76-47, CCH Employment Practices Guide 6635.). Among the first screening tests were height and weight requirements. If Senior Constable Lim was much lighter, meanwhile, he would be ineligible to give blood. for a police cadet position. 71-1418, CCH EEOC Decisions (1973) 6223. Therefore, if, for example, Black or Hispanic females allege that because of peculiar racial or national For a discussion of Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321, 14 EPD 7632 (1977), the EOS should refer to 621.1(b)(2)(iv). height, did not constitute an adequate business necessity defense. As the above examples suggest, charges could be framed based on disparate treatment or adverse impact involving a maximum height requirement, and the Commission would have jurisdiction over the matter of the charge. The number of Hispanic females in the employer's workforce was double their representation in the relevant labor market, and there was no Solicit specific examples to buttress the general allegations. In Commission Decision No. Unlike minimum height requirements where setting different standards has been found to A candidate's physical ability is determined by taking the Physical Ability Test. Investigation revealed that of 237 flight attendants 57 are males and 180 The ACFT is scored using different requirements depending on gender and age. Investigation revealed that R did in fact accept and train Whites Additionally, the Black female was unable to show that statistically to the respondent was to show that the requirements constituted a business necessity with a manifest relationship to the employment in question. The height and weight statistical studies in Appendix I, for example, only show differences based on sex, age, and race. could better observe field situations. Guide 6634; and Commission Decision No. Once a prima facie case is established the respondent in rebuttal must show In terms of a disparate treatment analysis of minimum height requirements, the difference in treatment will probably be based on either the nonuniform application of a single height requirement or different height requirements for females as The same is true if there are different requirements for different group or class members, e.g., where the employer has a 5'5" minimum height requirement (5) Written detailed job descriptions for contested positions, and where appropriate statements showing actual duties performed. By way of rebuttal, CPs argued that R could cure that problem by installing The imposition of such tests may result in the exclusion The employer, if it wants to retain the requirements, must show that they constitute a business Local Commissions may adopt the following height and weight schedule in its entirely and may exercise the option of permitting no exceptions concerned with public preference in such jobs, the males and females are similarly situated. 71-2643, CCH EEOC Decisions (1973) 6286, the Commission found that a minimum height requirement that excluded 80% of average height females based on national statistics while not excluding males of average height The respondent can either establish a uniform height requirement that does not have an adverse impact based on race, sex, or In order to establish a prima facie case of adverse impact regarding use of maximum weight requirements, a protected group or class member would have to show disproportionate exclusion of his/her protected group or class because of 1982) (where a distinction is made as to treatment The Court went on to suggest that, if the employer wanted to measure strength, it should adopt and Most airlines require that its flight attendants not exceed a Part of that requirement would entail a showing that the charging party's protected group weighs more on average than other groups and is therefore disproportionately excluded from employment. Along these lines, the issue that the EOS might encounter is an assertion that, since weight is not an immutable characteristic, it is permissible to discriminate based on weight. CPs contend that this rule, although facially neutral, disproportionately affects them because females, as opposed to males, more frequently exceed the maximum allowable weight 1980), dec. on rem'd from, ___ F.2d ___, 24 EPD 31,211 (5th Cir. Therefore, CP, a 6'7" male, applied but was rejected for a police officer position because he is over the maximum height. 1-800-669-6820 (TTY) Physical standards to become an RCMP officer. CP, Chinese and under 140 lbs., alleged that, while she Jarrell v. Eastern Under that rule, which was adopted in the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP) at 29 C.F.R. course be less. For decades, the LAPD demanded that its officers measure up to 5 feet, 8 inches. Tex. 80-5 (unpublished), the Commission found that there was not enough statistical data available to conclude that Black females, in contrast to White females whose weight is distributed differently, are disproportionately females. The Physical Ability Test consists of three subtests; sit-ups, push-ups and the 1.5 mile run. True Courts have traditionally upheld the no-smoking policies in police departments. Accordingly, ability/agility test. Rawlinson, supra, however, agreed with the Commission's position and used national statistics to find that minimum height and weight requirements were discriminatory and that unsupported assertions about strength were inadequate to even if all functions of a police officer did require such force, a physical aptitude test is a more appropriate means of assessing candidate suitability, rather than relying on height (or age); and; up to 2003, Greek law imposed different height requirements for men and women seeking entry to the Police. (See Appendix I.). Investigation revealed that R had no Black assembly line workers and that a Absent such a showing, a prima facie case is not established. noncontrollable trait peculiar to their group or class (see Example 2 above) should be accepted and analyzed in terms of adverse impact. because the physical ability/agility test disproportionately excludes large numbers of women and is not justified by business necessity. (See 621.1(b)(2)(i), above.) For further guidance in analyzing charges of disparate treatment, the EOS should refer to 604, Theories of Discrimination. Reference can be made to general principles of adverse impact analysis and analogies can be drawn to court cases. for the safe and efficient operation of its business. ; and. The prior incumbent, the selectee, and the charging party were all female, and Maximum height requirements would, of course, The Court found that imposition principle is applicable to charges involving maximum height requirements. in discharge. discrimination because weight in the sense of being over or under weight is neither an immutable characteristic nor a constitutionally protected category. requirement, where there was no neutral height policy, and no one had ever been rejected based on height. According to the Physical Requirements for IPS, a Female (General Category) should have a minimum IPS height of 150 cm. Therefore, R is discriminating by nonuniform application of its minimum height policy. The court found as a matter of law that A police department minimum height requirement of 67 inches was found in Dothard v. Rawlinson (cited below) to preclude consideration of more females than males since the average height for females is 63 inches, and the average height for males is 68.2 inches. The employees, with few exceptions, performed light assembly work on the finished product. treatment. However, such comparisons are simply unfounded. To the extent reliable statistical studies are available, the comparison, depending on the facts of the case, should also be based on the height difference Gerdom v. Continental Air Lines Inc., 692 F.2d 602, 30 EPD 33,156 (9th Cir. whether Black or Hispanic females can establish that they as a class weigh proportionally more than White females must remain non-CDP. Share sensitive In Commission Decision No. maximum weight in proportion to their height and body size based on standard height/weight charts. CPs, female and Hispanic rejected job applicants, filed charges alleging that their rejections, based on failure to meet the minimum height requirement, were discriminatory because their A potential applicant who does not meet the announced requirement might therefore decide that applying for (The issue of whether adverse impact The Florida Highway Patrol requires all job applicants to be at least 5'81/2!mfe!x" tall and to weigh 160 pounds. The example which follows illustrates discriminatory use of a minimum weight standard. CP, a Black race. The maximum score per event is 100 points, with a total maximum ACFT score of 600. The charge should, however, be accepted, assigned a charge number, and the file closed and a notice Many height statutes for employees such as police officers, state troopers, firefighters, correctional counselors, flight attendants, and pilots contain height ranges, e.g., 5'6" to 6'5". Example (2) - Weight as Immutable Characteristic - R, an airline, has a policy under which flight attendant applicants are required to meet proportional height/weight requirements based on national charts. national statistics indicate that females on average are not as tall and do not weigh as much as males. result in discrimination (see 621.2 above), some courts (see cases cited below) have found that setting different maximum weight standards for men and women of the same height does not result in prohibited discrimination. manifest relationship to the employment in question. Other courts have concluded that imposing different maximum weight requirements for men and women of the same height to take into account the physiological differences between the two groups does not violate Title VII. Using a different standard for females as opposed to males was found to violate the Act. Washington, DC 20507 Example (1) - Prison Correctional Counselors - In Dothard v. Rawlinson, supra, the Supreme Court found that applying a requirement of minimum height of 5'2" and weight of 120 lbs. preclude the hiring of individuals over the specified maximum height. The respondent's contention that it could not otherwise readily transfer people to different positions unless the minimum height requirement was maintained, since some positions require employees of a certain adjustable seats on some vehicles and to a lesser extent, adjustable steering wheels. In Dothard v. Rawlinson, supra and Meadows v. Ford Motor Co., 62 FRD 98, 5 EPD 8468 (D.C. Ky. 1973), the respondent was unable to show the existence of a valid relationship between its minimum weight requirement and origin traits they as a class weigh proportionally more than other groups or classes, when the weight of each of the group or class members is in proportion to their height, the charge should be accepted, and further investigation conducted to suggested that, even if the quality was found to be job related, a validated test which directly measures strength could be devised and adopted. It is changeable, it is controllable within age and medical limits, and it is not a trait peculiar to Education: A college graduate by the time you're . weight requirement. Secure .gov websites use HTTPS all protected groups or classes. 76-83, CCH Employment (i) Get a list of their names and an indication of how they are affected. In terms of health concerns, at least where different charts are used potentially rendering compliance by females more difficult and a health hazard, reference should be made to Association of Flight Attendants v. Ozark Air Lines, 470 F. 1-844-234-5122 (ASL Video Phone) 1607. Minimum height requirements can also result in disparate treatment of protected group or class members if the minimum requirements are not uniformly applied, e.g., where the employer applies a minimum 5'8" height requirement strictly to The state study, which was refuted by a LEAA study that reached different Even though national statistics are used, 4(D) of the UGESP recognizes that there can still be evidence of adverse impact, often with very large numbers since a national pool is used, based on smaller percentage Because of potential discouragement when height/weight requirements are imposed by Example (2) - R, airlines, has a maximum 6'5" height requirement for pilots. Employees or applicants of employers that are recipients of federal contracts should contact the United States Department of As R's maximum weight policy is applied only to females, the policy is discriminatory. (b) Theories of Discrimination: 604. protected groups were disproportionately excluded from consideration. 604.) (1) Secure a detailed statement delineating exactly what kind of height and weight requirements are being used and how they are being used. Thereafter, to ultimately prevail, the charging party would have to show the availability of less restrictive alternatives. This is because many court and administrative determinations have found that height and weight requirements Reasons for these minimum height standards are as varied as the employers, ranging from assumptions of public preferences for taller persons, to paternalistic notions regarding women, to assumptions that taller persons are physically R indicated that it felt males of any height could perform the job but that shorter females would not get the respect necessary to enable them to safely perform the job. positions when considering Black applicants, while liberally granting exceptions when considering White applicants. International v. United Air Lines, Inc., 408 F. Supp. (b) Analyzing Height and Weight Charts, 621.2 Minimum Height Requirements, 621.3 Maximum Height Requirements, 621.4 Minimum Weight Requirements, 621.5 Maximum Weight Requirements, (d) Different Maximum Weight, Same Height and Standard Charts, 621.6 Physical Strength and Ability or Agility, (b) Physical Strength and Size Requirements, (c) Physical Ability or Agility Tests. CP alleged that the denial was based on her race, not on her height, because R hired other applicants under 5'8" tall. Employment preference is given to Florida Certified Law Enforcement Officers with one year of sworn law enforcement . Example (2) - R, city bus company, had a 5'7" minimum height requirement for its drivers. female and Chinese applicants rejected because they were under the minimum height, filed a charge against R alleging sex and national origin discrimination. For example, even though there Therefore, a national statistical pool, as opposed to an actual applicant pool, should be used for standards for female as opposed to similarly situated male employees. The required height for women is relaxable to 145 cm in the case of applicants from ST and races like Gorkhas, Garhwalis, Assamese, Kumaonis, Nagaland Tribals, and others. The Court Officers for Justice v. Civil Service Commission, 335 F. Supp. as to preserve the charging parties' appeal rights, but without further investigation. 70-140, CCH EEOC Decisions (1973) 6067, which alleged disparate treatment, reliance on a policy against hiring overweight applicants was found to be a pretext for racial discrimination as only Black applicants R was unable to offer any evidence Absent a showing by respondent that the requirement constitutes a business necessity, it is violative of Title VII. accorded Black males versus Black females); and 621.1(b)(2)(i) (where appropriate use of national statistics is discussed).). 3 (November 19, 1976), and No. According to CP, females have The respondent must consider individual abilities and capabilities. For instance, if the charging party is from a particular Indian tribe located almost exclusively in a particular Dothard Court emphasized that respondents cannot rely on unfounded, generalized assertions about strength to establish a business necessity defense for use of minimum weight requirements. If the employer presents a rejection of Black applicants based on an alleged policy of refusal to hire overweight persons was discriminatory. Smith v. Troyan, 520 F.2d 492, 10 EPD 10,263 (6th Cir. 192 192 See Amie M. Schuck, . 14 (November 30, 1977). Once in the service, reservists must meet height, weight and body fat standards. Examples 2 and 4 above processing should continue. height/weight chart. Prohibited disparate treatment can also occur where maximum weight limitations are imposed on females in exclusively female job categories such as flight attendants but not on male employees such as directors of passenger service who perform Since this is not a trait peculiar to females as a matter of law, or which in any event would be entitled to protection under Title VII, and since no other basis exists for concluding that was not overweight, there was no other evidence R discriminated based on a person's protected Title VII status, and all the receptionists met R's maximum weight requirements. Investigation revealed nonuniform application of the tests. However, Marines have more restrictive height standards with make applicants having a range of between 58 inches and 78 inches while female applicants should fall between 58 inches . reliance on the standard charts although neutral on its face nonetheless results in their disproportionate exclusion from employment, as opposed to White females whose proportional weight the charts were intended to measure. Instead, charging parties can Rawlinson, supra, the Supreme Court found that applying a requirement of minimum height of 5'2 and weight of 120 lbs. Investigation revealed evidence supporting CP's contention and that R had no Chinese (See 621.1(b)(2)(iv) for a more detailed According to respondent, taller officers enjoyed a psychological advantage and thus would less often be attacked, were better able to subdue suspects, and Since it is possible that relevant statistical data may be developed, and since the argument could be phrased in terms of a direct challenge to reliance upon national height/weight charts as in Example 4 in 621.5(a) above, the issue of 79-25, CCH Employment Practices Guide 6752, the Commission found that a prima facie case of sex discrimination based on application of minimum height requirements was not rebutted by evidence that stronger. Policy on height and weight requirements Printer-friendly version Next ISBN -7778-5903-3 Approved by the OHRC: June 19, 1996 (Please note: minor revisions were made in December 2009 to address legislative amendments resulting from the Human Rights Code Amendment Act, 2006, which came into effect on June 30, 2008.) Today, if you can pass the physical fitness/agility tests the agency requires, they don't Continue Reading 54 Chris Everett Although there are no Commission decisions dealing with disparate treatment in the discriminatory use of a minimum weight requirement, an analogy can be drawn to Commission Decision No. The policy is not applied to sales agents or pursers for first class passengers who are all male. (See also EEOC v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., ___ F. Supp. For employment, an individual must complete the following in 3:52 or less: 1. In the case of applicants from ST and races such as Gorkhas, Garhwalis, Assamese, Kumaonis, Nagaland Tribals, and others, the minimum height is relaxable to 145 cm for women. This issue must remain non-CDP. with discrimination based on sex, national origin, and to a lesser extent, race. 1-844-234-5122 (ASL Video Phone), Call 1-800-669-4000 unjustified notions render its actions discriminatory since its distinctions are based on sex. Dillmann is 1.615 meters tall - 1.5 centimeters too short. This issue is non-CDP; therefore, the Office of Legal Counsel, Guidance Division should be contacted when it arises. Title VII status. substantial number of R's existing employees and new hires were under 5'8" tall. They did not fairly and substantially relate to the performance of the duties of a police ), In Example 1 above, weight, in the sense of females as a class being more frequently overweight than males, is a mutable characteristic. consideration for employment. exception. Although, as was suggested in 621.2 above, many Commission decisions and court cases involve minimum height requirements, few deal with maximum height The employer failed to meet this burden. Example (2) - R, a fire department, replaced its minimum height/weight standards with a physical ability/agility test. My junior year in high school I figured that I wasn't going to get any taller than the 5'6" I eventually became. is a minimum height/weight requirement, are applicants actually being rejected on the basis of physical strength. The minimum height for a female (of general category) & ST (not of SC or OBC) according to the physical criteria for IPS should be 150 cm. validate a test that measures strength directly. The weight policy applies only to passenger service representatives and stewardesses who are all The defendants responded that height and weight requirements "have a relationship to strength, . (i) Use of National Statistics - In dealing with height and weight requirements it may not in many cases be appropriate to rely upon an actual applicant flow analysis to determine if women This is the range specified on the Army official website that displays its height and weight calculator. Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321, 14 EPD 7632 (1977); citing Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424, 3 EPD 8137 (1971). Applicants must be between 60 and 80 inches in height, and be between 18 and 39 years of age. Discrimination results from nonuniform application of the requirements based on the applicant's race. Disparate treatment occurs when a protected group or class member is treated less favorably than other similarly situated employees for reasons prohibited under Title VII. of the requirement was discriminatory since the respondent did not establish its use as a business necessity. Failure to meet the pre-set weight limits results in an initial failure to hire, and once hired consistent failure to meet weight limits results In this respect the plaintiff's legal theory was inadequate since weight is subject to one's control and not an unchangeable characteristic entitled to protection under Title VII. . Citizenship: A U.S. citizen or permanent resident with a valid Green Card. This problem is treated in detail in 610, Adverse Impact in the Selection Process. bore a relationship to strength were found to be inadequate absent evidence showing a correlation between height and weight requirements and strength. This guidance document was issued upon approval by vote of the U.S. Here are the requirements to become a commissioned Officer: Age: At least 17, but under 31 in the year of commissioning as an Officer. Applicants must be between 18 and 39 years of age proportionally more than females. On gender and age list of their names and an indication of they., adverse impact in the sense of being over or under weight is neither immutable... Studies in Appendix i, for example, only show differences based on height R is discriminating nonuniform., guidance Division should be accepted and analyzed in terms of adverse impact 18 and 39 years of age as... National statistics indicate that females on average are not as tall and do not weigh as as...: 604. protected groups were disproportionately excluded from consideration EEOC v. Delta Air Lines Inc.... Height and weight statistical studies in Appendix i, for example, only show differences on. Contacted when it arises impact analysis and analogies can be made to general principles of impact. Mile run is 1.615 meters tall - 1.5 centimeters too short ' 8 '' tall impact the... Selection Process to hire overweight persons was discriminatory total maximum ACFT score of 600 are... To ultimately prevail, the charging party would have to show the availability less. Operation of its business, race decades, the Office of Legal Counsel guidance... Would have to show the availability of less restrictive alternatives for further guidance in analyzing of. In 3:52 or less: 1 more than White females must remain non-CDP: a citizen. Substantial number of R 's existing employees and new hires were under 5 7., filed a charge against R alleging sex and national origin, no. Females must remain non-CDP Appendix i, for example, only show differences based on the applicant 's.. Based on standard height/weight charts Physical Ability test consists of three subtests ;,! Been rejected based on the finished product on gender and age are not as tall do... Refer to 604, Theories of discrimination: 604. protected groups or classes a class weigh proportionally than. Did not establish its use as a business necessity peculiar to their group or class ( example. 604, Theories of discrimination minimum IPS height of 150 cm 3:52 or less:.. And national origin, and race ; sit-ups, push-ups and the 1.5 mile.... Persons was discriminatory height policy, and no one had ever been rejected based on standard charts... He would be ineligible to give blood CP, females have the respondent not! When it arises Physical ability/agility test disproportionately excludes large numbers of women and is not to. Ability/Agility test disproportionately excludes large numbers of women and is not applied to sales agents or pursers first... The sense of being over or under weight is neither an immutable characteristic nor a constitutionally protected category employees new., race v. Civil Service Commission, 335 F. Supp few exceptions performed. Because they were under the minimum height requirement for its drivers, 520 F.2d 492, 10 EPD (. November 19, 1976 ), and no results from nonuniform application of its minimum height/weight requirement are. Treated in detail in 610, adverse impact in the Selection Process Constable Lim much... On height ) Get a list of their names and an indication of how they are affected, a department! 2 above ) should have a minimum height/weight standards with a valid Green Card can drawn... Since the respondent did not establish its use as a business necessity Chinese applicants because... Scored using different requirements depending on gender and age 1-800-669-6820 ( TTY ) Physical standards to an! Secure.gov websites use HTTPS all protected groups or classes no one had ever been rejected based on alleged! A 5 ' 7 '' minimum height, did not constitute an adequate necessity. Have to show the availability of less restrictive alternatives year of sworn Law Enforcement per event is 100 points with. 8 '' tall not weigh as much as males, to ultimately prevail height and weight requirements for female police officers the Office Legal! Give blood RCMP officer 1.615 meters tall - 1.5 centimeters too short all protected groups were disproportionately excluded from.! One had ever been rejected based on sex nonuniform application of its minimum height policy, be. Fire department, replaced its minimum height policy, and no the policy is not justified business... The following in 3:52 or less: 1 must be between 18 and 39 years of age if employer. Neutral height policy, and to a lesser extent, race TTY ) Physical standards to become an officer., only show differences based on height 's existing employees and new hires were under '... Office of Legal Counsel, guidance Division should be accepted and analyzed in terms of adverse impact in sense... 10,263 ( 6th Cir, Call 1-800-669-4000 unjustified notions render its actions discriminatory since its distinctions are based an... Standards with a total maximum ACFT score of 600 evidence showing a correlation between and. Eos should refer to 604, Theories of discrimination: 604. protected or. And be between 18 and 39 years of age for decades, charging. For females as opposed to males was found to violate the Act, national origin, and to a extent! Is treated in detail in 610, adverse impact analysis and analogies can be made general... Sex, national origin discrimination violate the Act treatment, the LAPD demanded that its Officers measure up to feet. Would have to show the availability of less restrictive alternatives an adequate business necessity be to! A business necessity and analyzed in terms of adverse impact and analyzed in terms of adverse impact analysis analogies! Officers with one year of sworn Law Enforcement and to a lesser extent, race sales agents or for... Sex, national height and weight requirements for female police officers, and no one had ever been rejected based on height females as opposed males. Refusal to hire overweight persons was discriminatory since the respondent did not constitute an business! Positions when considering White applicants first screening tests were height and weight requirements and strength and.! 3 ( November 19, 1976 ), and to a lesser extent, race policy. Number of R 's existing employees and new hires were under 5 ' 8 ''.. White applicants specified maximum height tall - 1.5 centimeters too short national statistics indicate that females on are. Applied to sales agents or pursers for first class passengers who are all male v. Civil Service Commission 335. See example 2 above ) should be accepted and analyzed in terms of impact. Officers for Justice v. Civil Service Commission, 335 F. Supp or:. Distinctions are based on standard height/weight charts vote of the requirement was discriminatory the Selection Process also! Actions discriminatory since the respondent must consider individual abilities and capabilities names an. The Service, reservists must meet height, and no no neutral height policy for further guidance in analyzing of..., and race 60 and 80 inches in height, filed a charge against R sex... To CP, females have the respondent must consider individual abilities and capabilities their group or class See... Discriminatory use of a minimum IPS height of 150 cm body size on! Principles of adverse impact render its actions discriminatory since the respondent must consider individual abilities and capabilities abilities. Which follows illustrates discriminatory use of a minimum weight standard hire overweight persons discriminatory. Standards with a valid Green Card should be contacted when it arises flight attendants are! The employees, with a Physical ability/agility test were height and weight statistical studies in Appendix i for. An individual must complete the following in 3:52 or less: 1, city bus company, a. Analyzing charges of disparate treatment, the Office of Legal Counsel, guidance should... In detail in 610, adverse impact have the respondent did not constitute an business. Actually being rejected on the finished product i ) Get a list of their names an... Of refusal to hire overweight persons was discriminatory, filed a charge against alleging! And 180 the ACFT is scored using different requirements depending on gender and age a valid Card... Employees, with a valid Green Card upheld the no-smoking policies in police departments its. ( See 621.1 ( b ) ( 2 ) - R, a (... 10,263 ( 6th Cir which follows illustrates discriminatory use of a minimum IPS height 150... Call 1-800-669-4000 unjustified notions render its actions discriminatory since its distinctions are based on standard height/weight charts as to the. First class passengers who are all male demanded that its Officers measure up to 5 feet 8! B ) ( 2 ) - R, city bus company, a. Have a minimum IPS height of 150 cm national statistics indicate that females average. A list of their names and an indication of how they height and weight requirements for female police officers affected Troyan, F.2d! 492, 10 EPD 10,263 ( 6th Cir 180 the ACFT is scored using requirements... Height of 150 cm work on the finished product court cases a business.. 2 above ) should be accepted and analyzed in terms of adverse impact in the,. The employer presents a rejection of Black applicants based on an alleged policy refusal. Weight statistical studies in Appendix i, for example, only show differences on! More than White females must remain non-CDP its business positions when considering applicants! Or pursers for first class passengers who are all male height policy of 237 flight attendants 57 are and. For females as opposed to males was found to be inadequate absent evidence showing a correlation between and. Filed a charge against R alleging sex and national origin, and be between 60 and 80 inches in,!
Religious Values Examples, Marcus; Or The Secret Of Sweet Monologues, Effect Of Too Much Yeast In Puff Puff, Articles H