Cake or Dea^wbiscuit?
February 28, 2017 1:04 PM   Subscribe

There is no record of the 20th Century philosopher, Ludwig Wittgenstein, ever tasting a Jaffa Cake, though there is evidence that he was partial towards a bun. But his ideas are relevant to the Jaffa Cake puzzle.
David Edmonds uses the eternal question of whether a Jaffa Cake is actually a biscuit (it calls itself a cake for tax purposes) to look into the problems with insisting on a strict binary gender identity.
posted by MartinWisse (62 comments total) 12 users marked this as a favorite
 
My only questions is why does Berkeley Bowl torture me by only sporadically stocking them in the 'British foods' section? I demand consistent supply to feed my addiction. 5 types of digestive crackers but almost never Jaffa Cakes.

This is not cricket.
posted by MiltonRandKalman at 1:23 PM on February 28, 2017


I love this article.
Which aspects of our classification of the world come from the world itself and which come from us?
This is really what it all boils down to. A lot of gender essentialists just looove to bring out Science! as proof of the gender bindary. And, despite pointing out that science is a process that can be exploited, and that the results from that potentially exploited process can also contain bias, they still insist. Their reasoning to make the observable world fit into a binary gets really fucking convoluted. Labels are.. fraught on their own, and in no way are there two.

As a nonbinary person, I really do think gender as easy as pie. or cake. or biscuits.
posted by FirstMateKate at 1:26 PM on February 28, 2017 [4 favorites]


All concepts will get fuzzy at the edges.

So will Jaffa Cakes; but don't eat them at that point.
posted by leotrotsky at 1:32 PM on February 28, 2017 [16 favorites]


there is evidence that he was partial towards a bun.

Is that a kind of inside joke?
posted by stargell at 1:38 PM on February 28, 2017 [2 favorites]


If the Jaffa Cake dispute seems trivial, remember that VAT is 20% in the UK and McVities sell an awful lot of them. UK tax policy on food is very odd; in theory, staple foods don't attract VAT but luxury foods do. However, the border between these two categories is almost fractal, and having read the relevant case law it seems that the test is something like this:

1. Food is zero-rated for VAT.
1.1 Except for confectionary.
1.1.1 Unless it's cake or biscuit.
1.1.1.1 Apart from biscuits with chocolate on.

The Jaffa Cake case was about whether the snacks in question were cakes (1.1.1, no VAT) or biscuits with chocolate on (1.1.1.1, VAT). For the reasons set out in the judgment linked from the OP article, the tax tribunal decided they were cakes.

This was not the only such case.

Torq Ltd v Revenue & Customs - are breakfast bars confectionary or cake? Note paragraph 40, and the '11 tests of cake'.

Lees of Scotland v Revenue & Customs - are Tunnocks Snowballs confectionary or cake? From paragraphs 20 to 22 one gets a rare insight into the at times difficult and demanding role of the First-Tier Tax Tribunal...
posted by Major Clanger at 1:41 PM on February 28, 2017 [25 favorites]


> Lees of Scotland v Revenue & Customs - are Tunnocks Snowballs confectionary or cake? From paragraphs 20 to 22 one gets a rare insight into the at times difficult and demanding role of the First-Tier Tax Tribunal...

This is so wonderful.
posted by rtha at 1:50 PM on February 28, 2017 [4 favorites]


There's a subtle point lost that the law trying to answer the question "Is the Jaffa Cake legally a biscuit or not" is for some mysterious reason more appropriate than asking the better question "Why are we specifically taxing chocolate covered biscuits (1.1.1.1), again?" Isn't that a perfect example of how social problems get contorted by institutional power, etc., structural inertia, and so on.
posted by polymodus at 1:56 PM on February 28, 2017 [9 favorites]


Hi.
posted by wittgenstein at 2:00 PM on February 28, 2017 [31 favorites]


There's certainly an interesting social issue about tax policy on food. Is classifying some foods as 'luxuries' and taxing them a measure aimed at curbing (or at least getting revenue from) the indulgences of the middle class, or a measure aimed at segregating food into 'nice food' and 'food the working class subsists on'?
posted by Major Clanger at 2:06 PM on February 28, 2017


Mitchell and Webb were very clear about their stance on the issue.
posted by kersplunk at 2:07 PM on February 28, 2017 [4 favorites]


It's there an American version of this? or does that somehow further prove the articles point?
posted by lkc at 2:15 PM on February 28, 2017 [1 favorite]


There's an interesting similar thing in the USA (at least I think it's the USA's that to blame) which is why your digital camera can only record 29:59 of footage. Every digital camera that can record 30 minutes of video or more is considered a "video camera" and subject to higher tariffs. By coding a limit of less than 30 minutes, they get to pay less to bring it in to the country.
posted by themadthinker at 2:16 PM on February 28, 2017 [4 favorites]


Jaffa Cakes are technically classified as cakes, not biscuits. Chocolate biscuits are subject to VAT at 17.5 per cent, but cakes are zero-rated. In 1991 the British government tried to have Jaffa Cakes reclassified as biscuits. McVitie’s vigorously opposed this, as it would have added considerably to the price. As part of their evidence to the VAT tribunal they baked a special 12-inch Jaffa Cake to demonstrate the product’s inherent cakiness, and won the case. The key difference between cakes and biscuits is that cakes go hard when stale, whereas biscuits go soft.
posted by doctor_negative at 2:27 PM on February 28, 2017 [4 favorites]


Ah, thanks. My head starts swimming at "biscuits" with British stuff, and I end up thinking of corn pone with a chocolate drizzle being tried as a cake by a someone in a powdered wig, which is probably not the intent.
posted by lkc at 2:27 PM on February 28, 2017


It's both a floor wax and a dessert topping!

(Heh. I love Jaffa cakes)
posted by jonmc at 2:48 PM on February 28, 2017 [1 favorite]


It's there an American version of this?

When Wittgenstein came to America, he went to Cornell, where his former student, Norman Malcolm, hosted him. Malcolm's students were amazed to discover that the great philosopher imitated the mannerisms and speech patterns of Prof. Malcolm!
posted by thelonius at 3:04 PM on February 28, 2017


When people say “you know, tomatoes are actually fruits,” they're sharing a factoid that seems surprising because a tomato fits more closely with a “vegetable” classification. But either way it's a tiresome thing to say. The fact that we think of a tomato as a vegetable rather than a fruit is either (a) accidental or (b) because some of its properties — taste-wise? crop-wise? — seem more similar to vegetables. So if you tell me that a tomato is a fruit, you'd better back it up with some reason why it's important to make the distinction, or else I'm putting you in the “pedant” bucket like the one dude who always points out that “begging the question” doesn't mean what everyone thinks it means.

Same with “is a hot dog a sandwich?” — well, why are you asking? The spirit in which you ask the question will influence my answer. In this case, cookie-versus-cake is only relevant because of some ornery VAT rules. I recall a lawsuit where the court had to determine whether a burrito was a sandwich only because a sandwich shop signed a contract to open inside a mall food court on the condition that they enjoyed the exclusive right to sell sandwiches.

Thus: should Jaffa cakes be taxed like cookies? Fuck if I know — I'm not an economist. If a hot dog stand opens inside a food court, should the nearby sandwich shop? Depends on the contract, but if the term “sandwich shop” isn't defined in the document, then I'd say no — I think the common meaning of “sandwich shop” is a Subway-type place where you can have a sandwich constructed from parts on-demand.

But in a Platonic sense? Shit, I don't know. Most of the nouns we use every day are not part of a taxonomy. We learn what words mean primarily by seeing examples. I don't find those questions answerable because nobody invented a cookie and nobody is qualified to define what its essence is.
posted by savetheclocktower at 3:11 PM on February 28, 2017 [1 favorite]


The real differences is that cakes go hard when stale, whereas biscuits go hard in the motherfucking paint.
posted by GuyZero at 3:17 PM on February 28, 2017 [2 favorites]


In Culture and Value, Wittgenstein considers whether there is any difference between a bag of raisins and a cake:
Raisins may be the best part of a cake, but a bag of raisins is no better than a cake; and he who is in a position to give us a bag full of raisins, cannot necessarily bake a cake with them. A cake is not, as it were, thinned-out raisins.
There are no raisins in a Jaffa Cake, so Wittgenstein would probably have regarded it as a biscuit.
posted by verstegan at 3:19 PM on February 28, 2017 [5 favorites]


i don't want to live in a world where cakes have raisins in them
posted by mochapickle at 3:22 PM on February 28, 2017 [5 favorites]


So if you tell me that a tomato is a fruit, you'd better back it up with some reason why it's important to make the distinction, or else I'm putting you in the “pedant” bucket

Well it is important to me since I am a botanist, but I am also a pedant, so take your pick of buckets.
posted by pemberkins at 3:33 PM on February 28, 2017 [12 favorites]


UK tax policy on food is very odd; in theory, staple foods don't attract VAT but luxury foods do.

