Are You There God? It's Me, Chrystal: Trump, DeSantis ... and Judy Blume :)

 

So as mentioned, I said I probably wouldn't write again unless Trump was indicted.  Well, of course, he has been (yay!)

And he has released the song, "Justice for All" by The J6PC" on iTunes, which he debuted at his Waco,  Texas rally, of course the site of the infamous Waco Compound/ATF battle.

For those of you who don't know, "J6PC" stands for January 6th Prison Choir" - it's literally a recording of the convicted prisoners from the January 6th violent insurrection, singing the national anthem, with Trump's voice overlaid.

But you don't have to buy it - because I have it here for you, in all its ridiculous hypocrisy :)

Unless, of course, you WANT to buy it and support his legal fund.

(Told you that's what those Christmas trading cards he was peddling were about, didn't I? ;) 

And those of you still trying to convince us Antifa was responsible for Jan 6 - what say you now?  :)

Because Trump is openly celebrating and making money off January 6th!

So we're less shocked, these days, with his narcissistic audacity, and more LMAO at him, but should we be losing our ability to be shocked ?

But what IS hilarious is Fox News hosts now trying to act like they're just now shocked by him LOL!

And we still need to leave enough shock room for Ron DeSantis and his acolytes in Florida, who are leading the charge to ban books, and not just LGBTQ or race-related books - but Judy Blume for her discussion of menstruation, addressing the tendency of young girls to pass around misinformation about sex, getting this information from friends, sisters, etc in lieu of proper sex ed. 

As we know, the "sexual abstinence/purity/promise" public school programs in the 2000s failed miserably and resulted in the exact opposite of the intent (personal story about that below), but Republicans are now trying a different angle - in Florida, with House Bill 1069 - which limits sex education to 6th through 12th grades, including menstruation discussion.

And if you doubt me, below is a video clip of the Sponsor of HB 1069, Florida State Representative Stan McClain (R) being questioned about the menstruation aspect of this bill by Representative Ashley Gant (a former teacher) (D).

(***My apologies, the local news site sharing this video has made this video unable to be imbedded on other sites, so you'll need to follow the link to YouTube.)

It went like this:

Representative Gant (D): “So if little girls experience their menstrual cycle in 5th grade or 4th grade, will that prohibit conversations from them since they are in the grade lower than sixth grade?” .

Representative McClain (R): “It would."

???

Erm, as Representative Gant said,  these days, the age range for menstruation is 9 to 17, with most falling somewhere between 10 and 15 - this NHS site claiming as young as 8 - regardless, often at least a couple of years before 6th grade.

So I can imagine some poor 4th-grader going to the bathroom to find blood in their underwear, but being prohibited to discuss that with a teacher or anyone in the school, in a panic, not knowing this was normal :(

And just before this, Florida tried to pass a bill mandating that female athletes were menstruating to be on teams - when as I said here previously - and is also in the NHS link above - being underweight, strenuously athletic, or having a hormonal imbalance can all cause periods to be delayed, skipped, or even absent?

In fact, I, myself, didn't start menstruating until I was 16 (I was super skinny).

Which would mean that in Florida, I couldn't be on a sports team until then, until they took that piece out of the legislation!

Lucky for them, I'm not good at contact sports anyway lol. 

But if I was asked if I was menstruating on any form for sports, I would've told them "Not yet, but I'll keep this form as a sanitary napkin for when I do and give it back to you then, as proof" :)

Okay - how ignorant ARE you, modern Republicans, that nowadays, you don't know that the typical age range for young girls to start their period these days is 10 to 15, but can happen as young as 8 years old?

And how ignorant/ easily controlled do modern Republicans want US to be?

Do you WANT all girls to be ignorant, easily controlled and pregnant, having no clue how that happened or what? 

Thus, Judy /Blume is making the rounds at interviews for Variety and BBC, being very vocal about book-banning - and says that the first time she went through this, it was just various private lobbying groups - but now it's the actual government banning books - which is dangerous!

Amen!

Go Judy Blume!

Now - above, I had spoken about the "Sexual Abstinence" crazy of the 2000s.

I rarely mentioned my daughter on here due to prior experience, but with this topic, I don't think she'd mind ;)

When she was in middle school, we lived in Northern Kentucky - which Lexingtonians here refer to as the Northern-Kentucky Nazis because they are very hard core right, arrogant, and merciless.

At that time, there was no more sex education in public schools - only sex abstinence classes - which, of course, I thought was absurd, but it was required. 

So not only was I solely responsible for educating my daughter on the pros and cons of sex, the consequences of sex (and not just the physical ones like pregnancy or STIs, but the emotional consequences) and to combat preteen misinformation about sex, but I now had to defend my daughter from the teacher herself, who was  demanding that she sign the "Promise" form or not pass the class.

Here's how THAT conversation went in 2008:

Sex Abstinence Teacher:  "Hello, Ms. Smith?  I'm _____.  I'm calling because I'm very concerned, your daughter is politely refusing to sign the Promise form, which promises not to engage in sex until she's married.  Not only is this a requirement for passing the class, but it's worrisome that she might be engaging in premarital sex soon.  

 

Me:  "Oh - was she rude to you ?" 

 

SA Teacher:  "No, no, she was very polite.  She just said, 'To be honest, I have a lot of questions still about sex and I don't see the difference between some guy pressuring me to have sex without all the information and the school pressuring me to sign this Promise form without all the information.'" 

 

Me:  (Trying to stifle a chuckle).  "Okay, well .... she does have a point, right? 

 

SA Teacher:  "I can see that, but-" 

 

Me:  "So have you asked her if she's sexually active?" 

 

SA Teacher:  "Well, no." 

 

Me:  "Then I'm not sure what makes you assume this means other than exactly what she said.  Just so you know, I have asked her and she's not.  She has a lot of questions first, as she said.  She doesn't feel all her questions are answered, she isn't ready." 

 

SA Teacher:  "Well, that's actually what she said as her reasoning for not signing the form,." 

 

Me: "Right, and so did you answer any of them for her?" 

 

SA Teacher:  "Well, no, that's not the focus of this class, that's not within my purview." 

 

Me: "So help me out, then, because I had actual sexual education, where we could openly ask questions about sex - so what IS the focus of this class and 'within your purview?'" 

 

SA Teacher: "To prevent children from having premarital sex." 

 

Me:  "Yeah, and how's that working out?" 

 

SA Teacher:  "We believe it's effective in prevention of premarital sex." 

 

Me:  "With all due respect to your beliefs, do you actually have scientific evidence that this class is effective in preventing premarital sex?" 

 

SA Teacher:  "Well, not on hand, but I could find that information for you." 

 

Me:  "Really?  That's interesting, because I haven't been able to find those studies proving that. I think we'd have to follow them long term to know, in fact, which is why I'm wondering why such a class would be implemented in public schools without proof of efficacy." 

"Additionally, I'm not promoting premarital sex, by any means, but I think it's unrealistic to expect them to wait until marriage, and potentially harmful, in that they could be legally locked in a bad marriage over sex. "

 

SA Teacher:  "I've seen the evidence.  I'll send them to you." 

 

Me:  "Great!  So I tell you what - you send me that evidence and I'll reconsider my stance, but without that information, I support my daughter's decision to not sign the Promise form -  not because she wants to engage in premarital sex, but because she's not ready - she doesn't want to make any decision about sex until she has all of her questions answered, and as you just said, you can't do that for her, you're limited."

 

"So here's a deal for you to consider.  If you are able to find  solid evidence that this class is effective in preventing premarital sex, then she signs the Promise form and passes the class. " 

"If you are unable to find that evidence, she doesn't sign the form and she passes the class anyway - do we have a deal?" 

 

SA Teacher:  "That's fair.  I'm sure I can find that information for you. 

 

Me:  "Great!  Thank you so much! "

Of course -  I never received any evidence from her that the class was effective in preventing premarital sex - because just as I'd said, there wasn't any  :)

Also, my daughter passed the class without signing the form, per our deal :)

And in fact, we now we know these classes failed miserably to prevent premarital sex, the programs were an epic fail, after long-term studies were done - and yet they won't stop trying to find new ways to restrict sex education and control our private sex lives.

And I'm also super happy to report that my daughter was one of the last people in that class to engage in sexual activity later :)

Point being, when public schools do not properly educate children on sex, it's left to the parents and authors like Judy Blume to step in and answer questions with scientific backup, as well as relationship  issues as best we can, to correct any misinformation other kids pass along to them and educate them.

As for my personal sex education, though very religious, my mom was a former nurse and DID have "the talk" with us, but it only went so far - it was basic physical/biological mechanics that ended with a "never before marriage" focus.

And if I asked any specific questions about sex, I was met with the dreaded "thin-lipped face." LOL

So all I can say is, Thank GOD for my middle-school sex-ed class,  Judy Blume, and "Are You There, God?  It's Me, Margaret."  - and I mean that, this Palm Sunday! :)

And lastly what I have to say is this ...

Republicans - would  PLEASE mind your business and stop trying to government mandate  our personal consensual sex lives - particularly the private sex/reproductive choices of women, clearly without having any biological knowledge at all yourselves as to how things work - and and stop trying to government mandate them?

Not only is your obsession with sex beyond creepy, but with all that's going on in the world, it's really the last thing you should be focused on.

And I'm pretty sure that neither God, nor Jesus, ever meant for us to stay so ignorant and in the dark  - nor obsess about consensual sex as much as we do -  when there's so much more harmful sin out there, that Jesus repeatedly preached against (greed, hypocrisy, judgement without mercy)!