NATION

PASSWORD

Somerville, Mass to recognize polyamorous partnerships

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

What do you think of this?

I'm not poly, but good for them
78
42%
I'm gonna tell my wife and her boyfriend, so we can start planning the move
14
7%
Meh/undecided
20
11%
This is no bueno
75
40%
 
Total votes : 187

User avatar
Diopolis
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16830
Founded: May 15, 2012
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Diopolis » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:21 am

Cekoviu wrote:
Proctopeo wrote:you're right, I should accept that Slenderman exists as an entity to oppress whamen

this but unironically tbh
Diopolis wrote:I don't think he is refusing to acknowledge that.
He's refusing to acknowledge patriarchy exists, but then again, patriarchy is more of a conspiracy theory than my beliefs are.

diop be like "patriarchy doesnt exist but inshallah it should"

Yes. Patriarchy is the mistaken belief that people who think like me are near positions of power.
Proudly anti-mask, moderately anti-vax. 9/11 and OKC bombing truther. Tobacco-cancer link and HIV skeptic.
Economic left -3.88, authoritarian 6.15
Thoughts
Abortion is not healthcare.

User avatar
TURTLESHROOM II
Senator
 
Posts: 3547
Founded: Dec 08, 2014
Moralistic Democracy

Postby TURTLESHROOM II » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:23 am

Polygamy is not a sin.

Also, this is what we warned you about Obergefell. Incest is next.
Jesus loves you and died for you!
CM wrote:Have I reached peak enlightened centrism yet? I'm getting chills just thinking about taking an actual position.

Proctopeo wrote:anarcho-von habsburgism

The Selkie wrote:"Tengri's balls, [do] boys really never grow up?!"
Nuroblav wrote:On the contrary! Seize the means of ROBOT ARMS!
News ticker (updated 11/20/2020 AD):

Imagination Animals abandons Cartoonite invasion, Crossoverian economy collapses, ending war -|- TurtleShroom completes second ever international (cargo) airport in Begrad  -|- TS has perfected hydrogen bomb, anonymous source claims

User avatar
Cekoviu
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16699
Founded: Oct 18, 2017
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Cekoviu » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:24 am

TURTLESHROOM II wrote:Polygamy is not a sin.

Also, this is what we warned you about Obergefell. Incest is next.

if it's not a sin why are you concerned about this slippery slope :thinking:
RWDT - REST IN POWER
David Hume fangirl, massive Tuvaboo, anti-imperialist, and Castroist socialist. Also a sex-negative SWERF, traditionalist SJW, and Anglo-Catholic Episcopalian.
/tʃɛ'koʊ.vi:.ju:/ (check-OH-vee-you)

User avatar
Diopolis
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16830
Founded: May 15, 2012
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Diopolis » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:26 am

Cekoviu wrote:
TURTLESHROOM II wrote:Polygamy is not a sin.

Also, this is what we warned you about Obergefell. Incest is next.

if it's not a sin why are you concerned about this slippery slope :thinking:

Slippery slope predictions have proven accurate thus far.
Proudly anti-mask, moderately anti-vax. 9/11 and OKC bombing truther. Tobacco-cancer link and HIV skeptic.
Economic left -3.88, authoritarian 6.15
Thoughts
Abortion is not healthcare.

User avatar
Cisairse
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10815
Founded: Mar 17, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Cisairse » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:26 am

TURTLESHROOM II wrote:Polygamy is not a sin.

Also, this is what we warned you about Obergefell. Incest is next.

good, it should all be legal
The details of the above post are subject to leftist infighting.

I officially endorse Fivey Fox for president of the United States.

User avatar
TURTLESHROOM II
Senator
 
Posts: 3547
Founded: Dec 08, 2014
Moralistic Democracy

Postby TURTLESHROOM II » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:26 am

Cekoviu wrote:if it's not a sin why are you concerned about this slippery slope :thinking:


Polygamy is not a sin. Polyamory and incest are.

BTW, do you think the Mormons are going to have another convenient "revelation" in order to bring back polygamy, when the government they feared enough to compromise their faith allows it? :p
Last edited by TURTLESHROOM II on Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
Jesus loves you and died for you!
CM wrote:Have I reached peak enlightened centrism yet? I'm getting chills just thinking about taking an actual position.

Proctopeo wrote:anarcho-von habsburgism

The Selkie wrote:"Tengri's balls, [do] boys really never grow up?!"
Nuroblav wrote:On the contrary! Seize the means of ROBOT ARMS!
News ticker (updated 11/20/2020 AD):

Imagination Animals abandons Cartoonite invasion, Crossoverian economy collapses, ending war -|- TurtleShroom completes second ever international (cargo) airport in Begrad  -|- TS has perfected hydrogen bomb, anonymous source claims

User avatar
Proctopeo
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11801
Founded: Sep 26, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Proctopeo » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:27 am

Punished UMN wrote:
Proctopeo wrote:you're right, I should accept that Slenderman exists as an entity to oppress whamen

This is a stupid comparison. Your refusal to acknowledge that marriage exists primarily for the purpose of reproduction of capital, children, and social values, and that such a contract, when unregulated, would serve to increase the social power of those who already possess advantages in that area, is primarily driven by your libertarian ideology, and not by any kind of understanding of fact.

fwiw I was mostly rejecting the usage of "patriarchy"

it is evident that polygamy would end up concentrated with those most capable of acquiring and sustaining multiple romantic and sexual partners, and perhaps with a bias towards polygyny, largely because one man can make twenty women pregnant, but twenty men can't all make one woman pregnant

it wouldn't really be the work of a nebulous entity proposed by a sexist theory, and more a combination of personality and wealth, regardless of sex

however I don't see polygamy or polyamory as particularly concerning, as it doesn't seem like something most people would be particularly interested in anyways
the terminology is too cringe fail for that (lmao "polycule")

Diopolis wrote:
Punished UMN wrote:This is a stupid comparison. Your refusal to acknowledge that marriage exists primarily for the purpose of reproduction of capital, children, and social values, and that such a contract, when unregulated, would serve to increase the social power of those who already possess advantages in that area, is primarily driven by your libertarian ideology, and not by any kind of understanding of fact.

I don't think he is refusing to acknowledge that.
He's refusing to acknowledge patriarchy exists, but then again, patriarchy is more of a conspiracy theory than my beliefs are.

yes, exactly!
ec 4.38 soc -3.95
I don't like most tankies/red fascists
China Lied, People Died.
6500 Year-Old Soomer
RIP the LWDT and RWDT, may their legacy live on

User avatar
Punished UMN
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1223
Founded: Jul 05, 2020
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Punished UMN » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:28 am

Diopolis wrote:
Punished UMN wrote:This is a stupid comparison. Your refusal to acknowledge that marriage exists primarily for the purpose of reproduction of capital, children, and social values, and that such a contract, when unregulated, would serve to increase the social power of those who already possess advantages in that area, is primarily driven by your libertarian ideology, and not by any kind of understanding of fact.

I don't think he is refusing to acknowledge that.
He's refusing to acknowledge patriarchy exists, but then again, patriarchy is more of a conspiracy theory than my beliefs are.

Patriarchy is irrelevant to the entire question. It exists only as a function of the reproduction of capital.
Still lurking in the community, but don't expect much engagement.
Rawlsian socialist and Constitutional Monarchist. Proud member of the Napoleon Bonaparte fandom.
I have borderline personality disorder, if I overreact to something, try to approach me after the fact and I'll apologize
Asexual man.

User avatar
TURTLESHROOM II
Senator
 
Posts: 3547
Founded: Dec 08, 2014
Moralistic Democracy

Postby TURTLESHROOM II » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:28 am

Cisairse wrote:good, it should all be legal


"I support incest", reads the statement of the man whose signature presents a statement appearing to endorse a domestic terrorist network that advocates for people like me to have my skull bashed in with a bike lock.
Last edited by TURTLESHROOM II on Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
Jesus loves you and died for you!
CM wrote:Have I reached peak enlightened centrism yet? I'm getting chills just thinking about taking an actual position.

Proctopeo wrote:anarcho-von habsburgism

The Selkie wrote:"Tengri's balls, [do] boys really never grow up?!"
Nuroblav wrote:On the contrary! Seize the means of ROBOT ARMS!
News ticker (updated 11/20/2020 AD):

Imagination Animals abandons Cartoonite invasion, Crossoverian economy collapses, ending war -|- TurtleShroom completes second ever international (cargo) airport in Begrad  -|- TS has perfected hydrogen bomb, anonymous source claims

User avatar
Proctopeo
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11801
Founded: Sep 26, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Proctopeo » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:30 am

TURTLESHROOM II wrote:
Cisairse wrote:good, it should all be legal


"I support incest", reads the statement of the man whose signature presents a statement appearing to endorse a domestic terrorist network that advocates for people like me to have my skull bashed in with a bike lock.

anarcho-von habsburgism
ec 4.38 soc -3.95
I don't like most tankies/red fascists
China Lied, People Died.
6500 Year-Old Soomer
RIP the LWDT and RWDT, may their legacy live on

User avatar
Punished UMN
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1223
Founded: Jul 05, 2020
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Punished UMN » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:30 am

Proctopeo wrote:
Punished UMN wrote:This is a stupid comparison. Your refusal to acknowledge that marriage exists primarily for the purpose of reproduction of capital, children, and social values, and that such a contract, when unregulated, would serve to increase the social power of those who already possess advantages in that area, is primarily driven by your libertarian ideology, and not by any kind of understanding of fact.

fwiw I was mostly rejecting the usage of "patriarchy"

it is evident that polygamy would end up concentrated with those most capable of acquiring and sustaining multiple romantic and sexual partners, and perhaps with a bias towards polygyny, largely because one man can make twenty women pregnant, but twenty men can't all make one woman pregnant

it wouldn't really be the work of a nebulous entity proposed by a sexist theory, and more a combination of personality and wealth, regardless of sex

however I don't see polygamy or polyamory as particularly concerning, as it doesn't seem like something most people would be particularly interested in anyways
the terminology is too cringe fail for that (lmao "polycule")

Orwellian in the literary sense.
Still lurking in the community, but don't expect much engagement.
Rawlsian socialist and Constitutional Monarchist. Proud member of the Napoleon Bonaparte fandom.
I have borderline personality disorder, if I overreact to something, try to approach me after the fact and I'll apologize
Asexual man.

User avatar
Proctopeo
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11801
Founded: Sep 26, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Proctopeo » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:32 am

Punished UMN wrote:
Proctopeo wrote:fwiw I was mostly rejecting the usage of "patriarchy"

it is evident that polygamy would end up concentrated with those most capable of acquiring and sustaining multiple romantic and sexual partners, and perhaps with a bias towards polygyny, largely because one man can make twenty women pregnant, but twenty men can't all make one woman pregnant

it wouldn't really be the work of a nebulous entity proposed by a sexist theory, and more a combination of personality and wealth, regardless of sex

however I don't see polygamy or polyamory as particularly concerning, as it doesn't seem like something most people would be particularly interested in anyways
the terminology is too cringe fail for that (lmao "polycule")

Orwellian in the literary sense.

what the fuck do you mean by that
ec 4.38 soc -3.95
I don't like most tankies/red fascists
China Lied, People Died.
6500 Year-Old Soomer
RIP the LWDT and RWDT, may their legacy live on

User avatar
Diopolis
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16830
Founded: May 15, 2012
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Diopolis » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:32 am

Proctopeo wrote:
Punished UMN wrote:This is a stupid comparison. Your refusal to acknowledge that marriage exists primarily for the purpose of reproduction of capital, children, and social values, and that such a contract, when unregulated, would serve to increase the social power of those who already possess advantages in that area, is primarily driven by your libertarian ideology, and not by any kind of understanding of fact.

fwiw I was mostly rejecting the usage of "patriarchy"

it is evident that polygamy would end up concentrated with those most capable of acquiring and sustaining multiple romantic and sexual partners, and perhaps with a bias towards polygyny, largely because one man can make twenty women pregnant, but twenty men can't all make one woman pregnant

it wouldn't really be the work of a nebulous entity proposed by a sexist theory, and more a combination of personality and wealth, regardless of sex

however I don't see polygamy or polyamory as particularly concerning, as it doesn't seem like something most people would be particularly interested in anyways
the terminology is too cringe fail for that (lmao "polycule")

Diopolis wrote:I don't think he is refusing to acknowledge that.
He's refusing to acknowledge patriarchy exists, but then again, patriarchy is more of a conspiracy theory than my beliefs are.

yes, exactly!

In-practice polyamory would probably just turn out to be polygyny most of the time. Except that's not true polyamory, because true polyamory lives on the astral plane with true communism, but whatever. The simple fact of the matter is that men, on average, have more interest in having multiple partners.
I'm not sure that socially sanctioning some rapper's side chicks is to the common good, which is what it would amount to in practice. And of course, if we treat it like alphabet soup behavior then it gets promoted to middle schoolers so we wind up with more people doing that.
Proudly anti-mask, moderately anti-vax. 9/11 and OKC bombing truther. Tobacco-cancer link and HIV skeptic.
Economic left -3.88, authoritarian 6.15
Thoughts
Abortion is not healthcare.

User avatar
Cisairse
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10815
Founded: Mar 17, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Cisairse » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:33 am

TURTLESHROOM II wrote:
Cisairse wrote:good, it should all be legal


"I support incest", reads the statement of the man whose signature presents a statement appearing to endorse a domestic terrorist network that advocates for people like me to have my skull bashed in with a bike lock.

Yes. Is there a problem?
The details of the above post are subject to leftist infighting.

I officially endorse Fivey Fox for president of the United States.

User avatar
Kowani
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 28454
Founded: Apr 01, 2018
Democratic Socialists

Postby Kowani » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:33 am

Diopolis wrote:
Cekoviu wrote:if it's not a sin why are you concerned about this slippery slope :thinking:

Slippery slope predictions have proven accurate thus far.

Good. We should run down the slope.
Telconi wrote:Every once in a while Kowani does have a decent point.

Kowani wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:Also, you could quit being a condescending dick.
I could. But am I going to? Nah.
ni dio, ni rey, ni patria, ni amo

A Republic...if you can keep it.

User avatar
KingFerdinand1
Diplomat
 
Posts: 823
Founded: Feb 29, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby KingFerdinand1 » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:34 am

This Is Awful News.
Very Pro: President Of The United States Donald Trump, Invading North Korea, UTTLAND
Pro: Alozia
Anti: China, Socialists, Immigration
Very Anti: Dentali, Hillary, Communism, Communist Patagonia
"Anyone who thinks my story is anywhere near over is sadly mistaken." - Donald Trump, President of the United States

Political Compass: +8.88, +7.38

User avatar
Diopolis
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16830
Founded: May 15, 2012
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Diopolis » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:35 am

Kowani wrote:
Diopolis wrote:Slippery slope predictions have proven accurate thus far.

Good. We should run down the slope.

I'll note that except for the bottom of the slippery slope, it is legal to do whatever it is you want on the slope unless you happen to be in Saudi Arabia. There just isn't state support for it. I'm not sure why you need it.
Proudly anti-mask, moderately anti-vax. 9/11 and OKC bombing truther. Tobacco-cancer link and HIV skeptic.
Economic left -3.88, authoritarian 6.15
Thoughts
Abortion is not healthcare.

User avatar
Cisairse
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10815
Founded: Mar 17, 2017
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Cisairse » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:37 am

KingFerdinand1 wrote:This Is Awful News.


Incorrect, it's actually great news.
The details of the above post are subject to leftist infighting.

I officially endorse Fivey Fox for president of the United States.

User avatar
Punished UMN
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1223
Founded: Jul 05, 2020
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Punished UMN » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:38 am

Proctopeo wrote:
Punished UMN wrote:Orwellian in the literary sense.

what the fuck do you mean by that

That you are expressing rejection of something's existence, followed by an in-depth explanation of why said thing exists. It's not so much that you object to patriarchy theory as you object to the use of the term "patriarchy theory." It's Orwellian in the sense of the type of linguistic euphemisms used by the government in 1984.
Still lurking in the community, but don't expect much engagement.
Rawlsian socialist and Constitutional Monarchist. Proud member of the Napoleon Bonaparte fandom.
I have borderline personality disorder, if I overreact to something, try to approach me after the fact and I'll apologize
Asexual man.

User avatar
TURTLESHROOM II
Senator
 
Posts: 3547
Founded: Dec 08, 2014
Moralistic Democracy

Postby TURTLESHROOM II » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:38 am

Proctopeo wrote:
TURTLESHROOM II wrote:
"I support incest", reads the statement of the man whose signature presents a statement appearing to endorse a domestic terrorist network that advocates for people like me to have my skull bashed in with a bike lock.

anarcho-von habsburgism


If it fits, this is going into my signature.
Jesus loves you and died for you!
CM wrote:Have I reached peak enlightened centrism yet? I'm getting chills just thinking about taking an actual position.

Proctopeo wrote:anarcho-von habsburgism

The Selkie wrote:"Tengri's balls, [do] boys really never grow up?!"
Nuroblav wrote:On the contrary! Seize the means of ROBOT ARMS!
News ticker (updated 11/20/2020 AD):

Imagination Animals abandons Cartoonite invasion, Crossoverian economy collapses, ending war -|- TurtleShroom completes second ever international (cargo) airport in Begrad  -|- TS has perfected hydrogen bomb, anonymous source claims

User avatar
Proctopeo
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11801
Founded: Sep 26, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Proctopeo » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:40 am

Punished UMN wrote:
Proctopeo wrote:what the fuck do you mean by that

That you are expressing rejection of something's existence, followed by an in-depth explanation of why said thing exists. It's not so much that you object to patriarchy theory as you object to the use of the term "patriarchy theory." It's Orwellian in the sense of the type of linguistic euphemisms used by the government in 1984.

that's not patriarchy theory though
ec 4.38 soc -3.95
I don't like most tankies/red fascists
China Lied, People Died.
6500 Year-Old Soomer
RIP the LWDT and RWDT, may their legacy live on

User avatar
Cekoviu
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16699
Founded: Oct 18, 2017
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Cekoviu » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:40 am

Diopolis wrote:
Cekoviu wrote:if it's not a sin why are you concerned about this slippery slope :thinking:

Slippery slope predictions have proven accurate thus far.

yes, they have. and?
TURTLESHROOM II wrote:
Cekoviu wrote:if it's not a sin why are you concerned about this slippery slope :thinking:


Polygamy is not a sin. Polyamory and incest are.

BTW, do you think the Mormons are going to have another convenient "revelation" in order to bring back polygamy, when the government they feared enough to compromise their faith allows it? :p

uhhh im not sure how you can oppose polyamory but not polygamy tbh given that they're essentially the same thing but with different legal recognition

no, i do not think the mormons will do that.
Kowani wrote:
Diopolis wrote:Slippery slope predictions have proven accurate thus far.

Good. We should run down the slope.

this is an unsurprising take from someone who said rape is not intrinsically wrong
RWDT - REST IN POWER
David Hume fangirl, massive Tuvaboo, anti-imperialist, and Castroist socialist. Also a sex-negative SWERF, traditionalist SJW, and Anglo-Catholic Episcopalian.
/tʃɛ'koʊ.vi:.ju:/ (check-OH-vee-you)

User avatar
TURTLESHROOM II
Senator
 
Posts: 3547
Founded: Dec 08, 2014
Moralistic Democracy

Postby TURTLESHROOM II » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:40 am

Cisairse wrote:
TURTLESHROOM II wrote:
"I support incest", reads the statement of the man whose signature presents a statement appearing to endorse a domestic terrorist network that advocates for people like me to have my skull bashed in with a bike lock.

Yes. Is there a problem?


You support a domestic terror group that wants me beaten to a bloody pulp, and has beaten people like me to a bloody pulp. Advocating violence against the innocent is never okay, much less making statements that support terrorists.

Your support of incest needs no explanation as to why it is wrong.
Jesus loves you and died for you!
CM wrote:Have I reached peak enlightened centrism yet? I'm getting chills just thinking about taking an actual position.

Proctopeo wrote:anarcho-von habsburgism

The Selkie wrote:"Tengri's balls, [do] boys really never grow up?!"
Nuroblav wrote:On the contrary! Seize the means of ROBOT ARMS!
News ticker (updated 11/20/2020 AD):

Imagination Animals abandons Cartoonite invasion, Crossoverian economy collapses, ending war -|- TurtleShroom completes second ever international (cargo) airport in Begrad  -|- TS has perfected hydrogen bomb, anonymous source claims

User avatar
Diopolis
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16830
Founded: May 15, 2012
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Diopolis » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:42 am

Cekoviu wrote:
Diopolis wrote:Slippery slope predictions have proven accurate thus far.

yes, they have. and?
TURTLESHROOM II wrote:
Polygamy is not a sin. Polyamory and incest are.

BTW, do you think the Mormons are going to have another convenient "revelation" in order to bring back polygamy, when the government they feared enough to compromise their faith allows it? :p

uhhh im not sure how you can oppose polyamory but not polygamy tbh given that they're essentially the same thing but with different legal recognition

no, i do not think the mormons will do that.

IIRC he's a protestant fundamentalist who thinks men having many wives is fine but not women having many husbands because biblical literalism.
Proudly anti-mask, moderately anti-vax. 9/11 and OKC bombing truther. Tobacco-cancer link and HIV skeptic.
Economic left -3.88, authoritarian 6.15
Thoughts
Abortion is not healthcare.

User avatar
Punished UMN
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1223
Founded: Jul 05, 2020
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Punished UMN » Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:43 am

Proctopeo wrote:
Punished UMN wrote:That you are expressing rejection of something's existence, followed by an in-depth explanation of why said thing exists. It's not so much that you object to patriarchy theory as you object to the use of the term "patriarchy theory." It's Orwellian in the sense of the type of linguistic euphemisms used by the government in 1984.

that's not patriarchy theory though

You basically provided an in-depth explanation of why, without social regulation, men will gain more influence over social dynamics than women, then even said that, while sex does not dictate this relationship, that simple correlation will lead to this social shift. If you don't think that's based heavily in patriarchy theory, then I'm not sure what you think patriarchy theory is.
Still lurking in the community, but don't expect much engagement.
Rawlsian socialist and Constitutional Monarchist. Proud member of the Napoleon Bonaparte fandom.
I have borderline personality disorder, if I overreact to something, try to approach me after the fact and I'll apologize
Asexual man.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Absolon-7, Bombadil, Da Klan, Great Algerstonia, Greater Miami Shores, Infected Mushroom, Kowani, Major-Tom, Rusozak, Salus Maior, Sundiata, Transjlwanja, Valentine Z

Advertisement

Remove ads