Did these people dress as vaginas? If so, did they dance? That would be neat.

Rebecca, I agree that there is more than one way to interpret a play.

Rebecca - you are certainly a "special" person for offering your opinion after actually seeing the play.

;-)

I'm pretty sure that people here are sick of our (mine and Maryann's) Vagina Monologues. You have to admit that it takes two very "special" people to assume that their take on a play is the correct one and that others should adopt it. I'm going to say that there can be many ways to interpret a play. =D

Maryann, minors should not see this play. I've said that many times.

@KyleC, perhaps one of the first times we agree on a Scripture verse, yes indeed, quite beautiful! It was a refreshing verse to read. Perhaps one of my favorite is Psalms 51.

Yep, the minor will truly keep it to herself if she thinks that her abuse is salvation and heaven. Predators love that.

We probably keep coming back to the same point because that's the only thing you know about the play.

I would not recommend that you watch the play, Maryann. It deals with many realities (mostly humorous) that women have dealt with. Yes, even the types of realities that predators would hope that women or girls keep to themselves.

Rebecca, I'm not ignoring the abuse by the man and a boy.

I've already mentioned it twice.

In fact, the abuse by the males, characterized as violent, unwanted, and damaging sends a clear message that this was sexual abuse. There was trauma in each remembrance and recollection.

Ensler got that right.

But the abuse by the woman is "transforming" for the girl. She doesn't need men any more, and there no evidence of trauma for her, only enlightenment, joy, and freedom. No adult stands up to help her. As a parent, that's not cool- to have the mother call and she's shut out.

I have read this script and more.

Cloak it how you like, Ensler is taking a slap at male assault and portraying the girl as being freed in this sexual enounter with a woman.

Rebecca, I know we disagree on this play, however, I respect your point of view.

Have a great day.

Maryann, your arguments show that you have not seen the play. The girl in the monologue had been assaulted at a very young age. That was left in there. You keep focusing on the woman. You seem to ignore the abuse that happened before - by a man.

This is why I say that there is a bigger picture.

Didn't know you are such a Bible enthusiast, Kyle. ;-}

Please tell my why you put such stock in a Bible that you think is all myths, lies, etc.

Why do you attempt to bash Christians over the head with something you don't believe in anyway?

It's all made up, right?

" It's not all read the same way."

Never a truer word spoken.

On a side note, I love the Song of Solomon - such a sensual opening ;-)

"The song of songs, which is Solomon's.
Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth: for thy love is better than wine.
Because of the savour of thy good ointments thy name is as ointment poured forth, therefore do the virgins love thee.
Draw me, we will run after thee: the king hath brought me into his chambers: we will be glad and rejoice in thee, we will remember thy love more than wine: the upright love thee."

Beautiful.

"Sexual abuse is sexual abuse even if the kid thinks it's good. That's why the "perp" shouldn't be celebrated as bring the girl salvation and heaven."

Good morning maryann! Should murdering the firstborn of a nation in order to free slaves be celebrated even if Christians think it's good?

Food for thought.

This thread is starting to repeat items, so I don't have much further to say.

Ensler made a half-hearted attempt to clean up this segment by changing the girl's age to 16 and taking out the line, "If this is a rape, it was a good rape."

To me that is admission by the author that this part has serious flaws. Among them, condoning sexual abuse of a minor when the abuse is seen as helping the woman get over earlier male abuse, and offending women who had been raped.

How can anyone call a rape a good rape? Ensler was right to take out the line.

But the scene, the rape of the girl, still remains.

Sexual abuse is sexual abuse even if the kid thinks it's good. That's why the "perp" shouldn't be celebrated as bring the girl salvation and heaven.

Rebecca, the Bible has history, poetry, wisdom literature, etc. It's not all read the same way, so that's not an apt analogy.

This play was based on real life circumstances, and that's supposed to be one of its strenghts.

In this segment all male abuse which is recalled is violent, painful, and even ends in death for one man.

Somehow, the sexual experience that the minor has with the woman is now freeing her...... she thinks.

