M.F. made some good points, but there's a kind of weird mental flip flop that I see in the essay. In the beginning of her post she points out that authorities including the government will use force to establish ground rules so there shouldn't be any reason spanking's not okay, and then goes on to say we should "never trust the government" Now believe me, I want to hold strongly to both my right to mistrust my government and my right to disipline my kids as I see fit. I can truly see the point of of those who think that anti-spanking laws are just asking for a nation of nasty misbehaving miscreants who will then later be subdued under the feel good liberal nanny state with oh-so-much-more-humane hospital incarcerations, physical restraints and mind numbing medications. I'm just not sure if using the argument 'discipline is good because it establishes order, just see how our government uses it' and 'don't trust the government' work together. At what point does the force become okay just because someone more powerful than you is committing it?
I can rationalize the argument: a parent that abuses a child (read: where a spanking becomes a beating) is not unlike a government that becomes a tyranny.
I'm just not sure if using the argument 'discipline is good because it establishes order, just see how our government uses it' and 'don't trust the government' work together. At what point does the force become okay just because someone more powerful than you is committing it?
I could be wrong, but here's the point I think she's making: if you coddle your children and don't make them realize that there are real consequences for bad behavior, they have a rude awakening coming... because the police *will* use force to make them behave when they get older. I think she's just explaining the reality of harsh consequences in the real world, and that you're not doing your kid any favors by making them think they can get away with anything. Just my take on it...
####
On the subject of spanking in general:
I have yet to meet anyone who's against spanking who does not equate it to abuse, and most will refuse to admit that there's a big difference. Abusers randomly and severely beat their kids. "Spanking" is a technique used by parents as a last resort when repeated verbal warnings are igored, when kids are too wound up to listen, or are engaged in dangerous behavior, like running in the street. And I would agree with the linked article that, based on my observation, "Time-Outs" rarely work. Sometimes they do--but more often it seems like a technique used by parents who are either too inattentive or too tired from work to have the dedication that consistent discipline requires. Not to mention the fact that a lot of people have been effectively brainwashed by P.C. to make them believe that spanking=abuse...
There's a lot of "mental flip flops" in the discussion of spanking. I once saw a list of the top 10 reasons why spanking was bad. But each reason was readily applicable to why any form of punishment was bad. I don't think the organization realized it (or maybe the did, which is even worse), but they were actually proposing the eventual elimination of any form of punishment in the process of disciplining children.
Which brings me to my perpetual point on this issue (I bring my own soap box), and a point that, I think, often gets lost in the rhetoric.
Spanking is not discipline. It's punishment.
Spanking, in and of itself, will not produce "respect for authority, consideration of rules, self-discipline, and awareness of consequences." Spanking is a way to demonstrate to kids just how wrong their actions are. Some kids are responsive to time-outs. I wasn't one of them, but I was never spanked without multiple warnings from my parents about what would happen if I continued to disobey them.
Whether a spanking is preferable to a time-out depends on the kid. I never responded to time-outs and used them as opportunities to daydream. My child, on the other hand, hates them and seems to respond to them.
Unfortunately, I think most discussions about spanking are assumed to be black-and-white. And when I come in with my shades of gray, I annoy everybody.
Then, again, I'd also argue that if time-outs become examples of "withdrawal of love or attention" then they've crossed the line into being abusive, too.
The "any discipline is bad" response often reminds me of what happens when you engage in a debate with someone, especially politicians about the war. The reasons they give that war is "bad" are frequently against war in general. I love the reasoning that politicans who vote for war do not have kids who are going there, so this is reason to vote against it. I usually just ask those who utter such nonsense, "Are you against all war, then?" to which the reply is often "of course not."
To all:
Some psychological research shows spanking to be beneficial, particularly with certain groups of children. The problem is, of course, that anti-spanking advocates put spanking in the same category as smacking a kid silly. This black and white way of framing spanking shows that one is intolerant of ambiguity and provincial but those who are against it often cannot understand the shades of grey. For more on spanking studies, take a look at the work of UC Berkeley Professor Diana Baumrind.
So a good whuppin', when needed, isn't really so bad. It beats humiliation by a long shot.
I have to agree with this. Humiliation does a tremendous amount of harm. A judicious spanking, not beating, hurts for only a few minutes but gets the message across.
I spank(ed) my kids rarely, probably less than once a year per kid. Usually the spanking came about due to the child physically hurting someone else or endangering themselves or others.
dadvocate, your final statement reminded me of my great-grandmother's saying, "I only spanked for things that could hurt them, hurt someone else, or make them bad citizens."
She raised eleven children to be good, decent, contributing members of society. She was one of the most gentle, soft spoken women. Grandpa said he couldn't remember her ever raising her voice to any of them, but that she she could sure wield a switch.
Mercuria over a PaganParenting.net has a good article on this: Spare the Rod.
