Women Can Be Jerks Too
Maureen Dowd's article on the modern dilemmas of women finding a date are laughable. I started to write a post summarizing the error of Ms. Dowd's arguments but found that Roger Simon and his commenters had done it for me. Read it, it's a great post.
Update--Ok, I have to weigh in on this issue on Maureen Dowd and her snarky take on why she can't find a date with a man. Newsflash--anyone writing a book called "Are Men Necessary?
shouldn't be asking that question. (The book-cover is cool, though.) I have spent more than my fair share of time around women like Ms. Dowd who think that their lack of male companionship has more to do with their "independence" and brains and less to do with the fact that they are ballbusters. Even everyday women who pride themselves on being feminists fall into this trap when it comes to being dateless.
Case in point: I was at at the manicurist one day who happened to be a Dowd clone except for the low status job. She spent the next hour (it seemed like more) discussing the redneck men in Tennessee who wouldn't go out with a woman like her who had strong opinions, the lack of educated people in Tennessee, Southerners fear of change and the horrible condition of our healthcare (never mind the fact that our Medicaid program, Tenncare, spends more per person than just about any state, but that is a whole other post). By the time I left the salon, I felt like I'd been kicked in the stomach with the insults and putdowns. I can only imagine what a man who was involved with this woman would feel like. I was turned off by her and her negative views of men and traditional Southerners and I am neither one.
The truth is, most men like women who like men (except for some psychological cripples). I am opinionated, have a PHD and (hopefully), a decent IQ. I rarely meet a man who minds this. Why? Because I like men, enjoy their company and treat them as fellow human beings. These are the ingredients that many of these "feminist" women are missing in their interactions with men. They believe that because they are women, they can get away with saying anything and others should think they are enlightened, instead of just bullies or jerks. That's what they think men are--and that is why they will remain dateless.
Update--Ok, I have to weigh in on this issue on Maureen Dowd and her snarky take on why she can't find a date with a man. Newsflash--anyone writing a book called "Are Men Necessary?
shouldn't be asking that question. (The book-cover is cool, though.) I have spent more than my fair share of time around women like Ms. Dowd who think that their lack of male companionship has more to do with their "independence" and brains and less to do with the fact that they are ballbusters. Even everyday women who pride themselves on being feminists fall into this trap when it comes to being dateless. Case in point: I was at at the manicurist one day who happened to be a Dowd clone except for the low status job. She spent the next hour (it seemed like more) discussing the redneck men in Tennessee who wouldn't go out with a woman like her who had strong opinions, the lack of educated people in Tennessee, Southerners fear of change and the horrible condition of our healthcare (never mind the fact that our Medicaid program, Tenncare, spends more per person than just about any state, but that is a whole other post). By the time I left the salon, I felt like I'd been kicked in the stomach with the insults and putdowns. I can only imagine what a man who was involved with this woman would feel like. I was turned off by her and her negative views of men and traditional Southerners and I am neither one.
The truth is, most men like women who like men (except for some psychological cripples). I am opinionated, have a PHD and (hopefully), a decent IQ. I rarely meet a man who minds this. Why? Because I like men, enjoy their company and treat them as fellow human beings. These are the ingredients that many of these "feminist" women are missing in their interactions with men. They believe that because they are women, they can get away with saying anything and others should think they are enlightened, instead of just bullies or jerks. That's what they think men are--and that is why they will remain dateless.
posted by Helen at 3:36 PM
45 Comments:
Hear hear! I agree with all you wrote. Women like the one you overheard, in my experience, are far worse catches than they imagine themselves to be. They mistake nagging, disrespect, and being argumentative for "strong opinions", and for all their self-professed independence, still go to pieces if a man doesn't call when expected.
Thank you for your blog, Dr. Helen. It's time for smart, confident women to start speaking out against the diminishment of men and boys in our culture. Women complain that there are no more Prince Charmings, apparently unaware of all the work they've been doing to turn them into frogs.
It's possible to be a jerk without being a feminist and I suspect the manicurist might be an example.
However, having fouled her own nest, so to speak, becoming an aggressive feminist as a way of either rationalizing her situation or striking back at the supposed agents of her situation could be attractive.
