Dedh Ishqiya – what they didn’t see and what you must read

Posted: January 11, 2014 by moifightclub in Adaptation, Bet You Didn't Know, bollywood, cinema, film, WTF
Tags: , , , , ,


This is a strange scenario. I read review after review after review, every damn possible review of Dedh Ishqiya. Just to figure out one thing – to see if anyone has written about the homage scene in the film, and the inspiration behind the film’s spoiler, or scratched it beyond the surface. And i was extremely disappointed to see that not a single reviewer has mentioned it.

They didn’t get it?

They don’t know about it?

They haven’t read it?

Just because the director didn’t tell or it wasn’t mentioned in the press release?

Because, for me, that is the highlight of the film. The smartest scene in the film. And that *is* the film too. Strange. Seems like we are reading a group of philistines who have been raised on a limited staple diet and don’t know how to read a film beyond their radar. Not that such funny things has never happened in the past, but this should straight go to FunnyOrDie section. So which scene i am talking about?

SPOILER ALERT (Don’t read further if you haven’t seen the film yet and if you hate spoilers)

In the scene where both Naseer and Arshad’s hands are tied and they are watching Madhuri and Huma having fun, getting physical. Naseer looks at Arshad and says, Lihaaf maang le. Arshad looks up and smiles. And then we see just a big shadow on the wall which suggests physical intimacy between Madhuri and Huma’s characters. That’s the homage to Ismat Chughtai’s Lihaaf. The setting, Begum, homo-eroticism, huge shadow play – the elements and the incident is the same as in Lihaaf.

That’s not all, the entire back story of Madhuri’s husband is also from the same story. And the spoiler – their relationship and her back story is the core idea of the film. Rest of it has been just built up to cover this plot. So it can be called a really smart adaptation of the short story. Much respect for the writers of the film – Darab Farooqui, Abhishek Chaubey and Vishal Bhardwaj.

So why is it such a big fuss?

1. Because it involves Ismat Chughtai – one of the most eminent, progressive and feminist Urdu writers.

2. Because it involves Lihaaf (published in 1942) – the most popular and celebrated short story by Ismat Chughtai.

3. Because Lihaaf created a big controversy. Ismat Chughtai was charged with obscenity and was summoned by the Lahore court in 1944. She went to court, refused to apologise and won the case. Click here to read a funny excerpt about the case from her memoir. And if possible, do watch Naseer’s play on the same which also includes Manto’s trial.

4. And most importantly, because it’s still relevant. Chughtai’s story dealt with homo-eroticism and lesbianism which created a huge ruckus then. And today, when we are still debating gay rights and article 377 in India, a mainstream Hindi film brings the subject on the big screen with mainstream actors, and connects it so smartly to such an important and controversial literary work, and to its history. And we have no fucking clue! Lilaah!

Strangely, it seems most reviewers didn’t even get the historical, social, or literary context. If i was the boss, i would have surely asked for some explanation, rejection, and resignation. Because what’s the point of reviewing films if one doesn’t know where one is coming from – our art, culture, literature and such an important bit of history. It’s utterly shocking and baffling to say the least. It might sound extremely snobbish, but am fine with me being accused of snobbery than being philistine, especially when we are talking about Ismat Aapa and Bhardwaj’s cinema.

– You can find the English translation of the story here or here or in the embedded link below (translation by different writers). Do read. And do remember it was published in 1942.

– Found another adaptation on the net – a short film based on the same story

– If you were born and brought up in some other planet, Ismat Chughtai’s wiki page is here.

– To know what we thought about the film, click here.


  1. @Rohwit says:

    Any place that makes you look deeper at a piece of art is Mecca.

    Thank you for this piece. I don’t read much. Swore to read a lot after watching a short film that featured Chughtai and Manto’s story, woven into one long back. Couldn’t get the time.

    So yes I didn’t know of this aspect.

  2. Farhan says:

    In fact it could be the reason why people (critics) might dismiss the film as ‘attention seekingly’ ordinary. Goes to show why Bollywood is Bollywood.
    What is a critic? Should he be well versed in literature, arts or commerce? Most ‘critics’ are just film enthusiasts who have watched bollywood movies for some parts of their lives and are now writing to earn a living. Just like teachers in school. Those who can’t do…

  3. Tina says:

    I don’t know about Ismat Chughtai (don’t live in India) but worked out the relationship through the physical intimacy earlier and later in the shadows. I felt extremely pleased at the genius of the film as I linked it to 377 and the decadance of the setting etc. Film made me feel like I only scratched the surface so wanna see it again. Will be reading up on Chughtai too.

