Ageist of the Week

Ilyka Damen demonstrates how some people can’t help but display class-A irrationality, regardless of age. In a thread on Feministe, she said,

[Link] I am always being told that I should cut you a break because you are young, Alon, but this isn’t a youth problem. This is a reading comprehension problem. I am not “doing” anything to helpless, innocent words, and what I am talking about cannot in fact be applied to “any word or phrase.”

The youth part comes into it in that you’re currently at that stage where anything that can’t be shown to you by mathematical formula is suspect. Perhaps you will grow out of that in time. Until then, regarding your objection that I do not “talk about it empirically,” that is because I am more inclined to “talk about it personally,” possibly because I am not a think tank.

Circulate this to anyone you know who hangs around the same blogs she comments on: Ilyka Damen is an idiot who, by her own admission, is so shoddy that thinktanks are more intellectually serious than she is.

44 Responses to Ageist of the Week

  1. Auguste says:

    Sigh. You’re right, Alon, Ilyka’s comment was kind of ageist. She really should have unreservedly called you out for the smug, condescending, let-me-tell-you-ladies-something asshole you were being.

    And if any gay bottoms [although I second zuzu's "apocryphal" initial diagnosis] ask me to stop using that phrase the way women have asked that we stop using “cunt”, I’ll retract that aspect of it immediately.

  2. zuzu says:

    Nice to see that the tried-and-true method of calling your opponent irrational rather than engaging the substance of their points is still popular with the youth of today. I rather feared that might die out.

  3. muppt says:

    *burp*

  4. Chris Clarke says:

    You receive an iota of the condescension with which you routinely treat the entire world and you throw a hissy fit.

    Interesting.

    Remember this feeling, Alon. Imagine a not inconsiderable number of people having a feeling rather like it as a result of conversing with you.

  5. Tyler DiPietro says:

    Remember this feeling, Alon. Imagine a not inconsiderable number of people having a feeling rather like it as a result of conversing with you.

    I actually think Alon should take this as a reminder that anti-intellectualism is by no means the exclusive domain of the political right. This debacle aptly demonstrates it.

  6. rod. says:

    I don’t know what led to this conflict of opinions, and I am not taking sides here, but IMHO:

    - age is an issue and it can be a handicap (even if for biological reasons)

    - if someone invokes some other person’s age in a debacle, then I’d say that person probably has a weak argument, and thus needs to resort to some other tricks to gain an edge

    Just my 2 cents

  7. muppt says:

    “Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong as capable as men. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men. ” ~ Mathematician Theodore Kaczynski and convicted murderer

  8. Auguste says:

    I actually think Alon should take this as a reminder that anti-intellectualism is by no means the exclusive domain of the political right. This debacle aptly demonstrates it.

    Nah, we just hate our betters.

  9. Alon Levy says:

    Shorter Chris: it’s just as bad for Alon to explain to people why they’re wrong as it is for Ilyka to tell Alon he’s too young to understand.

  10. Tyler DiPietro says:

    Nah, we just hate our betters.

    Indeed. And the “betters” among arguments seem to meet an exceptional disdain. ;)

    Maybe I should just tell Alon he’s a doody head every time I disagree with him. That will most assuredly win every argument we have in the future.

  11. Alon Levy says:

    Auguste, talking to the gallery is useful, but for some reason you’re talking to Pandagon’s gallery here instead of to this blog’s.

  12. Auguste says:

    Sorry, I’m too anti-intellectual to be sure I’ve grasped your point exactly, but pace Tyler, I’ll take my uncivility and leave you alone.

  13. Tyler DiPietro says:

    Sorry, I’m too anti-intellectual to be sure I’ve grasped your point exactly, but pace Tyler, I’ll take my uncivility and leave you alone.

    The point is that I see a few recurring themes in that thread:

    1. Alon is condescending.
    2. Alon is young.
    3. Alon can’t comprehend the truthiness of what we’re saying, he should stop demanding evidence.
    4. “Logic” is gay.

    All of which smacks of anti-intellectualism, at least to my eyes.

  14. Auguste says:

    You know, I said I wasn’t coming back, and of course, being weak of flesh, I had to, and I just have to say that this:

    “Logic” is gay.

    really does tell me all I need to know.

    Condescension is the first refuge of the asshole, and if that epithet makes you sneer again, you just go hog-wild, my friend. It’s funny – in my life, I’ve met a lot of intellectuals, and the more accomplished, the less condescending. This has held true cross-discipline, too.

  15. Auguste says:

    [Need to know about Tyler's particular argument, I should say. Don't want to be seen as conflating.]

  16. Alon Levy says:

    Condescension is the first refuge of the asshole

    Which is, I presume, why people praise my precociousness when I agree with them and then age-bash me when I don’t.

  17. Tyler DiPietro says:

    Condescension is the first refuge of the asshole, and if that epithet makes you sneer again, you just go hog-wild, my friend. It’s funny – in my life, I’ve met a lot of intellectuals, and the more accomplished, the less condescending. This has held true cross-discipline, too.

    There is nothing “condescending” about demanding evidence when someone makes an assertion. What is being called “lived experience” in that thread is called “anecdotal evidence” everywhere else. It’s the same bullshit pulled by David Horrowitz to show that conservatives are opressed in academia and for Christian fundamentalists to show that that they are being oppressed by secular leftists .

    What’s condescending is your implication that some people are so hypersensitive that the use of “gay” as a term of derision is somehow an attack on all homosexuals. I don’t express restraint about using insults like “asshole”, “cock”, and “dickhead” for the same reason.

  18. Auguste says:

    What’s condescending is your implication that some people are so hypersensitive that the use of “gay” as a term of derision is somehow an attack on all homosexuals.

    You can’t see a point if it’s screaming in your ear, can you?

    Given the fact that gay rights advocates have been telling us for twenty years that yes, the use of “gay” as a term of derision is an attack on all homosexuals, I’m not too worried about my stance on this.

    Feminists ask for the same courtesy (and change in attitude said courtesy represents) about the word “cunt.”

    If you’re not going to respect either of those requests, that’s your prerogative, but you’re doing it because you’re not going to respect the requests, not because of some sort of superior reasoning skills.

  19. Auguste says:

    As for the age-bashing, Alon, as I said in my initial post, inasmuch as I saw ageism in what Ilyka said, she shouldn’t have. I’ll take your word that it’s prevalent elsewhere. But if you’re claiming that your post takes issue ONLY with the ageism and NOT with defending the rightness of what you were saying in the other thread, I suggest you read it again.

  20. Alon Levy says:

    But I have to side with Tyler on the “Logic is gay” thing. On the use/mention scale, it looks more like a mention than like use, because of the “Shorter Feministe regulars:” flavor of it. When someone writes a comment that goes, “Shorter ____: those bitches owe me sex,” it’s understood that the snarky writer is not using the word “bitch” but putting it in the mouth of the person he’s attacking.

  21. Alon Levy says:

    Also, I use the word “irrational” because that’s what age-bashing is. I didn’t use it to describe any of the people who talked about lived experience. I’m not sure if I should have; when in doubt, I always use weaker words. When people talked about lived experience, I responded that it was the wrong track to take because it doesn’t distinguish oppressed groups from non-oppressed groups. Tellingly, I only took the gloves off when I got age-bashed.

  22. Patness says:

    This is precisely the shitfest I got into when I first started at Livejournal 3 years and one month ago.

    Other people don’t get to make me decide how I feel about something. I do. I am free to decide what “cunt” means. For that matter, cripple that I am, I get to decide what that means, too. Likewise, I can’t stop other people from being offended by it. So if I want trouble, I’ll run up to a black person and call them “nigger” or run to a feminist and call her a “cunt”. It is up to them how they feel about it, although the results are predictable.

    See, the practice in areas of offensive speech is to a) get all riled up over it and then b) assume that whoever offended you knew what they were doing. It’s conflating the meaning to you, as an individual, with the intention of the person doing the offending. Sorry, that’s usually wrong. It IS terrible rationale, and it deserves to be called out for the stupidity that it is. The only way to point that out successfully is to show that the attacker is aware of your values and chose to deride a specific set of them. In which case, they disagree and they don’t like you.

    By which point what that person says is the least of your concerns.

