The Observer Viewpoint is a sounding board for groups and individuals with opposing, irreconcilable differences, and one opinionated letter can provoke passionate objections, as in the recent case of "The Vagina Monologues." Like the issues of abortion, the death penalty and parietals, no single brilliant letter will change a resolved mind; it will simply generate a brilliant retort. Regardless of how convincing or zealous the letter, yet another person will write in opposing the oppposer.

And so the argument over the morality of "The Vagina Monologues" may seem tedious and rather futile.

But the argument is, for me, precisely the most important part of this monologue. Even as a self-proclaimed liberated woman with high aspirations and no regard for glass ceilings, I do find some of the subject matter of the "Monologues" rather crude and discomforting. I can only imagine what a conservative male student must feel.

Though some of the material might be objectionable, the play was written by women for women in order to further confidence and understanding, not to provide water-cooler jokes. Those who attend the "Monologues" for the liberation, the thought-provoking dialogue, and the eye-opening material will treat it with the respect it deserves — with the respect that women deserve.

Those who go for the entertainment and controversy will certainly find all of the degradation and indignity that has caused so much dissension. And this is one of the major successes of the "Monologues." People are talking. Men and women alike are engaging in conversation that has been long overdue.

Very few people have written The Observer complaining about the tactful and polite Sex Education Videos presented to children in the sixth grade, and I have rarely heard any thoughtful, progressive dialogue about the moral implications of learning where a woman's ovaries are located. The videos were created to serve the purpose of education, and they do so effectively.

The objectionable language and material of the "Monologues" is necessary to stimulate conversation. It was created for that purpose and by the responses it has generated, it has obviously done so successfully.

Look back at every letter written to The Observer about the "Monologues." Both sides are present valid arguments, and yet still adamantly disagree. Why?

Because women deserve dignity and respect; because women need confidence and pride in their sexuality; because the woman's body is scared and should be treated with reverence; and because women need to learn to love their bodies without shame. Is any of this false? Are any of these arguments wrong?

The play itself may be objectionable, but the arguments that it brings up on either side of the issue all serve to promote and celebrate females as beautiful and strong. So, if you think the play is empowering, go see it. If you think it is reprehensible, don't.

But keep talking about it. Remember that the topic is the value and contribution of women in today's society. Women will continue to realize and exceed their potential.

• The topic at hand