Jump to content

Talk:The Vagina Monologues

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Missing the point entirely

[edit]

Sorry, haven't wasted my time reading the whole article, inasmuch as the introduction was so bad on so many points. One point at a time, please; says the professor.

Why am I writing now with so little read? Because saw just hours ago an interview with Eve Ensler on DemocracyNow, paired with a Congolese womens' rights activist. Eve at the end made the awed but proud remark, that the play just this year, is being produced in over 2000 localities. Awed by the world's response, and proud for the monies from royalties which sponsor the fund she supports.

Now at this point it perhaps occurs to you, that what this is all about is using the universal media of plays to bear a message to all the world's women (and hopefully men too), about the situation of virtually all the world's women to varying degrees. To what purpose is the play given? Certainly not only to entertain, but to effect an improvement in their situation. (IMHO, we are simply treating half the world's population and OUR children as chattel and slaves.) To not acknowledge, and to not group the main structure of the article around this theme of achieving a social change, is to ignore reality; almost to the point of reminding one of the diversionistic tactics of falsely labeled propaganda fronts.

I realize that this article can NOT solely be about the story of the true enfranchisement of women as a modern movement. This is the play we are talking about, but it must be in context. Context, context, context. To not make relevant referral in the introduction and later, is a disservice to all readers, whatever their views on womens' rights.

Can this be done from a NPOV, yes, but requires a meeting of many points of view: such as that evidenced in the crafting of the American Constitution (see what a mess they made LOL) Avoiding the whole issue, as it seems to me it does, is to be too craven.

If you have access to DemocracyNow on the net, then suggest you see the program with Eve and the congolese activist. You may find it enlightening; I found it moving, compelling and energizing.

If there should be an accord, hope someone who is versed in the issue will take the lead, as I am not even conversant. That's my two bits. PS Here in Stockholm it's been running for several years to great success. And I haven't even seen it. Yet! Idealist707 (talk) 12:25, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]


POV

[edit]

I can appreciate that The Vagina Monolgues has been widely criticised, but this article is mostly about what is wrong with the play. Only a small paragraph explains the nature of the play, and this doesn't explain why the play is noteworthy or go into any detail about the play itself. Surely there is more to this work than the poltical controversy surrounding it? An An 12:37, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

To abate this bias, we need to muster up in-my-own-words accounts of what the subject is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mission9801 (talk • contribs) 03:24, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There should be a seperate article called "Vagina Monologues Criticism, where all the crit is moved, and a "see also" link to it here. -Guest — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.117.92.159 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No. If it relates to the Article, is based around the article, it is part of the article. This is an encyclopedia, not a talk show damnit. --Cyberman 05:55, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Someone has got to be able to post some positive criticism of the play. This is so one sided its hilarious. - guest —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.88.110.233 (talk) 00:07, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

POV 2

[edit]

I've pared down some of the material in the criticisms section. Its very one-sided, used weasel words, didn't add to an appreciation of the play as a whole (by contextualising it within society). It was just lambasting Ensler while celebrating the opinions of other individuals - and wikipedia isn't the vehicle for that.

Can anyone prove that Robert Swope was sacked because of his article about the play? Its basically hearsay, which isn't appropriate for wikipedia. An An 01:21, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd add that I think Swope is justified at least in criticising the positive portrayal of statutory rape. Though it sounds like he's a tool overall.98.223.247.4 (talk) 05:55, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could some other material criticizing the Vagina Monologues be found? I read through some of those articles, and I agree with AnnaAniston. A lot of the arguments being made were extremely one-sided, were generalizing/stereotyping/making degrading assumptions, or were simply bad arguments. If we could find some criticism from a different point of view or one that is focused on the play as a whole related to society, it would be a much better balanced section.

As it is, it makes me cringe that we have a section of links from only one side, when there has to be material that could be found from both. 97.85.153.41 (talk) 18:39, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Children being raped makes me cringe. As does 'celebrating' a writer who endorses it and mocking a writer who pointed this out and got fired. There are other critics of this section of TVM who could be referenced. Equally the movement which encouraged women to examine their genitals in groups with mirrors could be referenced as part of the mindset which led to the writing of this performance piece--— ⦿⨦⨀Tumadoireacht Talk/Stalk 20:19, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hair - cites wanted

[edit]

I am moving the following to the talk page:

Some also criticized a section of the play called "Hair", which was seen as having the message that a woman could not be liberated if she chose to shave her pubic hair [5] (http://bettydodson.com/vdaymonobrad.htm).

