Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Emergent trends amongst some female bloggers in India.

In this post, we shall examine a phenomenon that has become a trend amongst some female bloggers in India. We shall take up 4 such blogs as case-studies, and examine common patterns exhibited in these blogs (although there are literally hundreds of blogs with similar themes).

Since the past few years, blogs written by females claiming to be working professionals. Their location is almost always a metro like Mumbai, Bangalore or New Delhi. Their blogs have gained significant popularity since the past few years and have acquired significant readership. Also, the expressive and (seemingly) creative posts by them are almost to the point of being professional novellas. In some cases, they have been so successful, that their blogs have been compiled / adapted into books and their authors have been offered regular columns at leading national dailies.

We shall now see the patterns in the content of these blogs, the motivations behind writing them, as also why they have gained such widespread popularity. In the end, we shall also see briefly why such blogs written by males don't succeed in getting as much popularity.

The blogs that we shall study as case-studies are as follows :-

1) Watching the world Go By
2) Confessions of a Stoner Chick.
3) That Only
4) the Restless Quill

To an extent, we may also study these blogs in the context of The Compulsive Confessor, arguably one of India's most widely read blogs, and whose author Ms. Mahadevan besides being a columnist, has also written a book.


Now, before we discuss the above blogs separately, we may bring to attention two definitive characteristics, that are shared commonly across all the above blogs. It is these two characteristics that, to a varying degree are used by the authors to attract readership.


1) One thing must be mentioned about what we may term as "Subliminal Communiques". These are defined as the purposeful insertion of a fact that one really wants to communicate, into a totally different and often irrelevant piece of information. For example :- "As I blew smoke rings ahead of me, I was unable to decide about....." The purposeful point being subliminally communicated here, is that the person in question is a smoker, and who ostensibly likes doing so, whereas the presented point is some decision that the person is confused about. Its as though the presented point is wrapped as a "veneer" around the purposeful point.

Even if not in exact sentences, many of the posts are such that they bring up different ideas, but which revolve around the same "explicit" themes. As an example, a post discussing, say, "relationships and love" will invariably discuss unprotected "flings" with male colleagues etc. And a post discussing, say, "Lost in translation", would also discuss about how a "one night encounter" was misinterpreted as the beginning of a relationship. So, they pretend to discuss one idea after another in different posts, but the true intent seems to be to repeatedly report of their various "affairs".

2) They all go good lengths to claim how "intelligent" they are in terms of intellect, academic records, employment history etc.


3) They all have atleast one post dedicated to smoking, and why they do it. They make it clear that despite knowing the hazards of smoking, they have no intention to quit, or sometimes they recount making fun of those people, who ask them to quit.


Let us examine these blogs one at a time :-

1) Watching the world Go By : This blog is authored by one "Searcher", who is "Searching for answers, for questions..." and for "peace". Ms. Searcher is a single female in Mumbai and claims to have worked in the media and advertising industry. She has had a tumultuous childhood (parents separated at an early age), which often finds mention in her posts. The long-term theme of her blog is that she is incapable of "loving much" and "being desired" and so she's seeking "answers" to these questions.


She also makes it a point to mention that her and her family's IQ is in the "high 140s". Her supposed Facebook profile also mentions that her IQ "used to be in the high 140s", but has dropped due to "age".


Now, so far it can be understood. But what may be intriguing, is that a number of her blog posts recount her multiple affairs with different men (often in quite articulate detail), and they summarize with the new lesson that she learnt from each experience --- like what went wrong, over-commitment, incapability to love his family, etc. If not recount, then nearly all her posts have atleast one mention of the fact that she has had "many boyfriends" (and these mentions are not passing mentions; they form an important point in the post).



In fact, the long-term crux of this blog is the multiple (mostly failed) physical relationships that the author has had, and the analysis of her inability to be consistent with any one of them. It looks like a very seemingly innocent and philosophical effort at finding out her "problems", but always under the overarching backdrop of her many past and present affairs.


Some posts are bizzare, like this one, which seem a contrived attempt at literary creativity. But like always, it too finds an important mention about her "many past boyfriends". Others simply discuss relationships between men and women, the "purpose of marriage", etc. again with the above standard references and mentions of her multiple past affairs. Also, like the Compulsive Confessor, it too has atleast one post dedicated to recounting a conversation with a colleague, who asked her to quit smoking and how she had a bit of fun at the colleague's expense.

Now it is unclear why the "answers to life's questions..." are centered around relationships with the "many boyfriends" (and affairs, night encounters etc.) that the author claims to have had. This, from someone who claims to have an IQ in the "high 140s". Why can't a visit to, say, an orphanage answer why she is "incapable of loving", is not quite clear.

2) Confessions of a Stoner Chick. This blog is purposefully an X rated reading material (blogspot first takes your permission before opening this page). The author of the blog is a Ms. "Stoner Chick", who is a 4.0 GPA grad student, and is "only 21 years old". Moreover, she is "hot" and not fat or ugly. She says that even though she enjoys taking narcotics, she is not a female of ill-repute who is forced to finance her drug habit that way.



Also, she emphasizes that she is an "Indian Indian", and not an "American Indian", lest we think that she's probably like any other spoilt American girl, instead of the "cultured" Indian woman who have 4.0 GPAs. The introduction itself can potentially be a major titillation for some male Indians who visit this blog.



The content of her blog tries to be as philosophical and contemplative as possible, about life and relationships, musical and artistic excellence, etc. However, it is a thinly veiled attempt at mentioning the real meat of the blog :- the author's pot sessions and drinking sessions after attending college fests and rock-concerts --- in precise detail. The author even celebrates the fact that she finds life to be enjoyable with her substance abuse.



The purpose of this blog is unclear, except to ostensibly attract readership from people, who are bound to be shocked at a 4.0 GPA girl, who admits to enjoying smoking pot and binge drinking. It is a clear case of attempting to attract readers through titillation.



3) That Only : This blog is written by a 28 year old female called "Rat". Unlike the previous two blogs, this blog does make a genuine attempt in logging the diary accounts of the author. This author's blog has been featured thrice in national dailies. The author is a psychology graduate, and enjoys Sting concerts.



However, the definitive feature of her blog is something like this (though not exact) : "I went to Bangalore and Ooty. Had a whale of a time......and in the evening I got so drunk, that I enjoyed it thoroughly"......"I went to my friend's after a long time.....and oh, was the Vodka so great.." In fact, it appears that her blog came into major prominence, after a national daily ran an article on such type of blogs (in the same vein as this article).



The article was titled, "Bimbodom's new Bridgets" by Kanika Gahlaut in Mumbai. Ms. Mahadevan, the author of The Compulsive Confessor", posted a "rebuttal" to it, which was not quite convincing as one. The same article discusses this article from That Only, which is about the author's appreciation of alcohol and why she has a "blast while drinking it".



It is not to say that some of Ms Rat's posts don't make for genuinely relatable and appreciable reads. But often, the blog cannot discuss things without the "lift" obtained by mentions about her long drinking sessions, and how the experience was exacerbated by doing so.



4) the Restless Quill : For the most part, this blog is genuinely honest in discussing whatever it discusses, completely unlike the blogs discussed above, whose real intent appears to be something else altogether (mostly to attract readership by titillation).


Some posts cannot be disagreed to easily, like this post on eve-teasing , as well as this brilliant post on the visible irresponsibility of popular Indian TV anchors like Arnab Goswami and Barkha Dutt.



However, it seems that like the blogs above it, the author also dedicated a post on why she smokes, has no intention to quit, and a critique to those whom she thinks are "preaching down her throat to quit" (though she advocates dissuading children to smoke). The post makes the fundamental mistake in opining that smokers have "a right to smoke", whereas the actuality is that smoking is no more than a privilege, and is NOT a right. The first right belongs to all people who have the right to fresh air, and last in the priority of offices, society and governments is to provide zones to smoke --- provided all other priorities before it are met, and space can be spared, if any.



All the above may also form a pattern witnessed in Compulsive Confessor and Watching-the-world-go-by as well. The authors are probably aware that as young, educated female Indians , who are consciously aware of the hazards of smoking, but who still admit to smoking publicly --- are bound to attract reader traffic to their blogs. It appears to be a deliberate attempt to attract readership from Indian males.

In fact, many female bloggers (like IT engineer Tamanna Mishra) too make it point to list their 'list of vices' atleast once. The rest of their posts (like those of Ms. Mishra and "the Restless Quill") are indeed genuine diary accounts of their experiences and viewpoints, but once a while they appear to "religiously" subscribe to such kind of posts.


This completes the study of this phenomenon observed amongst a section of female Indian bloggers. Any suggestions or comments would be welcome.

22 comments:

  1. I find this post bizzare !! Why you would you case study a blog that has not been updated in 4 years with incorrect facts about the writer !!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi. I thank the above anonymous poster for pointing out the mistake in the blog post, which has been immediately corrected.

    Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  3. In my defence:

    a)I would not call my blog "X-rated". I have put the warning so that people are warned of the somewhat mature subject matter in question. Nowhere have I posted anything pornographic or any "graphic" descriptions of sex.

    b)The point I was trying to make by saying I am not "fat" and "ugly" is that most people who smoke ganja (especially women) are assumed to be so, which is untrue. I know many women (apart from myself) who smoke ganja and are as motivated and fit as I am, hence I was trying to get rid of some of the cliches associated with pot smoking.

    c)When I said I was not "American Indian", I was referring to Native Americans, or Red Indians as they are commonly known. Most foreigners, when they see the term Indian think of Native Americans. I was merely trying to make a distinction between these two. Nowhere have I said I am, as you say, "cultured", or tried to imply that my "Indian-ness" implies being, in your terms, "cultured".

    d)Although you claim that I am trying to "attract readers", I have made NO attempts at publicizing my blog in any way. The blog was created as a sort of journal of my experiences through college and was meant to be read by a few friends. It has attracted very few hits and, has only around 10 posts on it. I had also sent you an email requesting you to take down the link, which you have not done, hence I am forced to make my blog personal.

    As for the rest of it, well, you're entitled to your opinion. Cheers!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi stonerchiq. Thanks for responding. Please don't see this as an "attack" on your blog. It is a journalistic description only, much like a book review or film review. You have the full right to express your opinion.

    By X-rated, I meant adult material that can also include (and is not limited to) high violence, usage of expletives as well as significant substance abuse (you can check wikipedia for more).

    Regarding point b) I reported your description of not being 'fat', "as is", and without my comments. Whatever you've said in your introduction was reproduced faithfully with appropriate double quotes. Any interpretation is left to the reader. Also, a regular substance abuser is NOT regarded as "fit" by any corporate employer, society or the law of any country (even if you may currently not suffer from any physical ailment).

    I don't agree with your point c), because American Indian is most widely used to denote American citizens of Indian descent in media. So, readers of India atleast are unlikely to be confused with native Indians. Your description of that gives the impression as I described, regardless of your claim (which I'm not inclined to believe by the way, as Native Americans or Latinos themselves don't go to lengths to emphasize that they're Indians).

    As regards point d), it is inconsequential as your blog is relatively new. A blog may require a few years to build a regular following. I have also not recieved any mail from you.

    Once again, your comments were very valued.

    Thank you

    ReplyDelete
  5. 1) The term 'X-rated' is usually used to denote pornographic subject matter. See http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/X-rated and http://lu.com/odlis/odlis_x.cfm

    2)When I said "fit" I meant physically fit. As for not being fit to be employed, I would disagree with that. Maybe employers would think I am 'unfit' to work, but I am currently employed and my weed habit has in no way affected it. There has long been a struggle to legalize marijuana as it has been proven to be far less addictive and harmful to recreational users than either tobacco or alcohol.

    3) If you do an image search for the term 'American Indian', you see http://www.google.co.in/images?rlz=1C1SKPC_enIN380IN380&q=american%20indian&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi
    Latinos are Hispanics, and nowhere did I even mention them. The term 'American Indian' is extremely commonly used in the United States for Native Americans.

    You have said that you attempted to take a 'journalistic' view of this phenomenon. Every story has an angle, of course, but a good journalist looks at the facts and writes about them without giving in to the temptation to take the moral high ground, which it seems you have done. If I were an editor, I would tell you your story is poorly researched (as it uses examples of blogs that are fairly inactive and have not been updated in some time), unobjective (as it does not quote any 'defence' by the authors themselves. You have also quoted things out of context, which is considered unethical in most journalistic circles, except perhaps the Filmfare/ Stardust brigade, whose bread and butter depends on such tactics.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi stonerchiq. Thanks for responding again.