From the article: "The only reason to ever spank a kid is to get his or her attention, after all other means have failed. This means you've told the kid "no," and you've told him WHY it's "no," and the child has let you know that further verbal interaction will be met with continued disobedience anyway...(Or, as my partner says, "Sometimes, you have to get the mule's attention...even if it means hitting it on the head with a 2x4.")."
Of course you don't want to teach children that all authority is automatically legitimate and good. There is a lot of criminal, corrupt, dishonest, racist, abusive, incompetent, etc. authority.
I've only gone as far as giving my kids a "spank". I haven't engaged in "spanking".
I've used a spank on the rear when the kids were younger as a way of letting them know that I'm serious when they wouldn't take me seriously or figured they could ignore my demands that they do as I said. I read somewhere (and don't remember the source) that a stinging smack on the rump can serve as an attention grabbing exclamation point at the end of a parents demand that something be done. It helps snap kids out of their state of being out of control or choosing to ignore you.
I see a spank as a tool to enforce discipline.
A spanking, as I see it, is more of a punishment, and punishments can help enforce discipline as well. But when I think of "spanking" I think of it is, "OK, come over here, I have to take you over my knee and give you ten whacks for what you did earlier."
I've never done the latter. Not because I'm against it, but the single spank at the point in time when the offense was taking place usually worked well enough.
But even the single spank on the child's rear was too much for my ex-wife. She hated me for it and said that there was NEVER a justification for hitting a child.
I watched her and my 8 year old son wrestle over a video game that my ex-wife wanted to take away from him. I stood by and watched for 15 minutes as she unsuccessfully tried to get it away from him. During that time, she asked me for help, but I said that since she didn't like the way that I disciplined the kids that I would watch and learn from her. She refused to give him a smack and he knew that she wouldn't. He also knew that if he held on long enough that he'd eventually win, and he wasn't concerned with punishment (grounding, having it taken away for a month) because she always makes those punishments so painless that the kids never remember them. (loose the game for 1/2 a day, etc)
At the end of it all, I did rub her nose in it (which I don't normally do). I said, "Now wouldn't this have been all that much easier and more effective had he gotten a good smack for disobeying you right up front?"
To this day, she still refuses to be forceful in demanding obedience. Negotation is the norm between here and them. Life is much better, for me at least, now that there are different homes and different rules.
And since she feels guilty about divorcing, she's become one of those single parents that things that she can make it up to her kids by buying them everything that they want.
I hope to be able to help them grow up right, but it's an increasingly uphill battle when I have to counter her poor parenting. Ugh.
While I think the California law is foolish, I am almost always a bit disturbed by people who vigorously defend spanking and "smacking" and poo-poo other methods of discipline. Children really do differ widely in their responsiveness to physical discipline, or any other form of punishment. I know spanking had absolutely NO positive effect on me as a child. And I learned from trial and error it was highly counterproductive with my own daughter. Some people are not afraid of pain, just angered by it.
I'm not vigorously defending anything as a silver bullet fix for all behavioral problems in children, and I'm not poo-pooing other methods.
I just know that there have been times where the spank was very effective when other methods were not.
Also, Anonymous... you say, "I know spanking had absolutely NO positive effect on me as a child". Curious as to how you'd know that, since I don't think that a child necessarily has the capacity to be the judge of effectiveness of a punishment being given to him/herself.
Is there such thing as a child that will readily admit that spankings are effective? Maybe we should ask our kids to give us their consent before we do punish them.
So a good whuppin', when needed, isn't really so bad. It beats humiliation by a long shot.
I am amazed by this comment. It is hard for me to imagine anything much more humiliating than being taken over someone's knee, one's pants taken down, and one's private area smacked repeatedly -- which is what spanking frequently entails in our culture.
A couple of other points that people tend to forget with regard to spanking:
-- The buttocks are a private erogenous zone. Do we really know what effect childhood spankings may have on some children's sexuality as they grow up? The possibility of imposing a sexual kink on my child against his or her will is not a risk I am willing to take.
-- As far as whether spanking works, I agree that it certainly produces a compliant child in the short term. But is compliance the primary goal of discipline? I think that the development of conscience and empathy in one's children should be the primary goals. I would prefer my children to be driven by conscience and empathy than by fear of being discovered in an act of wrong-doing by an angry authority figure.
22 Comments:
M.F. made some good points, but there's a kind of weird mental flip flop that I see in the essay. In the beginning of her post she points out that authorities including the government will use force to establish ground rules so there shouldn't be any reason spanking's not okay, and then goes on to say we should "never trust the government" Now believe me, I want to hold strongly to both my right to mistrust my government and my right to disipline my kids as I see fit. I can truly see the point of of those who think that anti-spanking laws are just asking for a nation of nasty misbehaving miscreants who will then later be subdued under the feel good liberal nanny state with oh-so-much-more-humane hospital incarcerations, physical restraints and mind numbing medications. I'm just not sure if using the argument 'discipline is good because it establishes order, just see how our government uses it' and 'don't trust the government' work together. At what point does the force become okay just because someone more powerful than you is committing it?
I can rationalize the argument: a parent that abuses a child (read: where a spanking becomes a beating) is not unlike a government that becomes a tyranny.
Here's a link to a Philadelphia-stroy that, in my mind, describes what happens when children are raised with little discipline.
I'm just not sure if using the argument 'discipline is good because it establishes order, just see how our government uses it' and 'don't trust the government' work together. At what point does the force become okay just because someone more powerful than you is committing it?
I could be wrong, but here's the point I think she's making: if you coddle your children and don't make them realize that there are real consequences for bad behavior, they have a rude awakening coming... because the police *will* use force to make them behave when they get older. I think she's just explaining the reality of harsh consequences in the real world, and that you're not doing your kid any favors by making them think they can get away with anything. Just my take on it...
####
On the subject of spanking in general:
I have yet to meet anyone who's against spanking who does not equate it to abuse, and most will refuse to admit that there's a big difference. Abusers randomly and severely beat their kids. "Spanking" is a technique used by parents as a last resort when repeated verbal warnings are igored, when kids are too wound up to listen, or are engaged in dangerous behavior, like running in the street. And I would agree with the linked article that, based on my observation, "Time-Outs" rarely work. Sometimes they do--but more often it seems like a technique used by parents who are either too inattentive or too tired from work to have the dedication that consistent discipline requires. Not to mention the fact that a lot of people have been effectively brainwashed by P.C. to make them believe that spanking=abuse...
There's a lot of "mental flip flops" in the discussion of spanking. I once saw a list of the top 10 reasons why spanking was bad. But each reason was readily applicable to why any form of punishment was bad. I don't think the organization realized it (or maybe the did, which is even worse), but they were actually proposing the eventual elimination of any form of punishment in the process of disciplining children.
Which brings me to my perpetual point on this issue (I bring my own soap box), and a point that, I think, often gets lost in the rhetoric.
Spanking is not discipline. It's punishment.
Spanking, in and of itself, will not produce "respect for authority, consideration of rules, self-discipline, and awareness of consequences." Spanking is a way to demonstrate to kids just how wrong their actions are. Some kids are responsive to time-outs. I wasn't one of them, but I was never spanked without multiple warnings from my parents about what would happen if I continued to disobey them.
Whether a spanking is preferable to a time-out depends on the kid. I never responded to time-outs and used them as opportunities to daydream. My child, on the other hand, hates them and seems to respond to them.
Unfortunately, I think most discussions about spanking are assumed to be black-and-white. And when I come in with my shades of gray, I annoy everybody.
Then, again, I'd also argue that if time-outs become examples of "withdrawal of love or attention" then they've crossed the line into being abusive, too.
Derek,
The "any discipline is bad" response often reminds me of what happens when you engage in a debate with someone, especially politicians about the war. The reasons they give that war is "bad" are frequently against war in general. I love the reasoning that politicans who vote for war do not have kids who are going there, so this is reason to vote against it. I usually just ask those who utter such nonsense, "Are you against all war, then?" to which the reply is often "of course not."
To all:
Some psychological research shows spanking to be beneficial, particularly with certain groups of children. The problem is, of course, that anti-spanking advocates put spanking in the same category as smacking a kid silly. This black and white way of framing spanking shows that one is intolerant of ambiguity and provincial but those who are against it often cannot understand the shades of grey. For more on spanking studies, take a look at the work of UC Berkeley Professor Diana Baumrind.
So a good whuppin', when needed, isn't really so bad. It beats humiliation by a long shot.
I have to agree with this. Humiliation does a tremendous amount of harm. A judicious spanking, not beating, hurts for only a few minutes but gets the message across.
I spank(ed) my kids rarely, probably less than once a year per kid. Usually the spanking came about due to the child physically hurting someone else or endangering themselves or others.
dadvocate, your final statement reminded me of my great-grandmother's saying, "I only spanked for things that could hurt them, hurt someone else, or make them bad citizens."
She raised eleven children to be good, decent, contributing members of society. She was one of the most gentle, soft spoken women. Grandpa said he couldn't remember her ever raising her voice to any of them, but that she she could sure wield a switch.
Mercuria over a PaganParenting.net has a good article on this: Spare the Rod.
From the article:
"The only reason to ever spank a kid is to get his or her attention, after all other means have failed. This means you've told the kid "no," and you've told him WHY it's "no," and the child has let you know that further verbal interaction will be met with continued disobedience anyway...(Or, as my partner says, "Sometimes, you have to get the mule's attention...even if it means hitting it on the head with a 2x4.")."
Of course you don't want to teach children that all authority is automatically legitimate and good. There is a lot of criminal, corrupt, dishonest, racist, abusive, incompetent, etc. authority.
I've only gone as far as giving my kids a "spank". I haven't engaged in "spanking".
I've used a spank on the rear when the kids were younger as a way of letting them know that I'm serious when they wouldn't take me seriously or figured they could ignore my demands that they do as I said. I read somewhere (and don't remember the source) that a stinging smack on the rump can serve as an attention grabbing exclamation point at the end of a parents demand that something be done. It helps snap kids out of their state of being out of control or choosing to ignore you.
I see a spank as a tool to enforce discipline.
A spanking, as I see it, is more of a punishment, and punishments can help enforce discipline as well. But when I think of "spanking" I think of it is, "OK, come over here, I have to take you over my knee and give you ten whacks for what you did earlier."
I've never done the latter. Not because I'm against it, but the single spank at the point in time when the offense was taking place usually worked well enough.
But even the single spank on the child's rear was too much for my ex-wife. She hated me for it and said that there was NEVER a justification for hitting a child.
I watched her and my 8 year old son wrestle over a video game that my ex-wife wanted to take away from him. I stood by and watched for 15 minutes as she unsuccessfully tried to get it away from him. During that time, she asked me for help, but I said that since she didn't like the way that I disciplined the kids that I would watch and learn from her. She refused to give him a smack and he knew that she wouldn't. He also knew that if he held on long enough that he'd eventually win, and he wasn't concerned with punishment (grounding, having it taken away for a month) because she always makes those punishments so painless that the kids never remember them. (loose the game for 1/2 a day, etc)
At the end of it all, I did rub her nose in it (which I don't normally do). I said, "Now wouldn't this have been all that much easier and more effective had he gotten a good smack for disobeying you right up front?"
To this day, she still refuses to be forceful in demanding obedience. Negotation is the norm between here and them. Life is much better, for me at least, now that there are different homes and different rules.
And since she feels guilty about divorcing, she's become one of those single parents that things that she can make it up to her kids by buying them everything that they want.
I hope to be able to help them grow up right, but it's an increasingly uphill battle when I have to counter her poor parenting. Ugh.
While I think the California law is foolish, I am almost always a bit disturbed by people who vigorously defend spanking and "smacking" and poo-poo other methods of discipline. Children really do differ widely in their responsiveness to physical discipline, or any other form of punishment. I know spanking had absolutely NO positive effect on me as a child. And I learned from trial and error it was highly counterproductive with my own daughter. Some people are not afraid of pain, just angered by it.
I'm not vigorously defending anything as a silver bullet fix for all behavioral problems in children, and I'm not poo-pooing other methods.
I just know that there have been times where the spank was very effective when other methods were not.
Also, Anonymous... you say, "I know spanking had absolutely NO positive effect on me as a child". Curious as to how you'd know that, since I don't think that a child necessarily has the capacity to be the judge of effectiveness of a punishment being given to him/herself.
Is there such thing as a child that will readily admit that spankings are effective? Maybe we should ask our kids to give us their consent before we do punish them.
So a good whuppin', when needed, isn't really so bad. It beats humiliation by a long shot.
I am amazed by this comment. It is hard for me to imagine anything much more humiliating than being taken over someone's knee, one's pants taken down, and one's private area smacked repeatedly -- which is what spanking frequently entails in our culture.
A couple of other points that people tend to forget with regard to spanking:
-- The buttocks are a private erogenous zone. Do we really know what effect childhood spankings may have on some children's sexuality as they grow up? The possibility of imposing a sexual kink on my child against his or her will is not a risk I am willing to take.
-- As far as whether spanking works, I agree that it certainly produces a compliant child in the short term. But is compliance the primary goal of discipline? I think that the development of conscience and empathy in one's children should be the primary goals. I would prefer my children to be driven by conscience and empathy than by fear of being discovered in an act of wrong-doing by an angry authority figure.
徵信社, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, 通姦, 通姦罪, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 捉姦, 監聽, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 外遇問題, 徵信, 捉姦, 女人徵信, 外遇問題, 女子徵信, 外遇, 徵信公司, 徵信網, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇蒐證, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 外遇沖開, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 外遇蒐證, 外遇, 通姦, 通姦罪, 贍養費, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信, 徵信社
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,
趣,
趣,
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,
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.........................................................................................................................................................................................
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
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
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
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
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..........................
85cc免費影片歐美免費影片77p2p影片網youtube影片sex888影片分享區成人影片影片土豆網影片終極三國影片小魔女免費影片UT視訊美女交友a片免費下載守護甜心影片楓之谷影片sex999免費影片youtube影片下載色情影片一葉晴貼影片區性感影片aaa片免費看影片5278影片網免費成人影片sex影片視訊分享區自拍密錄館sex888
Post a Comment
<< Home