...

The Jaffa Cake case was about whether the snacks in question were cakes (1.1.1, no VAT) or biscuits with chocolate on (1.1.1.1, VAT). For the reasons set out in the judgment linked from the OP article, the tax tribunal decided they were cakes.


I like the unspoken idea that chocolate covered cakes are somehow a staple food. "What do you want for tea tonight, kids? Jaffa Cakes?"

Another interesting VAT battle is that hot-served food should be VAT rated, but there's an exception for food which is only incidentally hot because it was recently cooked and can be eaten cold. This 'exception' is so wide that Greggs drives 2.5 million hot sausage rolls through it every week and straight into the maws of an appreciative public.
posted by Emma May Smith at 3:38 PM on February 28, 2017 [4 favorites]


...most humans are not topped by a thin but scrumptious layer of chocolate.

I think we have our work cut out for us here.
posted by Margalo Epps at 3:38 PM on February 28, 2017 [1 favorite]


I had a friend whose main job was to sue British supermarkets whenever their own-brand jaffa cakes started to look too similar to McVitie's Jaffa Cakes.
posted by w0mbat at 3:45 PM on February 28, 2017 [6 favorites]


savetheclocktower: When people say “you know, tomatoes are actually fruits,” they're sharing a factoid that seems surprising because a tomato fits more closely with a “vegetable” classification. But either way it's a tiresome thing to say. The fact that we think of a tomato as a vegetable rather than a fruit is either (a) accidental or (b) because some of its properties — taste-wise? crop-wise? — seem more similar to vegetables. So if you tell me that a tomato is a fruit, you'd better back it up with some reason why it's important to make the distinction, or else I'm putting you in the “pedant” bucket like the one dude who always points out that “begging the question” doesn't mean what everyone thinks it means.

You can outpedant these pedants by pointing out that they're confusing culinary categories with botanical categories. While tomatoes are botanically speaking fruit, they're vegetables when cooking. The main thing is, of course, that vegetables isn't a botanical category at all.
posted by Kattullus at 3:46 PM on February 28, 2017 [13 favorites]


The funniest anecdote I heard on this topic was about the non-human status of the X-Men. "Dolls", depicting human figures, had higher tariffs than "Toys" which include non human creatures, so Marvel argued to the US Court of International Trade that their action figures were mutants and not humans and so they should be taxed at a lower tariff rate (they won).

Wikipedia link. "Because a common theme in Marvel Comics had been the struggle for mutants like the X-Men to prove their humanity, the case shocked numerous fans."
posted by xdvesper at 4:23 PM on February 28, 2017 [14 favorites]


Well, time to complain to the BBC again. "Caster Semenya, who competes as a woman" Seriously?
posted by hoyland at 4:56 PM on February 28, 2017 [2 favorites]


At least I got to write the sentence "In addition to being a woman, Caster Semenya is also not a bathroom."
posted by hoyland at 5:03 PM on February 28, 2017 [1 favorite]


Two thoughts.

1) That's an interesting and clever way to discuss gender issues, and I approve.
2) Goddamn do I want a Jaffa Cake right now. (I'm American, mind, but I have had them, or similar foodstuffs.)
posted by SansPoint at 5:08 PM on February 28, 2017


It's there an American version of this? or does that somehow further prove the articles point?


From Threadbare, Homeland Security is interested in the gauge of bra underwires (because the US plays this game to a fare-thee-well for clothing, and H.S. is not distinct from Customs enforcement).
posted by clew at 5:12 PM on February 28, 2017 [1 favorite]


Well it is important to me since I am a botanist, but I am also a pedant, so take your pick of buckets.

Ah, but what kind of bucket - pail, canister, hod, or scuttle?
posted by Greg_Ace at 5:54 PM on February 28, 2017 [2 favorites]


What kind of bucket do we have for folks who keep yammering on about Jaffa Cakes right in front of those of us who can't get any?

I'd commit a crime for a Jaffa Cake right now.
posted by Mary Ellen Carter at 6:03 PM on February 28, 2017


Would you say a Jaffa Cake is on your bucket list?
posted by Greg_Ace at 6:39 PM on February 28, 2017


Say, Americans, looky what I just found!!
posted by Greg_Ace at 6:42 PM on February 28, 2017


(Only 16 left in stock...err, 15)
posted by Greg_Ace at 6:43 PM on February 28, 2017


Some odd tax laws in the US

Ice cubes
Rent a cow
Flour Exemption
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 8:24 PM on February 28, 2017 [1 favorite]


My head starts swimming at "biscuits" with British stuff, and I end up thinking of corn pone with a chocolate drizzle

Well, from the other side of the pond, I was mighty confused when I first came across "biscuits and gravy"... digestives with a sauce made from meat juice? I was rather disappointed when it turned out to be scones with white sauce...
posted by 43rdAnd9th at 8:52 PM on February 28, 2017 [3 favorites]


Meanwhile Americans shake our heads in puzzlement at Brits who unconvincingly suggest that cookies have some sort of favorable peptic benefit.
posted by Greg_Ace at 9:40 PM on February 28, 2017 [1 favorite]


I once performed at a peptic benefit...it wasn't very favorable, though
posted by Greg_Ace at 10:08 PM on February 28, 2017 [2 favorites]


... most humans are not topped by a thin but scrumptious layer of chocolate.
Another reason why people are terrible.
posted by um at 10:28 PM on February 28, 2017 [3 favorites]


The whole thing arouses my appetite for the classics
posted by thelonius at 2:11 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]


The Genderqueer Activist asked for a source for the statement that 4% of people identify as nonbinary. It comes from a 2014 Dutch survey of 8000 people, where they found ~1% were binary trans (identifying with the "opposite" gender from their birth assignment) and ~4% were "gender ambivalent" (identifying more-or-less equally with the male and female genders).

This is quite exciting, because the best estimates of the nonbinary population previously converged on about 0.4%

More discussion at that link.
posted by daisyk at 2:26 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]


Jaffa Cakes are OK, but I'd rather have a Cherry and White Chocolate Lu Pims. Sadly, I don't think they make them any more and only do the Raspberry and Dark Chocolate variety.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 2:47 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]


So we're saying that each Jaffa Cake's own bake-category self-identification should be accepted and respected?
posted by Segundus at 3:53 AM on March 1, 2017


The Genderqueer Activist asked for a source for the statement that 4% of people identify as nonbinary. It comes from a 2014 Dutch survey of 8000 people, where they found ~1% were binary trans (identifying with the "opposite" gender from their birth assignment) and ~4% were "gender ambivalent" (identifying more-or-less equally with the male and female genders).

This feels both interesting and tricky. Without having seen the question, I suspect most of this 4% would consider themselves cis without second thought and that they're the people with a weak sense of gender identity. A nuanced look at how people experience gender would be interesting, but it's really hard to tease out "weak sense of gender identity" from "has the luxury of not thinking about their gender identity". But 4% is a low enough number that they're probably doing a pretty decent job of it. (I mean, most cis people haven't thought about it, almost by definition, but they're not going to admit to anything that sounds even vaguely like ambivalence in a survey about gender identity.)
posted by hoyland at 4:09 AM on March 1, 2017


> i don't want to live in a world where cakes have raisins in them

Is panettone bread or cake? Answer carefully because your future depends on it.
posted by ardgedee at 4:15 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]


Panettone is clearly cake: involves eggs, is only eaten at special occasions, has a very light texture.

But it's clearly bread, because the uncooked mass is beaten to develop gluten for structure, as opposed to a cake batter which is intended to be light and crumbly when baked.

So, if we take a panettone and put it in a sealed box with a flask of poisonous gas and a source of radiation ...
posted by nonspecialist at 4:45 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]


Jaffa cakes are awesome but Polish Delicje are not too shabby and have a wide number of delicious flavors.
posted by wheek wheek wheek at 4:58 AM on March 1, 2017


There was a similar issue, tax wise, with the X-Men.
They argued in court that the X-Men, being mutants, were not human. This is because action figures of humans are classed as dolls and are taxed differently to action figures of non-human creatures, which are classed as toys.
I believe they won that and effectively halved the tax rate.
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 5:10 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]


I'll choose death please.... no no I meant cake. Is it too late to change my mind... tea with the vicar it is!
posted by diziet at 7:00 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]


This is great, but it's somewhat surprising to see it warmly received here, since it's basically an argument for gender as purely a social construct, and in the last few years a much more essentialist stance on gender has become popular here.

On the basis of the argument in the linked post, with which I agree, there's no reason to conclude that somebody socially categorized as a boy at birth, but who later identifies as non-binary, or anything else, is more "really" non-binary (etc) than they are a boy or man, as if the original categorization were a mistake and the subsequent claiming of identity merely represented the correcting of that mistake. Yet that's the essentialist (and I would argue ultimately deeply un-progressive) implication of gender identity discourse in recent years.

Of course you might have other strong reasons for respecting a person's declarations about their categorization rather than society's. For example, the sanctity of personal freedom of expression might be the core of your value-system. But overwhelmingly arguments for the coherence of the gender identity concept rely on the insistence that people's gender identities are "facts about the world" in a simple sense.
posted by oliverburkeman at 7:32 AM on March 1, 2017


Trick question. Panettone is panettone. It is neither bread nor cake.
posted by mochapickle at 8:19 AM on March 1, 2017


This is great, but it's somewhat surprising to see it warmly received here, since it's basically an argument for gender as purely a social construct, and in the last few years a much more essentialist stance on gender has become popular here.

I disagree that the discourse on gender here is gender essentialist. Though I agree that perhaps the public discourse is. Saying that gender is a social construct does not imply it is completely mutable and unimportant.

Of course you might have other strong reasons for respecting a person's declarations about their categorization rather than society's. For example, the sanctity of personal freedom of expression might be the core of your value-system.

Saying that gender is purely a social construct does not mean that it is not real, deeply felt, and important. You can consistently hold the position that gender is a social construct, and want to respect gender identification not only for personal expression, but because respecting gender identity is important to human dignity, and not respecting it harms people.

The problem with framing the issue as "personal expression" is that in typical liberal rights discourse it typically follows that all we need do is not obstruct someone's gender ID or persecute someone for it. Instead, I would suggest that we are obliged to actively promote acceptance and inclusion of different gender identities. The personal expression justification for acceptance of trans and non-binary gender identity is toothless and pretty hollow.
posted by lookoutbelow at 9:31 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]


One thing I learned recently is that a lot of public health experts have been advocating for population surveys to move away from the "one-question" model to the "two-question" model in order to capture more accurate data on gender identity.

One question:
-Are you male or female?

Two question:
-What was your assigned gender at birth?
-What is your current gender identity?

It's still imperfect-- certain versions still leave out the intersex respondents, still a problem for those who identify as genderqueer or gender diverse (unless that response is an option). But it would allow for much more accurate data collection about those who are transgender-- and being able to identify them would allow us to cross-reference data to quantify the health disparities they are experiencing.

One recent study estimated the current US adult transgender population at approximately one million, but the authors pointed out that estimates based on surveys that obscure the data (the one-question format) will necessary lead to lower numbers than actual.

Also, I once bought faux-Jaffa cakes for my father, because he loves chocolate and raspberry, but he found them repellent. SUCH AN AMERICAN.
posted by a fiendish thingy at 9:53 AM on March 1, 2017


(Also, if you enjoy taxonomy fights and history, I highly recommend Harriet Ritvo's The Platypus and the Mermaid-- it maps out how many taxonomy systems were in popular usage right up until creatures that broke the models were discovered, and all the in-fighting that accompanied those discoveries.)
posted by a fiendish thingy at 9:56 AM on March 1, 2017


Raisins may be the best part of a cake

Go home, Wittgenstein, you're drunk.

"Because a common theme in Marvel Comics had been the struggle for mutants like the X-Men to prove their humanity, the case shocked numerous fans."

