ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Saturday, November 29, 2014

Female Supremacy: The Endless Quest

It seems Martin van Creveld may need to reconsider the title of his forthcoming work for Castalia House in light of how feminists are not even pretending feminism is about equality anymore:
Girls write more complex programs and learn more about coding than boys when it comes to making computer games, a study has found.

A group of 12 - 13-year old pupils spent eight weeks developing their own 3D role playing games as part of the University of Sussex study. Dr Kate Howland and Dr Judith Good developed Flip, a programming language which uses a simple interface to help the pupils string together scripts, basic programs which trigger a change within the game, such as a message popping up once a treasure chest is opened.

The girls used seven triggers within the games, almost twice as many as the boys of the group, and were much more successful at creating complex scripts with two or more parts and conditional clauses. Boys had a tendency to build their triggers around when a character said something, the most first and most simple trigger the class learned. 

The games were created using software made available with fantasy game Neverwinter Nights 2, while Flip also translated the programs into English to help the students understand the scripts they'd created.
In other words, if adults dumb down a male activity and require girls to do it, the female interest in doing well scholastically and obediently pleasing their authority figures will cause them to outperform boys who just want to shoot people and blow things up.

Naturally, this not-at-all cherry-planted-watered-and-carefully-harvested discovery completely supersedes forty years and hundreds of billions of dollars worth of economic activity created by young men who never had to be taught or encouraged to do anything. Many of us old school developers were actively discouraged from doing what we did; some of us don't even have college degrees of any kind.

Did you even need to see the names to know that the "scientists" were women? This is precisely why the big push to get more women in STEM is certain to fail. Even when they manage to shepherd women through the educational process, most of them turn out to be more interested in fashion and thought-policing than they are in, you know, anything that resembles actual science.

Labels: ,

59 Comments:

Anonymous Steve November 29, 2014 5:55 AM  

"A study has found" ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Holy shit, you guys! They have a study!

And from the "University" of Sussex (formerly East Brighton Service Station) no less!

On the other hand, we have nearly 40 years of empirical evidence to suggest the opposite is true. We have a multibillion dollar global industry that falsifies the conclusions of this study, just by existing.

But who are you going to believe? The word of a couple of girl professors, or misogynistic old reality?

Anonymous Idle Pepper Brooks November 29, 2014 5:56 AM  

It's a bold strategy. Let's see if it pays off for them.

Blogger ErisGuy November 29, 2014 5:57 AM  

I often asked what does a feminist computer language look like. Now we know.

Give ‘em what they ask for.

I demand that all women—real women, not Sarah Palin female impersonators—be taught Flip instead of any variety of C.

Split CS departments into male and female departments, then add the female CS department to the department of feminist studies. I’m sure after a few decades female superiority will be made manifest, and all innovation in CS will be from women.

Anonymous VD November 29, 2014 5:58 AM  

we have nearly 40 years of empirical evidence to suggest the opposite is true.

But you have no PROOF! Where is the SCIENCE? If you don't have any SCIENTIFIC PROOF then you can't possibly claim that something is true just because you said you saw it once. What if I said I saw a unicorn? Huh? #EPIC PWNAGE #IFUCKINGLOVESCIENCE

Anonymous Logan November 29, 2014 6:10 AM  

I wonder how many of the people who tout the findings of this study would be outraged at the claim that men may be better at math than women. Didn't a Harvard president get fired over something like that? And is it not irony on stilts that the people who employ this double standard are the same people who are the most vocal about the importance of gender equality?

Feminism can be summed up by the following 2 claims:

When women are on the short end of the stick, it's sexism.
When men are on the short end of the stick, who gives a shit.

Feel the equality.

Anonymous Idle Pepper Brooks November 29, 2014 6:16 AM  

Now see Logan, if you shorten a stick, then both ends of it are now short.

This should help the equality situation.

Blogger Salt November 29, 2014 6:27 AM  

But what kind of games?

"More women play computer games than men within the UK, driven by females aged between 25 and 44 downloading free puzzle and trivia games on their smartphones, according to research published earlier this year."

It's not news that women make games. It's not even news that women play games. The whole article's purpose is backhanded feminism being served up as science. Without that, who gives a flip what 13 year-olds are doing?

Anonymous Difster November 29, 2014 6:55 AM  

Let's try this as a test:

Give each group of 12 boys and 12 girls the same stack of computer books. Each group has to stay locked in a classroom for 6 hours per day, 5 days per week for 6 weeks except for food and bathroom breaks.

There will be only one instruction: Create something.

Is there seriously any doubt at all which group would even be able to compile? The girls would go home each day bitterly complaining while the boys would go home and devour everything they could find at home to help them in class.

Of course in the end, the feminists would complain that such an event caters to how boys were raised (not their inherent nature of course) so the whole thing is invalid because they don't care about truth, facts, inherency, or just good old fashioned observable reality.

They'll devise test after test until the girls finally win and then declare that test the most important one.

Anonymous Steve November 29, 2014 6:58 AM  

VD - yar, I wish I was a real scientist like what those girls are with their shitty scripting language.

Salt - "More women play computer games than men within the UK, driven by females aged between 25 and 44 downloading free puzzle and trivia games on their smartphones, according to research published earlier this year."

Women have more free time to fill with trivial bullshit like bejewelled clones and dress up games than men do.

In other news, bears still poop in the woods.

Anonymous Difster November 29, 2014 7:07 AM  

It should be noted that in my earlier scenario, the plain and simple reason the girls would not produce anything is that they would refuse to cooperate with each other while the boys would be competing with each other and cooperating at the same time.

The girls would be so at each other's throat about the RIGHT way that they would sabotage their own progress rather than cooperate.

Anonymous PhillipGeorge(c)2014 November 29, 2014 7:13 AM  

God gave women a job; the job hasn't changed.

those nine words might just be the most politically incorrect words on the surface of this mere earth.

Vox. I maintain ethnicity/ sex is trivial. Man woman black white differences i mean.

If leadership rend their clothes/ humble themselves/ seek the Almighty [ you might like to read "truth personified"] then the land would be healed. Sex, skin, ability pale to a dim insignificance.

See Vox, I spent tonight listening to high end chamber music, baroque and neo baroque. While south pacific Islanders were practicing cannibalism, others were trying to codify transcendent quests. It's not sex, skin, genes, politics or geography.

It's Word, Spirit, desire.....[there's the difference - every time......]

written, spoken and authorized; for factualism....

Anonymous VD November 29, 2014 7:17 AM  

I maintain ethnicity/ sex is trivial. Man woman black white differences i mean.

That's nice. No one gives a damn. You're absolutely and utterly wrong. You might as reasonably maintain that Jesus was crucified on a cross of cheese.

There are millions of good, sincere Christians in Africa. This does not enable them to construct or even maintain an advanced technological society.

It's not sex, skin, genes, politics or geography.

Just shut up. Your idiotic and repetitive babbling is tedious. The answer to 2+2 is not "Jesus".

Anonymous Difster November 29, 2014 7:38 AM  

Phillip, if it ain't baroque, don't fixque it.

Anonymous PhillipGeorge(c)2014 November 29, 2014 7:39 AM  

It's your hypothesis though isn't it VD? Five foot tall people can't play basketball. Or dumb people can't engineer the Brooklyn Bridge.? But could Einstein untangle a fishing line?
A million good sincere Christians, pre-existent, might/ may have built the Pyramids. And if you were dropped naked into the Savannah you might want to employ one or two local who lives there/ even a black Pygmy or two. Love your work/.

Anonymous Herman the German November 29, 2014 7:41 AM  

Yes well said, VD. Those kind of Churchian Fairytales do tend to turn one's stomach. Always a pleasure to see a man stand up for reason, history, & observable reality. Please keep on postin', & we'll keep on reading/relishing/enjoying. Thank you, Sir.

Anonymous Statists are so dull November 29, 2014 7:42 AM  

The most important thing I learned getting my PhD was how fucking stupid academics are. Don't fool yourself, they are not selected for intelligence, they are the ones still going to school in their 20s while everyone else has found something useful to do.

Anonymous PhillipGeorge(c)2014 November 29, 2014 7:43 AM  

Epigenetic push factors in neuroplasitc latent potentials : I meant "live there", it was a typo.

Anonymous Herman the German November 29, 2014 7:43 AM  

Pfft..."can't.. might/may....might...blah blah blah.....FAIL.

Anonymous Stilicho November 29, 2014 7:49 AM  

Just imagine an interplanetary ship designed by women: no engines, but the bathrooms would be positively hedonistic.

Anonymous zen0 November 29, 2014 7:50 AM  

The girls used seven triggers within the games, almost twice as many as the boys of the group, and were much more successful at creating complex scripts with two or more parts and conditional clauses.

And then they "discovered boys", created complex social scenarios, got pregnant, had an abortion and turned to drugs and prostitution.
OR
they became lesbians, ate dorritos, and made many cats happy.

The end.

Anonymous JamesV November 29, 2014 7:51 AM  

There is a silver lining to this. As I get older employers will begin to think I'm not worth the money. Companies are willing to eschew a guy with twenty five years of experience for one with ten under the impression that the guy with ten is probably good enough.

I'm perfectly content to watch the industry fill up with a bunch of women who will likely quit withing ten years. The ones that don't quit are, in my experience, fine to work with. As more young tech workers quit the industry I become more valuable.

Companies will likely try to fill this void with cheap, foreign labor but that is a fight I'm more willing to take on.

Anonymous Sarcophilus November 29, 2014 7:51 AM  

Twice as many triggers and being more complex? Perhaps it explains "female logic".

Blogger buzzardist November 29, 2014 8:02 AM  

Does the study specify which end product any of the participants or people outside the study wanted to play at the end of the study?

This is a classic example of shitty, shitty social science. It's not science at all. It's researchers setting their own parameters to confirm their own biases. What constitutes ability in programming? Complexity. What counts as complexity? People using more and more variety of these specific tools that we've given them when we assign them a task. There's nothing here about innovation. There's nothing here about entertainment value. And when it comes to programming games, innovation and entertainment value are what matter. The ability to pick up tools that other people have created is merely a function of interest. Why did those boys not do more than the did? Because they were bored with the tasks given them. A nerdy kid teaching himself all of this same stuff on a more complex level that hasn't been dumbed down by the researchers? He won't be bored, and he'll beat the pants off of everyone in this study combined with what he creates.

Blogger Franz Lionheart November 29, 2014 8:15 AM  

Yes but which of the two games was more fun to play?

Anonymous Smokey November 29, 2014 8:21 AM  

Actually, this study doesn't seem to prove anything of the sort they claimed. Girls using twice as many triggers as boys - the only conclusion I can draw from that is that boys are more efficient than girls when it comes to coding.

Notice how they fail to mention how well the programs performed, and whether the girls' programs were performing more advanced functions that the boys' programs.

I suspect that the boys and girls were tasked with building the same shit, but the girls built "Indian Code", which is to say that they used too much code and functions to perform the same stuff that the boys did with less resourced and code. And I would really like to see how well each program functioned.

This article is dishonest. I will need to see the study results themselves, not some dumbass journalists interpretation of it, which doesn't even explain anything concrete about the study in question.

I also suspect that a little while from now we'll be seeing all sorts of "inconvenient" truths pop up about this study, and how it was conducted.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan November 29, 2014 8:25 AM  

After watching that boring SW trailer and reading about Femaganda in the above article there seems to be IMO a market for fiction aimed at teenage boys. But then again maybe that market has devolved to watching kick butt babes and eating corn syrup treats.

Anonymous trk November 29, 2014 8:47 AM  

I bet the boys game was more fun. Fun isn't always complex. A good game can be complex but it should be fun to replay.

Anonymous zippo November 29, 2014 8:53 AM  

Hmm, in UK, eh? I wonder how many of the girls were white, and how many of the boys were vibrants.

Anonymous Blastman November 29, 2014 8:57 AM  

Studies have shown that men are better at dealing with abstract information -- better visual-spatial capabilities. This translates into men being better problem solvers, particularly in sciences like mathematics, engineering, and programming.

I've read about other studies in mathematics (probably by more shoddy academic feminists ) who test a bunch of 8 year olds, or even 10-12 year olds in mathematics, and the scores of boys and girls end up about the same on average. So, they conclude from these studies that males and females are equally good at mathematics. The problem with these studies is that the superior problem solving ability of boys doesn't generally show up until boys start to mature and reach 14-16 years of age. Any study that tests kids 10 or 12 years old and concludes there is no difference between men/women in any cognitive ability is complete garbage.

bbc …

'Widening gap'
Dr Irwing, a senior lecturer in organisational psychology at Manchester University, told the Today programme on BBC Radio Four the study showed that, up to the age of 14, there was no difference between the IQs of boys and girls.
"But beyond that age and into adulthood there is a difference of five points, which is small but it can have important implications," he said.


The IMO (International Math Olympiad) is dominated by males year after year. It's an international math competition for 20 year old’s and under and with no post secondary education. Another good example of where the ability of men to solve mathematical problems is better and helps in programming skills.

There are 2 other factors that contribute to men generally excelling in some fields. First, men are more passionate about some fields of endeavor, and passion = interest = excellence. In my university days, I frequently would stay up all night working on various computer problems with a couple of friends. I've never seen a woman that had such a passion for some field of endeavor that they would give up so much sleep just to solve problems because they had such and interest and passion in that area. This interest and passion drives men to excel in some areas.

The ACM International Collegiate Programming Contest is another competition that is even more dominated by men than the Math Olympiad.

Blogger YIH November 29, 2014 9:05 AM  

I was curious, so I googled it. Wow, just wow - programming for retards.
Literally Barbie-level.

Blogger Nate November 29, 2014 9:23 AM  

"Boys had a tendency to build their triggers around when a character said something, the most first and most simple trigger the class learned. "

was this written by ESL students?

Blogger Nate November 29, 2014 9:29 AM  

Does anyone have link to the actual study? It looks more like someone looked through one little classes results and saw precisely what they hoped to see.

And no doubt some will assert this was actually science.

Anonymous Orville November 29, 2014 9:30 AM  

But could Einstein untangle a fishing line? Sailing was Al's hobby, I bet he could untangle fishing line AND tie a mean knot.

Some women can do it, but even those who could aren't wired for that kind of work.

My wife scored in the 98th percentile on a programming aptitude test, but when I explained to her the joy of sitting for hours intently focused in on solving a coding challenge, she freaked and gave up on the idea of being a coder, and I'm talking Java, not VisualBarbie.

Anonymous Soga November 29, 2014 9:32 AM  

So, to sum:

Men prefer substance. Women prefer form.

Seems like the boys in that class were trying to create a game, while the girls were just trying to do what they thought would please the authority figures: "I CAN CODING" level of coding.

Anonymous Anonymous November 29, 2014 9:44 AM  

One would tend to think its a matter of allowing the female advantage for operating within a given ruleset and working as a dynamic unity with the whole to be translated into creativity. Girls and women are better at "making do" with a given set of rules while boys and men seem to be more into creating their own rulesets. The former is clearly a more advantageous inclination in a more civilized society. Women also have a greater capacity for detail and this would also affect the results of such studies as this.

Not4U2Judge

Blogger Cataline Sergius November 29, 2014 9:58 AM  

All studies are biased in one way or another. They are all trying to prove a point. An important point of being in doctoral program is or at least was, learning to see how the scale has been weighted.

You were expected to learn that.

So what kind of game were they developing? Was it one that anyone would ever want to play for example? Or was it something like Zoe Quinn's, Staring at George Clooney?

I remember a couple of girls designing a board game in my junior high classroom back in a pre-computer game world.

Very prettily designed, Neatly drawn. They hoped to sell it to Milton Bradley. It was paint by numbers Game of Life kinda thing but nowhere as interesting. Throw the dice and advance. Hit the right square and you go forward, hit the wrong one and you go back.

No one in the class room wanted to play it.

I earned these girls eternal enmity because at the the same time they were making their game. I invented a card game that was actually pretty close to The Resistance, that I called Escape Plan. Everyone in the classroom wanted to play it so much it caused fights and eventually got banned.

No one wanted to play theirs.

Anonymous Harsh November 29, 2014 10:15 AM  

The girls used seven triggers within the games, almost twice as many as the boys of the group, and were much more successful at creating complex scripts with two or more parts and conditional clauses.

Writing complex code is not an indicator of a skilled programmer, and more often than not the opposite is true. A good programmer can do more with less, write pared-down code that does more than an unskilled coder's program, and this ability to create streamlined programs is a highly sought-after (and rare) skill. "Complex scripts" often lead to what we call spaghetti code.

Anonymous The other skeptic November 29, 2014 10:17 AM  

I Duck'd it as well (duckduckgo) and it is like all those other 'visual' programming languages.

It is designed for people who cannot deal with high levels of abstraction and need something more concrete and visual in order to understand programming.

I expect that most people who need such a crutch (although I think they call it a scaffold in the Education unreality world) will never make it to being able to deal with those more abstract programming languages that the real world deals with.

It's really the wereseal of languages.

Blogger Eric November 29, 2014 10:32 AM  

This is precisely why the big push to get more women in STEM is certain to fail.

Until they introduce quotas. Then eventually people outside the industry will start to say things like "Damn, it used to be the US was a software powerhouse. Why did all that work go to other countries?"

I maintain ethnicity/ sex is trivial.

You wouldn't if you had any experience at all in the industry.

OpenID mattse001 November 29, 2014 10:58 AM  

Note also the ages involved: 12-13. If this study were repeated at 17-18, would they receive the same results? What about 9-10?
Slipshod work.

Anonymous The other skeptic November 29, 2014 11:12 AM  

Note also the ages involved: 12-13. If this study were repeated at 17-18, would they receive the same results? What about 9-10?

Yes, this!

My criticism of the language was without considering the age of those they were testing. Obviously, early teens are much less able to deal with the levels of abstraction in modern computer languages.

In addition, as you suggest, males and females have different trajectories, ie, mature at different rates.

It is, as you say, shoddy research.

Blogger pyrrhus November 29, 2014 11:20 AM  

Note also the ages involved: 12-13. If this study were repeated at 17-18, would they receive the same results? What about 9-10?

Yes, in the Human Intelligence community, it is well known that boys do not achieve their full intelligence until their early twenties, while girls reach it by about 12. So it wouldn't be surprising if girls performed as well as boys at this age, and of course girls are always much more obedient and conforming.

Blogger Ron November 29, 2014 11:24 AM  

This is precisely why the big push to get more women in STEM is certain to fail.

Depends on what you mean by "fail". If you mean that they "fail to achieve the expressed goal of encouraging young women to achieve their heretofore suppressed potential to create fantastic games." Well, that is certainly true, because no women are a) being suppressed from that field and b) the vast majority have zero interest in doing so. For that matters, speaking as a male nerd with a libido, it would definitely make life easier if I was surrounded by hot gamer girls and cute capable female developers.

However, if by "fail" you mean "fail to set up the excuse for another con job that will confuse the public and allow them to use social and legal pressure to gain power over business and society for a select group of parasites". Well, I'm afraid that this is going to be one of those times when I can't agree with the superior intelligence.

Blogger Ron November 29, 2014 11:30 AM  

@Orville

and I'm talking Java, not VisualBarbie.

That only shows your wife is a natural programmer. No sane human being should be allowed to work with that abomination.

There are exactly two types of people who work with Java. Those who hate it, and those who have not yet realized that they hate it.

Blogger Ghost November 29, 2014 11:32 AM  

When I was 10, my feminist mom was singing along with that feminist theme song, "anything you can do, I can do better," when I looked at her and said, "that sounds like 'girls are better than boys.' Doesn't sound very fair to boys." She was trying to raise an egalitarian; it just made me see how unequal shit really is.

Anonymous sawtooth November 29, 2014 11:37 AM  

The thing that girls/young women are good at is recognizing rules and boundaries, especially social. They will stay rigidly within those lines and look askance at those who don't. True innovation usually involves subversion of the established order. If you invent something revolutionary, there will be a shake-up of the status quo and period of destabilization.

Women crave stability. These STEM and coding girls who "beat the boys" are just apple polishing teachers pets.

Blogger JLanceCombs November 29, 2014 11:43 AM  

Did anyone else notice that this study was essentially an advertisement for the software developed by the same University that performed the study?

Anonymous Presidente Macho Muy Macho El Grande y Macho November 29, 2014 12:14 PM  

Did anyone else notice that this study was essentially an advertisement for the software developed by the same University that performed the study?

Flip! It's the script that's got the enzymes plants crave!

Blogger SirHamster November 29, 2014 12:33 PM  

Note also the ages involved: 12-13. If this study were repeated at 17-18, would they receive the same results? What about 9-10?

Until we have such a study, we have a Scientific Consensus that that Girls are Better.

Anonymous The other skeptic November 29, 2014 12:57 PM  

we have a Scientific Consensus that that Girls are Better

Are you some sort of pedophile?

Anonymous Rolf November 29, 2014 1:14 PM  

Blastman - exactly. That was my first "are they serious?!" thought. In that age group boys are at their most squirrelly, and girls have the greatest focus and general maturity edge. I've taught in both middle (grades 6-8) and high schools (grades 9-12), and the difference when comparing M:F is huge. This study is much more about agenda-pushing and developmental scheduling difference than actual adult ability or interest levels.

Blogger Brad Andrews November 29, 2014 1:41 PM  

Isn't Flip really an interaction language as well? The measure seems to be "more interaction" rather than other elements of a solid game. Thus the girls got ahead by interacting more. Who is shocked by that?

They have been pushing "more women in engineering" since I was in my engineering degree in the early 1980s. It wasn't working then and the ongoing push to make the same thing work would fit the definition of insanity. (Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.)

Blogger Retrenched November 29, 2014 2:39 PM  

An easily testable hypothesis. Just create a tech start-up and staff it with no one but women -- a 100% female staff from top to bottom. Keep ALL the men out, every last one, since we all know boys are stupid and harassers and sexist misogynistic predators and stuff. Give the women five years and see if the games they produce are as good and popular as the ones produced and developed by men. If they are... well, score one for The Cathedral.

But until that happens, this study just looks like more wishful thinking on the part of female supremacists.

Anonymous The other skeptic November 29, 2014 3:46 PM  

Perhaps if some woman could develop a Vagina Input Device that is USB attached, women could use their Vagina Power to outperform men in the STEM fields.

Anonymous Idle Pepper Brooks November 29, 2014 5:28 PM  

Perhaps if some woman could develop a Vagina Input Device that is USB attached, women could use their Vagina Power to outperform men in the STEM fields.

Do you watch a lot of anime?

Ohhhhhh that's rad.

Anonymous tiredofitall November 29, 2014 8:00 PM  

"A group of 12 - 13-year old pupils spent eight weeks developing their own 3D role playing games as part of the University of Sussex study."

Wow...a group that's helpful. How many, what's the socioeconomic breakdown, where's the science here in this science?

"Dr Kate Howland and Dr Judith Good developed Flip, a programming language which uses a simple interface to help the pupils string together scripts, basic programs which trigger a change within the game, such as a message popping up once a treasure chest is opened."

So a programming language written by women is "easier" for young girls to work on than young boys, got it. How about next time they program in an actual computer language like C, or god forbid Java?

"The girls used seven triggers within the games, almost twice as many as the boys of the group, and were much more successful at creating complex scripts with two or more parts and conditional clauses. Boys had a tendency to build their triggers around when a character said something, the most first and most simple trigger the class learned."

So more is better in female programing? Good to know since the opposite is true in EVERY OTHER FRICKING programming language in the world. Of course guys would use less and simpler operators to program, the simpler it is the easier it is to find/fix mistakes. No reason to wade through thousands of lines of code to find an error when you can do it in less code.

These "scientists" came into this with a preconceived notion and did everything they could to try and make it a reality.

Anonymous paleopaleo November 29, 2014 10:45 PM  

Naturally, this not-at-all cherry-planted-watered-and-carefully-harvested discovery completely supersedes forty years and hundreds of billions of dollars worth of economic activity created by young men who never had to be taught or encouraged to do anything.

That about sums up the entire feminist canard.

Anonymous Quadko November 30, 2014 1:36 PM  

more complex programs
This is a success statistic for them? This is what good programmers are trying to avoid! A la "inside every complex big program is a simple small program struggling to get out". Complexity is increased bug count. Complexity is schedule delay. Complexity is feature creep. Complexity is project failure. Complexity is a product that doesn't affect the marked and fails to make money. Unnecessary complexity, of course, but that's certainly what they're talking about.

Blogger Mindstorm November 30, 2014 9:48 PM  

If I remember correctly, creators of the first "Witcher" game used Aurora Engine too. Why not check how many of them were men and how many were women?

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts