Most of the play is pretty harmless, actually--"I am woman hear me roar" kind of stuff--but one part of it is really, really reprehensible.
I'll explain why in a moment.
First, let's look at this article:
"Rape is good for you"?
Of particular interest to me was this line:
In a statement released Thursday afternoon, Jack Miller, university president, said the article crossed the lines of journalistic freedom. And "Rape is a profound violation of body and spirit, and to make light of it, even in satire, is abhorrent," Miller said. "We need to be sure that students understand that such hateful speech is not protected and simply is not worthy, on any ground, of publication."
Guy writes a satirical article for a university paper and chooses his subject poorly--and the president of the university shows what he thinks about little things like the "freedom of expression" and "freedom of the press".
"Rape," Mr. Miller says, "is a profound violation of body and spirit...."
So what does this have to do with Eve Ensler and The Vagina Monologues?
One of the "monologues" comes from a character who is a 14-year-old girl. This girl happily recounts the tale of a time when an older woman plied her with alcohol and then had lesbian sex with her. She's glad that the woman showed her about her "cooch".
Now, check me on this: the last time I checked, getting someone drunk and then having sex with that person was "date rape", wasn't it? I mean, when a man does something like that, feminists howl for his blood and/or certain body parts.
So: the 14-year-old is date-raped by an adult woman...and Eve Ensler says this is okay? Is this what feminism has come to? It sounds to me as if Eve Ensler thinks that pedophilia and date rape are okay as long as it's a lesbian doing it. Do I understand this?
What about Mr. Miller's statements, then? Mr. Miller says that rape "..."is a profound violation of body and spirit...."
Somebody should tell Eve Ensler that rape is rape, and rape is wrong. I thought we all understood that.