Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

October 23 2017

autistic-culture-is:

inexplicable bruises is autistic culture

1736 a3f6
1744 225a

autistic-culture-is:

autistic culture is when a cat falls asleep on your lap and you’re like. heck yeah

1759 a1a4 500

dreameronthewind:

hey look who’s trending

Doctors Are Now Saying That Menstrual Cramps Can Be as Painful as Having a Heart Attack

dinosaurrainbowstarfish:

feministingforchange:

nativepeopleproblems:

lipsredasroses:

sourcedumal:

foryoursexualinformation:

And in other news, water is wet

We told y'all asses.

Well thank heavens us ladies aren’t hysterical anymore!

Like they’re literally equivalent to birth contractions, how did it take them this long?

This just makes me angry. There is no fucking way it should have taken this long. No. Fucking. Way. But hey, the patriarchy isn’t real, amirite?

(not just women-some men and nb people too)

^^^^^!!! (so sorry, this is an older post and i didn’t realize i hadn’t addressed that yet. as a nonbinary, afab, intersex person that menstruates, ty for this important addition!!)

Doctors Are Now Saying That Menstrual Cramps Can Be as Painful as Having a Heart Attack

feministingforchange:

nativepeopleproblems:

lipsredasroses:

sourcedumal:

foryoursexualinformation:

And in other news, water is wet

We told y'all asses.

Well thank heavens us ladies aren’t hysterical anymore!

Like they’re literally equivalent to birth contractions, how did it take them this long?

This just makes me angry. There is no fucking way it should have taken this long. No. Fucking. Way. But hey, the patriarchy isn’t real, amirite?

Just to be 10000% clear:

feministingforchange:

Only the person PMSing is allowed to say it’s PMS. Anyone else’s opinion is neither welcome nor tolerated. 

feministingforchange:

I refuse to let my period be the “dirty little secret” that society seems to demand of me. While it’s no picnic, it’s a normal and necessary part of the human life cycle and without it, we’re toast folks!!! No one’s asking you to love it (who does?!), just stop treating people who menstruate like they are gross, bad, and dirty — pls & ty!!!

feministingforchange:

ace-discourse-up-my-sleeve:

feministingforchange:

goodness-gracious-great-balls-of:

feministingforchange:

goodness-gracious-great-balls-of:

feministingforchange:

goodness-gracious-great-balls-of:

feministingforchange:

whenever someone writes the words “inherently LGBT”, somewhere, a rainbow dies

I’m sorry but I disagree. I’m genderqueer and polysexual, well into the lgbtq fam. What is considered lgbtq is often an agreed upon social construct yes, many of the behaviors we expect from lgbtq people are rooted in stereotypes. But some people are inherently lgbtq because that’s how they were born, personally I figured it out later, but some people just know. There are also groups that are inherently lgbtq because they were built by and for the community. I can see how that phrase opens the door for The Straights to invalidate us, but it also gives us the opportunity to say “this is OURS you are not gonna come into our club and take it away or make it straight cause it’s inherently FOR lgbtq people”. Just my two cents. Hope it was coherent enough 😅

I think I see what you’re saying but I still stand by my OP. I’m cis panromantic and demisexual (just so ppl know) and the reality is that the spectra of genders and orientations existed long before the LGBT+ ever came to be (and would still technically exist without it). IOW, our Identities’ existence DO NOT rely on the existence of the LGBT+. Our safety and a ton of other things related to our IDs certainly can rely on it (which is why it was CREATED in the first place), but the existence of our IDs is not dependant on the LGBT+. Does that make sense?

How we talk about our IDs and the words we use to label them may have changed over time, but there’s no reason to believe these things haven’t always been here. The LGBT+ is literally only necessary because society is bigoted as hell and takes it out a lot on people specifically for their gender, sexual, &/or romantic orientations. So the LGBT+ is about addressing our marginalization and abuse against that bigotry and if it didn’t exist, we wouldn’t even need the LGBT+. Wouldn’t that be kinda awesome???

Moreover, what is and is not included in the LGBT+ acronym is not even REMOTELY static. It changes depending on time, place, people, etc. For example, TERFs/nbphobes will never include the T or the N, and bi/panphobes will never include the B or the P (& no exclusionist tends to include the + bc that leaves things open and gorsh, u sure wouldn’t want that! /s). So we cannot even agree on what to include at one single point in time so how on EARTH could there ever be anything “inherent” about it?!

This is literally all about hatekeeping who can and cannot be included and I want you all to watch closely because I don’t think I’ve seen a single person saying “inherently LGBT” that ever included the +. At MOST you’ll see them add the “PN”. That’s significant.

tl;dr, saying there is such a thing as “inherently LGBT” is a-historic and can be a gatekeeping tactic. It’s also essentializing and naturalizing the very NEED for an LGBT+ and, as a result, confirms for the Straights that we are in fact the “abnormal” ones and so we really DO deserve the abuse they inflict upon us (as they’ve always been trained to believe). Especially when they see us picking-on, bullying, excluding, and/or abusing each other, like MY. GOD. STOP.

#BoostAceVoices

Oh oh ooooh I see what you’re saying. Yeah lgbtq is kind of a club. We existed as individuals and realized we shared a likeness and formed a group based on that shared trait. Your identity and expression would be valid if the lgbtq group dissipated because well it’s just a name and associative clique.

I think some people rightly take offense to the association of the word “club” with the LGBT+/q***r communities, but your point is otherwise well made & taken. 

I can see that. It implies the age old stereotype of sexuality and gender are choices and can be unchosen. Shoulda been better with my word choice

No worries friend, it’s a learning opportunity and that’s a good thing :)

This is exactly the kind of stuff I was talking about, the kind of stuff we need more of. Whether or not you agree with either of them (I agree with them, but that’s beside the point), you have to have noticed that they listened to each other, took each other’s points, considered them for what they were, and responded as such, and look at how quickly they came to an agreement. It may take a while, but this is what the ace discourse tag needs to look like. 

Ty @ace-discourse-up-my-sleeve, you’re so kind!!

@goodness-gracious-great-balls-of, did you see this???

October 22 2017

feministingforchange:

sometimes i worry that… ppl so strongly associate me with “w e i r d” that even the fairly ordinary things that I do are still read as “B A D” when done by me

feministingforchange:

I will never understand how people could think murder is an appropriate response to murder. 

***ATTENTION ALL ASPEC DISCOURSERS***

feministingforchange:

This is getting way out of hand. 

Please ftlog STOP attacking each other over this. YES there is a LOT of disagreement here, it’s unfortunate but it’s a fact. Many of these disagreements have very real material impacts on people, no doubt there and i would never deny that. But attacking each other online isn’t likely to change anyone’s opinions. And not to be a buzzkill but it probably won’t help you come to terms with the harm you’ve already experienced so far in life. (I’m really sorry for that, btw)  

I don’t wanna be “that person”, and I guess I’m not gonna beg that we all just get along or whatever bs because that’s probably neither realistic nor possible. But otoh, don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask that everyone (minors AND adults included - bc for some reason I also have to remind the latter group) to try and treat each other with a little more respect, courtesy, patience, empathy, and understanding. 

If I wasn’t in so much terrible pain and brain fog I’d be clearer and address particular people I see causing unnecessary harm and hurting people I care about (on “both sides” of this supposed discourse, bc this just in: exclusionist =/= aphobe). But i am specifically asking people to stop with the suicide-baiting, trigger-baiting, general violence, dogpiling, and propagating general bigotry. 

IF we truly all do mean to make the world a safer place through this “”””ace discourse””””” as both sides claim to be striving for - we are not making THIS cyberspace any safer by promoting the use of violence and self-harm. And that has a ripple effect into the offline world (aka “the real world”) making other spaces more unsafe than they already are. 

Listen, I’m all for using violence if we must (including in activism, btw), but again - and pls correct me if i’m wrong - there appears to be no need to escalate a cyber-discourse into violence when you could simply make a call out for your followers & friends (or ask ME to do it, bc you know I do and will if I think it’s appropriate), report if necessary, and then block.

I understand that’s not always possible, I truly do get that. I also know that Tumblr @staff are less than responsive with the deleting and blocking. But it’s bullshit that so many of you are always so goddamn quick and willing to tell someone to go die or kill themselves, often in VERY violent ways. You cannot in all honesty tell me that this isn’t getting way too carried away and violent. And tbqh, I’m personally getting really goddamn sick of watching it all unfold.

