It's Raining Men ... on NPR

Friday, April 16, 2010


NPR ombudsman Alicia Shepard wrote recently that NPR "needs to try harder to find more female sources and commentators." She investigated NPR's stats and found them pretty lopsided. We wondered ... why so few women? So we asked blogger, professor and man Clay Shirky to posit his theory.

    Music Playlist
  • Stoney Street
    Artist: by Amon Tobin

Comments [44]

motorolaVE440 from USA

I have been working into IT industry for last 3 years, and i don't find much difference, in the treatment given to a male or a female candidate. In this world of competition even females should try to speak more by their work.

Jul. 05 2010 09:16 AM

Could you please fix the broken MP3 link? I would REALLY like to listen to this instead of just reading the transcript. Thanks.

May. 12 2010 09:33 AM
Jennifer B from Chicago

I'm a journalist myself, and I've spent 28 years of my life doing my very best male impersonation. It's only been in the last year or so that I've windexed my eyeballs hard enough to see that I will never be treated the same as a man, regardless of how smart I am, how I can out-tasteless-joke even the raunchiest, how easily I can just be "one of the guys," OR how often I ask/demand for better treatment, more $$, respect, etc.

It’s impossible to embody myself 100% like a man. But it IS possible to be 100% myself as a woman. But doing so would mean (gasp) embracing, rather than being embarrassed by, what Shirky calls "all of that kind of nurturing, social junk." What he speaks of and what Brooke allows to unfold is yet another conversation that sits on the premise that there is something wrong, shameful, and weak about smart, strong, career-oriented women embracing the feminine.

I guess it's not terribly surprising that Gladstone didn't defend the feminine archetype here. She’s of a generation in which being as man as you can got her as far as she is. And I respect her for that. While she's among the crowd Shirky wants to see more of, I'm certainly hoping that's I don't have to put that same varnish on my femininity to grow and succeed in my career.

There's a concept I once heard that speaks to this perfectly. It says humanity as a whole is like a bird, and each wing represents the male and the female. So in order to progress (aka fly), each wing must be equally valued, equally used, equally strong in society. What Shirky lobbies for and what Gladstone does not question, is that we need even more bulk on the already Mickey Rourkian male wing by having females be even more masculine. Imagine what the business place, marketplace, politics, education system, etc would look like if women WERE valued for what they bring to the world and for their oftentimes nurturing, compassionate abilities? Seems to me that's the only way this birdie's gonna fly.

May. 11 2010 02:39 PM

A proudhead lectures we be like him;
A journalist fails her own critique.
You both have done much better.

May. 04 2010 10:47 PM
Lindsay from Cambridge, MA

Thank you for this is a wonderful, thought provoking story. I've spent the last 10 years trying to get ahead in a male dominated industry and I think Mr. Shirky's comments, if intentionally exaggerated, are spot on. Unfortunately, it seems he did a disservice to his point by framing these behaviors so negatively because that only plays into the fears women have of being disliked. As he said and as I learned early in my career, working hard and hoping you get recognized is a common tact that women take and it is usually unsuccessful. Advocating for oneself is not pompous and stating what you can do is not arrogant if you have what it takes to back it up. I've learned over time that being assertive and confident doesn't make people like you less and it means they respect you more. And even if I hadn't found that to be true, I'd much rather be a respected b**ch who lives up to my potential than liked because I never do.

Apr. 23 2010 02:45 PM
Jennifer from Indianapolis, IN

I say thank you for talking about this Clay Shirky. It at least opens a discussion. In my 17 year career I've been told I was too assertive and vocal and it was off-putting. Now that I'm almost 40, have tried to restrain myself, taken my time and waited my turn I've been told I need to work on my "executive presence". I won't say I haven't made missteps or that I don't need to continually work on myself, but the fact remains I feel I have to walk a tightrope of meeting expectations to get what I want and deserve and I don't see the same in male colleagues who may be perceived as assertive and pushy, but are admired for it and viewed as having "executive presence" in spades. I don't have any answers and I certainly don't feel like a victim; it's just an interesting subject that deserves thoughtful debate and not knee-jerk anger or blame.

p.s. Loved Elaine's post on here. If you don't know who Brooksley Born is - go and find out right away.

Apr. 22 2010 11:59 AM
Mai Shiozaki from Washington, DC

Women should be more aggressive? Women should brag about themselves more? Essentially women should act more like men? That's the solution?

As press secretary for the National Organization for Women, it's my job to pitch the NOW president as an expert. I have found that generally media is still resistant to the idea of a female expert. I once pitched our NOW president to appear on an NPR show to talk about a major abortion legislation. I didn't hear from the producer, but half way into the show I got a frantic call from the producer saying, "This is a show about abortion and all the experts are men; I realized we need a female voice." She quickly got my president on the phone but it was for three minutes. I realized we were an after thought. For the rest of the segment male experts discussed women's reproductive rights.

That incident was so telling about how media approached female experts because even the female producer couldn't think outside the box -- even if the topic was about abortion.

Let me also add that I was a former reporter so I understand the limitations media face today. Editors simply don't have the time or resource to search for new voices. So it's my job to help them find new people.

We are a feminist organization so I understand there are politics regarding using a NOW spokesperson, but saying women experts should boast about their credentials and sell themselves better to the media is not the solution. Media has to wake up and realize women's voices matter. We are majority voters; women graduate from college more than men; there are more women in the work force; and advertisers, listen up: majority women control the purse strings in the family. That means women have buying power. So, if you're an advertiser and you just bought ad time on a show where male experts are discussing women's reproductive rights, I wouldn't brag about that.

Apr. 21 2010 03:24 PM

2 words- Brooksley Born

Apr. 20 2010 04:53 PM
Linda Lankowski from Wilbraham, MA

Loved the show. I hadn't noticed the low proportion of women - I must have been so used to hearing the male voices, that it seemed normal to me. Now that you mention it, though, I have to say I agree with Shirky that women don't sound as "authoritative" as men. We've been trained to not be the "biatch" and to phrase things differently - more as questions than as statements.

Before healing can begin, there must be recognition of the problem. So now, we've recognized the problem, and there could be several outcomes:

More women are used as experts/commentators on the radio, using the softer voice they currently use. This will bring the nation to an understanding that expertise does not have to be heard as strident, definitive answers.

OR radio shows find women to be experts/commentators who have the same strong, forceful voice the current (male) experts have, and we become used to that voice. Women will no longer tone down their message when speaking in a business setting.

Either way, we all win!

(By the way, if you need a female actuary as your expert, I'm willing to discuss issues...)

Apr. 20 2010 02:22 PM
Adrienne from Washington, DC

It's not ironic when a program examining the process of media reporting recapitulates the *exact* media failings on which it is reporting.

1) Clay Shirky has repeatedly contributed to On the Media for at least the past five years. A quick search of your website pulls him up. He's in your rolodex of "experts."

2) Clay Shirky doesn't have any actual expertise in the topic under discussion, gendered roles in society or a traditional media outlet like NPR. QED: you called in a generic 'pundit' who happened to have written something intentionally not thought through on a somewhat related topic in the past year.

3) Really, you couldn't bring, say, the NPR OMBUDSMAN on the air to discuss this? The National Association of Press Women wouldn't return your calls by deadline? You couldn't get the equally unqualified, but at least female, danah boyd on a telephone in timely fashion?

Way to blow out a lot of the trust you'd built with me and other listeners in the past.

Apr. 19 2010 08:54 PM
Austin Scott from NYC,

I agree the piece is ironic and patronizing but at least they are talking about a topic that obviously causes a reaction in many. Women are the majority and taking over much of the public and economic sphere. It seems to be cultural habits and perceptions that are the issue.

Apr. 19 2010 03:12 PM
Lauren Hall from MI

I'm glad you noted the irony of asking a man to comment on the lack of women as sources and commentators. Mr. Shirky's tired and typical response was a perfect example of why we need to hear more from women. His analysis predictibly, is that it's our fault, basically women are not enough like men; blame the victim. He listed many terrible attributes that are associated with men and blamed women for not having those very attributes, for not being men. I take exception to his premise that it is women that need to change. We need to challange cultural norms that continue to reinforce that women and children have less value. When you ask for our opinion, we actually have one and it is probably not the same as yours. NPR, this was a terrible ending to an interesting self reflection. You can do better.

Apr. 19 2010 02:51 PM
j koehn from california

So why does "This Week" on ABC, have only white guys in The Sunday Funnies segment? There are plenty of funny women and men of color. They tell topical stories and jokes. But each week it's the same old (and I do mean old!) half dozen guys.
How about a little George Lopez? Joy Behar? Whoopy? Ellen?

Apr. 19 2010 02:09 PM
amay cross from US

I'm afraid the commentators are right: it is really bad to comment on lack of female commentators with a male source--albeit smart and on the mark. It would have been easy.

I don't understand why last week's count was called unscientific, a count of expert names is a count. And if it comes up to 26% of women's voices, that's not good.

Even just try she source--at the WMC, they have loads of women experts in a directory. Or try google next time "she is an expert in" TK

Apr. 19 2010 01:39 PM
Phil from Chicago, IL

I hate these stories that claim women should behave more aggressively (i.e. like men) to succeed in the workplace. The better question is why can't men model there behavior on women thereby creating a better workplace.
One story that was missing in much of the subprime coverage was what would have happened if there were more women CEO's in board rooms? How many men must fail before we wake up and rethink this orthodoxy?

To quote musician Jim O'Rourke, "women of the world take over, because if you don't the world will come to an end."

Apr. 19 2010 01:32 PM
Jan Baker from Chicago, USA

It took me an hour this morning to find this show from last week and read the comments--it stuck with me that long. Thanks to Arti and REM and all who saw through the bs. I was so insulted I could have slapped Shirky. Listen, I'm sorry he can't see it, but women give the world so much more than he can appreciate. I wish he'd suffer just for a second what things would be like if women didn't take a wiser tack than mere self-promotion to be the equal of somebody like Skirky. Guess what? Everything isn't measured in what gets over in what people like him call culture. He can't begin to appreciate quality.

Apr. 19 2010 01:02 PM
Maria Brincker from Brooklyn, NY

Well - many interesting angles indeed. Shirky has a point about women and their lack of self-promotion and difficultly in the aggressive game of pretend overconfident certainty with blinders on that is often so dearly valued in the public sphere. But as rightfully pointed out by host Brooke Gladstone this is an issue that is deeply entrenched in the socialization that little girls go through and the beating grown women in public life receives as verbal stonings. And then there is of course the big issue of whether it would be nice to have other games in town than the combative one - i do think there is a place for caring beyond oneself and cooperation beyond the 'victorian almanac'! That being said i have written a rant myself that might support some of Shirky's points albeit from the rather different angle of mutual promotion through flirting:

comment are very welcome. Maria Brincker

Apr. 19 2010 11:33 AM

Interestingly, for all of the snickering from OTM and others, Fox News perhaps has the highest mix of women as anchors, guests, and pundits of the Big Three networks. Even O'Reilly has this mix.

Maybe there's something to consider regarding a network cast as pushy and right-wing.

Apr. 19 2010 10:30 AM
Emily Blair from Brooklyn

Have to add my voice to the chorus--hope it's not too high-pitched for you to hear. I found the selection of a male expert to interview on this subject not humorously ironic, but maddeningly ignorant! Women journalists, sociologists, historians and philosophers have been writing about these issues for years with much more depth and insight than Mr. Shirky demonstrated in this interview.

NPR has a long way to go in terms of diversity of every kind. I assume you are developing a plan to address this problem--a plan that goes beyond knowing better and doing the same old thing.

Apr. 19 2010 10:19 AM
jerkette from NYC

NPR coining new term: sexpert

Apr. 19 2010 08:03 AM
REM from Chicago

Reguarding Mr. Clay Shiry’s comments 4.16.10”

“And it looks to me like women in general, and the women whose educations I am responsible for in particular, are often lousy at those kinds of behaviors, even when the situation calls for it. They aren’t just bad at behaving like arrogant self-aggrandizing jerks. They are bad at behaving like self-promoting narcissists, anti-social obsessives, or pompous blowhards, even a little bit, even temporarily, even when it would be in their best interests to do so. Whatever bad things you can say about those behaviors, you can’t say they are underrepresented among people who have changed the world.”

Do I really have to behave more like a man to get a decent job and some respect? Just because men have historically dominated the business world, doesn’t mean they’ve done everything right in the past. I would rather change the system to one where no one has to behave like an “arrogant self-aggrandizing jerk” than to change myself to conform to a bad business culture. What’s wrong with presenting myself as who I am and what I aspire to be instead of lying and scrambling to live up to it? That’s self promotion done in a more positive light and truthful way.

Mr. Shirky may think it’s “false hope” “that women could be forceful and self-confident without being arrogant or jerky,” but what if we convinced the men to do it too? Maybe it’s the more feminine side of the yin-yang balance, but why should the spirit of business be masculine? We need to find balance and a healthy business atmosphere, the contributions of women will do that and that’s how we change the world to be a better place.

Apr. 18 2010 11:17 PM
Kate M from NJ

Your guest's comments would have been more right on if he'd been diagnosing why more men are callers on NPR-aired call-in shows than women.
An analysis of the WHOLE system of sexism, and how the media reflects the dynamics of the society it operates in, would have been more illuminating and interesting than inviting a man who rants to rant some more.

Apr. 18 2010 03:52 PM
Kat from Vermont

I value what Shirky has to say, but c'mon, you couldn't have selected someone whose focus is gender dynamics and sexism? He's so much more appropriate to address other issues.

The only way to change anything is to change it, i.e., concerned about inequality in the media? SHIFT the balance. Acknowledging the irony, laughing about that, and continuing on without unpacking why that was considered ok stopped well short of where it could have. OTM usually pushes and provokes and probes. Not this time.

Apr. 18 2010 03:49 PM
Rebecca from nyc

I expect more of NPR. This story blamed women for sexism. It was insulting and did nothing to educate or further the discussion about women in the media. This story was basically a way for journalists to feel like they are doing nothing wrong when they only call on white men as experts. There are lots of reasons why women may not put themselves out there more, including that it's seen as inappropriate and they are punished for it. And why were people of color mentioned in the intro and then never again? NPR should take a serious look at who it calls on as experts. That should start with the experts on this segment.

Apr. 18 2010 03:39 PM
Jylene Livengood from Lynn, MA

I have a new hero. Thank you Dr. Shirky! As a woman who had to learn the hard way to put myself forward just to survive, I actually thought your rant was correct and moderate. I wish I'd had training in my teens and twenties - instead, I actually had teachers and family trying to tell me how to be MORE demure because I was "unladylike" and people would not appreciate that!

We need diverse voices. I've worked in a lot of companies, some homogeneous, some heterogeneous. The more diverse companies on the whole had better cultures, more sustained growth and better customer relations. Homogeneous companies might have big growth spurts but it was a like our recent economy - boom/bust.

Personally, the retiring demure women were largely also bitter and felt overlooked, and the men around them often felt frustrated or just took advantage of them to do the work and lauded themselves for their "leadership." We need those voices. Exploitation isn't leadership but people who don't stand up aren't full contributors either.

Dr. Shirky, we need MORE of your voice! RANT ON!

Jylene Livengood
An assertive woman

Apr. 18 2010 02:43 PM
ed kriner from Reading Pa.

What difference does it make what the race or gender of the person is on NPR? They all toe the "party line" - that's the REAL problem. The party line at NPR is pro-corporate, pro-military, pro-torture, pro-war, pro capitalism.

Apr. 18 2010 01:33 PM
Gabriella Coleman from

Clay Shirky a scholar of networks and the Internet should know that networks, referrals, mentoring (who knows who, in other words), is as/more important than individual behavior.

You can be confident as can be, but it is not going to deliver any dividends if you are not invited.... to... speak at a conference or on NPR, for example.

I realize why you all invited him as his blog entry generated the controversy but the fact that you all did not get another (female) commentator to respond is in fact part of the problem....

Apr. 18 2010 11:35 AM
Vera from Charleston, SC

What a dumb insulting segment. There is no reason for women to be jerks or "Mommy Managers" to get ahead. Perhaps NPR and other news organizations need to pick up that Rolodex and call up some of the masses of women who have strong informed opinions and call them up.

BTW, I would like to see more minorities talk about non racial issues as well. It's kind of sad that the perception is that minorities are only concerned and biased about race issues. We do care about the economy, space exploration, and the iPad too.

Apr. 18 2010 11:11 AM
Andrew Horton from Hillsborough NH

I was floored by this story. Lack of feminine touch at NPR? Really. The Ombudsman is a woman. The President of NPR is a woman. Has anyone done serious counts of male/female breakdowns by category---hosts, reporters, invited guests? I bet the true numbers have males cowering in the minority. As a frequent listener, I hear more women "on air" then men. I even remember about five years back some office buddies were heading to a local NPR station for an interview and were requested to find at least one woman "for balance". Bet there is some secret memo floating about regarding "gender exposure". I'd be interested in stats on religious affiliation too--see if that balances with the national average. Shalom.

Apr. 18 2010 11:07 AM
Vivien Wolsk from NYC

A major reason why women don't act more assertively in self-advocacy was left out---this typically turns off men. Women want a love/sex life, and not caring what people (men) think often leaves them single, while men who act similarly are considered attractive and sexy.

Apr. 18 2010 11:04 AM
H. Bramson from Newark, NJ

The cure for "integrating" women and communities of color is not "inclusion" into the media system that already exists. It is a questioning and reassessing of the system that rewards men (mostly white) for 1) being men 2) being arrogant and 3) pretending they know something when they do not. Perhaps women do not want to be part of such a system? Arrogance is not a synonym for accuracy and intelligence and should not be a ticket to media success. We need to reassess the values we appreciate when opening doors for media-makers.

Apr. 18 2010 10:49 AM

Perhaps men should be pressured to stop being arrogant over-confident jerks instead of pressuring women to be like men!

Apr. 18 2010 10:39 AM
Elsie from Brooklyn

Just the other day I heard Leonard Lopate interview two female dermatologists/professors from NYU and at the beginning of the interview, he asked, "Do you want me to call you doctor or can I just use your first names?" This was incredibly condescending, and a question that would never be asked of a male doctor or professor who is always referred to as "Dr." or "Professor" and certainly would never be asked the humiliating question of whether one need call them by their title or not. Even the way the question was worded assumed that it was unnecessary to call these women by anything more than their first names. This infantilization of women happens all the time. Sadly, many women participate in it, either because they don't even notice it since its frequency makes it appear "normal," or because they don't want to rock the boat and jeopardize whatever status they've managed to achieve. Or they just don't want to appear "difficult" which is the adjective that is often tossed at intelligent women who demand the same level of respect that their male counterparts receive without ever having to ask for it.

Apr. 18 2010 10:37 AM
arti from las vegas

When the transcript comes out, I want to change the incidences of "women" to "black" or something and see how it plays that way. Then imagine a white person delivering a little lecture on how blacks are failing themselves. There's a reason we don't hear that sort of thing very often these days, but when it comes to women -

Apr. 18 2010 08:37 AM
Gaylen from New York, NY

I couldn't agree more with Shirky.. hard words but absolutely to the point... women erasing themselves for the better good.. to be caregivers and caretakers... if I hear one more speech of men receiving awards "thanking their wives" for being there while they were doing the difficult work I will throw up... and time the wives stopped being there and start making the art and books and movies and companies. And when we get rejected for being bitches and pushy, keep being so until rejection is no longer an option.

Apr. 18 2010 08:35 AM
Harry from Brooklyn, NY

This commentary is well over the top, but there is a serious issue here. It is true that, for much of the 19th and 20th centuries, women suffered educational and professional discrimination. Over the past half century, though, women have risen to positions of authority both public and private. Meanwhile, the number of men in college and graduate school has shrunk. Less than 40% of male high school grads go on to higher education. Barely 40% of law school students are men. Perhaps we are over-correcting?

As for NPR, I challenge anyone to listen to its news programming for more than 3 minutes without hearing a woman's voice -- or a man's voice, for that matter. The ombudsman judging this debate is a woman. The CEO of the largest and richest NPR station is a woman. I happen to volunteer at that station, where the gender balance seems to be exemplary. Surely there are more "target-rich environments" for anti-misogynists.

Apr. 18 2010 12:28 AM
mack from Western PA

The story seemed to conclude that it was the fault of women for not asserting themselves enough to catch the attention of journalists. It gave an example of a reporter who, when told by a woman to look at her work, did so and concluded her work was awesome.

The point here should be that the reporter was not doing his homework. If there is awesome and relevant work out there, a good journalist should find it without having to rely on the authors to point it out to them.

How vocal males or females are in seeking the attention of journalists should be irrelevant. The journalists should seek out the best material and experts based on the merit, not how loud they are.

I think the story missed the point. Journalists are being lazy, not doing their homework, and are taking the easy way out by relying on the loudest self-advocates to inform them. Good journalists would find the best sources, male or female, self-promoting or not.

Apr. 17 2010 09:00 PM
jerkette from NYC

Slang Dictionary

jerk definition

a stupid or worthless person. (Now both males and females.) : You are such a classic jerk!

jerk circa 1935, "tedious and ineffectual person," Amer.Eng. carnival slang, perhaps from jerkwater town (1878), where a steam locomotive crew had to take on boiler water from a trough or a creek because there was no water tank. This led 1890s to an adj. use of jerk as "inferior, insignificant."

hmmm, jerk seems to be a relative personal fav

Apr. 17 2010 07:56 PM
arti from las vegas

Wow, you sure blew it with this one. Perhaps to shed light on this issue, you might have consulted a woman instead of a man? Particularly a man who then sits there and insults women, and blames them for discrimination and prejudices against women?

Has it never occurred to this guy that maybe if people don't behave like arrogant, egotistical jerks, it's because THEY DON'T WANT TO BE? Has it never occurred to him that maybe some people would rather be relatively invisible in the world than to be MAJOR JERKS WHO DO DAMAGE TO IT? "First, do no harm." Has it never occurred to him that the bulk of terror and horror visited upon the world has occurred because of egotism, fanaticism, ideological extremism, and testosterone? Why would he assume that women would want to be like that, but are just, gee whiz, too scared, or too demure. Why would a woman want to be an arrogant jerk like him, blabbing on about a topic he is obviously no expert on, but on which he arrogantly presumes to judge others?

What a terrible piece. I had to jump out of my car - leaving the radio off in the house - and come here to comment. Ick.

Apr. 17 2010 07:49 PM
Austin Scott from NYC,

I work in the technology and advertising services space specifically in ad exchanges. It is heavily male dominated and have started a beta blog soon to be site called as an added voice. I went to Math and Science High School in Alabama and have been used to being 1 of 4 girls out of 30 boys in the field. This may have to do with my ability to be aggressive in my career and be a bit of a jerk :)

Apr. 17 2010 06:01 PM
Kim Pearson from Trenton, New Jersey

Perhaps you need recommendations for authoritative sources whom you could have consulted for this story. Here's a start:

!. Amy Alexander, veteran journalist, media critic and former NPR producer
2. Bob Butler, veteran broadcaster, NABJ VP for broadcast (or his counterparts in NAHJ, SAJA, AAJA)
3. Lisa Stone, - a company founded specifically in response to the invisibility of women's voices in political blogging.
4. Jen Pozner, ED, Women in Media and News
5. Melissa Ludtke, Editor of Nieman Reports
6. Keith Woods or any of the editors or faculty for who teach and write on diversity issues.
7. Dori Maynard, Richard Prince or Bobbi Bowman, Maynard institute
8. Pamela Newkirk, Shirley Biaggi or other journalism educators who have written about diversity issues.

I came up with those names without thinking very hard. Or perhaps you tried all of these folks and they were unavailable. That must be it.

Apr. 17 2010 05:00 PM
david from New Jersey

I listened to this piece and had to chuckle a bit. A white woman talking to a white man about the lack of female voices on npr and in the media. Perhaps as a man, I am subject to the biases and prejudices of my gender, but I think female representation on the network is less a crisis than the dearth of so-called minorities on the air there and elsewhere on public radio. (Something that was mentioned in the intro. and then never again in this segment.)

As someone with almost 20 years of news experience (10 in public radio) who's been looking to get back into the radio game for over a year, I've seen plenty of lesser talents snag gigs as producers, hosts and commentators. I've never been short on confidence, but over the past year I've had to shake my head as, time after time, the jobs I've sought have gone to both men and women whose common denominator was the fair complexion of their skin and the commonality of their cultural experiences.

That's a bigger crisis as far as I'm concerned.

Apr. 17 2010 08:00 AM
Erica P. from NJ

positive (adj) • Mistaken at the top of one's voice. — Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"

Apr. 17 2010 07:44 AM
Howard M Thompson

I would be happy to see a change in this male dominance. But, I don't want to see more experts & commentators like the ones we already have who shed much more heat that light.

Moreover, while we tend to promote more extroverted & aggressive people in our society, there is little evidence that organizations that are headed by such personalities are more successful than those lead by other personality types.

Apr. 17 2010 07:42 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.