The former Yugoslavia appears in the book not as a single, fully described setting but as a region shaped by war, sexual violence, and efforts to make support available to survivors. Its significance lies in the way the text connects an account of wartime atrocities to both public testimony and practical aid: women’s experiences are named, a monologue is dedicated to women of Bosnia, and a crisis center is planned to support women affected by rape and trauma across the region.

Wartime violence and witness

After her first trip to Bosnia, Eve Ensler returned to New York outraged by reports that between 20,000 and 70,000 women were being raped in Europe in 1993 as a systematic tactic of war. The scale and character of the violence, and the apparent failure to stop it, made the conflict a central point of comparison in her reflection on violence against women. A friend challenged her surprise by pointing out that more than 500,000 women were raped each year in the United States, which was not formally at war. The comparison widens the book’s frame: wartime violence in the former Yugoslavia is presented as extreme and organized, but not as wholly separate from violence occurring in peacetime elsewhere.

Ensler says she had spent time with women in camps, cafés, and refugee centers and had returned to Bosnia twice after her first visit. The account places her response within contact with women affected by the conflict, rather than treating the statistics as an abstract report. The passage offers no individual biographies for those women, but it emphasizes their survival and the importance of hearing their accounts. Ensler dedicates the monologue “MY VAGINA WAS MY VILLAGE” to the women of Bosnia and thanks the woman whose story informed it for sharing her experience. The dedication makes the piece a form of witness, while distinguishing the particular woman’s story from the wider group to whom the work is addressed.

A regional response to sexual violence

The former Yugoslavia also appears as the intended reach of organized assistance. The book describes V-Day’s support for the Center for Women War Victims in Croatia, which was expected to open the first rape crisis center in the former Yugoslavia. The center’s purpose was not limited to receiving women locally: it would also train women in Kosova and Chechyna to work with women in those places who had been raped and traumatized during the war. The plan thus links a center in Croatia to a wider network of survivor support and training across borders.

This initiative answers, in practical terms, the book’s account of violence that had seemed to meet too little intervention. The stated work is institutional and preparatory—opening a crisis center and training women—rather than a claim that the violence had been resolved. Its regional scope recognizes that women’s needs extended beyond one site, while the focus on training places local women in the work of supporting others affected by war.

Testimony, difference, and the work’s reach

The book’s approach to violence depends on listening to women whose experiences vary. In describing the interviews that grew into the monologues, Ensler says she spoke with more than two hundred women, including people of different ages, marital statuses, sexual orientations, occupations, and ethnic backgrounds. This breadth provides a context for understanding why the account of a woman from Bosnia is both particular and part of a wider work: the monologue draws on an individual story, yet its dedication recognizes a community of women living through wartime atrocities.

That commitment to listening continues after performances. Women approach Ensler to tell their own stories and communicate their responses, turning the work’s public presentation into an occasion for further testimony. The book describes these exchanges as one of her favorite parts of traveling with the work. In this structure, the former Yugoslavia is not only the location of a crisis described through numbers; it is also connected to an ongoing practice of listening, acknowledgment, and support. The proposed center gives that recognition an institutional counterpart, while the monologue keeps the testimony of women affected by war in public view.