Critics of the Vagina Monologues undermine the show’s continued relevance

My 77 Cents: Girls should fight for their right to party

For better or worse, college parties are not only a source of social interaction, but also of social currency. They set a dynamic of power and of expectation. The people who throw the parties have control.
In fraternities, for instance, the guest-lists, themes (with costumes), drinks, and even the space itself is all monitored and governed by the resident brothers, not by their guests. Members of that house will often control who can and cannot enter the house, using standards such as physical attractiveness or sorority affiliation.
Now, this is not to demonize the Greek system; indeed, being a Bowdoin student, I cannot claim to know exactly what Greek life is like. However, recent studies and media attention do suggest that some of the less flattering depictions of campus life in fraternities or sororities are not always fictitious.
Currently, sororities are not allowed to host parties in their houses.
In a recent op-ed in The New York Times, “Sororities Should Throw Parties,” Juliet Lapidos wrote that allowing sororities to throw parties—and thus to have some agency over the social scene—could decrease the number of sexual assaults committed against women. She posits that parties at sororities would prevent “the worst excesses” of fraternity parties, including spiked punch, and would give female partygoers a kind of home court advantage, so to speak.
However, this idea has proved both contentious and apparently unrealistic. Julie Johnson, of the National Panhellenic Conference (which represents 25 national sororities and women’s fraternities), noted publicly that the social standards—i.e. that women do not host parties with alcohol—are old and deeply rooted.
Johnson said that many sorority members are underage, which makes serving alcohol at parties a legal risk. She added that there would be new responsibility if girls threw parties: they would subject themselves to the associated costs, risks and cleanup. It is true that with power comes responsibility and perhaps, with a little increased responsibility, there might emerge a little more power for sorority women.
When asked why sororities generally remain alcohol free, Johnson replied, “it is what it is.” There doesn’t seem to be much compelling evidence that sororities should not be able to throw parties—it’s just tradition.
There are a lot of old standards that are not ideal. Part of making progress is not adhering to every old rule—we must acknowledge traditions, but we must also allow them elasticity over time.
I do think sororities should be able to have their own social life and throw their own parties. It would probably not be plausible to have sororities take all the social responsibility, and I’m not convinced that they necessarily should.
The way the system might work best is if both fraternities and sororities had the ability to host events, and could alternate monthly. This adjustment would also take some of the pressure off of fraternities, who now bear all the responsibility for social life in the Greek system.
With regard to sexual assault, it remains to be seen whether or not a new system would be effective. Giving women increased control over the social scene might be an important step. But it should not be the only step.

My 77 Cents: Dangers of Yik Yak outweigh the benefits

Anonymity is so hot right now. Not that it didn’t exist before, but there are now seemingly endless forums that offer the opportunity to speak in an uninhibited manner without any threat of personal identification. Anonymity allows us to speak more freely, perhaps. To say what we’ve been wanting to say without any consequence. To assign our names to something is to make us accountable for our actions, and where’s the fun in that?
Yik Yak is a great example of this phenomenon. In case you’re unfamiliar, Yik Yak is a free app in which users can write “Yaks,” brief statements of any kind, which are shared with users who fall within a ten mile radius. All users have the opportunity to contribute by composing or responding to posts, as well as by upvoting or downvoting posts. TIME aptly called it a “local, anonymous Twitter.”
Full disclosure: I’m not above Yik Yak; on the contrary, I read it a lot. Sometimes I even giggle despite myself at comments like this one: “When my friend asked me to stop acting like a flamingo I had to put my foot down.”
But the app’s more sinister implications have convinced me that it does more harm than good. When I’ve complained to friends about some of the upsetting Yaks, mostly I’ve been told that I’m taking it too seriously. We have no proof these are even Bowdoin students, since there are other people within a 10-mile radius of the College, and we have no proof these people are serious—they might just be trying to get a rise out of us.
My response is usually that it’s working. Whether or not these comments are written in earnest, whether or not it would be far more judicious of me to just delete the damn app, I still think it’s important to acknowledge that these messages contribute to the social climate of this campus.
Sure, it would be better to just ignore these hateful messages altogether. If you are one of these brave and impervious people, I salute you. But this task, of course, is easier said than done. What makes it even more difficult to dismiss these messages in the case of Yik Yak is that users know these comments are composed within relative proximity to them—close to home, if you will.
The app can be extremely problematic with regard to body dissatisfaction. Along with some other employees at the Women’s Resource Center, I am involved in the creation of campaigns, programming and focus groups surrounding healthy body image at Bowdoin. We have discussed Yik Yak’s affect on body image and noted that, more often than not, the app contributes to general distress.
One post I read recently was from a person asking how to tell his girlfriend that she needs to lose weight. Two responses were: “that’s why you dump them once they get fat,” and, maybe more troublingly, “the fact that you’re posting this to Yik Yak and arguing with anyone who tries to offer any insight proves you deserve a fat girlfriend.”
Another Yak read, “there should be a weight limit for leggings/yoga pants.” There were a slew of comments, including, “Fatties, put down the candy bar and eat a salad,” and, “Fat chicks shouldn’t wear yoga pants. It’s nasty. Not appealing. Go hit a gym.” Those are only a few examples.
Now, those aren’t the posts that get the most upvotes, nor are they free from contemptuous responses that call them out on their blatant cruelty. However, these sorts of posts do demonstrate that anonymous forums like Yik Yak ultimately facilitate bullying and hate speech.
Just this March, American University administrators issued a public statement denouncing racist statements made by students on Yik Yak. In February, after a female user reported how she was encouraged to commit suicide by other anonymous users, a petition asking for the app to be shut down surfaced online, and was signed by more than 78,000 people.
My point is not to say that everyone at Bowdoin—or everyone who posts on Yik Yak—is malicious. It is to say, however, that these kinds of apps have the potential to be incredibly injurious, and we as Bowdoin students are implicated in this by virtue of reading and contributing to them. The concept of Yik Yak does offer some interesting opportunities by creating a space in which people can share opinions, humor and honest communications. However, I don’t think these benefits outweigh its costs.
If you don’t have Yik Yak, don’t bother. If you do, be aware of the messages you are receiving. Be aware of what you’re writing.
We are responsible for fostering a community in which students feel safe, and apps like this, while entertaining, don’t really help anyone. A generation of people who take responsibility for their actions would be better than a generation of people who lash out from behind the anonymous comfort of a screen.

My 77 Cents

Critics of the Vagina Monologues undermine the show’s continued relevance

This piece represents the opinion of the author:

February 19, 2015

Bowdoin women took Kresge Auditorium by storm with two performances of “The Vagina Monologues” last weekend. The show is comprised of various episodes written by Eve Ensler, based on her interviews with real women from around the world. In 1998, Ensler and others launched V-Day, a global non-profit movement that works to end violence against women and girls.

As with anything covering a controversial topic or phenomenon, the play has earned some mixed reviews. Particularly, critics of the show express concern that its nearly 20-year-old content has become problematic. In fact, the Mount Holyoke women’s group that produced the play cancelled their production of “The Vagina Monologues” this year. Mount Holyoke student Yvonne Dean-Bailey explained the cancellation to the school via an email, stating, “gender is a wide and varied experience, one that cannot simply be reduced to biological or anatomical distinctions, and many of us who have participated in the show have grown increasingly uncomfortable presenting material that is inherently reductionist and exclusive.”

The play has also been criticized in the past for being a biased depiction of feminism, covering only a white Western perspective—despite its efforts at diversity. Also, since Ensler’s name is attached to the production, colleges may only perform it given that they do not change any of the original material. Given new kinds of awareness regarding gender and sexuality—topics that continue to become more complex every year—one could see why this unalterable content might be frustrating. It is also fair to say that much has been done in the realm of political correctness—at Bowdoin certainly, but also in the world at large.

That being said, I do think there is merit to performing “The Vagina Monologues.” Yes, the show leaves things out. It doesn’t portray men quite as fairly as it should. It is written from a markedly American perspective (the assumption of certain Western conventions and even use of American slang make that apparent). Despite its shortcomings, however, the show has continued to inspire, surprise, inform and empower both men and women throughout its nearly two-decade existence. This is not to diminish those groups who are not included in its messages of empowerment; and, undeniably, those perspectives deserve a voice, too. But to write off the show entirely would be a mistake. We have to treat “The Vagina Monologues” as one of many ways to appreciate the female experience. This year, the play had one of the most diverse casts in recent history, and this was an incredibly important aspect of the show, whose core value (I tend to believe) is inclusivity of all perspectives.

Even if the text itself can be limited, an opportunity to perform in the show offers women on this campus and throughout the world a voice; and I would cringe at any erasure of that. One hopes that more people continue to be brave enough to write about female experiences, both good and bad. That way, texts like this can continue to expand to fit the demands of the times as fraught topics like gender and sexuality continue to break through important social boundaries. Maybe it’s time to start writing new monologues. Surely no one production can capture the entirety of experience, but it can get the ball rolling in the right direction.

Comments are permanently closed.