Wither Derrick Jensen: Transphobia within Deep Green Resistance

DeepGreenResistanceThere are times where what may seems like small, bad theoretical idiosyncrasies can lead to huge mistakes. And there are times when a group takes what are really bad political ideas and they just run with it. And then there are times when a groups has both, and it leads them to such an unmitigated disaster of a move that the resulting controversy and scandal is liable to destroy that organization. For the British Socialist Workers Party it was a combination of a degraded internal democratic culture and an absolutely terrible and reductionistic view on feminism, led the leadership into actively covering up the rape scandal of a senior leader, and has now left the SWP totally discredited, with the majority of the members still worth a damn going either going off to form a new organization or fighting like hell against the leadership from within. For Deep Green Resistance it was something as seemingly minor and not directly related to its normal environmental work as a theoretical layover from the 1970s (thanks to Maoism, a decade that produced a lot in terms of revolutionary ideas and not so much in terms of good ones) called ‘Radical Feminism’ leading it to take an outright and disgusting transphobic positions.

But lets first step back for a bit.

Deep Green Resistance (DGR) is a radical environmentalist group inspired by the book of the same name and the other works of Derrick Jensen. I have often used Jensen as a shorthand way to refer to that element within radical environmentalism sometimes called ‘anarcho-primitivism,’ for at least until the last year or so he was one of its main theoreticians. But this milieu is far from homogenous. At times I’ve refereed to this strata within the broader Green Anarchist movement (other elements of which I have total respect for, Social Ecologists being top of that list) disparengly as “The Derrick Jensen Crowd,” but for the purposes here I’ll refer to them as the “EndCivs.” This is a simplification of course, but it is also apt, for that is was what they believe.

The various shades of EndCivs believe that ‘industrial civilization’ or even civilization itself is at fault for the current state of ecological destruction and degradation. That the ecological systems that support human life have been exploited and degraded to the max and that all of the destructive processes of modern industry are doomed to imminent collapse. Civilization itself is unsustainable.

These ideas are very problematic. But the tricky thing for me is, and why I have in the past spent so much of my time arguing with EndCivs over these issues, is that they are somewhat right. If you were to replace the word “civilization” with the word “capitalism” in the above statement, it would actually be very close to my own opinion on these issues. Capitalism is destroying the planet. Capitalism is totally environmentally unsustainable. Capitalism is a destructive death machine that has put humanity on the path to total collapse and possible extinction.

As someone studying and working in the environmental and sustainability field, I know in part the Derrick Jensens and other EndCivs are right. We are looking at the same data, the same evidence of ecological annihilation, and we see largely seeing the same long-term outcome, total system collapse. But where me and the EndCivs differ is for one, they see all civilizations as a whole as fundamentally unsustainable – from the Babylonians, to the Ancient Greeks to the present day – not just capitalism as at fault. And secondly they think there is effectively nothing we can do about it. And that is why EndCiv ideas are so dangerous in the environmental movement, because it is the politics of abject despair. Where I see the possibility of an ecosocialist revolution, of moving away from unsustainable practices by doing away with the profit motive and class society, the EndCivs see no such possibility. Where I see the need to and the possibility in totally restructuring all of our technology and economic processes to be sustainable, EndCivs want to throw the baby out with the bath water. Between the old choices for humanity laid out by Rosa Luxemburg, of “Socialism or Barbarism,” the EndCivs have chosen to embrace barbarism.

A number of interconnected tactical programs emerge from this politics of despair, all terrible.

Firstly there is the “raging against the dying of the light” attitude of making a number of great, last symbolic stands against ‘industrial civilization.’ A number of eco-terrorist farcical adventures comes form this ‘last stand for the planet’ notion, destroying damns, pipelines, power stations (though in reality all it has ever really meant is some non-violent direct actions) all doomed to failure. These are the ideas that Derrick Jensen has been irresponsibly foisting on young, radical environmentalists through DGR, ideas of which as far as I know he himself has never followed through with.

If you are not down with being part of the select, enlightened elite (“vanguard” if you will) bent not so much on saving the planet, but at least taking revenge for it, then there is always the option of running away. Why try to save the world (or even destroy industrial civilization) when you can just run off to the hills and start living off the land and growing your own food. The assumptions behind this sort of craven escapism is that those who are knowledgeable in primitive skills, permaculture methods of farming and so forth (things that I am actually very much for, including for the generalization of premaculture farming methods, and also pro teaching more people about, especially kids, I’m just against it being viewed as a solution in and of itself in these ways) will be more likely to survive the coming civilizational collapse.

See imbedded in all of the strains of EndCiv thought is the idea of post-collapse. That after the apocalypse, those select will be able to live – sustainably and in spiritual communion with nature of course – in gatherer-hunter bands or simple horticultural societies in the ruins of the old world. If this hyper-romanticized and naive apocalyptical daydream – which belongs more in a sci-fi dystopian movie then in real political discourse – may involve the deaths of potentially billions of people due to the collapse of the industrial, technological and agricultural systems needed to sustain our population, then so be it, there are too many people anyway they say. If the majority of those who’ll become displaced and possibly die due to things like global warming in the coming century live in the Global South, and those privileged to be living in ‘developed’ countries (where coincidentally, effectively all EndCivs are from) will have more resources to weather the coming storms, then so be it. The implied racism is not dealt with. Thus EndCivs have also absorbed the equally reactionary, regressive and wrong-headed neo-Malusian ideas as well.

If you find many of these ideas troubling, if not outright abhorrent, then good, cause they are. It is a rather odd program to march through the streets with on your banner, “we want you’re lives to be materially worst, we want you to starve, give up all technology that makes your lives better.” Can’t imagine its too easy to win people over to that program. But it is interesting how it is usually predominantly white middle-class kids – ie people who grew up with plenty – who are the one’s preaching scarcity. It is often only someone who has never lived on foodstamps can say others are living well beyond their means.

There is even tied into this notion in EndCiv circles the idea of the “hard crash.” That is that it might be preferable to help increase the rate of environmental degradation cause it’ll expedite the process of civilization’s collapse. These are actual ideas that are talked about and are nothing short of comic book villain levels of evil.

In all of this are the ideas of outright elitists. Some have even admitted as much to me openly. They view themselves as better then other people. That they will survive, they have the knowledge and purified moral high-ground, and the rest of humanity they can care less for. It is truly reactionary in the sense that it wants to turn back the civilizational time-line 10,000 years to before settled cities, and then somehow consider that an improvement. There is nothing liberating about starvation, or the lost of medical science, or the loss of thousands of years of literature and written thought.

A further aspect to this ridiculous post-apocalyptic fantasy of EndCivs is an implied ableism and transphobia. What is going to happen to those people who relay on modern medical technology, from wheelchairs to dialysis machines, in order to live their lives? You can’t build a wheelchair out of bark and kale. As far the EndCivs are concerned they’ll likely be one of the many untold victims of collapse. Callous ableism at its finest here, as these individuals with various impairments clearly don’t fit the rugged noble savage image that EndCivs so often fantasize about. As for the transgendered, what is going to happen to those people wishing to reassign their sex through surgery, hormone therapy or other means after collapse? Again, callous transphobia, these individuals clearly don’t fit into EndCivs’ vision of living purely off the land and exactly as nature supposedly intended them to.

And that was it I thought. Up until recently I assumed EndCivs’ transphobia was merely implied as an unintended side-effect due to the naivety and short-sightedness of their ideas. Boy howdy was I wrong.

So the current controversy with Deep Green Resistance broke out into the open when an altercation occurred at the Law and Disorder conference in Portland. What seems to have happened is that a number of trans-woman and their allies confronted DGR members tabling at the conference, attempted to deface some of DGR’s material with markers and ended up writing on some of the woman tabling in the process (an act that DGR has hyperbolically refereed to as a ‘misogynistic attack and assault,’ something to me sounds like bit of a stretch). Later on another DGR member had a burrito thrown at their head. The Law and Disorder conference organizers have since stated that DGR will no longer be welcome at their conference, and many other radical events and anarchist bookstores have followed suite. It has even reached the point where the Earth First! Journal Collective, another group in the broader EndCiv community, has full on denounced DGR and said they will no longer be printing anymore DGR material (on a side note, this does illustrates that EndCivs are not all homogenous with the same ideas, its more of a tendency and shade of opinion, I fully acknowledge that my descriptions here are just a mere necessary simplification). So what is this all about.

To be frank, the underlying issue is really bad. Deep Green Resistance has some of the most transphobic ideas I have ever seen on the far-left. So much so I’m actually somewhat uncomfortable with repeating them here. So consider this TRIGGER WARNING for Transphobia from here on out.

Deep Green Resistance and its leaders and writers, have adopted a number of incredibly essentialistic ideas. So for instance, there is an absolute and essentialistic value of “nature” with humanity posed as totally outside and opposed to it. Now I am all for viewing nature having intrinsic value of its own, but there are a number of dangers when we start to have such a “purity” fetish when it comes to nature, and DGR seems to have run into just about all of them. For, as I said early, they have also adopted certain aspects of Radical Feminist ideology for their understanding of woman and gender oppression. To grossly simplify, RadFem, among other issues, has an incredibly essentialistic view on female and male genders, that is if you are born a certain gender in society’s eyes, that’s what you are. Nevermind biological facts such as intersex individuals, or any other issues of identity, if you have “natural woman” parts then you are a woman. Trans-women to them are anything but.

So Derrick Jensen has said things like, “why is being trans woman acceptable when deciding I am trans black is not,” and, “I liked what I said to Julia or whatever his name was who wanted to join DGR: You are not a woman. You are a man who believes he is a woman.” Lierre Keith, a DGR leader and long-time RadFem writer has said when talking about trans individuals that gender, “is a class condition created by a brutal arrangement of power. I can’t fathom how mutilating people’s bodies to fit an oppressive power arrangement is frankly anything but a human rights violation. And men insisting that they are women is insulting and absurd.” And Cathy Brennan, another person tied to DGR, has openly claimed that transwoman “oppress” cis-gendered woman and lesbians, and has been insistent to the claim that, “penis = male.” These thoughts are so inbedded in Deep Green Resistance that when they posted their statement of their views on the Portland events, they repeatedly went out of their way to missgender those who “attacked” their tablers as “male”, when by all other reports the “attackers” were trans-women.

And to all of that, to all of them, all I can say is; Holy Flying Fuck You People Are Insane Bigoted Scum! To deny the horrifyingly real oppression faced every day by transwoman, transmen and other queer folk is disgusting, and so are you. I am not going to necessarily condone the “attack” on the DGR tablers obviously, but then again I wasn’t the one being so harshly insulted as a human being by having my identity totally discounted in such a way. Seriously, fuck you transphobes!

I make no claims whatsoever to being an expert or even sufficiently knowledgeable about the areas of queer theory, gender politics and the politics of identity. Usually when these subjects come up in conversation I patiently stay quiet and respectively listen to others thoughts and feelings on the matter. But even I know the basic thing that when a person identifies a certain way and has a preferred pronoun (whether she, he, they or otherwise) you fucking respect that. You do not have the right to be the ‘gender police’ and impose what your particular view of their identity is onto them. That is just the bare minimum basics of common decency and solidarity.

There are some bare minimums that are to be expected from all those on the far-left, and trans-inclusivity is top of that list. If you can’t pull that off, or worse, you come up with pathetically flimsy theoretical justifications for your transphobia, then you’re not welcome. The British Socialist Workers Party has been largely segregated off as pariahs due to their failure to confront rape culture in their ranks. The SWP has come up with some lackluster theoretical excuses related to what they miss-characterize as “democratic centralism” but no one cares. A similar fate likely awaits Deep Green Resistance unless they severely alter their ways, and those honest elements within DGR I sincerely implore to fight like hell to do just that. I do honestly believe that there are scores of good environmentalists and fighters in DGR who aren’t down with their leadership’s positions, and despite all of our other disagreements, I think these people who have done so much work for the movement deserves a place within it. There is always a difference between the leadership and the rank and file, that has to be remembered. But no one is going to buy the DGR leadership’s transphobic ideas, not one bit. Those pieces of RadFem theory have been thoroughly discredited for 30 years. They are wrong. I echo the views of Aric McBay, former DGR leader and co-writer with Jensen and Keith of Deep Green Resistance the book, who left DGR due to their transphobia, when he said:

For me, trans rights and trans inclusion are fundamental to building effective movements and to building a world worth living in. Speaking as the main author of the book that inspired [DGR] in the first place: they are most definitely my core values.

And transphobia–like racism and sexism and classism and homophobia–is a poison that those in power use to destroy movements and ruin lives. When faced with such poisons, who needs COINTELPRO?

Solidarity between movements is the only hope we have… I want to make it clear to people that I, and the vast majority of radical environmentalists, fully support trans rights and trans inclusion.

It is uncertain what the future will bring through all of this. There is a very real process of regroupment occurring amongst radical and anti-capitalist environmentalists. But the future belongs to those who want to fight for it, and fight for one that is inclusive of all. Environmental justice has to be combined with a deep and thoroughgoing social justice. Inclusivity is a must, intersectionality is a must, but most of all hope is a must. The environmental movement we need will be able to unit all the poor, exploited, marginalized and oppressed of the world in a fight to save our species and save all other life on this planet. It will not be built with the politics of despair.

About these ads

About redpleb

I'm a socialist, an activist, a worker and an all around troublemaker here in New Jersey. You can find me on twitter @RedPleb
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to Wither Derrick Jensen: Transphobia within Deep Green Resistance

  1. Good article, however you just used a broad brush to paint the entire green anarchist movement as middle class. That’s just bullshit. That’s the same bullshit attack that all anarchists get all the time. WTF?

    • redpleb says:

      To be clear I was referring to EndCivs specifically which I explicitly separated from other Green Anarchist tendencies and movements. And by and large, in my experience, this has been the case with EndCivs I’ve known. The only exception being some EndCivs I’ve know from Appalachia, but that an minority. Actually a noticeable percentage have been from upper-class backgrounds at that. And I have never once met or knew of a POC EndCivs

      • Jalen says:

        I know you personally and am a member of DGR. My parents wouldn’t have been able to feed me as a child if it wasn’t for assistance from the Army and food stamps. I live with two other anti-civs that you are familiar with, and between the three of us our income is less than $35,000 (we are all independents).

        You’ve never met a POC anti-civ activist becaue you’re never around anti-civs.

  2. Bigby Suvins says:

    Greetings. This article does nothing but stoke the old and new tinders that feed the fire of horizontal hostility. The “end-civers” that I know (me included) are nothing like the ones you speak about (especially character-wise). I am an ex member of DGR Austin. We collectively decided to leave the organization over a year ago because of their anti-trans policy, their lack of transparency, their push towards centralized power without open dialogue, their dismissal of organizers (and co-founders) who disagreed with central staff on the handlings of various issues, and the general cultish behavior displayed by leadership. As much as I am done with DGR, I am not done with the philosophies of “anti-civ” work. Your critique of its philosophies are narrow, generalized, and just wrong in parts. You may think the anti-civ philosophy is wrong. That’s fine. Take a deep breath and let’s roll up our sleeves and get working.. I personally think your anti-capitalist philosophy is important but doesn’t go far enough. But, the difference between you and me, is that I want to see where I overlap with you and go from there. I won’t attack such philosophies because I realize 1) this judgmental and over simplified rant does nothing to bring us together 2) i realize that anti-capitalism (much like anti-civ) includes a wide range of philosophies and approaches that shouldn’t be pigeon-holed into opinionated gossip columns 3)anti civ people can learn from anti-capitalist organizers and tacticians 4) I believe pretty whole-heartedly in most movements that take on these global powers and cultures that be. So rather than pushing people that are on your side away, let’s figure out ways where maybe we can work together, huh?

    • redpleb says:

      I am being clear here that I am willing to work with Anti-Civs, just as long as they are not transphobic (among other issues), in struggles in the here and now. Absolutely. But I am not going to hide our very real differences in that process. Anti-Civ “philosophy” is absolutely terrible and doomed to failure from the get go. This recent scandal has made that ever more clear. It seems terribly contradictory to me to advocate for the struggles of the oppressed and the exploited while putting forward a long term program of destruction and starvation.

    • redpleb says:

      I also think that swipe that anti-capitalists “don’t go far enough” compared to anti-civs is preposterous. Anti-civ is not more radical then anti-capitalists, its more regressive and reactionary. Its aim is to literally turn back the societal clock, it is anti-progressive

  3. Bigby Suvins says:

    As a clarification, I am obviously fine with you calling out the leadership of DGR and am fine with analysis, etc. of what happened and why (transparency and news of oppressive behavior is essential), but it is the extended “analysis” I have issues with. With broad strokes you paint all anti-civ thought into one green color. Those consequences on you and those within this movement could be harsh. You have nothing to gain by slandering character, especially the character of people you do not know. You also cause everyone to think that anti-civ people are anti-transgender. Some are and a few very vocal ones are not. This is classic horizontal hostility you are engaged in, the kind that COINTELPRO so effectively exploited for decades to ensure important work on the radical left would be bogged down for decades with dissolution, death, and suicide. Can we move beyond the name-calling and character assassination and stereotyping?

    • redpleb says:

      I think most of those charges against me are totally bogus. I’m pretty explicit in the article that I am simplifying a bit for length reasons, but I do make clear that not all AntiCivs are transphobic, that there are levels of opinions, Earth First being one of them. Drop the red herring of COINTELPRO is a pathetic diversionary tactic. This is real critique between those on the presumably far-left over theory, ideas and strategy. Anti-Civ ideas are absolutely garbage and deserve to be criticized, there is nothing sectarian about that seeing as I am making clear that I am willing to work with Anti-Civs in struggles in the present, just as long as they aren’t transphobic. But that doesn’t mean I’m going to pull any punches on my disagreements

  4. It seems odd to me, and generally indicative of discourse on the left, that their “callous” attitude towards transsexuals stands out for particular moral outrage, when they’re clearly a bunch of nutters who would speak of hoping to see 98% of the worlds population die a horrible death… It is an interesting question to me how long and in what the left should keep making such distinctions between discrimination and general misanthropy. It starts to look silly at some stage.

  5. Jalen says:

    While I don’t hold Derrick Jensen’s opinions as close to my heart as I’m sure you think I do, the man hits the nail on the head with this statement:

    “Now I am all for viewing nature having intrinsic value of its own, but there are a number of dangers when we start to have such a “purity” fetish when it comes to nature, and DGR seems to have run into just about all of them.”

    I was literally in the room with Derrick when he said “I don’t give a shit about purity.” This was in regards to bringing back extinct species via cloning.

  6. Jalen says:

    You’ve also underplayed why Aric McBay left DGR: http://www.deepgreenresistance.org/reponse-to-aric-mcbay/

    • redpleb says:

      I saw this and found it an incredibly evasive and vague statement with nothing to corroborate it. It doesn’t say why Aric tried to “oust” the DGR leadership and the reference to his differing stance on women’s spaces is where the charges all began.

      In contrast what I do have is Aric’s statement that I posted above which I found to be quite good and worthy of quoting.

      • Jalen says:

        Then ask a DGR member you know personally, i.e. myself, as opposed to believing every anarchist’s post online.

        It’s a very long story, but it (the ousting) had to do with the Chris Hedges Black Bloc article and Aric and Premadasi not wanting to allow Derrick to be critical of black bloc (the two of them both saw black bloc as DGR’s most prime recruits). Things got bad for a few weeks. Premadasi left DGR. Then Aric left DGR shortly after with a large some of money that has yet to be returned. That’s the truth.

    • BoundlessTesseract says:

      What you have posted here (specifically, the idea than Jensen, Keith, etc. did nothing but observe) doesn’t appear credible at all given the recent and unprecedented power grab made by Jensen and company to usurp absolute, hierarchical rule over a non-hierarchical movement. Given the recent trespasses into hypocrisy and transparent attempts at damage control (ex: One token “indigenous” person claiming to speak for all PoC on EF’s site), any credibility DGR may have held is quickly eroding.

      • terraveritas says:

        DGR has no token Indigenous person. They are white led and as far as I’ve seen an all white organization. They have one member on their board that they claim is a person of color who is in fact white. He appears white and acts white and is white. He lied about being a poc and they either never checked his story or… and we have to consider this at this point… the leadership may have been in on the deception. Their great solidarity with Indigenous people means kicking natives to the curb when natives don’t want to be run by white kids. Before the splits over the trans* policy, there were splits over the race and privilege issues. DGR Plains is now exploiting a Lakota on Lakota rift to send their young white members to hassle natives. If Whiteclay is shut down, the bootleggers and the drug dealers will simply fill in the gap, and another white clay will spring up on the other side of the reservation. Here’s a radical idea: instead of spending thousands of dollars on a lying white kid’s PR campaign, they could give that money to the natives working on rehab and traditional healing for addicts. The obscene amount of money they’ve spent on their own PR at this point could have funded a new alcohol and drug rehab worker who could have made an actual difference. The leaderships attitude to natives is paternalistic and colonial.

    • resistance says:

      Why is no one asking what DGR was doing with “a large some of money” in the first place? Are people really paying that much to skype with Derrick? As the central leaders in DGR do not have day jobs, and write for a limited market, where is all this money coming from?

      If it’s for royalties on the DGR book, Aric wrote most of that book. As he has been left out of their current, apparently for-profit, ventures he should get all the royalties for his work. It sounds to me like the remaining members of DGR are ripping off Aric. They are using his work while denigrating him.

      DGR members have been shilling for money endlessly and aggressively, spamming for vague campaigns with zero transparency or financial accountability. There have been blatant lies by some of the leadership about their identities, income, and histories. People seriously need to be asking more questions about this group, their leadership and their for-profit finances.

  7. You say: “And to all of that, to all of them, all I can say is; Holy Flying Fuck You People Are Insane Bigoted Scum! To deny the horrifyingly real oppression faced every day by transwoman, transmen and other queer folk is disgusting, and so are you. I am not going to necessarily condone the “attack” on the DGR tablers obviously, but then again I wasn’t the one being so harshly insulted as a human being by having my identity totally discounted in such a way. Seriously, fuck you transphobes!”
    You’re seriously misguided man, and it’s SO obvious you were born with a penis. Get over it. DGR aren’t transphobes and we won’t be no matter how many times you repeat that false claim. This was an attack on WOMEN made by some abusing MEN, and these men imagining themselves to be women won’t make this fact less true. As always, and not in the imagined world but in the REAL world, men are trying to silence women. I don’t want to understand your misogyny. So fuck you!

    • redpleb says:

      I’m allowing this comment for the sole purpose to help further expose the bankruptcy of DGR. There is very little I even need to say to it, as this person has done enough already to totally discredit themselves. They claim they’re not transphobic and then admittedly launches into bigoted anti-trans tirade. This transmisogynistic statement “This was an attack on WOMEN made by some abusing MEN, and these men imagining themselves to be women won’t make this fact less true” is the very heart of the matter. As long as DGR stands by the ideas that underlie it, of denying trans-woman their identities and feeding into the brutal, reactionary violence and hate against trans-women, they will have no place on the left

      • You still fail to recognize that this was violence against women perpetrated by men. And as of the tone of my comment, that was purely matched by that of your blog. Still making claims about matters you know naught. There is no reasoning from you and I see only your faulty logic and your misrepresentations of people you do not know and matters you are ignorant about. Educate yourself, you’ll see you come across like a complete ignoramus. The Feds are grinning because of people like you ‘red’ plebeian.

      • Rose Water says:

        The question is “what constitutes a woman?” Sex is clearly defined by genitalia. You are male, female, or intersex. Gender is a product of socialization. Transgender people are absolutely entitled to health care, education, freedom of speech, freedom to love and marry whomever they choose, freedom to engage in political struggle, and every other basic right that should be accorded to every human being. They are not, however, entitled to not be questioned.

    • Thanks for mansplaining to people just how misguided they are for believing that someone is transphobic who refers to people he thinks are trans women as “men imagining themselves to be women.”

      You are “fecal matter imagining itself to be human,” Mister Jan.

    • shaedofblue says:

      This was vandalism by women against other women’s books. Jumping in front of a marker isn’t being assaulted. And I have a uterus so my opinion must matter more than others according to the value system of radical feminists.

  8. Rose Water says:

    Your critique of DRG’s philosophy is well argued and, I believe, right. However, I think Keith and Jensen raise important points about the difference between sex and gender that deserve a better response than I’ve seen most often, which is basically some variety of “Fuck You.” Transgender people are demonstratively the victims of discrimination and oppression and that should be roundly condemned. That doesn’t, however, mean that women have to unquestioningly accept MtF trans people as women. There is a difference between questioning a claim and discrimination, and I suspect the real crime of many of the women who question is that they are not being the unconditional supporters that they are supposed to be. I wonder if there would have been such a brouhaha over FtM trans people being kept out of conference or a few symposia. The unmistakable unwillingness to engage Keith and Jensen’s argument makes me suspect that there is at least some truth to it.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s