Stay classy, Joe Francis

jfrancis.jpgAshley Alexandra Dupre, the sex worker in the Spitzer scandal, has filed a lawsuit against Girls Gone Wild, which notes that Dupre was underage when she exposed herself on video.
GGW founder and known asshole Joe Francis’ response: “But I think it’s ironic that she charged Gov. Spitzer $2,000 for sex and she wants to charge me 10 million for taking some naked pictures of her…I feel like I’m getting a raw deal.”
Warms the heart, no?
Thanks to Hilary for the link.

and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

104 Comments

  1. LeFey7
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 11:37 am | Permalink

    There’s nothing ironic about it.

  2. RoseColoredGlasses
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 11:40 am | Permalink

    As much as I hate this guy with the bottom most part of my heart-and brain-he does kinda have a point.

  3. Ninapendamaishi
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 11:47 am | Permalink

    He doesn’t have a point.
    Video-taping underage girls is illegal.
    There’s nothing unfair about being punished for it…
    Doesn’t matter what else she’s chosen to do. Sounds to me almost like people who bring up a victim’s sexual history in rape trails…

  4. Ninapendamaishi
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 11:48 am | Permalink

    Also, if she’s suing him, possibly when he videotaped her she was under the influence, pressured into it, or else wasn’t completely aware what the footage would be used for…
    I mean, god knows that’s the case with a lot of GGW girls.

  5. MLEmac
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 11:54 am | Permalink

    I have absolutely no sympathy for this guy.
    fucktard.

  6. LeFey7
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 11:58 am | Permalink

    RoseColoredGlasses, I disagree. He’s not just taking some naked pictures – he’s selling the naked pictures and raking in a fortune. Besides, shouldn’t she be the one to decide if, how and for how much her body is to be displayed?

  7. Destra
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:03 pm | Permalink

    I thought the exact same thing, Jessica, when I read his statement. If there was ever a man that deserved to be in jail, he’d be at the top of my list.

  8. Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:07 pm | Permalink

    Is Joe Fuckface implying that he had permission to take those pictures of her and disseminate them in the same way Spitzer had her permission to have sex with her? She’s not charging Francis anything! She’s fucking suing him because what he did was a crime! That’s like saying restitution is payment for services. “Oh, thank you for letting me violate you. Here’s some money!” Unbelievable.

  9. Ninapendamaishi
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:12 pm | Permalink

    Well, Joe Francis practices restitution all the time, if you read articles written by reporters who’ve investigated his business…
    You I’d say you’re spot on, FEM

  10. Ninapendamaishi
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:12 pm | Permalink

    Well, Joe Francis practices restitution all the time, if you read articles written by reporters who’ve investigated his business…
    So I’d say you’re spot on, FEM

  11. RoseColoredGlasses
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

    to everyone on this post…sorry that you took my comment the wrong way….I was speaking sarcastically…
    There is no way that I condone illegal videotaping of minors or anything illegal in general..

  12. j
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

    If you’ve read this article you know that Joe Francis is a certifiable sex offender.
    And now we know he doesn’t know the proper use of irony.

  13. piotrek
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:22 pm | Permalink

    So she wanted 1 million for new taping for Girls Gone Wild, they decided to use old material instead, and THEN she decided to sue, according to Joe Francis.
    I think it is a commercial dispute without any morality or social justice elements.
    Something is deeply suspicious about the setting when girls are getting drunken at a poolside and a filming crew distributes consent forms. Did she get semi-legally drunk with a faked ID, or they just plied girls with booze without checking? And do they ambush drunk young persons into signing contracts? I think, 10 million dollars is waaaaay excessive, but a class action suit for 100 million could be what they need.
    That said, on what planets girls are not aware what GGW is?

  14. spike the cat
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:26 pm | Permalink

    This guy is a greedy scum bag. If he was sloppy with doing business, then I say milk his ass. Squeeze out every last drop, if you can.
    Perhaps this will encourage more young women to come forward, and discourage others from following his business model.

