Mama's baby, Rapist's maybe?

I saw a picture on facebook today, that really made me think.  It talked about the Republican vote against abortion for rape and incest victims.  Now I understand that those who are pro-choice, myself included, are essentially in favor of preventing a life from being born.  But what about the life that is already here, now.  Do we ignore how it affects them?  Are the rights of the unborn, not quite human, indecipherable from a chicken, cluster of cells more important than the woman who is carrying it?  Rape is already a vicious and heinous crime, with memories that haunt victims for a lifetime.  But, to prohibit abortion, means not only do those memories haunt them, but now there is a physical, constant reminder of the day where a choice was taken from them. 

With the outlawing of abortion for rape victims, what will happen next?  Do the rapists get to have parental rights?  If caught, will he have to pay for child support? Can he petition for joint custody, meaning the woman can never put that day behind because she would routinely see the sick barbarian who claimed dominion over what was not his? What if the rape victim doesn't have health insurance (which Obamacare would prevent by the way), who pays for all of the medical expenses? By expenses I mean the ultrasounds, doctors, the person who administers the epidural, the nurses who watches over this hate-made baby. These expenses alone cost almost $20,000.  Who pays for the diapers, the formula, the clothes, the daycare, and extra-curricular activities?  Is it fair to make a woman who did not want any of these things, be bound by law to pay for them? 

Not to mention, how a pregnancy can affect other aspects of a woman's life.  Pregnancy is taxing on the body.  And pregnancy and giving birth are not 100% safe.  Even though, it is a small percentage of women who die from giving birth, the risk is still there.  More importantly, pregnancy is exponentially more dangerous on a child.  By child, I don't mean a 15 or 16 year old girl, I mean the little girl who is still in elementary school, with pig tails in her hair.  To have a girl on the cusp of young adulthood, be forced to give birth is unbelievable cruel.  Not only is her innocence lost, but so is her hope of returning to a somewhat normal life.

Now many would say that adoption is always an option.  Those who have never had to make this decision should close their mouths now.  In the midst of coping with having your most inner and sacred part of you ripped to shreds by an uncaring monsterous degenerate and dealing with the physiological and psychological changes of pregnancy, you must now make the hardest decision of your life: to give away your child.  No one can understand the gravity of that thought unless they have had to make it themselves.  Some may ask how is adoption a harder decision than abortion.  To hold your child, to hear it cry, wrap its hand around your finger and then hand your baby to a stranger... is more than one can bear.

I think the Republican ideology to ban abortion for rape and incest victims is incredibly insensitive and demoralizing, stemming from a fabricated delusion of self-righteous, right-wing religious bigotry.    I firmly believe that those who should make the choice about rape and incest victim rights, should be rape and incest victims.  Their voices should be heard, whether it be for or against the ban.  But politicians who are so far gone from the reality of the every day woman, should not be the ones who decide on a woman's reproductive right.

Yes, love and cherish the creation of hate and rage filled act that you didn't ask for and had no choice but to keep.. yea.. that sounds promising- said no sane person ever 

Best I never had??

As I continue on my journey of not settling for any guy,,, my clock is ticking. I often reminisce on a guy I will call "Vincent".  Now granted I was never in an official relationship with him, he is the longest relationship I've ever had.  I honestly didn't appreciate the little things he did while I was with him.  I never had to ask for quality time or wonder why I hadn't heard from him in 3 days.  I would give my left arm to have that comfort again.  He was very attractive.. tall, "good" hair, atheletic, in college and good behind closed doors.  But the fact remains he wasn't the best for me since we no longer speak.

The issue now is, no one has seemed to measure up to him or surpass him.  I was younger when I was with him so some things that weren't important then are major issues now, like children and where to live.  But those things aren't even relevent since I can't get to the point with a guy where they would be a deciding factor.  I seem to fall into this never ending cycle of liking a guy who is vaguely interested in me or not ready to settle down and the guys who like me, I'm vaguely interested in, if at all.