So as a criminologist, a fellow socially critical tumblr blogger, and not to mention someone with constant, diffuse, chronic pain: 

PLS.

FTLOG. 

STOP.

On Capital Punishment

feministingforchange:

duppymon:

feministingforchange:

imakesomestuff:

feministingforchange:

tie-dyelife​ replied to your post I will never understand how people could think murder is an…”

I envy your way of thinking. I just can’t get past the injustice. Not that it would make it right by any means, but an eye for an eye getting what you give makes more sense to me.Hope all is well dear.

Hi friend! Thanks for your input, and I hope that all is well with you too! 

I know that it seems logical and appropriate to respond to a murder in kind, but it doesn’t actually address any underlying problems and really just makes things worse for everyone involved. For instance, when a country uses murder as a response to murder, that country is condoning murder. It is participating in murder, is enabling murder, is ENCOURAGING murder as an appropriate response to things we don’t like. Is that something you actually want to be a part of? If murder makes you so angry, why would you participate in it? If it is so very wrong, WHY DO IT?!?! Moreover, it’s NOT a deterrent (x) and the system is incredibly flawed and biased so we cannot rely on it NOT to murder people for murder who are INNOCENT! (x)

Not only is capital punishment a theoretical/social nightmare, it is also a financial nightmare. It is SO MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE than no death penalty! Consider Kansas as an example:

Defending a death penalty case costs about four times as much as defending a case where the death penalty is not sought, according to a new study by the Kansas Judicial Council. Examining 34 potential death-penalty cases from 2004-2011, the study found that defense costs for death penalty trials averaged $395,762 per case, compared to $98,963 per case when the death penalty was not sought. Costs incurred by the trial court showed a similar disparity: $72,530 for cases with the death penalty; $21,554 for those without. Even in cases that ended in a guilty plea and did not go to trial, cases where the death penalty was sought incurred about twice the costs for both defense ($130,595 v. $64,711) and courts ($16,263 v. $7,384), compared to cases where death was not sought. The time spent on death cases was also much higher. Jury trials averaged 40.13 days in cases where the death penalty was being sought, but only 16.79 days when it was not an option. Justices of the Kansas Supreme Court assigned to write opinions estimated they spent 20 times more hours on death penalty appeals than on non-death appeals. The Department of Corrections said housing prisoners on death row cost more than twice as much per year ($49,380) as for prisoners in the general population ($24,690). (x)

So capital punishment is really just a horrible horrible thing that should have no place in a modern world. An eye for an eye is no way to approach crime control.

👏 👏 👏 

the death penalty doesn’t deter shit. you think trappers and gangbangers aren’t already living under threat of death daily? it ain’t stopping them. and if you know you’ll be executed if you’re convicted, it’s a lot of incentive to shoot it out with the cops.

Study: 88% of criminologists do not believe the death penalty is an effective deterrent

A recent study by Professor Michael Radelet and Traci Lacock of the University of Colorado found that 88% of the nation’s leading criminologists do not believe the death penalty is an effective deterrent to crime. The study, Do Executions Lower Homicide Rates? The Views of Leading Criminologists, published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, concluded, “There is overwhelming consensus among America’s top criminologists that the empirical research conducted on the deterrence question fails to support the threat or use of the death penalty.” A previous study in 1996 had come to similar conclusions.

The criminologists surveyed included - 1) Fellows in the American Society of Criminology (ASC), (2) Winners of  the ASC’s Sutherland Award, the highest award given by that organization for contributions to criminological theory, or (3) Presidents of the ASC between 1997 and the present. Those presidents before 1997 had been included in the prior survey. Respondents were asked to base their answers on existing empirical research, not their views on capital punishment.

Nearly 78% of those surveyed said that having the death penalty in a state does not lower the murder rate. In addition, 91% of respondents said politicians support the death penalty in order to appear tough on crime – and 75% said that it distracts legislatures on the state and national level from focusing on real solutions to crime problems. Over all, 94% agreed that there was little empirical evidence to support the deterrent effect of the death penalty. And 90% said the death penalty had little effect overall on the committing of murder. Additionally, 91.6% said that increasing the frequency of executions would not add a deterrent effect, and 87.6% said that speeding up executions wouldn’t work either.


