Warning: "Language" is sexist and dangerous to a woman's health

[destinie21]

Hi Destinie,

Thanks for your thoughts. There are quite a number of them, and some of the issues have been talked about a fair bit, since you're quoting from a couple days ago at least.

I'll pick a couple, however,

As far as the AD story no I didn't like it and I can't really explain anymore than I already have that the "feeling" behind the story or more accurately the "feeling" that I got from the story was bad. It seemed to close to reality for comfort.

A number of us got bad feelings from reading of the events in the story. I'm not sure if it was 'close to reality' since the author was probably not seeking to convey 'reality' and his tools were limited.
Certainly, of course, there have been brutal rapes; that's not in question.



Also I have to say that you're mistaken if you think that "taking a 'positive stand' against violence to women is equated to denouncing a *story* about violence to a woman, and labelling the author of the story of a sociopath as himslef". Fiirst off I had alot to say on those thread(S), and I never once labeled AD.

The remarks about 'positive stand' were not made with you, esp. in mind. More perdita; but the phrasing was rather inflammatory. I should have focussed narrowly on the statements of persons in this forum.

It was, of course, Mlledelaplume who labelled american demon a sociopath and incipient rapist; a couple folks seemed to agree, and no one but me has objected to the lack of evidence. I don't recall what you said on this issue.


The positive stand would have been denouncing the brutality in the story which I did. Had the story had anything aside from the brutality it should have been able to stand on it's own w/o the presence of violence. But alas the core of the story was the Brutal beating and defiling of this woman.

The story did contain mostly sadism and brutality, though as was pointed out by KillerM, the woman was represented as 'coming.'
Apparently in Laurel's book, that is/was enough to technically qualify as a 'nonconsent' story.**

Mlle and some other have said it belongs in 'extreme' and ultimately I don't have an objection to that; there can be 'gray' cases--esp. re bdsm--and their category doesn't ultimately interest me.

My only quarrel or puzzlement is when those same people--Mlle being one-- go on about the story causing men to become rapists: since, if that's true, why does putting in in 'extreme' prevent this evil (assuming the story has that effect, ftsoa)? Indeed a ten year old can access 'extreme.'

I'd ask you the same question: if it's agreed that certain depictions make guys--say one in a hundred-- do violent things, why is 'segregation' and 'categorization' the answer?

Further, the problem exists in other categories than non-consent; there are a number of stories at literotica main area that have brutality and 'sadism'; some of those in 'bdsm' for instance.

So here's the problem; I won't give an exact citation now, but in several stories the woman is flogged (sometimes the man). almost to the point of bleeding. she's turned on. then maybe her flogger fucks her and it's a great fuck for both.

Now for many people that's just not going to do it for them, either in reality or ijust in reading about it. Some may even say they feel nauseated at such a story.

So, do any seriously violent stories belong at literotica? This is not an idle question as several literary 'erotic' sites and magazines (e.g. Yellow Silk) simply say 'no violence.' IF you open the door, where do you draw the line?

Overall I'm not sure we disagree a great deal, but your large single para makes it hard to see. Maybe you can clarify, should you respond.

Best,
J.

**To the argument that her coming was not plausible: Well, I'd say in 2/3 of literotica stories--like porn stories and movies in general--, esp. those by men, the coming is rather too easy; too readily accomplished by strangers, and too earthquake-like. Hence one can see a reason Laurel may not want to get into the secondary question, 'was the coming plausible?'

I guess when you ask where you draw the line I would have to say at non consent. I enjoy some non-consent stories but those are the ones that at least have the illusion of role play and enjoyment.

While many of the orgasms might not be belivable they still go with the storyline. You cant mix piss and vinegar and tell me it's salad dressing. In AD story the enjoyment (even on the most masochistic levels) seems to be a leap. The only logical conclusion would then be that the character AD created is purely sadistic.


Which is to say that it seems like the female orgasm was thrown in just to get it into non consent. It would be like having an erotic couplings story then at the end saying oh yeah the girl was Asian and the guy was Black so put it in interracial.

In regards to do any violent stories belong on the lit

I'd have to say it's not that simple.
Any violence that is glorified and abusive I'd have to say no.
By saying that I mean. violence doesn't really belong in non consent because then it becomes brutality. I do like some of the stories that are catergorized under Nc by the way. But it's the ones that involve more reluctance and coersion rather than true non consent. No matter how you word it NC is rape while reluctance and Coersion leans more to the role play AD commented on.

