RE: Masterhood

RE: Masterhood (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

CuriousLord -> RE: Masterhood (5/6/2007 10:14:55 PM)
Peter's farieanne, I appreciate Yyour support and I'm glad Yyou also enjoy this dynamic. I would ask you express my appreciation to your Master. I wish Yyou both well.

MasterNdorei -> RE: Masterhood (5/6/2007 10:59:38 PM)
LA writes: When you attend a formal state dinner, you thank the wife of the official hosting, or the official themselves if they are female. That hardly means you believe that only the wife or official was the only person who did anything towards making it a successful event and that no one else deserves any credit. *** Yes, and when you visit the house of the One who owns me you can expect the same. The issue has never been about someone assuming the Master did the work, it has been about a Master taking credit for work He clearly did not do Himself. Your apparent knowledge of social protocol is pretty common, i am surprised this is an issue for you. It kind of seems you are flip flopping here. You went from critisizing a Master who accepts credit for the pie His slave makes, to complete understanding of the same dynamic when applied to formal state dinners. What is the point you are trying to make? CuriousLord writes: This is to say, I've found these relationships to be without strain nor drama. I'm curious if most following this dynamic are so blessed? * We all have our days when it comes to stressing out, but i will admit my days of being enslaved are much less stressful than before i was owned. With regards to drama, there is none in His house. He rules and does not allow it. AquaticSub writes: Ahh... we are so lucky that someone can come and tell us what a slave does and does not do. **** So long as you perpetuate the idea that anyone can call themselves a slave or a Master, from those who utter the words but have no idea what they are doing, to the married couples for whom it is the hat they wear when they want, to the ones who live their dynamic 24/7, to the ones who live literally chained in their Master's home, you perpetuate the confusion. You, Aquatic, can be as sarcastic as you want about people trying to define the differences in the dynamic, but the confusion of the definitions you cling to have already hung you once in this thread... maybe it is time to consider another way of thinking? It is obvious the dynamic you have with your Sir is a beautiful thing, and i love reading some of your posts, so please do not take this personally. i really believe there is a need for change in how people define subs and slaves. You are a beautiful example of what i consider a sub, and i applaud your right to take credit if that is what you want. But i also applaud the right of the Master's of others to accept credit for a slave's work. My point is this: If you can't tell the difference between a sub and a slave it is because there is no difference in the examples you follow. Accept more defined examples and there will be less confusion. There are two different words being used. There are different things required to being a slave, regardless of what your examples call themselves. Master's dorei

aSlavesLife -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 5:45:24 AM)
It looks like we are back to labels. The people that see the need for them, and the people that think that the world would be a better place if pharmacies just dumped pills into unmarked bottles, canned goods were just tin cans, and all communication consisted of grunts and gestures. The power of the latter's argument loses ground once they begin using defined words to support their arguments, but that they are cutting off their noses to spite their faces seems to elude them. At the heart of the matter is that M/s uses different terminology than D/s does. Until everyone understands this, there will always be confusion between the two parties. The situation suffers even more when one party tries evoking the legality argument. But even that logic is flawed. Until 2003, anal sex was illegal in Texas, but only a fool would claim that it didn't happen because it was illegal. Heroin is illegal in America, so by this poorly considered argument, there is zero heroin use in America. Ridiculous once you stop and think about it. A person has a legal right to walk away. But the legality is irrelevant to the issue. An abused spouse has the right to walk away too, yet many of them fail to do so. In the same light, many slaves find that they are emotionally incapable of leaving a relationship. Some slaves are kept in such a situation that they are physically unable to leave as well. Sure it is illegal, but so are the bruises on a submissive's ass after a play party. In the Iowa v. Collier case, the of Appeals held that BDSM activity did not fall within an exception to the Iowa assault statute as conduct by voluntary participants in a “sport, social or other activity” which did not create an “unreasonable risk of serious injury or breach of the peace.” Another part of that decree read " Whatever rights the defendant may enjoy regarding private sexual activity, when such activity results in the whipping or beating of another resulting in bodily injury, such rights are outweighed by the State's interest in protecting its citizens' health, safety, and moral welfare. . . . A state unquestionably has the power to protect its vital interest in the preservation of public peace and tranquility, and may prohibit such conduct when it poses a threat thereto. " Nebraska sex laws say pretty much the same thing. And don't forget that failure to report is a crime is also a crime. So every time that someone gets their ass paddled and fails to report it to the police, both the dom and the sub are committing crimes! So please, to keep yourselves from looking silly and hypocritical, enough with the claim that slavery doesn't happen because it is illegal. I am not sure what it matters as to who takes credit for what, but I certainly see where MastersDorei is coming from. The queen of England is going to get credit despite everyone knowing that she did not prepare anything. It was done on her authority. Bill Gates is going to get credit for the next installation of Windows even though the man probably hasn't written code since the mid 80's. Again, he will get credit because of his being the authority behind Microsoft. When my slave is a good hostess while I am entertaining guests, my guests thank me for my hospitality. The guests know that she was serving drinks, but they also know that my foot would be up her ass if her service was not outstanding.

IrishMist -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 5:56:30 AM)
quote: It looks like we are back to labels I wonder why so many others have such a hard time accepting that it's not the labels that bring the trouble, it's how OTHERS perceive them to be. Just because I perceive a slave to be a certain person/way of life does not mean that my idea is any better or worse than anyone elses. I have had a relationship that allowed for him to take a cane to me and beat me black and blue simply because it gave him a chuckle to do so. I have been literally forced to do things that I did not want to do simply because I gave him that power over me. I have been punished for disobeying to the point that I can not even contemplate doing such again in another relationship. Yet, just because I call myself a slave does not mean that the one who has the right to ask their dominant to stop is any less a slave than I am. All you chest thumpers who come here and say 'THIS IS THE WAY IT IS, AND YOU ARE NOT DOING IT RIGHT BECAUSE THIS IS THE WAY IT IS' need to stop and accept the fact that YOU are NOT always going to be right. No one cares how you define your own dynamic and relationship. No one cares if you are a Dominant, a Master, a Top or a Switch. NO one cares if your dictionary definitions match their own. And what's more, no one cares if you agree with them or not.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 7:22:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterNdorei You went from critisizing a Master who accepts credit for the pie His slave makes, to complete understanding of the same dynamic when applied to formal state dinners. What is the point you are trying to make? That formal manners do not dictate reality. It is completely unrealistic to expect a host to thank each and every possible person who worked towards making an event a success. However, it is understood by all parties that obviously the host is not solely responsible for the creation of the event nor that the host is the only one who could possible deserve credit. Specially gracious guests will often say "Please pass my thanks onto all those who helped make the evening a success" thus outright acknowledging the others to be considered part of the process. I've never suggested that the owner has NO credit or responsibility for their slave and their slaves behavior. Merely to suggest the slave has NONE, or that the master can claim things for which he had nothing to do with directly is completely illogical.

MasterNdorei -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 9:28:00 AM)
IrishMist writes: Yet, just because I call myself a slave does not mean that the one who has the right to ask their dominant to stop is any less a slave than I am. **** With all due respect, in stating this you perpetuate confusion. If a person has the right to ask a Dom to stop what they are doing, they are not enslaved. Think of Rome and how their slaves were treated. One of the major humiliations of being a slave, even if your owner was kind to you was that everyone in society knew you had no rights to stop what the owner might do to you. Think about slaves in service to royalty. How long do you think the king would tolerate a slave telling him to stop doing something? Think about those sold into slavery in the Americas. What do you think would have happened to one of them if they told their owners to stop doing something to them? Does all of this history of the word slave stop because one enters the realm of BDSM? i should hope we educate people, not stupify them. The flip side of this issue propels the idea that one of the dynamics holds more value when the truth lies in what you seek. One or the other will hold more value for you. i am suggesting that BDSM is *not* a contest. You hear a difference between "nun" and "paritioner". Between "active military" and "military reserves". "Between "nurse" and "school nurse". You hear it because there are different meanings to different words to clarify them. One has sacrificed other areas of their life to take the study of their interest to a more extreme level than the other. Does this make them more valuable? When you want a specialist, yes it does. Does this mean everyone should be so focused and disciplined as to forego other areas of life? No. The ones who do not take their study to such extemes have more experience in other areas of life. Ask a doctor how much time s/he had for hobbies when s/he was in med school. Ask a doctor's spouse how many times their family's plans are interupted on the weekends the doctor is on call. A school nurse does not have these issues. Does this make the school nurse more valuable? If you want someone who is more approchable and availible, and has more information about what has happened to your child in school that day, then yes it does. Does this mean everyone should aspire to be available and forego becoming a specialst? No. A slave, by the definition given above would be the first to tell you they are in no position to tell their owner to stop, or to tell Him/Her anything else. It is those who are subs who want the right to tell their top/Dom/Master to stop doing something. There is greatness in both paths depending upon the people involved. For the sake of eliminating continued mass confusion doesn't it make sense to define these two very different dynamics? This conflict isn't going to go away so long as people wander into the lifestyle expecting different definitions for different labels. Wouldn't our time on these boards be more productive by acknowldging the differences between the two, and work to begin defining the labels for the sake of communication, with everyone in agreement that each dynamic has it's stregnths and weaknesses, and no one dynamic is better than the other? Master's dorei

CuriousLord -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 9:56:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: aSlavesLife It looks like we are back to labels. The people that see the need for them, and the people that think that the world would be a better place if pharmacies just dumped pills into unmarked bottles, canned goods were just tin cans, and all communication consisted of grunts and gestures. The power of the latter's argument loses ground once they begin using defined words to support their arguments, but that they are cutting off their noses to spite their faces seems to elude them. I haven't even read the rest of your post yet. I just have to stop here, as I'm thoroughly amused- this is above and beyond, by a significant degree, the most intelligent thing I've ever seen anyone else write here on CM. Alright, I've read all of it now. I'm going to assume you were replying to aqua when she claimed a slave could call the police after being beaten too much, and the ensueing conversation? It's to see this point addressed. Honestly, I basically ignored this as I'm not a sadist and don't beat my slave- just kind of chuckled since she was trying to make me feel uncomfortable with something that didn't effect me.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 9:58:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterNdorei A slave, by the definition given above would be the first to tell you they are in no position to tell their owner to stop, or to tell Him/Her anything else. What about my partner and myself? He and I would be very horrified to try and tell the other person to stop doing something they felt was right for themselves. But we aren't masters or slaves to eachother at all. What about owners who tell their slaves to actively try and informed them and prevent them from doing some things? Or to tell them many other things?

MasterNdorei -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 10:02:11 AM)
LA writes: Specially gracious guests will often say "Please pass my thanks onto all those who helped make the evening a success" thus outright acknowledging the others to be considered part of the process. I've never suggested that the owner has NO credit or responsibility for their slave and their slaves behavior. Merely to suggest the slave has NONE, or that the master can claim things for which he had nothing to do with directly is completely illogical. ***** As i have posted in repsonse to another, i again mean no disrespect in this response to you. My purpose is to show the difference in opnions. In your mind these guests are "specially gracious". In my mind, if this is a lifestyle event, while they may mean well, they are uninformed. When i prepare a dinner for Master and is guests, i approch it from the angle that it is only an opportunity to please Master. i say this with all the humility i can muster and i know it is going to sound completely the opposite at first, so please delay your judgement until i can express everything i am trying to convey, but i have been entertaining a very long time. It is not a challenge for me to impress guests with what i cook. To coin a phrase, i answer to a higher power. A perfect example was a formal dinner i prepared years ago. One of the appetizers was brie with pecans and currant paste wrapped in phyllo. At one of the practice dinners the phyllo burst, and the ingredients spilled onto the baking pan. i did not want to serve any of them. The host insisted, so i did the best i could in presenting them. Several guests came by the kitchen later to tell me how much they enjoyed that appetizer, but the pit in my stomach remained. It was not until the host told me how much He had enjoyed the appetizer that i was able to release my sense of failure. It may seem illogical to you that a Master accept full credit for things He did not work Himself to create, but if both parties enter the event with this expressed dynamic between them, it is logical to them. It is my intention with these posts to show some of the nuances of service, and the mindset of one who lives as a slave in hopes of revealing a dynamic that is not often described, and that in doing so, people are more able to accept (or at least respect) logic that is not of their own dynamic. Master's dorei

CuriousLord -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 10:24:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross What about owners who tell their slaves to actively try and informed them and prevent them from doing some things? Or to tell them many other things? A slave would be acting in accordance to the will of her Master to inform him of an issue when under such a condition that she has been instructed to, either by guideline or order without a superceding contradiction. However, dorei is correct in saying that she can not tell the Master to stop- she can only inform him of the requested information, not issue an order.

MasterNdorei -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 10:27:42 AM)
LA writes: What about my partner and myself? He and I would be very horrified to try and tell the other person to stop doing something they felt was right for themselves. But we aren't masters or slaves to eachother at all. ** My point in this thread is the need for definitions and clarity of labels. That you may find exceptions to the definitions does not change the need for definitions. i still firmly believe until definitions are created, there will continue to be chaos on the boards, and muddled communication. Why propegate that? You admitted in your post that your dynamic is not M/s. This indicates that you prefer a dynamic that is primarily composed of another dynamic's definition. What is the confusion? LA writes: What about owners who tell their slaves to actively try and informed them and prevent them from doing some things? Or to tell them many other things? *** That is too vague a question to elicit a response. Master's dorei

CuriousLord -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 10:34:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist No one cares how you define your own dynamic and relationship. No one cares if you are a Dominant, a Master, a Top or a Switch. NO one cares if your dictionary definitions match their own. And what's more, no one cares if you agree with them or not. Didn't you read the responses where individuals and couples directly stated they did..? quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist All you chest thumpers who come here and say 'THIS IS THE WAY IT IS, AND YOU ARE NOT DOING IT RIGHT BECAUSE THIS IS THE WAY IT IS' need to stop and accept the fact that YOU are NOT always going to be right. Did you even read the OP? I made an entire section into it stating that's not what this was about. That there are different, equally valid systems, and that I'm just sharing my own because I came to understand it better and was looking to see if anyone else felt similarly about their own. --- Mist, if you.. don't like this thread.. you don't have to post in it.. Nothing rude's been stated in the OP. Just the terms and aspects of my dynamic, as I felt like sharing. The level of offense you've taken to this strikes me as extreme and uncalled for.

Archer -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 11:14:21 AM)
I think the problem comes when folks try to include things outside of or tangental to the relationship when hey speak of responsibility, of a Master to and for their slave. In the instance of crimeinal orders then the problem is not that the master is not responsible for the slave's actions (within the relationship itself) but that society also imposes responsibilities on every person as an individual and the person slave or Master is responsible to the society for their behaviour meeting some community standards. Slavery does not, and can not remove a person's responsibility to society in most cases. Because in a nation of laws even the most Alpha person is individually held to some community standards (Murder, robbery, assault, etc...) The Master may be responsible for the order to break those standards but society does not recognize that chain of command, unless the Master pipes up and admits to being the one giving the order after which society may well simply file charges against both parties. (Conspiricy to commit). But Society will still hold each individual responsible for their choices and every order given or followed is a choice. Give and accept responsibility/ Obey and accept the conseqences or Give and reject responsibility, / Disobey and accept the consequences. As to the definitions given in the OP I'm not of the same mind, I still contend that "ownership" is the definative difference. If the person genuinely feels OWNED then a condition of consensual slavery exists. If the person feels controlled but not owned then a condition of consensual submission exists. Obedience although desireable in a slave is not definative. Submission although it makes managing the slave possible is not definative You can own a dog that does not obey or submit and by all legal defintion you still own the dog, and you are in fact held by society responsible for that dog's actions.

WhiplashSmile -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 11:27:28 AM)
Now logically speaking.... If a slave is not responsible or accountable for their own actions, then all punishment should fall upon thier Master. So if a slave fucks up, the Master should punish himself under this idealized concept. Look this is completely insane to make a statement that slaves are not accountable nor responsible for their own actions. This is the very reason why punishment and even rewards come into play. Hell, this concept is known about even in periods of time and cultures where slavey has been legal. In terms of a slave being able to cook Bitchen Hot Apple pies and if she learned this from somebody other than her master, The Master was not responsible for this skill set. Master may be in control of this skill, but not responsbible for it either. Now any MASTER or DOM should know that they can't control everything around them... There is a Limit to the level of control. Anybody who thinks they have complete control over everything and anything about a slave is just Living life in denial and in an illustion. This applied to even in cultures and history periods where Slavery was legalized.. OK.. so let's get all romantic here for a moment, how does the path to owning a slaves Heart, Mind and Soul work.. OH Geeessh... Knock Knock Knock... The slave has not been magically transformed into something other than a human being! Dugh! We are talking about a human being still here. If it looks like a Duck, Sounds like a Duck it's really a duck. Responsible people are accountable people, now why do slave get punished again, is it not because the slave was accountable or responsible for something?

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 11:57:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterNdorei It is my intention with these posts to show some of the nuances of service, and the mindset of one who lives as a slave in hopes of revealing a dynamic that is not often described, and that in doing so, people are more able to accept (or at least respect) logic that is not of their own dynamic. Master's dorei What about this example: A slave has just had her first granddaughter born. She is preparing and doing the entire christening party. The master is on a business trip and won't even be around for the entire event. Now, I certainly agree that the slave will operate within what she knows to be the masters preferences and will want him to be pleased. But is she to plan this event ONLY with his tastes and pleasure in mind? A good master of course will order the slave to be a good hostess- and this includes considering the guests taste. I think we're seeing a difference in saying "a slave thinks ONLY EVER of the masters pleasure" and in saying "a slave thinks of the masters pleasure as ultimate top priority." A master could even order a slave to go do something nice for herself all on her own- she of course is acting within what the master has ordered and it is his pleasure for her to do that, but she MUST also think of her own pleasure because that is exactly what was ordered for her to do. There's no reason thinking of multiple people's pleasure simultaneously takes away from being a good slave. This is how slaves can be good parents and good friends and good polyamorists and even take care of themselves- they can maintain several relationships and multiple priorities at once- keeping the pleasure and expectations of the master as top and overaching, but not to the exclusion of all else.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 12:06:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterNdorei In my mind, if this is a lifestyle event, while they may mean well, they are uninformed. I know I certainly would disagree with you, and I've been at many lifestyle events. You're saying now that I am uninformed. quote: It may seem illogical to you that a Master accept full credit for things He did not work Himself to create, but if both parties enter the event with this expressed dynamic between them, it is logical to them. Now you are talkinga bout the slave ACCEPTING credit, not whether she is DUE credit. You are basically saying all those guests who tried to thank you were misinformed. Not very good thoughts to have of all your guests. Whether you have an issue with ACCEPTING other peoples thanks and credit is completely separate from whether you are actually DUE such credit. Does your master think the guests were misinformed and that their thanks should have all gone to him? Did he tell you to tell the guests that so they would not continue to make what you consider mistakes? I think people accept the reality that slaves do not wish to take credit for their actions quite fine, I simply know that when someone does something well, there may be many sources of credit and responsibility. Maybe it's because I am polamorous, but I understand that any ONE thing usually takes multiple sources of information, input, processing, and output. To suggest it all comes from and goes to one would be very ignorant of all the intertwining and essential steps. In polyamory, to ignore those steps will lead to destruction.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 12:09:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterNdorei My point in this thread is the need for definitions and clarity of labels. That you may find exceptions to the definitions does not change the need for definitions. But it does mean that your "definition" is bad and doesn't offer any clarity. A definition must exclude other possibilities, otherwise it is merely a general guideline with exceptions. quote: i still firmly believe until definitions are created, there will continue to be chaos on the boards, and muddled communication. Until we start discussing definitions, we actually all communicate pretty well and I'm not seeing any chaos myself. Even then, we communicate very well, we just don't agree. And if you want to wait for definitions...well I hardly think they will come about in the next three lifetimes. quote: You admitted in your post that your dynamic is not M/s. This indicates that you prefer a dynamic that is primarily composed of another dynamic's definition. What is the confusion? The confusion is that you suggested that "Ms relationships do X and this is a defining characteristic of them and how they are different from other relationships. I said "My relationship is not Ms but we do X so Ms can't be different in that way or defined by that characteristic."

MasterNdorei -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 12:12:21 PM)
Archer and WhiplashSmile: Why do you perpetuate something that rarely if ever happens in an M/s relationship? Putting energy into these bizzare notions perpetuates a myth about slaves that seldom exisits in reality. How many slaves do you personally know who have acted out illegal activites they would not have pursued on their own only to adhere to the wishes of One who owns them? How many people on these boards do you truly believ are truly in danger of following iilegal orders from their Master? Do you actually think if they were predisposed to such acts that a post from a complete stranger on a board would make a difference? Most importantly, aren't there more relevant issues to debate on these boards? Master's dorei

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 12:16:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterNdorei Why do you perpetuate something that rarely if ever happens in an M/s relationship? Because we're having an intellectual discussion to try and keep things aligned and follow them to their conclusion. You're the one who said you wanted definitions- this is how the process works. quote: How many slaves do you personally know who have acted out illegal activites they would not have pursued on their own only to adhere to the wishes of One who owns them? Four. quote: How many people on these boards do you truly believ are truly in danger of following iilegal orders from their Master? Six. quote: Do you actually think if they were predisposed to such acts that a post from a complete stranger on a board would make a difference? No. quote: Most importantly, aren't there more relevant issues to debate on these boards? I find definitions threads to be the most pointless discussions in the sub culture and all end up with everyone exactly where they were before, but I still engage in them because they can be fun and good mental exercises.

MasterNdorei -> RE: Masterhood (5/7/2007 12:40:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross quote: ORIGINAL: MasterNdorei In my mind, if this is a lifestyle event, while they may mean well, they are uninformed. I know I certainly would disagree with you, and I've been at many lifestyle events. You're saying now that I am uninformed. Yes, i am saying you are uninformed. If you had any knowledge of the dynamic about which i speak, you would understand where i am comming from, and not be insulted. i do not doubt for a moment that you have attended many lifestyle events. Most people who live their M/s dynamic full time do not attend events because of the misunderstandings. This is a prime example. i am saying you were uninformed at the time you gave the compliment in my direction. Knowing now that i prefer all compliments be made to the One who owns me, if you wanted to compliment me in a way that i could receive it best, would you continue to force your decisions on me by complimenting me directly? Or, would you compliment the One who owns me? i guess the issue here is if you compliment to make yourself look good, in which case it is really about you, then you would of course compliment the cook directly. In the event the compliment was geared to best affect the cook, it would be directed towards the Master. This is not as uncommon a practice as it first appears. You yourself (LA) have admitted to understanding this concept when in different settings. You just have not experienced it much in the lifestyle. i am merely stating that such a dynamic exists here too. Step outside of the lifestyle for a moment, and you can still see it. If you organized a function and someone came to you to compliment you, and you were given a choice, would you prefer to hear the compliment yourself? Or to have them tell your supervisor? At this point in time i do think you were uninformed. This is not an insult. However if you were to attend a function hosted by those you know follow this dynamic and knowing what you do now, you insisted on complimenting the cook directly i assure you, you would be viewed as rude. i try to error in other people's favor, thinking you uninformed was the benefit of the doubt. This is not to say you should begin only complimenting the leaders of an event. This is to say there is power in knowing the hosts of an event or dinner, and taking the time to learn their "culture" so to speak, much as a diplomat woulf want to be informed of the ways of the country they visit. i will respond the rest of you post as soon as i can. i am responding in between my daily tasks. i admire a lot about you LA, and i hope you will take this post in the spirit of which it is written. My commitment remains making lifestyle events more friendly towards minority groups. By acknowledging the M/s dynamic in the fashion many live it full time (even if they do not attend socials) you can make a difference. Master's dorei

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

6.445313E-02