viagra 24 hours delivery

7 Questions about Images On the Internet of the Final Pages of Catwoman #1

Abhay Khosla

SPOILER WARNING.

According to the internet, the final pages of CATWOMAN #1 by Judd Winick and Guillem March focus upon a tenderly erotic scene of The Batman and Catwoman having aggressive sex, which is apparently a thing that they show in the comics these days.

So, after looking at these images– and/or having stared longingly, however you want to phrase it… (and not having read any other comics lately to write about for this site since I’m not really reading comics at the moment, for various my-time-is-limited reasons not worth getting into here)… but so, yeah:   I have questions.

Here’s an image of one panel, courtesy of Scans_Daily

Question One.  When Catwoman says “Still… it doesn’t take long…“, what does that line mean exactly?  Is she… Is she implying that The Batman orgasms really fast, like right away, like maybe even in his bat-underwear?

I don’t know– on the one hand, I’d like to think that The Batman would have more control than that because … because he’s super-aware of his body or he has super-discipline over his body, after being trained by ninjas and Liam Neeson.
On the other hand, The Batman’s a regular guy and maybe we should all accept that, you know, that’s a thing that happens to regular guys, especially if they’ve had a couple Zima’s, and they’re young and they’re not really sure what’s going on, and they don’t really like the Daves Matthews Band but one of their songs is playing and why am I crying?

My point is The Batman’s not Superman– the very fact he’s not invincible  is what makes him The Batman instead of  Superman, right?  So if we agree that’s the fundamental appeal of The Batman is his inherent vulnerability, then maybe The Batman having a problem with premature ejaculation, maybe that makes him ever more The Batman.

 

 

Question Two.  Why is Catwoman tweaking his Bat-ears with her hands?  Does she think he can feel that?  What is going on there? Do people who live in the DCU think The Batman has a deformed skull or…?  What is that?

And since this is a thing that happens in real life– since you know and I know that people have definitely, definitely, definitely dressed up in those costumes and had sex in the bathroom of comic conventions, at least Dragon*Con because that one’s in Hotlanta and the heat and the sweat and the Bat-a-rangs, it’s probably just like that movie Body Heat except ever so slightly more Batmanish… when that happens in real life,  do you think teasing the Bat-ears is a thing that, like, the guy actively requests?  “Play with the Bat-ears.”  Am I the only one who hears that in their head when they look at that image?  And also: how do I stop hearing that oh god how do i stop hearing it?

Question Three.  Here we have the cliffhanger of the comic, which is The Batman having his nipples played with.  Why are people who create Bat-comics so fixated on his nipples?

The classic Neal Adams shot– The Batman, shirtless, nipples surrounded by thick swaths of chest hair…

… to the present, with Chris Sprouse and Grant Morrison, and nipples.  At the outset of his run, Morrison promised fans a return to the “hairy-chested love god” years of Adams, Bat-nipples thus pivotal to the early promotional efforts for his run…

Can you think of any major film franchise that has ever been as defined by its main character’s nipples as Batman has?  Think of poor Joel Schumacher.  If you google “Schumacher” and “Batman” and “nipple,” you get 241,000 results.  If you google “Schumacher” and “Tigerland” (i.e. the Veitnam-era drama that Schumacher directed, in which he arguably discovered Colin Farrell)… I only get 140,000 results.  Joel Schumacher’s entire film career has Batman’s nipples inexorably at its center, like a tittified Scylla and Charybdis. (If Joel Schumacher has a third nipple, let’s agree to call it Rudolph).

At what point when you’re deep in the Batman mythology, deep in the lore, at what point does the siren song of The Batman’s nipples drag you to a watery grave? I ask you.

I note here, for the record, that when The Batman was defeated by Bane in the 90’s, the Knightfall creators were certain to show you Bane’s nipples on the comics’ cover, as if to suggest that only a villain with larger nipples than Batman was man enough to defeat The Batman.

Question Four. If you have a problem with this scene, if you’re not a fan of this scene– if this were drawn better and written better, would this have worked for you?  Is the problem for you one of CONCEPT or EXECUTION?  In the words of Val Kilmer in the Oscar-winning film Real Genius, “would you qualify that as a launch problem or a design problem?”

