The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,119
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.
13 Jun 2013, 3:14 pm
OliveOilMom wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Holding a door is ok, but opening a woman's car door for her? That's really silly.
You have legs? You have hands? You can move? Good, then open your damn car door or GTFU
You have legs? You have hands? You can move? Good, then open your damn car door or GTFU
I never asked you to open a damn thing for me. I never said that it must be done or I'll be upset. Opening a car door isn't done all that much anymore, and rarely by the next generation, but it used to be done on a regular basis. When a guy took a girl somewhere as they were walking to the car he would walk around to her side and open her door and shut it then come around to his side. When they got there she would get her purse and he would get out and walk around and open her door for her again. There is no reason for it, it was just what was done, that's all. It's not done unless you are taking her somewhere, it's not like you go up to a stranger and do that. It's really only done by my generation now if it's a date type thing or they are going out somewhere together. If my husband were taking me out to dinner then he would do that but if we are going to the grocery store he wouldn't. It's just a part of etiquette, that's all and it's not a big deal.
As for telling me to grow the f**k up, I'm not the one on here whining about how it shouldn't be done or making a big deal out of it. I'm saying that it's just mannerly and polite and it's a nice thing to do. While I prefer that people show manners like this, in situations where they are appropriate, it doesn't make that much of a difference to me. It really just shows that the guy is polite and it shows class. You are free to disregard making that type of impression all you want to. And these things may not be done where you are from anyway. Each country and even region has it's own customs and manners. While they may not be part of the customs where you live you don't see me complaining about the fact that they aren't. Yes, I'm defending the practice but not wanting it mandated or anything. I'm not the one making such a big deal over nothing, so I suppose that means I already have grown the f**k up.
The "You" was directed at all women who want this sort of chivalry, it wasn't directed just at you.
13 Jun 2013, 3:42 pm
appletheclown wrote:
OliveOilMom wrote:
Ann2011 wrote:
appletheclown wrote:
Anyways, if a lady gets pregnant from a rape, what is the reason so many would abort the child anyways? There are things called orphanages, foster homes, and adoption programs that can take care of the child. Just because the child is the product of rape, doesn't ean you have to treat it like a parasite.
You skipped over the 9 months where the woman has to carry her attacker's baby, and the actual delivery. To me this is not acceptable. It's a violation as much as the rape is.
I think that the bottom line for abortion is that the baby is in the mothers body. I don't see the purpose of abortion to be "Kill the baby, now!" but I see it as "I want it out of my body, now!". Since the baby cannot survive outside the mother's body, it dies. It would die even if very carefully removed. I don't think the reason for the pregnancy has anything to do with her being able to decide to have an abortion. If she was raped and is pregnant from that then the pregnancy is still going to be the same as if her birth control pills failed or if in the heat of the moment nobody had a condom and decided to chance it. She has the right to have it removed from her body until it is big enough to survive outside the womb. I would think that many women who have abortions would be perfectly ok with a procedure that removes the very young fetus and places it in a type of (yet to be invented) incubator where it can grow and develop and then be adopted by someone. The result would be the same for her, the baby is out of her body, which was her goal. She was there first, and first come, first serve unless she consents for things to be different. This fact is why in situations where a pregnant woman may have a serious medical problem and the only way to help her would harm the baby, she has the choice about whose interests are put first. If I were pregnant and then dx'd with cancer and the treatment would kill the baby, I'd be given the choice of whether or not I want to be treated and allow the baby to die or I wanted to continue the pregnancy and insure a healthy baby but probably die shortly after delivery. First come, first serve. We can't change that fact to say that her choice about her body is only valid in certain situations. If she has the choice to choose herself over her unborn baby, then she has that choice across the board.
Now, for the really important question. Should a man be legally required to hold the door open for a woman going into an abortion clinic even if he is on the run from the cops for shooting a Craigslist hooker over $150? And should his legal responsibility for door opening be based at all on whether or not he supports Autism Speaks or uses Internet Explorer as his browser?
Then we are on different pages. Since I am not a woman, I would not know. The one thing I do know is that them being the same was my point, in fact a woman who gets an abortion for a failed pill or a broken condom is more faulty than a woman who got raped. If you know sex gets you women pregnant, don't have it. Same goes for guys. You have sex, and then you abort the baby like it wasn't supposed to happen if you had sex. There are plenty of oral positions and sexual interactions involving the extremities that can satisfy this craving we all have. And also, until your group of women stop complaining about having babies and abortions, don't complain about men leaving you alone to have sex with some else, this is kind of unfair to men who are just as sexually active as you, and hypocritical. This being said, don't have wang and va-jay-jay activities until it is time to make babies, and carry a .38 special, the second amendment protects ladies from rape too, not just men.
Or we could just make our own decisions about what we do with our bodies.
_________________
http://www.facebook.com/eidetic.onus
http://eidetic-onus.tumblr.com/
Warning, my tumblr is a man-free zone
Thelibrarian
Veteran
Joined: 5 Aug 2012
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,948
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
13 Jun 2013, 4:21 pm
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
OliveOilMom wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Holding a door is ok, but opening a woman's car door for her? That's really silly.
You have legs? You have hands? You can move? Good, then open your damn car door or GTFU
You have legs? You have hands? You can move? Good, then open your damn car door or GTFU
I never asked you to open a damn thing for me. I never said that it must be done or I'll be upset. Opening a car door isn't done all that much anymore, and rarely by the next generation, but it used to be done on a regular basis. When a guy took a girl somewhere as they were walking to the car he would walk around to her side and open her door and shut it then come around to his side. When they got there she would get her purse and he would get out and walk around and open her door for her again. There is no reason for it, it was just what was done, that's all. It's not done unless you are taking her somewhere, it's not like you go up to a stranger and do that. It's really only done by my generation now if it's a date type thing or they are going out somewhere together. If my husband were taking me out to dinner then he would do that but if we are going to the grocery store he wouldn't. It's just a part of etiquette, that's all and it's not a big deal.
As for telling me to grow the f**k up, I'm not the one on here whining about how it shouldn't be done or making a big deal out of it. I'm saying that it's just mannerly and polite and it's a nice thing to do. While I prefer that people show manners like this, in situations where they are appropriate, it doesn't make that much of a difference to me. It really just shows that the guy is polite and it shows class. You are free to disregard making that type of impression all you want to. And these things may not be done where you are from anyway. Each country and even region has it's own customs and manners. While they may not be part of the customs where you live you don't see me complaining about the fact that they aren't. Yes, I'm defending the practice but not wanting it mandated or anything. I'm not the one making such a big deal over nothing, so I suppose that means I already have grown the f**k up.
The "You" was directed at all women who want this sort of chivalry, it wasn't directed just at you.
Boo, as concluding postscript to my participation on this thread, I had my first conversation on this thread with a certain woman, though it won't be our last. Chivalry is part of the reason why, especially as an aspie who doesn't understand the unwritten rules well enough. Chivalry, at least for Westerners, and at least as it pertains to women, is about tempering affection with respect and fairness. Since chivalry is in part about stories with a moral, the moral of this one is that most women would rather be treated chivalrously than play silly political games.
The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,119
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.
13 Jun 2013, 4:38 pm
Thelibrarian wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
OliveOilMom wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Holding a door is ok, but opening a woman's car door for her? That's really silly.
You have legs? You have hands? You can move? Good, then open your damn car door or GTFU
You have legs? You have hands? You can move? Good, then open your damn car door or GTFU
I never asked you to open a damn thing for me. I never said that it must be done or I'll be upset. Opening a car door isn't done all that much anymore, and rarely by the next generation, but it used to be done on a regular basis. When a guy took a girl somewhere as they were walking to the car he would walk around to her side and open her door and shut it then come around to his side. When they got there she would get her purse and he would get out and walk around and open her door for her again. There is no reason for it, it was just what was done, that's all. It's not done unless you are taking her somewhere, it's not like you go up to a stranger and do that. It's really only done by my generation now if it's a date type thing or they are going out somewhere together. If my husband were taking me out to dinner then he would do that but if we are going to the grocery store he wouldn't. It's just a part of etiquette, that's all and it's not a big deal.
As for telling me to grow the f**k up, I'm not the one on here whining about how it shouldn't be done or making a big deal out of it. I'm saying that it's just mannerly and polite and it's a nice thing to do. While I prefer that people show manners like this, in situations where they are appropriate, it doesn't make that much of a difference to me. It really just shows that the guy is polite and it shows class. You are free to disregard making that type of impression all you want to. And these things may not be done where you are from anyway. Each country and even region has it's own customs and manners. While they may not be part of the customs where you live you don't see me complaining about the fact that they aren't. Yes, I'm defending the practice but not wanting it mandated or anything. I'm not the one making such a big deal over nothing, so I suppose that means I already have grown the f**k up.
The "You" was directed at all women who want this sort of chivalry, it wasn't directed just at you.
Boo, as concluding postscript to my participation on this thread, I had my first conversation on this thread with a certain woman, though it won't be our last. Chivalry is part of the reason why, especially as an aspie who doesn't understand the unwritten rules well enough. Chivalry, at least for Westerners, and at least as it pertains to women, is about tempering affection with respect and fairness. Since chivalry is in part about stories with a moral, the moral of this one is that most women would rather be treated chivalrously than play silly political games.
Yes, you're right about this bold part.
Thelibrarian
Veteran
Joined: 5 Aug 2012
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,948
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
13 Jun 2013, 4:41 pm
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Thelibrarian wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
OliveOilMom wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Holding a door is ok, but opening a woman's car door for her? That's really silly.
You have legs? You have hands? You can move? Good, then open your damn car door or GTFU
You have legs? You have hands? You can move? Good, then open your damn car door or GTFU
I never asked you to open a damn thing for me. I never said that it must be done or I'll be upset. Opening a car door isn't done all that much anymore, and rarely by the next generation, but it used to be done on a regular basis. When a guy took a girl somewhere as they were walking to the car he would walk around to her side and open her door and shut it then come around to his side. When they got there she would get her purse and he would get out and walk around and open her door for her again. There is no reason for it, it was just what was done, that's all. It's not done unless you are taking her somewhere, it's not like you go up to a stranger and do that. It's really only done by my generation now if it's a date type thing or they are going out somewhere together. If my husband were taking me out to dinner then he would do that but if we are going to the grocery store he wouldn't. It's just a part of etiquette, that's all and it's not a big deal.
As for telling me to grow the f**k up, I'm not the one on here whining about how it shouldn't be done or making a big deal out of it. I'm saying that it's just mannerly and polite and it's a nice thing to do. While I prefer that people show manners like this, in situations where they are appropriate, it doesn't make that much of a difference to me. It really just shows that the guy is polite and it shows class. You are free to disregard making that type of impression all you want to. And these things may not be done where you are from anyway. Each country and even region has it's own customs and manners. While they may not be part of the customs where you live you don't see me complaining about the fact that they aren't. Yes, I'm defending the practice but not wanting it mandated or anything. I'm not the one making such a big deal over nothing, so I suppose that means I already have grown the f**k up.
The "You" was directed at all women who want this sort of chivalry, it wasn't directed just at you.
Boo, as concluding postscript to my participation on this thread, I had my first conversation on this thread with a certain woman, though it won't be our last. Chivalry is part of the reason why, especially as an aspie who doesn't understand the unwritten rules well enough. Chivalry, at least for Westerners, and at least as it pertains to women, is about tempering affection with respect and fairness. Since chivalry is in part about stories with a moral, the moral of this one is that most women would rather be treated chivalrously than play silly political games.
Yes, you're right about this bold part.
Unless you care to quarrel with success, which is boy gets girl, it's hard to argue with any of it. Of course, we're hardly ready to get married or anything like that, but we're getting along great. As for that part of the narrative concerning, "and they lived happily ever after", it always starts from such beginnings as these.
Last edited by Thelibrarian on 13 Jun 2013, 4:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
13 Jun 2013, 4:52 pm
Oh BOO treat me chivalrously!!
_________________
http://www.facebook.com/eidetic.onus
http://eidetic-onus.tumblr.com/
Warning, my tumblr is a man-free zone
13 Jun 2013, 5:01 pm
meems wrote:
appletheclown wrote:
OliveOilMom wrote:
Ann2011 wrote:
appletheclown wrote:
Anyways, if a lady gets pregnant from a rape, what is the reason so many would abort the child anyways? There are things called orphanages, foster homes, and adoption programs that can take care of the child. Just because the child is the product of rape, doesn't ean you have to treat it like a parasite.
You skipped over the 9 months where the woman has to carry her attacker's baby, and the actual delivery. To me this is not acceptable. It's a violation as much as the rape is.
I think that the bottom line for abortion is that the baby is in the mothers body. I don't see the purpose of abortion to be "Kill the baby, now!" but I see it as "I want it out of my body, now!". Since the baby cannot survive outside the mother's body, it dies. It would die even if very carefully removed. I don't think the reason for the pregnancy has anything to do with her being able to decide to have an abortion. If she was raped and is pregnant from that then the pregnancy is still going to be the same as if her birth control pills failed or if in the heat of the moment nobody had a condom and decided to chance it. She has the right to have it removed from her body until it is big enough to survive outside the womb. I would think that many women who have abortions would be perfectly ok with a procedure that removes the very young fetus and places it in a type of (yet to be invented) incubator where it can grow and develop and then be adopted by someone. The result would be the same for her, the baby is out of her body, which was her goal. She was there first, and first come, first serve unless she consents for things to be different. This fact is why in situations where a pregnant woman may have a serious medical problem and the only way to help her would harm the baby, she has the choice about whose interests are put first. If I were pregnant and then dx'd with cancer and the treatment would kill the baby, I'd be given the choice of whether or not I want to be treated and allow the baby to die or I wanted to continue the pregnancy and insure a healthy baby but probably die shortly after delivery. First come, first serve. We can't change that fact to say that her choice about her body is only valid in certain situations. If she has the choice to choose herself over her unborn baby, then she has that choice across the board.
Now, for the really important question. Should a man be legally required to hold the door open for a woman going into an abortion clinic even if he is on the run from the cops for shooting a Craigslist hooker over $150? And should his legal responsibility for door opening be based at all on whether or not he supports Autism Speaks or uses Internet Explorer as his browser?
Then we are on different pages. Since I am not a woman, I would not know. The one thing I do know is that them being the same was my point, in fact a woman who gets an abortion for a failed pill or a broken condom is more faulty than a woman who got raped. If you know sex gets you women pregnant, don't have it. Same goes for guys. You have sex, and then you abort the baby like it wasn't supposed to happen if you had sex. There are plenty of oral positions and sexual interactions involving the extremities that can satisfy this craving we all have. And also, until your group of women stop complaining about having babies and abortions, don't complain about men leaving you alone to have sex with some else, this is kind of unfair to men who are just as sexually active as you, and hypocritical. This being said, don't have wang and va-jay-jay activities until it is time to make babies, and carry a .38 special, the second amendment protects ladies from rape too, not just men.
Or we could just make our own decisions about what we do with our bodies.
So you decided to get pregnant on purpose and have the abortion afterwards? But I thought that was premeditated murder. Sex gets you pregnant, that is what it we evolved to do when it happens. But then you say no? Well then why do what we haven't evolved to do, oh wait, because the bible is true, God must be an angry scientist!! !
god is an atheist..... oooweeeeeeeoooooooo....... (God is allowed to be an atheist)
Thelibrarian
Veteran
Joined: 5 Aug 2012
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,948
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
13 Jun 2013, 5:09 pm
13 Jun 2013, 5:11 pm
appletheclown wrote:
meems wrote:
appletheclown wrote:
OliveOilMom wrote:
Ann2011 wrote:
appletheclown wrote:
Anyways, if a lady gets pregnant from a rape, what is the reason so many would abort the child anyways? There are things called orphanages, foster homes, and adoption programs that can take care of the child. Just because the child is the product of rape, doesn't ean you have to treat it like a parasite.
You skipped over the 9 months where the woman has to carry her attacker's baby, and the actual delivery. To me this is not acceptable. It's a violation as much as the rape is.
I think that the bottom line for abortion is that the baby is in the mothers body. I don't see the purpose of abortion to be "Kill the baby, now!" but I see it as "I want it out of my body, now!". Since the baby cannot survive outside the mother's body, it dies. It would die even if very carefully removed. I don't think the reason for the pregnancy has anything to do with her being able to decide to have an abortion. If she was raped and is pregnant from that then the pregnancy is still going to be the same as if her birth control pills failed or if in the heat of the moment nobody had a condom and decided to chance it. She has the right to have it removed from her body until it is big enough to survive outside the womb. I would think that many women who have abortions would be perfectly ok with a procedure that removes the very young fetus and places it in a type of (yet to be invented) incubator where it can grow and develop and then be adopted by someone. The result would be the same for her, the baby is out of her body, which was her goal. She was there first, and first come, first serve unless she consents for things to be different. This fact is why in situations where a pregnant woman may have a serious medical problem and the only way to help her would harm the baby, she has the choice about whose interests are put first. If I were pregnant and then dx'd with cancer and the treatment would kill the baby, I'd be given the choice of whether or not I want to be treated and allow the baby to die or I wanted to continue the pregnancy and insure a healthy baby but probably die shortly after delivery. First come, first serve. We can't change that fact to say that her choice about her body is only valid in certain situations. If she has the choice to choose herself over her unborn baby, then she has that choice across the board.
Now, for the really important question. Should a man be legally required to hold the door open for a woman going into an abortion clinic even if he is on the run from the cops for shooting a Craigslist hooker over $150? And should his legal responsibility for door opening be based at all on whether or not he supports Autism Speaks or uses Internet Explorer as his browser?
Then we are on different pages. Since I am not a woman, I would not know. The one thing I do know is that them being the same was my point, in fact a woman who gets an abortion for a failed pill or a broken condom is more faulty than a woman who got raped. If you know sex gets you women pregnant, don't have it. Same goes for guys. You have sex, and then you abort the baby like it wasn't supposed to happen if you had sex. There are plenty of oral positions and sexual interactions involving the extremities that can satisfy this craving we all have. And also, until your group of women stop complaining about having babies and abortions, don't complain about men leaving you alone to have sex with some else, this is kind of unfair to men who are just as sexually active as you, and hypocritical. This being said, don't have wang and va-jay-jay activities until it is time to make babies, and carry a .38 special, the second amendment protects ladies from rape too, not just men.
Or we could just make our own decisions about what we do with our bodies.
So you decided to get pregnant on purpose and have the abortion afterwards? But I thought that was premeditated murder. Sex gets you pregnant, that is what it we evolved to do when it happens. But then you say no? Well then why do what we haven't evolved to do, oh wait, because the bible is true, God must be an angry scientist!! !
god is an atheist..... oooweeeeeeeoooooooo....... (God is allowed to be an atheist)You're post doesn't make much sense, so I really have no idea what to say.
My point still stands: women can decide what they want to do with their bodies.
_________________
http://www.facebook.com/eidetic.onus
http://eidetic-onus.tumblr.com/
Warning, my tumblr is a man-free zone
13 Jun 2013, 5:12 pm
Thelibrarian wrote:
meems wrote:
Oh BOO treat me chivalrously!!
Meems, for Boo, or anybody else, to be chivalrous to you means you will have to pretend you are a lady.
Good luck. It sounds as if you need it.
You make that sound like a bad thing; it isn't.
_________________
http://www.facebook.com/eidetic.onus
http://eidetic-onus.tumblr.com/
Warning, my tumblr is a man-free zone
13 Jun 2013, 5:13 pm
I do declare, someone's delicate sensibilities have been offended. Oh my!
_________________
http://www.facebook.com/eidetic.onus
http://eidetic-onus.tumblr.com/
Warning, my tumblr is a man-free zone
Thelibrarian
Veteran
Joined: 5 Aug 2012
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,948
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
13 Jun 2013, 5:16 pm
13 Jun 2013, 5:35 pm
Thelibrarian wrote:
meems wrote:
Thelibrarian wrote:
meems wrote:
Oh BOO treat me chivalrously!!
Meems, for Boo, or anybody else, to be chivalrous to you means you will have to pretend you are a lady.
Good luck. It sounds as if you need it.
You make that sound like a bad thing; it isn't.[/quote
I'm glad you said you said that and not me.
Perhaps the notion of someone showing deference simply because of being female doesn't sit well in her bonnet. Chivalry is another social dance, not an achievement to earn with vapors and eyelid flutters.
13 Jun 2013, 5:43 pm
Thelibrarian wrote:
meems wrote:
Thelibrarian wrote:
meems wrote:
Oh BOO treat me chivalrously!!
Meems, for Boo, or anybody else, to be chivalrous to you means you will have to pretend you are a lady.
Good luck. It sounds as if you need it.
You make that sound like a bad thing; it isn't.[/quote
I'm glad you said you said that and not me.
Said what? That not being a "lady" isn't a bad thing? I really don't see how conforming to societal pressures based on gender, to please others, somehow translates to a positive label in your mind.
I mean you already effectively said I'm not a "lady", so I'm assuming it's not that.
_________________
http://www.facebook.com/eidetic.onus
http://eidetic-onus.tumblr.com/
Warning, my tumblr is a man-free zone
The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,119
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.
13 Jun 2013, 5:47 pm
Thelibrarian wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Thelibrarian wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
OliveOilMom wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Holding a door is ok, but opening a woman's car door for her? That's really silly.
You have legs? You have hands? You can move? Good, then open your damn car door or GTFU
You have legs? You have hands? You can move? Good, then open your damn car door or GTFU
I never asked you to open a damn thing for me. I never said that it must be done or I'll be upset. Opening a car door isn't done all that much anymore, and rarely by the next generation, but it used to be done on a regular basis. When a guy took a girl somewhere as they were walking to the car he would walk around to her side and open her door and shut it then come around to his side. When they got there she would get her purse and he would get out and walk around and open her door for her again. There is no reason for it, it was just what was done, that's all. It's not done unless you are taking her somewhere, it's not like you go up to a stranger and do that. It's really only done by my generation now if it's a date type thing or they are going out somewhere together. If my husband were taking me out to dinner then he would do that but if we are going to the grocery store he wouldn't. It's just a part of etiquette, that's all and it's not a big deal.
As for telling me to grow the f**k up, I'm not the one on here whining about how it shouldn't be done or making a big deal out of it. I'm saying that it's just mannerly and polite and it's a nice thing to do. While I prefer that people show manners like this, in situations where they are appropriate, it doesn't make that much of a difference to me. It really just shows that the guy is polite and it shows class. You are free to disregard making that type of impression all you want to. And these things may not be done where you are from anyway. Each country and even region has it's own customs and manners. While they may not be part of the customs where you live you don't see me complaining about the fact that they aren't. Yes, I'm defending the practice but not wanting it mandated or anything. I'm not the one making such a big deal over nothing, so I suppose that means I already have grown the f**k up.
The "You" was directed at all women who want this sort of chivalry, it wasn't directed just at you.
Boo, as concluding postscript to my participation on this thread, I had my first conversation on this thread with a certain woman, though it won't be our last. Chivalry is part of the reason why, especially as an aspie who doesn't understand the unwritten rules well enough. Chivalry, at least for Westerners, and at least as it pertains to women, is about tempering affection with respect and fairness. Since chivalry is in part about stories with a moral, the moral of this one is that most women would rather be treated chivalrously than play silly political games.
Yes, you're right about this bold part.
Unless you care to quarrel with success, which is boy gets girl, it's hard to argue with any of it. Of course, we're hardly ready to get married or anything like that, but we're getting along great. As for that part of the narrative concerning, "and they lived happily ever after", it always starts from such beginnings as these.
I prefer the Shrek way tho.
13 Jun 2013, 5:48 pm
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
|
Good news
in Bipolar, Tourettes, Schizophrenia, and other Psychological Conditions |
26 Jan 2025, 6:49 pm |
| Some good news... |
24 Nov 2024, 8:32 pm |
| Feel good about my life and future |
08 Jan 2025, 1:05 pm |
| Any Good Totally Free Dating Sites? |
24 Nov 2024, 8:33 pm |