Tried to read MoDo's column. Quit about half way through wondering if she ever shuts up. One thing people in her position (male and female) often forget is that the people they associate with are rarely ordinary, normal people and thus to make any type of generalization based on their experiences with these people is erroneous.
The problem with the Maureen Dowds of the world - and I know a number of them - isn't that they are feminists or even that they are ball busters (one can be either or both of those outside the home, yet still end up in a good marriage).
No - the real problem for them is that everything - and I do mean EVERYTHING revolves around them. It's all about how they think, how they feel, what they want. Unless the guy is psychic he's never ever going to be able to please her - because anything that doesn't directly contribute to making HER feel wonderful... means HE is being a selfish pig.
For instance - if she is having a really bad day - she'll want him to listen to her go through it in detail and commiserate with her. OTOH If he's having a bad day and tries to talk to her about it... the resulting thought process is - why is he always dumping his problems on me? Doesn't he know I have enough of my own? How selfish can he be?
You can always tell when someone (man or woman) has this life view... they tend to blame all their problems on the other person. Just as MoDo blames her lack of dates on the men of the world who just can't appreciate her wonderfulness.
Yeah, guys are just chomping at the bit to get together with a woman who has a razor blade for a tongue and a far-left liberal, how-to book for a brain. Strong women—-I love ‘em. Hell, I married one—-but that doesn’t mean I want to hand-feed raw meat to a rabid dog, and Dowdy doesn’t understand the difference. Angry is angry, that’s the bottom line.
If I throw back a couple of beers and go looking for a fight, it doesn’t mean I’m strong, it means I need a buzz to get permission to go off for the wrong reasons. Anger is a lot like that and you know what—-it’s addictive, and Dowdy’s looking a lot like an addict to me.
Here’s the wrap –up: A woman friend of mine once said, “I’d like to find a guy like you.” I told her the truth in love: “A guy like me would never go out with a woman like you.” She’s an angry woman blaming everyone else for her crap. Who wants to hook-up with that?! I love her to pieces, but it’s the truth. Years have passed and she hasn’t proven me wrong. She’s a lot like Maureen Dowd.
Hi allicent:
No need to agree with me on this blog! I do think women like Maureen Dowd are dateless due to their dislike of men and their general tasteless behavior. But this is not to say that there are not other women who are successful and like men who have a hard time. I do know women like that also--they are a different breed than the Maureen Dowds of the world.
Dowd's funny, isn't she? But not funny ha ha. She doesn't seem to recognize that her question "Why can't a man love me?" is answered by her simultaneous query, "Are men necessary?"
Twenty years ago, I married up, at age 23. She does the difficult work of childraising, while I get to pretend I am doing something more than making a paycheck. (And I am not trying to be cute or ingratiating in saying so. I really think I have the easier job, and I really did marry up. Lucky as hell, I am.) I didn't date enough to meet anyone like Maureen, but I work with a few of them. Their male counterpart is similarly destructive. And no fun at all. Ick.
Her ideal lover is herself, of course. What man can compete with MoDo's love of MoDo? She is certain she could be a better man than any man she's ever met. She might be right, but that ability doesn't get one a date too often, apparently.
Hey, I like men too. Generally speaking, a heap more than I like women. But hell yeah I'm a ballbuster. I'm an equal opportunity ballbuster. I've been busting your balls a bit on here. If being challenging and demanding (which I think is what it means to be a ballbuster) is a problem, then hellfire, I'll guess I'll just go stag. And I have to agree with Maureen a bit on this one. There are men who can handle it, but there are loads who really don't want a woman who will challenge them too much. Or at least who will not do so directly. Wheedling and manipulation, they'll deal with. And what's the big deal anyway. Guys bust each other's balls all the time.
Actually, anon, we don't.
I don't mind dealing with a woman who is forthright. Saves time, among other things.
I do object to the excess of forthrightness bordering on rudeness or worse, backed up by the clear threat that, if replied to in the same way, she might cry.
It has been my experience that some woman, new to the forthright business, don't know how to do it, exactly, and it becomes more like hostility for hostility's sake, even if they don't mean it.
It's one thing to challenge another as an equal. It's another to be a butthead and call it challenging.
In the latter case, you may find yourself playing alone.
I'm puzzled Anon, what's the point of equal opportunity ballbusting? Dowd admits that "being challenging and demanding" pretty much ensures one will "just go stag." So I guess you win.
But what exactly do you win with that approach? It's not like there's some limited supply in modern society of men or women who are "challenging and demanding." No, of late there is a bottomless well of people intent on acting like petulant teenagers.
Mature adults figure out at some point that society operates alot more smoothly -to everyone's benefit- the less ballbusting (and the more polite) people are.
Fact is, ballbusting is easy, cooperation is hard.
Richard and annoymous:
I think that the difference is that men do not tend to use the relationship as leverage. If you have words with a man, they will tend to continue the relationship--but with women (and of course, some whipped men)they will either break off all ties with you, or in my experience, sabotage you. Case in point--I had a secretary where I worked who did not like it when I called her on her mistakes (this included scheduling me on my days off, not telling me if people canceled etc.). I was direct with her, not rude but told her simply to schedule me on the correct days etc. She continued to do it--cost me alot of time and I eventually was told by another psychologist that she did not "like" me. I quickly moved from this practice as I knew that this "oversite" would continue and I was losing buisiness because of her. One of my colleagues spent time teaching me how to talk to female secretaries by beating around the bush and never being direct. I could not stomach it and have never hired another office manager since.
pogo--
I think there's a big difference between being challenging and demanding and acting like a petulant teenager. Even in personal relationships, parties reasonably have some expectations of each other. Being frank and direct about this is hardly petulant. And say what you will, I think many men tend to view demanding women as "petulant" and demanding men as strong, leader types.
What do I win? I reckon I place honesty and self-respect over "smooth runnings". I can say with absolute honesty that I'd be much happier alone than choking down my resentments in order to be "cooperative".
Helen-- But I guess that's what I am saying...many men DO use the relationship as leverage, at least in a way. I recently had an experience in my office. This gentleman had recently made his interest in me known. Within the next day or so, he happened to come to my office and a discussion b/w this gentleman, another guy, and myself ensued. For no apparent reason, the gentleman got defensive. We certainly weren't attacking him. Only engaging in a debate. Since then, he's hardly spoken to me.
Again, clearly, that's all for the best.
Hey Anonymous,
I guess we can agree that both men and women can use a relationship as leverage. However,I do not think one has to "choke down" their resentments in order to be cooperative in personal relationships. Sometimes, it is more important to make another person happy than to be right. I am not talking about changing one's opinions or belief systems--I mean merely accomodating others at times or presenting information to others in a way that does not put them on the defensive. This is done all of the time in marital relationships--by both men and women.
At one time the bitter female who finds her soft and real self after a good lay was a staple of pop culture (think James Bond). I'm not sure it led to the best relationships, but we may not want to go there.
Nonetheless, bitchy or not, dating is often difficult for a woman of a certain age (and MoDo appears to be moving into that range). Sure men more often date younger, but the bigger problem is they die younger. Widowers are a little thin on the ground and widows numerous. Which brings us to Dr. Helen's later post--too seldom do we hear of the great unfairness of longevity rates. Nor do we have pink ribbons & great fund raisers for prostate cancer. Indeed, heart diseases kill at different ages if similar rates - that's a nice bi-sexual cause.
To Annoymous:
Yes, heart disease is an equal opportunity killer. I am all for ribbons and fund raisers for prostate cancer--from what I have read, 80% of men get the disease by the time they are 80. I remember once talking to a girlfriend about being upset that a relative had prostate cancer and she said with a shrug, "Oh, don't all men get that?" I thought it rather flippant. Can you imagine the reverse on my part, "Oh, don't all women get breast cancer"?
Maureen Dowd is an a**hole.
Maureen seems to be a throwback to the mother in Pride and Prejudice who thinks that marriage is the only real opportunity for women. Being single is not some kind of hell, especially for successful, famous women like Dowd. My advice to Dowd would be to be happy for what you have and stop complaining! No one likes a complainer.
