February 9, 2017 - 23:22
This week I've been thinking a lot about what is and isn't "inclusive." I started to worry about the topic because of my involvement with the Bryn Mawr production of The Vagina Monologues: a show that is often considered to be out-dated and only representative of certain types of women. When we were talking about inclusion (especially inclusion of all voices), I was wondering if putting on such a show is a negative thing; can a show that has negative connotations still be informative and even important?
Literacy, especially on a topic like sexual health is really important, and it's not one that is often taught. Schools often shy away from sexual education, and even when I was selling tickets, I realized how few people would come up to the table- simply because the use of the word vagina made them uncomfortable. In this way, a narrow version of this literacy through the Vagina Monologues still serves as an enterance point. We're trying to as a cast have talk backs and conversation to stretch comfort zones, but I still worry it's not enough.
Are we then a brave space? Can we be a brave space without conversation? Are we a safe space instead? I haven't really figured that one out yet.