Vaginas are sacred
Vaginas are great
When vaginas go umentioned
God gets quite irate.
So, why can’t a I get a crowd to show up when i talk about my penis? That monologue would take HOURS. 
I know it’s just normal high school horseshit and it’s not the outrage of the century, but he principal’s response is stupid. There is nothing offensive about the word “vagina.” It’s not offensive to toddlers. It’s not offensive to parents or old people or nuns. It’s just not an objectionable word and the principal’s concerns are phony. It’s no different than deciding that “elbow” or “navel” are sensitive words and asking kids not to say them. It’s setting a stupid condition and then punishing the kids for violating that stupid condition. I know these girls agreed not to say it, but the school was retarded for making such a demand in the first place.
[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian]
All I said was “That vagina was fit for Jehovah.”
[/QUOTE]
Stop that. You’re only making it worse for yourself.
[QUOTE=Scissorjack]
Menage A Trois. Or “Snatches Of Conversation”.
[/QUOTE]
[ ::: splutter ::: ]
That was a thing of beauty. 
Question: Did either of the articles even mention anything about complaints or was this a preemptive strike against insubordination?
[QUOTE=Kalhoun]
The pussification of America is just so damn frustrating!
[/QUOTE]
Shouldn’t that be vaginafication?
[QUOTE=Scissorjack]
Menage A Trois. Or “Snatches Of Conversation”.
[/QUOTE]
Excellent.
[QUOTE=Lizard]
So, why can’t a I get a crowd to show up when i talk about my penis? That monologue would take HOURS. 
[/QUOTE]
Most of that time spent looking for it. Anybody got an electron microscope?
[QUOTE=rayh]
Shouldn’t that be vaginafication?
[/QUOTE]
Aw, what the fuck! Let’s be rebels!
(cuntification?)
Maude Lebowski: Does the female form make you uncomfortable, Mr. Lebowski?
The Dude: Uh, is that what this is a picture of?
Maude Lebowski: In a sense, yes. My art has been commended as being strongly vaginal which bothers some men. The word itself makes some men uncomfortable. Vagina.
The Dude: Oh yeah?
Maude Lebowski: Yes, they don’t like hearing it and find it difficult to say whereas without batting an eye a man will refer to his dick or his rod or his Johnson.
The Dude: Johnson?
Stranger
It is utterly maddening that no source has been available to tell us what the agreed-upon substitute word was to be.
[QUOTE=kaylasdad99]
It is utterly maddening that no source has been available to tell us what the agreed-upon substitute word was to be.
[/QUOTE]
Oddly, it was “cock.”
[QUOTE=NinjaChick]
Could someone please explain to me why we need to protect children and “unsuspecting” adults from an anatomical term?
[/QUOTE]
Obviously, vaginas rub some people the wrong way.
And just as obviously, the reason for that is the precise inverse.
Quoting Diogenes the Cynic:
.
No it was a negotiated deal, The presenters’ blatant violation of said agreement was the stupid part. If they were not happy with the agreement, fight it then not later. In the adult world such a breach of agreement very well might get you sued, or charged with criminal charges of fraud. Fail to honor a bet (which is an agreement) and it could get you hurt or worse.
I agree, there is nothing about the word vagina I find offensive, and I can’t personally think of any one I know who thinks of it as offensive. It is in the unexpected context that it becomes problematic. As resonable adults, I am quite sure that you and I can discuss any aspect of human anatomy, or any biological function. We are adults, and we can even laugh at the common culture inuendoes that will no doubt occur. We are adults.
That does not make it appropriate for the 3-yr old who my wife and I babysit for. I am not upset about the the words Viagra, “Erectile Dysfunction”, or even “personal lubricant”. I just think I should have the opportunity to avoid them when the audience is not ready. (Or I am not ready to explain) . I am against general censorship. With TV , Mrs. Seenidog and I screen stuff and make sure it is appropriate to the audience. We have been known to watch stuff that would be entirely inappropriate for the young one, But most definately NOT while she (the young one) is a part of the audience. For that reason we usually watch presscreened videos with the the little one here. Our Choice.
The principal thought he had an agreement in this case, and the show would be approppriate for the audience. By making that agreement, the parties involved made a commitment. They broke a contract. And by not following that, they took it upon themselves to decide what was appropriate or not. Sort of took the decision way from the attendees. As the principle said, presenting the play would probably have been possible. But shortcuts and shock value seemed to have taken over.
If you cannot figure out that explaining an elbow or a navel is somewhat easier than explaininng a vagina, I hold very little hope for this conversation.
My point is that the ladies involved decieved the principle, and through him the excpetations of the attendees, and it was wrong. If they had fought the terms of the contract, or better yet pushed for a better venue, I would be arguing on thier side.
If they had agreed to take on some high interest credit cards, are the not obliged to honor the terms of those agreements?
[QUOTE=Miller]
Except that the idea of the entire performance (not just the reading from The Vagina Monologues) was not intended to be a “XXX” program. It was supposed to be all-ages appropriate. Now, personally, I don’t think there’s anything “child inappropriate” about the word “vagina,” and I don’t have any respect for the attitude that finds the word “vagina” to be offensive or inappropriate. However, the school administration is still going to have to deal with parents who feel that way, and I can appreciate their desire just not to have to deal with the complaints that would be generated by letting the reading go unexpurgated. The girls wanted to make a statement, and I fully support that, but the way in which they made that statement pretty much screwed the administration and dragged it into a fight it wanted no part of, so they’re going to have to take their lumps over that.
[/QUOTE]
Maybe, just maybe, the school should turn to those parents and say, “Get a grip, if we ban every word that somebody doesn’t like we have about three words we could use. Some folks would complain about moist.”
A school does not have to be about just educating it’s registered students.
Hell, the whole point of the Vagina Monologues (if I remember correctly) is that vagina is NOT a dirty word and we should stop thinking of it that way. I’d take that suspension proudly.
[QUOTE=seenidog]
…That does not make it appropriate for the 3-yr old who my wife and I babysit for. …
…If you cannot figure out that explaining an elbow or a navel is somewhat easier than explaininng a vagina, I hold very little hope for this conversation.
[/quote]
I have two daughters. My oldest knew the word “vagina” when she was three (my youngest is still less than two) and it was no trick to explain it to her. She has one. If you think it’s “inappropriate” to teach a child the proper terminology for parts of her own anatomy, pray tell, what words would you suggest in their place?
[QUOTE=ArchiveGuy]
So what were they supposed to say? Were they expected to omit that line (in unison), omit just the word, or substitute the word for something else?
“My short skirt is a liberation flag in the women’s army. I declare these streets, any streets, my cooter’s country.”
[/QUOTE]
Umm, cuntry, don’t ya think?
Serious comment: The school was way dead wrong in even requesting that they not utter that word. The girls, caught between the proverbial rock and hard place, had to either select some other reading (which they should not have had to do, this one wasn’t obscene) or modify this reading (ridiculous). The school has committed an obscenity. The girls merely exposed it.
[QUOTE=Kalhoun]
What does that have to do with it? If they’re reading from it, they should read it as written.
[/quote]
Well, since they weren’t performing the show, then odds are there were precious few indications that the show was being, y’know, performed. As to reading it as written: sounds wonderful, provided they didn’t agree upfront that they would not. If the oh so onerous strictures get youir bloomers in a twist, raise hell right fucking then. If reading the selections as written is so important, then don’t agree to do it in another fashion. Frightfully simple, really.
Yeah, sensibilities. And no, I’m not kidding you. Frankly, I wouldn’t care if my daughter heard someone else using proper terminology for vagina, penis, chlamydia or any number of other things. But I’m kinda funny inasmuch as I recognize that not everyone is as hip and groovy as I am, and wouldn’t try to piss off a group of parents as well as administrators by openly lying that I would do something in a given way, then do it opposite during performance.
Christ in a truck! I’m terribly unaccustomed to being the voice of responsibility. I gotta do a few rails of heroin, knock back a coupla cocktails, then drive somewhere just to shake this feeling off.
It’s actually probably good for the girls. They got to be rebels and score a point for free speech. They got attention and reb cred and they have a story to tell when they get old. It’s their Tommy Smith/John Carlos moment. That’s all much better than if they had just performed their lines and been forgotten.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
It’s actually probably good for the girls.
[/QUOTE]
I agree. It’ll teach them that many of the authority figures they’ll encounter in life will be morons.