Say vagina, get suspended

[Kalhoun]

@Garfield226

It seems you’ve reversed the order of events in your statement. You see, the girls were first told to change the artists words, and upon their agreement, they were allowed to advertise that they were performing a reading. Had there been no agreement, there would have been no advertisement. Who’s irresponsible? The girls, for lying about what they were going to perform.

No, it’s irresponsible for an adult authority figure to ask children to break the rules (those rules being, don’t say you’re quoting something and then change the words). They were intimidated, and then after some thought, made the correct decision to honor the artist’s work as written. If it wasn’t for civil disobedience, Rosa Parks would still (symbolically) be sitting at the back of the bus (as “agreed” upon) instead of forcing the “blind” to see the error of their ways.

The principal didn’t get “punk’d” (if there’s one term we can all agree upon to be banned, can this please be it?), he was lied to and took appropriate action to punish the liars. I didn’t see Ashton Kutcher supergluing his desk drawers shut or anything – he did his job, part of which includes punishing those who don’t abide by the rules he and the school board set.

And they took their lumps…yup, he flexed his authoritarian muscles, alright. The girls provided a valuable lesson to the morons who asked them to alter the words of the reading without the author’s permission.

(Incidently, you may not like the term, but I used “punk’d” correctly. From the Slang Dictionary:

fooled, tricked, made the butt of a practical joke

There would have been a lot less embarrassment and conflict if he’d just let them perform the reading as it was intended. And I’m sure he agrees (as he bangs his head against his desk).

[Garfield226]

@Kalhoun

No, it’s irresponsible for an adult authority figure to ask children to break the rules (those rules being, don’t say you’re quoting something and then change the words).

Nobody asked them to perform that particular excerpt from that particular work, did they? They made the decision to perform it, and when told they couldn’t perform it as it was intended to be performed, they decided to do it anyway, rather than either A) trying to compromise like mature people (e.g. argue their point ahead of time to persuade the principal to change his judgment), or B) picking a different piece. No one asked them to break the rules, they decided to do that when they didn’t get their way.

They were intimidated, and then after some thought, made the correct decision to honor the artist’s work as written. If it wasn’t for civil disobedience, Rosa Parks would still (symbolically) be sitting at the back of the bus (as “agreed” upon) instead of forcing the “blind” to see the error of their ways.

You’ll of course excuse me if I don’t quite see the similarity between the start of the national civil rights movement and a few teenagers saying “vagina” after being told not to. Compare the principal to Hitler, and maybe you’d have something…

(Incidently, you may not like the term, but I used “punk’d” correctly.

Just because you used it correctly doesn’t make you sound less intelligent for using it in the first place. Cf. “leet speak.”

[Kalhoun]

@Garfield226

Nobody asked them to perform that particular excerpt from that particular work, did they? They made the decision to perform it, and when told they couldn’t perform it as it was intended to be performed, they decided to do it anyway, rather than either A) trying to compromise like mature people (e.g. argue their point ahead of time to persuade the principal to change his judgment), or B) picking a different piece. No one asked them to break the rules, they decided to do that when they didn’t get their way.

The principal should have grown a pair and let them perform the agreed upon piece as written instead of stapling a fig leaf over it. Either that, or he should have said, “No.” It’s not his place to re-write someone else’s art.

You’ll of course excuse me if I don’t quite see the similarity between the start of the national civil rights movement and a few teenagers saying “vagina” after being told not to. Compare the principal to Hitler, and maybe you’d have something…

If you can’t see the similarity in the point being made, then the point they were making is evidently lost on you.

Just because you used it correctly doesn’t make you sound less intelligent for using it in the first place. Cf. “leet speak.”

I was coming at it from the girls’ point of view. You know…putting yourself in someone else’s shoes? Get it? We’re not talking about adults here. We’re talking about teen-age girls trying on some right-headed independence.

[WhyNot]

Has anyone in the thread actually said the girls shouldn’t have been punished? I don’t think so. Maybe I missed it. We (the girls’ supporters) have all agreed that - because they agreed to take the word vagina out and then broke their word - they deserve the suspension. We’re not protesting the suspension, we’re not emailing the principal with death threats, we’re not saying that the punishment is unfair. We’re saying that the original demand was unfair and ill-advised. Sure, they could have presented some of our arguments beforehand. They could have chosen a different script. Or they could choose civil disobedience to raise the volume on the issue and get more people involved. Part of civil disobedience training is that when you’re found guilty and sentenced, you serve the sentence!

