So anti-feminist darling Kathleen Parker of the Washington Post just won a Pulitzer Prize for commentary.
The editors at The American Prospect blog TAPPED posted a reminiscence of Parker by TAP’s Kerry Howley from last November’s print issue. (Emphasis mine.)
Save the Males, Kathleen Parker’s 2008 polemic on sexual permissiveness and libertinism, contains the following euphemisms for vagina: “inner sanctum,” “familiars,” “you know what,” “very private parlor,” “sacred vessel,” “vestal vestibule,” and “hirsute abyss of God’s little oven.” We will be, laments Parker in her obligatory chapter on Eve Ensler’s The Vagina Monologues, so “awash in vaginaism,” that we are nothing beyond “vaginas on the plain seeking out other vaginas with which to hold hands and gaze unlongingly into the silky night of a manless moon.” We have abandoned a better, gentler America, a place where women were “above this sort of thing,” a nation where men did not “talk about vaginas in public.”
Funny. Just yesterday a friend asked me about unusual vaginal discharge and I told her what I knew about it. Worse (from Kathleen Parker’s perspective, I suppose) I grabbed a couple of medical reference books, did some follow-up research on Google, and we talked about that too.
Here’s where it gets tricky. Because I’ve been in intimate relationships with women for a number of decades, and therefore I’m relatively familiar with different kinds of discharges, I briefly considered suggesting I take a quick look at her vagina. I balked, however, because in order to do that I’d have seen her vulva as well. We’re not on those sort of terms, however, and so I don’t think either of us would have been comfortable with that.
While I feel Parker should feel reassured by my reservations I have a feeling she wouldn’t be. I expect she’d be appalled that I’m familiar enough with “inner sanctums,” “familars,” “you know whats,” “hirstute abyss of God’s little ovens” (though statistics suggest these days they’re actually hirsute only about half the time), and “down theres” that I can distinguish vaginas from vulvas.
Meanwhile I’m embarrassed that Parker doesn’t make the distinction.
And speaking of distinctions, what’s the difference between “talking about vaginas in public” and writing about them, disparagingly no less, in the pages of the Washington Post?
“Vestal vestibule?” That’s
Submitted by K (not verified) on Mon, 2010-04-12 16:49.“Vestal vestibule?” That’s what it is now? New diagnosis: K has vestal vestibulitis. What? No.
I tell you what, I have absolutely no desire to go back in time to a point where we did not talk about these things. I don’t think anybody benefits by being ignorant of their own bodies. Hasn’t she heard purity is a myth?
And I’ve seen Kathleen Parker’s column in my local paper for awhile, she’s Syndicated & all. She has said some just,... weird at times contradictory stuff.
Now if you’ll excuse me I do believe I have to go look for some other vaginas with which to hold hands and stare at a manless moon. For some reason. I’ve never done that before but according to her it’s what I’ve been doing all along so I better get on the ball.
[There’s also the matter of “vestal” being defined as “A virgin consecrated to Vesta, and to the service of watching the sacred fire, which was to be perpetually kept burning upon her altar; A virgin; a woman pure and chaste; also, a nun; Of or pertaining to Vesta, the virgin goddess of the hearth; hence, pure; chaste.” Which obviously only a subset of, um, vestibules are. I’m now even more concerned about Parker’s sense of anatomy: vestibules and vaginas are different parts. Thanks, K. —fl]
K, that would be vestibulitis
Submitted by Sungold (not verified) on Mon, 2010-04-12 21:35.K, that would be vestibulitis dedicated to keeping you vestal. Trouble is, you didn’t sign up for perpetual virginity … Here’s to you living as unconsecrated life as you wish.
And yeah, Parker is weird enough to be almost interesting. Her anatomy is only the start. Even though I’m fond enough of hair, calling anything “hirsute” is enough to make it sexually repellent! The word gives me the creepy-crawlies. Okay, maybe that’s my issue, not Parker’s.
A friend of mine made a film
Submitted by calpoet (not verified) on Mon, 2010-04-12 17:15.A friend of mine made a film about a photographer who published a book of close up shots of women’s vaginas. It’s called “Petals” and you can find out more about it at https://nickkarras.com/Home_Page.html I wrote a poem that is featured in the film that seems relevant to your blog today. It’s called “Cunt Variations”:
Cunt Variations
Cunt: the hard-edged word, but truest—
what else but a cunt is it, that portal from
nowhere to now we all traverse?
Pussy: the man’s favorite. Tames
the extraordinary wildness, domesticates
treachery, deceit, whole jungles of fear.
Beaver: utilitarian. Gets things done.
Waddles into pleasure, flaps its tail
Nothing to worry about; split, the porno shot.
Crack: the kid’s way of seeing it.
Simple, straightforward. That’s what it is.
The opening to the egg, the crack in the cosmos.
Snatch: the obscenity. Something you grab.
Hold on to. Under every dress in your subway car.
Between every pair of women’s legs you behold.
Vagina: clinical as medicine. The doctor’s word.
Echos of the virgin. The V shape exposed.
A cousin to labia, a gynecologist’s note.
Hole: no imagination. Nothing to say.
From emptiness to nowhere.
Nobody calls it that. Reserved for the ass.
Bush: inaccurate. Only the exterior
and these days, not even that.
So many shaved now, or trimmed like hedges.
Twat: ugly as spit, never spoken softly.
An adolescent’s choice, all those twats
dreamt about each night. When? when?
Quim, cooch, muff, downtown,
monkey, poozle, pup, slit,
rarer forms, pet names you and your girl know.
Many more, each culture its own: concha,
chacon. The worst thing you can say in Spanish:
La concha de tu madre
The Hawaiian, lovely: punani,
The German, less lovely puderdose
Italian: fregna, lumaca, pipa
On and on, cunt variations,
naming the thing, life’s doorway,
Where the eggs drop, the blood flows.
Featured in the film Petals, a documentary about photographer Nick Karras
[Thanks, Calpoet. —fl]
I guess I’m dumber than I
Submitted by Sungold (not verified) on Mon, 2010-04-12 21:56.I guess I’m dumber than I thought, but I so do not get the significance of the letters appended on the trees! Any interpretations? Or am I just thick tonight?
And also, figleaf? Without special equipment you’re never going to see much vagina. You’ll always see a lot more vulva. Which is diagnostically fine, since any “excess” discharge has been – by its very definition! – discharged from the vagina and has taken up residence in the vulva, or perhaps in one’s panties. (Note, though, that mid-cycle cervical mucous might look suspicious due to its viscousness, yet be perfectly okay. So the very definition of “excess” is individual and variable.) I’m actually very skeptical that a heterosexual man without any special training can diagnose discharges in women – especially one who’s not his regular partner. Most of us women are way more tuned in to our own secretions than our partners are, even after 20 years.
Your reticence is also socially fine, because it sounds like your volunteering would have come across as transgressive, and not in a good or sexy way. If a male friend of mine made such an offer, I’d ask him to get his M.D. first, and then we could talk about me showing him my coochie. Otherwise, I’d take it as a really clear sexual overture, and I’d probably be pissed. Maybe this is already obvious, but if not, it needs to be said. (And then there’s the little matter of what your wife would think.) Anyway, it’s good you didn’t dwell on that idea for too long.
Recaptha: mustangs that (this must relate to sex, but how??)
My favorite fun names are
Submitted by Inferno (not verified) on Mon, 2010-04-12 22:39.My favorite fun names are “the gates of Venus” and “Candy Land.”
Of course I am a male and I talk about vaginas with both men and women on a regular basis.
( I also talk about all things sexual, all things politics, all types of non mainstream lifestyles and religion is a wonderful topic)
I use the word vagina if I am not a good friend, or I say “kitty” if they seem not easy to offend, and I say pussy if I know them well.
I must admit however that many people simply don’t wish to talk about such things and from my personal point of view… I think it is because their parents tought them that they should be ashamed of themselves.
The failure to distinguish
Submitted by Plymouth (not verified) on Mon, 2010-04-12 23:01.The failure to distinguish vagina from vulvas is extremely confusing to children too. You may have even blogged about this previously, but how many of us remember “boys have a penis girls have a vagina!”? I distinctly recall saying to my parents that I pee through my vagina. To which they replied that no I pee through my urethra. And then they told me boys have a urethra too and then I was just TOTALLY confused. A confusion which could have easily been cleared up if they had just used the word vulva, which describes the whole damned thing, which is what I thought they were talking about in the first place when I wanted to know what I was using to pee. I don’t think I learned which part was the vagina until many years later. Or learned why I would even CARE about that part.
So sad, but it wasn’t until I
Submitted by TsaphanBabe (not verified) on Thu, 2010-04-15 16:14.So sad, but it wasn’t until I was in my THIRTIES that I even realized what the vagina was. Totally thought the vulva was the vagina. And, yes, it was The Vagina Monologues that educated me.
My daughter has (and now daughters will) learned the correct anatomical terms. She won’t have the confusion. She’s almost seven and we actually had the conversation about how some people might say “vagina” when they mean vulva or urethra or any other part in the area.
I’ve been trying to get #baldvulvas going on Twitter, without any luck. My idea (only semi-related to this post, but related to others of yours) is to draw attention to the expectation that women wax themselves almost completely if not totally bald. My trouble with it is the expectation not the waxing itself…
Anyway, I wander. I really do enjoy your blog. Thanks for the good work. :-)