The Pink Lady Code
For those of us who are excited to hear the upcoming Pink Lady Pledge, I would also like to remind those who do not know.. They also have a code... Apparently.
Now I don't like/appreciate most of these but if ROTPL were to address them, I would appreciate it. Read them at your own discression, again, I'm just the messenger...
The Pink Lady Code.
Rule 1: Obey the Pink Lady Pledge: Act cool, look cool, be cool. Til' death do us part, think Pink!
Rule 2: At no time is a Pink Lady to become romantically involved with a non-T-Bird member. Restriction is rescinded only after graduation from school or expulsion. A Pink Lady will not date a: Jock, nerd, Preppie, anybody non-cool, or member of a rival school or gang. T-Birds, not NERDS!
Rule 3: The Pink Lady jacket symbolizes that the wearer is the girlfriend / consort of a T-Bird member. Upon leaving the Pink Ladies under duress (violation of rules 1 and 2, expulsion, illness, death, school transfer) or personal choice, wearer must return the jacket to the T-Birds to avoid damaging said T-Birds' reputations. `They got a Rep to protect'. Rep is everything.
Rule 4: A Pink Lady must present herself in appropriate attire at school at all times - Pink Lady jacket a must! Flashy, seductive costumes are not allowed, as they allow non-T-Bird students (and other males, staff included) to see what is for T-Bird eyes only. Seductive attire appropriate only to be worn at functions if accompanied by their T-Bird escort / boyfriend.
Rule 5: A Pink Lady is to have a cigarette and matches / lighter on her at all times, for herself - cigarette equals `cool' - plus her fellow Pink Ladies and T-Birds (and favored Rydell staff) who might perchance wish to bum a smoke.
Rule 6: No Pink Lady is allowed to interfere with other Pink Lady to T-Bird relationships. If the leader of the T-Birds is spoken for, unattached Pink Lady is not permitted to trespass on fellow Pink Lady relationship. If the leader of the T-Birds is available (Pink Lady girlfriend leaves - see rule #3), unattached Pink Lady may make advances on unclaimed T-Bird leader. See rule #4, apply it. The prettier the Pink Lady, the more interested the unattached T-Bird will be.
Rule 7: Returning to Rule #2, Fraternization outside of T-Birds, if all members of the T-Birds are accounted for - have Pink Lady girlfriends - unattached Pink Lady must remain single. Addendum: If unattached Pink Lady has interest in non-T-Bird student, and wishes to pursue relationship with said student, see rule #3.
Rule 8. Contrary to popular belief, (see Rydell school year 1958-1959 (Grease), Premarital `coupling' (Sliding into home base - thank you, Louis DiMucci) isn't a requirement for being a Pink Lady. Just don't die a virgin or die wearing your mother's underwear.
Rule 9: If you're a non-romantic friend of the Pink Ladies, you're a friend for life. Friendship (non-fraternizational) may include nerd/brainiac (good for assistance with essays), and jock. NOT allowed: Gossip Girls (Patty Simcox), or annoying cheerleaders (Stacie & Gracie).
ADDITIONAL - Added June 16, 1962 If unattached Pink Lady meets and falls for former-nerd-turned-badass-biker, who saved the butts of T-Birds and Rydell students, fraternization rules rescinded!! (Co-signed by Johnny, Goose, Louis, Davey, Stephanie, Sharon, Paulette, Rhonda, Dolores).
It may be just my personal opinion, but I've got a scene in my head that I would want to play out..
Hear me out.
I would want a situation where the Pink Ladies are at the Frosty Palace or down where they race the cars and a few guys come over and the Pink Ladies start getting hit on or flirted with. They are polite or some flirt back (but with no real heat behind it) and the T-Birds clock it. They stroll up, nonchalantly- a little smug because they are not worried about a damn thing because the girls can handle themselves and each TBird finds their pair with the Ladies, join their sides. Looking like a force to be reckoned with.
"Hit the pavement fella's. These lovely Ladies are spoken for."
"They looked lonely, not like we could see any signs to say they arn't."
"Dont need em. You're in TBird Territory. And eveyone around here knows... our girls are the Pink Ladies. So if you aint a TBird, you aint got a chance.."
"Meaning you can look, but you can't touch."
"What, is that like a rule of your gangs?"
"Our code. And yes. Always will be."
56 notes
·
View notes
Marriage Equality for Most
Marriage in the United States is inconsistent. In 45 states adults can marry minors, same-sex marriage only became federally protected two years ago, and unlike every other couple, couples on Supplemental Security Income (SSI) receive no financial benefit. A recent opinion article in WaPo “Marriage has a monopoly on legal benefits. It shouldn’t.” by Rhaina Cohen, asserts that marriage is the only way to have a relationship be recognized as important and deserving of any protections and benefits if the people are not relatives. This is true, unless you are an SSI recipient, and you lose your benefits after marriage.
Marriage calls for vulnerability, so why are our most vulnerable not getting married? Those under 65 years-old who receive SSI are one of the most vulnerable populations: people with disabilities who have little to no income or assets. People on SSI get married less, and get divorced more, than people who do not receive SSI. This is not for a lack of love or desire, but for the penalties people on SSI receive when they get married.
To receive SSI because you have a disability is to have your income and assets restricted. The maximum, which has not been updated in 35 years, you would get is $943 a month and you cannot have more than $2000 in assets. If an SSI recipient has an increase to their income or assets, they will either lose some or all their SSI and no longer have insurance. If both people in a marriage are on SSI, they will lose 25% of their income and assets. The maliciously naïve thinking is that there are shared costs, like living expenses, when you are married means you do not need as much to survive. The outdated limits the Social Security Administration (SSA) has on the people with disabilities who receive SSI restrict most opportunities to make their lives better. The SSA want to limit their spending regardless of the pain it causes those who will suffer without SSI. It is hard to get on SSI, and it is far too easy to lose. Qualifying for SSI automatically qualifies a person for Medicaid, tying their insurance coverage to their source of income.
When I consider marriage, I imagine a couple so in love getting a happily ever after. When people on SSI consider marriage, they think about if they will be able to afford to lose their benefits, if they can live with their spouse and have health insurance. There are too many stories of people with disabilities being so in love, getting married, losing their benefits, and then while still being so in love, needing to get divorced because without health insurance they will suffer and/or die.
Other couples are holding out on marriage, waiting for the day that the U.S will recognize the cruelty of the SSI limits. This is at the expense of the legal protections’ spouses have. A person with a disability is more likely to need medical care, and in an emergency, of course they want their loved one with them. Those who hold out on marriage risk not being allowed to help make medical decisions in an emergency, or even to visit their partner in critical condition since they would not be family. Inconsistent once more, holding out for marriage does not guarantee keeping SSI status. Regardless of state laws about common-law-marriage, if someone on SSI lives with their partner who contributes household income, they can lose their insurance and income.
To be clear, people who receive SSI are stuck in poverty limbo. They cannot acquire wealth beyond $2,000 in assets, and when they are married no more than $3000. The monthly stipend has not been updated in 35 years and has not been adjusted to the cost of living. At its inception, a quarter of SSI was spent on rent, and 5 years ago 83% went towards rent. To have a part-time job to supplement their supplemental income to cover their living expenses would cost them their SSI and their health insurance. Love can overcome many things, but can it overcome the hardship of losing your only means of survival?
Congressman Jimmy Panetta (D-CA) introduced the Marriage Equality for Disabled Adults Act, a bill aimed to secure the equal right to marry for people with disabilities. Dying in committee last year, this is the second time this bill has been introduced. With the current state of the country, it is ripe to die again. However, if passed, over 7.5 million Americans would no longer be forced to choose between their income and health, and their loves. Congress and the SSA need to update SSI to ensure that all adult Americans can get married without penalty. Most is not enough; the United States needs marriage equality for all.
4 notes
·
View notes
i keep seeing people disregard commas so let me clear something up for you
"there's a pretty naked man here." the man is rather naked, you get a sense of slight discomfort, but it's mostly just an observation.
"there's a pretty, naked man here." the man is pretty. You're getting the sense that they're still noticing his nudity, but he's pretty.
6 notes
·
View notes
Hey guess fucking what. Some of my acquaintances decided to form a LGBT youth group in our city (which obviously doesn’t have one). It’s official and legal and supported by the Cyprus acceptance organization or whatever. You know what that means? Besides them being able to hang out in a private and comfortable space and be legally represented? It means that… wait for it… every participant requires a consent form from a parent/legal guardian. This is exactly what gatekeeping is. Most queer kids here — “here” being a very religious orthodox conservative place — are closeted or just not out to their parents. Who are pretty homophobic. Those kids are exactly the people this group aims to help. And hey, who cares if they can’t even get into the NICE PRIVATE ROOM WE HAVE???!!!! WHO CARES!!! Signature forgery is a crime. If it wasn’t I would’ve readily forged my parents signatures. But I don’t wanna get into legal trouble over smth small like a forgery, I wanna go big with a murder or a felony or smth. I hate it when organizations ruin everything.
0 notes