, and school board are the ones that generally make this decision.
I also think that people should say what they want to say if they are willing to accept the consequences of their actions.
If you read all my posts in this thread, you will discover that I believe many things–that the principal was an idiot for not telling them they couldn’t perform anything from TVM; that the principal was an idiot for expecting them to censor TVM; that the girls were making a good stand; that the girls should accept the consequences of making that stand; that the community is right to complain if they disagree with the way the principal is handling it; that the principal is still the appropriate person to make this decision; etc.
Hot damn, I am able to maintain many opinions at once. I’m so complex.
Quite to the contrary. Your post seemed to indicate that the problem was the word “vagina”. Because, as you said, “. . .it’s very important to screen out certain ages, or penis will ensue.” So it seems to me that I caught the biblically knowledgeable (heh, thanks WhyNot) point of your post.
If, by some chance, you were attempting to say otherwise, consider me your vessel. Please fill me with knowledge of your point.
Otherwise, piss off.
DSeid: I suppose I’m one of those who feels that restrictions should continue to exist in certain instances and that the final decision as to what happens if students go against those restrictions should happen at the most base level. If the teacher or sponsor feels that they are able to handle it, great. If the teacher/sponsor feels that the offense was egregious enough to warrant interdiction by someone else, then whoever they want to send it up to. That will, in most instances, be the principal. No offense, stretch, but if the principal can’t handle the situation, particularly in the case of something like this, then he or she should probably not be in that position. As soon as you try and have the superintendent stepping in to run the show, it will quickly devolve into chaos. And as a school board member, I have enough crap to worry about without trying to ride herd over students. As to who decides, it should be the principal. Will there be horrible clusterbiblicalknowledges sometimes? Sure, but I honestly don’t know who else such a decision should be left to. To turn that around: Who do you think should make that decision?
Can I claim “complex”, too? Because up until now I’d been considering myself a “crusty old bastard”. And “complex” is quicker to think and, if need be, type out.
My point, since it does not seem to be obvious, is that the age of the person hearing certain sounds is not a determining factor (if indeed there is any factor) of whether injury will result. It may be common assumption, but not factual information, that children are harmed by hearing certain words and that the harm no longer occurs when they grow older.
Even if you don’t feel the subject of this thread is a particular word, consider what would have happened if a word at random were picked from, say, NBC News and used in the performance. Nothing. So it is indeed the particular word, regardless of the reason or source.
Thank you. I will do just that, and commend you for being so friendly and civil.