Categories
a voice for men a woman is always to blame antifeminism empathy deficit FemRAs harassment misogyny MRA no games for girls none dare call it conspiracy oppressed men rape culture taking pleasure in women's pain threats TyphonBlue victrim blaming video games white knights

A Voice for Men’s Honey Badgers ask: Why hasn’t Anita Sarkeesian been harassed MORE?

A Voice for Men’s so-called “Honey Badgers” — its little super-team of female MRAs, led by blabby Canadian videoblogger Karen “GirlWritesWhat” Straughan — have a new theory about Anita Sarkeesian. And it’s a doozy.

Sarkeesian, you may recall, is a feminist cultural critic who’s faced pretty much nonstop harassment from misogynistic internet assholes since she launched a project to dissect sexist tropes in video games. AVFM has contributed, in its own special way, to this wave of harassment, with articles describing Sarkeesian as, among other things, a “moneygrubbing liar” and a “queen bee … girl interloper” in the world of video games; AVFM’s Dean Esmay also held her partially responsible, along with an assortment of other internet feminists, for the suicide of one Canadian Men’s Rights Activist.

The principals at AVFM have blamed her for — either inadvertently or deliberately — bringing this harassment on herself by going to 4chan and posting about her project. (As I noted in a previous post, there’s no actual evidence she ever did this.)

The Honey Badgers, for their part, are certain that getting harassed by 4chaners was  part of her devious plan all along.

In a teaser for their internet “radio” show tonight, the “Honey Badger” known as TyphonBlue writes:

Like all professional damsels in distress, Anita Sarkeesian had to choose a good dragon. Just the right looming shadow to fall over her delicate and fragile sensibilities; just the right cackling stage-villain to inspire her cries of helpless horror.

She chose 4-chan. An internet forum known for it’s underbelly of foul-tempered and hair-triggered trolls.

Then, after accusing Sarkeesian of inviting countless rape and death threats upon herself (and only a portion of it from 4channers, I should add), the Badgers take their weird conspiracy theory one step further:

But we at Honey Badger Radio have noticed something… odd. The wave of so-called hate that Anita received from her carefully chosen dragon, wasn’t really all that bad.

Yeah. A year and a half (so far) of pretty much unending harassment and baseless criticism, complete with violent threats directed not only at her but at other women who have defended her — that’s nothing.

Compared to 4-chan’s usual scorched earth strategy–raizing [sic] everything to the ground and pissing on the ashes, Anita got a little singed, like she sat too close to a campfire.

So we have to ask… Did 4-chan white knight Anita? I mean, come on. Was that the best 4 chan could do?

Yes, that’s right. The Honey Badgers are accusing those who sent rape and death threats to Anita Sarkeesian … of “white knighting” her.

I can’t even.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

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

686 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Myoo
Myoo
6 years ago

Anita Sarkeesian’s new video is out, by the way:

Arthur Dent
Arthur Dent
6 years ago

Lifelong gamer and humanitarian feminist. Been following the Anita feminist tropes videos for a while now. The Honey Badger show was not very useful in addressing the issues due to it not having any pro-Sarkeesian speakers (lack of balance) and having a call-in section, always a recipe for topic derailing.

I’m glad Anita has produced a series on female tropes in videogames, long overdue IMO. I’m with her 100% on disabling Youtube comments. No human being should have to sift through that sort of vile, abusive hate speech every day just to vet and let through the occasional comments of legitimate criticism. It would scare me to have to look at that stuff.

However, I do take issue with the tendency for all criticism of Anita’s work to be put in the same bracket as the misogynist bile that initially met her Youtube series.

For example, I find many of her gaming examples to be taken out of context to suit a broader point. This is a legitimate criticism as it means the loss of nuance and balance in her arguments. For example, it is one thing to list an example of a female being dressed in a compliant and meek way. But to then fail to point out that this character becomes a tough to beat boss later in the game, well that feels like someone either cherry-picking to make a point or someone who hasn’t played the game itself.

Her use of Youtuber’s gameplay footage without their consent is another sticking point. In fairness, she does not include their voiceovers but the issue is one of politeness and honesty. Firstly politeness – you may not owe it to them to contact the original videomakers, but it certainly would be a nice gesture.
Secondly, honesty – by implication you are hinting to the casual viewer that the gameplay footage is your own. By only citing the game’s developers and not the Youtuber’s videos you are perpetuating that myth (intentionally or not) that the gameplay footage is your own.

This is also important because if we are to get a video series like Anita’s shown in schools it would need to give fair attribution to all sources (including background reading materials.). The youth market are front and centre of the gaming world and a video series on female tropes in games would make a great teaching tool.

However to do this we would need to get the video peer reviewed by the relevant scientific community (social science/media studies? Could someone please help me with this if possible) which has not yet happened.

I’m fairly new to the concept of peer review but I think it’s something like

A thing is produced

That thing gets placed in the public domain

It then gets critiqued by both the public and the press

Journalists write critically balanced pieces about the work and the person involved in it to give the public the best chance of an open and informed debate of the issues raised

[Note: I would contend that this has not happened with the gaming or mainstream press in Anita’s case. None of the above points have been put to Anita in an interview, or a Q and A session. Her lectures are now effectively media blackouts.]

If it wants to be used as an academic teaching tool that’s where peer review comes in.

The scientific community all test the theories, pick it apart, check the sources

Useful, constructive feedback is given

Better work is produced in the long run. Either by Anita herself (because she is being held to account) or by someone else who gets inspired to go out and do their own thing.

Debate and public discourse in enriched for us all.. And, at the end of it, Media Studies (I think) teachers get a teaching aid to help educate young teenage people about the systemic, negative stereotypes of women in games. Everyone wins!

And yet, the video series has not been put up for peer review. This would involve Anita being accountable for her work to the scientific community in a way the press has failed to do.

It may also give more detailed information about where her kickstarter funds went. It would seem that even aspiring young vloggers would quite like to know this:

ttp://readwrite.com/2013/03/19/anita-sarkeesian-i-love-you-but-please-show-me-the-money#awesm=~ooKs7tc8ytjMwI

Leaving aside her public statements to students about not liking games (in direct contradiction to what she has consistently told the gaming press about being a lifelong gamer) and her dubious tele-marketing past, I think Anita is not the spokesperson for feminism I would like to see representing the gaming community.

Whilst I respect the raising of awareness she has done and feel nothing but empathy for how she has suffered at the keyboards of misogynistic tools, I think we need a better person to make the case. It isn’t me, I freely admit I don’t have the courage or stomach to take on the darker elements of our community. But it needs to be someone with rock-solid integrity and a degree of knowledge about the subject that I don’t feel Anita has.

By all means defend Anita from people thinking anonymity and a keyboard is gives license to vent bile. Just because you see her as ‘fighting the good fight’, don’t forget to take a critical view of what she produces.

Because if the haters have put Anita beyond criticism, then that’s a poor state of affairs for everyone. Let’s keep on keeping each other honest.

pecunium
6 years ago

Arthur Dent: For example, I find many of her gaming examples to be taken out of context to suit a broader point. This is a legitimate criticism as it means the loss of nuance and balance in her arguments. For example, it is one thing to list an example of a female being dressed in a compliant and meek way. But to then fail to point out that this character becomes a tough to beat boss later in the game, well that feels like someone either cherry-picking to make a point or someone who hasn’t played the game itself.

The toughness of the character doesn’t negate the issue of being dresssed purely to provide “fan service” to the men who play the game. One could argue quite the reverse. Take a game like Soul Caliber V, where Phyrra starts off with far more clothing than she has when she gets tougher, but Patroklos doesn’t have this shift; in addition, when he becomes a tougher character his coverage doesn’t change, but the visual effect is to look more armored. Phyrra goes from a shield and schoolgirl outfit to no shield and couple of handkerchiefs.

Her use of Youtuber’s gameplay footage without their consent is another sticking point.

Bullshit. In the first place they chose to put those clips into a public environment. Her contextualisation of them is a fair use. They represent a culture, and that culture is depicted in their self-chosen examples of how they interact with each other, and the world at large. I have a blog. If someone wished to cite it as an example of how “feminists” relate to the world that would be a legitimate thing, and getting my prior permission wouldn’t be needed.

However to do this we would need to get the video peer reviewed by the relevant scientific community (social science/media studies? Could someone please help me with this if possible) which has not yet happened.

It’s not possible, because the work isn’t of a nature to make peer review useful, nor practical.. The shortest of peer reviews takes 6 months to a year. Moreover Sarkeesian’s observations aren’t such that peer review is going to do anything. What claims do you think require it?

I’m fairly new to the concept of peer review but I think it’s something like

A thing is produced

That thing gets placed in the public domain

It then gets critiqued by both the public and the press

Journalists write critically balanced pieces about the work and the person involved in it to give the public the best chance of an open and informed debate of the issues raised

That’s not how peer review works.

Peer Review: The Basics

­Peer review, also known as refereeing, is the cornerstone of science. It is a process whereby a scientist’s research is assessed for quality before it is funded or published. The “peer” in peer review means that the scientist in question will submit his work to other experts in the field. In other words, if the scientist is a biologist studying the migration habits of a particular bird, he will submit that research to colleagues who have sufficient knowledge of birds and bird migration to give a thorough and proper evaluation. It’s the job of the reviewers to comment on the quality, significance and originality of the research. Reviewers aren’t the ultimate arbiters about whether research should be funded or published, but their comments inform the decision makers….

Generally, the process of peer review involves an exchange between a journal editor and a team of reviewers, also known as referees. After the referees receive a paper from the editor, they read it closely and provide individual critiques, usually within two to four weeks. In their critiques, they:

Comment on the validity of the science, identifying scientific errors and evaluating the design and methodology used
Judge the significance by evaluating the importance of the findings
Determine the originality of the work based on how much it advances the field. Reviewers also identify missing or inaccurate references.
Recommend that the paper be published or rejected. Editors don’t have to heed this recommendation, but most do.

Science.com, How Stuff works: Peer review

Since Sarkeesian isn’t trying to get this published in a peer reviewed forum (in part because it’s not dealing with the questions in a peer-reviewable way) there is neither a need for such a review, nor any set of “peers” to review it.

That doesn’t even touch one of the more diffucult aspects of peer review, the suppression of things the reviewers don’t like/disagree with.

There are some valid questions about the merit of peer review, and what it’s useful for

Leaving aside her public statements to students about not liking games (in direct contradiction to what she has consistently told the gaming press about being a lifelong gamer

This nonsense again. I am a “lifelong” board gamer. Guess what, there are board games I don’t like, some which I sort of like, and some which I love: all in the same genre. That has to do with the game mechanics, ease of play, sense of balance, etc. If I were to tell you I hate Supremacy, that doesn’t mean I’m not a lifelong player of games in the “Risk” family.

By all means defend Anita from people thinking anonymity and a keyboard is gives license to vent bile. Just because you see her as ‘fighting the good fight’, don’t forget to take a critical view of what she produces.

Gee, that’s so gently pompous of you. The issue at play here isn’t, “does Sarkeesian’s work have no flaws”, but, “this group of people think she deserves/needs more death and rape threats”.

Your comment here seems to be of the ilk you describe above in relation to, “call in shows”, a handy tool for derailment.

cloudiah
6 years ago

I think the most important point is that Arthur Dent has set up a strawman to argue with, since no one here or in the rest of Feministria is saying that Anita’s work can’t be critiqued or equating reasonable critique with the harassment and threats she’s received.

pecunium
6 years ago

There is also some red herring in the comment about money, since the piece he cites says that the question of how successful crowdfunding gets spent is one that should be answered across the board; and uses Sarkeesian, in large part, because she is visible.

Arthur Dent
Arthur Dent
6 years ago
Reply to  pecunium

I apologise for sounding pompous. (No lets be fair, for being pompous) I can be overly verbose and to sometimes assume that other people have never thought the same things I have. I am working on it, daily.

Thank you for the link on peer review, it was quite an eye opener for me. I really hadn’t expected that sort of community to act in such a cliquey way (I suppose that’s me being quite naive). Not to mention the bias and the ineffectiveness in spotting errors/flaws in work. I’d recommend the article to anyone. I’ll certainly be doing further reading on the subject.

I would like to ask though, what is the alternative? Considering that I genuinely do want something like Anita’s videos used as a teaching aid, how do we (as a community) go about making this happen? In other words, who do I write to and what do I say? And is there a check/balance the work needs to go through before it can be in a classroom scenario? How does the work get refined? (Apologies for the surfeit of questions).

I also thank you for your Soul Calibur V analysis. In effect, the gameplay does not give the skimpiness of the clothing a free pass. I admit, I got caught up in the fact that since she hadn’t played the game it took away a layer of critique from her POV. But it didn’t invalidate the point she WAS making –
it is quite ludicrous actually if you think about it. I’d want to armor up if someone was swinging a bloomin’ great sword at me (pardon my french). This is a fair point and something I feel would have actually added to Anita’s analysis (the point being that agency does not cover up for a lack of covering up). That’s why I enjoy exploring issues like these. It adds to the debate and strengthens arguments. Perhaps an accompanying article written by Anita (or someone she appoints) could go into the issues in a deeper way.

On the ‘lifelong gamer’ issue, I must admit it’s tangential to the main arguments. I actually don’t care that much if Anita has been a hardcore gamer all (or even part of) her life. I’d just like to see full disclosure here, seeing as Anita now becomes the go-to person for issues of sexism in the industry (not on purpose, by default) and she’s on record telling students that she actually never liked videogames. Not some videogames, or a few, but videogames full stop. It was only for the project that she started playing them. In direct contradiction to what she told the press regularly.

I think that does have a bearing on her viewpoint. Certainly doesn’t invalidate it, but it needs addressing as it is a disingenuous assertion on her part. Then we move on and get back to debating the issues she raises. Should only take a quick one line statement from Anita to either confirm or explain that she meant something else.

The reason I think it’s a minor thing is that insider cred is not a prerequisite for making points about a community. it’s just that they get jumpy when an ‘outsider’ comes in and starts pointing out systemic problems with their community (well boo-hoo ). Like if I was to take on sexism in the board game industry and knew there was a large proportion of nutters who would bite the head off me for even daring to comment, I’d want to cement my ground as a hardcore board-gamer (even if I wasn’t).

The problem with doing this is that those who oppose open discussion and would rather my view went away would try and dig up anything they could on me. Finding out that I wasn’t a ‘proper’ board games fan would give them ammo for keeping off-topic and avoiding the points I am trying to make. That’s why, whilst I don’t care myself, I think it’s a long-term tactical mistake on Anita’s part to present herself falsely.

With regards to the Youtube footage, again, I wasn’t suggesting Anita HAD to contact the original users (she is under no obligation to do so). I just said I would consider it polite to do so. Personal preference, ya-know? In fact the main point was the footage gave the impression of being Anita’s (and by implication, proving she has played the games in question). It isn’t, and by only citing the developers of the games as a source she furthers that idea. Again, I think an accompanying article by Anita might be able to address that point in passing. One, two sentences max. Easily fixed.

As to my conflation of ideas, i never said anyone on this site or in feminism in general was suppressing debate about Anita’s videos. I think in my (admittedly clumsily worded) close the point I was grasping towards was the need for civil public discourse on the issues Anita raises. The honey badger show doesn’t help this. It felt like venting for the sake of venting. It wasn’t fair or balanced. it didn’t give right of reply. It didn’t take a constructive view.

The additional point I was raising was that we need to ensure that negative bile of the kind seen here does not close us off to legitimate criticism of Anita’s work, or bleed into civil debate about sexism in games in general. I understand that nobody suggested or even hinted otherwise. I just felt it was important to state as i hadn’t seen this raised in any articles in the gaming or mainstream press.
I firmly believe it is down to those within a movement to hold each other to account for their work. To talk about it, to point out the positive and negative aspects and to sharpen it through critical debate. I’d like to think that’s what we’re doing. We become the armor ideas put on before they go to face the world. A world that includes basement dwelling enemies of free speech and equal rights.

I would rather tend towards sort of suggesting in a tentative way that this is merely raising an additional (quite important) point rather than derailing. The kind of comments on the Honey Badger show and by Youtube commenters (on Anita’s channel) are directly linked to a breakdown in civil discourse. They skew debate away from constructive criticism and add little to the cause of ideas. A culture that includes legitimate criticism. They are intrinsically linked. None of this is Anita’s fault. None of this changes the absurd bleak awfulness of people asking for MORE abuse to be heaped Anita’s way. We need to combat this most urgently. I feel the most effective way to do this is to point out that link. To show people that the end result is a breakdown in open debate for all parties.

I am writing a 6000 word plus article on why the behavior of people sending death/rape threats to Sarkeesian is inhuman and wretched behavior, but I’ll be looking to post that somewhere it can have the most impact, somewhere people have closed themselves off to a bitter, paranoid worldview that construes all criticism as some sort of feminist plot. Because if just one person looks at the post and thinks again, that’s a small triumph.

The fact that you have put up with a genial old buffer like myself by engaging in a thoughtful reply proves that the essence of open debate is still alive and well here, and that cheers my heart. I go on elsewhere to murkier places to further the debate, armed with more facts and reason with which to do so. For that, I thank you all.

vaiyt
6 years ago

Soul Calibur is one of the most blatantly exploitative series in the genre. One only has to look at Ivy’s ridiculous outfits, or Sophitia’s progressive undressing with each game, or characters like Tira which seem to be created to appeal to specific fetishes, or the out-of-control boobage in the official artwork, or the armor-breaking mechanic in IV which’s basically made so that female characters can get their clothes removed mid-fight. It’s stupid and overall detracts from the tone of the series.

Again, videos like Anita’s aren’t studies on specific games, but rather of trends which these games are meant to represent. When examined collectively, it’s easy to see all of them draw on a common pool of assumptions and stereotypes about gender. Even well-meaning critics often miss the forest for the trees in order to defend a specific game they have an emotional investment in, which gets kind of frustrating when I see it for the umpteenth time.

Arthur Dent
Arthur Dent
6 years ago
Reply to  vaiyt

This is true. I love Soul Calibur myself but it’s kind of embarrassing for me to try and introduce it to a non-gamer because of the way the female characters are dressed. I can’t really ever explain to them how this became acceptable in the gaming culture.

I liked the gameplay mechanic of the armor-break and wished we could have it back (thought V was dumbed down gameplay-wise in general) but perhaps there could be a top level of armor and a second (equally covering) one underneath.

I think you’re spot on about the emotional investment angle. People just don’t like having flaws pointed out in the things they love. It hurts. But the important thing to do is to use that pain constructively to take a fresh and honest look at the thing they love. Because no matter how one loves a game, there are certain things we just can’t let fly anymore. Especially if we want people to take games seriously, as an art form.

titianblue
titianblue
6 years ago

TL:DR

hellkell
hellkell
6 years ago

WAY TL;DR

I give “humanitarian feminist” all the side-eye.

kittehserf
6 years ago

The additional point I was raising was that we need to ensure that negative bile of the kind seen here does not close us off to legitimate criticism of Anita’s work, or bleed into civil debate about sexism in games in general.

That horse has long since bolted. When you’ve got men or boys screaming that a woman should be raped and murdered for even suggesting there’s sexism in games and the gaming community, and carrying on like their basic human rights are under threat from women playing, or women not being represented as fucktoys in games, then hoping for civil discourse is kind of laughable – and for me, suggesting Anita’s work is what really needs critiquing is just being wilfully blind. Her points were more than adequatelly proved by the response to them.

Disclaimer: the only computer games I play are Solitaire and Tetris. I have no interest in gaming outside that, nor the slightest desire to take it up.

kittehserf
6 years ago

Serrana, that is too gorgeous!

Did you see the sign I made for if there’s ever a Manboobz-owned pub?

http://i.imgur.com/MLSO4Lu.jpg

Viscaria
Viscaria
6 years ago

I give “humanitarian feminist” all the side-eye.

Seconded.

Argenti Aertheri
6 years ago

Pecunium — first, I just saw your old reply to our discussion about that paper, and yeah, things like that definitely fail to capture those of us who either know we’ll get the psych eval or don’t need more than basic first aid. But my issue was with combining all intentional injuries to oneself and then discussing them in a way that read like they were talking about suicide. Old news now though I guess.

“If someone wished to cite it as an example of how “feminists” relate to the world that would be a legitimate thing, and getting my prior permission wouldn’t be needed.”

To be fair, you’d grumble if they didn’t cite their source. And I agree she should do that much, prior permission, no, but citation? Yeah. But I’m big on citations and have some, uh, interesting views on copyright. Like, even if it’s free public domain, I tend to give a hint where it came from (the header images on the Borg being the one exception — the fonts are all findable from the CSS that outputs them)

Speaking of the Borg, I madlibed an old NWO post I had sitting around as a madlib. Go do NWO-limbs or post your own madlib (or hit the “contact an admin” button and send me what you want turned into a madlib)

serrana
serrana
6 years ago

That’s awesome, kittehserf. I want to go there.

CassandraSays
6 years ago

Thirded. I’d probably be giving the rest of the comment some side-eye too if it hadn’t made me doze off in the middle.

Arthur Dent
Arthur Dent
6 years ago

kittehserf: I’m not suggesting that Anita’s work is the problem. I think it’s part of the (long-term) solution. I don’t expect it to be perfect. What I’m suggesting is that we don’t let hate speech and bigotry knock civil debate off course. Those who made the rape/death threats are the problem and need to be held to account. Their response to Anita was an eye-opener for a lot of people.

Their aim is to silence all honest critical debate (positive and negative) thereby drawing attention away from the issues Anita raises. I refuse to give up on the idea that civil debate is possible. We need polite forums of debate, much like this one, where peoples work can be held to account, as can peoples criticisms of said work. I believe this is how better work gets produced, and better criticisms. I’m open to new ideas and happy to be proved wrong.

hellkell
hellkell
6 years ago

I hate to burst your bubble, Aurthur, but this IS a mockery site. Not really a place for Robert’s rules.

Arthur Dent
Arthur Dent
6 years ago

Oh. I suppose it’s comforting to know I’m as socially bashful online as IRL. Sorry about that.Thanks for introducing me to Robert’s rules though.

kittehserf
6 years ago

What hellkell said, Arthur. If there are places where Anita’s, or other, critiques are being sensibly discussed, that’s great, but that’s not what this site is about. It’s about mocking misogyny, not picking over criticisms of misogyny.

Arthur Dent
Arthur Dent
6 years ago

Ah, understood, i shall try to find one. I do tend to leap in without looking at what the website I’m commenting on is all about. Will attempt to stop myself from doing that in future. Thank you for being patient with me.

kittehserf
6 years ago

No probs!

Argenti Aertheri
6 years ago

“polite forums of debate”

*looks around* no, this won’t do at all… *plasters the place in hideous wallpaper where the mangos smell like mangos*

kittehserf
6 years ago

No, no, we have to use kitty wallpaper!

Argenti Aertheri
6 years ago

Sneaky mango wallpaper disguised as kitties?

kittehserf
6 years ago

Mango-scented kitties!

Argenti Aertheri
6 years ago

Kitty licks you to determine your flavor, you have to resist licking kitty lest you get a mouthful of fur.

Or, if you’re pecunium, you never go near a cat again.

Hmm, thank you. I was debating what I wanted for a snack, I have mango ice pops.

Argenti Aertheri
6 years ago

Hey pecunium, how do you feel about frozen mango? I have to get my face in it to smell it, but I don’t hate the smell. (I am, however, less than fond of the fruit to sugar ratio of these)

kittehserf
6 years ago

I get mouthfulls of kitty fur without trying. I’m sure Mads ejects hers when she wafts past me.

Alice Sanguinaria
6 years ago

That’s just a Furrinati symbol of ownership. If you don’t have your kitty’s fur on you, how would the other furry creatures of the world know that you’re the kitty’s eternal servant?

pecunium
6 years ago

Frozen mango is like mango juice, not too bad to be around.

It’s mostly the fresh fruit which gets to me… as a smell. As a taste… I’d rather lick a cat.

kittehserf
6 years ago

Alice – this is correct. Kitty fur shows that they own All the Things.

Did you see Freemage’s excellent information about the singular of Furrinati, on the Red Pill thread?

alternatesteve90
6 years ago

@Arthur: Welcome to Manboobz; I recently delurked myself.

In any case, though Anita has undoubtedly done a lot of good work in the past, and work that she should be commended for, nobody is perfect. Even our heroes may have a few flaws. And that’s all I’ll say here.

On a lighter note, speaking of the “furrinati”, how many of you guys are Garfield fans? =D

Alice Sanguinaria
6 years ago

kittehs – I did. I need to recall that, I don’t want to make a mistake in referring to the Furrinati.

(Makes me wish that I could actually OWN a cat, but I honestly can’t imagine myself touching one, let alone be responsible for said kitty’s care. Damn it.)

kittehserf
6 years ago

Own a cat? Own a cat?

Wash your mouth out!

Is it allergies that mean owning being a kitty’s servant isn’t possible? 🙁

1 12 13 14