When people say "the Ukraine", is the "the" incorrect?
May 7, 2009 12:05 PM Subscribe
Pete's hot new girlfriend is Ukranian.
Pete's hot new girlfriend is from Ukraine.
Pete's hot new girlfriend is from the Ukraine.
I've heard all 3, and the third, with the "the" - is that correct?
On the one hand, if she was Hungarian, no one would say she was from "the Hungary".
On the other hand, maybe....that-country-that-is-always-so-hard-to-conquer-when-playing-Risk; perhaps it's considered a geographical entity, like "the Yucatan" or "the Balkans"?
Is the "the" ever proper, or is this just broken / incorrect English?
On the one hand, if she was Hungarian, no one would say she was from "the Hungary".
On the other hand, maybe....that-country-that-is-always-so-hard-to-conquer-when-playing-Risk; perhaps it's considered a geographical entity, like "the Yucatan" or "the Balkans"?
Is the "the" ever proper, or is this just broken / incorrect English?
I believe that when using the article, it's akin to saying, "She's from the Caucasus" - you're referring to the region, not specifically the country.
posted by notsnot at 12:08 PM on May 7, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by notsnot at 12:08 PM on May 7, 2009 [1 favorite]
Between the first two options - the first can be a statement of ethnicity, the second is geographic origin.
posted by kickingtheground at 12:10 PM on May 7, 2009
posted by kickingtheground at 12:10 PM on May 7, 2009
On the one hand, if she was Hungarian, no one would say she was from "the Hungary".
But you wouldn't say "She's from United States" or "She's from Netherlands" either. But with Ukraine, you can say it either way. Ukraine without the "the" is more common. Ukrainian is how you would describe people
posted by delmoi at 12:11 PM on May 7, 2009
But you wouldn't say "She's from United States" or "She's from Netherlands" either. But with Ukraine, you can say it either way. Ukraine without the "the" is more common. Ukrainian is how you would describe people
posted by delmoi at 12:11 PM on May 7, 2009
Just to add to the confusion, there's "The Ukraine girls really knock me out." Which is tricky because it looks like it's saying "The Ukraine," but the "the" is actually referring to "girls" there so it's not addressing the "Ukraine" vs. "the Ukraine" issue at all but proposing a simple "Ukraine" in place of "Ukranian."
On the other hand, this is probably not within the Beatles' scope of expertise. Perhaps all we can take from this is the observation that Ukrainian girls are indeed pretty hot, which does seem like something the Beatles might be qualified to comment on. So good on Pete.
posted by Naberius at 12:22 PM on May 7, 2009 [2 favorites]
On the other hand, this is probably not within the Beatles' scope of expertise. Perhaps all we can take from this is the observation that Ukrainian girls are indeed pretty hot, which does seem like something the Beatles might be qualified to comment on. So good on Pete.
posted by Naberius at 12:22 PM on May 7, 2009 [2 favorites]
I can say from experience that (at least) some Ukrainians feel that "the Ukraine" is at best archaic in English usage or, at worst, offensive. I gather that this is because, as notsnot points out, the "the" tends to refer to the region and this may have semi-colonial implications insofar as it avoids identifying a nation or country in favour of a more vague geographic area. Ukraine has a long history of dealing with Russian imperialism. See also "the Sudan" vs. "Sudan" for a similar colonial vibe.
A related but different issue is the habit some English-speakers have of referring to countries or their governments by using "the", for example, "the Russians", "the Chinese". When this is done in reference to governments (or other elites) as opposed to the collective population of a country it can be taken badly because it conflates the views, actions, or policies of a national government with those of its citizens at the same time as it implies some sort of hegemonic collective in place of a diverse aggregate of individual citizens. Also, it tends to be used to refer either to "enemy" countries or in circumstances where the country referred to is portrayed in a negative light.
posted by onshi at 12:26 PM on May 7, 2009 [3 favorites]
A related but different issue is the habit some English-speakers have of referring to countries or their governments by using "the", for example, "the Russians", "the Chinese". When this is done in reference to governments (or other elites) as opposed to the collective population of a country it can be taken badly because it conflates the views, actions, or policies of a national government with those of its citizens at the same time as it implies some sort of hegemonic collective in place of a diverse aggregate of individual citizens. Also, it tends to be used to refer either to "enemy" countries or in circumstances where the country referred to is portrayed in a negative light.
posted by onshi at 12:26 PM on May 7, 2009 [3 favorites]
Some Ukrainians were cheesed off when Obama called it "the Ukraine" because they thought it implied "the Ukraine, which is a colony of Russia" or somesuch. So, go with "Pete's hot girlfriend is from Ukraine."
posted by electroboy at 12:32 PM on May 7, 2009
posted by electroboy at 12:32 PM on May 7, 2009
Also, to delmoi's point: although it wouldn't be correct to say "from United States" or "from Netherlands", each of these countries does have an alternative (though deprecated) "the"-free name in English To avoid the "the", you could say "from America" or "from Holland".
posted by onshi at 12:37 PM on May 7, 2009
posted by onshi at 12:37 PM on May 7, 2009
Response by poster: Aha! Thanks for the links, I hadn't looked in the Blue!
one of languagehat's posts made it clear for me (as usual for lhat):
>>"The Ukraine" is traditional in English because it referred to a region rather than a country; we say "the Congo" for the same reason. The word "Ukraine" itself originally meant simply 'borderland.' <<
And then there's the whole thing about the "the" upsetting people because it implies that the modern nation is less important than the general region - sorta like you wouldn't call an Italian a Mediterranean, but more politically loaded due to the soviet history?
So
Ukranian = descriptive of origin [Horilka is Ukranian hard liquor]
Ukraine = nation [Viktor Yushchenko is president of Ukraine.]
the Ukraine = region, and not suitable for modern usage [probably due to its rich farmland and central geography, humans have been living in the Ukraine for approximately 7 thousand years, according to recent archaeological evidence]
posted by bartleby at 12:45 PM on May 7, 2009
one of languagehat's posts made it clear for me (as usual for lhat):
>>"The Ukraine" is traditional in English because it referred to a region rather than a country; we say "the Congo" for the same reason. The word "Ukraine" itself originally meant simply 'borderland.' <<
And then there's the whole thing about the "the" upsetting people because it implies that the modern nation is less important than the general region - sorta like you wouldn't call an Italian a Mediterranean, but more politically loaded due to the soviet history?
So
Ukranian = descriptive of origin [Horilka is Ukranian hard liquor]
Ukraine = nation [Viktor Yushchenko is president of Ukraine.]
the Ukraine = region, and not suitable for modern usage [probably due to its rich farmland and central geography, humans have been living in the Ukraine for approximately 7 thousand years, according to recent archaeological evidence]
posted by bartleby at 12:45 PM on May 7, 2009
Lucky Pete!
To answer your question -- "Is the "the" ever proper, or is this just broken / incorrect English?" -- it pretty clearly IS sometimes proper. This seems to be the opposite of what you are concluding. Which also seems inconsistent with what languagehat was saying.
posted by Clyde Mnestra at 12:50 PM on May 7, 2009
To answer your question -- "Is the "the" ever proper, or is this just broken / incorrect English?" -- it pretty clearly IS sometimes proper. This seems to be the opposite of what you are concluding. Which also seems inconsistent with what languagehat was saying.
posted by Clyde Mnestra at 12:50 PM on May 7, 2009
My family escaped from Cossacks in the Ukraine and have never called it that without the the.
posted by Kirklander at 12:50 PM on May 7, 2009
posted by Kirklander at 12:50 PM on May 7, 2009
The four Ukranians I met on an exchange told me quite explicitly that coming from a Russian they would consider "the Ukraine" quite insulting, but that they wouldn't necessarily expect a Canadian to know what they were saying.
From what they told me "the Ukraine" was part of the USSR and treated quite badly as such and that the change to just "Ukraine" was an important part of recgonizing their more recent freedom as a Nation.
posted by tiamat at 12:58 PM on May 7, 2009 [1 favorite]
From what they told me "the Ukraine" was part of the USSR and treated quite badly as such and that the change to just "Ukraine" was an important part of recgonizing their more recent freedom as a Nation.
posted by tiamat at 12:58 PM on May 7, 2009 [1 favorite]
But you wouldn't say "She's from United States" or "She's from Netherlands" either. But with Ukraine, you can say it either way. Ukraine without the "the" is more common. Ukrainian is how you would describe people
Also, to delmoi's point: although it wouldn't be correct to say "from United States" or "from Netherlands", each of these countries does have an alternative (though deprecated) "the"-free name in English To avoid the "the", you could say "from America" or "from Holland".
On the first point, these are both describing corporations and/or geographic entities, hence the aricles. The United States in America is quite literally the states that united to form a political entity within the geographic entity known as America (nowadays we use the term "the Americas", which I suppose makes the situation more confusing). As for the Netherlands, it's the same thing: the political units that make up the larger political unit known as The Netherlands.
On the second point, both America and Holland are inaccurate cognates, and any style guide would tell you to avoid them. As stated, America is a geographic entity. As for Holland, it is but one state that makes up The Netherlands (traditionally the richest and most powerful one, where Amsterdam is located).
posted by hiteleven at 1:17 PM on May 7, 2009
Also, to delmoi's point: although it wouldn't be correct to say "from United States" or "from Netherlands", each of these countries does have an alternative (though deprecated) "the"-free name in English To avoid the "the", you could say "from America" or "from Holland".
On the first point, these are both describing corporations and/or geographic entities, hence the aricles. The United States in America is quite literally the states that united to form a political entity within the geographic entity known as America (nowadays we use the term "the Americas", which I suppose makes the situation more confusing). As for the Netherlands, it's the same thing: the political units that make up the larger political unit known as The Netherlands.
On the second point, both America and Holland are inaccurate cognates, and any style guide would tell you to avoid them. As stated, America is a geographic entity. As for Holland, it is but one state that makes up The Netherlands (traditionally the richest and most powerful one, where Amsterdam is located).
posted by hiteleven at 1:17 PM on May 7, 2009
The problem isn't just that "the Ukraine" makes it sound like a region rather than a nation. It's that it makes it sound like a region of Russia — after all, it got that name by being on the Russian border.
So to people who are sensitive to the issue, it would be a little like calling the Republic of Ireland "the southern suburbs of Belfast" or Pakistan "India's western frontier."
Like other folks here, though, my understanding is that it's less of an issue in English than in Russian or Ukrainian, and that people from outside the area get some slack for using the name that was, after all, printed on all the maps for a long time.
posted by nebulawindphone at 1:19 PM on May 7, 2009
So to people who are sensitive to the issue, it would be a little like calling the Republic of Ireland "the southern suburbs of Belfast" or Pakistan "India's western frontier."
Like other folks here, though, my understanding is that it's less of an issue in English than in Russian or Ukrainian, and that people from outside the area get some slack for using the name that was, after all, printed on all the maps for a long time.
posted by nebulawindphone at 1:19 PM on May 7, 2009
it pretty clearly IS sometimes proper. This seems to be the opposite of what you are concluding. Which also seems inconsistent with what languagehat was saying.
You appear to have understood neither what I was saying nor the issue in general. The reasons for the original use of the article in English are irrelevant except as a historical curiosity; there is an independent country now, and it chooses to be called "Ukraine" in English rather than "the Ukraine," and that's really all that matters. Whether an English-speaker might consider the use of the article "proper" in some sense is also irrelevant; such use offends most Ukrainians (as does the parallel use of на Украине rather than в Украине in Russian), and since Pete presumably does not want to offend his hot new girlfriend, he should avoid it.
posted by languagehat at 1:50 PM on May 7, 2009 [1 favorite]
You appear to have understood neither what I was saying nor the issue in general. The reasons for the original use of the article in English are irrelevant except as a historical curiosity; there is an independent country now, and it chooses to be called "Ukraine" in English rather than "the Ukraine," and that's really all that matters. Whether an English-speaker might consider the use of the article "proper" in some sense is also irrelevant; such use offends most Ukrainians (as does the parallel use of на Украине rather than в Украине in Russian), and since Pete presumably does not want to offend his hot new girlfriend, he should avoid it.
posted by languagehat at 1:50 PM on May 7, 2009 [1 favorite]
languagehat, I think you are quite possibly right. Here is what I meant about the issue. The question was whether Pete's new GF, who has *some* quality of Ukraine about her, might ever be properly attributed to "the Ukraine." It struck me that if she was of the region, she might not necessarily be of the state. You seem to be taking the position that the existence of the country (Ukraine) extirpates any other sense of "the Ukraine." That may be the case, but isn't established by whether those presently of Ukraine get cheesed off when *they* are said to be of "the Ukraine." It also may be that the OP mean that Pete's new GF could was of "Ukraine" proper, but I hadn't absorbed that.
As to to the interpretation of your original gospel, I yield, but with a question. You said "Personally, I think this whole "we must say Ukraine" thing is silly politcorrectnoss, but what the hell, if it makes the Ukrainians happy, why not? But neither Ukrainian nor Russian has articles (as oaf points out), so the whole argument seems a bit silly." I had thought you would take the view that what is proper in English is determined by the usage of native speakers -- so that if "the Ukraine" was commonly used it might be regarded as proper English, rather than turning on whether a listener native in another language might abreact. But I stand corrected, and should have regarded this as obvious; in any event, no doubt you would have it so, and unleash your expertise in your typical manner.
posted by Clyde Mnestra at 3:21 PM on May 7, 2009
As to to the interpretation of your original gospel, I yield, but with a question. You said "Personally, I think this whole "we must say Ukraine" thing is silly politcorrectnoss, but what the hell, if it makes the Ukrainians happy, why not? But neither Ukrainian nor Russian has articles (as oaf points out), so the whole argument seems a bit silly." I had thought you would take the view that what is proper in English is determined by the usage of native speakers -- so that if "the Ukraine" was commonly used it might be regarded as proper English, rather than turning on whether a listener native in another language might abreact. But I stand corrected, and should have regarded this as obvious; in any event, no doubt you would have it so, and unleash your expertise in your typical manner.
posted by Clyde Mnestra at 3:21 PM on May 7, 2009
This usage mystified me when I came to America, since I'd not heard any other countries referred to with a definite article, except "phrase" ones like the US of A or ones where I could clearly understand the name's root as a break-downable phrase, such as the Nether/lands. In most Slavic languages, "Ukraine" would be immediately identifiable as having a root in a word for border or frontier, but it seems strange that English speakers would pick up on that, as the root is not commonly known to English speakers. And also, hearing Americans calling Ukraine "the borderland" or something would, to me, imply a familiarity with geography which I've not seen in more than a few people! Additionally, the word (or ones like it) exist to describe other regions in Slav-populated lands. The Serbs and Croats fought over "Krajina," which belonged to Croatia and was, in a general sense, a border area. The Ukraine / Krajina resemblance is obvious, esp. when one considers that Ukraine is really Ukrayina, in Ukrainian.
I mess up articles a lot, being a Bosnian speaker, but "The Ukraine" still sounds weird to me; a bit dimunitive, as if it's not properly a nation, but just some odd region. It certainly evokes the egotistical nature of 19th Century British "explorers" or something too - the idea that the world consisted of areas to be conquered, not nations. I don't use it for these reasons, plus when in doubt, I'd go along with the natives.
posted by Dee Xtrovert at 4:13 PM on May 7, 2009
I mess up articles a lot, being a Bosnian speaker, but "The Ukraine" still sounds weird to me; a bit dimunitive, as if it's not properly a nation, but just some odd region. It certainly evokes the egotistical nature of 19th Century British "explorers" or something too - the idea that the world consisted of areas to be conquered, not nations. I don't use it for these reasons, plus when in doubt, I'd go along with the natives.
posted by Dee Xtrovert at 4:13 PM on May 7, 2009
It certainly evokes the egotistical nature of 19th Century British "explorers" or something too - the idea that the world consisted of areas to be conquered, not nations.
With respect, I think that may be going it a bit. There are other regionalisms, such as Le Marche in Italy, i.e. marches, borderland. Not all such places become independent countries, but the names will stick long after the meaning becomes obscure.
(Of course, there are also the Welsh marches....)
posted by IndigoJones at 5:11 PM on May 7, 2009
With respect, I think that may be going it a bit. There are other regionalisms, such as Le Marche in Italy, i.e. marches, borderland. Not all such places become independent countries, but the names will stick long after the meaning becomes obscure.
(Of course, there are also the Welsh marches....)
posted by IndigoJones at 5:11 PM on May 7, 2009
Response by poster: Yeah, I think I opened up a can o' worms here.
But I think we can all agree that "the Ukraine" is archaic at minimum and insulting at worst.
Thinking back, I think I've actually picked this article problem partly from 19th century British literature as well as really old maps. I'm sure I've read stories with characters who "were wounded while serving in the Crimea" or who were "posted to the Punjab" when doing service in India, or the like.
It seems that the use of the article implies that these locations were not sovereign states, or states not recognized by imperialist nations, etc. and so were referred to only as regions, with the article in front.
The point has been raised several times above that there's a big mental change between what might have been referred to as "the Ukraine" in the Soviet era and "Ukraine" today. I have no problem with that, so I'm going to tell everyone I know to drop the article unless they have some legitimate reason to refer to the region in general prior to the existence of the state that now occupies more or less the the same location in the present.
Now if only I could find a way to prevent the following type of exchange, which I hear every so often:
"Oh, you're not American, you mean you're Canadian."
"No, I am Canadian, but that's North America, so I'm American!"
"Well, whatever, I only take American money, so take back your Toonie."
"If you take American money, you take Canadian money - Canada's in North America!"
It's odd to see a really angry Canadian, but you can do it if you try...
posted by bartleby at 5:17 PM on May 7, 2009
But I think we can all agree that "the Ukraine" is archaic at minimum and insulting at worst.
Thinking back, I think I've actually picked this article problem partly from 19th century British literature as well as really old maps. I'm sure I've read stories with characters who "were wounded while serving in the Crimea" or who were "posted to the Punjab" when doing service in India, or the like.
It seems that the use of the article implies that these locations were not sovereign states, or states not recognized by imperialist nations, etc. and so were referred to only as regions, with the article in front.
The point has been raised several times above that there's a big mental change between what might have been referred to as "the Ukraine" in the Soviet era and "Ukraine" today. I have no problem with that, so I'm going to tell everyone I know to drop the article unless they have some legitimate reason to refer to the region in general prior to the existence of the state that now occupies more or less the the same location in the present.
Now if only I could find a way to prevent the following type of exchange, which I hear every so often:
"Oh, you're not American, you mean you're Canadian."
"No, I am Canadian, but that's North America, so I'm American!"
"Well, whatever, I only take American money, so take back your Toonie."
"If you take American money, you take Canadian money - Canada's in North America!"
It's odd to see a really angry Canadian, but you can do it if you try...
posted by bartleby at 5:17 PM on May 7, 2009
I have a huge, huge problem with the prescriptivism inherent in what is nothing more than taking the на/в Украине fight into English. It's nearly as silly as the Ivory Coast insisting that its correct name in English is Côte d'Ivoire.
"American" is the correct demonym for people from the U.S.
If a non-native speaker thinks he has to tell a native speaker how to speak the language, he is almost certainly wrong.
posted by oaf at 7:00 PM on May 7, 2009
"American" is the correct demonym for people from the U.S.
If a non-native speaker thinks he has to tell a native speaker how to speak the language, he is almost certainly wrong.
posted by oaf at 7:00 PM on May 7, 2009
Thinking back, I think I've actually picked this article problem partly from 19th century British literature as well as really old maps. I'm sure I've read stories with characters who "were wounded while serving in the Crimea" or who were "posted to the Punjab" when doing service in India, or the like.
That's exactly what I meant; it sounds like an historical relic, and one from a fairly presumptuous (by today's standards) place and era at that. I've certainly read examples of this from 19th Century British novels, exactly like the ones you mention. I suppose that's how people discussed these places then - in keeping with the idea of the marvel Great Empires and the like. But things have changed, and today this just sounds, well insulting and archaic.
posted by Dee Xtrovert at 7:38 PM on May 7, 2009
That's exactly what I meant; it sounds like an historical relic, and one from a fairly presumptuous (by today's standards) place and era at that. I've certainly read examples of this from 19th Century British novels, exactly like the ones you mention. I suppose that's how people discussed these places then - in keeping with the idea of the marvel Great Empires and the like. But things have changed, and today this just sounds, well insulting and archaic.
posted by Dee Xtrovert at 7:38 PM on May 7, 2009
TD's old girlfriend was from the Ukraine, and she called herself Ukrainian.
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:12 PM on May 7, 2009
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:12 PM on May 7, 2009
Note to self: avoid "the Bronx," for fear of neo-colonial offense. Esp. [the] South Bronx, after dark.
Seriously, I take the point that usage has evolved. Someone should look into whether the map in Risk has played any part in this whole crisis.
posted by Clyde Mnestra at 8:38 PM on May 7, 2009
Seriously, I take the point that usage has evolved. Someone should look into whether the map in Risk has played any part in this whole crisis.
posted by Clyde Mnestra at 8:38 PM on May 7, 2009
Now if only I could find a way to prevent the following type of exchange, which I hear every so often:
"Oh, you're not American, you mean you're Canadian."
"No, I am Canadian, but that's North America, so I'm American!"
"Well, whatever, I only take American money, so take back your Toonie."
"If you take American money, you take Canadian money - Canada's in North America!"
It's odd to see a really angry Canadian, but you can do it if you try...
In this situation, you tell the Canadian that he's being an ass (I'm Canadian, FWIW).
posted by smorange at 9:20 PM on May 7, 2009
"Oh, you're not American, you mean you're Canadian."
"No, I am Canadian, but that's North America, so I'm American!"
"Well, whatever, I only take American money, so take back your Toonie."
"If you take American money, you take Canadian money - Canada's in North America!"
It's odd to see a really angry Canadian, but you can do it if you try...
In this situation, you tell the Canadian that he's being an ass (I'm Canadian, FWIW).
posted by smorange at 9:20 PM on May 7, 2009
bartleby, the exchange that you transcribed never happens. Some (very few) Canadians are offended by Americans' laying claim to "American." No Canadian that I've ever met, and I've lived here for 12 years in two major cities, actually WANTS to be called "American."
Anyway I've wondered if "the Ukraine" is used just because it sounds so much like "the Yukon." Regardless, I'm n-thing comments like languagehat's. "Ukraine" sans article is how they want it, and it's their country to name.
"Die Schweiz" is the German word for "Switzerland," but none of Italian, French or Romansh use an article in their versions.
posted by ethnomethodologist at 9:28 PM on May 7, 2009
Anyway I've wondered if "the Ukraine" is used just because it sounds so much like "the Yukon." Regardless, I'm n-thing comments like languagehat's. "Ukraine" sans article is how they want it, and it's their country to name.
"Die Schweiz" is the German word for "Switzerland," but none of Italian, French or Romansh use an article in their versions.
posted by ethnomethodologist at 9:28 PM on May 7, 2009
As to to the interpretation of your original gospel, I yield, but with a question. You said "Personally, I think this whole "we must say Ukraine" thing is silly politcorrectnoss, but what the hell, if it makes the Ukrainians happy, why not? But neither Ukrainian nor Russian has articles (as oaf points out), so the whole argument seems a bit silly." I had thought you would take the view that what is proper in English is determined by the usage of native speakers -- so that if "the Ukraine" was commonly used it might be regarded as proper English, rather than turning on whether a listener native in another language might abreact.
Sorry, I should have made myself clearer. I've gone through an evolution on this issue myself; when it first came up (I guess right after independence, in '91) my reaction was "Oh for chrissake, don't tell us how to use articles, you don't even have them in your language." But over the years I've realized that that's unnecessarily dismissive and that a lot of Ukrainians know English quite well and realize the implications of the article, so I've migrated to the opposite point of view; the quote from the earlier thread shows me in mid-transition, still muttering about "silly politcorrectnoss" but willing to be accommodating. I no longer think it's silly.
posted by languagehat at 7:14 AM on May 8, 2009
Sorry, I should have made myself clearer. I've gone through an evolution on this issue myself; when it first came up (I guess right after independence, in '91) my reaction was "Oh for chrissake, don't tell us how to use articles, you don't even have them in your language." But over the years I've realized that that's unnecessarily dismissive and that a lot of Ukrainians know English quite well and realize the implications of the article, so I've migrated to the opposite point of view; the quote from the earlier thread shows me in mid-transition, still muttering about "silly politcorrectnoss" but willing to be accommodating. I no longer think it's silly.
posted by languagehat at 7:14 AM on May 8, 2009
There's plenty of discussion in the last AskMeFi about this and on Wikipedia.
posted by turkeyphant at 7:19 AM on May 8, 2009
posted by turkeyphant at 7:19 AM on May 8, 2009
Is Pete from Bronx or the Bronx?
posted by Brian Puccio at 8:40 PM on May 10, 2009
posted by Brian Puccio at 8:40 PM on May 10, 2009
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 12:07 PM on May 7, 2009