Monday, March 18, 2024

Blockers And The Lies

Now the British government has added their two pence. The right-wing conservatives lies on puberty blockers has spread to Britain and Canada…
NHS England to stop prescribing puberty blockers
Children will no longer routinely be prescribed puberty blockers at gender identity clinics, NHS England has confirmed.
BBC News
By Josh Parry
12 March 2024


The decision comes after a review found there was "not enough evidence" they are safe or effective.

Puberty blockers, which pause the physical changes of puberty, will now only be available as part of research.

It comes weeks before an independent review into gender identity services in England is due to be published.

An interim report from the review, published in 2022 by Dr Hilary Cass, had earlier found there were "gaps in evidence" around the drugs and called for a transformation in the model of care for children with gender-related distress.

Dr Cass's review follows a sharp rise in referrals to the Gender Identity Development Service (Gids), run by the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust, which saw an increase from 250 per year to over 5,000 in 2022.
  •     New youth gender services further delayed
  •     Child gender clinic closure leaves uncertain future
  •     What does transgender mean and what does the law say?
Puberty supressing hormones - more commonly known as puberty blockers - work by suppressing the release of hormones that cause puberty and are often prescribed to children questioning their gender as a way of stopping physical changes such as breast development or facial hair.

Fewer than 100 young people in England are currently prescribed puberty blockers by the NHS. They will all able to continue their treatment.

NHS England held a public consultation on their usage and last year introduced an interim policy which stated they should only be given as part of research trials or in "exceptional circumstances".
The BIG LIE… “found there were ‘gaps in evidence’”

And the lie has spread to the west coast of Canada to Alberta.
RCI
By Joel Dryden, Jennifer Lee · CBC News
March 11, 2024


Legislation affecting transgender and non-binary youth and adults expected this fall

It's been a little more than a month since the Alberta government announced a planned fall rollout  of legislation focused around top and bottom surgeries, puberty blockers, hormone therapies and other elements of what's referred to as gender-affirming care.

Canadian doctors, nurses and medical groups  have pushed back against the move, while an open letter was released by 36 Alberta academics, predominantly from law schools, asking the province to reconsider  the changes.

The measures in question — the strictest transgender youth rules  in the country — are part of a fraught, polarized debate that has only recently  entered Alberta's political landscape but have already been subjects of great controversy in Saskatchewan  and New Brunswick .

They have long been the subject of battles fought by lawmakers and courts  in the United States, where gender-affirming care for minors is endorsed by a number of major U.S. medical associations, including the American Medical Association  and the American Academy of Pediatrics .

But though they have long held support from those U.S.-based medical organizations, in recent years, traditionally right-leaning states have taken a different view of the issue. More than 20 states have moved to ban gender-affirming care, according to tracking (new window) by the Kaiser Family Foundation, a non-partisan organization focused on health policy. Many of those bans are currently subject to lawsuits.
The Republican acid has spread far and wide.

So what the research on puberty blockers? I turn to Pub Med for the research, Pub Med is run by the U.S. National Institute of Health and it is a data base of all federally financed research here in the U.S.
Is puberty delaying treatment ‘experimental treatment’?
By Simona Giordano and Søren Holm
Int J Transgend Health. 2020; 21(2): 113–121.
Published online 2020 Apr 11. doi: 10.1080/26895269.2020.1747768

 

In 2019 five clinicians working at the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust in London in the United Kingdom (UK) resigned (The Times, 2019), and one of the governors of the Trust also resigned (The Guardian, 2019b). Among other reasons, they adduced that puberty ‘blockers’1 are prescribed experimentally to gender diverse youth, without sufficiently robust evidence around efficacy and safety, and without sufficiently robust diagnosis.

One issue that has emerged from these disputes is that there seems to be lack of clarity around whether or not clinicians, patients, families, and policy-makers should consider puberty delaying intervention as experimental, and, if so, in what ways. This concern has also been raised in the academic literature (Biggs, 2019; Henegan & Jefferson, 2019).

In this editorial we unpack and analyze the claim that prescribing puberty delaying medications is experimental and we show that provision of puberty delaying medications to adolescents with gender dysphoria is not experimental, or at least not any more experimental than standard pediatric practice when there are no licensed2 treatment options for a pediatric patient population.

