Our Sexism Problem

Has anyone noticed the recent explosion of solidarity and outrage among women Democrats over the sexist treatment in the media of Hillary Clinton during this primary season?  MYDD regulars would say this is something that has been an issue among Clinton supporters for a long while, but in terms of national coverage, we seemed to have turned some kind of corner, reached critical mass.  There was an excellent discussion with folks from Emily's List and NARAL Pro Choice America yesterday, for example, on Talk of the Nation, the NPR program.  There was the New York Times article earlier this week, and now all the morning shows are talking about it today.

In my advocacy for Barack Obama, here and among my friends, I've always tried to keep a cool head about the nature of this primary, remembering that Clinton is not some kind of evil enemy, but a fellow Democrat.  Sometimes, I've been very frustrated with Clinton tactics, things that made me want to lash, and in some cases to actually lash out in anger.  But I've also always tried to refrain from the type of casual sexism (and the not-so-casual, bordering on vitriolic kind) that one often hears thrown around about powerful women.  

As much as I often regret the sort of "gotcha" PC atmospherics which surrounds our public discourse on matters relating to identity politics, I'm also quite aware of the utility of this line.  Yesterday on Talk of the Nation, Elizabeth Shipp eloquently made the point that open sexism is one of the last frontiers of public bigotry in this country (though, I'm quite sure that heterosexism ought to be included in that category as well).  One in five Kentucky and West Virginia voters notwithstanding, America has by and large become a place where--at least in mainstream public discourse--open racism is frowned upon.  We have a ways to go before we get there with sexism and heterosexism, I'm afraid.  

What is frustrating is when you hear this sort of thing from Democratic activists, netrootsers, and hyper-supporters.  I've been hearing about the awful things that Obama supporters have been saying to turn off Clinton supporters for some time.  Earlier this week I encountered it first hand.

One commenter, responding to charges of sexism, wrote this:  

Please, give me a break. I have not seen a hint of sexism coming from Obama. Politely saying to a reporter "I'll be with you in a minute sweety" doesn't exactly drip sexism. Again this is  the broken down Clinton Machine running out of gas and oil. It's starting to sputter, and looking for a bumper to grab onto to give it a boost. But the wheels are falling off.Most of the feminists out there can be mistaken for men and are never called anything close to sweety. I know other things were said by Obama, but this seems to be the worst. Oh my god, did he call her sweety? How dare he!

Much as I agreed with his point that it was hard to pin anti-Hillary sexism on Obama, I was taken aback by the turn his comment took near the end, and highlighting his comment that "most of the feminists out there can be mistaken for men," I responded this way:  

totally out of line.  I'm a proud feminist and a Barack Obama supporter.  You clearly have a misunderstanding of what feminism means.  Feminism is a core Democratic Party value:  the belief that women should be treated as equals socially, culturally, and politically.  It also means that you recognize the huge barriers that women have faced in the past and still face, and that you feel the need to work actively for gender equality.
If you don't believe this, then you should reconsider your commitment to the Democratic Party.  
So shame on you for engaging in extremely juvenile stereotyping.

My new friend then responded with this gem:  

I apologize to you for the statement, but not to most of the other women on this site. A lot of the women out there don't understand what a feminist actually is. I do actually understand and have studied the 3 waves of feminism.

I should have let it die, I suppose, but I was angry now, and responded this way:  

I'll accept your apology as a feminist and a progressive, but I'm a dude.  
And while I think I see where you're coming from, I think the dismissiveness & stereotyping is what gets people angry.  
I think we can honestly criticize knee-jerk identity politics and still be fully committed to women's rights.  But we have to call out and fight against these stereotypes.  That's why I responded the way I did.

It went back and forth a little while longer, as these things do, he arguing that he can be brash sometimes, and me saying that brashness wasn't the issue, but rather blatant sexism & stereotyping.  He got his last word in with this post:

Please drop it because your ungraciousness is starting to aggrivate me. Don't bother commenting for I will not read another from you on the subject. I for one am going to take my beautiful intelligent (more intelligent I )non feminist but strong girlfriend for a drive. We will now go where she wants. I haven't clubbed a woman over the head in a long time.

Why put all of this in a diary?  I felt the need to share with Clinton supporters, with whom I spend most of the time arguing, that I am with you on this one.  It's a big problem.  And it's not a problem because it might divide the Democratic electorate--that is secondary.  The major problem is that we haven't come far enough as a nation to make it highly uncomfortable for people to engage in casual sexism in public (progressive, even) fora.  

No pitches here either:  I won't try to convince you that your anger is misplaced, mainly because I don't think it is.  I think you have a point.  But I will make a pledge to redouble my efforts to weed out sexism in my thinking and writing, and to call out bigotry of all sorts when I hear it or read it.  

I encourage my fellow Obama supporters to do the same.  

Tags: feminism, gender discrimination, progressive values (all tags)



Tips & Recs for Gender Equality?

How about it?

by Bargeron 2008-05-22 05:28AM | 0 recs
I really do think it's a generational thing

This isn't an ageism swipe... and I certainly can agree that there's been an ugly streak of sexism from certain portals in the media - maintstream included (I will NOT admit to such coming from the Obama campaign)... and finally - I absolutely am not diminishing the work done by women throughout our nation's history fighting for equality.

But that said...

I look at folks in my age bracket and younger (I'm 34).   I look at my own experiences.

I have married friends who pay no mind to the 'gender roles' prescribed by our parents.  Women who head downtown in the morning for their jobs at high powered law firms, while the husband stays home to tend to the house.   Women who outearn their husbands as doctors, while the man works a decidedly less pressure filled job in an office.

I suppose one never knows what happens in such couple's private lives, but it's never seemed to have been an issue, a source of friction when I meet them for drinks or dinner.

I look at my own situation -- I was hired by a woman.  In ten years with the same company, I've reported to a female Director my entire time at this company.   My mentor - the single biggest guiding force in my career here - is a woman (and more than that a dear friend).  Our CEO is a woman - and we're a large mulitnational in the Fortune 100.

None of these things really ever occurred to me until this primary.   I never once thought it unusual to have a female boss, nor has it affected my work in any possible fashion.

I'm not saying the battles over equality are over - but frankly, I think, looking at my generation and the ones following - they're getting damn close.

I'd say the same thing about race.

Anyone not comforted by the fact that Gen Xers, Gen Yers, and Millenials just haven't seen this primary through the racial and gender prisms our parents and grandparents wants a talking point rather than a solution; rather than an end to very thing they claim to be so fervently fighting.

We stand on the shoulders of our forerunners who laid the groundwork for such a world - I absolutely acknowledge the struggles of the suffragettes and civil rights leaders.   I absolutely acknowledge the work of our parents to try to install a sense of equality, of gender and racial blindness to the fitness of a man or a woman to do ANY job... from doctor to lawyer to teacher to CEO to President.

I just wish that folks of an older generation would step back and look at our example -- would see that we're actually trying to fulfill the dreams that they set forth.

Like I said - they deserve all the credit in the world for making our progress possible... I just wish they'd recognize that progress HAS been made.

We're living proof of it.

by zonk 2008-05-22 05:39AM | 0 recs
Re: I really do think it's a generational thing

This is a good point and something I've noticed.  I'm 27 and ensconced in the bubble of academia, so I totally "get" the generational phenomenon you're talking about.  

But I want only to caution that in our understandable exuberance over the change we see in our generation, we don't forget that sexism is still real and has teeth.

I'd also note that your examples of powerful women come from the professional world.  I think part of the disconnect comes when we forget that for working-class women (the vast majority of women) this sort of parity just doesn't exist.  

But, point taken:  viva la progress!

by Bargeron 2008-05-22 05:45AM | 0 recs
Re: I really do think it's a generational thing

Oh sure...

But I want only to caution that in our understandable exuberance over the change we see in our generation, we don't forget that sexism is still real and has teeth.

No doubt, it does.

And once the inevitable sands of time age our generation to point where we're in congress, in board rooms, etc - I have no doubt there will still be stubborn pockets.

The battle isn't over - but it's definitely being won, and I think both time and numbers on our side.

by zonk 2008-05-22 06:00AM | 0 recs
That's what gives me hope

We Gen X'ers caught a lot of flak for seeming to not care about things... and stuff... you know... issues... or something...

Er, where was I?  Oh yes, Gen X.  The very fact that we're so blase' about race, gender, and other issues is exactly why we're well positioned to take over for the Boomers.  Obama, while technically a back-end-Boomer, really is post-Boomer in his mentality and believes in solutions that work, rather than getting hung up on ideology.  

Which isn't to say he's immoral or anything, but he, like a lot of Gen X'ers I know, would rather get a little done at a time, and keep getting things done, than hold off and do nothing until such time as everything can be done at once.  Doesn't generally work out in such a way that we get everything we want all at once, does it?

by Dracomicron 2008-05-22 05:53AM | 0 recs
Oh dear...

You think Gen X will ever take over for the Boomers in any meaningful sense? I suspect we'll be a repeat of the "lost generation" that preceded the Boomers. We're the mayo on a Boomer/Millinial sandwich.

by Mobar 2008-05-22 06:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Oh dear...

Sounds like a boomer. Never trusted anyone older than their special generation, now don't trust anyone younger.

by IowaMike 2008-05-22 07:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Oh dear...

The use of "we" in reference to Gen X would suggest otherwise.

by Mobar 2008-05-22 07:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Oh dear...

pardon, a self-flagellating X'er I see.

Boomers are no more special than our generation. They sure think of themselves as superior. They are in numbers, but that's about all.

I don't consider us (the x's) to be last at all. I just find that CW is ruled by the boomers. When they were young, they never trusted anyone over 40. Now that they are, they don't trust anyone younger than 40, unless its their kids.

by IowaMike 2008-05-22 08:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Oh dear...

lost, not last.

by IowaMike 2008-05-22 08:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Oh dear...

I don't think I'm a self-hating X-er, just honest. We're bookended by larger generations that have for assorted reasons captured media and cultural attention. I've seen numbers suggesting that X-ers tend to be more conservative than their elders and youngers, so I'm perfectly happy letting the torch largely pass us by if it increases the odds of liberal leadership. I'm afraid our generational power will be limited to the 90210 kids getting AIDs tests, inspiring Vogue to run a "grunge" fashion spread, and our rich resentment of baby boomers nurtured and developed through 10 years of "20th anniversery" specials of every dump a white kid took in the 60s.

I suspect there are numerous opportunities for outlying X-ers to lead millenials in interesting directions, but the Tom Brokaws of tomorrow aren't going to be writing books about our "generational" accomplishments.

And I should have said "silent," not "lost" generation. I'm afraid our literary talent doesn't compare to the Losts.

by Mobar 2008-05-22 12:04PM | 0 recs
Millenials aren't going to grow up quickly

This is no insult to them, but Millenials are going to be slow in taking responsibility.  

I suppose it depends on how the movement that Obama is currently championing turns out, though.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-22 07:29AM | 0 recs
I think you're a man, right?

If I am wrong, please forgive me.

A sentence stood out to me in your post which I hope you will remember if/when you become a father:
"I suppose one never knows what happens in such couple's private lives, but it's never seemed to have been an issue, a source of friction when I meet them for drinks or dinner."

I am a woman. A Masters Degree holder from an ivy league school, I worked hard on my education and my career. I owned my own business until I had children when I sold it and earned a comfortable nest-egg. I now work free-lance for the company which bought my business. I am also a mother of twin boy, 4 years old.

I've always been a feminist. Becoming a mother made me a feminist-on-steroids. :)

I have a completely new-found respect and admiration for women who balance career, husband's career and family. My own mother (who had a brilliant career in the field of Women's Healthcare and Childbirth while raising 3 daughters) and yes, Hillary Clinton.

In my 20's and early 30's, my attitude would have been very much like yours... that there are no barriers for women, that we have the world at our feet, that we can have-it-all, that there is no glass ceiling. Becoming a mother changed that in my own life and (with maybe 1 exception) in the life of every single other mother I know. No matter how incredible the man you marry, no matter how progressive and feminist, the buck stops with mom. The juggle is impossible to understand until you're in it. Women deserve far more respect and admiration than they receive.

I've been floored by the sexism in this primary season. Seeing it coming from the press and from fellow Democrats has left a very large and painful wound for me. Everytime I saw it I donated $44 to Hillary's campaign (to be the 44th POTUS). I am now maxed out as an individual donor. I live in NYC and was in a happy bubble of blissful ignorance about how rampant and pervasive sexism still is. I'm glad we are talking about it. Once again, Hillary has led us to confront a reality we need to address.

