NATION

PASSWORD

Should families who reject LGBT children by guilty of abuse?

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

Should rejection, and anti-LGBT+ treatment, by parents be classified as a form of abuse/neglect?

Yes
244
51%
No
164
34%
Maybe so
39
8%
I'm a fabulous Flamingo~!
31
6%
 
Total votes : 478

User avatar
Noraika
Minister
 
Posts: 2589
Founded: Nov 29, 2014
Ex-Nation

Should families who reject LGBT children by guilty of abuse?

Postby Noraika » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:23 am

To provide a working definition of neglect and abuse, it is defined as "any non-accidental behaviour by parents, caregivers, other adults or older adolescents that is outside the norms of conduct and entails a substantial risk of causing physical or emotional harm to a child or young person. Such behaviours may be intentional or unintentional and can include acts of omission (i.e., neglect) and commission (i.e., abuse)." [1]

With regards to LGB+ and Transgender youth, there is strong evidence to conclude that rejection, by family, and particularly parents, has severe impacts on the positive life outcomes and mental health of the youth. This impact can either be positive if parents are supportive or accepting, or negative if parents are un-supportive or rejecting.

"[H]ow families respond when youth come out during adolescence can have a powerful impact on young people’s health and well-being...Family connections have been shown to prevent major health risks and are a critical foundation for general well-being for all children...how they react and adjust to their children’s coming out can have a dramatic and compelling impact on their LGBT children’s health, mental health and well-being. LGBT young people whose parents and caregivers reject them or try to change them are at high risk for depression, substance abuse, suicide and HIV infection. And LGBT young people whose parents support them and stand up for them show much higher levels of self-esteem and greater well-being, with lower rates of health and mental health problems." [2]

These negative impacts can carry on into adulthood, with "LGB adults who reported high rates of parental rejection in their teens were 8.4 times more likely to report having attempted suicide, 5.9 times more likely to report high levels of depression, 3.4 times more likely to use illegal drugs, and 3.4 times more likely to have had unprotected sex than LGB peers who reported no or low levels of family rejection." [3] These findings are continually supported by other studies, whether specifically LGBT+, transgender, or otherwise. [4]

This is of course, not all the data which could be presented, but I'd like to keep this at a bearable length.

My Two Cents is that it most certainly should be considered a form of child abuse. It is clear time and time again that this is something which is extremely detrimental to the mental health, and positive life outcomes, of LGBT+ youth, and is definitely significant enough for this to be considered a type of abusive treatment.

Parents and families must be educated and taught that, regardless of their opinions on their child being LGB+ and/or Transgender, regardless of any 'sincerely-held beliefs' on the topic, they do not have authority or control over this aspect of their child's life, and that it is not appropriate for them to reject, try to change, or treat differently, their children for this reason.

Trying to change, or rejecting, a child because of their sexual orientation or gender identity, has every reason, from everything I can tell, to be considered a form of child abuse.
LOVEWHOYOUARE~
TRANSEQUALITY~
~ Economic Left -9.38 | Social Libertarian -2.77 ~
~ 93 Equality - 36 Liberty - 50 Stability ~

Democratic Socialism ● Egalitarianism ● Feminism ● LGBT+ rights ● Monarchism ● Social Justice ● Souverainism ● Statism


Pronouns: She/Her ♀️
Pagan and proud! ⛦
Gender and sex aren't the same thing!

User avatar
Renewed Imperial Germany
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6928
Founded: Jun 18, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Renewed Imperial Germany » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:25 am

Yes. 100%, unequivocally, yes.
Bailey Quinn, Nice ta meet ya! (Female Pronouns Please)
Also known as Harley
NS Stats are not used here.
<3 Alex's NS Wife <3
Normal is a setting on the dryer

User avatar
Uxupox
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13448
Founded: Nov 13, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Uxupox » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:26 am

My kids are getting the boot whether they like it or not when they reach 18.
Economic Left/Right: 0.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.00

User avatar
Othelos
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12727
Founded: Feb 05, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Othelos » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:27 am

It depends on the level of rejection. Ideally a parent who doesn't agree with/like LGBT people would continue to treat the child the same while maintaining a healthy distance. But treating the child badly or kicking out a child for being LGBT should be considered abuse.
American & German, ich kann auch Deutsch. I'm a democratic socialist and I support the reorganization of the economy into worker cooperatives. I have a B.S. in finance.

Economic Left/Right: -4.0
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.51
Pro: Human rights, equality, LGBT rights, market socialism, socialized healthcare, worker cooperatives, the EU in theory, green energy, public transportation, the internet as a utility
Anti: Authoritarian regimes and systems, the Chinese government, the modern capitalist system, identity politics, die AfD, populism, organized religion, Erdogan, assault weapon ownership
Free Tibet and Hong Kong | Keep Taiwan Independent

User avatar
Noraika
Minister
 
Posts: 2589
Founded: Nov 29, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Noraika » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:30 am

Othelos wrote:It depends on the level of rejection. Ideally a parent who doesn't agree with/like LGBT people would continue to treat the child the same while maintaining a healthy distance. But treating the child badly or kicking out a child for being LGBT should be considered abuse.

Couldn't fit that into the title. ^^;
As I said in the OP, we can have parents who don't agree, but aren't abusive, but this is specifically discussing when this impacts the child in a negative manner, which is correlated with higher levels. With that said, the word "reject" can only be interpreted so many ways, and non-abusive rejection would be the exception to the rule.
Last edited by Noraika on Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
LOVEWHOYOUARE~
TRANSEQUALITY~
~ Economic Left -9.38 | Social Libertarian -2.77 ~
~ 93 Equality - 36 Liberty - 50 Stability ~

Democratic Socialism ● Egalitarianism ● Feminism ● LGBT+ rights ● Monarchism ● Social Justice ● Souverainism ● Statism


Pronouns: She/Her ♀️
Pagan and proud! ⛦
Gender and sex aren't the same thing!

User avatar
Central European Commonwealth
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 403
Founded: Aug 26, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Central European Commonwealth » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:33 am

Yes. And whoever is in charge of Child Protection should go Barnevernet on their asses.
Last edited by Central European Commonwealth on Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
Vote in our parliamentary elections!

Economic Left/Right: -7.75

Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -9.23
Loves: Environmentalism, Social Libertarianism, Feminism, Mhairi Black, Bioregionalism, Razem, LGBT+ rights, Voltairine De Cleyre
Likes: Keynesianism, Prometheism, Robert Biedroń, The Nordic Model, Social Justice, The SNP, Lewica, Wiosna, Nicola Sturgeon, Emma Goldman, Daniel DeLeon
Meh: Socialism, Minarchism, PO, Dharmic Religion, Political Correctness, MRM, The Labour Party, The Democratic Party, Donald Tusk
Dislikes: Communism, Conservatism, PiS, Abrahamic Religion, Andrzej Duda
Hates: Totalitarianism, Stalinism, Fascism, Nazism, Ethnic Nationalism, The GOP, Konfederacja, Donald Trump, Putin


User avatar
Benuty
Post Czar
 
Posts: 36268
Founded: Jan 21, 2013
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Benuty » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:34 am

Thanks for making me blind with that OP.
Last edited by Hashem 13.8 billion years ago
King of Madness in the Right Wing Discussion Thread. Winner of 2016 Posters Award for Insanity.
Please be aware my posts in NSG, and P2TM are separate.

User avatar
United Marxist Nations
Post Czar
 
Posts: 33804
Founded: Dec 02, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby United Marxist Nations » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:35 am

What is meant by rejection? I wouldn't reject the individual, or even their orientation, but I would certainly reject any activity in-line with said orientation.
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.

