Join 3,514 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


...I reject the furtive attitude and filthy custom which forbids the eyes what delights them most.
May 3, 2009 4:34 PM   Subscribe

F/lthy Gorgeous Th/ngs "aims to cultivate innovative content that stimulates us sexually and intellectually." [Not Safe For Work/Prudes]
posted by mhjb (80 comments total) 23 users marked this as a favorite

 
Erotica and membership fees feels a little bit like porn on the front page. That tingly feeling you get? When you find porn on the front page?

You'll know it when you see it.
posted by puckish at 5:16 PM on May 3, 2009


F/thy s/ow /oading p/entious c/ap.


Ha! at least I got the c/ap!
posted by Elmore at 5:17 PM on May 3, 2009 [2 favorites]


aims to cultivate innovative content that stimulates us sexually and intellectually

To arose those of us older than 35, this website needs more content about home renovations and the real estate market.
posted by KokuRyu at 5:24 PM on May 3, 2009 [11 favorites]


My. How edgy.
posted by dame at 5:25 PM on May 3, 2009 [1 favorite]


If I knew how to tag before moving on, I would. Guess it's time to read the details.
posted by path at 5:27 PM on May 3, 2009


This seems like it's just your standard porn paysite dressed up in hipster clothes.
posted by dersins at 5:28 PM on May 3, 2009 [3 favorites]


Eh, when you have to go out of your way to make sex intriguing it probably means that you're crossing some wires in your brain. This is rather dull.
posted by Burhanistan at 5:29 PM on May 3, 2009 [1 favorite]


I'm looking for the innovation, but the porn keeps getting in the way.
posted by rtha at 5:29 PM on May 3, 2009


Not a prude, and yet uncomfortable. This was not what I expected when I clicked. Umm.
posted by Captain Cardanthian! at 5:30 PM on May 3, 2009


This seems like it's just your standard porn paysite dressed up in hipster clothes.

Porn paysite, how quaint
posted by mattoxic at 5:34 PM on May 3, 2009 [1 favorite]


Metafilter: Not a prude, and yet uncomfortable.
posted by Elmore at 5:34 PM on May 3, 2009


Perhaps I've missed something.

However, I'm a pretty straight forward hetero guy, and I found this to be pretty depressingly hetero-centric. They claim that "FGT aims to cultivate innovative content that stimulates us sexually and intellectually," and yet not a single GLBT feature?
posted by oddman at 5:35 PM on May 3, 2009 [12 favorites]


I'd call it masturbatory, but that would imply the site's opposite effect.
posted by The White Hat at 5:37 PM on May 3, 2009


This is rather dull.

Yup, not moving me off a zero on the erection hardness scale.

It's back to good old National Geographic and Health and Efficiency for me.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 5:38 PM on May 3, 2009


I was expecting a very female looking post op trans delivering oral sex while discussing "The Brothers Karamazov" and drinking coffee from a starbuck's cup. Needless to say, I am VERY disappointed. So, It's back to National Geographic for me... tut tut...
posted by Elmore at 5:43 PM on May 3, 2009


Err... once I can borrow it off Peter...
posted by Elmore at 6:11 PM on May 3, 2009 [1 favorite]


That's not my attitude.
posted by furtive at 6:26 PM on May 3, 2009


F/lthyGorgeousTh/ngs is an online magazine about sex for artists, thinkers and sensualists. FGT aims to cultivate innovative content that stimulates us sexually and intellectually.

Then learn to spell.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:31 PM on May 3, 2009


Who are these people who spend hundreds of hours designing websites and soliciting written and visual content for a final product that is, ultimately, boring crap?

It just seems like such a tremendous waste of person-hours.
posted by jayder at 6:34 PM on May 3, 2009


Art as porn is fine and porn as art is fine, as long as it's done well. This site seems to be aimed more to the connoisseur than the typical porn consumer. The exact difference being some dude screaming out, "BOOBIES!" and some guy having the same reaction, but they happen to be wearing a top hat and a monocle.
posted by zerokey at 6:40 PM on May 3, 2009 [2 favorites]


So you are saying that I am a better person because I use the toothpaste that the frog in the top hat and monocle told me to. Cool.
posted by Elmore at 6:47 PM on May 3, 2009


I don't mean to be all "your favorite porn sucks" about this but I'm not getting the awesome part of this.
posted by jessamyn at 6:53 PM on May 3, 2009 [2 favorites]


In the aftermath of Hitchcock and Rear Window, who are musicians to explore the complexities of gaze? How might song parallel the rococo twists of painted voyeurism in Fragonard’s The Swing? Even the printed word requires a master on par with Flaubert and Foucault to distill the truths of a casual spy or systemic surveillance; what hope does a basement band have? A slim but viable one: digital culture.

