Who is Ann Coulter?


Ann Coulter is an American public figure with a legal background who regularly represents far right political views in the American media. She is the author of several books including ‘In Trump we Trust’ (written when Coulter still supported Trump as the Republican Presidential candidate.)

Coulter is something of an extremist, outspoken on her favourite topics of immigration and Islam. In the aftermath of September 11 she made a public proposal that America should invade Muslim countries, kill their leaders and convert the population to Christianity.

Some of Coulter’s most infamous quotations including the extremely racist “Congress could pass a law tomorrow requiring that all aliens from Arabic countries leave… We should require passports to fly domestically. Passports can be forged, but they can also be checked with the home country in case of any suspicious-looking swarthy males ” can be found in this article. These quotations are not isolated examples of Coulter’s extremist hate views. A quick You Tube search finds hundreds of videos of her spouting her hate rhetoric and making provocative and inflammitory comments, deliberately intended to offend.

She has been given a vast amount of media attention and numerous platforms upon which to air her views. As the poster girl for ultra Conservative Republican ideals few individuals have received more attention.

However the tide has been changing for Coulter recently. For all her celebration of Trump’s presidency Coulter has become increasingly disenfranchised with the man she so enthusiastically endorsed and this has lost her support among the President’s far right fan base. She called Trump out for his failure to build his promised wall on the Mexican border, and publicly criticised him for changing his stance on immigration.  More recently Coulter clashed with Trump over the ‘Dreamers’ program (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) and published a tweet calling for the President to be impeached.

Before her views are examined Coulter cuts an impressive public figure. She is confident, smartly dressed, articulate and obviously someone who has read widely in her chosen field of interest. Unfortunately though, as soon as she opens her mouth (or her Twitter app), she is exposed as an individual notable not just for her bigotry but for her stupidity. This is a genuine tweet from Coulter’s personal Twitter account in reaction to Hurricane Harvey:

This closed minded world view was again illustrated on her Twitter account when she tweeted:

(Based on Coulter’s logic here Donald Trump, who had a German grandfather, would not even have been eligible to vote, let alone to stand for the Presidency…)

To best explain Ann Coulter to a UK audience I’d simply summarise her as a US version Katie Hopkins albeit with a bigger budget for hair. Her Twitter feed yields the same threats, rants, prejudices and hate that we have come to expect from Madame Hopkins. Let us hope that the American media tire of her vitriol and push this blowsy loudmouthed hater out of the public eye.

A selection of tweets that show Ann Coulter for what she is >


Roanna is one of the founder members of Resisting Hate. She is the author of the majority of our articles, and also publishes a blog on Huffington Post UK

Liberals, Progressives and Hate Speech


The politics of the left are often referred to with the umbrella term ‘liberal’ which is an over simplified view of the left wing and which doesn’t allow for the schism between those who identify as Liberal and those who identify as Progressive.

Liberals are interested in upholding the rights of the individual and believe the role of the state should be limited in the extent to which it can intervene with the rights of individual citizens.

A Progressive is interested in forcing the hand of change and solving the inequities caused by public or private power structures. The lacuna between the Liberal v Progressive is sometimes described as bottom up v top down politics. Liberals believe change should evolve from the people, Progressives believe change should be orchestrated intentionally by state intervention or, in the case of the private sphere, the legal system or corporate decision makers.

Put even more simply the Liberal v Progressive split is similar to the Equality v Equities argument. A Liberal believes in the principles of fairness and equality (everyone gets the same) a Progressive believes in correcting inequities (everyone gets what they need which means some receive more than others).  My primary interest as a Progressive anti-hate activist is in addressing inequities that occur as a result of hate and hate speech. This is not a value argument, I am not saying that hate speech is wrong in itself, I am saying that when we allow hate speech to flourish it has significant and tangible consequences for both individuals and communities. This is not about setting moral standards, it is about reducing the potential for harm.

When discussing free speech it is important to be clear that Liberals are concerned with the contract between the state and the individual and not the relationship between individuals. This often causes confusion when the question of hate speech arises as the blocking of hate speech from social media sites like Facebook or Twitter is often wrongly deemed to be contravening the right to free speech. Blocking hate speech from a private platform is not censorship and only becomes a direct infringement of rights if it is driven by state led legislature applying to public (not private) places.  Therefore when Progressives like myself call for private companies to curb hate speech this is not infringing on civil liberties. Censorship would be the state saying an idea cannot be expressed. This is different to the prevention of an idea being circulated within a particular social sphere.

There are three primary tangible consequences for individuals and communities that arise from hate speech:

Hate speech leads to discrimination

When we allow hate speech that targets race, gender, orientation, health status and religion we are giving a platform to indoctrinate people against these groups. This results in individuals belonging to these groups being stigmatised which in turn leads to discrimination in the workplace and a reduction in opportunities for those individuals.

Hate speech leads to fear and violence

The link between hate speech and violence has been proposed numerous times. It has been argued that exposure to hate speech desensitises individuals to the idea of harming others by reducing the focus of their target to being less than human – much hate speech online is aimed directly at dehumanising communities. Our group have seen migrants called cockroaches, Muslims called savages and Jews told that they belong in ‘the ovens’. All three of these community groups have seen an increase in hate crime over the last 5 years.

The language of hate speech disenfranchises and demeans individuals and breaks down relations between communities which become strained and eventually result in verbal and physical clashes.

It is important to fully understand the wider implications of hate speech – this is not just about the feelings of an individual but about the growing isolation of whole community groups.

It is my view (a view shared by World Policy Institute fellow Susan Benesch) that wide spread hate speech paves the way for an increase in violence. When it becomes acceptable to abuse a person on one platform it is a precursor to abusing them physically.

Hate speech leads to an increase in suicide

Scientists at Syracuse University have investigated the link between hate speech and suicide and found there to be a correlation. Their research states Ethnic immigrant groups subjected to more negative ethnophaulisms, or hate speech, were more likely to commit suicide.  If hate speech has been proven to be a catalyst toward actual loss of life then this is perhaps the strongest argument that action to prevent it needs to be taken.

It is necessary to spell out the argument against hate speech this clearly as, too often, this debate is reduced to being argued from the perspective of a Liberal and gets dragged into the quagmire of the right to speak v the right not to be offended. The reason I oppose hate speech is not (as often so ineloquently put by the far right) that it hurts people’s ‘feelz’ but because hate speech leads to genuine social and economic inequities for individuals and communities. As a Progressive I strongly believe it is the role of both the state and of private corporations (think social media platforms) to play their part in resolving these inequities.

This is not about censorship and rights, this is about keeping the people of our country safe.

Roanna is one of the founder members of Resisting Hate. She is the author of the majority of our articles, and also publishes a blog on Huffington Post UK

Sue Hall – Neo Fascist Artist

Sue Hall, is a popular textile artist regularly exhibited, who tweets hate towards the London Mayor, and shares bigotry with neo-nazis without any of her fans worldwide realising the depth of hate espoused by her horrific views.  Looking at her tweets, there are even Muslim fans of her textile exhibits, sadly unaware she is a white supremacist Islamophobe who wants all Muslims to leave the UK.
Renowned Cheshire-based textile artist Sue Hall is an active far right extremist on Twitter who regularly interacts with neo-Nazi Mark Collett, white supremacist “Peter Sweden”, and the leaders of Britain First, plus profilic twitter bigot David Vance with whom she exchanges hate tweets every other day.  Many of her tweets are also spreading bile towards Muslims and there are numerous white supremacist, anti-black, anti-immigrant, and anti-transgender tweets in addition on her account.
Sue receives backing and support from many public arts organisations and venues which happily exhibit her work, despite the fact she tweets extreme hate against Muslims.  This is absolutely galling, and the public urgently needs to be informed of her appallingly discriminatory views.  She is not fit to receive any arts sponsorship or funding, while she uses social media platforms to openly support acts of mass-murder and genocide against Muslims.



Disharmony in 140 characters


Cliché after cliché. Reverse racism was today’s. Was everyone brainwashed? Is it racist for a black woman, that has suffered exclusion, name-calling, and online abuse, to remark that Britain has a problem with racism? Is it acceptable, to sit in a room, in Britain, complaining about people’s racism against white folk? Did India’s caste system preceding colonialism somehow excuse racism from colonialists to the ‘savages’ of yesteryear? Had we stepped back to the Heart of Darkness?

“Africans would have been better off being kept by the British”.

Can people not see the language they use, the tone they take, the attitudes they hold, with any sort of realism or objectivity? Life in 140 characters; the brutality of it. The simplicity. The bipolarity. Nothing complex exists. Cliché follows cliché. Opinion follows opinion. Why must we live in a world where people’s views must only reach 140 characters?

“Niggers in a woodpile” is “casual”, a mild reprimand. Shame.

The oppression. The brutality. What have The Romans ever done for us?

“We built them schools”. Sure, but for who? Why? What life is it for them?

“Them”. Sigh.

“They”. It’s always “they”. Why not us?

“Uncivilised”. What on Earth? What makes painting and writing more civilised than a proverb or inscription? White and black, dark or light, but what of the shades in between? The beautiful shades. The differences, the colour. What makes a sacrifice less humane than a murder or a crusade? Who decides what is civilised?

“But the dictators are worse”. Worse for whom? Death or slavery? White or black? Who created the dictators? Things Fall Apart as the villagers wrestle, but wrestling is power, right? Wrestling for pride or the entertainment of children; who are the savages?

“Brainwashed” with no pledge of allegiance. No national anthem. Knives and forks are civilised, manners too, but guns? What of civilised guns? Civilise the savages; which savages? Are we back in time?

Retaliation is condemned, but what of the initial actor? Laud them, defend them. Oil and guns and tea and trade. But we must defend our shores. Which shores? All of the shores?

“They hate the British”.

Diversity. Culture. Love and peace. Why must we fight and resist each other? Why must we create disharmony in 140 characters?


This article was first published here

Roanna is one of the founder members of Resisting Hate. She is the author of the majority of our articles, and also publishes a blog on Huffington Post UK

Anonymous Haters and Trolls on Social Media


In a heated exchange with the leader of an online hate group several years ago I scorned his comment that “The wars of the future would be fought on social media.” But these days I am not so certain he wasn’t being uncharacteristically prophetic. Social media is proving to be a fertile ground for anonymous haters, trolls and abusers to spread their vitriol without fear of censure. Facebook and Twitter in particular attract a highly undesirable element who conduct themselves on the internet in a manner they would very likely not dare to in a face to face environment.

Broadly speaking, the people spreading hate on the internet fall into five distinct categories:

The Ignorant

The first group of problem social media accounts genuinely believe what they are saying. They are willing to involve themselves in discussion and make some attempt to offer evidence to back up their assertions. The trouble is that they are ignorant in the sense that they cannot discern genuine facts from fake news and bias.  They quote from secondary sources, blog sites and tabloid newspapers and frequently mistake opinion for fact.

The Easily Led

In this category I would place the people who have no particular convictions but who are responsible for sharing and liking a lot of the hate that becomes popular on social media. A prime example of the Easily Led would be the people who share click bait pictures and memes from Britain First and, thus unwittingly, give more oxygen to organised hate groups.

The Fame Hungry

For some individuals online hate is a method to propel them to notoriety. We have seen this with extremist characters like Katie Hopkins and Tommy Robinson who put out more and more extreme posts in an attempt to build a platform for their hate. Their overriding objective is personal fame. This can also be seen with a lot of accounts who use hate speech to gain followers and, therefore, popularity on social media platforms.

Prejudice Promotors

In the modern world of the internet – racists, homophobes, Islamophobes and Anti Semites no longer need to lurk in the dark shadows of their local pub sharing views with a handful of people. Social media is the perfect tool for this category to spread their genuine hate and prejudicial views.

This category absolutely believe in what they are saying and actively attempt to convert others to their way of thinking. Unlike the Ignorant these people are not being swayed by propaganda – this lot are the ones creating the propaganda.


Trolls basically just like causing trouble. They will take the most contentious side of any online debate but have little interest in anything other than the reaction they will cause. They will throw insults, harass and target people in the hope of causing distress. They are usually pretty thick.

In order to combat the rising tide of hate on social media it is important that all these different categories of people are tackled. Each category needs to be approached with different tactics.

In the case of the Ignorant it is important to educate them. Link to quality news articles, statistics, and fact based media to encourage them to challenge their views.  It is also important to humanise the victims they are dehumanising. Share personal accounts from individuals in minority groups who have experienced hate and discrimination so the Ignorant can understand the very real impact their hate has on others.

Don’t get downhearted if they openly reject the information you provide. It is more important to get them thinking than it is to emerge the victor in a Twitter row.

Education is also the best tool against the Easily Led. Don’t be afraid to tell friends and family why you found that meme or picture that they shared offensive. In some cases they may genuinely not know that “Like and share if you think this puppy is cute” is actually a cynical marketing ploy for hate pages to acquire more likes and followers.

The best way to react to the Fame Hungry is not to respond at all. Any reaction will give them the result they want which is increased exposure for their views. Sharing their posts or retweeting them – even with a view to shaming them – will just enable their hate to be seen by more people. There are exceptions to this, Resisting Hate and other anti hate groups will sometimes share hate posts in the full knowledge that our followers will report the accounts where they breach social media Terms of Service. (Be careful however not to openly ask people to report as this can get your own account suspended. We usually just highlight the offensive post and then trust our followers to make their own judgement about reporting.)

Prejudice Promoters clearly need stopping. There are a great many places where the perpetrators of online hate can be reported. Reporting these accounts can help to limit the spread of their influence and will also deter them from making new accounts to spread their bile.  Not only can hate be reported to the social media platforms themselves but in cases where a post on social media is breaching the laws of the country it is often worth bringing it to the attention of law enforcement too.

Resisting Hate often contact the employers of radical haters with screenshots of the views they are promoting and this has tactic been very successful in establishing clear consequences for the publication of discrimination and prejudice using social media accounts.

Most social media platforms also have the function where problem accounts can be muted or blocked. Take full advantage of these tools. You have every right to engage online without being subject to abuse.

Roanna is one of the founder members of Resisting Hate. She is the author of the majority of our articles, and also publishes a blog on Huffington Post UK

Chesham Ultras – Bigots not Patriots


A concerned member of the public brought this local football club to our attention earlier today.

Chesham Ultras describe themselves as the No.1 football firm in the Chilterns but their behaviour online is more suited to a hate group than a respectable football organisation. Their time line is a barrage of hate, discrimination and prejudice.

They regularly post Islamophobic hatred in particular.



Their obsession with far right bigots is belly crawlingly sycophantic.



They pick fights, harass and abuse other accounts on Twitter



They glorify graffiti and vandalism of public property.



And they boast about being arrested by the police.



In short this motley collection of far right fascist footballing wannabes is a disgrace to both the beautiful game and the locality they claim to represent. We will certainly be bringing this issue to the attention of their registered football club and we have provided the contact details below in case any of our readers would like to do the same.




Racism in Halifax RLFC


A concerned member of the public has brought to our attention some very troubling issues of racism and race hate linked to Halifax RLFC.

Professional rugby league players Ben Johnston, Shane Grady and Steven Tyrer are using Twitter to tweet extreme racial hatred and abuse against Muslims, asylum seekers and refugees.

Ben Johnston has also tweeted in support of Islamophobic extremist ex convict Tommy Robinson offering support and commenting he believes Robinson (known for his hate views and association with the far right and Islamophobic EDL, PegidaUK and Britain First) to be a ‘hero’. He publicly acknowledges he is a “massive fan” of Robinson.
Ben Johnson has tweeted hate speech against the religion of Islam, using the words “The peaceful religion strikes again” with the clear intention to link the peaceful members of a world faith to the atrocities of terrorism.
Johnston also tweeted in support of a National Front / Northwest Infidels anti-Asylum seeker protest in Widnes, supported by another Halifax player who shares some of Mr Johnstone’s repugnant views, Stephen Tyrer (@styrer89), the post originating from notorious racist tweeter David Jones (@DavidJo52951945) who tweeted about asylum seekers “Brits don’t want them here“.
In addition to his bigoted rhetoric against Muslims Tyrer has also put out threatening tweets about traveller communities in the UK.
Fellow Halifax RLFC player Shane Grady tweeted hatefully…  “Asylum seeker centre in Widnes, no f*cking chance“, a tweet which shows no compassion toward his fellow human beings.

It is abhorrent when any member of the public expresses views of hate and discrimination but it becomes more dangerous when done by celebrities or sports figures as these are people who carry a good deal of influence, particularly with young people. This kind of twisted thinking can warp the minds of our young and indoctrinate them into vile and prejudiced beliefs that will have negative consequences for the innocent people who are the subject of this kind of targeted hate.

We call upon Halifax RLFC to take this evidence of hate speech seriously and to investigate a matter that is bringing not just their members but their whole organisation into disrepute.

Roanna is one of the founder members of Resisting Hate. She is the author of the majority of our articles, and also publishes a blog on Huffington Post UK

BNP Member and Grenfell Tower Tragedy


Warning – some distressing content in this article

Charlotte Lewis is a long time BNP supporter and member and boasts a chequered past even for the far right.

She was investigated by the Police in 2010 for this post on her Facebook Page

“I wish that Derrick Bird could have come down to London & shot dead some illegal immigrants, rather than killing his fellow British people. If that offends you then tough; it’s my opinion and I’m entitled to it.”

In that same year she dressed as a Muslim, drinking and smoking in her costume, in a deliberate attempt to promote antipathy toward the Islamic faith.

In 2011 when an eighteen year old man of colour was stabbed to death on Oxford Street in the Boxing Day sales, Charlotte had this comment to make:

“Good riddance to bad rubbish.” 

Earlier this year, during the atrocity of the London Attacks, Charlotte made these comments:

Deeply offensive on all fronts. A racist, Islamophobic, extreme Nationalist determined to use social media to spread her bile.

The tragedy in Grenfall Towers shocked the whole country with the massive loss of life and the disregard for proper safety measures that will be investigated for many months to come. For most of us this is a time to support our fellow human beings. The disaster has brought some real examples of humanity from all communities both in and outside London. For Charlotte Lewis the disaster was a further opportunity to spread her hate.

She began with a comment to the effect that she had a problem with “foreigners” occupying British social housing.


And went on to wildly speculate about the cause of the fire.


She was challenged on this by several Twitter accounts all explaining that the people in Grenfall Towers were as British as she was. They pointed out the loss of life and the fact that people had died.

Charlotte was indifferent to the mass loss of human life.



People were increduous at her absolute inability to empathise with human suffering. But she confirmed that she just didn’t care about them.

So there you have it. This is how somebody who has upheld the values of the BNP party for several years and even stood for election with them (see below) reacts to tens possibly even hundreds of her fellow human beings killed through no fault of their own.

Charlotte Lewis does not represent Britain. True British values were demonstrated by those of all races and faiths out there in the community helping the victims of this dreadful carnage.

Roanna is one of the founder members of Resisting Hate. She is the author of the majority of our articles, and also publishes a blog on Huffington Post UK

Hater Forgets Own Posts


We find a lot of haters are delusional but this one we encountered today took the cake as well as the biscuit as he actually managed to forget the content of his own time line. Resisting Hate pointed out he was an Islamophobe, an allegation our hater vehemently denied, asking us to prove it.

So we did….


We would remind our readers that all of these tweets have been put onto a public social media platform by the individual himself with no amendments or alterations by ourselves.





Written by a guest writer for Resisting Hate

Much has happened since Manchester, some of it life affirming, some of it depressing. Most normal, decent humans can at such a time set all else aside, even if temporarily, to give their heart, mind and soul to the victims of such an atrocity. Yet, we know this is not always the case and a few seem to exhibit a Pavlovian response upon hearing of Terrorism, Child Sexual Abuse and Rape.

There is no need here, due to many fine writings by a number of charities and organisations, to highlight the issues around rape, but it’s pertinent to say that the ‘guess the offender’s ethnicity and religion’ brigade is, to most, repugnant. It is hard to remain positive in such a climate and the reminder that empty vessels ring loudest is a valid one. One such vessel is Stephen/Tommy Yaxley/Robinson. A large vessel, or rather an empty vessel with a large following, a seemingly busy conduit for … what I am not exactly sure. When he goes home to his family and he’s asked, ‘What did you do today Daddy?’ we might wonder at the ensuing bedtime story. A large following, yes. But a loyal one?

The Twitter sphere is different from real life as can be evidenced by actual attendance to Tommy’s events which is comparative with his bed fellows Britain First. Much of SteTom’s time seems to be with wannabe hack Caolan Robertson, so with such a limited social circle it is unsurprising most of his time is spent on Twitter. Prior to Manchester SteTom and CaRob were admonished by the Great British legal system for doing what professional journalists would never do, namely risking a rape trial by breaking the law regarding attendance at court and reporting of cases. SteTom had adopted a cause, a young woman having already been subjected to male violation, not unlike Chelsey, sister of SteTom’s former EDL pal. SteTom, like Nuttall recently, seems to ignore boys, men and victims of white CSA or Child Sexual Exploitation.

Let’s try and be charitable for a moment and give SteTom the benefit of the doubt that he cares about women and girls. Let us be charitable and forgive his ‘previous’ for an incident involving a former girlfriend, and his violent past. That is until we look at his online behaviour. Consider these tweets:

Online sexist behaviour at its worst.

SteTom has also publicly denied the pain of the ever growing male victims of Child Sexual Abuse within football, the bravery of which has created @TheOffsideTrust. Unlike the NHS sport and schools those associated with sport have no legal obligation to report abuse. There is no mandatory reporting. Imagine then the sacrificial bravery of whistleblowers who, knowing the risk, often losing everything, do the right thing and speak out. Speaking out from within a community, or institution, when there is wrong doing is the bravest and most selfless thing to do. Horrific then that SteTom referred to someone whistleblowing as ‘a snitch’ and tweeting like a grass’.

I wonder what is being done to ensure Yaxley-Robinson’s children aren’t radicalised? After all he tweeted, in the paraphrasing of Bryan Adams, ‘Everything I do, I do for you’. So, what is this ‘everything’ SteTom is doing for his real life family? It must be asked if his behaviour both on and offline is a form of coercive control. His online ‘family’ comprises considerably of the most malleable; those who follow without question; those who are either incapable of questioning, or don’t know how to, or are too scared. Recently an everyday tweeter reported SteTom for inciting hatred which he then promptly retweeted (the Twitter equivalent of unleashing the hounds) causing a ‘pile on’. This of course is an internet version of thuggery that is indicative of a lack of intelligence to debate with reason.

Various groups have tweeted SteTom sharing accurate facts and statistics with regards to the ethnicity of sex offenders. But accuracy is a clear contrast to SteTom’s recent ‘The religion of peace again’ tweet put out after an incident when two Muslim women were attacked by a known white supremacist. It seems that despite these facts from bona fide sources SteTom and his fanboys simply refuse to believe what is before them. This blind acceptance is dangerous and is something SteTom capitalises on, much like coercive control; almost a form of ‘grooming’ in itself. 

Back to whistleblowing – or grassing and snitching as SteTom calls it –  If you ‘see something – say something’. This is as important online as it is offline.  Plenty do of course but, just as in the real world, the body or authority to whom the whistleblower whistles must act. Come on Twitterati, get reporting – and Twitter do you really want to be an enabler?

Finally, to all victims of rape; Child Abuse; Child Sexual Abuse; Child Sexual Exploitation; Domestic Violence; Grooming and Coercive Control regardless of your gender, sexuality, religion, ethnicity or skin colour – you are believed, you matter and we are blowing that whistle for you because you were ignored; we will not allow you to continue to be ignored; you are important, you matter – regardless of who harmed you.


Werwolf – new Nazi group



After far right Neo Nazi group National Action was proscribed by the British government we have been waiting to see what the spotty teenagers would do next. They had stated that they would regroup under a different identity so it was only a matter of time to wait until the next hate group emerged from the ashes of their previous failed attempt.

The haters have rebranded themselves “Werwolf” This is both a pun on “We are Wolf” and a nod to a Nazi campaign during the Second World War. (It is also an amusing mispelling of ‘werewolf’ which is very characteristic of the far right/white supremacists’ consistent inability to master the English language).

The primary Twitter account associated with Werwolf immediately locked up when we challenged it on some of the anti semitic tweets it had been putting out and has remained locked ever since. Naturally we will target this account with one of our established under cover accounts so we can monitor the hate from within. In the meantime it is pretty obvious from monitoring the timeline of responses to account @WERWOLFUK45 that it is continuing to tweet unpleasant hate tweets. However as it has an echo chamber of 212 followers it will not be enjoying much success in spreading its poison to a wide audience.

So far we have received a lot of speculation in relation to which individuals are associated with this group but Resisting Hate have not yet independently verified these sources. So the individuals below are not confirmed as being definite members of Werwolf but likely suspects whose names are already being discussed among anti hate organisations and the media.

If any of our readers have any further information please email us at support@resistinghate.org

(Don’t bother emailing us with threats Werwolf, we’ve seen them all before. Yawn).