I don't think a minor can be seduced by a woman and be delivered from male sexual violence and it somehow be okay.

EA, perps are fathers, brothers, counselors, teachers, etc. and in this play, she was a 24-yr. "pretty lady" who was a secretary.

The abuse the girl suffers before she meets the woman is called painful, suffering, and violent. But, when she meets this woman, who brings a new kind of predation, the girl is no longer calling it abuse.

The minor calls this abuse heaven and her salvation and no character in the segment denounces what the woman did to the child.

Sorry, Edith. Ensler is sending the message that sexual abuse by men is violent and damaging, but at the hands of an older, experienced woman, it is not longer abuse, but a freeing from the "violent men."

Do you think the woman should have been reported and done jail time?

Why doesn't Ensler portray the abuse at the hands of men as heaven as well?

"Afterwards the gorgeous lady teaches me everything about my Coochi Snorcher. She makes me play with myself in front of her and she teaches me all the different ways to give myself pleasure. She's very thorough. She tells me to always know how to give myself pleasure so I'll never need to rely on a man. In the morning I am worried that I've become a butch because I'm so in love with her. She laughs, but I never see her again. I realize later she was my surprising, unexpected and politically-incorrect salvation. She transformed my sorry-ass Coochi Snorcher and raised it into a kind of heaven."

I don't think perps are reading The Vagina Monologues to get ideas.

I think if victims read the ENTIRE book of recollections they will take away from it the appropriate thinking, not "oh, I guess since my abuse wasn't violent, it doesn't count."

Maryann, that's the point. Not everyone sees a play, a literary work, or a movie in the same context that they do the bible. I didn't see the play and feel like I should "go and do like wise," instead, I felt informed about certain realities. It was not a promotion, just like rape camps were not promoted because a prisoner was represented.

80% of the play was comedy. It's not being represented accurately here. I apologize for that.

Again, the play was for adults and I wouldn't recommend it for everyone.

I understand.

But I also realize that the play can lead to more real life victims, as some can see that the predator in the segment discussed is seen as "enlightening" the girl.

As one poster stated, he saw it as "positive abuse." That abuse doesn't get reported often.

I cried for the woman in the Bosnian rape camp. In fact, I was still crying through the next monologue. My friend and I both commented that we knew people with stories just like the young girl in the monologue you keep mentioning.

(to help protect real life victims)

Maryann, I think his point was that instead of focusing on the abuse of a character in a play, that the outrage should be directed to real life victims. That was part of the bigger picture, to me.

WriteIn, the 16-yr. old that had a sexual relationship with Ratcliff was brought up, as well as the case in Goliad County where a school counselor faces loosing her job and possible jail time for not reporting sexual abuse of a minor.

As for the rape of a child in a Lavaca County school, I have not read the details. I'm sure it will be a tragic account.

Well let me also add the Former Sheriff of Victoria.

I find it funny that social conservatives are so focus on a play about rape rather than a real child rape in a school district in Lavaca County a few Months ago.

EAnn you are correct a community college IS EXACTLY THE "place for mind expanding experiences and the development of independent thinking", however if I wanted filth like that I would have picked it up behind the counter at the local Circle K, and if I just want to watch my tax money get flushed down the toilet I just turn on Channel 15 and watch the city council at work.

@EA, no problem, enjoy the evening.

Yes, you did mention it in a way. My mistake for thinking you were generically shunning the play, and not Aprill's word. Fair enough.

Of course I wouldn't mind.

I'll send you a message Rebecca, if you don't mind.

I'd write a play if I could, but my talent will limit me to being in the audience. I'm happy there. I wouldn't recommend the play to everyone, of course. =D

@EA, I wasn't impressed and handled it a different way. Didn't I comment on it about being in the paper and it being read to kids? I think I did. If it wasn't her article, it was one of the them. I just found it:

"@thepatriot, wow, I think you bring something to the table that seriously needs to be considered. I thought the exact thing you wrote about and wondered if it would happen. I knew a school in town encourages their students to read the paper and hoped liked crazy they missed this day. Sad. I think it a sad culture that a child will learn about something so incredible in such a base way."

http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/news/...

How I dealt with the issue in particular to it being base: http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/weblo...

Maryann, you and I would report the abuse, of course. We would do anything to stop it. Even write a play that brings awareness to abuse. Oh, but no one would be forced against their will to watch said play, except for some Drama students. =P

I'm sorry that you felt insulted by me. Please bring to my attention the insult that I traded with you so that I may apologize.

So, Jared, almost two weeks after the fact--where was your protest of vulgarity when Aprill Brandon used the word poontang in her 'humor' column? Talk about vulgar! That column was printed in a newspaper that your kids could read at school. You had a choice as to whether you attended the play or not.

Using your line of reasoning--Aprill started it!

Rebecca, I won't trade insults with you in the discussion.

Your last statement was clear. You think the girl was a victim. I apologize for not interpreting this correctly.

Whether or not you would report the predator is still unclear. That could mean stopping further abuse.

Another problem I do find is the vulgarity in the play that debases one of the most intimate parts of the body. So what we have is a play used as a fundraiser to uplift women by using words that are vulgar. It is confusing at best. And these are not just the words from the victims, so that "it is real, can't you accept that we should create a public play about true horrible events" will not work. Much of the vulgarity comes from the narration of Ensler, the words she has chosen to use. Speaking so lowly of such a powerful part of the human body does nothing to make it better. If you read the descriptions Ensler uses, a victim may walk away feeling she is taking the whole abuse thing too seriously for "I was only touched" in whatever base name you want to call the vagina.

The body part is not just another place on the body. It is such a powerful part of a woman that if abused usually sends the person into severe suffering for years, if treated according to nature becomes the area of life's most pleasurable and bonding experiences that we know of.

I realize this may not affect everyone and it is not my only problem with the play, just another one that meant something to me.

Whoa Maryann, back up! If that's what you thought I meant, you are way off! You and I both understand (because I was assuming that we were intelligent adults) that the girl is a victim, even if she doesn't. The fact that that mentality exists in victims, blew me away. You either misunderstood me or you sunk very low, Maryann.

Thank your for clarifying my misunderstanding of some not seeing themselves as victims and specifically you not seeing them as victims.

Rebecca, on this issue, I would go by the law, and that line is not blurred for me. I am a former high school teacher, and I remember well our notification that if we suspect or know of abuse, we had to report it to CPS or the police.

Surely, we are not going to change each other's minds, but discussing this issue has helped to clarify some things for me.

Thanks for the dialogue.

Maryann, I already told you that I interpreted that particular monologue as "some victims don't see themselves as victims." That's a heads up for me on many levels. You are the one who has blurred the line with your interpretation.

EA, how much jail time do you think Ratcliff should have gotten?

What did he do to derserve it, and how is he different than this adult who uses her influence and alcohol to seduce the girl?

I don't think you'd have to invent a happy ending for the girl. Surely out of some of the women she interviewed there was some girl who was abused by another woman and the abuser was reported so that she could not abuse again.

What about if the abuse happened 30 or 40 years ago, when the reporting laws were diffferent?

Rebecca, if you were a public school teacher or counselor and this teen confided in you, by state law you would be required to report the sexual abuse case to the police or CPS. You could possibly lose your job and go to jail for failing to do so.

My "twist" would be to report it. Don't know what yours would be.

There is a counselor in Goliad who may lose her job and face jail time because she failed also to see a victim of sexual abuse last fall and report it.

Looks like this play blurs the line between a lawful predator and consentual sex. Just like the predators would like.

MaryAnn--

Ratcliff did not do a minute of time. Not a second. He was booked in and out on a PR bond, thanks to Judge Williams, in less than a few minutes. He never made it out of the booking area, except to be released to the outside.

And with the exception of the Amish who have a real taboo about lying, have you ever heard of a perp of any age that admits perping on a victim? Perps always say the victim was willing, wanted it, etc.

As to justice for the teen victim, why would you write a happy ending for this kid when that may have not been the case? That is information we don't have. But to invent an ending that makes us feel less bad about the kid's circumstances is not fair to that victim.

Maryann, you may look for a link yourself. I'm not trying to change you, just trying to reassure you that not everyone interprets or TWISTS (as N4 likes to call it) the way you do. You saw the monologue as promotion of abuse whereas I saw it as bringing awareness. I think that how we are so different with our TWISTS is interesting.

Hole in 1

Do you think that anyone could have benefited from a modified Vagina Monologues?

Keep the dirty language, the humor, etc. but the modify somewhat the abuse scene where the adult plies the kid with alcohol and "rapes" her?

Maybe bring a little justice into the play so that one knows that some abusers go to jail and don't just go around sexually enlightening" young girls?

A link to the Ratcliff information:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/m...

holein1,

Just wanted to let you know I appreciate your thoughtful and insightful comment here.

Keep it up, and I may be forced to change my mind about you.

Rebecca, I haven't read the script of that vignette. Perhaps you can provide a link.

On the other segment, that is an interesting point. I can see that some might not feel victimized, but others would. Again, that points to saying that some abuse is okay, while some is not.

I find a few similarities (as well as differences) with the Vagina Monologues sexual predator and one that was continually in the Victoria Advocate a few years back.

Our former Sheriff Ratliff was involved with a 16-yr. old that had ambivalent feelings about their sexual relationship. Ratcliff was an older, supposedly more sophisticated man that used his position to obtain sexual pleasure.

He did some jail time for that, though not as much as many would have liked.

The young man felt like a victim at times, since as a 25-yr. old he accused the Ratcliff of sexual assault.

However, according to this newspaper article, Ratcliff says that he didn't make UNWANTED sexual advances toward the then 16-yr. old. He claims that they had an ongoing sexual relationship "for years."

Odd that as a youngster, he didn't feel victimized by Ratcliff.

I think the play demonstrates that the sexual advances to this girl were not unwanted as well.

But the adult can be held legally liable for sexual abuse because the child is not able to determine IF she is a victim.

In the play the predator was never exposed, and she didn't do jail time, so that is certainly different than the Ratcliff case.

On a final note, if this segment weren't so flawed, Ensler would have never modified the girl's age AND censored the line, "If it was a rape, it was a good. "

I think she should have gone farther, as one can interpret this as condoning sexual abuse if the youngster feels enlightened by it.

I wonder why those with delicate sensitivities can't distinguish the difference between open dialogue about a subject and glorification of an act?

Creating dialogue about a subject is one way we understand it. Do you think that there may have been more than a few conversations between mothers and daughters about sexual abuse after the play? Do you think that some of those may never have happened if it were not for the play?

I tend to think these people are also the same ones that say talking to their children about safe sex is like telling them to go ahead and have sex with anyone and everyone.

Take a shower with your clothes on do you?

Maryann, I'm sorry that you interpreted that some abuse was ok from the play. Not everyone did. What I interpreted was that some victims don't see themselves as victims.

Maryann, do you assume that because one of the monologues dealt with an account of a Bosnian woman's experience in a rape camp, that the play promotes rape camps too?

Hello Rebecca,

Does any adult character in the segment discussed stand up for the abused minor? When the mother, who could have helped, calls, she's lied to:

"She says, 'Your vagina, untouched by man, smells so nice, so fresh, wish I could keep it that way forever.' I get crazy wild and then the phone rings and of course it's my mama. I'm sure she knows; she catches me at everything.

I'm breathing so heavy and I try to act normal when I get on the phone and she asks me, 'What's wrong with you, have you been running?'

I say 'No, Mama, exercising.'

Then she tells the beautiful secretary to make sure I'm not around boys and the lady tells her, "Trust me, there's no boys around here." Afterwards the gorgeous lady teaches me everything about my Coochi Snorcher. "

The episode ends with the girl stating, "I realize later she was my surprising, unexpected and politically-incorrect salvation. She transformed my sorry-ass Coochi Snorcher and raised it into a kind of heaven."

I'd say politically incorrect.

This play is still flawed, even though Ensler changed this scene from the original 13-yr. old being assaulted to a 16 yr. old and even took out the line, "If it was a rape, it was a good rape."

I'm sure some women were offended that any rape was portrayed as a good rape.

If some were offened that this abuse was portrayed as okay with that line, they should realize that the scene still remains, only with an age change.

The play is open to interpretation that some abuse is okay.

The play did not promote these things. It was a realistic portrayal of how women view their sexuality - different ages and throughout the world - mixed in with alarming facts, much humor, and some things that helped break down some of the taboo. That's the context I saw the play in.

I analyzed the play from a very different place than Maryann, as I'm sure many in the audience would.

Hello Edith,

You know I respect your point of view as well, particularly your kind hospitableness at your, well, on the internet.....!

I haven't been able to join in lately until today, but I've read the comments, and I have to say that I agree with those who say that there is a better forum to get these things out.

Why? Because of the mixed messages of the play in so many areas.

As you know, feminist critics have decried the play for portraying men as the enemy and for not giving portrayals of healthy (non-abusive) heterosexual sex. It's not just the one scene that is problematic, but others as well.

Personally, the profanity, the vulgarity don't bother me. I cussed like a sailor (well, almost) as a kid in Port Lavaca. But take out this stuff, and the play still promotes a double standard that some abuse is okay.

Also, from reading the other people's points of view, some one said that this play promotes and "open dialogue." I hope that is the case, because that would include the point of view of those who don't value the play.

Have a good day, Edith.

Maryann,

I think your questions are largely irrelevant in my opinion. What does it matter to outcome if the predator knew what she was? It had no bearing on the girls experience at the hands of abusers.

You seem to be denying the validity of this type of personal experience as a helpful tool for women and, if I were to put my flippantly narrow-minded tabloidal hat on, potentially prolonging the abuse of others by refusing to endorse this opportunity to raise awareness of such issues

;-)

MaryAnn, for all your knowledge of stuff, and you know how I respect your brain--you need to just sit and chat with victims of childhood sexual assault. I think you would be surprised at what you would learn. I am talking about real, live, breathing folks, not studies or surveys. Folks you can ask questions of.

Amazingly, for a variety of reasons, they do not always view themselves as victims, nor do they always view their victimization as brutal or violent.

When you continue to focus on this scenario, and to question the teen's feelings and viewpoint, you do a terrible disservice to victims who fall into this category. You must be willing to accept that until we allow victims to own their feelings, they will never realize their genuine self. We can't tell someone else how they are supposed to feel about anything! It will always be a mask. That is not emotionally healthy.

Hello Kyle,

If using quotes and words from Eve Ensler's play reminds you of tabloidism, so be it.

Do you think the predator understood she was a predator? I know you understand as well the concept of adult predators who think they are helping out.

Please answer my questions.

Who will decide if some abuse is "positive"?

The child?

Should this type of abuse be reported?

Maryann,

Hello. What's with the tabloid newspaper style approach to this?

If she had said it was a "good rape" I still would have viewed it within the context of her story.

I know you must understand the concept of a victim who does not realise she is a victim? Do you not think awareness of such a type of abuse should be raised along with the orgasms and repression? Personally I do and in this fashion.

If this monologue breaks a taboo then it does so with an underlying positive message of "you're not alone - we understand." . At least that's what I take from this segment.

Hello Kyle,

"Positive" abuse is an interesting term. Are you saying that some abuse is okay as long as the child feels enlightened by it?

Are children able to make that call?

Who will be the judge on what abuse should be reported to parents, CPS, and the police? By law, school teachers have to report any sexual abuse to CPS or the police.

So, should we change that because it doesn't sit well with your relativistic viewpoint?

The original script had the line, "If it was a rape, it was a good rape"

Since you were in the audience, do you think that it was a "good rape"?

I wonder how many women, because of the play, felt more comfortable about admitting their abuse or sharing "their story" with someone else. OR admitting to themselves that their abuse was really abuse and not just a "different kind of abuse so it doesn't count."

@maryann

I think you give too little credit to the audience - I was in the audience and I certainly did not view it as condoning that particular behavior - rather, to me, it was a story portraying abuse in a very different guise - one of a groomed child that dealt with her experiences as if there was a degree of normalcy. The "positive" abuse by the other woman shaped this woman's life whether you like it or not. Should we discount her abuse experience simply because it does not conform to the "norm"? We see similar tales in other aspects of mental trauma - see Stockholm syndrome for examples of unexpected behavior and thought within a given situation.

Simply because it doesn't sit well with your personal subjective view of what constitutes a constructive moral message does not negate its effectiveness as a tool to provide comfort for those who have experienced a similar episode, nor does it impede the raising of awareness in the community at large. Rather the variety of personal experiences in this play serves to broaden the mind of those who may be under the woefully inadequate impression that abuse occurs within a handful of black and white scenario's.

Maryann, the play is geared towards educated adults. You do not have to serve as their external conscience.

Geek, would you advise a minor who confides in you that she given alchohol by an adult and then taught to masturbate in front of her to tell her mother?

(or bring in CPS or the cops?)

I agree that one can see it that way.

I think that one could also see that the predator did not think she was a predator and continue on the same path.

Also, I think that people in the audience could see this as condoning what the adult did.

It was a well put together and thought provoking show. I enjoyed it very much. The cast was talented and entertaining and the language, although jarring for some, was used precisely as language should be used - to communicate a message in the most effective way possible. The subject matter was spot on and the cause was well worth it.

Kudos to the cast, crew, and VC!

A word to the wise... Be careful where you aim your 'values' stick. Someone may aim one right back at you.

Some victims don't understand that they are victims, Maryann. What an eye opening discovery to learn that a young victim wouldn't understand that she was a victim. It was also eye-opening to "get behind the eyes" of the character and to understand the string of abuses that go her there.

Again, this is mature content, and not for everyone.

Cally might have a point. Some realities are not for everyone. The play touches on real abuses of women. If you think some of the discourse in the play is terrible, imagine the women who have been abused. But, rather than stopping the play, maybe we should focus on stopping the abuse. The play brings awareness, but I agree that the play is for a mature audience.

I haven't seen the play, but I've read part of the script. It's difficult to reconcile how a play that is used for raising awareness of sexual abuse has a segment that portrays a particular instance of sexual abuse as a "kind of heaven."

From the script of the play, "Afterwards the gorgeous lady teaches me everything about my Coochi Snorcher. She makes me play with myself in front of her and she teaches me all the different ways to give myself pleasure. She's very thorough. She tells me to always know how to give myself pleasure so I'll never need to rely on a man. In the morning I am worried that I've become a butch because I'm so in love with her. She laughs, but I never see her again. I realize later she was my surprising, unexpected and politically-incorrect salvation. She transformed my sorry-ass Coochi Snorcher and raised it into a kind of heaven."

http://www.sacerdoti.com/jonathan/vag...

This was also the scene where the girl stated "If it was a rape, it was a good rape." But because of college professors complaining the line was taken out by Ensler. The scene still remains.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content...

You can look at the entire segment and realize that giving alcohol to a minor is wrong, an adult preying upon an infatuated teen is wrong, the woman not telling the child's mother is wrong, not informing CPS or the police is wrong, and some other items as well.

These vignettes are taken from real-life scenes after Ensler interviewed 100+ women. Ironically, if the mother of the girl or some other adult reported the 24-yr. old predator, the VA would have reported this as well as sexual abuse.

Somehow, though, it's being celebrated by some.

