|
SedanChair posted:It actually wasn't an outrage piece, and people who see at as "outrage" have probably encountered it through the filter of online white supremacist groups. *eyes you significantly*
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 05:50 |
|
|
Jarmak posted:Massive popularity is in fact strong evidence that a group of people aren't bothered by a thing. 50 Shades of Grey was quite successful at the box office, as far as I recall. Doesn't mean there wasn't also a sizeable group of feminists who spoke out against it. In addition, whether or not it's ruffling any feathers among Japanese people themselves, I find it discouraging that studio execs still think, quite probably correctly, that white audiences won't turn out for a movie set in Japan about a Japanese phenomenon unless white people are front and centre.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 18:07
|
|
|
The Japanese really like racism, it's like a hobby
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Not really, because you asked for a mass media piece. Those don't tend to be good or accurate sources of information. Mass media are good at gauging popular interest around different topics and/or generating it. Usually there are also comments sections that can provide some additional insight. The Chrysanthemum and the Sword was almost entirely based on literature, films, and news stories, yet it's still one of the most influential and highly regarded studies of Japanese culture.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Not really, because you asked for a mass media piece. Those don't tend to be good or accurate sources of information. Yes? Absolutely? And it's not racist in either direction. Cultural exchange goes both directions. And yes I thought it went without saying that popularity refers to the majority not to literally every person. I missed the part where you established a small minority gets to declare themselves caretakers of Japanese cultural purity against the wishes of the majority.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 18:17
|
|
silence_kit posted:Social justice proponents have a different view of morality than most people. For one, intent doesn't matter or it matters little in actions and words that are offensive to minorities, so the possible innocent or benign intent of a perceived offender doesn't make his action or words less offensive. This idea that intent doesn't matter is not consistently held by them--indeed, they'd be obligated to totally reform how we do criminal justice if the intent of the perpetrator always didn't matter to them--it only applies to cases where the majority group of a member thereof is offending/oppressing a minority group or a member thereof. So the cooks being poorly trained or pressured to make low cost food or ignorant of how to make Asian food doesn't excuse the action. It is still racist and bad. Excuse me, I didn't mean to kill someone when I put a gun to their head and pulled the trigger, so therefore they didn't actually die. Please, retreat into full solipsism, and let us be rid of you.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 18:19
|
|
|
Vermain posted:These are not statistical studies. This conversation has degenerated into absurdity. Nobody has provided evidence that this film will be viewed negatively in Japan, so why would we expect someone to prove it will be seen positively? Anecdotal evidence is a fine place to start in these discussions, until somebody has something better. Certainly if a Japanese person were to post that the film offended them, that anecdote would be a valid piece of evidence in favor of cultural appropriation (if you believe such a thing exists), at least until broader studies are available. Box office receipts of similar films are actually pretty good evidence this style of appropriation is not seen as offensive by the Japanese. Of course probably nobody will like the film anywhere, because it's been panned by critics. Obdicut has brought up that the film may be perceived differently by Japanese-Americans than the Japanese. Perhaps he would like to expand on that subject? Squalid fucked around with this message at 18:41 on Dec 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
I spent six years in Japan myself and my experience is the same as that of Let Us English (great name by the way: I'm now considering a name change to "I go to shopping"). I never once got the sense that Japanese people, by and large, had a serious problem with films like The Last Samurai, and in fact the opposite appeared to be true. Hollywood films that reference Japan or have something to do with its culture and history tend to be very popular. And for people who don't like those films it seems less a sense of "Malicious gaijin stealing and defiling my culture," and more a sense of "Hollywood films are trash and I don't watch that poo poo." I'm sure there probably are Japanese who feel that such movies might give a misleading impression of their culture, historical or otherwise, but even then it's not like they're getting outraged and deeply offended by it, at least not to the extent that it's such a major problem that the populace at large is talking about 'cultural appropriation' and what needs to be done about it. Of course, as has been pointed out, and as I can certainly attest to based on my own experience, this is a country that massively appropriates other cultures, especially American culture, so it shouldn't be too surprising that they don't consider it a huge problem. I suppose that the far right nationalists rolling around in their black vans blaring propaganda, blaming everything on foreigners and yearning for a return to the days of Japan's pure and glorious past might have a serious issue with this kind of stuff, but they're fuckwits and very few people give a poo poo what they think.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2FGgYp6mdk
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:Social justice proponents have a different view of morality than most people. For one, intent doesn't matter or it matters little in actions and words that are offensive to minorities, so the possible innocent or benign intent of a perceived offender doesn't make his action or words less offensive. This idea that intent doesn't matter is not consistently held by them--indeed, they'd be obligated to totally reform how we do criminal justice if the intent of the perpetrator always didn't matter to them--it only applies to cases where the majority group of a member thereof is offending/oppressing a minority group or a member thereof. So the cooks being poorly trained or pressured to make low cost food or ignorant of how to make Asian food doesn't excuse the action. It is still racist and bad. Effectronica posted:Excuse me, I didn't mean to kill someone when I put a gun to their head and pulled the trigger, so therefore they didn't actually die. Please, retreat into full solipsism, and let us be rid of you. To expand on Eff's snark, you seem to be going in the opposite direction of what you're complaining about, that intent has an over-importance to whether or not something is offensive. Intent is a factor, and an important one, but you can't use intent to tell someone that they weren't or shouldn't be offended by it. Naming a sports team the 'Redskins' might not be done with malicious intentions and could even be meant to show respected in a misguided way (this is a hypothetical and not meant to be a representation of the intentions of the actual Washington Redskins), but that doesn't mean that actual Native Americans shouldn't be offended by it or that their objections have any less merit. That's because, yes, some actions themselves are racist and bad regardless of intent. At best intent changes how the transgressor should be approached. Someone who honestly had good intentions should be willing to listen to grievances and hopefully accept that they made a mistake and endeavor to either stop whatever it is they are doing and/or take steps to ensure they don't do it again. And intent can also tell us the character of the person in question. Someone who does something racist out of genuine ignorance isn't necessarily racist themselves even though the action still is. Also quote:On one hand there's an idea a bit like Original Sin in Christianity that the intrinsic state of white men is to be bigoted. While I'm positive you could find a tumblr that claims this, this isn't something that any significant amount of people in the real world have ever said or actually believe. Stop bitching.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:While I'm positive you could find a tumblr that claims this, this isn't something that any significant amount of people in the real world have ever said or actually believe. Stop bitching. Pretty sure he's using a snarky metaphor to refer to the oft cited concept that everyone has unavoidable racial bias. Particularly the way some people will hide behind it when pressed to defend having used specific accusations of racism as a pejorative.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
This is interesting, because most people here seem to be using 'cultural appropriation' as a dog whistle for 'racial purity'. I always understood cultural appropriation to refer to things like models wearing Native American headdresses as a fashion statement when the headdress is a symbol of authority and accomplishment in the native culture. It'd be similar to the Japanese deciding to print a bunch of Medal of Honors and wear them when they go drinking. The cultural appropriation people are talking about here is much more restrictive and it's getting to the point where people are walking like racist shitheels and quacking like racist shitheels, so there might be something going on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:While I'm positive you could find a tumblr that claims this, this isn't something that any significant amount of people in the real world have ever said or actually believe. Stop bitching. Presumably that's a description of the (correct, imo) theory of structural racism, in which members of the dominant culture participate in a discriminatory system without necessarily having discriminatory intent.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Presumably that's a description of the (correct, imo) theory of structural racism, in which members of the dominant culture participate in a discriminatory system without necessarily having discriminatory intent. Being part of a bigoted system does not necessarily make one an active bigot, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 19:59
|
|
|
NovemberMike posted:I always understood cultural appropriation to refer to things like models wearing Native American headdresses as a fashion statement when the headdress is a symbol of authority and accomplishment in the native culture. It'd be similar to the Japanese deciding to print a bunch of Medal of Honors and wear them when they go drinking. Crucifixes are very common in Japan. They became popular through exposure to the goth sub-culture, because Christians are a very small minority.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
the japanese go loving mental for christmas as well 
JFairfax fucked around with this message at 20:07 on Dec 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:Mass media are good at gauging popular interest around different topics and/or generating it. Usually there are also comments sections that can provide some additional insight. The Chrysanthemum and the Sword was almost entirely based on literature, films, and news stories, yet it's still one of the most influential and highly regarded studies of Japanese culture. Hah no it's not, it's considered wildly biased by modern ethnographers, anthropologists, and sociologists and rife with methodological problems. Who told you it's still highly regarded? The same people who told you race was a real thing? Jarmak posted:Yes? Absolutely? And it's not racist in either direction. Cultural exchange goes both directions. Cultural exchange and appropriation are different things. But really, your position is that if a group does Bad Thing, it is okay to do Bad Thing to them? quote:And yes I thought it went without saying that popularity refers to the majority not to literally every person. I missed the part where you established a small minority gets to declare themselves caretakers of Japanese cultural purity against the wishes of the majority. That's not what I did though. For example, you might do a survey of some conservative country and find the majority of the women aren't upset with or offended by the concept that women shouldn't work and should remain at home. That doens't mean it's unimportant that a minority of women feel otherwise. Majority/minority acceptance of something doesn't tell you anything other than that itself. it is also nearly impossible to assess: box office tickets are not an actual survey of the population.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
NovemberMike posted:This is interesting, because most people here seem to be using 'cultural appropriation' as a dog whistle for 'racial purity'. I think it is instructive that Obdicut's original complaint about the film The Sea of Trees was not that it promoted an ignorant or bigoted view of Japanese culture, or misuses symbols important to the Japanese, but that it is focused on white people. Filmmakers generally try and use protagonists that viewers can relate with. It makes sense, we like characters that are like ourselves. I think most people understand this intuitively. If I'm watching a Chinese movie set in America like Rumble In the Bronx, I don't expect it to have an American protagonist. Similarly, I imagine most Japanese viewers are understanding of American movies set in Japan. However America is not solely inhabited by white people. There are millions of Asian-Americans, and like other minority communities they often feel a sense of otherness, that they aren't really included in White American society. Why can't audiences connect with a Japanese-American protagonist, they ask? How are we different? Directors seem to have no bones about casting Jews and Irish in lead roles, are Asians somehow less American? Where is our place in society? Part of building an inclusive nation is giving proper representation and voice to all groups, and Asians-Americans can rightly claim Hollywood has done a poor job of representing them. Your feeling about this discussion is essentially why I dislike the term cultural appropriation. It's an umbrella concept that includes several issues that don't necessarily have a lot in common, or at least have very different solutions. edit: A Japanese-American might be especially galled by their absence from this film because fitting them in would be so easy and would make good narrative sense. The real issue is just their general under-representation in Hollywood in general, or at least the feeling of under-representation. Who What Now posted:Being part of a bigoted system does not necessarily make one an active bigot, though. My man you're reading too far into this Squalid fucked around with this message at 21:18 on Dec 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Being part of a bigoted system does not necessarily make one an active bigot, though. Sure, they're frequently passive bigots. If you live in a bigoted society, you are likely to hold bigoted ideas and do bigoted things, unless you actively and consciously strive not to. That's where the path of least resistance leads you. This is only controversial if you have a childish conception of people trying to discuss bigotry being some kind of finger-pointing attack mob.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
I think that people who get angry when someone outside of their culture/religion/extended-sci-fi-universe does something that is ideologically sacreligious, such as fashionably wear a Native American headdress, or use elephant dung as one of the material ls in a painting of the Virgin Mary, for example, then it would be a good idea for that person to turn inward for validation of their beliefs and hopefully come to the realization that not everyone is going to have the same exact sensibilities.
Sulphuric Asshole fucked around with this message at 20:51 on Dec 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 20:48
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Sure, they're frequently passive bigots. If you live in a bigoted society, you are likely to hold bigoted ideas and do bigoted things, unless you actively and consciously strive not to. That's where the path of least resistance leads you. This is only controversial if you have a childish conception of people trying to discuss bigotry being some kind of finger-pointing attack mob. Which is the view silence_kit seems to hold, and what I was trying to say is a stupid view to have.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 21:04
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Cultural exchange and appropriation are different things. But really, your position is that if a group does Bad Thing, it is okay to do Bad Thing to them? No my position is that it's a stupid loving concept and neither of those actions are bad. Also this is another stupid loving analogy. Polling women in a conservative country does in fact give you an accurate representation of what women in those countries think, which is the analog to what was being asserted. Are you really arguing that racial purity in culture is an objective moral issue that supersedes what the popular will of the actual owners of that culture prefer?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:No my position is that it's a stupid loving concept and neither of those actions are bad. No, it gives you an accurate representation of what they told poll takers, which can likely be what society is pressuring them to say.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
Yes it's not as if people routinely lie in polls and other public avenues about their beliefs for fear that their beliefs might be held against them https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shy_Tory_Factor
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
Wow that's really relevant to the analogy
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:No, it gives you an accurate representation of what they told poll takers, which can likely be what society is pressuring them to say. Not to mention that is possible for a thing to be bad despite the views of a cohort affected by thing thinking otherwise. That and the usage of the language "racial purity" in the post shows an extremely tone deaf strawman.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
archangelwar posted:Not to mention that is possible for a thing to be bad despite the views of a cohort affected by thing thinking otherwise. That and the usage of the language "racial purity" in the post shows an extremely tone deaf strawman. No, not really in this context, that was the point of the post.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 22:15
|
|
Jarmak posted:No, not really in this context, that was the point of the post. Okay. Would you mind laying out how it demands racial purity? I mean, apart from the sheer irony of suggesting that Japan would be pluralistic as h*ck if it weren't for the goddamn SJWs.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Wow that's really relevant to the analogy Yes?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Yes? No? Since error of this type is impossible for this type of data? Unless you really want to go with the irrelevantly pedantic "the actual analog is what people told the pollsters  " which okay then but that doesn't change my point?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 22:26
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:No my position is that it's a stupid loving concept and neither of those actions are bad. Yeah, so it doesn't matter if both of them do it or not. That objection was meaningless. quote:Also this is another stupid loving analogy. Polling women in a conservative country does in fact give you an accurate representation of what women in those countries think, which is the analog to what was being asserted. No it doesn't. it tells you what they'll answer on a poll, and a lot depends on how you set up the poll. And no, the analogue was box office receipts. Still you missed the point: a simple majority of a population agreeing something is good doesn't mean anything, nobody thinks direct democracy is the best way to do anything except a few occupy die hards. quote:Are you really arguing that racial purity in culture is an objective moral issue that supersedes what the popular will of the actual owners of that culture prefer? What are you talking about with racial purity? When did I say anything about racial purity? Obdicut fucked around with this message at 22:30 on Dec 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Yeah, so it doesn't matter if both of them do it or not. That objection was meaningless. It's not meaningless, the mutual nature of the action highlights how stupid this poo poo is. Direct democracy is a pretty good way to decide if something is insulting, unless you think there is a larger objective moral issue at play with letting white people play Japanese characters that transcends what Japanese people think about it? Yes saying only Japanese people should be cast for those movies is a racial purity argument. It's no different then the idiots complaining that stormtroopers can't be black.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 22:51
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:It's not meaningless, the mutual nature of the action highlights how stupid this poo poo is. How does that logic work to you? Why would people doing mutually bad things to each other just be 'stupid'? Try to actually make a coherent argument, right now your only argument is "This is dumb, I don't like it". quote:Direct democracy is a pretty good way to decide if something is insulting, unless you think there is a larger objective moral issue at play with letting white people play Japanese characters that transcends what Japanese people think about it? How is it a good way to figure out if something is insulting? How does this make sense to you? What about a minority of people who find it insulting--do they not really find it insulting if the majority does? I'm really interested in the logic of your ol' brain pan, it seems to have cool rules. You keep saying "Japanese people" as though they all think one thing, too, and you keep conflating Japanese and Japanese-American people. quote:Yes saying only Japanese people should be cast for those movies is a racial purity argument. It's no different then the idiots complaining that stormtroopers can't be black. Hahah nice one. I'm sorry, I can't bring myself to believe you actually feel this same, this is just too much a classic "No, you're the racist." US movies have a large problem of undercasting Asians. They cast white people for asian roles, they make very few asian roles, and so, asians are hugely underrepresented in our movies, and they are most especially underrepresented in leading roles. This is a real, actual thing that happens, it's not a feeling or an emotion. The reverse is not true: Asians do not frequently get cast to play white roles, and obviously, whites are overrepresented in hollywood movies. So it's not in the least, in any way, the slightest, to any degree, like saying that stormtroopers can't be black. It's noting that yet again, Hollywood decides to not take an absolutely perfect chance to cast lead Asian actors and instead casts white people for the leads, and the problem of asian under representation remains. The added insult here is that it's also taking a very real place with a very real health crisis in Japan and using it as a horror movie. Edit: Also are you not from the US and you don't know what racial purity means or something?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
I'm bewildered that so many of you seem to think the rest of the world gives a single gently caress about you or how you feel about your culture further than how much money you'll spend on expressing it. You're not special, and the world actively hates you. This goes for all of us, unless someone here is miraculously part of the .01% that runs the place. Also: "Oh no, not a horror movie being insensitive! That might make someone uncomfortable!" Jesus Christ. Talmonis fucked around with this message at 23:13 on Dec 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 23:11
|
|
|
Talmonis posted:I'm bewildered that so many of you seem to think the rest of the world gives a single gently caress about you or how you feel about your culture further than how much money you'll spend on expressing it. You're not special, and the world actively hates you. This goes for all of us, unless someone here is miraculously part of the .01% that runs the place. Man, sounds like you had a rough loving day. This is the kind of post that basically says that all caring is pointless because none of us matter and none of us have the power to change anything, right? quote:Also: "Oh no, not a horror movie being insensitive! That might make someone uncomfortable!" Jesus Christ. Chill out man, it'll be okay. You're reading words on a website and being asked to think about things, it shouldn't gently caress you up this much. Maybe you could explain why that's such a ridiculous idea to you? Obdicut fucked around with this message at 23:21 on Dec 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Bruce Lee, arguably one of the most famous Asian film stars in the entire world, allegedly created the concept for Kung Fu (titled "The Warrior" with the exact same premise as Kung Fu) which was later recast with a white dude in lead after his concept was shot down. Let me repeat this: Bruce Lee, probably the most famous Chinese person outside of Chairman Mao, was turned down because Americans wouldn't accept an Asian dude playing lead. There's a huge problem with under-representation of Asians in cinema/TV which is absolutely not the same thing as "Stormtroopers can't be black"
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Man, sounds like you had a rough loving day. More that if you're either A.) So privileged in life that you are offended at the food offered in a foreign country you get to go to college in, or B.) So utterly obsessed with what may offend some tiny portion of any given group that you make it a personal crusade; you might just have too much time on your hands. Nobody gives a poo poo how you feel, except those closest to you. Sucks, but that's life.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
Talmonis posted:More that if you're either A.) So privileged in life that you are offended at the food offered in a foreign country you get to go to college in, or B.) So utterly obsessed with what may offend some tiny portion of any given group that you make it a personal crusade; you might just have too much time on your hands. Nobody gives a poo poo how you feel, except those closest to you. Sucks, but that's life. Actually, I give a poo poo what they feel too. I know other people that also give a poo poo how they feel, because it turns out feelings are actually pretty important to humans, and to make this whole society work we actually have to pay attention to feelings. I know, it's so rough! If everything was just numbers and people were just rational it'd be so much easier, but darn it, turns out emotions are kinda vital to this 'human' thing. There's whole public health programs about looking at feelings, and arranging stuff to take into account people's feelings about stuff. There seems to be a heavy indulgence in irony in the thread: do you get any twinge as you emotionally rant about "nobody gives a poo poo how you feel"? The food thing is not a big deal. it is an old-as-the-hills thing, actually, that immigrants to the US have complained about forever. It actually used to be much, much worse, in that generally in the US there was gently caress-all foreign cuisine aside from the totally americanized bastardry, other than in immigrant communities. Now the foodie revolution is cool and all, but it also means that people sometimes just start blindly whacking up recipes and sticking a label on them, when the dish bears little or no resemblance to the original dish. It's not a huge deal, but luckily, the fix is the simplest thing in the world, and is actually kind of fun: come up with a new name for the dish you're serving, or make a dish that's remotely authentic. If it doesn't happen, is it An Outrage? No, just a little thing that's kind of lovely. There's much bigger fish to fry--the lack of Asian inclusion in Hollywood is a much bigger fish, for example, even just sticking inside cultural stuff--but there's no particular reason to ignore it or to try to cauterize the emotional attachment people have to their culture.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Man, sounds like you had a rough loving day. Other than contextless whining, do you have an argument that isn't just "u mad bro??" Is there a point to continuing the thread in the vein of "Obdicut and Tiny Brontosaurus contrive to find new ways to appear ridiculous"? And finally, is there a better example of upper-middle class privileged lefty navel gazing and self-regard than focusing on the question of whether or not California rolls are like a white cisprivileged heterosexist boot stamping on an oppressed PoC's face forever instead of quote:While food quality and preparation were major concerns, students also called for better treatment of CDS staff, saying that they wanted “a guaranteed 40 hour work week, benefits for part-time workers, personal days, funding for job training and increased wages.” - See more at: http://oberlinreview.org/9451/news/students-protest-in-wake-of-a-house-petition/#sthash.4Ltozfay.dpuf
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 23:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 05:50 |
|
|
The Insect Court posted:Other than contextless whining, do you have an argument that isn't just "u mad bro??" Yeah, it's in the other posts of mine. quote:Is there a point to continuing the thread in the vein of "Obdicut and Tiny Brontosaurus contrive to find new ways to appear ridiculous"? You should close the thread, then. quote:And finally, is there a better example of upper-middle class privileged lefty navel gazing and self-regard than focusing on the question of whether or not California rolls are like a white cisprivileged heterosexist boot stamping on an oppressed PoC's face forever instead of I think it's a pretty trivial issue too and don't get why you want to focus on it rather than larger problems. Nobody has been able to explain why they want to focus on it so much.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 23:39
|
|