  4. r1kartik says:

    I fall in the category of didn’t know because I haven’t read. Thanks for the input. Helps to know what I am missing. Although I wouldn’t go as far as resignations but the scene was definitely one of the best shot scenes that I have seen in a long long time. Helps to know the genesis.

  5. Sourav Roy says:

    Thank you so much for this angry and sensitive post.

    I admit that, I too, didn’t get the ‘Lihaaf’ subtext of the film either (a shortcoming on my part which I am determined to address). But in my opinion, any sensitive viewer should get the homoerotic aspect of these two characters’ relationship and the strong feminist overtones of creating a sanctuary immune to men.

    So I think, there are two problems here with Bollywood viewers (in which I count myself in).

    Firstly, how little we know about the cultural history of the Indian subcontinent and how proud we are of that fact. Because only HIndu Jingoists still bother about Hindu Cultural History and the terrorists (who, as we all know are always bearded Muslims) bother about the Muslim counterpart, right?

    Even when enjoying the film, my mind was awash with questions: like when Para was talking about astrology (how much do Hindu and Islam astrological systems have in common?) or dancing to an overtly Bhakti song (where all do the Bhakti and Sufi song traditions meet?) or when the camera showed a chandelier made of flower during Jaan Mohammed’s celebration party (what is the Urdu word for it?). Why don’t I know any of these? Where can I find out? (certainly not via Google)

    Secondly, even when we don’t know all that we are supposed to know (then again rarely anybody does), we don’t know that we don’t know and refuse to be humble and sensitive. Because we have read all the top Upworthy and Buzzfeed articles and even have the rare achivement of finishing some long articles from New York Times and The Atlantic, right? How dare someone call us philistine because we have not read some story by some writer? If I want a culture lesson, why should I head to a multiplex?

    Thankfully, I don’t dare to call myself a film critic.

  6. coronaurora says:

    Ahaa! This has me genuinely surprised: the nidus of this curiously staged caper has a culturo-historical anchor, wow! I was discussing the final act last night of how non-judgementally and feather-like he delivered the whole homoerotic angle and how game the actors were to it. Will definitely spread the word as I re-watch the film with family and friends. And it is a film that deserves to be rewatched simply because there are too many things vying for attention: the sleights, the artificial constructs and the Khalu-Babban camaraderie. There are way too many tonal shifts because of the genre-necessities and ?fear of unbalancing the film with nostalgia.

    On an aside, I went in wanting a different film: to me the character of Begum was downright haunting and I thought both the screenplay and the uber-clever, post-modern deconstruction of this cooped-up woman through having young lovers and Khalu-Babban banter just dilutes and reduces her super-compelling graph. Am surprised Dixit was able to transmit a journey through the snatches of screentime she gets to elucidate her pain. Her world needed a little more drama and ambition in propping up: Chaubey and Setu nail the atmosphere but in their cynicism and irreverence do not let you indulge properly to be transported: the music, the songs almost stiffle under all that grime. Its almost like they were too scared it’d make the film too dark and depressing. Which is surprising as Chaubey etched a more twisted, full-fledged character of Krishna in the first film.

    Anyways, the morsels of cultural brilliance that we get to bite into are just way too many. Have been listening to Begum Akhtar’s ghazals since I have come, and now this: I want to hug Chaubey and Bharadwaj to let the viewers give a peek into this linguo-cultural encyclopedia.

  7. Like others above, even I am admittedly a moron. Even I hadn’t read the story, and couldn’t recognize the literary aspect of this film.

    • After reading this blog and comments above, even I wish to admit I got the homosexuality part. Perhaps, I got it pretty early on in the film, and… ahem, you guys may blame me for lying, but I could predict the lady leads motivations pretty early. I loved the film nevertheless 🙂

  8. Bobby Sing says:

    Yes, you are perfectly right in spotting that and adding to this I also couldnt read anyone mentioning the name of Dr. Bashir Badr too in their reviews.

    But for me this was one of the great steps taken by the team to make an authentic film and here is my take on the same.

  9. hmmm.. you mean to say that official critics should have very deep understanding and knowledge of history of Literature? I mean, its good to have, but should it be that mandatory?
    Sehwag once said that he has never heard about Mankad(I am not sure if he was the one) or his record. Does that make him a less cricketer. Should he be fired because of that??
    You sir behave like a laughable ass once VB’s film releases. How about throwing some opinion on the crore which VB took from Akhilesh yadav, when people are dying?

    • Yes, Mister Singh, You can get out in your diapers and start reviewing films. Its just corn-cola and some shit going around. You might not know anything, and that’s fine for you, but don’t expect me to respect you or your views.
      As for Sehwag ( well, i can ask who is Sehwag as i don’t follow cricket) there’s a difference between playing the game and knowing/not knowing. Don’t drag your moronic self into weird comparisons. What’s the connect between a cricketer’s talent and his information? Even if he doesn’t know Mankad, and as long as he plays good cricket, that’s all fine. That’s not the job of a film reviewer or a critic. And surely i don’t have patience and energy to explain what the job of a reviewer should be. You can go back to the guys you read and follow.

      As for VB taking crore, you think one can take a crore from Akhilesh Yadav? He was given. It’s part of the subsidy for shooting the film in UP. And that’s why i guess even Akshilesh’s photo was there in opening credit which looked terrible. But subsidy is nothing illegal. It happens worldwide, so many countries do it to promote work/tourism. And it comes with attached conditions . You have to spend the money there, take cast and crew from there, do certain things. That’s how things work and films get made worldwide. I don’t know the exact terms and conditions the UP govt has set for this subside but its more or less on the same lines everywhere. It’s given to Bullet Raja for the same.

      VB getting a crore and Akhilesh not doing anything when people are dying, that’s VB’s fault? Please use your brains when commenting here. I think i should add that here.

  10. Golgotai says:

    hey did you ask VB before licking his ass? you think you know all because you watch theatre at prithvi? Pseudo. You’re like that student who, when knows the answer of a question that nobody else knows, considers others morons. Tell me which film was based on the works of Anis? Clueless??Wiki it sucker because neither you nor your aspirant-self-proclaimed critic friends would know it and prithvi too didn’t have the play on him.

  11. I don’t think many reviewers mentioned open tributes to Begum Akhtar, Ghalib, and Bashir Badr even, Ismat Chugtai toh door ki baat ho gayi. (Another minor trivia is Abhishek Chaubey is originally from Faizabad…same as Begum Akhtari Faizabaadi.)

  12. Aditya says:

    Had zero knowledge about Ismat Chugtai tribute/homage. After reading the story, much respect to the writers of Dedh.
    @varun – Apart from the ones you mentioned, there was a The Good, the Bad and the Ugly reference too.

  13. Sourabh says:

    I was pleasantly elated to see that reference as well. The bunch of apes I went with naturally missed it, oohing-aahing over Huma and Madhuri, while this additional piece of information spiced up the bonhomie of the two women for me.

  14. Yes! Thank you so much for this post! I am so glad you went ahead and tackled this reference and the lack of attention given to it! And bless this movie for pairing (sort of) Huma and Madhuri. Sigh. Brilliant tributes in this movie to so many amazing figures.

  15. Nikhil Kumar says:

    It was clear that there was a homo-erotic angle to the character of Madhuri and Huma from the first scene they came together in. Also, Lihaaf is in the English Hons. course in DU (they may have changed it after the recent FYUP). If only these reviewers were a little more educated. The TOI reviewer draws reference to Thelma and Louise and in the bracket says -an English film. What blahness; if one needs to explain Thelma and Louise to TOI readers, I am sure giving a reference to Lihaaf would be like reading Finnegan’s Wake for them. One can’t implore enough, the plummeting quality in everything.


  17. Johanna says:

    those who did not know.. or those who could not relate.. are the ones who have not loved.. or dont know what it is to love..

  18. Sunit Mukherjee says:

    Well,i had told my friend who was watching the movie with me in Rohtak on seeing the scene that this is Abhishek Chaubey’s subtle tribute to Ismat Chugtai and her revolutionary story Lihaaf. I feel the reviewers were more interested to listen to the swear word~ ch##iyapa,rather than the observe the emerging statement of Behenapa(sisterhood) as reflected by Begum Para and Munira in the movie. The emerging socio-sexual contours of India is reflected in the movie. Men are O.K.,but ‘we can do without them too’ is the underlying message!

  19. Sunit Mukherjee says:

    Well,i had told my friend who was watching the movie with me in Rohtak on seeing the scene that this is Abhishek Chaubey’s subtle tribute to Ismat Chugtai and her revolutionary story Lihaaf. I feel the reviewers were more interested to listen to the swear word~ ch##iyapa,rather than observe the emerging statement of Behenapa(sisterhood) as reflected by Begum Para and Munira in the movie. The emerging socio-sexual contours of India is reflected in the movie. Men are O.K.,but ‘we can do without them too’ is the underlying message!


  20. very nice perspective; adaptation of Lihaf

  21. ddeosthalee says:

    Actually i have read Lihaaf more than once and it’s far more powerful and provocative than anything in Dedh Ishqiya. But more importantly i object to moifightclub’s sanctimonious tone. No, i didn’t see the connection. And it’s great that you did. Would have been even nicer to put it out without gloating over it. But frankly, nothing in Madhuri-Huma’s performances gets anywhere close to the sharpness of Chughtai’s pen and hence the homage itself is rendered superficial.

    • @ddeosthalee – Guilty as charged. The post was written in HULK-mode. Was angry because not a single reviewer mentioned it. If this is the state of affairs of film criticism in this country, Lilaah! Not that i have much respect for most of them. Wait. Om Dar B Dar coming soon. Dying to see how they review it. Your objection is also welcome. True, gloating makes it look bad. And i prefer to look bad than to be stupid. Oops, gloating again. Joking.

      As far as sharpness of pen goes, true. But i think it used as thriller element here, so no really underlined. Also, the narrator’s voice and her shock and reaction in the short gives it that edge.

  22. bhaskar says:

    I did read lihaaf but in english so i don’t know what i’ve lost in the translation. But i really don’t think that the entire film was exactly a justification for that backstory. Yes it did seem that but the story is far more sharper and concerning about the narrator’s perspective. Here i think the story did get mellowed down or very in sync with the rest of the plot. It worked as a whole is what i say. But what a beautiful homage to both Ismat aapa and Begum Akhtar and Ghalib and Bashir saab. Haven’t seen such real looking shayars in films reciting with such taste before.

  23. Jay Bajaj says:

    If I want to learn history I’d go to a college–not to a cinema hall. So many film directors have taken liberty with the history under the skin of “creative license” that one wonders what’s true history and waht’s made up.

  24. smriti suman says:

    I am not a reviwer or film critique but lastnight when i wrote a first response was its a most subtly queer cinema we have ever seen.I found its a best adoption of lihaaf in a very subtly strong way. It bring back Ismat Chugtaiand begum Akhtar in public memory .

  25. Aniruddha Guha says:

    Thank you for bringing the short story to my notice. More joy.

  26. Maithili says:

    I am so happy to have someone who figured the same reference. I mentioned it to my boyfriend when we stepped out only to then wonder if I was over analyzing. But super stuff!

  27. AD says:

    Thank you so much for mentioning Chugtai’s The Quilt. I believe most reviewers did not address this angle deliberately as it’s way too controversial for a Hindi film, especially when it has not been promoted as a lesbian love story and only, subtly suggested it. And of course this comes post the much ‘significant’ Supreme Court verdict.

  28. Sosha says:

    I think anyone who knows the story should’ve got it. I had studied her Eng translation, titled The Quilt, back in college and it’s still so vivid in my mind. Thank you so much for this post. Film reviewers in media these days are terrible.

  29. Ayan Banerjee says:

    I think that it is downright unfair that ‘Dedh Ishqiya’ be considered ‘based’ on Chugtai’s Lihaaf. I had not read the story before – I read it now, and it is quite beautiful, but I shudder to think that Vishal Bharadwaj actually chose this story to render a poor thriller that the film tries to be most of the time. I have always hated middle path film-making, and this film is probably one of the best examples of it. Thinking that this was the person who made ‘Maqbool’ makes me sadder – for that film is probably one of the best renditions of Macbeth I have seen along with Kurosawa’s ‘Throne of Blood.’ Chugtai’s story cries out to be made into a beautiful, haunting film – what we have in Bharadwaj’s version is a totally unconvincing plot (which covers 75% of screen time) woven around the relationship between the two women. Of course there are flashes of good cinema – the Musheiras’, Para’s dance with Shah peeping through a frosted window frame, a general sepia/yellow tone to most of the indoor shots creating a very recognizable ambiance of a typical haveli, but the storyline is so downright flimsy – with utterly slapstick comedy thrown about liberally and the thrill aspects so entirely predictable – that by the time one reaches the rather tangential reference to Lihaaf (which comes about ten minutes before the end I guess), the interest in the film is almost lost. It is rather tragic that Bharadwaj no longer has the courage to make a film on a controversial yet sensitive issue without putting a commercially viable layer on it. The film is downright pretentious, trying to put in elements of absurdist theatre, neo-realistic cinema – I could go on – with nothing really gelling together. Yes, it does acknowledge several eminent people in its way.Even ‘Jaane Bhi Do Yaaron’ – a direct take on Antonioni’s ‘Blow up’ acknowledged the director by having the park where everything happens named as Antonioni park – but I don’t say that it is a good film because of that reference! ‘Jaane tu ya Jaane naa’ – a not-so-old film which I really like (oh I can go on saying that the form is close to Bunuel’s ‘Obscure Objects of desire’ and all that) ends with an old guy waiting at the airport showing a placard with ‘Godot’ written on it (obviously invoking Beckett’s ‘Waiting for Godot) – is good not because of this bit of gimmickry, it is good because it has a very spontaneous script with magic realism blending seamlessly with a very convincing depiction of the upper middle class society of Mumbai. In fact, Tyrewala’s very next film (Jhutha Hi sahi), made in the same vein as Jaane tu – utterly fails, because if you want to copy spontaneity, you are defeating the whole purpose! The same can be said of ‘Der Ishqiya’ – both Chaubey and Bharadwaj cannot get out of the aura of ‘Ishqiya’ (which was a far far better film than this one) – and tries the same close-to-reality-earthy-thriller treatment with a subtle relationship story – and for me, the effort is a complete failure.

    However, the film (and obviously Chugtai’s story) throws up a rather important question – can a lesbian relationship grow out of necessity much more easily than a gay one? Or rather, is being gay a much more inherent biological preference than being lesbian (i.e. can two lonely women find it much easier to find solace in each other’s bodies even without being inherently ONLY lesbian, than two men who are similarly lonely)?

  30. Loved the reference ….. and on the other point …. considering that For a full “critic” community that thought Kaminey was from QT school of film making and there was not so much as a mention on Guy Ritchie what do u expect … and that too on a subject that can’t be mentioned ….babaji ka thulloo?

  31. saniya says:

    i knew it as soon as i saw…though idk abt lihaaf nd al

  32. diksha uniyal says:

    read this blog:
    this is the reason why I never miss Bobby Singh’s review. He is one of the critique who can see films and much beyond.

  33. Rupha says:

    Great observation! I did get the homosexuality bit.. but knew nothing of the reference to Lihaaf and Ismat. Lovely insight S! 🙂 🙂 We must catch up sometime by the way 🙂

  34. For those pointing out the Firstpost piece, here’s my observation –

    And Aseem Chhabra mentions the blog in his rediff piece

  35. Puneet Dhingra says:

    Wow..thanks for pointing out these important and major elements of the movie..haven’t heard about this short story but surely I felt the same in that shadow scene..and even in one more scene at the end when they were running towards the car holding their hands(closeup shot of their hands) can actually tells you the emotions going on between both of them.

  36. Majid Bazmi says:

    pseudo intellectualism ka nateeja hai “Dedh Ishqiya”.Its not actually an adaptation but anyways its a bore,streched with some some unwanted characters and scenarios and most importantly some unwanted flashbacks.
    Quoting Mirza Ghalib,Qateel Shifaai,or Ismat Chughtai doesnt make it brilliant.Infact they should have handled it more carefully.Aur bhi bahut saari baatein hain jaise ki naseeruddin ka haanth hilne waala beemari ka koi lena dena hi nahi hai picture se aur bhi do teen baatein lekin khair abhi ke liye alvida.

  37. carefreeabandon says:

    Excellent! Sadly though, the only thing more disappointing than Bollywood movies these days, are the reviews.

  38. nidhi says:

    I did have a feeling..they were trying to show lesbian relation between them…but wasn’t sure…
    But had no idea of ismat and all..
    Thanx for the details ..

    • well, Good Morning. And some you can scroll up for comments. Read the Rediff piece carefully. I think you posted it without even reading it. Once you read it you will realise what a dumb thing to do.

  39. Jyotsna says:

    Well u all should read an article published in the editorial page of ‘The Hindustan times”,dated 15 Jan 14.The person has scrutinised the movie well and has also mentioned Ismat’s Lihaf.He has clearly talked about the homosexual relationship the director wished to portray between Madhuri and Huma.

  40. bholibhali says:

    I am a big fan of Ishmat Aapa. Its a wonderful adaptation. Thanks for sharing the discourse of film.

  41. I will tell you one reason why many critics would have intentionally not quoted this.

    Didn’t you mention “SPOILER ALERT (Don’t read further if you haven’t seen the film yet and if you hate spoilers)” before disclosing the ‘BIG SECRET’ yourself? So you wanted all critics reviews to be only for people who have already seen the film?

    Please don’t underestimate others just coz you think no end of yourself.

  42. […] 2. Ismat Chughtai- In this ongoing season of biopics, why has no one suggested a movie about her ? May we  suggest that Vidya Balan play the  young firebrand proto-feminist  while the divine Ms Rekha acts as the artist in her autumnal years? A woman with a strong feminist view point,  writing about previously taboo topics such as womens’ sexuality-  of course only Gulzaar can pen the lyrics for the film.  There is also the chance for some excellent wink-wink nudge-nudge cameos what with her later life spent as the part of film literati in Bombay. We are hoping she’s ripe for a re-disovery any way seeing as some claim that Dedh Ishqiya was a covert homage to her work. […]

  43. Vivek Vashishth says:

    I saw this movie 2 days back and I am still shocked why is this movie becoming the talk of the town. the critics loved it, and so did the audience (as per the imdb rating). But I am perplexed. I have always relied on imdb for an indicator of a good bollywood movie but this one seems to be an exception, as per me.

    The movie starts very pregnant with a rustic feel with that ‘batman’ punch, and from there on I was looking forward to meet that character again (some solid vocals there!), only to be disappointed. The movie never picks up, actually. It starts with an interesting contest, a modern day weird swayamvar based on poetic skills (mixed with shooting..??). From there on it becomes a slow train that keeps on giving black smoke. Vijay Raz is good but his character is ambiguous. Madhuri is terrific though. Shah looks pale, Huma is decent, but the show-stealer is Warsi.

    Anyhow, the story is too laboriously over-stretched. The movie expands over 152 minutes when the plot becomes a bit too obvious just after interval. The twist was too weak to be called so as it was visible from miles away. The explanations and the motives behind the so-called twist , as explained in the denouement, are too weak and poorly crafted.

    To top all this crass, the climax is so harrowingly weak and Tarantino style that it takes away all the “real-feel” of the movie (which anyhow one never experiences).

    Why so much fuss about this one..??

  44. Sanjeev says:

    Loved the film and did enjoy the ‘bonding’. It wasn’t too difficult to miss. Remember the scene when Munia greets Begam Para after spending time with Babban. I guess, Khalujaan and Babban probably come to terms with this fact and decide not to elope with these lovely ladies in the end. But thanks for the reference to ‘Lihaaf’. Didn’t realize it earlier but makes a perfect sense now.

  45. Vikram P says:

    Might want to check this out. Great piece on the Urdu used in the movie

  46. nadi says:

    Now there is an article about this.

    But you saw it first 🙂

    I have posted a link to this review on the EPW page.

  47. antixmehra says:

    Thanks for helping me connect the dots. I didn’t get the lihaaf reference in the scene, but the homosexual innuendos, and the back story seemed strikingly familiar. I couldn’t help but connect it to Ismat Chughtai’s lihaaf. Now that I read this, I’m a little more clear! Thanks so much!!

    PS: You’re absolutely right. People who haven’t read the story have no business reviewing this movie. The whole movie is a work of genius IMO, all the nuances and especially the fact that this is a kind of adaptation of lihaaf.

  48. antixmehra says:

    You resolved my deja vu. Thanks!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.