Let's Get Ready To OH GOD OH GOD OH GOD

[filkertom]

This oughta be fun. Conservative Catholics are criticizing a decision by the University of Notre Dame's president to allow "The Vagina Monologues" on campus, saying the play — which includes discussions of homosexuality and orgasms — goes against the school's Catholic character.

I'm actually torn as to which way I feel about this -- I mean, I love the play, and think it's extremely important, not to mention that it's always good to shove this stuff in the faces of the repressed and hypocritical Catholic Church... but it is a private university, as I recall. Dunno how banning the play would affect their accrediting.

What do you think? About the play, about the decision, about the Church's attitude?

Comments

I hope Notre Dame stands up

[jkb.livejournal.com]

for its rights to have any play it wants on campus, and tells the conservative Catholics to sit on a tack. I'm in the process of converting to Catholicism myself, and I think a lot of "outsiders" don't realize that it's not a simple matter of Catholics trying to repress non-Catholics; there are these internal battles that go on between those who believe that Jesus' message would of *course* include women and gay people and lead to a more liberal, loving society, and those who think Catholicism is about defending quasi-traditional notions of purity and sexual "morality." Of course a lot of liberal Catholics get fed up and jump ship, but there are still lots of people in the churches who want Catholicism to be broad-minded, universal, and loving.

At one time, Catholics were the patrons of the arts in Europe; popes financed works by Michelangelo. Catholics who think Catholicism is about repression and uptightness *can* find precedent to make their case, but it's a selective reading of Catholicism. I assume the president of the University of Notre Dame is a Catholic, and I hope he or she takes a stand for the University's right to present controversial ideas.

[scifantasy.livejournal.com]

What do you think? About the play, about the decision, about the Church's attitude?

More power to the president for allowing it. I hope he doesn't crack under the pressure from outside, but if he does I'll understand. If people disagree with him, they're free to no longer give money, to not apply, or to speak out, but I really don't see any permanent damage to the University for it.

But let me just highlight two quotations from the article:

"To be a university means that we engage in diversity of viewpoints that are vigorously debated, some of which will challenge Catholic understanding. I don't think we should be afraid of that. That's what it is to be a university."

--UND's president.

"The fact that he has studied this issue so carefully and attended the play and considered all of the implications and come to this conclusion suggests to me that he has total disregard for Notre Dame's Catholic identity."

--Leader of an opposed group.

Now, I know what the latter meant, but couldn't you read that as "Studying issues and considering implications and making informed decisions are un-Catholic"?

[twfarlan.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure I see how banning the play would affect their accreditation.

I do think one quote from the article is rather telling:

Patrick J. Reilly, president of the Cardinal Newman Society, a conservative group that opposes allowing the play on Catholic campuses, called the decision hypocritical. "The fact that he has studied this issue so carefully and attended the play and considered all of the implications and come to this conclusion suggests to me that he has total disregard for Notre Dame's Catholic identity," Reilly said.

Let me get this straight. Studying an issue, doing research on a question, and considering the outcome of his decision is against the Catholic character? What, good Catholics don't do any of those things? Or is he saying that doing those things is against Notre Dame's character, specifically?

[ladysmith.livejournal.com]

Nope. Good Catholics accept whatever the church tells them. Research and questioning authority is DEFINITELY against the Catholic character.

Got me into a HELL of a lot of trouble when I was in Catholic school.

[dr-zrfq.livejournal.com]

Don't know about the University of Notre Dame du Lac specifically, but a *LOT* of the Catholic colleges in the USA are Jesuit institutions. You want research and questioning authority? Jesuits are a good place to go for that. (Most of the priests I had as teachers in Catholic school went to Jesuit colleges. This made their classes quite a bit of fun.)

[magicaltrevor.livejournal.com]

You have to admit, however, that Mother Church is not exactly conducive to dissent or question, no matter how you might want to justify it. If I want research and questioning authority, I just head off to my nearest feminist group. Maybe jesuits are the best the catholic church has to offer in this regard, but they are still bound by the (very) limiting constraints of the catholic church.

[backrubbear.livejournal.com]

Considering the Jesuit order swears absolute obedience to the Pope (IIRC), that seems a little weird. Consistent with the few Jesuits I've met, but weird. :-)

[twfarlan.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that got me into trouble when I was a Southern Baptist... and when I went to a Church of Christ high school, too. And they all say they don't have anything in common!

[umbran.livejournal.com]

I have friends who went to Notre Dame. If they are any measure, the school's "Catholic character" here is highly overstated. Notre Dame is filled with real people. People who like to laugh, and occasionally have orgasms out of wedlock. Many may be Catholic, but they aren't monks and nuns...

[emiofbrie.livejournal.com]

Granted, however Notre Dame decides is their business, since they are a private institution...

But the good thing is that if they were to ban the play, we have just as much of a right to think them total gits for banning it *heh* ;)

[umbran.livejournal.com]

They are a private institution - but many students are getting Federal student aid and loans, and that makes some things a different kettle of fish...

[magicaltrevor.livejournal.com]

Well, even if it is a private university, it's still the university's decision, not the decision of Catholics in general. That would be like saying that policy at an African-American university could be dictated by any random group of African Americans. I mean, I could see how, if said example university defined itself by its African-American identity, it would want to take into account the opinions of the minority to which it caters. But sorry, just because someone randomly has something in common with the archaic ideals of Notre Dame, it doesn't mean they have the right to dictate policy there. It's really not any of their business.

Plus, just... who doesn't want to run into a big crowd of crazed repressed christians and just scream VAGINA!! VAGINAVAGINAVAGINA!!! just to watch a couple of 'em drop on the ground and start seizing? Well, maybe it's just me. I am an evil feminazi, after all :)

[the-dark-snack.livejournal.com]

The play is good but I have how it has caused everyone to refer to the entire female genital area as the vagina. Tha vagina is an internal organ only.

Censorship in any form is detestable.

The Catholic church is WAY too full of themselves for their own good. The church has forbidden surrogate motherhood. Good thing they didn't do that earlier (like say, when their diety was conceived).

[trdsf.livejournal.com]

The church has forbidden surrogate motherhood. Good thing they didn't do that earlier (like say, when their diety was conceived).

.

.

.

You're beautiful, you know that?

[the-dark-snack.livejournal.com]

And you are me new special friend.

[trdsf.livejournal.com]

*beam!* And now it's mutual. :)

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

Oh, snap.

[the-dark-snack.livejournal.com]

There was a German accent in that statement, right?

[morpheus0013.livejournal.com]

Because the president of the University is the one authorizing it, I don't think the idea of it being a private university comes into it. If some outside force were shoving it down the collective campus throat, that'd be one thing, but it's an administrative decision.

[trdsf.livejournal.com]

Well, seeing as how the school itself authorized the play rather than being taken to court and made to show it, those complaining about it should just not go. I don't see anything in here that attendance at the play will be required by the school, either. Just a buncha bluenoses who can't stand the possibility that somewhere, someone else might not be as miserable as they are.

[purpleranger.livejournal.com]

Whenever I hear someone mention THE VAGINA MONOLOGUES, it reminds me of a movie called CHATTERBOX. It's about . . . well, maybe you should look this one up on IMDB.

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

I know exactly what it is. That's why I've got these Brillo pads for my eyeballs, here.

[yinepuhotep.livejournal.com]

It's been a long time since I saw the play, but I do have trouble with any play that glorifies rape.

What else do you call it when an adult gets a 13yo girl drunk, then use her as the victim in a sexual act?

If a man did it, they'd call it rape. So why don't they call it that when it's a woman? And why do they glorify it in the play, rather than condemning it?

I'd say that anyone who objects to rape and child sex has every right to oppose THE VAGINA MONOLOGUES.

[yinepuhotep.livejournal.com]

For those who don't know what I'm talking about, the title of the segment that glorifies child rape is "The Little Coochie Snorcher That Could".

[sylverwolfe.livejournal.com]

if i recall that monologue correctly, the little girl had experienced several traumas, leaving her afraid of sex, and the older woman taught her that it could be an experience of ecstasy rather than pain and fear. i also recall the girl being a little older, closer to 16, which depending on the time and geographic location may have been the age of consent. they way she described the apartment indicates the sixties or seventies.
i agree, child rape is unquestionably a terrible and criminal act whether it's committed by a male or a female, and the woman's use of alcohol to "loosen" the girl is questionable at best, but i feel the girl who gave the story to Eve Ensler felt that the experience restored her to womanhood by breaking the mental block the traumas had put in place. the monologue was, i'm nearly certain, not intended to glorify the rape of a minor.

[yinepuhotep.livejournal.com]

In the original version of the play (I understand it's been changed since I saw it, because too many people complained about things like that episode), the girl was 13 when she was raped by the older woman, and was 16 when she told her story.

Even in the play itself, the girl said "some people call it [what the older woman did to her] rape" so it's pretty clear that Eve Ensler knew exactly what it was when she wrote it.

[magicaltrevor.livejournal.com]

I still feel it ought to be up to the girl who had the experience to decide whether it was rape. Yes, you're right that we would say it was rape if a man did it. But that's because men are in power. She probably would have felt raped if it had been a man, given her past experiences with men. She probably would have felt used again. But her it is her decision, and hers alone, to decide whether the experience was empowering or not. She clearly felt it was empowering. Rape laws are not in place to make victims out of people; they're there to keep people from being victimized and to protect those who feel they've been victimized. It's not right to judge the perception of the woman giving the monologue, and it's not right to assume that she doesn't know what empowers her.

I, too, seem to remember the girl being more like 16. And I don't remember the scene of the man raping her when she was 10 being glorified. If this woman has anything to be upset about, it's what happened to her during that scene rather than an experience she found liberating.

Many teenagers experiment with sex, some with older teenagers. Some of these situations would qualify, if brought into a court, as statutory rape. So. Does that mean if a 15-year-old and her 18-year-old boyfriend had sex on his prom night, it was rape? Only if she feels it was so. Some couples like this remember their teenage sexual experimentation fondly into their later years. Not everything is black and white, especially where sex is concerned.

[hitchkitty.livejournal.com]

"Yes, you're right that we would say it was rape if a man did it. But that's because men are in power."

No, that's because of a sexist double-standard. Last time I checked, those were for Republicans.

[yinepuhotep.livejournal.com]

As I have already said, I do not know what changes were made in the Stalinized version of the play.

In the original, UN-Stalinized version, the girl in that segment stated that she was 13 when she was raped, and that she was 16 while narrating the events of the rape.

There is no question in my mind that getting a 13 year old child drunk and then sexually assaulting her is rape, regardless of whether the attacker is male or female. There is also no question in my mind that referring to the attack as a "good rape" (as happened in the Un-Stalinized version of the play) trivializes the suffering of those who have been raped in the real world.

[nomaddervish.livejournal.com]

Yes, you're right that we would say it was rape if a man did it.

Thank you for saying that. Seriously, thank you.

"If a man did this, it would be one of the two worst possible crimes to commit against an individual¹, but, since a woman did it, it's OK."

I've long believed that some people's definition of "sexual equality" includes discrimination against men, but I've never seen anyone come out and state it so clearly.

You also seem to be conveniently ignoring that statutory rape laws are based on the concept that a minor cannot give meaningful consent because older people are in power. Even if the older person is a woman. That seems to pretty well nullify the "it's not rape because men are in power and the person who did it is a woman" argument, as a 24-year-old is also in power relative to a 13- or 16-year-old. (Wikipedia confirms that the girl was 13 in the original version, but her age was changed to 16 in later versions, presumably at the same time as the line "If it was rape, it was good rape." was excised.)


¹ Some people say murder is worst, others say rape, but pretty much everyone seems to agree that those are the top two.

[sylverwolfe.livejournal.com]

heh. i stage-managed a production of VM at UofL my second semester here. the girl who performed the moaning monologue would have given meg ryan a run for her money. i think this is where i'm supposed to make a double entendre regarding the phrase "standing O," but i'll let it get past me. we filled a 300-seat venue two out of three nights that weekend, nearly unheard-of in the theatre dept.
i think the university should be allowed to do the production, provided they approach it with an open and sensitive mindset. there are some TOUCHY things in those monologues that might be triggers for people in the audience. i'm sure the director would like to present the play with utmost care and sensitivity, but what the university as a producer would be willing to allow worries me a bit. the uptight conservative Catholics who protest the play for its content can take their selective view of what's "good" and stick it in their collective ear. sometimes theatre presents topics that aren't "good" or conflict with somebody's beliefs. heck, MOST of the time it does. and some people just don't have anything better to do with their time, so they complain about the theatre. look at the folks who protested the naming of the second LotR film The Two Towers because they felt it was a blatant attempt to cash in on the horror of 9/11. something's always gonna offend SOMEbody, if nothing else for the sake of making noise.

[pixelene.livejournal.com]

I managed to catch a showing of "Hedwig and the Angry Inch" (complete with John "fucking" Cameron "fucking" Mitchell) at Notre Dame on Feb 12th, 2004, and the Queer Film Fest folks were struggling back then. It's too bad they're still struggling now and sad that they almost were NOT allowed to show tVMs.

[scott644.livejournal.com]

If the school receives government funding, they can be required to allow the showing or lose their funding, which will in turn hurt their accredidation through loss of resources. But that's pretty heavy-handed and unlikely.