Some also criticized is a weasel-term and not welcome on wikipedia. The source for this criticism is a letter to Betty Dodson from Brad Fox whom, I believe is a webmaster of [1] (I can't fully verify this while at work). The source is published among a collection of letters and articles crticising The Vagina Monologues on Dodson's webpage - a self-publishing arena.

In terms of re-working this paragraph to be NPOV, it would be better to show published, scholarly or argued criticism of this monologue. Or, it would be better if someone would like to get a script and write an NPOV description of a sample of monologues. This second option would allow readers of wikipedia to make informed choices about the subject matter themselves. If no-one else takes this up, I will do it when I have time. An An 01:18, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It doesn't take experts to refute this argument. Viewing pubic hair removal as a choice equivalent to the choice of retaining it is already a form of liberation. Mission9801 03:27, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
But we don't have to refute the argument, we have to describe the play in neutral terms! AnAn 22:46, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The majority of Eve Ensler's post-"Monologues" work has been dedicated to focus on brutality by patriarchies against the very existence of women: Her follow up, Necessary Targets, was an extension of the Bosnian Piece, about a pair of women who travel to Bosnia to aid victims of the rape camps. Her next work, The Good Body, presents the stories of fourteen women from all around the world who altered their bodies in some way after caving to societal pressure, which is portrayed as a tool of oppression wrought by male society. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnnaAniston (talk • contribs) 01:21, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

American college performances

[edit]

While its nice to know that The Vagina Monologues has been performed at so many american college campuses. But, I'm beginning to think that the list is becoming long and a bit meaningless. I suggest that we either pick 2 (or 3) high-profile campuses and list those, or just create a list of performance venues and list everywhere its ever been done. AnAn 01:34, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article claims that the transgendered monologues cannot be performed at Catholic universities. I attend a Catholic university, am currently in the play, and am reading part of the monologue for it. Therefore, I question the validity of this statement.147.126.46.168 01:44, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In England

[edit]

The article omits the 2 V-Days held in London (1999 and 2002) with a cast to rival that of New York, in addition to the highly successful West End run from May 2001 through to October 2002. V9seb 14:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In Indonesia

[edit]

The Vagina Monologues have been performed in Indonesia a couple of years ago. At Jakarta's Taman Ismail Marzuki if I'm not mistaken. A couple of Indonesian actresses participated, among them Ria Irawan and Christine Hakim, again if I recall correctly. Unfortunately I can't remember when exactly, nor can I cite any media coverage of the performance. But it has been performed in Indonesia. --Lemi4 05:03, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Australia

[edit]

They have been performed in Adelaide in the last 2 years. Ozdaren 14:46, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actresses alphabetical order pls!

[edit]

I am going to put these in alphabetical order if no-one has any objections. -- Librarianofages 11:11, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is this massive list even necessary? Since nothing is said to them, what difference would there be between having this massive section lengthening this article, and say a category?--Crossmr 14:30, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It shoud be alphabetized and/or broken out into it's own article called Actresses who have performed in The Vagina Monologues. Of course, some people would prefer the non-gender specific term Actor. If no one can bother to alphabetize it, it serves no purpose in my view. However, if the list is in order of the women who have appeared in it chronologically, it could stay. At present the list is NOT in chronological order, just random as they thought of it order. LiPollis 05:01, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But again, what purpose does it serve? Wikipedia isn't a random collection of information, and a simple list of individuals who have performed in this play doesn't seem to me like it really benefits this article. Since nothing is being written about them, and its a simple list, adding a category to an article about them if they're notable enough should suffice.--Crossmr 07:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if the list is going to ultimately remain or not, but I went ahead an alphabetized the list and corrected the column structure. I didn't organize by last name as that would not have been as visually appealing. Tanman627 10:07, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Tanman627 for being bold! I too wonder if the list is necessary at all but at lkeast now there is some order to it. I understand why you did it the way you did, by first name. Someone may still re-order it by last name, but this is better than the random listing. Thanks again. Perhaps we should put the list to a vote? LiPollis 08:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian Performances

[edit]

Why are the Canadian Performances seperated from the others worldwide? There is no text stating why this is neccessary. Should it say U.S. performaces, then Canadian, then other parts of the world? I'm assuming that the first performance listing is US. ZueJay (talk) 06:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Transgender Version

[edit]

Isn't there a Transgender version of the Vagina Monologues featuring completely original segments? I saw a documentary about it but it may have just been something inspired by the Vagina Monologues. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.63.202.209 (talk) 03:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

[edit]

Separated Trivia from references and organized the links a bit. Didn't have time to finish, will do so later if possible. [unsigned] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hourick (talk • contribs) 03:19, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The trivia section contains entirely references to the vagina monologues in popular culture. It ought to be changed to a 'References in Popular Culture' section. [unsigned] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.86.51.104 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Performances in other countries

[edit]

The "Performances in other countries" section should, IMO, be split into its own article - takes up much too much space here. Comments? --ZimZalaBim talk 21:57, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

lulz

[edit]

Just wanted to thank whoever came up with "Hoohaa brouhaha." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.53.180.14 (talk) 23:36, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vagina Monologues Racist?

[edit]

I recently read an article (http://asreview.as.wwu.edu/News/561/womens-center-not-to-produce-vagina-monologues-this-year) that spoke of criticism of vag mon being racist. Apparently the roles of women being brutalized are directed to be played by women of colour. Essentially the mantle of victim hood is pushed onto women of color. While the more empowering roles are to be played by whites. I was wondering if this should be added to the criticism section of the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by P0o1 (talk • contribs) 18:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go cry to Al Sharpton or the ACLU.--70.149.134.54 (talk) 03:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:LogoblackbackVDAY.gif

[edit]

Image:LogoblackbackVDAY.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 13:20, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Read Our Lips

[edit]

I am not comfortable with this paragraph at all. I think it needs to come out entirely as it's merely discussing an amateur performance and it references to an amateur blog. As it says in the blog: "We had about 55-60 people show up for our 3 performances. Most of them were friends & family supporting us." You can't get much more amateur than that.

I also feel that the Men's Story Project should be considered for the chopping block: Perhaps a separate section could be made for this, but it's pretty small potatoes, too. Are we supposed to feature every amateur spin-off there is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MagdaOakewoman (talk • contribs) 04:13, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with that above users concerns. This article is specifically about the Vagina Monologues which as a subject only encompasses 'so much'. If this was an article about 'feminist theater', for example, then naturally there would be a much broader scope of discussion/study and additions such as 'Read Our Lips' would be totally appropriate. Perhaps the information can be 'blocked-out' from view yet left for others to possibly copy to a more relevant article or a new article if desired? The Men's Story Project seems to have a little more relevance, yet only as a male structured version of the Vagina Monologues. Other than that, the information doesn't seem to belong here either. --Yonkinator (talk) 15:07, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

YONK, then what do you think the next step should be? I don't believe you can block out the section but leave it intact. Can you? I agree that an article on feminist theatre would be good for all the amateur productions (female) but what about the male? Should there be a category for "Genital Theatre"? I mean, it sounds ludicrous but what are your thoughts on the matter? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MagdaOakewoman (talk • contribs) 16:30, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

YONK, Thanks for taking on the responsibility and fixing it. Much appreciated!MagdaOakewoman (talk) 17:25, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The case of Robert Swope

[edit]

A disparity struck me in the way that it is suggested that "date rape" can occur between a 13 year old and a 24 year old. Wouldn't this properly be called "molestation?" I admit that I'm ignorant of the play, but if the play advances this claim, perhaps it should be put euphemistically in quotations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Obliu222 (talk • contribs) 05:19, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the correct term for this situation is statutory rape, since it involved someone too young to give legal consent. I've changed it accordingly. --Icarus (Hi!) 06:52, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like this whole section has been removed which is a disgrace given that it's the most controversial aspect of the play.--Shakehandsman (talk) 01:52, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The definition of rape changes from country to country, as does the accepted definitions of artist merit and of pornography or child porn--— ⦿⨦⨀Tumadoireacht Talk/Stalk 20:24, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why is this section called "the case of Robert Swope" was there a court case " Is there a suitcase " does it infer he is a nut case ? or is there is no legal case that there should be ? I will change it to "Robert Swope critique" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tumadoireacht (talk • contribs) 07:48, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is it just me or does the link about Swope's critique go to this page?: https://www.jfk-assassination.net/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.240.203.191 (talk) 23:22, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with sentence explaining title

[edit]

"Every monologue somehow relates to the vagina, be it through sex, love, rape, menstruation, female genital mutilation, masturbation, birth, orgasm, the variety of names for the vagina, or simply as a physical aspect of the body."

From all the monologues I'm aware of, and certainly all of the ones specifically mentioned in this Article here on Wiki, none of the monologues relate to the vagina.

Let me explain. Some monologues concern pregnancy, but pregnancy takes place in the uterus, not the vagina. In fact, it's only called the vagina when you're not pregnant, and when you are it's the birth canal, but that said the canal is not where the pregnancy takes place. It is, however, where birth takes place naturally (IE not having a C-section).

Other monologues concern ovulation and menstruation, which take place in the ovaries and endometrium, respectively. The egg precursor (which contrary to popular belief is a precursor cell, not a true egg, the precursor cell will only run Meiosis II to become an egg when a sperm cell is at least within a chemically detectable distance, if not actually touching the membrane) is ejected from the rest of the ovary and moves through the fallopian tubes, which are also not the vagina but very much elsewhere in the female reproductive system. As for menstruation, the endometrium (uterus wall) sheds extra tissue when the egg precursor reaches the uterus (where, having left the fallopian tubes, the cell can no longer run Meiosis II to accept a sperm and will most likely lyse). The lining that is shed will fall through the vagina, after dissolving in blood plasma from nearby capillaries, but here again the vagina isn't really where the action is. (Not really where the action is for menstruation as with most of pregnancy, and for ovulation the vagina is not even remotely involved, not even in passing, that process is entirely restricted to the ovaries and fallopian tubes, not the vagina.)

One monologue relates the account of a girlfriend whose boyfriend liked to stare at her vulva for hours on end. Judging by the length of time, this was almost certainly her vulva and not her vagina. Letting him stare at her vagina would require spreading her vulva apart, which would be fine for a short time but would probably become very painful if continuously held open for 10 minutes, let alone the several hours alluded to in the monologue.

In summary, the above-quoted sentence is problematic, because the monologues have little if anything to do with the vagina. They all mainly concern other parts of the female reproductive system, and not so much the vagina. We need a more accurate sentence to explain the play's title, whatever the true origin of the title may be (perhaps that the vagina is in between the vulva and the uterus, both of which are more directly related to the monologues, or if there's a statement by Ensler outside the play itself, that would be even better). The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 19:14, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I get what you're saying here. Perhaps the sentence should be changed to say the vagina is referenced metaphorically. Belchfire (talk) 21:08, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Suggested change: "Each of the monologues deals with an aspect of the feminine experience, touching on matters such as sex, love, rape, menstruation, female genital mutilation, masturbation, birth, orgasm, the various common names for the vagina, or simply as a physical aspect of the body." Belchfire (talk) 20:36, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That would be better. Still, how does this sound? "Each of the monologues deals with an aspect of the female anatomy or metabolism, touching on matters such as sex, love, rape, menstruation, female genital mutilation, masturbation, birth, orgasm, the various common names for the female reproductive system (the whole of which is sometimes incorrectly called the vagina, a term for a particular internal structure), or simply that system as a physical aspect of the body."
That's better yet. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 22:51, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In case you didn't spot it, I actually fixed that sentence myself about 2 weeks ago. But feel free to massage it yourself, if you like. My sole concern is to keep out feminist cruft, to the extent possible. But I have a feeling you aren't going to let me down in that department.  :-) Belchfire (talk) 23:45, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Each of the monologues deals with an aspect of the female anatomy or metabolism, touching on matters such as sex, love, rape, menstruation, female genital mutilation, masturbation, birth, orgasm, the various common names for the female reproductive system (the whole of which is sometimes incorrectly called the vagina, a term for a particular internal structure), or simply that system as a physical aspect of the body."
Now, I've even thrown in links. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "feminist cruft," but judging by your positive "feeling" you must be familiar with my past contributions throughout Wikipedia. :-) The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 05:43, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(Not) Banned at Holyoke -- now we've seen everything

[edit]

Bizarre.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2015/01/16/womens-college-theater-group-cancels-vagina-monologues-because-its-offensive-to-women-who-dont-have-one/

184.7.165.242 (talk) 21:17, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A theatre group choosing not to perform the play is not the same thing as it being banned. --345Kai (talk) 21:33, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merger of Vagina Monologues at Catholic Institutions into this article

[edit]

Since December 2011 it has been suggested by User:Toddst1 that Vagina Monologues at Catholic Institutions be merged into this article. But I see that no discussion was started to pursue this. Someone who has edited this article can perform the merger as I don't think the whole content is needed. Pinging possible editors @Shakehandsman, MarnetteD, AnnaAniston, and Daniel Case:. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 05:08, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Done by WikiProject Merge. For a moment I thought that Performances of The Vagina Monologues would be a better target, but then I was surprised to find that was just a long list of actresses. Wbm1058 (talk) 06:13, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 14 external links on The Vagina Monologues. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:29, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Vagina Monologues. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:00, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Vagina Monologues. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:40, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Vagina_Monologues&oldid=1252171313"