    I'm afraid your wiktionary link (on X-rated) is dysfunctional. As I said earlier and repeat now, you may look at the wikipedia entry for X-rated (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-rated).

    Also, once again I urge you to look at the wikipedia disambiguation page for American Indian. Again, in the Indian context (since you're an Indian working and residing in India), the "NATIVE American Indian" PoV does not arise at all, by any stretch.

    I appreciate your views on this article. I invited the authors of the other blogs also to comment, but so far only you have taken time to respond, for which I thank you.

    I urge you to take some time to view other post entries on the phenomenon of girls outperforming boys in 10th and 12std exams, as well as an upcoming series on the dominance of the US dollar as the wold's reserve currency.

    Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hi Tamanna. I'll try to be informal in this post.

    Can I call you Tams or Tammy ? Thanks a lot for taking time to respond. After Stonerchick, you are the second one to have taken your time to respond.

    1) See I have a word of praise for your blog, except the post on smoking, that's all. I had the same words for your friend TRQ's blog too.

    2) I'm Not a Sanskrit honours graduate, and neither am I pursuing an MBA. I'm an IT engineer like you (professionally too).

    3) This blog is the result of recording my free thoughts, before I "grow up" and take over more "responsibilities", whatever they mean, you know like "settling down", marriage (yeesh!), etc.

    You know, I'm not the kind of a person who blogs about a trip to the mall, and what-I-saw-at-the-zoo. Those are girly blogs, like your's and TRQ's. Whatever I've posted (and am going to post) are after observing various phenomena after due deliberation.

    4) In the first post of this blog, I've stated that I'll be studying phenomena around us, and the language IS going to be formal. Its not "archaic" language, but the language used in philosophical or academic discourses, or even in proofs. I CANNOT use informal, casual or slapstick language. Also, I'll try to maintain neutrality, and journalistic propriety in all my posts.

    I hope that answers some of your questions.

    Thank you.

    P.S : Please don't smoke. It accelerates your aging process (anathema for any girl).

    ReplyDelete
  10. Apart from being a pathetic writer, you're also a sexist dickwad. "Girly posts"? "aging process"? really? You sound like the kind of guy who sits reading these women's blogs late at night while jerking yourself off and then hating on them.

    My advice- live life. Get a girlfriend. Or even just a female friend. Maybe then you'll be able to satisfy that woman you finally "settle down" with.

    Also, if you've ever done any kind of academic or journalistic writing, you'd know that this is absolutely not the way it is done. Apart from the pathetic grammar and misquotes, you have very little substance to your writing matter, often using misguided examples to fit in with your little armchair theories. No academic journal accepts this kind of writing.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  12. This post has definitely attracted adverse reactions from the female bloggers,who were case-studied. I quite expected this reaction, as anyone whose "real intent" is dredged out publicly, will.

    The scathing (nay virulent) responses, is actually a defense mechanism to defend against whatever has been written about. So, MORE AND MORE of that emerges in a bid to overpower the opinion expressed in my post, in order to justify themselves. In a way, this cements the opinion in my blog-post.

    Except probably stonerchick, NONE of the females who've responded have tried to give a tangible reason or justification for their posts. Stonerchick tried to give an honest "defence" (why "defence" ? When did I "attack"?), but I do not agree with her points on why she posted whatever she did. Tammy and others are just wasting time by spewing insults, with no substance in their argument. If an argument's reply has little other than vilification, that is proof enough for the argument's substance.

    The post on the domination of the US dollar is coming up soon. I was down with the flu and fever since the past 4 days, and some other untoward incidents (granny had to be taken to hospital after falling down) kept me from writing.

    For the benefit of readers, who may have an interest the following are the upcoming posts :-

    1) How the US dollar came to be the global reserve currency.

    2) Why the US dollar cannot be replaced by say, Yuan.

    3) Why can't Bollywood film directors repeat their successes ? (Think flops like Delhi-6, Jodha Akbar and Raavan).

    Thank you.

    P.S. : I don't read Compulsive Confessor-LIKE blogs "late at night" ! They're laughable to put it euphemistically.

    I think many females want to get a book deal and TV appearances like Mahadevan did, and this may explain why so many "wannabe CC" blogs are coming up fast.

    Anonymous, please don't concern yourself with me and my 'girlfriends'. I evaluated some of them to be girl-FIENDS actually. I'll let you know when I "settle down" with one !

    ReplyDelete
  13. First, maybe you should stop referring to women bloggers as females. Then maybe you should stop being SO boring. And then maybe you should stick to your engineering background and leave the writing to those who know what they're doing. I can't believe stonerchick and Tamanna actually responded to your utter nonsense. I'd love to call you names but then your already pathetic ego and self esteem is going to take further nosedive. Academic indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hi Restless Quill. Thanks for taking the time to respond to my post.

    I'm a bit disappointed to learn that you think my posts are "boring". I'd suggest you to read other posts on my blog, which attempt to understand other phenomena. The part 2 on the US Dollar's dominance shall be up soon too. Maybe you feel this way because a formal treatment, not unlike in research or academic studies, is attempted in them. I'm afraid, I cannot use informal language.

    I'm glad you didn't use the comment facility to call me names (unlike an anonymous poster above), as there is no moderation enabled --- but most importantly, you reciprocated the comment proprieties that I exercised when I posted on your blog. I thank you for that.

    Actually software programming does not really require an "engineering background". That may explain people like Tammy (Tamanna) and me are tempted to write more about life and observations of phenomena.

    Finally : I'd strongly suggest you discuss the CONTENT of my post. Discussing ME is a waste of my time, and yours.

    Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Hahaha. YOu're funny. Discuss the content of your post? Why on earth would I "discuss" your opinion. I'd have gladly come back with "discussions" if you had even one line of unbiased fact. A bunch of opinions, I have nothing to say.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I read your post a few days ago and it made me think. I've read exactly two of your posts, so I don't claim to have a thorough understanding of your blog but I was compelled to comment on a few points. Not to worry, I will only comment on the content, not your personality.

    I find it curious that the two posts address the readers like a professor giving a lecture ("We shall answer the question poised earlier"). It is not a style commonly used in blogs, as I'm sure you would've read on the Wikipedia entry of a blog. The whole idea of blogs, especially educational blogs, is that they're interactive, not directive.

    A long word like titillation is used without a synonym or explanation which might put an average reader off. Yet, the basic economic concepts explained I learnt in my first year of university (and I didn't study economics), so I'm confused as to who your audience is meant to be.

    The basis of comparison for the four blogs seems to be that they all smoke and are looking for attention. Now I have only read TRQ's blog more which is how I found yours, and had a quick look at other two links you gave which actually worked (one didn't). All three bloggers write in a compelling way which makes you want to read more. I actually added one to my Reader. I'm sure many bloggers dream of publishing a book, but you only get better at writing by doing it and being open to feedback. What better place to practice than a blog! The fact that a blog is a public medium means the writer is vulnerable, those who share something personal even more so. To me the biggest put-off in a blog is looking for more hits. This kind are not difficult to spot if you read enough blogs and comments.

    But it seems to me that you are not particularly concerned about traffic or hits on your blog which, along with my previous comments, leaves me to wonder why you write a blog at all. Surely a newspaper or a quarterly would fit your purpose and style a lot better.

    I felt the need to comment because I felt your post was patronising towards the four bloggers and didn't follow the protocol usually used in the 'blogosphere'. Responding to comments in detail which you had deleted and picking on links that don't work is petty and downright rude. Moreover, this is inexcusable from someone who claims to be academic and formal.

    You said: "This post has definitely attracted adverse reactions from the female bloggers,who were case-studied. I quite expected this reaction, as anyone whose "real intent" is dredged out publicly, will." Yours should have been an attempt to case study blogs, not bloggers. I don't agree with your judgement of their reaction. However, if this is what you think, it seems to me that your adverse reaction to comments shows your real intent, which was to get attention.

    Please don't spend time responding to this. I won't be back to read it.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I read your post a few days ago and it made me think. I've read exactly two of your posts, so I don't claim to have a thorough understanding of your blog but I was compelled to comment on a few points. Not to worry, I will only comment on the content, not your personality.

    I find it curious that the two posts address the readers like a professor giving a lecture ("We shall answer the question poised earlier"). It is not a style commonly used in blogs, as I'm sure you would've read on the Wikipedia entry of a blog. The whole idea of blogs, especially educational blogs, is that they're interactive, not directive.

    A long word like titillation is used without a synonym or explanation which might put an average reader off. Yet, the basic economic concepts explained I learnt in my first year of university (and I didn't study economics), so I'm confused as to who your audience is meant to be.

    The basis of comparison for the four blogs seems to be that they all smoke and are looking for attention. Now I have only read TRQ's blog more which is how I found yours, and had a quick look at other two links you gave which actually worked (one didn't). All three bloggers write in a compelling way which makes you want to read more. I actually added one to my Reader. I'm sure many bloggers dream of publishing a book, but you only get better at writing by doing it and being open to feedback. What better place to practice than a blog! The fact that a blog is a public medium means the writer is vulnerable, those who share something personal even more so. To me the biggest put-off in a blog is looking for more hits. This kind are not difficult to spot if you read enough blogs and comments. (cont.)

    ReplyDelete
  18. But it seems to me that you are not particularly concerned about traffic or hits on your blog which, along with my previous comments, leaves me to wonder why you write a blog at all. Surely a newspaper or a quarterly would fit your purpose and style a lot better.

    I felt the need to comment because I felt your post was patronising towards the four bloggers and didn't follow the protocol usually used in the 'blogosphere'. Responding to comments in detail which you had deleted and picking on links that don't work is petty and downright rude. Moreover, this is inexcusable from someone who claims to be academic and formal.

    You said: "This post has definitely attracted adverse reactions from the female bloggers,who were case-studied. I quite expected this reaction, as anyone whose "real intent" is dredged out publicly, will." Yours should have been an attempt to case study blogs, not bloggers. I don't agree with your judgement of their reaction. However, if this is what you think, it seems to me that your adverse reaction to comments shows your real intent, which was to get attention.

    Please don't spend time responding to this. I won't be back to read it.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Hi Peas. I really appreciate your spending time to post your good suggestions here.

    Actually I've mentioned in previous comments (as well as the opening para of the very first post, Understanding Fate & Destiny - 1) that the language used in the posts shall be formal, journalistic or academic, because they may require data, history or objectivity. I think informal or "chatty" language is used mostly in the "interactive blogs" (as you rightly put it), as tey discuss personal experiences, short stories etc.

    Since this particular post was put up, Stonerchick seems to have changed the url of her blog (I guess she either deleted her blog and moved it to WordPress, or put up the text in a new url in blogspot). That's why the url which I linked to, is defunct now.

    I don't quite agree that there must be a "target audience" for blogs. They're primarily a recording medium, whose reach is global and which are easily accessible. That's a blog's primary functon. If readers acquire interest, then readership grows. Otherwise, the primary function is still served.

    As an example, books by Stephen Hawking and Chomsky are available globally. So, the publisher's job is done. Now few people read (fewer even understand) books by Hawking or Chomsky. But those who do, know they're brilliant pieces of work. So its the idea that matters, and not how much it sells or how many "hits" it gets.

    Finally, the authors of the comments themselves chose to delete their own comments. Also, I have not enabled comment moderation or comment blockage since starting the blog (they're at default settings). However, I have requested the commentators to comment only on the posts (should they comment) instead of profanities etc. as I can't spare time for comment moderation.

    Once again, I sincerely thank you for taking time to post your views and suggestions here.

    ReplyDelete
  20. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I hope you got your doctorate for this wonderful study. What is on your agenda next? Analysing what is inside a "female's" handbag?
    No offense..but what are you trying to convey here?

    ReplyDelete
  22. I can say with certainty that the above commentator is impersonating the said person (astatine). He/She must be reminded that impersonation is an offence even in cyberspace.

    Now I've enabled comment moderation to avoid such comments.

    Thanks.

    ReplyDelete

Comments :