monogamy

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I can't speak for anyone else. But, marriage works for me. i have been with my husband for twenty seven years. Both of us have been faithful. Maybe, it was because, we were a little older. When, we wed. I don't know. It just worked out.
 
There is no need for me to take practical steps in finding a girlfriend. I am an ugly loser. This is not an attitude. This is not an opinion. This is a FACT. I am kryptonite when it comes to women. I am ugly. I am a loser. There is not one thing attractive about me. And please do not say "it's your attitude that is unattractive." I can be the nicest, sweetest, most kind person with a great personality and sense of humor, and women still won't find me remotely attractive, because I have a big nose, a skinny face, and balding. I am utterly gross. Plus, I don't make much money, which explains the loser part of me.

Turn your thought process on its head...would you want to be with a woman who had this self-opinion of herself?

I think you need to look at aspects of your life and start gradually changing them....for example...can you move to a different state or city? What about taking a few months off to go traveling and see a bit of the world? It won't necessarily lead you to finding a girlfriend but at least it gets you out of your comfort zone. What about Poland or some of the other Eastern European countries, they love Americans there for some strange reason. As for money, frankly, fuck it. There's a depression on, everyone's got financial problems. I personally know several people that have gone from being worth several million to close to bankrupt. I am not exaggerating. And yet they still take their three or four holidays a year, and, for that matter, their wives/girlfriends haven't left them. Go figure.
 
There is no need for me to take practical steps in finding a girlfriend. I am an ugly loser. This is not an attitude. This is not an opinion. This is a FACT. I am kryptonite when it comes to women. I am ugly. I am a loser. There is not one thing attractive about me. And please do not say "it's your attitude that is unattractive." I can be the nicest, sweetest, most kind person with a great personality and sense of humor, and women still won't find me remotely attractive, because I have a big nose, a skinny face, and balding. I am utterly gross. Plus, I don't make much money, which explains the loser part of me.

Dude, it's completely wrong to think of yourself that way. I used to think the same thing about myself. I used to be made fun of for my rather shabby, undesirable looks. No, I wasn't openly bullied by boys, but I could tell that they talked about me and snickered behind my back. I used to look on at the beautiful, popular girls who would get all of the attention, and feel like crying.

But 3 years after those days, in the past year, I've actually had a real boyfriend! A serious one! I couldn't believe it. And I actually ended up breaking HIS heart. :slant: I never thought I could ever get a boy to even look at me back then. Then again, it's different for girls to change physically..We have make-up, hair straighteners, all that good stuff. But boys change, too. Boys who I would never think of even LOOKING at back then, today, make me weak in the knees.

Not to mention, there are some ugly douchebags at my school who've managed to snag some girlfriends somehow. It amazes me. If a mean hearted, revolting-looking guy could get himself a girlfriend, I don't see why a good hearted, "ugly" guy can't. ;) And honestly, I really doubt you're as ugly as you say you are (hence, the quotes around ugly :D). You wouldn't believe the shattered self images of some guys I know, and they don't look half as bad as they say they do.

Personally, a man that doesn't have money is not a loser in my eyes. I'd rather be with a sweet guy who lives in a shabby apartment than a tool who has a condo. Yeah, to a degree, money is important in a relationship, but not fully. If you're going out with someone in the beginning of your relationship, they may not care too much about your financial situation. But if you're going to get married to someone, or even move in with someone, you're going to need to find ways to support each other. I'm sure there are easy, fair-paying jobs out there SOMEWHERE that you can find.

Look, I don't think I'm the prettiest girl ever. I've been turned down by boys I had crushes on, and it took a blow to my self esteem. But you can't let yourself be controlled by that. It seems impossible, but it's not - you can find a person who youcan connect with emotionally, mentally, physically, romantically, and sexually with. It could be tomorrow, two months, or ten years. Go out and find that person! Don't let them find you. Part of starting a relationship is wanting it so badly that you are willing to search for that person yourself.

Good luck. :wave:
 
Congrats! :)

I don't want to be mean, but this isn't the first time that Joe has written something like that, and then it's followed by 10-15 encouraging posts. Rinse and repeat.

Confidence comes from within, not gained or measured by what anonymous posters on a message board say.

