Tuesday, April 18, 2006

More Male Bashing

Larry sent me this picture today to let me know the kind of trashy posters this "tolerant" University posts on it's campus. Take a look.

56 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

They may have jumped the shark with this one. Even people sympathetic to the narrative are going to be taken aback by the depiction of half naked prepubescent boys as congenital rapists and hate criminals.

BTW the 80% figure is bogus. I suspect that the group promoting this posits that all white men are hate criminals, unless they are homosexual, and that 20% of white males are homosexual.

you can find the actual stats here - http://www.civilrights.org/issues/hate/details.cfm?id=38321

2:05 PM, April 18, 2006  
Blogger dadvocate said...

I agree with anonymous, my first reaction to the poster is that it is perverse.

The poster promotes exactly what it pretends to be fighting, hate.

2:08 PM, April 18, 2006  
Anonymous Jim said...

The stats are indeed bogus; it's almost impossible to get honest reporting the first place, so there is no reliable data to build stats on.

I agree with Dadvocate; the poster is hate speech.

2:14 PM, April 18, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"hate crime" has always been a misnomer, having nothing to do with hate. It would be more accurate to call it "value crime" or "irrelevant superficial attribute crime", but these would necessarily include things that are currently acceptable in this culture, like this poster. Which doesn't make the idea any more valid ... if I commit a crime, I commit a crime. What I had in my head at the time is irrelevant.

2:32 PM, April 18, 2006  
Blogger L.Austin Bernard said...

The group that it was posted by was indeed (it appeared) to be a homosexual group.

though like most college boards of its type half a kajillion things were posted on it

2:34 PM, April 18, 2006  
Blogger Darren Blacksmith said...

I have no problem with gays individually , but I am so sick of the activities of these gay groups. The concept of 'hate crimes' is so nebulus and obviously politically driven. You can bet they only apply the label to the activities of straight white men. If the same thing were done by anyone else they would, by definition, label it something else. If they are so keen on stats then maybe we should start publicising the fact that gay men are more likely than straight men to be paedophiles.

Incidentally, here in England, white people are now less likely than other races to be responsible for racist attacks.

2:48 PM, April 18, 2006  
Blogger John Doe said...

It is a very peculiar poster. Its semiotics are contradictory. With its similarity to a host of war/refugee images, it appears to show its target as vulnerable rather than dangerous. It is not what I would call a conventional image meant to represent white male supremacy. That seems unlikely to elicit the reaction its words appear to seek, and there are surely any number photographs of boys out there which show a mean or aggressive demeanor more suited to the message. Whoever made it up is either an incompetent "artist", is presenting a subtext which goes over my head (perhaps it is even counter-propoganda?), or has some real issues to deal with. Personally, I go with that - whoever made it up needs help.

2:51 PM, April 18, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Darren is right. "Hate crimes" laws were a bicuit tossed by liberals to their constituents.

3:36 PM, April 18, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What's the big deal? Who objects to allowing groups to post things on campus? Who thinks the provost whould have disallowed this? Why?

4:07 PM, April 18, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The big deal is the blatant hypocricy, the invalid logic, the social acceptance of the condemnation of all white men by virtue of their being white men, particularly when it is painfully obvious that white men are the only minority in this country for whom it is socially unacceptable for them to defend themselves.

Would a poster condemning all black males because of the percentage of prison populations that are black males be socially acceptable? Or a poster condemning all women because 70% of divorces are initiated by women?

But I don't think anyone said that the provost should disallow this. Why? Because the dolt who made this poster has a right to do so in this country. Just as the commenters here have a right to point out its flaws.

But if the situation were one of my hypothetical posters, you wouldn't hear a whisper about free speech.

4:26 PM, April 18, 2006  
Anonymous Jim said...

Darren, you are so right about the useful vagueness of hate crime laws, and this is coming from a gay man. Take a peek at Gayptriot sometime; they falw the gay pressure groups from time to time for just what you are talking about. Concealed weapons are a better answer to gay-bashing than a hundred hate crime laws. Armed and fabulous.

As for the pedophilia point, these days, at least in the Us, straight women sure are making up for lost time with every other category. I don't know that gay men are more likely to offend than straight men, and perhaps the data is skewed - I wonder how many straight men don't get prosecuted because they get permission from the parents of their underaged paramours.

4:32 PM, April 18, 2006  
Blogger Helen said...

Anonymous 4:07:

Or since you are so confident about the tolerance of universities, why don't we send Larry a poster to stick up next to the one on hate crimes at the University of South Florida. It could be something like..."Gays will be Gays" and state the percentage of homosexual men who are pedophiles or maybe this one, "Blacks will be blacks" and states the number of whites who are murdered by blacks in interracial crimes each year (hint--it is much higher than the reverse). We could add your name to the poster since you seem so sincere. After all, it's no big deal. And I am sure the provost will allow it. Why? Don't know--you tell me.

4:33 PM, April 18, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Any ideas of where the original picture is taken from? I have a strong feeling that I've seen this one before someplace, like documenting the Hitler Youth or something.

6:21 PM, April 18, 2006  
Blogger Helen said...

Anonymous,

Yes, that is what it looked like to me--not sure where the original is from. Anyone out there know?

6:37 PM, April 18, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well I suspect that the intended message is - what you call boyishness is actually a hate crime. So the 'artist' intends for the boys to look as though they're puffing-up their chests in a masculine fashion to resemble the haters that they'll all become. That these boys were likely gassed shortly afterwards is therefore regarded as poetic justice.

This fits with various popular feminist theories which posit that allowing juvenile males to develop masculine traits results in a rape culture, or whatever totalizing feminist cultural critique is prominent at the time. Such precepts are part of essentialist critiques of males which hold that males possess retarded moral, empathetic, and intuitive aptitudes and that these are nurtured by patriarchy to enforce male domination ( see Testosterone Poisoning )

7:07 PM, April 18, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.dukenewsense.com/blog/2006/04/possible-e-mail-sting-by-durham-police.html

not a good sign. But don't you suspect that the public would have learned of an incriminating response?

8:00 PM, April 18, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous 4:26,

If the posters you mentioned were disallowed at the same campus, you might have apoint about hypocracy. Is that the case?

So, unless that is the case, what's the big deal?

10:59 PM, April 18, 2006  
Blogger Assistant Village Idiot said...

80% of all hate posters are put up by leftists.

11:02 PM, April 18, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

helen,

I said nothing about my confidence in the tolerance of universities. You know that.

It really is no big deal until students are not allowed to post something you suggest at the same campus.

I can't tell you what the provost will allow or will not allow. But comparing reality against your imagined injustice is silly. Compare reality against reality at the same campus before redlining the Whine-O-Meter.

11:05 PM, April 18, 2006  
Blogger Rizzo said...

anonymous 11:05

So what's your point exactly? That it's no big deal if someone is allowed to put up racist and sexist garbage that demonizes white males so long as we white males can respond by putting up racist and sexist garbage of our own?

What if I don't want to put up racist and sexist garbage? Can I still complain about those who do?

Two points: First, you're nuts if you think such a thing would be allowed by any administration. What's more, before the administration even knew about it students would be tearing down the flyers, writing op-ed pieces in the university newspaper, organization protests and sit-ins, and calling for more tolerance workshops for us white males to attend. Administrators would do what they needed to in order to appease the students.

Second, it's largely irrelevant whether the administration would allow other flyers or not. No one would actually do it, and if someone did, do you think the response of an administrator to a homosexual or black student group would be "Hey guys, it's no big deal because you're allowed to put up flyers demonizing straight white guys. Go to it."? He wouldn't have his job very long, I assure you.

11:58 AM, April 19, 2006  
Anonymous dweeb said...

So what's your point exactly? That it's no big deal if someone is allowed to put up racist and sexist garbage that demonizes white males so long as we white males can respond by putting up racist and sexist garbage of our own?

Well, yeah, that's what free speech IS all about, after all.
I disagree with the poster, but I'll defend their right to post it.

What if I don't want to put up racist and sexist garbage? Can I still complain about those who do?

You are free to respond or not. Your willingness, or lack thereof, to promote your own beliefs has no impact upon their right to promote theirs.

Rizzo, we don't know for sure how the administration will react until they are tested. They are innocent of enforcing a double standard until proven guilty. At NKU, the administration recently fired a professor for leading the destruction of a pro-life display, so don't assume all university administrators ignore free speech. Some still get it.

You're free to complain about the manifest stupidity of people holding those ideas, and condemn and rebut the ideas, but when you start denying that they have a right to hold or express them, you're out of line. Idiots have free speech rights, too.

12:58 PM, April 19, 2006  
Blogger Rizzo said...

dweeb,

I'm not talking about their right to do it. I don't contest that, although I probably have less faith than you do that most university administrators are free speech absolutists. What I'm objecting to is the notion that seems to be put forth by the anonymous commenter above that we shouldn't be particularly bothered by it if the university allows the poster of flyers that offend other groups. In other words, we should only be bothered by the hypocrisy of the administration, which in this case, hasn't been proven, not the contents of the poster itself. So until we can prove or disprove the administration's alleged hypocrisy, no big deal.

And the best reaction to this flyer, in my view, is not to post offensive flyers of our own just for the sake of proving that we have free speech, and then should we find out we do, letting the matter drop. Also, I do wonder how well a flyer that called the campus' homosexual organization a hate group would last and what the reaction would be.

2:15 PM, April 19, 2006  
Blogger Rizzo said...

Also, one more thing. You write:

You are free to respond or not. Your willingness, or lack thereof, to promote your own beliefs has no impact upon their right to promote theirs.

This is where you kind of missed my point. Putting up a bunch of racist garbage is most certainly not my own beliefs. So why should I do it? Just to prove I have free speech?

Anyway, I was just responding to the implication that as long as all groups are allowed to put forth their messages, that we shouldn't be bothered by the messages themselves.

2:19 PM, April 19, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous 1105,

You ask:
"So what's your point exactly? That it's no big deal if someone is allowed to put up racist and sexist garbage that demonizes white males so long as we white males can respond by putting up racist and sexist garbage of our own?"

1. It is no big deal if someone "is allowed to put up racist and sexist garbage that demonizes white males..."

2. It is no big deal even if white males cannot respond with their own favorite racist and sexist garbage.

3. You might have a point if you were referring to some real event on this campus where a poster was disallowed, but all you are doing is whining about your own answer to your own hypothetical. If you don't like your answer, just quit arguing with yourself.

3:16 PM, April 19, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

CORRECTION:

Alas, I failed to give Rizzo credit where it is due. That last post should have been addressed to Rizzo. The error is mine due to sloppy cut and paste techniques.

3:19 PM, April 19, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rizzo,

I am not at all concerned if anyone is offended. That is their own free choice.

Therefore, I am not at all concerned if people are offended by what is said, written, or posted.

If we limit ourselves to saying what offends no one, we have effectively chosen silence.

3:24 PM, April 19, 2006  
Blogger Rizzo said...

anonymous 3:16,

First, I'm whining about nothing, just discussing. Second, I think you pretty much made my point for me when you said it's "It is no big deal even if white males cannot respond with their own favorite racist and sexist garbage."

Basically, us white males shouldn't be bothered or offended (for the record, I'm not offended by this, I largely think it's silly) regardless of what is said about us.

So, I'm not sure what you're saying about me arguing with my own hypothetical. My hypothetical (which isn't so much a hypothetical on many campuses, although perhaps this one) is exactly what you seem to endorse.

4:37 PM, April 19, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rizzo,

Feel free to be bothered or offended by whatever you choose. I don't care what offends you or any white male. Nor do I care what offends women, blacks, Mexicans, or Arabs. Why should I?

The choice to be offended is individual. People will choose to be offended for any number of reasons, and that's their personal mental state. It's nobody's business.

Then the offended may decide to tell us how offended they are. That's fine, too. They have that right of expression.

But when they tell us how offended they are, it's reasonable to ask what's the big deal. Maybe someone will tell us what's the big deal?

4:53 PM, April 19, 2006  
Blogger Rizzo said...

anonymous 3:24,

I'm not particularly offended by the flyer, as I am not an easily offended person. What brought me into this conversation was that every time free speech topics come up, someone always jumps in with "But they have the right to do it," as if that trumps every argument and ends the discussion. But so what? No one criticized their right to do it, they were criticizing the content of the flyer. There's a difference.

Some did point out the hypothetical possibility, which I think is entirely plausible, that the university administration would be less absolutist on other types of free speech. Maybe they're wrong about this particular univerisity, but I don't think this is out of bounds for discussion as far as the general state of post-secondary education goes.

In short, I agree with what you said in your last post, but I don't think that's where the controversy was.

The disagreement I have is with those who think that since they have the right to do it, the rest of us should just shut up now and quit criticizing it.

I've been guilty of the same argument myself in the past. On of my friends, a former Boy Scout, was upset with the organization's anti-gay policies, and my response was "They have a right to their own membership rules." Well, I can now admit that was stupid argument. He never claimed they didn't have the right, he was just expressing his unhappiness with their policies. My argument was completely irrelevant, as is the free speech argument here.

4:55 PM, April 19, 2006  
Anonymous GM Roper said...

Tolerance is only word candy if uttered by those left of center. When applied to the left, it doesn't count.

5:17 PM, April 19, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rizzo,

Nobody in this thread made the argument you should shut up because others have free speech rights.

My question still stands unanswered. What's the big deal about the poster?

9:28 PM, April 19, 2006  
Blogger Rizzo said...

anonymous 9:28

Umm, yeah. Let's recap what happened by quoting the post by anonymous 4:07 (which I assume was you):

What's the big deal? Who objects to allowing groups to post things on campus? Who thinks the provost whould have disallowed this? Why?

At what point before this post did anyone object to allowing groups to post flyers? The only thing I read were posts complaining about the content of what was actually posted. Yet, this comment implied that we shouldn't bother caring, or for that matter commenting, so long as it was "allowed".

10:29 PM, April 19, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rizzo,

Sorry. I asked who objected to allowing the posting, and who thinks authorities should have stopped it. That says nothing about advocating you shut up.

So, here's the question nobody will answer: What's the big deal about the poster?

Helen initially posted the item. Maybe she knows.

Perhaps it is no big deal.

9:50 AM, April 20, 2006  
Blogger Rizzo said...

Ok, this will probably be my last post on the subject, because I'm bored with it and I just don't care anymore, but I will try to answer your question. I think that people are bothered by the poster for a few reasons (to be honest, I'm kind of surprised that I even need to answer this since I thought other comments have made it pretty obvious):

1. It unfairly demonizes white men. It implies that straight white men are more predisposed that other groups to commit the list crimes below, when we all know that it's nonsense.

2. The 80% statistic is most likely a lie. The way hate crimes are defined, it's almost as if only white males (and perhaps occasionally white females) can be guilty of them. For example, if a white man rapes a black woman, it's a hate crime. If a black man rapes a white woman, it's not. Personally, I'm opposed to lying for a cause, no matter how noble it might be.

3. Some are bothered by the hypocrisy of the group that put up the flyer. Presumably this is a gay group that demands tolerance for themselves while practicing intolerance toward others.

4. The fact that such posters have become rather ho-hum on many college campus. The reaction to such a poster is almost nonexistent, yet if someone put one up demonizing blacks or gays, the reaction on campus would be much different, and I'm not just talking about the administration. I'm talking about fellow students, faculty members, etc. Not many students would be reacting by defending the free speech of the person who put up the flyer, and telling the offended groups to just deal with it. When white males complain, they're whining. When other groups do it, it's a genuine grievance. At least that's how it's often treated on many college campuses (and again I'm not just talking about the actions of the administrators, whatever they might be).

12:38 PM, April 20, 2006  
Anonymous dweeb said...

Rizzo,

In other words, we should only be bothered by the hypocrisy of the administration, which in this case, hasn't been proven, not the contents of the poster itself. So until we can prove or disprove the administration's alleged hypocrisy, no big deal.

And exactly so - we shouldn't be drawn into throwing out spurious accusations that can come back to bite us. Save your ire for cases where you have evidence to stand on, and don't go all Chicken Little/Boy-who-cried-wolf over speculative slights. As far as the university administration goes, until you have evidence of a double standard, it's a non-issue, and, quite frankly, jumping the gun on such accusations only gives them a heads up so they can allow some low-impact token conservative speech and crow about how fair they are.

This is where you kind of missed my point. Putting up a bunch of racist garbage is most certainly not my own beliefs. So why should I do it? Just to prove I have free speech?

No. First of all, no one suggested you put up anything YOU view as racist garbage, but your objection to the poster makes it pretty much a given that reasonable statements supporting your point of view would be viewed as racist garbage, and condemned as such, by those who put up the poster. You could also satirize the poster's blatant spin doctoring in a number of ways. For instance, affirmative action bake sales are a common satirizing response to leftist agitprop, but they are viewed as racist garbage by those they satirize. However, if you aren't willing to get in the game, it seems immature to whine about the other side outplaying you.

What brought me into this conversation was that every time free speech topics come up, someone always jumps in with "But they have the right to do it," as if that trumps every argument and ends the discussion.

If you attack them for effectively conveying their message, it does end it. Stay scrupulously on the message, and THEN you can dismiss such objections.

On of my friends, a former Boy Scout, was upset with the organization's anti-gay policies, and my response was "They have a right to their own membership rules." Well, I can now admit that was stupid argument. He never claimed they didn't have the right, he was just expressing his unhappiness with their policies.

In other words, he was EMOTING, and you offered a RATIONAL response, and you don't think that was valid on your part. By taking that position, you buy into the hegemony of feelings over principle that is the SOP of people like those who put up the poster. Don't validate his sloppy thinking. If he objects to their policies, goad him to form a group with policies he agrees with. I constantly run into people who want to "reform" the Boy Scouts. That's what leftists do. On the other hand, few people realize that The Assemblies of God, the 2nd largest Protestant denomination in the country, found the Boy Scouts TOO inclusive in their membership policies, but rather than try to change the Scouts, they formed their own alternative, the Royal Rangers, which is an outstanding similar organization limited to Evangelical Christians. While the AoG DID something, your friend whined, and you were right to point out to him that what the Scouts do is none of his business, and, conversely, he is free to form an alternative and his policies in so doing are none of the Scouts' business.

I think that people are bothered by the poster for a few reasons

Yeah, we all get that part. It goes without saying that the message bothers almost everyone here, so, if that's your only point, people are complimenting you by reading in subtexts - they're assuming you have something substantive to add.

I don't get that angry about the poster, but rather about the position of those posting it. The poster itself represents a BRILLIANT piece of marketing and political street theater, and I can appreciate that on the same level as a batter appreciates the skill of the pitcher who just struck him out. If I was trying to promote their bankrupt ideas, the only effective way would be to resort to their ethically questionable manipulation, and I have to admit that they're very good at being bad. However, more than I fault them for effectively utilizing the only means available to them, I fault the weak mindedness of a society where these tactics are actually effective, and that is the fault of our side for failing to effectively promote clear, logical thought over blindly emoting through life. To that end, I advocate that we be excrutiatingly rigorous in our own rhetoric.

1:28 PM, April 20, 2006  
Blogger Rizzo said...

Allright, I lied, one more post:

Dweeb, you say:

If you attack them for effectively conveying their message, it does end it. Stay scrupulously on the message, and THEN you can dismiss such objections.

My point was that that was exactly what people here were doing before someone piped in with the "they have the right to do it" argument. No one argued that they didn't have the right to do it, they were arguing with the message itself. Some, including myself, did speculate that such rights might not be extended to other groups, and perhaps we shouldn't have, but that doesn't mean that we think this group doesn't have the right.

Second thing:

Yeah, we all get that part. It goes without saying that the message bothers almost everyone here, so, if that's your only point, people are complimenting you by reading in subtexts - they're assuming you have something substantive to add.

Apparently the anonymous poster who repeatedly asked why people were offended did not get that part. At any rate, I put that post up to provide an answer to his question, not to fish for compliments or to add anything substantive, which is why I included the disclaimer about how I didn't think it was necessary to point these things out since others have already done so.

But that's enough. We're essentially arguing about nothing since we're both in agreement that the group has the right to do it.

2:03 PM, April 20, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rizzo,

Minor correction. I didn't ask why people were offended. I asked what was the big deal about the poster. I don't think it's a big deal that people are offended. Do you? Does anyone?

4:55 PM, April 20, 2006  
Anonymous Jim said...

With regard to posting this or any other offensive poster, we should "let a hundred flowers bloom". Groups should not only be permitted but encouraged to reveal their vile bigotries. The should be required to identify themsleves on thier posters - unattributed posters can be torn down because they don't represent anybody's speech.

A poster like this is enough to make the high-minded group who posted it look like a front for NAMBLA, whatever worthy purpose they may have had. (As if)

4:59 PM, April 20, 2006  
Anonymous dweeb said...

We're essentially arguing about nothing since we're both in agreement that the group has the right to do it.

And, I presume, that they are scum. Creative and effective scum, but that just makes them more dangerous.

The should be required to identify themsleves on thier posters

Um, actually...no. Anonymous speech is protected - see McIntyre vs. Ohio Election Commission. Who is speaking is irrelevant unless one is looking for handles for ad hominems.

11:53 PM, April 20, 2006  
Anonymous Jim said...

"Um, actually...no. Anonymous speech is protected - see McIntyre vs. Ohio Election Commission. Who is speaking is irrelevant unless one is looking for handles for ad hominems"

Not a problem, since they are not being attacked, just their posters. And there will be times when people absolutely must have the right to stay anonymous if they are to have any right of free speech - undeniable. But in this case if they come forward to complain, they label themselves as child moletser.

Which leads me to ask why CPS in that state was not involved in this case.

5:19 PM, April 21, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dr. Helen, a thought about a research project. Given that Knoxville's J-S (and, indeed, many local papers) publishes the names and pictures (and thus identifies gender) of all the high academic achievers at local high schools, would a comparison of the number of males vs females over time show any trends? There ought to be 25 years worth of data or more. If, as I perceive, the number/% of high achieving males is decreasing with time, that ought to support at least a speculation that males are differentially discouraged academically.

Just a thought.

11:31 AM, April 22, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous 11:31,

That's agood idea. However, it would not tell us if males and females are approaching HS differently and taking different things from it. It would only tell us how they are being evaluated.

I think many teachers evakuate not on how well a student masters the material, but on the learning process the student uses mastering the material.

For example, suppose one student got A's on all quizes, tests, midterm, and final. Suppose another got C's on all quizes, tests, and midterm. But that student got an A on the final. And let's say both demonstrate the same grasp of the material at the end of the course. We would expect one student to get an A and the other to get a B. High school honors can be misleading.

I suspect the SAT folks have very good info on the aptitude and achievement test results by gender. That might give a clearer picture of what has been mastered rather than how it has been mastered.

1:34 PM, April 22, 2006  
Anonymous dweeb said...

Jim, there's no basis for concluding the posters of the flier were child molesters.

10:42 PM, April 22, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Very cool design! Useful information. Go on! mesotherapy newmarket concerta+net concerta respordol evista Brown leather handbags Reliable dishwashers

5:21 PM, February 28, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Bible says:"What goes into a man's mouth does not make him unclean, but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him unclean." This poster, and what it says, is a real piece of self advertisement. It says more about the person who authored it, rather than the intended target!

10:49 PM, March 05, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Luka Magnotta said it best

cut men...do we not bleed?

1:53 AM, June 01, 2007  
Blogger look said...

情趣用品,
性感睡衣,
免費視訊聊天,
視訊交友網,
美姬圖影,
情境坊歡愉用品,
花美姬情趣用品,
成人圖片,
臺灣情色網,
嘟嘟情人色網,
色情網站,
情境坊歡愉用品,
徵信,
徵信公司,
徵信,
外遇,
徵信,
徵信,
抓姦,
徵信,
外遇,
徵信,
徵信社,
徵信社,
抓姦,
徵信社,
徵信社,
徵信社,
,
,
整型,
視訊聊天,
視訊交友,
AV女優,
色情,
A片,
A片,
情趣用品,
情色,
A片,
色情影片,
情趣用品,
A片,
AV女優,
視訊聊天室,
聊天,
情趣用品,
情惑用品性易購,
情侶歡愉用品,
A片,
情趣,
情惑用品性易購,
辣妹視訊,
自慰套,
情侶歡愉用品,
寄情築園小遊戲,
aio交友愛情館,
美女視訊,
色情A片,
情趣用品,
徵信社,
情趣用品,
A片,
美女視訊,
色情A片,
AV女優,
A片,
辣妹視訊,
自慰套,
情侶歡愉用品,

12:03 AM, March 15, 2009  
Blogger mmbox said...

2008真情寫真aa片免費看捷克論壇微風論壇大眾論壇plus論壇080視訊聊天室情色視訊交友90739美女交友-成人聊天室色情小說做愛成人圖片區豆豆色情聊天室080豆豆聊天室 小辣妹影音交友網台中情人聊天室桃園星願聊天室高雄網友聊天室新中台灣聊天室中部網友聊天室嘉義之光聊天室基隆海岸聊天室中壢網友聊天室南台灣聊天室南部聊坊聊天室台南不夜城聊天室南部網友聊天室屏東網友聊天室台南網友聊天室屏東聊坊聊天室雲林網友聊天室大學生BBS聊天室網路學院聊天室屏東夜語聊天室孤男寡女聊天室一網情深聊天室心靈饗宴聊天室流星花園聊天室食色男女色情聊天室真愛宣言交友聊天室情人皇朝聊天室上班族成人聊天室上班族f1影音視訊聊天室哈雷視訊聊天室080影音視訊聊天室38不夜城聊天室援交聊天室080080哈啦聊天室台北已婚聊天室已婚廣場聊天室 夢幻家族聊天室摸摸扣扣同學會聊天室520情色聊天室QQ成人交友聊天室免費視訊網愛聊天室愛情公寓免費聊天室拉子性愛聊天室柔情網友聊天室哈啦影音交友網哈啦影音視訊聊天室櫻井莉亞三點全露寫真集123上班族聊天室尋夢園上班族聊天室成人聊天室上班族080上班族聊天室6k聊天室粉紅豆豆聊天室080豆豆聊天網新豆豆聊天室080聊天室免費音樂試聽流行音樂試聽免費aa片試看免費a長片線上看色情貼影片免費a長片

7:08 AM, March 22, 2009  
Blogger mmbox said...

本土成人貼圖站大台灣情色網台灣男人幫論壇A圖網嘟嘟成人電影網火辣春夢貼圖網情色貼圖俱樂部台灣成人電影絲襪美腿樂園18美女貼圖區柔情聊天網707網愛聊天室聯盟台北69色情貼圖區38女孩情色網台灣映像館波波成人情色網站美女成人貼圖區無碼貼圖力量色妹妹性愛貼圖區日本女優貼圖網日本美少女貼圖區亞洲風暴情色貼圖網哈啦聊天室美少女自拍貼圖辣妹成人情色網台北女孩情色網辣手貼圖情色網AV無碼女優影片男女情色寫真貼圖a片天使俱樂部萍水相逢遊戲區平水相逢遊戲區免費視訊交友90739免費視訊聊天辣妹視訊 - 影音聊天網080視訊聊天室日本美女肛交美女工廠貼圖區百分百貼圖區亞洲成人電影情色網台灣本土自拍貼圖網麻辣貼圖情色網好色客成人圖片貼圖區711成人AV貼圖區台灣美女貼圖區筱萱成人論壇咪咪情色貼圖區momokoko同學會視訊kk272視訊情色文學小站成人情色貼圖區嘟嘟成人網嘟嘟情人色網 - 貼圖區免費色情a片下載台灣情色論壇成人影片分享免費視訊聊天區微風 成人 論壇kiss文學區taiwankiss文學區

7:08 AM, March 22, 2009  
Blogger nini said...

85cc免費影城 愛情公寓正妹牆川藏第一美女 成人影片 情色交友網 美女視訊 美女視訊 視訊情人高雄網 JP成人影城 383成人影城 aa片免費a片下載 a片線上看aa片免費看 ※a片線上試看※sex520免費影片※ aa片免費看 BT成人論壇 金瓶影片交流區 自拍美女聊天室 aa片免費a片下載 SEX520免費影片 免費a片 日本美女寫真集 sex520aa免費影片 sex520aa免費影片 BT成人網 Hotsee免費視訊交友 百分百貼影片區 SEX520免費影片 免費視訊聊天室 情人視訊高雄網 星光情色討論版 正妹牆 383成人影城 線上85cc免費影城 85cc免費影城 85cc免費影城 85cc免費影城 ※免費視訊聊天室※ ※免費視訊聊天室※ 免費視訊聊天室 85cc免費影片 85cc免費影片 080苗栗人聊天室 080苗栗人聊天室 080中部人聊天室 080中部人聊天室 免費a片下載 免費a片 AA片免費看 aa片免費看 aa片免費看 aa片免費看 aa片免費看 日本av女優影片 av女優 av女優無碼影城 av女優 av女優 百分百成人圖片 百分百成人圖片 視訊情人高雄網 電話交友 影音電話交友 絕色影城 絕色影城 夜未眠成人影城 夜未眠成人影城 色咪咪影片網 色咪咪影片網 色咪咪影片網 色咪咪影片網 色咪咪影片網 免費色咪咪貼影片 免費色咪咪貼影片 色情遊戲 色情遊戲 色情遊戲 色情遊戲 影音視訊交友網 視訊交友網 080視訊聊天室 ※免費視訊聊天室※ ※免費視訊聊天室※ 視訊聊天室 成人影音視訊聊天室 ut影音視訊聊天室 ※免費視訊聊天室※ 視訊ukiss聊天室視訊ukiss聊天室 視訊交友90739 視訊交友90739 情人視訊網 168視訊美女 168視訊美女 168視訊美女 視訊美女館 視訊美女館 免費視訊美女網 小高聊天室 小高聊天室 aio交友聊天室 aio交友聊天室 交友聊天室 交友聊天室 線上a片 線上a片 線上a片 線上a片 線上a片 免費線上a片 免費線上a片 嘟嘟成人網站 成人漫畫 情色文學 嘟嘟成人網 成人貼圖區 情色文學成人小說 微風成人區 情色貼圖區 免費視訊聊天 免費成人圖片區 愛情公寓 愛情公寓聊天室 寄情築園小遊戲 免費aa片線上看 aa片免費看 情色SXE聊天室 SEX情色遊戲 色情A片 免費下載 av女優 俱樂部 情色論壇 辣妹視訊 情色貼圖網 免費色情 聊天室 情人視訊聊天室 免費a片成人影城 免費a片-aa片免費看 0204貼圖區 SEX情色 交友聊天-線上免費 女優天堂 成人交友網 成人情色貼圖區 18禁 -女優王國 080視訊美女聊天室 080視訊聊天室 視訊交友90739 免費a片 aio 視訊交友網 成人影城-免費a片※免費視訊聊天※85cc免費影片日本線上免費a片 免費色咪咪影片免費色咪咪影片aaa片免費看影片aaa片免費看成人影城免費色咪咪影片

1:47 PM, April 05, 2009  
Blogger 天天看正妹 said...

免費視訊聊天 ut聊天室辣妹視訊UT影音視訊聊天室 吉澤明步QQ美女視訊秀 85cc免費影片aa影片下載城sex免費成人影片aaa片免費看短片美女視訊 sex383線上娛樂場av969 免費短片日本免費視訊aa影片下載城視訊網愛聊天室影音視訊交友 咆哮小老鼠分享論壇sex520免費影片aa免費影片下載城aio辣妺視訊 aio辣妹交友愛情館 jp成人影片aio交友愛情館馬子免費影片免費線上a片18成人85cc影城0204movie免費色咪咪視訊網pc交友s383視訊玩美女人34c高雄視訊聊天jp成人免費視訊辣妹 kk777視訊俱樂部xxxpandalive173影音視訊聊天室 sex520-卡通影片成人免費視訊 完美女人13060 免費視訊聊天sexy girl video movie辣妹妹影音視訊聊天室UT視訊美女交友視訊情色網百事無碼a片dvd線上aa片免費看18禁成人網ut聊天室kk俱樂部視訊激情網愛聊天 情人小魔女自拍卡通aa片免費看夜未眠成人影城aio性愛dvd辣妹影片直播拓網視訊交友視訊聊天室ggoo168論壇視訊辣妹love104影音live秀 美女show-live視訊情色yam交友辣妹妹影音視訊聊天室s383情色大網咖視訊aaa俱樂部台灣情色網無碼avdvdsexy diamond sex888入口Show-live視訊聊天室

4:14 AM, April 14, 2009  
Blogger 天天看正妹 said...

免費 a 片aaaaa片俱樂部影片aaaaa片俱樂部dodo豆豆聊天室sex520網路自拍美女聊天室天堂免費線上avdvd援交av080影片aa影片下載城aaa片免費看短片成人圖片區18成人avooogo2av免費影片sexdiy影城免費線上成人影片bonbonsex0951影片下載日本av女優sex888免費看影片免費視訊78論壇辣妹有約辣妹no31314視訊dudu sex免費影片avdvd情色影片免費色咪咪影片網av080免費試看日本美女寫真集辣妹脫衣麻將視訊聊天室性福免費影片分享日本美女寫真集,kk視訊aio交友愛情館免費成人美女視訊bt論壇色情自拍免費a片卡通tw 18 net卡通18美少女圖色情漫畫777美女小護士免費 aa 片試看百分百成人情色圖片a片免費觀賞sexy girls get fuckedsexy girl video movie情色文學成人小說sex888免費看eyny 伊莉論壇sexdiy影城自拍情色0204movie免費影片aio免費aa片試看s383情色大網咖sexy girl video movie草莓牛奶AV論壇台灣論壇18禁遊戲區環球辣妹聊天室 90691拓網aio交友愛情館拓網學生族視訊777美女 sex888影片分享區hi5 tv免費影片aa的滿18歲卡通影片sex383線上娛樂場sexdiy影城免費a片線上觀看真人美女辣妹鋼管脫衣秀比基尼辣妹一夜情視訊aio交友愛情館

4:15 AM, April 14, 2009  
Blogger 天天看正妹 said...

小魔女免費影城免費看 aa的滿18歲影片sex383線上娛樂場kk777視訊俱樂部aa的滿18歲影片85cc免費影片a片免費看A片-sex520視訊聊天室v6 0plus論壇sex520免費影片avdvd-情色網qq美美色網ut13077視訊聊天A片-無碼援交東京熱一本道aaa免費看影片免費視訊聊天室微風成人免費視訊聊天 ut聊天室av1688影音視訊天堂免費 a 片85cc免費影城亞洲禁果影城微風成人av論壇sex520免費影片JP成人網免費成人視訊aaa影片下載城免費a片 ut交友成人視訊85cc成人影城免費A片aa的滿18歲影片小魔女免費影片85cc免費影片aaa片免費看短片aa影片下載城aaaaa片俱樂部影片aaaaa片俱樂部aa的滿18歲影片小魔女免費影片台灣論壇免費影片後宮0204movie免費影片免費卡通影片線上觀看線上免費a片觀看85cc免費影片免費A片aa影片下載城ut聊天室辣妹視訊UT影音視訊聊天室 日本免費視訊aaaa 片俱樂部aaaa片免費看影片免費視訊78論壇情色偷拍免費A片免費aaaaa片俱樂部影片aa影片下載城色漫畫帝國av俱樂部aaaa彩虹頻道免費影片 杜蕾斯成人免費卡通影片線上觀看85cc免費影片線上觀賞免費線上歐美A片觀看免費a片卡通aaa的滿18歲卡通影片sex520免費影片免費 a 片

4:15 AM, April 14, 2009  
Blogger 徵信 said...

外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇


外遇 外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇外遇
外遇

外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 ,
外遇 外遇 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇

外遇 外遇

外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿喜帖囍帖卡片外遇外遇 外遇 外遇外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇 外遇 外遇剖析 外遇調查 外遇案例 外遇諮詢 偷情 第三者外遇話題 外遇發洩 感情挽回 徵信社 外遇心態 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 外遇徵信社徵信社外遇 外遇 抓姦徵信協會徵信公司 包二奶 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信 婚姻 婚前徵信 前科 個人資料 外遇 第三者 徵信社 偵探社 抓姦 偵探社 偵探社婚 偵探社 偵探社偵探家事服務家事服務家電維修家事服務家事服務家事服務家事服務家事服務持久持久持久持久持久持久持久離婚網頁設計徵信社徵信社徵信徵信社外遇離婚協議書劈腿持久持久持久持久持久劈腿剖析徵信徵信社外遇外遇外遇外遇徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信徵信社徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信公會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信公會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿

3:09 AM, April 20, 2009  
Blogger 1314 said...

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..........................

10:41 PM, May 19, 2009  
Blogger 1122 said...

080aa片直播080aa片直播080aa片直播18jack主入口18jack主入口18jack主入口18x us18x us18x us18成人avooo18成人avooo18成人avooo18成人avooo18成人avooo18成人免費18成人免費18成人免費18成人免費18成人免費18成人影城

10:59 PM, June 07, 2009  

Post a Comment

<< Home