I don't remeber mlle saying that the story would breed rapists but, I do agree that stories like that can act as warning signs in some cases. I already explained the "feeling" I got from the story. Of course every horror, murder, rape ect.. author isn't some physco out to kill. But to find such brutality in a story that was meant for expressly for pleasure is dismaying. I think that's the part that made me nauseous. This wasn't submitted as part of some larger story ie a murder mystery or as some developmental glimpse into the physce of a character in order for the reader to understand what made the character tick. It was written as erotica, that's the upsetting thing.

 

[MlledeLaPlumeBleu]

Des, don't bother.

Pure is a psychic vampire who uses all of the twelve phallacies of logic to deliberately "mis-respond" to your points in an attempt to delay the fond illusion that he's actually making cohesive sense, with a desperate need to prolong the argument- any argument.

Eventually, you will get incredibly weary of repeating yourself, clarifying obvious points and responding to extraneous red herrings and "misunderstandings" of your words. At that point, you will put Pure on "ignore" and Pure will declare himself King of the Mountain through sheer mental buggery. I have a feeling this has been a common thread throughout Pure's personal social interactions in life. My father was an expert at this particular manuever. The upshot? Eventually no one wanted to talk to him.

Having a discourse with Pure is the equivalent of trying to have a gentleman's duel with someone who keeps running behind trees and trying to distract you with cries of "Look! It's the Hindenburg!" He's throwing glitter in your face, he's doing a jaunty jig, he's pulling rabbits out of his hat. He tries to distract you with shiny unrelated things, as if you were a mentally challenged crow on a sagging powerline.

You say, "I think that all fish swim."
And Pure is immediately there with, "All things that swim are fish??? How do you justify *that*?!"
You say: "All fish live in the water"
And Pure says: "All fish live in the SEA? Are you forgetting about lakes??"
You say: "I never said fish were exclusively saltwater denizens."
And Pure says: "Who said anything about saltwater vs freshwater? Where did I say that? Show me where I used the word saltwater! Can ya, huh? Can ya?"

When you walk away in disgust, he shakes his own hand and marches off, kazoo in mouth to a self-made fanfare. Then he has custard pie with elves.

I value your good intentions and valor entirely too much, Des, to wish such a fruitless, empty interaction on you.


love, Nicola

 

[Pure]

Feelings

Hi Destinie

You described the SUV story and your reactions thus:

But to find such brutality in a story that was meant for expressly for pleasure is dismaying. I think that's the part that made me nauseous. This wasn't submitted as part of some larger story ie a murder mystery or as some developmental glimpse into the psyche of a character in order for the reader to understand what made the character tick. It was written as erotica, that's the upsetting thing

This point has been made by several posters, Math Girl, perdita, MDLPB. I do see what you mean, but it just doesn't wash--by itself-- as a reason for how literotica (or any publisher) should treat the thing.

Substitute the word 'degradation' for 'brutality'; and one can imagine your statement being applied to the passage I how quote:

======
http://www.literotica.com:81/stories/showstory.php?id=31818

"Auction of a Slave" by zenwstick


[A woman's master has her demonstrate skills to those interested in buying her for a weekend]

The man behind me has taken out the plug, inserted the black dildo in my pussy and is now pushing his cock into my ass. It slides right in and he begins pounding me hard, his nails digging into my ass cheeks. Moments later he explodes in my asshole. I can feel his sperm shooting deep inside. The man in front of me pulls away.

Master takes the blindfold off of me. He directs me to the centre of the room, where a small silver chalice is sitting on the floor. He points to it and I know what to do. I crouch over it and squeeze the man's cum from my ass and watch it ooze down. When I am done, Master leads me to one of the men who has a spoon. I turn around and he spoons off the remainder while I spread my ass cheeks for him. Then I turn around, kneel, close my eyes while the man puts the spoon in my open mouth. I close it and suck off the remaining cum. Thank you, Sir, I say to the man. He says, looking at Master, add another 500 to the bidding. [...]


