Why I don’t want women to become ‘equal to men’

Written by Jessica Eaton

04 August 2018

 

We need to stop saying that women want to be equal to men – or that we are striving for women to be seen as the ‘same as men in society’.

 

After many a frustrating conversation with people who have somehow managed to mix up egalitarianism, equalism and feminism, this blog feels timely.

There’s only so many times we should have to explain that feminism is NOT a movement to make women equal to men. Feminism undoubtedly means different things to different people, but can we stop watering it down now? The dumbing down of feminism has gone too far in the third wave. I have heard feminism defined as everything from ‘the belief that all people are equal’ to ‘feminists believe that women should be the same as men in society.’ What? Nah.

Feminism is not ‘for the equality of all people’. Feminism is not ‘the belief that women should be treated the same as men.’ Feminism is not ‘the movement to make women equal to men in society.’ Feminism is not equalism.

Feminism is the liberation of women and girls all over the world from the patriarchy and misogyny that continues to harm and oppress them as a class of people. Feminism centres women unflinchingly and unapologetically. Feminism is the conversation about women’s issues in the world; without having to add some tokenistic sentence at the end acknowledging that men also experience some things too. Yah, we know. But we are talking about women right now, so hush.

The problem with saying that we are working towards women becoming equal to men is that it frames men and male cultures as being the optimum culture or the ideal goal that women should reach to become equal.

I’m here to say: what a crock of shit.

For women to be valid, whole human beings in society – feminism has got to move beyond this notion that women are striving for what men already have. I don’t want anything men already have. None of it. It’s a mess.

If we take modern men and male experiences as the ‘goal’ level for women to achieve in personal life and society, what would success look like?

  • Would success mean that women’s suicide rates rise to the same levels as the male suicide rate because as women reach ‘equality’ they must follow the patriarchal value of eradicating ‘feminine’ emotions and expressions, including talking about their feelings and seeking help?

 

  • Would success mean that women’s cancer mortality rates rise to the same rates as men because as women finally reach the almighty peak of maleness, they also stop seeking help for medical issues because of embarrassment, and just like men do now; they begin waiting until a health problem has become unbearable before they seek help, meaning cancer has usually spread and is more complex to treat?

 

  • Would success mean that women significantly increase their rates of violent crime and interpersonal violence to match that of men around the world?

 

  • Would success mean that women increase their murders of their partners and ex partners by at least 200% to match the rates of women killed by male partners and ex partners each year?

 

  • Would success mean that women increase their rates of sexual violence, trafficking and exploitation of men and boys at an unprecedented rate never before seen in history to achieve ‘equality with men’?

 

  • Would success mean that women become the most likely group to die in gun and knife violence with other women all over the world?

 

  • Would success mean that women working in aid roles begin abusing, sexually assaulting and sexually exploiting boys in deprived areas to match the male role model we currently have?

 

  • Would success mean women in power developing regimes in which baby boys were murdered or aborted because no one wanted a son?

 

  • Would success mean that women must begin carrying out many more terrorist acts and mass murders all over the world, especially school shootings – to claim equality with the men?

 

Is this what we mean by ‘feminism is the movement to make women equal to men’? Or when we say this, do we just mean the ‘good’ bits like higher salaries and more power in society?

It’s not. This is the stuff of nightmares. No one wants this. Even people who claim to hate feminism and claim that women should be equal to men in all arenas don’t REALLY want to see this level of sex equality. No one wants this in the world. No one wants women to step up to match what men already have.

I don’t think we’ve thought through this whole ‘we want women to be equal to men’ thing. I don’t think we have realised that we have framed male issues and experiences as the goal we are all supposedly striving for, and what that would actually mean for us all. All sorts of people hark on about how women finally being ‘the same as men’ in society would mean that we were respected, paid higher wages and would be safer. It’s bollocks.

The reality is, we cannot assume that what men in have society is the standard we should be striving for as women. Men are miserable and harmed daily by the patriarchy – they just haven’t figured it out yet. Men’s rights activists kick off on twitter about male suicide rates but don’t look into the way male gender role stereotypes they support; are harming them every day. Campaigns argue that men and boys are also victims of rape and that is absolutely true – but do not admit that the vast majority of perpetrators of those crimes are men. Activists argue that men are significantly more likely to be killed in violence than women which is also correct – but the fact that more than 97% of violence and murders are committed by men seems to escape them. I’ve even seen campaigns from men’s rights activists arguing that family courts are biased against fathers and men – and there is some truth in that claim – but to them I say this:

The laws about family court weren’t written by women. The legislation about children remaining with their mothers was not signed off by women. The majority of all judges are men. Legislators were men. Policymakers were men. The research that the majority of family court attachment and bonding theory was based on came from JOHN Bowlby. A man. A lot of the legislation and policies were developed in a time where men were the breadwinners and women were the childrearers. It made sense to the men in power that women should take care of the babies and men should go out and do important man things. Nowadays, MRAs are positioning that as ‘reverse sexism’ – but actually, its a legacy from the patriarchy. The assumption that you wouldn’t want to play an active part in your kids’ lives, dreamt up, supported by, signed off by and judged by your fellow patriarchal family court judge. Think about it. Women were not in influential positions at the time these systems were being developed. Women did not orchestrate these patriarchal systems. Men did.

All of the things wrong with society at present (and all of the things that even MRAs hate about society), were created by, funded by, legislated by, demanded by, invented by and sold by men. Therefore, why should feminism support a movement of women ‘becoming equal to men’? In fact, why should we be using male experience and cultures around the world as a blueprint at all?

There is something important to be said here. Feminism is the movement towards liberation of women and girls from the oppression and control of the patriarchy – but actually, the real change will come for the world when we rise up and dismantle the patriarchy together. The destruction of patriarchal and misogynistic values benefits everyone.

As a woman who is proudly radical feminist, is a specialist in the psychology of sexual violence against women and girls – but is also the Chair and Founder of the first male mental health and wellbeing centre in the UK, serving around 150 men per month – I can see that the patriarchy is killing all of us.

Men come into our centre having been abused, neglected, sexually exploited, having suffered with mental health issues and lived in misery for decades and they sit in front of us and say ‘I thought I should just shut up and put up – be a real man and not ask for help.’ Men so harmed by gender role stereotypes that they cry in therapy and then apologise for crying because it means they are not a ‘real man’.

The best way I have found to explain it to people is that the patriarchy harms men, but oppresses women. Often times, men hear us talk about the patriarchy oppressing, killing and dehumanising women – and when we say ‘patriarchy’ they hear ‘all men’. Hence the annoying phrase NAMALT (not all men are like that!).

My view, is that if men could detach themselves from the patriarchy and see how it harms them and makes them miserable, they would stop fighting against feminism as a movement. However, and this is important, it does mean that we have to actively challenge the warped current wave of liberal feminism which oftentimes completely contradicts itself and props up the patriarchy in a number of concerning ways. Not least by claiming that these gender role stereotypes are real, innate qualities and not social constructs that harm us all.

To explain how the patriarchal values of our world harm men and women, I’ve made this handy table:

(You can zoom in on this image if it displays too small)

2018-08-04

The point is this:

Men are not the blueprint.

The current epidemic of male violence cannot be the standard we all strive for. Men are coerced into, are propping up and are being harmed by patriarchal values. They don’t have it right. We should not be trying to emulate that. We should not be striving to become equal with men in their patriarchal misery – we should be challenging and dismantling the patriarchy and its global values until we can revolt.

True change in the world will only come with revolution. Revolution is not possible if we perceive male privilege and male experience as the ‘goal’ women should be working towards in the world. We don’t want to be the ‘same as men’. Why would be want to replicate a broken system? Why would we work towards total misery and increased violence?

I don’t know about you, but my vision for women is not that we become more violent, more misogynistic, more miserable, less able to speak about our emotions, less able to seek help, more likely to bully each other for ‘feminine traits’ and so confused that we begin celebrating the same toxic masculinity that is harming us every day.

That’s not my feminism. That’s not my vision for us all.

Imagine for a second, if we did dismantle the patriarchal beliefs and cultures centuries of male power have created for us. A world where men can show their emotions without worrying that someone will call them the ultimate insult: a woman. A society where women are not objectified as sex toys to be used up and thrown away when they get older or imperfect. A world in which teenage boys are not having to visit therapists and doctors about their erectile dysfunction and addiction to porn. A society in which rape isn’t a constant threat to women and girls all over the world – and a joke told about men in prison. A life in which men can participate and enjoy parenthood in equality with the mothers of their children because they believe their role is just as important. A workplace where a pregnant woman isn’t managed out of her job because she is perceived as unreliable – but where a man whose wife is pregnant is promoted for becoming a ‘responsible family man’. A world where women can become the main breadwinners and not make men feel insecure about it. A community where men can stay at home with the kids admiring the tenacity of the mother of his kids who rakes in the cash in a job she loves.

A world where the patriarchy no longer controls women, kills female babies because they were unwanted, hacks off vulva and clitoris of women, revels in porn, excuses everything with rape myths, positions ‘woman’ as the ultimate insult to men, sells women’s bodies and denies women the right to healthcare and advice about their own reproductive systems.

True feminism is revolution. Feminism is the liberation of women from the values and systems of the patriarchy. Feminism is the movement to challenge and dismantle the patriarchy, raising new generations of humans that do not fall into the same tropes we have. Feminism is not about centring men in our discussions or our events – but feminism will inevitably support men to be healthier and happier.

I don’t want to be ‘equal to men’. I want to rip up the blueprint and smash up the patriarchy and start again with our new generations. I want us all to take a step back, breathe and realise that the patriarchy harms all of us, and claiming that feminism is about women working towards being ‘the same as men’ in society is us moving in the wrong direction. And yet, the patriarchy in power are scared of women becoming more networked and more influential – because they know it will dilute the power of the patriarch.

With all the harm done to men by the patriarchy, I find myself asking men – what are you clinging on to it for? What is it about feminism that scares you? What is it about femininity that makes you feel so insecure? What do you stand to lose if we one day break down the patriarchal powers in the world?

Once we can answer those questions honestly and with integrity, we can take the first steps to breaking down the patriarchy and the patriarchal values, myths and messages being communicated all over the world.

 

Written by Jessica Eaton

Founder of VictimFocus http://www.victimfocus.org.uk

Tweet @JessicaE13Eaton

Email Jessica@victimfocus.org.uk

37 thoughts on “Why I don’t want women to become ‘equal to men’

  1. I would say the view of Family Court favouring mothers is completely untrue through experience and knowing of many other hundreds of women’s stories showing a similar pattern to my experience. I would therefore say it is damaging for mothers in general to make a claim that Family Court favours the mother. If researched well it would be seen that most cases going through the Family Courts involve abuse and abusers are being assisted by the Family Courts to continue this abuse by not using up to date scientific research of the logistics of abuse. Abusers are both male and female, with a much higher rate of male abusers than female abusers.

    Liked by 3 people

      1. Mras make the claim that family court is unfair on fathers and it is a completely baseless and false claim. It’s incongruous to see in the midst of an article rightly disavowing the aim of equality in favour of liberation support being leant to mra and fathers rights fictional notions that mothers are favoured in family court. Mothers are not at all favoured and face massive disadvantages and retraumatisation in family court.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. But the point of that part of the blog is to say that MRAs claim that the system is set up to support women and discriminate against men – so I used that section to argue that the system they hate so much that they claim is discriminating against men – was set up and governed by men

        Liked by 1 person

      3. Neither the intent not the impact of the family court system privileges women, there is not grain of truth to the suggestion that men are in any way disadvantaged by that system. Whilst the courts are institutionally patriarchal, within the family court system there are many patriarchal women advocating for the same patriarchal policies that harm women. These harms are further compounded by the myths spread by father’s rights activists claiming that the court is biased against men–it isn’t, it never was, and the prominence of this false narrative has the effect of influencing judges and others to act even more in father’s favour. Which is classic abusive male behaviour, the exact type we can’t lend any credence to.

        Liked by 2 people

  2. “Men are miserable and harmed daily by the patriarchy – they just haven’t figured it out yet.”

    I realize you screen comments, but hopefully you’ll post this one. The quote above, being a simplistic stereotypical dismissal – hopefully helps people realize how we need to provide the space for people to speak for themselves and their experiences, rather than have people speak for them… which is probably a principle of feminism already.

    Also important to note that there are many voices aside from MRAs who have good analysis of the situation.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. “I don’t know about you, but my vision for women is not that we become more violent, more misogynistic, more miserable, less able to speak about our emotions, less able to seek help, more likely to bully each other for ‘feminine traits’ and so confused that we begin celebrating the same toxic masculinity that is harming us every day.”

    I know that there are many schools of feminism, but I do not know of any that advocates for anything mentioned above.

    “With all the harm done to men by the patriarchy, I find myself asking men – what are you clinging on to it for? What is it about feminism that scares you? What is it about femininity that makes you feel so insecure? What do you stand to lose if we one day break down the patriarchal powers in the world?”

    Engles answered that question in “The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State” back in 1884.

    Patriarchy provides men with economic, reproductive, and sexual benefits heavily downplayed in this article.

    I really don’t get how a man in the 19th century understood that, but feminist women in the 21st century don’t (or just flat-out refuse to see it).

    Liked by 2 people

  4. “Feminism is the liberation of women and girls all over the world from the patriarchy and misogyny that continues to harm and oppress them as a class of people. Feminism centres women unflinchingly and unapologetically. Feminism is the conversation about women’s issues in the world; without having to add some tokenistic sentence at the end acknowledging that men also experience some things too. Yah, we know. But we are talking about women right now, so hush.”

    Replace the banner and the demographic and this could be any form of supremacy. This could have come straight out a National-Socialist pamphlet circa 1930. “We centre the Aryan people unflinchingly and unapologetically”

    And like all ideologies based on separation it’s devaluing your own and others humanity. By definition and inherently self-destructive. And so it will self-destruct. If you live long enough you’ll see.

    Like

  5. Family courts usually favor men when the father pursues custody. However, men do not pursue custody as often as women do. So it may look like the courts favor women with granting them custody but if there is a custody battle where men pursue custody then the courts are mores likely to favor men over women and the courts grant custody to the fathers regardless of wether or not it is the father or the mother who is incompetent or the abuser.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. I find it most suprising how you in turn admit, that men have lots of issues. You however have forgot to mention, that women being equal to men means, that

    > Girls and boys have an equal school suspension rate despite education researchers claiming that girls are bullying more than boys, especially against other girls and girls that develop anxiety going to school mostly because of other girls bullying them.

    > Boys have an equal rate of getting higher grades in school as girls, where the rate is now somewhere around 2:3 in all western countries.

    > Women doing more overhours at work, paid and unpaid, in order to pursue their career

    > Women getting 50% of the severe workplace releated diseases (currently at around 15-20%)

    > Women making 50% of the fatal workplace accident victims, where men currently hold 90%

    > Women doing 50% of the heavy, dangerous, dirty and unhealthy jobs which is currently for more than 90% by men

    > Prostrate cancer research getting 50% of the research funding (currently up to 4 times less, despite the higher mortality rates of prostrate cancer) compared to breast cancer research

    > Men getting equal amount of help as victims in DV cases, male help shelters, which now more or less are completely missing in all western countries (my country has more than 480 women’s help shelters but like 3 self-funded shelters for male victims, despite men are almost equally (47-50% depending on the study) as often victims of DV), as Erin Pizzey tried to get done in the 70’s already

    > Women making 50% of the homeless, where men are now 30% ahead of women

    > We close the empathy gap that disbenefits men

    No, feminism never wanted equality.

    Like

  7. This reads like a straw argument more than anything. From what I know no one actually claimed feminism is about women becoming “just like men” and all the baggage that brings with it. You never cite any feminist writers who advocate women being just like men in every aspect, so where are they?

    Like

  8. I agree with the comments above by Vanessa, Carabelle and Laurie regarding the treatment of protective mothers and their children within the family court system. You clearly state in your article that ‘there is some truth’ in the claim that the courts are biased towards fathers. I would like to know what evidence you have for that considering that the vast amount of research on this subject shows the opposite?

    I would recommend checking out the work of Louise Tickle (journalist specialising in family court abuses), Dr Gillian Mcdonald, Mothers Unite UK and Women’s Aid for UK based research. Both Barry Goldstein and Lundy Bancroft continue to do important work on this issue aswell. I would also highly recommend The Women’s Coalition in New Zealand. This is by no means an exhaustive list.

    The family courts are most definitely, as you say, a patriarchal system. However, this is not because children are able to remain with their mothers or that judges don’t support fathers to play an active part in children’s lives. Infact, I find both those claims extraordinary for many reasons.

    Firstly, 70% of fathers who apply for full custody will be awarded it, even in cases where there have been allegations by women and children of abuse (commonly, child sexual abuse). Within the past decade or so, family courts all over the world changed their default position to that of shared parenting (under pressure from powerful father’s rights groups). Considering that the majority of contact/custody cases involve domestic violence, this has obviously seen increased risk of harm for both women and children. In practise, family courts put the rights of fathers to have contact with their children above the right of mothers and those very children to be safe from harm. Child contact at any cost. Again, there is plenty of research on this. There are also many many women speaking out about their experiences (not forgetting the adult survivors of court ordered abusive contact) We need to start listening to them.

    Secondly, it seems you think ‘children remaining with their mothers’, and recognising attachment and bonding in regards to mothering, is somehow patriarchal? Lets not forget that before the Tender Years Doctrine mothers had no rights to their children whatsoever. Fathers essentially owned them. There are dire consequences for not acknowledging the harm that forced separation from their primary care giver has on children, let alone the psychological and emotional trauma it has on mothers. How is it radical feminist to support women being told by judges to stop breastfeeding so that they may hand their babies,unwillingly, over to men who may be outright dangerous or who have shown no interest or support? Because that is what IS happening. And that is the real life consequence of court ordered ‘equality’ and ‘shared parenting’. Only 10% of separated parents go to court for contact/custody cases. Most are able to sort it out amicably between themselves. How many single mothers wouldn’t want support from another person to raise their child – not many, I can tell you. How many good fathers would take children away from their mother knowing it would cause her great distress? It is not women’s liberation to abandon those mothers who for good reason don’t want to be forced (they will be jailed if they don’t) into contact/custody arrangements that are harmful to them and their children.

    Thirdly, you talk about the work of John Bowlby yet do not mention the work of Richard Gardner of which plays a huge part in modern family law. He was the originator of ‘Parental Alienation Syndrome’ an unproven ‘disease’ used against mothers in cases where children have alleged sexual abuse by their father. Not surprisingly, he also made many dangerous pro paedophile claims like the one below:

    Older children may be helped to appreciate that sexual encounters between an adult and a child are not universally considered to be reprehensible acts. The child might be told about other societies in which such behavior was and is considered normal. The child might be helped to appreciate the wisdom of Shakespeare’s Hamlet, who said, “Nothing’s either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.”

    Gardner, R.A. (1992). True and False Accusations of Child Sex Abuse . Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics.(p. 549)

    I implore you to look again at your claims about fathers and the family courts. What you say here is familiar to those of us with experience of father’s rights activism. It is harmful to women and children, and, right now, many of us are feeling like you’ve thrown us under the bus. You have a platform that survivors of the family courts do not have. Please don’t use it to hinder rather than help our cause.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Thanks for this well referenced comment. I think a lot of people have misunderstood my intent here. The point I was making is that many MRA and fathers justice organisations claim that due to children remaining with their mother most of the times after a split (this is NOT including domestic abuse cases or where father is offender where they manipulate the system a lot of the time and use the system to further victimise women and kids) – they therefore claim that mums get the kids and dads end up with weekend contact in the U.K. this happens a lot as standard.
      I’ve seen MRA websites claiming that this is feminism’s fault. It’s women’s fault. That women manipulate the system and get a better deal. I’ve seen them say it’s feminist campaigners that have caused this patriarchal system.
      They ignore that men set the system up, run it, legislate it, govern it, write the policies etc.
      So I was sort of arguing to that point that women did not create this system that they claim discriminates against them.
      The point that ‘there is some truth’ was about the fact that the standard set up in U.K. after a break up is that Mum has the kids and Dad gets contact in week or over weekends. When this breaks down, we use contact orders.
      Like I say, when Dad is abuser or wealthy or highly manipulative, it’s a very different story.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. That “standard set up” is decided by agreement between parents outside of family court. It is not “discriminatory” and has nothing to do with family court when the parents decide to agree arrangements between themselves as most do. They can and do make any kind of arrangement that they see best between them. Only in disagreement does the case end up in family court, these often are the instances where the men are abusive, controlling, and manipulative. The idea that men are discriminated against by their decision to be secondary carers/non-residential parent is itself antifeminist because it negates the ways that being a primary carer has a disadvantageous impact on women’s lives in patriarchal society and feeds into the idea that women are privileged as mothers, which they are not.

        What misogynists say about feminism on a chat board is one thing. The information about family court in this article is misleading and inaccurate even as it makes a feminist case for a liberatory politics–an essential component of which must include the recognition of the ways single motherhood is not a position of privilege.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. I think I’ve made it clear that I agree with all of this but the article was addressing specifically their gripe that the contact system is set up ‘by women’ to be against them, claiming that it’s the fault of feminism and female supremacy.

        Like

      3. My response in the article is very clearly aimed at MRAs claiming that they are suffering ‘reverse sexism’ whilst not realising the irony that it was men that set up and governed that system that they feel is oppressing them

        Like

      4. MRAs are arguing about something that has nothing to do with reality. The end goal of “fathers justice organizations” is to hold children over a mother’s head to prevent her from leaving.

        I’m not sure what women get out of pandering to their claims.

        Liked by 2 people

  9. I was literally JUST talking to a friend about this the other day about how I don’t want equality because it insinuates you have to be equal TO something, aka men, and I don’t want that, I want to liberated from the patriarchy. Thank you for putting it so eloquently into words, another fantastic blog post. Keep up the good work!

    Like

  10. I found this a very thought-provoking and interesting read, so thanks very much. I agree with almost every word. I think we can see that in western society what we basically have is a situation where a set of historical rules has created a set of perverse incentives which are probably beneficial to a relatively small cadre of individuals, and are not beneficial to the majority of either men or women.

    The effects of this are in turn that unhappy men are doing what unhappy men have always done everywhere, which is lash out fairly indiscriminately, at both men and women, making life bad for all concerned.

    We can see the effects of this on men every day: poor education and health outcomes, high unemployment, loneliness and suicide. Many other things.

    We can see that the motherhood penalty is damaging to both sexes. It’s pushing men into work and women out of it, when in many cases both genders in a couple would prefer different outcomes.

    So that’s not the world we want. I suppose we need a world where we have fewer preconceptions and prejudices of what we are supposed to do, while still accepting that even once we’ve got a perfectly fair environment, men and women may still choose to make different choices, and that’s okay.

    The question for me is how this world is brought about. This blog calls on men to get involved in the drive to end the patriarchy. How do we get men involved and how we make that happen?

    Perhaps I misinterpret, but it feels as if this blog says basically that men should form their own movement to address the impact of the patriarchy because they aren’t wanted in the feminist movement.

    Or perhaps just that men can’t even be expected to try and understand, and that change will be done to men, with or without our input, but once it has been done to us we will see it was good, and feel happier.

    I can’t help but feel that this isn’t the ideal approach. If we want to create this world, don’t we need to involve anyone who wants to be a part of it? Don’t we need a language which speaks to everyone, without contempt or suspicion, inviting them onto a journey with us.

    I’d like to be a part of that journey, and ideally I’d like to go on it with you, not in the same direction but apart.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. perhaps this quote can help:

      “As interest in feminist thinking and practice has waned, there has been even less focus on the plight of men than in the heyday of feminist movement. This lack of interest does not change the fact that only a feminist vision that embraces feminist masculinity, that loves boys and men and demands on their behalf every right that we desire for girls and women, can renew men in our society. Feminist thinking teaches us all, males especially, how to love justice and freedom in ways that foster and affirm life. Clearly we need new strategies, new theories, guides that will show us how to create a world where feminist masculinity thrives.”
      –bell hooks, The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity and Love

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Men are very much wanted in the feminist movement! In fact, most women love it because, its so refreshing to see or hear a man that is willing or trying to understand what our movement is TRULT about and to disavow the common lies and myths that are spool prevent in our culture. Amazingly, alot of men really believe that sexism is a thing of the past..lol..so, yeah, that’s what were up against

      Like

  11. As a man, I love this article and agree with it totally.

    It shouldn’t be asked of women that they reform towards being men to resolve inequality that is caused by men in the first place. It is us men who need to reform – be less violent, less obnoxious, and less criminally awful in general.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s