Ebooks   ➡  Nonfiction  ➡  Entertainment  ➡  Humor and satire

Hubs that Provoke


These are some of my views on controversial issues. They may not be fully and unquestionably right, nor will they be a farce, and completely devoid of merit.

Roy T James

Copyright 2015 Roy T James

Published by Roy T James at Shakespir


p<>{color:#000;}. Male, Female and Libido – An Oblique View

p<>{color:#000;}. Why do we live as a society?

p<>{color:#000;}. Religion: How a New one Evolve

p<>{color:#000;}. What makes us do, what we do?

p<>{color:#000;}. Unity is strength? Like Hell!

p<>{color:#000;}. Why do we like, what we like?

p<>{color:#000;}. In Defense of Terrorism

p<>{color:#000;}. A FEW OF MY BASIC DOUBTS

p<>{color:#000;}. A Few More of my Basic Doubts

p<>{color:#000;}. Some more of My Doubts

p<>{color:#000;}. Mind and matter, what differentiates the two?

p<>{color:#000;}. The Spiritual and the Material, What is the Difference?

p<>{color:#000;}. The spiritual and the Material, Why are they Different?

p<>{color:#000;}. The spiritual and the Material, What Finally, is the Takeaway?

p<>{color:#000;}. Why is there Unrest?

p<>{color:#000;}. A way to kick out intolerance

p<>{color:#000;}. The Real and The Abstract: Where is the difference?

p<>{color:#000;}. Getting Hurt by Words: What is so Special

p<>{color:#000;}. Can’t we warm up to Global Warming?

p<>{color:#000;}. Why do we react the way we react?

p<>{color:#000;}. The secret of good times, of achievements and success

p<>{color:#000;}. Man can’t find what is good for him, but as men, they however do

p<>{color:#000;}. Is Language, for Communication?

p<>{color:#000;}. How to stop terrorism

p<>{color:#000;}. How to be free of Intolerance

Chapter 1

Male, Female and Libido – An Oblique View

I shall begin with a short introduction to the state of the art, as far as sex and the genders go.

A man’s sex drive is mainly in his head. Two areas of the brain, the cerebral cortex and limbic system, are vital to a man’s sex drive and performance. They’re so important, the fact is that as far as man is concerned, simply thinking or dreaming about a sexual experience is enough to empower him for a blissful completion. Researchers are finding new evidences of arousal of men caused by imagery and related stimuli, whereas such objects make only marginal changes in women’s sexual attitude.

Also many of the statistics and reports show that men tend to have the higher libido. I believe that part of the problem with a lot of the studies (like Johnson & Johnsons) is in the “social stigma’s” that have been existing in the past centuries. Even though women nowadays feel more liberated and find it more “appropriate” to express their sexual desires/drives, not much has changed in this regard. The old double-standard stands in a lot of instances, as though possessing some safety cover. For example, one of the most barbaric of all anti female rituals, FGM, is freely practiced in many parts of the world. (I happen to read a supporting letter or article written by a woman, stating how liberating, FGM was for her and how comfortable, it made her feel.)

From our medical knowledge, we identify this difference in libido with women’s hormonal balances. Women tend to have extreme highs and lows in estrogen, progesterone, FSH (follicle-stimulating hormone), LH (luteinizing hormone) because of menstruation, where as men’s Testosterone, Estradiol, SHBG (Sex Hormone Binding Globulin), PSA (Prostate Specific Antigen), etc. tend to remain fairly constant across the board until midlife. Hence, men also actually have a cycle similiar to the womens monthly cycle (though not as extreme) and they also go through “andropause”, the equivalent of menopause, however, this takes the form of a lifetime cycle

Functionally, it is generally accepted that libido in both sexes is equally strong. Men tend to ‘show off’ this sexual aggressiveness, while women tend to keep a more tongue in cheek libido. Women may be more conservative, and, pickier. It is thus accepted that most women talk of relationships, while most men talk of sex in general. But there are women who would appear this way as well—overly aggressive. On the whole, it is normal for men to be more aggressive; women will be, but only selectively. And that is why sex-drive is more evident in men.

I think we are way off the mark. From what can be learned by observing other forms of life (described in my book, The Unsure Male), not only that there is no aspect of life and living, where females show a capability less than that of male, but also there are instances after instances, where the females show a discernible upper hand, when compared with male.