And let me just say that confidence is really what is attractive to women. At the end of the day, they want someone who is confident in themselves, even more so than looks. In my case, I'm a chubby guy, who has gained even more weight the last few months (my fault), with a receding hairline, and I don't make a lot of money. Yet I have no problems meeting women, because I use three things - my Italian charm, quirky sense of humour, and confidence in myself - to my advantage. I have never, nor will I ever, put myself down in public or in private. That's a non-starter with women and will get me nowhere.

But, hey, no matter what we say here, Joe is still going to be writing the same things over and over. Only he will be able to someday realize that an attitude adjustment towards himself will go a long way.
 
Congrats! :)

I don't want to be mean, but this isn't the first time that Joe has written something like that, and then it's followed by 10-15 encouraging posts. Rinse and repeat.

Confidence comes from within, not gained or measured by what anonymous posters on a message board say.

And let me just say that confidence is really what is attractive to women. At the end of the day, they want someone who is confident in themselves, even more so than looks. In my case, I'm a chubby guy, who has gained even more weight the last few months (my fault), with a receding hairline, and I don't make a lot of money. Yet I have no problems meeting women, because I use three things - my Italian charm, quirky sense of humour, and confidence in myself - to my advantage. I have never, nor will I ever, put myself down in public or in private. That's a non-starter with women and will get me nowhere.

But, hey, no matter what we say here, Joe is still going to be writing the same things over and over. Only he will be able to someday realize that an attitude adjustment towards himself will go a long way.

Oh. :shifty: I'm new here. I wouldn't know the whereabouts of certain interferencers, or whatever you call them. :D

And I agree! I could never be with a guy who has no self esteem. I think there's a limit with how men can be such douches sometimes. :huh: I want someone in the middle - confident, happy, and loving, and still able to express some insecurities when we've come to know each other for a while. The boyfriend I mentioned in my rant...ughh...

I ultimately broke up with him for his age (he was 19, I was 15 at the time :huh:) and I realized I was uncomfortable after assuming I wouldn't care so much, but I did. Instead of being a mature, young adult, he keep beating himself up for the fact he was too old for me. He thought it was all his fault for being born 4 years before me :|. He told me he would kill himself if we didn't go back out and that I was the only girl in the world that was right for him...Like, really, dude? Just grow up.
 
New York (CNN) -- Could letting your man sleep with another woman help your relationship?

Author and former mistress Holly Hill thinks so.

"One of the main things that I have learned is that a woman that negotiates infidelity with her partner is far more powerful than a woman who is sitting home wondering why he's late from the office Christmas party," she says.

"It's better to walk the dog on a leash than let it escape through an unseen hole in the back fence."

Hill's memoir, "Sugarbabe" details her yearlong adventure with a series of so-called "sugar daddies." The book sold 24,000 copies in her native Australia, according to her publisher, and has just been released in the United States. Holly Hill is a pen name.

"I thought it was men that would like the book," she says, "But in fact it's women, because what it says to women is that if your man cheats on you, he still loves you, and he's probably running about average."

Allowing their men to stray is a concept that's difficult for most women to contemplate.

But Hill says that if a woman takes the time to truly examine her relationship and considers Mother Nature's unerring spell on men's libidos, she might realize that letting her boyfriend or spouse know she's OK with him having sex elsewhere is a logical way to prevent him from doing it in secret.

"I think that cheating men are normal," says Hill. "Monogamous men are heroes. Monogamy does have a place in relationships, but not on the long-term. Men are hard-wired to betray women on the long-term."

But psychology professor Lawrence Josephs believes it is more personality type than gender that indicates whether a person might cheat.

"People who are higher in narcissism -- whether they are male or female -- are more likely to cheat. People who feel entitled to it, people who have what's called avoidant attachment style where they tend to have more impersonal sex," are more prone to straying, he said.

The professor also said people who experience lower levels of empathy or guilt tend to engage in more infidelity.

Hill says, that of course it's every woman's right to refuse to have sex when she's not in the mood or has a headache. However, expecting men to cope on their own with no outlet whatsoever is shortsighted and cruel, says Hill.

The author, who holds a psychology degree from the University of Southern Queensland, says her experience as a "sugarbabe" taught her some valuable lessons about what drives men to seek sex outside marriage.

Finding herself in financial dire straits after her married boyfriend unexpectedly dumped her four years ago (he had persuaded her to quit her job and enjoy his financial support as part of "the mistress plan"), she decided to get creative about her employment options.

