Archive for September, 2009

h1

Free-Range Kids

September 29, 2009

I’ve finished Free-Range Kids by Lenore Skenazy, and I’ve been trying a few things to make my kids more independent. I feel sort of like Bill Murray’s character in What About Bob: “Baby steps to the elevator. Baby steps I’m on the elevator. Baby steps…” We’ve done Walking to the Mailbox Alone and now Hanging Out at the Church Carnival With a Fistful of Game Tickets and Without Hovering Parents.

My next step will be to try Skenazy’s suggestion of starting a “walking school bus” – one parent walking a neighborhood gang of kids to school until they get the hang of it and can go on their own. My next-door neighbor and the lady a couple of doors down both have kids that go to my kids’ school. I’m going to ask them to do this bus thing with me. I’ll even volunteer to be the first parent walker.

A couple of things stood out in this book. (Beyond its exceptional hilarity, I mean. I haven’t laughed so hard while reading in ages.) The first was chapter 10, subtitled “Quit Trying to Control Everything. It Doesn’t Work Anyway.”

Control is the crux of our problem. Or the illusion of control is, rather. We think that if we just follow our kids around, poking our noses into everything they do, that nothing bad will ever happen to them. And we think that if we relinquish control for five minutes, we will suddenly become Bad Parents. And worse, our kids might be fatally harmed.

We no longer fear deadly disease (except swine flu). We no longer expect one or more of our kids to die before adulthood, something that used to be common when my grandmothers were children. Our kids are statistically safer than at any previous point in history.  So, as Skenazy says:

The more safe our children became, the more we started to worry about them, because now if anything dangerous did happen to them, it would clearly be our fault. Fate has gone out the window, replaced by parental omnipotence. And it is this belief in control combined with the fear of screwing up that is driving us mad…

Think of a person with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, says Harvey Roy Greenberg, a Manhattan psychiatrist. That person gets up in the morning and has to arrange the pillows on his bed just so or, he worries, something terrible will happen. He has to avoid touching the doorknob or something terrible will happen. He has to eat his Grape Nuts out of the Flintstones bowl or something terrible will happen. He has all these little things he believes he has to do or – poof – the world will fall apart.

“All of this is driven by a kind of insane feeling of omnipotence,” says Greenberg. It’s a belief “that you can exert all power over all things.” And when it comes to your children, “you think you can lay down a magic carpet and conjure up spells that will guarantee your child absolute security. Good luck to that!”

So what can we do to allay our fears? I mean, besides letting them do stuff and just gutting it out? The answer is found in another part of the book that stood out to me, the chapter entitled “Strangers with Candy.”

Skenazy recounts the story of an elderly lady reading her newspaper with a magnifying glass in her doctor’s office. A small boy comes up to her and as she’s about to hand him the magnifying glass that has drawn his curiosity, his mother swoops him up and exclaims, “He has to learn fast not to talk to strangers!”

That’s not the way to keep anyone safe. And that “Don’t trust anyone!” lesson could conceivably end up making that little boy less safe (not to mention terrified of old ladies). Imagine if, against all odds – and I’m about to tell you just how long those odds are – some horrible guy does come up one day and say, “Hi, little fella. Mommy sent me to get you.” Presto – he mentioned mom, so he’s not a stranger anymore. He grabs the boy even while, just a few feet away with her back turned, a grandma sits reading her paper. Will the little boy scream, “Hey lady! Help! Put down the magnifying glass and call the police!” Or will he not say anything, because she’s a stranger, and Mommy said never to talk to them?

It’s a chilling scenario. But it’s a preventable one with some training. Skenazy outlines a cop’s lesson:

It involves literally showing kids the lures a predator could use: a bag of candy, a leash that supposedly “proves” a guy is looking for his puppy. Then he has the children practice the three things that could help them the most:

1. Throwing their hands in front of them like a stop sign.

2. Screaming at the top of their lungs, “No! Get away! You’re not my dad!” “Your voice is your most effective crime-fighting tool,” he tells them.

3. Running like hell.

By actually getting up and practicing those things, the kids feel ready for the worst… Public safety instructors liken this kind of training to the “Stop, drop, and roll” drill that kids get as part of fire safety instruction. Once again, it is extremely unlikely they’ll ever need to use it, but – it’s handy to have. And rather than creating more fear, it seems to help alleviate it. The more afraid we are of something, the more power it has over us. But the more prepared we are, the more power we get back. Training confers power.