(My pet theory is that for a sex scene in comics, you want to go with smaller panels.  See, Chaykin’s work in American Flagg #3, your better scenes from Guido Crepax, Fantastic Four #23, the Steranko Nick Fury/Contessa scene, etc.  Pet theory.  Creepy, creepy pet theory.)

Question Five. As part of this whole DC-Nu 52, whatever this is called, this is probably one of the most  heavily advertised and promoted comics that Judd Winick has written in recent memory, since at least 2000’s Pedro & Me. Every  issue of the DC-Nu launch titles is being reviewed a million times over, by every comic site under the sun, this one included.  Plus, video interviews on MTV‘s website (“We’re getting back to the essence of what Catwoman is“)(?).  Plus, TV commercials, media coverage, etc.  And yet, in response to that opportunity, this is the direction Winick went in– exploitation fare that might get a certain kind of fan talking, rather than attempting to sell himself as a writer of any substance.

Question: if Winick tomorrow were to try to launch a serious, artistic series, after his career at DC, after material like the foregoing, an original series which he tried to sell as the effort of a quote-unquote “real” writer, would you be willing to … to “believe” him?

You know, Winick’s doing his job.  This will probably sell some comics– it’s my recollection that there was a decent-sized audience in the 90’s for sexy crap, and since most of the DC relaunch is rooted in the 90’s aesthetic… Heck, might work; might work.  But can you put your name on this kind of thing and remain untainted by it?  A lot of people in comics– they’re doing the jobs of selling comics. Sometimes, maybe that job’s not so pretty.  To be honest, I think of Judd Winick as being a joke… but maybe I think that based upon material that to some extent calls for him to be a joke…? Are you able to separate that out when– when they ask you to?  I know with other people, I’ve struggled with that; I’ve had that reaction of “Oh, now you really mean it; well, ain’t I lucky“, and so.

But this is how the guy used this bigger stage he’s on, so maybe any ambition in Winick died a long time ago; maybe the question is moot.  On the other hand, he states in interviews that the defining characteristic of his writing is “edginess” (!), so maybe hope springs eternal.

Related: when you imagine them creating this scene, do you imagine those inset panels zooming in on Batman’s hand were in some kind of script, all typed out, or added in by an artist trying to find ways to “spice up” the scene?  Which is worse?  Is there any way to say that one of those things is worse than the other in this particular case?

Question Six.  Why does the Batman have to be such a shitty fuck-buddy to Catwoman?  “Angry” and “gives in”–?  Why can’t the Batman just be a fucking cool bro, like Ashton Kutcher in that one movie, instead of hate-fucking broken girls?

Is it that fans want The Batman to, like, punish crime with his cock?

Question Seven.  So, we have some images that seem to have been designed to “get people talking“, and here I am talking about them.  To what extent am I complicit? To what extent have I tainted myself by association?  With every “you’re wasting all of our time creating worthless shit” greeted with “the fact you care we make terrible shit incessantly is proof that we’ve done the job of making you care,” how much am I myself guilty of distracting you from your life?

36 Responses to “ 7 Questions about Images On the Internet of the Final Pages of Catwoman #1 ”

  1. This was pretty funny. But… maybe you should actually read the comic before commenting on it. It’s pretty fun. Dumb as hell, but fun, and sexy and kinda silly. I didn’t expect very much from this book at all, and it kind of surprised me by actually being a smutty good time. Maybe you can slag Winick off for not aiming higher than that, but I’m also not sure that it’s such a bad thing, once in a while, for a comic to just do a good job at nicely drawn smut and nothing more.

  2. on Question One: premature ejaculation…

    Batman can beat anything, with proper preparation.
    Context, context, context.

    Lemme No-Prize this a little. Catwoman made the pass. She didn’t give him enough time to prepare here. She had him right where she wanted him.

    Advantage: Catwoman

  3. Ed pretty much has the size of it right there. It’s nicely done, nicely executed dumb fun, and yes, Catwoman and Batman have sex in their cat-and-bat-suits in the end, which is absolutely hilarious and awesome. And y’know what, I believe there’s been a million posts on this here interweb pleading for the right of comic book people to make comic books that are “just fun,” or “dumb fun,” or what have you, that aren’t, like, Superboy punching the head off of Matter-Eater Lad because of Gritty Seriousness, and that our own Abhay Khosla may have contributed a column or twelve to that train of thought, and I wonder, what exactly is the difference between the guilty-pleasure dumb fun of seeing someone fight a Nazi dinosaur or whatever and the guilty-pleasure dumb fun of seeing Batman and Catwoman do it in their Batman and Catwoman suits? Both are adolescent and juvenile, but one is just violent, which is cool, while the other involves icky icky sex?

  4. On Batman being a terrible fuck-buddy, I think this is pretty much the standard depiction of the character, right? One gets the impression that in general Catwoman is just a cooler, more fun person to hang around with, while Batman is an uptight prick, making “harrumph, harrumph, my city, harrumph, cowardly and superstitious” noises all the time, even whilst ejaculating. Even back in those old “hairy-chested love-god” stories, Talia is always like “I totally want to fuck,” and Batman is like “humph humph humph, you were once the sperm of my sworn enemy, humph”, and it’s like, what the fuck is wrong with you, dude, unclench that Bat-sphincter for once!

  5. This isn’t meant to be directed at anyone, but I’m always put off by the argument, “You have to read the entire work in question to have an opinion.” It’s like…I don’t anchovies on pizza, and if I smell anchovies on a pizza, I don’t need to eat that pizza to reaffirm I don’t like anchovies.

    Showing Batman, or any other character marketed and sold to children, having sex…that’s anchovies on ice cream. It’s putting something that’s perfectly fine on it’s own in something it has no business being near.

  6. Batman’s pissed his tights before, right? So premature ejaculation isn’t a stretch. I like the idea of a sexually dysfunctional Batman; maybe he needs to take those pills from the commercials with the guy who looks like “Bob” Dobbs, too.

    But, poor Alfred, cleaning out that costume!

  7. Why is that the last page and not on the cover…?

  8. “Showing Batman, or any other character marketed and sold to children, having sex”

    Batman hasn’t been marketed to children since the mid-eighties, at least. And really, you have a problem with Batman having sex, but not with him beating the shit out of people on a regular basis, or a major recurring character in his book torturing and killing hundreds of people over the course of the last couple decades?

  9. This kind of makes me want to pick up this issue.

  10. I don’t buy the “He beats people up all the time, so why can’t he have sex” argument for a minute. STAR WARS is chock-full of Stormtroopers getting shot and dudes getting their arms cut off, but would you be happy with Han and Leia having a bit of over-the-clothes frottage? Uh-uh. Violence is conflict and all stories – especially superhero stories – are about conflict. You can’t have superheroes without conflict, so there has to be violence. Batman FIGHTS crime, he doesn’t FUCK crime. And nobody would argue with an insinuation here or a rejoinder there, but full-on spending several pages depicting Bat/Cat foreplay is just icky and unnecessary.

    Admittedly, it’s in a Catwoman comic and I’m guessing the target audience for that is 10% grrrls and 90% mouth-breathing cock-wranglers.

  11. I don’t mind that they have sex. It’s just that… it’s not subtle in any way. A touch of subtlety would go a long way. Their relationship can be implied, or even shown any number of ways… and your imagination can fill in the blanks. Otherwise, I think it just reads like pandering. “Look, you can read about sexy times between Batman and Catwoman in here!” Like a trashy nighttime soap opera.

    It sort of reads like Winick never read Watchmen, but saw the movie and liked the costume sex scene.

    What’s sexier- this, or the famous Jim Steranko Nick Fury/Contessa scene?

    Same thing with the Starfire deal in whatever book that’s from. Starfire being open to sex with multiple partners? I suppose that makes sense to a warrior race who don’t share what we consider to be our standard social mores. It’s just that it’s so… blatant, I guess. It hits you over the head. HEY KIDS! SEX!

    I dunno. Half of me thinks it’s a little distasteful, and the other half thinks “shut up, grandpa.” If you dig it, I’m not going to give you a hard time. I just think that there’s something to be said for a touch of subtlety.

    The overt violence in so many DC books of late, on the other hand…

  12. First, I am not interested in any way, shape or form in buying a comic for a superhero sex scene.
    That being said … If people want to spend their money on it, let ‘em. I agree that this “we like our violence but keep sex out of comics” position is just nonsense.
    It’s ALL nonsense – fictional stories about fictional characters that you either love and take seriously or you don’t care about. And within that you have well-written, thoughtful nonsense and mediocre nonsense and really bad nonsense.
    So God forbid the Batman/Catwoman sex scene, but ending another New 52 Bat title with the Joker’s face hanging from a wall is “kewl” and “artsy” and appropriate? Nonsense.