Hill, who was 39 at the time, posted an ad online announcing her search for a sugar daddy, someone who would pay her $1,000 a week in exchange for her company, cooking, conversation, massages and, when they desired it, sex. She says the ad attracted 11,000 responses.

At the time, Hill says she saw a distinct difference between what she was doing and prostitution.

"I thought that because I was a 24/7 exclusive mistress that I wasn't part of the world's oldest profession, but with hindsight I was, because what I was doing ... I was charging men for services, part of which included sex," says Hill.

However, she adds, any married woman who no longer loves her husband but continues to have sex with him to retain the comforts of being married could also be considered part of that oldest profession.

Most of Hill's "daddies" were wealthy married men who surprisingly often opted for conversation, she says. While entertaining with red wine and exotic food platters she'd prepare in her Sydney apartment, Hill learned that most of these men sought her attention because they simply weren't getting enough sex from their wives.

"Men need to get their rocks off," says Hill. "If a woman crosses her legs for any length of time and doesn't arrange some sort of alternative for her man, he is going to cheat on her."

By alternatives, Hill is referring to her idea of "negotiated infidelity." That shouldn't be confused with an open relationship, which to Hill "has no rules." Nor does it imply that it's necessary that a wife allow her husband to hop into bed with whomever he chooses -- unless of course she's OK with that. Hill says negotiated infidelity could mean hubby makes a trip to the local strip club for the occasional lap dance or updates his porn collection.

And in no way does it have to be a one-way street.

"Ideally the woman will want to stray as well," says Hill. "Some won't want to because they're at home taking care of toddlers. But the woman definitely needs to negotiate infidelity as well, especially because that will generate her man's competitive nature. The more lovers the woman has, the more attraction the man will have for his partner."

But how do women -- and men for that matter -- get past those ingrained feelings of possessiveness and jealousy?

"Women need to remember the difference between why women and men have sex," she says. "Women tend to value intimacy. For men it's often the thrill of the chase, or the quick sex with a stranger. Men don't even have to know their lovers' names! It's often just a cheap thrill and has nothing to do with us as a loving girlfriend or wife. Once we understand that, it's much easier to let him go off."

But Josephs doesn't think understanding will overcome jealousy.

"I think what's universal is that no one likes sharing partners -- whether you're male or female. I think jealousy is a kind of universal emotion," the professor said.


Her sugarbabe days now over, Hill lets her boyfriend of two years, Phil Dean "go off" on occasion. Hill says she believes negotiating their infidelity has been instrumental in keeping their relationship strong and committed, not to mention electric.

"[Dean] can have sex with the Australian women's basketball team for all I care, but he can't spoon any of them," says Hill. "For me, spooning is cheating."

Dean, 45, who works for an insurance company in Sydney, jokes that he hasn't slept with any members of the Australian basketball team. But he is a big supporter of negotiated infidelity.

"I was actually very relieved when Holly and I started to speak about it [at the beginning of the relationship]," he says. "She asked me if I'd be happy in a monogamous long-term relationship and I had to say 'no'."

And while Dean says he doesn't get jealous when Holly spends time with another lover, some of his male friends are certainly jealous of his relationship's flexibility.

"Some think it couldn't get any better than what I have," says Dean. "Some, however, don't want to embrace the concept. They feel protective of their partner and don't want to share."

Central to the idea of negotiated infidelity, Hill says, is each couple figuring out what their boundaries are. While she admits she shed a few tears at the start of her relationship as she and Dean tested their comfort levels with different arrangements (Dean also says it has definitely been a learning process), they're now very clear about what they will and won't allow.

While Dean has the green light to have sex with other women, he's not permitted to stay overnight. He also can't take his lovers away for romantic weekends. And Hill says she'll have an all-out hissy fit if he spoons another woman.

Hill, on the other hand, is allowed to spoon her lovers because Dean has no problem with that and recognizes that intimacy is an important part of sex for women. Hill isn't, however, allowed to wear any of the outfits Dean has bought for her when she meets up with a lover.

But how can Hill be sure Dean isn't spooning if she isn't there?

"If you're talking about sexual needs honestly with your partner, you get better at communicating with each other, you get better with honesty," says Hill. "Everything is out in the open and you have an honest relationship according to your man's biology, not according to some outdated social norms." (Hill is working on another book that will address why women also like to venture outside their marriages for sex.)

Those rules sound artificial to Marcella Weiner, adjunct professor of Marymount Manhattan College and author of "Repairing Your Marriage After His Affair: A Woman's Guide to Hope and Healing."

"Unless you're totally dead inside of you and have no heart or no brains or no anything -- when you're with another person, you're with another person," said Weiner. "It's not just here's my penis, here's your vagina that's it. It is for some people -- but that's a mechanical kind of thing."

While it may not be for everyone, Hill is optimistic that if more people embraced the idea of negotiated infidelity, cheating could become a thing of the past, leading to fewer divorces and truly happy lifelong relationships.

"We just have to be honest about the way nature created us, and we have to work with nature instead of working against her. This isn't rocket science. This is what every man already knows and I think what every woman deep down already knows."
 
I'd rather hear the point of view of a psychologist than a former mistress.

And also, what about married women who want something on the side? Where are their cheerleaders? Because married men have a harder time to do deal with their wives straying than the other way around.
 
It's strange that Hill says that the problem is that wives are not sleeping with husbands, and presents the solution as men sleeping with other women. Wouldn't an appropriate solution would be to encourage wives to sleep with their husbands (even if they're not always up to it) rather than immediately encouraging them to go elsewhere?
 
Wouldn't an appropriate solution would be to encourage wives to sleep with their husbands (even if they're not always up to it) rather than immediately encouraging them to go elsewhere?

Because that makes it sounds like the woman's at fault if the man strays - well, ladies, you didn't do your job to keep your man satisfied!

Which is a sentiment that is sadly still prevelent.
 
Because that makes it sounds like the woman's at fault if the man strays - well, ladies, you didn't do your job to keep your man satisfied!

Which is a sentiment that is sadly still prevelent.

The article already suggests the woman is at fault if the man strays.

If it's working for Hill, good for her. But I don't buy it.
 
Because that makes it sounds like the woman's at fault if the man strays - well, ladies, you didn't do your job to keep your man satisfied!

Which is a sentiment that is sadly still prevelent.

Hmm. I don't think that it's saying that the woman is completely at fault and that the man has no responsibility. It's certainly not the case that if a woman has less than x amount of sex with her husband that it makes it okay for him to cheat. But, I think there is a certain amount of responsibility if a woman is ignoring legitimate needs of her husband. Just like if the husband was not fulfilling his wife's emotional needs....it wouldn't make it okay for her to cultivate a deep emotional bond with her co-worker, but it would make it a lot easier for her to do so. In a marriage both people have needs, and if someone is ignoring the needs of the other person, it would be bizarre to me to say that they are not at least partially at fault. It doesn't make it okay for the other person to cheat, but there are contributing factors that have to be considered.
 
i think partners who are neglected tend to stray and find their needs fulfilled elsewhere if they and their partners are incapable of addressing those needs.

could be physical, emotional, etc.

so it's not so simple as saying if you're not having sex 2-3 times a week, ladies, then your man is going to stray. (though, incidentally, there *are* some religious-based "therapies" that essentially say that, since a man biologically needs a sexual release every 2-3 days [which may be true], then it is your wifely responsibility to keep up with that ... but don't get me started on the religious-therapy-morality complex where all sorts of sexual needs and behaviors are pathologized using just the slightest patina of "science" in order to gloss over what is a specific world view ... it's no different than intelligent design, but i digress ...)

but it is saying that if a partner is feeling a gaping need somewhere in the relationship, it should be addressed as a couple. and perhaps it's impossible for said couple to actually address the issue. then we make choices. :shrug: and we live with those decisions.
 
Of course I agree with the more nuanced thinking behind such a sentiment, but whenever you hear such a sentiment expressed, I've found the person saying it really isn't thinking in such a nuanced way and is not being very helpful.
 
i think partners who are neglected tend to stray and find their needs fulfilled elsewhere if they and their partners are incapable of addressing those needs.

could be physical, emotional, etc.

so it's not so simple as saying if you're not having sex 2-3 times a week, ladies, then your man is going to stray. (though, incidentally, there *are* some religious-based "therapies" that essentially say that, since a man biologically needs a sexual release every 2-3 days [which may be true], then it is your wifely responsibility to keep up with that ... but don't get me started on the religious-therapy-morality complex where all sorts of sexual needs and behaviors are pathologized using just the slightest patina of "science" in order to gloss over what is a specific world view ... it's no different than intelligent design, but i digress ...)

but it is saying that if a partner is feeling a gaping need somewhere in the relationship, it should be addressed as a couple. and perhaps it's impossible for said couple to actually address the issue. then we make choices. :shrug: and we live with those decisions.