    Anyone with a cause (and you can’t tell me feminism isn’t, at Feministe) will have a chip on their shoulder about things sensitive to their cause. Using cunt as a name is one of them. I defend “godless” from attack with a certain pride. Everyone has causes – not everyone shares the same causes. Just because they don’t, does not have to mean it’s an attack on you.

  23. muppt says:

    David Horowitz’s an evil zionist jew and former communist!

  24. Alon Levy says:

    Well, I think I agree, Pat. But for the record, I’ve never used the word “Cunt” except possibly when talking descriptively about the organ. The setup was that Zuzu approvingly linked to a post shredding that word using mostly personal experience. I made an obligatory “It’s okay in Britain” comment, which crops up in every discussion of the word; usually the participants duly note it or perhaps talk about it a little and then move on. On Feministe, it turned into a mudslinging fest, which evolved into a flamewar about women’s lived experiences. I said lived experience didn’t count for much for specific reasons, in response to which Ilyka decided to engage in age-bashing.

  25. Katie Kish says:

    But for the record, I’ve never used the word “Cunt” except possibly when talking descriptively about the organ. Possibly. Pfft. You used it ALL the time.

    Someone pointed out that your assertion about the word use in Britain was wrong.

    You’re shit storm about age bashing is just a clever duck of answering to the real arguments that were being presented, IMO.

    4. “Logic” is gay.
    Not classy at all – no matter how you’re attempting to use it. “Logic is a spic” “Logic is jewish” … Unless I’ve missed some other place in which the term “gay” was applied to logic – then its just not in anyway acceptable – less so than bashing someone’s age.

    Anyway – I really do need to know what is wrong with using “live experience” as an argument. Everything is based on lived experience in a lot of situations. …At work we have no empirical evidence that the guy at the computer department is a sexist pig – but because of all our experiences with him – we all know he is, and the stories that we all have would be enough in court to get him into a lot of trouble.

    The trouble is, Alon, its like these women are saying “ouch” and you’re saying “it didn’t hurt you”.

  26. Katie Kish says:

    PS – Is there really going to be an ageist every week!?

  27. Alon Levy says:

    Possibly. Pfft. You used it ALL the time.

    When talking about the organ, yes. Talking about shaved cunts, small dicks, and fat asses isn’t the same as using these words to refer to people.

    You’re shit storm about age bashing is just a clever duck of answering to the real arguments that were being presented, IMO.

    Let me get it straight. Ilyka’s age-bashing was perfectly fine, but my calling her on it was just a way of ducking her argument?

    Anyway – I really do need to know what is wrong with using “live experience” as an argument.

    Tell someone at AIPAC that Israel is an apartheid state. You’ll be screamed at for being anti-Semitic, and people with the same level of zeal as Ilyka will insist that you’re hurting them, that you’re oppressing them just because they’re Jewish. They’ll talk in length about their lived experience with anti-Semitism. Hell, just say so on this blog; I’m pretty sure Ran Halprin is still reading, waiting for the moment I resume criticizing the occupation.

  28. Lesley Plum says:

    Alon, spare me. I laid out in a comment all the reasons why “cunt” connotes inferiority. Not one person in that thread, including you, took it up and attempted to refute my premises. Well, you took one sentence entirely out of context, but never dealt with the substance of the comment.

    Now, no one’s required to respond to my comments, but I find it rather disingenuous to say that the feminists on the thread just “magically” wanted to excise a word from people’s vocabulary when no one on the thread who said “Cunt is an acceptable word to use” laid out any argument against why it connotes inferiority in reply. Instead, it was all “Well, it just doesn’t! So there!” There’s no empirical analysis tied to that either.

    Eventually I did criticize you for taking things out of context, and I’m going to again. That analysis you wanted about how words like “cunt” help perpetuate a sexist society? It’s been done before. We all, on Feministe, know that. Therefore, when we’re having discussions about the word, we take that as a given. Same with the idea that women are an oppressed group whereas men are not. It’s taken as a given on the blog. As is the idea that the lived experience of an oppressed group needs to take precedence over that of a non-oppressed group when it comes to defining things that perpetuate the oppression of the first group. You’re ignoring all of that. You’re acting as if we’re taking about “lived experience” in a completely context-free environment. That’s just not the case. You’ve been reading feminist blogs long enough to know that, so if you don’t, you might need to read some more. Further, if we’re going to have to reiterate those concepts every single time we have a discussion, there’s really no point in having the more advanced discussions. Just put a never-ending loop of Feminism 101 on the blog.