  15. Ninapendamaishi
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:30 pm | Permalink

    “That said, on what planets girls are not aware what GGW is?”
    Well, he didn’t become big until after the first video or two.
    “but a class action suit for 100 million could be what they need.”
    Yeah, I /totally/ think they need that.
    “So she wanted 1 million for new taping for Girls Gone Wild, they decided to use old material instead, and THEN she decided to sue, according to Joe Francis.
    I think it is a commercial dispute without any morality or social justice elements.”
    Well, it wouldn’t surprise me if that’s most of her motive, but I’m not sure you can entirely separate the two. After all, as someone else pointed out, isn’t it a bit wrong that he’s videotaping drunk girls in compromising positions and making millions, while all they get is a lousy t-shirt?

  16. happyphantom
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:31 pm | Permalink

    Pricks are supposed to get a raw deal. And since he is such a prick, he should get a super raw deal.

  17. Zvebab Ghobar
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

    Note to Ashley,
    If you don’t want people seeing your boobs – try keeping your shirt on when in public.
    Ooops, am I blaming the victim?

  18. dee
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:37 pm | Permalink

    “He doesn’t have a point.
    Video-taping underage girls is illegal.”
    I believe prostitution is illegal, as well. Hmmm, I wonder if she paid taxes on that money. Oh, I forgot, she was given immunity for spilling the beans on Gov Spitzer.
    BTW, I think GGW is an asshole. I also think Ashley is a slut.

  19. david
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:42 pm | Permalink

    Awesome posts everyone; he really does deserve all that is coming at him, what a jerk/idiot. I feel like he has being asking to get himself sued and thrown in jail for years now and am very surprised that it has taken this long.
    Anyway, I have a question I have been thinking about for while now, and seeing that I think most posts on here will be rightly condemning him; I was wondering if people could let me know what they think about this question. You see, I have been wondering what exactly goes into making someone a misogynists/misandrist/sexist/racist/homophobe…? I mean, we keep saying that society does it; it is the commercials on television… And I partly agree, I think that these are a huge factor in telling men what they should be, but as a man, I rarely felt like these taught me to be as violent or hateful as a lot of people become (obviously some do, like the GTA article points out, but I feel that that is far from the average message), and they definitely don’t explain misandry. I believe that misandry comes out of a reaction to messages, i.e. reacting to how patriarchy/men tell women to behave/think, or reacting to GTA, not by accepting its message. I am curious about how experience influences men. Men are taught for so long to bottle up and deny their emotions, and are always being given the message to live up to that super masculinity, but I believe many men do not want to live up to that standard and feel alienated or shamed if they don’t; they are caught in a mess of conflicting desires and messages and emotions. I was wondering what you all out there think about the intersection of pent up emotions of inferiority/worthlessness, a unrealistic and ridiculous standards for what it is to be a men, and misogynistic or sexist attitudes and actions. I would also love to hear about similarities and differences in becoming sexists or racist.

  20. Anna
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:43 pm | Permalink

    Did someone on a feminist website seriously just call someone a “slut”? Impressive.

  21. Ninapendamaishi
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:50 pm | Permalink

    “”He doesn’t have a point.
    Video-taping underage girls is illegal.”
    I believe prostitution is illegal, as well. Hmmm, I wonder if she paid taxes on that money. Oh, I forgot, she was given immunity for spilling the beans on Gov Spitzer.”
    Whether or not she should have been punished for prostitution, has no bearing on whether or not Joe Francis should have been punished for videotaping underage girls.
    “I believe prostitution is illegal, as well. Hmmm, I wonder if she paid taxes on that money. Oh, I forgot, she was given immunity for spilling the beans on Gov Spitzer.
    BTW, I think GGW is an asshole. I also think Ashley is a slut.”
    I think you will find that most people on a feminist website, believe that people should have a high degree of choice (/choice/ implying absence of coercion) to do what they choose with their body…

  22. dee
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

    Yes, the same way that Lynne Cheney is a slut, minus the sex.

  23. sciencevalkyr
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:57 pm | Permalink

    Zvebab Ghobar:
    What part of “videotaping underage girls is illegal” don’t you understand?
    Seriously, the guy should be in jail for child pornography.

  24. sciencevalkyr
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:57 pm | Permalink

    Zvebab Ghobar:
    What part of “videotaping underage girls is illegal” don’t you understand?
    Seriously, the guy should be in jail for child pornography.

  25. acranom
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

    “Note to Ashley,
    If you don’t want people seeing your boobs – try keeping your shirt on when in public.
    Ooops, am I blaming the victim?”
    YES.
    David, that is a really big question, probably deserving of a better forum than this particular comment thread.

  26. tprincess
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 12:59 pm | Permalink

    I’m sorry, I believe the misogynistic insult you’re looking for is “whore.” Sluts do it for fun, whores do it for money, remember? *drowns in sarcasm*
    It doesn’t matter if she’s slept with the entire Eastern seaboard for cash, credit, and Paypal. Video-taping underage girls topless is WRONG. That is what we’re talking about, now Dupre’s sex life or any job involved with her sex life. She’s not getting all verklempt over something she did last week, she’s doing it over something she did as a minor. And videotaping a teenage girl with an active sex life topless is just as wrong, skeevy, and illegal as videotaping a teenage virgin topless.

  27. Anna
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 1:01 pm | Permalink

    Also, a feminism that only protects/advocates for the sweet virginal girl next door who never gets into any trouble is incomplete at best, pretty much irrelevant at worst.

  28. sciencevalkyr
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

    Zvebab Ghobar:
    What part of “videotaping underage girls is illegal” don’t you understand?
    Seriously, the guy should be in jail for child pornography.

  29. dee
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 1:06 pm | Permalink

    “I think you will find that most people on a feminist website, believe that people should have a high degree of choice (/choice/ implying absence of coercion) to do what they choose with their body…”
    Yes, and I also detect a double standard. Ashley should be free to prostitute herself if she chooses. Prostitution is illegal. Ashley has immunity and has already probably made a million bucks (and is trying to milk another $10 million out of GGW).
    Then Spitzer should also be free to purchase sex from a willing seller, yet he was forced to resign his position and may still face criminal charges.
    I am not defending ANY of these people. I think they all epitomize SLEAZE.
    Does anyone here really think Ashley is a victim? And of what?

  30. Ninapendamaishi
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 1:14 pm | Permalink

    dee,
    To use a less sexist and loaded terminology, do you mean “driven largely by financial gain”? I would guess most people in this country are, women and especially men. Don’t you know that’s glorified, in a capitilist society?

  31. Ninapendamaishi
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 1:20 pm | Permalink

    “Does anyone here really think Ashley is a victim? And of what?”
    Let me put it this way, do you think Ashley would rather be a high-paid sex worker, or a successful politician?
    What do you think the chances are of a /female/ from a moderate background, like Ashley, ever being able to be in Spitzer’s position?
    The playing field wasn’t level to begin with… doesn’t matter whether Ashley wasn’t the most unfortunate person in the world…

  32. Ninapendamaishi
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 1:24 pm | Permalink

    And it wasn’t Ashley’s fault that Spitzer had to resign. It was a political thing, b/c the general American populace doesn’t accept prostitution and b/c it made Spitzer somewhat hypocritical…
    Politicians resign for reasons separate from legality all the time. Like being /gay/ for chrissakes…

  33. dee
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 1:31 pm | Permalink

    Nina, I can clearly see some people are offended by my use of the word slut. I use it when it applies and it isn’t limited to females.
    Would you believe it if I told you I’d rather have my daughter be an honest prostitute than the CEO of RJ Reynolds?

  34. spike the cat
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 1:37 pm | Permalink

    “Then Spitzer should also be free to purchase sex from a willing seller, yet he was forced to resign his position and may still face criminal charges.”
    Spitzer wasn’t just some regular dude off the street.
    Don’t you think that elected officials, who have been involved with several branches of government, should be held at least to the standard that they set for everybody else?
    If you want to be in positions of power where you create and enforce laws that affect everybody, you can’t expect to be above the law.
    He’s an adult, there were clear consequences to his actions, of which he was well aware of beforehand.
    And people get immunity in trials all the time. It’s how the system works. She was just smart enough not to have been an elected official.

  35. Ninapendamaishi
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 1:37 pm | Permalink

    “Would you believe it if I told you I’d rather have my daughter be an honest prostitute than the CEO of RJ Reynolds?”
    Well, as we all should know, prostitution doesn’t exist in a vacuum.
    Your average prostitute who has worked in the business for long show signs of severe trauma, b/c of having men (not all men, but plenty) ignore their comfort and actually physically abuse their bodies.
    So I would hope that you wouldn’t want your daughter to be any kind of a prostitute, unless that was really the best of her options… That doesn’t mean she would be a /bad person/ of course, for deciding for herself that /was/ the best of her options…

  36. dee
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 1:45 pm | Permalink

    “Your average prostitute who has worked in the business for long show signs of severe trauma, b/c of having men (not all men, but plenty) ignore their comfort and actually physically abuse their bodies.”
    That certainly can be true for many women, not just prostitutes.
    And the prostitute thingy….it worked out pretty good for Heather Mills.

  37. MLEmac
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 1:45 pm | Permalink

    once again dee, What the fuck does her being eliot spitzer’s call girl when she was 22 have to do with some sleazes getting her drunk, then getting her to show her boobs when she was 17?! They also got her to sign the release form when she was drunk. None of that was in anyway legal. True, she does not have a squeaky clean record herself, but that has absolutely nothing to do with what this asshole GETTING HER DRUNK AND SEXUALLY USING HER WHEN SHE WAS 17!
    So STFU about who she consensually fucked, even if it was for money. You are as bad as asshole lawyers who blame the rape victim because she’s not a virgin.

  38. Ninapendamaishi
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 1:54 pm | Permalink

    dee,
    “”Your average prostitute who has worked in the business for long show signs of severe trauma, b/c of having men (not all men, but plenty) ignore their comfort and actually physically abuse their bodies.”
    That certainly can be true for many women, not just prostitutes.”
    It’s true for a lot of women in the general population, and a significantly higher percentage of prostitutes in particular. Did you also know that for some reason statistically 90% of women who choose to do sex work were raped before the age of 18?
    And this:
    “once again dee, What the fuck does her being eliot spitzer’s call girl when she was 22 have to do with some sleazes getting her drunk, then getting her to show her boobs when she was 17?! They also got her to sign the release form when she was drunk. None of that was in anyway legal. True, she does not have a squeaky clean record herself, but that has absolutely nothing to do with what this asshole GETTING HER DRUNK AND SEXUALLY USING HER WHEN SHE WAS 17! ”

  39. jfaustus
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 1:57 pm | Permalink

    dee-based: “I also think Ashley is a slut.” Define “slut.” Then consider your definition, and the understanding of the role of sex in culture that informs that definition. Then consider whether how well the meaning of “slut” relates to the meaning of “freedom.” Then come back and we’ll have a nice chat.
    dee-ranged: “Yes, and I also detect a double standard. Ashley should be free to prostitute herself if she chooses. Prostitution is illegal.” Not to burst your bubble, but a for something to be a double standard, each standard has to come from the same place. See, there’s not a ‘burger double standard’ because the Big Mac comes with sesame seeds on the bun and the Whopper doesn’t. Two different establishments, two different standards. Following? Feminists, unlike mainstream neo-Calvinists have complex views about prostitution and whether it should be legal. No one on this thread (except you, natch) was trashing Ashley for being a prostitute. So your big ‘gotcha’ falls to a KO in round 1 because no one here is advocating what you say is the first of the two ‘double standards.’ Oops!
    dee-lerious: “Ashley has immunity and has already probably made a million bucks (and is trying to milk another $10 million out of GGW).” “Probably?” Wow, what a weighty argument. I can make up facts, too. Of course, that would make me look stupid. And she’s trying to sue someone with deep pockets for big money. Gasp! What could be more un-American and immoral.
    O, wait. Shit. I think I got that one wrong. Wait… thinking back to law school… Oh, yeah! One of the moral principles underpinning the common law is that when people breach a duty of care and harm someone through that breach, the harmed person is entitled to recompense.

  40. Leslie
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 2:00 pm | Permalink

    ninapendamaishi & MLEmac… i agree. you dont even need to get into the argument over whether or not it was right for her to be a prostitute… thats a totally different issue. the fact remains that she was taken advantage of as a minor, and that is wrong and illegal. im not saying shes this awesome person who only wants justice… sure, the fame/money are probably really appealing to her.. but that doesnt change the fact that she was taken advantage of and GGW has to be held accountable for it.

  41. Zvebab Ghobar
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 2:11 pm | Permalink

    Is anyone seriously attempting to call this “child pornography”?
    http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=64874
    That’s hysterical, legalistic hairsplitting. Watch that video. She knows exactly what she’s doing and is having a great time doing it.

  42. dee
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 2:15 pm | Permalink

    Stop treating her like she’s some goddamn baby.
    And who says some sleaze got her drunk and made her sign a form? I saw the videotape and it sure didn’t appear she was coerced. She was acting like many kids her age act when they’ve had a few drinks. It doesn’t mean they’re brain dead.
    I have nothing against what she did with Spitzer or her dancing topless. That’s her business. But she shouldn’t run crying that she was exploited because she wasn’t. She made conscious decisions that had consequences.
    The laws are fucked up. If at seventeen she had a child, she would be emancipated and could make decisions for herself, as well as her child. But because she doesn’t, she is treated like a little girl. She isn’t.
    No judge or jury in the world is going to give her $10 million. Nor should they.
    If taking pics of her when she was a minor is a crime, and prostituting herself is a crime, then they both should be penalized.
    I’m just not cutting her slack because she’s a woman.

  43. Josh
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 2:24 pm | Permalink

    I haven’t read the comments, so I don’t know if this was covered, but first I have to say, “what an asshole.”
    Next, I seem to recall from law school too long ago that a minor’s contract is voidable at the option of the minor, presumably because a minor is not legally competent to enter into a contract. Thus, regardless of whether we saw her on video consent, or show her (fake) ID, or even sign a consent form, if she cannot consent as a legal matter, than Francis is where he should be, and that’s up shit’s creek.
    When your business model is predicated on taking advantage of very young women, then you assume the risk that one of them is not telling you the truth.

  44. BabyPop
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 2:28 pm | Permalink

    .She was acting like many kids her age act when they’ve had a few drinks. It doesn’t mean they’re brain dead.

    I think you’re just about the last person on earth to be chiming in on who is and who is not brain dead. And saying that someone cannot enter into a legal contract as a minor (and an INTOXICATED minor, mind you) has nothing to do with said person’s intellect and everything to do with established law. Troll off elswhere, will ya.

  45. dee
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 2:36 pm | Permalink

    Isn’t having fake ID a crime?

  46. jfaustus
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 2:43 pm | Permalink

    Dee-bauched: Why are you on a feminist Web site? Did you come to learn or only to vent your anger? If the latter, we’re not really interested, and you might find a more receptive audience at some of the MRA sites.
    If the former, you might actually want to listen instead of regurgitating trite misogynist bullshit. In the naive spirit of hoping you’re here for the former, here’s some food for thought:
    1. She says that Francis’ reps plied her with alcohol. Who are you to say she’s lying? That’s a question of fact for a jury to decide on after hearing all the evidence, not for some sexist to decide because he thinks she’s a slut.
    2. Even if she weren’t drunk, she was 17. The law says that is too young to enter into a contract. Period. You think that’s wrong? Tell us why, and tell us where you would draw the line.
    3. What is ‘coerced’ to you? Does it have to involve a gun? Can it involve intense social pressure? How about being isolated in someone’s bus, a little drunk, not knowing anyone, unsure where you are, unsure how to get home, not really trusting the folks you’re with, and all of them pressing drinks into your hand one after the other, screaming and whooping and telling you to take off your shirt just like the other girls see the other girls are doing it what the fuck are you some kind of prude christ you’re gonna get paid for this plus the free booze so what’s the big deal…
    You have no idea what happend on that bus, and neither do I. One tiny video edited and produced by GGW is hardly evidence to hang your whole theory on. The difference is that I’m not rushing to judge. You are, and are bending the evidence to fit pre-determined conclusions.
    4. Prostitution is a crime, and it is penalized. In fact, it is almost exclusively prostitutes who serve jail time. This is one of the rare cases where the authorities were more interested in the john. Hence Ashley got immunity. This happens all the time in all sorts of criminal cases so it’s either disingenuous or stuipd to pretend that prostitutes aren’t punished.
    5. No one is saying that she should get special treatment because sh’e a woman. We’re saying she should get a fair shake even though she is a woman, and a prostitute.

  47. BabyPop
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

    Tracy Lords had a fake ID too, hon. Seriously. Hang it up.

  48. Ninapendamaishi
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 2:48 pm | Permalink

    “Watch that video. She knows exactly what she’s doing and is having a great time doing it. ”
    “And who says some sleaze got her drunk and made her sign a form? I saw the videotape and it sure didn’t appear she was coerced. ”
    HELL-O? Have you ever heard of this little thing called video editing? Are you aware of how often someone says something like that when a video is present at /rape trials/?
    I’m not saying a huge, life-threatening amount of coercion was used. Coercion occurs in different degrees…
    A reporter who followed Joe Francis around found that often peer pressure was used to get a girl to take her top off (guys in the background chanting “do it! do it”… and /of course/ that bit was edited out, to make it look like the girl went wild of her own volition.
    And there /is/ such a thing as being young and stupid. I did some things for some guys when I was about 18 b/c I thought it was what I was supposed to do, and what would make them happy… Didn’t really help me, ultimately. And it was hard for me to completely blame them, b/c I’d gone along w/ what they wanted, but at the same time the older I get the more I realize they were out of line to begin with. But teenagers in our culture fall into that pattern all the time. But re: her expression in the video, if you’re going to go through with doing something, it’s not like you’re going to act unhappy about it. She was projecting an image, for sure. Doesn’t mean we /know/ everything going on in her head -jeez.
    Finally, Joe Francis is /still/ being exploitative. Before she was a celebrity, he didn’t care about this footage. Know that she is a celebritity in a way that, no doubt, comes with cons as well as pros, he wants to profit from it. Well guess what, so does she. Amazing. Should he be allowed to profit off her image but she shouldn’t, or something? That’s messed up…

  49. mjane
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

    I think $10 million is a bit excessive to sue for. I’d like to know how she picked that number. Is that what’s he’s made off pictures of her? If she lied about her age when she signed the release form, then he shouldn’t be able to profit off her pictures but I don’t think she she should be able to get money for that. If she falsely presented her age as 18, then neither party should be able to profit from the pictures.
    If they knew she wasn’t really 18, then stop using the pictures/videos/whatever, give her the money you made off them, end of story.
    I hate those GGW commercials, and yes, most girls on there seem a bit drunk but, perhaps they should think about things before they drink that much. I don’t care what sex or age you are, getting so drunk you make decisions you regret later is stupid.

  50. BabyPop
    Posted April 30, 2008 at 3:04 pm | Permalink

    yes, most girls on there seem a bit drunk but, perhaps they should think about things before they drink that much

    Blah blah rape apology blah blah sexist frames blah blah.

    taking advantage of drunk/underage girls that can’t give consent and then whining about how YOU’RE the real victim later is stupid.

    Fixed that for you, mjane.

Feministing In Your Inbox

Sign up for our Newsletter to stay in touch with Feministing
and receive regular updates and exclusive content.

224 queries. 2.107 seconds