It should be addressed as a couple where possible, but where there is a mismatch it can be addressed by, well, to be blunt, the woman granting allowance for him to look at porn - once it isn't interfering with the actual relationship. In my admittedly limited experience at lot of Irish women have hang-ups about this (less so, to be fair, the twentysomething generation.) This is one of the reasons why I generally, on balance, approve of pornography.
 
If you're in a relationship I think you probably shouldn't, but I'm just being realistic.
 
Not sure if I'd agree, I think there's a valid debate to be had around pornography. I would automatically discount viewpoints based solely on religious strictures, but still.
 
I cant believe it's even an issue to anyone :shrug:

Here is the female equivalent...

CANOE - Lifewise Sex Files: The failings of make-believe

The failings of make-believe

Right now, an entire generation of teenage girls are being set up for future failure.

Thing is, they don't even know it yet. They're clueless and hopeful and happily drinking up a sweet, syrupy potion known as the hunky leading man ideal.

What they can't possibly realize is that they're heading for a long road of disappointment ahead. For them, it all starts with a young, pasty heartthrob named Robert Pattinson.

For my generation, it was John Cusack.

It wasn't that Cusack was ridiculously good looking, but he was cute enough and he played the adorably lovesick Lloyd Dobler in the coming-of-age film, Say Anything. With that single, character defining role, girls everywhere willingly drank the rom-com Kool-Aid.


We believed it was only a matter of time until the boy we liked would stand outside our window holding up a ghetto blaster playing Peter Gabriel's In Your Eyes, or some equally cheesy love ballad.

Well, guess what? We waited and dated and it never did happen.

Okay, I did get close once. Rewind to when I was first discovering boys and you'll see me getting serenaded by a shaggy-haired boy singing a sloppy rendition of Guns & Roses' Patience along to the acoustic guitar. In retrospect, I am pretty sure I wasn't the first girl he played that song for, but that's another story.

Regardless, at the time I was certain this was just the beginning of his big, sweeping, romantic gestures. Sadly, I soon discovered that this slightly off-key performance was all I was getting.

This is where we've been steered wrong. By Lloyd Dobler and, more recently, Pattinson as the vampire romantic, Edward.

Generation after generation of girls and even full-grown women fall for it - sitting down to saccharine-dripping tales of happily-ever-after, via the rom com.

Sure, they seem harmless enough, but could these gushing, boy-meets-girl flicks actually be damaging our relationships?

They just might be.

According to a survey out of Australia, loaded-up scenes filling with over-the-top romance are setting us up with unrealistic expectations of real-life relationships.

And no wonder. After all, in the world of chick flicks, even undeserving characters - Kate Hudson as Andie in How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days, cut-throat magazine editor Jenna (Jennifer Garner) in 13 Going on 30 and journal-obsessed neurotic Renée Zellweger in Bridget Jones’s Diary, just to give you a small sampling - somehow manage to score the guy.

In the lovely, formulaic world, scripts may get drama-filled and messy, but the on-screen matches always seem to work out brilliantly (cue the fireworks).

The survey found that almost half believe rom-coms have not just tainted, but ruined their view of an ideal relationship. Meanwhile, one in four feels they're expected to be able to read their partner's mind, and one in five say their mates expect to receive unexpected gifts and flowers for no reason.

Meanwhile, guys scramble to keep up. Yeah, good luck with that, what with Cusack (the crack daddy of all romance) to contend with.

But, here's the thing: Eventually we grow up and learn the difference between fantasy and reality. We realize that the former won't get the bills paid, the trash taken out or the dishes washed and that, in real life, it's the creases in love's imperfect plot lines that keeps things interesting. We mess up, iron out the wrinkles and sometimes, in the midst of this crazy thing called love, we discover something real, with blemishes and blips and yes, even magical, moments of pure, blissful perfection.

Still, that won't stop us from watching and weeping and gripping onto the hair-thin possibility that one day, somewhere, somehow, we might be on the receiving end of a spectacular, mind-blowing, pie-in-the-sky sentimental outpouring of amazing rom-com proportions.

Can it happen? Sure.

All you need is just a little patience, about $5 and rental card for at your local video store. Suspension of disbelief is a mighty tool, but while it's a nice place to visit for a predictable 90 minutes or so, I've yet to meet any couple who actually lives there.

Rom com quotes that are killing your love life: :lol:

Notting Hill

Anna (Julia Roberts) to William (Hugh Grant): "I'm also just a girl, standing in front of a boy, asking him to love her."

Don Juan DeMarco (Johnny Depp)

"There are only four questions of value in life. What is sacred? Of what is the spirit made of? What is worth living for? What is worth dying for? The answer to each is the same. Only love."

When Harry Met Sally

Harry (Billy Crystal) to Sally (Meg Ryan): "I came here tonight because when you realize you want to spend the rest of your life with somebody, you want the rest of your life to start as soon as possible."

The Notebook

Noah (Ryan Gosling) to Allie (Rachel McAdams): "The best love is the kind that awakens the soul and makes us reach for more, that plants a fire in our hearts and brings peace to our minds and that's what you've given me."

Love Actually

Jamie (Colin Firth) trying to speak Portuguese to Aurelia (Lúcia Moniz): "Beautiful Aurelia, I've come here with a view of asking you to marriage me. I know I seems an insane person - because I hardly knows you - but sometimes things are so transparency, they don't need evidential proof."
 
:rolleyes:

poor girls. culture is so mean to them. no matter what they do, they are always and forever victims.

Hollywood is a dream factory. they know what the girls want. if they wouldn't buy tickets to shitty romantic comedies maybe they wouldn't be made.

for some reason, i never piloted the Milennium Falcon through hyperspace, nor did i rescue the Ark of the Covenant and keep it safe from Hitler's armies, and yet, i don't feel as if i've been lied to and cheated out of the exciting life that should have been real because i saw it in a movie.
 
^

I must be a bad woman -- I have never seen a single movie mentioned in that article. The last romantic comedy I watched was As Good As it Gets. Yup, Jack Nicholson as the cranky, obsessive compulsive, old, balding, and kinda fat leading man. (the character was apparently wealthy) That actually does sound a lot like the guys indra is bound to attract. :lol: :sad: Minus the wealth part, of course. (can't have everything :wink: ) :angry:
 
:rolleyes:

poor girls. culture is so mean to them. no matter what they do, they are always and forever victims.

Perhaps you missed my point.

If pornography can potentially be perceived to create unrealistic expectations, the gender flipside of that is over-the-top romance.

It's really just the capacity to discern fantasy from reality and balance in expectations. That way women shouldn't feel threatened by porn and men shouldn't feel they have to live up to leading man silliness.
 
:rolleyes:

poor girls. culture is so mean to them. no matter what they do, they are always and forever victims.

Hollywood is a dream factory. they know what the girls want. if they wouldn't buy tickets to shitty romantic comedies maybe they wouldn't be made.

Hmmm.The culture has become more feminised, possibly. On the other hand, I wouldn't assume that all women are really very into that rom-com stuff, in the same way that I don't think most straight males are really turned-on by the Hollywood borderline-anorexic hard body types that we're supposed to be into. I think we are arguing over multiple issues here.

:for some reason, i never piloted the Milennium Falcon through hyperspace, nor did i rescue the Ark of the Covenant and keep it safe from Hitler's armies, and yet, i don't feel as if i've been lied to and cheated out of the exciting life that should have been real because i saw it in a movie.

Well, Flash Gordon was clearly gay as Christmas, so there's kind of a homo-erotic subtext as regards these kinds of role models. I would argue.
 
Perhaps you missed my point.

If pornography can potentially be perceived to create unrealistic expectations, the gender flipside of that is over-the-top romance.



i disagree. i think porn is porn, and its about fucking. i think that the male equivalent to the unrealistic expectations in a rom-com would be the heroics of the aforementioned Han Solo or Indiana Jones (or James Bond, or Jason Bourne, or whatever).

men like porn and women like rom-coms? were i a woman i'd be upset at the simplification of my sexuality required of the comparison.
 
Back
Top Bottom