|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On September 07 2017 23:06 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 21:23 Velr wrote:
There are pre-employment drugtests? WTF? Is this normal? Welcome to America. If it's not explicitly written down in the constitution then it's not a real right.
I wish we could do some drug tests in Australia before the employee signed up, given theres a blatant ice user employed, in a work environment where drug tests need to be negotiated by all the staff and then rehab needs to be paid for by the employer.
|
On September 07 2017 23:01 bo1b wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 22:55 kollin wrote:
The problem's mainly semantic I think, because some people read 'toxic masculinity' and presume that it means all masculinity is toxic, whereas others read it and think it just means to highlight the parts of masculinity that are toxic. The problem exists that overly stereotypical masculine behaviour clearly is a result of sexual selection over how ever many generations, along with the lesson most people learn in school about people who are competitive and people who are not. Fair enough it results in stupid situations like the "man up" problem. On the other hand what should be obviously the same thing but reflected in women, which to me has the same genesis has been flipped to be a result of men. Sex sells so women starve them selves therefor its a result of toxic masculinity is a flawed argument in a lot of ways and transfers responsibilty from women to an invisible oppressor in much the same way that a male equivalent should realistically be transferred to what ultimately probably comes down to what they think will impress women in the long run. Instead it's the patriarchy.
See there you gave some reasoning you had not previously stated. So you say that women do things they think will impress men, and that is the root cause of things like anorexia. Now if women are doing these things to impress men, how do you think the power structure of society plays into things? The fact that we have a male dominated society must have an impact on how often and how pressured women feel to impress men, yes?
Also consider how rabidly men consume products and advertisements that use sex to sell.
|
United States44401 Posts
On September 07 2017 22:20 bo1b wrote:
I'd argue thats no more the result of toxic masculinity then starving yourself as a teen age girl is the result of toxic femininity.
Stupidity is sex blind.
I actually accept your premise. That's society imposing bullshit ideas of the gender ideal onto vulnerable people with predictable results. You've sold me on toxic femininity as a concept.
|
On September 07 2017 23:05 Liquid`Drone wrote:
I don't personally mind if you start using toxic femininity as a term for exaggerated focus on 'feminine virtues' that end up being damaging to themselves or others.
If you can understand my perspective, you can probably understand my distaste for exaggerated virtues put forward by any sex as being anything more then stupidity, I hope.
|
On September 07 2017 22:44 Jockmcplop wrote:
Can someone define for me exactly what 'toxic masculinity' is?
Whenever I've seen it used its been as a way of making someone feel better about their lack of masculinity.
An example of it is a girl talking to one of her male friends and her boyfriend comes up, clocks the other dude, and then forcibly removes her from the area just because he don't know who this guy is.
tl;dr - act like a man, not a neanderthal.
|
On September 07 2017 23:09 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 23:01 bo1b wrote:On September 07 2017 22:55 kollin wrote:
The problem's mainly semantic I think, because some people read 'toxic masculinity' and presume that it means all masculinity is toxic, whereas others read it and think it just means to highlight the parts of masculinity that are toxic. The problem exists that overly stereotypical masculine behaviour clearly is a result of sexual selection over how ever many generations, along with the lesson most people learn in school about people who are competitive and people who are not. Fair enough it results in stupid situations like the "man up" problem. On the other hand what should be obviously the same thing but reflected in women, which to me has the same genesis has been flipped to be a result of men. Sex sells so women starve them selves therefor its a result of toxic masculinity is a flawed argument in a lot of ways and transfers responsibilty from women to an invisible oppressor in much the same way that a male equivalent should realistically be transferred to what ultimately probably comes down to what they think will impress women in the long run. Instead it's the patriarchy. See there you gave some reasoning you had not previously stated. So you say that women do things they think will impress men, and that is the root cause of things like anorexia. Now if women are doing these things to impress men, how do you think the power structure of society plays into things? The fact that we have a male dominated society must have an impact on how often and how pressured women feel to impress men, yes? Also consider how rabidly men consume products and advertisements that use sex to sell.
Has male dominated culture been influenced in any way, in your opinion, by the overwhelming biological urge to reproduce? And if so, could it be said that in some small way, women also have a part in this? And if so, could you not see the problem I have with this sort of argument, as to an outsider such as myself they seem to cancel each other out, and society is left with toxic stupidity more then anything.
|
|
|
United Kingdom10021 Posts
On September 07 2017 23:12 bo1b wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 23:09 Doodsmack wrote:On September 07 2017 23:01 bo1b wrote:On September 07 2017 22:55 kollin wrote:
The problem's mainly semantic I think, because some people read 'toxic masculinity' and presume that it means all masculinity is toxic, whereas others read it and think it just means to highlight the parts of masculinity that are toxic. The problem exists that overly stereotypical masculine behaviour clearly is a result of sexual selection over how ever many generations, along with the lesson most people learn in school about people who are competitive and people who are not. Fair enough it results in stupid situations like the "man up" problem. On the other hand what should be obviously the same thing but reflected in women, which to me has the same genesis has been flipped to be a result of men. Sex sells so women starve them selves therefor its a result of toxic masculinity is a flawed argument in a lot of ways and transfers responsibilty from women to an invisible oppressor in much the same way that a male equivalent should realistically be transferred to what ultimately probably comes down to what they think will impress women in the long run. Instead it's the patriarchy. See there you gave some reasoning you had not previously stated. So you say that women do things they think will impress men, and that is the root cause of things like anorexia. Now if women are doing these things to impress men, how do you think the power structure of society plays into things? The fact that we have a male dominated society must have an impact on how often and how pressured women feel to impress men, yes? Also consider how rabidly men consume products and advertisements that use sex to sell. Has male dominated culture been influenced in any way, in your opinion, by the overwhelming biological urge to reproduce? And if so, could it be said that in some small way, women also have a part in this? And if so, could you not see the problem I have with this sort of argument, as to an outsider such as myself they seem to cancel each other out, and society is left with toxic stupidity more then anything.
I wouldn't say they cancel each other out, but the root of toxic masculinity is definite female expectations and selection pressure.
|
United States44401 Posts
As I understand it we're simply talking about exaggerated cultural ideals that take a largely broad and uncontroversial idea and then fuck with people's heads through peer pressure and popular culture. Take the simple example "it is good for a woman to be sexy". Pretty bland, pretty vague, sexy is broadly good, that makes sense.
The problem arrives when we get into weird outlier instagram culture areas where a ridiculous and unattainable level of constant sexiness is normalized and anyone who doesn't attain it has failed as a woman. Or, in the real world, if you don't wear high heels to your office job then you've failed.
There is nothing wrong with the general ideas, the problem is that humans are basically bad at processing them and, through a combination of mass media cultural presence and people internalizing the ideas, will fuck themselves up with it.
Which is why it's okay to remind ourselves that these ideas are just ideas, that literally all those instagram women are high price escorts with photoshop, and that the Rock is an actor playing a part, not a literal role model.
|
On September 07 2017 23:12 bo1b wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 23:09 Doodsmack wrote:On September 07 2017 23:01 bo1b wrote:On September 07 2017 22:55 kollin wrote:
The problem's mainly semantic I think, because some people read 'toxic masculinity' and presume that it means all masculinity is toxic, whereas others read it and think it just means to highlight the parts of masculinity that are toxic. The problem exists that overly stereotypical masculine behaviour clearly is a result of sexual selection over how ever many generations, along with the lesson most people learn in school about people who are competitive and people who are not. Fair enough it results in stupid situations like the "man up" problem. On the other hand what should be obviously the same thing but reflected in women, which to me has the same genesis has been flipped to be a result of men. Sex sells so women starve them selves therefor its a result of toxic masculinity is a flawed argument in a lot of ways and transfers responsibilty from women to an invisible oppressor in much the same way that a male equivalent should realistically be transferred to what ultimately probably comes down to what they think will impress women in the long run. Instead it's the patriarchy. See there you gave some reasoning you had not previously stated. So you say that women do things they think will impress men, and that is the root cause of things like anorexia. Now if women are doing these things to impress men, how do you think the power structure of society plays into things? The fact that we have a male dominated society must have an impact on how often and how pressured women feel to impress men, yes? Also consider how rabidly men consume products and advertisements that use sex to sell. Has male dominated culture been influenced in any way, in your opinion, by the overwhelming biological urge to reproduce? And if so, could it be said that in some small way, women also have a part in this? And if so, could you not see the problem I have with this sort of argument, as to an outsider such as myself they seem to cancel each other out, and society is left with toxic stupidity more then anything.
Okay we can agree that both women and men have a contribution - the question is to what degree. Here you say women play a part "in some small way". Does that mean men play a part in a much larger way - even if male dominated society, as you say, is a product of biology and evolution?
You seem to be admitting that society being male dominated WILL have an effect on women in this regard, but just excusing the fact that society is male dominated. But that does not lead to the effect men and women have "canceling each other out" - quite the opposite.
|
On September 07 2017 23:16 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 23:12 bo1b wrote:On September 07 2017 23:09 Doodsmack wrote:On September 07 2017 23:01 bo1b wrote:On September 07 2017 22:55 kollin wrote:
The problem's mainly semantic I think, because some people read 'toxic masculinity' and presume that it means all masculinity is toxic, whereas others read it and think it just means to highlight the parts of masculinity that are toxic. The problem exists that overly stereotypical masculine behaviour clearly is a result of sexual selection over how ever many generations, along with the lesson most people learn in school about people who are competitive and people who are not. Fair enough it results in stupid situations like the "man up" problem. On the other hand what should be obviously the same thing but reflected in women, which to me has the same genesis has been flipped to be a result of men. Sex sells so women starve them selves therefor its a result of toxic masculinity is a flawed argument in a lot of ways and transfers responsibilty from women to an invisible oppressor in much the same way that a male equivalent should realistically be transferred to what ultimately probably comes down to what they think will impress women in the long run. Instead it's the patriarchy. See there you gave some reasoning you had not previously stated. So you say that women do things they think will impress men, and that is the root cause of things like anorexia. Now if women are doing these things to impress men, how do you think the power structure of society plays into things? The fact that we have a male dominated society must have an impact on how often and how pressured women feel to impress men, yes? Also consider how rabidly men consume products and advertisements that use sex to sell. Has male dominated culture been influenced in any way, in your opinion, by the overwhelming biological urge to reproduce? And if so, could it be said that in some small way, women also have a part in this? And if so, could you not see the problem I have with this sort of argument, as to an outsider such as myself they seem to cancel each other out, and society is left with toxic stupidity more then anything. I wouldn't say they cancel each other out, but the root of toxic masculinity is definite female expectations and selection pressure.
If you accept the problems that women outwardly cause themselves as being a result of male dominated culture and women acting in such a way that they think gives a competitive edge, then they must cancel each other out, as the end result is an endless loop of the two sexes competing within ther respective groups to shape society. If that is the case then toxic masculinity is a moot point, and instead the topic of discussion should be about the proper way to push society forward.
|
United States44401 Posts
On September 07 2017 23:12 bo1b wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 23:09 Doodsmack wrote:On September 07 2017 23:01 bo1b wrote:On September 07 2017 22:55 kollin wrote:
The problem's mainly semantic I think, because some people read 'toxic masculinity' and presume that it means all masculinity is toxic, whereas others read it and think it just means to highlight the parts of masculinity that are toxic. The problem exists that overly stereotypical masculine behaviour clearly is a result of sexual selection over how ever many generations, along with the lesson most people learn in school about people who are competitive and people who are not. Fair enough it results in stupid situations like the "man up" problem. On the other hand what should be obviously the same thing but reflected in women, which to me has the same genesis has been flipped to be a result of men. Sex sells so women starve them selves therefor its a result of toxic masculinity is a flawed argument in a lot of ways and transfers responsibilty from women to an invisible oppressor in much the same way that a male equivalent should realistically be transferred to what ultimately probably comes down to what they think will impress women in the long run. Instead it's the patriarchy. See there you gave some reasoning you had not previously stated. So you say that women do things they think will impress men, and that is the root cause of things like anorexia. Now if women are doing these things to impress men, how do you think the power structure of society plays into things? The fact that we have a male dominated society must have an impact on how often and how pressured women feel to impress men, yes? Also consider how rabidly men consume products and advertisements that use sex to sell. Has male dominated culture been influenced in any way, in your opinion, by the overwhelming biological urge to reproduce? And if so, could it be said that in some small way, women also have a part in this? And if so, could you not see the problem I have with this sort of argument, as to an outsider such as myself they seem to cancel each other out, and society is left with toxic stupidity more then anything.
Societal gender roles are absolutely to be blamed on both sexes. Hell, these days you'll probably find more rape apologists in a room of middle aged women than a room full of middle aged men. It's not about casting blame, it's about asking the question "where do our ideas of what it means to be a man/woman come from and how do they impact us?"
|
On September 07 2017 23:17 KwarK wrote:
As I understand it we're simply talking about exaggerated cultural ideals that take a largely broad and uncontroversial idea and then fuck with people's heads through peer pressure and popular culture. Take the simple example "it is good for a woman to be sexy". Pretty bland, pretty vague, sexy is broadly good, that makes sense.
The problem arrives when we get into weird outlier instagram culture areas where a ridiculous and unattainable level of constant sexiness is normalized and anyone who doesn't attain it has failed as a woman. Or, in the real world, if you don't wear high heels to your office job then you've failed.
There is nothing wrong with the general ideas, the problem is that humans are basically bad at processing them and, through a combination of mass media cultural presence and people internalizing the ideas, will fuck themselves up with it.
Which is why it's okay to remind ourselves that these ideas are just ideas, that literally all those instagram women are high price escorts with photoshop, and that the Rock is an actor playing a part, not a literal role model.
I think before you can face those problems though you have to both identify what the problems are, and have some sort of definition of the cause.
Currently as displayed in this thread there is a nebulous definition where all roads lead back to rome, and agency is forcibly removed from an entire sex as a result.
On September 07 2017 23:19 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 23:12 bo1b wrote:On September 07 2017 23:09 Doodsmack wrote:On September 07 2017 23:01 bo1b wrote:On September 07 2017 22:55 kollin wrote:
The problem's mainly semantic I think, because some people read 'toxic masculinity' and presume that it means all masculinity is toxic, whereas others read it and think it just means to highlight the parts of masculinity that are toxic. The problem exists that overly stereotypical masculine behaviour clearly is a result of sexual selection over how ever many generations, along with the lesson most people learn in school about people who are competitive and people who are not. Fair enough it results in stupid situations like the "man up" problem. On the other hand what should be obviously the same thing but reflected in women, which to me has the same genesis has been flipped to be a result of men. Sex sells so women starve them selves therefor its a result of toxic masculinity is a flawed argument in a lot of ways and transfers responsibilty from women to an invisible oppressor in much the same way that a male equivalent should realistically be transferred to what ultimately probably comes down to what they think will impress women in the long run. Instead it's the patriarchy. See there you gave some reasoning you had not previously stated. So you say that women do things they think will impress men, and that is the root cause of things like anorexia. Now if women are doing these things to impress men, how do you think the power structure of society plays into things? The fact that we have a male dominated society must have an impact on how often and how pressured women feel to impress men, yes? Also consider how rabidly men consume products and advertisements that use sex to sell. Has male dominated culture been influenced in any way, in your opinion, by the overwhelming biological urge to reproduce? And if so, could it be said that in some small way, women also have a part in this? And if so, could you not see the problem I have with this sort of argument, as to an outsider such as myself they seem to cancel each other out, and society is left with toxic stupidity more then anything. Societal gender roles are absolutely to be blamed on both sexes. Hell, these days you'll probably find more rape apologists in a room of middle aged women than a room full of middle aged men. It's not about casting blame, it's about asking the question "where do our ideas of what it means to be a man/woman come from and how do they impact us?"
I agree.
|
Norway28917 Posts
On September 07 2017 23:10 bo1b wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 23:05 Liquid`Drone wrote:
I don't personally mind if you start using toxic femininity as a term for exaggerated focus on 'feminine virtues' that end up being damaging to themselves or others. If you can understand my perspective, you can probably understand my distaste for exaggerated virtues put forward by any sex as being anything more then stupidity, I hope.
I can understand it, but I disagree. I think whenever you see large groups of people who behave in similarly stupid manners, the likelihood of individual stupidity being the reason decreases and the likelihood of there being some structural explanation behind the stupidity increases. If you think the term toxic masculinity is a stupid term, that's fair enough, but from my perspective, it's fairly easy to understand the meaning it attempts to convey, and it's a fairly useful term as well. Like most terms it struggles with people (and I might be guilty of it for all I know) not fully understanding where it is applicable and what it's supposed to encompass, but language is fluid and sometimes we need to converse to really get on the same page about what the term entails.
|
it feels like you take exception to calling it masculinity, toxic or otherwise. i'm getting this impression because you repeatedly favor calling it stupidity instead. and indeed, it is stupid. but not all stupidity is a result of toxic masculinity, and certainly we can't fix all stupidity.
|
On September 07 2017 23:19 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 23:12 bo1b wrote:On September 07 2017 23:09 Doodsmack wrote:On September 07 2017 23:01 bo1b wrote:On September 07 2017 22:55 kollin wrote:
The problem's mainly semantic I think, because some people read 'toxic masculinity' and presume that it means all masculinity is toxic, whereas others read it and think it just means to highlight the parts of masculinity that are toxic. The problem exists that overly stereotypical masculine behaviour clearly is a result of sexual selection over how ever many generations, along with the lesson most people learn in school about people who are competitive and people who are not. Fair enough it results in stupid situations like the "man up" problem. On the other hand what should be obviously the same thing but reflected in women, which to me has the same genesis has been flipped to be a result of men. Sex sells so women starve them selves therefor its a result of toxic masculinity is a flawed argument in a lot of ways and transfers responsibilty from women to an invisible oppressor in much the same way that a male equivalent should realistically be transferred to what ultimately probably comes down to what they think will impress women in the long run. Instead it's the patriarchy. See there you gave some reasoning you had not previously stated. So you say that women do things they think will impress men, and that is the root cause of things like anorexia. Now if women are doing these things to impress men, how do you think the power structure of society plays into things? The fact that we have a male dominated society must have an impact on how often and how pressured women feel to impress men, yes? Also consider how rabidly men consume products and advertisements that use sex to sell. Has male dominated culture been influenced in any way, in your opinion, by the overwhelming biological urge to reproduce? And if so, could it be said that in some small way, women also have a part in this? And if so, could you not see the problem I have with this sort of argument, as to an outsider such as myself they seem to cancel each other out, and society is left with toxic stupidity more then anything. Societal gender roles are absolutely to be blamed on both sexes. Hell, these days you'll probably find more rape apologists in a room of middle aged women than a room full of middle aged men. It's not about casting blame, it's about asking the question "where do our ideas of what it means to be a man/woman come from and how do they impact us?"
I don’t know how many times we are going to have to say “its not about blame”. But we might need to start every post about toxic masculinity with “its not about blaming men.”
|
On September 07 2017 23:18 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 23:12 bo1b wrote:On September 07 2017 23:09 Doodsmack wrote:On September 07 2017 23:01 bo1b wrote:On September 07 2017 22:55 kollin wrote:
The problem's mainly semantic I think, because some people read 'toxic masculinity' and presume that it means all masculinity is toxic, whereas others read it and think it just means to highlight the parts of masculinity that are toxic. The problem exists that overly stereotypical masculine behaviour clearly is a result of sexual selection over how ever many generations, along with the lesson most people learn in school about people who are competitive and people who are not. Fair enough it results in stupid situations like the "man up" problem. On the other hand what should be obviously the same thing but reflected in women, which to me has the same genesis has been flipped to be a result of men. Sex sells so women starve them selves therefor its a result of toxic masculinity is a flawed argument in a lot of ways and transfers responsibilty from women to an invisible oppressor in much the same way that a male equivalent should realistically be transferred to what ultimately probably comes down to what they think will impress women in the long run. Instead it's the patriarchy. See there you gave some reasoning you had not previously stated. So you say that women do things they think will impress men, and that is the root cause of things like anorexia. Now if women are doing these things to impress men, how do you think the power structure of society plays into things? The fact that we have a male dominated society must have an impact on how often and how pressured women feel to impress men, yes? Also consider how rabidly men consume products and advertisements that use sex to sell. Has male dominated culture been influenced in any way, in your opinion, by the overwhelming biological urge to reproduce? And if so, could it be said that in some small way, women also have a part in this? And if so, could you not see the problem I have with this sort of argument, as to an outsider such as myself they seem to cancel each other out, and society is left with toxic stupidity more then anything. Okay we can agree that both women and men have a contribution - the question is to what degree. Here you say women play a part "in some small way". Does that mean men play a part in a much larger way - even if male dominated society, as you say, is a product of biology and evolution? You seem to be admitting that society being male dominated WILL have an effect on women in this regard, but just excusing the fact that society is male dominated. But that does not lead to the effect men and women have "canceling each other out" - quite the opposite.
I actually expect that society will be dominated by one gender or another so long as we are not perfect machines sailing through the universe. I also expect that the next few generations will be female dominated as more and more cards are falling into line in that way. I also don't think you understand what I mean by cancelling out.
|
Toxic masculinity does not just involve trying to impress women too. When a man blows his brains out because he didn't feel like he could talk about the problems afflicting him, hes a victim of toxic masculinity.
|
On September 07 2017 23:22 brian wrote:
it feels like you take exception to calling it masculinity, toxic or otherwise. i'm getting this impression because you repeatedly favor calling it stupidity instead. and indeed, it is stupid. but not all stupidity is a result of toxic masculinity, and certainly we can't fix all stupidity.
I take exception to there being a blatand double standard, the name itself seems to be very poorly defined and includes more things on some days then others, and really doesn't set a particularly good tone going forward. In an outrage culture I hope you can forgive me for trying to balance the playing field a little.
|
United Kingdom10021 Posts
On September 07 2017 23:23 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 23:19 KwarK wrote:On September 07 2017 23:12 bo1b wrote:On September 07 2017 23:09 Doodsmack wrote:On September 07 2017 23:01 bo1b wrote:On September 07 2017 22:55 kollin wrote:
The problem's mainly semantic I think, because some people read 'toxic masculinity' and presume that it means all masculinity is toxic, whereas others read it and think it just means to highlight the parts of masculinity that are toxic. The problem exists that overly stereotypical masculine behaviour clearly is a result of sexual selection over how ever many generations, along with the lesson most people learn in school about people who are competitive and people who are not. Fair enough it results in stupid situations like the "man up" problem. On the other hand what should be obviously the same thing but reflected in women, which to me has the same genesis has been flipped to be a result of men. Sex sells so women starve them selves therefor its a result of toxic masculinity is a flawed argument in a lot of ways and transfers responsibilty from women to an invisible oppressor in much the same way that a male equivalent should realistically be transferred to what ultimately probably comes down to what they think will impress women in the long run. Instead it's the patriarchy. See there you gave some reasoning you had not previously stated. So you say that women do things they think will impress men, and that is the root cause of things like anorexia. Now if women are doing these things to impress men, how do you think the power structure of society plays into things? The fact that we have a male dominated society must have an impact on how often and how pressured women feel to impress men, yes? Also consider how rabidly men consume products and advertisements that use sex to sell. Has male dominated culture been influenced in any way, in your opinion, by the overwhelming biological urge to reproduce? And if so, could it be said that in some small way, women also have a part in this? And if so, could you not see the problem I have with this sort of argument, as to an outsider such as myself they seem to cancel each other out, and society is left with toxic stupidity more then anything. Societal gender roles are absolutely to be blamed on both sexes. Hell, these days you'll probably find more rape apologists in a room of middle aged women than a room full of middle aged men. It's not about casting blame, it's about asking the question "where do our ideas of what it means to be a man/woman come from and how do they impact us?" I don’t know how many times we are going to have to say “its not about blame”. But we might need to start every post about toxic masculinity with “its not about blaming men.”
You might want to send an email to all of the journalists who work for The Guardian, and let them know this 
|
|
|
|
|
|
199
139
71
1793
1778
1014
EPT
