The Vagina Monologues: A justification

For an upcoming performance evening focusing on gender based violence, mental health, sexual orientation, and gender identify, I wanted to perform one of The Vagina Monologues. I was told no. This is my letter of appeal which I sent roughly five minutes ago, so I haven't heard back yet! 

I write to appeal the CMG’s decision regarding the performance of segments of The Vagina Monologues at Asinakekelane’s upcoming Heart to Heart evening. As a student, I was surprised by this decision, as it seemed to contradict the school’s philosophy of creativity and boundary pushing. As an artist, I was angered; as I believe that when you begin to censor art, you censor people. And as a woman and someone who possesses a vagina, I was disappointed; because the issue of vaginas being taboo is frankly one that we ought to have moved past.

First, some history. Eve Ensler drafted the Monologues in 1996, basing them off of interviews that she held with 200 women and people with vaginas. They started informally – discussions between friends, in much the way that students discuss issues and concerns with their friends today. Over time, she began to collect these interviews and based her monologues off of them. Ensler says that her work was based on “growing up in a violent society.” Her purpose however, was to celebrate vaginas – parts of our body that are often demonised, attacked, politicised. As the monologues grew and performances began to spread, the intent changed to a campaign to prevent gender based violence – something that is at the heart of our Asinakekelane here on campus.

Since the creation of The Vagina Monologues, schools and colleges all across the world have performed them in order to empower, educate, and entertain. When it comes to the UWC movement, last year a group of students performed the Monologues at UWC Red Cross Nordic. The play has been lauded as “the most important piece of political theater of the last decade,” by the New York Times.

In terms of our context here at Waterford, The Vagina Monologues are primarily a celebration. Since Asinakekelane started, we have had students perform many times in assembly, and at events such as Men’s Week. Songs and poems about rape, homophobia, and violence have been performed. While they have been accompanied by trigger warnings, they have been allowed to be performed. My question is this: what message is being sent by this? Are we suggesting that in order to convince people of the validity of our concerns we must shock? Poems about rape and abuse are the way forward when it comes to the prevention of gender based violence? While these performances are worthy, and important, and well done, I believe that there is space for more, and for diversity. There is space for light-heartedness and for fun, there is space to celebrate and acknowledge the funny and the absurd, there is space to talk about vaginas

I acknowledge that there are concerns about the appropriateness of these monologues. Some of them are graphic, and I agree that they would be a poor fit for a high school environment. I also acknowledge the context that we are in, and the culture that we must respect. I know that there is a delicate balance to be maintained between respecting that culture and bringing forward contrasting ideas. Some of the monologues would not work towards that purpose. But among them are monologues that are fun. That celebrate and laugh at the topics that we discuss, and that bring a lighter view to the very serious issues that we are trying to confront.

I can also understand the concern that these monologues are dated. There have been critics of the script since its creation – many of the arguments focus on the fact that the show seems to perpetuate the idea that gender exists as a binary, and that it does not account for the fact that there are women without vaginas, and people who have vaginas that are not women. To this, I offer the words of the author, as she defends her work far better than I ever could.

“The Vagina Monologues never intended to be a play about what it means to be a woman. It is and always has been a play about what it means to have a vagina. In the play, I never defined a woman as a person with a vagina.

Inclusion doesn’t come from refusing to acknowledge our distinctive experiences, and trying to erase them, in an attempt to pretend they do not exist. Inclusion comes from listening to our differences, and honoring the right of everyone to talk about their reality, free from oppression and bigotry and silencing. That’s real inclusion — to listen to different stories, with curiosity, and love, and respect, in all their particular and distinctive human individuality.” – Eve Ensler, Time Magazine, 2015

Finally, I would ask for a reason that this was originally rejected. I am curious as to the thinking, as to whatever concerns guided this decision. I have always believed that art has the power to transform and to heal, and I believe that this play is one of the best examples of that philosophy. There are many of my fellow students that agree with this, and are eager to help with and to see this performance. In the words of Eve Ensler, “we’re worried about vaginas.”

I hope you will take this proposal into account.

Sincerely,

Maia Selkirk

P.S. I have attached a PDF copy of The Vagina Monologues for reference in case you have not been able to read them.