View Full Version : Nice Story, but aspects bug me.
My sister shared this story (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/anonymous-donors-pay-off-kmart-222535611.html) about good samaritans paying off people's lay-aways for christmas. I like the idea, and I think it's great. Most of the donations were between $25-50. It allowed people on tough times to have a nice christmas.
But there are lines in the article that bother me. In one statement, a woman was purchasing $200 in toys for her four year old son. In another, a woman bought "carts of toys" for another woman. I will assume that this woman who had "carts of toys" had the average number of children in the US (2.5). I'll also assume that she, therefore had 2.5 "carts" of toys. The same amount per kid, right?
I will assume that 2.5 "carts" of toys cost more than $200.
I am bothered by this.
I like christmas, I do. I realize that it's fun to provide presents for your kids. I understand that part of the "holiday spirit" for people is stuff. Ok? I get it, really. I was raised in this culture, I know what it is.
Ok, I know that this might sound all scroogy and stuff. But please note that both privately and through our business, we made charitable contributions to organizations that feed, clothe, and give presents to children and families over the holidays.
So, i'm not against people having a nice christmas.
But really?
Last "christmas" (ie, June) we bought ONE toy for our son as his gift. It cost $17. It's a wooden helicopter that we got at the fair-trade shop. $17. One gift. We also had a nice family dinner and sang winter songs and told winter stories. The total I spent on the celebration -- food and all -- was $69. Yes, that included the gift for DS.
This christmas, we are spending money on our holiday. We saved up, and it's cash. I'm not crying poor at all. My parents and ILs have provided gifts and toys for DS -- according to their desires, customs, and income. We directed the process, asking for less, for simple things, and for things we know DS will want and use.
Because of this, we have purchased *zero* christmas gifts for him. He won't need any more than what he will be given, and let me be honest, I'm fairly certain that's more than he'll need.
I'm starting toy rotation in our home. Toy rotation is a total PITA.
Toy rotation is practiced so that children do not feel overwhelmed by the nnumber of toys they have. Behavioral studies on children are showing that many of their extreme break-downs and misbehaviors are due to "over stimulation" -- usually from having too many toys.
The "cure" has been "toy rotation" -- which means putting some toys away and bringing them out and putting other toys away. For some of us, the "cure" has been "toy reduction" and "toy minimalism."
But it is very difficult for us to manage OTHERS who feel that a child *needs* $200 or more of toys at christmas. "NEED."
I cannot tell you how many times I have been told "but he NEEDS a christmas!" and he "needs" lots of presents.
he doesn't. He DOESN'T. he is 3. He has more than enough! He has everything he needs! He has MORE than he needs!
Anyway, rant over. If he has any needs, it's for more blocks. That's what he plays with the most. Not cars, not stuffed toys, not trucks. He plays with rocks, sticks, shells, fabric and blocks. And books. the kid loves books.
But, we use the library. This way, he learns to care for books and to share them with others. He's also proud as a pea**** about having his "very own library book bag" which they give each kid when they check out their first books. Good lord, you would have thought the boy was king of NZ he was so proud of that book-bag!
So, here's what I'm saying:
1. It is very nice of these people to be so generous to other families;
2. I'm glad that families get to have a nice christmas, when they feared there might not be any christmas at all;
3. I think that everyone needs to rethink what a child "needs" at christmas. most of us don't remember the gifts we got as a 4 yr old, btu we do remember the time spent with family, or the magical experiences of decorations or getting the tree or doing crafts or cooking.
i think it's time we start shifting that focus.
but i'm preachin' to the choir.
Zoe - Just because a person uses Lay Away doesn't mean they are thrifty - or even needy. It may mean they have maxed out all their CC's and drained their bank accounts already on luxuires (or a $200 worth of toys) and so this is a way that they can buy something without having the temptation of actually having "savings" around to purchase everything at one time. Many people do seriously have trouble holding on to money irregardless of what they have or how much they earn, so lay away can just be another alternative to using credit. I'd stick with donating food items to the food bank aor maybe something like Toys for Tots as you know it will most likely go to the truelly needy.
true, which is what i did.
i like that people are being "nice" to others.
what i don't like is that people feel that a 4 yr old "needs" $200 worth of toys at christmas.
Also, my mom used lay-away quite a bit when i was a kid -- mostly for clothes for us. we did not go to expensive shops, but we would go for school clothes and my mother would have us pick a ffew mix-and-match outfits, and this was a way to not use credit cards, but still afford to clothe us. I'm well acquainted with lay-away.
I had a very similar reaction. I love the idea of anonymous benefactors--I did, after all, grow up watching The Millionaire, in which John Beresford Tipton, through an intermediary, presented deserving individuals with a cashier's check that was supposed to turn their lives around--but I'm not sure this was the most thoughtful use of money. I can shop with the best of 'em, but I agree that piles of soon-to-be broken and discarded Chinese-made toys aren't the answer to anyone's problems.
catherine
12-16-11, 4:08pm
I agree also that a 4 year old does not need $200 worth of presents. But, to play devil's advocate...
....Christmas for some is the ONE time when you feel you have permission to splurge--especially if you struggle all year just to provide basics. The people who don't have much money have the opportunity to go a little crazy and say, "hey, it's Christmas."
...People have many different ways of celebrating Christmas. I know that simple living is about tempering the consumer-fest. But some people grew up on Christmas lite and others didn't.
We (the family I raised, 4 kids) had very little money, but we pretty much had blow-out Christmases every year. I'm not saying it's right, but we paid cash, and we used it as an opportunity to catch up on all those necessities that had been ignored for a while. For instance, one time my kids thanked me, in the line at Walmart, for buying them socks--as in "Mom, thank you SO MUCH for buying us these socks!". I was a little embarrassed. Well you better believe that every Christmas, they get socks.
Even when I was young, my parents gave us lots of gifts--they weren't all big. They might be cool pens, or a paperback and of course some clothes. But we had a lot of stuff to open. On the other hand, my best friend got one or two things.
There's nothing wrong with either way. Some get a lot; some get a little. Big deal.
There is something wrong with throwing your budget out of whack to give kids stuff they really don't need, or things you feel they have to have because of peer pressure. But otherwise, to each his own.
I think there's a big difference between a "blowout" that you save for and can afford, vs a blow out that you can't afford.
There's also a big difference, imo, between a blow out that includes "lots of little things, including necessities" vs a blow out of $200 of toys alone, whether there are a lot of them or a few large ones.
And, this difference is based on affordability.
We are travelling over the holidays. Considering our tight, tight budget, it's a BIG deal. That being said, we saved up for it and are paying cash. We also are going "on the cheap" staying at hostels, only going for a week, keeping driving (and fuel costs) to a minimum, etc. Half the holiday will be at our home.
This might be a "blow out" in it's own way -- a non-object way. BUT i did save and can afford it.
That's very different than feeling that you "MUST" have a 'blowout' -- however that is defined -- even if you don't have the money.
catherine
12-16-11, 4:54pm
I agree with you, Zoebird, which is why I said I was playing devil's advocate. And there are certainly a lot of things that bother me about Christmas consumerism: I hate that people stand in line for hours for the Toy of the Year; I hate that several department stores opened on Thanksgiving this year; I hate that in general, people feel they have to give their kids everything they want or they'll grow up unhappy. I hate that all that crap winds up in landfills. I hate that Christmas = Retailers' Heaven and that there really is NO Christ in Christmas anymore.
But, I was just saying that I don't know the lady with the 2.5 carts of toys. Would I want to subsidize all those toys by paying her lay-away? I doubt it. But at Christmas people have a lot of different emotional stuff based on traditions and expectations and they deal with it differently. That's all I'm saying.
There's no doubt about people dealing with their emotional stuff during the holidays. I think it's the toughest time of year.
I posted in the religion forum about christmas for atheists a song by Tim Minchin (White Wine in the Sun).
I've found this song really helpful. For *years* i've been trying to figure out my relationship to the holidays. We never decorate, we don't' really care to 'celebrate' the way that our families do, and would much rather just have a restful time with people without obligations -- financial, emotional or otherwise.
I find that each holiday brings a slew of guilt trips and emotional obligations that i feel forced to do, but no one else follows through with. Last year, it was enforced Skype on christmas day, which they backed out of without notifying us, after I went to *extreme* lengths to m ake it happen, which was neglecting my own needs in the process. Lesson learned. No Skype on christmas this year.
But, aside from this, I found this song liberating because it can be about what I like about the holidays, not what I don't want. I just have to stand up for it. "I like the chords, but the lyrics are dodgy" for example. Or "guess what? i really don't want a christmas tree, thanks." And how about "no gifts for christmas? -- yes, i'm happy with socks, jocks and chocolates.
Hawk's version of christmas is fascinating. For him, it's when someone comes to visit and we go on holiday. Last year was aunt edna. This year is amma and baba. next year is mimi and opa. then who? he figures aunt edna again. :) And it's cute.
People say to him "are you excited about christmas?" and he says "yes! Yes!" and they ask him if he is excited about santa, and he says "I don't know who this santa is, but my amma and baba are coming for christmas!'
there it is: white wine in the sun.
----
To another angle, because it's important in my family sagas --
Have we talked about Jesus?
The answer to this is yes. We are not christian. But the local church has a fun sing-along that is on wednesdays and costs $2 so we go.
They sing mostly about nothing -- bugs, leaves, whatever -- and then maybe 1/3 of the songs involve god or jesus. we have no problem with this -- even if the lyrics are a bit dodgy. LOL
anyway, Hawk asked his dad about jesus, and this was the conversation:
HAWK: Is St. George's about Jesus?
RYAN: Yes.
HAWK: Why is it about Jesus?
RYAN: They like what he was all about.
HAWK: They like what he said to the people?
RYAN: Yep, he talked about things like love and peace.
HAWK: And pizza, too.
RYAN: [laughing]
HAWK: Because pizza is good for you.
---
he's only 3.
we also watched this great documentary about 'did jesus survive the crucifixion?' which was *fabulously scholarly*. Hawk didn't understand why jesus would be hurt, why people would want to hurt jesus. He didn't quite catch who jesus was, either, but he did connect it to the church (and, apparently, pizza).
Today, he said "I'm pretty sure that Jesus did live, and then died later in the old days in another place. I don't think the cross is necessary to look at to understand jesus. But i like singing the songs."
In general, we talk to him about the stories of jesus, and that's really all we know -- stories. and that other churches (we use churches to mean "religious groups" for simplicity at this point) have other stories about other people -- how his friend lenny is jewish and that they have other stories that don't involve jesus, and how we also have stories of the buddha in our family (he's very into buddha these days).
and we explain how stories help us understand things that we might not otherwise understand. And so he asked Tim (the minister) at the last sing-along what he understands about Jesus. he said "Jesus is a lot of stories, which story do you like best, and what did it help you understand?" (He's had a language jump since early november when the other conversation occurred). So, Tim told him his favorite story about Jesus (which I can't recall), and I told him mine, and DH told him his. And hawk decided that all of the stories were good, but none were as interesting as Houndsley and Catina.
For us, this non-religious perspective while still honoring the value of the stories and their value to individuals has been really liberating for us.
My mother is devastated that we aren't raising him catholic/christian, and she feels that it is vitally important to avoid hell. I told her that I do not believe that, nor do I want her sharing that idea with DS at this point. I told her that it's fine to share her beliefs -- this is what she likes about jesus, etc. But it's not ok to frighten him or manipulate him into the faith practices with a fear of hell or other retribution. that *is* dodgy.
So, i've definitely taken the 'christ' out of christmas, and even taken the 'christmas' out of the december holidays. it's summer here, not winter-holiday time. We celebrate that (with a gift) in winter. It's also non-religious. It's summer time now, and time to celebrate the warm sun and the beaches and all of the beautiful relaxing and fun time that summer can be.
I have figured out that simply enjoying the time the way that i want to enjoy it is ok. it's amazing how a little song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCNvZqpa-7Q) can help facilitate that.
I feel at peace about it.
I wish more people felt at peace during the holidays -- whether they are buying carts of things or not.
Zoebird, I could have written your post myself. I agree with you 100%. Most children I know have WAY WAY more than they need already, before Christmas and birthdays roll around. For those who are in need, I imagine there are things they need a lot more than $200 of toys.
catherine
12-16-11, 5:31pm
I wish more people felt at peace during the holidays -- whether they are buying carts of things or not.
A wonderful Christmas sentiment: God (or Yahweh or Higher Power or Buddha or the Universe or our inner spirit or whoever) bless us every one.
sallysue
what hawk wants most from us is time together.
and lots of berries and yogurt.
ApatheticNoMore
12-16-11, 6:21pm
Maybe someone should start a movement and a bumper sticker:
"What I'm giving my kids for christmas: a habitable planet."
Boda Boom.
Oh that's pretty snarky isn't it? But really all this waste for the sake of "our kids" is maybe NOT in the true long interest of "our kids" (ie who is going to have to live with this mess?).
Sure kids should have some toys to play with etc. (and of course socks!) but it's the excess. I'm tolerant of much in human nature, but frankly losing tolerance for this seasonal nuttiness.
iris lily
12-16-11, 6:58pm
This is the time of year where my misanthropy is magnified. I do not generally give to do-gooder social service organizations that benefit humans, and I will be stone cold DEAD before I ever pay for someone's cheap-crap-from-China being held at a big box store. I do not have a positive attitude toward this king of thing. :) With that clarity, I wonder how ya'll would have received this plea from the head of a do-gooder organization that provides toys for children:
" We need more donations or else we won't be able to give the same number of toys to the kids that they received last year."
I feel sorry for the guy because I can only assume he misspoke. Who would really care if the kids got "the same number of toys." I keep hearing about an economic problem here. I think that means we need to cut back.
I've also observed the huge number of plastic toys displayed in ghetto yards and in the dumpsters and etc. Stop with the plastic, it's out of control. As a last point, I always suspect that what a poor kid really wants is not delivered in the generic Gift a Kid packages, anyway. And that is too bad. It's sort of this attitude: you are poor, you take our charity, no one really cares enough about you to find out what you'd REALLY like, but hey, here's some crap. Merry Christmas.
Honestly, like someone said, the cheap crappy toys are EASY to give and they are the least of what poor families need. But whatever.
I think that one toy is enough. seriously.
this year, as far as i can tell, hawk will be getting several toys: 2 from my parents, possibly 2-ish from my ILs (they tend to send several like last year he got a back pack, side walk chalk, paper and crayons, and a puzzle), one from some friends of ours. That's a lot of presents. No gift from us this year.
part of it, too, is not setting up expectations. He doesn't get birthday gifts -- we do a party with NO gifts. I'm very clear about NO gifts, and most people are pretty grateful. my parents and ILs send him something, so he'll get two gifts, but we don't open them on his birthday.
we open and give gifts at "random" times -- they are "joys" and "surprises." it's not connected to a specific day on purpose. I don't want to set up an expectation of getting gifts. So, we keep it random.
AND, sometimes Daddy gets a gift and we don't. or mommy and daddy/hawk don't, and sometimes just hawk, and sometimes everyone. Right? Just depends.
But hawk also loves to GIVE gifts. He mostly makes them, which is cool.
JaneV2.0
12-16-11, 11:54pm
I looked over the tags on a neighborhood "giving tree" and asked the attendant if there were any for adults. She looked at me like I had two heads, but I really would have liked to donate a warm hat or lap robe or cocoa or something to someone who could use it. I share Iris Lily's suspicion that we're just throwing cheap crap at kids that need much more than that.
Who the heck are we to judge another family's choices about what amount of toys someone else's child "needs"?
What if that child has leukemia and another 6 months to live? What if he is one of ten sibs, and the toys are for all of them?
There are many ways of giving, most of them based in one's cultural experiences. Calling someone out for doing something you would not do is expressing a personal bias, IMHO.
ApatheticNoMore
12-17-11, 12:30am
So it is wrong to call a wasteful society out when it is wasteful? Um ok. And it's not saying that I am 100% pure or anything. There is nothing pure in this world.
But nearly $300 in christmas gifts for a child is now the average in the U.S.. apparently. How much ends up in landfills? But it's wrong to point that out, I guess. The thing is it is future generations that will actually suffer the most for this. Yes the very kids being "gifted".
Now actually parenting and handling these social expectations is very hard I imagine. Cruel pig headed denial of your "spoiled children" alone is probably not a good policy. Maybe the one gift idea and channeling interest into activities done for the holidays and so on. So that more gifts aren't missed so much.
Apathetic, it's not wrong IMHO to name a wasteful society. I think I got triggered there just a little on what sounded like the classic judge the poor stuff. FWIW, we do not give gifts of stuff to our young adult kids, and in the past we have had very modest, practical gift giving. These are our family values. I would not judge another family because their practices are different... that's substantively different from lamenting the state of our society that promulgates the levels of consumption I suspect we all find nuts.
I'm sorry, but aside from wastefulness, there is the issue of children's actual needs.
there are *plenty* of studies about the situation of overstimulation from too many toys. read several online psychology and child-rearing related journals and blogs by various experts and they will tell you to decrease the number of toys in a child's life so that they are not overstimulated.
overstimulation harms them. it decreases their capacity to create because they feel overwhelmed. They have trouble managing their feelings of being overwhelmed (because they cannot handle their feelings anyway, we have to teach them how to channel and manage them effectively) which turns into tantrums and various forms of "misbehavior" that comes from too much stuff.
Instead of simply giving these children what they need -- which is LESS -- parents drug them for misbehavior. DRUG THEM. school insist that they are drugged and punished rather than. . . SIMPLIFYING THEIR LIVES.
hundreds or thousands of dollars worth of toys for the last 6 months of a child's life is not going to make that child's life better, honestly, it isn't. It is a tragedy that a child dies, but the number of toys does not increase the child's health, wellbeing, or joy in the last bardo. Make a Wish foundation's number one wishes are always for time for the family to be together and have fun -- disneyland/world, a holiday at a camp, and in some cases, a simple dream that a kid may have to go canoeing one more time.
Making those wishes come true -- which I have been a part of -- is a true joy and truly heartbreaking. But the kids want their parents, their families, and freedom from the drugs and the hospital for just a moment, a simple and small moment, before moving into the unknown.
So don't lecture me about being callous about "another family's choices."
Their choices are harming them financially (assuming they can't afford these things). Their choices are harming the economy (this is complex, but true). Their choices are harming the environment. Their choices are harming their children.
They are trying to do something great for their children BUT they are doing something against their children.
I agree that if a family has 10 children, it might require "carts" to manage their toys/gifts for the holidays. true. There is so much we don't know.
But there is nothing wrong with being critical. A 4 yr old does not need $200 worth of toys! Seriously, s/he DOESN"T.
you simply cannot demonstrate to me HOW a child "requires" $200 worth of toys. Unless it's one, highly creative and long-lasting toy (jungle gym styled play equipment? a really great sand box?) -- then I'll buy the argument.
But this overstimulation of our children IS a massive issue. it's so much bigger than people think.
and, likewise, I do like the sentiment of people giving.
I think it is very nice that people thought to do this for others -- regardless of their level of wealth. It's nice that some of the families who may not have been able to afford christmas were able to have one. It's very nice.
I have spent many a year doing what Jane2.0 writes about. I have provided for families -- the whole family -- for the holidays. I always try to find out not just what the kids may want/need, but the parents and grandparents too. Often, multiple friends and I go in together to help several families, not just providing gifts, but also clothes, school supplies, and food for the holidays and beyond when we can provide those sorts of things (e.g., home made jars of "dried soups" that can be made later; cookie mixes that can be made later with minimal additions such as water or a bit of oil).
I'm not without the giving spirit.
BUT, it is also fine to be critical of behaviors that people -- in general -- engage in that harm them, and harm all of us.
catherine
12-17-11, 9:02am
Apathetic, it's not wrong IMHO to name a wasteful society. I think I got triggered there just a little on what sounded like the classic judge the poor stuff. FWIW, we do not give gifts of stuff to our young adult kids, and in the past we have had very modest, practical gift giving. These are our family values. I would not judge another family because their practices are different... that's substantively different from lamenting the state of our society that promulgates the levels of consumption I suspect we all find nuts.
That's exactly what I was trying to say--you said it better, redfox.
Also, are we absolutely sure that the entire $200 amount was toys? I thought I read that the donor wanted to pay off a ticket that included toys - I don't think it said all of it was toys. Maybe there were some pajamas, socks, and other things in there?
Having said that, I too agree that $200 of toys is too much for one child, but as redfox said, we don't know all the details. Maybe that included toys for other sibs or cousins. But I'm not a scrooge either - in fact, I'm off to donate a new soccer ball to the local toy drive...
I was wondering the same thing about the woman paying off all the layaways. And I do wonder about what we think children should have. About 20 years ago, an elderly lady in our community began collecting gifts for needy children in the area. I always contributed, because it seemed like a good thing. But now, MANY organizations are collecting in this small town and have all collected thousands of gifts. Are we teaching "needy" people that they need much more than they really do by flooding their kids with an excessive amount of stuff? I don't know........but we can't possibly have that many needy children in this small community.
I do wonder about all of the gift collection sites everywhere.
Here's the thing. We don't need to know the details of what was in each order that was paid for when lay away was paid off.
It's a way of obfuscating about the issues inherent. "we don't know, so we can't judge." At the individual level, TRUE. in general, false.
We can discuss the information that we know, make logical inferences, discuss the outcomes *in general*. This is not a specific judgment on "the poor" or anyone in the story itself.
It's simply asserting that there are certain cultural and social problems at play, and that this wonderful impulse to help others might be sadly misguided or not trying to create the outcome that the person desires. Or, an outcome that I desire or agree with.
CathyA --
The organization here to whom we gave money serves the whole country, and we make financial contributions, not actual toys. This way, the money can be spent on operations as well -- which can keep the organization going.
Very well said. Our faith is central to our lives, so for us Christmas is a huge deal. That said we don't exchange presents with anyone and we don't buy our son or each other gifts. Christmas is supposed to be about the gift that was given to us by God, not what is wrapped under a tree. So for that reason we don't give each other gifts. We do give to those in need. We purchase warm coats and deliver them to the schools in the inner city, the local woman and children's shelter and the rescue mission. We donate home made pies to the rescue mission so that the men there can have a treat made with love during their Christmas celebration. We dontate time delivering coffee to police who are directing traffic during this craziness. etc... That is our gift giving.
Zoe - Just because a person uses Lay Away doesn't mean they are thrifty - or even needy. It may mean they have maxed out all their CC's and drained their bank accounts already on luxuires (or a $200 worth of toys) and so this is a way that they can buy something without having the temptation of actually having "savings" around to purchase everything at one time. .
Some people use it as a way to "hide" the abundance of toys until the last minute as well. To keep the kids from stumbling upon it.
No kid needs any of this stuff. The most brain building toys, and the ones that hold the most play value are open ended and very low cost.
It was good to read this thread today.
We're under attack from family members because we opted out of the annual come-over-and-watch-my-kids-open-ten-thousand-presents event on Christmas morning. These are very well-off close relatives who have had to dedicate an entire room of their house just to store toys, most of which are never touched. Only the newest one is interesting, ever.
I don't dislike children (as they've accused). I just don't enjoy that ritual, to put it mildly, and don't really see gift-opening as a spectator sport.
I know there's no right way and wrong way. But I don't personally approve of this kind of wastefulness, this grooming of future uber-consumers, and it makes me a little sick, so I'm done. And evidently that makes me a crummy person in the eyes of my in-laws. So be it.
I agree with you, Zoebird, about how much kids need and the cultural expectations. It's pretty far out of whack.
For us with Christmas presents I'm not as concerned with price as I am with other factors like play value, quality and other factors. We had a couple of expensive Christmases when the girls were little. We'd get things like a wood dollhouse and furnishings and a nice set of wood blocks, which cost a little more, but those toys will go through all five of my kids and probably still be useful for my grandkids. My then-9-year old nephew got a guitar and amp last year, which was expensive, but he loves it and is pursuing learning to play the guitar as a hobby. I thought about getting the kids a piano next year. I don't have a set amount I spend, sometimes it's not much at all, sometimes it's kind of a lot, but what I get them is based on where they are at.
I tend not to buy much for tiny kids. Travis, my 9 month old, doesn't care. James, my 2 year old, is happy with anything. Grandma got him a colouring book and crayons and he was happy as a lark.
The Franciscan group our family is affiliated with has a gift drive each year for the Victims of Torture center, which helps refugees who have been victims of torture and people rescued from sex slavery to set up house and home. Most of the requests are for things like pajamas, bedding, pots and pans and things like that. I think that is a valuable contribution. We also like to donate to charities that provide things like clean water, mosquito nets to protect against malaria and livestock to people in third world countries. I find that it's a good counter to the consumerist message the kids get this time of year. When you think about people who don't have food or clean water it's harder to feel sorry for yourself that you didn't get something you wanted.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.