Kyle...I'll bow to your expertise with hookers. I never paid for recreational sex with cash. Back in my single days, however, I spent a bundle on flowers, dinners, theater tickets, various and sundry gifts...and it wasn't always a sure thing. I've never had any sex that wasn't recreational in intent. I was fortunate in that I met several young ladies who enjoyed the recreational aspects of sex as much as I did. I've been married 38 years and NEVER had the procreational kind. (shudder)

cally--you're right. A community college is no place for mind expanding experiences and the development of independent thinking.

That sort of stuff is best left to the big universities.

Which small parochial college did you say you attended?

Between 300-400 people is about 10% of the entire Victoria electorate that bothered to vote in the last mayoral election. It's tough to get people around here to do anything (as a lonesome and cold Mr. Tasin could testify to) so I'd call it a definite win.

Not to mention that every cent of $2000 went to good causes.

I have seen the Vagina monologues, not by my choice, and as a college educated woman I see nothing entertaining or appropriate about this "so called" award winning play. A community college is no place for a play such as this one. It is vulgar and completely inappropriate. VC should look much closer at what they put their name on. What a complete waste of money. Why would anyone representing VC think this is a good idea? Lights should not have been turned on for this, and I do agree with lms01. You are right Kyle C it "sold out" to the tune of about 300 people. Whoopti Doo!

@www "Someone needs to teach Tasin about the joys of RECREACTIONAL sex as opposed to the procreational kind."

Hookers don't come cheap.

hicktoria.

You and I agree on something.

"The one blight on the evening was the ridiculous Paul Tasin standing outside the building entrance with the obligatory poster and telling people they shouldn't be having sex except for procreation"

Someone needs to teach Tasin about the joys of RECREACTIONAL sex as opposed to the procreational kind.

EdithAnn...thanks...I missed that.

Sometimes it helps to actually read the article before you post a comment.

Five lines into the article: "They stood there in the wings of the Victoria College Johnson Symposium..."

FYI, the VC Johnson Symposium and the VC Auditorium are not the same place.

Two "Sold Out" performances and only $2,000 was raised for the Women's Crisis Center? How much were tickets....$1 each?

Even if $2,000 is only 90% of the total, isn't that a relatively small amount, given the size of the VC auditorium and two sold out performances?

Was the entire auditorium used? If not, then the term "sold out" is misleading.

The $2,000 figure came from Lisa DeVries today.

I wish I could have seen it. Sounds realy good. I just love how saying vagina or haveing a play with the word makes this town cringe. I am a staight and narrow kind of person but come on it's fun. Everything always has to get so political blah blah blah. Its just a performance. LMAO!

My question is, should this have been presented at VC? We have read about recent budget cuts affecting the school, including the possible loss of new student financial aid. So why did the college agree to allow there facilities to be used for the purpose of raising money for an outside entity that is in no way connected to higher education. I'm sure the college had to have staff on hand for the event, custodians to clean up after and probably security officers dedicated to it in case of protesters and disruptions. All that is not without expense. I never saw any mention that the VC theatrical department was involved in any way and I may be wrong here but it is my understanding that the actors were instructors and employees at the college. Should the college be spending money for outside interests in these times? Why don't all the non-profit groups use the college since they pay for everything. This coming weekend is the Knowledge Bowl, another event that will cost VC more money but which is really in no way connected to the school.

This was a really good play. I can say that because I saw it. It bothers me that a man can stand up and make crude jokes and we call it comedy, excusing the behavior. But, when the humor is honest, thought provoking, informative, therapeutic, and deals with the themes most of us THINK but don't SAY, BECAUSE it's WOMEN - raising money for WOMEN, it's complained about? Guys, you can opt out, I can change the channel, but don't deny me the choice. Obviously, people (adults) were in attendance, they enjoyed the play, and money was raised.

What's to protest now?

Someone needs to make a sign that reads " <------------Should have been aborted!" and stand next to him where ever he goes around town....

"VC generally is spot on, when it comes to guaging the pulse of this community."

The play sold out both nights - what better gauge of the community could there be?

Why did Victoria College agree to host something such as this? This was not in line with past behavior of this institution, and certainly not indicative of the long standing conservative values the college has so eloquently modeled throughout it's history. VC generally is spot on, when it comes to guaging the pulse of this community, but in this case they missed the mark big time. I'm finding it difficult to understand why the VC administration allowed such a performance and used my tax dollars to do so?

Unfortunately the "lone protester" was not the only person in Victoria that was oppossed to this production. This is pure unadulterated filth. This wouldn't have happenned on Dr. Goodson's watch.

Kyle C

It would probably be the same punishment it was some 30 plus years ago before the Supreme Court decided 5 to 4 to legalize killing unborn babies.

"Also, it sounds like we need to decide which is the proper punishment for Mr. Tasin's show of free speech."

Disagreement is an integral component of free speech and is to be found in use on both sides of an argument.

Let us ask Mr. Tasin, if his proposal to outlaw abortion came to pass, what would be "proper punishment" for a woman found guilty of this crime?

Well behaved women seldom make history, I've read. Thank goodness we have these amazing, talented and yes, BRAVE women here in Ol' Vic. They make is a richer place for us all, even Mr. Tasin, whether he knows it or not. ;)

Hey Rebecca, great minds think alike huh? ;) Just noticed that u posted the same web addy as the one I found my info on. :)

Well there is evidence that continued use of birth control pills can increase your breast cancer chances. But as I suspected, abortion does NOT cause it. Seems these anti-abortion folks are taking some old studies, while disregarding the NEW studies from the national cancer institute no less, just to try and justify their cause. This is what I found folks...

In February 2003, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) convened a workshop of over 100 of the world’s leading experts who study pregnancy and breast cancer risk. Workshop participants reviewed existing population-based, clinical, and animal studies on the relationship between pregnancy and breast cancer risk, including studies of induced and spontaneous abortions. They concluded that having an abortion or miscarriage does not increase a woman’s subsequent risk of developing breast cancer. A summary of their findings, titled Summary Report: Early Reproductive Events and Breast Cancer Workshop, can be found at http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/er....

***Notice how this is from a GOVERNMENT website, so this isn't just some googled malarky. Guess that squashes his argument :) Here's the link to the page I found the above paragraph on http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/fa...

There is a link between the pill (birth control) and breast cancer. Since the pill is an "abortant" then "abortion" can be said to cause breast cancer? Is that the logic?

Abortion, Miscarriage, and Breast Cancer (no link) http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/fa...

Birth Control Pill & Breast Cancer (a link) http://www.webmd.com/breast-cancer/gu...

Don't know who this Tasin is but have seen the guy with the abortion sign. He has been all over the city and was at one time holding a sign that said abortion causes breast cancer. He is a bit camera shy and runs away if you try to engage him. Not sure what his story is but would like for him to get his facts straight. I have never heard of anyone getting breast cancer as a result of an abortion nor any studys to support this.

Ok, so who is this Tasin guy and what is his deal?? I have twice seen some bozo standing on the corner of the houston hwy and laurent at 8 in the morning holding an atrocious anti-abortion sign. You know seeing such a horrid picture of an aborted child is not what i need to see on my commute. I wonder if this is the same looney tune yall are referring to? The odd thing is that he is always by his lonesome when I've seen him. Usually there is a group of fruitloops holding up signs like that. Can anyone fill me in on who this guy is?

Ditto Jack & Ricky.

its the new era and not the 1900's when you said the word vagina and penis was like oh my god they said badwords come on peaple grow up

My husband and I did attend and I can say that everyone involved with the production did a fantastic job! The one blight on the evening was the ridiculous Paul Tasin standing outside the building entrance with the obligatory poster and telling people they shouldn't be having sex except for procreation...

I didn't attend but am glad that it was done here. Sounds like it went over well once peopel got toactually see the show for themselves and not just others opinions of it. Hve to assume that the "lone protester" was Mr. Tasin or one of his henchmen.
Patrick Barnes

Well done Lisa and cast!