'The Social Network' writer Aaron Sorkin addresses the woman problem: Is his explanation enough?

Social-NetworkImage Credit: The Social Network writer Aaron Sorkin wrote in a blog post that he gets why women were “appalled” by the film’s portrayal of femaledom, “but you have to understand that that was the very specific world I was writing about.” In a response to comments on TV writer Ken Levine’s blog, Sorkin wrote a long and thoughtful explanation as to why — as we pointed out here when the film opened to rapturous reviews and box office — almost every woman on the screen was a sex object or a bimbo or a psycho or a combination thereof. Basically, he says he was showing us how the central characters — Mark Zuckerberg and his Facebook crew — view women. “Facebook was born during a night of incredibly [sic] misogyny,” he writes. “The idea of comparing women to farm animals, and then to each other, based on their looks and then publicly ranking them. It was a revenge stunt, aimed first at the woman who’d most recently broke his heart (who should get some kind of medal for not breaking his head) and then at the entire female population of Harvard.”

Perhaps most interestingly, he goes on to say: “More generally, I was writing about a very angry and deeply misogynistic group of people. These aren’t the cuddly nerds we made movies about in the 80′s. They’re very angry that the cheerleader still wants to go out with the quarterback instead of the men (boys) who are running the universe right now. The women they surround themselves with aren’t women who challenge them (and frankly, no woman who could challenge them would be interested in being anywhere near them.)”

Absolutely true, and very much worth discussion. I’m not about to let the filmmakers completely off the hook — some clearer nod to this insight in the film would have been welcome — much less am I about to suddenly declare this a feminist film for pointing out such glaring inequalities. But this brings up an important point in current culture: We pretend feminism has advanced so much that we barely need it anymore, and yet in many of the most important places (technology, religion, finance) men still not only call the shots, but they also surround themselves with women who do the opposite of challenging them. Sorkin says, “These women — whether it’s the girls who are happy to take their clothes off and dance for the boys or Eduardo’s psycho-girlfriend — are real. I mean REALLY real.” I’m sure some of those ladies are more complicated and nuanced than that (who knows if the real-life Christy had perfectly good motivation for setting things on fire?), but let’s bring it back to the matter at hand here, the portrayal of women on film. That’s where we can do something: We need more movies about cool, strong, complicated women doing stuff. The more girls see that, the more they’ll feel like they can be the ones making the next Facebook. And the more boys see that, the less they’ll act like sexist tools even if they make the next Facebook.

And if Aaron Sorkin wanted to write that movie, I wouldn’t complain.

More ‘Social Network’:
Dave Karger: ‘The Social Network’: Whose side are you on?
‘The Social Network’ has a woman problem

‘Social Network’: Natalie Portman was Aaron Sorkin’s secret weapon
24 ‘What’s on that Computer?!’ Faves

Comments (160 total) Add your comment
Page: 1 2 3 5
  • allie

    Oh my lord, can we just STOP whining about this already?? You’re one of those people who would change a Civil War movie because the black people weren’t being portrayed as smart and independent. People need to realize that when you right a movie about historical events you can’t change the way people are viewed just because it’s sexist.

    • tellusataletunes

      Well said Allie.

      • Ann

        I can’t believe anyone is agreeing with this moron. Black people were not smart during the civil war? The racists have come out. I’m sure you people think there are still no smart black people. God forbid a black person be portrayed as smart. If you want to agree to the historical card, how many airhead bimbos do you think you will find at Harvard as characterized in the film? Well said my backside. Sorkin is trying to deflect the inaccuracy of his characterizations by blaming it on the characters. Women are nothing short of plot devices in this movie.

      • Jake

        Ann, I’d much rather see the bimbos in this film than you represent females. Your lack of intelligence would paint a far worse picture.

      • Aeryn

        Okay Ann. the bimbos they were sleeping with in the movie did not go to Harvard. the boys had already pissed off most of the Harvard girls.anyway how was Allie’s comment racist? some African slaves were smart, some weren’t. She was just pointing out the fact that you cant call something racist/sexist if its true. I’m sorry to say this, but there are quite a few women who act like the female characters in the movie, while other girls are smarter than that. But Mark Zuckerberg probably didn’t attract the latter type, did he?

      • Ann

        @ Aeryn
        Mark Zuckerberg has been with the same non skanky girl for years. It’s people like you who look to movie to judge someone. And also, I did not read “some” black people. Allie did not specify who. She said black people. And notice I did not say anything about the independent part of her comment that’s a fact the the majority were not at the time.

        @Jake
        Go enjoy the intelligent bimbos you long for. God forbid there are multiple representation of women so you have to choose only one.

      • ann

        Wow. Other Ann sucks. allie never said black people “were not smart and independent,” just that this writer would be complaining that civil war movies did not portray them as such. Maybe you should read posts more carefully before responding.

      • Ann

        Hi other Ann, I agree why should people complain if there is a incorrect characterization? All those foolish people who complained about black face because it did not give an accurate of black people. We should have just let them portray black people as bumbling idiots and not say anything. That would make Allie and you very happy. It is always a great thing for movies to feed into the stereotypes. God forbid anyone try to capture reality. There were smart black people in that time, why bother to show them when it is so much easier to rely on stereotypes and pass them on to the next generation. No one should speak their mind about inaccuracies in media.

      • ann

        Seriously other Ann. That has NOTHING to do with this discussion. A movie was made. It’s over, it’s done. If you don’t agree with how it was made, don’t support it with your money. Go out and inspire people to make movies that have more realistic portrayals. But get over this issue about this comment here and now because it’s getting old.

      • Ann

        Really? Nothing to do with the dicussion? Okay other Ann, I can’t comment on an issue that Allie brought up because you don’t want me to. Got it my master. The discussion ends when you want it to even though you did not start it. God forbid anyone have a problem with something you consider a non-issue. Queen Ann won’t have that and I must obey.

      • ann

        True.

    • Saracen Riggins

      Agreed – stop whining. Can’t we just enjoy the movie for what it is? And like Allie says, you can’t change things for a movie just because people might not like it. Well, you can, but you shouldn’t.

      • James D

        i like your name.

    • K

      So your saying we shouldn’t portray women as smart and independent in this film because there were no smart and independent women during this time? Of course there was. Your arguement doesn’t make much sense.

      • Me

        Nobody’s saying there weren’t any smart and independent women in this film, just that the guys in it weren’t interested in such women! It’s really more a reflection of the guys’ insecurities than anything else.

      • Me

        Whoops, I meant “during this time,” not “in this film.”

      • Jason

        I agree with me. No one is claiming there aren’t smart, interesting women–these men just want nothing to do with them. They dig on ho’s. What’s so bad about that?

      • Woot

        I just laughed at “I agree with me.” I understand, it just sounded funny reading it.

      • Jake

        It’s about point-of-view.

    • TBK

      The problem is that this isn’t just about a historical event. Women are still greatly outnumbered by men in many key industries, such as technology and finance. Yes, there have been major inroads made by women in the workplace over the past few decades, but the shift in gender politics isn’t NEARLY as pronounced as society would have us believe.

      • bill hater

        The problem is that this (the movie that is the subject of this whole discussion) IS just about a “historical” event. Though there are millions of strong and intelligent women in the world, none (or almost none) of them were directly involved in the creation of Facebook. Which is what this is about. “This” being the movie and the event that is the creation of Facebook. Not a social commentary on the injustices of society.

      • SMA

        I’m sorry, but you are wrong. There number of women in the workforce outnumber the amount of men. This year for the first time ever, the number of female managers outnumbered the amount of men. Women earn more college degrees and Master degrees. Men have the majority of finance and tech jobs, but that is because that is an industry that at this time, primarily has male applicants. In short time, we will need to be making comments on message boards about how men are not be reflected adequately.

      • Sabrina

        @SMA That may be true, but I assure you, as a woman in this society, there’s SO much inequality. Case in point: I can’t walk down the street without being catcalled (and I assure you I’m far from being a supermodel). Being a woman is still hard. There certainly have been leaps and bounds made, but we have a long, long way to go to legitimately gain respect from a lot of men out there. I think a huge number of men still think of women as less-than-men. Go back and read the comment threads from when Hillary was running for president! Frightening.

      • Sabrina

        Also, to clarify – I loved the film and wholeheartedly agree that it’s about a specific set of people in a specific time. It’s not offensive because it’s not a broad commentary. Unfortunately there are plenty of sexist men out there…and plenty of truly stupid women who make it very easy to poke fun. Sorkin has written plenty of smart, driven female characters- no doubt this was a conscious choice.

      • Jenn

        OH, SMA, Even if that’s true over all the work force, it is NOT true in so many fields. I work @ a media company and there are many more men than women. The women can’t become managers despite superior work. I could out-work my male coworkers blindfolded w/ one hand tied behind my back, but I can’t get equal pay or title because of BS “reasons.” I’m the go-to gal, but not compensated for it whatsoever. And the few women who work there feel that way. And bringing up the subject in the proper channels just brings you trouble and puts you at the front of the line for the next round of layoffs. I suspect in many fields this is common. I know it is in mine. I used to say that if I had a daughter I’d tell her she could do anything – now I say I’d tell her that she COULD, but she might want to think real hard about whether it’s worth the struggle to get into a male-dominated field.

    • Kelly

      Thank you ~

    • sally

      Agreed. Stop the whining. I saw the movie and wasn’t affended. It’s telling a specific story. Not everything has to be sugarcoated to not hurt the feelings of woman.

      • Greg

        It’s not about offending or not offending, it’s about our social sensibilities. The movie portrays a story about highly successful, influential people who are very sexist. We’re not talking about feelings. We’re talking about the equality of all people.

      • Talentmeter

        how about letting an artist express their perspective without getting up in arms

      • carla

        I totally agree. No one is saying that women aren’t outnumbered in the work force, or that men have many advantages over them, but this is a story about the beginnings of Facebook. It’s great to open up a discussion about men and women and inequality, but this is not the place. We can’t add or delete characters from a true accounting of an event…because then it would not be a true story. And by the way, I am a 42 year old intelligent, independent woman who loved this movie because I was fascinated by the whole story of the phenomenon that is Facebook. When I want to debate men/women, black/white or Democrat/Republican, I don’t go to the movies, I have thoughtful discussions with friends or watch MSNBC.

    • Nathan

      Another day, another thing to be offended by. This is a total non-story.

    • thin

      The movie is bookended by intelligent, able women, and both of them make clear that Zuckerberg’s not a nice guy and not someone they’re ever going to be with. It is never at any point unclear that these are not good guys and that they are surrounding themselves with women who are dim and flimsy because they’re the only type they can deal with. People who care about this already are aware that this is a statement about the men in the movie, not the women, and the people who don’t get it aren’t going to care anyway.

      • Cate

        Well put!

    • Angeleen

      I don’t know, having a logical discussion that portrays both sides of a story seems very unlike whining to me.

      Regardless of where your opinion lies, aren’t you glad that we are talking about these issues.

      I don’t want to live in a place where someone feels slighted/insulted and they confront the person with logical reasoning for that feeling and they are just told to ‘stop whining’.

      Sometimes I get really annoyed at our inability to talk through differences of opinion.

    • Mikey Pike

      Hey there, posters, It is not “whining” to point out racism and sexism in this film, it’s decent, smart and absolutely justified.

      Let’s get this out of the way up front: the portrayal of Asian women in this film was disgusting, one-dimensional, creepy, sexist and racist – no ifs, ands, or buts. PERIOD. END OF STORY.

      I already had to warn an Asian student I know to dismiss this disgusting aspect of the film and for her to be on the lookout for college creeps who “can’t see the problem.”

      The fact you some of you can’t see it says you need serious help, and likely just as much, time to actually grow up.

      I have dated and cared about two Asian women in my lifetime, and got to know them and their families well. They were NOTHING like the oversexualized tramp caricatures that infested this movie. These were supposed to be HARVARD GIRLS???? Bimbos ready to drop trou in a college bathroom and basically brainless the rest of the time???

      Really? Harvard students? Asian cutie-pie groupies of what?Jewish Software geeks? I guess they got into Harvard on the Bimbo quota we all know is operating there for all those dang Asian kids who get perfect SAT scores and straight As. They must really be BIMBOS. Wow, that must make us white males breathe a big sigh of relief. Har, har.

      Give me a BREAK.

      It is this insufferable, juvenile male view of the world that the film itself ADOPTS, and does not CRITIQUE. Zuckerberg in real life actually is still with a serious, intelligent, highly accomplished and educated Asian woman he met at Harvard, no bimbo, no sex in the first ten minutes of meeting.

      The Social Network was a very well made and interesting film, utterly disfigured by this puerile racist and sexist aspect.

      If I had an Asian daughter and had taken her to this movie I would have walked out and had to explain to here, while she wept, why some creeps and film audiences still treat you all like sex toys or cardboard cutouts with no real soul. Horrible.

      Message for all you boneheads who can’t see what I am talking about: look in the mirror, fixing the problem starts right there. GOT IT?

  • allie

    *write*

  • Geoff

    This is such a non-issue, and frankly, a lie. We do see the woman in the beginning, challenging Mark word for word. We also see Rashida Jones as a very respectable assistant lawyer who does stand as a peer to Mark and even offers him some outside perspective and insight.

    Can someone name for me one EW columnist that is not a liberal trying to force an agenda?

    • Elizabeth

      Agenda?

      It was an observation made, it was a question asked, and there has now been an answer given. Last time I checked, blogs (and the comment area) were a place to ‘discuss’ things – since we all can’t do it face to face anymore.

      There is a LOT of negative female depictions out there right now in entertainment/media, not just in this movie. What are the redeeming, admirable qualities of “Real Housewives”? Or Gloria Allred?

      I understand Sorkin’s point of view, and I also understand Armstrong’s question. Maybe I have a hidden agenda I wasn’t aware of now…

      • sparkle the gym bag

        but what everyone wants to know is…do you have a nice rack?….opps was that offensive to hunters because I used the word rack in a manner they find appalling or to you because I made people think about your howitzers or derringers as the case may be…i have a hidden agenda…in my pants…and yes it may be a derringer or a howitzer..is that offensive to military folks…on and on and on….

      • Angeleen

        I agree Elizabeth. I don’t get why everyone gets all defensive just because someone has the audacity to question our media.(*Gasp!* We should just watch this sh%t and be happy we’re Americans!)

        This whole attitude of “I hate people who get offended!” is kind of ridiculous to me.

        I am pretty sure all these people complaining are doing so becayse they are offended that someone was offended.

        So let’s talk about it, not call each other names or make is some political b.s. (Guess what?! I’m NOT a liberal!).

      • bill hater

        Bringing politics into this was stupid, not doubt about that. Questioning the media, now of all times, is wonderful. Complaining about a movie that is “historic” in nature (about an event in which not one of the myriad of strong and intelligent women of the world was directly involved in) doesn’t make much sense.

        It’s like complaining that Germans are portrayed in a bad light in any World War II movie. They are! Because that’s just how it worked out at that point in history.

    • Felicia

      That’s your opinion and you’re welcome to it but you don’t have the right to dismiss another person’s opinion because you disagree with it. If it was such a non-issue, would Sorkin address it? It can’t just be the writer of this article that is frustrated with the portrayal of women in the movie.

      • pretzelgirl

        I’m glad you pointed this out, Felicia. After all, Sorkin is the guy who created the character of C.J. Craig. (And many other female characters in West Wing were complex, witty, interesting, funny, touching, etc.) He’s capable of writing intelligent female characters. He’s capable of discussing why he didn’t write many in this film. If it weren’t a worthwhile discussion to have, I doubt he would have taken the time to participate.

  • Diane

    A friend of mine is going through a break up and I just exchanged an email that said all men were stupid heads with cooties.

    Honestly the revenge fantasy isn’t that unusual

  • Sarah

    I thought that the portrayal was probably pretty accurate – I wasn’t offended by Sorkin’s use of women. He was just reflecting the way women are perceived and often allow themselves to be perceived. I thought his blog response was accurate, too; I am certain that there are probably tons of women who actually WANT or at least agree to get on the “F### Truck” because they think that is a good way to make connections and enjoy interacting with privileged men. I am also sure that men, even very smart men like Zuckerberg and Saverin, often go for women who offer a lot in terms of physical attractiveness but little in terms of intellectual challenge. I don’t think Sorkin was saying “this is what I think of all women,” I think he was saying “this is how women are perceived by some, and how they contribute to that perception.” Anyone who has seen his other work, like The West Wing, Sports Night, A Few Good Men, or The American President knows that he’s not a misogynist. He knows and writes intelligent, multi-faceted women.

  • Mole

    I think Jennifer just wants to use the film as a jumping-off point to a bigger issue, but frankly, I think we’re in a period of reaction to overly equalized film portrayals of women (I think every action movie in the ’90s/2000s seemed to have the sassy, butt-kicking girl character). Yes, I completely agree with your point. However, I do think we’re past the point where each individual story and every movie that ever comes out ever has to address it directly. We as an audience are smart enough to know that in this day and age, if there’s a woman problem with The Social Network, it was probably put there on-purpose.

    • jason

      Who are you to “let them off the hook” or not? This is a total non issue. When you write things like “is his explanation enough”, it says a lot more about you than it does the movie. You clearly have an agenda and your own personal hangups, and that’s fine because we all do. But when you somehow claim that the movie owes you something or needs to conform to your preconceived notions on what or who should be portrayed which way according to you, than I think you completely miss the point of movies or art in general.

      • jason

        To clarify, this was towards Jennifer not Mole.

    • Michaela

      but that’s just it! it’s THE sassy, butt-kicking girl character. as though there were only one type of woman who could be featured in an action movie! i’m sorry, but having a token woman in a film does not make it an “overly equalized portrayal”.
      (This was toward Mole, not Jason or Jennifer Armstrong)

  • JMaG

    It really never crossed my mind when I was watching it, but thinking about it now I guess I could see that point. However, give credit to the GENIUS script that was written and move on.

  • saint of E. 69th st

    hahaha “girls making the next facebook”….wow you should do comedy

    • Greg

      If this comment was about an ETHNIC minority, it wouldn’t have made it to the public board. Think about it.

      • saint of E. 69th st

        yep

      • pretzelgirl

        Good point, Greg. Your explanation below was great, too, but the “reply” button doesn’t show up there. I find switching the gender, ethnicity or gender preference in discussions really useful.

      • Kate

        Exactly. I’ve said before that sexism is the last form of discrimination and prejudice that is socially acceptable, and comments like that prove it (of course, I was saying this before the States started losing their minds re: Muslims and homosexuality, so maybe I need to reconsider…).

      • chris

        blacks make the next facebook? you should do comedy!

      • Gabby

        @Kate: Just because Islamophobia and homophobia weren’t as discussed and center stage in the media as they are today doesn’t mean they weren’t as much of a potent and pervasive force; it just means nothing was really significantly challenging the Christian-heterosexual power structure, which is what’s starting to happen now. It’s going to get uglier before it gets better.

    • brighton beach

      you are correct greg, you can not so something negative about a group or someone without being labeled a bigot ANYONE should be able to say what they want period no censorship!

      • Greg

        While I do believe in the freedom of speech, the point I am trying to make is that women, as a group, are not offered the same protection as other groups, even though sexism and racism are both sensitive issues. Whether or not censorship is the right thing to do, the public opinion of sexism is reflected by the inaction of this website to censor the above comment. Simply changing the word ‘women’ to some other group or denomination would result in the comment being removed entirely, even though the inauguration of Obama was said by some to have ‘struck down racism.’ Don’t get me wrong– I’m not at all saying that racism should be fair game. I’m just saying that all issues of equality should be taken seriously and that saint’s comment suggests that many of us don’t (or won’t, probably out of convenience).

      • saint of E. 69th st

        Greg, your response is right on target I posted that knowing many people would blast straight to 9 on the “offended” meter. I believe in no censorship, that everything is fair game, but I respect the right of those who disagree to voice it as loudly as they wish. I also believe in letting those who provide art/music/entertainment present the story they are trying to tell without fear of reprisal by those who would censor their work or demand an alternate or “inclusive or noninclusive” view whatever the case may be.

  • Sentry Doodi

    The great irony of feminism, on display courtesy of EW. Before you complain of a lack of intellegence among female characters in this film, try showing some yourself, EW

    • Anna

      “The great irony of feminism”

      Lol. Okay, buddy.

  • zod

    imagine that..some people are offended…when are people going to grow the f up and just let artist put their work out there without someone, group, or segment being “offended” we get EVERYTHING! OFFENDS SOMEBODY..now go get a life…

    • Felicia

      Maybe we would grow the f up if there were more positive portrayals of women in the media but when even a smart movie can’t show women as worth something, than that is a problem.

      • saint of E. 69th st

        a writer/director should have the freedom to present their vision without concern for the work’s perception by certain groups or individuals

      • The Devil

        @saint – Actually, no they shouldn’t. People have a right to their views and to express it. Exactly the same as the artist having the right to their views and expressing theirs.

      • saint of E. 69th st

        @ The Devil, I agree others should have the right to critique, but my post was about the artist’s right to present without concern for other’s perception.

    • kramer

      we have become the “nation of the offended” i just offended myself, if i offended you i am not sorry

      • Jaden

        Whenever and wherever there’s rampant societal/institutional inequality, you’ll also find those pesky “offended” people. Sorry. But I’m happy for you that you obviously got to be a heterosexual white man.

  • Greg

    Nice follow-up. Well said, Jen.

  • silk

    When some woman movies (e.g. Sex in The City) portrays men as pigs, sexist, morons, stupid, etc. etc., where are all the people that speak again them? Double standard? YES!

    • Felicia

      First of all, I don’t agree that SatC shows all men that way. Also, there are FAR more movies that show the male perspective than the female so it’s not exactly equitable. Quick, name something off the top of your that came out in the last 5 years that showed strong, insightful women with cardboard cutout men…I thought so.

      • ghost of david carridine

        boooo…wooo…i was working on that when that maid tied me up in that closet..sounds like you have some guy issues…interested in an old ghost I was on kung fu you know….and besides movies like that would be SCFY

      • DT

        Wow, Felicia. You allowed us a full ellipses to answer? How generous. Dumba$$!

      • Kate

        And yet DT, you have no answer to her question. Telling.

      • Lily

        How about most romantic comedies? Men are practically cartoon characters in those. And as someone who suffered through the Sex and the City movies, which were extremely successful, I can tell you that the male characters are absurd. You should also note that movies like The Ugly Truth actually portray women in a much more negative light, while ostensibly being “for women.” It’s ludicrous to get up-in-arms about The Social Network, given the state of romantic comedies today.

      • chris

        how about every commerical on television where women are the smart, practical, “straight men”, and the guys are idiots, pushovers, and always wrong.

      • Anna

        @chris: And somehow manage to never be portrayed doing the housework, thus reinforcing the societal expectations/double standards that cleaning/cooking is “women’s work.”

  • cruzilla

    I remember thinking at one point during the movie that Harvard women did not come across all that great in the film. But really the most sympathetic character was Erica, the ex-girlfriend. And I thought the reaction shots of the girls reading about the rating website was both realistic and sympathetic. Maybe you were laughing intitally at the rating game, but then seeing their responses (hopefully) made you come to your senses, seeing that these guys were hurting people. I don’t think anyone in this movie comes across as particularly likable (Eduardo is the closest) even if they are clever and funny in the film.

    • mackey3000

      Nah, I still laughed! I LOVED that he did that in retaliation to her breaking his heart, kinda thing I’d do. Most of those Harvard girls prolly deserved to have their wittle feelings hurt!

  • Seth

    Wait, this is the same publication that regularly fawns over how great Twilight’s perception of women is right? Yeah, just checking.

    • Anna

      Hardly. In fact, I’d give anything to have the writers at this site stop debating that apparently “hot topic.” EW writers never unanimously endorsed Twilight as a bastion of feminism – they just made a big deal out of the fact that a franchise marketed overwhelmingly to women (no matter how poorly made it was), which sexualized the men more than it did the women for once, was making a killing at the box office.

      • anonymous

        I recall one article referring to Bella as a “strong woman.” Wish I could back up my words by linking to it.

      • Dylan

        @anon: She said “unanimously.” One writer’s opinion doesn’t qualify as the EW’s official take on feminism of lack thereof in Twilight. If multiple writers came down on the same side as him/her, then I’d be worried.

  • Sparky

    Hello. I am a lady… and I enjoyed this film immensely. I thought it was obvious what Sorkin and Fincher were trying to do once the only girl who was intriguing enough as a character and an actual GIRL was practically omitted from the film to become an object of much greater desire. Apparently we’re forgetting the other strong woman who was portrayed in the film(Marilyn) who practically emasculates Mark when she turns him down towards the end. The women who actually have some sort of intelligence are singled out as characters who can bring their male counterparts down to another level.

Page: 1 2 3 5
Add your comment
The rules: Keep it clean, and stay on the subject - or we may delete your comment. If you see inappropriate language, e-mail us. An asterisk (*) indicates a required field.

When you click on the "Post Comment" button above to submit your comments, you are indicating your acceptance of and are agreeing to the Terms of Service. You can also read our Privacy Policy.

Latest Videos

Advertisement

TV Recaps

Powered by WordPress.com VIP