Well, it's kind of complicated. The X-Men mutants from the very beginning have been described as Homo superior, a separate species--although I guess that's been retconned to "Homo sapiens superior", technically a subspecies--so there's some basis for that. On the other hand, they've also been shown to be able to reproduce with humans and produce (AFAIK) non-sterile offspring, so there's that. I guess that I always assumed that the whole point was something more in line with Star Trek's Federation, which promotes equal rights for all sentient beings, regardless of their species or even physical basis (i.e. energy beings). On a more practical note, I think that at different times in the incredibly tangled history of Marvel and Toy Biz, they were probably making a lot more off the toys than they were the comics, and if it were necessary to declare that the X-Men were technically unusually intelligent jackfruit to keep the whole thing going, well, whatever.
posted by Halloween Jack at 11:06 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]


Also, I once bought faux-Jaffa cakes for my father, because he loves chocolate and raspberry, but he found them repellent. SUCH AN AMERICAN.

I am not American at all, and a pretty adventurous eater - if it stands still long enough, I'll try it. Chocolate and orange is just Weird, and you are Weird if you like it.
posted by Dr Dracator at 11:18 AM on March 1, 2017


Saying that gender is purely a social construct does not mean that it is not real, deeply felt, and important.

I totally agree (for some value of "real") – it's currently much less controversial within the left to assert that race is purely a social construct, but that certainly doesn't mean it's unimportant.

But seeing that something is a social construct does have certain consequences that are different from the position that gender identity is simply a pre-existing aspect of each person's personality, awaiting discovery. For example it lends weight to the feminist goal of "abolishing gender", which would be both an obnoxious and presumably impossible goal, if gender were something already given in the fabric of nature.

I guess my main stumbling-block here is that I have absolutely no introspective sense of what it could mean to have a gender identity, as distinct from my socially constructed gender or my personality-in-general. I can't find one when I look inside, and reading other people writing about their own experience offers no clues. I know that one response to this, perhaps hinted at above by hoyland, is that I must therefore be cisgender, because I am privileged not to have to think about the matter. But that's circular logic, and anyway I have thought about the matter…
posted by oliverburkeman at 11:26 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]


Chocolate and orange is just Weird, and you are Weird if you like it.

Fight m--wait, weird is cool. Carry on, then.
posted by Halloween Jack at 11:36 AM on March 1, 2017


(Only 16 left in stock...err, 15)

Down to 7...I bet that vendor is going to be very confused why they got a sudden run on that product.
posted by Greg_Ace at 12:26 PM on March 1, 2017


> I think it's the USA's that to blame... why your digital camera can only record 29:59 of footage

No, that would be the EU. Messing with consumer electronics device definitions has a history. In 1989, they tried to reclassify camcorders as video recorders (14% tariff) instead of TV cameras (4.9%). The EU version of my old 1999 Sony Digital8 camcorder didn't have an analog video input.
posted by ASCII Costanza head at 3:29 PM on March 1, 2017


It's still imperfect-- certain versions still leave out the intersex respondents, still a problem for those who identify as genderqueer or gender diverse (unless that response is an option). But it would allow for much more accurate data collection about those who are transgender-- and being able to identify them would allow us to cross-reference data to quantify the health disparities they are experiencing.

An awful lot of trans people would consider it completely inappropriate to be asked what sex they were assigned at birth and their "current" gender identity is (see a recent AskMe), especially since many people do not see their gender identity as having changed, but rather having been recognised/acknowledged by others. Far more people would answer "Are you transgender?" or "Does your gender identity differ from that assigned at birth?" because they're less intrusive (and arguably more inclusive). There's arguably the reverse problem to that which spawned MSM.

Personally, I'll grit my teeth and accept "of transgender experience" if it'll get people who won't answer "are you transgender" to answer the question, even though I think it's problematic. But I sure as hell won't tell you what gender I was assigned at birth unless I think you have good reason to know. And, realistically, surveys that have reason to know don't phrase the question that way. I'm being grumpy, but this is a way of saying that if public health at large is suddenly going to take an interest in us, they maybe want to listen to us and the handful of people who've been plugging away on that research for years.
posted by hoyland at 4:45 PM on March 2, 2017


« Older A Millennial Reviews: ‘Seinfeld'   |   Someone once told me that culture was meat wrapped... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments