speculawyer
Member
I think harassment of deceased equine is unacceptable speciesism. I apologize for my uncouth behavior.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
'Shirtstorm' Leads To Apology From European Space Scientist
- Thread starter richiek
- Start date
- Status
Dice//
Banned
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Of course it's been about STEM cultures' inclusiveness of women from the beginning.
But there's a difference between "that shirt creates a culture of exclusion".... (Which strikes me as odd... because I think relatively few women would feel upset or excluded or stay out of science over it. And I find it arguable that it only exists because of deep sexism)
and... "the fact that that shirt was allowed to air shows that there is a lack of concern for inclusiveness at that group".
For the upteenth time
The shirt is symptomatic of the problems with being inclusive to women in STEM fields. It, specifically, does not produce all of the toxicity and other things that is found to be problematic in the fields. It is the straw that broke the camel's back. It's the drop in the bucket that made it run over.
Wearing a shirt with partially naked space bondage babes is VERY different from a real, living woman choosing to present her self as sexy. One is an object, and the other is a person with agency.
The shirt is symptomatic of the problems with being inclusive to women in STEM fields. It, specifically, does not produce all of the toxicity and other things that is found to be problematic in the fields. It is the straw that broke the camel's back. It's the drop in the bucket that made it run over.
Wearing a shirt with partially naked space bondage babes is VERY different from a real, living woman choosing to present her self as sexy. One is an object, and the other is a person with agency.
Liu Kang Baking A Pie
Member
Yes. I think a lot of people come in here like "haha this is stupid, you're stupid for caring" and don't even realize they're dismissing every valid opinion in one clean sweep. People just want these things to be basically accepted as existing at all in the face of wave after wave of dismissals and handwaving. We don't have to have agreement on every single part.
It's a discussion about how people feel, and there are a lot of people that just like to shit on that instead of participating.
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
I don't think anyone thinks the shirt actually got up and pushed a woman out of the lab
Dice//
Banned
Yeah
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
The creator of the depiction of these females doesn't seem to be important. Because if it did, we could say "oh, the designer of the shirt was a woman" and move on.
You could just as well dismiss it and say "a woman is just a susceptible of perpetuating sexist stereotypes" or any number of arguments. In any case, the sex of the creator, or the "quality" of the female depicted ("one is an object"? That's arguable) is irrelevant.
As an aside, I think a lot of the female forms that men create and celebrate are coming from just as innocent and celebratory of a place as backslash's avatar. A lot of what feminists have torn to pieces as being harmful trash for society are conceived in a designer's mind from a very happy place of "let's make beauty". It doesn't mean they can't unintentionally perpetuate sexism... but remember that sometimes. Everything that's been criticized comes from people making what they would like to see.... It must be especially easy to rag on it if you don't share the appeal.
Incredibly late to the thread, but it's interesting to see how discussion has evolved.
I think I need to pay more attention to OT threads on social issues more frequently. There's still an unfortunate noise-to-signal ratio, but this may be the first time in an internet thread that I've seen the logical voice dominate the emotional voice.
Also, some people (nobody in particular) seem to need help:
5 Weird Ways to Immediately Lose a Logical Argument:
1. Make an analogy that is hyperbolic and an extreme extrapolation of a worst case scenario.
2. End your argument after making a one sentence conclusory statement.
3. Ignore what's actually being argued, and argue something else.
4. State personal life experience as argument support, as if memory of that experience in hindsight is both completely objective and reflective of everybody's personal life experience.
5. Ignore the context of a declaration or statement.
I think I need to pay more attention to OT threads on social issues more frequently. There's still an unfortunate noise-to-signal ratio, but this may be the first time in an internet thread that I've seen the logical voice dominate the emotional voice.
Also, some people (nobody in particular) seem to need help:
5 Weird Ways to Immediately Lose a Logical Argument:
1. Make an analogy that is hyperbolic and an extreme extrapolation of a worst case scenario.
2. End your argument after making a one sentence conclusory statement.
3. Ignore what's actually being argued, and argue something else.
4. State personal life experience as argument support, as if memory of that experience in hindsight is both completely objective and reflective of everybody's personal life experience.
5. Ignore the context of a declaration or statement.
The creator has been noted, but then you go on to say their gender is irrelevant. Also, no, a shirt is an object. You can't argue that. Yes, women are just as capable of being sexist like men can be, even out of ignorance. But the crux of the controversy is not that the man has this shirt, or that this shirt exists. It is that this man, by representing the ESA, wore a shirt that struck a nerve for women in STEM fields, and women with awareness of sexism in said fields. It reminded them of a constant exposure to behavior that turns women off from wanting to enter these fields
Please do not compare a man's drawings of women as the same as a woman taking a flattering picture of herself. They are NOT the same. (Backslash is a person, the drawings are not).
And here's a newsflash for you: the author is dead. The intent of a work does not make that the work's received message.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Sure, I can agree.
The medium seems completely irrelevant to me. Photography has long been a main target of criticism for being sexualized ... and it doesn't matter whether the model in question has orchestrated the photo shoot themselves - they have been criticized for how they present themselves sexually.
And it would honestly be the height of sexism to pay mind to whether the artist of a female drawing is male or female.... If you really believe that, it would be because you see men as an Other.
I'm pretty sure the intent of a clothes designer's work is for people to wear her clothes. I don't see why her death matters here... would she leap in slow motion "nooooo! I didn't intend for you to wear that on TV when representing STEM!"?
But again, seems like an irrelevance. What people intend in their art doesn't seem to exempt people from activist criticism one bit.
I hope the creator, medium, and intent of art doesn't matter when feminism critiques portrayals of women... because otherwise it will merely be a matter of finding a sexual image done by women, starring themselves, and intended to be "art"... and you can't criticize it any longer? Surely not.
You want to make this shirt not a big deal? Make feminism win. Make it so a woman can walk the streets as clothed as Lady Godiva without being harassed or fearing for her safety. Make it so when a woman says No, the man respects her decision. Make it so that a women expressing her sexuality or lackthereof is never demonized for her choice.
Then, maybe after that's been internalized by everyone, and no woman is afraid to enter any field because she knows she'll be respected, maybe a dude can wear a shirt with sexy ladies on it.
Then, maybe after that's been internalized by everyone, and no woman is afraid to enter any field because she knows she'll be respected, maybe a dude can wear a shirt with sexy ladies on it.
This whole thing remains completely counterproductive.
I can't believe I've seen people argue that uniform policies at work are supposed to be helpful to women, or culturally agreed. They aren't, because we don't tend to work in workers co-operatives.
They are imposed, top down from employers, and they are imposed for one reason only - to homogenise the workforce so that workers are easier to replace in an effort to push down pay and working conditions, resulting in a worse economic deal for women.
You know, the thing that actually keeps women out of STEM fields rather than bullshit gender theories, such as childcare, maternity rights, hours and pay.
Meanwhile we see white Twitter feminism shot outrageous in the foot again in its desperation to push its anti-sexual expression narrative, espousing notions of objectification based on Mulvey's theory of gaze that were laughable even back in 1975. And it continues to not give a shit about all the minorities that such a narrative shits on, because none of them actually understand intersectionality.
And then they wonder why women are rejecting feminism as a label.
I can't believe I've seen people argue that uniform policies at work are supposed to be helpful to women, or culturally agreed. They aren't, because we don't tend to work in workers co-operatives.
They are imposed, top down from employers, and they are imposed for one reason only - to homogenise the workforce so that workers are easier to replace in an effort to push down pay and working conditions, resulting in a worse economic deal for women.
You know, the thing that actually keeps women out of STEM fields rather than bullshit gender theories, such as childcare, maternity rights, hours and pay.
Meanwhile we see white Twitter feminism shot outrageous in the foot again in its desperation to push its anti-sexual expression narrative, espousing notions of objectification based on Mulvey's theory of gaze that were laughable even back in 1975. And it continues to not give a shit about all the minorities that such a narrative shits on, because none of them actually understand intersectionality.
And then they wonder why women are rejecting feminism as a label.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I know all feminists don't do that, because I am a feminist.
I was merely making the point that a lot of targets of feminist critique come from very innocent, creative places. Almost no one sets out to make female demeaning or female object-making art (there are exceptions, true). It usually comes from a place of a creator wanting to make something beautiful.
And you can still criticize that... because it still can contain issues with society. What someone finds beautiful can be problematic for society and reflecting negative trends.
If that's obvious to you, then I'm probably not addressing you when I say it. I would argue that it's not obvious to everyone.
But of course a woman could be raised on very sexist values and reflect that in her own self-portrait, to use a blunt example.
The fact that you could have a class of students criticize a piece of photography, and then say at the end "and you're all wrong because this woman orchestrated it herself" doesn't seem to make a lot of sense, right?
Surely it's obvious that many women have made themselves "prizes" and you don't need to be a male to film male gaze.
Yeah I see your point there. Of course, someone could then say their intent was to empower the submissive role.It's really not a stretch to imagine that comically exaggerated depictions of the female body in poses and positions that are "objectifying," is not going to be criticized. Yes, traditionally someone being bound nude like that has an element of objectification to it. It may not be obvious, but if you are at all familiar with kink, you'll probably be familiar with it. If you're not familiar with kink.. well.. now you know!
I guess I just don't think the criticism could be thrown out the window when you learn some new fact about how the art was made. Who the artist is, why they made it... well, let's just say that no one ever took that into account when criticizing countless other things.
Liu Kang Baking A Pie
Member
What are you talking about? Can you give some examples? Because I'm not sure anything you've described fits anything anyone has said throughout this entire thread, so why bring it up now?
YesNOnoNOYes
Member
:x
This thread really saps my faith in humanity.
How are people so afraid of acknowledging that some people in the world may find the shirt problematic? How is the basic response is "tough shit, this is how things are, and this is how things gonna be, so learn how to deal" instead of "oh, maybe we can tone down a little of our communication when it's under public attention / televised interview" ??
... also, >__< ... are we at the point where we are contending "how to feminism right, let me tell you ladiez"
really?
>___<
bunbuns, you are stronger than i <3 also liu kang, kharvey, opto, dice o7
This thread really saps my faith in humanity.
How are people so afraid of acknowledging that some people in the world may find the shirt problematic? How is the basic response is "tough shit, this is how things are, and this is how things gonna be, so learn how to deal" instead of "oh, maybe we can tone down a little of our communication when it's under public attention / televised interview" ??
... also, >__< ... are we at the point where we are contending "how to feminism right, let me tell you ladiez"
really?
>___<
bunbuns, you are stronger than i <3 also liu kang, kharvey, opto, dice o7
It's really not a stretch to imagine that comically exaggerated depictions of the female body in poses and positions that are "objectifying," is not going to be criticized. Yes, traditionally someone being bound nude like that has an element of objectification to it. It may not be obvious, but if you are at all familiar with kink, you'll probably be familiar with it. If you're not familiar with kink.. well.. now you know
I really do not recognise yiur depiction of kink. Kink is fundamentally about being play and fantasy, and the supposedly objectified party always retaining ultimate agency to stop or carry on.
Kink is, effectively, a giant mockery of the notion of objectification thorough something as mild as gaze could ever be possible.
And objectification and gaze theory have always, always been used to try and push speech and expression of kink out of the public sphere in order to marginalise and discriminate against it's participants.
Wait, what? I might be wrong since academically, I only took a couple undergraduate women's studies classes.. but to my knowledge, we generally don't criticize how the models present themselves.
We criticize how the women's bodies are being positioned to objectify them. We criticize the "male gaze," the idea that most photos of women are taken with the straight male gaze in mind-- that is, hypersexualized. We criticize that women's bodies broken down, sometimes literally, and reduced to really being things, not people... things used to sell, things used as "prizes."
Here are some images:
I realize this isn't in the field of science, and it's about selling things... but it's the same concept. The same idea that women's bodies are... things. Objects. etc.
Some people believe that attitude is reflected on that man's shirt. Based on the history of how women's bodies are depicted, even from a quick google search I pulled up... it should be more obvious why people feel that way,
Intent matters a lot, but not in the way you are describing it, I think.
TBH, anyone could criticize my avatar and say that I'm contributing to sexism in videogames by panning to a culture that's been historically sexist towards women. Even if I don't agree with them, it doesn't mean their opinion isn't valid... and I made this avatar.
It's really not a stretch to imagine that comically exaggerated depictions of the female body in poses and positions that are "objectifying," is not going to be criticized. Yes, traditionally someone being bound nude like that has an element of objectification to it. It may not be obvious, but if you are at all familiar with kink, you'll probably be familiar with it. If you're not familiar with kink.. well.. now you know
Just want to point out, the poster with the cigarette is different from the others, it says "smoking is to be tobacco's slave". It's a really weird poster but it's not trying to sell you anything.
Huh? It describes the entire narrative that the shirt is problematic at all. It can only be problematic if gaze theory has some merit. It doesn't.
Gaze theory is inherently problematic, because it discriminates against the expression of minority groups and is based on clumsy generalisations.
Dice//
Banned
I agree with the first bit, and with regards to the last line: Thanks, but I'm out haha
Too tired to go on
Yes, actual meaningful structural issues that hurt women, and not a handful of polemics with only self declared validity.
(That colostate paper is hilarious. 20 qualitative interviews with the examples cherry picked to fit the author's argument? Yeesh.)
Liu Kang Baking A Pie
Member
That's all good, but then what's the story for how real women in astronomy have felt about it?
YesNOnoNOYes
Member
Cant it just be problematic because it makes some people uncomfortable?...and it may perpetuate a certain notion about women's bodies as objects of decoration to younger generation?
I'm not trying to create a care-bear world here :x But in professional capacity, I think certain standards should be expected.
Also, full disclosure: I dont find the shirt offensive and I'm a woman. But I acknowledge others may feel differently and I am willing to take steps to make sure that other people's boundaries are observed, specially in public settings.
I've never seen someone read a paper so quickly, damn. I'm impressed.
What about that paper leads you to conclude the examples are "cherrypicked"? The Methods say ithe subjects were the people who managed to schedule an interview.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.
I don't know why it's confusing?
I'll restate. You said "we don't criticize how the models present themselves".
And I've said that how the model "chooses to presents themselves" is irrelevant. If we took your examples of obvious objectifying photography above and said "the model chose to present themselves this way, no men were involved in the production of this image", it wouldn't matter at all. You've said "no one is throwing criticism out the window because we learned about how it was made", so you likely agree with this.
The point I've tried to make is that most of this sexual art is made with innocence and good intent. It's the same as if it's a model shooting themselves, or a group of people (which may include men) making a commercial product. It can come from a good creative place.... and it's still okay to criticize it and expose it as a symptom of sexist culture if that is the case.
This was not aimed at you at all backslash, but this was my brief point I was making a few posts back: people shouldn't imagine they're combating some group of consciously-objectifying male brutes making this art. It's mostly made with good intentions.
Glenn Reynolds said:
Off to a bad start already. Commenting on the fact that the T-shirt contributes to/is symptomatic of a chilly professional climate for women and girls entering STEM fields does not cancel out or negate the marvellous achievement of landing the probe on a comet, or make it "all about the clothes." Indeed, if I look at the Twitter feed of one of the "outraged feminists" quoted by Glenn, an astrophysicist, it's filled with astronomy and public outreach, including discussions of the science of the comet landing.
I'll repeat the comment made by Alice Bell: "Pointing [sexism] out is not a distraction to the science. Its part of it. Its time science finally realised that."
Glenn Reynolds said:
Claiming that the many women and men who publicly commented on the appropriateness (or lack thereof) of the shirt are "outraged" and forming a "lynch mob" is a way of trivialising and dismissing their concerns. This quote from another Gaf poster in a different thread (which was, funnily enough, about sexist T-shirts) continues to be relevant:
"[M]inimizing the complaint is step one in dismissing it. Someone can't just be annoyed, they have to be OUTRAGED. And then, to make that claim seem even more poorly-thought-out and reactionary, you have to suggest the "outrage" is false somehow, implying the person expressing this "outrage" is simply an attention whore grabbing the nearest possible opportunity to have attention paid to them.
Once you've neatly, succinctly established that someone commenting negatively on the obvious sexism is an overemotional liar who doesn't actually believe what they're saying, you can easily tell yourself and others that everything's okay."
(Indeed, this would have been a much smaller event if it were not for anti-feminists using this as a stepping stone to vent their anger and hurl abuse at those who are having a critical discussion about sexism and public outreach. I think the discussion needs to move away from Mike Taylor as an individual completely, honestly - he's apologised, and it's time to move on. The bigger discussion about sexism in STEM, however, remains entirely valid.)
The rest of the article, such as:
Glenn Reynolds said:
Glenn Reynolds said:
Glenn Reynolds said:
continues to miss the point and attack straw feminists.
not_so_special
Banned
yup...for the opossite reasons of your post
Dice//
Banned
Apparently not, huh.
^
People forget the human life is so largely fabricated and our social world is so massively 'made up' to fit this strange mould we've made it into (sometimes arbitrarily). It sucks we have dress codes, but we do, and often they're in a great deal of settings. And yeah, usually we wear black to a funeral, we largely observe this. When we go to work, we usually wear something with a neutral or at least positive message or of respectable taste; so sorry guys, sometimes sexily drawn woman don't fit that format and sometimes its off-putting when women, like myself, just don't freaking get it or sometimes just don't like it made so public.
It's not an offensive shirt to me (though it may to some), but there's a lot more to be said here then WELL HE SHOULD WEAR IT AND YOU FEMINISTS KEEP BARGING IN ON OUR FUN. Sorry! But we're in this together, and playing fair helps everyone.
No, and it's actually quite vital that society rejects any notions of people's comfort as being important.
If "it makes some people uncomfortable" is a valid test for being problematic, then all feminism of any kind is problematic, because clearly there are people uncomfortable with it.
The whole point is that's nonsense. It's a reductio ad absurdum, in much the same way the game violence debate was (and twenty years later we have our evidence in abundance - they were wrong, people can distinguish portrayals from real human beings, and the theory has no merit).
"Certain standards" are, as I pointed out above, designed to be inherently damaging to the general populace, as a basic piece of class prejudice that disproportionately affects women.
I'm not - my entire career has been about trying to make sure that other people's boundaries are destroyed, because they are inherently destructive cultural concepts. These are all reruns of the arguments run by the Church in favour of religious censorship, then the Mary Whitehouses of this world, then the anti-gay censors. "This makes me uncomfortable, so it must be ghettoised."
YesNOnoNOYes
Member
The opposite being that we should not attempt to create a more inclusive attitude during professional hours? Does that sap your faith in humanity?
:x
Dice//
Banned
Quote for truth (in case it was skimmed the first time)
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
It's not like I ever said any of this because I was criticizing gaffers' statements.
This was my original statement, and it's true, and it doesn't exist to combat anyone on this board.
BocoDragon said:
If you say that all shirt critics/feminists "know that"... well maybe it's useful for those shirt-defenders/critics of feminism to know that you know that.
I'm very late to the thread but the guy is an idiot.
I'm not saying he should be wearing a suit and tie but there's a difference between dressing casual and this shirt, that's what a High schooler would wear.
He was being interviewed for TV, his shirt is very far from being acceptable.
I'm not saying he should be wearing a suit and tie but there's a difference between dressing casual and this shirt, that's what a High schooler would wear.
He was being interviewed for TV, his shirt is very far from being acceptable.
It seems like your primary point w/r/t the shirt incident is that you don't believe that images, artworks, etc can be representative of wider cultural trends or affect the way people percieve and engage with the world, yeah? Does this mean that you believe that, say, advertising is totally ineffective?
YesNOnoNOYes
Member
Oh wow.
I guess we come from very different backgrounds. I have to reiterate that my perspectives come from assessing the matter in professional settings. I think that shirt was definitely inappropriate for work-related televised interview.
I have always try to observe that people are made to be more welcomed, when I can. It extends to more than gender. A small example at my last workplace was that we had an IT department that was dominated by Asian employees. There was only one white guy there and it was a team of six.
At some point in time, the white person complained to HR because the rest of the team made him feel unwelcomed because they keep talking in Mandarin. They were talking about regular stuff, hobbies and the like, but the white guy does not understand Mandarin and he felt really uncomfortable and excluded.
I counselled the other employees not to speak in other languages when they are at work. It is inappropriate.
I am not talking about social movements in my posts. I think I have to stress that professional conduct should be regarded with a different scope.
I am glad that your careers have been breaking boundaries that have held back progress in terms of religions and pro-LGBT issues. Much respects.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
There are definitely those who have a cruder angle on attacking the shirt... though I agree, it's not most gaffers.
Though if that crude angle were "it's ugly" .. maybe that's something we can all agree on
This is not quite a valid comparison. When we speak about violence in video games, such as murder, it's fairly simple to show that playing video games does not have a correlation with increased violence towards other people. Sexism, on the other hand, is much more subtle, and largely takes the form of unconscious attitudes. This is why it is useful to listen to the people who have been on the receiving end of sexism in their lives and careers. For many women, the presence of that imagery being casually worn on a global livestream by a head scientist (without being flagged as inappropriate by the PR staff), in addition to the words used to describe the Philae lander ("she's sexy but not easy"), was simply an unwelcome reminder of a society that still values them for their body rather than their mind.
Annoying Old Party Man
Member
Where's that "who gives a shit" Harrison Ford gif when you need it.
Jesus Christ, the world has become offended-land. That a woman (not even bought) made that t-shirt as a present for the guy makes it even more hilarious.
Jesus Christ, the world has become offended-land. That a woman (not even bought) made that t-shirt as a present for the guy makes it even more hilarious.
You apparently know some very slow paper readers. It's a very short paper.
So it's a self selected sample group where the actual returned data isn't published, but certain parts from certain responses are taken out of context.
That's pretty much the definition of cherrypicked.
I think there are some limited contexts - (advertising is informative, you can learn a product exists from it).
But by and large yes, I think advertising is a massive scam (including, importantly, many of the metrics that advertising uses to justify it's supposed power).
Liu Kang Baking A Pie
Member
"Minimizing the complaint is step one in dismissing it. Someone can't just be annoyed, they have to be OUTRAGED. And then, to make that claim seem even more poorly-thought-out and reactionary, you have to suggest the "outrage" is false somehow, implying the person expressing this "outrage" is simply an attention whore grabbing the nearest possible opportunity to have attention paid to them.
Once you've neatly, succinctly established that someone commenting negatively on the obvious sexism is an overemotional liar who doesn't actually believe what they're saying, you can easily tell yourself and others that everything's okay."
Threads like this are like perpetual motion.
You pretty much exhaust the argument about 10 pages in, if that, then someone who hasn't read those pages, comes in and makes (usually driveby) post with a comment that has just been eviscerated by both sides in the past 10 pages... and we start over!
Meaning: *spend 10 pages debating on why it's more than "just a shirt"*
"WTF? People are so easily riled up.. it's just a shirt people, FFS!"
*start over*
You pretty much exhaust the argument about 10 pages in, if that, then someone who hasn't read those pages, comes in and makes (usually driveby) post with a comment that has just been eviscerated by both sides in the past 10 pages... and we start over!
Meaning: *spend 10 pages debating on why it's more than "just a shirt"*
"WTF? People are so easily riled up.. it's just a shirt people, FFS!"
*start over*
It's absolutely no different - it is a completely valid comparison. When we speak above violence in videogames, such as casual assault and not just murder, such underlying unconscious attitudes if they exist would be just as affected about attitudes to violence, and violence would go up as a result. It doesn't.
This is another way of saying that sexism is a special snowflake and we should ignore evidence, because of vague, unprovable cultural crap. It's hiding in the god of gaps in the same way a fundamental religionist does.
Annoying Old Party Man
Member
What do all these have to do with my post, Liu Bake?
That it's broadly irrelevant and fragmented to the point where there are just as many women in astronomy who feel the negative response is harmful than those complaining?
Jedeye Sniv
Banned
With any issue though, the individual reader has to assess "is this a big deal?" Some people believe that it is, others believe it is not. If you don't think this is a big deal then you are in essence dismissing it. This is how opinions work, not everyone has to agree with the thesis statement that "this shirt is offensive and inappropriate".
shanshan310
Member
You seem pretty offended by all these complaints. A lot of people give a shit, and for a lot of decent reasons if you'd actually read the thread.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked