| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/21/2007 10:17:53 AM · #251 |
Originally posted by escapetooz:
...Another factor for the amount of poverty in women and children... stay at home moms. Scenario: Typical "Model" family. A woman gives up education and career to be a stay at home mom and do the family thing. She is putting in the work (roughly) of 2 full time jobs but is not getting paid for any of it and is not gaining any "work" experience. Meanwhile her husband is off doing years of work, school, what have you, getting promotions, taking care of the financial aspects of the household. They both put in a LOT of work to create that family BUT the woman has nothing "tangible" to show for it. Divorce comes. Sure the wife might get child support and alamony but chances are it's not enough. She is now on her own, no job skills, possibly no house, trying to support her children. Working crappy, underpaid jobs. While the husband is still making all his money and now only has to support himself (save the checks).
This is very, very common. It makes me sick to hear complaints about Alamony and child support. There are exceptions of course, but for the most part, IT MAKES SENSE! |
To this I can only say "tough cookies." No one held a gun to anyone's head and forced them into those roles. It is a decision made within the family unit. I have little pity for stay at home moms who find themselves middle aged with no job experience. They made the choice to be a stay at home mother. I'm not saying that being a SAHM is a bad choice, but it is one that is made freely. The man could just as well stay at home and be a stay at home dad while Mom goes out and works.
As for child support...don't get me started...I lose 50% of my pay (after taxes, mind you) to a woman who makes twice as much as I do thanks in large part to the penis hating feminazi that sits on the bench in the jurisdiction where my support case resides. |
|
|
|
05/21/2007 10:48:36 AM · #252 |
Originally posted by Efergoh:
Originally posted by escapetooz:
...Another factor for the amount of poverty in women and children... stay at home moms. Scenario: Typical "Model" family. A woman gives up education and career to be a stay at home mom and do the family thing. She is putting in the work (roughly) of 2 full time jobs but is not getting paid for any of it and is not gaining any "work" experience. Meanwhile her husband is off doing years of work, school, what have you, getting promotions, taking care of the financial aspects of the household. They both put in a LOT of work to create that family BUT the woman has nothing "tangible" to show for it. Divorce comes. Sure the wife might get child support and alamony but chances are it's not enough. She is now on her own, no job skills, possibly no house, trying to support her children. Working crappy, underpaid jobs. While the husband is still making all his money and now only has to support himself (save the checks).
This is very, very common. It makes me sick to hear complaints about Alamony and child support. There are exceptions of course, but for the most part, IT MAKES SENSE! |
To this I can only say "tough cookies." No one held a gun to anyone's head and forced them into those roles. It is a decision made within the family unit. I have little pity for stay at home moms who find themselves middle aged with no job experience. They made the choice to be a stay at home mother. I'm not saying that being a SAHM is a bad choice, but it is one that is made freely. The man could just as well stay at home and be a stay at home dad while Mom goes out and works.
As for child support...don't get me started...I lose 50% of my pay (after taxes, mind you) to a woman who makes twice as much as I do thanks in large part to the penis hating feminazi that sits on the bench in the jurisdiction where my support case resides. |
I think this is a really mean view point held because you are affected by paying child support. Sorry you don't feel it's your responsibility to take care of your children.
The decision to be a stay at home mom is not just hers, it is a family decision, one that is depended upon the fact that there is an assumption that one parent will take care of the FAMILY financially while the other takes care of the rest. When the FAMILY breaks apart you can't expect the half that was doing all of that unpaid labor to be left in the cold with nothing.
If the roles are reversed and the man stays at home, same thing. If the mother makes more money and he takes the kids, by all means she should pay child support too.
If she makes twice as much as you than that isn't the poor stay at home scenario and that was not what I was talking about. If she has the kids full time then yes I agree you should pay some, not 50%. I don't know what state you live in but that's not how things went down for my child support or my brothers. My mom NEEDED the help and my dad wasn't ordered to pay much and she let him pay half of what the courts ordered if he took care of things that needed to be payed for here and there (clothes, dentist, etc). My stepdad is ordered to pay just as much as my dad (for my little brother) was and I know for a fact he makes more money.
I don't know how it all works. Our legal system is flawed for sure and I'm not denying that. Some men get screwed and pay more than they should while some women get screwed and get practically nothing. |
|
|
|
05/21/2007 11:00:01 AM · #253 |
Sorta off topic because the op doesn't really want personal experience to bias her theory. I lived with a guy for several years who was divorced. He had three kids, two of which lived with him. The third lived with her mom. He had to pay child support for the one living with her, she didn't pay anything for the two he had. She earned more money than he did.
The reason the third one lived with her mom was because he suspected he wasn't the dad(pre-dna testing). So this brings me to another little bump in the road. How many men paid child support for kids that were not fathered by them?
I have also talked to women that actually picked out the wealthiest guys to f**k based on how much child support they would receive when(not if) they became pregnant. The men had no idea these women were using them in this manner. They just thought it was their lucky night. This was around the time I decided that a person should establish their worth on an individual basis. I stopped wringing my hands about who was treated fairly.
OK. Back to the serious discussion about why women aren't equal.
BTW. I live in a town that has 3 colleges, a vo-tech and several business schools. The high schools allow students to take college classes for free for two years. So, at least here, someone would have to decide they do not want to get more education, more than saying it isn't an option for them. |
|
|
|
05/21/2007 01:05:34 PM · #254 |
Originally posted by pcody:
Sorta off topic because the op doesn't really want personal experience to bias her theory. I lived with a guy for several years who was divorced. He had three kids, two of which lived with him. The third lived with her mom. He had to pay child support for the one living with her, she didn't pay anything for the two he had. She earned more money than he did.
The reason the third one lived with her mom was because he suspected he wasn't the dad(pre-dna testing). So this brings me to another little bump in the road. How many men paid child support for kids that were not fathered by them?
I have also talked to women that actually picked out the wealthiest guys to f**k based on how much child support they would receive when(not if) they became pregnant. The men had no idea these women were using them in this manner. They just thought it was their lucky night. This was around the time I decided that a person should establish their worth on an individual basis. I stopped wringing my hands about who was treated fairly.
OK. Back to the serious discussion about why women aren't equal.
BTW. I live in a town that has 3 colleges, a vo-tech and several business schools. The high schools allow students to take college classes for free for two years. So, at least here, someone would have to decide they do not want to get more education, more than saying it isn't an option for them. |
No I understand there are problems. I don't mind personal stories, as I said, as long as they aren't used as attacks. I think you raised a good point. Our legal system is severly flawed. The point of child support (at least in my humble opinion) is to provide income to the people who need it. I think this should be based on income and who has the children, and should not just be given to women regardless of these factors. The reason I see this as a women's issue is because most of the time the women are the ones that need the help, but as you have illustrated that is not always the case. The big problem I think (though I dont have all my info on the laws) is that a lot of the cases on child support are subjective and dependent upon the lawyers fighting and the judge's ultimate ruling.
Trust me, I have some stories about aweful women a lot like the ones that you have told. But also a lot about men just as bad. And sometimes it is the women who can't afford to get a proper lawyer or who don't WANT to fight for their support because they are thinking more about the man than themselves or their children (such as in abusive relationships. many times the women run away and leave the man with everything to scared or still to conscerned about him and his reputation to fight.) It's sad but true and happens all too often. I don't want to hear cries out of "AH HA! See it's the women's fault!" because you have to look at the reasons women might not fight, just like any "choice" sometimes it is influenced way beyond factors that anyone can realize...
Think of the presidential races as what I'm trying to say on "choice". Supposedly we are chosing every step of the way until the final election and in the end we still don't like what we've got. You got to think.... you are limited to the candidates, out of those, limited to who can afford to get their names out there so that they will get the vote (presumably those with large amounts of family money and/or supported by large corporations that undoubtedly influence their platforms) and then you get to the end and you have 2 choices, neither of which seem that great and you wonder "this is the best our country can do?"
That is how I see "choice" in most situations. It's a long line of picking the lesser of 2 evils. Career or family or trying to fit in both, fight for support and be hated for it or try and do it all on your own and have the possibility of living in poverty, choose a career that is "female" dominated that is easier to get into but pays less or choose a field that is more "male" dominated, harder to get into, and has no gaurantee that you will be paid equally but you will probably make more in the long run.
I'm not saying this is only women, it is everyone. I'm just saying for all those that say "tough luck it was her choice" you have to look at WHAT choices a woman has and what the CONSEQUENCES of those choices are. Women and minorities have significantly LESS ideal choices and routes to attain those choices than the majority. In the end we are left with a result that is much less than ideal but possibly better (though not always) than the alternative. |
|
|
|
05/21/2007 06:31:20 PM · #255 |
hmm guess I have to disagree with everything to get this thing hopin again? lol.
*Insert controvery here* |
|
|
|
05/21/2007 06:44:31 PM · #256 |
Originally posted by pcody:
Sorta off topic because the op doesn't really want personal experience to bias her theory. I lived with a guy for several years who was divorced. He had three kids, two of which lived with him. The third lived with her mom. He had to pay child support for the one living with her, she didn't pay anything for the two he had. She earned more money than he did.
The reason the third one lived with her mom was because he suspected he wasn't the dad(pre-dna testing). So this brings me to another little bump in the road. How many men paid child support for kids that were not fathered by them?
I have also talked to women that actually picked out the wealthiest guys to f**k based on how much child support they would receive when(not if) they became pregnant. The men had no idea these women were using them in this manner. They just thought it was their lucky night. This was around the time I decided that a person should establish their worth on an individual basis. I stopped wringing my hands about who was treated fairly.
OK. Back to the serious discussion about why women aren't equal.
BTW. I live in a town that has 3 colleges, a vo-tech and several business schools. The high schools allow students to take college classes for free for two years. So, at least here, someone would have to decide they do not want to get more education, more than saying it isn't an option for them. |
The issue with anecdotes is that they are useful to disprove a point, but not to make a universal point. If you are saying that child maintenance as a concept is flawed, then you are stretching one anecdote too far. If you are making the point that it is not perfect, or can result in unfairness, then fine. The issue is not anecdotes themselves, but how they are used.
|
|
|
|
05/21/2007 07:19:19 PM · #257 |
Originally posted by Efergoh:
As for child support...don't get me started...I lose 50% of my pay (after taxes, mind you) to a woman who makes twice as much as I do thanks in large part to the penis hating feminazi that sits on the bench in the jurisdiction where my support case resides. |
In Michigan, child support is determined with a table that takes both parents' income into account. Perhaps you should get yours adjusted if she really makes that much more than you.
Remember, it took both of you to make those children in the first place. |
|
|
|
05/21/2007 08:46:03 PM · #258 |
Originally posted by escapetooz:
I think this is a really mean view point held because you are affected by paying child support. Sorry you don't feel it's your responsibility to take care of your children.
The decision to be a stay at home mom is not just hers, it is a family decision, one that is depended upon the fact that there is an assumption that one parent will take care of the FAMILY financially while the other takes care of the rest. When the FAMILY breaks apart you can't expect the half that was doing all of that unpaid labor to be left in the cold with nothing.
If the roles are reversed and the man stays at home, same thing. If the mother makes more money and he takes the kids, by all means she should pay child support too.
|
Guess what? The world itself is a pretty mean place. Try as you might, Utopia will never be achieved. Sorry to bust your bubble.
I take personal offense that you would assume that I don't feel responsible for my children. I see this as a typical feminist assumption of men. I love my son. He is mine, and yes, I am responsible for him, and I take responsibility for him. I do feel that support should be commensurate with wage. between taxes and child support, I loose nearly 2/3 of my income. Illegal immigrants picking lettuce make more money than I do at the end of the day.
My personal experience coupled with other first hand accounts of other men trapped in the Friend of the Court nightmare tells me that not only is the system flawed, but it is biased toward the mother.
When I was still in the Marine Corps, I did not have a problem paying what I was ordered to pay. I thought it was a bit steep, but between my income and my wife's income, the deductions from my pay wasn't as painful. It bothered the hell out of me that every time I saw my son's mother she was in a different new car, has new clothes while my son's clothes were threadbare, but I dealt with it.
I'm now no longer married, and the Marine Corps put me out to pasture after I got my ass blown off in Iraq. When I first got out, I requested a review of the case and an adjustment in the support order. I was living on a little more than $600 per month disability from the Veterans' Administration. I couldn't walk more than a few feet at a time, and work was pretty much out of the question.
3 months later I got a letter from the court notifying me that there was a warrant for my arrest for nonpayment. I arranged a court date to plead my case. I was sitting in a wheelchair while the (female) judge told me I better get well quick and get a job because she didn't see a reason to lower the order. Mind you, the order was higher than what I was receiving from the VA for disability.
Over the last 4 years I have been fighting to get the order lowered to something that I could afford and still get by myself. The order is still higher than my monthly income, but state rules only permit garnishment of no more than 50% of net pay. So, yes, I am still paying, but I am still falling behind every week. What is even more insulting, I am being charged interest on the arrears that are piling up (I am being charge interest on money that was neither borrowed nor loaned).
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
In Michigan, child support is determined with a table that takes both parents' income into account. Perhaps you should get yours adjusted if she really makes that much more than you. |
Been trying for years to no avail.
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Remember, it took both of you to make those children in the first place. |
Again, I'm insulted that people assume that my complaints about support payments equal disregard for my son.
|
|
|
|
05/21/2007 09:13:36 PM · #259 |
Originally posted by Efergoh:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
In Michigan, child support is determined with a table that takes both parents' income into account. Perhaps you should get yours adjusted if she really makes that much more than you. |
Been trying for years to no avail.
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Remember, it took both of you to make those children in the first place. |
Again, I'm insulted that people assume that my complaints about support payments equal disregard for my son. |
Don't be insulted, in many cases, that's exactly what is going on. I know a guy who got paid under the table for years simply to avoid making child support payments while he drove a $40,000 vehicle. I would think that your case would generate a bit more sympathy from the court, but, it's not out of line with other horror stories I've heard.
I know nothing of your specific case, but here's a calculator that uses the guidelines for Michigan in case you haven't seen just how far out of whack your payments are. |
|
|
|
05/21/2007 10:00:32 PM · #260 |
How come I've never heard of women paying child support? Can someone tell me why?
As a matter of fact, I never got child support from my mom when she left me with my dad.. We ate spaghettios every night and put up with it..
=o |
|
|
|
05/21/2007 10:17:28 PM · #261 |
Originally posted by Beautiful-Joe:
How come I've never heard of women paying child support? Can someone tell me why? |
that's discrimination! why are women viewed as "weak" and need not pay child support? in the name of women equality, this must be changed :p |
|
|
|
05/21/2007 10:22:40 PM · #262 |
Originally posted by Beautiful-Joe:
How come I've never heard of women paying child support? Can someone tell me why?
As a matter of fact, I never got child support from my mom when she left me with my dad.. We ate spaghettios every night and put up with it..
=o |
Awe c'mon dude. If we want them to start paying child support that means we'd need to give them the right to work. I don't know about you but I sure won't let that happen, no sir!
Next thing ya know, they'll be wanting to vote and stuff.
Ridiculous. |
|
|
|
05/21/2007 10:50:53 PM · #263 |
Originally posted by Efergoh:
Originally posted by escapetooz:
I think this is a really mean view point held because you are affected by paying child support. Sorry you don't feel it's your responsibility to take care of your children.
The decision to be a stay at home mom is not just hers, it is a family decision, one that is depended upon the fact that there is an assumption that one parent will take care of the FAMILY financially while the other takes care of the rest. When the FAMILY breaks apart you can't expect the half that was doing all of that unpaid labor to be left in the cold with nothing.
If the roles are reversed and the man stays at home, same thing. If the mother makes more money and he takes the kids, by all means she should pay child support too.
|
Guess what? The world itself is a pretty mean place. Try as you might, Utopia will never be achieved. Sorry to bust your bubble.
I take personal offense that you would assume that I don't feel responsible for my children. I see this as a typical feminist assumption of men. I love my son. He is mine, and yes, I am responsible for him, and I take responsibility for him. I do feel that support should be commensurate with wage. between taxes and child support, I loose nearly 2/3 of my income. Illegal immigrants picking lettuce make more money than I do at the end of the day.
My personal experience coupled with other first hand accounts of other men trapped in the Friend of the Court nightmare tells me that not only is the system flawed, but it is biased toward the mother.
When I was still in the Marine Corps, I did not have a problem paying what I was ordered to pay. I thought it was a bit steep, but between my income and my wife's income, the deductions from my pay wasn't as painful. It bothered the hell out of me that every time I saw my son's mother she was in a different new car, has new clothes while my son's clothes were threadbare, but I dealt with it.
I'm now no longer married, and the Marine Corps put me out to pasture after I got my ass blown off in Iraq. When I first got out, I requested a review of the case and an adjustment in the support order. I was living on a little more than $600 per month disability from the Veterans' Administration. I couldn't walk more than a few feet at a time, and work was pretty much out of the question.
3 months later I got a letter from the court notifying me that there was a warrant for my arrest for nonpayment. I arranged a court date to plead my case. I was sitting in a wheelchair while the (female) judge told me I better get well quick and get a job because she didn't see a reason to lower the order. Mind you, the order was higher than what I was receiving from the VA for disability.
Over the last 4 years I have been fighting to get the order lowered to something that I could afford and still get by myself. The order is still higher than my monthly income, but state rules only permit garnishment of no more than 50% of net pay. So, yes, I am still paying, but I am still falling behind every week. What is even more insulting, I am being charged interest on the arrears that are piling up (I am being charge interest on money that was neither borrowed nor loaned).
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
In Michigan, child support is determined with a table that takes both parents' income into account. Perhaps you should get yours adjusted if she really makes that much more than you. |
Been trying for years to no avail.
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Remember, it took both of you to make those children in the first place. |
Again, I'm insulted that people assume that my complaints about support payments equal disregard for my son. |
You know, I didn't meant to insult you. I actually typed that before I read your situation and continued on and AGREED with you that it was unfair as it went on, forgetting I had typed that. So we both made assumptions here. You from the start came out all a blaze saying "tough cookies" and labeling me "typical feminist" when the typical feminist is NOT what the media paints. It's what you THINK is typical, not what is.
I don't think your situation is fair. Not at all, and if you had read what I wrote after, you'd realize that. |
|
|
|
05/21/2007 10:53:38 PM · #264 |
Originally posted by Beautiful-Joe:
How come I've never heard of women paying child support? Can someone tell me why?
As a matter of fact, I never got child support from my mom when she left me with my dad.. We ate spaghettios every night and put up with it..
=o |
I have heard of it. Did your dad fight for it? Did he take her to court?
|
|
|
|
05/21/2007 11:03:58 PM · #265 |
Originally posted by Beautiful-Joe:
How come I've never heard of women paying child support? Can someone tell me why?
As a matter of fact, I never got child support from my mom when she left me with my dad.. We ate spaghettios every night and put up with it..
=o |
Here in MI, the guidelines are based only on the number of kids, who has custody and the salaries of the parents. Gender is irrelevant (or at least it's supposed to be). |
|
|
|
05/21/2007 11:05:58 PM · #266 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Gender is irrelevant (or at least it's supposed to be). |
This sadly would only be true in a "Double Blind" test, and is not apt to happen any time soon.
Ray |
|
|
|
05/21/2007 11:31:45 PM · #267 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Here in MI, the guidelines are based only on the number of kids, who has custody and the salaries of the parents. Gender is irrelevant (or at least it's supposed to be). |
That would only be possible if the judges who signed the orders were secluded from the parties involved, and read transcripts of testimony that was devoid of gender identification.
Every person...every last one of us has a bias and an agenda. Anyone who claims otherwise is a liar...anyone who continues to insist after being called on it, is a good liar.
|
|
|
|
05/21/2007 11:44:38 PM · #268 |
Originally posted by Efergoh:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Here in MI, the guidelines are based only on the number of kids, who has custody and the salaries of the parents. Gender is irrelevant (or at least it's supposed to be). |
That would only be possible if the judges who signed the orders were secluded from the parties involved, and read transcripts of testimony that was devoid of gender identification.
Every person...every last one of us has a bias and an agenda. Anyone who claims otherwise is a liar...anyone who continues to insist after being called on it, is a good liar. |
Hence the caveat in parentheses |
|
|
|
05/22/2007 12:38:55 AM · #269 |
Hehe.. My dad took my mom to court yes.
My mom said that he was harrassing her by taking her to court and she was ordered to pay the support. But she hired a different lawyer who made up a mental illness to protect her. (The judge later ordered her to pay the support.. And she was killed unfortunately. I have a new mom now. One who is responsible. But she still lives off my dad's money. She doesn't have a job). Then my dad and I along with alllll of my other brothers (Gavin, Ripley, Vincent, Darius, Yannai, James, Daniel) lived on spaghettios and ramen for the next three years. Then we met my new mom. They had a couple of kids. I lost one of my brothers. We are a screwed up bunch but we are family. And just think, if it hadn't been for my cheap-ass mother, we would've all been fine in the first place. |
|
|
|
05/22/2007 08:41:42 AM · #270 |
Originally posted by Beautiful-Joe:
Hehe.. My dad took my mom to court yes.
My mom said that he was harrassing her by taking her to court and she was ordered to pay the support. But she hired a different lawyer who made up a mental illness to protect her. (The judge later ordered her to pay the support.. And she was killed unfortunately. I have a new mom now. One who is responsible. But she still lives off my dad's money. She doesn't have a job). Then my dad and I along with alllll of my other brothers (Gavin, Ripley, Vincent, Darius, Yannai, James, Daniel) lived on spaghettios and ramen for the next three years. Then we met my new mom. They had a couple of kids. I lost one of my brothers. We are a screwed up bunch but we are family. And just think, if it hadn't been for my cheap-ass mother, we would've all been fine in the first place. |
ahhh well that explains your general disdain for women. Now you need to learn that that was one woman and get past it to see that women are all different, just as men are all different and there are dads that leave and moms that leave and you can't judge all women based on your personal experience. But you just illustrated yourself that moms CAN be required to pay support, weither they do is another story, just as it is with dads. |
|
|
|
06/07/2007 03:16:46 AM · #271 |
I'd like to start this up again.
New topic: Reproductive Rights. Yes, I want to get into it about the dreaded A word and the like.
Personal stance: It should be legal and accessable. I don't think I could personally do it, but it is not up to me to decide for anyone else. Birth control and the morning after pill should be easily accessable as well. More of the morning after pill would lead to less abortions. Also... better sex ed. To hell with abstinence only, it breads ignorance. |
|
|
|
06/07/2007 03:42:05 AM · #272 |
Originally posted by escapetooz:
I'd like to start this up again.
New topic: Reproductive Rights. Yes, I want to get into it about the dreaded A word and the like. |
if you must discuss this, may i suggest you start a new thread for it separately? unless, you feel that it is directly related to feminism or women equality, which was supposed to be the topic of this current thread. |
|
|
|
06/07/2007 03:56:12 AM · #273 |
Originally posted by crayon:
Originally posted by escapetooz:
I'd like to start this up again.
New topic: Reproductive Rights. Yes, I want to get into it about the dreaded A word and the like. |
if you must discuss this, may i suggest you start a new thread for it separately? unless, you feel that it is directly related to feminism or women equality, which was supposed to be the topic of this current thread. |
it is. it is one of the dominant feminist issues. |
|
|
|
06/07/2007 04:09:45 AM · #274 |
Originally posted by escapetooz:
Originally posted by crayon:
Originally posted by escapetooz:
I'd like to start this up again.
New topic: Reproductive Rights. Yes, I want to get into it about the dreaded A word and the like. |
if you must discuss this, may i suggest you start a new thread for it separately? unless, you feel that it is directly related to feminism or women equality, which was supposed to be the topic of this current thread. |
it is. it is one of the dominant feminist issues. |
i think that is one reason why, to some(most?) people, feminist groups are being too extreme in their work - trying to relate anything they could, to make themselves the centre of attention, or appear to have an agenda. the last time i checked, child birth something that related to both the male and female gender. maybe i've forgotten about the amazons. |
|
|
|
06/07/2007 04:14:27 AM · #275 |
Originally posted by escapetooz:
Originally posted by crayon:
Originally posted by escapetooz:
I'd like to start this up again.
New topic: Reproductive Rights. Yes, I want to get into it about the dreaded A word and the like. |
if you must discuss this, may i suggest you start a new thread for it separately? unless, you feel that it is directly related to feminism or women equality, which was supposed to be the topic of this current thread. |
it is. it is one of the dominant feminist issues. |
Are you referring to reproduction where there is no sperm to fertilize the egg? I think in most, if not all, cases of human reproduction the contribution of both a man and a woman were required.
Message edited by author 2007-06-07 04:16:26. |
|