If that so, how come in the matters concerning sex, human males are being widely attributed with a more aggressive and imposing role, a remarkable deviation from other forms of life? In search of an answer, I started observing the male life style closely, especially those aspects that are unique for males. The answer I found, happen to be quite an intuitive one too. Our bodies are so constituted as to put the benefits of multitasking to full use. We use each and every part of our physique for more than one function. For example, the same organ is used for speaking and for tasting, and so for smiling and for biting, or so for looking and for crying.

As an unintended consequence of this, so far as man is concerned, whenever he does relieve himself, especially when the male anatomy requires him to be in physical contact with the necessary implement throughout the act, the possibility of him being strongly reminded of the other ‘task’ of this implement, exists. This repeats many a time in a day, that too in an ambience of comparative seclusion and privacy. Stage is set for arousing images to appear with exciting thoughts. As there is no evidence to suggest that the male sex is gifted with additional willpower to counter this, a rather violent and excited disposition could be the result. Those inclined to meaningful vocations of life, like arts, crafts, science, or philosophy, generally vent this as increased productivity (This we reward as long as it is on matters other than sex, while reproaching heavily, if it happens to be connected with sex!), and others, especially those on the fringes of camaraderie, vent this in ill treating women. This, I think, is how aggression came to be associated with men in general.

Here you may be wondering, why men resorted to crimes against women? They could have easily found something less harmful and more likeable to do with women, to act on the images that came up during such occasions as the ones narrated above. However that doesn’t happen. That is because the male sex is severely limited in its ability to do good to the females. Many such occasions in the past (during evolution!) ended up in the male getting severely admonished, whenever he attempted to do something good for the female. (A casual glance at the fate of the male of the species whenever a mating session completes, can show that the male, even now, continues to get reprimanded!) Therefore, being intelligent, man always resorts to one of the few things he is sure of, the easiest being such types of violence. (This in fact is the main finding of my book)

Naturally, as a reaction at least, when women would have followed suit, they also would have turned aggressive. It did happen or not, we don’t know. As there is no evidence to suggest that in the earlier times women weren’t forceful in finding their way, we can say, the passive nature of women is a later development. I think women have resigned to a rather submissive role now, as the experience gained over the ages certainly discounted all hopes of men providing anything more than mere passive, sometimes good, presence. (These days women happen to be found everywhere with a subdued libido and a bashful temperament, as that will encourage the man to volunteer for anything, the woman would find inconvenient to do herself!) To add to that, men proudly took up on themselves, all the tough, uninteresting and dangerous activities of living. Hence women have chosen to stick to the rather less taxing and emotionally rewarding functions of life, tending to home and family. (Curiously, whenever we face a major problem in our society, rather than examining this arrangement, we have been suppressing the problem to cause it to reappear somewhere else, mostly in a more serious form. A cursory glance at the major headlines of any day can prove this.)

As a permanent solution to our problems, in the case of man, I think it is worth examining the possibility of separating the sexual, and the urinary functions from the very same organ meant for both. Perhaps the welcome changes brought by such an alteration could free the mankind of immense misery.

To any trigger, reactions from men and women are greatly different. Obviously the difference between the male and female physique should be the prime suspect. An enquiry into this, which has been overlooked so far, leads to interesting results.

Chapter 2

Why do we live as closed societies?

The very idea of a society should be against human nature. Each member of the human species is vastly different from every other member of his species, having distinct physical and mental makeup with ones own priorities and approach. What is good for one need not be acceptable to every other person, and this, in fact, is what we celebrate as uniqueness or individuality. Therefore, it stands to reason to conclude that the human race will be best served when each and every member of the species grows unhindered in one’s individual space or environment.

But what is actually happening is something else. Apart from groups based on age, language, nativity, profession and other naturally identifiable differences, abstract walls like religion, caste or social status and many other artificial differences are constantly rising in our midst, making it impossible to live without being part of a group. Unlike animals who took the natural path of cohabiting in groups as their survival is better ensured when they are organized thus, our species took the unnatural path of organizing themselves into groups. (In fact it is better to consider this as a good assumption, remember, no one has established the survival rate of animals as considerably low or different, when not in groups. We saw them moving in groups, we also saw them fighting against threat, and we put two and two together!) We also overlook the fact that humans can survive better when not in groups. For example, widely dispersing at the sign of danger, is a part of the survival strategy of well trained forces.


This can become much more clear, if we are to examine the ‘successes’ and ‘failures’ of human society since the beginning of history. Those that are most often quoted as ‘success stories’, are the tales of individual brilliance, like those extolling the capabilities of our effort in subjugating the planet and controlling its forces. In stark contrast, almost all the failure stories pertain to natural calamities or human intolerance. It should be clear as daylight, in any such disaster, the loss would have been much less and easily containable, had not the victims been living as a settlement, well connected to each other and with close interactions.

If we are to scrutinize in earnest, the advances we made and the pitfalls encountered, it is possible to label almost all instances of success as attributable to individual excellence, be it associated with arts, crafts, science, philosophy, exploration, cure or anything else. Take the case of the age of exploration, one of the most successful periods in human history, where almost all the talents that we are proud of, came to fore. The distinct mark left by some of our predecessors, whose spirit of adventure and the desire to face challenge being the singular reason behind such endeavors, is clearly noticeable in the way we identify many countries, places or other entities. In the modern era, there is no invention, discovery, physical things of existence or abstract ideas, which cannot be attributed to some fertile mind.

Disregarding all this, we chose to constrict ourselves into a society. Why?

A closer look at the life and living style of animals can show that the only activity in life, where animals take part as individuals is mating. All other ‘chores’, be it related to food gathering, or to rest and of recreation are always performed as a group. If so, why is mating restricted to the ‘individual sphere’ of animals? Why don’t they perform this in groups? What is there to prevent animals from partnering with the intention to mate, when they are in groups?

To find an answer to this, let us re-examine mating, closely, breaking down the process into stages, before, after and during the conduct of union. The period before, made noticeable by the plethora of natural enhancements to the females’ appearance and form, presumably is to attract the male. The union proper or the exchange of gametes also, is easily noticeable by the short time interval between the end and its beginning. But it is the post mating behavior that deserves further study, as, for animals belonging to whatever species, this phase is made striking by the total transformation, of the female into an epitome of distaste. A few examples shall be:

- The males of the honey bee are led to their death; their genitals drop off inside the queen.

- The male of the spider, black widow, usually dies days after mating, although occasionally he is so weak after mating that he is captured and eaten by the female.

- Among the insect, praying mantis, females devour their partners after mating.

- Female of the cat will scream and then move away immediately on completion of mating, fall down, lick herself furiously, roll around and if Tom doesn’t leave the scene promptly or tries to approach her right after mating she will strike out at him.

- The not so friendly demeanor among the female of our canine friends as soon as the male dog completes its mission.

- The female of the lion may mate approximately every 15 minutes when she is in heat, continuously for three days and nights without sleeping, and sometimes with five different males. The males are left physically exhausted as the act is often accompanied by snarling, biting, growling, threats and other forms of violence. Sometimes the female turns and swats the male during dismount.

- Female of one of the most gentle and docile of all animals, deer, show tendencies of violence only on exceptional occasions, the post union unrest being one such occasion.

One thing can be read from this beyond doubt. Animals cannot afford to mate when they are in groups, as the resulting commotion, the post mating fury of large number of females, will not be suitable for happy existence. Also while in groups there are many other activities of mutual involvement that are far more acceptable, to males specially. It is therefore natural that animals choose to form into groups.

I think we blindly followed animals. Having decided to perform the crucial activities of mating in private, we needed to find a reason for doing it so. As human nature posits, we would have found a reason for doing so, in a good abstraction, shyness. Covering ourselves with clothes, which gave rise to a plethora of pastimes like vanity or timidity, and many other signatures of human race, could find its origin here. (I think, we can’t withstand the weather now, since our bodies have become used to clothes, is a better argument, than that we started to cover ourselves for escaping from the weather)

In fact for finding a reason to continue our life as a society, we are attributing whatever good that happens with us, to our social life. Also, whatever untoward happens with us, we always want to attribute that to someone from our race. Whereas facts are exactly the opposite!

Chapter 3

Religion: How a New one Evolve

Religions: a raison d’être

No other example, of mankind’s quest for the irrational, shall be more descriptive than our journey in theology.

The earliest civilizations chose as gods, everyday objects or beings or other entities occurring naturally. These objects of veneration would not have been successful enough in holding our attention for a considerable period of time, in the defense against destabilizing thoughts, the primary function of any such entity. (That ‘the destabilizing thoughts’ is an integral part of life, and all that we see as unique to humans is closely related to this, is discussed in one of my books, The Unsure Male) This could have been the reason for successive cultures to choose as revered objects and gods, anything that is grand, esoteric and of magnificent proportions. Two things must have happened at this stage. Firstly, with the elapse of time, people would have acquired the necessary skills and the ability to make all these images and other representations at a faster rate, resulting in a larger amount of ‘free time’. Secondly, the objects itself, by constant use, would have become part of the daily use implements, the resulting proliferation giving away the novelty value. The essential function of making sure that no time is left for the ‘destabilizing’ thoughts being compromised thus, and the improvisations having lost their bite to spark fresh, unique thoughts, people would have been on the lookout for something more potent. Thus begins the era of spiritual exploration giving rise to many new religions. Each new religion is nothing but an amalgam of tenets founded on a varied mix of the harsh ones amongst the existing social norms and a few, even harsher ones, newly thought of. Needless to say, the more abstract the tenets, the more long-lasting the effects; the more constricting the rites, the more substantial the crowds.

Bottom of Form

Thus, religion is but an excuse to bypass the rational while immersing oneself in constrictions and impediments. On top of that, religion offers a large structure, a medium in which such restrictions can manifest. And we are able to introduce new constrictions and impediments at will and with ease, that too with no fear of resolution.

In fact every new religion holds sway over the society for certain period of time till the followers start yearning for something more stringent. This can happen, as, due to frequent use, the existing religious controls might become largely ineffective in keeping the ‘destabilizing’ thoughts at bay. As one can easily see, the effectiveness of those ‘stringent’ controls continues to get blunted by familiarity. This will render it powerless to defend against the ‘destabilizing’ thoughts, creating a void, to be filled by either a different sect of the present religion following more severe controls, or a new religion itself. As all religions are based on controlling the three most potent social ‘retarders’ that human beings have identified as effective in regulating the severity and order of social transactions, new sect or religion takes shape with differing degree of harshness, in the control and regulation of those very retardants.

The first such force is easily identifiable as fear. The most potent of which, the fear of the unknown, thus occupy the position of ‘retarder’ number one. Modulating this dread is the primary service that all religions render to us, right from the time of birth. All religions thus exploit this fear to direct humans to organize their lives in a manner suitable for keeping ones interest away from those ‘thoughts’. The more effective was religion in shooing away fear, the more free time people must have had, to be troubled again by such ‘thoughts’. That would have necessitated suitable entities of varied other forms to garner people’s interest.

Thus was born the second such force. The plethora of observances and other repetitive activities that are always associated with a religion constitute this. Each one of these having the potency of occupying certain amount of free time, a large collection of such observances might have been necessitated for incessant support. Over time, these have come to occupy an important position in ones social life as rituals, ceremonies and other formalities as part of a rich cultural heritage.

The third and the most significant force is the part played by religion in providing one with hope, giving everyone a reason to do things as they are accustomed to, by tradition.

As mentioned, a new religion always evolves to fill the vacuum created by the existing one becoming ineffective. In this case, the severity and reach of the new one and its elements are always dependent on how the above steps were embodied in the defunct religion.

Chapter 4

What makes us do, what we do?

How is it that, while one person is ready to sacrifice his own life for a stranger, another show no qualms in murdering a dear one? What makes us do, what we do?

A survey of available literature points to six fundamental needs that everyone has in common, and all behavior can be simply abstracted as an attempt to meet those six needs. The needs can be identified as, Certainty, the assurance that one can avoid pain and gain pleasure, Uncertainty/Variety, the need one perpetually has for the unknown, change, or new stimuli, Significance, the necessity to feel unique, important, special or needed, Connection/Love, the pleasure of strong feelings of closeness or union with someone or something, Growth, the happiness from the expansion of capacity, capability or understanding, and finally, Contribution, the fulfillment one feels from service, helping, giving and supporting.

Fulfillment can only be achieved by focusing on two spiritual needs, all sagacious words and writings exhort. One such is the need to continuously grow, and two, the need to contribute beyond ourselves in a meaningful way. Like any other living being, humans also have a long list of natural needs and meeting these satisfyingly, is the primary function of life. Therefore we humans have the need to be part of a lot of activities of varying style, content, endurance and strength, each of them meeting a part of ones needs and desires.

But the above discussion does not answer the most pertinent question in this regard. Why is that unlike other forms of life, we humans go after one or a few among their wants at the cost of sacrificing many other needs and conveniences, some of which, even to their peril? What are we striving for? What makes us do, how we do?

We, I think, have been maintaining this as one of the most difficult questions of life. There is no historical figure who did not attempt to answer this, a quick glance into our collection of classics of yesteryears and those of recent times shall easily show. Also, there is no one who did not become a historical entity despite pontificating on this question, a further look at the collection can reveal. It seems this is a question of very serious proportions.

The answer to this question is easily obtained as far as a small baby or child is concerned. Whatever the child does, it shall be to please some of its wants, food or physical comfort or to be freed from discomfort, as can be observed easily. It is only when the child grows up to be a man or a woman does this answer would seem inadequate. Assuming that we continue to grow as rational beings and act in a manner appropriate for maximizing our level of contentment, we should be at a loss to explain many of the things that grown-ups do, things, capable of causing great harm to their own life. As grown ups, we display a leaning towards potentially dangerous activities as well as taking even ordinary and enjoyable things to its extremes.

A closer examination into our our actions point to the need of revisiting our idea of the rational. Also, its transient nature becomes another feature worth consideration. Taking these into account, when we investigate our doings further, something interesting emerge that can explain much of our behavioral quirks we have been leaving as humor.

Especially in physical world, it is a known fact that everything loses the values attributed to any of its properties, when the property is measured at its extremes. All the relationships, dependencies and other connections are valid or can be reliably predicted, only when they are in a range noticeably away from the respective limits, both the upper limit and the lower one. An analogous relationship can be observed in living beings too, if we are to study the occurrences of emotional expressions, rational transactions or other forms of exchange. Our reactions when we are extremely tired, terribly unhappy, highly excited or full of joy need not be the same as what our reactions would have been, in normal times. As it is a known fact that manifestation of various elements of human nature under duress is prone to large deviations, the propensity to find solace in the ‘extremes’ of whatever one does can also be considered as one such large deviation. Therefore, human interest for the ‘extremes’ or the irrational can be attributed to some ‘duress’, one is perpetually under. The indifference to murder, which is easily acknowledged as one such behavior as well as the eagerness to sacrifice, which is rarely recognized as one, exemplifies such ‘extremes’.

**]In short, all that we do can be better understood if we are to see them either as ‘rational’ acts or as ‘irrational’ ones. It should be clear: everything we do in a rational manner is to satisfy some facet of human nature. But a more interesting question in this regard arise. Why do we do irrational things?

In fact unlike other members of the living world, humans have the ability to ascribe emotions to events and occurrences of ones life. They also possess the wherewithal to indulge in an unlimited number of activities to suit each and every one of the emotions desired. And unlike all other forms of life, humans have been utilizing all these emotions to derive happiness. And he found it convenient to extend these in an irrational manner, (extremes) whenever the need arose keep the thoughts of such ‘duress’ at bay. Irrational acts are thus of great help in making one forget the ‘duress’. (One cannot extend the rational acts indefinitely in this manner, by definition, rational has a logical end. And, the ‘duress’ might return)

Thus everything we do in an irrational manner, is to free us of unhappy thoughts, by keeping us occupied without a break,.

Chapter 5

Unity is strength? Like Hell!

Since time immemorial we have been spreading the idea that unity is something to strive for. Posters and pictures such as the ones shown play a major part in popularizing this.


I think, to a large extent as a result of such influences, ‘unity is strength’ has come to be accepted as a maxim, one that permeates into all activities of the society, especially in left leaning states. Quite palpable is the presence of this in organized resistances against real or perceived dangers, which, though detrimental to harmony and peace of the society and many a time horribly destructive in nature, is tolerated by general populace as good examples of the great power of unity.

(Whether this tolerance is worthwhile and, is this ‘resistance’ yielding something, are questions that need to be examined afresh. If we compared the state of any society before this ‘organized resistance’ and after a certain time gap, we might find the present state better off. But that doesn’t show that the society is not worse off compared to what could have been the present state of the society, had that ‘resistance’ not taken place. Still we consider ‘organized resistance movements’ as a good thing. Isn’t this another example of our penchant for the irrational?)

The idea that unity is strength, I think originated when some of our ancestors saw around them instances like, say a big animal like lion getting caught in a spider web or, a huge carcass easily moved by a colony of ants, leading them to the idea that when the insignificant things happen in unison, they can change something big. Notably in the instances that struck them, the result of unification was visibly empowering in nature. And we have come to accept it as an adage applicable to all living beings.

Let us re-examine this aphorism starting with a rather simpler form of life, a plant. Imagine we sow a group of seeds. On germination, if they are planted suitably dispersed with plentiful availability of essential needs like sunlight, water or other nutrients, the seeds are sure grow into healthy plants or trees that provide good yield. If not, the lack of the basic needs shall cause the plants’ growth to be stunted and shall give rise to unhealthy trees, greatly affecting the yield. Such is the case with everything that has life. In the case of plants, the influence of factors other than the generally identified needs of sunlight, air, water and nutrients have already been noticed as significant for healthy growth, the Indian scientist Dr Jagdish Chandra Bose being a pioneer in this field. Also, even before the advent of any such scientific findings or discovery, all the essential parts of farming used to be governed by certain traditional observances, fables and other sayings that more or less is a hidden treasury of logical thoughts and concepts. In short, our approach to plant life is one of rational thinking, where we constantly monitor our performance and are always on the lookout for improvements.

Quite rational also is our approach to the question of breeding and caring for farm animals. The size of such farms, its location, physical composition as well as the techniques employed in raising stock are guided by similar principles. Sufficient importance can be seen to be ascribed to provision of adequate free area or space for each animal to grow unhindered, in addition to plentiful sunlight, fresh air and other natural amenities taking a prime position.

But when it comes to human life, we certainly are deviating from such examples of good logic. Not only that the methods adopted to nurse human babies deviate from the sound techniques of our farms, but also the human parents are showing a clear affinity towards techniques and patterns that are restrictive in nature, even when those are detrimental to happy growth. Forgetting all that we did for facilitating robust growth in other forms of life, we seem to be on an ardent search to find novel ways of augmenting human capability, to offset the loss caused by our restrictive approach! And I think, from a large multitude of such reasoning, inferences and syllogisms floating around in our literary wealth, the maxim ‘unity is strength’ came to be appropriated to support such a move, to make marginal improvements in our capability without the need to effect any actual improvement in human capacity. In short, unity generates an apparent feeling of being reinforced, without any real addition to ones strength.

However, in places where the proverb ‘unity is strength’ might be found matching, there are other proverbs like “faith will move mountains’, or ‘practice makes perfect’, which could have been fitting the idea much more aptly. Or why didn’t we think of the benefits of individuality and make an effort to popularize that? Why did we continue to forget the prime position of direction or leadership in the achievement of success? Or why such posters like these are not in wide circulation?

More than that, we still go on with ‘unity is strength’ as a rational maxim, especially in human affairs. Aren’t we continuing with the irrational?

Chapter 6

What makes us like, what we like?

I am asking this question thinking that an answer to this will be of great help in my search for the answer to another question, why is fair or light complexion so much in demand? That it is highly sought after, is quite evident from the proliferation of whitening creams and other such treatments in our society.

In fact, all my efforts to find an answer made it more and more clear to me that, we humans have no special affinity to any shade. Look at our possessions, those living or non living objects that are close to us, and see the more or less equal distribution of these, among all the colors. It can even be said that, it is the different shades of black that more often than not, turns out to be the choice. A casual look at our wares, pets, vehicles or dresses shall be enough to support this.

Why is it that when it comes to humans, that too only in the matters of complexion, we have a leaning towards the lighter one, the fair? More than that, why are we steering away from the dark?

That humans want to be fair complexioned has come to be accepted as a gospel truth, is evident from the plethora of writings available around us, repeatedly reminding each one of the need to be ‘fair’ towards the dark skinned.


Visit: http://www.Shakespir.com/books/view/627358 to purchase this book to continue reading. Show the author you appreciate their work!

Hubs that Provoke

A collection of observations, especially covering the irrational in our life. These cover almost all aspects of our society, and provides a satisfactory explanation to the imponderables of our world.

  • Author: Roy T James
  • Published: 2016-04-04 05:50:09
  • Words: 28817
Hubs that Provoke Hubs that Provoke