Florida is a nutty place. This week, the legislature in the state of hanging chads, the state governed by The Doughboy Brother, is taking up debate on a very important bill. Referred to as the “Pull Up Your Britches” bill-a moniker that transports me back to the days of churning butter on the prairie with Ma Ingalls-the proposed law aims to punish teens that show their underwear in public.
Should this bill pass, kids whose Calvins and Victorias peek above the waistband of their low-rise skinny jeans will face up to 10 days of suspension, which pisses me off, because back in the day, I had to get caught smoking weed out of a makeshift pipe just to earn three days off, and that generally carried with it some kind of juvie record. Ten days for a little exposed g-string makes me a tad resentful.
The sponsor of this quaintly titled bill is one state senator, Gary Siplin of Orlando, who evidently has a boner to pick with the lost cause that is today's youth and their overt lack of morality. Never mind that his own morality is questionable: He was convicted recently of grand theft related to staff payroll during his re-election campaign. Siplin has yet to suffer any consequences from his conviction, as the Florida Senate is refraining from suspending him while he meanders through the appeals process. And thank Goddess for this, because, truly, who else in that progressive state could possibly do the important work of legislating how much flesh and undergarment other leathered-in-the-sun Floridians are forced to see?
This bill suffers a particularly harsh degree of ridiculosity in its narrowness. If there is a suspension to be doled out to Siplin, it should be for his sheer lack of vision and stunted ingenuity when it comes to seeing that the young, bronzed hard-bodies of the Sunshine State are properly cloaked. Forget about Siplin's financial dalliance; government officials screw the people every day and the earth still spins quietly on her axis, albeit gasping from all the CO2 emissions. Let's be real. Nobody gives a cockroach's dust about this guy's silly old grand-theft thingy because it falls into the boring kind of morality category involving stuff like numbers and decimals and junk. It's not saucy like the other morality category, the one that gets folks clambering onto a bandwagon to impeach.
The latter is the kind of morality that makes people fidget, the kind that makes the breath stutter, the eyelids droop, the nipples engorge, the skin flush hot-red and the nether regions of both sexes hum. Ah, it's so grand! But not so much for the puritanical Siplins of the world, who are uncomfortable with this thing called being human, and therein lies the foundation for the effort to legislate visible skivvies.
So, I say, cast a wider net, Gary! Your legislation simply doesn't go far enough. The pulling up of britches should be just the beginning. Why stop there, oh shortsighted fool? Why not make it illegal for a bra strap to slip just beyond the edge of a tank top? This should absolutely be off-limits for teens. Every time I witness such an egregious offense, I'm barraged with memories of Madonna in her holy Like a Virgin era. To this day, nothing makes me want to rat my hair and dry-hump like a fallen bra strap, and there's no way I'm alone on this.
Toe cleavage should most definitely be included as a no-no in your bill, Gar, because flip-flops dangled and bounced juuust so during calculus can be extremely distracting to the kid who suffers from podophilia. Ankles, knees, elbows, wrists-each a temptation of varying degree-should all be noted as taboo and included as earmarks. And there should be, without exception, a zero-tolerance clause for the young, exposed shoulder or suprasternal notch. Mandatory turtlenecks should be written into the bill. Yes, it's Florida. Yes, it's muggy. But morals are morals, and the children must be saved.
And speaking of the children, why limit this legislation to the under-18 set? I see plenty of mommies and their fleshy parts at the playground, bending over the sandbox and slipping down the slides with their frail Cosabella strings stretched across angular hipbones. Mommas of all shapes and sizes sport the ubiquitous pastel triangle of sheer fabric at the small of their backs, pulled taut above the waistband of designer jeans, held in place by little wisps of shimmering elastic threatening to snap upon retrieval of a downed sippie cup. Don't these women, flaunting their mommy bits, deserve suspension, too? Where do you think the kids learn this stuff, anyway? Hell, if I could get suspended from domestic duties for 10 days, I'd unbutton my pants and wear them around my ankles at SeaWorld. Gimme that hall pass, Senator!
That's just the thing, though. This bill, if it becomes law, will most certainly backfire, because morality, sexual or otherwise, cannot be legislated. Just try telling a kid she can't do something and watch her figure out a way to do it better, and right under your nose at that. Can't show underwear? Fine. How about not wearing any? It might be good for senatorial job security, this generation of commando kids. Then legislators could spend their time figuring out how to regulate visible ass-crack and the appropriate punishment for that infraction. Nor can a preposterous law like this be enforced; half of every school district would be on house arrest. And if the kids aren't in school, how are military recruiters going to have access to them? Siplin really didn't think this one through.
What irks me most is that guys like this senator from Jeb Country waste so much energy waving the ethics flag while simultaneously breaking rules that are inconvenient to them. Morality is à la carte for the Siplin breed and is followed or discarded depending on the desired level of self-advancement. He's offended by the site of underwear but fine with stealing money from taxpayers? Fuck him. He should pull his hands from his constituents' coffers and do something that matters. Like demanding accountability from the Bushies who want nothing more than to send our low-riding kids to fight their immoral war.