What the hell's the difference? Their banning it because they think it's immoral, does it really matter why they think it's immoral?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/mar/25/iceland-most-feminist-country
Quote
Iceland: the world's most feminist country
Iceland has just banned all strip clubs. Perhaps it's down to the lesbian prime minister, but this may just be the most female-friendly country on the planet
Iceland is fast becoming a world-leader in feminism. A country with a tiny population of 320,000, it is on the brink of achieving what many considered to be impossible: closing down its sex industry.
While activists in Britain battle on in an attempt to regulate lapdance clubs – the number of which has been growing at an alarming rate during the last decade – Iceland has passed a law that will result in every strip club in the country being shut down. And forget hiring a topless waitress in an attempt to get around the bar: the law, which was passed with no votes against and only two abstentions, will make it illegal for any business to profit from the nudity of its employees.
Even more impressive: the Nordic state is the first country in the world to ban stripping and lapdancing for feminist, rather than religious, reasons. Kolbrún Halldórsdóttir, the politician who first proposed the ban, firmly told the national press on Wednesday: "It is not acceptable that women or people in general are a product to be sold." When I asked her if she thinks Iceland has become the greatest feminist country in the world, she replied: "It is certainly up there. Mainly as a result of the feminist groups putting pressure on parliamentarians. These women work 24 hours a day, seven days a week with their campaigns and it eventually filters down to all of society."
The news is a real boost to feminists around the world, showing us that when an entire country unites behind an idea anything can happen. And it is bound to give a shot in the arm to the feminist campaign in the UK against an industry that is both a cause and a consequence of gaping inequality between men and women.
According to Icelandic police, 100 foreign women travel to the country annually to work in strip clubs. It is unclear whether the women are trafficked, but feminists say it is telling that as the stripping industry has grown, the number of Icelandic women wishing to work in it has not. Supporters of the bill say that some of the clubs are a front for prostitution – and that many of the women work there because of drug abuse and poverty rather than free choice. I have visited a strip club in Reykjavik and observed the women. None of them looked happy in their work.
So how has Iceland managed it? To start with, it has a strong women's movement and a high number of female politicans. Almost half the parliamentarians are female and it was ranked fourth out of 130 countries on the international gender gap index (behind Norway, Finland and Sweden). All four of these Scandinavian countries have, to some degree, criminalised the purchase of sex (legislation that the UK will adopt on 1 April). "Once you break past the glass ceiling and have more than one third of female politicians," says Halldórsdóttir, "something changes. Feminist energy seems to permeate everything."
Johanna Sigurðardottir is Iceland's first female and the world's first openly lesbian head of state. Guðrún Jónsdóttir of Stígamót, an organisation based in Reykjavik that campaigns against sexual violence, says she has enjoyed the support of Sigurðardottir for their campaigns against rape and domestic violence: "Johanna is a great feminist in that she challenges the men in her party and refuses to let them oppress her."
Then there is the fact that feminists in Iceland appear to be entirely united in opposition to prostitution, unlike the UK where heated debates rage over whether prostitution and lapdancing are empowering or degrading to women. There is also public support: the ban on commercial sexual activity is not only supported by feminists but also much of the population. A 2007 poll found that 82% of women and 57% of men support the criminalisation of paying for sex – either in brothels or lapdance clubs – and fewer than 10% of Icelanders were opposed.
Jónsdóttir says the ban could mean the death of the sex industry. "Last year we passed a law against the purchase of sex, recently introduced an action plan on trafficking of women, and now we have shut down the strip clubs. The Nordic countries are leading the way on women's equality, recognising women as equal citizens rather than commodities for sale."
Strip club owners are, not surprisingly, furious about the new law. One gave an interview to a local newspaper in which he likened Iceland's approach to that of a country such as Saudi Arabia, where it is not permitted to see any part of a woman's body in public. "I have reached the age where I'm not sure whether I want to bother with this hassle any more," he said.
Janice Raymond, a director of Coalition Against Trafficking in Women, hopes that all sex industry profiteers feel the same way, and believes the new law will pave the way for governments in other countries to follow suit. "What a victory, not only for the Icelanders but for everyone worldwide who repudiates the sexual exploitation of women," she says.
Jónsdóttir is confident that the law will create a change in attitudes towards women. "I guess the men of Iceland will just have to get used to the idea that women are not for sale."
A victory for a certain type of (second-wave?) feminism, perhaps. I think many feminists and feminist thinkers do not see state-enforced bans on particular practices as the most effective way of overcoming patriarchy and sexism in general...
Euro fundietard hillbillies. Here, in the enlightened secular USA we have strippers and even prostitution. What women (or men) do with their body is their business. You going to enact prohibition next, or what? Hicks. Rubes. Cretins. :outback:
Yeah, that felt good. :lol:
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on March 30, 2010, 11:02:09 PM
I think many feminists and feminist thinkers do not see state-enforced bans on particular practices as the most effective way of overcoming patriarchy and sexism in general...
They're obviously not Democrats. ;)
Have to love the patronizing attitudes that could produce this:
QuoteI have visited a strip club in Reykjavik and observed the women. None of them looked happy in their work.
Having never been to a strip club, I couldn't tell you how "happy" Philadelphian or American strippers seem to be in their work. But I have seen an endless amount of female waitresses, bartenders, secretaries, and fast-food employees who looked positively miserable in their work...
feminists are always so mean to their sluttier sisters :(
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on March 30, 2010, 11:07:26 PM
Have to love the patronizing attitudes that could produce this:
QuoteI have visited a strip club in Reykjavik and observed the women. None of them looked happy in their work.
Having never been to a strip club, I couldn't tell you how "happy" Philadelphian or American strippers seem to be in their work. But I have seen an endless amount of female waitresses, bartenders, secretaries, and fast-food employees who looked positively miserable in their work...
hell if i catch a glimpse of myslef in my computer moniter at times i look miserable too. We must ban accounting! especially around month end :contract:
Every time I'm starting to feel happy about Obama imposing communism upon America, I come across European stories like this that make me pause.
Quote from: citizen k on March 30, 2010, 11:07:11 PM
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on March 30, 2010, 11:02:09 PM
I think many feminists and feminist thinkers do not see state-enforced bans on particular practices as the most effective way of overcoming patriarchy and sexism in general...
They're obviously not Democrats. ;)
No, they're often quite further to the left...
Quote from: HVC on March 30, 2010, 11:09:56 PM
feminists are always so mean to their sluttier sisters :(
Doing things men like is taboo. As is associating with them. They are the enemy. I know because I've seen Suze Orman's show.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 30, 2010, 10:48:19 PM
What the hell's the difference? Their banning it because they think it's immoral, does it really matter why they think it's immoral?
Well, I think it clearly does. :huh: A ban on strip clubs enacted due to religious pressure for the sake of public morals has a different signification than one advocated for by feminist groups. It demonstrates the relative importance of the group advocating it, and feminist groups have traditionally held much less political sway than religious groups. So I think the distinction is a valid one.
This does make sense to a certain degree. It's probably to chilly to go around naked in an igloo.
Quotewhen an entire country unites behind an idea anything can happen
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.warwick.ac.uk%2Fimages%2Fmichaelwalford%2F2006%2F10%2F06%2Ftriumph_of_the_will_stadium_shot.jpg&hash=3bc23eeae84ae65b2f54ceec41795ed4eae43fb6)
Also, I find it reprehensible that with the Icelandic economy lieing in shambles they push the employees of a whole economic branch onto the streets.
That's what you get for electing a lesbian Prime Minister.
good riddance... it was expensive and not very good...
Quote from: Martinus on March 31, 2010, 01:21:25 AM
That's what you get for electing a lesbian Prime Minister.
:lol:
Wow, I'm going to assume this is intentional irony.
No. Lesbians are our allies on gay rights but they are also evil. A gay guy in power would never ban straight porn or straight gogo clubs.
The worst quality about lesbians (and militant feminists in general) is that in their quest to protect women, they end up banning all kinds of porn or all kinds of sex industry services, with man-on-man stuff often being a poor collateral damage victim of their crusade. :cry:
Quote from: Syt on March 31, 2010, 12:10:34 AM
Also, I find it reprehensible that with the Icelandic economy lieing in shambles they push the employees of a whole economic branch onto the streets.
The girls are imports, usually polish or baltic.
Thinking about it, this is kind of an interesting counterpoint to the burqa/etc. debates; at what point does a woman's self-presentation cease being an expression of individual agency and become the expression of systemic exploitation? And what is the state's role in identifying and legislating this distinction?
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on March 31, 2010, 01:58:14 AM
Thinking about it, this is kind of an interesting counterpoint to the burqa/etc. debates; at what point does a woman's self-presentation cease being an expression of individual agency and become the expression of systemic exploitation? And what is the state's role in identifying and legislating this distinction?
The two cases are not comparable at all, except on a purely superficial level. I sincerely doubt Icelandic girls are raised by their families who threaten to murder them if they ever stop lap dancing.
Quote from: Martinus on March 31, 2010, 02:07:24 AM
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on March 31, 2010, 01:58:14 AM
Thinking about it, this is kind of an interesting counterpoint to the burqa/etc. debates; at what point does a woman's self-presentation cease being an expression of individual agency and become the expression of systemic exploitation? And what is the state's role in identifying and legislating this distinction?
The two cases are not comparable at all, except on a purely superficial level. I sincerely doubt Icelandic girls are raised by their families who threaten to murder them if they ever stop lap dancing.
The girls are imported, they are not locals.
Quote from: Martinus on March 31, 2010, 01:21:25 AM
That's what you get for electing a lesbian Prime Minister.
Electing a gay foreign minister doesn't seem to be a good idea either.
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on March 31, 2010, 01:58:14 AM
Thinking about it, this is kind of an interesting counterpoint to the burqa/etc. debates; at what point does a woman's self-presentation cease being an expression of individual agency and become the expression of systemic exploitation? And what is the state's role in identifying and legislating this distinction?
Systematic exploitation can exist in labor markets only in the presence of collusion to enforce that exploitation.
I suppose Iceland will have to ban modeling next, for the sake of consistency?
QuoteIceland bans strip clubs
The two of them.
Quote from: The Larch on March 31, 2010, 03:22:33 AM
QuoteIceland bans strip clubs
The two of them.
Actually only one was left after a previous crackdown. No joke.
Bad timing. Think how cool a disaster movie would be with a volcano erupting and the only survivors sheltering in a strip club as the molten lava slides inexorably towards them.
Quote from: The Larch on March 31, 2010, 03:22:33 AM
QuoteIceland bans strip clubs
The two of them.
The other one closed down years ago.
Quote from: Brazen on March 31, 2010, 03:56:35 AM
Bad timing. Think how cool a disaster movie would be with a volcano erupting and the only survivors sheltering in a strip club as the molten lava slides inexorably towards them.
Volcano movies are always bad. Volcano (5.1/10) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120461/), Dante's Peak (5.6/10) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118928/) and Eruption (3.5/10) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0125078/) from 1997 alone....
Quote from: Brazen on March 31, 2010, 03:56:35 AM
Bad timing. Think how cool a disaster movie would be with a volcano erupting and the only survivors sheltering in a strip club as the molten lava slides inexorably towards them.
And THEN the strippers turned in to zombies
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVkQCDfIe38
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on March 30, 2010, 11:07:26 PM
Have to love the patronizing attitudes that could produce this:
QuoteI have visited a strip club in Reykjavik and observed the women. None of them looked happy in their work.
Having never been to a strip club, I couldn't tell you how "happy" Philadelphian or American strippers seem to be in their work. But I have seen an endless amount of female waitresses, bartenders, secretaries, and fast-food employees who looked positively miserable in their work...
Strippers always look "happy" with their work to me. They fucking better, or no more Benjamins. :mad:
How many did they have, 1 or 2?
Quote from: Grey Fox on March 31, 2010, 06:10:13 AM
How many did they have, 1 or 2?
They had 2, then there was 1 now there is none. The clubs suxxored in the sense that walking into an almost empty club none of the strippers come up to you.