I can vouch for that. I did two years of Krav Maga, the Israeli army’s hand-to-hand combat training, and by the end I felt like I could handle myself in any physical situation. I was less afraid, not more.

Now I feel like I have a way to make my kids safer and ease some of my worries over their growing independence. Hooray, Free-Rangers!

h1

Hello!

September 27, 2009

I’d like to extend a warm welcome to all of y’all coming over from Free-Range Kids. Please take a look around, and if you like what you see, come back to visit!

I’d like to say “thank you” to Lenore Skenazy, first for her excellent book, and second for re-printing my post (below) on her site. I’ll be posting again about Free-Range Kids (the book) in the next couple of days, and I’ll share with you more of the steps I’m taking to make my children more independent of their paranoid mommy.

-Lynn

h1

A Tale of the Mail

September 26, 2009

I’ve been one of those hyper-paranoid mothers who cringes when letting her seven-year-old son use a public restroom unattended by a parent because there is sure to be a serial molester lurking within, just waiting for a kid to pounce on. But The Boy is nearly eight, and mommy can’t drag him into the Ladies’ Room anymore, so I let him go off on his own with warnings not to talk to anyone and, for the love of Pete, wash your hands!

Then I use hand sanitizer on him anyway when he gets back because he probably touched the door handle.

I am ridiculously paranoid. In other words, I’m an American suburban mother in 2009. Everyone in my social set is exactly the same way.

But there’s been a part of me that hates this. I don’t enjoy tailing The Boy in every activity he pursues as though he might light himself on fire or get snatched up in a windowless van if my back were turned for 15 seconds. He’s a pretty responsible kid, especially for his age. My mom friends and I lament to each other about how we wish we could let our kids run around outside in little gangs, unsupervised, the way we used to run around when we were kids.

And then I stumbled across Lenore Skenazy. You may remember Lenore’s being in the news recently when she let her nine-year-old son, Izzy, ride the New York subway by himself. He took the train from Bloomingdale’s to their apartment and came home not only unscathed but with a newfound sense of self-reliance. Lenore wrote a column about the experience in the New York Post, and that was the beginning of an international firestorm that ended with her being proclaimed “World’s Worst Mother.”

I was fascinated by Lenore’s story. I started reading her blog, Free-Range Kids, and as I read I felt a growing sense that this lady is on to something. It’s not that I’m suddenly convinced to let my kids ride solo on my city’s sketchy public transportation, but rather that I’m beginning to see my paranoia for the nuttiness it is.

I picked up a copy of Free-Range Kids (the book) and was immediately assured that it would be worth reading when I saw the title of the first chapter: “Play Dates and Axe Murderers: How to Tell the Difference.”

Don’t be fooled into thinking that Ms. Skenazy is flip. She’s hysterically hilarious, but she backs up her assertions with cold, hard facts, and that appeals to the logical part of me.

So I decided after reading a bit to try an experiment. I would let The Boy get the mail by himself.

I know I just heard you snort.

Our mailbox is neither on our front porch nor in our front yard. Instead, it’s about a 1/3-mile round-trip around a curvy street. I cannot see the mailbox without walking roughly 200 yards away from our house. The Boy would have to cross one cul-de-sac and walk about 10 minutes by himself (at least half of it out of my sight) to get the mail.

Allow me to set the scene: it’s a warm, sunny afternoon in suburbia, about 3 o’clock. The lawns have greened up with recent rains, and a mild breeze blows the scent of lantana and fresh-cut St. Augustine. Nary a car rolls by on our quiet street. The Boy sets off with an extra spring in his springy seven-year-old step, and I watch calmly out of the kitchen window until he is out of sight around the bend. Then I calmly pick up a book and calmly step out onto the front porch, where I sit down to await his return. Calmly.

And then the murder car drives by.

It’s not a windowless van, but it is something almost equally alarming. It’s a blue SUV with a girl who’s roughly 10 years old standing up with the top half of her body sticking out of the sunroof. And it’s heading straight for the mailbox.

I am not joking. This actually happened.

