healthcare, law, LDS

Utah’s new “pregnancy and pre-natal child support” law…

Last night, as I watched Liam Neeson kicking ass in his Taken series, I was scanning the news for interesting headlines. Sure enough, The New York Times delivered with a story about a new law set to go into effect in Utah next month. The headline read, “Utah Will Require Fathers to Help With Pregnancy Bills”. It was inspired by a law signed by Utah Governor Spencer J. Cox on March 16th, which amends Utah’s Child Support Act by “requiring any father whose paternity has been established to pay half of the mother’s insurance premiums while she is pregnant, and any related medical costs, including the birth.” The new law is set to take effect on May 5th of this year.

Utah’s new law comes from HB113, which was sponsored State Representative Brady Brammer and State Senator Daniel McCay, both of whom are Republicans. The men said they came up with this law as a way of addressing the very contentious abortion debates that have come up in recent years, as “pro-life” people try to convince the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade. Mr. Brammer confirmed that he hoped this bill would be sort of a “pro-life” measure, although he didn’t intend it to be about abortion, per se. It’s more that he recognizes that pregnant people are in a “really tough spot, making a really tough decision.” In other words, he acknowledges that many women decide to terminate their pregnancies because of the high cost of being pregnant and giving birth. Personally, I don’t think it’s a bad thing that Mr. Brammer acknowledges that simple fact. It’s true– fathers’ names aren’t the ones on the medical bills when it comes to pregnancy, and since they are responsible for making women pregnant, theoretically, they should be paying.

On the surface, this new law, which may be the nation’s first stand-alone law to mandate prenatal child support, sounds like a good thing. In fact, given the culture of Utah, I can see why prenatal child support has now been made a state law. Utah is a state full of Latter-day Saints (Mormons), and Mormons are famously pro-marriage and family– as long as the marriage and family involves a man and a woman… or women, as they case may be. Utah is historically not so tough on polygamist families. However, once I started thinking about the law, I realized that it could cause some problems. And then I looked at the comment section, and sure enough, I saw how this new law could end up complicating matters for a lot of women. The first point made in the story, in fact, illustrates that the new law doesn’t directly assist pregnant women and could tie them to abusive partners.

In Utah, a person who is considering having an abortion must wait 72 hours and receive “counseling”. The counseling includes information that is designed to discourage abortion, rather than allowing pregnant people to simply hear the facts about the procedure and determine the right course of action for themselves. Supposedly, if the woman also has some help paying the bills, that might also convince her to have the baby instead of terminating the pregnancy. That is probably true in some cases, although it doesn’t address the fact that some women just plain don’t want to be pregnant or go through childbirth, particularly if the baby is the product of a tryst with someone she doesn’t know or care about. While adoption is still an option for people who don’t wish to parent their offspring, a lot of pregnant people decide not to choose adoption. They have some good reasons for not choosing that path, too. Frankly, if I were pregnant and didn’t want a baby, I would probably not choose adoption over abortion. But I have always wanted to have kids and didn’t get the chance.

Looking at the comment section, I saw many men opining that thanks to this law, men might FINALLY have a say in forcing women to birth babies when they don’t wish to be pregnant. After all, if he’s paying his fair share, shouldn’t he be able to dictate that the woman stay pregnant? Personally, I don’t think so. It’s still her body that is being used as a vessel. It’s still her health on the line. It’s her kidneys and bladder being danced upon in the middle of the night, and her nether regions that will be ripped apart as the baby passes through the birth canal… and it’s her blood pressure that might rise to unhealthy levels that could lead to a stroke and permanent disability or even death. Financial support from fathers is a very good and necessary thing for pregnant people, but it’s still not an equalizer of the situation at hand when it comes to making babies.

The bill would also require the paternity to be confirmed. There are situations in which the paternity can’t be confirmed, or perhaps the pregnant person does not wish to identify the father. In those situations, the mother would presumably still be paying her own bills. Although I know that there are initiatives that exist that encourage mothers to identify the fathers of their babies– mainly so that the government can go after deadbeat fathers. I was once interviewed for a job that would have had me encouraging new mothers to name the fathers of their babies if they hadn’t already. It wasn’t about involving dads, though. It was mainly about money, and preventing mothers from using welfare or other social safety nets.

If you’ve followed my story, you know that I’m very much in favor of father’s rights, once the babies are born. Even if the mother thinks the father is a total shithead, I think the father should have rights. After all, in most situations, the women chose the fathers of their children when they consented to having sex with them. And before anyone jumps my shit, let me reiterate that I also know that there are exceptions. In fact, the exceptions are one reason why I strongly believe in a person’s right to have an abortion. However, if the baby is born, and there is a father, and he wants to be in the baby’s life, I think it should be allowed and encouraged. If fathers had stronger rights when Bill’s kids were young and Bill could have feasibly gotten custody of his daughters, maybe they wouldn’t have gone through all they did. And I write that knowing that Bill also chose a poor mother for his daughters.

However, I don’t think the time leading up to parenthood is the same for males and females. Men do their part at the time of conception. So many of them do choose to walk away from their responsibilities, and it seems that a lot of them either never think twice about it or don’t ever know the difference because they’re never told about the pregnancy. Either way, once they’ve fertilized the egg, their path to parenthood involves waiting and, if they’re a decent sort or the relationship is amicable, supporting the woman through the pregnancy. Women, on the other hand, have to deal with the physical, emotional, mental, and hormonal effects of being pregnant. Some of it, I’ve heard, is pretty amazing and interesting. A lot of it is unpleasant or even dangerous. All of it is potentially very expensive.

Anyway… it wouldn’t be one of my blog posts without a few reactions from the peanut gallery. Here are some of the unedited comments that made me laugh, scratch my head, or feel genuine concern for the people of Utah who will be testing this new law. As you can see, reactions ran the gamut. Some people, whose comments I didn’t include, were aghast because they live in countries where this isn’t an issue because healthcare is a fundamental right, rather than an overpriced privilege.

Agreed, however this is more about Mormons and polygamy than it is about a cultural problem with men taking paternal responsibility for creating children. It’s Utah. (probably)

When I was pregnant in the 80’s I was told that the most dangerous time in a women’s life was when she was pregnant. This just makes it more dangerous to be a woman. (this could be true, too… there will be some men that won’t pay and will think murder is a better solution)

That’s a start. The impregnator should also pay all the funeral expenses, if the pregnant woman dies from complications caused by the pregnancy. The impregnator should also be assessed a portion of the funds necessary to care for any underage children the pregnant woman might have as a result of other impregnators, since she’s no longer alive to contribute her share of support for those children.

Story cut out on me but that’s what I’m talking about. And don’t stop with pregnancy bills. Get some hard and fast bills on the floor to make sure these fathers are paying child support. Real child support; not 5.25/wk you (I, anyway) see these moms receiving. Of course, women are more susceptible to being murdered by an alleged love one during pregnancy than any other time. Maybe we need to rethink that whole mandatory vasectomy thing. Do it at age 15 – when they’re mature enough, and wish to start a family, reverse it. After all, a male can impregnate multiple women a day if he were so inclined whereas a woman if going to produce 1 child in 40 weeks. (side note– not all vasectomies are reversible. I know this from Bill’s experience. I would NEVER support mandatory vasectomies, for the same reason I support a woman’s right to have an abortion. No one should have a say over another person’s bodily autonomy.)

Utah is creative in its efforts to allow men to control women’s reproduction.

I have a strong feeling were going to be seeing a lot of fathers move out of Utah and make it a strictly women only state.

They should make this retroactive. It would bankrupt the LDS Church.

Great, as long as the putative father has the right to demand an abortion. (make up your minds, guys…)

But they don’t get any say about abortion.

So are they having a voice on abortion or not ? (Why is this so important?)

Good….now it paves the way for father’s to have a say in abortion too.

Nice. Can fathers block abortions now? Accountability is a two way street. (not in cases of rape or incest, you cave dwelling twit.)

Great, but also should have concent before his baby is murdered as well.

They should be able to veto abortion decisions then. Their money their choice. (This comment got a shitload of replies. Why do so many people seem to think that an investment of money trumps everything? This guy seems to think that paying money for pregnancy and pre-natal support is akin to paying a prostitute.)

So the father has to pay half the medical bills (I agree because he helped make that baby) but the father has no say if the mother wants to commit murder and have an abortion? (ABORTION ISN’T MURDER!)

If guys have no say in preventing an abortion, then they shouldn’t be forced to pay pre baby costs. (They DO have a say. Don’t have sex with a woman with whom you don’t wish to make babies.)

And just like that – the words “it doesn’t feel as good with a condom” were never said in Utah ever again… (bwahahaahaa!)

This is what happens when you let men set the “birthing” agenda. Next thing you know, we’ll be requiring DNA testing of every fetus to determine the father. How long is that gonna take, who’s gonna pay for it and what if a woman refuses to name the father, or the man she names refuses to provide a sample? Too ridiculous. (I think she’s right.)

First, how do you establish paternity before birth? Second, does this give the presumed father the right to monitor the woman’s pregnancy and behavior? Will he have a say in the birth plan? Is he allowed to attend medical appointments? Will he be there for the birth? Or does he just get to foot the bill with the mother? What if the mother doesn’t desire or need his assistance? This could go south really quickly. (Yep… this was my thought, too.)

As long as the mother and fetus can be on my family insurance during the pregnancy then I don’t have a problem with it. The problem is that if I’m not married to the woman, how can she be on my insurance? (this guy is clearly NOT a mental giant… dude, maybe you shouldn’t be having sex with people to whom you aren’t married, if her not being on your “family insurance” is a concern? In fairness to him, he did come back and clarify, showing that he’s not really as dumb as that comment seems… Besides, the law indicates that the man must pay half of the woman’s health insurance premium, not put her on his insurance. And with a pregnancy rider, that’s probably gonna be pricey.)

And one guy, whose comment I can no longer find, said he was fine with the new law as long as a woman didn’t “trap” him into being a father. Now– I know for a fact that men CAN be raped, but the odds of a male rape leading to pregnancy are pretty small. I think the bigger issue is convincing men to use condoms and/or not have sex so freely with women they don’t wish to make babies with. I doubt being trapped in fatherhood is a real thing for the vast majority of men, if the man is being responsible.

There were many more comments, but I don’t have all day to share them. Bill was up very late last night, working in the office. We got a late start this morning and I want to practice guitar and do some reading. Anyway, after March’s visit from Aunt Flow, which was a bit irregular, I realize that this is an issue that really won’t affect me at all for much longer… and probably doesn’t affect me now, if I’m honest. It’ll be interesting to see what Utah does with this new legislation and how it changes things in the Beehive State. I’ll be watching for the headlines.

Standard
celebrities, complaints, Duggars, religion

Nurie Keller’s got one in the oven…

Lately, I’ve noticed a bunch of hits on a post I wrote about Nurie Keller in October 2020. I wrote that post in reaction to speculation that Nurie Keller, wife of Nathan Keller, might have been pregnant. People in the Duggar Family News Facebook Group were thinking that Nurie, who in October, had just been married a few months, might have one in the oven. One person wrote that Nurie was “pregnant as all get out”. I was amused by that comment, so I used it as a blog post title. If you read what I wrote, though, you’ll find that I don’t actually care if Nurie is having sex. I would expect her to, since she’s a young woman who is married and follows a fundamentalist Christian faith. And I don’t actually care much about the status of her womb, either. I mean, I hope she has a healthy and happy pregnancy, but I would wish that for any pregnant person. I don’t go out of my way looking for information about her life.

I guess I can understand why people are interested in this family, though. Jill Rodrigues is kind of fascinating in a train wreck kind of way. She wears a lot of makeup and sports an 80s era hairdo. She has many children and is often featuring them on social media, particularly the ones who are of marriageable age. Looking at YouTube, I see that a lot of videos have been made spoofing Jill. And Jill herself also has a channel and the camera thumbnails for her videos are often unintentionally hilarious.

Why do I hear the theme song for “Lowered Expectations” when I look at these two?
Seriously…

Well… Nurie’s mother, weirdorama mom of 13, Jill Rodrigues, apparently announced last night that her eldest child, married Nurie Keller, sister-in-law to Anna Keller, who is the wife of Josh Duggar, is now pregnant. She’s about seven weeks along– due October 12, 2021. Jill and her husband, who run a “printing press ministry”, made a nighttime video announcing Nurie’s womb status. It seems a little early to be announcing this, and it also seems like it shouldn’t necessarily be Jill’s news to share. But maybe Nurie’s okay with it.

Notice in the above video screenshot, Jill is wearing a Plexus hoodie. I keep hearing about Plexus, but not being a fan of multi-level marketing schemes, I don’t know a whole lot about it. A quick look at the Plexus Web site tells me that it’s a brand of products for weight management and nutrition. Religious folks seem to be very much into MLMs, but I’m pretty leery of them, mainly because of an experience I had in the mid 90s when I was looking for a job. I see that I haven’t reposted about that experience yet, so I’ll do that after I finish writing this post.

Yikes… almost like a caricature. I don’t really know or care that much about Jill, but candidly speaking, these stills are a bit sideshow-ish.

I don’t follow Jill Rodrigues at all. I only know about her because people in the Duggar group follow her and post about her all the time. A lot of people are fascinated by her, because she seems to be obsessed with self-promotion. I might be inclined to take a peek at her page, but I’ve heard she blocks anyone who either isn’t completely positive or reacts “inappropriately”. Like, for instance, anyone who uses a laugh emoji in a mocking way is liable to be blocked. In that sense, she’s not unlike Lori Alexander, aka The Transformed Wife, who similarly blocks anyone who doesn’t shit hearts and roses on her posts, many of which are pretty cringeworthy.

A screenshot of the big announcement. I think Nurie looks well. She has pretty hair.

Anyway, since I can see that people are looking for Nurie, here’s an obligatory post about her pregnancy. I guess now, she really is “pregnant as all get out” and has “one in the oven”. I hope she’s happy and healthy, and doesn’t get trotted out too much for the masses as she blossoms into motherhood. I really do mean that, by the way. I’m not a completely snarky asshole. I especially hope her mom hasn’t spoken too soon. I am glad, however, that they made the announcement without setting off any explosives. I read another tragic news story today about a man who died while trying to rig a “gender reveal” explosive. His is the second sad story I’ve read in a month about men who have killed themselves trying to celebrate a baby shower or reveal their unborn babies’ genitalia with a bang. I don’t laugh about these obvious Darwin Awards candidates because I know that the babies who will be born without ever knowing their fathers will have to live with that for the rest of their lives.

In other fundie news, Jessa Seewald is also pregnant with her fourth baby. She reportedly had a miscarriage, so this one will be a “rainbow baby”. I’m thinking it might be time for her and Ben to look for new digs. Their tiny hand-me-down house must be getting pretty tight by now. But as it’s not my womb or my family, I don’t actually care too much… I do think she and her husband, Ben, make beautiful babies, though. Also, Kendra Caldwell Duggar is about to pop any day with her third baby with Joe Duggar. And so is her 41 year old mom with Kendra’s next sibling! Sheesh!

I’m also continuing to watch Growing Pains… and yes, there have been even more fat jokes, even as Tracey Gold was obviously fading away. In one episode, Tracey’s character, Carol Seaver, gets asked by her on screen grandma about why she got so “svelte and sexy”. Her other grandma, played by tiny Jane Powell, makes a comment about being a size two. And Kirk Cameron, as Mike Seaver, tells Carol’s date that she will “turn into a porker at midnight”. No wonder Tracey had issues with anorexia!

I’m nursing some pain today, too, because I tried to take the dogs for a walk and Noyzi slipped out the front door. I made a grab for him, slipped, and skinned my knee, gave myself a big bruise, and tore off part of my thumbnail. I also had to sit on the floor for a few minutes, because the pain was enough to make me feel a bit faint. Then Arran threw up. Needless to say, I never got around to walking the dogs yesterday. I’ll try to do it today. Bill has to leave town on Saturday, and I’ll be alone for three fucking weeks. Sometimes, I hate his job…

Standard
celebrities

Pregnant as “all get out”!

No, not me. As many readers might know, I follow the Duggar Family News group on Facebook. That group follows and snarks on the Duggar family, but it also follows a few other “supersized” families. One such brood that they like to watch is the Rodrigues family, headed by weirdorama mom, Jill.

The Rodrigueses have 13 children, all of whom are very skinny. Jill Rodrigues is very prominent on social media. I don’t really follow them at all, except for what I see in the Duggar Family News group. They’re easy to make fun of, mainly because Jill appears to be a bit of a fame whore. She wears tons of makeup, always has her hair styled in an 80s fashion, and has a weird habit of name dropping the Duggars.

Eldest daughter, Nurie, was homeschooled and got married earlier this year. Her husband is Nathan Keller, who is Anna Keller Duggar’s brother. That means that Nurie is Josh Duggar’s sister-in-law.

When Nurie had her nuptials, she wore a second hand wedding gown that it’s said was purchased for her at a thrift shop when she was about 12 or 13. Nurie is now 21 years old and has been married for just over two months. Photos are now circulating in the Duggar Family News group with Nurie holding her belly. Many people are speculating that she might already be pregnant, hence the title of today’s post.

I don’t actually care too much if Nurie’s expecting. She’s over 21 and married, and has probably been having sex. Sex leads to pregnancy, particularly when you’re that young. And she’s a fundie Baptist, so she probably would like to be pregnant. Either way, every time I see a picture of her, I see two big rows of white teeth framed by heavy lipstick. She’s always smiling. Maybe it’s the glow of the Lord. Maybe she’s just happy to be on her own.

I actually think Nurie is quite pretty. I wouldn’t choose to wear as much makeup as she does. And while I don’t know what her mother is actually like, I get the sense that she and her siblings are regularly trotted out for her mother’s purposes.

For some reason, Jill Rodrigues seems very interested in following the Duggars’ example and being famous for having a big, religious family. But one other thing I’ve noticed is that Jill seems to want to auction off her daughters to marriage as they come of age. Usually, this happens when the daughter is about done with homeschool and “graduates” from high school. This is something that others have noticed, too.

Jill will post a picture of one of her kids, usually one of the daughters who is getting close to marriage age. She posts about what a “godly” person the young woman is, or she writes about what a “servant’s heart” she has. The youngster is almost always fully decked out in makeup, dressed up, with big white teeth showing in a cringeworthy smile that looks a bit strained. It has the feel of a livestock auction. Like, I’d want to go up and check out her teeth and feet, looking for soundness or athletic potential. It’s really creepy.

Nurie supposedly decided at age four that she wanted to be a Christian. Maybe I’m overly cynical, but I have a strong suspicion that Nurie had nothing to do with her conversion to religion. But it makes for a nice story for true believers, I guess. People in the Duggar Family News group are speculating that Nurie hasn’t announced her “pregnancy” yet, because they’re waiting to find out if Jill is also pregnant. But it could be that Nurie just has a belly because she’s been eating more and the rest of her body hasn’t yet caught up.

Know who else is pregnant? Kendra Duggar, wife of Joseph Duggar. She is due with her third baby and she’s just 22 years old. And, once again, her mother is pregnant, too. When Kendra was pregnant with her first baby, Garrett, her mom, Christina, (in her late thirties then) was also pregnant with her eighth baby. And now, Christina, aged 41, is apparently preggo again.

I always wanted to have kids. It didn’t work out for me. Now that I see the way the world is going, I’m kind of glad I don’t have to worry about my children trying to navigate things while donning face masks and visors. But I guess if you are a strong believer in religion and you think God is in control of everything, a baby represents hope and perhaps a future voter who will help swing the government in a way that suits your religious views.

Anyway… it’s interesting to see who ends up with whom in these big ass fundie families. Supposedly, Kendra’s sister, Lauren, is courting James Duggar. If they get together, that would mean their children would be “double cousins”. Maybe that isn’t such an odd phenomenon in the world of fundie Christianity. I think I’m just glad I’m not in it. Mainstream Presbyterianism was enough religion for me.

Incidentally, having a prominent beer gut apparently feels much the same as being pregnant…

Standard
true crime

Women in Alabama ought to be up in arms!

Alabama is in the news again for its increasingly misogynistic views and policies regarding females, particularly those of color. In May of this year, Alabama’s female, Republican governor, Kay Ivey, signed an unconstitutional bill into law that outright bans most abortions at all stages of pregnancy.

Meanwhile, the Internet is abuzz today due to the case of 28 year old Marshae Jones, who was five months pregnant with a girl last December when she was shot in the stomach during a fight with another woman. The fetus did not survive the shooting, which would have been sad enough. What really has people alarmed, though, is that Ms. Jones has now been charged with manslaughter and was just released from jail on a $50,000 bond.

How can this be, you ask? Well, police say that Ms. Jones started the fight that got her shot in the stomach. She did not take steps to keep herself out of harm’s way. Because she was pregnant, they conclude that she should have done all she could to protect her unborn fetus. Since she allegedly started the fight that ended with her being shot and her unborn child’s death, police reason that she should be charged with manslaughter.

But I say hold on there, coppers… what about the woman who did the shooting? Ebony Jemison, who was fighting with Ms. Jones in the parking lot of a Dollar General store over the paternity of the unborn child, was initially charged with manslaughter in the death of the fetus. That charge was dismissed after the grand jury failed to indict her. So evidently, Ebony Jemison is now free, even though she shot someone. However, based on reports, she did shoot in self-defense, as she was evidently trying to get away from Jones when she fired her weapon.

Now… having read about this case, I’m pretty dumbfounded. Do I think Marshae Jones was right to get into a violent altercation with another woman over the father of her unborn baby? No, not particularly. Pregnant or not, I think it’s stupid to get into violent fights with other people, particularly if they’re packing heat. However, losing a pregnancy should not be a crime. I’m sure Ms. Jones had no idea she would be shot and her unborn child would be killed. This situation, like others involving pregnant women that have resulted in incarceration, seems to put pregnant women at a different legal status than other people. That’s not fair, and it could set a horrible precedent for other women who might lose a pregnancy that others might deem was due to their negligence.

Complicating matters is the fact that Ms. Jones is a black woman, and I think we know what kind of record Alabama has towards promoting the rights of people of color. This situation is appalling on many levels and reeks a bit of The Handmaid’s Tale to me. Before you know it, pregnant women in Alabama will wind up practically incarcerated by their own accord, trying to avoid being arrested for losing a pregnancy.

The officer who was quoted about this case, Lieutenant Danny Reed of the Pleasant Grove Police Department, had this to say: “When a five-month pregnant woman initiates a fight and attacks another person, I believe some responsibility lies with her as to any injury to her unborn child. That child is dependent on its mother to try to keep it from harm, and she shouldn’t seek out unnecessary physical altercations.” There’s something about that statement that totally skeeves me out. He sounds like a legalistic cretin who hates women and wants to control them.

I’m glad to see people are outraged about this and saying “Hell no.” This is a slippery slope we really don’t need to be on. I’m also glad to read that prosecutors may choose not to prosecute Marshae Jones for the death of her unborn daughter. It’s not that I don’t think what Jones did was stupid and the loss of her baby was avoidable. It’s just that this could really cause problems for a lot of other pregnant women. Pregnant and breastfeeding women in the United States are already under a microscope, with people calling the cops on them if they think they’re doing anything to harm their unborn fetuses. I’m reminded of Tasha Adams, the woman in Toad Suck, Arkansas, who was arrested when a waitress called the cops on her for drinking while breastfeeding.

Pregnant women should NEVER be prosecuted for losing a pregnancy, regardless of whether or not it was her fault. That’s is a dangerously slippery slope and it will cause a lot of problems. Where do you stop? Should we prosecute women for smoking, drinking, walking after dark alone, or not wearing a seatbelt while pregnant? Should we prosecute them for getting into car accidents, falling down stairs while wearing high heels, or eating food that makes them sick? You see where I’m going with this? And again, I really doubt Ms. Jones knew Ms. Jemison was going to shoot her.

Incidentally, this case predates Alabama’s new law against abortion, so it has no official bearing on this case. However, the fact that people in Alabama want to force women to be pregnant when they may not want to be is a good indicator of how women are treated there. Makes me glad I don’t live there myself… although they obviously could use some more blue voters.

Standard
complaints

Just pop, already…

Like a lot of people, most of them in Britain, I’ve been waiting for Meghan Markle to have her baby. Well… maybe I’m not waiting with “bated breath” or anything, but I am curious as to what the little tyke will be like. Meghan and Harry, of course, are doing things differently than other royals have done in the past. They’ve decided to keep the details of the birth “private” until they’ve had a chance to celebrate as a family.

I suppose I understand that thinking on one level. I guess even Britain’s royals have the right to some privacy. On the other hand, Meghan and Harry are very public figures. It’s true that Harry didn’t choose to be royal, but they are “working royals”, so that means they kind of have a duty to the people. If they weren’t working royals, people would be less interested in their lives and their offspring. If they want to live private lives, they should probably give up being royal and go live privately on their own pounds. They should name their baby Fred or Judy or something and eat Beanie Weanies for lunch.

Every day on my newsfeed, there’s at least one new story about Meghan Markle and the status of her womb. Thanks to their decision to be secretive, speculation is at an all time high. I think that deciding to birth privately has made people all the more determined to invade their privacy. It seems inescapable to me… and I think maybe they should just get over themselves and stop with this “privacy” nonsense. It’s a pipe dream. I get that Harry doesn’t like the paparazzi. He has every right not to like the media (even if he did marry an actress), but unfortunately, putting up with the press is part and parcel of being royal.

I have to be honest, not that anyone cares, but I’ve found myself not really liking Meghan Markle that much. There’s been a lot of drama this year. The royal family had finally stopped having so many scandals and were acquiring more respectability. Now, there’s all kinds of scuttlebutt coming out about Harry and William, Meghan and Kate, Meghan and the royal staff, Meghan and her father, Meghan and her bodyguards, etc. I find it annoying, although I’m sure other people find it fascinating. Plus, every picture of Meghan shows her with that same smile on her face and her hand floating over her enlarged middle like a satellite.

My Google newsfeed is mostly full of stories about the British Royal Family, mainly because I opted out of anything about Donald Trump or any stories that I have to use a VPN to read. That leaves the British Royal Family and The Duggars, along with assorted articles about such varied subjects as worm infestations in dogs, cruise ships, and whether I should join the Army or the Air Force. Here’s a clue. I won’t be joining any military services. I’m not sure how that got on my feed in the first place.

Anyway, I’m ready for Meghan to pop already. I know she has to do it on her own time, but I’m tired of reading stories about gamblers in Britain betting on her baby’s birthday. I’d rather read about Kate Middleton getting pregnant again. I won’t be surprised if she has another child, even if being pregnant does make her sick. Once Meghan pops, I can turn my attention to Jessa Seewald, who’s also about to pop. These women are popping all over.

On another note, I see CNN has gotten into the fun game, as they’ve provided a Royal Baby Name generator on their site. There was a time when it was considered a serious news source. I guess it’s not anymore. I’d like to write something clever, but I’m distracted by the noise outside my window. They’re doing roadwork that involves jackhammers.

Edited to add: Ask, and ye shall receive.

Standard