RE: The Dualism of Obedience

RE: The Dualism of Obedience (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress

Message

MisPandora -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/19/2006 9:58:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MsKatHouston If I am continually fighting with a submissive over the smallest things then I don't waste my time with them. My punishments are not fun for me or the slave. If I have to expend a lot of energy on punishments alone and get no satisfactory play and companionship, then they are not worth it to me. I think anyone who chooses to enter into a D/s relationship does so willingly and should do enough research and communication on the onset to ensure you are compatible with your desires and limits. I don't see enforcement as the same as punishment. I can enforce rules in a positive way to make the slave want to continue to obey. I can make it fulfilling for the slave as well, thus enforcing my will. We deal with humans...enforcement does not necessarily mean a slave is UNwilling imo I think his misconception is that the domina is obligated to provide corporal punishment, or at least that's what I gleaned from his post. Personally, I am served by SM submissives, and I never punish them with corporal. That's like giving a kid candy for doing something wrong. If the disappointment of Mistress isn't enough to appropriately motivate them, we're going to have a serious talk. If the unwanted behavior continues despite interventions, I would consider dismissal. I have no need for someone to be in service to me that consistently wants to be displeasing. Service is not to turn into "my chore" or problem; rather, if it is so time consuming or grief-ridden, I'd rather dismiss and do it myself. End of story.

MisPandora -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/19/2006 10:01:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: anthrosub Hmmm...I guess what I'm talking about is the difference between those who enjoy enforcement via corporal punishment and feel it's necessary versus those who simply want peaceful, willing compliance. I think your misconception, as I have stated previously, is that the domina is obligated to "enforce via corporal". Any nitwit with half a brain knows that giving someone something they want for an unwanted behavior is not going to CHANGE the unwanted behavior. Perhaps I'm not catching that you actually understand that "enforcement" can be achieved by other means.......but your posts certainly don't reflect that.

subfever -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/19/2006 10:05:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TeeGO quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy quote: How is having obedience and good service not having kink? Do you think I'd spend any of my time mummifying Fox or tying him up or the other things he enjoys if he needed me to force him to obey me? Not likely because he wouldn't be around here long enough to ever enjoy those fun parts of BDSM. Dear Tammjo, Under the Unpaid Labor Doctrine, there is NO KINK and there is NO SEX. You have KINK and I would infer, some sex. Kink may not be the reason Fox obeys you, and you may not use it to enforce his obedience, but it plays a key role in your M/S relationship --- so by my own definition, Fox is not subject to the UNPAID LABOR DOCTRINE. What Anthrosub is saying is perfectly valid. Giving orders, being a taskmaster, and expecting the sub to exert self discipline without kink or sex is not BDSM --- it is something else. I would say its part of the Unpaid Labor Doctrine or to be less generous, part of the Boss Some Guy Around Club. I'll take it one step further, BDSM stripped of kink or sex is simply Vanilla power exchange and or colorless manipulation. A service component only leaves subs wondering, "Why don't I just marry some bitchy woman instead?" I agree with you completely cloudboy. I'm mostly in agreement. If a male's desire to submit is not motivated by his libido, then what else could it be motivated by? A need to process unresolved negative emotions? A need to perpetuate and/or validate a damaged self-esteem? Or...? I'm not trying to be judgmental here, I just don't understand non-sensual, "no-strings" submission. How can this be motivated by something healthy and positive? Someone please explain this to me. Disclaimer: I'm not trying to say that every submissive act has to be directly tied to a sensual/sexual pay-off. I'm talking about the basic underlying motivation for wanting to submit in the first place.

AAkasha -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/19/2006 10:21:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: anthrosub I'm posting this under "Ask a Mistress" because that's the perspective from which I would like to discuss the topic. So please forgive me for skipping the General forum. For a long time I have been fascinated by the dualism within the lifestyle and feel obedience is a good point from which to start. This means I see it elsewhere. I'd like to hear what others have experienced in reflecting on the dynamics of dualism. When it comes to obedience, One might say it's to be expected as a willing act and yet there's also the aspect of enforcement. If it's willing, why would there need to be enforcement...if it's enforced, how can it rightfully be called a willing act? From here, you can start exploring the idea of what is a willing act and go on from there. Perhaps the resolution of this dichotomy is that a slave's will is "allowed" and metered by the Owner. In other words, the slave is given or instructed just how much intiative can be expressed without permission. But this seems like it would be a lot of work. Still, in my view it would provide for both "willing" obedience and enforcement. Whenever the subject exceeds the limitations while exercising will, that's when enforcement comes in. Perhaps this all goes hand in hand with sadomasochistic tendencies. I'm bringing this up because I've seen profiles and/or talked with Dominants who have no interest in enforcement (as in corporal punishment) and expect only willing obedience. I wonder how prevalent this view (only willing obedience) is and how rewarding it has been for those who practice it. anthrosub My partner does the dishes and keeps the house clean because that's just part of his responsibilities in the relationship. There is no need for punishment or adjusting his behavior. There is no tension or domination in this area of our relationshipo, or any "service" area of our relationship. Nor is there tension/dominance related to (most of the time) when I want sex or an orgasm or a backrub; I ask for it, he gives it. I don't have to dominate him to get it; he does not have to pretend to be a brat, or play any mindgames with me to create drama. However, I have a sadistic, fetishy streak that must be addressed/fed on a regular basis. It is a desire to make him submit to things that go against his nature or are not easy for him. I get the desire to "break him down" and make him surrender to me. Of course, deep down, he wants this too; that does not mean the acts are not challenging for him. Depending on how my mood is, it might be minor or it might be a long night or weekend of torments. I get my femdom "itch" scratched that way -- not through maintaining things I want/need in the relationship. If I felt like I had to use domination to get things done, it wouldn't work. Akasha

MisPandora -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/19/2006 10:51:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subfever I'm not trying to be judgmental here, I just don't understand non-sensual, "no-strings" submission. How can this be motivated by something healthy and positive? Someone please explain this to me. Disclaimer: I'm not trying to say that every submissive act has to be directly tied to a sensual/sexual pay-off. I'm talking about the basic underlying motivation for wanting to submit in the first place. And herein lies the answer to the thread about why we as dominas are disappointed and/or never find what we seek. Once we have someone in service to us that truly lives to be pleasing and obedient....nothing less will ever suffice. We will be endlessly disappointed until someone else comes along who is similarly motivated.

Wickad -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/20/2006 12:21:59 AM)
If I understand the OP he is wondering about how to feel submissive if there is never an 'exhibition' of his Mistress's will. There are other ways to express 'will' rather than beating the hell out of someone. I have an expectation of obedience, absolute obedience. I do not believe in punishment but merely consequences. An exhibition of my will would be placing my slave in a position they do not like, or are unfamiliar with in order to watch them work through the situation because "I" told them to, not because they enjoy it. This is just one example and many more can be found in a Dominant's actions towards their slave. Most Dominants don't reward slaves with play for being bad. If you are getting play, then you have pleased your Mistress. Just some thoughts, Wickad

anthrosub -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/20/2006 5:09:15 AM)
I'm not sure how my original question about the dualisms found within the lifestyle moved to discussing my position on what it takes to feel Dominated but so far it's been an interesting read. Wickad's last post and LadyHugs' offering are pretty much on the same page about all this as I am. I'm not looking for a daily Domme fix or expecting a constant flogging or micro-management via corporal punishment. I think many of the posters are not getting what I'm talking about and are unaware of it or at least suspect they may not. As far as what the thread has come to focus on, LadyHugs and Wickad have picked up on it. What it was originally trying to focus on was something intangible that has a subtle connection to the tangible. I'm beginning to think the distinction is too fine for a lot of people to see or perhaps those who can't see it don't because of their own orientation towards the lifestyle (which makes sense). anthrosub

peterK50 -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/20/2006 5:30:17 AM)
I think LadyHugs put it very nicely. I enter into relationships to be obedient, not to cause problems. I sometimes however need the catharsis of the whip on my behind a few dozen times to "straighten my head out." Punishment is knowing I messed up & made her unhappy.

subfever -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/20/2006 5:38:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MisPandora quote: ORIGINAL: subfever I'm not trying to be judgmental here, I just don't understand non-sensual, "no-strings" submission. How can this be motivated by something healthy and positive? Someone please explain this to me. Disclaimer: I'm not trying to say that every submissive act has to be directly tied to a sensual/sexual pay-off. I'm talking about the basic underlying motivation for wanting to submit in the first place. And herein lies the answer to the thread about why we as dominas are disappointed and/or never find what we seek. Once we have someone in service to us that truly lives to be pleasing and obedient....nothing less will ever suffice. We will be endlessly disappointed until someone else comes along who is similarly motivated. But what's the underlying source that motivates such a malesub?

marieToo -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/20/2006 5:59:55 AM)
Anthro: I know this was addressed to Mistresses. I am not a Mistress, but was reading the thread. I am not exactly clear on what you are saying, so maybe Im off base with this. But it sounds to me that when you are in a M/s D/s relationship, you need/desire a "tune-up". Much like a car that is expected to run with ease; the oil has to be changed and the fluids have to be refilled, spark plugs need to be changed. I think thats a very natural feeling to someone who desires long term commitment founded in service. People who engage in S and M play exclusively, rather than relationships that are service oriented may have a harder time understanding what you are saying. I understtand the need for "maintainence". We crave it , we need those reminders to help us feel our owners control in our lives. Same way you throw a log in a fire to keep it going. However, why shroud this in a cloak of "corporal punishment". Why not ask for it simply because you need to feel it?

cloudboy -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/20/2006 6:06:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MisPandora And herein lies the answer to the thread about why we as dominas are disappointed and/or never find what we seek. Once we have someone in service to us that truly lives to be pleasing and obedient....nothing less will ever suffice. We will be endlessly disappointed until someone else comes along who is similarly motivated. Yes, "the problem" isn't in the submissives, its in what you seek. Subs don't want and therefore won't stay with The Unpaid Labor Doctrine for very long. Getting something for nothing IS very corrupting, so its no wonder you will be "endlessly disappointed" when the slave inevitably leaves The Unpaid Labor Doctrine and you are forced to find a replacement.

marieToo -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/20/2006 6:34:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subfever quote: ORIGINAL: TeeGO quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy quote: How is having obedience and good service not having kink? Do you think I'd spend any of my time mummifying Fox or tying him up or the other things he enjoys if he needed me to force him to obey me? Not likely because he wouldn't be around here long enough to ever enjoy those fun parts of BDSM. Dear Tammjo, Under the Unpaid Labor Doctrine, there is NO KINK and there is NO SEX. You have KINK and I would infer, some sex. Kink may not be the reason Fox obeys you, and you may not use it to enforce his obedience, but it plays a key role in your M/S relationship --- so by my own definition, Fox is not subject to the UNPAID LABOR DOCTRINE. What Anthrosub is saying is perfectly valid. Giving orders, being a taskmaster, and expecting the sub to exert self discipline without kink or sex is not BDSM --- it is something else. I would say its part of the Unpaid Labor Doctrine or to be less generous, part of the Boss Some Guy Around Club. I'll take it one step further, BDSM stripped of kink or sex is simply Vanilla power exchange and or colorless manipulation. A service component only leaves subs wondering, "Why don't I just marry some bitchy woman instead?" I agree with you completely cloudboy. I'm mostly in agreement. If a male's desire to submit is not motivated by his libido, then what else could it be motivated by? A need to process unresolved negative emotions? A need to perpetuate and/or validate a damaged self-esteem? Or...? I'm not trying to be judgmental here, I just don't understand non-sensual, "no-strings" submission. How can this be motivated by something healthy and positive? Someone please explain this to me. Disclaimer: I'm not trying to say that every submissive act has to be directly tied to a sensual/sexual pay-off. I'm talking about the basic underlying motivation for wanting to submit in the first place. It may not be sexual, or perceived as sexual to alot of people who practice wiitwd. But I think it has to be mutual. I dont think anyone gives anything without feeling fulfilled in return. I think thats where alot of Dominants (not ALL) make their mistake. They think there are people out there living and dying for no other reason than to be dedicated to another person's happiness, all while foresaking their own needs. IMO Dominants/Masters who expect this will probably go all their lives being disappointed. A sub/slave being motivated towards service-orientation is one thing. Alot of submissives feel motived to serve and to please. The problem is in finding Dominants/Masters who know how to inspire. Without continuous inspiration from the Master, continuous dedication from the sub will be impossible. Any relationship where one or the other party is not getting their needs met is doomed to failure. Its not only about one persons pleasure and service. You get back what you put in. No matter which side of the equation you're on. Its that simple.

SenseofBelonging -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/20/2006 8:13:09 AM)
there's no question Mistress expects willing obedience and no question that i provide willing obedience. the only time punishment comes into the equation is when ive done something to displease Her without having been disobedient. She does not micromanage my life and i do have free will over much of my life, and therefore opportunity to displease Her though i try to keep that to an absolute minimum. during my day to day life i am constantly asking myself "would She approve"...and procede from there. At times im wrong and at times im punished

thetammyjo -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/20/2006 8:19:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: anthrosub Thanks for your thoughts, I can see the points you are making. Perhaps I'm cutting too fine a line in what my own thoughts are and they are coming across too broad when I try to describe them. If it helps at all, what I personally experience inwardly is a sort of "flip" of the dynamic between controlling and being controlled; hence, my reference to feeling like I'm "Dominating myself" that I described earlier. anthrosub I think in many ways a good slave is very much in control of himself so that he is not distracted by his own desires and can focus on service and pleasing another. Note that I do not use the terms submissive and slave interchangeably however. I think that someone who is submissive needs to have direction and orders and control to submit to. Someone who is a slave serves and should have been trained so he knows what to do -- services requires a lot of self-motivation and action because I (and those I own) see it as a vocation in a many ways.

thetammyjo -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/20/2006 8:25:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subfever I'm mostly in agreement. If a male's desire to submit is not motivated by his libido, then what else could it be motivated by? A need to process unresolved negative emotions? A need to perpetuate and/or validate a damaged self-esteem? Or...? I'm not trying to be judgmental here, I just don't understand non-sensual, "no-strings" submission. How can this be motivated by something healthy and positive? Someone please explain this to me. Disclaimer: I'm not trying to say that every submissive act has to be directly tied to a sensual/sexual pay-off. I'm talking about the basic underlying motivation for wanting to submit in the first place. Some slaves get off on pleasing others -- on the smile, on the "thank you" and on the knowledge that they can do a job well. A lot of people I've known who would make someone a good slave fulfill these desire to please and care by doing charity work or entering jobs where they can do this on a regular basis. It isn't the same but it can be a way to get part of what they need for a while. Again I don't see submission as being the same as being a slave though.

thetammyjo -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/20/2006 8:30:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Wickad If I understand the OP he is wondering about how to feel submissive if there is never an 'exhibition' of his Mistress's will. There are other ways to express 'will' rather than beating the hell out of someone. I have an expectation of obedience, absolute obedience. I do not believe in punishment but merely consequences. An exhibition of my will would be placing my slave in a position they do not like, or are unfamiliar with in order to watch them work through the situation because "I" told them to, not because they enjoy it. This is just one example and many more can be found in a Dominant's actions towards their slave. Most Dominants don't reward slaves with play for being bad. If you are getting play, then you have pleased your Mistress. Just some thoughts, Wickad Just in case anyone is interested, a book that addresses the need to feel like a submissive or a slave even when not directly controlled is "SlaveCraft: Roadmaps for Erotic Servitude principles, skills and tools" by Guy Baldwin and “a grateful slave”. It addresses the fact that you cannot be controlled all the time otherwise what you are making the dominant or owner do is serve you and submit to your needs. It offers ideas and exercises in how to keep in the appropriate mindset on your own or with the help if your owner/dominant. I'd add that if you are being ignored in your relationship then it is time to step out of your roles and renegotiate things or at the very least tell your dominant so they can realize something is happening. Believe it or not, must of us aren't mind readers so we can't know something is off unless you tell us.

AAkasha -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/20/2006 8:54:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy quote: ORIGINAL: MisPandora And herein lies the answer to the thread about why we as dominas are disappointed and/or never find what we seek. Once we have someone in service to us that truly lives to be pleasing and obedient....nothing less will ever suffice. We will be endlessly disappointed until someone else comes along who is similarly motivated. Yes, "the problem" isn't in the submissives, its in what you seek. Subs don't want and therefore won't stay with The Unpaid Labor Doctrine for very long. Getting something for nothing IS very corrupting, so its no wonder you will be "endlessly disappointed" when the slave inevitably leaves The Unpaid Labor Doctrine and you are forced to find a replacement. The "Unpaid Labor Doctrine" exists and is quite functional in relationships -- it's called devotion and being in love. It is ironic that it exists a lot in vanilla relationships. When a man loves a woman deeply, he will do anything for her, and he gets a tremendous amount of pleasure doing it. He does not share this devotion with any woman, he does not seek out women to give it to (unless he is desperately lonely); in fact, he often has to be very deeply involved to be this devoted. But once he is, he will go to the ends of the earth to put a smile on the face of the woman he loves. Then there are submissives. They claim to offer this unconditional devotion, but it always has strings attached. The femdom is expected to play those strings to get the desired effect -- submission and devotion. When she does not, she has a malcontent on her hands. Or, she is told she is not a true dominant. Many of these subs are merely fetishists; others, though, do seek a deep level of submission, which I believe is idealized love and devotion. The problem is that you cannot simply apply unconditional love and devotion to a woman and expect it to work. First, she must desire it and value it (ie, love him back just as deeply). Second, it cannot be just applied onto a relationship at the onset, or else it creates a very creepy stalker vibe. It has to be genuine and come from the heart. You don't just invent devotion of this level. Some subs seek it, and they idealize it in their head, and they want it and want to see it happen in a relationship. In all of my longterm relationships, vanilla or kinky, the dynamic of unconditional love/serving came into place when mutual love/trust was established. He would do anything for me -- anything it all -- if he knew it would bring me some pleasure or solitude. All I need to do is ask. And, it includes suffering or submitting to my sadistic desires, also. Would he do that for any woman? Hell no. Does he consider it "unpaid labor doctrine"? Of course not. He does get something back in return; shared love. Some men are wired to express love and affection through service and have a built in "desire to please" (even vanilla men). Others are on a different spectrum but find partners that fall in that same area. Those that do not believe in this kind of submission have never felt true love. You don't feel used when you devote yourself or give unconditionally -- hell no, you feel GRATITUDE for having the opportunity to please the woman you love so dearly. Is your love so bitter? On her birthday, do you feel obligated and resentful because you are expected to give a gift, or do you get excited and joyous that you have the opportunity to celebrate your love for her? For a submissive man, or a devoted man, he seeks to celebrate this love every single day. Akasha

anthrosub -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/20/2006 3:22:00 PM)
It was early this morning and nearly time to go to work when I wrote my last post. I wanted to say more but just didn't have time. I thought about this thread during the day and thought of an analogy that might help demonstrate my point about the need for experiencing the expression of my partner's Domination. It also shows how the context can be necessary for the dynamics involved while not being required by any particular party on either side of the fence. Military Service. Here we have a hierachy, a pecking order, full of ritual, initiation, training, obedience, initiative, consequences, etc. The difference is those who are in control can also be answering to a "higher authority" on up the chain of command. People are trained until they reach a maintenance level but are still tested and drilled on an ongoing basis by their superiors. It's a system and just as a previous poster mentioned, needs occasional maintenance to preserve a smooth and efficient operation. So in this sense, perhaps those of you who think I'm simply whining about not getting my "Domme fix" will see what I'm really trying to say. It's the outward expression and participation, no matter what form it may take, that I'm talking about. This thread has skewed off the original intent of the post as I mentioned earlier but that's okay; I'm glad it took off as it did. The original point or question was about the psychological experience of one's free will versus being controlled and how they sometimes appear to turn inside out on each other. Maybe not many people have experienced this and that's why so many don't understand the original post. anthrosub

AAkasha -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/20/2006 3:29:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: anthrosub It was early this morning and nearly time to go to work when I wrote my last post. I wanted to say more but just didn't have time. I thought about this thread during the day and thought of an analogy that might help demonstrate my point about the need for experiencing the expression of my partner's Domination. It also shows how the context can be necessary for the dynamics involved while not being required by any particular party on either side of the fence. Military Service. Here we have a hierachy, a pecking order, full of ritual, initiation, training, obedience, initiative, consequences, etc. The difference is those who are in control can also be answering to a "higher authority" on up the chain of command. People are trained until they reach a maintenance level but are still tested and drilled on an ongoing basis by their superiors. It's a system and just as a previous poster mentioned, needs occasional maintenance to preserve a smooth and efficient operation. So in this sense, perhaps those of you who think I'm simply whining about not getting my "Domme fix" will see what I'm really trying to say. It's the outward expression and participation, no matter what form it may take, that I'm talking about. This thread has skewed off the original intent of the post as I mentioned earlier but that's okay; I'm glad it took off as it did. The original point or question was about the psychological experience of one's free will versus being controlled and how they sometimes appear to turn inside out on each other. Maybe not many people have experienced this and that's why so many don't understand the original post. anthrosub Are you saying you would be unfulfilled in a relationship that was fairly normal/vanilla -- but with lots of shades of BDSM/flavors of kink (not as punishment, but for example, being caged or put into bondage for a night just because it was her fantasy, or being spanked over her knee naked because she was feeling frisky)? Why look for a relationship with such a structured heirarchy that requires maintenance? Talk about looking for a needle in a haystack. There are lots of women who are kinky as part of their sexuality and how they express their affection. If you are perfectly capable of pulling your weight/responsibilities in a relationship (you cook, she does the dishes. You make the bed, she vacuuums. You make all the money, she does not work but handles the domestics. -- etc, any balance you want) without domination, why look for something that is so complicated and structured that it limits your partners? Akasha

anthrosub -> RE: The Dualism of Obedience (6/20/2006 4:17:19 PM)
Interesting set of questions...for a moment there, you had me thinking maybe I'm on the wrong website or have this whole lifestyle thing completely misunderstood! But to answer your basic question, I would say there are those out there who practice Domination as a business (Pros) and there are those out there who have woven the whole ritual, acting out, expression of being a Dominant, into their daily lives to the point that it's no effort for them at all because it's what they naturally enjoy, and continuing on down the spectrum, there are those like you described who sort of dabble in BDSM-ish activities without really seeing it as anything more than a form of kinky play. I would say my focus is on finding someone a few notches above the type you describe and beyond; the further the better. Ideally, I would like to meet someone who naturally enjoys Domination and exploring the whole spectrum of how it can be expressed. To me, that is how I understand the term "play" and would equate it to experimentation; exploring together what gives both of us the sense of fulfillment we enjoy and what doesn't. It's not about "requirements" at all, especially if it's what both people seek; in this case it would be a natural occurence and expression of our personalities. What's wrong with that? Yes, this probably does narrow the field considerably but at my age, I've had my share of vanilla relationships where some kinky play occurs in the bedroom while we lay out our mutual responsibilities in the day to day. I want to experience being controlled...for real...with consequences that contribute to shaping me into the person she envisions. I would like to experience a transformation. I'm sure there are people out there who would enjoy something like this and perhaps there are many more who have never really stopped and realized that it actually can be done. Each of us has a lot more power and ability within ourselves to do things totally unconventional...it's just a matter of realizing it and acting on our passions (where there's a will, there's a way). The only hitch is finding a partner, for this is something I can't do by myself. anthrosub P.S. If you want to get a sense of what I'm talking about regarding pursuing one's dreams, read the first chapter of "Illusions" by Richard Bach (takes maybe 5 minutes and you don't even have to buy the book if you're in a bookstore having coffee).

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.1552734