|
On May 30 2011 04:55 Steven.Bonnell.II wrote:
I can't believe that people honestly believe that entire groups of people today in the United States are being sysmatically and racially "kept down" by "the man".
If you're talking about "maturity", it sounds to me like there are a bunch of "self-enlightened" 18-22 year olds here who think that because they've taken Black Studies 101, or read >insert random internet article< here, that they're able to make definitive statements about races of people being kept down in the USA.
You're not going to convince anybody by making ad hominem attacks.
Does racism still exist today in the United States? Definitely.
Is it anywhere NEAR COMPARABLE to the racism that existed even 50 years ago, let alone 100 years ago? ABSOLUTELY NOT. If you think it does, if you think that any person in the United States today can't attend a university using financial aid, or get a job somewhere if they work hard for it, you probably haven't spent much time outside of your dorm or college walls.
This is a strawman argument. Nobody claimed that the racism that exists today is anywhere near comparable to the racism that existed 50 or 100 years ago.
People are calling you out because you claimed that people who live in poverty "choose" to do so. In reality, there are enormous institutional, political, and cultural forces that cause people to become mired in long-term poverty. If you want to find out more about this stuff, I suggest you read some articles and books written by sociologists who have studied this matter.
|
On May 30 2011 06:21 Navillus wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 06:01 rycho wrote:
it really blows my mind that people are still offended by words in fucking 2011. i personally can't stand destiny's attitude and i would never watch his stream, but i respect him for having the correct point of view on this. why would anyone care what words anyone else uses? thats just really fucking stupid. on top of that, there are plenty of words/phrases that offend people that no one has even brought up, like:
- any cuss word
- retard: this is used constantly, i know my mother gets offended at this one
- down syndrome
- moron: this is a psychological term used in the eugenics movement
- "kill yourself": i hear this a lot
there are plenty more. personally i'm not going to sit around worrying about whether or not what i say is going to offend some idiot, and i don't think anyone else should either.
i'd also like to point out that there are much much more heinous acts than rape, for example:
murder - yet no one gives a shit if i say "i murdered him!" after i win a ladder game
genocide - this is actually a term in HoN, when an entire team dies it says "genocide" in big red letters across the screen
i fell bad for anyone who has been raped, of course. this doesn't mean i'm going to tiptoe around with what i say in the hopes that i don't offend anyone. personally i think anyone taking deep emotional offense to what some guy says on a sc2 stream is either a complete fucking dumbass or has emotional issues that they need to deal with and it isn't my problem. Words have power, Hitler took power with words, and when you stop caring about offending one group of people that's one step closer to not caring about that group at all.
they only have the power we assign to them. i dare you to come up with a word or insult that would offend me, because there isn't one; i'm not a fucking idiot sitting around praying someone doesn't utter a certain combination of syllables and then run into a corner and cry if they do like some of the posters in this thread apparently do.
ideas matter, words don't.
|
So what? Im Italian. I dont care if someone calls me a Wop. I dont care if someone calls me a Cracker. Im short. I dont care if someone calls me a Midget. Words only offend you if YOU let them. Just ignore the other person, since you sure as hell cant change them.
If you get offended by a word, it just means you arent mentally strong enough to deal with a emotional jab.
|
On May 30 2011 06:19 Navillus wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 05:54 nvs. wrote:You can argue that Incontrol's offends are "less offensive" (which I agree to btw), still it is highly hypocritical behaviour of him. Thats my point.
BTW: To be clear, I totally think that Incontrol was 100% right on today's show. But I just have the feeling that he just did that for himself to get some PR points in the community. I get that feeling to, given his long track record of pseudo-racism and "I don't give a fuck" attitude. I mean... he called in to a pizza place and used a fake indian accent when a black lady was on the other side of the phone. That's not immature racism?? Ii disagree, I mean iNcontrol was clearly being immature when he did that but I think that he also controls himself and knows where to draw the line and I think that he actually gets offended when someone else crosses the line the way destiny did, I mean related to his "I don't give a fuck" attitude I don't think that he would do it just for PR points I think he actually was angry about it.
I don't know. I think based on the discussion that went on today, I'd say Incontrol would make a very good politician - 'I might have sinned in the same way, but pointing that out is a low tactic, so we're going to disregard everything I've done. My whole track record is just a mistake, and I admit that now, so everything displayed in this moment and in the future is all that's valid. Now that that's out of the way, let's take you to task on why you're wrong as I am now untouchable in character.'
Eerily reminds me of all the governors that get caught cheating in various ways or get caught in the middle of corruption. ;o And, it's not 'agreeing to disagree' in a discussion with incontrol, he 'implores' you to also take the sudden high road he's adapted to.
Makes me sadface.
|
Ever heard of the idea that you sometimes have to exaggerate to make a point? Words have meaning, more meaning to some people. Believing words shouldn't have any affect on people is just being naive.
|
On May 30 2011 06:23 wzzit wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 04:55 Steven.Bonnell.II wrote:
I can't believe that people honestly believe that entire groups of people today in the United States are being sysmatically and racially "kept down" by "the man".
If you're talking about "maturity", it sounds to me like there are a bunch of "self-enlightened" 18-22 year olds here who think that because they've taken Black Studies 101, or read >insert random internet article< here, that they're able to make definitive statements about races of people being kept down in the USA.
You're not going to convince anybody by making ad hominem attacks. Show nested quote +
Does racism still exist today in the United States? Definitely.
Is it anywhere NEAR COMPARABLE to the racism that existed even 50 years ago, let alone 100 years ago? ABSOLUTELY NOT. If you think it does, if you think that any person in the United States today can't attend a university using financial aid, or get a job somewhere if they work hard for it, you probably haven't spent much time outside of your dorm or college walls.
This is a strawman argument. Nobody claimed that the racism that exists today is anywhere near comparable to the racism that existed 50 or 100 years ago. People are calling you out because you claimed that people who live in poverty "choose" to do so. In reality, there are enormous institutional, political, and cultural forces that cause people to become mired in long-term poverty.
Then its on them. It is far from impossible for someone who comes from a poor inner city neighborhood to get a college education. Is it harder? Sure. But as soon as you add the cultural tag, you absolve any personal responsibility.
Life is about choices. You either chose to learn in school, or you chose not to. You choose to sell crack, or do it, or you dont. That isnt a social question. Its a personal one.
|
On May 30 2011 04:55 Steven.Bonnell.II wrote:
I can't believe that people honestly believe that entire groups of people today in the United States are being sysmatically and racially "kept down" by "the man".
this is hilariously ignorant jesus
|
On May 30 2011 06:02 wzzit wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 04:56 cocaineduck wrote:On May 30 2011 03:53 wzzit wrote:On May 30 2011 03:46 cocaineduck wrote:On May 30 2011 03:43 wzzit wrote:On May 30 2011 03:32 Steven.Bonnell.II wrote:
You know who else doesn't understand what it means to be enslaved, beaten, segrated, or oppressed throughout American history? ANY BLACK PERSON UNDER 50 YEARS OF AGE.
This is really ignorant. As a white person, you have no idea how historical memory works. You think that Jews today don't understand the devastation of the Holocaust? Or that Koreans don't understand the humiliation that came with Japanese colonization? Historical memory gets transmitted from generation to generation. It's a critical part of cultural identity. Why does a jewish person understand the history books better than me? Memory is NOT genetic in any way. They identify with a group that this happened to. They dont understand the happening itself any better or any worse than anyone else. Because the only interaction you have with the Holocaust is whatever you read in your history books. Jews continue to live out the ramifications of the Holocaust in their daily interactions with their family and culture, whether it be stories from Holocaust survivors or cultural practices centered around the event. They might not understand the degradation that Holocaust victims themselves actually went through, but they certainly understand it on a deeper level than non-Jews. So the difference is basicly that they read about it more than me then? Is that what you mean? No, they have done a lot more than simply "read about it." Since I'm Korean, let me use Korean culture as an example. All Koreans grow up understanding the history of Japanese colonization not simply because they've read about it in their history classes, but because they've experienced this history through a variety of other sources. For instance, Koreans pay tribute to the women who were enslaved by the Japanese during WWII through their cultural practices (e.g., books, music, movies, museums, memorial events, etc.). Koreans learn about this history and vicariously experience this history through their daily interactions with their parents, grandparents, and other relatives who have personally experienced the degrading conditions imposed on them by the Japanese. As a result, Koreans understand the conditions of Japanese oppression on a much deeper level than what outsiders read about in their history books. This is what I mean by "historical memory." When you grow up interacting with the ramifications of a historical event in your daily practices, this memory doesn't simply become a historical footnote, as it is for outsiders; it forms an integral part of your cultural identity and cultural memory. Outsiders cannot understand the significance of this historical memory to our daily lives because they have no experience with it outside of their history books.
You are right, i don't understand. To me this sounds like you are raised a certain way in korea. It has absolutely nothing to do with a memory. Because YOU didnt experience this first hand so you have no real memory of it.
You are talking about culture and my gripe with this is that it's sort of a victim complex. You could all stop raising people in this way and not have these feelings but you choose not to. You see what im saying?
Not trying to be an asshole or anything, but its hard to talk about these things without stepping on toes.
My point is that its all about the grey-scale. Destiny said that a colored person today really has no idea about the implication of the word back then. This is true. However it is also true that he might have more of an idea than Destiny has.
The question is when the explosiveness of the word will fade out, and the only way that will happen is if people actually "just move on", no matter how bad that sounds.
An example was posted earlier via a penn points video about the word "retard" wich is now a horrible word. Even saw some kennedy dude on bill maher some time ago who talked about how bad it was to call something dumb "retarded".
Idiot however has become an accepted word with no such explosive connotations. But really:
"In 19th and early 20th century medicine and psychology, an "idiot" was a person with a very severe mental retardation. In the early 1900s, Dr. Henry H. Goddard proposed a classification system for mental retardation based on the Binet-Simon concept of mental age. Individuals with the lowest mental age level (less than three years) were identified as idiots; imbeciles had a mental age of three to 7 years, and morons had a mental age of seven to ten years.[7] IQ, or intelligence quotient, is determined by dividing a person's mental age, as determined by standardized tests, by their actual age. The term "idiot" was used to refer to people having an IQ below 30.[8][9]"
- wikipedia
|
On May 30 2011 06:27 Two_DoWn wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 06:23 wzzit wrote:On May 30 2011 04:55 Steven.Bonnell.II wrote:
I can't believe that people honestly believe that entire groups of people today in the United States are being sysmatically and racially "kept down" by "the man".
If you're talking about "maturity", it sounds to me like there are a bunch of "self-enlightened" 18-22 year olds here who think that because they've taken Black Studies 101, or read >insert random internet article< here, that they're able to make definitive statements about races of people being kept down in the USA.
You're not going to convince anybody by making ad hominem attacks.
Does racism still exist today in the United States? Definitely.
Is it anywhere NEAR COMPARABLE to the racism that existed even 50 years ago, let alone 100 years ago? ABSOLUTELY NOT. If you think it does, if you think that any person in the United States today can't attend a university using financial aid, or get a job somewhere if they work hard for it, you probably haven't spent much time outside of your dorm or college walls.
This is a strawman argument. Nobody claimed that the racism that exists today is anywhere near comparable to the racism that existed 50 or 100 years ago. People are calling you out because you claimed that people who live in poverty "choose" to do so. In reality, there are enormous institutional, political, and cultural forces that cause people to become mired in long-term poverty. Then its on them. It is far from impossible for someone who comes from a poor inner city neighborhood to get a college education. Is it harder? Sure. But as soon as you add the cultural tag, you absolve any personal responsibility. Life is about choices. You either chose to learn in school, or you chose not to. You choose to sell crack, or do it, or you dont. That isnt a social question. Its a personal one.
When he means to read up on the sociological aspect, he really means that.
What you said is clearly uneducated on the matter. It is, in fact, due to social and political forces that a lot of people are "STUCK" in their predicament and thus cannot get out.
If you think poverty doesn't have a large hindrance on the majority of the uneducated, you're deeply mistaken. They go hand in hand. The very idea that you believe people are choosing to sell crack without any influencing major factors that prohibit them from choosing more widely and socially acceptable goals is really sad D:
P.S: far from impossible? It's actually far from possible.
|
I'm a believer in taking things in the spirit in which it was conveyed.
The term "nigger" is very ambiguous. It doesn't neccessarily have to be ladden with racism, and if it isn't it should be interpreted as it. It very much depends on context.
The term "rape" is a lot less ambiguous. It refers to a specific act and is not offensive in of itself to people who've been subject to rape but reminds them of the traumatic incident and in that way it might be a very insensitive thing to say and should be used carefully.
As far as sensorship goes, I think that deliberately "stepping carefully" when dealing with minorities is a lot more disrespectful than jokingly disarming racist terms, as the act of avoiding those terms is the same as validating and lending weight to them.
All in all I think Destiny and Wheat had a lot of really solid arguments.
Incontrols arguments can be summed up as: "Ok, I see what you did there", "ololol you can't be serious", and "I can't believe I'm hearing this!". I could not decide whether he was trolling or not.
|
On May 30 2011 06:30 cocaineduck wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 06:02 wzzit wrote:On May 30 2011 04:56 cocaineduck wrote:On May 30 2011 03:53 wzzit wrote:On May 30 2011 03:46 cocaineduck wrote:On May 30 2011 03:43 wzzit wrote:On May 30 2011 03:32 Steven.Bonnell.II wrote:
You know who else doesn't understand what it means to be enslaved, beaten, segrated, or oppressed throughout American history? ANY BLACK PERSON UNDER 50 YEARS OF AGE.
This is really ignorant. As a white person, you have no idea how historical memory works. You think that Jews today don't understand the devastation of the Holocaust? Or that Koreans don't understand the humiliation that came with Japanese colonization? Historical memory gets transmitted from generation to generation. It's a critical part of cultural identity. Why does a jewish person understand the history books better than me? Memory is NOT genetic in any way. They identify with a group that this happened to. They dont understand the happening itself any better or any worse than anyone else. Because the only interaction you have with the Holocaust is whatever you read in your history books. Jews continue to live out the ramifications of the Holocaust in their daily interactions with their family and culture, whether it be stories from Holocaust survivors or cultural practices centered around the event. They might not understand the degradation that Holocaust victims themselves actually went through, but they certainly understand it on a deeper level than non-Jews. So the difference is basicly that they read about it more than me then? Is that what you mean? No, they have done a lot more than simply "read about it." Since I'm Korean, let me use Korean culture as an example. All Koreans grow up understanding the history of Japanese colonization not simply because they've read about it in their history classes, but because they've experienced this history through a variety of other sources. For instance, Koreans pay tribute to the women who were enslaved by the Japanese during WWII through their cultural practices (e.g., books, music, movies, museums, memorial events, etc.). Koreans learn about this history and vicariously experience this history through their daily interactions with their parents, grandparents, and other relatives who have personally experienced the degrading conditions imposed on them by the Japanese. As a result, Koreans understand the conditions of Japanese oppression on a much deeper level than what outsiders read about in their history books. This is what I mean by "historical memory." When you grow up interacting with the ramifications of a historical event in your daily practices, this memory doesn't simply become a historical footnote, as it is for outsiders; it forms an integral part of your cultural identity and cultural memory. Outsiders cannot understand the significance of this historical memory to our daily lives because they have no experience with it outside of their history books. You are right, i don't understand. To me this sounds like you are raised a certain way in korea. It has absolutely nothing to do with a memory. Because YOU didnt experience this first hand so you have no real memory of it. You are talking about culture and my gripe with this is that it's sort of a victim complex. You could all stop raising people in this way and not have these feelings but you choose not to. You see what im saying? Not trying to be an asshole or anything, but its hard to talk about these things without stepping on toes.
You might not be trying to be an asshole, but you do a pretty good job of it. "Historical memory" doesn't boil down to a simplistic victim complex. It also includes other elements of cultural identity, such as cultural and national pride. Are you going to tell me that people who are proud of the deeds of their forefathers have no basis for doing so just because they weren't around when it happened? Should we mock people who are proud of their grandfathers' service in WWII because they weren't fighting on the beaches of Omaha when it happened?
My point is that its all about the grey-scale. Destiny said that a colored person today really has no idea about the implication of the word back then. This is true. However it is also true that he might have more of an idea than Destiny has.
This point is actually in complete agreement with what I wrote earlier. Actually, it nicely summarizes my main point.
|
Calgary25988 Posts
There's nothing Starcraft-specific to this discussion. It's now a discussion about appropriate language, which is way beyond the scope of this show or the expertise of these hosts.
|
On May 30 2011 06:36 wzzit wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 06:30 cocaineduck wrote:On May 30 2011 06:02 wzzit wrote:On May 30 2011 04:56 cocaineduck wrote:On May 30 2011 03:53 wzzit wrote:On May 30 2011 03:46 cocaineduck wrote:On May 30 2011 03:43 wzzit wrote:On May 30 2011 03:32 Steven.Bonnell.II wrote:
You know who else doesn't understand what it means to be enslaved, beaten, segrated, or oppressed throughout American history? ANY BLACK PERSON UNDER 50 YEARS OF AGE.
This is really ignorant. As a white person, you have no idea how historical memory works. You think that Jews today don't understand the devastation of the Holocaust? Or that Koreans don't understand the humiliation that came with Japanese colonization? Historical memory gets transmitted from generation to generation. It's a critical part of cultural identity. Why does a jewish person understand the history books better than me? Memory is NOT genetic in any way. They identify with a group that this happened to. They dont understand the happening itself any better or any worse than anyone else. Because the only interaction you have with the Holocaust is whatever you read in your history books. Jews continue to live out the ramifications of the Holocaust in their daily interactions with their family and culture, whether it be stories from Holocaust survivors or cultural practices centered around the event. They might not understand the degradation that Holocaust victims themselves actually went through, but they certainly understand it on a deeper level than non-Jews. So the difference is basicly that they read about it more than me then? Is that what you mean? No, they have done a lot more than simply "read about it." Since I'm Korean, let me use Korean culture as an example. All Koreans grow up understanding the history of Japanese colonization not simply because they've read about it in their history classes, but because they've experienced this history through a variety of other sources. For instance, Koreans pay tribute to the women who were enslaved by the Japanese during WWII through their cultural practices (e.g., books, music, movies, museums, memorial events, etc.). Koreans learn about this history and vicariously experience this history through their daily interactions with their parents, grandparents, and other relatives who have personally experienced the degrading conditions imposed on them by the Japanese. As a result, Koreans understand the conditions of Japanese oppression on a much deeper level than what outsiders read about in their history books. This is what I mean by "historical memory." When you grow up interacting with the ramifications of a historical event in your daily practices, this memory doesn't simply become a historical footnote, as it is for outsiders; it forms an integral part of your cultural identity and cultural memory. Outsiders cannot understand the significance of this historical memory to our daily lives because they have no experience with it outside of their history books. You are right, i don't understand. To me this sounds like you are raised a certain way in korea. It has absolutely nothing to do with a memory. Because YOU didnt experience this first hand so you have no real memory of it. You are talking about culture and my gripe with this is that it's sort of a victim complex. You could all stop raising people in this way and not have these feelings but you choose not to. You see what im saying? Not trying to be an asshole or anything, but its hard to talk about these things without stepping on toes. You might not be trying to be an asshole, but you do a pretty good job of it. "Historical memory" doesn't boil down to a simplistic victim complex. It also includes other elements of cultural identity, such as cultural and national pride. Are you going to tell me that people who are proud of the deeds of their forefathers have no basis for doing so just because they weren't around when it happened? Should we mock people who are proud of their grandfathers' service in WWII because they weren't fighting on the beaches of Omaha when it happened? Show nested quote +
My point is that its all about the grey-scale. Destiny said that a colored person today really has no idea about the implication of the word back then. This is true. However it is also true that he might have more of an idea than Destiny has.
This point is actually in complete agreement with what I wrote earlier. Actually, it nicely summarizes my main point.
:S
I am sorry if i am offending you in some way, but that is to be expected when debating this with someone who has already made it clear that they are offended you know.
I would tell you that they have no basis in reality for that yes. Since they dont. That doesnt mean they should be mocked for it or that its wrong. But the simple fact is that they dont have any basis for it. Its the same thing with people who say "we" when "their" team wins in some sport and then take pride in that. They had nothing to do with it other than being born closer to them than the opposing teams players.
If they know someone on the team, sure i get that they are proud of THEM. Just as i could get being proud of your grandfather for his service on D-day or whatever.
However my point is that it gets silly when its a "historical" pride. Like if i where to be proud about what the swedish vikings did. I think its cool and interesting sure, but im not proud to share a 0.00001% (Actual statistical fact mind you) more similar DNA with them than i do with a somali.
I guess we come to the same conclusion but arrive there by very different paths then.
|
On May 30 2011 06:06 Razvy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 05:17 Ragoo wrote:
After watching today's episode of WoC I have to say that I might check out Destiny's stream in the future, even tho I normally don't watch any streaming. But he seems like a cool person who has the same opinion on the whole "bad language" issue that I have.
Incontrol on the other hand... I don't see what's bad about saying "rape" in the gaming context. It's just a gamer term for utterly defeating someone, just like you would say "own/pwn" or any form of act of physical violence like "annihilate/destroy/kill/...". These words don't have their original meaning in the gaming context.
When I say "MC totally raped Goody today" and you literally think about MC fucking Goody in the ass against his will, you are just fucked up, cause really, you should just think about a Protoss army rolling over tanks and such. You say that like you don't know anyone close to you who's been raped. I hope it stays that way, I really, really do. People can argue context all they want. Context changes for people based on their own experiences. Some people can throw it around casually because it doesn't mean anything to them but winning in a video game. Whenever I hear 'rape' I can't think of anything else but my best friend and what she went through. I will NEVER use 'rape' casually again. I understand other people will. I can't change that, but I certainly can't support it either.
I actually have a close friend who got raped.
Still, why would I ever think about that when I hear things such as "Strelok totally raped Kas today!" or "this strategy completely rapes hatchery first builds". Clearly the caster doesn't talk about the sexual rape, so why would I think about it.
I mean I don't really think that it's the casters fault that you think about such things that he didn't talk about.
|
This seems to be really going off the topic of the show....
To me it seems as easy as if you get offended by these words don't watch the streams that you will hear them in?
|
People have such a ridiculously warped view of what racism constitutes.
If you're going to make an argument about the usage of a word, you're just looking for attention, the same way those kids make those police demonstrations in the General forum. And if someone actually claims offense over the usage of a word, they're choosing to do so; another cry for attention.
Not only that, but the majority of people taking that stance are hypocrites and are guilty of exactly what they're arguing against.
|
On May 30 2011 02:38 SmoKim wrote:
and just like that, WoC thread slowy transformed to SotG thread ^_^
you see you see!?!?!?! - Sen
|
On May 30 2011 06:36 NeonGenesis wrote:
I'm a believer in taking things in the spirit in which it was conveyed.
The term "nigger" is very ambiguous. It doesn't neccessarily have to be ladden with racism, and if it isn't it should be interpreted as it. It very much depends on context.
The term "rape" is a lot less ambiguous. It refers to a specific act and is not offensive in of itself to people who've been subject to rape but reminds them of the traumatic incident and in that way it might be a very insensitive thing to say and should be used carefully.
As far as sensorship goes, I think that deliberately "stepping carefully" when dealing with minorities is a lot more disrespectful than jokingly disarming racist terms, as the act of avoiding those terms is the same as validating and lending weight to them.
All in all I think Destiny and Wheat had a lot of really solid arguments.
Incontrols arguments can be summed up as: "Ok, I see what you did there", "ololol you can't be serious", and "I can't believe I'm hearing this!". I could not decide whether he was trolling or not.
Just playing the condescending white knight of the SC2 community, telling people what they can do or say in their own stream while being the self-elected voice of black people and rape victims in America (next episode he'll school the upcoming guest on what it is to be a dwarf while impersonating a vietnamese pig on the phone with Dominique Strauss Kahn).
|
|
|
In my opinion most parents that don't want to expose their children to swear words couldn't care less about the effect of the language on their children per se. I think they are just worried that the child will repeat those words in public and people will think they are bad parents.
Now I'm European so I would need the opinion of an American to confirm this, but I get the feeling that American parents wouldn't be so paranoid if your Child Protective Services agency wouldn't exist or if they didn't have that much power. I know they are not gonna take a child into custody just because he repeats swear words, but still, I think the looming menace of the agency contributes to the paranoia. All countries have the same kind of agency but only in the US they can take away a child with so little justification (which is weird because the US has the strongest right-protecting constitution.)
Because I think what I explained above is a factor (I could be wrong), I believe it's a little unfair that the rest of the world has to pay for the social and political problems of the US. So yeah, I wouldn't want Jinro or Destiny to stop saying fuck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
