Three female students suspended for saying "vagina"

[Napoleon54]

Cross River students suspended for saying 'vagina' at open mic session

By DIANA COSTELLO AND SUSAN ELAN
THE JOURNAL NEWS
Original publication: March 6, 2007

CROSS RIVER - Saying the word "vagina" during a reading at a John Jay High School open mic session has resulted in suspension for three female students and has sparked a debate about censorship throughout the community.

School administrators had warned the girls it would be inappropriate to say the word while reading a selection from Eve Ensler's "The Vagina Monologues," but the students were willing to suffer the consequences.

Now Ensler, a playwright and feminist who grew up in Scarsdale, has offered to visit the Katonah-Lewisboro school district to discuss the matter.

Juniors Megan Reback, Elan Stahl and Hannah Levinson will each serve separate one-day, in-school suspensions this week, Reback said.

"When I was able to say the word 'vagina' and be proud to say it … and it wasn't crude and it wasn't inappropriate and it was very real and very pure, it was important to me," Reback said yesterday. "We were willing and ready to take whatever came."

The administrators' decision to suspend the girls has caused an uproar within the school, with students making T-shirts and posters to protest the punishment. A group opposed to the suspension has been created on Facebook.com, a popular Internet networking site, and had attracted more than 350 members yesterday.

The move has prompted parents to write to the Board of Education and circulate e-mails calling the suspension a "blatant attempt at censorship."

School board President Peter Breslin said the decision to suspend the students was not about censorship, but rather about insubordination. He said school administrators had been concerned about the use of the word because young children would be at the open mic session, and the girls had agreed not to say it.

"I think the students need to understand that if you make an agreement with the administration to do something, and then you don't do it, there's going to be consequences for that," he said. "We are very committed to free expression and we do not tolerate censorship in our district."

"The Vagina Monologues" is a book based on interviews with more than 200 women about their experiences of sexuality. Since being written in 1996 as a response to the guilt and embarrassment many women still connect with their bodies, the book has been translated into 45 languages and been performed in cities throughout the world.

The piece has also led to the founding of "V-Day," an international grass-roots movement dedicated to stopping violence against women. It is celebrated Feb. 14 with people performing "The Vagina Monologues" and raising money for the cause.

Ensler offered yesterday to take part in a public meeting to discuss with students, parents and educators why it was important for girls of high school age to feel comfortable saying the word "vagina."

The author said much of the violence that happens to women in the United States occurs because they are "disempowered by lack of education."

"What is wrong about the word 'vagina,' which is the correct biological term for a body part?" Ensler asked. "It is not slang. It is not dirty or racy. The fact that it was censored is an indication of exactly what is going on in American schools, where girls and boys are not being educated about their bodies in a healthy way. We're pushing everything into the closet.

"We need open, healthy sex education where girls know and love their bodies," said Ensler, who addressed the United Nations yesterday during an international conference dedicated to stopping rape as a weapon in conflict.

The controversy in Cross River centers around the verse: "My short skirt is a liberation flag in the women's army. I declare these streets, any streets, my vagina's country."

The words were part of a longer selection, which the three girls had divided among themselves.

Leading up to the performance, the girls had debated whether to say the word that they knew would get them into trouble. One idea they discussed was to not actually say the word, but rather hold up a sign with the word written on it.

Ultimately, however, they decided to say "vagina" because they did not feel they had the liberty to change a work of art.

All three girls read the final line together, as a sign of unity.

"I think almost everyone can agree it's important to uphold the integrity of literature and not change or alter it," Reback said.

School administrators did not return requests for comment yesterday, but Breslin, the board president, pointed to the district's stance against censorship during a debate over Nadine Gordimer's "July's People." The book is part of the 10th-grade curriculum, despite parents' criticism about its sexual and racial content.

As for a student's right to free expression, the U.S. Supreme Court has said students "do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech and expression at the schoolhouse gate."

Public school officials, however, may regulate student expression that substantially disrupts the school environment or that infringes on the rights of others. Many courts have held that school officials can restrict student speech that is lewd, The First Amendment Center said.

Allen Hershkowitz, a 51-year-old environmental scientist with two children in the high school, said suspending the students was not only a form of censorship, but was also bad educating. He would like to see the administrators apologize for making a mistake.

"No one should be embarrassed to use the word 'vagina,' " said Hershkowitz, a former Lewisboro town councilman. "It's exactly the opposite message we should be teaching our children. ... That's when problems arise, when they're not informed and not feeling comfortable referring to their bodies."
Linky (http://www.thejournalnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070306/NEWS02/703060363/1018&GID=xi+6X4FdPrduoI2j4z90HCGbIVUKXnx7c7Gbd64k1iw=)

The school is defending itself by saying the students weren't suspended for saying "vagina", they were suspended for insubordination because they were asked not to say the word. So... how is that any different?! That's just a feeble attempt at shifting blame.

I think those girls showed a lot of integrity by standing up for themselves. Good for them.

[ohukuo]

IMO, if they didn't want the girls saying the word "vagina"then why are they reading that book in the first place? Its good that they are standing up for themselves cause its rediculous. \

Students will learn about the human body sooner or later so why sensor? Besides they are Sophmores/10 graders. They already took sex ed and what not. Their in high school and their mature about it. Seems like the educational board is just under estimating how mature their students really are.

[DarkFury]

Hmmmm... makes you wonder what they refer to it in "sexual education" class? :shrug:


The "V-Spot" maybe? :hmm:

[ohukuo]

Hmmmm... makes you wonder what they refer to it in "sexual education" class? :shrug:


The "V-Spot" maybe? :hmm:

I am just assuming thats what they called it in class.

"So this students is the V-Spot."

[johnnymk]

I have a friend nearly 40 who believes that the word "pu..y is the grossest word ever.

[Nija]

I just saw this play this weekend at the Hermosa Beach Playhouse. I laughed so hard I was in tears at more than one point [Angry Vagina & the last one, whose name I've forgotten)

I think it's crap that the school is going to be allowed to get away with this, although on Fark I was reading some very compelling arguements on why this shouldn't be allowed. I'm ok with the school just flat out saying "No" to the entire reading, but these girls couldn't very well have read the whole thing and replaced with the word "vagina" with "front butt".

[fillup0215]

that is too funny...let them be!

[Grafalgar]

Personally, I think we should totally and completely ban the word. We should make "Ban the Evil V-Word" posters and flags and websites and stuff saying how bloody awful that word is and no one should ever be allowed to use it ever. Same goes for P-Word. Shameful, terrible word!

When people need to refer to those parts, they just don't. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil sort of thing. It doesn't exist! That thing in your pants? A ha, Gotcha! You have no pants! There is nothing below your belly-button! Shame on you for implying otherwise!

[Airencracken]

Where do we live again? This can't be America, because that nation prides itself on freedom and liberty, nah has to be somewhere else...

[Memo]

I have a friend nearly 40 who believes that the word "pu..y is the grossest word ever.

That person sounds like a total c*nt

[Napoleon54]

That person sounds like a total c*nt

:stupid: :heh:

I was listening to a weekly radio show last week and the host ended by saying "See you next Tuesday!". I was laughing so hard my brain almost came out my nose. I don't think I'd ever heard that phrase used innocently.

[ohukuo]

Where do we live again? This can't be America, because that nation prides itself on freedom and liberty, nah has to be somewhere else...

I doubt this is America. FREE SPEECH! and there not getting there free speech

[MrGreg]

The 11th grade health teacher in my high school was married to a former nun. He would give you a detention for using the word "sex." Instead, the proper term was, and I'm not making this up, "intimate skin to skin contact."

[LPMiller]

seems to me if you have one, you ought to be able to mention it by name.

[Jeffbx]

Where do we live again? This can't be America, because that nation prides itself on freedom and liberty, nah has to be somewhere else...

Remember, that's only when you're discussing violence, crime and drugs. That sex talk is a no-no! Children might hear and "figure it out"! Let's save THAT business for the honeymoon.

[oblongmelon]

Remember, that's only when you're discussing violence, crime and drugs. That sex talk is a no-no! Children might hear and "figure it out"! Let's save THAT business for the honeymoon.

haha..you must have known my mother!...or yet again, any Italian mother who believes that even after their daughters give birth to many children-are still virgins.

[Mommypooh]

Too bad my 3 year old already says and knows what a vagina is, as well as that it is where babies come from. Come on people it is a proper name for a body part. What next can't say Penis. My son can, and he is only 2.

We need to be proud of our bodies not ashamed of them.

GRRRR>..... this makes me mad.

[Houdini]

Sounds stupid as hell. But I don't trust simple media outlets, who are notorious as hell at missing details.

But if it happened even as remotely as presented, it sounds completely without merit. Hiding behind insubordination ploy just sounds cowardly.

I've never seen the play, and I know it's kinda controversial whereever it plays. But if it were only an exerpt, and they won't walking around yelling "vagina!" to everyone all day, I don't see a problem. it's not like they were harassing other students.

As far as free speech, though, your rights are somewhat limited as a minor anyway. So I don't think that really pertains in this case as a valid argument.

[KIISQueen]

Wtf!!!!

[cruelpupet]

I cant wait to have kids. I hope my kids will constantly be in the news doing this stuff. Schools CAN NOT ban speech. It violates the 1st Amendment.

Any argument that schools can apply rules like this have never held in court.

[Nija]

I cant wait to have kids. I hope my kids will constantly be in the news doing this stuff. Schools CAN NOT ban speech. It violates the 1st Amendment.

Any argument that schools can apply rules like this have never held in court.
In the 1969 case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, the high court ruled 7-2 that school officials violated the First Amendment rights of three Iowa students by suspending them for wearing black armbands to school. Even though the students were not technically speaking, the high court determined that the wearing of the armbands to protest the war was a form of symbolic speech “akin to pure speech.” The court referred to the wearing of the armbands as a “nondisruptive, passive expression of a political viewpoint.”

The Supreme Court established a protective standard for student expression in Tinker, which says that school officials cannot censor student expression unless they can reasonably forecast that the expression will cause a substantial disruption of school activities or will invade the rights others.

Though public school students possess the right to free speech, they are not free to express themselves in an unlimited form or fashion. In 1986, the Supreme Court ruled in Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser that school officials did not violate the First Amendment rights of a student suspended for giving a vulgar and lewd speech before the student assembly.

In Fraser, the high court wrote that “the freedom to advocate unpopular and controversial views in schools and classrooms must be balanced against society’s countervailing interest in teaching students the boundaries of socially appropriate behavior.”

In recent years, several students have been punished for writing poems, essays or displaying artwork that school officials deem disruptive or inappropriate. The school officials generally must show that they had a reasonable forecast (expectation that) the student expression would cause a substantial disruption. They cannot overreact with what the Supreme Court in Tinker called “undifferentiated fear or apprehension.”

Fark Thread I stole this from (http://forums.fark.com/cgi/fark/comments.pl?IDLink=2652957)

All the administration has to say is that saying "Vagina" (And I'll let you know, they say it A LOT) would have been "disruptive". However, they are not going with that line of thinking, they are going with insubordination, because the girls promised not to say vagina, and then turned around and said it, thus violating their promise.

It's all bull****.

[ialsohaveadream]

I'm a big supporter of vagina in its many forms, including word form. More info on that support here (http://www.poorlydrawnlife.com/2007/03/daydreaming-problem-with-vagina.html).


Schools CAN NOT ban speech. It violates the 1st Amendment.

Any argument that schools can apply rules like this have never held in court.
Actually, yes they have. The Court has ruled that schools can make certain limitations on student speech if it's necessary to create a healthy environment for learning.

[Freelance Superhero]

oh god... are you kidding me? they're in HIGH SCHOOL, for cryin out loud. at least they weren't using the other words, which have already been outlined in this thread...

[eSDee]

The school board should have put up a notice saying that there would be "mature" material at the open mic so if the people who brought their kids wouldn't get all pissy. It was just poor planning it seems.

[johnnymk]

maybe they should have used the word "fajita"

[Jeffbx]

Mmmmm - I do like a good fajita!

[MikeD]

The school board should have put up a notice saying that there would be "mature" material at the open mic so if the people who brought their kids wouldn't get all pissy. It was just poor planning it seems.

:stupid:

Was SD the only one who read the whole article? :gle:


School board President Peter Breslin said the decision to suspend the students was not about censorship, but rather about insubordination. He said school administrators had been concerned about the use of the word because young children would be at the open mic session, and the girls had agreed not to say it.

If this is true, then the school is within their bounds to suspend the kids. Whether you feel they should be able to say it (the free speech argument...AGAIN) doesn't matter in the context of the argument the school provided. If the school administration was truly concerned about young children, and the girls agreed to not use the term...well, then they should be suspended.

The uproar should have come BEFORE the presentation. The girls and all these parents should have come forth and argued that the term should be used. Agreeing to the school's terms with their fingers crossed, and then backing out and breaking these terms, was certainly not the way to do it.

[DarkFury]

Mmmmm - I do like a good fajita!
Betta be careful.... I hear that those kinds can be "hot and spicy".... but hey, a simple shot the next day can solve most of your problems if they arise. :eek: :heh:

[VTGreg]

:stupid:

Was SD the only one who read the whole article? :gle:



If this is true, then the school is within their bounds to suspend the kids. Whether you feel they should be able to say it (the free speech argument...AGAIN) doesn't matter in the context of the argument the school provided. If the school administration was truly concerned about young children, and the girls agreed to not use the term...well, then they should be suspended.

The uproar should have come BEFORE the presentation. The girls and all these parents should have come forth and argued that the term should be used. Agreeing to the school's terms with their fingers crossed, and then backing out and breaking these terms, was certainly not the way to do it.

:stupid:

I don't think the school is hiding at all. They had a discussion with the girls before the open mic session and the girls agreed to not use the word. They then used the word during the session.

The school was obviously worried about the material because of the audience. Just because these girls are in high school does not mean that every person in attendance was in high school. Some parents are not concerned with their young children hearing certain words, others are, but the parents do have a right to choose what their children are exposed to.

The school could have given a notice that the material would be mature but we don't the original purpose of the open-mic session.

Sounds like both parties could have taken steps to avoid the issue, but I don't think the school board is out of line suspending these girls if there was an agreement in place.

[Napoleon54]

Here's how I envision this going down. School puts on an open mic session but asks to review all material before it is presented. Girls say they want to read part of the Vagina Monologues. School agrees to allow it as long as they don't say "Vagina" or request that they use an euphamism. Girls agree, go on stage, and say "vagina" anyway. Sound fair?

If someone runs a stop sign you can say they're guilty of a traffic infraction. But more specifically, they're guilty of running a stop sign and that's what a traffic ticket would say: "ran stop sign", not vaguely "traffic infraction".

I agree the girls are guilty of insubordination. But insubordination is a very broad term. More specifically, the girls have been suspended for a particular type of insubordination: failing to censure themselves.

Similarly, suppose I tell the police that I'm not going to kill my wife. But then I go home and kill my wife. What're they going to arrest me for, lying? No, they'll arrest me for killing my wife.

[MikeD]

What's so hard about this? This was a school function, with terms dictated by the school administration. The girls willingly agreed to the terms set forth by the school, and then completely backed out of them.

Not only is it poor taste (aforementioned young children present), but they showed a complete disregard for the authority in charge. Now THAT'S a great lesson to be learned here! "We can do whatever we want, no matter what anyone says!" :2far:

If they're so concerned about free speech, and not being censured, they should have stood on the street corner by the school and yelled it from the top of their lungs. Go have at it. But to say one thing, do the opposite, and then cower behind "free speech, free speech" is just flat out wrong.

These kids, and their parents as well, sound like a bunch of whiny bitches here. I'm sure it was soooo cool to say "vagina" in school, and see the administration get up in arms over it. Yeah, yeah, that's great...you got one over on the suits in the room. Shut up, take your in-school suspension, and be glad that the baby-ass mentality prevalent in today's society is in place.

Heh, disregarding the authorities...that'll get you shot in the ass on the Mexican border. :hehehmm:

[Grafalgar]

I fail to see what's inappropriate about the word "vagina" for any age group. Slang / derogatory versions thereof, yes, those are obviously inappropriate.

Furthermore, kudos for the girls for using it and going against authority to do so. While they're getting punished (for whatever reason), they've brought a several important issues to light, from censorship to silly moral 'blocks.'

[VTGreg]

I fail to see what's inappropriate about the word "vagina" for any age group. Slang / derogatory versions thereof, yes, those are obviously inappropriate.

Furthermore, kudos for the girls for using it and going against authority to do so. While they're getting punished (for whatever reason), they've brought a several important issues to light, from censorship to silly moral 'blocks.'

Just because you don't see any issue with the word doesn't mean that every person feels the same way. Parents have the right to determine (to a certain extent) what their children are subjected to.

It all depends on how this open-mic session was advertised. If it was intended for a mature audience then the school is out of line asking the girls to use the "G" rated version. However, if this was a family-friendly event, then they have every right to monitor what material is being presented and not allow any material that could be considered questionable for the audience.

[Markel]

What's so hard about this? This was a school function, with terms dictated by the school administration. The girls willingly agreed to the terms set forth by the school, and then completely backed out of them.

Not only is it poor taste (aforementioned young children present), but they showed a complete disregard for the authority in charge. Now THAT'S a great lesson to be learned here! "We can do whatever we want, no matter what anyone says!" :2far:
:stupid:

I'm not at all familiar with the content of the Vagina Monologues, but I would venture that it is not a "G" (or even "PG") rated work. With that in view, the school is perfectly right to set up some kind of "filter" for what the girls wanted to read. (Can you imagine the uproar there would be if the school DIDN'T screen what was presented and something offensive was done?) And I think that what the girls did IS by definition (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=insubordination) "insubordination": 1. not submitting to authority; disobedient:.

[Grafalgar]

Just because you don't see any issue with the word doesn't mean that every person feels the same way. Parents have the right to determine (to a certain extent) what their children are subjected to.

Oh I totally understand that my views can be very different from the next person. And of course parents have the right to let their learn anything they desire.

What I was trying to get across is the idea of challenging the though that 'vagina' is, itself, a mature word not intended for children. I'm not considering the context in the Vagina Monologues, as I do not know the content. I'm focused entirely on that particular word and its "appropriateness" for children.

If everybody just went around saying "I can choose to teach my kids whatever I want, don't challenge my thoughts" our culture will never progress :P And I, for one, would like to see a little more societal progress in the area of sexuality and all the fears surrounding it.

[cruelpupet]

This actually is the same debate as using the word ****** or fag. The principle asked them to use a euphemism, if I use the word hooha and everyone understands that to be the word vagina, then why use it?

Since when are medical terms for body parts inappropriate?

[MikeD]

This actually is the same debate as using the word ****** or fag. The principle asked them to use a euphemism, if I use the word hooha and everyone understands that to be the word vagina, then why use it?

Since when are medical terms for body parts inappropriate?

I guess this boils down to two different camps: those who view this as a "free speech" and/or censure issue, and those who are looking at the insubordination aspect.

I don't think vagina is a horrible word. I doubt most people do. For that matter, I don't mind hooha either. ;) To me, the issue is the blatant insubordination and the fact that the girls want to hide behind "free speech" and not take responsibility for their actions.

Again, great lesson being taught here: doesn't matter what the prevailing authorities say, it's OK to do what you want. :2far:

[Houdini]

Right. There's nothing wrong with the words vagina, vulva, genitals, penis, etc. But to use words that you've been explicitly told NOT to use, in an educational setting, and more important, words that you've agreed NOT to use, is an entirely different matter. If you make an agreement and/or promise, stick to it. Otherwise, in an academic setting (or in a job, etc) I could see the insubordination argument.

H

[johnnymk]

I guess this boils down to two different camps: those who view this as a "free speech" and/or censure issue, and those who are looking at the insubordination aspect.

I don't think vagina is a horrible word. I doubt most people do. For that matter, I don't mind hooha either. ;) To me, the issue is the blatant insubordination and the fact that the girls want to hide behind "free speech" and not take responsibility for their actions.

Again, great lesson being taught here: doesn't matter what the prevailing authorities say, it's OK to do what you want. :2far:

:stupid:

[Napoleon54]

In this instance insubordination = failure to censor.

Call it whatever you want, but the students were suspended for saying "vagina". If school hadn't told them not to say "vagina" in the first place, then we wouldn't be having this discussion. This entire debate stems from the school's desire to censor student expression.

I give the school credit for allowing them to read segments of the Vagina Monologues to begin with. It would've been much safer for them to avoid the issue entirely by not approving the reading at all. I.e. they could've banned the whole thing rather than just the one word. I wouldn't agree with that either, of coruse, but I'm glad they didn't go to that extreme.

I think ultimately the debate hinges on the nuances of the "agreement". Was it mutually agreed on? I can see the school calling something an agreement even if it was only one sided (ex. agreement = we told them not to say it). Did the girls commit to it by saying "ok, we won't say 'vagina'" and then go back on their word, or did the school just assume that they wouldn't? This knowledge is essential for determining if anything other than saying "vagina" occured.

[MikeD]

In this instance insubordination = failure to censor.

:2far:

Sorry, just simply don't agree with you.


I think ultimately the debate hinges on the nuances of the "agreement". Was it mutually agreed on? I can see the school calling something an agreement even if it was only one sided (ex. agreement = we told them not to say it). Did the girls commit to it by saying "ok, we won't say 'vagina'", or did the school just assume that they wouldn't? This knowledge is essential for determining if anything other than saying "vagina" occured.


He said school administrators had been concerned about the use of the word because young children would be at the open mic session, and the girls had agreed not to say it.

They're guilty!

Death penalty!!! :hihi:

[cheapie]

this is not a free speech issue. while i might argue it's not really an inappropriate word to use, they aren't really in a public arena where you can say anything you want. this topic has been beaten to death here with regards to what you can wear, present, write, etc. in the school setting.

[LPMiller]

sometimes, you have to be insubordinate.

[cruelpupet]

this is not a free speech issue. while i might argue it's not really an inappropriate word to use, they aren't really in a public arena where you can say anything you want. this topic has been beaten to death here with regards to what you can wear, present, write, etc. in the school setting.

Two words...

PUBLIC school :)

[MikeD]

Two words...

PUBLIC school :)

Really?

I guess they should be able to come to school in bikinis too, right? I mean, that's acceptable beach attire. And the guys in nothing but shorts on.

Would that fly?

The arguments being posted here on the girl's behalf are reaaaaaly getting a bit thin.

[ShawnLee]

Two words...

PUBLIC school :)
Which brings up another two words: Time and Place, as in the restrictions to speech that are accepted by the Supreme Court and therefore are acceptable under law.

[cruelpupet]

But...it is not disruptive speec as they were reading from the vagina monologues in an assembly.

[cheapie]

Two words...

PUBLIC school :)


what? so that means....nothing. the schools can, do, and have enforced dress codes, decided what's appropriate to say, write, etc. that doesn't mean i think they're right in this instance, but they're seemingly within the bounds of their authority here.

[Napoleon54]

sometimes, you have to be insubordinate.

:stupid: :agree:

[Houdini]

Which brings up another two words: Time and Place, as in the restrictions to speech that are accepted by the Supreme Court and therefore are acceptable under law.

Yep. I'm all for free speech, but people do lose some rights upon entering school campuses. I can't carry a weapon on school campuses, though I can most other places.