Things I Used to Wear: S.T.A.R.S.

Look you guys, I need to get something off my chest: I used to volunteer as a abstinence-only "teen mentor" for middle-schoolers.

Seriously: in the Students Today Aren't Ready for Sex program, or S.T.A.R.S. for short. This is the shirt I wore every week to brainwash the young and impressionable minds of 12- and 13-year-old boys and girls.

I'm so embarrassed. I was going to confess this yesterday in my Blog for Choice post because it seemed relevant. But then, on the other hand, it didn't seem relevant.

In my defense, I was young and foolish. I needed to pad my college applications with something more versatile and substantial than athletics. S.T.A.R.S. was perfect in this capacity. To the casual viewer, this activity demonstrated that I was compassionate and interested in current affairs; a leader among men. However, to anyone else I probably seemed like a spineless d-bag, easily persuaded into selling her soul by empty rhetoric and the possibility of interacting with conservative Christian boys.

You know, the funny thing is that sometimes being a spineless d-bag has it's advantages. In the 3rd week of my second year doing S.T.A.R.S. (no, I didn't get enough the first time around), both of my co-mentors were going to be out of town for some super-fab spring break trip I wasn't invited to. There were a number of fellow mentors who could fill in for the one session, but I decided to impose on a guy I'd been interested in for the past few months. Why not? The fact was I needed someone to help me run the session, and this was innocent enough. Plus, he had a car.

So, what happened? Did we hook up wearing our S.T.A.R.S. shirts? Um, no. This is not that story. The boy in question, let's call him Val Kilmer, agreed to assist me for the one session. We were alone in his car. We got lunch. We talked about music and mutual friends. It was one of those very strange situations that when you're in them, you have no idea what's going on. Afterwards, you think that maybe it could have been almost a date, but it was definitely not a date because either you or the other person was being weird. And you only realize that it could have been sort of a date a few days later, and by then it is much, much to late to do anything about the fact that you blew it. (Those last couple sentences sound like they could have been part of a monologue in the movie "He's Just Not That Into You." Which, bt-dubs, is the worst movie in existence. Or at least top 10.)

Obviously, I was the one who blew it, for reasons that would be foreign to me except for I don't think they even exist. Being a teenager and trying to get a little action is hard enough, and it is nearly impossible when the irony of your self-righteous, abstinent douchebaggery is staring you in the face. Ay, ay, ay. (Looking back, the writing was on the wall. A popular strip club in my hometown shared the name of the program, so I was often teased about working for Stars Cabaret when I wore this t-shirt to school. In my dreams, people.)

When I found the picture of this shirt tonight, that was the first memory that popped into my head. Ridiculous, huh? For the record, the second memory was of a fellow teen mentor roleplaying the part of a 12-year-old during training. For some reason she was also playing the part as if she were a Chinese-Italian exchange student. "Wat iz dees prega-nancy?" she wondered obnoxiously.

I think this video pretty much sums up the situation.

*********************
Things I Used to Wear is an irregular series featuring strange items from my former wardrobe. Past entries have included a tank top, shoes, a shirt, glittery makeup and another tank top.

Blog for Choice Day 2010 (was 2 days ago)

Friday was NARAL's 5th annual Blog for Choice Day. I had every intention of dedicating a post on HWW to the event, which is held on January 22 to commemorate the anniversary of Roe v. Wade (37th this year!).

Obviously, I am a slacker and no such post exists. In my defense, I had a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad week, so you should all feel very sorry for me. I cried at work. Who cries at work?! I'm 25 years old, for Chrissake. A huge chunk of my pride is gone forever. Which will be followed by another huge chunk of my pride the next time it happens. And the next time, and so on. Lovely.

Anyway, the theme of this year's Blog for Choice Day was "Trust Women," which is an homage to the late Dr. Tiller who typically wore a button carrying the sentiment.

Before I get into a discussion of "Trusting Women", I wanted to talk about this theme in relation to a upcoming commercial. The commercial in question is Focus on the Family's pro-life/anti-choice ad, which is set to air during the Super Bowl. In a completely inexplicable move, CBS is allowing Focus on the Family to be the Super Bowl's first "issue ad" to ever appear. In the past, Moveon.org, PETA and the United Church of Christ have attempted to buy Super Bowl real estate, but CBS has turned down their requests, according to AlterNet.

Although representatives at CBS refused to talk to the Advocate (weird), spokesman Dana McClintock told the NY Times: “Our standards and practices continue to adhere to a policy that insures that all ads on all sides of an issue are appropriate for air.” I'll believe when I see it.

The 30-second, $2.8 million ad will feature the notoriously obnoxious--I mean, religious--University of Florida QB Tim Tebow, and his mommy, Pam. According to Wikipedia, Tebow's mother became seriously ill during her pregnancy and the medications used to save her life threatened the Tebow fetus. Doctor's recommended she terminate the pregnancy, anticipating a still-birth which could put Mama Tebow at serious risk. Obviously, the abortion did not occur, and the little Tebow grew up to be (against all the homeschooling odds) an NCAA football megastar.

The Tebow's will presumably relate this story during Focus on the Family's commercial.

So, ladies listen up! Please consider the odds of your fetus growing up to become a professional athlete (supposedly 1 in 22,000) before you terminate a pregnancy. I think that's what Focus on the Family is getting at. We'll see on February 7.

Now back to "Trust Women." Jos at Feministing writes:

Since Roe v. Wade became law 37 years ago abortion access has been under constant attack both from antis in the streets and legislation like the Hyde Amendment. Regardless of intent many of these actions send a clear message that women can't be trusted. Abortion, a medical procedure that is only needed by members of a marginalized population, has been singled out from all other procedures as something the state will not support financially and that often requires crossing medically unnecessary hurdles like waiting periods, parental consent, and harassment by antis. The implication is both that abortion should be controversial and taboo and that women can't be trusted to decide if they should have the procedure, even with the help of doctors and counselors.

"Trust Women" is a reminder that access to abortion shouldn't be limited because of politics or religious ideology. And it's a reminder that no one but the woman seeking an abortion is qualified to decide if it's the right decision. "Trust Women" means recognizing that each individual woman can make her own decisions about what is best for her.

Jos is pretty smart, and these things make sense to me. The logistical and financial hoops that women have to jump through in order to get an abortion are often excessive, and are put in place by people who out of touch with the reality of the situation.

"Trust Women" reminds us that the decision to terminate a pregnancy is not a simple one that a woman takes lightly. Young, middle-aged, single, married, whatever-- an unwanted pregnancy is a scary situation, and I think it's ignorant to assume that women carelessly choose to abort.

On the other hand, (yes, there is another hand) it takes two to tango, right? While I firmly believe that a woman should have the final decision in whether she wants to carry a pregnancy to term or not, should her opinion be the only one that matters? What about the father? Does he have no voice?

Sure, you're probably rolling your eyes right now. If you came to this blog on purpose (ha!), you probably know me and we're probably similar people: women, liberal, open-minded. But there's more to it than that. Honestly, I used to think that the man's opinion was irrelevant. Whoever he was, it didn't matter! It's not his body, it shouldn't be his choice.

But what sort of man-hating bullshit is that? Of course the father should get a say! There should always be a discussion. That's all I'm saying. If you can be an adult and have sex and get pregnant, then you can be an adult and talk about the consequences.

If nothing else, look at it like this: why should women carry the entire burden of deciding to have an abortion? It's not fair. Share the experience, share the emotional toll.

And that's all she wrote on Blog for Choice Day (two days late).

Happy New Year!

2010! Whoa! Can you believe it? Time flies when you're living your life.

Speaking of which... I've taken an unintentional hiatus from Healthy, Wealthy & Wise, and I'm sad about this. Life has been overwhelming the last couple months, but I plan on getting back into the blog soon. Promise.

While I have your attention, I wanted to relate a short anecdote, which has given me great cause for concern recently. A couple days ago, a coworker found out that he has some major health problems, and is undergoing a serious medical procedure next week. He's in his 6o's and strives to be active and healthy, leading a weekly "health and wellness" group for our clients. So how did Mr. Healthy get sick? He stopped drinking alcohol and smoking cigarettes a number of years ago, doesn't touch red meat and sprinkles seaweed on nearly everything (which has arguable benefits). He's been unable to get much exercise in the last year due to a prolonged rehab from illness, but in a previous lifetime, he was very active.

It blows my mind that my coworker is going through this right now (and only partially because I'm selfish and his absence virtually doubles my work load). He works so hard to advocate healthy choices, and seems to practice what he preaches. I think that heredity plays a significant role in these situations, but to some extent, is this also a cautionary tale? (See picture.) Will the decisions we make now affect us more significantly down the road? Food for thought.

Take care of yourself, please. And Happy New Year!