The entire attraction of the strip club is the strippers trying to pick me up.. even if it is just to get me to buy a lapdance.
No loss then, except the one of freedom.
Quote from: Grey Fox on March 31, 2010, 06:22:44 AM
No loss then, except the one of freedom.
meh... lets just wait until we get one of our normal old lecherous men back and we'll have our strip clubs back.. though I hope this makes the clubs better though... being moral about strip clubs is possible for us when we don't have the benjamins to frequent them anymore :contract:
I find the idea of Icelandic strippers... intriguing. :cool:
The only thing that I find more intriguing is the idea of Afghani strippers (assuming they are in fact HOTT under those burqas). :perv:
"Most friendly to females?" Only if the female isn't a lesbo interested in seeing a stripper. :(
We must liberate these poor, trampled masses.
Yet more proof that giving women the vote was a bad idea. They can't handle the responsibility.
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on March 30, 2010, 11:20:42 PM
Well, I think it clearly does. :huh: A ban on strip clubs enacted due to religious pressure for the sake of public morals has a different signification than one advocated for by feminist groups. It demonstrates the relative importance of the group advocating it, and feminist groups have traditionally held much less political sway than religious groups. So I think the distinction is a valid one.
One group has a puritanical need to enforce its ideology on others using guilt and the power of the state. The other does also.
Big difference.
But anyway I am sure the women who enjoy making money this way will have no problem getting to their clientele regardless of what certain prudes say. They always do.
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on March 31, 2010, 01:58:14 AM
Thinking about it, this is kind of an interesting counterpoint to the burqa/etc. debates; at what point does a woman's self-presentation cease being an expression of individual agency and become the expression of systemic exploitation? And what is the state's role in identifying and legislating this distinction?
Ah the old white slavery, we need to free the poor innocent prostitutes and strippers thing again. Of course studies have usually shown that most adult female strippers and prostitutes freely chose their profession without coercion but facts have never stopped the puritans and prudes in society before. God forbid women be allowed to make choices on their own, THEY MUST BE EXPLOITED VICTIMS!! Oh Em Gee!
Quote from: BVN on March 31, 2010, 03:26:19 AM
Actually only one was left after a previous crackdown. No joke.
And now government policy has cost them their lucrative monopoly :(
Quote from: Caliga on March 31, 2010, 05:13:44 AM
Strippers always look "happy" with their work to me. They fucking better, or no more Benjamins. :mad:
Like most professions the best ones are the ones who enjoy the job. You can usually pick out the ones who do not want to be there....or so I have heard.
Quote from: Viking on March 31, 2010, 04:05:57 AM
Volcano movies are always bad. Volcano (5.1/10) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120461/), Dante's Peak (5.6/10) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118928/) and Eruption (3.5/10) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0125078/) from 1997 alone....
What about Joe vs. the Volcano?
Quote from: frunk on March 31, 2010, 09:56:40 AM
Quote from: Viking on March 31, 2010, 04:05:57 AM
Volcano movies are always bad. Volcano (5.1/10) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120461/), Dante's Peak (5.6/10) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118928/) and Eruption (3.5/10) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0125078/) from 1997 alone....
What about Joe vs. the Volcano?
5.4, yes that movie sucks as well.
What about SuperVolcano? or Krakatoa: East of Java? or The Devil at 4 O'Clock? or My Little Pony: The Movie?
Quote from: frunk on March 31, 2010, 10:39:02 AM
What about SuperVolcano? or Krakatoa: East of Java? or The Devil at 4 O'Clock? or My Little Pony: The Movie?
Yes, Yes, Maybe and WTF?
QuoteWhile the ponies enjoy their festive spring party, the evil witch Hydia is up in her gloomy home, the Volcano of Doom, plotting to turn Ponyland into a wasteland.
At least you can still get elf sex (http://www.thefrisky.com/post/246-if-elf-sex-is-real-then-we-should-all-move-to-iceland-asap/) in Iceland.
Return of the King- 8.8
Icelanders are morons.
:huh: Is that chick just batshit or do alot of Icelanders believe in hidden people with glittery sperm or whatever?
Quote from: Caliga on March 31, 2010, 06:28:37 PM
:huh: Is that chick just batshit or do alot of Icelanders believe in hidden people with glittery sperm or whatever?
The tourists like that shit.
Quote from: Viking on March 31, 2010, 06:33:13 PM
The tourists like that shit.
I assumed the entire country wasn't insane, but thanks for the clarification.
Quote from: frunk on March 31, 2010, 11:07:31 AM
QuoteWhile the ponies enjoy their festive spring party, the evil witch Hydia is up in her gloomy home, the Volcano of Doom, plotting to turn Ponyland into a wasteland.
:wub:
Quote from: Caliga on March 31, 2010, 06:28:37 PM
:huh: Is that chick just batshit or do alot of Icelanders believe in hidden people with glittery sperm or whatever?
Her parting quote: definitely words to live by.
As far as I understand it, Nordic types will only keep their clothes on unless it's illegal to do otherwise anyhow.
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on March 31, 2010, 01:58:14 AM
Thinking about it, this is kind of an interesting counterpoint to the burqa/etc. debates; at what point does a woman's self-presentation cease being an expression of individual agency and become the expression of systemic exploitation? And what is the state's role in identifying and legislating this distinction?
This is an interesting thought.
I'm torn on this law.
I find I really can't care. Cities ban strip clubs all the time, or re-zone them, and Iceland is really just a small city, so meh.
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 05, 2010, 06:42:10 PM
This is an interesting thought.
I'm torn on this law.
Again if they are going to make it illegal for women to work certain jobs they better damn well have the decency to do the same for us.
:( man, no economy, no boobs. and it's Iceland. I guess they still got Bjork.
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on April 05, 2010, 10:22:19 PM
:( man, no economy, no boobs. and it's Iceland. I guess they still got Bjork.
And EVE-O's CCP, whose net worth will soon exceed Iceland's. :menace:
Returning to the subject, I find hypocritical the idea that free people are deemed exploited because they are "forced" to work to feed off lifestyle habits (i.e. drugs) that they have themselves chosen to undertake. Many of them use drugs and alcohol. So what? Many "legit" workers are drug addicts and alcoholics as well. Are their jobs exploitative as well?
More like a double standard and clueless stereotypes to me : Working the sex industry is dirty, working in sewage draining is not. However people cannot blame the women (or call them skanks, teases, golddiggers or hookers like they used too). That would be mean to these "poor little girls" as it is now seen as being not of their fault; they are misled in the industry, they are clueless, eager to please, exploited victims needing only to be helped out of this vicious circle, and so on. So instead of blaming the woman's lifestyle choices, we demonize the men who seek them, call them pigs and dirty lechers, and now penalize them and hunt them down in some countries (like Sweden and Norway now, where actually seeking and hiring a legally consenting adult prostitute is illegal). :rolleyes:
Strippers, just like common workers, sell their workforce (in their case their talent for bodily tease) to gain their wages. Unless they are coerced to work by a pimp or a gang and are battered into selling their body, they can use the fruits of their work as they see fit and working the sex industry is a personal choice. Sometimes the least bad choices of those available to an individual, yes, but a choice nonetheless.
I mean yeah, they could work as a cashier in some convenience store and be "respected" for a shitty wage (they are not, more often then not), or they can be payed c*ckteases and win a shitload of money each night. I have more respect for women who learn to use their bodies to work men's instincts to milk them out of their money, and make tons of cash out of it. And to some of them, this actually pay their studies to be able to work in more "respectable", higher-end jobs.
The only people who see it as truly demeaning are women who cannot work in strip clubs anyway because either they are too gung-ho, manhaters, and/or lesbians, or women who have had really, really bad experiences in the sex trade and want to spare other women from living the same (who are I empathize more with than the former, as I agree violent, abusive pimps, madams, and customers should be hunted down and dealt with).
I asked to women around me, including my girlfriend, (in Montreal, with its reputation of third-wave feminism and moral liberalization) about the ban of strip clubs, and they are all bewildered about that law, because they do not consider stripping in clubs for money as demeaning to women. Some opined that this was more as a value judgment and culpability from a few militant elected feminists enshrined in body of law.
But I ask the all-important question: are male strip clubs banned too in Iceland? From what I read, they aren't covered by this new law (they fix only on the women in the articles). So in effect, if they are not, the same work is legally deemed demeaning to women in Iceland, but not to men.
Quote from: Drakken on April 06, 2010, 09:13:09 AM
I asked around to women around me,
Maybe you really are Swedish.
Quote from: Valmy on April 05, 2010, 09:58:09 PM
Again if they are going to make it illegal for women to work certain jobs they better damn well have the decency to do the same for us.
I'd have no problem with banning strip joints.
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 06, 2010, 12:40:24 PM
Quote from: Valmy on April 05, 2010, 09:58:09 PM
Again if they are going to make it illegal for women to work certain jobs they better damn well have the decency to do the same for us.
I'd have no problem with banning strip joints.
monster. Worse than Hitler.
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 06, 2010, 12:56:21 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 06, 2010, 12:40:24 PM
Quote from: Valmy on April 05, 2010, 09:58:09 PM
Again if they are going to make it illegal for women to work certain jobs they better damn well have the decency to do the same for us.
I'd have no problem with banning strip joints.
monster. Worse than Hitler.
I have no problem with it either. Strip joints are dull and pretty gross.
It's really only about finding out if you went to High school with any of the strippers.
[Norgy] What about strip malls? [/Norgy]
Good thing he's not around here anymore, I'd hate to see what he'd make of "the topless towers of Ilium". :bleeding:
I don't really see the appeal of strip clubs. Blue balls or coming in your pants(and in a room full of people)? No thanks.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on April 06, 2010, 03:54:32 PM
I don't really see the appeal of strip clubs. Blue balls or coming in your pants(and in a room full of people)? No thanks.
There was one year in university when a bunch of my fraternity buddies and I somehow managed to get VIP cards to the local strip club (which meant free covers).
The "appeal" was that it was a male-only environment, and the dancers liked and encouraged us to be loud and boisterous. You weren't worrying about trying to pick up women so no one was trying to look 'cool'. To my mind the strippers themselves were almost peripheral to the experience.
What I didn't get were the creepy guys sitting in the back by themselves. :unsure:
Quote from: Barrister on April 06, 2010, 04:01:02 PM
The "appeal" was that it was a male-only environment, and the dancers liked and encouraged us to be loud and boisterous. You weren't worrying about trying to pick up women so no one was trying to look 'cool'. To my mind the strippers themselves were almost peripheral to the experience.
Okay, Horty.
Quote from: garbon on April 06, 2010, 12:59:11 PM
I have no problem with it either. Strip joints are dull and pretty gross.
Then don't go.
Quote from: garbon on April 06, 2010, 12:59:11 PM
Strip joints are dull and pretty gross.
I agree mostly with my Nubian brother.
Quote from: Barrister on April 06, 2010, 04:01:02 PM
The "appeal" was that it was a male-only environment, and the dancers liked and encouraged us to be loud and boisterous. You weren't worrying about trying to pick up women so no one was trying to look 'cool'. To my mind the strippers themselves were almost peripheral to the experience.
So it was just a way to keep girls from honing in on guy's night?
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on April 06, 2010, 05:59:12 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 06, 2010, 04:01:02 PM
The "appeal" was that it was a male-only environment, and the dancers liked and encouraged us to be loud and boisterous. You weren't worrying about trying to pick up women so no one was trying to look 'cool'. To my mind the strippers themselves were almost peripheral to the experience.
So it was just a way to keep girls from honing in on guy's night?
Pretty much.
I've never gone to a strip club. Though I imagine that's probably not to surprising to people here.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 06, 2010, 06:28:18 PM
I've never gone to a strip club. Though I imagine that's probably not to surprising to people here.
Some are basement-like and dark. Except filled with "entertainers" that will grind her crotch on your crotch for a small fee. And for another fee, give you a blow job under the table.
I've seen male strippers. They just get sweaty and gross. Besides, I can get sex from beautiful people so why pay to see some uggo strip?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Z_r_AfYAjA
Just cause she dances go-go
Don't make her a ho, no
-_-