Previous Story
Mistreatment of women
|
Posted on Apr 03 2006
In response to Ellen J. Rayphand’s letter published in these pages on March 31, which asked whether a woman’s intelligence, thoughtfulness, and/or worthwhile contributions aren’t just as or more important than her body, the answer is, yes, of course they are. But that wasn’t the point of Kate Ensler’s play, or of the t-shirts being sold in connection with the production of Vagina Monologues, or the use of the word “vagina.”
Ensler’s play was written to respond to the mistreatment of women as sex objects—and since the vagina is the focus of most of such mistreatment, it seems a perfectly appropriate word to use. What the play and the t-shirts are saying is women and their vaginas are being abused and mistreated; that their vaginas should be the private property of women for them to control themselves.
Ensler—and those who subsequently produced and performed the play—have deliberately chosen the play as a vehicle to alert and sensitize women—and men—to the abuse that women around the world have suffered in the past and are still subjected to in the present and to raise funds to help such women recover and regain their dignity and re-assert their control over their vaginas.
It was not meant as a vehicle for discussing other women’s rights—in employment, or in education, or in the religious hierarchy. And thus the qualities Rayphand identifies, while important, don’t play much of a role here, since they do not relate directly to the subject, or the intention of the play.
Ruth L. Tighe
Tanapag