There is much work to be done.

by twinmom 2008-05-22 05:53AM | 0 recs
Re: I think you're a man, right?

Nice comment.  I told my wife last night that I can't remember in  my lifetime (I'm 27) a moment of greater solidarity among women to stand up against sexism.  As an Obama supporter I am of course hopeful that it doesn't translate into disgust for Obama, but I think that the heightened feminist consciousness that has emerged lately has been a great gift of the Clinton candidacy to the ongoing struggle for justice for all people.  

by Bargeron 2008-05-22 05:56AM | 0 recs
this gen x'er

totally gets and appreciates your diary.

by canadian gal 2008-05-22 07:00AM | 0 recs
Re: this gen x'er

Thanks, you're one of the best.  

by Bargeron 2008-05-22 07:08AM | 0 recs
Re: I think you're a man, right?

I am -

And I completely understand what you're saying.  There's simply no getting around the biology of the human condition - and motherhood is obviously something I'm never, to say nothing of balancing it with potential careers and what not.

The closest I - or any man -  can ever hope to come is recognizing that fact.  I think to a greater extent than previous generations, 'we' are getting there... perhaps not there yet, but certainly on that road.

As I said, all of my experiences are second hand observations and they're a pale substitute for actual empathy.

The world has changed - and I think it continues to change - in the right direction.

A progressive society, at its heart, molds itself around the prevailing realities, seeking not to change what cannot be changed, but to remake that which can be remade in a more equitable fashion.

For example -

One of my friends just had her second child.  She's a whipsmart attorney, still technically on leave from one of Chicago's largest and most prestigious firms.

Forty years ago - she probably wouldn't have been at the firm to begin with.

Twenty years ago - starting a family might well have ended her career.

Even ten years ago - it would have stunted her career.  

She's a dedicated mother - but she's also very dedicated to the law, to her career in it.

I work in a related filed (legal publishing) - and I put her in touch with a start-up that my company has partnered with on occasion.   They've got an interesting business model - their analytical work (writing about case law, legislation, etc) is performed entirely by women in precisely my friend's position.   Female attorneys that have decided to start a family, but also want to stay current with the law and do plan to resume practicing at some point.   The company recruits basically via word of mouth and references - and their entire stable of analysts are telecommuters who basically work like newspaper stringers... picking up cases and topics as their schedule permits.

Now to be sure - none of this erases the fact that she's still working while simultaneously caring for an infant during the day.  Lord knows I couldn't do it...

My point is just that it's an inherent inequality that we're never going to eliminate in its entirety.

All we can do is address what we can -

1)Culturally... recognize the work required, as colleagues, as husbands, as employers, as friends.

2)Legally... ensuring that legal mechanisms are in place that allow women to become mothers if and when they choose without negative career repercussions.  Eliminate, as best we can, forcing them to decide between either.

3)Technologically... like I said above - I think the model employed by the publisher I mention is the wave of the future.

by zonk 2008-05-22 06:33AM | 0 recs
It's certainly not one-way

While the person you were quoting was certainly out-of-line, I do have to say that most of the sexism I see on this site is perpetrated by Clinton supporters (or people pretending to be Clinton supporters).  Or even Clinton herself.

She's not your "girl."  She's a woman.  Her proper name referencial in public discourse is "Hillary Clinton," "Senator Clinton," or just "Clinton"... not "Hillary."  

Nobody "gang banged" her at a debate because of her gender, they did it because she was 20 points ahead of everyone else.  Nobody is criticizing her for lying about Tuzla snipers because she's a "girl" (thanks, Former President Bill Clinton), they're doing it because she lied on camera about snipers.

I know there's still sexism in this country, but if Clinton were a man and pandering to gun owners as much as she did, Obama would've said "John Wayne" or "Roy Rogers" instead of "Annie Oakley"... and I have no idea why Geraldine Ferraro would suggest that that somehow wouldn't be appropriate.  And she's really the worst of this breed of sexism-blamers... she who has a bone to pick because she was an Affirmative Action vice-presidential selection in one of the most doomed candidacies in our nation's history.  

No, Gerry, Obama brushing dirt off his shoulder is not brushing off a woman, it's showing his constituency that the mudslinging over the worst kind of "gotcha" politics that Clinton and McCain were doing wasn't going to phase him.  He was brushing off McCain's attack as well as Clinton's.  Does that make him ageist, too?

When I hear about women making 20% less than men in the same job, or when I see stupid crap like Citizens United Not Timid or Bros Before Hoes shirts, or about people in authority sexually harassing women, that all pisses me off to no end... but none of it is why Clinton is losing the nomination.  If anything, her gender has helped her.  In the exit polling, 90% of the people who said that gender was important to them voted FOR Clinton.  It's believed by many that women saved her candidacy in New Hampshire (I don't necessarally believe that it was that simple, but still).

By largely ignoring most of the specious little crap like "Iron my shirt," the media did what they wouldn't do for Obama due to Reverend Wright, which was try to diffuse the identity issue altogether.

The fact that Geraldine Ferraro and others are trivializing Hillary Clinton's candidacy into something that failed because of sexism is incredibly disrespectful of how powerful a candidate and how powerful a person Hillary Clinton is.  The only person that could sink Clinton is... Clinton.  And that's what she did.  It's a glorious win for post-gender-identity politics: The woman gets to fail on her own merits, just like all but one of the men in the Democratic contest.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-22 05:44AM | 0 recs
Re: It's certainly not one-way

No, I understand all of this, and I think the Clinton campaign has been smart enough to try and spin gold out of straw when it comes to the sexism issue.  After all, there are more women than men in the Democratic Party.  

And I don't want you to think that I somehow believe sexism has single-handedly undone Clinton's campaign.  It's been a badly-run campaign for the most part.  I point to Mark Penn's early (and astonishing) ignorance of the proportional delegate allocation.

My limited purpose here is to remind everyone that words matter, and if we are committed to a more just world, a world where, as you aptly put it "the woman gets to fail on her own merits," then we need to confront casual sexism and make it uncomfortable to engage in.  

by Bargeron 2008-05-22 05:49AM | 0 recs
While I agree...

...that it should be uncomfortable to engage in sexism, I thought the media was fairly responsible in reporting this sort of thing briefly and not giving it greater play.

Most of the coverage I heard was a couple minutes at most, the pundits said it was sexist and stupid and not worth their time, then they moved on.

Devoting lots of coverage on the subject is a surefire way to get a ton of blowback, not only from people guilty of these small sexism gestures, but also from feminists who don't think it's helpful to dwell on issues that only exist to divide us further.

The proper response to "iron my shirt" is "you are an idiot."  I'm reassured that most of these jackasses will never see a woman naked without paying for it with that attitude.  Hopefully they won't breed.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-22 06:00AM | 0 recs
Re: While I agree...

I love this:  

The proper response to "iron my shirt" is "you are an idiot."

by Bargeron 2008-05-22 06:04AM | 0 recs
Well yeah.

It's the god-honest truth.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-22 06:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Our Sexism Problem

As I just argued in another comment, support for Obama does not necessarily entail complacency to the discrimination against women that is still quite frequent and accepted in our society, a concern regarding the continued underrepresentation of women in positions of power, and opposition to the brutality that women face around the world.  It is a candidate preference based on an analysis of two individuals who are not reducible to demographic affiliations no matter how central.  It also does not mean dismissal of the symbolic nature of HRC's candidacy and shared disappointment in its apparent (not yet conclusive) defeat.  It is eminently possible to be happy about an outcome in some respects and sad regarding others.

by Strummerson 2008-05-22 05:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Our Sexism Problem

I agree with you whole-heartedly

by Bargeron 2008-05-22 05:50AM | 0 recs
I agree. . .

There is still a large problem with seeing women as somehow less than men in this country.  Case in point, Castellanos on CNN with his "white bitch" statement.  It's something that needs to be more actively pointed out and discredited.  I think one reason it is seemingly ubiquitous in on television is because we ignore it instead of calling it what it is and showing we are offended.  Open racism has been on the decline in this country because it's been pointed out and discredited.

I think where it becomes a problem in this election is when some passionate Clinton supporters conflate the issue of sexism with Barack Obama.  I've seen many statements regarding how much Obama has benefitted from sexism and how he should give a speech apologizing for the actions of others.  I simply don't know how to respond to that.  I wouldn't ask Clinton to apologize for 1 in 5 of her voters in WV and Kentucky, she's not responsible for their views.  Conflating the issue of sexism and Obama to the point where one would vote for the republican nominee (an openly sexist man and leading a regressive party concerning womens' rights) is simply devoid of common sense.  No, I'm not saying to shut up about sexism and fall in line behind Obama.  I'm saying call out sexism and vote against the party that promotes it, and that may mean voting for Obama.

Example of Open Sexism:

Example of Open Racism:

by shalca 2008-05-22 05:54AM | 0 recs
Re: I agree. . .

I could not agree more with your comment.  

by Bargeron 2008-05-22 05:57AM | 0 recs

The press does what they're going to do, and voting for McCain because of things the press does is not good logic.

It would be great if Clinton could give a historic speech on gender equality the way Obama gave his speech on race, but asking Obama to do it seems like contracting the issue out to a hired gun.  I'm sure he could do it, and do it well, but he couldn't diffuse the issue the Democrats are having right now: Only Clinton could do that.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-22 06:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Our Sexism Problem

There is NO doubt the media has jumped all over Clinton for her gender and Obama for being bi-racial.
Having a woman or bi-racial President is a real threat to the established white male power structure.
Obama is biracial...playing race? (ah he was born that way)
Clinton is a woman..playing gender?..(ah she was born that way.)

any Dem who was not outraged when Sen. Clinton was call a "bitch" on TV by a Republican operative/Commentater..and it was ok...is not a Dem

http://mediamatters.org/items/2008052100 02

by nogo postal 2008-05-22 06:01AM | 0 recs
The problem arises when...

...people start to conflate the words of supporters when "taking back" derogatory terminology with the still-insulting uses.

Example: Tina Fey said "Bitch is the new black" when talking about Clinton.

That is NOT insulting, because she means it in a different way than the jackass you quoted.  Fey is trying to say that Clinton is tough, ready, and currently popular, while the other guy is highlighting the bad trait of "playing the victim."

by Dracomicron 2008-05-22 06:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Our Sexism Problem

The big problem is with what is called "benevolent sexism". This is different from the discrimination that occurs from overt sexism and from racism, but in many ways is just as detrimental.

In overt sexism and most racism, the overarching theme is that either the minority party is not qualified or is not welcome because of their minority status. For example, comments like "women are too emotional to lead" or "blacks are all drug addicts" are representative of this type of discrimination.

Benevolent sexism on the other hand is demeaning to women, but doing it under the guise of politeness or care-taking. Even something as seemingly benign as a man holding a door open for a woman can be considered benevolent sexism. While the man was likely just doing it because there is a social norm saying that's what polite people do, there is also an undertone of "poor little lady, let me open that big heavy door for you". Despite that being far from the original intent, it can still end up having that effect. These norms have the effect of passively presenting women as the weaker sex to society as a whole.

These types of comments and acts have been magnified by focus on identity politics in this campaign.

One of the other issues is that there is very little occurrence of benevolent racism. It's typically either overt or it's not there. That makes it easy to identify and call out. Benevolent sexism on the other hand is not easy to identify (or to identify the effects of it) and when it is, it can appear that someone is being criticized for being polite.

It's a Catch-22 with no simple solutions. Sen. Clinton's candidacy has certainly helped combat the issues by presenting another strong woman in a leadership position, but it will take many more women following her mold to move our society in the right direction.

by Thadd Selden 2008-05-22 06:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Our Sexism Problem

Thanks for a very thoughtful comment.  Holding doors for women was a hard thing for this Southern boy to give up, but my feminist wife has taught me well the point you eloquently make about "benevolent sexism"

by Bargeron 2008-05-22 06:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Our Sexism Problem

Sexism and racism are both problems with evidence hurting and helping both in this cycle.

My question is which talking point is the one the Clinton people think is bigger? Is it "she is more electable," or "she isn't winning because of sexism?"  Logically they  cancel each other out so I have never taken either one of these claims too seriously.

by IowaMike 2008-05-22 07:04AM | 0 recs
Re: Our Sexism Problem

I just caught your diary as it was about to dip below the horizon, but I'm glad I did. thank you.

by linfar 2008-05-22 01:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Our Sexism Problem

thanks for the comment

by Bargeron 2008-05-23 01:18PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads