Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > General Poly Discussions

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #141  
Old 11-27-2013, 06:27 AM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is online now
Official Greeter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Olympia, Washington
Posts: 5,021
Default Part 1 of 2

Re: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/ ... ahhh, the horrors of public libraries and coffee shops impelled this computer dunce to figure out how to a make a special exception for that site's cookies. At last, I received the pleasure of a microscope going up the butt of my implicit prejudices. Sort of like a colonoscopy!

Sez https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/Study?tid=-1 ...

Quote:
"Thank you for completing the study!
Thank you for your participation. In this study, we are investigating how people's attitudes towards age and gender influence their perceptions of behavior. We are particularly interested in whether participants who have automatic, implicit attitudes associating warm personality characteristics with certain groups evaluate a member of that group differently when they act in a way which violates that expectation. We are expecting that overall, females and older people will be judged more harshly than males and young people.
Our measure of implicit attitudes is the Implicit Association Test (IAT). The main idea of the IAT is that people who have more positive implicit attitudes toward a concept (e.g., older people, females) will be able to categorize the items more quickly when that concept and warm traits are categorized with the same key as compared to when that concept and cold traits are categorized with the same key. Surprisingly, these associations are sometimes very different than our conscious attitudes and beliefs. One purpose of our research is to figure out why that happens. Your results for the IAT are reported below.
*Your data suggest a strong association between the elderly and personal warmth.*
If your score was described as 'inconclusive,' then your performance was not within the range to provide an interpretable result. Most inconclusive results are due to a high number of errors.
Depending on the magnitude of your result, your automatic associations may be described as 'slight', 'moderate', 'strong', or 'little to no preference'. How implicit associations affect our judgments and behaviors is not well understood and may be influenced by a number of variables. As such, the score should serve as an opportunity for self-reflection, not as a definitive assessment of your implicit thoughts or feelings. This and future research will clarify the way in which implicit thinking and feelings affects our perception, judgment, and action.
Thank you again for your participation!"
In the test they shot my way, they put me through my paces with a speed test (oh hells! not a speed test) to identify whether a word or visage signified warm or cold, or old or young, respectively. Don't know how I rated speed-wise but I did finish that part "fast enough for their taste" with zero errors. [cue applause]

Then the story scenario. A person named Chris has been harassing hir fellow employees. Ignoring their input, threatening to tattle on them for trivial offenses, insulting them and whatnot. Not one but many employees have complained about this, so it looks like Chris is the problem, not them.

I was tested to see if I could guess Chris' age and gender. Thinking to myself, "Hmmm, stereotypically speaking, women are known to have subtler ways to harass others. Insults, threats, and dismissals are commonly considered to be male tactics in most cases. So, I guessed that Chris was a guy. I also guessed that he was old because the story said he was close to retirement. Yay me: Both guesses were correct!

I was then asked several questions about what my impression about Chris was so far. How intelligent, how likable, how popular, etc.

I said "slightly unintelligent" because he's been clever enough to get away with this behavior for some time, but not clever enough to forever escape my (the human resources manager's) wrath! I assessed that he was quite mean, unlikeable, unpopular, etc.

However, I only "slightly disliked him" because I figured he might be helped with counseling and/or meds. I do know all too well what it's like to have something comparable to an out-of-body experience where you feel like you're watching yourself act like an asshole, and you can't believe you're doing it. In that sense, I potentially sympathized with Chris. Needed to know more details about the situation to make a better assessment.

Well, suspension was recommended as his penalty for the latest complaint (which had come a link or two up the command chain to get to me). I was presented with a range of one day to over two weeks of suspension -- I assumed without pay.

I judged that Chris needed a substantial wake-up call, so I suspended him for seven days. (And I didn't get to add this on the test, but my words to Chris would have been courteous but stern: "Dude, you have a problem. Get some help for it. I'm suspending you for seven days because you need to know that I mean business. If I catch you acting like that again, you can expect a much worse suspension or even more likely, termination before you can retire. You need help, man. See that you get it!")

And with that, I got the test's appraisal that I tend to perceive old folks as warm folks.

At first I didn't think that tracked because the Mormon church is run by old men (the General Authorities) and I see those guys as cold, cold characters. But then it occurred to me that I used to believe in the church and the General Authorities as well. Throughout my years as a youth, I was merely awed by their calm gentle demeanor as they spoke in the Salt Lake Tabernacle at General Conference.

Furthermore, the old people I met first in my life were my grandparents, and all four of them were quite warm towards me (especially Grandma on my dad's side). I think first impressions really have an impact on us when it comes to the impressions we receive at our earliest ages. That stuff sticks to us for life.

And I had an old aunt (great aunt?) who lived across the street. I used to cross the street and visit her for hours at a crack. She was warm and friendly as could be and we had a great rapport. Aunt Esthma (sp?) was her name.

And to cement it all, I married a woman twice my age when I was 21. That woman always carried herself with grace, warmth, and courtesy. So as she aged, my childhood impressions of senior citizens were confirmed, even though I lost all faith in those dubious General Authorities.

And that's my theory of why the test concluded I have an ingrained tendency to trust older people.

Interesting test. Would like to take more but tick tick tick, that clock just won't stop.

[continued below]
__________________
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 11-27-2013, 06:28 AM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is online now
Official Greeter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Olympia, Washington
Posts: 5,021
Default Part 2 of 2

[continued from above]

Quote:
In Post #59, kdt26417 said:
I mean people aren't seriously trying to tell me, are they, that African Americans aren't attending poly get-togethers because I and other bigots are calling them blacks? If I found the right "magic word" to call them, would they suddenly start attending the poly get-togethers that they were staying away from before?
And in Post #73, ColorsWolf suggested:
"Here's an idea: how about calling them 'people?'"
And kdt26417 now replies:
O'pe. Once again I've been caught secretly thinking "black" people aren't really people. I don't suppose I could restate my former statement? to wit:

I mean people aren't seriously trying to tell me, are they, that certain other people aren't attending poly get-togethers because I and other bigots are calling them "blacks?" If I called them "people," would they then suddenly start attending the poly get-togethers that they were staying away from before?

This concludes my correction of that paragraph. Let me know if further corrections are needed.

I'll probably never live amongst many of the people we're talking about here. But some of those people are talking to us on this thread, board, and forum. That's a start.

And I've got my experience as a missionary in Detroit to bolster whatever I can learn about various people now. I guess it doesn't seem like much, but hey, look at this thread (and its "sister thread"). People on both sides of the cultural fence being discussed here have made some remarkable verbal connections with each other and, in my mind, broken down some significant cultural barriers. So if the two groups of people can keep conversing with each other, then understanding will increase all around and I suspect poly potlucks everywhere will start to look more "colorful." I'd like that!

ColorsWolf, I understand that I can't descry anything from a person I've barely met except what they (or their avatar) look/s like. Imagination fills in the gaps; it's human nature. But I get that the gaps are filled by imagination alone, which may more may not include one whit of reality. I guess I just find that the occasional interactions I have with people of the culture in question, both live and on the net, both private and public, will slowly help me build up a rapport with them and persuade (even one or two of) them to join me in a poly get-together sometime. I don't take that as a guarantee, just as a hope.

---

Re (from LovingRadiance):
Quote:
"No one would even know wtf he was talking about if he started a thread on the topic without descriptives."
Picture this thread title: "Polyamory and People."

Re:
Quote:
"Ironically -- I took the question to another venue -- where I *know* there are people who identify as racial minorities in the U.S.. Because *I can see their photos.*
I asked them *personally* about discussing the topic and used the *exact* words that kdt used -- as a quote.
They responded positively that they would love to communicate with him and appreciated his interest."
O'pe. And I need to follow through on that. Sorry I've left your PM on the back burner for so long; that's not usually like me. I'll try to get to it, uh, when I'm done with this post perhaps.

Re:
Quote:
"Maybe the *real* issue is that people who *don't want to discuss it should just not discuss it* and people who do want to -- can. "
ColorsWolf, you do make it really really hard for me to talk about the issues that I wanted to talk about in this thread. It seems to me like almost every post I write, you find fault with it, especially fault in its terminology, and point to that fault as if it were proof that I hate, despise, or look down on these other people I've been trying to talk about. Don't you think that if I hated said people that much, I'd be pleased as punch that they leave me alone at my poly meetings? But instead, I'm trying to figure out how to convey to them enough of my welcome, warmth, and eagerness to rub shoulders with them, to persuade them to join me and my fellow other people. If this is a con job by me, it's a hell of a con job. So far only you and Dirtclustit have been able to see through it.

---

Re: http://aafteota.wordpress.com/2013/1...ies-speak-out/ ... wow that deserves to be a post in this thread -- and in the other thread I started about cultural issues. Will have to see if I can get it planted there as well.

Yes, precisely: An ignorant ally is better than a sagacious enemy. Ignorant allies are willing to be taught and trained. Sagacious enemies figure they already know what they need to know and certainly aren't going to take instruction from the likes of *me!*

What it really seems to boil down to is that we have two (actually many) groups of people who've been marginalized by a certain other group of people. The situation is a big fat mess, and I don't think we can expect to find a perfect starting place to start from in trying to pick up the mess.

It's like when a hurricane or an F4+ rips through a bunch of neighborhoods. Rubble everywhere. Homes in shambles. Infrastructure gone. Live wires dancing on the streets. Roads blocked by uprooted trees and other debris. What more perfect place to start could there be than just picking up a board somewhere, and putting it in a "discard pile." It doesn't put a dent in the mess, but it's as good a way to start the clean-up (and re-building) as any.

And when someone else starts trying to clear a tree off the road, you don't yell, "Hey! We're not working on trees and roads now, we're working on boards! Get over here and help me." People in the midst of a great big mess need to treat each other courteously and considerately if they are to hold their morale together and attempt to wrest a new and better world out of the bitter jaws of disaster.

Race relations are a disaster. Peoples of both/multiple cultures are attempting to clean up the mess. The work is distressing and frustrating. Which is exactly why we all need to learn to exercise some patience and speak civilly and compassionately to one another. The mess (and lives lost) is bad enough without us bickering over every little word.
__________________
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"

Last edited by kdt26417; 11-27-2013 at 07:29 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 11-27-2013, 06:57 AM
ColorsWolf's Avatar
ColorsWolf ColorsWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: CA, U.S.A.
Posts: 362
Default

Kevin, I just think you focus too much on the color of some one's skin or what their "Race" is, is all I am saying.~

I'm not attacking you, I'm just trying to make my point here:

It isn't how some one looks, it's their way of life: if you notice that some people of a certain culture are not so numerous in participating in polyamory then that in my opinion is what we are talking about here.~

I am sure there are plenty people with "black skin" that have polyamorous relationships, it's not like "people with black skin are allergic to polyamory", it all has to do with the culture they were raised with and what kind of person they are.~

For example, we had some people here talking about how it is in some Caribbean cultures and others talked about American Black Cultures, etc..~

I am glad you are learning more about people first hand and I am glad you are beginning to realize that there is so much more than just the surface when it comes to people such as the color of their skin or their "race".~

Sincerely,

ColorsWolf
__________________
Love yourself, you are beautiful!~ ^_^

*Believe in yourself, you can do anything*!~ ^_^

Appreciate every thing, every thing is precious.~

Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 11-27-2013, 08:45 AM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is online now
Official Greeter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Olympia, Washington
Posts: 5,021
Default

Re:
Quote:
"Kevin, I just think you focus too much on the color of someone's skin or what their 'Race' is, is all I am saying."
Even after that last post when I tried to stop saying "blacks" and start saying "people" instead? Why can't you affirm my efforts instead of continually shooting me down for my past mistakes?

Of course I care more about someone's way of life than I do their skin color! Their skin color isn't even as significant as their clothing color, since at least they can usually pick out their clothing color and that in turn maybe says something at least about their preferences.

Re:
Quote:
"If you notice that some people of a certain culture are not so numerous in participating in polyamory then that in my opinion is what we are talking about here."
But, but ... what I've been hearing is that many American descendants of slaves do indeed practice polyamory: It walks like a duck, it quacks like a duck; they're just not comfortable calling it a duck (or anything else for that matter). They don't want to call it anything, they don't want to attend our meetings, they just want to "live the life." Which is their right.

I don't feel *entitled* to have people of every ethnicity attend my poly potlucks. It's just something I thought might be cool if all relevant persons wanted to agree to it.

Re:
Quote:
"I am sure there are plenty people with 'black skin' that have polyamorous relationships, it's not like 'people with black skin are allergic to polyamory,' it all has to do with the culture they were raised with and what kind of person they are."
Yes and coincidentally it's already been pointed out in various ways and by various people posting on this thread that "black polyamory" is practiced amongst some people's cultures but not others -- depending on religion, traditions, and so forth.

Re:
Quote:
"For example, we had some people here talking about how it is in some Caribbean cultures and others talked about American Black Cultures, etc."
Umm yeah, sure did. (And I read those posts. Paid attention to them as well.)

Re:
Quote:
"I am glad you are learning more about people firsthand and I am glad you are beginning to realize that there is so much more than just the surface when it comes to people such as the color of their skin or their 'race.'"
I began to realize that as soon as I was old enough to understand what the words "race" and "culture" meant. The problem here isn't about me needing to be taught to realize it. I'm already there. The problem is me figuring out how to communicate that I realize it in such a way that others can understand and believe. Frankly, I think I've made every reasonable effort to do so. There comes a time when the ball is in the listener's court. That is, the listener must actually *listen* -- not just temporarily bide their time while thinking up a devastating retort.

Have you listened to me? Have you read all my posts in this thread? Did you put yourself in my shoes when you read them, or did you merely scan them for weaknesses? You seem to have quite a penchant for putting people (especially me since a diplomat makes such an easy target) down. Do you do this so as to boost yourself up? There are better ways. What Stephen R. Covey calls a win-win. I don't have to lose in order for you to win. It is possible that the both of us can win. But we've got to stop fighting against each other first.

ColorsWolf, I am just about done with you. I've cautioned you before that I'd only take so much abuse before I'd stop responding to your posts, and we are now teetering on the brink of that change. If you desire that change, any little push now will convince me fully that you and I are done talking. If you don't desire that change, than start treating me as an equal, not as a recalcitrant pupil.

Personally, I think we've wandered far afield from what would really bring diverse poly cultures together. Instead we are arguing about why this or that word is wrong, a classic downfall of the stereotypical polyamorist. Polyamorists are (prejudicially) known for aggressively defending *their* definitions of words and what words *they* think we should use and when *they* think we ought to use them.

I wonder if people who descended in the United States from slaves haven't noticed that about "white polyamorists," and as a result want to step as far away from our semantic battles as possible. If you don't call it anything, then there's no label to argue about. Seems to simplify things, kinda ...

Anyway, I am tired of the criticism and the abuse and the disturbing reversals of personality face just when I least expect it. You need to be more consistent. Either decide that you like me and that you truly support me, or pull that rug out from under me now and be done with it.

This may be the last post I write and direct to you. I'll be thinking about that. It's also very possible the next post I direct at you will simply say, "Sorry man, but we're done."

I beg you not to put me in that position. There's a first time for everything, but I'd rather there not be a first time for this.

Now, I suggest we all get quite back on topic, meaning: What can we do to get polyamorists of every ethnicity to get and meet together more than they have up until now? You're welcome to answer that to accomplish the objective, we need to speak to people of other cultures in logical, non-offensive words. But (and this is the last time I'll ask), don't answer in that or any other way unless you can stop nitpicking at the motes in my eyes while ignoring the beams in your eyes. Remove the beams, and then you'll be able to see clearly to pick out the motes (without plucking my eyes out along with them).

No more kdt26417 versus ColorsWolf nonsense. This thread isn't supposed to be about our apparent enmity with each other. It's supposed to be about getting polys of diverse ethnicities together to join hands, both on the web and in real life.

Enough said. I've tried long and hard to please you and find common ground you and I can share. You've resisted me at every turn, either condescendingly or angrily. Well it takes a lot before I'll admit to being angry in public like this, but I'm admitting it now. *Don't* push me any further. It won't help you, and it won't help this website.

Kevin
__________________
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 11-27-2013, 09:11 AM
ColorsWolf's Avatar
ColorsWolf ColorsWolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: CA, U.S.A.
Posts: 362
Default

I'm sorry, I must have read too much into your posts as I have a tendency to be very literal online as it is extremely difficult to be so otherwise or understand otherwise.~

I'm also sorry if you thought I was arguing with you or being condescending as I did not see that at all, that was definitely not my intent, and I apologize for arguing.~


LovingRadiance also spurred me very much and made my hairs bristle, I mistakingly was seeing you agreeing with her point that it is justifiable to stereotype people and all I saw was her you and this thread taking a turn for the worse.~

But I see now I was mistaken, I realize now there are better ways to get my message across and not to mistake people in place of other people.~


For that I am truly sorry and I hope we can move on from this as you have suggested.~

I agree that we can get more people of all cultures and walks of life to join in polyamory or we might even discover that they already do but they might not "call it" as such, as I believe it was you or some one else who said that (my memory is a little fuzzy right now), if we simply talk to them and try to get to know them all assumptions aside.~

Love,

ColorsWolf
__________________
Love yourself, you are beautiful!~ ^_^

*Believe in yourself, you can do anything*!~ ^_^

Appreciate every thing, every thing is precious.~


Last edited by ColorsWolf; 11-27-2013 at 09:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 11-27-2013, 09:14 AM
london london is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK - land of the free
Posts: 1,635
Default

When do we hold elections for Race Relations Officer of polyamory.com because I never got to vote in the last one. Is it cos I is black?
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 11-27-2013, 07:47 PM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,271
Default

Colorswolf-
I woould like to invite you to check out my real life. (I'm NOT being sarcastic). If you are interested, send me a PM and I will send you my real life info for fb. You need not add me as a friend to see it-because it's an open page.

I grasp what you THINK I was saying and meant.
What you are doing is making a few LARGE assumptions that color your opinion of my meaning. Incorrectly.

You say you are picking about being literal. But you aren't speaking in educated literal terms regarding social psychology. Social psychology (the study of how people think about, influence, and relate to one another) is VERY VERY pertinent to the question that KDT asked in this thread.
It's also MY MAJOR in school of which I am nearly finished with my bachelors and about ready to move on to my Masters (to be followed by a phd). It's my heart. It's the love of my life.

You have REPEATEDLY all over the board said you were interested in learning. So-when you vehemently disagreed with me, I posted the necessary info for you to ACTUALLY go read the experts information regarding what I said. I didn't ask you to take me at MY word. But gave you links to expert information, so that you could more easily access what I was talking about-in fuller depth-and hopefully with less confusion.

But-you didn't do that. Interestingly enough, KDT, did. I would reason to guess he's found some interesting stuff, not only written, but about himself too.

At no point was I making excuses for people mistreating others.
BUT-if we want to elicit change, it's necessary to understand the UNDERLYING reasons why people do what they do when they do what they do.

PART of why people do what they do is nurture (learned) but some is nature.

We DO STEREOTYPE naturally and we do stereotype learned.
But-before we go assuming that all stereotyping can be abolished, it's critical to understand that stereotyping at its core is a natural mechanism of humans and that can't be changed.
What can be changed is when and how and why we are stereotyping what.

I don't have time or interest in RE-WRITING all of my studies into this thread so that you can read it and finally realize I'm not being a bigoted bitch. But I was VERY interested in sharing what I have learned-because it could be HIGHLY useful not only in this thread, but in the personal lives of each of us participating in the thread.

Humans DO stereotype naturally. It's a part of who we are. That doesn't mean we can't learn to be more conscious and more careful about it. But to deny that it's true that all humans do it is naive at best.
Stereotyping is a form of classification. We classify all sorts of shit, including people.
We classify (and stereotype) by grade, by age, by gender, by IQ, by physical ability, by color, by number, by date, by time, by size, by shape....
This is a baseline truth.

In order to affect how people USE stereotypes (which is the real issue); we need to understand WHY they use them and WHAT they use them for so that we can help them be more structured and careful in their use of them.

The world isn't as simple as "right" and "wrong" or "black" and "white". There are many things that we do (like stereotyping) that have GOOD uses. For example, we stereotype plants. When dealing with plant life in a new area, we will often assess a plants useful properties and safety for eating based upon certain stereotypes learned from plants in an area we were familiar with. This can SAVE YOUR LIFE. It's a GOOD purpose.
We also stereotype in bad ways (which is what we are all used to talking about) and I won't give examples, because plenty have already been given in this thread. But the issue isn't to abolish stereotyping COMPLETELY. It's to reduce it back to the original purpose it was useful for.

Seriously-as much as you express an interest in learning about new ideas/concepts and understanding people; you should check out some information on social psych, social perception & attributions, classification and stereotyping etc. Do a search on David G Meyers-great info he's put out on the topics. Well written, clearly written, interesting, sometimes provocative and very educational. You might find that A) you enjoy the topic and B) you aren't so dead set on believing I'm some psycho bitch.

My life is fully integrated with a variety of cultures and races and lifestyles enmeshed in a close and large chosen family. You would be hard-pressed to find anyone in my real life-even if they don't like me personally-who would believe that I am remotely racist or sexist. But-I'm not about to pretend that people aren't what they are or don't do what they DO do.

My life interest is the science of why we do what we do. It's what I study, it's what I center my education on. It's what I know.
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 11-27-2013, 07:55 PM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,271
Default

kdt-wasn't that an awesome test set up?
I am going to go back and do more of them. There's some cool info about how they came up with that program and what they are doing with the information too. It's really cool.
On a side note-the first test it gave me was on race. Specifically looking for prejudice against "blacks" (as said in the test). It noted afterward, that *most* people in the US (of any race) tend to hold a prejudice to at least some small degree against blacks and explained some of the US cultural effect etc.
But-my test came out having no prejudice for or against either. (keeping in mind that *most by definition being the majority, but could be only 1% more).
The second test showed I had a "slightly favorable" attitude towards prostitutes.
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 11-28-2013, 06:41 AM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is online now
Official Greeter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Olympia, Washington
Posts: 5,021
Default

Re (from london):
Quote:
"When do we hold elections for Race Relations Officer of polyamory.com because I never got to vote in the last one. Is it cos I is black?"
Yes london, it's cos you is black, and as we know all blacks are bigots. Hence unfit to vote (much less run) for the Race Relations Offer job. Now bow your head and humbly and say, "Amen."

Amen. (And also, you will once again not receive a slice of cake.)

I'm definitely with LovingRadiance in the sense that some stereotying is good, necessary, and useful, while other sterotyping is hateful, pointless, and illogical. Sorry if that offends, but I can't just back down on my position -- not without a huge learning curve that gave me lots of citations to confirm the supposed facts along the way.

Yes LR, the test set-up was very nice (even though I hated the "under the clock" pressure preliminaries). Who knows when I'll find good opportunity to try it again later.

Thanks for posting the various links; I believe that they'll help a lot of people (myself included).

Sincerely,
Kevin T.
__________________
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 11-28-2013, 11:21 PM
Dirtclustit Dirtclustit is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Middle of Oregon
Posts: 431
Default No offense

buddy o pal

but you have much too firm of a grip

to know what you are talking about

because the object you are gripping

matters much more than how tight

you death grip hold on things are

Last edited by Dirtclustit; 11-28-2013 at 11:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:22 AM.