We will analyze three issues in particular: 1) Does the fact that the drugs used for inducing and maintaining puberty delay are prescribed ‘off label’ make the use experimental?; 2) does the fact that the drugs do not have market authorization for puberty delay in gender diverse children make the use experimental?; and 3) does the fact that there are no randomized controlled trials of puberty delay in gender diverse children make the use experimental?

[…]

Conclusions

Puberty delaying medications are currently provided off label to adolescents affected by gender dysphoria and this particular use cannot be investigated by a RCT. We have shown that this does not mean they are experimental drugs or are provided experimentally. Whether or not these (or even approved drugs) are ethically prescribed depends on whether they are likely to serve the patient’s health interests based on the evidence available at the time of prescription.

The published literature provides insight into the likely benefits of GnRHa. In summary, they reduce the patient’s dysphoria (Cohen-Kettenis & Pfäfflin, 2003, p. 171; Kreukels & Cohen-Kettenis, 2011, p. 467), reduce the invasiveness of future surgery (for example, mastectomy in trans men; treatment for facial and body hair, thyroid chondroplasty to improve appearance and cricothyroid approximation to raise the pitch of the voice in trans women) (Cohen-Kettenis & Pfäfflin, 2003, p. 171); GnRHa is correlated with improved psychosocial adaptation (Cohen-Kettenis & Pfäfflin, 2003, p. 171; Kreukels & Cohen-Kettenis, 2011, p. 467) and reduced suicidal ideation and attempts. Hembree noted increased suicidal ideation where blockers were not given (Hembree, 2011; see further, Imbimbo et al., 2009; Kreukels & Cohen-Kettenis, 2011; Murad et al., 2010; Spack, 2008).

In light of the collected and published evidence, it seems that the international clinical community has found a sensible point of balance: GnRHa can be prescribed to adolescents who experience strong and distressing dysphoria. GnRHa is not usually recommended for prepubertal children, when there is still significant uncertainty around the future gender identity development trajectory. The reaction to pubertal development will be part of the clinical assessment. In this way, most likely GnRHa will only be given to those who most likely will choose to continue to transition, but should the patient change their mind, then no permanent changes will have been effected (whereas, should an untreated person transition, permanent changes of pubertal development will only be partially reversible surgically). Parents, clinicians and significant others should continue to be open to the idea that the gender identity development of an adolescent might fluctuate even after puberty and therefore that the provision of gender affirming medical treatment is a separate decision from the earlier provision of puberty delaying treatment.
But this will not stop the lies the right-wing conservatives with their lies. They don’t care what the facts are, they want to stir up their base and create doubt in others.



Meanwhile down to one of our favorite state to dislike, Florida…
Gov. Ron DeSantis' war on 'woke' appears to be losing steam in Florida
PBS: All Things Considered
By Greg Allen
March 15, 2024


In Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis' campaign against ideas he considers "woke" has run into some roadblocks.

A court settlement this week blunted his Parental Rights in Education Act, a law that critics call Don't Say Gay. And earlier this month, a federal court blocked another key measure that DeSantis introduced in 2021 and called the Stop WOKE Act. It marked the beginning of DeSantis' efforts to reshape how Floridians view and teach issues involving race and gender identity.

The Stop WOKE Act banned instruction in schools or mandatory training in workplaces that suggest a person is privileged or oppressed because of their race, sex or national origin. Other bills and regulations soon followed, targeting programs to promote diversity, equity and inclusion. For decades, DEI programs as they're known have worked to promote fair treatment of underrepresented groups.

DeSantis believes DEI programs that focus on issues such as race and sexual orientation are unconstitutional and discriminatory. "They call it equity," he said when introducing the Stop WOKE Act. "Just understand, when you hear equity used, that is just an ability for people to smuggle in their ideology."

Politically, the Stop WOKE Act, which was later renamed the Individual Freedom Act was a winner for DeSantis. It helped mobilize conservatives in Florida, helping him win reelection in 2022 by a wide margin. Legally though, it ran into problems.
You have to consider two things. First the Republicans don’t want us educated because educated people think for themselves. The second is the right-wing conservatives believe that being LGBTQ+ is a choice, they do not believe we are born this way. They think one day we sat down and thought “Gee, I want to be trans, it want to be beat-up, kicked upon, discriminated against, and just made to feel like shit.

*****
Remember:
"R" is for reverse.
"D" is for forward.
Don't let them take us back to the 1950s

A Bad Omen!

There are bad vibes coming out of the Supreme Court on drag shows! We lost a skirmish and it is not good news coming out of the courts. Notice how they avoided the First Amendment, they conveniently ignored the 1st Amendment.
The justices rejected an emergency appeal from a LGBTQ student group seeking to put on a drag show on a Texas campus.
Courthouse News Service
By KELSEY REICHMANN
March 15, 2024


The Supreme Court said on Friday that West Texas A&M University does not have to allow an LGBTQ student group to host a charity drag show the school’s Christian president banned. 

Spectrum WT asked the Supreme Court for emergency intervention so its annual drag show could take place on campus. The justices denied the student group’s application without an explanation. There were no noted dissents. 

The student group hosts events for West Texas A&M’s LGBTQ community. One of these events is a drag show raising money for the Trevor Project, a nonprofit that provides suicide prevention services for LGBTQ youth. 

Last year, Spectrum WT coordinated with university staff as it planned the show. The performance would have been limited to audience members over the age of 13 and would not have featured any risque or lewd conduct. 

Although the group organized the show with university staff, it was abruptly shut down by the university’s president shortly before the event. Walter Wendler said drag shows discriminate against women by stereotyping them. Wendler went so far as to claim that no drag show could ever be a harmless event. 

“Regardless of ‘stated intent,’ such drag shows are ‘derisive, divisive and demoralizing’ to many students on campus,” Lanora Pettit, Texas’ principal deputy solicitor general, wrote. “And just as he would ‘not support ‘blackface’ performances in our campus, even if told the performance is a form of free speech or intended as humor.’”
So is that going to be their new focus on banning drag shows that it “... discriminate against women by stereotyping them.”?

VOX writes,
The Supreme Court will allow a public Texas university’s unconstitutional ban on drag shows to remain in effect, in a decision announced Friday.

The Court’s decision in Spectrum WT v. Wendler is just one line long and offers no explanation. The decision is also only temporary, but it effectively means that LGBTQ college students in North Texas are not allowed to exercise their First Amendment rights for an indefinite period of time.

This is a story with two very clear villains. One is a university president who banned drag shows on campus, allegedly because he believes that drag is sexist. The other is a notoriously anti-LGBTQ judge.

[…]

Indeed, in its brief to the justices, Spectrum WT has pointed to a federal appeals court decision that held that a fraternity was protected by the First Amendment when it dressed several male students in women’s clothing and held an “ugly woman contest.” One of these men wore actual blackface, dressing as “an offensive caricature of a black woman.”

[…]

The answer is that West Texas A&M is located just outside of Amarillo, Texas. And cases brought in Amarillo’s federal courthouse are all heard by the city’s sole federal judge, Matthew Kacsmaryk. Kacsmaryk is a Trump appointee with strong ties to the religious right. He’s best known for his stalled attempt to ban the abortion drug mifepristone.
Hopefully the new policy to prevent judge shopping might stop these judges that Trump appointed.

NBC News writes,
JT Morris, a lawyer representing Spectrum WT, said the group will continue to protest the ban, with oral arguments coming up in the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals next month.

“The show is not over,” he said. Morris works for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which backs free expression on college campuses.

[…]

The LGBTQ group says its members’ free speech rights under the Constitution's First Amendment were violated, pointing to a university policy that bars administrators from denying access to facilities based on the political, religious or ideological views.
Notice how the right-wing conservatives conveniently ignore the Constitution when it doesn’t serve their bigoted views?

What I'm concerned about is that the Supreme Court will say that it is a "States Rights" issue and ignore the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

*****

Remember:
"R" is for reverse.
"D" is for forward.
Don't let them take us back to the 1950s

Sunday, March 17, 2024

A Call To All Good Citizens

A couple of bills have been introduced to Connecticut General Assembly that I just found out about today and they affect our community.

I remember when I was Executive Director of CT TansAdvocacy Coalition I used to send out calls for testimony. But now there is only silence out of the LGBTQ+ organizations here in Connecticut.

I don’t know why other organization didn’t spread the word about the hearings, but there wasn’t one peep from any of them about these bills. I don’t know if it is because fiefdoms and silos that they wanted to keep this information close to their chests but… the results were all I see is testimony in opposition to the bills!

The first bill that I’m tracking is…
(b) Each local or regional board of education shall provide a reason if such board removes or restricts access to any library material belonging to the collection of a school library or media center. No board shall remove or restrict access to library material for any of the following:
(1) Partisan approval or disapproval of any library material by the board;
(2) An author's race, nationality, gender identity, sexual orientation or political or religious views;
(3) Personal discomfort, morality or political or religious views of a member or members of the board;
(4) An author's points of view concerning current events, whether international, national or local;
(5) The race, nationality, gender identity, sexual orientation or political or religious views of a protagonist or other characters or as otherwise represented in the library material; or
(6) The content of the library material is related to sexual health and addresses physical, mental, emotional or social dimensions of human sexuality, including, but not limited to, puberty, sex and relationships.
This prevents the banning of books like they do in Republican states. The books cannot be banned just because there are trans or gay characters or it is about Black history or other protected class.

But get a load of the testimony…

This one is by Teachers/Parents Against Porn who wrote,
Given the current state of activism within the American Library Association, it is outrageous that the Connecticut legislature would propose to restrict any elected officials rights to remove inappropriate, highly sexualized materials in school libraries. Over the past 10 years, activists have created thousands of books sexualizing children as young as infants. These social contagion materials should have never been allowed in the public schools funded by taxpayer dollars as they do not promote actual education in reading, writing, history or math. Children will never be tested on this material; it is not required for
advancement or graduation.

The ALA, CLA (Connecticut Library Association) and other proponents of sexualized materials in public schools are hiding behind policies that are intentionally deceptive to the average person. They claim that parents are trying to promote censorship and/or intolerance which is a bold faced lie. Parent’s objections are based on the immoral content including highly graphic sexualized activity. The types of books we are talking about include but are not limited to descriptions and drawings of sexual acts and introductions to sexually explicit activities including accessing pornography on the internet.
So tell me where in the bill does it say that the law doesn’t ban pornography? To these people anything LGBTQ is porn.

A person against the bill wrote…
School libraries serve children. Their function is to share knowledge through age-appropriate written material, which would not include a Pandora's Box of harmful and inappropriate information that can be misconstrued and confusing to a young mind, or an old one for that matter.
Therefore, I believe local and regional school boards are in the best position to discern what is the best interest of their student base and their decisions concerning said interests should not be stymied by Raised H.B. No. 5417, which I object to.
Another person against the bill…
I am totally opposed to this bill...this is a complete over reach of state authority, and should NOT be in any way considered. Librarians should not have the authority to be protected under any such law so as to provide our children with books that are deemed inappropriate in their content. No Board of Education should be prohibited from overseeing what books are allowed in school libraries, and for that matter in school curriculums. This is our role as board members, hence it is why were are elected. I vehemently oppose this bill.
Then we have this organization which opposes any LGBTQ legislation, 

Taking points that I want to make:
  • This bill does nothing more than to prevent discrimination based on protected classes, they can still ban books because it porn. What it does do is to prevent books from being removed because bias.
  • This bill doesn’t remove the authority of the local elected offices or boards but what it does do is to make sure that they are not banning books because of protected classes.

*****

The second bill that I’m tracking is,
The bill adds…
(2) "Gender-affirming health care services" means all medical care relating to the treatment of gender dysphoria as set forth in the most recent edition of the American Psychiatric Association's "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders" and gender incongruence, as defined in the most recent revision of the "International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems"; and tatistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems"; and
(3) "Person" includes an individual, a partnership, an association, a limited liability company or a corporation.
(b) When any person has had a judgment entered against such person, in any state, where liability, in whole or in part, is based on the alleged provision, receipt, assistance in receipt or provision, material support for, or any theory of vicarious, joint, several or conspiracy liability derived therefrom, for reproductive health care services or gender-affirming health care services that are permitted under the laws of this state, such person may recover damages from any party that brought the action leading to that judgment or has sought to enforce that judgment. Recoverable damages shall include:
(1) Just damages created by the action that led to that judgment, including, but not limited to, money damages in the amount of the judgment in that other state and costs, expenses and reasonable attorney's fees spent in defending the action that resulted in the entry of a judgment in another state; and
(2) costs, expenses and reasonable attorney's fees incurred in bringing an action under this section as may be allowed by the court.

Statement of Purpose:
To consolidate various provisions of the general statutes relating to reproductive health care services and gender-affirming health care services by incorporating existing statutory language concerning gender-affirming health care services into existing statutes concerning reproductive health care services.

The testimony at the hearing really brought out a lot of negative testimony…

A nun wrote,

Hello. I believe that the traditional American family, consisting of persons related by blood or adoption through the marriage of one man and one woman. This is the cornerstone of American society and the
government is duty-bound to protect the integrity of the family unit as described by scripture, through legislation. This bill does not support my values.
Thank you for your consideration.
A doctor wrote,
I am very concerned about the lack of wisdom in allowing children to transition genders. The brain doesn’t develop until age 25. To make irreversible decisions before the rational brain is fully developed is a disservice to the people they have the potential of becoming and liking as an adult (themselves). The long term health concerns of taking hormones of the opposite gender is also a serious concern. Suicidal ideation increases, general life expectancy decreases and quality of life decreases. The complications of their medical care have no good solutions. I believe it is important to protect children. That is the primary responsibility of their parents. This bill cripples a parent’s ability to help and protect their child. I strongly oppose it and hope you will too. Please protect our children.
Boy! For a doctor he sure has it upside down the suicidal ideations is cause by people like the good doctor. By people who try to block us from our true gender, people who think we are going to hell!

Another in opposition,
SB 214 seeks to end civilization as we know it. Our Founding Fathers, in their innate wisdom, put Christian values into our constitution. This bill seeks to tear out sacred document. “Gender Affirmation” was first used as a term by scientists in German camps in the 1940s. Just listen to it on the War Room. This is a scheme to make our children communists.
This is the quality of the opposing, they have no idea what the bill is about but they heard it was bad from a right-wing propagandist.

This organization has opposed every Trans or LGBTQ bill...
My name is Leslie Wolfgang and I am the Director of Public Policy for the Family Institute of Connecticut. I am testifying against SB214. I am providing some background on the bill, proposing an edit and also addressing gender-affirming health care for minors more generally. In the matter of SB214, the underlying law was likely passed in response to bans in other states of certain gender-affirming care for minors. The law creates hurdles for litigants before the State may use its resources to issue summons, subpoenas and more. The State’s ability to assist depends on whether there is “gender affirming” care and a “similar claim would exist under the laws of this state”. It is bound to raise “suspect class” issues and deserves closer scrutiny by people familiar with U.S. Constitution jurisprudence.

At the root of every lawsuit is a hurting person. In the matter of these lawsuits from out-of-state related to gender-affirming health care services . . there is likely a person who received gender-affirming services as a child and is now suing a medical provider.

The law creates another level of review and mechanism for The law creates another level of review and mechanism for a counter-suit against people who are likely already experiencing mental, physical and financial anguish in pursuit of their claims. Who makes a determination about whether there would be a similar claim under CT law? How will it be proven?

Minors in particular, have no control over the laws of their state-- whether something is banned or permitted. They have no control over the state where they received treatment. This law creates uncertainties and hurdles for them as they seek to have their legal claims fairly heard and investigated.

I recommend this bill be amended to exclude claims from people who received their treatment as minors. States that have banned gender-affirming care for minors have a point. “Gender affirming” care is not new, but it is not settled science either. In my written testimony I am providing a link to a February 2, 2024, New York Times article titled “As Kids, They Thought They Were Trans. They No Longer Do” and also ‘Gender-Affirming Care Is Dangerous. I Know Because I Helped Pioneer It.’. In that article, the chief psychiatrist for one of the first international gender clinics, talks about the pressure by activists on doctors to ignore their training and provide only “gender-affirming” care. She also re-iterates data that up to 80% of children resolve their gender dysphoria if allowed to complete puberty without medical intervention. She quotes a 2020 study that states “In light of available evidence, gender reassignment of minors is an experimental practice.” and warns that “young people, whose brains were still maturing, lacked the ability to properly assess the consequences of making decisions they would have to live with for the rest of their lives.”
There is a lot more that he writes. What we need to do is counter him with facts! Our own personal stories… but above all be respectful! Let their hate and lies show and our love shine.

We need to write about why this bill is so important to us the trans community.

You can find your legislator here… at the main Connecticut General Assembly’s web page, scroll down to “Find Your Legislators.”

For tips on testifying and writing letters (use the same format as speaking in a hearing, but you are not limited to 3 minutes.) see what I wrote here… “Testifying and Speaking in Public

We people people to counter these negative testimonies! We need you to write or talk to your legislator! Help us to help you and the others in the LGBTQ+ community.

Okay, You Want To Be Scared?

[Editorial]

These are really scary thoughts…
Trump is packing the national and state RNCs with his cronies.
Trump packed the courts with judges who ruled on ideologies not the Constitution.
Trump has said he would prosecute his political opponents.
Think back to the 1930s, does this remind you of anyone?

*****
Donald Trump said on Saturday if he does not win November's presidential election it will mean the likely end of American democracy.

The Republican presidential candidate, speaking to supporters in Ohio, made the claim after repeating his baseless assertion that his 2020 election defeat to Democratic President Joe Biden was the result of election fraud.

During an outdoor speech that was whipped by strong winds and punctuated by some profane language, Trump predicted that if he does not win the Nov. 5 general election, American democracy will come to an end.

"If we don't win this election, I don't think you're going to have another election in this country," Trump said.

Trump, who is under criminal indictment in Georgia for trying to overturn the result of the 2020 election there, this week won enough delegates to mathematically clinch the Republican nomination.
Are you scared yet?
 
[/Editorial]

Saturday, March 16, 2024

Saturday 9: Charlie Mops


On Saturdays I take a break from the heavy stuff and have some fun…


Not familiar with this week's song? Hear it here.
 
1. This week's song is about a legend, Charlie Mops, the man who invented beer. Tell us about something you enjoy so much you could sing about it with the same enthusiasm the Salt Sea Pirates sing of beer.
Oh, oh, you don’t want me to sing. I am tone deaf!
I made my own cassettes and unbeknownst to me it was slow. Well when my niece and nephews heard the tape, they noticed it off key but not me.

2.  The lyrics tell us beer goes well with breakfast, dinner and snacks. Think about what you dined on yesterday. What beverages did you have with your breakfast, your dinner, and your between-meal snack?
I had a beer for lunch.
Four of us seniors when out to lunch at the Westbrook Lobster in Wallinford and I had beer to go with the Tuscan Seafood.

3. "Charlie Mops" was chosen because it's an Irish drinking song and Sunday is St. Patrick's Day. Do you expect to raise a glass in honor of the day?
Nope. But my cousins will, one is even in an Irish band.

4. Beer is not the only beverage often dyed green for St. Patrick's Day. In 1970, McDonald's introduced the Shamrock Shake, a milkshake made with a minty green syrup. If we were to go out for shakes right now, what flavor would you order?
Well there is only one flavor to get and that is Chocolate!

5. Legend has it that wearing green makes you invisible to leprechauns, who can be mischievous pranksters. Is there anyone you would like to avoid today?
Nope.

6. For all our talk of green, it was not the original color of St. Patrick's Day. Through most of the 18th century, blue was worn across England and Ireland to honor St. Patrick. The Irish switched to green to express their independence from the English. Which color do wear more often: blue or green?
Blue, as in blue jeans.

7. Today St. Patrick's Day is observed all over the world. In Tokyo, it's not a single day but a weekend celebration. When you think of Japan, what's the first thing that comes to mind?
Cars.

8. One of the biggest parades each year in Buenos Airies is for St. Patrick's Day. Have you ever participated in a parade?
Yes, when I was a scout, we pretended to be camping on the back of a trailer used to carry bulldozers. We had a tent, logs to sit around a make believe fire, and some potted shrubs.

9. Georgia Southern University in Statesboro, GA, crowns a Miss St. Patrick's Day. Tell us about an event you recall from your college days.
A bunch of us from the dorm went up to Letchworth State Park for a weekend, we rented a cabin in the park. They were all liberal arts major who didn't have a problem missing a class, a friend and me were engineering majors who couldn’t get out of class on Fridays. My friend was a pilot and signed out the college’s student flying club plane.
Here we are trying to find a grass airstrip in the middle of hay country. Every fields was grass! We finally found it and landed safely.

Thanks so much for joining us again at Saturday: 9. As always, feel free to come back, see who has participated and comment on their posts. In fact sometimes, if you want to read & comment on everyone's responses, you might want to check back again tomorrow. But it is not a rule. We haven’t any rules here. Join us on next Saturday for another version of Saturday: 9, "Just A Silly Meme on a Saturday!" Enjoy your weekend!