Janie Boschma

After reading the article “Women’s Rights, Not Lefts” in the latest issue of the Riverfront Review, I was left feeling angry and very confused. With every positive thing I read, there was a statement to contradict it. I don’t believe everyone has to have the same opinions as me.

I’m wondering how anyone could feel that “Promoting women’s rights was a good thing, at first.” How can it not be a good thing anymore? I don’t believe the majority of women feel they are better than men, but they are still not considered equal to them; that is why we still continue to work toward equality. Second, women do not need to stay home with their children. What is this, 1954? I have decided not to have children. My sister is currently the “breadwinner” in her family, while my brother-in-law – who sees his children as much his responsibility as his wife’s – goes to school. Thirdly, the only time rape is not the man’s fault is when the woman is the one who rapes someone. As far as a female president goes, I know there are intelligent people out there who vote based on who is best qualified to lead our country, not based on that person’s gender.

Here comes the confusing part. The article states that “V-Day generates broader attention for the fight to stop violence against women and girls, including rape, battery, incest, female genital mutilation (FGM) and sexual slavery.” But why do you need to fight for women’s protection against rape if it is not always the man’s fault that a woman is raped? And I’m curious; would you tell women at the Bolton Refuge House that it’s not always the man’s fault?

I’m happy to see someone try to explain that “The Vagina Monologues” are not “inappropriate.” I don’t believe the vagina or talking openly about violence against a woman and her vagina is inappropriate. But I also don’t believe it is inappropriate for women to talk openly about sex and their vaginas. Men do all the time, that is part of the whole equality thing.

Yes, “the monologues were intense and graphic,” as expressed in the article; they get the point across. But who are these people that “needed” it to be less graphic? “The Vagina Monologues” are meant to be seen by adults. Are these adults not able to handle the truth and reality?

I thought the article did a good job of explaining the Vagina Monologues “Reclaiming Cunt,” but I was confused again when I read that a woman “should be proud of what she has, and what she is.” And that, “if she feels the need to yell about it, let her, I just hope she doesn’t do it in public.”

This is like saying that it’s OK to be proud as long as you hide it from the rest of the world.

I also became confused when the article discussed women’s feelings about their vaginas. I’m happy to hear what any woman wants to express about her vagina, whether it’s a place someone has been before or not. But I’m curious as to what makes “most of these girls” special feelings about their vaginas “normal; and even conservative?” If I have liberal feelings about my vagina, does that make my feelings about it not “normal?”

Maybe there was a misunderstanding about the petition at the candle light vigil. The goal is to see that all hospitals would be required to have the “morning-after pill” available to rape victims who came into the hospital. It is not forcing women to take it, and it is not an abortion; it’s the same as birth control. Here is what I don’t understand about people who are against the morning-after pill, or birth control for that matter. They don’t want abortion, or single mothers – because heaven forbid the government should have to financially help them – or sex education, or the morning-after pill. So I’m curious as to what a conservative, single woman who does not believe in abortion, cannot financially support a child, and who gets pregnant because she has been the victim of sexual assault would plan to do?

The article made me angry and again confused when the idea of helping others was brought up. The article states that “most conservatives believe that people should help themselves and we shouldn’t need to ask the government for money,” but it has also been my experience that most conservatives are “Christians” who believe in Jesus, who believed in helping others, including financially.

If “we should do as much as we can to help those who cannot help themselves so that they can get on their feet, work for themselves and contribute in a positive way to society” and if “violence against women is everybody’s problem,” why and how does “we” not include our government? Our government is, “We the people.”

Let me say that I also “want women to let go of self doubt, move ahead without hesitation, and be proud of who they are and who they want to be.”

I agree that sometimes we need to set our differences aside for the greater good, but I’m not sure that is possible when someone doesn’t seem sure what those differences are or what they really believe in.

Wee is a sophomore English education major and guest columnist for The Spectator.