So I begin to ask the question was Vincent the best I'll ever have?  The answer honestly scares me because if he was... the future is bleak at best.  What should I do?  Just continue as usual, change my standards? What do you do when no one measures up to the one before?  Is it all a mind game or was he the best?  I am over Vincent so thats no the issue as many would think, but he did set a standard, which wasn't very high... yet no one can pass it.

(WO)MAN LAW

We've all heard of the "Bro Code" or  "Man Law", but what about us gals?  What rules and laws do we have to follow?  What is the proper procedure we should follow when it comes to nights out and men?

This question arose on a night out with my girlfriends when we ventured out to Ust and Adams Morgan, DC; Two live areas for the 20 something socialites of the city.  Now it is understood then when girls go out, we are in competition with all the other single, and some not-so-single women that are out prowling the city.  But, in a group of girls, are we in competition with each other?  Many of us would say that we aren't, but lets look at the facts.

If there are three girls and two guys, one girl is going home empty handed.  But how is it decided who that one girl is?  One of my good girlfriends has adapted the policy that once you say you think a guy is cute, he is off limits.  But what happens when you make that claim but don't act upon it, is he back on the table?

Now there is no issue of course if none of the girls are interested in a guy, but what happens when Guy A talks to Girl A, and that leaves Guy B talking with Girls B and C.  FACEOFF!!  To your corners ladies!!  Sadly, in this event one girl will lose.  Should Girl C be mad that Girl B got the guy?  Many of us ladies would be "in our feelings" and feel as though Girl B has almost stolen the guy from us.  I think however, it is up to the guy anyway who he wants to pursue.  When presented with two options, we select the one that is best for us at that time.

So how do we handle this situation?  Do we not approach or entertain at all if everyone can't get one?  Or do we accept that there may be a chance that one of us doesn't get a prize?  Do we follow the rule that once we claim a guy within our girl circle, he is off limits even if he is not interested?  What do we do ladies?

From my standpoint, again it is ultimately up to the guy.  If more than one of your friends is interested, ladies stand up straight, smile with your eyes and let the games begin!!!  Because at the end of the day, you want your friends to be happy, even if its with the tall, dark and handsome guy you didn't know.

Politics and Education

In a time of political chaos and a declining economy, mass layoffs and budget cuts have become the norm for American society.  With each cut, businesses and families are drastically affected.  But when it comes to education, no one seems to truly understand the ramifications of budget cutting...

I worked in Prince George's County public school system last school year.  I witnessed firsthand how tragic lack of funds can cripple a school.  A social studies class with 55 students in it at one time... a nation that doesn't know its history will be lost in the future.  More depressing is that two teachers from the social studies department were cut by the end of the year.

Now you may be asking, how does politics fit in with education?  Well, when teachers have to be cut, it isn't the black and white process you may think it is.  Teachers with tenure of course have precedence over rookie teachers.  But what happens when there are only tenured teachers to be fired?

Well the logical thing would be to look for teachers who are "unsatisfactory" and let those teachers go.  However, that was not the case at Bowie High School.  This is where the politics come in to play.  An unsatisfactory teacher, who is tenured, has to be declared as so two times in order to be fired.  In this case, two teachers were up for elimination; both had been working for the system the same amount of years; one who had been satisfactory for the duration of his career, and the other had received an unsatisfactory that year.  Now again, most would think a no brainer of who to let go.  However, the teacher that had shown consistent satisfaction, had even been chosen to be a mentor two years in a row, was selected to be terminated. 

Why do you ask?  So that the unsatisfactory teacher could work another year, be determined as unsatisfactory and then fired, with the hopes that the satisfactory teacher could find somewhere else in the county to teach.  The same county that was letting go over 1,000 teachers. 

Now I am not a parent, but I would be very disturbed to find out that a teacher deemed unsatisfactory would be chosen to teach over a teacher who was in good standing.  More importantly, if this is occuring over the county, state and nation, is it any wonder why students test scores are declining and children are less prepared for college? 

