Why? Because when I posted about the watershed, it was specifically in connection with the fact that the play has more disturbing elements!!!

At no point did I say that I objected to the word ‘vagina’.

And I have no probem if people want to continue the debate. It just feels like folks are going round in circles, vehemently agreeing about the main issues, and that we might enjoy ourselves more if we were to move on…

He was, apparently quite specific about it being the “v-word” that wasn’t to be said.

I’m not sure how the darker parts of the play are therefore relevant to your notion of this being a “watershed” issue. But as this is your blog, I’m happy to leave the comments as they stand should you want us to.

I’d obviously be as disturbed as Mija and others if I thought the Principal was merely objecting to the word ‘vagina’. But some of the subject matter of the Monologues is quite dark, and there *are* passages whose suitability for younger audience members could be debatable (even 13 year olds). Hence my “watershed” comment.

I agree, too, that the timing and style of the Principal’s intervention is relevant… If there’d been clear, calm discussion a few days before leading to a firm agreement not to use certain passages, that’s one thing. If the Principal stormed up to the side of the stage demanding cuts in the text just as the young women were about to go on and perform, that’s another.

And I think we should probably all move on…

Generally though, these headmasters/mistresses are inundated with parents who argue every little discipline their children receive, and more so every day. Parents are not afraid to issue legal proceedings or, some would say, even buy their way out of a problem by offering money for the building fund etc. Heads often feel under pressure to make politically correct decisions – although it seems that this guy tied himself up in knots making his.

Your point re body image is terribly important. I have seen so many instances of high school age girls feeling so unhappy with their bodies that they are in despair. It would be confusing to them if ‘fuck’ was OK by him and ‘vagina’ wasn’t.

I guess that I really worry what happens to a school if the head of the school isn’t supported and respected. An issue like this can actually bring a school down for years. Here, just yesterday a Headmaster made this dumb ‘two bricks apart’ rule. If a teacher saw something inappropriate b/w a boy and girl, he/she was to say ‘two brick apart please’.
It was an unfortunate use of words, as he has been labelled as the headmaster who is ‘thick as a brick’.

I was talking to a friend in NY who’s been following this case. Apparently, while the girls were being forbidden to use the word “vagina,” a male student was allowed to use the word “fuck” (something which btw cannot be said on network TV in the US) in his performance. It was that inconsistancy that prompted the school board president to overturn the principal’s decision.

Obviously I’m thinking too much about this. Clearly I need to make my own blog entry.

Abel, I could understand your “watershed” comment if the word had been one of the FCC “bad words”. In fact, when I first started reading about this, I’d expected that the word was “cunt” which would have made th principal’s actions more understandable. But the word “vagina” is one that can be said on TV at any hour. It’s the correct medical term for that part of the body. There isn’t another word that could be put in its place.

The comment that he made that the reason was that there were members of the audience who were very young turned out to be false — apparently the youngest members anyone can confirm were there were 13. The original statements out of the principal were that the girls had defied their teachers when apparently the teachers were supportive throughout. My feeling is that respect isn’t some sort of default — it has to be earned.

Also, the girls in question didn’t actually request that their suspension be overturned — their original comments after the fact were that they expected to be suspended but decided leaving the play’s language intact was worth it. The overturning was a decision made by the superintendent of schools after he decided the orginal order to remove the material was not a correct one.

What bothers me most about this is not even the issue of censorship, but the fact that by is actions (which I have to think were done without a lot of thought) this principal went a long way toward inappropriately shaming and sexualizing the female students. I don’t have children, but I know from friends with teenage daughters that one of the hardest tasks they undertake is keeping their teens from developing shame about their bodies.