I loved your post... and as for Maureen, she did look hot in those red shoes on Drudge. She should leave the bar though and maybe try a different venue,... church?
I'm arguing from Asia.
Plenty of guys 30+, said they don't date anyone older than 26, simply because they wanted kids, wanted not to worry about the biological clock (which in the absence of really affordable infertility work is much shorter).
Sad to say, but the work of building a career and being highly educated, tends to mean the age women consider marriage is later than less successful women, which doesn't help.
I'm not sexist or anything but I can't offer to get pregnant - so women in marriage have an added burden. At least, women keep their hair and live longer.
How can someone who graduated from college 36 years ago call ner self a "modern" "girl", anyway?
Dowd can't write to save her life. If the guilt-tripped, PC set weren't hectored into abandoning reason she wouldn't be writing at the NYT. Her career is so constructed that she is a sort of Milli-Vanilli of leftist journalism.
Tfeh!
I find a reasoned, intellectual discussion with a woman is both enjoyable and insightful. As a man, I need to get off the physical world reality we in which we live. The woman must come to grips with the need to expand outside her emotional/bonding nature to connect with the man's reality based thought process. In the end, both parties come away with a deeper understanding of the other.
Ms. Dowd, on the other hand not only embraces her emotion based thought process, she uses it as a crude cudgel. Unfortunately, she is neither intellecutally gifted nor is her choice of weapon anything but a banner proclaiming she is out of ammunition. If I were a betting man, I'd say Ms.Dowd's public persona 'I am woman, hear me roar' deflates to 'I am woman, hear me whimper' in the quiet loneliness of her single life.
The universe is separated into two unequal parts - Yourself and Everything Else. Learn to reach out an communicate Maureen, before the Universe passes you by.
Helen,
Age is a part of the decision men make for younger women....and I do not mean that as stupidly simple as I state it. In discussion with both men and women acquaintances I have found many recognize that the folks, male and female, who are not with someone...through divorce or lost relationships which might be multiple times...tend to be very cynical and thus not easy to have a relationship with.
I am married to a woman two years my senior, and we met at 40-something and married after we were 50 (her deceased husband was my best friend). I had been burned in a pair of bum marriages which I can now say were faulty from the start, and I should have known so. I was doubting, cynical and often questioned her early in our relationship. This saint of a woman not only tolerated my poor attitude, but over time caused me to mellow, and now we are open, confident and completely consumed with spending the rest of our lives together.
It pains me to see many of the folks in our circle of acquaintances who are not, and most likely never will be, in such a relationship. They are male and female ballbusters who seem to use the attitude as a defense mechanism so as not to again be burned. That is truly sad as the attitude and aggresive efforts doom them to being alone or in more failed relationships.
Duke of DeLand
Great post! I agree 100%. My perpetually-single female friends have quite a few things in common. They refuse to improve their own lives, because they're waiting for a man to come along and make things better. They date men who are totally unsuitable for them, and then spend a lot of time critizing those men and trying to change them. And they blame everything that goes wrong in their lives on sexism, but have no problem with applying the broadest, most vulgar stereotypes to every man they meet.
I love these friends, but I'd be seriously tempted to warn off any man who came into their lives. If he wasn't crazy when he started dating them, he would be before long!
I disagree. This is just an article trying to trash Maureen Dowd because she says men are turned off by strong independent high educated women.
I do believe (a proportion of) men don't want to date such women. Simply because they rather have a woman that they can take care of, that they can provide for, or that they can "show off" for.
Just because you write a book called "Are men necessary?" (though insulting such a title might be to men), does not mean you automatically have problems meeting / dating men. This is just a poor excuse to trash Maureen Dowd.
Quote:
The truth is, most men like women who like men (except for some psychological cripples). I am opinionated, have a PHD and (hopefully), a decent IQ. I rarely meet a man who minds this. Why? Because I like men, enjoy their company and treat them as fellow human beings. These are the ingredients that many of these "feminist" women are missing in their interactions with men.
OK so because this ONE individual woman, who happens to have a PhD say she doesn't have problems with men, Maureen Dowd must be talking nonsense.
First she SAYS she doesn't have problems.
This is just her observation, and who says that she is telling the truth.
Second, maybe the men are just being nice to her, but who says they actually would consider dating her, let alone marrying her (if she is not married or dating yet).
Third, one individual doesn't make a difference! How come feminists always hang on to these one-individual arguments????????
gerard - first of all Dr. Helen's happily married, you dipstick. And second, there are lots of excuses to trash Maureen Dowd, this is merely one. Sorry if you *like* MoDo. Maybe you should give her a call - I hear she's looking for a man.
I have been practicing psychiatry for 32 years. In medical school (late 1960s), we males, esp. doctors, assumed that the role of the nurse was an extension of us, not that they were independent entities. Now many RNs are Masters-level, many are independently functioning nurse practitioners (able to write prescriptions), and many make more than some MDs.To be truthful, I often resent being criticized in my patient-management by persons less credentialled. But, as a scientist, I would do a disservice to my patients not to listen. At 60, I now struggle with how to view women. Colleagues ? or cutsies to approach romantically by acting as if i view them as colleagues ? Same issue with female lawyers. I was in a dedicated relationship with one for 23 years. She was a great Lady, but litigated everything against me re: toast, what to watch on TV, etc. I truly believe that Viagra and Cialis popularity result from the inability of a male to sexaully open up to loud or aggressive women.
Dr. Helen, Hoorah for You...I happen to be one of those men that enjoy the company of, and conversation with intelligent women when I am lucky enough to find one. I am past 60 and divorced for ten years. I tried dating but found out quickly that that was mine field which should best be avoided. I have known several women like MoDo. They are their own worst enemies. Because they are "stuck on stupid" (Neo-feminism) they chase off good men that could and would enrich their lives, but because of that stupidity, instead of looking in a mirror they blame men, or society, or whatever that meets their agenda. They don't realize they were sold a bill of goods. Ladies, and I speak to the MoDos of the world, look in a mirror and take a critial self-inventory or go find a good conservative phychologist.
There are a lot of good men out there that you are stumbling over but, blindly kicking aside on you trip to power.
I think a part of Ms. Dowd's problem is that she thinks she needs a man of high stature, numerous credentials, and a wall full of degrees and various diplomas. Any man who does not fit this ideal is a sperm donating mule who is an exact characterization of men portrayed in todays t.v. commercials. Drones whos fight or flight instinct kicks in when faced when a educated woman nears us.
Sorry to burst Ms. Dowds bubble but the "Sex in the City" view of modern relationships is not the reality most of us live in.
Some of us blue collar Joes are quite intelligent, clean up nice, and even enjoy opera.
But heres a secret I would like to share with Ms. Dowd and others who may think like her.
Its not that we are afraid of a assertive educated women. We just dont need them. Here in Blue Collarville we tend to gravitate torwards women who can chop wood, raise children, put us in our place when needed, and just love us men for who we are, not what our job is or what social events we are invited to. We need solid women who can think on thier feet and keep a family going rain or shine. Those women are indispensable. Some women can be both educated and chop wood. Those women know who they are and dont need a man to fill out their resume and usually are not on the market long.
Fact is, intelligence is far more then a diploma, Pultzer, or a snarky column in the New York Times.
I say Ms. Dowd needs to learn how to chop wood insted of chopping men off at the knees.
After reading her columns over the years (I no longer waste my time with the NYT), Ms. D's problem is not what she thinks it is. Any male (or female) of ordinary intelligence will find her an amalgam of arrogance and stupidity, a fatal combination, independent of gender, to any relationship relationship
Buried somewhere in the blog of the Anchoress, theanchoress.com, is an article of hers from sometime ago that is MoDo-centric, and makes some excellent points about MoDo-ism the the specific and general sense.
I believe the article's name is 'Maureen Dowd's Uterus'... I kid you not. Don't be put off by the gyno-title...it is really is a cogent piece of bloggery.
As far as I'm concered, MoDo is a toxic blight. But I have heard that soon MoDo-ites are going to shell out to get their venom injection online.
Bob B
Isn't it funny that MoDo cannot understand that men aren't attracted to women who act like men… Men have a word for someone we view in that light, it’s called a friend. I don’t date my friends & nor do I find men attractive. I prefer the differences that women bring to the table in a relationship & think that those differences make us better people. I personally am not put off or challenged by intelligent women, women who are successful or women who earn more then me. I am however put off by women who don’t act like women. If she wants to be treated like a man so badly, I’ll offer her the advice I’d give to any of my male counterparts & that is to “suck it up like a man.” MoDo, if you’re going to continue to insist to be treated like a guy, then don’t complain when men treat you how you’d like… like a man.
I've met many, many people just like Ms. Dowd, who are abrasive as hell, can't attract a lover, and cast about for reasons to blame the opposite sex instead of themselves. I've met men who do it, I've met women who do it.
Anyone who proclaims any characteristic as typical of half of the people on the planet is full of shit.
The long and short of it is, people are quite good at finding those who confirm their view of the world. If Ms. Dowd is convinced that men don't like her, then she'll make it so.
Here's a take on what might be eating at MoDo. Its Article 117:
http://fredoneverything.net/FOE_Frame_Column.htm
Article 264 is about Dowd.
http://fredoneverything.net/FOE_Frame_Column.htm
An awful lot of women seem to take pride in describing themselves as "brutally honest" or "honest to a fault." I don't read Dowd, so I don't know if she falls into that camp. Nor do I see that there's anything inherently feminist about brutal honesty. On the other hand, I don't want to spend time with someone, male or female, who is brutally honest. And many older women that I respect learned a long time ago that tact and-- God forbid-- a little flattery, will get you much farther when you're dealing with men.
Personalities aside, no-one in their right mind would ever trust Dowdy Maureen with anything: Not family finances, not with making breakfast or dinner, not with the least concern for kids other than stuffing 'em headfirst into some smarmy upscale pre-K program delighted in by the two-mommies set.
Marriage is not a "partnership". Husband and wife are not mere adjuncts of corporate convenience. When I said, at a late age to a far younger lady, "This is my solemn vow", I was shaking so hard the minister had to hold my wrist. Happiness, and real terror... the two of us in my mind had become as one. "'Til death do us part..." and I still weep at that, for Shiva's drum-and-flame beats invincible in all there is.
"Commitment" also seems the wrong word. We have three magnificent kids, I cannot tell you how proud I am, and thankful for them. People actually ask, "How did you manage that?" and I have no reply. But they have never heard a harsh or unfair word from either of us; we trust them, and do everything we can to encourage them and foster independence; above all, by simply staying together, it seems we secure them a base that renders all their risks worth taking.
One reads that homosexual "marriage" (sic) will criminalize the nuclear family by defining husband and wife, father and mother, as "discriminatory" because we restrict "benefits" to legimate, biological offspring. But I suspect, with Maureen Dowd as an alternative, that phony little PC-types will hit a wall that even their narcissistic solipsisms can't crash through.
There is such a thing as real Love; there is powerful incentive to pass on one's family name (my documented lineage extends back many centuries); there is, above all, the blessed hope that drives one's willingness to sacrifice for one's beloved children. Given the discriminatory advantage of happy childhoods and a stable home, they will beat out your bewildered, saddened, "two mommies" orphans every time. Not for what they do, but because of who they are. We have nature with us, and all of human history, and no cruddy little bunch of lesbo-femmers is going rob us of our marriage, our children, or the Name that is their proud birthright.
Whatever doltish legalisms Mde Dowd expects to wash away her failures, she and her sisterhood must fail. Like Quaker celibrates (what an analogy!), her kind will simply breed itself out of the population-- excreted, as it were, from out the body politic. As true families based on love and sacrifice all do, we'll go our way without her leave, or anyone's. I will have small, fat people known as grandchildren, and when they ask, "Gramps, when you were born, were there people then?" I'll say what I told their Dad: Shut up, and deal! Against that admonition, even Dowdy Maureen can muster no defense.
Great article.
Can you imagine a date with MoDo? After hearing how I as a man were responsible for global warming, wars, sexism, rape, etc over the entree I would excuse myself, go to the gents room, climb out the window, leave town, change my name, move to a new counrty, have a sex change and live under a bridge in eastern europe like a common troll just so she wouldnt find me again.
The people have spoken MoDo you should not breed.
To anonymous,
Thanks for your comment--I needed a good laugh today and the image of a man dodging out the men's room and living under a bridge just to escape a woman like MoDo is hilarious.
MoDo is dateless because most men know that the last time they met someone who had that type of temperament, a house fell on her during the Wizard of Oz.
THIS IS ALL BESIDE THE POINT. THE POINT IS THATMAUREEN DOWD IS SIMPLY A CRAPPY WRITER. SHE MAY BE SMART (AND I THINK SHE IS), BUT SHE'S NOT A GIFTED WRITER. HER USE OF LANGUAGE IS ATROCIOUS. HER ATTEMPTS AT INCORPORATING A CASUAL VERNACULAR COMES OF STILTED AND RUINS ANY SENSE OF CADENCE HER ARTICLES MIGHT HAVE OTHERWISE HAD.
Cool blog, interesting information... Keep it UP »
希望大家都會非常非常幸福~
「朵朵小語‧優美的眷戀在這個世界上，最重要的一件事，就是好好愛自己。好好愛自己，你的眼睛才能看見天空的美麗，耳朵才能聽見山水的清音。好好愛自己，你才能體會所有美好的東西，所有的文字與音符才能像清泉一樣注入你的心靈。好好愛自己，你才有愛人的能力，也才有讓別人愛上你的魅力。而愛自己的第一步，就是切斷讓自己覺得黏膩的過去，以無沾無滯的輕快心情，大步走向前去。愛自己的第二步，則是隨時保持孩子般的好奇，願意接受未知的指引；也隨時可以拋卻不再需要的行囊，一路雲淡風輕。親愛的，你是天地之間獨一無二的旅人，在陽光與月光的交替之中瀟灑獨行.................
日本成人影音視訊聊天室日本成人影音視訊聊天室日本成人影音視訊聊天室日本成人影音視訊聊天室日本成人影音視訊聊天室日本成人影音視訊聊天室日本成人影音視訊聊天室日本成人影音視訊聊天室日本成人影音視訊聊天室辣妹影音視訊聊天網辣妹影音視訊聊天網辣妹影音視訊聊天網辣妹影音視訊聊天網辣妹影音視訊聊天網辣妹影音視訊聊天網辣妹影音視訊聊天網辣妹影音視訊聊天網辣妹影音視訊聊天網辣妹影音視訊聊天網Love104影音視訊聊天室Love104影音視訊聊天室Love104影音視訊聊天室Love104影音視訊聊天室Love104影音視訊聊天室Love104影音視訊聊天室Love104影音視訊聊天室Love104影音視訊聊天室Love104影音視訊聊天室Love104影音視訊聊天室後宮成人電影後宮成人電影後宮成人電影後宮成人電影後宮成人電影後宮成人電影後宮成人電影後宮成人電影後宮成人電影後宮成人電影癡漢成人俱樂部癡漢成人俱樂部癡漢成人俱樂部癡漢成人俱樂部癡漢成人俱樂部癡漢成人俱樂部癡漢成人俱樂部癡漢成人俱樂部癡漢成人俱樂部癡漢成人俱樂部小老婆機車網 - 俱樂部小老婆機車網 - 俱樂部小老婆機車網 - 俱樂部小老婆機車網 - 俱樂部小老婆機車網 - 俱樂部小老婆機車網 - 俱樂部小老婆機車網 - 俱樂部小老婆機車網 - 俱樂部
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
金瓶影片交流區免費色情影片潮吹百大正妹正妹18禁成人網a免費視訊聊天網正妹牆正妹日報無名正妹牆aa片正妹照片正妹百人斬天天看正妹無名正妹正妹裸照成人圖片百分百成人圖片一葉情貼圖片區 av127成人圖片區圖片34c甜心寶貝貼片貼圖片區可愛圖片百分百成人圖片養眼圖片383視訊影音城成人影城成人影城aa-dvdaa-dvdlove 免費視訊美女影音觀賞love 免費視訊美女影音觀賞tvnet0204 我愛你視訊美女拳
Post a Comment
<< Home