In 35 years of life, I have seen only the occasional drunken idiot somewhere between the ages of 18 and 28 sticking out of a moving vehicle’s sunroof, usually at night, downtown, and while making the “woo!” noise. So when I saw this preteen practicing for her very own Girls Gone Wild video on my street at 3 o’clock in the afternoon, I was distressed.

My mind leaped to the only logical conclusion: any driver who would let a child hang out of the sunroof of a moving vehicle would also swoop up my seven-year-old boy and sell him into child slavery somewhere in Asia. No doubt letting him hang out of the sunroof all the way to the docks.

I prepared myself to sprint to the mailbox. (The Boy had my car keys, conveniently attached to the same key ring as my mailbox key.)

But then I didn’t.

Instead I took a deep breath and sat back down. And I waited, straining my ears for the sounds of screaming and squealing tires. Three minutes later, The Boy reappeared around the bend, holding a piece of mail and grinning.

He came home unscathed and with a newfound sense of self-reliance. And I took a baby step toward moving him toward adulthood.

h1

Enjoying Some Early-Autumn Kettle Corn

September 25, 2009

danbrown

I ragged on Dan Brown a bit in my last mention of The Lost Symbol. After reading it, I’d like to give him props for attempting to do something extremely difficult: seek out the universal truths demonstrated within six millennia of human history and distill them into a pop-fiction adventure. I get the sense that he buys into the idea that there are absolute truths out there and that he is trying to convince his readers.

In my case, he was preaching to the choir. This is the whole purpose of my reading the canon of Western Civilization – to determine what is true and what is not. Whether I’ll find Truth is unclear, but I believe that the search itself will be life-changing. And I also believe Truth exists, whether I’m capable of finding it or not.

I want to share with you a passage that had me laughing because I’m apparently on a wavelength with Dan Brown:

“Arabic?” Anderson asked. “They look like normal numbers.”

“Our normal numbers are Arabic.” Langdon had become so accustomed to clarifying this point for his students that he’d actually prepared a lecture about the scientific advances made by early Middle Eastern cultures, one of them being our modern numbering system, whose advantages over Roman numerals included ‘positional notation’ and the invention of the number zero. Of course, Langdon always ended this lecture with a reminder that Arab culture had also given mankind the world al-kuhl – the favorite beverage of Harvard freshmen – known as alcohol.

There were more of these overlaps between what I’ve been studying and what Brown had to say. That’s really not surprising given we’re drawing from the same canon. It is fun, though.

One annoying mistake was the repeated mention by scientist characters of the “fact” that the explorers proved the earth was spherical. Humans have known the earth is spherical since ancient times. Not only did they have the always-circular shadow of eclipses to go on, but watching ships sail into the horizon makes earth’s curvature pretty obvious. First the bottom of the ship disappears, then the lower part of the mast goes, and then the sail. And they eventually come back, meaning the ship didn’t fall off the edge. Three thousand years ago, natural philosophers were arguing not whether the earth was spherical but rather the circumference of that sphere.

I’m going to assume Dan Brown knows this, which makes me more annoyed that he would perpetuate a myth – especially when he’s written a book to make us believe other myths as truths. My mind goes back to Augustine: how can you convince people that what you say is right when you cite an example that is obviously wrong?

Perhaps I am too harsh. This is genre fiction, not a revelation.

Nonetheless, it was a fun read. Formulaic and predictable, but fun. It’s definitely popcorn for the brain.

h1

Come Back to Texas

September 24, 2009

I’m back in beautiful central Texas, arriving just in time for The Big M to take off on a business trip to Santa Fe. In honor of our recent air travel (and because I don’t feel like drawing anything tonight), I present to you a wonderful drawing done last week by The Girl:

TGs_plane

Isn’t that just the most wonderful airplane ever? She told me that Mama is flying it. I especially love the “42″ on the tail. The image isn’t flipped — she wrote it as a mirror image. I am flying amongst the stars. This picture makes me happy.

What also makes me happy is being back home. I enjoyed getting to know my sister in a new context. I enjoyed the Deep South, particularly Mrs. Wilkes’ Boarding House in Savannah, Georgia, a dining establishment that should be on everyone’s bucket list.

But I missed my family.

On my first day back, TG had a little friend come over after school for a playdate. On the way home, she told this joke:

TG: Knock-knock! (giggles)

Little Friend: Who’s there?

TG: Banana! (more giggles)

LF: Banana who?