  13. Thanks for the comments, everybody.

    1. “I didn’t expect very much from this book at all, and it kind of surprised me by actually being a smutty good time.” Glad to hear you liked the comic– I don’t think that’s what I’m in the market for, but it’s cool the issue as a whole worked for you. From what I can tell from reviews, the rest of the issue is Catwoman having a standard-ish Catwoman adventure, though, so I don’t know that the rest of it would change any of my questions.

    2. “Batman can beat anything, with proper preparation.” But isn’t there a line in, like, Batman RIP that Batman has prepared for everything? I don’t know if RIP is still in continuity though. (A lot of complaints about this scene were that the continuity was fuzzy– not joking; apparently, the sex scene is inconsistent with Hush somehow).

    3. “pleading for the right of comic book people to make comic books that are just fun, or dumb fun, or what have you, that aren’t, like, Superboy punching the head off of Matter-Eater Lad because of Gritty Seriousness, and that our own Abhay Khosla may have contributed a column or twelve to that train of thought”– Oh? I don’t know– it’s possible. I remember thinking people were rejecting what was charming and odd about all these characters when all that started, but I don’t know that I’d call “charm” and “dumb fun” the same thing, exactly.

    But I don’t know– you’re probably right and I’ve been inconsistent. I don’t really remember. I can speak for right now, and right now, I don’t think the opposite of Gritty Seriousness is “dumb fun”. I think those are just the opposite sides of the same unthinking coin, you know? “Fun” has weird connotations to me in comics, and I feel like that’s been the case for a while, is why I’m hemming and hawing here…

    4. “Showing Batman, or any other character marketed and sold to children, having sex…that’s anchovies on ice cream.” Ah, so that’s a problem with concept and not execution. I find that interesting. That’s the question I most don’t know the answer to. I think I’m okay with the concept– other people have pulled off scenes in the past– Steranko’s Nick Fury & Contessa page is a great, great page, you know? People like seeing fictional characters get together– there are a lot of people really invested in the idea of those two in particular getting sexy together. There are probably ladies on tumblr or livejournal who are DOWN with this scene. (And who refer to them as “The Bat and the Cat” which is more creepy than John Waters ejaculating onto Crispin Glover’s ventriloquism doll to me and I’m not sure why, that phrase– the Bat and the Cat really, really freaks me out and I couldn’t guess why).

    But then if it’s execution, that means, what, I can imagine in my head a BETTER Batman-Catwoman scene…? Some platonic ideal of Batman-Catwoman lovemaking that this failed to meet…? EEP! Well, that doesn’t sound right either! So I really genuinely don’t know where I come out on that. When I think on it long enough, I actually start talking myself into “Maybe that’s actually a great scene.” So I don’t know.

    5. “Batman’s pissed his tights before, right?” … yes. Yes, he has.

    6. “Why is that the last page and not on the cover…?” Guillem March did a nice job on the cover, actually, if you go look at it. I like how he drew the background, at least.

    7. “And really, you have a problem with Batman having sex, but not with him beating the shit out of people on a regular basis, or a major recurring character in his book torturing and killing hundreds of people over the course of the last couple decades?” … Yes?

    8. “This kind of makes me want to pick up this issue.” According to some of the comments, it’s a pretty good one. I hear the new Wonder Woman is good, too. Men at War had things to like about it. I haven’t read much else– I just haven’t been to a shop and I’m distracted lately. You know: my character on Borderlands isn’t just going to level up on his own…

    9. “would you be happy with Han and Leia having a bit of over-the-clothes frottage?” … Yes. Also: something something George Lucas joke.

  14. 10. “Starfire being open to sex with multiple partners?” Well, it’s at least not like it’s at the same time, yet.

    11. “ending another New 52 Bat title with the Joker’s face hanging from a wall”… what? EDIT: Oh, right, right– I heard something about that. So weird.

  15. @moose n squirrel: A lot, if not all, of the animated stuff is definitely marketed towards kids, though, right? And while there’s obviously a big difference between comics-Batman and animated-Batman at any given time, there’s still at least the specter of the idea that kids will be attracted to comic books depicting their favorite character (admittedly, sales suggest that it hasn’t turned that way in a long, long time). So there are still aspects or interpretations of the character being marketed towards kids, at least. At the same time, I agree with you that Batman having sex isn’t really a bigger deal than, say, the existence of the “Goddamn Batman” version.