Eastern Orthodox Catechumen. Religious communitarian with Sorelian, Marxist, and Traditionalist influences. Sympathies toward Sunni Islam. All flags/avatars are chosen for aesthetic or humor purposes only
An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.

User avatar
Benuty
Post Czar
 
Posts: 36268
Founded: Jan 21, 2013
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Benuty » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:35 am

Uxupox wrote:My kids are getting the boot whether they like it or not when they reach 18.

Please you are all like children to me.

I kicked mine out when they hit 1000 years.
Last edited by Hashem 13.8 billion years ago
King of Madness in the Right Wing Discussion Thread. Winner of 2016 Posters Award for Insanity.
Please be aware my posts in NSG, and P2TM are separate.

User avatar
Vassenor
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 52108
Founded: Nov 11, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Vassenor » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:35 am

Central European Commonwealth wrote:Yes. And whoever is in charge of Child Protection should go Barnevernet on their asses.


Aside from their screwup that was kind of responsible for the Breivik incident.
Jenny / Sailor Astraea
WOMAN

MtF trans and proud - She / Her / etc.
100% Asbestos Free

Team Mystic
#iamEUropean

User avatar
Benuty
Post Czar
 
Posts: 36268
Founded: Jan 21, 2013
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Benuty » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:37 am

Vassenor wrote:
Central European Commonwealth wrote:Yes. And whoever is in charge of Child Protection should go Barnevernet on their asses.


Aside from their screwup that was kind of responsible for the Breivik incident.

Not just Brevik, but from what I read quite a few more incidents.
Last edited by Hashem 13.8 billion years ago
King of Madness in the Right Wing Discussion Thread. Winner of 2016 Posters Award for Insanity.
Please be aware my posts in NSG, and P2TM are separate.

User avatar
United Furry Alliance
Diplomat
 
Posts: 795
Founded: Mar 28, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby United Furry Alliance » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:37 am

Yes
Past-A small island nation of warrior monks
Modern-continent sized nation Run by Scholars.
Futuristic-Star sized mobile station that travels the multiverse run by scientists.
Pros-Science and democracies,USA(mostly),Atheism,Blueberries.
Cons-Religon,Monarchy,Cherries,

User avatar
Noraika
Minister
 
Posts: 2589
Founded: Nov 29, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Noraika » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:38 am

United Marxist Nations wrote:What is meant by rejection? I wouldn't reject the individual, or even their orientation, but I would certainly reject any activity in-line with said orientation.

"Parents and families must be educated and taught that, regardless of their opinions on their child being LGB+ and/or Transgender, regardless of any 'sincerely-held beliefs' on the topic, they do not have authority or control over this aspect of their child's life, and that it is not appropriate for them to reject, try to change, or treat differently, their children for this reason."
- Glorious OP :p
LOVEWHOYOUARE~
TRANSEQUALITY~
~ Economic Left -9.38 | Social Libertarian -2.77 ~
~ 93 Equality - 36 Liberty - 50 Stability ~

Democratic Socialism ● Egalitarianism ● Feminism ● LGBT+ rights ● Monarchism ● Social Justice ● Souverainism ● Statism


Pronouns: She/Her ♀️
Pagan and proud! ⛦
Gender and sex aren't the same thing!

User avatar
The Serbian Empire
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 58026
Founded: Apr 18, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby The Serbian Empire » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:39 am

Definitely yes. I see it as dereliction of parenting duties.
LOVEWHOYOUARE~ WOMAN
Level 12 Myrmidon, Level ⑨ Tsundere, Level ✿ Hold My Flower
Bad Idea Purveyor
8 Values: https://8values.github.io/results.html?e=56.1&d=70.2&g=86.5&s=91.9
Political Compass: Economic -10.00 Authoritarian: -9.13
TG for Facebook if you want to friend me
Marissa, Goddess of Stratospheric Reach
preferred pronouns: Female ones
Primarily lesbian, but pansexual in nature

User avatar
Aelex
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11398
Founded: Jun 05, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Aelex » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:39 am

No. It's the right of the kid than to chose a life-style as long as they aren't harming anyone in the process but it's also the right of the parents than to not support this life-style even if, depending on it's intensity, said lack of support can be down-right dickish.

Now, as the brother of a lesbian, I myself adopt a stance of "benevolently not giving a shit" because I love her and thus try to don't act any differently as I would if she was straight; but, I honestly don't think I would be as accepting if it was for my own children.
Citoyen Français. Bonapartiste Républicain (aka De Gaule's Gaullisme) with Keynesian leanings on economics. Latin Christian.

User avatar
United Marxist Nations
Post Czar
 
Posts: 33804
Founded: Dec 02, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby United Marxist Nations » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:39 am

Noraika wrote:
United Marxist Nations wrote:What is meant by rejection? I wouldn't reject the individual, or even their orientation, but I would certainly reject any activity in-line with said orientation.

"Parents and families must be educated and taught that, regardless of their opinions on their child being LGB+ and/or Transgender, regardless of any 'sincerely-held beliefs' on the topic, they do not have authority or control over this aspect of their child's life, and that it is not appropriate for them to reject, try to change, or treat differently, their children for this reason."
- Glorious OP :p

That doesn't really answer the question. If I were to try to maintain a child's celibacy or to prevent them from undergoing sexual reassignment until adulthood (and disown them in the event that they were to do the latter after the age of 18), would I be considered 'abusive'?
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.

Eastern Orthodox Catechumen. Religious communitarian with Sorelian, Marxist, and Traditionalist influences. Sympathies toward Sunni Islam. All flags/avatars are chosen for aesthetic or humor purposes only
An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.

User avatar
Benuty
Post Czar
 
Posts: 36268
Founded: Jan 21, 2013
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Benuty » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:42 am

The Serbian Empire wrote:Definitely yes. I see it as dereliction of parenting duties.

Back in my day we could just claim the child as a bastard. Thus freeing us of caring for them.

Surprised no one has thought of that.
Last edited by Hashem 13.8 billion years ago
King of Madness in the Right Wing Discussion Thread. Winner of 2016 Posters Award for Insanity.
Please be aware my posts in NSG, and P2TM are separate.

User avatar
Renewed Imperial Germany
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6928
Founded: Jun 18, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Renewed Imperial Germany » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:43 am

United Marxist Nations wrote:
Noraika wrote:"Parents and families must be educated and taught that, regardless of their opinions on their child being LGB+ and/or Transgender, regardless of any 'sincerely-held beliefs' on the topic, they do not have authority or control over this aspect of their child's life, and that it is not appropriate for them to reject, try to change, or treat differently, their children for this reason."
- Glorious OP :p

That doesn't really answer the question. If I were to try to maintain a child's celibacy or to prevent them from undergoing sexual reassignment until adulthood (and disown them in the event that they were to do the latter after the age of 18), would I be considered 'abusive'?


The bolded part is extremely abusive.
Bailey Quinn, Nice ta meet ya! (Female Pronouns Please)
Also known as Harley
NS Stats are not used here.
<3 Alex's NS Wife <3
Normal is a setting on the dryer

User avatar
Luminesa
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 55150
Founded: Dec 09, 2014
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Luminesa » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:43 am

Noraika wrote:
Othelos wrote:It depends on the level of rejection. Ideally a parent who doesn't agree with/like LGBT people would continue to treat the child the same while maintaining a healthy distance. But treating the child badly or kicking out a child for being LGBT should be considered abuse.

Couldn't fit that into the title. ^^;
As I said in the OP, we can have parents who don't agree, but aren't abusive, but this is specifically discussing when this impacts the child in a negative manner, which is correlated with higher levels. With that said, the word "reject" can only be interpreted so many ways, and non-abusive rejection would be the exception to the rule.

I mean, a parent telling a child "no" is going to impact them negatively no matter what the situation is. Kids just don't like being told "no". But that's not abuse. The idea is, "Is the parent going to be loving and caring of their child, even though they disagree on [insert disagreement here], or are they going to try and bring them down verbally or physically because of [insert disagreement here]." Because there's nothing inherently wrong with saying, "I disagree with what you're doing, but if you ever run into trouble in life, I'll always be here to give you hugs and bake you cookies and love you."
Catholic, pro-life, and proud of it. I prefer my debates on religion, politics, and sports with some coffee and a little Aquinas and G.K. CHESTERTON here and there. Not that I need the coffee, but you know... :3

So apparently I am an ENFP!

Unofficial #1 fan of the Who Dat Nation.
"I'm just a singer of simple songs, I'm not a real political man. I watch CNN, but I'm not sure I can tell you the difference in Iraq and Iran. But I know Jesus, and I talk to God, and I remember this from when I was young:
faith, hope and love are some good things He gave us...
and the greatest is love."
-Alan Jackson

User avatar
Romakivila
Diplomat
 
Posts: 519
Founded: Jun 02, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Romakivila » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:43 am

It depends, but in most cases sure. However I'm concerned that by doing this you go down a slippery slope when intervening with parenting.
Why don't you have a seat please?

User avatar
Renewed Imperial Germany
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6928
Founded: Jun 18, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Renewed Imperial Germany » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:44 am

Aelex wrote:No. It's the right of the kid than to chose a life-style as long as they aren't harming anyone in the process but it's also the right of the parents than to not support this life-style even if, depending on it's intensity, said lack of support can be down-right dickish.

Now, as the brother of a lesbian, I myself adopt a stance of "benevolently not giving a shit" because I love her and thus try to don't act any differently as I would if she was straight; but, I honestly don't think I would be as accepting if it was for my own children.


Parents have no right to harm their children, and no-one 'chooses' to be LGBTQIA.
Bailey Quinn, Nice ta meet ya! (Female Pronouns Please)
Also known as Harley
NS Stats are not used here.
<3 Alex's NS Wife <3
Normal is a setting on the dryer

User avatar
Noraika
Minister
 
Posts: 2589
Founded: Nov 29, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Noraika » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:45 am

Aelex wrote:No. It's the right of the kid than to chose a life-style as long as they aren't harming anyone in the process but it's also the right of the parents than to not support this life-style even if, depending on it's intensity, said lack of support can be down-right dickish.

Now, as the brother of a lesbian, I myself adopt a stance of "benevolently not giving a shit" because I love her and thus try to don't act any differently as I would if she was straight; but, I honestly don't think I would be as accepting if it was for my own children.

And how does the impact that parental rejection has on the child not fall within the legal definitions of abuse, given its emotional and psychological impact?

United Marxist Nations wrote:That doesn't really answer the question. If I were to try to maintain a child's celibacy or to prevent them from undergoing sexual reassignment until adulthood (and disown them in the event that they were to do the latter after the age of 18), would I be considered 'abusive'?

A parent refusing to allow their child to receive treatment which is medically necessary (which is what transitioning is), is entirely abusive, becuase it compromises the health of the child for the 'preferences' of the parents. The medical standards of care quite clearly state, in the WPATH Standards of Care v7, that even "withholding puberty suppression and subsequent feminizing or masculinizing hormone therapy is not a neutral option for adolescents." and that such a decision is not the parent's right to do.
Last edited by Noraika on Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
LOVEWHOYOUARE~
TRANSEQUALITY~
~ Economic Left -9.38 | Social Libertarian -2.77 ~
~ 93 Equality - 36 Liberty - 50 Stability ~

Democratic Socialism ● Egalitarianism ● Feminism ● LGBT+ rights ● Monarchism ● Social Justice ● Souverainism ● Statism


Pronouns: She/Her ♀️
Pagan and proud! ⛦
Gender and sex aren't the same thing!

User avatar
United Marxist Nations
Post Czar
 
Posts: 33804
Founded: Dec 02, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby United Marxist Nations » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:45 am

Renewed Imperial Germany wrote:
United Marxist Nations wrote:That doesn't really answer the question. If I were to try to maintain a child's celibacy or to prevent them from undergoing sexual reassignment until adulthood (and disown them in the event that they were to do the latter after the age of 18), would I be considered 'abusive'?


The bolded part is extremely abusive.

How? I don't technically have legal obligation to them at that point, so, if they do something that they can't take back, and which violates my religious beliefs, why shouldn't I disown them?
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.

Eastern Orthodox Catechumen. Religious communitarian with Sorelian, Marxist, and Traditionalist influences. Sympathies toward Sunni Islam. All flags/avatars are chosen for aesthetic or humor purposes only
An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.

User avatar
United Marxist Nations
Post Czar
 
Posts: 33804
Founded: Dec 02, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby United Marxist Nations » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:47 am

Noraika wrote:
Aelex wrote:No. It's the right of the kid than to chose a life-style as long as they aren't harming anyone in the process but it's also the right of the parents than to not support this life-style even if, depending on it's intensity, said lack of support can be down-right dickish.

Now, as the brother of a lesbian, I myself adopt a stance of "benevolently not giving a shit" because I love her and thus try to don't act any differently as I would if she was straight; but, I honestly don't think I would be as accepting if it was for my own children.

And how does the impact that parental rejection has on the child not fall within the legal definitions of abuse, given its emotional and psychological impact?

United Marxist Nations wrote:That doesn't really answer the question. If I were to try to maintain a child's celibacy or to prevent them from undergoing sexual reassignment until adulthood (and disown them in the event that they were to do the latter after the age of 18), would I be considered 'abusive'?

A parent refusing to allow their child to receive treatment which is medically necessary (which is what transitioning is), is entirely abusive, becuase it compromises the health of the child for the 'preferences' of the parents. The medical standards of care quite clearly state, in the WPATH Standards of Care v7, that even "withholding puberty suppression and subsequent feminizing or masculinizing hormone therapy is not a neutral option for adolescents." and that such a decision is not the parent's right to do.

In that case, I would rather just let the state take them off my hands if they were to transition against my will.
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.

Eastern Orthodox Catechumen. Religious communitarian with Sorelian, Marxist, and Traditionalist influences. Sympathies toward Sunni Islam. All flags/avatars are chosen for aesthetic or humor purposes only
An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.

User avatar
Renewed Imperial Germany
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6928
Founded: Jun 18, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Renewed Imperial Germany » Sun Jul 24, 2016 11:47 am

United Marxist Nations wrote:
Renewed Imperial Germany wrote:
The bolded part is extremely abusive.

How? I don't technically have legal obligation to them at that point, so, if they do something that they can't take back, and which violates my religious beliefs, why shouldn't I disown them?


Because, they are still your child, and disowning them is more or less telling them 'you don't matter to me.' Religion of love my ass.
Bailey Quinn, Nice ta meet ya! (Female Pronouns Please)
Also known as Harley
NS Stats are not used here.
<3 Alex's NS Wife <3
Normal is a setting on the dryer

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bear Stearns, Cisairse, Cordel One, Democratic Peoples republic of Kelvinsi, Dollystana, Dresderstan, Elejamie, Greed and Death, Havl, Jamesburgh, Kargintina the Third, Maineiacs, Philjia, Region of Dwipantara, San Lumen, Shazbotdom, Shrillland, South Odreria 2, Stellar Colonies, The Black Forrest, The Rich Port, Thermodolia, Tungusic Republic, Uiiop, US-SSR, Valentine Z, Valrifell, Zixu

Advertisement

Remove ads