TG: Knock-knock! (stronger giggles)

LF: Who’s there?

TG: Aren’t you glad I didn’t say banana? (collapses in giggles)

Obviously we need to work on our joke-telling. Tomorrow I will fill you in on what I thought of Dan Brown’s latest opus.

It’s good to be back.

h1

Arrrrrrrrrr!!

September 19, 2009

Today is Talk Like a Pirate Day. It seems apropos that I am in Savannah, the literary home of Captain Flint, the oft-referred-to and never-seen star of Treasure Island. The treasure, you see, was Flint’s. He had buried it on an island and then died in Savannah some years before Jim Hawkins and Long John Silver, et al. went after it. Treasure Island is a lovely book. I read it twice this summer — once to myself and once aloud to the kids. I recommend it. We also watched the 1950′s-era Disney movie. Now I understand where Mr. Krabs on SpongeBob gets his accent.

I decided to enjoy my last morning in Savannah by going for a run through Forsyth Park, which is adjacent to the little house my sister and I are staying in. Here’s a shot of the fountain I took with my phone:

fountain

Isn’t it lovely?

About halfway through my run I realized that I’m way too fat and out of shape to be running, so I walked for a while. Conveniently, there was a local farmer’s market going on in the park and I had brought money for breakfast. I got a cup of coffee, a fresh plum, and — best of all — homemade sweet potato pie for just under $5 combined. Here’s a shot of it in the sitting area of our little house before I devoured it:

breakfast

The book, by the way, is Museum of Science and Industry: Chicago. Seems like a random choice to put in a Savannah guest house. The breakfast was *delicious*.

We had a lovely day yesterday that included a morning at the day spa, a visit to Tybee Beach, and an evening of girl talk and girl-movie watching. (Music and Lyrics with Drew Barrymore and Hugh Grant. I love that movie.)

I learned something shocking about my sister. Truly shocking. I’m not even sure how to approach this.

But here goes.

Are you ready?

She doesn’t like Pride and Prejudice. Can’t stand it. No Colin Firth, no Jennifer Ehle as Elizabeth Bennet for her. No glorious six-hour BBC offering starring an American as the heroine. This is a movie I watch in its uninterrupted entirety at least quarterly. It’s even on my laptop. I could watch it now.

But I won’t because we have to head out. We’re going to Charleston now.

BTW — happy 37th birthday to K’s personal pirate, The Other Big M.

h1

The Secret Teachings of Airports

September 15, 2009

I’m going to Savannah, Georgia tomorrow with my sissy! We’ll be staying in a carriage house and eating lots of fried food beneath live oaks dripping with Spanish moss.

In honor of the occasion, I picked up Dan Brown’s latest excretion, “The Lost Symbol”, which was released today.

Why Dan Brown, do you ask? Picture me reading “The Lost Symbol” in beautiful historic Savannah:

savannah

Now picture the reality: me reading Dan Brown in the chaos of DFW.

dfw_Page_1

Dan Brown is the quintessential airport author. I have no doubt that every bookseller in the place will have about a billion copies of his novel everywhere. And I’ll be one of the lucky many reading it!

I downloaded the book last night on my Kindle. The Kindle has a couple of disadvantages, the primary one being that using it in public makes me look like a techno-douche. But it offers advantages for travel. It: a) is small and compact, b) holds 100 books or so, and c) cloaks what I’m reading in pseudo-respectability. I can read Dan Brown with impunity!

I’ve already snuck a peek at the beginning. This is what appears just after the title page:

To live in the world without becoming aware of the meaning of the world is like wandering about in a great library without touching the books.

The Secret Teachings of All Ages

I literally clapped my hands with delight after reading that! It is so Dan Brown! He takes a statement that sounds like a platitude and makes it a “secret teaching”. I love it! We’re going to have an exciting journey together, he and I.

Sometimes I just need my trashy fiction fix.

h1

I Like to Kick Things

September 15, 2009

The Big M has really taken to his MMA training. For those of you unfamiliar with MMA, it stands for Mixed Martial Arts, which is approximately a combination of kickboxing, jiu-jitsu, and wrestling. The Big M now throws a beautifully terrifying jab-cross combination and was working on his round kick yesterday.

The round kick is designed to take out the opponent at the rib cage or at the knee. (Or if you’re really enthusiastic and flexible, at the head.) It’s a wonderfully fun kick to throw. It’s a timing kick. You throw your leg up in a front kick to give it power and at the last second rotate the hips and feet to bring your shin driving sideways into the target.

I got all excited that The Big M was learning it and convinced him to hold a pad against his hip so I could kick him.

*THWACK!*

It’s a beautiful sound, like a baseball hitting the sweet spot of the bat. The Big M looked pleasantly surprised at my power. I was too, given I hadn’t warmed up or even practiced this kick in probably 12 months.

*THWACK!!*

Even better! He looks mildly alarmed!

*THWACK!!!*

“Okay. That’s enough,” he said. I grinned. Heh. Heh. Still got it.

“I’m worried you’re going to kick the bathtub.”

Apparently I was just missing it on the wind-up. That would have been hard to explain, a broken foot from kicking the bathtub.

There’s not a point to this story, other than that I like to kick things. And The Big M is very tolerant.

h1

Food for Thought

September 14, 2009

A dear friend from my college days at Texas A&M University majored in agronomy. When people asked what that meant she would reply, “Soils.” Only in Lez’s East Texas accent it came out, “Souls.”

I was reminded of that after reading about Norman Borlaug.

Norman Borlaug saved a billion lives. That is not a typo. He saved a thousand million human beings.

How is that possible?

Dr. Borlaug was a part-time professor of agronomy at Texas A&M. His full-time gig was bringing high-yield agriculture to Mexico, Pakistan, India, and Africa. His research and lobbying efforts doubled and even tripled the grain production of farmland in these countries.

Norman Borlaug, courtesy The Atlantic

Norman Borlaug, The Atlantic

As a culture we are very focused on the morality of food production. I’ve read Michael Pollan’s The Omnivore’s Dilemma, I’ve tried to shift to buying organic and locally grown groceries, and I’ve even planted my own vegetable garden. What I hadn’t done was given much thought to what the shift to organics might do to global agriculture.  Reading about Dr. Borlaug has opened my eyes to the environmental and, more importantly, the human impact of such a shift.

From an interview he gave nine years ago:

Even if you could use all the organic material that you have–the animal manures, the human waste, the plant residues–and get them back on the soil, you couldn’t feed more than 4 billion people… [note: current world population is closing in on 7 billion people]

In 1960, the production of the 17 most important food, feed, and fiber crops–virtually all of the important crops grown in the U.S. at that time and still grown today–was 252 million tons. By 1990, it had more than doubled, to 596 million tons, and was produced on 25 million fewer acres than were cultivated in 1960. If we had tried to produce the harvest of 1990 with the technology of 1960, we would have had to have increased the cultivated area by another 177 million hectares, about 460 million more acres of land of the same quality–which we didn’t have, and so it would have been much more. We would have moved into marginal grazing areas and plowed up things that wouldn’t be productive in the long run. We would have had to move into rolling mountainous country and chop down our forests. President Clinton would not have had the nice job of setting aside millions of acres of land for restricted use, where you can’t cut a tree even for paper and pulp or for lumber. So all of this ties together.

For perspective, 460 million acres is more than twice the size of Texas. Something would have had to have given: the land or the people.

From a January 1997 article by Gregg Easterbrook from The Atlantic:

To Borlaug, the argument for high-yield cereal crops, inorganic fertilizers, and irrigation became irrefutable when the global population began to take off after the Second World War. But many governments of developing nations were suspicious, partly for reasons of tradition (wheat was then a foreign substance in India) and partly because contact between Western technical experts and peasant farmers might shake up feudal cultures to the discomfort of the elite classes. Meanwhile, some commentators were suggesting that it would be wrong to increase the food supply in the developing world: better to let nature do the dirty work of restraining the human population.

Do I spy eugenicists in natural selection’s clothing? Continuing:

Yet statistics suggest that high-yield agriculture brakes population growth rather than accelerating it, by starting the progression from the high-birth-rate, high-death-rate societies of feudal cultures toward the low-birth-rate, low-death-rate societies of Western nations. As the former Indian diplomat Karan Singh is reported to have said, “Development is the best contraceptive.” In subsistence agriculture children are viewed as manual labor, and thus large numbers are desired. In technical agriculture knowledge becomes more important, and parents thus have fewer children in order to devote resources to their education.