In fact, getting sentenced is part of the awareness raising process. Would we have found out about this if the girls hadn’t been suspended? Of course not. Then there would have been 40 less people discussing realistic ways to teach your children body parts. (Hundreds or thousands less when you add up all the water coolers and lunchrooms where this will be discussed today.) Maybe there are some young parents or future parents out there reading this right now who are thinking, “Oh, so it really is just another word that can be brought up in play!” and the next generation won’t be so warped about it. And we’re only the fourth ripple in the pond - the first being the principal and girls, the second being her schoolmates, the third being her local community. Obviously, this issue has even more of an impact on them than on us. And none of those ripples would have happened if they had quietly switched to doing the same old scene from The Bad Seed that had been done to death by high school girls for 50 years. (But an amoral child serial killer and the mother who murders her is more appropriate than the word “vagina”, apparently.)

[Marley23]

@WhyNot

Has anyone in the thread actually said the girls shouldn’t have been punished? I don’t think so. Maybe I missed it. We (the girls’ supporters) have all agreed that - because they agreed to take the word vagina out and then broke their word - they deserve the suspension.

I think you should accept the consequences when you engage in civil disobedience, but I don’t think they deserve to be punished - they did nothing wrong. Aside from that aside, suspension is excessive. Detention, maybe, is appropriate if you insist they need to be punished for breaking a dumb rule. When I went to school, way back in the late 90s, suspension was reserved for really severe transgressions. A fight wouldn’t get you suspended, but these girls are getting suspended for naming a part of their bodies? That’s crap.

I’ve actually been in the Vagina Monologues, and I can’t remember the last time I agreed with Eve Ensler - but I do on this one.

[Kalhoun]

@WhyNot

Has anyone in the thread actually said the girls shouldn’t have been punished? I don’t think so. Maybe I missed it. We (the girls’ supporters) have all agreed that - because they agreed to take the word vagina out and then broke their word - they deserve the suspension. We’re not protesting the suspension, we’re not emailing the principal with death threats, we’re not saying that the punishment is unfair. We’re saying that the original demand was unfair and ill-advised. Sure, they could have presented some of our arguments beforehand. They could have chosen a different script. Or they could choose civil disobedience to raise the volume on the issue and get more people involved. Part of civil disobedience training is that when you’re found guilty and sentenced, you serve the sentence!

In fact, getting sentenced is part of the awareness raising process. Would we have found out about this if the girls hadn’t been suspended? Of course not. Then there would have been 40 less people discussing realistic ways to teach your children body parts. (Hundreds or thousands less when you add up all the water coolers and lunchrooms where this will be discussed today.) Maybe there are some young parents or future parents out there reading this right now who are thinking, “Oh, so it really is just another word that can be brought up in play!” and the next generation won’t be so warped about it. And we’re only the fourth ripple in the pond - the first being the principal and girls, the second being her schoolmates, the third being her local community. Obviously, this issue has even more of an impact on them than on us. And none of those ripples would have happened if they had quietly switched to doing the same old scene from The Bad Seed that had been done to death by high school girls for 50 years. (But an amoral child serial killer and the mother who murders her is more appropriate than the word “vagina”, apparently.)

Well told. Instead of using the reading as an opportunity for a learning experience, the administration chose to perpetuate the ickification of the female body, thereby entirely missing the point of the piece.

[ArizonaTeach]

But the title of this thread is “Say vagina, get suspended,” WhyNot. So yes, it seems some people do believe the thrust of this argument is that the girls are being punished soley for uttering that word.

So our school is doing *Grease * for the musical this year. Does anyone really expect the line “She’s a real pussy wagon” to be in the play? Plays and readings get cut and altered ALL THE TIME in schools. All. The. Time. Where is this idea that they have to read it exactly as written coming from? I used to coach the speech team, and the kids had to do selected readings inside ten minutes, so poems were cut, words were changed, sentences were truncated. Hell, there were judges at our speech tournaments who would automatically drop the kid a couple rankings if they swore. Right or wrong, they were the judges, and you had to play to the audience.

This is absolutely not a free speech issue. If the kids had gotten on stage and said curse words for five minutes, ending with “First amendment, mother fuckers!” would it be defended here? Seriously?

The girls wanted to do a reading at an open mic night, if I’m understanding it right…not the whole play, which is an issue that seems to be being ignored here. It’s been awhile since I’ve seen The Vagina Monologues, but are you seriously telling me that there’s not a five-six minute section that doesn’t use the word “vagina?” The girls could have chosen anything. The school, doing its due diligence, made sure everything in the performance would be up to the community’s standards (and I believe the principal knows more about the community’s standards than The Straght Dope). The kids had an understanding that they would not say the word – which, again, is not at all an unusual request, and quite frankly, more common than not – but apparently not only had every intention of saying the word, they said it together (hey, that’s not an original script note, is it? You know, reading the monologue as a trio? Damn kids were already messing with the text!) to emphasize the point. The kids were in the wrong.

This is simply disobedience, not civil disobedience. These kids were not striking a blow for free speech. It’s not like they all got together and said, “this inability to say forbidden words in a public, school setting is infringing on my right as a human being, just like not being able to curse in thread titles is a blow to humanity.” Kids (and teachers, for that matter) absolutely positively do not have the right to say anything and everything they want to in school, and I am willing to bet that many people who are defending the girls would not do so if they used other words that are deemed offensive by some and not by others, which is the case here.

This is coming from an AP English teacher who has had complaints over the past 13 years about teaching mythology (by fundamentalists), *Huckleberry Finn * (by a black family), *Invisible Man * (mother offended by the stripper in chapter 1), *Romeo and Juliet * (girl’s older sister had just committed suicide – why was I being so insensitive?) and a myriad of short stories and poems that offended a large Mormon community, so I’ve been hit from all sides.

Anyway, this is only my second post ever, after a guest message two years ago, so be gentle. (Yes, I lurked for two years – and I know the whole Liberal/Libertarian story, incidentally!). I just felt the need to defend my profession in a matter that seems crystal clear to me, but apparently isn’t so from the outside.

[Cowboy8467]

@ArizonaTeach

But the title of this thread is “Say vagina, get suspended,” WhyNot. So yes, it seems some people do believe the thrust of this argument is that the girls are being punished soley for uttering that word.

Actually, as the OP I do not feel that the girls are being punished solely for their utterance of the word vagina. I realize that they made an agreement with the principal and then reneged on it, but I still think it’s stupid that they had to make the agreement in the first place for many of the reasons that have previously been stated.

[GLWasteful]

@Diogenes the Cynic

I can’t defend a principal caving into concerns that morons will be offended by something, and it’s not exactly like he avoided controversy anyway.

He would have. If it weren’t for those meddling kids. But seriously, any principal has to keep a lot of balls in the air at any given time. Like I said, some of them are absolute bullshit, but for good or for ill, the principal still has to address issues that arise. Like students lying to the administration. Or parents who are uncomfortable with lunch selections. Or the two gunmen working their way toward the library.

Ignorant of what?

Societal context, mostly.

ETA that I missed where you had said that you’ve seen it. If you’ve seen it then why would you think that there’s a distinction between reading lines from the play and performing the play? Reading the lines IS how it’s performed.

Yes, and I am fully aware of that. However, this whole brouhaha came about because of a flip comment about the school creating programs that say “XXX”. Since this was an all ages event (or so it seems from what’s been reported thus far), then there wouldn’t have been a fucking program that prominently featured the name of the play. And I’ve seen damned few people commenting on the superintendent saying that the kids were welcome to perform the play as written. So long as they perform it for an audience that knows full well going in that they are going to see “The Vagina Monologues” and are able to determine if they are comfortable hearing the language contained therein when they decide whether or not to go.

[LifeOnWry]

@Malacandra

Okay. Would you object to linking to a picture of your elbow?

Would you object to linking to a picture of your navel?

Would you object to linking to a picture of your vagina?

Enquiring minds just want to know.

OK. I gotta give you that one.

I still don’t quite get the blushing, tittering (ha!) attitude (HA AGAIN!) that goes with naming body parts.

[WhyNot]

@ArizonaTeach

But the title of this thread is “Say vagina, get suspended,” WhyNot. So yes, it seems some people do believe the thrust of this argument is that the girls are being punished soley for uttering that word.

Possibly, but that’s reading into it. Thread titles are meant to be descriptive and are limited in length by the software. They’re also, like any title, ideally designed to draw people into the meat of the text. I think it’s an effective title. The item being discussed is a trio of girls who were suspended for saying “vagina”.

So our school is doing *Grease * for the musical this year. Does anyone really expect the line “She’s a real pussy wagon” to be in the play?

I did *Grease *in high school. And yes, our Kenicke was told to repeat the “Draggin’ wagon” line instead of “pussy wagon” and change “the chicks’ll cream” to “dream”. And yes, on performance night he magically “forgot”. Seven performances, he “forgot”, in fact. If you can get your Kenicke to comply, you are the bestest director ever. I’ve seen a lot of high school productions of Grease, and it’s always been sung with the dirty bits in the end, no matter what the kids agree to during rehearsals.

Plays and readings get cut and altered ALL THE TIME in schools. All. The. Time. Where is this idea that they have to read it exactly as written coming from?

Sure, here I agree with you. Nothing goes uncut in forensics.

This is absolutely not a free speech issue. If the kids had gotten on stage and said curse words for five minutes, ending with “First amendment, mother fuckers!” would it be defended here? Seriously?

Nope. Well, yes probably it would, but not by me. But “vagina” is not a curse word, so what’s your point? Apples and elephants, my dear.

It’s been awhile since I’ve seen The Vagina Monologues, but are you seriously telling me that there’s not a five-six minute section that doesn’t use the word “vagina?”

Sure there are. There’s a rather long bit about women who were told really odd euphemisms for their vaginas and punished by their mothers for touching themselves. But every single monologue, sooner or later, comes back to vaginas. It’s sort of the unifying theme to the monologues!

This is simply disobedience, not civil disobedience. These kids were not striking a blow for free speech. It’s not like they all got together and said, “this inability to say forbidden words in a public, school setting is infringing on my right as a human being, just like not being able to curse in thread titles is a blow to humanity.” Kids (and teachers, for that matter) absolutely positively do not have the right to say anything and everything they want to in school, and I am willing to bet that many people who are defending the girls would not do so if they used other words that are deemed offensive by some and not by others, which is the case here.

I just don’t agree. I think it’s appalling that vagina is considered an offensive word more than penis or trachea or scapula, simply because that means there’s no non-offensive way to refer to the most important and visible organ we have that men don’t. Sure, people have their foibles, but that doesn’t mean we have to enable them, or that we shouldn’t have community discussion about them.

This is coming from an AP English teacher who has had complaints over the past 13 years about teaching mythology (by fundamentalists), *Huckleberry Finn * (by a black family), *Invisible Man * (mother offended by the stripper in chapter 1), *Romeo and Juliet * (girl’s older sister had just committed suicide – why was I being so insensitive?) and a myriad of short stories and poems that offended a large Mormon community, so I’ve been hit from all sides.

And, as you can probably guess, I’d support your right to teach as you see fit in all of those cases, as I support these girls in raising awareness as they see fit. They absolutely made a conscious decision to do this - it’s in the article. This was not spontaneous. You make decisions based on the good of the student, not the prevailing community attitudes, and that’s a good thing. So I don’t see why it’s a bad thing that these girls did the same. Precocious, yes. Deserving of punishment for lying and insubordination, sure. But they’re doing the same thing you are by not removing Huckleberry Finn from the curriculum - they’re standing firm in their appreciation of the art and raising community awareness that the status quo might not be the best way to do things.

Anyway, this is only my second post ever, after a guest message two years ago, so be gentle. (Yes, I lurked for two years – and I know the whole Liberal/Libertarian story, incidentally!). I just felt the need to defend my profession in a matter that seems crystal clear to me, but apparently isn’t so from the outside.

Welcome back. Please do keep posting. In fact, I’d be very interested, since you’re a speech team coach, as to your take on why scenes like The Bad Seed, Agnes of God (rape, pregnancy, sex with priests and gasp SMOKING) and Metal of Honor Rag and *The Laundromat *and The Children’s Hour and Days of Wine and Roses are staples of forensics, while one solitary “vagina” in a non-sexual context is anathema. (I’m probably dating myself a little with those examples, but I swear to Og, if I never see another Agnes of God DDA, I will die a happy woman!)

[GLWasteful]

@Kalhoun

What would the “proper” word be that would even come close to expressing the intent of the piece? Using anatomically correct terminology is not considered “hip” or “groovy” (well…maybe groovy, in the case of a cooter) in any circles. The hip folks are the ones that come up with clever slang. It’s always been this way.

Damn, Sam. You have managed to completely miss the point that has been made by the administration, myself and other posters. Once more, since it seems to have eluded you: There’s nothing whatsoever wrong with the term “vagina”. What was wrong was agreeing, which these girls did, to do a reading and not use that particular term, then turn around and use it.

It’s irresponsible to tell kids to advertise that they’re performing a reading and then expect them to change the artist’s words. Most likely without the artist’s permission.

Horseshit. If you’re this ignorant about how things happen all the fucking time in a performance setting, then maybe you should spend some time paying attention to the world around you.

These girls requested (I imagine) to perform a reading from “The Vagina Monologues” at an Open Mic Night at their school. The administration was stupid not to foresee something of this sort, and agreed if the girls would avoid using the word “vagina”. The girls agreed to this. They said that they would perform without using the word “vagina”. Damned if I know what they were supposed to say instead, and would like to know, but that doesn’t matter. What matters is that they said they would do the reading without using a term that the administration felt would be poorly received by the audience. They then used the word that they had been instructed not to use, and were suspended. I personally think that suspension was a little harsh, but I don’t know the community as well as those who live there. It appears that you have some deep insight that has thus far eluded me. Might I inquire where I could get some?

Again, this has nothing to do with the word “vagina” being uttered on a school stage by school actors. The fucking superintendent said that they were welcome to perform the show. This is an instance of three girls barefacedly lying to the principal, then being punished for doing so. As someone already pointed out, if they had used the sort of language that I use daily and wrapped it up by saying, “First Amendment, Motherfuckers!” Then this conversation wouldn’t be taking place.

[tdn]

I’m confused on a couple of points, so maybe those of you defending the girls can emlighten me.

1. Can you cite where the principal explicitly said that it was OK to say the word “penis” in the show?

2. Some of you claim that the show was advertised as The Vagina Monologues or as including it. I missed that cite as well. Can you provide it?

Since a great many arguments you are making revolve around these two assertions, I’d like to see where they are mentioned in the first place.

[Mangetout]

What is odd is not that they got twitchy over the utterance of the word ‘vagina’ - that sort of spluttering and collar-fingering goes on all the time; what’s peculiar is that they agreed to the inclusion of the piece in the first place. If you think vaginas are not for public airing, why allow students to perform a piece from something called The Vagina Monologues, fercryinoutloud?

[tdn]

@GLWasteful

The fucking superintendent said that they were welcome to perform the show.

This bears repeating. Several times.

The fucking superintendent said that they were welcome to perform the show.
The fucking superintendent said that they were welcome to perform the show.
The fucking superintendent said that they were welcome to perform the show.
The fucking superintendent said that they were welcome to perform the show.
The fucking superintendent said that they were welcome to perform the show.
The fucking superintendent said that they were welcome to perform the show.
The fucking superintendent said that they were welcome to perform the show.

I’m sure that this inconvenient fact will be roundly ignored.

[tdn]

@Mangetout

If you think vaginas are not for public airing, why allow students to perform a piece from something called The Vagina Monologues, fercryinoutloud?

I’ll add my voice to the chorus wanting to know what the bowdlerized version was. That might answer a great number of questions.

[Malacandra]

@WhyNot

Welcome back. Please do keep posting. In fact, I’d be very interested, since you’re a speech team coach, as to your take on why scenes like The Bad Seed, Agnes of God (rape, pregnancy, sex with priests and gasp SMOKING) and Metal of Honor Rag and *The Laundromat *and The Children’s Hour and Days of Wine and Roses are staples of forensics, while one solitary “vagina” in a non-sexual context is anathema. (I’m probably dating myself a little with those examples, but I swear to Og, if I never see another Agnes of God DDA, I will die a happy woman!)

The hell it’s a non-sexual context. Are you seriously asserting there’s no subtext there in proclaiming a short skirt as your vagina’s flag of freedom - and there’s no more impact intended there than in proclaiming a short-sleeved shirt as your elbow’s flag of freedom? (It’s hard here not to say something about the citizen’s right to bare arms.)

[Zakalwe]

@Malacandra

(It’s hard here not to say something about the citizen’s right to bare arms.)

Apparelly, it’s impossible.

[Malacandra]

@Zakalwe

Apparelly, it’s impossible.

Don’t get shirty with me! :dubious:

[Nars_Glinley]

For better or worse (probably worse), the very mention of genitalia in public in American society is taboo. I could go on and on about the rash on my elbow at work. If the same rash were on my penis, I’d probably get fired for talking about it.