Categories
antifeminism bad boys beta males evil women men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny nice guys rape rapey the spearhead thug-lovers violence against men/women

On The Spearhead, it’s always women’s fault

It wasn't me.

A sex offender in Washington state who has spent most of his life behind bars, convicted of an assortment of different crimes ranging from check kiting to child molestation, is close to his release date. Not surprisingly, given his long history of preying on young girls, prosecutors are pushing for him to be sent instead to a facility for sexual predators, as a recent story on SeattlePI.com notes.

A state psychologist has described Donald “Theo” Holmes as a remorseless psychopath and a pathological liar who has managed to rack up an impressive array of crimes, many involving underage girls, during his stints outside of prison.  As the psychologist observed:

 “He uses women and children to feed his sexual desires, and he uses other members of society to supply him with money, clothes, and cars that make him look important and fuel the grandiosity which is an ingrained part of his personality. …

“He admits to multiple sexual conquests and is proud of the fact that he has 22 children and that he has had mothers and daughters … pregnant at the same time with his child.”

Holmes, for his part, simply describes himself as a “womanizer.” Apparently 12-year-old girls count as “women” in his world.

Over on The Spearhead, W.F. Price uses this case as an example of what is wrong with, you guessed it, women.

Fathering 22 children is not easy even without spending so much time incarcerated, so one can only assume that his criminality had absolutely no ill effect on his success with women. In fact, it may have enhanced his love life.

Here again, we see that being a good man has nothing to do with one’s success with women, and often is an impediment. One of the big lies of feminism is that women will shower affection on well-behaved men, and have no desire for the low-life thugs of society. Sadly, this is not the case.

Perhaps the most important message we can get out there to young men is that there is little connection between what turns women on and what is objectively good for society.

I don’t know any feminists who think that women only go for “good” guys; indeed, the feminists I know spend a lot of time discussing (and trying to help) women who are or were involved with not-so-good-guys. Evidently the imaginary feminists Price hangs out with, though, are reincarnations of Victorians who assume all women are perfect little angels.

Price is bad enough. Do we have to look at the comments too? Yes, yes we do. Let’s start with the very first one, from Opus, who asked:

but is he really so bad [?]… there is nothing to suggest that the minors were anything other than enthusiatic. Whatever views one may have as to the age of consent, the girls were not infants or children but adolescents.

Yep, in Opus’ mind, sex with 12- and 14-year-olds is no problem, so long as we assume (based on nothing) that they were “enthusiastic” about it. Last I checked, this comment had  16 upvotes and only 3 downvotes, so apparently he’s not the only one willing to blame underage girls for being raped. Sorry, having “enthusiastic” sex with a career criminal many decades older than them.

Meanwhile, Anonymous Reader (in another heavily upvoted comment) takes aim at:

the state of Washington. There’s no way this guy could have spawned 22 children if he had to support them on his own. How many are on AFDC, WIC or other welfare programs, paid for by ordinary, working Beta men? Yes, this is a result of liberalism but it also is a result of feminism.

AFDC and WIC are, of course, intended to make sure that the children of poor women don’t, you know, starve to death.  Now, I’m pretty sure Holmes wouldn’t have given a shit if his kids all starved. But apparently neither would Anonymous and his numerous upvoters. Why exactly should the children – some of whom may well be the result of the rape of underage girls — have to pay the price for Holmes’ despicable actions?

Yes, you can blame liberalism and feminism for the fact that these children are being fed. That’s not a bad thing. The actions of Holmes weren’t the actions of a liberal or a feminist; they were the actions of a seemingly psychopathic  sexual predator who assumed, like many traditionalist men, that women and girls are put on this earth for men to use as they see fit.

NOTE: I didn’t set out today to write yet another post about The Spearhead. But I read Price’s post and sort of had to say something. My next post will have nothing to do with The Spearhead. I promise.

EDITED TO ADD:  Picture credit: Zampieri, “God reprimanding Adam and Eve,” detail;  photo G. Piolle.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

186 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Nobby
Nobby
9 years ago

@Captain Bathrobe I saw an interesting theory once about Rome’s Fall, that it was actually the Catholic Church’s fault. Before Constantine, conquered lands were usually allowed to keep thier own religion and culture intact. Upon the entrance of Christianity, this stopped. As such, Rome had a much, much harder time recruiting soldiers and thus expanding, and then on is history.

titfortat
9 years ago

. Sometimes the old ways are the best ways.(NWO)

Try reading a book called “Sex at Dawn”, it talks about the really Old times. It might enlighten you a bit about sexuality.

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
9 years ago

Something to do with not enough babies being born of the right sort CB.

Social Darwinism for the (non)Win!

eilish
eilish
9 years ago

Oh my God. NOWslave: if you are going to hark back to the olden days, please refer to the ones that actually existed. You are correct that violence has always been used against women by men in their society to punish them for seeking civil emancipation, but everything else you say has all the historical authenticity of a Georgette Heyer novel.

We know you think women should not have any civil rights, and should be completely under the control of their husbands and fathers. The mystery is why you think women should want this, as well.

NWOslave
NWOslave
9 years ago

@Kendra, the bionic mommy…You’re under a false assumption. Only the elite learned to read/math in schools hundreds of years ago. The common man and woman would teach themselves in their homes. For every man whose wife/daughter couldn’t read the reverse was true as well, where a wife or daughter would read to the father/husband a story from a coveted book they owned.

The “wife” beatings of so many “fictional” stories are just that fiction. If they weren’t the letters written from long ago would be riddled with these stories. These evil men as you seem to assume would have been practically non existant as opposed to today.

I have two brothers and two sisters, many years ago one of my sisters had a boyfriend. He was a great guy except for the “juice” he tried to quit and since none of us drink he tried. But, he couldn’t stop, he wasn’t voilent towards her, but he once punched a wall in her house while drunk. My brother and I went over and gave him a stern talking to and a bloody lip and such, (so much better than calling the cops). He went to AA but the juice was too strong, he couldn’t quit. So we went in and kicked him the fuck out, (literally). My sister weakly protested because she knew we were right. She is now married to a real stand up guy.

The moral of the above story is, back in the olden days everyone had extended families, (one of the perks of large families). So if a man were to hit a woman back then, the womans father, sons, uncles, ect. would come over and beat the ever loving shit out of him. Even his father and brothers would join in. The propaganda machine that will tell you about a womans daily beatings back then are false. DV simply wasn’t acceptable back then and was more or less unheard of. TV lies in case you didn’t know.

As far as vaccines go, do you know whats in those injections? Next time you toss down a tylanol maybe you should think twice. Ya never know, I just might be helping by reccomending not eating tylanols like candy.

Lydia
Lydia
9 years ago

16 or 18 as the age of consent? Isn’t that a bit…late? Here in Germany, the age of consent is 14 (and 16 for booze), and so far, it doesn’t seem to me that young girls are systematically taken advantage of. But then again, we don’t have pageants for toddlers, either. And we don’t fuss so much about children being born in caring, loving relationships that happen to be unwed. And our contracepts seem to work most of the time, therefore not resulting in a massive teen pregnancy rate.

Maybe in the end a youngster’s sexual maturity depends on what we teach them as a society…?

@Catherine: “girls my age are better looking than you.”

Ewwww.

Seriously, ewwww. Ok, maybe forget what I wrote above. You really manage to sound like a child whore here. Where are your parents, girl?

@MRAL: *OMEGA* *HUSBANDS*??? I thought omegas never get a woman.

Also, if women just want to abuse men, shouldn’t you be glad about not getting one? You really need to decide, man.

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
9 years ago

Lydia-yes. The US has had some pretty weird hang ups about sex since our founding. However I am kind of puzzled that your country would not look even a little askance at a 14 year old with a 54 year old.

Captain Bathrobe
Captain Bathrobe
9 years ago

DV simply wasn’t acceptable back then and was more or less unheard of.

See, kids, this is what happens when you get your history from right-wing talk show hosts and The History Channel: you start to think that your own ass is a legitimate source of information.

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
9 years ago

The massive amount of fail in your claims makes babies cry NWOslave.

Do you know ANYTHING?

Captain Bathrobe
Captain Bathrobe
9 years ago

@Nobby,

I think that theory is far more plausible than “they fucked themselves to death.” But, hey, what do I know?

NWOslave
NWOslave
9 years ago

@Captain Bathrobe…Last comment of the night, I’m tired and have a long day tommorow.

You said…”Ah yes, the idea that men are salivating dogs who can’t control themselves! What a dim view of men you have, NWO.”

So women slut walking, dressing in less, wearing practically nothing on the beach, perfume, jewelry, high heels, ect, ect, ect. Is this an example of women “restraining” their sexuality? Don’t women do this, use their sexuality to attract men? Or is doing this just to feel good about yourselves, because if it is, I’m guessing women do this when they plan to stay home alone. I mean women want to feel good about themselves when they’re alone as well, right? Do srtippers use their sexuality to get money? Do prostitutes use their sexuality to get money? And how do they dress? Use your superior logic ladies and debunk away.

Captain Bathrobe
Captain Bathrobe
9 years ago

He knows quite a lot, Elizabeth. It’s just all wrong.

Captain Bathrobe
Captain Bathrobe
9 years ago

Um, NWO, you stated that women failing to restrain their sexuality would result in “rape culture” like we’ve never seen before–i.e., men would not be able to restrain themselves and start raping uncontrollably, or something. I said, bullshit; men can learn to, you know, not rape. Then you went off on some tangent about women dressing sexily like that was somehow the same thing as men raping indiscriminately.

I’ll give you a clue: it’s not the same thing. Women who dress and act in a sexually attractive manner ARE NOT ATTACKING OR HURTING ANYONE. Whereas rapists definitely are.

Women who dress attractively

ARE

NOT

ASKING

TO

BE

RAPED.

Seriously, dude, what the fuck is wrong with you?

Lady Victoria von Syrus
Lady Victoria von Syrus
9 years ago

You know what else? We had such a greater sense of community when we practiced human sacrifice every spring to make the crops grow. And I, for one, miss how efficient slavery made a city’s economy. There’s certainly nothing to bring a family together like raiding your neighbors or putting a pogrom together, either.

There are reasons that these things aren’t done anymore, and it’s because they are harmful, bad and wrong.

There’s also a big problem, one that I’ve bought into at times, when talking about the ‘olden days’. Just which olden days are we talking about? Victorian social, marital and sexual mores were quite different from the late medieval mores, and even late medieval mores changed subtly from country to country. That’s to say nothing of the way things were done in China, India, Japan or various tribal societies; or how early man lived before widespread agriculture. I don’t doubt that in some cultures, a woman’s male relatives would rein in an abusive husband – but in other cultures, it would have been seen as the height of rudeness to interfere in a man’s own household.

Lydia
Lydia
9 years ago

@Elizabeth: I forgot to mention, we do.

In fact, I even faintly remember the case of a 14-year-old girl and a 41-year-old man. But even in that case, if the girl really WANTS to stay with that man, you can’t do anything about it.

According to the girl, living with her (apparently not so great) mother was even worse for her. Of course, now you could start assuming why she was staying with that guy, father figure or something else.

But in this case, it wasn’t any kind of abuse, just a regular parental/CPS agency failure, but, of course, that happens every day, as long as any jerk who can’t even keep his driving license is allowed to have children.

@Slave: Maybe he started drinking because he felt sorry for his wife to have you as her brother?!

I mean, what’s worse: DV or more DV, now perpetrated by NWOSlave? I didn’t think you were that much of an asshole in real life too, but obviously you are. Unfortunately, your sister didn’t have the ovaries to report you. I would have, believe me.

Shrew
Shrew
9 years ago

Also, NWO, ‘slutwalks’ aren’t about attracting men, they’re about affirming women’s right to their own sexuality, no matter how they dress, act or have sex.

At least attempt to google things before making long-winded rants about them.

Comrade Svilova
Comrade Svilova
9 years ago

As the Captain said, wow NWOSlave, and you say feminists hate men? At least we don’t think they’re all rapists just waiting to be unleashed by the power of unrestrained female sexuality.

Unrestrained female sexuality will always lead to unrestrained male sexuality. And when that happens, you’ll know what a real rape culture is, and all the bruqa’s in the world won’t help then.

I think men as a class can handle some unrestrained, passionate, enthusiastic, consenting sexuality. *fans self* Oh, yeah.

Alex
9 years ago

Titfortat, most feminists are not conservative because, you know, we want to keep our reproductive rights, etc. As to the age of consent, I said it when it first happened, and I’ll say again now: that was the only good thing Stevie ever did for this country, and likely the only thing he ever will. Feminists =/= leftists. Both Left and Right have gone against feminist interests numerous times; it’s just that the Right is a lot worse.

NWOslave
NWOslave
9 years ago

@Captain Bathrobe…One last comment, what the hell.

I got a delicious hoagie and I’m parading it around in front of starving people. I am showing it off. Aw man it smells so goooooood, just like perfume. When ya look at it it is goooorgeous, it’s just making your mouth water and I’m really grinding it in those poor sap starving peoples faces. But I “own” it baby and you can’t have it.

Do I deserve to get bonked on the head and have someone take it? Some will say no some will say yes. If I continually do this WILL someone bonk me or another innocent person who happens to have food on the head and take it. You betcha. But it’s not the saaaaame.

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
9 years ago

Okay-but that sounds awfully exploitative to me because she is trying to escape her terrible mother unless 14 year olds can work?

titfortat
9 years ago

As to the age of consent, I said it when it first happened, and I’ll say again now: that was the only good thing Stevie ever did for this country,(Alex)

I agree, I just find it ironic that he did it and not a feminist.

Lady Victoria von Syrus
Lady Victoria von Syrus
9 years ago

Expanding your metaphor, NWOslave:

What if you and people in your same general demographic continuously had your sandwiches stolen by another general demographic? What if the bonk on your head was rather damaging to you, and put you at risk for developing things like epilepsy or short term memory loss*? What if the people who kept taking your sandwiches weren’t even starving, and were capable of either making or buying their own? They just took your sandwich because they wanted to take your sandwich. What if the police only sometimes believed that you’d been the victim of assault and theft, and said that, because you’d made donations to soup kitchens before, or given your sandwich away before, you didn’t have a right to complain when someone took a different sandwich away from you?

*Yes, I know rape doesn’t cause that, but I’m drawing a parallel between the risks for epilepsy and things like pregnancy, PTSD and HIV.

Sarah
Sarah
9 years ago

Or, you know what, NWOslave, what if sexuality is nothing like a freaking sandwich?

For fuck’s sake. Sex and sexuality isn’t an object you can steal. Comparing it to a sandwich is just… gross.

Sarah
Sarah
9 years ago

Ugh. Ugh. Ugh. NWOslave. The way you describe rape and sex is disgusting. Seriously. It makes my skin crawl.

Being horny is not a need, not like being hungry. And sex isn’t a fucking sandwich.

I’m sorry for the double post, but the amount of rage and ickiness I’m feeling right now is just so… ugh.

Bee
Bee
9 years ago

NWOslave, of course teasing people isn’t nice, but neither is it, in itself, an excuse for committing a crime. But we can distinguish your made-up hypothetical from real-life instances of rape because your story involves something you have whereas rape involves something a person is. You can leave your sandwich at home. You can eat it in the car. I gotta bring my body with me.

Most rapes — at least most that I’ve had any experience with — are committed against a person who is mostly covered up, not flashy, not provocative. Sweatpants. Jeans. A sweater. Pajamas. A work uniform. Your contention that rape only happens because of a style of dress is incorrect and purposefully misleading. Blame it on women, and we can all ignore the actual problem of real rapes that happen to real people. It’s disgusting that you’d even try to do that.

Lydia
Lydia
9 years ago

@Elizabeth:

“Okay-but that sounds awfully exploitative to me because she is trying to escape her terrible mother unless 14 year olds can work?”

Sorry, but I don’t quite understand your question?

@Slave: Rape is not sex, it’s violence. Whether a woman gets forced into sex, or violently abused, humiliated, stalked or something else, doesn’t matter in the end.

If you’re referring to a woman with that sandwich, and she’s really parading her “hoagies” in front of you, she may want it indeed. However, asking for her consent in such a situation will work wonders preventing a rape accusation.

Alex
9 years ago

@NWOslave

This, class, is called a faulty analogy.

Yeah, you wave food in front of starving people, they’re most likely going to take it from you. You know why? Because you need food to, you know, live.

You wave sex in front of “sex-starved” (bullshit) people and they’ll rape you? First we’d have to assume that rape is about sex, and then we’d have to assume that no one can control their sexuality. This might surprise you, but you will not die if you don’t have sex, which is why sex is not an uncontrollable impulse. If you can stop yourself in the middle sex when your parent walks into the room, you can sure as hell stop yourself from raping someone. It’s as simple as that.

Alex
9 years ago

Titfortat,

He didn’t do it for the same reasons feminists would have, I assure you.

titfortat
9 years ago

Alex

Youre right, I wonder why they didnt?

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
9 years ago

Lydia-if she is able to work then she could presumably find some kind of residence on her own that she pays for which means she is making this choice of her own free will and not because she needs a place to stay badly enough that she has to let this guy have sex with her in exchange for the place to stay.

The power in that relationship is too lopsided otherwise.

Seraph
Seraph
9 years ago

@NWOSlave: You make all men sound like rabid animals who should be locked up, and I take that as a personal insult. Stop projecting your diseased fantasies onto everything with a Y-chromosome. Most of us can actually look at a woman being sexy without wanting to do her harm. What the hell is wrong with you?

Lydia
Lydia
9 years ago

@Elizabeth: Errr – I don’t quite know correctly about the laws for “child labour” (just gonna call it this way – you know what I mean), but I don’t think, with school and everything, she could have possibly made enough money for her own flat (we’ve got special residential groups with supervision for these cases anyway) but I think she really wanted to stay with that man. Also, I remember that the mother called the police once, but they too said they couldn’t do anything about this as this whole thing was consensual apparently.

So, again, parental/CPS failure. Not everyone knows Goethe in my country, although the rest of the world seems to believe this.

Sorry, I’m absolutely tired right now: Did you get my point? Moving in with that guy was a side effect of having a relationship with him, NOT the other way round. She did NOT pay him with sex.

Again: Did you get it? I’m not defending these people, just like I generally don’t defend anyone who doesn’t know Goethe. (I’m wording it this way because I don’t want to sound classist.)

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
9 years ago

I can see your point-I just cannot see how it is not exploitative considering the circumstances.

Plymouth
Plymouth
9 years ago

Going back like 100 posts because I was on a plane all day and am just getting to responding;

Pecunium said: “You could have said it was because women like the idea of a slender man they can physically dominate.”

The thing is, I think this is not all that far off from why I do like scrawny guys – I am intimidated by being with someone who is significantly stronger than me. I don’t mind boyfriends who are slightly stronger than me, but when they are more than a little stronger than me I just feel kinda inadequate all the time. So I don’t necessarily literally want to dominate them, but I do want to be at least close to equally matched. Wresting with boys is sexy fun time, but it’s no fun when they win too fast! 🙂

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
9 years ago

Although I am reading up on Goethe and I have no idea what on earth you mean Lydia.

OHSHIII
OHSHIII
9 years ago

NWOslave | May 17, 2011 at 8:27 pm

@Captain Bathrobe…One last comment, what the hell.

I got a delicious hoagie and I’m parading it around in front of starving people. I am showing it off. Aw man it smells so goooooood, just like perfume. When ya look at it it is goooorgeous, it’s just making your mouth water and I’m really grinding it in those poor sap starving peoples faces. But I “own” it baby and you can’t have it.

Do I deserve to get bonked on the head and have someone take it? Some will say no some will say yes. If I continually do this WILL someone bonk me or another innocent person who happens to have food on the head and take it. You betcha. But it’s not the saaaaame.

1. Comparing a woman’s own body (which she owns) to a sandwich (as described by a 3rd-rate porn writer), and men to some starving homeless people. CLASSY.
2. So, to you, a woman walking around in public and minding her own goddamn business while looking attractive is the exact same thing as you prancing around right in front of some homeless people and interacting with them — gloating to them that you have a sandwich, rubbing it in their faces that you have a sandwich and you know they’re hungry and it amuses you.I’m not even sure where to start. For one thing, the world doesn’t revolve around you; a hot woman being out in public has nothing to do with you at all. That you interpret her mere presence as her “parading” herself in front of you and slapping you in the face with the fact that she’d never, never, never go for you (and you did, of course, ask her about that, right? [Or do we also have some social anxiety- and self esteem-related issues to talk about?]) is disturbing. That you are so offended and enraged by just the thought of a pretty girl walking down the street speaks volumes, and none of it is positive. 3. If you were attacked, beaten, and robbed of your sandwich, IT WOULD STILL BE A CRIME. That you were being an asshole to those starving homeless people, and harassing them personally, would still not excuse them from attacking you. They would still be subject to the law, and the case itself would be so straightforward that it most likely wouldn’t even go to trial.CONCLUSION: You have some severe issues when it comes to people, women especially. Seek help from a licensed therapist soon.

Lydia
Lydia
9 years ago

Would it not be exploitative for you in other circumstances?

Of course, a relationship like this has always an abusive touch to it, but then again, so do teen pregnancies, where a teenage child has to care for a baby child (and the baby child is at her child mommy’s mercy).
Or when the police got those girl brides out from the – were they LDS people? – and some said it’s those people’s “religious freedom” to “live” and treat these girls the way their religion tells them to do.

What I’m trying to say: Of all consenting (or: “consenting”) exploitative relationships an underage girl (or boy) could find herself in, this constellation is certainly one of the least exploitative.

But again, yeah, you know it, parental/CPS failure. That’s some kind of child abuse, too.

red_locker
red_locker
9 years ago

Allow me, as a man, to join the facepalm train at NWOslave’s faulty analogy.

Because, FUCK!

Alex
9 years ago

Titfortat,

Feminists have totally run this country? Do we even have a single party leader who identifies as feminist? If we do, I think I missed that…

Lydia
Lydia
9 years ago

About that Goethe thing: Working class guidos. Their female counterparts are roaming all around this once gifted country. 40-year old women with snakeskin and their fake-tanned teenage daughters of several unknown fathers, I guess that girl belonged to them too. So that’s what I meant, but I was not trying to sound classist (or otherwise-ist) so hence my subtle Goethe reference.

OHSHIII
OHSHIII
9 years ago

I should have also pointed out, NWO, that your metaphor is both retarded and creeeepy. A woman — or a man — or a child — is not a sandwich, and reducing a person you are sexually attracted to to food is MESSED THE FUCK UP. And sexual assault is nothing like being bonked on the head and robbed of your goddamn lunch.

Plymouth
Plymouth
9 years ago

So, I think that sandwich analogy really breaks down if you consider strip clubs. At strip clubs women really ARE quite literally parading around naked and shaking their tits in men’s faces. And while there certainly are a few individuals who get the incorrect message that it’s OK to harass these women, the VAST VAST MAJORITY of men do not upon leaving the strip club go find a stripper to rape. If they did, strip clubs would fail as a business model because no one would be willing to work in them! Yes, strippers are absolutely using their sexuality to get money, I don’t think many people would deny that. But the fact that they do so does not turn men into sex-crazed rapists. Apparently just getting to watch a girl shake her tits in your face is in itself worth paying for for plenty of people.

Lydia
Lydia
9 years ago

And yet: These people are allowed to have children, and you wonder why a 14-year old girl coming from such a “family” may engage in an exploitative relationship.

Again, parental/ – …oh, nevermind. Really.

titfortat
9 years ago

Alex

come on, you cant tell me if it wasnt important to most feminists that they couldnt have gotten Iggie or Jack on board to at least make a push. And where has Elizabeth been the whole time? Oops, enough with Canadian politics. 🙂

titfortat
9 years ago

Apparently just getting to watch a girl shake her tits in your face is in itself worth paying for for plenty of people.(plymouth)

You do realize some of the clubs offered all you can eat buffets. At least they did that in Quebec when I was a teen.

Lydia
Lydia
9 years ago

“And where has Elizabeth been the whole time?”

Ummm, she was here…!?!

titfortat
9 years ago

lydia

Are you american?

Lydia
Lydia
9 years ago

*lulz*

Totally. That’s why I keep mentioning GERMAN laws and GOETHE throughout this thread.

But hey, Germany has got an eagle too, so I guess we’re not that far apart, culturally.

titfortat
9 years ago

?