I am blindfolded again and told to suck one of the men. While I lick his balls and suck his cock, Master tells the men that the winner of the auction will get me for 24 hours. He explains that while the winner cannot share me with others in anyway, he can do absolutely anything within the limits. As you can see, Master says, she will be drinking the cum that came out of her ass, just as soon as we add some more cum to the chalice.
[...]
the man I am sucking shoots into my mouth. God, there is a lot of it. I hold it all in and then turn as Master holds the chalice for me, and then I let it all flow back out into the cup. Thank you, Sir, I say.

The last man who needs to cum asks me to climb on to his cock. I surprise him by slipping his cock into my ass and begin riding him hard. In a few moments he warns me he is about to cum and I pull back and hold his cock into the silver cup and watch him unload into it. I look down and notice I have soiled his cock a little. I look up at Master. He nods. I lean down and lick off what I have left behind.

Master leads me into the bathroom and has me get into the tub. He hands me the chalice and I hold it high above my head while I am kneeling and let the men watch the cum drip into my open mouth. Once my mouth is full I just hold it open. The men, as if on cue, begin washing me down with their urine. It sprays my breasts, my ass, and some of it shoots into my mouth. When they are done, Master nods and, looking at the men, I swallow everything that is in my mouth. Then I lick each man clean, as I have been taught.
----

Mr Z is an articulate and respected writer at lit., and iirc is getting published.

Do you have any problem imagining some readers might say it made them feel nauseous? (maybe you?) I don't.

Do you have trouble imagining someone saying this degradation in reality is upsetting, and in story is definitely NOT erotica? I don't personally.

Further it could be said that the implicit consent of the woman in the story makes the degradation even more upsetting; she, perhaps, has been treated in such a way that she no longer 'minds' this stuff.

Yet I don't see anyone calling for the removal of the story to 'extreme'.

Do you see my problem? There are any number of scenes someone is going to say gave them nauseous feelings; from gay male scenes, to daughter fucks Uncle John, to the above 'degradation.' So the characteristics you find in the SUV story are clearly *not* sufficient to lead to any conclusion about 'not erotic' or 'belongs to extreme' or such.

Note: I'm not saying you personally shouldn't have the feelings or aren't entitled to them ( I have some around the SUV story, too); or that you shouldn't act on them-- go read something else, or send the author a pm that says 'yeccch'.

Best,

J.

 

[MlledeLaPlumeBleu]

Hey, you're right- if you change the operative word everyone's objecting to, that does seem to solve the problem!

Like, say, if I said "bumblepuppy" instead of "brutality", or tea-cosy, or kitty-wiggles, or mimsy or brillig or Jabberwocky.

Yep. That takes away all my offense.

And if Americandemon changed the punching to a humiliating clown nose and scuba flippers, and the bloody cell phone to an embarrassing magic marker scrawled happy face incorporating the victim's butthole into it's design, I wouldn't mind his rape story so much.


Hey, wait- whose POV is that in your example? Not the aggressor.

It's odd to me that you just can't conceive of why most people would see a difference between healthy kinks- consentual incest fantasies, gay stuff, bdsm, degradation, and yes, even most non-consent-

and brutal sadistic rape. I have to assume it's because you don't know the ramifications of brutal sadistic rape firsthand.

Even if I granted you that much- that lasciviously celebrating the complete ripping and ruin of a woman is the same as horny siblings playing doctor- no one wants to censor it- so what the hell is your point?

 

[destinie21]

I feel as though I’d entered a really boring and uneventful time warp. And some how I'm reminded of a dog chasing his tail.

Also careful with your synonyms pure. though a word may be synonmous with another or (interchangable) they don't always mean or denote the same thing. Ie hate is synonomous with dislike. But as far as I'm concerned dislike is not synonomous with hate. Which is to say I dislike a lot of things I hate only one or two.

 

[Svenskaflicka]

It's just a jump to the left...

 

[Pure]

Hi destinie,

you say,

I'm reminded of a dog chasing his tail.

Sorry if I was unclear.


Also careful with your synonyms pure. though a word may be synonmous with another or (interchangable) they don't always mean or denote the same thing. Ie hate is synonomous with dislike. But as far as I'm concerned dislike is not synonomous with hate. Which is to say I dislike a lot of things I hate only one or two.
------

I don't believe I said brutality and degradation were synonyms.

This simple point is that your nauseousness-- like the nauseousness of many people in reading the passage of mr z-- is no reason to claim a piece doesn't belong at literotica or isn't erotica; and is no reason (in case that's the way you'd go) to claim the piece belongs in 'extreme.'