Oh. deary. me.
posted by Wolof at 7:00 PM on May 3, 2009 [3 favorites]


These are the things I find risible about this:

1) Sex as "lifestyle." Look, yeah, we all know that a sex toy now and then can be fun. But it always seems needlessly jaded to get all hobbyist about fucking. It's like the stoner with the $800 bong.

2) The clichéd feminism. I realize that as a guy, I'm not supposed to, y'know, hamper women's expressions or whatever the fuck, but can we get a moratorium on the "I'm a whore because of feminism" thing? Fine, great, you wanna be a whore, OK. I still think it's dumb. (FWIW, I think being a professional athlete is dumb too.)

3) SERIOUS POETRY: "my frenzy. my frenzy." Look, the feelings you get while fucking? Express them by fucking.

4) Blurry photography. That's how you can tell it's "erotica."

5) Terrible editing/layout. The way those graphs are jogged, it's hard to tell which way you go from one to another, and the choppy editing makes it worse.

6) The whole thing feels like it was made by attention whores. Yeah, it's great that you can orgasm through anal, but that just seems gratuitous in supporting your facile observation that there's "beauty in paradox." Tossing the sex in seems to be a way to yell "Pay attention to my deep thoughts" without actually having any.
posted by klangklangston at 7:07 PM on May 3, 2009 [28 favorites]


Or: This site is probably best viewed in a post-masturbatory haze, and you have unfortunately presented it to a pre-masturbation audience.
posted by klangklangston at 7:09 PM on May 3, 2009 [6 favorites]


Half the porn and good writing of NightCharm (NSFW, all gay, hot).
posted by munchingzombie at 7:13 PM on May 3, 2009


I love to discover intriguing and delightful out of the way websites which I can forward to my oldest and closest friends. This wasn't one of them.
posted by digsrus at 7:14 PM on May 3, 2009


f/nally, a s/te wh/ch caters to my amateur fet/sh. all other "amateur" stuff has this weird hang-up about be/ng professional /n some way or another. / have always wanted total amateur/sm. out of focus photography, templated web des/gn, barely readable copy... / am so /n heat r/ght now. /'ll do anyth/ng you want.

the doggerel poetry /s a +.
posted by the aloha at 7:14 PM on May 3, 2009


Well, they're obviously into slash.
posted by klangklangston at 7:20 PM on May 3, 2009 [5 favorites]


and here I am considering how to optimize a getPixel() operation.
posted by localhuman at 7:40 PM on May 3, 2009 [1 favorite]


What's the innovative part? Is it buttsecks? I hope it's buttsecks! PLEASE TELL ME IT'S BUTTSECKS!

Cuz OMG buttsecks.
posted by Mister_A at 7:55 PM on May 3, 2009 [2 favorites]


Nothing cool about this. Trust me, I'm all in to cool, thinking person's porn, that's why I go to indienudes.com, which is everything that F/|+YYYY H|pst3r Th|ngs wishes it was, and also free! free! free! and, best of all, it is quick to load and doesn't have horribly self-indulgent design.

I won't flag this, but I wish I didn't waste my precious clicks clicking on the link.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have wanking to do.
posted by fuq at 8:00 PM on May 3, 2009


Very pretty. And sloooooow. WTH? The site was eating 60%-90% of my CPU cycles?

Nice idea, nice presentation, but some basic acquaintance with user needs would help.

The one thing I did think was kind of cool was the collection of old "porn" engraving. Amusing.
posted by Xoebe at 8:01 PM on May 3, 2009


MetaFilter: Best Viewed in a Post-Masturbatory Haze.

And yes, you can all stop with the tag lines. This one will never be surpassed.
posted by Mister_A at 8:03 PM on May 3, 2009


Sex as "lifestyle." Look, yeah, we all know that a sex toy now and then can be fun. But it always seems needlessly jaded to get all hobbyist about fucking. It's like the stoner with the $800 bong.

That was the same assocation I made. This site reminds me of the kind of young twenty-something who makes a personality of talking about sex all the time. Like the person who talks about drugs all the time, they are boring boring boring. I can understand the error, though, because both of those things can be pretty great. To centre a lifestyle around, though? Please.
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 8:21 PM on May 3, 2009 [2 favorites]


Why are people describing this as "hipster"? Does hipsters now mean anything pretentious now?

(I certainly agree it's pretentious)
posted by delmoi at 8:30 PM on May 3, 2009 [2 favorites]


I'm just here for the groupsex pile-on.
posted by nola at 8:50 PM on May 3, 2009 [1 favorite]


This site reminds me of the kind of young twenty-something who makes a personality of talking about sex all the time.

And she also finds this boring. I heard.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 8:52 PM on May 3, 2009 [1 favorite]


...I reject the furtive attitude and filthy custom which forbids the eyes what delights them most.

Shit. I just choked on my curry.
posted by The Light Fantastic at 8:59 PM on May 3, 2009 [2 favorites]


Not safe for prudes? Sheesh. All I see here are young, thin, white, female bodies. In other words, same old same old. Call me when there's a porn site done by women that actually reverses the male gaze (actually, feel free to link such a thing here, I'm sure it exists).
posted by jokeefe at 9:07 PM on May 3, 2009 [6 favorites]


I'm just here for the groupsex pile-on.

there is a difference?
posted by the aloha at 9:26 PM on May 3, 2009


Aaaaand once again Art+Porn = Skinny naked girls.
posted by The Whelk at 9:35 PM on May 3, 2009 [1 favorite]


I've seen more titillating content in a Monkey Wards catalog, back in the 70's.
posted by Goofyy at 10:07 PM on May 3, 2009


The site got my computer all hot and bothered, that's for sure.

I hope it's not some bullshit Flash exploit.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:09 PM on May 3, 2009


I suppose this is as good a place to announce that fearfulsymmetry's Steampunk Dildo is now a reality. Via.
posted by mattdidthat at 11:40 PM on May 3, 2009


Yeah I'm not getting the "hipster" aspect of this.

But the guy who thinks being a professional athlete is dumb has obviously never made millions of dollars as a professional athlete, like many of them do. Not that they should, but still.
posted by ChickenringNYC at 12:40 AM on May 4, 2009


What's the innovative part? Is it buttsecks?

Buttsecks is so 2002. Today it's part of every prude's sexual repertoire.

The innovative act for 2009 is felching. Be there or be square.

I suppose this is as good a place to announce that fearfulsymmetry's Steampunk Dildo is now a reality.

Firing up the pressure cooker and strapping on the welding gloves when it's time to have a quick wank is definitely innovative.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 1:17 AM on May 4, 2009


These are the things I find risible about this:

1) Sex as "lifestyle." Look, yeah, we all know that a sex toy now and then can be fun. But it always seems needlessly jaded to get all hobbyist about fucking. It's like the stoner with the $800 bong.


Sorry to be "that girl" about this, or to sound like I'm defending this pablum, but how the hell is sex NOT a lifestyle? And how are you gonna deride all of kink culture as hobbyism from a position of some kind of lackadaisical vanilla privilege and call the OTHER people jaded? Take an interest, for fuck's sake.

2) The clichéd feminism. I realize that as a guy, I'm not supposed to, y'know, hamper women's expressions or whatever the fuck, but can we get a moratorium on the "I'm a whore because of feminism" thing? Fine, great, you wanna be a whore, OK. I still think it's dumb. (FWIW, I think being a professional athlete is dumb too.)

Whatever. Assuming you're talking about sexwork of some sort, which I understand you're directly complicit with anyway, which makes the criticism ...weird, and not general unabashed slatternliness, what is dumber about being valuated on a physical basis than an intellectual one? How is that not just unempathetic editorializing? Is there some conclusive psychological study I'm unaware of, showing that athletes, dancers, masseuses, and whores are all wracked with regret in their sunset years? But, for what it's worth, my response to "Whores because of feminism" would basically be "no, you're a whore because of capitalism, baby. There have been whores since before there were 'feminists,' ya heard?"

And last, I'm awfully glad someone else brought up how there's not even anything but the most mainstream porn snaps on this site anyway, I was too heavy of heart to address that fact. But then again, maybe that seeming need of mine for something other than what's readily available everywhere I look makes me a precious hobbyist.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 1:22 AM on May 4, 2009


It's back to good old National Geographic ...

I got a stack of these out, uh, kind of through the cul-de-sac if you're cutting over to the Henshaw's. Me-mail me and maybe I'll let you know where.
posted by From Bklyn at 1:42 AM on May 4, 2009


From the steampunk dildo site:
grooves are so air/steam gets directed into them and then through the teeny little holes that are drilled to make the engine. its not very optimised as it takes way way too much pressure to run this tiny thing, going to experiment with a few other engine designs. think I have too many holes/grooves machined into it, probably need to have only one inlet vs like um, 9 or so, hah.

So let see: an engineering student that 1. can't figure out how many air holes are needed, 2. cant drill them in a straight row, 3. apparently is yet to discover sand paper and finally 4. surprised that steam is too hot for private parts, is looking for a job. God help us all.
posted by c13 at 1:42 AM on May 4, 2009


what is dumber about being valuated on a physical basis than an intellectual one

I dunno, but if you can't run a hundred metres in under 11 seconds I am calling you dumb.

Also, "valuated"? Any chance of using a spot of English?
posted by Wolof at 3:01 AM on May 4, 2009


Even the printed word requires a master on par with Flaubert and Foucault to distill the truths of a casual spy or systemic surveillance; what hope does a basement band have? A slim but viable one: digital culture.

There's some wanking going on here, but it sure as hell isn't me doing it.
posted by Mr. Bad Example at 3:07 AM on May 4, 2009 [1 favorite]


hurf durf dirty pictures
posted by unSane at 3:23 AM on May 4, 2009


hurf durf dirty pictures

Make that "hurf durf boring pictures" and I'd be in agreement.

Some of the writing was so cliched that I'm actually wondering if it was really done tongue in cheek, like that hegelian article. And while I'm all for photos of naked women, these were just the same old same old, when there is so much more out there. What a waste of effort -- can there really be people who would pay for this, when there is so much better available online for free and on the library shelves?
posted by Forktine at 5:59 AM on May 4, 2009


Call me when there's a porn site done by women that actually reverses the male gaze

I'm not a woman, but from what I understand about the male gaze, I imagine it would be something like this. (SFW)
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 6:06 AM on May 4, 2009 [6 favorites]


Call me when there's a porn site done by women that actually reverses the male gaze

Do you mean one that shows such ugly people that men must look away?
posted by Pollomacho at 6:13 AM on May 4, 2009


I WANT AN ALBATROSS TO STARE AT ME!!!
posted by oddman at 6:44 AM on May 4, 2009


I'm not a woman, but from what I understand about the male gaze, I imagine it would be something like this.

You also have to constantly consider what the albatross might like and enjoy when choosing how to look, walk, talk, and behave.

So, be a large sexy mackerel, basically.
posted by The Whelk at 7:41 AM on May 4, 2009 [1 favorite]


I enjoyed some of the little gadgets and stuff. They are kinda cool!

http://filthygorgeousthings.com/voyeur/daily-fix/pose-tit

http://filthygorgeousthings.com/voyeur/daily-fix/exhibition-of-czech-photography

http://filthygorgeousthings.com/voyeur/daily-fix

I might get one of those grate stickers....
posted by lazaruslong at 9:13 AM on May 4, 2009


Can we please not turn this into another ALBATROSSAL GAZE thread?

I hate those.
posted by everichon at 9:25 AM on May 4, 2009


I just don't get what's good about this. I mean if you want porn, there are much better places to get it. If you want to read intelligent and interesting things don't read anything here. It's just pretty intellectually and porn-ally dishonest.
posted by ob at 9:47 AM on May 4, 2009


"Sorry to be "that girl" about this, or to sound like I'm defending this pablum, but how the hell is sex NOT a lifestyle? And how are you gonna deride all of kink culture as hobbyism from a position of some kind of lackadaisical vanilla privilege and call the OTHER people jaded? Take an interest, for fuck's sake."

Because it's fucking silly, pun intended. Because sex as "lifestyle" implies both that sex should permeate all existence (which sounds good but is in practicality boring as hell) and that you need lifestyle accouterments to enjoy it. The point was fairly precise—their "lifestyle" section is where they do product reviews for their sexy, sexy lifestyle. Like I said, it's like talking to the stoner with the $800 bong, yeah, great, so what?

Further, arguing that "sex" is a lifestyle is stupid. Both because it's over-broad (I have no problem ceding Bondage Balls as a lifestyle, or swinging as a lifestyle), and because it posits mode of sexual expression as "legitimate." It's re-modernism, writ sex. It means that variation within the hobby requires reclamation—I know you've met people who are into BDSM who don't enjoy the whole leather-chaps munch thing. But by claiming BDSM as a single lifestyle, that means folks who enjoy the most salient part of it—the BDSM sex—have to negotiate that in terms of the whole leather and latex aesthetic, which (I'd argue) is intentionally sub-cultural and separated from utility.

And no, I don't have to take an interest in other people's sex lives. Don't feed me the bullshit where if I'm not outwardly demonstrating my approval and encouragement that I'm judging them and exercising privilege—my not judging comes with a big dollop of Don't Give A Fuck.

Whatever. Assuming you're talking about sexwork of some sort, which I understand you're directly complicit with anyway, which makes the criticism ...weird, and not general unabashed slatternliness, what is dumber about being valuated on a physical basis than an intellectual one? How is that not just unempathetic editorializing? Is there some conclusive psychological study I'm unaware of, showing that athletes, dancers, masseuses, and whores are all wracked with regret in their sunset years? But, for what it's worth, my response to "Whores because of feminism" would basically be "no, you're a whore because of capitalism, baby. There have been whores since before there were 'feminists,' ya heard?"

This is what I was referencing. The third-wave crit-lit crap is cliché, and I didn't buy it when Sasha Grey was arguing that having a train run on her ass was some sort of critical subversion of gender politics either. The essay is boring, shows a facile understanding of feminist arguments, and was silly when Kathleen Hanna was arguing the same thing far less pretentiously.

As far as physical careers, Sic transit gloria mundi, in sex work or in linebacking, only the number of whores who get paid like top-flight pro athletes is how many? What's the other skill that they're going to get paid for after no one wants to pay them for sex? I can count on one hand how many porn stars have managed to make a long and successful career out of porn without seriously fucking up their lives, and the vast majority of them have no idea what they're getting into or what the paths to fiscal security are (again, just like athletes).

But you want some sort of peer-reviewed study to find out that many former athletes and sex workers maybe could have made better choices with their lives? That's taking sex-positive to stupid.
posted by klangklangston at 9:56 AM on May 4, 2009 [3 favorites]


klangklangston, you just kinda wasted a whole bunch of words just to say 'your favorite porn sucks'
posted by empath at 10:16 AM on May 4, 2009


Can we please not turn this into another ALBATROSSAL GAZE thread?

Too skinny, would not eat. This sardine needs to EAT SOME PLANKTON amirite?!?
posted by Pollomacho at 10:45 AM on May 4, 2009



Everyone would be gushing over this if there were pictures of "real women with curves".
posted by Zambrano at 10:55 AM on May 4, 2009


Cortes plays with the tension of between the visible and the suggestively concealed

wut?
posted by Geezum Crowe at 10:58 AM on May 4, 2009


pr0n in a cuter outfit...
posted by PuppyCat at 11:27 AM on May 4, 2009


Everyone would be gushing over this if there were pictures of "real women with curves".

Probably not, given the annoying and deeply pretentious presentation. But we'd certainly be less likely to call it out as the same old porn dressed up in new clothes.

Because, y'know, it wouldn;t be.
posted by dersins at 11:28 AM on May 4, 2009


klangklangston: That's taking sex-positive to stupid.

Oh my, that essay you linked was really horrible. The one trying to sell deep-throating in new age evangelical terms also had me rolling my eyes.

I think one of the signs that the sex-positive movement has gone off the rails is how much effort it spends trying to vilify the straw-Dworkins rather than providing the first person perspectives and howtos. The first-wave sex-positives generally agreed that there were problem with porn and prostitution and tried to create better practices for both. At the same time, they published a ton of very practical guides that filled in the missing gaps in people's sex education. Now, it's all about rationalizing gonzo and girls gone wild.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 11:42 AM on May 4, 2009 [3 favorites]


More albatross, less Hegre
posted by fcummins at 11:53 AM on May 4, 2009


In the aftermath of Hitchcock and Rear Window, who are musicians to explore the complexities of gaze? How might song parallel the rococo twists of painted voyeurism in Fragonard’s The Swing? Even the printed word requires a master on par with Flaubert and Foucault to distill the truths of a casual spy or systemic surveillance; what hope does a basement band have? A slim but viable one: digital culture.

Ah, come on wolof, that's adorable in a second-year film studies kind of way. I just want to pinch its 'I just discovered deconstruction, lookit!' little cheeks and pat its sweet little head. You just know that this was somebody's term paper, which received an A during some weary 1 a.m. point of marking a far too large pile of papers that all regurgitated the same sort of thing. It's a necessary part of the learning curve and I've written my share of them, too.
posted by jokeefe at 12:42 PM on May 4, 2009


Also, I ask for porn sites made my women which consider men's bodies in the same sort of style as 'regular' porn, and I get a picture of an albatross. Oy.
posted by jokeefe at 12:44 PM on May 4, 2009


For people who used to think that Nerve and Suicide Girls were "edgy" and that Violet Blue ever stood for anything besides promoting her own career, here comes Lucy with that football again.
posted by Halloween Jack at 12:45 PM on May 4, 2009 [2 favorites]


In the aftermath of Hitchcock and Rear Window, who are musicians to explore the complexities of gaze?

Because Hitchcock said it all AMIRITE
posted by jokeefe at 12:47 PM on May 4, 2009


"For people who used to think that Nerve and Suicide Girls were "edgy" and that Violet Blue ever stood for anything besides promoting her own career, here comes Lucy with that football again."

What I liked about Nerve when it first ran as a print mag was how incredibly broad its focus was. I liked having essays about Sufi sensuality next to pictorials about male strippers. It had arts, culture and sex all mashed up next to each other, and seemed to not take itself too seriously either.

Now, unfortunately, it's just kinda another lifestyle portal with some indie porn.
posted by klangklangston at 12:57 PM on May 4, 2009 [1 favorite]


Semi Off Topic Rant: I came of age in the Reagan/Bush years when everyone knew about AIDS but no one was willing to talk to teens about it. My formal institutional sex education was loaded with "don't do it," "ask your doctor before doing it," "ask your parents or clergy if you have doubts about it." Discovering writers who were not afraid to talk about the practical aspects of sex certainly saved me a lot of embarrassment, if not my life.

It's actually shocking to me how things seem like we've slid 20 years into the past. I mean, really an essay promising orgasms from unprotected throatfucking? "Choose orgasm because deep throat fucking can make you come."

The first-wave sex-positive educators were, if nothing else, quite pragmatic about managing expectations. It might be a turn-off, it might be fun, it might be awkward, it might give you an orgasm, it might not.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 1:21 PM on May 4, 2009


Whoops, had to submit that prematurely. I really hesitate to think about what kids coming out of know-nothing abstinence-only programs are learning about sex.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 1:38 PM on May 4, 2009


Ah, come on wolof, that's adorable in a second-year film studies kind of way.

I wrote a PhD of which a third was closely related to this subject.

I'm overly touchy about this sort of crap, I know.
posted by Wolof at 3:47 AM on May 5, 2009


Yeah, this site seems a little... prudish. I mean, who isn't pro-[whore,slut,love]? If someone likes sex, and can find willing partners, good for them*!

My underwhelmed reaction is almost entirely down to the way they play off this "furtive attitude" to feign edginess. I guess they just don't realise that it's the 21st century and everything went public long ago (in the civilised world, which is at least partly defined by sexual freedom and equality). There's such a thing as private, but "taboo" is an unhelpful concept which only really still exists because some people are turned on by it.

Also, would love to see such a site reversing the male gaze. For one, it would actually be kind of radical. For two, I might actually understand what the male gaze was if I had something to contrast it with.

* personal, psychological, and public health protection goes without saying
posted by Wrinkled Stumpskin at 10:12 AM on May 5, 2009


No offense, Wolof, like I said, I've written my share too. Laugh to keep from crying, perhaps?
posted by jokeefe at 1:45 PM on May 6, 2009


« Older Newsarama posts a massive six part interview with ...  |  Frank Soltesz was a master of ... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments