Skip to content

Catching Up on Uni News from Labor Day Weekend

Click to enlarge

Good morning, and welcome to the unofficial start of autumn, or the start of the school year, or the final countdown to the start of the NFL season, or the MLB season’s home stretch, or however you choose to define the post-Labor Day week. I had a really fun holiday weekend (more on that in a bit) and hope you did too.

There was a lot of uni news you may have missed over the last few days, especially since Uni Watch was closed for the long weekend, so today I want to go over some of the more notable items, beginning with the Wild unveiling their Winter Classic uniform, and holy moly is it a beauty. I mean, is that spectacular or what?

Here’s another view, this time showing the socks:

According to the team’s press release, the uniform is “designed to celebrate the state’s rich hockey pedigree, the rivalry of the Twin Cities, and [the state’s] legacy as the State of Hockey.” Speaking of which, the here’s a closer look at the “State of Hockey” logo on the pants:

That’s an A+++++ in my book. Additional info here and here.

Speaking of the Wild, a tweet from beat writer Michael Russo indicates that they’ll have a new alternate jersey for the 2022-23 season.

(My thanks to Justin Ganz for the news about the 2022-23 alternate.)

• • • • •

• • • • •

Click to enlarge

Oopsie: Another key uni-related moment from the weekend came prior to the start of Saturday’s Indiana/Iowa game, when Indiana running back David Holloman trotted onto the field wearing “Indinia” across his chest.

Holloman didn’t have any rushing attempts or pass receptions during the game, and it’s not clear to me whether he was even on the field for any snaps. But his pregame jersey typo is already legendary.

Speaking of Indiana football, they announced that they’ll be wearing 1980s throwbacks against Cincinnati on Sept. 18.

And as long as we’re talking about college football, I was intrigued to see that BYU, in addition to using “C” designations for captains, is also using “A”s for alternate captains:

Obviously, that’s a standard thing in hockey, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen it before in football. Weird!

(My thanks to Shiloh Lloyd for the BYU item.)

• • • • •

• • • • •

Click to enlarge

Long overdue: Another bit of important news from the weekend is that Baylor’s women’s hoops team (which, like all Baylor squads, has a very pleasing color scheme) will no longer be known as the Lady Bears and will now simply be the Bears.

While this is a welcome development, there are still lots of colleges and, especially, high schools out there whose women’s and girls’ teams are saddled with sexist team names. Sometimes these names aren’t even gendered — they’re just condescendingly “less than.” At Bath High School in Lima, Ohio, for example, the boys’ teams are called the Wildcats and the girls’ teams are the Wildkittens — a patronizingly cutesy, diminutive name that’s clearly sexist, even though it’s not gendered. That’s a terrible message to send to the girls at Bath High — they (and all other girls) deserve better.

Longtime reader Tom Konecny has been nudging me to run a weekly item about this phenomenon, similar to the “Native American Appropriation News” segment. The thing is, there’s a lot of Native-related news taking place (schools changing their team names, teams retiring Native-themed logos, etc.), while news about sexist team names is much less frequent. One could argue that that’s all the more reason to spotlight the schools that are still using these outdated names, just to draw attention to them and try to get the ball rolling on this issue. What do you folks think — is that something you’d be interested in seeing on Uni Watch?

Meanwhile, in a related item that was just announced early this morning, the NWHL (National Women’s Hockey League) will no longer have a gendered name. It will henceforth be known as the Premier Hockey Federation.

(My thanks to Andreas Papadopoulos for the NWHL item.)

• • • • •

• • • • •

ITEM! Raffle for now-rare cap: As most of you know, the Uni Watch Classic Cap is sold out and no longer in production. But reader Troy Fordyce has an extra Size 8 cap and has generously offered to let me raffle it off.

This will be a one-day raffle. USA mailing addresses only. To enter, send an email with your mailing address to the raffle in-box by 8pm Eastern tonight. One entry per person. I’ll announce the winner tomorrow. Big thanks to Troy for making this one possible!

• • • • •

• • • • •

Teespring sale reminder: In case you missed it late last week, Teespring is running one of their site-wide sales. Up until midnight Eastern tonight, you can get 10% off of anything in the Uni Watch, Naming Wrongs, or Uni Rock shops by using the checkout code SUNSET. By using that code, you’ll save a bit of coin and Uni Watch will still make its full profit — a win-win!

Speaking of which: The September pin — which, as I mentioned last week, is a football bobblehead — still has not arrived at the Teespring warehouse, although I expect it to be there this afternoon. I’m not allowed to start taking orders until they give me the green light, which I hope will take place sometime today. So if you want to be able to take advantage of the discount code today while purchasing the pin, check back here (I’ll update this section as soon as the pins are available) and/or keep an eye on my Twitter feed (I’ll tweet as soon as the pins are ready to be ordered).

Update: FedEx now says the pins, which were supposed to arrive at Teespring’s warehouse last Friday, and were then delayed until today, are now further delayed until tomorrow. Very frustrating — really sorry about that.

My thanks, as always, for your consideration of our products.

• • • • •

• • • • •

Screen shot 2009-10-04 at 10.07.15 PM.png

Culinary Corner — scallop report:  As I mentioned last Friday, I recently ordered two dozen live scallops — something I’d never seen available for sale before. Here’s how they turned out:

Our friends Nate and Heather came over to help/share/etc. Shucking the two dozen live scallops turned out to be pretty simple (we watched an instructional video beforehand) and fairly enjoyable (for all of these photos, you can click to enlarge):

As expected, the female scallops had shiny red roe inside. We put the shucked scallops in one bowl, the roe from the female scallops in another bowl, and all the other viscera in a third bowl:

I wish I’d thought to weigh the scallop yield, as it would have been interesting to know how much meat I got for my $100, but I didn’t think of that until it was too late.

Nate and Heather brought along some scallops, purchased from their local fishmonger (and pre-shucked, of course), to serve as a control group. We quickly realized that the scallops we’d shucked were much smaller than the ones from the fishmonger. That was a bit disappointing — I hadn’t realized that the live scallops would be so small. Looking back at photos from the vendor’s website, they didn’t misrepresent their product — it’s just that there were no “normal” scallops for comparison. My bad for not noticing or realizing the smaller size.

Anyway: I took six of the just-shucked scallops, cut them into smaller pieces, and put them in a small container with some lime juice to turn into ceviche. (Sorry, no photos of that.)

I took another six scallops, plus two of the larger ones from the fishmonger, sliced them into thin rounds, and drizzled them with a simple dressing made of olive oil, lemon juice, and sea salt. Both scallop varieties tasted great — sweet, fresh, oceanic — but we all agreed they could use a bit more of something or other, so Mary provided a few thin slices of jalapeño, which added a nice bit of flavor and texture. In this photo (sorry about the lighting — our dining room is not an ideal photo setting), you can see the larger locally purchased scallops on the left and the ones we shucked in the center:

I took another six scallops, plus two more of the larger ones, and seared them in a mixture of olive oil and butter. We served these with a bit of corn/tomato/bacon salsa that Mary had made the day before.

It was all delicious, but here the difference in size really came into play, because the larger scallops had a much meatier mouthfeel — more satisfying than the smaller ones we had shucked. Dang.

I also sautéed the roe in the same skillet. This turned out to be the big revelation, at least for me — I’d never had scallop roe before, and it was so good! Seafood-y, earthy, and surprisingly firm (not mealy like I feared it might be). Loved it!

Finally, I took the last of our scallops, plus two more of the larger ones, tossed them in some melted butter, topped them with a mix of panko breadcrumbs and olive oil, and baked them in a 400º oven for about 20 minutes. The breadcrumbs didn’t get as browned as I’d hoped, but it the results were still very tasty. Again, the larger ones were more satisfying.

Shortly after Nate and Heather went home, Mary and I looked at each other and suddenly realized we’d all forgotten about the ceviche! By this time it had fully “cooked,” so I drained the lime juice, left the scallop meat in the fridge, and then took it with us to the beach the next day. It was really, really good — a perfect snack for sitting at the ocean.

Verdict: Shucking live scallops is a fun experience, and getting to eat the roe is a nice bonus. But I can’t really say that the freshly shucked scallops tasted any better than the ones from the fishmonger, and the smaller size was a downer. Overall: I probably wouldn’t do this again, but I’m glad I tried it — a fun and educational experiment!

• • • • •

• • • • •

Click to enlarge

All in the family: My friend Tim, who lives in North Carolina, is one of five brothers. Over the weekend, he hosted all of his siblings at his home — the first time in over a decade that they’d all been together in one place. They wore a uniform of sorts for the occasion — complete with numbers on the back, corresponding to their sibling order:

Love that — well done!

• • • • •

Sorry, no Ticker today, as the entire Uni Watch team had yesterday off. The Ticker will return tomorrow.

Last but not least: Happy Rosh Hashanah to all who are observing! — Paul

Comments (68)

    Anybody else seeing all the text everywhere on the site (even in the box I’m typing this comment in!) slashed through?

    I would be in favor of adding ‘Lady’ in front of team names provided that all other team names had ‘Man’ in front of it.

    Now taking the ice, your New York Man Islanders!

    Now do you see how ridiculous it is.

    “Now taking the ice, your New York Man Islanders”

    That’s New York Gentlemen Islanders to you, Jay!

    But most casual sports fans know that the New York Islanders are a team of men playing the game of ice hockey. I couldn’t tell you the name of any of the teams in the Premier Hockey Federation. I doubt most casual sports fans know there is a professional hockey league for women.

    What you’re basically saying is that men’s sports are the default in most people’s minds. Longstanding naming conventions may reflect that, but they also *perpetuate* that. Which is why it’s time to change those longstanding conventions.

    Counter point: take the Lady Vols basketball team, who have been wildly successful for decades and have a distinct logo not used by the men’s teams. Is this them being relegated to “secondary” status, or them having forged their own identity?

    I’m not saying the above line of reasoning applies to all situations, just that the opposite reasoning that they all must be changed should not be blindly applied to all situations, either.

    What’s interesting is that the New York Islanders are not a men’s team. A woman can play for them (see Manon Rheaume and the Tampa Bay Lightning). So, definitionally, calling the team the New York Man Islanders would not be correct (although it is factually correct 99.9% of the time).

    Similarly, women can play on the PGA Tour. Both Michelle Wie and Annika Sorenstam played in PGA Tour events. It’s not the Men’s Professional Golf Association Tour, it’s the Professional Golf Association Tour. However, men cannot play on the LPGA Tour. It’s truly a Ladies Professional Golf tour.

    That’s not to say that I agree with gendered team names. I certainly don’t want to see team names that treat the women’s team as less than the men’s team. I would prefer to hear from women on the topic, though.

    But the cool thing is when there already are qualifiers in the name, like the New York Football Man Giants!

    Although I am not an expert I would say no. Cowgirl is the female equivalent of the male sports team, the issue arises when a modifier such as “lady” is tacked on to the male team name which implies that male teams are the default or when a nonequal name is used (such as wildcat vs wildkitten). The Geese/Ganders would be an equal gendered solution but Geese/Goslings would not.

    I think having an occasional ticker section highlighting sexist mascot news is a great idea since it is such an important issue. Very few things make me angrier than seeing a team called the Lady somethings.

    It was especially satisfying to see the Baylor news given the school’s recent blatant Title IX issues and their organizational treatment of female students (especially female athletes) as second-class citizens.

    I’m fine with Lady Whatevers, provided that the school also calls its corresponding men’s teams the Gentlemen Whatevers. Which none do, so Lady is never appropriate.

    And I second the approval of the topic as an occasional Ticker section.

    Another vote to include this in the ticker, and thanks RS for saying how I feel about this issue so perfectly.

    The Men’s and Women’s athletic programs at Centenary College (La.) are called the Gentlemen (and/or Gents) and Ladies. Probably their most famous alumni would be NBA Hall of Famer Robert Parish, though Hal Sutton certainly deserves a nod as well. They dropped down to D3 sports after 2011 after being in the Summit League in D1.

    Kenyon Lords and Ladies, anyone? Or Amherst Lord Jeffs and Lady Jeffs? But even those, I’m told, are now beyond the pale.

    Honestly I always had this thought in the back of my mind when the Uni-Watch ticker would someday just be a collection of the misappropriations(?) in sports…no more uniform oddities in the ticker, just sections devoted to teams changing from inappropriate names, a section on everyone calling themselves blue collar, and now we could add a section on teams getting rid of the “lady” monikers.

    To add to this, my high school team was called the Panthers. In at least one of the sports, the girls team went by Pink Panthers, and had pink based uniforms which wasn’t a school color.

    Since you asked, I have no interest in being alerted to some high school changing a girls team name from Lady Haymakers to Haymakers in the same way that I have no desire to be informed of a middle school keeping its Warrior name but eliminating American Indian imagery. Those schools/teams should do whatever they please; I simply do not care, though. I skip them and on the occasions when there is long section of them I just give up on the rest of the ticker altogether.

    Robert, do you mean you don’t care about any news regarding teams changing their names? Or just name-change news in those two categories?

    Given that some here are already saying they don’t know why it is a big deal to have gendered names for athletic teams seems to me like a great reason to spotlight the issue. Give them the opportunity to learn more about it.

    Whether or not it’s a “big deal” is strictly a matter of opinion, and it’s not exactly clear what more there is to learn about the issue other than it may be news to many of us that “lady” is now considered a pejorative.

    Along these lines, however, should leagues such as the WNBA change their names as well? Or could the argument even be made that gender segregation in sports in general is sexist?

    should leagues such as the WNBA change their names as well?

    I’d be fine with that. And as noted in today’s post, the NWHL has already taken that step.

    The NWSL is getting a new logo for next season, so when that news came out there were writers and players who suggested dropping “women’s” from the name as well.

    There are also people who write about the WNBA that use MNBA to refer to the NBA, though I haven’t seen that with any other leagues. The whole idea is to not position men’s sports as the default.

    Also, yes, I’d be in favor of such a Ticker section.

    But (and this is in response to Jamie) the NBA is not, by rule, men-only. It is open to any basketball player, of either, capable of playing at a high enough level. The WNBA, for now, is women-only. Do people genuinely not recognize the distinction?

    I think the difference here is that for a league like the WNBA, the “W” is a selling point. The WNBA’s entire reason for being is to showcase the best women basketball players. So I don’t think it makes sense to attempt to conceal the very aspect of what makes your organization attractive (to some fans at least) and unique.

    I’ve always found the “Lady Whatevers” to simply be the product of poor branding. It’s lazy. But it’s also something that can’t be avoided in some cases without a complete rebranding – and then, it limits your options in what you can use in the rebrand, being essentially forced to pick something sex-neutral.

    And thanks, Paul, for turning me off of scallops for all time.

    it limits your options in what you can use in the rebrand, being essentially forced to pick something sex-neutral.

    And the problem with that is..?

    If you’ve ever wondered about the value of typography in a uniform design, take a look at that Wild jersey. That’s not a particularly conservative design by hockey standards, but the classic typography grounds it in tradition and lets the bold colors and the otherwise kinda busy crest shine. You could easily do the same logo, but with beveling and shadows and black outlines and all the other arrows in the modern quiver, but it would look awful.

    The Wild have always been above average at design. The crest, the 04 ASG unis, the North Stars RR. Gotta give them credit.

    Huh…did you say something? Sorry; I was just basking in the glory of that beautiful Minnesota Wild Winter Classic uniform.

    If you want to have a ticker section in regards to Lady Teams, go for it. I’m actually kind of interested if more high schools use this gendering term versus college sports, as a percentage of course. If readers don’t want to read it they can skip over it. I have zero interest in soccer so I always pass that section. Out of context, I enjoy the name Wildkittens. I have no clue what their logo looks like but I’m imagining it to be a hissing kitten drawn in the style of the old Dick and Jane books. Also, what becomes of the WNBA?

    I’m trying to picture the Wild sweater without the stripes on top of the wordmark. For some reason this bothers me. Then again if it wasn’t there it might look like a giant green space. It looks great and I want to buy one now before it gets a uni ad.

    Out of context, I enjoy the name Wildkittens. I have no clue what their logo looks like but I’m imagining it to be a hissing kitten drawn in the style of the old Dick and Jane books.

    Agreed. Change the boys’ team to that name, to match the girls’ team, and we’re good!

    Paul, my Evanston (Illinois) Township High School team name is the Wildkits. The local college, Northwestern University, has its Wildcats.


    Those of us who have attended both schools are Kit-Cats.

    Interesting on the scallops. Were they all sea scallops or did they give you a mix of bay and sea scallops?

    Nicknames for teams used to be such a fluid thing until about a century ago now. They’re still more fluid outside of the US in rugby and soccer for example.

    I don’t think it’ll ever happen here, in a world where you need to plans for the shirts and hats you’re going to ship and sell months/years in advance, but it would be interesting to see team nicknames actually relate to current rosters again. And in that world, you don’t have to walk into being called a Wildkitten because that’s the school district you live in.

    Are we not going to discuss the fact that the new MN wild jersey has contrasting elbow patches? It’s such a neat feature!!

    Honestly, I missed that detail! It’s not shown in the promo photos. I now see that it’s shown in the hype video (which I hadn’t watched until now because I tend to avoid hype videos), available on this page:

    Although it’s “old-school,” I don’t care for it. Makes the sleeves look too busy. Still, thanks for pointing it out!

    I think there’s a place on Uni-Watch for reporting on gendered nicknames in the same manner as it has for Native American misappropriation.

    Also, Paul: Looking at the photos, I think you got live Bay Scallops, which are a different species than Sea Scallops.

    I announce a lot of middle school and high school girls sports and I always ask the coach what they’d like to be called. Anecdotally, I would say it’s about 50/50 on including “Lady” as part of the mascot, including my daughter’s high school basketball team, but not her softball team. (Maybe because there is a boys’ basketball team but not a boys’ softball team?

    Kinda related:
    Auto racing made some rather clumsy efforts at inclusion during the ‘command to fire’ when females made the starting grid (on at least one occasion, calling out a competitor by name).
    I’m glad it’s by-and-large “Drivers…start your engines” now, because that what everyone behind the wheel is (even an all-male field isn’t necessarily all “Gentlemen”).

    I’d prefer to see all team name/branding news that is not sport-specific located in the Grab Bag.

    Big thumbs down on that Wild uniform. Way too much red and white. Those colors are too distracting when green is the main color. Can’t have that much of them as accents. My beloved Bucks had that problem with their 2005-2014 unis. The rudimentary lettering is nice though.

    Northland College in Wisconsin (D3) is the Lumberjacks and the Lumberjills:

    My high school, Milwaukee Pius, has the Lady Popes, which, for a Catholic HS, is one of the most unusual ones.

    Although Appleton’s Fox Valley Lutheran – the Foxes – did call their girls teams the Foxy Ladies until a few year ago.

    I think the “Lady” monikers were/are just an easy way – especially for headline writers – to distinguish. For Baylor, rather than two headlines of “Baylor beats TCU” and “Bears beat TCU,” saying “Lady Bears beat TCU lets you know right away it was the girls/women’s team.

    Likely the same for the athletic departments when it comes to tickets, advertising, etc.

    I don’t think losing them is bad but may be more confusing.

    My feeling on the Wild uniform. It serves its purpose as a one-off. It looks old-time but it ain’t pretty. Too much happening on the front of the jersey especially with the stripe across the top. Mini captain’s letter doesn’t look great. Not a fan of the elbow patches. Was that really a common thing with old jerseys? A lot of players had elbow pads on the outside way back or they would just mend the jersey. This is not a 1980s office blazer.

    I am in agreement on the Wild uniform. That sweater is way to busy with all of the stripes, and the color of the gloves looks terrible with that sweater. Big fail.

    I think having a header for gendered nicknames would be fine. It doesn’t necessarily have to be on a regular schedule, just something you pull out when that sort of news comes up. It might only come up so often, but then you have it when you need it. You could use the transgender symbol, ⚧️, to denote it.

    I think there’s a delineation to make with such names.

    On the one hand, when there’s no need to add a gendered term, I think we’re at the point where it can go.

    That said, on the other hand, per the Lumberjacks/Lumberjills example above, I do think there are instances where, when a team name is gendered, having separate names is moreso about a “being technically correct” thing than it is a gender thing. Clairmont-Mudd-Scripps, a D3 co-op out of California, calls its male teams the Stags and its female teams the Athenas. A female Stag is, well, just not a thing among deer. When one thinks about the female teams for the South Florida Bulls, which are also called the Bulls, it’s just not technically correct; there aren’t female bulls — more on that in a second, though.

    The computer programmer in me wants to see us be technically correct. There’s no need to specify a gender for a bear or a volunteer. If you’re going to name your team after a specific gender of a species, though, I’d make sure the team’s gender coordinates with the name to be correct. One could argue that’s part of the outmoded thing we’re trying to eliminate, but I think something like Bulls is familiar enough to us that it would be a bridge too far to ask the NBA team to become the Chicago Cattle, nor do I think South Florida’s womens’ teams want to become the Cows. I think the Chicago Bulls stay the Chicago Bulls, while maybe South Florida could use a university-wide rebrand (it’s not even in South Florida; it’s in Tampa and it’s no further south than Central Florida).

    Aside: While adding “gentlemen” to team names that utilize “lady” may seem ridiculous, there’s actually a part of me that finds it kind of appealing in a “this is in no way practical, but I like the theory behind it” way. While I understand those terms evoke genders, they also kind of evoke a kinder, more polite, civilized and chivalrous time, too, with the idea of “being a gentleman” or “being a lady” evoking a certain etiquette, something I feel like we could use more of in our society. While I’m not one to say one must adhere to one’s physical gender, I would generally like to see those who identify as male attempt to be more gentlemanly and those who identify as female attempt to be more lady-like in terms of the consciousness of etiquette and kindness toward others those terms entail. I wish we could take the good and not the bad. That’s probably not possible, though. [shrug]

    According to a few different sites on the web, mustangs can be male or female: link. The lady part can go, though.

    I also wouldn’t rule out a female pope someday, though. It might be a while, but it doesn’t seem as impossible as, say, a female bull.

    I can’t believe this is still a discussion in 2021. If you can’t see why “Wildcats” for men and “Lady Wildcats” for women is a problem, I don’t know what I can add.

    I’ve mentioned this before: Rugby gets it it right now. The World Cup for men is called the Rugby World Cup and the World Cup for women is called the Rugby World Cup. No “Womens World Cup” or other modifiers that aren’t applied to the men’s tournament. No implication that the mens game is the “default” or “main” event and the women’s is a derivative event.


    If you want to know why this is important read every word of that press release.

    I would be in favour of a ticker for this sort of nonsense, provided that you think there’s enough content to keep it alive. I would call it “Unnecessarily Gendered Nickname Watch”

    I read the press release very carefully, and it failed to explain exactly how giving two related but separate events identical names is a good idea.

    Count me as one who wouldn’t mind seeing a section highlighting gendered team names. For me, having some qualifier such as lady really just serves to subconsciously reduce girls/womens’ teams to some sort of secondary status beneath the male teams. I think some comments above about it not being a big deal fail to see that this stuff are symptoms of bigger problems and by highlighting stuff that some may perceive to be inconsequential can also serve to shine a light on the bigger deal issues.

    “Obviously, that’s a standard thing in hockey, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen it before in football. Weird!”

    Sam Echeverry of the Montreal Alouettes. “A” on jersey:


    Here’s a few from Ohio for the gender names off the top of my head… Johnstown Johnnies, Fredericktown Freddies and Avon Lake Shoremen.

    Johnstown uses a male character, sort of Johnnie Walker-ish as their logo and mascot. The female athletic teams go by “Lady Johnnies”, which I find absolutely stupid.

    Fredericktown uses a cardinal as their logo and mascot. I’m not sure if Lady Freddies is used.

    Avon Lake would often use Shoregals for the female teams. A bit patronizing.

    I would be proud to wear the uniform of a team called the Mermaids, the Valkyries, or the Amazons. And have we forgotten the Toledo Mud Hens? But let’s not kid ourselves: Iconography with gender favors the masculine, should you try to list them all.
    A feature addressing gender inequality in team names would be a welcome addition to Uni Watch.
    Are women’s teams of the University of South Carolina called the “Game Hens”?

    How ironic. The day I decided to wear my Branches T-shirt a massive wind storm decided to knock down my neighbor’s tree into my front yard and roof. Thankfully no injuries and maybe minimal damage. In the light of day tomorrow we’ll see the extent of it all. Rickety indeed!

    Take it from a Minnesotan, the Wild’s primary logo is corny and stale, and the name is atrocious. I don’t speak for the whole state, but many of us wouldn’t hate to go back to the North Stars…

    Good take, sir.
    As an aside, being a fisherman, I always thought “Minnesota Northern” would be a great team name. Pike are apex predators and, visually, are just freakin’ cool.

    I would definitely be keen for a regular series of ticker entries about removing sexist team names.

    My alma mater’s teams are also the Bears. When I was in school, the women’s teams were called the Teddy Bears

Comments are closed.