It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Evolutionary dynamics of male homosexuality.

page: 11
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 07:58 AM
reply to post by Alexander1111
Let's look at this another way. How come you are intolerant of your body's true & natural gender? How come you don't accept your body's true & natural gender? Your body is normal. Why do you resist what is? Why do you want something else than what is?

It seems like those who need to learn more about tolerance & acceptance are not those who you think.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 03:14 PM
reply to post by schrodingers dog

Yeah. Ah, what are you saying?

I can't find your specific inquiries about my claims of questionable "treatments" for a variety of behavioral "disorders or for openly/obviously homosexual humans and urban centers or resource limitations and homosexual behavior?

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 03:25 PM
reply to post by djerwulfe

I have no idea what you're talking about.
You haven't posted for a while so I don't know what you're referring to or to which of my posts you are responding.
When I click to the link on your post it takes me back to a post that you've already responded to.
You're a strange cat.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 05:21 PM

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
reply to post by djerwulfe

Do you have any facts to support this opinion?
Any studies or published works?
If not I suspect neither person or fact will ever be able to "bully" you.
That for sure, is neither healthy or natural.

(Sorry, even though I try to come off as sharp, I ain't..)

Anyway, it was this remark, above from you, schrodinger's dog. It was confusing to me. I get the impression you think/thought I am dogmatically adherent to some world view or stance on the source/purpose/status of homosexuals that defies conventional logic or the limited attempts at unbiased research into the area.
And I don't understand why. Specifically, is the purpose of the statement anything other than to illustrate that you disagree with me on something subjective, or...?

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 05:42 PM
reply to post by djerwulfe

Let me bring in a post I made whilst you were away:

Originally posted by schrodingers dog

Nature in itself is neutral. The natural world just is. The forests, the animals, the clouds, have no conceptual position of themselves. Humans, depending on their society and culture, put concepts and labels to all that surrounds them.
Let me give you an example:
Let's say that in this moment a little baby girl is born in either of three places.

1. Thailand: In Thailand, no matter what our Western sensibilities might be, it is legal if she registers with the state, for her to become a prostitute at the age of 18. Not only that, but this girl will not be ostresized and will often be respected for supporting her family.

2. Saudi Arabia: According to their modesty laws women can't drive so as to not be exposed to potential sin.

RIYADH (Reuters) - Saudi police have detained a woman for violating rules banning women from driving in the conservative Muslim country, a newspaper said on Sunday.

The woman from Buraida north of Riyadh was stopped by a police patrol after driving 10 km to collect her husband, al-Hayat newspaper said.

The woman's "legal guardian" -- her husband -- was required to sign a declaration that he would not allow her to drive again, it said. It was not immediately clear if she was released or would face legal action.

Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world that forbids women from driving on the basis of fatwas, or religious opinions, from clerics who say it is un-Islamic.
Reuters Sun Jun 15, 2008

3. USA: Here, neither of those two extremes are acceptable.

Same girl, born in three different cultures, all of them convinced that under their cultural interpretation of their religion, have their moral compass absolutely right.
Three cultures that all have their "doctormcauley/Conspiriology" and will judge each other's morality from their own blinder assisted view.
But this little girl is the same little girl no matter where she is born. Same thing applies to homosexuality. No choices here, just natural babies being born, the luck of the draw will determine if they are fortunate enough to be born into a tolerant culture.

[edit on 27-6-2008 by schrodingers dog]

Basically yes I disagree with you. The post you quoted was to illustrate that whilst you're obviously entitled to your position, it is just that, a position. It's perfectly logical for YOU to believe that homosexuality is abnormal, just as it is perfectly logical for a person of another culture to categorize your behavior as abnormal. This thread attempts to distance culture/values from the real ground breaking science that is out there. Thus the approach here, is to address the issue without placing a value/judgement of the act itself.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 05:59 PM

Originally posted by I_AM_that_I_AM

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer

By definition, homosexuality is indeed a disorder. Men were not designed with the intention to have sex with other men.

Actually no, by definition they aren't.
Men were not designed at all.
And you have no actual proof to the contrary.
Until then, arguing about it is pointless.

Then why do woman get pregnant when a males sperm enters the females uterus and embeds itself into the egg?

Because THAT is the way it was designed!

Why doesn't it happen when sperm are swimming upstream in the rectum?

Duh,, well that isn't about what sex is designed for that's just about sex PERIOD sex for sex sake is all that is about. Sex without the responsibilities that go with the intended design. Cheap sex, that comes as an acquired taste for what ever the reason. Excusing homosexual sex by genetic anomaly is just great to excuse why they are that way and just as easily be used to excuse the Jeffery Dahmers of the world. I feel as affected by Gays calling bigotry to anyone that doesn't agree with their life styles as I would John Wayne Gacey for not understanding his genetic screw up "Forcing" him to have sex with children and young males dismembering them and tossing them into the desplaines river and burying them under the floorboards of his basement.

- Con

[edit on 28-6-2008 by Conspiriology]

Mod Edit: Please Review the Following Link: Courtesy Is Mandatory

[edit on 28-6-2008 by DontTreadOnMe]

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 06:03 PM
I understand you, but this is precisley my point. There is basically a universal taboo against homosexuality. The cultures that openly embraced homosexuality as an acceptable or even encouraged behavioral norm are no longer with us, or are "diseased" you might say.
No moral judgement from me. Purely biological. No biological function. No reproductive purpose. Sex is reproductive. That's all genital stimulation and all the associated neural effects are in place to do: drive the species to procreate.
Anything else is abnormal, indulgent, abstract and purposeless. Like many many other common human behaviors.
Social deviance is correlated time and time again to population density, affluence and ultimately decadence.
People who don't have to struggle to live and have kids get bored!
I underatnd the various manifestations and shifting viewpoints of homosexuality in a broad historical sense, yet it doesn't change the fact that homo sapiens are sexually dimorphic. We have males and females to mix the genes via a specific tried and true method of survival.
If homosexuality were "normal" there would be a genetic outcome of the sex act between same sex partners.

I always think of housecats. No homo housecats. Why? Becasue sex is unpleasant for the domesticated feline. Kitty cat penises are barbed. Yet cats have sex alot and have kittens. Why? Hormones. Nothing more. Bio-programming.
Where does this become opinion? Simply, if you ask about the "why" of sex and answer it, then the uselessness of homosexuality is appearent.

Again. No condemning here with values. People enagage in all kinds of deviant behaviors triggered by sooooo many different factors it boggles the mind .

As I mentioned before, defining a homosexual is problematic in and of itself. Men are programmed to actively seek mates. They are more "trigger happy" with their apparatus. Many more reported gay encounters among North American males than females. Why?

[edit on 28-6-2008 by djerwulfe]

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 06:21 PM
reply to post by Conspiriology

whew! But I do see this type of arguing by convenience things.
I've said before that any human behavior can be argued to have a genetic origin, but that doesn't really address the issue becasue people don't generally understand gene expression. Even "experts" don't really.

I've heard of the God Gene.

There may be something to it.
I am alive today only as a result of antibiotics. As are many people. I willlive my life as best I can, but I don't ignore the fact that I would be dead if not for technology. I am a deviant. And I take this into serious consideration when my wife and I talk about our children.

We are, with the kindest intentions at heart, breeding inferior members of the group. To suggest that we knowingly abort defective fetuses is a moral dilemma.
I will say, that I am PRO-CHOICE. People don't debate this like they used to, but I haven't forgotten.
One unique aspect of North America that distinguishes us from some of our peers is a very vocal and influential force that insists on financial rewards for people reproducing without the means to support their offspring. What a dilemma!! What is "right?" How do deny children food and warmth and family? How is a state case worker with the Department of Child-Family services supposed to evaluate these situations objectively and conclusively? How do we protect taxpayer rights and yet head off sufferring?

****************I strongly believe that empowering educating females is the only path to a strong vibrant gene pool without artificial or technological intervention. *********************

Go Girl Power!!! But don't be sluts.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 06:51 PM

Originally posted by djerwulfe
[****************I strongly believe that empowering educating females is the only path to a strong vibrant gene pool without artificial or technological intervention. *********************

Go Girl Power!!! But don't be sluts.

Ha ha I like your posts a lot whether I agree with them or not they are intelligent and entertaining. I am NOT pro choice when pro-choice discriminates against the males biological investment in that life. This is mocked by cynics who suggest all our investment was the pleasure we derived from it. This is not true, the investment may be worthy of a few bartenders jokes but the loss of that son or daughter would have otherwise been the living example of any other son or daughter lost in a car accident or drugs etc,. is just as significant to some of us nevertheless.

I agree with you and woman have a tough situation these days. I sure don't envy them and still think men are pigs, act like pigs etc if not for woman, we would all be barabarians lol

- Con

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 07:10 PM
reply to post by Conspiriology

Fantastic. Appreciated.

I wholly understand your pro-life position. It is so hard to honestly consider legislating a "yes" or "no" blanket policy for this issue. Both sides are arguably "right" as is often the case. Both sides, generally, feel that they have the best interests for The People at heart. And a stance on an issue that gets crammed into these "either or" situations in the public discourse has an infinite variety of motivators and case-specific instances that color an individual's stance. These "black or white" contests are a plague.
And there is no wholly impartial, universally accepted standard or Popular Supreme Judge.
No matter what, the larger the geograohic area that a legal standard is imposed, the more room for abuse and misuse of that law. Unfortunately.

posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 09:34 PM
reply to post by djerwulfe

Well there is a discussion that could be argued to the end of time in and of itself however you DID say something I took a double take on and is so profound a statement it is worth repeating and just as worthy of quoting.

You said "I strongly believe that empowering educating females is the only path to a strong vibrant gene pool without artificial or technological intervention" when you think about it, I mean really think about it, that statement and the areas of our lives our future that can be changed for the better just by realizing the importance the sheer influence a woman who is a mother could have if we were to make more resources available for their education and for husbands of those mothers to appreciate the role they play what a difference that could make. The most important thing I think a child needs is security and love.

When I think back on the kind of mom I had as a child I don't recall that I was ever taught to consider her subject to a man or my Dad per'se and I always got the feeling he was perfectly ok with her raising us four kids. They had a system and the system was the typical Ozzie and Harriet Father knows best, Ward and June kind of family unit and I would say it worked ok. I always felt my mom loved us kids she spoiled us rotten and my Dad made sure we always had a roof over our heads and three squares a day. He wasn't as involved with us on an individual hands on way as I would have liked but he was a Cop and worked a lot of midnights and strange shifts. I see so many kids today growing up in such dismal situations and so many with no father present.

When I was a kid you know the times have changed, we grew up with pot and beer and schools didn't have any problems at all with kids going to school with ak-47's or nine mil Glock shooting everyone with the kind of drugs you try once and are hooked with the kind of ravages that sap your youth from the inside out like Meth and ecstasy.

You got to be a much more in tune parent today with the computer coming out long after I graduated High School I often have wondered what a difference it would have made on me had I the Internet and computers at my disposal back when I was in School and I think it would have been a drastic difference with me making many different choices and probably much better career choices.

I think if I had been home schooled with the kind of parents I had growing up, with a computer back then generational differences not being an object, I would have had a much better education. The kind of problems I had during school from the bullying and just not understanding things I wanted to ask my parents about but was to shy about it. I think when a woman says things like "I'm just a housewife" so apologetic is she when it is without a doubt the most important calling in the world. NOT being a Doctor or Scientist or Lawyer but being a Mom and more men should consider that with all the respect the others get. We are told not to talk about religion in our homes anymore not say grace before dinner not talk about God as if it is a form of child abuse. This humanist secular reasoning is the kind undo was talking about but I still don't think she gets it. We take an oath before God in marriage and God knew this is so important a choice in life sex family all of it that it was so important to screw with it was death. This is why he said this kind of sin of the flesh was so important to get it out of the mind before we must regret not getting it before it was out in our actions.

Why we must talk HARD to this kind of sin. When you consider the kind of punishment God instructed for the person committing adultery it was the death penalty as this idea of marriage and not marrying purely out of attraction but to Christian Character in a family that prays together because it stays together. The kind of behaviors we are asked to be tolerant of the lord instructs are an abomination and should be shunned for the effect is they who have considered to live this lifestyle have hardened hearts and are that much harder to convert many never will.
That is why I think it is right to talk hard about the homosexual the womanizer and not treat this with kid gloves but with rebuke plane and simple the moment we tolerate it the lord says it will flourish and destroy an entire nation attacking it at the family roots.

I think that kind of stuff still goes on but today the challenges are so complicated and a lot of it doesn't have to be if the home was the foundation of our society and the family was taken more seriously then the kind of family,,

planned parenthood

is about.

- Con

[edit on 28-6-2008 by Conspiriology]

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 12:59 AM

Originally posted by MrBender
"Hey I want to be disowned by my family, kicked out of my church, ostracized by all my friends, fired from my job, ridiculed by society in general, and stripped of basic civil rights! Yeah, sign me up that sounds like fun!"

My that sounds familiar, but it has nothing to do with sexuality.


Having read through the thread I feel I should weigh in with my own personal testimony. I’m what is probably best described as a bisexual. I’ve been attracted to both sexes since I was pre-pubescent, but I must admit that the strongest feelings I’ve had have been toward other men, and the longest relationships I’ve had have been with the same sex as well, though that’s not saying much. I spent some 15 years living the gay lifestyle, but have been celibate now for almost a decade. During those 15 years I spent a lot of time and effort talking to my gay friends about their experiences, and what they felt about the origins of their sexuality. I did this as part of an attempt to understand myself and why I am the way I am (I’ve always been rather introspective) as well as understanding others, and how they‘ve come to be how they are. I’ve come to believe that there is no single reason for homosexual behavior, that the reasons and motivations are as disparate as human personalities are. It seems clear that there are rare cases of people with hormonal disorders, hermaphrodites, etc. Who feel trapped in the wrong body for bio-chemical reasons. There are those, like myself and others I’ve known, who were exposed to sexual behaviors, situations, and images at way too young an age, and were profoundly effected by it. I’ve known guys who could never be ‘in love’ with another man, but are addicted to sex and find it most easy to get in the gay community, so that’s where they hang out. I’ve known guys who are ‘in love‘ with the idea of being with a man, but rarely act on their fascination, as dealing with the whole ’wrong equipment’ thing is too much for them. I’ve been accused of ’acting butch’ because I’m not effeminate, by a friend of mine from high school who only started acting ’gay’ once we graduated. My point there is that peer pressure exists in every sub culture. I had another friend from high school who was a tall strapping, good looking, and physically a thoroughly masculine guy, but who had no male role model growing up. He had three older sisters and an absentee dad, and so learned to act like a girl. This guy was a total hunk, but talked like a sissy. Everyone was convinced he was gay, but believe me when I tell you he wasn’t (and I even seduced a couple of football players). He’s married with three kids now. My point is that people are complex, and sexuality is without doubt our most complex behavior. The idea that sexuality could be determined soly by genetics, or by environment alone is sophomoric, IMO. We are each as unique as our fingerprints. Different people react differently to the same experiences, so there is a definite genetic component, but we are also very much the products of our environment. My .02

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 01:16 AM
Nice courageous work my friend.
Very well said.
Star for you!
If I were a mod I'd give you two applause.

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 01:18 AM
i was wrong

[edit on 29-6-2008 by doctormcauley]

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 01:35 AM
reply to post by resistor

resistor....I tried to read your seemed genuine. There were no paragraph breaks, but I've seen some ATS threads have this problem, so I won't blame your writing skills.

If you are genuine, in what you wrote, then kudos. You seem to have pointed out how, in some venues, people are different. Bisexuality seems to be a real phenomenon....I don't get it, but others may. Who am I to judge? Who is ANYBODY to judge???

I've tried to point out the hyprocrisy, without actually saying the words....but I will now say the words. STRAIGHT men are sexually attracted to two women engaging in sex!! There are many, many STRAIGHT men who are getting excited, right now, by my very words, I'd imagine. Just the thought, the image.....

These same 'STRAIGHT' men....(not all of them, of course, just the ones in Congress...and NOT ALL of know who!) try to lord over other people, to impose their 'values' and other BS nonsense.....over others' rights, just to satisfy their twisted agendas, and twisted 'beliefs'.

We have a current situation, on the SC...Scalia and Thomas, especially....those two seem to be homosexual blood brothers, or something!!! I'm not saying they're having sex.....but they are WAY too close for comfort!!!!!! Let's starta new thread....Scalia and Thomas are Gay Lovers!!!!

Yeah, Boy!!! THAT should get some attention!!!!

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 12:05 PM

Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
reply to post by WickedStar

"Dude" learn to mind your own business, OR learn to pay enough attention not to make yourself look stupid.
"Dude" posted, in reference to my post, with an uncalled for accusation, and did not direct any of his links at my post. Just the knee jerk racist whine because I do not agree.
So next time, don't embarass yourse

Unbelievable. You're being a cry-baby over a joke. Seriously? That's your problem right now? Look pumpkin, have a little herbal tea and learn to breathe slowly. Now take a good look at my profile...

We see Kevin Smith, an Opie and Anthony banner, South Park visitors, and Bill Hicks' quotes.

I'm going to break the fourth wall here, but no matter how serious a subject I will take a moment to make a joke. I HATE having to explain humor, but apparently my joke hurt your wittle feelings, so I'll make a special exception and be a coddling parent... just for you.

ALSO, the joke was not meant to imply that you're being racist, but considering how defensive you got maybe we ought to rethink that.
The joke stemmed from the fact that you used the "Spade" line. Get it. You said "call a spade a spade." In real life, whenever I hear that line my response always is, "or we could just call a spade a 'n-word,' (of course I say the actual word). Here in internet land you usually can't phrase it that way because everybody is a sensitive cry-baby with sand on their tampons. They assume that just by using the "EN WORD OMGZ!!1" you are a racist. Speaking of sensitive people, are you feeling better sweetie pie, now that I've explained it all nice-nice for you? Had some tea? Wiped the sand off?

Great. Now, stop claiming I have an "agenda." See, I know a few gay guys, and they're good guys, you know, good fellas. They're a hell of a lot more compassionate than I am, and I do try to be nice, but I know that I'm a douche nozzle. I also know from our conversations that being gay isn't a choice for them. You see, there's this thing that I, and all straight guys, like so much, and these gay gentlemen simply consider it a furry dumpster. They love women, but they wouldn't go near that horrible, garbage juice-leaking thing if you paid them. Oh wait, I'm using a little humor again, I'd better slow down before I hurt some feelings. Anyway, the bottom line is that the homosexual issue, in reality, doesn't affect me one iota, I just hate ignorance.

I also have empathy and fully understand that being gay is a genetic crap shoot. You're being concieved, the universe rolls snake eyes, and now you like man-ass. No big deal, right, some people are left handed, and some people are gay? Wrong. Our society has put this awful stigma on being gay. Gay people suffer from the last socially acceptable prejudice. At least racists hide their prejudice.

And here is where I stop. Sure, I could post anecdotal evidence of relatives, failed marriages, pain, suffering, turmoil, and all of these other wonderful things that have directly come out of society's attitudes towards homosexuality, but who the hell am I to pretend I can relate?

Also, I did not post any "opinions." I posted "facts." You know, those crazy things that get in the way of biggoted opinions. You can still have your opinions regardless of the facts, that's what makes America so great, but that is indeed called ignorance. And you know what, you're free to be ignorant, but here on ATS most members don't like ignorance, and we strive to deny it, just like the motto says. Remember though, this is ATS, and instead of ignoring evidence and facts, you should be contructing a conspiracy theory around why the facts don't agree with your opinion. Start researching the evil GWO and their agenda to skew studies by paying off scientists so that gays will be more accepted in society. Then, in 2012, all straight men will be enslaved to good fashion, grooming, and designer fragrances...

OH NOES!!!11!!

The bottom line, if you're going to hate someone, don't do it for something silly . If you hate people because their primary concern when picking out a couch is how their face will feel pressed into the cushions, maybe you need a hobby...

Oh no, a little joke, yet again. Nobody cry.

I'm going to make the "Don Imus" thread so every time I make a joke that hurts someones feelings I can just post to that thread and apologize.


Originally posted by forsakenwayfarer
reply to post by Sunsetspawn

What has become of ATS?

You make rash accusation based on disagreement with your opinion

We covered this, it was a joke. And don't you mean disagreement with documented fact? I did post facts, after all.

and obvious persecution issues because of your homo-sexuality.

So maybe you could point out where I said I was gay?

I'm sorry, what's that?

Exactly, you can't. I suppose you just love being wrong. Well, maybe you don't, but you should learn to because you're so good at it.

Oh, wait, I know. Because I zealously oppose biggotry against homosexuals, that makes me gay? Well, I guess you can call me a spade too.

See what I did there, it's called a callback

In short, no one outside your circlejerk wants to talk to you.

Now that's not true, plenty of people besides my teenage ballerina girlfriend talk to me? In a few months I have to stop referring to her as teenage though, doesn't that suck?

And please, circle jerk is for amatuers. Ookie cookie is where it's at.

Nothing has become of ATS.

Disingenuousness and shinanigans. You know damn well that many of the good CTers AND debunkers have gone away and there are many more biggotted idiots and religious zealots. You've been here for years so I know that you're aware of this.

[edit on 6/29/2008 by Sunsetspawn]

posted on Jun, 30 2008 @ 02:37 PM
reply to post by Conspiriology

I will ALWAYS be sick to my stomach watching two guys kissing.

Reminds me of a funny story.

PETER GRANT: Hi, I'm Peter Grant. I manage Led Zeppelin.

BOB DYLAN: Do I come to you with my problems?

posted on Jun, 30 2008 @ 03:24 PM

Originally posted by dave420

You can't look at someone's DNA and go "Yup - there's the gay gene - he must like Dolly Parton and scented candles". That is a horrifically patronising view of the human genome, homosexuality, and human sexuality in general

Jeez,, ya know what I am getting tired of is you Atheists wanting to engage in every debased depraved act then have a reason to excuse yourself from it no matter how un natural it is according to the ergonomically incorrect the act obvioulsy is in the case of some sexual acts, you will argue it isn't by choice while any other bent like sex with animals or the dead,, well those can stay in the sicko category and have nothing to do with genetics. '

Not only that but you want us to accept it than make legislation endorse it

not only that but while it may be genetic, then if it is,, it is obviously a birth defect.

NOPE you don't want any stigma like that attached to it either wanting us to accept it, legislate it into endorse it and then say it is natural and the way nature intended it to be. Not only that but want it stricken from the bible and made morally acceptable while having no stereotypes even while it is a curious coincedence that almost all of you here are darwinist atheists who defend this position mocking us Christians as if we are saying:

You can't look at someone's DNA and go "Yup - there's the gay gene - he must like Dolly Parton and scented candles". That is a horrifically patronising view of the human genome, homosexuality, and human sexuality in general

When that is exactly what Atheists at the rational response squad and many of you here have done as Atheists linking us to the "God Gene" saying, Yup,, he must ignore reason and logic, dum de dum dum,, I bet he doesn't see facts very well when they are right infront of him ,, dum de dum dum

I am willing to consider the genetic aspect of it but I am not making any promises I will read anyones research and promise to read it.

If it is so,, than it is a defect like any other and no that doesn't mean we should "fix them" but asking me to accept all of your suggestions is just overwhelming to me.

- Con

[edit on 30-6-2008 by Conspiriology]

posted on Jun, 30 2008 @ 03:25 PM

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by Conspiriology

I will ALWAYS be sick to my stomach watching two guys kissing.

Reminds me of a funny story.

PETER GRANT: Hi, I'm Peter Grant. I manage Led Zeppelin.

BOB DYLAN: Do I come to you with my problems?



- Con

posted on Jun, 30 2008 @ 04:19 PM

They love women, but they wouldn't go near that horrible, garbage juice-leaking thing if you paid them.

I find the statistics that caused this long chain reaction, interesting. Nature definitely does create hurdles for us to either leap over or learn to live with.

But your words above are offensive. Truly. This thread isn't about woman bashing. And it definitely hurt my wittle feelings. Yup. I was unpleasantly shocked by it and found it lacking in taste and constructivity.

new topics

top topics

<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in