    My problem with the issue is that I *didn’t* find it fun, big, dumb, or any other stripe; for me, the first half of Red Hood did a lot better job of that (though the overall comic was Not Very Good). I guess I expected a little more. In the Exiles, Winnick showed he had a tendency to do cheesecake-oriented stories when the team went to a nude beach while a female Sunfire distracted Morph by trying on lingerie–but at least that was balanced by interesting character development. There was none of that here; this is barely more sophisticated than the sex-crazed Catwoman Kevin Smith was trotting around a few months back. I know it’s a reboot and all, but the Catwoman here seems a few narrative steps back from the last one.

  16. Personally, I would love to read a comic where Batman fucks crime.

  17. I’m going to do this Abhay style:

    1) “batman hasn’t been marketed to children since the mid-eighties, at least.”

    He hasn’t? Just in the past two years, here are the things I know of:

    – Batman: Brave and the Bold cartoon
    – toys that went along with that cartoon
    – Batman: Lego video game
    – toys that went along with that

    Batman is practically Barney or Kermit the Frog.

    2) “Ah, so that’s a problem with concept and not execution.”

    I have a problem with any character marketed and sold to 4 year olds shown having explicit sex in a product made by the parent company. If it was insinuated, ok, fair game, but a full on shot…no thank you. And I know what you’re saying…is there a classier way to show it? Possibly, and that would be *much* better, but I may have a problem with that, too, I dunno.

  18. Batman not marketed to children since the mid-80’s?

    My kid is wearing Batman underwear as he sleeps under Batman sheets and bedspreads. Every Walmart in the land has Batman toys in it, and has for many years.

  19. This comic exists so that is review can exist.

  20. This was my favorite Abhay post of all time, partly because I didn’t give half a shit about what he was tearing down, but partly because it was actually rather concise by his standards. Good show, man!

    As for my opinion, I basically think that they should’ve gotten rid of the costume from the great Brubaker/Cooke/Stewart run and just gone back to the awful Jim Balent costume, if this is the direction they wanna go in. (I’m sure Abhay thought those comics were shite too, if he actually read any of them, but that’s ok).

  21. Okay, to make my point about “kids and Batman” absolutely thuddingly clear: no actual child has picked up a Batman comic book in at least twenty years, and if you were complaining about children being turned off by the content of such a comic, you are decades too late.

    Also, I realize that this America, founded by The Pilgrims and all, where we like our killin’ and our torture but screech to the high heavens if a stray nipple makes its way onto network television, but seriously – lighten the fuck up! Your kids, if they have them, are getting way more twisted and fucked up by the notion that it’s perfectly fine for a “hero” to run around beating people up, dangling them off ledges, etc. than by exposure to cheesecake and the whiff of consensual sex. Consensual sex: good! Torture and casual violence: bad! These are the radical positions I happen to hold.

  22. [...] • Abhay Khosla asks seven questions about the final pages of Catwoman #1. [...]

  23. “Is it that fans want The Batman to, like, punish crime with his cock?”

    I was drinking when I read this. You nearly owed me a new laptop.

  24. Chris Hero,

    You wrote: 1) “batman hasn’t been marketed to children since the mid-eighties, at least.”

    He hasn’t? Just in the past two years, here are the things I know of:

    – Batman: Brave and the Bold cartoon
    – toys that went along with that cartoon
    – Batman: Lego video game
    – toys that went along with that

    But see, if I’m a parent – I’m not, but if I were – I’d say, ‘Okay, so there are certain Batman products appropriate for my kid, and one’s that aren’t.’ Isn’t it safe to assume there are plenty of little Batman fans out there whose parents won’t allow them to watch The Dark Knight films or even the Tim Burton/Michael Keaton Batman? DC does provide a Brave and the Bold title for younger kids.

    Look, as a fan of the Silver Age I fully understand the desire to have comics return to a more simpler, age-appropriate format where moral science-based heros solved crime with little violence, flirted with their girlfriends and were depicted by the likes of Carmine Infantino, Gil Kane and Murphy Anderson. But at the same time, as a 37-year-old fan, I wince at the notion that comics are supposed to be, “Just for kids” and aren’t supposed to present adult situations. They shouldn’t exclude one age group for another, just provide different stories to appeal to different age groups. Seems like DC and Marvel and their respective parent companies do try and do that. You may wish you could buy your kid the regular monthly Batman comic, but it’s not like you don’t have other ways to satisfy his Bat-mania, right?

  25. If the second issue’s title is “The Morning After”, can #3’s title be “Enemies With Benefits”?

  26. [...] what Abhay Khosla had to say on the [...]

  27. The real surprise on looking at these panels is that Catwoman wears underwear under all that leather. A prudish streak after all?

  28. [...] Last, but by no means least, there’s Catwoman. In many regards, this title is much like the two Bat-ladies. Selina Kyle is a complex, interesting, powerful woman. The overall story is interesting and well-paced. Unfortunately, the last several pages have become quickly infamous. Batman appears in Catwoman’s room and the two engage in a pointlessly drawn-out sex scene. While the clarification of the love-hate relationship between the two as a physical relationship is fine, the presentation is frankly bizarre. The best overall analysis of this gratuitous plot point is brilliantly provided by Savage Critic. [...]

  29. it’s the way they did it that is making everyone unhappy. Batman’s had sex lots of times. so has Superman, Spider-Man, Wolverine…even Thor has had sex lots of times.
    there’s something about the whole scene and i don’t know exactly what yet, but it comes off to me as silly and not sexy at all.
    it’s supposed to be sexy. but it looks sad and gross. i guess most sex is just sad and gross, so there u go. there’s your realism.
    but i don’t think that’s what the comic was aiming for. it really was trying to be sexy.
    it’s got nothing to do with imaginary 5 year olds being traumatized by this. that’s silly too. sex isn’t as big of a deal to kids as it is to adults. believe me, i was a kid myself once. in fact, i think kids understand sex way better than most adults i know do. i don’t mean that they should be having sex, or that kids are sexy. cuz they aren’t. kids are probably the last people on the world i would ever fuck. and mostly becuz they just aren’t sexy at all.
    but adults wringing their hands and donning their armor to fight this so called offense to the innocence of childhood are just wacky, scared and possessive. adults mess it all up. it’s obvious that no one in this culture gives a fuck about love or sex at all. cuz they freak out about ‘sex’ and don’t think twice about murder and rape!!!
    yes, rape!!!!!
    people are fine with sex being depicted or referred to as along as it’s rape. god forbid there actually be consensual sex for pleasure between two people that don’t feel like they own each other. that’s what it comes down to. start watching for what things are and quit making dumb shit up. America is scared fuckless about sex. always has been overall.
    anyways, i thought the scene was dumb, but purely based on how gross and unsexy it actually was. DC suxxxx once again. they are all about tits and Marvel knows it’s all about the ass.
    (u guys really are dumbshits, aren’t you?)

  30. Hey. Espn linked here, brah.

    That is some committed research.

  31. [...] Volume: After reading Abhay Khosla’s ‘7 Questions about Images On The Internet of the Final Pages of Catwoman #1’, I found myself with some strange and unsettling feelings about the nature of Cat on Bat [...]

  32. I appreciate, result in I found just what I used to be looking for. You’ve ended my four day long hunt! God Bless you man. Have a great day. Bye

  33. Somebody essentially assist to make critically posts I would state. That is the first time I frequented your web page and thus far? I amazed with the research you made to create this actual post amazing. Magnificent task!

  34. [...] do not want to rehash Red Hood and the Outlaws, Wonder Woman, or Catwoman here; even though last month’s Catwoman #0 is obviously the principle motivator of this post. [...]

  35. [...] Last, but by no means least, there’s Catwoman. In many regards, this title is much like the two Bat-ladies. Selina Kyle is a complex, interesting, powerful woman. The overall story is interesting and well-paced. Unfortunately, the last several pages have become quickly infamous. Batman appears in Catwoman’s room and the two engage in a pointlessly drawn-out sex scene. While the clarification of the love-hate relationship between the two as a physical relationship is fine, the presentation is frankly bizarre. The best overall analysis of this gratuitous plot point is brilliantly provided by Savage Critic. [...]

  36. May I simply say what a comfort to find a person that
    actually understands what they are talking about on
    the net. You definitely realize how to bring a problem to light and make it important.
    A lot more people ought to check this out and
    understand this side of your story. It’s surprising you are not more popular since you definitely possess the gift.

Leave a Reply


seven × 1 =