If the passage I supplied simply lacked 'brutality', I could easily quote you in the Story of O where the woman's legs are pulled apart and she's flogged on the inner thighs and near her pussy till she bleeds. I think that would be suitably 'brutal' for many, yet is a well known piece of bdsm erotica, suitable for posting as erotica in literotica's main area.

Although you haven't mentioned censorship--maybe you just believe in categorization/sequestration approach of Mlle--you're in the position most censors and judges have found themselves; you're simply saying, of the (to you) really objectionable material, "I know it when I see it."

I suppose, regarding your example of 'hate' and 'dislike', that you may say, 'well there's the brutal and the really really brutal'; this is the approach of Mlle of the baseless statements and accusations. The problem is Laurel would have to telephone you to make the call: "Destinie is this 'really really brutal' so I should turn it down as erotica? " Iow you have no objective criterion.

Best,

J.

 

[oggbashan]

Eventually, you will get incredibly weary of repeating yourself, clarifying obvious points and responding to extraneous red herrings and "misunderstandings" of your words. At that point, you will put Pure on "ignore" ...

Pure was the only person that I had on "ignore" but I became slightly irritated because I was unable to follow the sense of any thread that had Pure in it. So I de-ignored Pure but cannot see any logical reason to respond to anything Pure has posted recently so now I have Pure on "virtual ignore".

I still cannot follow the sense of any thread that has Pure in it.

Og

 

[Pure]

Mlle said,

//It's odd to me that you just can't conceive of why most people would see a difference between healthy kinks- consentual incest fantasies, gay stuff, bdsm, degradation, and yes, even most non-consent-

and brutal sadistic rape. //

Although she's of the categorization/sequestration approach, not the censorship one, she has the same problem as censors. Criterion.

As a matter of fact, the supreme cts of both US and Canada did NOT see the difference she spoke of, for most of their history, in respect of pornography or obscenity. The Canadian Supreme Ct. in particular, followed the line of MacKinnon in its _R. v. Butler_ decision; it specifically included 'degradation' among the characteristics that would make something suppressible as a matter of public policy. "Healthy degradation" is a rather rare concept occurring in the minds of a few literoticians --perhaps including myself--and *not* most judges or members of the general public.


What Mlle calls 'healthy kink' is *not* viewed that way by many, and iirc there was a big debate at literotica over the incorporation of incest stories in the main area. "healthy incest"** is not, for instance, an acceptable category at the fine erotica site 'clean sheets'.

J.

PS:

"healthy kink" including 'healthy incest' 'healthy degradation' and so on seems to be a category that Mlle would define as "perversion that doesn't result in serious physical injury and which is portrayed as enjoyable to those who do it." This is proposed as a category of genuine erotica, not deserving special categorization/sequestration.

Again, for most of the legal history of court judments re pornography in US Canada and England this is not a satisfactory criterion for what's to be suppressed; for one thing it would allow a substantial amount of child porn to pass. The censorship proceedings against gay and lesbian literature. too, have generally *not* been impressed with the 'healthy kink' or 'enjoyment-of-the-parties' arguments.

 

[MathGirl]

Originally posted by oggbashan I still cannot follow the sense of any thread that has Pure in it.

Dear Og,
I was very glad to hear that. Thought I was the only one.
MG

 

[Pure]

Math Girl said,
Originally posted by oggbashan

//I still cannot follow the sense of any thread that has Pure in it. //
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Dear Og,
I was very glad to hear that. Thought I was the only one.
MG
-----

Hey, if I've been unclear, at least you're not heaving insults, 'psychic vampire' etc. Thanks for that.

I've simplified my points in the last couple postings, and in a sentence, 'nausea' will simply not do as a way or means of separating 'genuine erotica' **from 'disgusting tripe' (or substitute your favorite negative label used regarding writing). It's too subjective.

I hope that clarifies. If it doesn't I shall have to visit you astrally and drink your blood.

J.

**what can and should be posted at lit., main area.

 

[MathGirl]

I hope that clarifies.

Dear Pure,
Not really, but I'm probably just being a stupid female.
MG

 

[Pure]

MG

//a stupid female.//

Not at all, MG. Though sometimes reluctant to display your intelligence. Which I wish were not the case.

 

[destinie21]

Hi destinie,

you say,

I'm reminded of a dog chasing his tail.

Sorry if I was unclear.


Also careful with your synonyms pure. though a word may be synonmous with another or (interchangable) they don't always mean or denote the same thing. Ie hate is synonomous with dislike. But as far as I'm concerned dislike is not synonomous with hate. Which is to say I dislike a lot of things I hate only one or two.
------

I don't believe I said brutality and degradation were synonyms.

This simple point is that your nauseousness-- like the nauseousness of many people in reading the passage of mr z-- is no reason to claim a piece doesn't belong at literotica or isn't erotica; and is no reason (in case that's the way you'd go) to claim the piece belongs in 'extreme.'

If the passage I supplied simply lacked 'brutality', I could easily quote you in the Story of O where the woman's legs are pulled apart and she's flogged on the inner thighs and near her pussy till she bleeds. I think that would be suitably 'brutal' for many, yet is a well known piece of bdsm erotica, suitable for posting as erotica in literotica's main area.

Although you haven't mentioned censorship--maybe you just believe in categorization/sequestration approach of Mlle--you're in the position most censors and judges have found themselves; you're simply saying, of the (to you) really objectionable material, "I know it when I see it."

I suppose, regarding your example of 'hate' and 'dislike', that you may say, 'well there's the brutal and the really really brutal'; this is the approach of Mlle of the baseless statements and accusations. The problem is Laurel would have to telephone you to make the call: "Destinie is this 'really really brutal' so I should turn it down as erotica? " Iow you have no objective criterion.

Best,

J.

If you weren't suggesting that brutality and degradation were synonomous then why would you suggest that they were interchangable? Also my nausea is based on the fact that (listen closely here)

The story is non consent which by definition means lack of assent or approval. So if the second party in the story isn't a masochist the story then becomes brutal. If the person is a masochist then the story isn't really non consent. I'm not saying that bdsm and the like are wrong or brutal beacause it's between two CONSENTING adults. Also when I mentioned a dog chasing it's tail I meant that the effort is fruitless and doomed to be repeated not that what you say is unclear. I can't really follow where you're trying to lead though because your focus constantly shifts.
It's a sophmoric debating tactic, I get that I just don't follow because your veiws seem haphazard and at times half formed. Also you often suggest changing words in posts which by default will change what is being said. It's not like me saying half a dozen and you saying six because I don't really think we agree on the nuances. It's like me saying apples and you saying yeah interchange apple for orange. Which doesn't really make sense sure they're both fruit from a tree but that's about it.

 

[Pure]

Destinie said,
//The story is non consent which by definition means lack of assent or approval. So if the second party in the story isn't a masochist the story then becomes brutal. If the person is a masochist then the story isn't really non consent.//

I don't really care, ultimately, if the SUV story is 'really nonconsent'
which is a category invented and defined and implemented by Laurel. It's perhaps a nonsense and certainly non realistic category of fantasies about extraordinarily enjoyable rape-like events that happen only to women. Ever had one?

I don't care, also, in the end, if the story goes to 'extreme'.
I was simply addressing whether the SUV story could be considered 'erotica'. And I reiterate, because it disgusts you, isn't a good basis for deciding (it's not erotica). Laurel decided, and maybe she was wrong, but the decision at least had the veneer of objectivity.

J.
"the sophomoric"
Hey I always did dig Senior babes.

 

[MathGirl]

Originally posted by Pure Not at all, MG.

Dear Pure,
Tha point is that I detest any story that involves brutality as a part of sex. I don't care if it's against women, men, or pets. My approach is not to argue about it, though. I just don't read it. I guess that's why the whole issue makes little sense to me.
MG

 

[Never]

Oh, I seem to have gotten lost. Can anyone point me to the right place?

I'm looking for a thread on language being inherently sexist that focuses on semiotics… Has anyone seen that?

 

[Pure]

MG,

//Dear Pure,
Tha point is that I detest any story that involves brutality as a part of sex. I don't care if it's against women, men, or pets. My approach is not to argue about it, though. I just don't read it. I guess that's why the whole issue makes little sense to me.
MG//


At the level of "I detest" there can indeed be little debate or discussion, unless reasons are given, which they can't always be done.
"On matters of taste there can be no disputing" as the saying goes.


Only at the level of literotica or public policy or 'artistic merit' do the debates begin, and, if you will remember there were such debates regarding both the nonconsent and the incest categories being included in lit's main area. Some simply detest the latter, esp. incest survivors.

Regards,
J.

 

[Pure]

//on language being inherently sexist //

I never saw anything on this topic in this thread. It began, you'll recall, with a discussion of whether a picture of a slit in a cloth, included in a cigarette ad was meant to evoke a pussy; metaphor, metonymy, etc.

The 'sexism' or 'anti-woman' or 'patriarchal' nature of some porn or erotic writing, esp. that containing violence, seems like a related topic, but why not add something on semantics if that's your interest.

J.

 

[MlledeLaPlumeBleu]

I'm with you, Og.

a haiku for MG:

Oh Math Girl, don't weep
use all that intelligence
put Pure on "ignore"

We girlz is real dumb
Lauren, me, Destinie, you
Pure said so outright

The logic of Pure
belongs in your Aunt's back yard
with Walter's Bee Em

 

[MathGirl]

a haiku for MG:

Dear Blu,
That was very nice, thank you. Sentimentality like that often gives me a cramp.
MG
Ps. It was just gas, though.

 

[Pure]

teed juss

Mlle:

//We girlz is real dumb
Lauren, me, Destinie, you
Pure said so outright //

Quote me, or withdraw it.

J.

 

[destinie21]

Destinie said,
//The story is non consent which by definition means lack of assent or approval. So if the second party in the story isn't a masochist the story then becomes brutal. If the person is a masochist then the story isn't really non consent.//

I don't really care, ultimately, if the SUV story is 'really nonconsent'
which is a category invented and defined and implemented by Laurel. It's perhaps a nonsense and certainly non realistic category of fantasies about extraordinarily enjoyable rape-like events that happen only to women. Ever had one?

I don't care, also, in the end, if the story goes to 'extreme'.
I was simply addressing whether the SUV story could be considered 'erotica'. And I reiterate, because it disgusts you, isn't a good basis for deciding (it's not erotica). Laurel decided, and maybe she was wrong, but the decision at least had the veneer of objectivity.

J.
"the sophomoric"
Hey I always did dig Senior babes.

If you've read any of my posts in the other threads pretaining to this issue you'd know that I never claimed to be objective. As a matter of fact I said something to the effect that objectivity is a impossible because once an opinion is formed objectivity becomes impossible. And no I've never fantasized about rape, I'm much to familiar with the reality. As far as catergorization If I don't feel something is erotic the to me it's not erotica.

 

[Pure]

Hi Des,

//As far as catergorization If I don't feel something is erotic the[n] to me it's not erotica.//

As I said to MG, at the level of "I detest X" or here, "I'm not turned on by X" there can never be any debate.

But in dealing with literotica (or public) policy, one can't just deal with one reader's personal reaction. Maybe that topic doesn't interest you, or course. (Maybe that's what's meant by your saying you're not interested in being objective; which the person running lit. must be.)

I bet, however, that you're just like me and many others: a number of categories at lit don't do anything for you: can you honestly say you're turned on by incest, gay male sex, sadistic consensual beatings, urine drinking? Few of us are that 'omnivorous,' though i do love when I run across such folks.

But at the same time, I (probably you) and most others are willing to say (on some particular, disgusting to oneself category), "Yes that's erotica, but it's just not my cuppa."


Best,
J.

 

[americandemon]

So here we are

Let me get some things straight. I see alot of you HATED the SUV story. LOL Well you know what? I hated writting it! The person who edits my stories said my nonconsent stories weren't very realistic. I got pissed and tried to write a "REAL" rape story. Cunt in a SUV was then born. It's done its job. I think too well. LOL Now all of you think I could be a rapist. I wanted to make it real to prove a point to my editor. I don't like the story. It is my least fav of all my stories. Anyway, I am not a rapist. I would never hurt a woman like that in the Suv story. I do like control and can get alittle rough with my sex partner. But if she didn't like it.....we wouldn't do it. End of story. Now go and pick on someone else ok?
Demon
P.s I see you hate my poems too huh? I know there not good. Hell I've never claimed to be a writter like everyone else in here. But Laural is nice enough to let me post my crap. And my poems are more about getting a feeling across more than being a writter. I know I am no writter.
I won't be back so carry on. Bye