# Vagina Dialogues - canceled, too offensive **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [July 24, 2015, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119 "2015-07-24T23:56:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/81 "2015-07-27T20:41:45Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > I think the thuggish and speech-suppressing nature of many on today’s left is pretty obvious to most people who aren’t part of their clan. When a tenured professor can have his career threatened because a ‘Firefly’ poster is deemed to create a ‘hostile environment’, something is out of control. Great to have you back around Sam. You’ve been low profile the past few years if I am not mistaken. What’s the deal on the Firefly thing? As a conservative sci fi nerd I gotta hear this one. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/82 "2015-07-27T21:02:00Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > Great to have you back around Sam. You’ve been low profile the past few years if I am not mistaken. > > What’s the deal on the Firefly thing? As a conservative sci fi nerd I gotta hear this one. Yeah, I’ve been avoiding the politics threads pretty much in the last while. After 15 years, the arguments seem to be the same old recycled debates we’ve had many, many times. I guess I’ve gotten tired of it. As for the Firefly story: [College campus police save students from threat of Firefly poster](http://www.avclub.com/article/college-campus-police-save-students-from-threat-of-62346) > [@](#): > > Campus police at the University Of Wisconsin-Stout, a dark and slightly creamy university that pairs surprisingly well with chocolate, have once more secured the safety of their students by ripping down a theater professor’s Firefly poster, which threatened to murder everyone who looked at it. Or rather, as you can see in the image to the left there, captured Firefly star Nathan Fillion’s character in his typically tough-but-fair idiom, while also using the word “kill,” suggesting that theater professor James Miller was just waiting for the right opportunity to kill one of his students, just as soon as they were awake and in possession of both faces and guns. The poster in question was one of Mal Reynolds standing, with one of his famous quotes underneath: “You don’t know me son, so let me explain this to you once; If I ever kill you, you’ll be awake. You’ll be facing me. And you’ll be armed.” Bear in mind that this is a professor of _theater_. He was accused of violating the ‘safe space’ of students who might be triggered by the word ‘kill’, or the notion of people having guns, or the thought that the professor actually believes that killing people is something fun to do. The professor himself is a liberal, and responded by putting up a cartoon poster saying, [“Warning: Fascism.”](https://www.thefire.org/fascism-picture-posted-by-university-of-wisconsin-stout-professor-james-miller/) That got him into further hot water with the administration, and it was only when the whole issue went viral with several cast members of Firefly weighing in in his defense and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education becoming involved that the administration backed down and left him alone. Lest anyone think this is an isolated case, The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education has been fighting these attacks against free expression for a long time. Usually the abuses are targeted at conservatives, but not always. FIRE defends people on the left and right, and they’ve amassed a pretty large case list. You can read about them and some of the cases they’ve fought [here](https://www.thefire.org/category/cases/free-speech/). ---
**Author:** ![Drunky\_Smurf](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drunky_smurf/32/449_2.png) [@Drunky\_Smurf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drunky_Smurf)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/83 "2015-07-27T21:05:26Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > And this is why I No, no you really don’t. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/84 "2015-07-27T21:06:08Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > No, I think we can be fairly certain that no one involved with any production of the play has thought of the play as such. > > Yet we can _also_ be fairly certain, I would guess, that at least one audience member, somewhere, has come away from that part of the play thinking ‘see, it’s NOT so bad for an adult to have sex with a 13-year-old!’ (Or ‘16-year-old.’) Sure, probably. Is that the responsibility of the playwright, though? To what extent is that audience member validating something they already believed in? To what extent would that person’s behavior have been different if they hadn’t seen this particular play? Obviously, that’s not something that’s really knowable, but I tend to suspect that the sort of person looking for a rationalization for sleeping with a thirteen year old is going to keep looking until they find it. > [@](#): > > When it comes to making a piece of work that includes the “authentic experiences” of others, there is a difference between, say, a book of testimonial essays, and a play in which performers speak directly to the audience, portraying the person who had that authentic experience. > > Why this is so is beyond the scope of the thread. But the fact is that a person who wants to rationalize using kids for sex is going to get far more support from seeing an actress stand up and say ‘I was seduced at 13 and I loved it’ than he or she would get from reading an essay in which the writer says the same thing. > > Theater is powerful. Cliché? Maybe…but it’s also true. I’m not sure I agree that it’s a fact that seeing something in a play is more likely to make an audience member accept it than reading about the same thing in an essay. But even if I did, I’m not sure why it matters. If it’s reasonable to object to the play because “at least one” audience member has come away with the idea that this is okay, then it’s equally reasonable to object to a collection of written essays on the same subject, because “at least one” reader has come away with the idea that this is okay. > [@](#): > > _The Vagina Monologues_ has been intensely meaningful to many women over the years, but that doesn’t mean that it wasn’t written by a human being at a particular time. Perhaps Ensler didn’t really think through the way that the Coochie piece could be used to justify making use of kids for sex. Perhaps if she had thought that through at the time, she wouldn’t have included the piece. > > And, perhaps, if the zeitgeist of the mid-90s (when the play was being written) had been identical to the zeitgeist of 2015, Ensler would have included a transgender monologue. According to Wikipedia, that didn’t happen until 2004. But it did happen–and so I’m puzzled at claims that the play has been ‘banned’ as being unfriendly to transwomen. This brings up something important which I think has been overlooked in this thread: namely, the play hasn’t been banned at all. The theater group at Mount Holyoke that normally performs the play, has decided not to perform it any more. There’s no indication, at least in the linked article, that they were forced to drop it due to any sort of outside pressure. It appears to be a decision they arrived at internally, based on how members of the theater group felt about performing the play. There’s nothing preventing another group of students from getting together and mounting a performance of the play on campus. Since the decision to drop the play has been portrayed as an example of liberal censorship, despite the complete lack of an actual censor in the story, let’s all take a moment to consider the administrative reaction if a group of students decided to perform _The Vagina Monologues_ at, say, Bob Jones University. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/85 "2015-07-27T21:13:26Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > You can read about them and some of the cases they’ve fought [here](https://www.thefire.org/category/cases/free-speech/). I’d like to respond to the rest of your post better/later/politer and hope I will, but I REALLY have to run for the evening now. But HOLEY CRAP that’s some messed up shit right there. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/86 "2015-07-27T21:14:09Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Not in this thread perhaps, but how about the people who protest on campus to prevent Bill Maher, Ayan Hiirsi Ali, or Condoleeza Rice from speaking? How about the “#BlackLivesMatter” assholes who pushed aside Martin O’Malley and then became outraged when he had the temerity to suggest that all lives matter? How about the people who tried to use ‘John Doe’ investigations to stop a politician they didn’t like? How about the IRS targeting conservatives with audits and refusing to grant tax exempt status to conservative outreach groups while letting their liberal counterparts through quickly? > > How about the flash mobs of outrage on twitter and elsewhere that seek to have people’s careers and lives ruined for saying things they don’t like? How about the people who made a scientist who landed a machine on a freaking COMET give a tearful apology because they didn’t like the shirt he was wearing when the announcement was made? > > Here in Canada, we have ‘human rights tribunals’ who can and will destroy you if you step outside of what is the current politically-correct orthodoxy in a public way. They have issued lifetime gag orders against religious leaders, preventing them from speaking out against homosexuality. On the other hand, those same tribunals will defend to the death such attitudes so long as it’s coming from Islamic leaders, because they are a ‘protected’ group. > > I think the thuggish and speech-suppressing nature of many on today’s left is pretty obvious to most people who aren’t part of their clan. When a tenured professor can have his career threatened because a ‘Firefly’ poster is deemed to create a ‘hostile environment’, something is out of control. That’s an adorable rant, **Sam**. Maybe someday you can post it in a thread where it’s relevant. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2015, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/87 "2015-07-28T20:05:03Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > That’s an adorable rant, **Sam**. Maybe someday you can post it in a thread where it’s relevant. Yeah. Most of us could come up with an equally-long list of Objectionable Stuff done by self-proclaimed conservatives. If we then proceeded to make the claim that doing Objectionable Stuff is _characteristic of_ conservatives, then we’d be standing on the exact same shaky ground that Sam\_Stone staked out in that post. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2015, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/88 "2015-07-28T20:24:38Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > If it’s reasonable to object to the play because “at least one” audience member has come away with the idea that this is okay, then it’s equally reasonable to object to a collection of written essays on the same subject, because “at least one” reader has come away with the idea that this is okay. Sure, but that (the “at least one audience member” aspect) was not my argument. My argument was that the portion of the play in question (the “Coochie” segment) was probably _not_ intentionally included in order to normalize adults’ use of kids for sex. But even if there was no intention to normalize, the segment does have strong potential to provide emotional support to those who want to see the use of kids for sex in a positive light. Seeing a viewpoint enacted on a stage can engender a very strong _'I’m not alone!_’ reaction; the theater as an art form has made use of this phenomenon for millennia. (Of course my assertion that the segment has such a potential is not provable, but then I’m not claiming that it’s provable.) For those who believe that normalizing the adult use of kids for sex is a bad thing, it would make sense to omit that segment. The play, after all, has a nearly two-decades long history of having segments added or deleted (witness the addition of the transgender-themed segments in 2004, as mentioned in my post). I’m not arguing for banning the entire play or for pretending any particular segment never existed. _I’m saying that times and perceptions change._ What Ensler perceived in 1996 as being that segment’s message, may differ from what she now sees as the segment’s message. > [@Miller](#): > > This brings up something important which I think has been overlooked in this thread: namely, the play hasn’t been banned at all. The theater group at Mount Holyoke that normally performs the play, has decided not to perform it any more. There’s no indication, at least in the linked article, that they were forced to drop it due to any sort of outside pressure. It appears to be a decision they arrived at internally, based on how members of the theater group felt about performing the play. There’s nothing preventing another group of students from getting together and mounting a performance of the play on campus. > > Since the decision to drop the play has been portrayed as an example of liberal censorship, despite the complete lack of an actual censor in the story, let’s all take a moment to consider the administrative reaction if a group of students decided to perform _The Vagina Monologues_ at, say, Bob Jones University. Good point. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/89 "2015-07-29T01:57:53Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > Sure, but that (the “at least one audience member” aspect) was not my argument. > > My argument was that the portion of the play in question (the “Coochie” segment) was probably _not_ intentionally included in order to normalize adults’ use of kids for sex. But even if there was no intention to normalize, the segment does have strong potential to provide emotional support to those who want to see the use of kids for sex in a positive light. Seeing a viewpoint enacted on a stage can engender a very strong _'I’m not alone!_’ reaction; the theater as an art form has made use of this phenomenon for millennia. (Of course my assertion that the segment has such a potential is not provable, but then I’m not claiming that it’s provable.) I can see someone having that reaction, I’m just not convinced that it’s necessarily something the people putting on the play need to be concerned about. You can’t predict or control how damaged people are going to react to a given work of art. I don’t think one creep in an audience thinking, “I’m not alone!” is the same as normalizing sexual abuse, and I doubt that watching a play is going to be the difference between that person molesting a kid, and them not molesting a kid. Certainly, if people involved in the production of the play (or Ensler herself) decide to remove the segment because it makes them uncomfortable, for the reason you outlined or some other reason, I’m not fussed about it. I just think that, if someone decides _not_ to drop it, there’s nothing wrong with that, either. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/90 "2015-07-29T06:08:58Z")
> [@Haberdash](#): > > And in five years when transsexuals are no longer trendy you’ll be yelling at a play that portrays them positively and insisting you never believed otherwise, of course. Um, this implies that you think that absent social justice trend-following, we’d largely default to despising positive portrayals of transsexuals. That sounds off to me, but then I was interested in trans\* and intersex issues before they were trendy. Maybe I’m in the freaky 1%. Or maybe you have some big hangups about transsexualism. ---
**Author:** ![Haberdash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Haberdash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Haberdash)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 10:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/91 "2015-07-29T10:19:13Z")
Right, you’ve always loved transsexuals, just like you’ve always hated the “good rape” of 13-year olds, and in five years you will be proclaiming that you always knew that painting your house orange gives your cancer or whatever the lockstep cause of the moment randomly is then. The left-wing memory hole is a powerful thing. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 10:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/92 "2015-07-29T10:39:48Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > Have you ever even seen the piece in question? It’s dripping with ambiguity. The whole point of it is ambiguity. That it’s delivered in a very dreamy sexy way by an adult woman reminiscing a pleasurable sexual experience, and the word “rape” punches you in the face at the end as you realize that this very sexy scene she’s describing was indeed rape. > > Because that’s how most rapes are. Most rapes are ambiguous. Children feel sexual pleasure when they’re being raped sometimes. Grown women feel love for their rapists sometimes. Rape is ambiguous. That is the experience of millions of girls and women. And men. Both the situation described and the feelings reported about it are very similar to the introductions to sex of my maternal grandfather and of Gabriel García Márquez. I tried reading Gabo’s autobiography despite never having been able to stand his writings, but had to drop it after that scene - the mileage of thousands upon thousands of other readers evidently varies. ---
**Author:** ![Haberdash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Haberdash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Haberdash)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 10:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/93 "2015-07-29T10:45:57Z")
I think allowing people to discuss their interpretation of the scene and whether it is promoting rape or not is a good idea, therefore it’s a bad idea to demand the silencing of anyone who tries to discuss the scene, or cancel the play because transsexuals are upset at the notion that women tend to have vaginas. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 11:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/94 "2015-07-29T11:23:42Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > And men. Both the situation described and the feelings reported about it are very similar to the introductions to sex of my maternal grandfather and of Gabriel García Márquez. I tried reading Gabo’s autobiography despite never having been able to stand his writings, but had to drop it after that scene - the mileage of thousands upon thousands of other readers evidently varies. Your maternal grandmother knew Gabriel García Marquez??? Cool! ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 11:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/95 "2015-07-29T11:24:54Z")
> [@Haberdash](#): > > Right, you’ve always loved transsexuals, just like you’ve always hated the “good rape” of 13-year olds, and in five years you will be proclaiming that you always knew that painting your house orange gives your cancer or whatever the lockstep cause of the moment randomly is then. The left-wing memory hole is a powerful thing. Remarkably enough, some of us actually _have_ been in favor of equal treatment for transgender people for years, even decades. Most of us don’t think 13 year olds should be having sex, period. There is also a difference between _statutory_ rape (which is what the scene is question is about) and _coercive_ rape which apparently many no longer comprehend due to their binary view of the world which makes no distinctions between one bad thing and another. You are revealing just how narrow-minded you actually are by such statement, and that you have some sort of bias or agenda, the exact details of which I can’t discern but don’t really care about anyway. > [@Haberdash](#): > > I think allowing people to discuss their interpretation of the scene and whether it is promoting rape or not is a good idea, therefore it’s a bad idea to demand the silencing of anyone who tries to discuss the scene, or cancel the play because transsexuals are upset at the notion that women tend to have vaginas. That’s a very broad brush you’ve got there. Give the lengths to which many transwomen go to have a vagina constructed the notion that they’re “upset” at “the notion that women tend to have vaginas” is ludicrous. SOME transwomen seem to be upset about the play, but it’s no secret that many transgender people are psychologically damaged, victims of assault and rape, and may have atypical reactions to certain things that don’t bother even other transgender folks. I think we should listen to these people, and perhaps warn them if we are aware a certain work might upset them, but I’m not 100% convinced the entire world should be censored because of their PTSD. ---
**Author:** ![Haberdash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Haberdash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Haberdash)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 11:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/96 "2015-07-29T11:34:25Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > There is also a difference between _statutory_ rape (which is what the scene is question is about) and _coercive_ rape which apparently many no longer comprehend due to their binary view of the world which makes no distinctions between one bad thing and another. Ooh, tell us about how “technically it’s ephebophilia” next! ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/97 "2015-07-29T11:44:47Z")
A 13 year old can “consent” to sex with an older adult in the sense that a 13 year old can want and desire sexual intercourse with someone, but because such a person lacks mature judgement, and the older person in inherently in a position of greater power (knowledge, judgement, money, freedom of movement, driver’s license, vehicle, etc.) the danger comes from _exploitation_ of the younger person, emotional manipulation, and so forth. It can still be very damaging but _differently_ damaging than coercive sex where the recipient does not want the contact, may physically resist, may be physically assaulted/damaged by the act, and so forth. That is, in fact, why there is a distinction between “child molestation” and “statutory rape”. Neither is good, both are criminal, but saying they’re the same thing is like saying someone breaking into your home and stealing your stuff is the same as someone beating you senseless and leaving you bleeding in the street. Both are wrong, both are harmful/damaging, but they aren’t the same thing. That’s also why two thirteen year olds having sex with each other are (or were, until recently) seen as a different circumstance than a thirty year old having sex with someone thirteen. Two teenagers are less likely to engage in damaging exploitation with each other, although I could make an argument they still shouldn’t be having sex with each other or anyone else. But I’m sure you’ll find a way to twist that explanation around into some weird, twisted fantasy of yours that anyone who isn’t frothing at the mouth as much as you are over the topic is somehow “pro-rape”. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Haberdash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Haberdash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Haberdash)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/98 "2015-07-29T11:53:20Z")
As you may recall: 1. The reason people suspect the play and the people who insist on defending the play as above criticism of being “pro rape” is because it very much does not present the incident as “just a thing that happened” but goes out of its way to both acknowledge it as a rape, and proclaim it “good.” The source of the claim that “what is portrayed in the play is a rape” is not me, or Puritans, or the legal code, it is the play itself, which chooses to use that word. 2. The reason the scene is being brought up in this thread is because, in the past, the people who insist on defending the play as above criticism have worked to silence anyone who questions the scene. 3. #2 is ironic because the same steamroller tactics and black and white “all art must be either Received Oracular Wisdom or Poisonous Issue of Satan” thinking that were once used to defend the “good rape” scene are now being used to keep the play from being staged. ---
**Author:** ![handsomeharry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e9c0ed/32.png) [@handsomeharry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeharry)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2015, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/99 "2015-08-02T04:27:44Z")
> [@Tim\_R.Mortiss](#): > > Right up there with the woman who could \*sing \*from her _diaphragm_! Wouldn’t that be monophragm? ---
**Author:** ![DocCathode](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doccathode/32/18773_2.png) [@DocCathode](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DocCathode)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2015, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119/100 "2015-08-02T19:47:40Z")
> [@Haberdash](#): > > Right, you’ve always loved transsexuals, just like you’ve always hated the “good rape” of 13-year olds, and in five years you will be proclaiming that you always knew that painting your house orange gives your cancer or whatever the lockstep cause of the moment randomly is then. The left-wing memory hole is a powerful thing. I can’t speak for anybody else, but a search of my posts would reveal I’ve been an LGB and T ally since at least 2000. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/vagina-dialogues-canceled-too-offensive/726119.md?page=6)