What do you think?
Rate this book
Patriarchy and Accumulation on a World Scale: Women in the International Division of Labour
This now classic book traces the social origins of the sexual division of labor. It gives a history of the related processes of colonization and "housewifization" and extends this analysis to the contemporary new international division of labor and the role that women have to play as the cheapest producers and consumers. First published in 1986, it was hailed as a major paradigm shift for feminist theory. Eleven years on, Maria Mies' theory of capitalist patriarchy has become even more relevant; this new edition includes a substantial new introduction in which she both applies her theory to the new globalized world and answers her critics.
272 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1986
96 people are currently reading
3784 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 43 reviews
August 14, 2014
An interesting but ultimately underwhelming and dated account of the interrelation between global capitalism, patriarchy, and environmental destruction. While Mies' project is ambitious and at points compelling, it falls flat at several key points. In particular, she is generally dismissive of the historical force of white supremacy (speaking only briefly about race and focusing on a first/third world dichotomy that neglects racial inequality within each sphere), antagonistic to the rights of sex workers, glosses over real differences between women, and lapses regularly into romanticizing and orientalizing residents of the Global South. Her major argument (that women are defined as housewives and into the "informal" sector) is useful, but is really only a starting point. Much needed supplementary reads include Silvia Federici's Caliban and the Witch and Revolution at Point Zero, Chandra Mohanty's Feminism without Borders, Ariel Salleh's Eco-Sufficiency and Global Justice, and Angel Davis's classic Women, Race, & Class
January 28, 2018
Finally finished "Patriarchy and Accumulation on a World Scale" This is a book I'm going to rank up there with other books that have changed my thinking and perspective like:
"How the West Underdeveloped Africa"
"Black Skin, white Masks"
"Guns germs and Steel"
"Cannibals and Kings"
"Sapiens: A brief history of Mankind"
I have always thought that patriarchy wasn't just about men oppressing and purveying violence against women for the sake of it, but rather because of a systematic anomaly that is held up by the establishment. But the Author actually explains this concept with the most insight I have ever witnessed.
Maria Mies, traces violence against women from hunter gatherer societies, through the agrarian revolution, medivial times, slavery, colonialism and neoliberalism and shows how it's all connected to capitalism and accumulation and division of labor in a way that those who produce nothing, yet hold the monopoly of violence can appropriate other people's productivity.
She meticulously builds the idea that patriarchy isn't just about the oppression of women per se but rather the oppression of everyone and with women taking the brunt of it. She has great insights about the housewifation of women and how the system has been built to intentionally refuse to acknowledge the value of domestic work, by painting the false notion of "man the bread winner" and the concept of "love" where a woman's labor will not be monetized because of the fallacious of the idea that she has to do it out of love, family or duty.
But the best part of this book is Maria's own critique of of the shortcomings of many feminist movements, especially their inability to focus on the the Capitalistic part of patriarchy and their failure to address slavery, colonialism and race divisions. In simple words, white women should face the fact that in as much as they have fought for their own liberation, they have inadvertently supported the same system that oppresses non white and especially black women.
I will not spoil for any potential reader what insights Maria has on the culture of rape and sexual subjugation of women. But I honestly understand how the system has made men believe they hold a say over a woman's body and also, the bias of sexual exclusivity against women. In other words, why a man is expected to express his sexual pursuits heroically yet a woman should be ashamed of hers.
"How the West Underdeveloped Africa"
"Black Skin, white Masks"
"Guns germs and Steel"
"Cannibals and Kings"
"Sapiens: A brief history of Mankind"
I have always thought that patriarchy wasn't just about men oppressing and purveying violence against women for the sake of it, but rather because of a systematic anomaly that is held up by the establishment. But the Author actually explains this concept with the most insight I have ever witnessed.
Maria Mies, traces violence against women from hunter gatherer societies, through the agrarian revolution, medivial times, slavery, colonialism and neoliberalism and shows how it's all connected to capitalism and accumulation and division of labor in a way that those who produce nothing, yet hold the monopoly of violence can appropriate other people's productivity.
She meticulously builds the idea that patriarchy isn't just about the oppression of women per se but rather the oppression of everyone and with women taking the brunt of it. She has great insights about the housewifation of women and how the system has been built to intentionally refuse to acknowledge the value of domestic work, by painting the false notion of "man the bread winner" and the concept of "love" where a woman's labor will not be monetized because of the fallacious of the idea that she has to do it out of love, family or duty.
But the best part of this book is Maria's own critique of of the shortcomings of many feminist movements, especially their inability to focus on the the Capitalistic part of patriarchy and their failure to address slavery, colonialism and race divisions. In simple words, white women should face the fact that in as much as they have fought for their own liberation, they have inadvertently supported the same system that oppresses non white and especially black women.
I will not spoil for any potential reader what insights Maria has on the culture of rape and sexual subjugation of women. But I honestly understand how the system has made men believe they hold a say over a woman's body and also, the bias of sexual exclusivity against women. In other words, why a man is expected to express his sexual pursuits heroically yet a woman should be ashamed of hers.
July 3, 2018
Although the insights of Maria Mies are valuable and significant, especially some historical researchs (the witch hunt related to capitalist accumulation, the bride-price system in India, etc.), there are problems with the conceptual framework of this book: from the Marxist point of view, Sombart was wrong when he claimed that capitalism emerged from a luxury (Cf. Ellen Meiksins Wood); Marx's „bourgeois sentimentalism“ has nothing to do with proletarian antifeminism; no, the proletarians have no real material interest in „the domestication of their female class companions“, although they may have been convinced &behave as they have, but in the structural sense, for them is actually irrelevant whether the housework is performed by their wives or a social institution.... See the key point in Cinzia Arruza's text „Remarks on Gender“: „A man would lose nothing, in terms of workload, if the distribution of care work were completely socialized instead of being performed by his wife. In structural terms, there would be no antagonistic or irreconcilable interests. Of course, this does not mean that he is aware of this problem, as it may well be that he is so integrated into sexist culture that he has developed some severe form of narcissism based on his presumed male superiority, which leads him to naturally oppose any attempts to socialize care work, or the emancipation of his wife. The capitalist, on the other hand, has something to lose in the socialization of the means of production; it is not just about his convictions about the way the world and his place in it, but also the massive profits he happily expropriates from the workers.“
May 18, 2018
An enlightening read that touches on key concepts of feminism such as women exploitation/oppression/subordination, capitalist patriarchy and women autonomy. The book also delves into the origins of the sexual divisions of labour, the colonization of women and their housewifization and violence against women with a focus on India on this regard. In conclusion she tries to build a feminist perspective for the future mind you the book was written in the mid 80s.
June 4, 2012
One of the most important books I've read. Unfortunately awful title might conceal an engagingly written merger of radical feminism, ecology, and world systems theory.
February 21, 2024
the analysis was good but the last chapter is a "return to premodernity" kind of look that just does not seem feasible for me
July 9, 2014
For being an academic book, Mies writes clearly and uses very concrete examples that make her point easy to understand. This book is central to my research, but anyone interested in seeing history in a new way can really appreciate it. My only complaint is that chapter after chapter is a little redundant. This is a book that you could really just read the second and third chapters to summarize her argument.
November 10, 2015
A classic on Marxist feminism. So good!
January 4, 2025
maria mies is so GOATED but only 4 stars because in the last 10 pages she starts to sound a little too much like RFK Jr and cites Mary Daly & FINRRAGE (Janice Raymond’s anti-surrogacy nonprofit) which is like 🤨🤨🤨 girl
July 7, 2025
A book everyone should read at once in their life to understand how the society is structured on exploitation of some people (mainly women).
Lots of uncomfortable truths but if I think benefits one’s brain and heart a lot.
Lots of uncomfortable truths but if I think benefits one’s brain and heart a lot.
August 3, 2019
The title does not do this book justice. It’s a classic for a reason. There’s serious life changing stuff in here. Read this book!!
March 29, 2018
Marxist feminists like Maria Mies and Silvia Federici (Caliban and the Witch) have made invaluable contributions to marxist theory with their demonstration of the crucial role of the subjugation of women in the development and perpetuation of capitalism, or capitalist patriarchy as Mies described it. Their insights led to the flowering of other theoretical developments, such as contemporary Social Reproduction theory, which seeks to reveal the ways in which daily and generational reproductive labor, found in households, schools, hospitals and prisons, also sustains the drive for accumulation. Mies’s classic work is required reading for all progressives; while I would take issue with some points, especially in her final prescriptive “what is to be done" chapter, her basic analysis that it is the “non-wage labour of women and other non-wage labourers as slaves, contract workers and peasants in the colonies - constitutes the perennial basis upon which 'capitalist productive labour' can be built up and exploited” was certainly a groundbreaking development in both feminist and marxist theory.
March 22, 2007
totally lifechanging.
February 29, 2008
Still a classic hat must be cited in discussion on "the" topic
February 18, 2020
Crap. don't waste your time.
April 22, 2021
Mies' overarching argument is that the sexual division of labor (defining wage labor as productive and women's reproductive and homemaking work as unproductive) is not a result of economic systems of accumulation, but underpins the entire enterprise. Unpaid women's work provides not only the manpower for capitalist labor and accumulation through reproduction, but because it is unpaid and unappreciated, it forces women to engage in productive labor to maintain subsistence. This, Mies argues, constitutes superexploitation, and the current systems of capitalism would not be possible without it.
Her perspective is unique and all the more powerful due to her experience as an activist and advocate for exploited women in the Third World, with whom she has spent many years. Because of this, she has an uncommon understanding of the practicalities of how exploitation of Third World women and oppression and patriarchal control of First World women are inextricably intertwined. She lays it all out clearly, and starkly, from the village women who toil day in and day out to make lace, to the woman who was part of a "development" initiative to increase the inflow of milk to inner city India who ended up saddled with costs for a buffalo she couldn't afford and none of the profit from the milk she produced, to the Asian sex workers who service Western businessmen, to the dowry murders, rapes, and other abuses of women the world over. This is made possible and perpetuated by the Western oppression of women, their "housewifization" and being reduced to consumers of cheap goods. It's harrowing at times, and makes the blood boil, but she ends on a hopeful note, laying out concrete steps towards an overthrow of patriarchy, which she argues is necessary in order to stop the manifestations of systems of economic accumulation based on exploitation, of which capitalism is just the latest incarnation.
Particularly informative to me was her discussion of the ways that socialist systems of government are no better for women than capitalist ones, because both are built on an ideological foundation of neverending accumulation, though they emphasize different means to achieve this goal. As she lays out clearly, these systems will always rely on the exploitation of women's reproductive ability and their unpaid and "unproductive" labor. She argues that in order to transcend these accumulation-based systems, we need to redefine labor, and acknowledge the ebb and flow of work and leisure in life, and further recognize that it is in the acceptance of this combination that the greatest fulfillment is achieved. Furthermore, we need to recognize that participation in subsistence living is more fulfilling to humanity than the production and accumulation of cheap, worthless commodities.
Her perspective is unique and all the more powerful due to her experience as an activist and advocate for exploited women in the Third World, with whom she has spent many years. Because of this, she has an uncommon understanding of the practicalities of how exploitation of Third World women and oppression and patriarchal control of First World women are inextricably intertwined. She lays it all out clearly, and starkly, from the village women who toil day in and day out to make lace, to the woman who was part of a "development" initiative to increase the inflow of milk to inner city India who ended up saddled with costs for a buffalo she couldn't afford and none of the profit from the milk she produced, to the Asian sex workers who service Western businessmen, to the dowry murders, rapes, and other abuses of women the world over. This is made possible and perpetuated by the Western oppression of women, their "housewifization" and being reduced to consumers of cheap goods. It's harrowing at times, and makes the blood boil, but she ends on a hopeful note, laying out concrete steps towards an overthrow of patriarchy, which she argues is necessary in order to stop the manifestations of systems of economic accumulation based on exploitation, of which capitalism is just the latest incarnation.
Particularly informative to me was her discussion of the ways that socialist systems of government are no better for women than capitalist ones, because both are built on an ideological foundation of neverending accumulation, though they emphasize different means to achieve this goal. As she lays out clearly, these systems will always rely on the exploitation of women's reproductive ability and their unpaid and "unproductive" labor. She argues that in order to transcend these accumulation-based systems, we need to redefine labor, and acknowledge the ebb and flow of work and leisure in life, and further recognize that it is in the acceptance of this combination that the greatest fulfillment is achieved. Furthermore, we need to recognize that participation in subsistence living is more fulfilling to humanity than the production and accumulation of cheap, worthless commodities.
June 23, 2021
Excellent book that underlines the necessity of understanding the subordination and exploitation of women in the context of a global division of labour under the dictates of capital accumulation
Particular highlights include:
The creation of the monogamous nuclear family and how it is rooted in patriarchal capitalism, consisting of the principles of kinship and cohabitation, with the man as head and breadwinner, started with propertied classes of the bourgeoisie in the late 18th century as only they could afford to have a "family"
Propertyless people shared all their work and were not thought of, moreover discouraged from forming such "families"
Families were only passed down, in fact forced, to the petty bourgeoisie and proletariat throughout the 19th century as capitalists sought to produce enough proletarian children for the next generation of workers, co-enforced by the criminalisation of sexual intercourse before and outside marriage, and the state and church's control over women's autonomy and contraception
Thus the housewifization of women had the objective of ensuring there were enough workers and soldiers for capital and state, as well as a new consumer for household goods, and the reduction of labour power costs
Convincing criticism of Indira Rajaraman's explanation that the spread of dowry among the poorer sections of Indian society, who had previously practised bride-price, was as a result of the decline in the female rural labour force, itself a result of increased productivity of modern agriculture
Common with other economists, Rajaraman applies simple cost benefit calculations to bride-price and dowry, and totally ignores their different historical and cultural roots
By erroneously defining dowry as the deficit cost when the consumptive costs of clothing and feeding the bride outweighs their housework, childbearing capacity and income-participating work, Rajaraman advances the common myth that the dowry is basically a rotating fund that is cancelled out when a family's son marries
This narrow economistic argument fails to explain the current situation that all families with female children are punished due to the dowry system, not just those with more daughters than sons
In reality the bride-giving family has no bargaining power and only the groom's family can determine the dowry's amount
As is the case with many abstract economic models constructed to fit a reality that does not match the model, the policy implications do not demand structural changes of patriarchal and capitalist social relations, but only a reduction of expenses, combined with more female income-generating activities
Particular highlights include:
The creation of the monogamous nuclear family and how it is rooted in patriarchal capitalism, consisting of the principles of kinship and cohabitation, with the man as head and breadwinner, started with propertied classes of the bourgeoisie in the late 18th century as only they could afford to have a "family"
Propertyless people shared all their work and were not thought of, moreover discouraged from forming such "families"
Families were only passed down, in fact forced, to the petty bourgeoisie and proletariat throughout the 19th century as capitalists sought to produce enough proletarian children for the next generation of workers, co-enforced by the criminalisation of sexual intercourse before and outside marriage, and the state and church's control over women's autonomy and contraception
Thus the housewifization of women had the objective of ensuring there were enough workers and soldiers for capital and state, as well as a new consumer for household goods, and the reduction of labour power costs
Convincing criticism of Indira Rajaraman's explanation that the spread of dowry among the poorer sections of Indian society, who had previously practised bride-price, was as a result of the decline in the female rural labour force, itself a result of increased productivity of modern agriculture
Common with other economists, Rajaraman applies simple cost benefit calculations to bride-price and dowry, and totally ignores their different historical and cultural roots
By erroneously defining dowry as the deficit cost when the consumptive costs of clothing and feeding the bride outweighs their housework, childbearing capacity and income-participating work, Rajaraman advances the common myth that the dowry is basically a rotating fund that is cancelled out when a family's son marries
This narrow economistic argument fails to explain the current situation that all families with female children are punished due to the dowry system, not just those with more daughters than sons
In reality the bride-giving family has no bargaining power and only the groom's family can determine the dowry's amount
As is the case with many abstract economic models constructed to fit a reality that does not match the model, the policy implications do not demand structural changes of patriarchal and capitalist social relations, but only a reduction of expenses, combined with more female income-generating activities
July 30, 2024
A useful history of patriarchy under feudalism and capitalism. What's not as useful is the theory. Mies expands the marxist theory of labor to include women's labor, most notably childbirth. This practically forces her into anarchism, considering the ugly implications of centrally planning childbirth. This makes her analysis of patriarchy under socialism simplified (something she admits to) and the worst part of the book, as she sees Soviet natalism vs Chinese anti-natalism as just different flavors of patriarchy. That the former once had the strong support of working-class women while the latter didn't is irrelevant, Soviet women were simply brainwashed by patriarchy. In her defense, this was written in the 80s where state socialism was discredited and leftists were searching for new politics. State socialism made gains, but ultimately failed to liberate women, so maybe anarchism could do better?
But history hasn't been entirely kind to this book either. As some of the other reviews point out, regression into pre-modernity is basically a joke in 2024, and the national/racial divisions between women are run much deeper than Mies thought. Middle-class women have gained political power and this hasn't led to any real internationalism. Still, you should read this book. It's too useful to pass up.
But history hasn't been entirely kind to this book either. As some of the other reviews point out, regression into pre-modernity is basically a joke in 2024, and the national/racial divisions between women are run much deeper than Mies thought. Middle-class women have gained political power and this hasn't led to any real internationalism. Still, you should read this book. It's too useful to pass up.
September 4, 2025
A commitment to "reductive materialism" (despite a certain hesitation before Marx) critically weakens this text: in order to account for that "world historic defeat of the female sex" that Engels so eloquently details, Mies must posit a monopoly on weaponry on the part of men. This rather weak anthropology, which only serves to reinforce that fantasied image of primitive-man-as-hunter that Mies herself is seeking to undermine, therefore misfires in much the same way that Firestone's attempted "materialist" account of the origin of patriarchy does: the displacement from "biology" onto tool development thus resolves nothing. Therefore, despite her hostility to Engels, this ends up as little more than a re-write (a reformulation, not merely a repetition) of The Origin of the Family, simply with an altered thesis. Perhaps most symptomatic is Mies' rejection of both psychoanalysis and structuralism, which necessarily means discarding the "binary signification" thesis which serves as Lacan's answer to this very question. The most interesting subjects covered here (the witchhunt, "housewifization") are addressed better elsewhere (namely, in Federici). Furthermore, Mies takes a certain "voyeuristic" attitude towards India, as many white women continue to (paging Nussbaum).
May 14, 2020
Surprisingly easy to read and understandable, yet comprehensive and enlightening book about how capitalist-patriarchy propagates and upholds the abuse of women both in the third world (those laboring for long hours and low wages) and in the first world and/or middle class ("housewifization"). Mies explained how the woman question is often forgotten and undermined even in national liberation struggles, and emphasized how no revolution can be truly successful or complete without women's labor—which, even though essential, are made invisible because of the international division of labor (formal vs. informal sector, industrial work vs. housework, men's work vs. women's work). Here, Mies not only called for women's solidarity and for them to take control of their labor, lives, and their bodies. She also urged men to have the same responsibility in shedding unfounded masculine stereotypes (man-the-hunter) and proposed a rethinking of economic models with the view that no women, nations, or resources are exploited.
NOTE: I did not mean to take that long to read this book. I just got so busy with school and life that I entered a two-year reading slump. Booooo.
NOTE: I did not mean to take that long to read this book. I just got so busy with school and life that I entered a two-year reading slump. Booooo.
January 27, 2021
This is now one of my favorite books and one that I will definitely recommend to everyone.
"Whereas the concept patriarchy denotes the historical depth of women’s exploitation and oppression, the concept capitalism is expressive of the contemporary manifestation, or the latest development of this system. Women’s problems today cannot be explained by merely referring to the old forms of patriarchal dominance. Nor can they be explained if one accepts the position that patriarchy is a ‘pre-capitalist’ system of social relations which has been destroyed and superseded, together with ‘feudalism’, by capitalist relations, because women’s exploitation and oppression cannot be explained by the functioning of capitalism alone, at least not capitalism as it is commonly understood. It is my thesis that capitalism cannot function without patriarchy, that the goal of this system, namely the never-ending process of capital accumulation, cannot be achieved unless patriarchal man-woman relations are maintained or newly created."
"Whereas the concept patriarchy denotes the historical depth of women’s exploitation and oppression, the concept capitalism is expressive of the contemporary manifestation, or the latest development of this system. Women’s problems today cannot be explained by merely referring to the old forms of patriarchal dominance. Nor can they be explained if one accepts the position that patriarchy is a ‘pre-capitalist’ system of social relations which has been destroyed and superseded, together with ‘feudalism’, by capitalist relations, because women’s exploitation and oppression cannot be explained by the functioning of capitalism alone, at least not capitalism as it is commonly understood. It is my thesis that capitalism cannot function without patriarchy, that the goal of this system, namely the never-ending process of capital accumulation, cannot be achieved unless patriarchal man-woman relations are maintained or newly created."
May 18, 2023
Very influential in shaping my personal views on gender politics. Leaving this review her because she recently passed. It’s been a while so a lot of the details are fuzzy but her discussion of the gendered division of labor, third world nationalist projects and women’s experiences in them, and of course the witch hunts (I had heard about this in a YouTube video that cited the Caliban and the Witch who’s author is and ideological compatriot and friend of Mies) changed and expanded my way of thinking about things.I had no idea for eg that primitive forms of birth control had long existed prior to the pill - I had never really considered the fact that labor itself had to be reproduced and the home itself is the site of reproduction and that this has all sort of downstream effects with respect to gender norms and ideology like the relationship between tool use and sexual slang. Really enjoyed it.
October 24, 2024
honestly, a 5 star read. it’s provides a material analysis on the position of those gendered and socially ascribed the sex of women, for the ability to exploit their labor for capital accumulation within the family and production. some very important critiques of Marx and Engels, as well as at the time socialist economies and nation lie within the analysis, sharpening the ways in which material analysis has been and is done. while some of its terminology and analysis could be found dated, esp given the social change gender has undergone within western society, its analysis, for me, stands the test of time as the material realities in the book are found as a constant under patriarchal capitalist society. the theory of how the world may be shaped within a feminist and thereby humanizing scope still leans itself towards the real of possibility through its understanding of the global market and production relations within if. in all, another necessary for marxists
January 23, 2020
Supongo que tiene cosas matizables o revisables (leía en otra crítica que peca de cierto orientalismo en algunas descripciones de cuestiones del Sur global), y hay pequeñas cosas que han quedado desfasadas, pero para ser un libro con más de 30 años me parece que en líneas generales sigue totalmente vigente y, que, para variar, no parece haber sido muy tenido en cuenta fuera de los círculos feministas. Así que aunque podría ser un 4 ó 4`5 le pongo un 5 por lo necesario que es y más en el contexto actual de emergencia climática, con la necesidad de abordar la crisis con criterios de justicia social (en los que deberían estar incluidos las injusticias contra las mujeres como colectivo pero a menudo parece que no es así) y la justicia internacional norte-sur.
August 28, 2019
The writer reveals the connection of capitalism to the patriarchal system, and emphasizes that, in contrast to what most socialists think, patriarchy still wouldn’t be eradicated in a socialist system, and thus sets clear the fact that socialism is not the answer, but feminism itself is, as an ideology that stands by itself and not connected or founded upon another—mostly patriarchal—ideology, to achieve a feminist aim, and that is, consciousness-raising and consequently women’s emancipation. A must-read.
September 29, 2019
I picked this up because I saw it was required reading for a feminist class at the university of Hawaii. I’m not sure how relevant is is almost 40 years after it’s original publication; in some ways it is, and I don’t regret reading it, but I would imagine there’s a more contemporary similar monograph out there? It was more about India and Germany than the rest of the world, at times way over generalized, but still made interesting and useful points.
April 9, 2023
Sophisticated theses on the (current) state of the world unmatched by anything else I've read, including anything since 1986. Why is it feminists of the 70s and 80s were publishing groundbreaking scholarship one would have thought could have made a positive difference.
(I'll tell you why)
What Mies has done which is perhaps more important is illustrate with flawless arguments how patriarchy and capitalism collude in the destruction of humankind and nature.
(I'll tell you why)
What Mies has done which is perhaps more important is illustrate with flawless arguments how patriarchy and capitalism collude in the destruction of humankind and nature.
January 18, 2024
Es un libro denso, pero que vale la pena para entender como si articulan el capitalismo y el patriarcado para explotar a las colonias, a las mujeres y a la naturaleza. Me ha gustado particularmente el último capítulo donde hace propuestas para una economía alternativa donde alinea el feminismo con el decrecimiento.
June 3, 2020
Eu quedo-me especialmente com a parte mais empírica do livro, os capítulos centrais; sobretudo frente ao começo mais teoricista, ainda que cumha crítica teórica de Marx com certo interesse. Também me parece de enorme interesse a crítica feminista ao trabalho que faz
Displaying 1 - 30 of 43 reviews