Life Education
Kay Steiger has an interesting idea:
The second part of that is proposing a shift to including valuable life skills in part of a standard public education. Rather than taking a home ec class where students are asked to make a pan of brownies in one week of a six-week class, why not take a life skill like cooking seriously as part of a comprehensive education? After all, the default has be come that people need to opt in to learning how to cook rather than opting out.
I’d actually like to see schools take on other life skills as part of a required education: learning basic financial skills about how to use a credit card, comprehensive sex education, and learning how to buy for and cook healthy, balanced meals on a budget. After all, these are skills that everyone can use. Rather than assuming everyone pick them up outside of the education system, why don’t we make them part of a required education along with math, English, and physical education?
These sound like pretty good ideas to me. At the same time, it would be a pretty good idea to actually teach everyone to read, write, and do basic math in school and at the moment we’re a pretty long way off. So in some respects, I hesitate to suggest that we should be expanding the scope of the curriculum. On the other hand, perhaps one can make the case that a richer curriculum with a more practical orientation could help people stay engaged with school. Certainly it seems like something worth thinking about.
62 Responses to “Life Education”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
October 14th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Er, not quite. You couldn’t be more wrong.
October 14th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
You finally realized you need more of that?
October 14th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
You said it, Matt. After all, who learns anything in life?
October 14th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
This sounds like one of those liberal overreach ideas that I thought we’d have to wait until AFTER the election to get!
October 14th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
We’d have so much more time in school for useful skills if we didn’t take 10 years to teach arithmetic.
Seriously. It’s not fucking rocket science.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Matt misunderstands me. I’m not suggesting we do these things instead of teaching math, science, and reading, simply in addition to. There’s no need for them to be mutually exclusive. I’d point out that comprehensive sex ed already has widespread support.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
“learning how to buy for and cook healthy, balanced meals on a budget”
I’m sure that little junior and juniette will pay close attention and stop eating junk food. Maybe we can also show them scary movies about the dangers of driving too fast.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Schools that are failing to teach basic skills have issues unrelated to the amount of time spent on the subject.
Schools that are not having that problem could probably benefit from some of this (credit management seems particularly topical).
I don’t think it is either/or necessarily.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
Matt misunderstands me. I’m not suggesting we do these things instead of teaching math, science, and reading, simply in addition to. There’s no need for them to be mutually exclusive.
No. Cooking is a social skill and can be learned easily through assimilation. Cooking as a professional skill can be taught in vocational academies.
Arts education first, please, before we even start talking about this.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
Just adding extra coursework is not a good idea. I don’t want anyone to fail high-school because they got a D in cooking.
Not only that, but Cooking isn’t really standardized, and from a liability point of view is a non-starter. In my class, we spent 3 quarters of the semester watching videos about table manners.
As far as “Financial Planning” goes, I had to take one of those classes too. Our teacher spent the class teaching us the tenets of a Get-Rich-Quick Book(Flip Houses! Ownership Society!!!).
This sort of thing sounds great on the margin, but implementation is never very great, since managerial energies will be (rightly) focused on Math and Reading.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
You think the fights over sex education were tough? Ain’t nothing compared to the fights over cooking education are going to be. Southerners — always on the lookout for something to get their panties in a twist over — are proclaim this the second coming of Northern Aggression. They’re gonna take our cobblers! They want to destroy our heritage! It’s JUST LIKE RECONSTRUCTION! Also, good cooking necessarily involves copious amounts of wine — just look at the photo you chose to accompany this post — which means, of course, that Oh Noes! Obama wants to teach all our childrens to get drunk and nekkid in school! Also, there’s the French aspect.
On a more personal note, I find that seduction is much easier if you are the only man the woman knows who can cook. Creating an entire generation of passable cooks is going to force those of us who need (or needed — married now) a social crutch to look to other hobbies. And what would those new hobbies be? You don’t have an answer for that one, do you Mr. Smarty-Pants?
October 14th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Scythia? This IS arts education.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
This sort of thing sounds great on the margin, but implementation is never very great
Teaching “financial skills” could be one of those things where the problem is that many people probably don’t know much about it themselves, and finding people willing to teach it will probably be difficult.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Agree, but you should be able to opt-out.
In order to fit an AP class I wanted to take into my high school schedule, I had to take a required “personal economics” class for 4 weeks in the summer. This is probably a valuable experience for a lot of students, but I didn’t appreciate spending 2 hours every morning in June listening to somebody talk about how to balance a checkbook.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
It’s just a little to easy to look at every social ill and say, “There oughta be a class!” Effective education is a difficult prospect, and social change through public education is doubly difficult.
I’m all for revising school educations to cover (or cover more) personal finances and cooking and sex ed and health and ethics and problem solving and the environment, but short of a Sputnik-like push, we’re unlikely to see any real gains from this.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
I think it’s funny that through 14 years of public school and four years of college I never learned anything about the financial decisions I would need to make after I graduated.
Every student should leave high school with an understanding of home mortgages, credit cards, IRAs, income taxes, social security, unemployment, checking accounts, etc. Why not get every student a passport if they want one? Teach them about the department of licensing, the department of revenue, how to contest a speeding ticket, how to mail parcels. How to register to vote. How to register to run for office. How to file a citizen initiative.
Some of my most valued experiences in school were practical. I learned how to type. I learned how to program. I made wooden models in shop class. I think my sex ed and health classes were actually pretty good.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
I know somebody who taught a gardening/cooking class. The middle and high school students loved turning the vegetables from the campus garden into a meal and the otherwise pizza-chasing teens were happy to eat the greens that came out of it. Just as Matt starts to suggest, this is exactly the kind of expansion of arts education that keeps kids involved in school.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
My basic opinion is this: Most parents could and should be able to teach their kids about living on a budget, grocery shopping, and cooking, but a lot of parents might not be able to teach, calculus, trig, chemistry, a foreign language, etc.
Basically, parents have a comparative advantage in teaching one skill set and schools another, so they should specialize.
Also, I teach at the university level. I could go into a huge diatribe about how horribly prepared students are. Some don’t even know that .25, 1/4, and 25% are all the same thing. Its seriously bad these days. Let’s fix that before we teach them how to saute.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
Worst. Idea. Ever.
Honestly, shouldn’t parents do something? So flec3ther didn’t learn any practical life skills in school? So what? His parents never talked to him about any of this stuff?
I am a professor and a progressive and I think dragging schools into this kind of “education” is completely wrong headed. I’m still new at the whole professor thing, but believe me when I tell you that even students at first rate liberal arts colleges like mine can barely read and have no depth of knowledge in any cultural tradition (not even the religious one that permeates our college).
What exactly would be the goals of ‘life skills’ education? I’m still laughing at the bone headed attempts of my high school to teach personal finance, etc. Talk about dumbing down American education!
October 14th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
We got a bit of financial stuff in the 80’s in California. I also appreciated one teacher going thru how one can make an idea become a law.
What I’d like to see is what to do if you are arrested. I’d think that would gets some kids (and parents!) attention.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
Matt misunderstands me. I’m not suggesting we do these things instead of teaching math, science, and reading, simply in addition to. There’s no need for them to be mutually exclusive.
No, I think Kay Steiger misunderstands Matthew. Unlike Kay, Matthew understands that there are only a limited number of school hours. Among that limited supply of school hours, schools need to balance the number of hours devoted to any particular subject against the hours devoted other subjects. If Kay wants more cooking classes, she needs to explain why the school hours she proposes to devote to cooking are better spent teaching cooking as opposed to math and reading.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
A push to teach more home economics classes seems like a push in the wrong direction. Certainly it’s getting plenty of scorn here in the comments.
A better idea might be a concerted effort to connected the laundry list of subjects/facts learned in highschool to everyday life. Linking government/economics to personal finance for example, as well as the current economic crisis and the basics of starting/running a business. Cooking and nutrition can be discussed in health class, but also in chemistry/biology. Basic computer skills could be integrated into math classes (like how to use a spread sheet).
October 14th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
They have these kind of classes in non-college track high school programs. It’s just a bunch of academic dinks who think they don’t exist. The same kind of people who wet their drawers over a charming piece about old diner waitresses on NPR but would shoot their daughter if she dropped out of college to wait tables propose these kind of life skills classes. They already exist.
I read a post from you buddy Ezra once about him spending half a day not being able to find escarole. In college classes they teach you how to find the escarole of your dreams. In non-college track they teach you to substitute lettuce and call it a day. [4 credit hours - Shopping for the Rest of Us]
October 14th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Math should be tied directly to issues like credit card and interest, as well as mortgages and balance sheets (or investment returns).
Those are real world skills that people never get exposed to.
and it would be easy to tie it in to the standard cirriculum.
And it would be easy to sell to the public, in that a better eductated citizenry wouldn’t be in such a debt related mess (or, at least they would walk into the next mess with their eyes open).
And in order to avoid totally federalizing education, grants could be made available for those states who want such a program. Then the graduates from those states will, over time, economically dominate those who reject it.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:15 pm
A lot of people are raised in families that emphasize academic achievement over practical skills. But that emphasis comes back to haunt those same people later in life.
Our educational system should teach practical skills such as building houses and gardening for food and use real-world projects to introduce subjects such as math and science.
Everyone should graduate high school being able to cook healthy meals, building green homes, and managing finances.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:19 pm
You know, I actually think this stuff is a lot more objectively important than literature, physics, biology, chemistry, algebra, advanced math, and a lot of other things.
I really think we’d be a lot better off teaching kids the basics of cooking, home maintenance, personal finance, IRAs, filing taxes, leases, bank accounts, predatory payday loans, etc. This stuff is VITAL knowledge, and yet we have kids in school for 14 years and somehow we never get around to it because we’re all too busy reading Moby Dick. It’s ridiculous.
I mean, YES we should still read Moby Dick and write papers and learn algebra and chemistry and all that good stuff.
But I’m sorry, half the day should be a little more geared towards practical knowledge. Stuff that, when they bring it home to their parents, their parents say “wow, that’s really useful,” as opposed to “oh, honey, I forgot all that 30 years ago.” Would it really bring down the nation to cut back on the stoichiometry for that?
October 14th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Most people don’t have the slightest chance of understanding their mortgage or the impact of their credit card debt. The first problem is that they are morons. The second problem is that this leads to them not understanding basic math. You could teach them that paying the minimum each month on their credit card is a bad idea, but they’re not actually going to understand why.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
Requiring kids to take classes about things they can learn at home or by trial and error is a stupid idea. Schools should teach subjects that students and their parents can’t learn by themselves. I do wish the econ curriculum had more personal finance than it does presently, but it is not the State’s job to rote teach everything that families might not already do well. If we teach people to read, write, and analyze and send them off with a robust vocabulary then they can learn new things that they choose to explore.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:29 pm
I think education isn’t that complicated. We’re just bad at it in this country. I’m not saying that other industrialized nations are shining exemplars, but I don’t think they agonize over changes in the window-dressing like we do.
Everyone needs to learn life skills, but is a school classroom the best place for it? I’m not even convinced we suffer from a deficit in life skills. Youth readily learn how to drive, how to text to each other, how to plastered photos on myspace, how to spend money, etc.
The deficit is not a lack of domain knowledge, but if anything, it’s a lack of judgment and critical thinking applied to these domains. If you understand rudimentary math, you can apply this to managing savings and debt. But the “life skill” of establishing bank accounts and credit cards is something you pick up on an as-needed basis.
As for cooking, I suppose I could see the point if schools were doing well in a lot of other things, but I would put it way behind music, for instance, and definitely behind the core curriculum.
I don’t see it as a conservative position that you begin education by learning how to read and how to quantify, and rapidly bootstrap this into learning how to think and solve problems. Once you’ve mastered this, picking up specific domains is an application of your core skills. Obviously, it would be a disaster if a generation knew nothing other than how to pass arbitrary tests of basic skills, but once basic skills are learned, domain knowledge is absorbed much more efficiently. E.g., a kid who actually wants to cook can find some recipes and experiment. The results will be better with the guidance of knowledgeable adults, but the ability to read and follow instructions is enough to produce a passable result in many cases.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
A lot of people are raised in families that emphasize academic achievement over practical skills. But that emphasis comes back to haunt those same people later in life.
You know what? I know how to read, write, and do math very well. I also know how to use a library. It’s better I spent my limited, precious time in school learning all of those things so that when I need to figure out how to fix my car or put up some dry wall, I can get a book on the topic. And because I’ve learned math, I have an intuitive understanding of how credit cards and mortgages work. I highly doubt that someone who has trouble grasping basic and intermediate math classes is going to suddenly understand these “personal finance” concepts just because someone taught him a class on it.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
I think we should go the other route entirely, and have education be exclusively memorizing Latin texts. Maybe some Greek ones for the more decadent among our students. Memorizing Latin texts is precisely the most practical education possible, since Julius Caesar teaches you how to conquer and massacre the wogs. And that’s ultimately what everything is about.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
I think we should go the other route entirely, and have education be exclusively memorizing Latin texts. Maybe some Greek ones for the more decadent among our students.
Greek is the more refined language. Or Hebrew. Latin is the more “vulgar” language.
October 14th, 2008 at 8:03 pm
But don’t stop there. Gym class can be transformed from dodge ball to yoga, meditation, etc.
October 14th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
I had the good fortune to work in kitchens some when I was much younger, and since that time I’ve had occasion to watch a lot of civilians trying to use a kitchen. I think people would be a lot more interested in cooking and in preparing their own food if they could use a kitchen knife with a bit of skill. I don’t mean fancy stuff like turning fancy radishes or stuff like that, just fast and efficient chopping, peeling things with a sharp knife, etc. I’ve watched people struggle with crappy knives that they don’t know how to use, and it’s no wonder they’d rather open a can!
October 14th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
You guys should check out Japanese public schools sometime. The students don’t learn much in the way of basic subjects (due to forcing teachers to teach to the level of the lowest student in the class, who are together all day every day, so no various levels of class), but they do teach cooking, woodworking, gardening, and several other things.
I wouldn’t mind seeing funding given for states or school districts to run an after-school program that teaches basic life skills. You could have it be an hour or 90 minutes after school and rotate the subjects based on season (ie, cooking/gardening in the warmer months, financial stuff in the winter). Making sure buses were available after school for kids who live too far to walk or can’t get picked up would be necessary, though.
October 14th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
Get rid of stupid-ass sports like baseball, football and basketball and teach martial arts – including the philosophy of same. That would produce both healthier kids and kids less trapped in the chimpanzee fear of their peers.
A generation of kids who learn how to RELAX under threat rather than panic might have changed our whole approach to things like 9/11.
October 14th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
When I was 11th grade I took AP Biology, Accelerated Math, AP Chemistry, Bamd, AP English and AP History. But if I had taken a life skills class they could have made extra sure I knew all the stuff my dad taught me about cooking and safe sex. What a wonderful waste of time. Also the worst teachers always get assigned those classes and pass everyone who makes a minimal effort.
October 14th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
just a thought… i love how recommendations to try to keep disinterested kids interested in school only come from people who loved school and were always engaged
October 14th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Geez, it would be nice if people who wrote about education actually had some background in it. There was the guy, kind of important, his name was, uhm, John Dewey. And he was like America’s greatest philosopher. And he as probably America’s, no the world’s, great educational theorist. And he sort of argued that you shouldn’t separate life skills from learning reading, and writing and math. Because that is how you actually learned, by engaging in everyday activities and being motivated to engage with them. You know what cooking is, besides cooking, a phenomenal chemistry or physics lesson. You know what re-habbing a bodega in your neighborhood is? An amazing social studies and physics lesson. I could go on. And when American public education first started that was the model the best and the brightest were arguing for – to learn through living, through being citizens, a wholistic learning. There separate classes are kind of – you know – idiotic when you think about it. I mean there is no logic.
October 14th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
“Every student should leave high school with an understanding of home mortgages, credit cards, IRAs, income taxes, social security, unemployment, checking accounts, etc.”
This is all very important stuff for an adult to know, but many adults have no clue about this stuff. A school in an affluent town probably doesn’t need this kind of education, but there are probably lots of poor kids whose parents are incapable of educating them about these seemingly basic things.
October 14th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
The 3 Rs: readin’, ritin’, and restauranterin’
October 14th, 2008 at 10:23 pm
I don’t know why we don’t learn stats until college. Being able to identify trumped up numbers seems more useful than trigonometry to me.
October 14th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
I think it’s a mistake to group together all the various proposals for ‘alternative’ subjects as has been done above. Even if we were to grant, arguendo, that they all (gardening, cooking, financials, health, etc. etc.) would contribute equally to a person’s well being if mastered, the fact is that not all students have either the intellect or the temperament to do so.
Rather, imo, we should allow students to take entirely different classes depending on their projected path (workforce, community college, liberal arts college, science/engineering/technical college) when they get to high school. There should be a required curriculum of only communication, reading, writing (with the lightest of touches on literature), logic and simple mathematics – and that’s it. Any student would be free to take additional classes – and, presumably, would be expected to by universities, but they should not be required. My reasoning is twofold: first, the named disciplines are as I see it the most important skills a person needs to find success in the workforce – employers don’t care if you can name all the capitals of South American nations, or who the 15th president was, for instance – and, second, if a student is genuinely interested in a given subject (like geography, history, government, advanced maths, chemistry, physics, as well as the alternative subjects mentioned up thread) they can either take an elective and move on to college – or simply go to their local library. I don’t understand or agree with the thinking that we ‘owe’ it to children to force feed them these classes – classes that may as well be Trivial Pursuit prep for all the interest students may have in them or relevance they may hold to further success.
This would perhaps free up some additional hours to devote to the slower or parent-less students who struggle with skills that most all jobs outside of food service will require later on in life. But, even if no additional school time were to be devoted to these core classes, students would at least have less information to process and proportionally more time to do homework.
And I say all this having taken all the AP classes my high school offered at the time, lol.
October 14th, 2008 at 11:09 pm
Its not either or. At a local high school, the culinary arts teacher and the reading teacher got together and came up with a successful and award winning program:
See
October 14th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
<a href=”“>
Here’s the link that got cut off my previous message.
October 15th, 2008 at 12:08 am
“i love how recommendations to try to keep disinterested kids interested in school only come from people who loved school and were always engaged”
I hated school. I wanted to spend my time translating Aristotle, and they wanted me to do infantile nonsense like memorize the state capitals and read garbage like David Lodge.
October 15th, 2008 at 1:32 am
Plus ca change… When I was in seventh grade, part of math class was learning how to write checks and balance a checkbook. In high school, typing was a required course in what was then called “distributive education” (i.e., school-to-work), and a lot of college-prep types took typing as well. Shop classes were about auto maintenance, furniture repair and basic skills with hand tools. Phys-ed included “health” classes, which included the basics of sex. I didn’t take home-ed, but I believe they learned to sew, and cooking was about more than baking brownies. Even the art classes tended toward the practical, such as pottery and silk-screen printing. This was in the early 1960s.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:02 am
A comment unrelated to the post, but related to the picture accompanying it. With the shells already open in the dish, it is way, way too late to add wine.
October 15th, 2008 at 6:28 am
High school curricula will vary from state to state, but typically high school graduation requirements involve 4 units English, 3-4 units math, 2-3 units science, 2There may be additional arts/career/foreign language requirements sprinkled in here and there. That’s like 11-16 units required. Most high school students take 6-8 courses per year. That’s like 24-32 courses over a high school career. Students already have a substantial opportunity to take elective courses.
Is every student required to take a (for example) cooking course to graduate? No. But for schools to teach every student cooking, they would need to dramatically expand the number of cooking classes they offered . . . which in turn would require not only additional cooking teachers, but additional cooking classrooms. Many of the students would gain *nothing* from the course because they are immature or uninterested and the focus of the course would have to be shifted from teaching a few students who are engaged and interested to teaching everyone. Think for a minute about the stupid and silly things that even the best teenagers do. Now imagine being a cooking teacher with classes upon classes filled with folks who are being made to take your course. That job would suck.
The flip side of the equation is that there are very few students who “aren’t college bound” that, if only they could take some “voc-ed courses” and only worry about basic English, math, etc would magically become happy, responsible, productive students. The vast majority of students who make Ds and Fs in academic classes make Ds and Fs in elective classes, too, because what kills them is their work ethic. They are flat-out lazy and/or unprepared.
Sure, you can tinker around the margins all you want but either you are going to have kids prepared with a basic grounding in English, Math, Science, and Social Studies or you aren’t. Watering down the courses isn’t going to help any. The kids who aren’t going to college are *already* not taking the “going to college” courses. They are already taking a substantial amount of electives. If you want to improve the rigor or the quality of vocational education, fine. But its not a magic bullet.
Back to requiring cooking classes. Great. So what happens when a kid from a private school who wasn’t required to take a bunch of cooking classes applies to an elite university and is being compared to kids from public schools? So long as colleges and universities want to see academic courses on transcripts, public schools are going to have a hard time selling parents on the idea that their kids need only a few basic courses in math and English to be successful. I don’t think that the demands of colleges *ought* to drive the high school curricula, but that’s life. Or I’m number one in my class, but someone transfers in from a state that doesn’t require students to take a bunch of voc-ed classes and allows them to instead take academic elective like honors or AP courses. If my state weighs grades, I’m now not number one in my class.
October 15th, 2008 at 8:36 am
1) I would add a class in proper use and care of firearms –handguns, assault rifles,etc.
2) Plue what the Army calls “Fundamental Skills of The Soldier” — use of cover and concealment, land navigation, how to execute ambushes and raids, etc.
3) Plus basic street entrepreneurship
October 15th, 2008 at 8:39 am
Plus Matthew may have a MISTAKEN understanding of the purpose of public education.
It is NOT to teach us the important subjects — it’s to DISTRACT us AWAY from learning the important subjects by making us waste years on bullshit.
As well as brainwashing us with obvious lies known as American History and Civics.
Kinda like Fox News coverage of politics.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:29 am
Mandatory basic financial education is something I’ve been metaphorically yelling about for several years now. It should be required in high school and college.
It doesn’t have to be such that a junior in high school is discussing margin calls and the intricacies of dollar-cost averaging or anything. Just basic budgeting skills, how to determine the best lending options, the possible dangers of just making minimum credit card payments, etc. And it’s not like it’d cost a fortune to implement.
Yes, “life experience” is often the best teacher. But when it comes to money, failing the lesson can cause irreparable harm.
October 15th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
“3) Plus basic street entrepreneurship”
Is that a course on how to hold down your corner or something? Or is a class on how to sell mixtapes from the trunk of your car?
October 15th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Don’s class schedule, 2025:
9-9:55 Hustlin’
10-10:55 Keepin’ the Count Straight
11-11:55 Gat Practice
12-12:55 Lunch
1-1:55 Interpersonal Relations between Pimp and Ho
2-2:55 English
3-3:55 Mixtape Craft Shop / Cookin’ Crack Craft Shop
4-4:55 US Criminal Justice System
5-5:55 Elective: Heidegger’s Ontology
March 2nd, 2009 at 9:20 am
levitraVery interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 11th, 2009 at 9:36 am
Incredible site!
March 22nd, 2009 at 7:37 am
tramadol
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
April 2nd, 2009 at 10:26 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
buy cheap viagra
April 8th, 2009 at 4:29 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
viagra