The Vagina Monologues
Abstract:
Ah, the c-word.
Body:
As part of V-Day, UCF hosted a performance of
The Vagina
Monologues. Although I tried to see it last
night, I didn't hear back from anyone I asked until it was too late (which was
my own fault for not asking people sooner), so I went today. Overall I enjoyed
it, but I have some critiques (of
course!).
The scenes about violence against women are good. Using empathy and evidence, we hear stories and statistics of rape and beating. Those scenes are the most powerful in the play, so much so that it was hard to clap after them.
I also liked the scenes where women express their sexuality. Here in America we live in the shadow of English sexual conservatism. And although we like a good tease, we get squeamish at graphic depictions of sexual acts. The Vagina Monologues tries to shock repressed audience members and encourages them to accept human sexuality, especially female sexuality.
I take difference with The Vagina Monologues on two issues: female circumcision and female chauvinism. Although most of the world does not practice female circumcision, it's part of some religious and cultural practices. If done properly in a sterile environment, it should not pose a significant risk to the woman. In my opinion, female circumcision is not unlike male circumcision, an operation performed routinely on Jewish and American newborn boys. And although there is possibly a cleanliness argument for male circumcision (removal of the foreskin eliminates a skin fold where bacteria can grow if unwashed), it's mostly done for religious or cultural (antimasturbation) reasons. And female circumcisions are usually preformed as rights of passage rather than as postnatal surgery. If anything, we ought to be campaigning that men (and women who currently are not) be given the right too choose circumcision. You can argue about pressures to consent, but the existence of choice is an important first step. I wasn't given the choice to keep my funskin and I don't know if I would have, but I wish I could have made that choice rather than having others make it for me.
Second, the play promotes a kind of female chauvinism that has been growing in America and other Occidental countries over the last few decades but notably exploded in the 90s. There is an undercurrent of men-bashing and women-better-than-men jokes that appear in various scenes. For example, one scene implies that the clitoris makes women better than men because they can experience more sexual pleasure. But this ignores the evolutionary history of the clitoris as a device for mate selection, where men best able to sexually please women outreproduced less skilled men. It's a selection force still at work today. The clitoris doesn't make women better, just the more skilled tester in a particular part of the mate selection process.
It could be argued that female chauvinism is necessary to overcome male chauvinism. But as bad as male chauvinism is, its impact has been tempered with time and I expect it will continue to wane in America. Female chauvinism, though, is on the rise and men are not standing up. Sure, there's The Man Show and Spike TV, but this laddie-style programming reflects female chauvinism's view of men and does nothing to promote a positive (or even realistic) view of men. If we continue on this path we'll soon find ourselves living in a world where men are ashamed of their penises. Some men already are.
Before you send me hate mail, in my defense I am certainly a feminist. Studing evolutionary psychology precludes it. Men and women are both crazy and nonnormative, but women are generally less destructive in their craziness. And although it's used as a female chauvinistic joke, the world really would be a better place if women ruled it, just as it would be a better place if anyone who didn't lust after power ruled.
Overall I enjoyed the play and would recommend seeing it at least for entertainment value, remembering that at times it steps over the line of feminism into female chauvinism. Hopefully it will have a positive cultural effect.
The scenes about violence against women are good. Using empathy and evidence, we hear stories and statistics of rape and beating. Those scenes are the most powerful in the play, so much so that it was hard to clap after them.
I also liked the scenes where women express their sexuality. Here in America we live in the shadow of English sexual conservatism. And although we like a good tease, we get squeamish at graphic depictions of sexual acts. The Vagina Monologues tries to shock repressed audience members and encourages them to accept human sexuality, especially female sexuality.
I take difference with The Vagina Monologues on two issues: female circumcision and female chauvinism. Although most of the world does not practice female circumcision, it's part of some religious and cultural practices. If done properly in a sterile environment, it should not pose a significant risk to the woman. In my opinion, female circumcision is not unlike male circumcision, an operation performed routinely on Jewish and American newborn boys. And although there is possibly a cleanliness argument for male circumcision (removal of the foreskin eliminates a skin fold where bacteria can grow if unwashed), it's mostly done for religious or cultural (antimasturbation) reasons. And female circumcisions are usually preformed as rights of passage rather than as postnatal surgery. If anything, we ought to be campaigning that men (and women who currently are not) be given the right too choose circumcision. You can argue about pressures to consent, but the existence of choice is an important first step. I wasn't given the choice to keep my funskin and I don't know if I would have, but I wish I could have made that choice rather than having others make it for me.
Second, the play promotes a kind of female chauvinism that has been growing in America and other Occidental countries over the last few decades but notably exploded in the 90s. There is an undercurrent of men-bashing and women-better-than-men jokes that appear in various scenes. For example, one scene implies that the clitoris makes women better than men because they can experience more sexual pleasure. But this ignores the evolutionary history of the clitoris as a device for mate selection, where men best able to sexually please women outreproduced less skilled men. It's a selection force still at work today. The clitoris doesn't make women better, just the more skilled tester in a particular part of the mate selection process.
It could be argued that female chauvinism is necessary to overcome male chauvinism. But as bad as male chauvinism is, its impact has been tempered with time and I expect it will continue to wane in America. Female chauvinism, though, is on the rise and men are not standing up. Sure, there's The Man Show and Spike TV, but this laddie-style programming reflects female chauvinism's view of men and does nothing to promote a positive (or even realistic) view of men. If we continue on this path we'll soon find ourselves living in a world where men are ashamed of their penises. Some men already are.
Before you send me hate mail, in my defense I am certainly a feminist. Studing evolutionary psychology precludes it. Men and women are both crazy and nonnormative, but women are generally less destructive in their craziness. And although it's used as a female chauvinistic joke, the world really would be a better place if women ruled it, just as it would be a better place if anyone who didn't lust after power ruled.
Overall I enjoyed the play and would recommend seeing it at least for entertainment value, remembering that at times it steps over the line of feminism into female chauvinism. Hopefully it will have a positive cultural effect.
Posted: Sat - February 28, 2004 at 07:34 PM |
Quick Links
Quicker Links
Search
Advertising
Calendar
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
Archives
Categories
XML/RSS Feed
Donate
Frappr
Counter
Statistics
Total entries in this blog:
Total entries in this category: 104
Published On: Mar 28, 2007 07:08 PM
Total entries in this category: 104
Published On: Mar 28, 2007 07:08 PM