So as you can all see, we criminologists largely agree that empirically; the death penalty (and also “tough on crime/zero tolerance” shit”) is a T E R R I B L E excuse for “crime control” that’s causing more social harm than good. 

Pls help us criminologists bypass self-serving politicians by spreading this very important - and to a large degree PUBLICLY FUNDED - information far and wide!!!

Pls SIGNAL BOOST!! 

feministingforchange:

thatonechick339:

nervouslikeme:

I like how men tell us that periods are somehow simultaneously “not that bad” and also bad enough that we shouldn’t be allowed to hold positions of power.

This is a very important and powerful text post.

too true*, but also - consider this: cis men are uniquely characterized as “uncontrollable victims of their own biology” when it comes to sex & rape (the onus is somehow on women for control here), meanwhile men are also simultaneously characterized as the only gender capable of “controlling the masses”. 

*except, i assume OP is re cis men & women? 

feministingforchange:

grizzlekc:

feministingforchange:

tuesdaytothursday:

feministingforchange:

medicationmambo:

Love when there are “how to tell if someone is lying/manipulating you” posts on my dash and 90% of them are things I do as an autistic person

Stuff like not making eye contact, wringing my hands, having a closed-off posture, having to control the tone of my voice, preferring to talk over the Internet… The whole damn list is just a huge presumption that if you don’t act “normal” then you’re lying

Like… Buddy. My whole childhood I got in trouble for things I didn’t do because I couldn’t make eye contact and I laughed at inappropriate times because that’s how my body decided to deal with fear. It wasn’t the greatest tbh

Although can we have a thing where a ~great detective~ accuses someone of being a murderer based on body language during an interrogation and then they’re like “I’m autistic, you fuck. This is just what I do! …Nice work being ableist and letting the real killer get away btw”

^^^This is so important. And as a criminologist, let me also add that body language is actually a TERRIBLE indicator of truth telling & deception. 

Unfortunately, all of the research shows that using nonverbal behavior when trying to detect deception is not very useful.

If you doubt that claim, please see what all of the leading experts on the topic have to say (see Science News).

And using technology to detect deception isn’t as useful as people think it is (see ScienceDaily Report).

Why is it so difficult to detect deception by watching a person’s nonverbal behavior?

A detailed explanation is provided below or you can skip ahead to the next page and read why it is even more difficult to detect deception by a loved one (next page, catching lovers lying).

To begin with, there is some truth to the idea that people display or “leak” their genuine feelings when lying. But, these genuine displays of emotion—called “micro expressions"—last only a fraction of a second. As such, these expressions are too brief to be of much practical use (see facial expression test).

Furthermore, the nonverbal cues identified represent “on average” what might happen when studying many individuals rather than identifying what any specific individual is likely to do.

For instance, imagine that you have a group of 1000 men and a group of 1000 women, and you know that, on average, the men are 2 inches taller than the women. Now, say you find out that someone is 5’9”. Based on that information alone, can you tell with any certainty, if the individual in question is a man or a woman?

Why not?

The problem with “averages” is that it is difficult to use the information obtained from a large group to make claims back to any specific individual without a lot of other information. After all, there are tall women, short men and everything in-between. So, knowing someone’s height, by itself, does not really help solve the problem of trying to figure out if any given individual is a man or a woman (see Truth, Lies and Romance—provides a detailed example of this type of problem).

Second, the nonverbal cues that have been found are based on small statistical patterns—they are not strong, informative (diagnostic) differences.

This time, pretend that you have a large group of men and a large group of women. But, now the average height difference between the two groups is very small—say less than an half an inch. That half an inch may still be a statistical difference, but because the difference is so small, it is even less useful when trying to guess someone’s sex just by knowing how tall they are.

This is the same problem that occurs when using nonverbal cues to detect deception. The cues represent small, statistical differences between two groups rather information that can be used the other way around; that is, to distinguish liars from ts.

For example, some studies show that liars blink a few more times on average than truth-tellers (and not every study shows this). Now, say you notice that someone blinks several times while talking to you? Are they telling the truth or not? Who knows? To begin with, both liars and truth-tellers blink when talking (you are probably blinking right now)… And some liars rarely blink while some truth-tellers blink a lot… The graphs below show why the differences obtain are of little use when trying to detect deception…

Differences in Blinking Between Truth-tellers and Liars

In fact, the nonverbal cues that have been identified vary widely from person-to-person, situation-to-situation, and the nature of the lie being told (see Ebesu & Miller; Buller; Burgoon; Buslig & Roiger; Buller, Burgoon, White, and Ebesu; Burgoon, Buller, Ebesu, White and Rockwell).

So, in any given situation anything might happen, and the nonverbal cues that have been found ONLY emerge when looking at group averages.

Long story short, because only small statistical differences in detection cues have been discovered. It is very difficult to identify group members (liars versus truth-tellers) based on the cues that have been identified.

Most people, however, do not believe this claim.

Most people believe that nonverbal behavior can be used to detect deception. But, all the research shows that people no better than “flipping a coin” when trying to detect deception, especially when it comes to love and romance (see Miller & Stiff).

The nonverbal cues that have been identified are not useful because truth-tellers and liars are more similar in their behavior than they are different. And there are many reasons why the nonverbal differences identified are so small and of little practical use (see Fielder & Walka; McCornack).

First, many of the lies that people tell come naturally with no planning, thought, or effort. Lying is often automatic and effortless. Most people are not even aware of the fact that they are lying when they do it. Deception can come across as being “natural” because for many people it is natural.

Second, even if there is some stress or anxiety present when people lie—people typically tell the same lies over and over. Accordingly, people become very comfortable with their lies as time passes. In fact, people tell the same lies so often that they actually begin to believe what they are saying.

Finally, telling the truth can sometimes be just as difficult and stressful than lying. Have you ever been agitated, confused, anxious, or upset while trying to tell the truth only to have people doubt what you are saying? “High stake” situations are stressful for both liars as well as truth-tellers. In such situations, both liars and truth-tellers can get nervous and give off the appearance of telling a lie.

Or think about the problem this way: if detecting deception were so easy, everyone would do it and there would a lot few problems. Affairs, crime, and fraud are only possible because people, even trained professionals, have a difficult time detecting deception with any degree of success.

And, for the most part, people are even worse at spotting lies when dealing with someone they love… (source)

Sorry for the long response, this just NEEDS to be said & known. I’m very sorry this happens to you @medicationmambo bc it absolutely should NOT *hugs*

SIGNAL BOOST!!!!

oh my god, thank you so much

I got in trouble for wearing the wrong expressions (I never was and still often am not sure of what my face looks like w/o a mirror) or talking in the wrong tone as a kid

My pleasure! This has been a huge point of contention for me in my life as a criminologist and the more people are armed w/ this knowledge the better. 

We need to smash this myth to pieces and dance on its remains!!!!

Body language can tell you how comfortable or uncomfortable a person is, it doesn’t let you read someone’s mind. There are lots of clues contained within a person’s behavioral affect, but even if you *can* tell someone is lying, you can’t tell why or about what. Reading body language is just one tool, not a sledgehammer, and it should be one of several that you use.

hear hear!

1823 bf04 500

feministingforchange:

Here’s the link. Oh and if you wondered:

THIS IS WHY CAPITAL PUNISHMENT NEEDS TO STOP!!!!!

1833 ce42 500

feministingforchange:

secluded-thunderstorm:

anti-capitalistlesbianwitch:

jewishzevran:

gaylienz:

alwaysbewoke:

alwaysbewoke:

#NoRacistCostumes2k15

#NoRacistCostumes2k16

adding this pic because tbh Natives have a FUCK TON of racist costumes made after them. Shit like Indian Princess and headdresses and Reservation Queen. People continue to think its okay to dress up like us with their shitty fake feathers and ‘war paint’. Its not. 

^People seem to forget this one

This shouldn’t have to be said every year, but here we are again. C’mon, people.

#NORACISTCOSTUMES2K16

#NoRacistCostumes2K17

On Capital Punishment

feministingforchange:

duppymon:

feministingforchange:

imakesomestuff:

feministingforchange:

tie-dyelife​ replied to your post I will never understand how people could think murder is an…”

I envy your way of thinking. I just can’t get past the injustice. Not that it would make it right by any means, but an eye for an eye getting what you give makes more sense to me.Hope all is well dear.

Hi friend! Thanks for your input, and I hope that all is well with you too! 

I know that it seems logical and appropriate to respond to a murder in kind, but it doesn’t actually address any underlying problems and really just makes things worse for everyone involved. For instance, when a country uses murder as a response to murder, that country is condoning murder. It is participating in murder, is enabling murder, is ENCOURAGING murder as an appropriate response to things we don’t like. Is that something you actually want to be a part of? If murder makes you so angry, why would you participate in it? If it is so very wrong, WHY DO IT?!?! Moreover, it’s NOT a deterrent (x) and the system is incredibly flawed and biased so we cannot rely on it NOT to murder people for murder who are INNOCENT! (x)

Not only is capital punishment a theoretical/social nightmare, it is also a financial nightmare. It is SO MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE than no death penalty! Consider Kansas as an example:

Defending a death penalty case costs about four times as much as defending a case where the death penalty is not sought, according to a new study by the Kansas Judicial Council. Examining 34 potential death-penalty cases from 2004-2011, the study found that defense costs for death penalty trials averaged $395,762 per case, compared to $98,963 per case when the death penalty was not sought. Costs incurred by the trial court showed a similar disparity: $72,530 for cases with the death penalty; $21,554 for those without. Even in cases that ended in a guilty plea and did not go to trial, cases where the death penalty was sought incurred about twice the costs for both defense ($130,595 v. $64,711) and courts ($16,263 v. $7,384), compared to cases where death was not sought. The time spent on death cases was also much higher. Jury trials averaged 40.13 days in cases where the death penalty was being sought, but only 16.79 days when it was not an option. Justices of the Kansas Supreme Court assigned to write opinions estimated they spent 20 times more hours on death penalty appeals than on non-death appeals. The Department of Corrections said housing prisoners on death row cost more than twice as much per year ($49,380) as for prisoners in the general population ($24,690). (x)

So capital punishment is really just a horrible horrible thing that should have no place in a modern world. An eye for an eye is no way to approach crime control.

👏 👏 👏 

the death penalty doesn’t deter shit. you think trappers and gangbangers aren’t already living under threat of death daily? it ain’t stopping them. and if you know you’ll be executed if you’re convicted, it’s a lot of incentive to shoot it out with the cops.

Study: 88% of criminologists do not believe the death penalty is an effective deterrent

A recent study by Professor Michael Radelet and Traci Lacock of the University of Colorado found that 88% of the nation’s leading criminologists do not believe the death penalty is an effective deterrent to crime. The study, Do Executions Lower Homicide Rates? The Views of Leading Criminologists, published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, concluded, “There is overwhelming consensus among America’s top criminologists that the empirical research conducted on the deterrence question fails to support the threat or use of the death penalty.” A previous study in 1996 had come to similar conclusions.

The criminologists surveyed included - 1) Fellows in the American Society of Criminology (ASC), (2) Winners of  the ASC’s Sutherland Award, the highest award given by that organization for contributions to criminological theory, or (3) Presidents of the ASC between 1997 and the present. Those presidents before 1997 had been included in the prior survey. Respondents were asked to base their answers on existing empirical research, not their views on capital punishment.

Nearly 78% of those surveyed said that having the death penalty in a state does not lower the murder rate. In addition, 91% of respondents said politicians support the death penalty in order to appear tough on crime – and 75% said that it distracts legislatures on the state and national level from focusing on real solutions to crime problems. Over all, 94% agreed that there was little empirical evidence to support the deterrent effect of the death penalty. And 90% said the death penalty had little effect overall on the committing of murder. Additionally, 91.6% said that increasing the frequency of executions would not add a deterrent effect, and 87.6% said that speeding up executions wouldn’t work either.


So as you can all see, we criminologists largely agree that empirically; the death penalty (and also “tough on crime/zero tolerance” shit”) is a T E R R I B L E excuse for “crime control” that’s causing more social harm than good. 

Pls help us criminologists bypass self-serving politicians by spreading this very important - and to a large degree PUBLICLY FUNDED - information far and wide!!!

Pls SIGNAL BOOST!! 

@goodness-gracious-great-balls-of in case you missed it <3

Today’s PSA courtesy of Neurodivergent Rebel:

Older posts are this way If this message doesn't go away, click anywhere on the page to continue loading posts.
Could not load more posts
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
Just a second, loading more posts...
You've reached the end.

Don't be the product, buy the product!

Schweinderl