  29. You know what Alon, you might have a point about ageism, but you certainly are condescending – just read that last paragraph of your post.

    Tyler, in the context of insults, living experience/annecdotal data is the only data that matters, since they are so context specific. You can’t make any kind of empirical observations, since every reaction is unique. This is what makes it different from science, and this is why it’s damn condescending when Alon comes and tries to tell others that their concerns are not valid.
    If someone tells you that you insulted them, you appologize, and explain that you didn’t mean to. You don’t say “no, I didn’t”.

  30. Lesley Plum says:

    See, the practice in areas of offensive speech is to a) get all riled up over it and then b) assume that whoever offended you knew what they were doing. It’s conflating the meaning to you, as an individual, with the intention of the person doing the offending. Sorry, that’s usually wrong. It IS terrible rationale, and it deserves to be called out for the stupidity that it is. The only way to point that out successfully is to show that the attacker is aware of your values and chose to deride a specific set of them. In which case, they disagree and they don’t like you.

    That’s all well and good, but it’s somewhat disingenuous to assume that the vast majority of Americans, for example, do not understand the connotations of the word “nigger.” Therefore, even if they say they mean something else by it, odds are they know full well the cultural meaning attached and how people will likely interpret it. Since you can’t actually get inside their heads, you can’t really successfully show the attacker is aware of cultural values. You have to go with the assumption that they are, because statistically that’s the most likely scenario. They might come back and say “I’m new to this country, and I really didn’t know that.” At which point, you’d say “OK, but now you do know, so please don’t use it in the future.” In most English-speaking countries, though, “cunt” is considered a quite offensive word (not just to feminists, any assertion to the contrary), so to imagine that the participants in that thread were unaware goes against all likelihood. Further, no one came back and said “I really didn’t know that.”

  31. Lynet says:

    Sigh.

    Alon,

    I think it makes sense to read Ilyka’s post (and zuzu’s quote of it) as addressing questions such as the following:

    - Does it hurt women (politically) to perpetuate the meaning behind the word ‘cunt’ [as understood by those in Ilyka's culture]?
    - [When] is the word ‘cunt’ offensive to women?
    - Are there liberal bloggers out there who are negligent in considering the above issues before deciding to use the word ‘cunt’?

    Ilyka makes the claim that many male liberal bloggers either don’t care whether the word ‘cunt’ is offensive to women such as herself, or don’t realise why it’s offensive to women such as herself. She tries to amend the latter by explaining.

    With regard to the first of these questions, your comment “[T]he word “cunt” is only that offensive in American English. In British English it’s a run of the mill insult, on a par with “arsehole.” ” is a non sequitur.

    With regard to the second of these questions, your first comment is relevant, but skirts the difficult part of the issue by bringing up one case where it might be more okay to use the word. Unfortunately, the one case you bring up is not useful in tackling the main, more difficult issue, because it references a completely different culture to the one that Ilyka references. Moreover, this culture is one that you yourself are not familiar with. That limits the amount of useful information you could give if the writer of that thread had wanted to discuss that (different) issue anyway – which she didn’t.

    With regard to your third question, your statement might be relevant if the bloggers in question were British.

    In conclusion, your statement might have been barely relevant, but it wasn’t helpful with reference to the main issues.

    If you intended to provide a counter-example to the statement “The word ‘cunt’ is always offensive” then I salute you as a fellow mathematician. However, you leave the question of whether it is always offensive in American culture wide open, thereby completely missing the main point of the discussion. As someone outside American culture, I don’t find Ilyka’s post unduly USA-centric any more than I find your posts on American politics unduly USA-centric. There is nothing to stop you discussing local issues on the internet. Moreover, for various reasons, I find both issues interesting.

    Many posters on Feministe have reacted to your peripheral point by jumping to the conclusion that you were offering a completely stupid piece of evidence against their main point. This was perhaps uncharitable, but not difficult to understand.

    Moreover, when someone is expressing an emotion and you react by bringing up a peripheral issue, it is very easy for others to think that you are disregarding that emotion. The question of whether you should be allowed to ignore emotion in favour of having a more detached discussion is a thorny one that I have no intention of addressing, but it might be well to take this on board if you want to understand the reaction you got.

  32. Lynet says:

    Additionally – rants are not required to be reasonable, but I’ll point this out anyway. Your conclusion “Ilyka Damen is an idiot who, by her own admission, is so shoddy that thinktanks are more intellectually serious than she is” does not follow from Ilyka’s statement. Ilyka was not saying that she was against talking about things empirically, nor that she was incapable of talking about things empirically, nor that empirical evidence that contradicted her claims would be worthless. Admittedly, genuine empirical evidence that contradicts an “I feel” statement can be hard to come by, and much of Ilyka’s statement was a statement about her own feelings. There’s nothing wrong with that. Feelings are important.

    Do you contend that feelings are never intellectually serious?

    You seem to have some concern that anyone could pick a particular word or phrase, claim to be offended by it, and demand that it not be said. One point that needs to be noted is that such a demand is considerably more reasonable when the word or phrase in question is not necessary in order for some particular statement to be able to be said at all. Thus, for example, demanding that no-one criticise Israel for fear of being anti-Semitic stifles an important viewpoint, and should be disallowed. On the other hand, asking that people not refer to women as ‘cunts’ only stifles an important viewpoint if you really do think that the word ‘cunt’, with all its implications, is best way to get your viewpoint across. And if you do think this, then there are several possibilities:
    1. You don’t think that ‘cunt’ is misogynistic in this sense.
    2. You do think that ‘cunt’ is misogynistic when used in this sense, and think that this is a bad thing, in general, but you think the need to get the other connotations which the word can give you makes up for the misogyny which you will slightly perpetuate thereby.
    3. You do think ‘cunt’ is misogynistic when used in this sense, and the misogyny is part of your intended meaning.

    Ilyka argues against (1). Her comments about Roy seem to allow room for (2), but she would like people to understand the extent to which she finds the word offensive before coming to those sorts of conclusions.

    I do not think Ilyka is trying to address (3).

    Does this help?

  33. Patness says:

    .’ “Logic” is gay. ‘
    Not classy at all – no matter how you’re attempting to use it. “Logic is a spic” “Logic is jewish”

    Logic is retarded. ‘Nuff said.

    because statistically that’s the most likely scenario.
    It’s not that I disagree, here. Our opinions are in synch, but it is a baseless (and irrelevant) argument.

    They might come back and say “I’m new to this country, and I really didn’t know that.” At which point, you’d say “OK, but now you do know, so please don’t use it in the future.” In most English-speaking countries, though, “cunt” is considered a quite offensive word (not just to feminists, any assertion to the contrary), so to imagine that the participants in that thread were unaware goes against all likelihood. Further, no one came back and said “I really didn’t know that.”
    Again, I’m not addressing all of English-speaking culture and I’m not calling a polling firm a cunt. Rather, that the offensiveness of the word cunt is incidental. I can say it with my friends, family, even several of my coworkers without a problem. I can greatly choose an audience and throw it in a conversation without it being detrimental to anyone’s causes. The meaning is contextual, not purely objective, and there exist a vast number of scenarios where the plights of women and misogyny are not part of the context of the discussion where I use the word ‘cunt’, for example. That doesn’t stop people from ignoring it and assuming a specific context, however. Similar examples could be used for the word ‘retarded’, which almost everyone says.

    You do not get to choose how I mean a word, and you do not get to choose what that word means when it is spoken to me. You don’t. So, please… don’t try to represent all English-speaking nations. At the very least, don’t try to represent me. I don’t need any representation.

  34. Alon Levy says:

    You know what Alon, you might have a point about ageism, but you certainly are condescending – just read that last paragraph of your post.

    Oh, that wasn’t supposed to be condescending, merely insulting. From what I’ve observed, people who aren’t idiots either respond to my actual points or find ways to dodge them that don’t involve age-bashing.

    … You’re ignoring all of that. You’re acting as if we’re taking about “lived experience” in a completely context-free environment.

    No, I’m disagreeing with that. There’s a very important difference between not knowing that feminists tend to value women’s lived experience as a way of identifying and tackling sexism, and knowing that but thinking that they’re wrong on that point. I don’t agree with movement feminism on everything.

  35. Alon Levy says:

    Lynet, I need to go somewhere now, but I’ll probably write a full-fledged post about the exact problem with lived experience, since there are certain cases in which it’s valid.

  36. SLC says:

    Re muppt

    1. David Horowitz is a former Trotskyite.

    2. Paul Wolfowitz is an Arab lover.

  37. zuzu says:

    I made an obligatory “It’s okay in Britain” comment, which crops up in every discussion of the word; usually the participants duly note it or perhaps talk about it a little and then move on. On Feministe, it turned into a mudslinging fest, which evolved into a flamewar about women’s lived experiences. I said lived experience didn’t count for much for specific reasons, in response to which Ilyka decided to engage in age-bashing.

    Let’s start with your “It’s okay in Britain” comment. You know why that raised hackles? BECAUSE IT CROPS UP IN EVERY DISCUSSION OF THE WORD. And it’s always raised by a non-Brit whose experience with British usage seems to be limited to Trainspotting. And then the Brits will come in and say that the person who raised it is wrong about the usage, and that people really need to stop using Trainspotting as some kind of field guide to British slang.

    So, right there, you came in with a bullshit argument that someone always raises and it’s always wrong. And then you started dismissing lived experience.

    I know you don’t think you’re condescending, but given that you actually ARGUED with me about where I grew up on the basis of your notions of what a Northeasterner must sound like and one conversation in which it’s highly unlikely I said either of the words you based this on, I’m going to have to go with “Condescending? Yes.”

  38. Alon Levy says:

    Zuzu, I’m not sure who you’re talking to. It’s not me, because you’re telling me I argued with you over things I never argued with you about, and because you’re taking my dismissal of lived experience as evidence that I’m condescending even though I’ve made it clear I don’t think it is. It’s not my commenters or my readers, who, judging by previous comments here, are probably more like Tyler than like you on average. So the only possible conclusion I have is that you’re talking to the Feministe echo chamber, which would be perfectly understandable but for the fact that this isn’t Feministe.

    Or are you just rambling to feel good about yourself?

  39. zuzu says:

    Zuzu, I’m not sure who you’re talking to. It’s not me, because you’re telling me I argued with you over things I never argued with you about, and because you’re taking my dismissal of lived experience as evidence that I’m condescending even though I’ve made it clear I don’t think it is.

    Rest assured, I’m talking to you. You’re the one who brought up the British usage of “cunt,” and you’re the one who was wrong about it. And you’re the one who can’t understand why people might be sick to death of hearing that tired old rationale again.

    And now you’re here sniveling about ageism and irrationality and echo chambers and rambling to feel good about myself rather than just admitting that you were totally wrong about the British usage. Well, if you’re that unhappy with Feministe, you’re quite welcome not to come back.

  40. Alon Levy says:

    Rest assured, I’m talking to you.

    Or so you insist… but by the same token, I could appeal to your experience as a secular Muslim Pakistani. It will have nothing to do with you, and I know it won’t appeal to you because you’ve never had that experience, but I can certainly say I’m talking to you.

  41. zuzu says:

    WTF are you talking about?

  42. [...] Lynet’s point about the difference between different applications of lived experience is strong enough to require me to clarify my general anti-anecdote position. To summarize the [...]

  43. [...] point about the difference between different applications of lived experience is strong enough to require me to clarify my general anti-anecdote position. To summarize the [...]

  44. whatever says:

    It’s funny to read this a year later. The asshole rightwinger that late in life claimed she was a lefty Ilyka Damen has bailed from the blogosphere. The asshole Chris Clarke first bailed, then couldnt’ stick with that promise.

    The asshole zuzu bailed from feminste but couldn’t stick with her promise and came back.

    All you so called putative feminsists bash anyone that disagrees with you constantly. You have never been empirical or reality based. Alon is a condescending patronizing pimple head for never understanding that.

    There is no patriarchy, at least not the grande conspiracy theory thought up in some women’s study class.

    Hey Alon, welcome to the real world. Your modern feminist buddies, they were never your buddies. Stop being a dipshit and get on with the real work of advancing human rights. It will have nothing to do with these assholes. Sadly.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: