The Vagina Diatribes
---
You may have seen this story by now:
What exactly is the difference between "censorship" and "punishment for saying something"? Is Principal Leprine trying to craft some clever distinction between prior restraint and criminalized speech? At a school literary event? Yeah right, good luck with that.
Some hasty stitches:
--"Vagina" is a clinical, anatomical, neutral word (just ask David). It is not a profanity, nor is it a misogynistic slur. If the argument is that the word is still inappropriate for the younger children, then how could the piece as a whole not also be inappropriate? Whose bright idea was it to allow a reading of "The Vagina Monologues" but without the word "vagina"? It boggles the mind.
--Context counts. This was a literary event — an "open mic" — and apparently extra-curricular. To the extent that a public school is permitted to quash speech (or conduct) without violating the First Amendment, it is limited to speech (or conduct) that disrupts the educational environment. That all-important criterion was, for example, at the heart of the recent case Harper v. Poway (a/k/a the "anti-gay t-shirt case"). How can reciting literature at a literary function be "disruptive to the educational environment"?
--The whole incident is yet another reminder that the overarching goal of modern public education is, far too often, simply to conditional children to "just obey." Don't think, don't question — just obey. (But cf., this chain.)
--Doesn't anyone read Tinker anymore?
More thoughts at Concurring Opinions, Metroblogging.
EMBARRASSING FACT: I have neither read nor seen a performance of "The Vagina Monologues." Want to take me sometime?
A Westchester public high school has suspended three girls who disobeyed officials by saying the word "vagina" in a reading from "The Vagina Monologues."Huh?
...
The "Monologues" excerpt was read Friday night at an event sponsored by the literary magazine at John Jay HS in Cross River.
...
The suspension has prompted allegations of censorship. But principal Richard Leprine said yesterday the girls were punished not because of what they said but because "they disobeyed orders not to say it."
What exactly is the difference between "censorship" and "punishment for saying something"? Is Principal Leprine trying to craft some clever distinction between prior restraint and criminalized speech? At a school literary event? Yeah right, good luck with that.
Some hasty stitches:
--"Vagina" is a clinical, anatomical, neutral word (just ask David). It is not a profanity, nor is it a misogynistic slur. If the argument is that the word is still inappropriate for the younger children, then how could the piece as a whole not also be inappropriate? Whose bright idea was it to allow a reading of "The Vagina Monologues" but without the word "vagina"? It boggles the mind.
--Context counts. This was a literary event — an "open mic" — and apparently extra-curricular. To the extent that a public school is permitted to quash speech (or conduct) without violating the First Amendment, it is limited to speech (or conduct) that disrupts the educational environment. That all-important criterion was, for example, at the heart of the recent case Harper v. Poway (a/k/a the "anti-gay t-shirt case"). How can reciting literature at a literary function be "disruptive to the educational environment"?
--The whole incident is yet another reminder that the overarching goal of modern public education is, far too often, simply to conditional children to "just obey." Don't think, don't question — just obey. (But cf., this chain.)
--Doesn't anyone read Tinker anymore?
More thoughts at Concurring Opinions, Metroblogging.
EMBARRASSING FACT: I have neither read nor seen a performance of "The Vagina Monologues." Want to take me sometime?
Posted by Kip on
8 March 2007
To comment on this post, please visit the new blogsite.