Anecdotally, I can vouch for this claim in my own family. My great-grandparents were sharecroppers who produced eight children to support their farm. Their second daughter became a schoolteacher and had three children. Her oldest son worked in retail management and had only two children, of whom I’m the oldest. The non-farming generations didn’t need to produce extra workers.

This excerpt summarizes the effort for which Borlaug won the 1970 Nobel Peace Prize:

Despite the institutional resistance Borlaug stayed in Pakistan and India… By 1965 famine on the subcontinent was so bad that governments made a commitment to dwarf wheat [the crop Borlaug developed]. Borlaug arranged for a convoy of thirty-five trucks to carry high-yield seeds … to a Los Angeles dock for shipment. The convoy was held up by the Mexican police, blocked by U.S. border agents attempting to enforce a ban on seed importation, and then stopped by the National Guard when the Watts riot prevented access to the L.A. harbor. Finally the seed ship sailed. Borlaug says, “I went to bed thinking the problem was at last solved, and woke up to the news that war had broken out between India and Pakistan.”

Nevertheless, Borlaug and many local scientists who were his former trainees in Mexico planted the first crop of dwarf wheat on the subcontinent, sometimes working within sight of artillery flashes. Sowed late, that crop germinated poorly, yet yields still rose 70 percent. This prevented general wartime starvation in the region, though famine did strike parts of India. There were also riots in the state of Kerala in 1966, when a population whose ancestors had for centuries eaten rice was presented with sacks of wheat flour originating in Borlaug’s fields.

Owing to wartime emergency, Borlaug was given the go-ahead to circumvent the [local rulers]. “Within a few hours of that decision I had all the seed contracts signed and a much larger planting effort in place,” he says. “If it hadn’t been for the war, I might never have been given true freedom to test these ideas.” The next harvest “was beautiful, a 98 percent improvement.” By 1968 Pakistan was self-sufficient in wheat production. India required only a few years longer. Paul Ehrlich had written in The Population Bomb (1968) that it was “a fantasy” that India would “ever” feed itself. By 1974 India was self-sufficient in the production of all cereals.

This is an incredible, indescribable achievement – the more so when you realize how much opposition Borlaug faced in his efforts. That opposition still exists today with regard to improving African agriculture.

As an aside, I’d like to give a little shout-out to The Big M’s farming peeps in Iowa. Keep up the good work!

Dr. Borlaug died yesterday at the age of 95. In honor of his life’s work, I ask you please to read this article from The Atlantic and, if you have time, this interview he did for the website Reason.

h1

It’s Getting Hot in Here

September 14, 2009

In the morning before I get up I like to read the daily prayer/information of the day from Universalis. This is an on-line publishing group that puts the Liturgy of the Hours, mass readings, and other Catholic information out into the ether for public viewing. I get it on my cell phone.

When it’s a saint’s day there’s usually some straightforward explanation of what the person did to earn sainthood. Today’s description is particularly entertaining, however. Apparently, today is the 688th anniversary of Dante Alighieri’s death.

Dante, as painted during his lifetime by Giotto

Dante, as painted during his lifetime by Giotto

Allow me to quote from Universalis:

“…Too many people think of ‘grim Dante’ of the Inferno (Hell), the inventor of grotesque punishments, and that is all they know of and read. Fools! The horrors of Hell are the horrors of sin itself, sin stripped of the false romanticism we give it…”

I love the declaration of, “Fools!” Such passion! Such humanity, to strip away all neutrality in the description! It cracks me up. It also makes me want to read Dante again. There are three parts to the Divine Comedy: Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso. Count me among the fools who have read only the first of these.

More:

“The Divine Comedy is a massive poem narrating a journey through Hell, Purgatory, and Paradise – it is simultaneously a vision, an imaginative poem, a spiritual journey, a commentary on life and politics, a deep work of psychology, and a synthesis of the then still revolutionary theology of St. Thomas Aquinas.”

Nice sell. More:

“But if you must read just one book, read the Purgatorio (Purgatory), where you see ordinary, fallible men and women – people like you and me – no longer able to sin, or wanting to, but still bearing the stain and being purged of it. Suffering there is, but there is also joy…”

I’ll put Dante on the reading list, behind Thomas Aquinas. I guess you could say he’s on the back burner for now. (heh heh)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.