Who is responsible for making these decisions?  The principals?  The High School Consortium?  The Superintendent?  All these important personnel, who are getting paid well over $100,000 a year, are making poor decisions that affect our nation's children and our nation's future.  So much for the motto of "Children First".

Bowie High..Not so Suburban anymore

Bowie is one of the most prestigious and fastest growing areas in Prince George's county, MD.  It is known for its half of a million dollar homes and ever growing population of upper middle class citizens.  It would seem only fitting that the educational establishments would follow suit.  I am a proud product of 2 schools in Bowie, only venturing out for the Science and Technology program at Eleanor Roosevelt High School. 

Bowie  High school is one of the better high schools in Prince George's county, even housing the Principal of the year for Maryland.   As a member of the staff and witnessing the inter-workings of Bowie High, I have come to the conclusion that it is only great because so many others are below par.  Parents this year alone have complained of seniors having half day schedules simply because there weren't enough teachers or classes to provide them with a full day schedule.  In a time where America is falling further and further behind other countries in education, this is unacceptable.

Now besides quality education, a parent's top priority is the safety of his or her child.  When this is compromised, someone somewhere has failed.  I am at the Annex building of Bowie High, where it is only freshman students.  For the largest class of freshman ever at Bowie High school, with its own building, there is a grand total of 3 security guards.  Now since this is Bowie, and most children come from good backgrounds, the lack of security is usually non consequential.  I have broken up 2 fights this year (mind you I am all of 5'3 where most freshman boys are now towering over me at 5'10-6'0) without the aid of security; one time security showed up, strolling down the hallway, once the fight had been resolved for almost 2 minutes.  Now fights are dangerous but managable.  But what happens when something, let's say more life threatening happens?

That is exactly what occured, May 19, 2011 at approximately 2:15pm.  Bowie is an early school and the Annex dismisses 10 minutes earlier than the Main building.  So at 2:15pm, right after the final bell had rung for dismissal, I am packing up my things to go home, when I hear what sounds like a stampede in the hallway.  I look up, puzzled to what could be going on, and a student runs to my door and shouts "He has a gun!".  Immediately I spring in to action, still having 3 students in my classroom that walk home, and tell the student to close my door.  She closes the door, but reopens it to allow one of her friends in.  At this point I am screaming for her to close the door.  Eventually, she looks out the door window, against my suggestion to get away from the door, and says that the hallway is clear.  We later found out that the student had a knife, not a gun.  The student had been in the building the whole day with the knife on him.  None the less, in that time, the teacher across the hall had been calling security for about 5 minutes.  No one ever showed up.  No security was in the hallway.  We were left to our own defenses against a hysterical student with a weapon.  Eventually, students told the lead security guard who the student was and the student who was attacked.  By this time, both boys had exited the building.  One had even made it onto his bus to go home. 

When events like this occur, parents, staff and students should be notified.  This also did not occur.  No letters were sent home, no emails to staff, yet we've had meetings for lesser reasons. 

Events like this are truly scary because in a time where this rising generation cares less and less about human life and respect for authority, we are increasingly becoming out numbered.  School is supposed to be a safe place, but when those who are getting paid the big bucks negate to protect their pawns in this twisted game of chess, everyone loses.

Mortal Combat: Love vs Logic

Many times in life we are faced with choices.  If everything were black and white things would be so much easier.. Yes.. No... if those were the only two choices things wouldn't be so difficult.  However, life is filled with gray areas... the maybe.. the but what ifs.. the well if this were to change...  So what happens when the gray area is when determining a mate?

All of us have our deal breakers, meaning things that are non-negotiable.  These deal breakers vary from person to person, ie tall, thick, wealthy, to many guys fav of a phatt butt and many women's preference for..err... ummm.. well let's just say size matters. 

For many of us these are just preferences.  Most people have lists of things that we want in a mate, but are all of those things equal in weight?  For example, is height as important as salary?  Does good conversation hold the same weight as good hair? 

Some things are clearly important to a healthy relationship like communication skills, attractiveness, job stability (yes, money matters) and of course a healthy sex life.  The issue I always seem to run into is finding a guy who has some of the qualities I deem important but not all. 

Since deciding to stop accepting certain types of guys in my life, that meant I had to do some spring cleaning.  So guys who had some but not all had to go.  But was that the wise choice?

One guy in particular, many would say I made the wrong choice.  He was successful, educated, tall, beautiful brown skin, nice body build, with no kids and seemed to be interested in me.   He was willing to travel to come see me and would try to look out for me when I needed it.  He eventually started sending poetry to me as well.. yea its corny but I was an English major so the idea was nice.  So why do you ask did I let him go?  I wasn't attracted to him physically.  There was no spark when I looked at him or was around him.  I didn't get that little fluttery feeling in my stomach like I did with other guys who I had liked in the past.

I would rather be with a guy who maybe didn't graduate from college, had a steady job, with a child (not children) or some other less than ideal trait than be with someone who I wasn't attracted to.  Do not confuse attractive with attracted, there is a difference.  I can look at someone and say they are attractive without being attracted to them, nothing draws me to that person.  Logically, the guy who I let go would have been the best choice, however, my heart wasn't in it.  I had tried in the past to make my heart see what my brain did, but it never happened.

So in the battle of love vs logic.... TKO Love wins...... Didn't Bella choose Edward over Jacob?

To Defend or Not To Defend? Which is legal?

Now I am a very compassionate person and usually act like a grandma since I work with kids, so its in my nature to worry and coddle.  I usually am sympathetic to most causes and often give the beneit of the doubt.  I'm that girl who gets stood up and thinks well maybe his car broke down or his phone was stolen so he couldn't reach me.  However, when it comes to obligations, I get a little indignant.  Meaning I favor choice.

I was watching the news the other night and the report was very disturbing.  Apparently, a transgendered woman/man/IDK was beaten to the point she/he/it had a seisure in the corner of a Baltimore Mcdonalds.  This was all caught on videotape by an employee that worked at the Mcdonalds.  The two girls who beat her (I'll just say her since that what she appears to look like) were 14 and 18 years old.  They were mad because their boyfriends had hit on the transgendered girl and decided to take their anger out on her.  

There are so many issues with this one scenario that this case could become monumental.  The first being the possible hate crime associated since it is a transgendered person.  The second being, the fact that a 14 year old would have the audacity or even the mentality that it is approriate behavior to beat and kick another person until the point of a seizure. But the issue that I'd like to address is:  Are the employeess who stood by and did nothing accountable for the girl's beating? 

This is a very touchy subject, especially for those who have been bullied, jumped or had to fight a lot growing up.  The girl who was beaten is suing the employees for not helping her.  Now, granted I've stopped fights or attempted to break up fights because I'm a teacher, however, if I were on the street... No Mam.  I am not going to risk my health for the sake of yours.  Yes, I will call 911.  Yes, I will yell STOP!  Yes, I will try to help calm the situation before you get the snot beat out of you.  But there is no way in this world am I going to jump in a fight between two or more grown people that has nothing to do with me.    People these days do not value life.  Who says that the person beating you doesn't have a knife, gun or a freakin machete. Yes, I said machete... it could happen. This person could have trained with the masters and know the art of the lotus dragon or some crap.   

So does she have a case?  Should these on lookers, employees of McDonalds, have helped her?  Yes, if that was their choice to do so.  If they are found guilty, that sets the precidence that anyone who witnesses a fight must then take action to stop it.  MUST.  Legally obligated at that point.

This would sit fine with me a little bit if it weren't for the case that happened last year where 2 or 3 security guards stood by while a teen girl was jumped by a group of teens.  Yes, SECURITY GUARDS.  So that seems like an open and shut case.  NOPE.  Reporters soon found out that the security guards weren't legally supposed to help.  Its not in their contract.  They are supposed to alert the police.  That is it.

So why is it that we as citizens are supposed to be held to a higher standard than that of security guards.  Their job purpose is to protect, not mine.

I feel bad for this girl/boy but you can't sue people for not helping you. If you can I'm going to start suing a whole bunch of folks!!