Monday, August 27, 2007

Reciprocal Violence can Lead to More Injury

When it comes to domestic violence, we're frequently told that men getting hit doesn't matter because even if men get hit, they are rarely hurt. A new study shows this may not be the case, especially if the violence is reciprocal (thanks to Steve for pointing out the article):

Regarding perpetration of violence, more women than men (25 percent versus 11 percent) were responsible. In fact, 71 percent of the instigators in nonreciprocal partner violence were women. This finding surprised Whitaker and his colleagues, they admitted in their study report.

As for physical injury due to intimate partner violence, it was more likely to occur when the violence was reciprocal than nonreciprocal. And while injury was more likely when violence was perpetrated by men, in relationships with reciprocal violence it was the men who were injured more often (25 percent of the time) than were women (20 percent of the time). "This is important as violence perpetrated by women is often seen as not serious," Whitaker and his group stressed....

Of the study's numerous findings, Whitaker said, "I think the most important is that a great deal of interpersonal violence is reciprocally perpetrated and that when it is reciprocally perpetrated, it is much more likely to result in injury than when perpetrated by only one partner."


If reciprocal violence results in more injuries, it would seem important for domestic violence prevention to focus on both women and men in these cases. By focusing only on men, women never get the help they need to reduce violence. The false notion that men perpetrate the majority of domestic violence and women are on the receiving end just doesn't seem to be holding up in study after study.

Update: Trudy W. Schuett over at Dean's World has some thoughts on domestic violence.

Update II: Take a look at these "feminists" who brag about beating up their boyfriends and other men (Hat Tip: Dean's World). This seems to undercut claims that women are nicer or fundamentally more innocent than men. You can read more on that subject, here.

Labels:

88 Comments:

Blogger Judge Rufus Peckham said...

. . . And the study was conducted by a source one would think can't be plausibly impeached, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Yet, why am I so certain that it will be denigrated by gender feminists as unworthy of belief? The fact is, anyone seeking to advance an agenda without regard to objectivity can find "evidence" to support most any conclusion they want to reach. The evidence that clearly goes against the agenda is either ignored or disparaged. It is all a tiresome game and we should not dignify it with serious discussion. Not even the left-leaning mainstream media pays much mind to most of the garbage the gender feminists try to peddle.

6:35 PM, August 27, 2007  
Blogger br549 said...

You sound as if you've tried a few in your time.

Considering the left wing media gives it (feminist outbursts) little time, I would be pleased as punch if the male side was given as little attention also. For once, the term "better than nothing" would truly have meaning.

7:14 PM, August 27, 2007  
Blogger tomcal said...

I think Lorena Bobbitt taught all of us guys that while women, on average, may not be able to hit harder, they can find other means to retaliate which are far more frightening...

11:17 PM, August 27, 2007  
Blogger jw said...

I would never say that the left, the hard-right or the media ignore feminist ramblings or fail to support contempt for men. Where would you get such an idea?

In looking at violence within the family I am first concerned with reducing abuse of children to the last number possible. To do that WE NEED inclusion of husband victims.

Not including the men ensures that known to be abusive mothers gain custody. Half of those known to be abusive mothers will abuse the kids. Even for those kids not abused, a person who abuses other adults will, I would think, be a sub-standard parent.

Sadly, we live in a culture which prefers abused babies to treating men fairly.

3:29 AM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger Mercurior said...

but you know the MOMENT, these feminists read this study, they will claim ah but its the patriarchy, making the figures up., and it doesnt count this or that or.. or.. or.. so the study may be underreported, by the nasty male police.

(slight sarcasm)

4:48 AM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger Derek said...

It's never a good thing to replace "scientific inquiry" with "scientific ideology." When you base your claims on your ideology, you've pretty much sunk your credibility. Because, often, what you want to be true doesn't mesh with people's lived experience.

Those who already agree with you will continue to do so. But you rarely win new adherents.

9:42 AM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger Oligonicella said...

Let us not neglect that women aren't truly dainty little weaklings for the most part. They clock well when they wish and can be extremely physical when they wish.

I went to visit a friend only to see him burst out of the house as I approached the porch. A moment later a chest of drawers came down the stairs, not bouncy-bouncy, but missing all stairs to crash into kindling at the bottom. To be clear, this thing was three-drawer tall and maybe 2.5' wide.

Thrown by his wife.

11:35 AM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger Oligonicella said...

Oh, yes. It was fully loaded with clothing.

11:36 AM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger br549 said...

Seems to me she could of just stated she wanted a new wardrobe. The extremes some go to, what can you say?

12:16 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger canucksis said...

This is a good study from credible sources and credible information... Will it come out and be recognized by the profession ? Some YES some NO... because it goes against everything we have been told for so many years.

Here is an interesting point too. In Canada they did not track male victims at all until 1999. In 99, the Federal Government finally got Statistics Canada to start tracking male victims and to include those numbers in the DV Stats and others.

Another point of interest... The Majority of the Statistics that are used by Shelter's and other's in the 'DV Industry' pre-date the inclusion of the Male Victim Stats. Many in fact use statistics generated in the 'Dark Years' of 1970-1990. Just look at the 'Sources & References' used by the Shelter & DV industries and look at the dates of that info...

One of the common studies which I forget the name of at this moment, actually uses stats form women IN shelters... 80% of which state that they have been physically abused. It's no different than asking a stadium full of Police Officer's on the Beat if they have ever had to use force to subdue criminals!

Sorry... but I do not know the US timing as to when & how the tracking started but I know that DOJ and other's are tracking now and below you'll find reference to the USA number's & stats.

HERE is some Federal Government info & Stats from Canada.

------------------------------
Measuring Violence Against Women Statistical Trends 2006
http://www.statcan.ca/english/research/85-570-XIE/85-570-XIE2006001.pdf

Statistics From this report:
Percentage of spousal homicides with a history of domestic violence between victim and offender, by offender relationship to victim, 1991 to 2004

Offender: Male Victims:
Legal wife ....................58
Common-law wife ........74
Separated wife ..............75
Divorced wife ..............100
(Ex) Same-sex spouse ...100
Total male victims .........70

Offender: Female Victims:
Legal husband ...............45
Common-law husband ...63
Separated husband .........72
Divorced husband ..........77
(Ex) Same-sex spouse ....50
Total female victims .......59

Notes: Includes spousal homicides involving one accused and one victim, representing 91% of all spousal homicides between 1991 and 2004. Excludes 44 spousal homicides in which the existence of a history of domestic violence was unknown.
Source: Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Homicide Survey.

Overall, women were two-and-a-half times as likely as men to report the most serious forms of violence, such as being beaten, choked, threatened with a gun or knife, and sexually assaulted (Fig. 5). The estimated number of women and men who experienced these types of assaults over the five-year period was 254,000 and 89,000 respectively. Extrapolated Calculation: (89,000 X 2.5) = 222,500

ALSO NOTE: (Gannon and Brzozowski 2004). Male victims are also less likely to report spousal violence to police unless the assault involves injury or a weapon. Male victims were much less likely to report to the police (17% in 2004), and the percentage was not much higher than in 1999.


Canada's Shelters for Abused Women, 2005/2006
Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Statistics Canada
http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/85-002-XIE/85-002-XIE2007004.htm
http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/85-002-XIE/85-002-XIE2007004.pdf

· The 2004 GSS indicated that some 653,000 women and 546,000 men in Canada were the victims of spousal violence in the five years preceding the survey. (Corrected now in the HTML version of the document)


· Female spousal violence victims are more likely than male victims to turn to informal sources of support 83% versus 60%) and are more likely than male victims to seek assistance from a social service (47% and 20%, respectively) (Mihorean, 2005).

· In 2006 there were 553 shelters providing residential services to women and children fleeing abusive situations in Canada, according to the 2005/2006 Transition Home Survey (THS) ** 1 for Men

Admissions of women and children to these shelters reached just over 105,700 in the 12-month period beginning April 1, 2005 and the cost of operating these facilities totalled approximately $317 million. And while not all residents of these shelters were fleeing domestic abuse, a majority were.

According to the GSS, the rates of spousal violence for men (6%) and women (7%) are similar, highlighting that men too are victims of this type of abuse.

· The THS asks shelters to indicate whether or not they permit adult males to be admitted to their facility. (1) About 9 out of 10 shelters prohibit the admission of men, while approximately 8% have policies that permit men to be admitted. Of those facilities allowing adult male residents, emergency shelters constituted the largest number (31%), followed by second stage facilities (24%). Just 10% of facilities that permitted men to be admitted were transition homes and another tenth were women’s emergency centres.
· Findings from the THS show that in 2006 (2), about 2,300 men were admitted to facilities that also provide residential services to abused women. However, a small fraction of these annual admissions were related to spousal violence. About 6% (137 men) of the adult males admitted to shelters surveyed on the THS were also admitted for reasons of abuse and 3% (64 men) were seeking refuge due specifically to spousal abuse.

* (1). Facilities that exclusively serve male victims of spousal violence fall outside the scope of the THS. At the time of this survey, only one such facility was known to be in operation.
* (2). Because few men are admitted to the shelters surveyed through the THS, only information on annual admissions is collected. There are no snapshot data for adult males.

Family Violence in Canada: A Statistical Profile 2006
Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics
http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/85-224-XIE/85-224-XIE2006000.pdf


Some Statistics from Department of Justice, USA.

Bureau of Justice Statistics Intimate Partner Violence in the U.S.:
Injury and Treatment
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/intimate/injury.htm

Bureau of Justice Statistics Intimate Partner Violence in the U.S.:
Reporting to police
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/intimate/report.htm



REFERENCES EXAMINING ASSAULTS BY WOMEN ON THEIR SPOUSES OR MALE PARTNERS: AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Martin S. Fiebert, Department of Psychology California State University, Long Beach
SUMMARY: This bibliography examines 196 scholarly investigations: 153 empirical studies and 43 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 177,100.

http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

12:40 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger Oligonicella said...

canucksis --

Thorough and I'm sure took a chunk of your time. Many thanks.

2:54 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger Oligonicella said...

br549 --

I found your comment amusing. I wonder what percentage of women would if the genders were reversed?

2:56 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger trollsmyth said...

"In fact, 71 percent of the instigators in nonreciprocal partner violence were women. This finding surprised Whitaker and his colleagues, they admitted in their study report."

Um... Did these folks skip junior high? Or were they just not paying attention?

3:13 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger rhhardin said...

Men are assumed to be able to take injury, and women are not.

That's what being a man about it is.

The idea may even be correct. In any case, it lives also in the feminist position.

It's not a double standard if you notice that men and women are different after all.

An old New Yorker cartoon showed a man and woman arguing, and the woman saying, ``Now, don't try to reason with me.'' Exactly.

3:15 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger Matthew said...

I'm not sure I understand the concept of reciprocal violence. Does that just mean both partners are violent? For instance, it says men are more likely to be injured in reciprocal violence, and that women are instigating a lot of non reciprocal violence. Is it possible to infer that men tend not to retaliate if they are unharmed, but if they are physically harmed they tend to retaliate?

3:18 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger Cosmo said...

I'll agree w/rhhardin, but offer the following observation --

When my foreign-born wife came to live in the U.S., she was appalled at the number of times, on television and in movies, women struck or became violent with men in response to things like accidental or real insults and embarrassments, or other perceived wrongs the assaulted men had supposedly committed.

Before she pointed it out, I'd always been vaguely aware of the double-standard, but hadn't realized how much I'd come to regard such behavior as normal or acceptable.

But then, she comes from a place where the cultural/entertainment apparatus isn't engaged in packaging superficial, fashion-pose empowerment and righteousness as a form of 'liberation' -- and she's as tough as nails as a result.

3:21 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger Helen said...

Matthew,

Yes, the idea of reciprocal vs. nonreciprocal violence can be confusing. According to the study, reciprocal violence is when both partners are engaged in the violence. Non-reciprocal is when one partner is the perpetrator of violence but the other partner does not respond with violence.

From the study, it would seem that men are somewhat more likely to be injured than women if both partners get into a fight. However, if the man alone is violent, the woman is more often the one hurt.

3:59 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger Bugs said...

In reciprocal situations, could it be that women feel more threatened and therefore escalate their level of violence more quickly than men? At the same time, could it be that, although the violence is reciprocal, men tend to "hold back" when fighting a woman?

Does this mean that abused women would fare better if they fought back as hard as they could? Should there be a difference between defending yourself from an anonymous thug and defending yourself from an abusive boyfriend, girlfriend, or spouse?

4:28 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger Gene said...

"However, if the man alone is violent, the woman is more often the one hurt."

That seems kind of obvious. If no one's hitting you, how are you going to get hurt?

Gene

4:31 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger Helen said...

Bugs,

Good questions. I do wonder if women who are willing to fight back tend to be willing to fight hard and injure while men do not feel that they can go all out. It makes sense that a man who hits a woman who does not fight back would injure her as he has shown himself willing to hit. In the reciprocal situation, with both fighting, it could be that the man holds back and the woman does not.

In the situation you described with the abused woman, I would say that the woman who does not fight back has a different psychological make-up than the one who does. That is, it is perhaps not in her nature to fight back against the man, just as it is not in some men's nature to hit back against someone who is hurting them. I think an interpersonal relationship is different than defending oneself against a thug. Hitting back is not the answer in an interpersonal relationship unless one is about to get killed by the spouse at that moment. Of course, sometimes, some restraint is necessary but hitting seems out of place with a supposed loved one. Once someone has started hitting, it's probably time to go. Trying to duke it out seems counterproductive and not something that should be aspired to in any interpersonal relationship.

4:44 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger Jan said...

On a related topic just recently the state of Maine put through a new law changing our primary aggressor laws regarding domestic violence to predominant aggressor laws. BEWARE! My understanding is that Maine is around the 19th state to change to predominant aggressor laws so they could be coming to your state also if they haven't already been put in place.
The reason for the change from primary to predominant? IMHO it's because more women are being arrested due to mandatory arrest laws and mainstream feminists would have us believe that woman arrested = victim twice victimized in ALL cases. Primary means first, Predominant means Man.
I went to a seminar on how they will be training law enforcement to determine the predominant aggressor in a dv call out. The instructor said, "If he slaps her in the face and she goes and gets a frying pan and hits him with it, who is the predominant aggressor?"
Of course the man is. So I raised my hand and said, "What if she slaps him and he goes and gets a frying pan and hits her?" His reply,(looking at me with contempt in his eyes) "Well if HE is afraid..." So no matter what she does she's the victim and no matter what he doesn't do she's the victim. Scary stuff these new laws. By the way if you have a chance please take a look at our new video PSA that is linked to the home page on our website and tell us what you think and if you like it pass it on! www.dahmw.org Thanks, Jan Brown Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men and Women

5:56 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger Laika's Last Woof said...

The study actually makes perfect sense: if a girl hits you but does no damage you laugh it off, but if she hits you hard enough to injure you your survival instincts are more likely to kick in.

As I've mentioned on this site previously, counterattacking strictly with restraint has worked for me. I don't know if trapping a violent girl's arms counts as "reciprocal violence" or not, and I would certainly not advise blind adherence to any doctrine to deal with complex situations, but it has worked for me.

6:04 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger Ardsgaine said...

When my wife and I got together, I told her I would never hit her, and that if she ever hit me our relationship would be over. In over twenty years of living together we've never hit each other. Setting the rules at the beginning is a good idea, and I think if men and women did that--and stuck to their word--it would greatly decrease domestic violence. If you leave after the first time you are hit, your chances of being murdered (for leaving) are a lot lower than if you leave after the twentieth time. By the twentieth time you are a possession of the abuser, and have no right to a separate life.

6:10 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger Helen said...

Hi Jan,

These laws sound unfair and should be challenged. I will come by and check out the video and I suggest others do the same. Thanks!

6:54 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger canucksis said...

Many good responses and excellent questions.

Yes .. it did take me a little while to assemble that data and I have piles more compiled but it's not for here & now.

There is one point that is not addressed in the study that is discussed here and also missing from the stats I put up earlier. Women are more likely to use a weapon during a physical assault, for two reasons... 1) It is a compensation for size and strength (which I am sure everyone can understand) and 2) The obtain a control level in the violence.

Men do quite often hold back and that even translates down to the reporting factor, where men are 2.5 times less likely to report incidents... There are other reasons in there as well but Men, very often do not want to report because of the stigma attached to Male Victims.

JAN: You are so right on the Primary Aggressor Laws... they are quite literally painting a bulls-eye on males in very general terms. Will this really help anyone ? Absolutely not except for further fuelling the DV Industry as it stands.

On a Clinic / Medical Stand point... Many facilities and resources that do screening for Abuse use a common screening tool called: "Routine Universal Comprehensive Screening (RUCS) Protocol for Woman Abuse". This is a VERY Gender specific screening process and eliminates the fact that Men are also victims. Just about EVERY Hospital or Medical & Social Service facility in North America uses this as a tool. There are variations but they are all pretty much based on this particular screening tool.

Google Search "Routine Universal Comprehensive Screening" and check it out.

9:16 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger br549 said...

woofster, I got in lots of trouble listening to you last time. I'll be reading your posts with the eye of the Oracle from now on.

This is one uber goober who doesn't need to go through some instances twice!

10:10 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger br549 said...

trollsmyth,

They obviously didn't have any girl friends in junior high or high school. Breaking up with your girlfriend in those days was best done in a huge parking lot. You'd never find your ring again if you broke up on a grassy area. Unless it was shoved up your nose instead.

Overall, I still believe men who get abused (meaning beat up here) by women do so because they will not or (moral reasons) cannot hit back. And / or, they leave before it comes to that. Rarely is it because a man couldn't even punch his way out of a beauty parlor, although that happens, too. Some women don't seem to realize that when they fly off the handle. And call me old school - no man should hit a woman except under obvious circumstances where no other course is possible.

10:25 PM, August 28, 2007  
Blogger Alaysia said...

I hate to break it to you folks, but the 'domestic violence industry' is aware of these facts. They don't care.

I've worked in social services and in roles that interact with domestic violence shelters and other services. The DV gang are like a cult, they're true believers.

Here's how it works. If a woman beats her kids, it because her husband or boyfriend has driven her to it, so he's got to go. If she beats her elderly mother or father, same thing. If she beats on the man, it's self defense. If he doesn't beat her, then he must have been psychologically abusive. Whichever way you cut it, she's not at fault. I've seen these people try to blame 10 year old boys for making their mother abusive.

So you can cite all of the studies you want, it's not going to change domestic violence policy. Anyone who has any familiarity with DV cases knows that the stereotypes aren't even half of the story. But that's the story that DV advocates want to believe and that's what they sell to the public. If they acknowledged the reality of the situation, they'd lose power. The sad thing is that kids are hurt, innocent men are hurt, and even women are hurt because they don't want to deal with the BS programs that these providers try to make them go through.

12:47 AM, August 29, 2007  
Blogger jw said...

canucksis: Any idea why the 2007 "Family Violence in Canada" is two months late?
-------------


The entire field of family violence is so twisted I'm not sure if we can have decency or human rights. I'm no longer sure at all. There's simply too much contempt for all males.

Think of the thing: We all live in a culture which openly prefers abused children to helping mere-men. A wife is violent, she gets the kids and about half the time abuses them. The victim father gets hatred and the full knowledge that he is forbidden by force of law to protect his children. THAT is who the people in our culture are.

I'm not at all sure why reciprocal violence is more likely to hurt men. Given the misandry of the current research system I rather doubt we CAN know the why.

4:10 AM, August 29, 2007  
Blogger dadvocate said...

Jan's comments aptly point out the goal of the dv industry. About 10 years ago I was waiting in a state social service office in Kentucky and idly picked up a brochure on domestic violence. It stated all spousal abuse was committed by men.

I mentioned to the social worker that I didn't believe that. She said she had been taught that in a seminar which seemed to satisfy her limited intellectual curiosity. Later, on the Internet, I found the official Kentucky domestic violence training manual. It state that all spousal abuse was committed by men. Unfortunately (because they're hiding the evidence), this manual is no longer available on the Web. Fortunately, maybe they now realize dv goes both ways.

There was ample evidence then that these claims weren't true but as Jan and Alaysia point out, they don't care. It's more about a feminist agenda than equal protection under the law.

7:08 AM, August 29, 2007  
Blogger TrudyWSchuett said...

I've got rather a lengthy post on the issue over at Dean's World:
http://www.deanesmay.com/posts/1188373265.shtml

Thanks to influential people like Dr. Helen, we may someday be able fix this mess!

Bless you for bringing it up!

9:09 AM, August 29, 2007  
Blogger Helen said...

Trudy,

Thanks for letting me know about your post. I'll add it here with an update.

10:12 AM, August 29, 2007  
Blogger canucksis said...

" jw said...
canucksis: Any idea why the 2007 "Family Violence in Canada" is two months late?"

2 Months late ? That could go a couple of ways :)

Alaysia,
You are so right.. it is a whole lot more to it and people in that industry don't care because they know where they are getting paid from. It's pretty sad, when the Public Good is usurped so easily by those that crave power for the sake of having power...

The FACT that the DV industry doesn't care and has it's own agenda is disturbing, to say the least. That is why we need to get the info out there into the public eye. Domestic Abuse happens to everyone, regardless of gender.

Good People like Dr. Helen and other's in the profession are starting to acknowledge it. "Some Media" is starting to report it and article it. The General Public is still blinded by the years of "propaganda" but that is also slowly (very slowly) starting to change.

Women are abused, Men are abused, Children are abused... It IS a Societal Problem that affects everyone.

The DV Industry is also missing a major point too... If they actually started to provide services for Male Victims the number of shelter's would go up, the legal system would also get more the entire "industry" would mushroom. Counselling Services would also get an increase in people because Men would be seeking help too...

Public Education & Knowledge has to be forefront to get this balanced. With the "Information Age" we now have the ability to track, capture and disseminate the information. The "Ministry of Truth" no longer controls everything fully and word is out and growing. Sadly, the "radical factions" are also waging war on each other and the fallout is affecting a lot of people.

11:11 AM, August 29, 2007  
Blogger reality2007 said...

What no one has mentioned is this very disturbing fact: The more women get away with domestic violence and child abuse, as laws pushed by Feminists keep slithering around common sense and sanity, this sends a very clear message to all women- that they are free to hurt or kill anyone they want any time they want.

We are creating monsters. It's virtually already legal for a woman to murder her husband as we have seen, and if we stay on this path, the logical outcome will be 10 years from now women will be murdering men at random in public, blowing their heads off with a gun for making a suggestive remark and just walk away, no questions asked because it might make her late for her salon appointment, or mothers throwing their children out of moving cars (because they're in a bad mood) their little skulls smashing against the pavement, killing them instantly, as mom drives off into the sunset, cackling like an old witch, no questions asked. She was a 'victim.' Our society is sick, sick, sick, sick, sick.

It is no womder that American women are now the most despised group of people around the world in history.

2:40 PM, August 29, 2007  
Blogger Helen said...

reality 2007,

Please tone it down. You are getting really trollish.

2:57 PM, August 29, 2007  
Blogger reality2007 said...

"reality 2007,

Please tone it down. You are getting really trollish."

From CNN:

SELMER, Tennessee (CNN) --
As her minister husband lay
dying from a shotgun wound to
the back, Mary Carol Winkler
wiped the blood bubbling on
his lips, his head seperated
from his body because his spine
had been severed from the shotgun
blast, still hanging onto life.
One can only imagine the pain he
must have suffered..."

Hey, you better contact CNN & tell
them to 'tone it down.' They're
getting a little too 'trollish.' What an idiotic word.

Since you run this blog, shouldn't have more class than to sink so low as to personally attack the posters here and call them names?

3:49 PM, August 29, 2007  
Blogger Judge Rufus Peckham said...

Listen, my eyes are wide open to the fact that well-organized lobbies are at work on our state legislators to favor women in these situations. Men's lobbies are not rearly so well organized or powerful. The state legislators, mostly men by the way, do need votes and contributions. Courts are not nearly as easily coerced in APPLYING the laws, regardless of the stereotype. Sure there are examples galore of strange judicial decisions, but generally the courts do the just thing -- you don't hear about it because that's not news. We need to acknowledge that there are legitimate reasons for only arresting one party in many disputes where both parties use force; and I read nothing in the laws that REQUIRES police to arrest only the husband, but I'd like to see evidence of statistics (as opposed to purely anecdotal accounts) to know how these laws are being applied. Here's the important point: there are far more instances of women being hurt badly in domestic disputes than men (we're bigger and stronger on average -- fact of life). But just because that is so, ALL MEN SHOULD NOT BE STEREOTYPED AND AUTOMATICALLY ADJUDGED THE "PRIMARY AGGRESSOR." Men shouldn't be stereotyped any more than blacks should be stereotyped merely because the black male population is involved in violent crimes disproportionate to their numbers. THAT'S the issue, as I see it, and we need to pick our spots and stay focused and not be hysterical -- like the gender feminists who want to ban urinals because they symbolize male dominance!

4:48 PM, August 29, 2007  
Blogger reality2007 said...

I remember one attorney on a website discussing how reporting an assault on yourself by your spouse (if you are male) is the first time in the history of law that reporting a crime can actually result in being arrested and subsequently convicted for the very crime you reported and THE VICTIM OF.

It's like reporting that you were rob at gunpoint and the police coming and arresting you for robbery.

I have a girlfriend, but she isn't moving into my house- ever. We've been together for two years & she knows the score. It's too dangerous for a man to live with a woman- marriage- all of that.

Forget it, too much liabilty and far too much risk. Being assaulted then going to jail for it, falsely accused of rape or molestation (if there are kids), the incredible risk of losing your house to her in a divorce- I would feel far safer in Iraq than to live with a woman in the U.S. today.

5:59 PM, August 29, 2007  
Blogger br549 said...

reality..

You really don't have to yell at everyone who wants to discuss things a little deeper, clarify a few things. Development of discourse and open dialog is what this blog is all about.

You seem to consider someone simply disagreeing with you as an attack. I'm wondering if you yell at people at stop lights who don't drive the same brand of car as you. Isn't that disagreeing with you too? It's not really much different than that.

9:11 PM, August 29, 2007  
Blogger br549 said...

Seems alaysia and jw are really on to something, there. Sad as hell, isn't it?

I have to consider myself very lucky I was able to get my kids. They're loved and they know it. And we have a blast.

9:42 PM, August 29, 2007  
Blogger Oligonicella said...

reality2007 --

I have a girlfriend,...

Right. Either you are writing here in a manner you actually don't espouse (nice juxt) or have the balls to exhibit in the wild, or you have some gal with a huge self-worth problem.

8:54 AM, August 30, 2007  
Blogger 1charlie2 said...

oligonicalla,

I am not sure why you doubt reality2007's account of his not living with his girlfriend. I know a half-dozen successful, professional males in exactly the same situation. The will not marry, and will not cohabit.

If the female presses, it's "buh-bye, it's been fun." They've all been (according to them and to the several GFs I met) very up front about it. Each has seen (or experienced) what the court situation is really like (one is a judge, in fact), and wants nooooo part of it.

I'm not endorsing the choice -- I've been happily married 19 years next month -- but I certainly see it occurring. And I am grimly amused, because some cliche about "hens, home, roosting" comes to mind.

Honestly, when you spend time in Family Court (or in Divorce Court, though I don't have and personal experience there) it's apparent how horribly stacked the deck is against the male.

In fact, I plan on taking my sons to court to sit and watch and learn before they move out of the house -- it's VERY instructive. they're both very bright, and were brought up with a very strong sense of fair play. I bet I won't have to say a word.

Heck, examine "predominant abuser" laws (New York has them, too). It's disgusting. So intelligent males

Ahh, the law of Unintended Consequences -- gotta' love it.

12:57 PM, August 30, 2007  
Blogger reality2007 said...

Thanks, 1charlie2, and that is oustanding how you are educating your sons. It's what all boys need to be taught at an early age; that marriage to women today in the U.S. with the laws and cultural hatred towards men and women's complete unaccountability or responsibility for anything, is a lot like teaching your sons about the dangers of drugs.

The similiarities are eerie- like American women, drugs will make you feel physically good for a few minutes, but then will proceed to destroy your entire life, which is why you need to avoid them and anyone who associates with them as much as possbile.

As for you, Oligonicella, I noticed all you focused on was my girlfriend, and completely ignored the important parts. Sounds like someone is jealous. I told you I am not going to sleep with you no matter what you do.

2:01 PM, August 30, 2007  
Blogger 1charlie2 said...

reality2007,

I can't say I'm completely in your camp. Talking about "American Women" is painting with a fairly broad brush. Although there are a few who certainly can be extraordinarily destructive.

And since I live in New York, I do have to educate my boys about the legal pitfalls they face, and how those pitfalls can and occasionally do enable unscrupulous women solely on the basis of their gender. As I said, I suspect by that time, I won't have to say a word. . .

3:09 PM, August 30, 2007  
Blogger Oligonicella said...

1charlie2 --

Reread. I don't doubt he could have a girlfriend, I promote she's got a horrible self-image if he does. You think he could keep this:

"like American women, drugs will make you feel physically good for a few minutes, but then will proceed to destroy your entire life"

out of their relationship?


reality2007 --

"I told you I am not going to sleep with you..."

Thank you for what small favors you bestow.

3:56 PM, August 30, 2007  
Blogger reality2007 said...

1charlie2,

As you've probably guessed, my girlfriend isn't American. Painting with a 'fairly broad brush' when it comes to American women is a good idea- even if she seems like the sweetest woman in the world & even is- this isn't a character issue- it is a cultural one.

98% of women today feel justified for the horrible things they do, and were raised to play the victim, thus never taking responsibility for anything. It is the essense of their amorality.

Plus, women have been told over and over that men are dogs, stupid, worthless- not even human, so in their minds they are only being sweet to you in the same way as they are to a dog. This is why women you would never dream of in a million years of doing the things they do- do the most awful things to stab you in the back- and as it is happening, you tell yourself, "this cannot be happening," just as thousand of men right now are saying to themselves all over the U.S.

I am 44 years old, have been married, have two grown children, 23 and 24 (son and a daughter) have lived with about nine different women over the last twenty years, have gone through somewhere around 25-30 girlfriends (that's not including high school)-countless sex, countless female co-workers, etc. I know ALOT about women, and that is the reason I am so sick of them-I know the truth.

The funniest thing is that the guys that argue with me the most about how women are and defend them so, don't even realize that by doing so they are only letting me know they have had very little expereince with women and/or are virgins, naive, and buy into the lies and are basically maginas. Why should they care? They're not going to be having sex anyway- women don't want a guy like that.

And then the women on forums like these think that just because I'm saying what I'm saying here and on forums like this, they just mindlessly assume that that's what I do all day- walk around talking about how horrible women are all day to everyone I meet, and thus have a 'horrible' personality and thus wouldn't be able to get laid. It's that narrow 2-dimensional thinking women have. Yea, right. I know how to play the game.

And I also know how to survive.

You think I have a dark and negative attitude? The reality out here is darker than a Stephen King novel. It's easy to attack the messenger because it is the easiest form of denial. People don't want to believe all this is true- too bad. You'd better suck up, and smarten up is what I tell every guy I meet- or else you're going to get run over, screwed over, or even worse. Every man needs to learn to adapt- it's the only way to survive in this shit tornado women have created.

4:06 PM, August 30, 2007  
Blogger reality2007 said...

"Reread. I don't doubt he could have a girlfriend, I promote she's got a horrible self-image if he does."

You're an idiot. I can tell YOU have a horrible self image and don't even have a girlfriend- you're either a virgin or gay. I can tell by your attitude, prissy man.

"You think he could keep this:

"like American women, drugs will make you feel physically good for a few minutes, but then will proceed to destroy your entire life"

out of their relationship?"


Who said my girlfriend was American?

The one thing you think you're oh so clever at- cross examination- you even suck at that. Now THAT must be cause for major low self-esteem.

4:13 PM, August 30, 2007  
Blogger reality2007 said...

“Shaming tactics.” It conjures up the histrionic behavior of female detractors who refuse to argue their points with logic. Yet women are not the only ones guilty of using shaming tactics against men. Male gynocentrists use them, too.
Shaming tactics are emotional devices meant to play on a man’s insecurities and shut down debate. They are meant to elicit sympathy for women and to demonize men who ask hard questions. Most, if not all, shaming tactics are basically ad homimem attacks. Anyway, it might be helpful to categorize the major shaming tactics that are used against men whenever a discussion arises about feminism, men’s issues, romance, etc.

The following list contains descriptions of shaming tactics, some examples of quotes employing the tactics, and even color-coded aliases for mnemonic purposes. Enjoy.

Charge of Irascibility (Code Red)

Discussion:

The target is accused of having anger management issues. Whatever negative emotions he has are assumed to be unjustifiable.

Examples:
“You’re bitter!"
“You need to get over your anger at women.”
“You are so negative!”

Response: Anger is a legitimate emotion in the face of injustice. It is important to remember that passive acceptance of evil is not a virtue.

Charge of Cowardice (Code Yellow)

Discussion: The target is accused of having an unjustifiable fear of interaction with women.

Examples:
“You need to get over your fear.”
“Step up and take a chance like a man!”
“You’re afraid of a strong woman!”

Response: It is important to remember that there is a difference between bravery and stupidity. The only risks that reasonable people dare to take are calculated risks. One weighs the likely costs and benefits of said risks. As it is, some men are finding out that many women fail a cost-benefit analysis.

Charge of Hypersensitivity (Code Blue) - The Crybaby Charge

Discussion: The target is accused of being hysterical or exaggerating the problems of men (i.e., he is accused of playing “Chicken Little”).

Examples:
“Stop whining!”
“Get over it!”
“Suck it up like a man!”
“You guys don’t have it as nearly as bad as us women!”
“You’re just afraid of losing your male privileges.”
“Your fragile male ego …”
“Wow! You guys need to get a grip!

”Response: One who uses the Code Blue shaming tactic reveals a callous indifference to the humanity of men. It may be constructive to confront such an accuser and ask if a certain problem men face needs to be addressed or not (”yes” or “no”), however small it may be seem to be. If the accuser answers in the negative, it may constructive to ask why any man should care about the accuser’s welfare since the favor will obviously not be returned. If the accuser claims to be unable to do anything about the said problem, one can ask the accuser why an attack is necessary against those who are doing something about it.

Charge of Puerility (Code Green) - The Peter Pan Charge

Discussion: The target is accused of being immature and/or irresponsible in some manner that reflects badly on his status as an adult male.

Examples:
“Grow up!”
“You are so immature!”
“Do you live with your mother?”
“I’m not interested in boys. I’m interested in real men.”
“Men are shirking their God-given responsibility to marry and bear children.”

Response:

It should be remembered that one’s sexual history, marital status, parental status, etc. are not reliable indicators of maturity and accountability. If they were, then we would not hear of white collar crime, divorce, teen sex, unplanned pregnancies, extramarital affairs, etc.


Charge of Endangerment (Code Orange) - The Elevated Threat ChargeDiscussion:
The target is accused of being a menace in some undefined manner. This charge may be coupled with some attempt to censor the target.

Examples:
“You guys are scary.”
“You make me feel afraid.”

Response: It may be constructive to point out that only bigots and tyrants are afraid of having the truth expressed to them. One may also ask why some women think they can handle leadership roles if they are so threatened by a man’s legitimate freedom of expression.

Charge of Rationalization (Code Purple) - The Sour Grapes ChargeDiscussion: The target is accused of explaining away his own failures and/or dissatisfaction by blaming women for his problems.

Example:
“You are just bitter because you can’t get laid.”

Response:
In this case, it must be asked if it really matters how one arrives at the truth. In other words, one may submit to the accuser, “What if the grapes really are sour?” At any rate, the Code Purple shaming tactic is an example of what is called “circumstantial ad hominem.”

Charge of Fanaticism (Code Brown) - The Brown Shirts ChargeDiscussion:
The target is accused of subscribing to an intolerant, extremist ideology or of being devoted to an ignorant viewpoint.

Examples:
“You’re one of those right-wing wackos.”
“You’re an extremist”
“You sound like the KKK.”
“… more anti-feminist zaniness”

Response: One should remember that the truth is not decided by the number of people subscribing to it. Whether or not certain ideas are “out of the mainstream” is besides the point. A correct conclusion is also not necessarily reached by embracing some middle ground between two opposing viewpoints (i.e., the logical fallacy of “False Compromise”).


Charge of Invirility (Code Lavender)
Discussion: The target’s sexual orientation or masculinity is called into question.

Examples:

“Are you gay?”
“I need a real man, not a sissy.”
“You’re such a wimp.”

Response:
Unless one is working for religious conservatives, it is usually of little consequence if a straight man leaves his accusers guessing about his sexual orientation.

Charge of Overgeneralization (Code Gray)

Discussion: The target is accused of making generalizations or supporting unwarranted stereotypes about women.

Examples:
“I’m not like that!”
“Stop generalizing!”
“That’s a sexist stereotype!”

Response:
One may point out that feminists and many other women make generalizations about men. Quotations from feminists, for example, can be easily obtained to prove this point. Also, one should note that pointing to a trend is not the same as overgeneralizing. Although not all women may have a certain characteristic, a significant amount of them might.

Charge of Misogyny (Code Black)

Discussion: The target is accused of displaying some form of unwarranted malice to a particular woman or to women in general.

Examples:
“You misogynist creep!”
“Why do you hate women?”
“Do you love your mother?”
“You are insensitive to the plight of women.”
“You are mean-spirited.”
“You view women as doormats.”
“You want to roll back the rights of women!!”
“You are going to make me cry.”

Response:

One may ask the accuser how does a pro-male agenda become inherently anti-female (especially since feminists often claim that gains for men and women are “not a zero-sum game”). One may also ask the accuser how do they account for women who agree with the target’s viewpoints. The Code Black shaming tactic often integrates the logical fallacies of “argumentum ad misericordiam” (viz., argumentation based on pity for women) and/or “argumentum in terrorem” (viz., arousing fear about what the target wants to do to women).


Charge of Instability (Code White) -

The White Padded Room ChargeDiscussion: The target is accused of being emotionally or mentally unstable.

Examples:
“You’re unstable.”
“You have issues.”
“You need therapy.”
“Weirdo!”

Response:

In response to this attack, one may point to peer-reviewed literature and then ask the accuser if the target’s mental and/or emotional condition can explain the existence of valid research on the matter.

Charge of Selfishness (Code Silver)

Discussion: This attack is self-explanatory. It is a common charge hurled at men who do not want to be bothered with romantic pursuits.

Examples:
“You are so materialistic.”
“You are so greedy.

”Response:

It may be beneficial to turn the accusation back on the one pressing the charge. For instance, one may retort, “So you are saying I shouldn’t spend my money on myself, but should instead spend it on a woman like you —and you accuse me of being selfish?? Just what were you planning to do for me anyway?”

Charge of Superficiality (Code Gold) -

The All-That-Glitters ChargeDiscussion: The charge of superficiality is usually hurled at men with regard to their mating preferences.

Examples:

“If you didn’t go after bimbos, then …”
“How can you be so shallow and turn down a single mother?”

Response:


Average-looking women can be just as problematic in their behavior as beautiful, “high-maintanence” women. Regarding the shallowness of women, popular media furnishes plenty of examples where petty demands are made of men by females (viz., those notorious laundry lists of things a man should/should not do for his girlfriend or wife).

Charge of Unattractiveness (Code Tan) - The Ugly Tan Charge

Discussion: The target is accused of having no romantic potential as far as women are concerned.
Examples:
“I bet you are fat and ugly.”
“You can’t get laid!”
“Creep!”
“Loser!”
“Have you thought about the problem being you?”

Response:

This is another example of “circumstantial ad hominem.” The target’s romantic potential ultimately does not reflect on the merit of his arguments.

Charge of Defeatism (Code Maroon)

Discussion: This shaming tactic is akin to the Charge of Irascibility and the Charge of Cowardice in that the accuser attacks the target’s negative or guarded attitude about a situation. However, the focus is not so much on the target’s anger or fear, but on the target’s supposed attitude of resignation.

Examples:
“Stop being so negative.”
“You are so cynical.”
“If you refuse to have relationships with women, then you are admitting defeat.”
“C’mon! Men are doers, not quitters.”

Response:
The charge of defeatism can be diffused by explaining that one is merely being realistic about a situation. Also, one can point out that asking men to just accept their mistreatment at the hands of women and society is the real attitude that is defeatist. Many men have not lost their resolve; many have lost their patience.


Threat of Withheld Affection (Code Pink) -

The Pink WhipDiscussion: The target is admonished that his viewpoints or behavior will cause women to reject him as a mate.

Examples:

“No woman will marry you with that attitude.”“Creeps like you will never get laid!”Response: This is an example of the logical fallacy “argumentum ad baculum” (the “appeal to force”). The accuser attempts to negate the validity of a position by pointing to some undesirable circumstance that will befall anyone who takes said position. Really, the only way to deal with the “Pink Whip” is to realize that a man’s happiness and worth is not based on his romantic conquests (including marriage).

5:42 PM, August 30, 2007  
Blogger reality2007 said...

“Shaming tactics.” It conjures up the histrionic behavior of female detractors who refuse to argue their points with logic. Yet women are not the only ones guilty of using shaming tactics against men. Male gynocentrists use them, too.
Shaming tactics are emotional devices meant to play on a man’s insecurities and shut down debate. They are meant to elicit sympathy for women and to demonize men who ask hard questions. Most, if not all, shaming tactics are basically ad homimem attacks. Anyway, it might be helpful to categorize the major shaming tactics that are used against men whenever a discussion arises about feminism, men’s issues, romance, etc.

The following list contains descriptions of shaming tactics, some examples of quotes employing the tactics, and even color-coded aliases for mnemonic purposes. Enjoy.

Charge of Irascibility (Code Red)

Discussion:

The target is accused of having anger management issues. Whatever negative emotions he has are assumed to be unjustifiable.

Examples:
“You’re bitter!"
“You need to get over your anger at women.”
“You are so negative!”

Response: Anger is a legitimate emotion in the face of injustice. It is important to remember that passive acceptance of evil is not a virtue.

Charge of Cowardice (Code Yellow)

Discussion: The target is accused of having an unjustifiable fear of interaction with women.

Examples:
“You need to get over your fear.”
“Step up and take a chance like a man!”
“You’re afraid of a strong woman!”

Response: It is important to remember that there is a difference between bravery and stupidity. The only risks that reasonable people dare to take are calculated risks. One weighs the likely costs and benefits of said risks. As it is, some men are finding out that many women fail a cost-benefit analysis.

Charge of Hypersensitivity (Code Blue) - The Crybaby Charge

Discussion: The target is accused of being hysterical or exaggerating the problems of men (i.e., he is accused of playing “Chicken Little”).

Examples:
“Stop whining!”
“Get over it!”
“Suck it up like a man!”
“You guys don’t have it as nearly as bad as us women!”
“You’re just afraid of losing your male privileges.”
“Your fragile male ego …”
“Wow! You guys need to get a grip!

”Response: One who uses the Code Blue shaming tactic reveals a callous indifference to the humanity of men. It may be constructive to confront such an accuser and ask if a certain problem men face needs to be addressed or not (”yes” or “no”), however small it may be seem to be. If the accuser answers in the negative, it may constructive to ask why any man should care about the accuser’s welfare since the favor will obviously not be returned. If the accuser claims to be unable to do anything about the said problem, one can ask the accuser why an attack is necessary against those who are doing something about it.

Charge of Puerility (Code Green) - The Peter Pan Charge

Discussion: The target is accused of being immature and/or irresponsible in some manner that reflects badly on his status as an adult male.

Examples:
“Grow up!”
“You are so immature!”
“Do you live with your mother?”
“I’m not interested in boys. I’m interested in real men.”
“Men are shirking their God-given responsibility to marry and bear children.”

Response:

It should be remembered that one’s sexual history, marital status, parental status, etc. are not reliable indicators of maturity and accountability. If they were, then we would not hear of white collar crime, divorce, teen sex, unplanned pregnancies, extramarital affairs, etc.


Charge of Endangerment (Code Orange) - The Elevated Threat ChargeDiscussion:
The target is accused of being a menace in some undefined manner. This charge may be coupled with some attempt to censor the target.

Examples:
“You guys are scary.”
“You make me feel afraid.”

Response: It may be constructive to point out that only bigots and tyrants are afraid of having the truth expressed to them. One may also ask why some women think they can handle leadership roles if they are so threatened by a man’s legitimate freedom of expression.

Charge of Rationalization (Code Purple) - The Sour Grapes ChargeDiscussion: The target is accused of explaining away his own failures and/or dissatisfaction by blaming women for his problems.

Example:
“You are just bitter because you can’t get laid.”

Response:
In this case, it must be asked if it really matters how one arrives at the truth. In other words, one may submit to the accuser, “What if the grapes really are sour?” At any rate, the Code Purple shaming tactic is an example of what is called “circumstantial ad hominem.”

Charge of Fanaticism (Code Brown) - The Brown Shirts ChargeDiscussion:
The target is accused of subscribing to an intolerant, extremist ideology or of being devoted to an ignorant viewpoint.

Examples:
“You’re one of those right-wing wackos.”
“You’re an extremist”
“You sound like the KKK.”
“… more anti-feminist zaniness”

Response: One should remember that the truth is not decided by the number of people subscribing to it. Whether or not certain ideas are “out of the mainstream” is besides the point. A correct conclusion is also not necessarily reached by embracing some middle ground between two opposing viewpoints (i.e., the logical fallacy of “False Compromise”).


Charge of Invirility (Code Lavender)
Discussion: The target’s sexual orientation or masculinity is called into question.

Examples:

“Are you gay?”
“I need a real man, not a sissy.”
“You’re such a wimp.”

Response:
Unless one is working for religious conservatives, it is usually of little consequence if a straight man leaves his accusers guessing about his sexual orientation.

Charge of Overgeneralization (Code Gray)

Discussion: The target is accused of making generalizations or supporting unwarranted stereotypes about women.

Examples:
“I’m not like that!”
“Stop generalizing!”
“That’s a sexist stereotype!”

Response:
One may point out that feminists and many other women make generalizations about men. Quotations from feminists, for example, can be easily obtained to prove this point. Also, one should note that pointing to a trend is not the same as overgeneralizing. Although not all women may have a certain characteristic, a significant amount of them might.

Charge of Misogyny (Code Black)

Discussion: The target is accused of displaying some form of unwarranted malice to a particular woman or to women in general.

Examples:
“You misogynist creep!”
“Why do you hate women?”
“Do you love your mother?”
“You are insensitive to the plight of women.”
“You are mean-spirited.”
“You view women as doormats.”
“You want to roll back the rights of women!!”
“You are going to make me cry.”

Response:

One may ask the accuser how does a pro-male agenda become inherently anti-female (especially since feminists often claim that gains for men and women are “not a zero-sum game”). One may also ask the accuser how do they account for women who agree with the target’s viewpoints. The Code Black shaming tactic often integrates the logical fallacies of “argumentum ad misericordiam” (viz., argumentation based on pity for women) and/or “argumentum in terrorem” (viz., arousing fear about what the target wants to do to women).


Charge of Instability (Code White) -

The White Padded Room ChargeDiscussion: The target is accused of being emotionally or mentally unstable.

Examples:
“You’re unstable.”
“You have issues.”
“You need therapy.”
“Weirdo!”

Response:

In response to this attack, one may point to peer-reviewed literature and then ask the accuser if the target’s mental and/or emotional condition can explain the existence of valid research on the matter.

Charge of Selfishness (Code Silver)

Discussion: This attack is self-explanatory. It is a common charge hurled at men who do not want to be bothered with romantic pursuits.

Examples:
“You are so materialistic.”
“You are so greedy.

”Response:

It may be beneficial to turn the accusation back on the one pressing the charge. For instance, one may retort, “So you are saying I shouldn’t spend my money on myself, but should instead spend it on a woman like you —and you accuse me of being selfish?? Just what were you planning to do for me anyway?”

Charge of Superficiality (Code Gold) -

The All-That-Glitters ChargeDiscussion: The charge of superficiality is usually hurled at men with regard to their mating preferences.

Examples:

“If you didn’t go after bimbos, then …”
“How can you be so shallow and turn down a single mother?”

Response:


Average-looking women can be just as problematic in their behavior as beautiful, “high-maintanence” women. Regarding the shallowness of women, popular media furnishes plenty of examples where petty demands are made of men by females (viz., those notorious laundry lists of things a man should/should not do for his girlfriend or wife).

Charge of Unattractiveness (Code Tan) - The Ugly Tan Charge

Discussion: The target is accused of having no romantic potential as far as women are concerned.
Examples:
“I bet you are fat and ugly.”
“You can’t get laid!”
“Creep!”
“Loser!”
“Have you thought about the problem being you?”

Response:

This is another example of “circumstantial ad hominem.” The target’s romantic potential ultimately does not reflect on the merit of his arguments.

Charge of Defeatism (Code Maroon)

Discussion: This shaming tactic is akin to the Charge of Irascibility and the Charge of Cowardice in that the accuser attacks the target’s negative or guarded attitude about a situation. However, the focus is not so much on the target’s anger or fear, but on the target’s supposed attitude of resignation.

Examples:
“Stop being so negative.”
“You are so cynical.”
“If you refuse to have relationships with women, then you are admitting defeat.”
“C’mon! Men are doers, not quitters.”

Response:
The charge of defeatism can be diffused by explaining that one is merely being realistic about a situation. Also, one can point out that asking men to just accept their mistreatment at the hands of women and society is the real attitude that is defeatist. Many men have not lost their resolve; many have lost their patience.


Threat of Withheld Affection (Code Pink) -

The Pink WhipDiscussion: The target is admonished that his viewpoints or behavior will cause women to reject him as a mate.

Examples:

“No woman will marry you with that attitude.”“Creeps like you will never get laid!”Response: This is an example of the logical fallacy “argumentum ad baculum” (the “appeal to force”). The accuser attempts to negate the validity of a position by pointing to some undesirable circumstance that will befall anyone who takes said position. Really, the only way to deal with the “Pink Whip” is to realize that a man’s happiness and worth is not based on his romantic conquests (including marriage).

5:42 PM, August 30, 2007  
Blogger 1charlie2 said...

reality2007,

You and I really have to part company on this subject.

Painting with a 'fairly broad brush' when it comes to American women is a good idea

Then it must be a good idea for women to paint men as

dogs, stupid, worthless- not even human

Sorry, I can't agree with either viewpoint.

Plus, women have been told over and over that men are so in their minds they are only being sweet to you in the same way as they are to a dog.

Sorry, patronization and over-generalization can cut both ways. I want neither. Feminists want to paint men. You seem to want to paint women. A pox on both your houses.

The funniest thing is that the guys that argue with me the most about how women are and defend them so, don't even realize that by doing so they are only letting me know they have had very little expereince with women and/or are virgins, naive, and buy into the lies and are basically maginas.

Now who is engaging in your "Code Green" behavior ?

Let me refresh you memory

Examples:
“Grow up!”
“You are so immature!”
“Do you live with your mother?”
“I’m not interested in boys. I’m interested in real men.”


You lost me with the argumentum ad hominem.

7:50 PM, August 30, 2007  
Blogger reality2007 said...

"Painting with a 'fairly broad brush' when it comes to American women is a good idea
Then it must be a good idea for women to paint men as
dogs, stupid, worthless- not even human
Sorry, I can't agree with either viewpoint"

Let me sort it out for you then, since you are having so much difficulty comprehending the situation. It is very simple.

The actual truth and reality is that men are not stupid dogs.

The actual truth and reality is that American women actually are dangerous especially with the legal system enabling them.

In order to begin to understand the world, you have to pull your head out of the collective anus that so much of the genral public thinks in today, obsessed with 'perception' and 'attitudes'-attacking the speaker, etc. These are all constructs of female thinking and are anything but 'progressive' as you deceived into thinking. These tactics of propaganda are the basic elements of Communism. It's just called 'Political Correctness.'

Stop concerning yourself with me, and start concerning yourself with the real dangers- marriages, DV laws, false allegations. Stop trying to 'cross-examine' me- that's what women do in order to dodge the subject, usually because they are not intelligent to discuss the topic.

"The funniest thing is that the guys that argue with me the most about how women are and defend them so, don't even realize that by doing so they are only letting me know they have had very little expereince with women and/or are virgins, naive, and buy into the lies and are basically maginas.

Now who is engaging in your "Code Green" behavior ?"

Reading that paragraph I don't see anywhere in it:

"Examples:
“Grow up!”
“You are so immature!”
“Do you live with your mother?”
“I’m not interested in boys. I’m interested in real men.”

The paragraph refers to men's inexperience with women which is not one in the same as maturity.

See how the PC police have distorted your thinking to the point of making you an idiot, where can't even think straight?

10:06 AM, August 31, 2007  
Blogger reality2007 said...

"Painting with a 'fairly broad brush' when it comes to American women is a good idea
Then it must be a good idea for women to paint men as
dogs, stupid, worthless- not even human
Sorry, I can't agree with either viewpoint"

Let me sort it out for you then, since you are having so much difficulty comprehending the situation. It is very simple.

The actual truth and reality is that men are not stupid dogs.

The actual truth and reality is that American women actually are dangerous especially with the legal system enabling them.

In order to begin to understand the world, you have to pull your head out of the collective anus that so much of the genral public thinks in today, obsessed with 'perception' and 'attitudes'-attacking the speaker, etc. These are all constructs of female thinking and are anything but 'progressive' as you deceived into thinking. These tactics of propaganda are the basic elements of Communism. It's just called 'Political Correctness.'

Stop concerning yourself with me, and start concerning yourself with the real dangers- marriages, DV laws, false allegations. Stop trying to 'cross-examine' me- that's what women do in order to dodge the subject, usually because they are not intelligent to discuss the topic.

"The funniest thing is that the guys that argue with me the most about how women are and defend them so, don't even realize that by doing so they are only letting me know they have had very little expereince with women and/or are virgins, naive, and buy into the lies and are basically maginas.

Now who is engaging in your "Code Green" behavior ?"

Reading that paragraph I don't see anywhere in it:

"Examples:
“Grow up!”
“You are so immature!”
“Do you live with your mother?”
“I’m not interested in boys. I’m interested in real men.”

The paragraph refers to men's inexperience with women which is not one in the same as maturity.

See how the PC police have distorted your thinking to the point of making you an idiot, where can't even think straight?

10:06 AM, August 31, 2007  
Blogger Fausta said...

To me, a sure sign that a marriage has desintegrated beyond repair is violence, be it reciprocal or not.

12:41 PM, August 31, 2007  
Blogger Helen said...

Fausta,

I agree--once two people are hitting each other or one is hitting the other, it is a bad sign and time to go.

12:44 PM, August 31, 2007  
Blogger Adrian said...

You think I have a dark and negative attitude?

Nah, we just think you're a dumbass, especially since you can't even tell the difference between a man and a woman. It is unfortunate, too, because you probably do have something to say about women and culture buried somewhere deep down inside all that bluster and hyperbole.

1:24 PM, August 31, 2007  
Blogger reality2007 said...

But wait a minute, television and movies show us images all day long, day after day of women beating, kicking, slapping, and punching men while an hysterical laugh track (or live audience) plays in the background. And if you tell women nowadays about a man being punched by a woman they laugh out loud.

A woman beating on a man encouraged and even funny now. One would have to assume from all indicators that this is virtually healthy for a relationship as well, from a female perspective. (Certainly not a male's).

Out culture now encourages domestic violence iniated by women, so it is so easy to see that women now proceed to do it guilt-free because they are taught it is normal to hit a man, so little wonder that the man defends himself or retaliates in a moment of rage at being struck and in pain, and then sends the woman to the hospital or kills her, thus the higher DV rate for men.

I haven't met any women in years who thought that beating or hurting a man is wrong.

You can blame pop culture, but seriously, how stupid and pathetic would someone have to be to think hurting someone is funny? Particuliarly your spouse- the one you supposedly 'love.' How much could you actually 'love' someone anyway if you think it's funny to hit them or hurt them physically? How broken would your moral compass have to be? Isn't it obvious who?

Let's just say this:
I've never met a man who thought it was funny to hurt a woman physically or any other way for that matter.

1:35 PM, August 31, 2007  
Blogger reality2007 said...

"Nah, we just think you're a dumbass,"

I wasn't talkig to you, so that makes you the 'dumbass,' doesn't it?

"Especially since you can't even tell the difference between a man and a woman"

Do you even know what you are talking about, idiot?

Aren't you one of the many maginas that loiter around this blog?

1:42 PM, August 31, 2007  
Blogger Mercurior said...

that one comment about a man thinking he had breast cancer.. and they laughed..

the didnt know a man can get breast cancer.. and it kills then just the same.

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/content/CRI_2_4_1X_What_is_male_breast_cancer_28.asp?sitearea=CRI

its nice to see how they care about men.

the rest of that article shows the true evil side of those women. and its only increasing.

3:34 PM, August 31, 2007  
Blogger Adrian said...

Aren't you one of the many maginas that loiter around this blog?

Also, just FYI, I am fairly certain that the slang you are trying to use is maNgina unless you are trying to call me a mountain range in southern Spain or something. (Although, you are just about bizarre enough to do such thing.)

4:46 PM, August 31, 2007  
Blogger The Monster said...

That Kentucky declaration that only men are aggressors sounds about right. A friend from there has told me stories of men who got the crap beaten out of them by their spouse/gf, and the latter without a scratch. The cops show up and arrest the guy EVERY TIME. He is guilty of possession of Y chromosomes or something.

6:39 PM, August 31, 2007  
Blogger Oligonicella said...

Yeow, prick him with a pin and he doth bleed and bleed and bleed. Like a balloon slowly deflating with a tired squeal.

By the way, oh great cross examiner, reread what I said. Didn't say your girlfriend (what number 39, over one per year since 13?) was American. I said she would have to have low esteem to be with someone who views even just American women with such blanket vitriol. And no, someone who has "gone through" that many 'girlfriends' in that time does not know a lot about women, he's just a user.

"I wasn't talki(n)g to you, so that makes you the 'dumbass,' doesn't it?"

You just don't get the open forum thing, do you?

"Stop concerning yourself with me..."

Rich, considering your modus operandi.

7:02 PM, August 31, 2007  
Blogger br549 said...

fausta / Dr. Helen

I submit there would be almost endless arguments before physical violence started. And that it would be time to leave if non-stop arguing occurred. To do physical harm, or to stay if physical harm is being done to you - no matter if male or female - doesn't make any sense, once you step off that spot so you can truly see it.

Speaking as one who waited too long, I admit. My hands never left my pockets, and I have the marks to prove it. But if I left before getting my kids, I would never have gotten them. I could not and did not leave them behind. She got tired of throwing everything in the kitchen at me, and left herself, with a little outside help. Off to a hospital. And that's when the fun and games really got started.

10:17 PM, September 01, 2007  
Blogger Jan said...

Judge Peckham said:

I read nothing in the laws that REQUIRES police to arrest only the husband, but I'd like to see evidence of statistics (as opposed to purely anecdotal accounts) to know how these laws are being applied.

Dear Judge,
You are correct, the laws are not necessarily the problem but the way they are being applied are in some jurisdictions. Not all domestic assault arrests are against men but this new law will increase the number of men vs the number of women being arrested. In my opinion the reason many states are adopting predominant aggressor laws ( I read that around 19 states have them now)is due to the increase in women being arrested for dv. Not all women arrested are the aggressors (and not all men) but surely not all of them are victims defending themselves either.
In Maine in the year 2000 16% percent of arrests for domestic assault were women, in 2005 almost 22% were women.
Many times law enforcement officers are trained by the battered women's advocates and others who believe that 95-98% of victims in domestic violence incidences are women. There is a lot of "perceptual accentuation" around this issue.
The training for law enforcement on the new primary aggressor laws (here in Maine) portrays everything the women does as self defense. I attended a training on how police officers will be instructed on how to determine who the predominant aggressor is when called to a domestic dispute once the law takes effect here.
We were asked to determine who the predominant aggressor was in this scenario: Man slaps a woman, the woman goes and gets a frying pan and hits him with it...who is the predominant aggressor? The man. So I asked what if the woman slaps the man and he goes and gets a frying pan and hits her? The instructors response was, Is HE in fear?
We don't have to ask if the woman was afraid I guess because it's assumed that she is.
It appears from this new training that the only way a man will be considered the victim in a domestic dispute is if he states he is in fear of his abuser. Men in our society have a difficult time admitting fear, especially to a police officer.
Men have called our helpline confiding horrendous stories of psychological terror and physical abuse perpetrated against them by their female intimate partners. Still they say, "But I wasn't afraid of her." Men are conditioned to be tough and "take it like a man," and to never admit to being afraid so as not to appear weak. So that's a major stumbling block for male victims.
Recently,a Lt. in a police department here told me that an officer was called to a domestic dispute between an wife and husband. She punched the husband so hard she broke his nose. This happened in a public place in front of witnesses...the husband never laid a finger on her...the officer chose not to arrest the wife. I speculated that she was not arrested (and the Lt. agreed with me) because it's better to let a violent female go than face the wrath of the battered women's advocates for arresting a women.
So the law in and of itself is not bias/slanted but the enforcement of it certainly can be and given the circumstances it would be extremely difficult to get unbias statistical evidence in these matters. Just My Opinion, Jan

11:18 PM, September 02, 2007  
Blogger Jeff said...

While walking in an office building, in a completely unprovoked jealous rage, my ex-wife struck me in the face with a set of keys. She scratched my cornea, and I still have a slight vision problem from it.

An onlooker called the police, who upon arrival promptly threatened to arrest me --- even though I hadn't even hit back. I was held, cuffed, with my eye bleeding. Seeing this, my then wife calmed down and told the police she didn't want to file a report. They released me with a warning not to provoke her again.

If you are a man with a woman, you have no civil rights whatsoever. Your treatment under the law will depend solely on the notoriously fickle emotions of the woman you are with.

1:44 AM, September 03, 2007  
Blogger br549 said...

In the Bible, the Apostle Paul (or Saint Paul, depending) states, "A man does best alone". It rings with more truth now than it did almost 2,000 years ago.

I suppose one of Freud's most famous questions is yet unanswered.

I really do enjoy talking to women, some women. For a while, as long as the conversation doesn't lead to anything but an eventual "Goodbye, it was nice talking to (or meeting) you."

11:04 AM, September 03, 2007  
Blogger Laika's Last Woof said...

br549 said...
"... woofster, I got in lots of trouble listening to you last time. I'll be reading your posts with the eye of the Oracle from now on."
You should use that Eye for everything you read. (I loved your response to my earlier comment, btw ... hilarious!)
I think the point to your humor segues into Dr. Reynolds' advice:

"... it is a bad sign and time to go."
As well as things turned out for me in the specific situations, the relationship itself was doomed, and the hitting and wrestling were strong warning signs. The breakup was awful and our friends were caught in the middle.

"... the Apostle Paul (or Saint Paul, depending) states, 'A man does best alone'."
I sympathize, but unfortunately when it comes to sex for us heteros they're the only game in town. We men compete fiercely for the limited pool of single, non-overweight women for a reason: they're worth it.

7:45 PM, September 04, 2007  
Blogger br549 said...

woofster....

Yeah, women are worth it. And damn I really hate that.

12:21 AM, September 08, 2007  
Blogger Hunkston said...

Any accident which results in jury should be treated seriously and the recipient should always be seen by a medical professional as soon as possible. In particular if people suffer injuries to the head or brain they should immediately to a professional and also if someone suffers a spinal injury they should be careful as this can result in serious injuries in the long term. If you or someone you know receives a spinal cord injury they should see a doctor immediately!!

9:56 AM, February 18, 2008  
Blogger Mister-M said...

References Examining Assaults by Women on Spouses/Partners

I included that link in a recent condemnation of VAWA on my own blog.

~Mister-M

1:44 PM, March 03, 2008  
Blogger Mister-M said...

And (it appears) I managed to screw up the link, but if you Google the above, you'll find it. ;)

1:45 PM, March 03, 2008  
Blogger sexy said...

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,A片,視訊聊天室,聊天室,視訊,視訊聊天室,080苗栗人聊天室,上班族聊天室,成人聊天室,中部人聊天室,一夜情聊天室,情色聊天室,視訊交友網a片,a片


免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情色交友,免費AV,色情網站,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人影片,成人網站,A片,H漫,18成人,成人圖片,成人漫畫,情色網,日本A片,免費A片下載,性愛

A片,色情,成人,做愛,情色文學,A片下載,色情遊戲,色情影片,色情聊天室,情色電影,免費視訊,免費視訊聊天,免費視訊聊天室,一葉情貼圖片區,情色,情色視訊,免費成人影片,視訊交友,視訊聊天,視訊聊天室,言情小說,愛情小說,AIO,AV片,A漫,avdvd,聊天室,自拍,情色論壇,視訊美女,AV成人網,色情A片,SEX,成人論壇

情趣用品,A片,免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情色交友,色情網站,免費AV,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人網站,H漫,18成人,成人圖片,成人漫畫,成人影片,情色網


情趣用品,A片,免費A片,日本A片,A片下載,線上A片,成人電影,嘟嘟成人網,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,微風成人區,成人文章,成人影城,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,臺灣情色網,色情,情色電影,色情遊戲,嘟嘟情人色網,麗的色遊戲,情色論壇,色情網站,一葉情貼圖片區,做愛,性愛,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,美女交友,做愛影片

av,情趣用品,a片,成人電影,微風成人,嘟嘟成人網,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,成人文章,成人影城,愛情公寓,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,色情,寄情築園小遊戲,情色電影,aio,av女優,AV,免費A片,日本a片,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,聊天室,美女交友,成人光碟

情趣用品.A片,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,色情,寄情築園小遊戲,情色電影,色情遊戲,色情網站,聊天室,ut聊天室,豆豆聊天室,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,免費A片,日本a片,a片下載,線上a片,av女優,av,成人電影,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,成人文章,成人影城,成人網站,自拍,尋夢園聊天室

8:43 AM, December 27, 2008  
Blogger sex said...

免費視訊聊天,辣妹視訊,視訊交友網,美女視訊,視訊交友,視訊交友90739,成人聊天室,視訊聊天室,視訊聊天,視訊聊天室,情色視訊,情人視訊網,視訊美女,一葉情貼圖片區,免費視訊聊天室,免費視訊,ut聊天室,聊天室,豆豆聊天室,尋夢園聊天室,聊天室尋夢園,影音視訊聊天室

威而柔,自慰套,自慰套,SM,充氣娃娃,充氣娃娃,潤滑液,飛機杯,按摩棒,跳蛋,性感睡衣,威而柔,自慰套,自慰套,SM,充氣娃娃,充氣娃娃,潤滑液,飛機杯,按摩棒,跳蛋,性感睡衣
情惑用品性易購,情侶歡愉用品

色情遊戲,寄情築園小遊戲,情色文學,一葉情貼圖片區,情惑用品性易購,情人視訊網,辣妹視訊,情色交友,成人論壇,情色論壇,愛情公寓,情色,舊情人,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,色情小說,做愛,做愛影片,性愛

情惑用品性易購,aio交友愛情館,一葉情貼圖片區,情趣用品,情侶歡愉用品

辣妹視訊,美女視訊,視訊交友網,視訊聊天室,視訊交友,視訊美女,免費視訊,免費視訊聊天,視訊交友90739,免費視訊聊天室,成人聊天室,視訊聊天,視訊交友aooyy,哈啦聊天室,辣妺視訊

A片,色情A片,視訊,080視訊聊天室,視訊美女34c,視訊情人高雄網,視訊交友高雄網

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情侶歡愉用品

網頁設計,徵信社

4:15 AM, February 10, 2009  
Blogger blog said...

This is the latest and hottest ghd styler ever. If you need a ghd hair straighteners, this is a must buyghd hair straighteners,cheap ghd hair straighteners,pink ghd hair straightenersghd straightenersComme vous pouvez le voir, il s'agit d'une paire de chaussures shox classiquepink ghd hair straighteners . Si vous souhaitez poursuivre la mode, nike shox NZ sont votre meilleu…nike tnCette paire de Nike Shox Torch est chaud en maintenant la demande.nike chaussurestn chaussures

3:12 AM, March 08, 2009  
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,

1:43 PM, 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

9:24 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

9:24 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

5:32 AM, April 06, 2009  
Blogger xxx日本美女寫真 said...

"85cc免費影城aa的滿18歲影片85cc免費影片aaa免費看影片aaaaa片俱樂部影片免費 a 片85cc免費影片aa影片下載城微風成人av論壇免費a片aaa片免費看影片aaa片免費看短片小魔女免費影片免費視訊聊天 a片免費看a 免費影片觀賞免費視訊聊天室微風成人85cc免費影片85cc成人影城免費成人視訊亞洲禁果影城aa的滿18歲影片A片-sex女優王國aaaaa片俱樂部免費卡通影片線上觀看線上免費a片觀看A片-sex女優王國情色偷拍免費A片免費A片免費看 aa的滿18歲影片aaa影片下載城日本免費視訊av俱樂部後宮0204movie免費影片免費 a 片ut聊天室辣妹視訊情色美女視訊聊天室免費卡通影片線上觀看 ut交友成人視訊免費A片av1688影音視訊天堂aaa的滿18歲卡通影片s383情色大網咖視訊美女館aaaa 片俱樂部免費a片卡通aaaa片免費看影片aaa片免費看短片 杜蕾斯成人UT影音視訊聊天室 免費視訊78論壇免費aaaaa片俱樂部影片aaaa彩虹頻道免費影片aa影片下載城色漫畫帝國kk777視訊俱樂部美女視訊5278論壇ut聊天室aio交友愛情館免費視訊聊天成人a圖片區小說頻道彩虹頻道免費影片jp成人小魔女免費影城免費 aa 片試看情色文學A片-無碼援交東京熱一本道亞洲東洋影片gay片免費下載卡通aa片免費看成人影片分享小魔女免費影片視訊高雄情人聊天室34c卡通美女a片免費試看av免費影片,視訊聊天go2av免費影片情色 網站sex女優王國高中生援交偷拍自拍限制級色情 片plus論壇080情人網免費av影片免費a片卡通浪漫月光論壇免費aa片avdvd無碼影音視訊交友 免費視訊辣妹情人視訊網免費視訊辣妹 免費視訊78論壇台灣kiss情色貼圖區sex免費看影片彩虹論壇免費視訊聊天室 咆哮小老鼠分享論壇月宮貼圖色妹妹嘟嘟情人色網日本美女寫真集,kk視訊成人情色 視訊21sexsexy辣妹視訊百分百成人情色圖片ut辣妹哈啦視訊聊天室 素人自拍免費影片線上觀賞論壇男人的最愛中國性愛城avdvd無碼aaa免費看影片bt電影下載,免費成人片免費a片卡通dudu sexavdvd-情色網
qq美美色網
ut13077視訊聊天
"

3:17 PM, April 09, 2009  
Blogger xxx日本美女寫真 said...

成人視訊交友
視訊網路美女
免費視訊聊天
ut聊天室辣妹視訊
live173影音視訊聊天室
免費視訊聊天
一夜情人視訊
免費視訊聊天
免費視訊聊天
免費視訊聊天
免費視訊聊天
xxx383美女寫真
kk777視訊俱樂部
xxx383成人視訊
情色 視訊免費成人
xxx383
免費a片線上觀看s383視訊
xxxpanda
線上 aa 片試看,成人 視訊
xxxpanda com
xxx movie
一對多視訊,美女短片免費試看
免費a片卡通,免費成人片試看
xxx18
玩美女人影音秀
xxxholic次元魔女
xxxholic春夢記
xx18 net影片交流區
性愛,a漫,線上a片
xx插插排行榜
hi5 tv免費影片
xxxpanda com
免費成人影片sex女優
xvediox com
sex383線上娛樂場
aaa的滿18歲卡通影片
台灣美眉討論區
台灣無碼女優
免費a片卡通,travian tw4
sexy girl video movie
520sex
gogo2sex
aaaaa片俱樂部影片
xx18 net影片交流區
sex女優王國情色
sex情色
av969 免費短片
免費成人情色
ut視訊
168 視訊聊天
色美媚,洪爺的家
色美媚,洪爺的家
6k聊天網,搞笑影片,性愛,後宮
哈尼視訊,鹹濕視訊
土豆網韓劇播放
線上 aa 片試看嘟嘟,免費線上a電影
情色文學,情色視訊交友
微風論壇短片區
免費色咪咪影片網
av383,dvd,無碼影片
玩美女人,自拍
無碼卡通,性愛,聊天室
日本 a 片,無碼影片,美女,sexy,a片天堂
sex520貼片,日本av女優,色美眉,sex,成人
檳榔西施摸奶影片,免費A片
a片短片試看,av女優報報
免費 a片,sogo 色論壇
免費h影片,成人影片分享
電影,h片,卡提諾王國小說
UT影音視訊聊天室
色美眉部落格 2,視訊主播脫衣秀
比基尼美女的奶,玩美女人影音秀
比基尼美女的奶,玩美女人影音秀
免費影片觀賞,av博物館
免費影片觀賞,av博物館
av 女優,黑色會美眉
av 女優,黑色會美眉
成人影片,h片,無碼a片
吉澤明步
成人,UT視訊交友,視訊女郎,免費視訊秀,限制級
免費 aa 片試看,成人影片分享
無碼av女優, 色美眉部落格 2
無碼av女優, 色美眉部落格 2
遊戲天堂,免費av,美女自拍
倉井空免費影片,情趣 商品,視訊 美女
免費a片線上觀看,sex520貼片
辣妹脫衣麻將視訊聊天室
夢幻家族影音視訊聊天室
免費 a 長片線上看,黑澀會美眉無名,辣妹no3
080色情聊天室 080尋夢園
wii遊戲壓片,情色遊戲

3:17 PM, April 09, 2009  
Blogger xxx日本美女寫真 said...

"免費視訊美女520sexy girl
sogo論壇aa片免費看
免費線上 aa 片試看85CC
情色18 禁sex520免費a長片
av女優影片情色文學
日本av淫蕩人妻免費漫畫帝國
777美女dvd無碼av女優
視訊辣妹girl5320 貼片貼圖區
本土自拍影片qq 美美色網漫畫
百分百成人圖片avdvd
視訊辣妹找援交
dodo豆豆聊天室
成人影片下載免費線上a片
sex999日本美女寫真集
色情漫畫777美女dvdav
小護士免費 aa 片試看
網路自拍美女聊天室天堂
080聊天網桃園天堂
雪之深戀 080聊天網水之浪漫
sex888入口免費性影片觀賞
高中生援交偷拍自拍限制級色情 片
aa 片試看免費卡通
百分百成人情色圖片
嘟嘟情人網影片
內衣模特兒寫真成人圖貼
免費視訊78論壇
拓網學生族視訊777美女
辣妹有約辣妹no31314視訊
dudu sex免費 aa 片試看
成人a影片論壇
"

3:17 PM, April 09, 2009  
Blogger 123456 said...

广州托盘复合托盘食品托盘天津木托盘胶合板托盘蜂窝纸托盘塑木托盘熏蒸木托盘木制托盘广东塑料托盘钢托盘钢制托盘栈板塑料栈板木栈板垫仓板托盘包装求购托盘天津托盘温州托盘山东托盘北京托盘上海木托盘塑胶托盘卡板纸卡板塑料卡板手推车推车机场手推车好孩子手推车液压手推车超市手推车医用手推车康贝手推车不锈钢手推车平板车电动平板车老虎车静音手推车平板手推车小推车模具架置物架堆垛架巧固架整理架物料整理架挂板架整理柜零件柜零件整理柜文件整理柜仓储笼仓库笼料箱塑料箱钢制料箱货箱整理箱塑料整理箱周转箱塑料周转箱防静电周转箱求购周转箱物流箱物料盒零件盒塑料零件盒卡板箱周转筐塑料周转筐周转箩登高车物流台车台车密集架档案密集架文件柜办公文件柜北京文件柜广州文件柜上海文件柜南京文件柜深圳文件柜钢制文件柜铁皮文件柜档案柜文件柜厂底图柜档案柜鞋柜储物柜更衣柜防火防磁柜防磁柜防火防磁文件柜图书架资料柜工具柜

6:39 AM, April 13, 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

3:45 AM, April 21, 2009  
Blogger ★〃花蓮租車〃★ said...

花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花東旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,租車公司,花蓮旅行社,花蓮旅遊景點,花蓮旅遊行程,花蓮旅遊地圖,花蓮一日遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車旅遊網,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花東旅遊景點,租車,花蓮旅遊,花東旅遊行程,花東旅遊地圖,花蓮租車公司,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊租車,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮賞鯨,花蓮旅遊,花蓮旅遊,租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車 ,花蓮 租車,花蓮,花蓮旅遊網,花蓮租車網,花蓮,租車,花東 旅遊,花蓮 租車,花蓮,旅遊,租車公司,花蓮,花蓮旅遊,花東旅遊,花蓮地圖,包車,花蓮,旅遊租車,花蓮 租車,租車,花蓮租車資訊網,花蓮 旅遊,租車,花東,花東地圖,租車公司,租車網,花蓮租車旅遊,租車,花蓮,賞鯨,花蓮旅遊租車,花東旅遊,租車網,花蓮海洋公園,租車 ,花蓮 租車,花蓮,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車公司,租車花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車公司,花蓮一日遊,花蓮包車,花蓮租車網,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮旅行社,花東旅遊,花蓮包車,租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮一日遊,租車服務,花蓮租車公司,花蓮包車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車公司,花蓮一日遊,花蓮包車,花蓮租車網,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車公司,花蓮一日遊,花蓮租車,租車網,花蓮租車公司,花蓮旅遊,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車公司,花蓮租車公司,花蓮一日遊,租車花蓮,租車服務,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車公司,花蓮一日遊,花蓮旅遊,花蓮賞鯨,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車公司,花蓮一日遊,花蓮包車,花蓮租車網,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車公司,花蓮一日遊,租車花蓮,花蓮租車網,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車公司,花蓮一日遊,租車花蓮,花蓮租車網,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車公司,花蓮一日遊,花蓮包車,花蓮,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車公司,花蓮一日遊,花蓮包車,花蓮租車網,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車公司,花蓮一日遊,花蓮包車,花蓮租車網,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車公司,花蓮一日遊,花蓮包車,花蓮租車網,租車公司,花蓮租車,花蓮租車公司,花蓮一日遊,花蓮旅遊,花蓮旅遊租車,花蓮租車網,花蓮租車,花蓮一日遊,租車花蓮,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮旅遊,花蓮包車,花蓮溯溪,花蓮泛舟,花蓮溯溪旅遊網,花蓮旅遊,花蓮民宿,花蓮入口網,花蓮民宿黃頁,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,租車公司,花蓮旅遊租車,花蓮租車,租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花東旅遊,花蓮賞鯨,花蓮旅遊,花蓮泛舟,花蓮賞鯨,花蓮溯溪,花蓮泛舟,花蓮泛舟,花蓮溯溪,花蓮旅遊,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花東旅遊,花蓮,花東,花蓮旅遊,花東旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮,花東,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花東旅遊,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮,花東旅遊萬事通,花蓮旅遊,租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮包車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車旅遊網,花蓮太魯閣,花蓮旅遊網,花蓮包車,花東旅遊,花蓮旅遊行程,花蓮旅遊,花蓮 租車,花蓮租車資訊網,花蓮租車旅遊,花蓮旅遊租車,租車,花蓮旅遊推薦,花蓮旅遊包車,花蓮租車,花蓮,花蓮租車,花蓮地圖,花蓮旅遊優惠,花蓮旅遊資訊網,花蓮旅遊景點,賞鯨,花蓮行程,花蓮旅遊,花蓮旅遊租車,花東旅遊景點,花東旅遊行程,花蓮旅遊blog,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,租車,花東旅遊

3:17 AM, April 24, 2009  
Blogger bing shen said...

handbags Louis Vuitton Vuitton  handbags Balenciaga Balenciaga  Bally handbags Bottega Veneta handbags Cartier handbags Chanel handbags Chloe handbags Christian Dior handbags Coach handbags Dolce Gabanna handbags

2:25 AM, May 01, 2009  
Blogger  said...

ドルチェ&ガッバーナDOLCE & GABBANAドルチェ&ガッバーナ バッグドルチェ&ガッバーナ 財布ドルチェ&ガッバーナ ネックレスドルチェ&ガッバーナ サングラスドルチェ&ガッバーナ リングドルチェ&ガッバーナ 香水ドルチェ&ガッバーナ シューズドルチェ&ガッバーナ アウタードルチェ&ガッバーナ インナードルチェ&ガッバーナ シャツドルチェ&ガッバーナ ジーンズドルチェ&ガッバーナ 時計ドルチェ&ガッバーナ Tシャツグッチgucciグッチ バッググッチ 財布グッチ ネックレスグッチ サングラスグッチ リンググッチ 香水グッチ シューズグッチ アウターグッチ シャツグッチ ジーンズグッチ 時計グッチ Tシャツグッチ アウターグッチ インナーディオールChristian Diorディオール バッグディオール 財布ディオール ネックレスディオール サングラスディオール リングディオール 香水ディオール シューズディオール アウターディオール シャツディオール ジーンズディオール Tシャツディオール 時計ディオール インナーヴィトンLOUIS VUITTONヴィトン バッグヴィトン 財布ヴィトン ネックレスヴィトン サングラスヴィトン リングヴィトン シューズヴィトン アウターヴィトン シャツヴィトン ジーンズヴィトン Tシャツヴィトン 時計シャネルCHANELシャネル バッグシャネル 財布シャネル ネックレスシャネル サングラスシャネル リングシャネル 香水シャネル シューズシャネル アウターシャネル シャツシャネル ジーンズシャネル Tシャツシャネル 時計シャネル インナープラダpradaプラダ バッグプラダ 財布プラダ ネックレスプラダ サングラスプラダ リングプラダ 香水プラダ シューズプラダ アウタープラダ シャツプラダ ジーンズプラダ Tシャツプラダ 時計フェラガモSALVATORE FERRAGAMOフェラガモ バッグフェラガモ 財布フェラガモ ネックレスフェラガモ サングラスフェラガモ リングフェラガモ 香水フェラガモ シューズフェラガモ アウターフェラガモ シャツフェラガモ ジーンズフェラガモ Tシャツフェラガモ 時計セリーヌCELINEセリーヌ バッグセリーヌ 財布セリーヌ ネックレスセリーヌ サングラスセリーヌ リングセリーヌ 香水セリーヌ シューズセリーヌ アウターセリーヌ シャツセリーヌ ジーンズセリーヌ TシャツボッテガBOTTEGA VENETAボッテガ バッグボッテガ 財布ボッテガ ネックレスボッテガ サングラスボッテガ リングボッテガ 香水ボッテガ シューズボッテガ アウターボッテガ シャツボッテガ ジーンズボッテガ TシャツコーチCOACHコーチ バッグコーチ 財布コーチ ネックレスコーチ サングラスコーチ リングコーチ 香水コーチ シューズコーチ アウターコーチ シャツコーチ ジーンズコーチ Tシャツコーチ 時計ダンヒルdunhillダンヒル バッグダンヒル 財布ダンヒル カフスボタンダンヒル サングラスダンヒル リングダンヒル 香水ダンヒル シューズダンヒル アウターダンヒル シャツダンヒル ジーンズダンヒル Tシャツダンヒル 時計ロエベLOEWEロエベ バッグロエベ 財布ロエベ ネックレスロエベ サングラスロエベ キーホルダーロエベ 香水ロエベ シューズロエベ アウターロエベ シャツロエベ ジーンズロエベ TシャツディーゼルDIESELディーゼル バッグディーゼル 財布ディーゼル ネックレスディーゼル サングラスディーゼル リングディーゼル 香水ディーゼル シューズディーゼル アウターディーゼル シャツディーゼル ジーンズディーゼル Tシャツディーゼル 時計ディーゼル インナーデリヘル 大阪仙台 デリヘル仙台 風俗仙台 デリヘル仙台 風俗仙台 デリヘル仙台 風俗家族葬滋賀 賃貸葬儀 費用滋賀県の賃貸滋賀の賃貸アダルト SEO被リンク相互リンク茶道具 買取絵画 買取レザー革小物クレジットカード 現金化現金化ショッピング枠 現金化クレジットカード 現金化現金化ショッピング枠 現金化FXFX 比較FX 初心者脱毛 大阪埋没 大阪わきが 大阪オーロラ 大阪クリニックエスニックタウンサーチ探偵 大阪浮気調査 大阪素行調査 大阪別れさせ 大阪吹田 美容室エステ 尼崎キャッシング大阪 賃貸中古車 販売ルームウェア大阪 マンション賃貸マンション 神戸中古 ゴルフクラブクールビズフィットネスクラブ大阪府 司法書士クレジット 申し込みベビードール矯正歯科 東京ホワイトニング 東京大阪 ラブホテルリサイクルショップ不動産カードローン投資 信託下着即日 キャッシング三井住友銀行神戸市 中央区 税理士FX消費者金融ローン引越し生命保険ジェルネイル人材派遣ネット証券アフィリエイト格安航空券ウィークリーマンションレンタカーSEOオフィス家具合宿免許ペット用品高速バスデリヘルキャバクラ派遣コラーゲン化粧品インテリアウェディング結婚相談投資物件留学貸事務所 大阪経営コンサルティング工芸品高級品自動車保険ホテヘルレストランウェディングバイク買取運転免許ベビーカー外反母趾圧力鍋腕時計フェラガモデリヘルキャバクラセレブプラセンタカルシウム青汁ブルーベリー家具脱毛クリーム除毛クリームコスト削減 大阪弁護士 大阪車買取 大阪バイク買取 大阪エステ 大阪リフォーム 大阪
大阪 歯科派遣 大阪アルバイト 大阪転職 大阪大阪 住宅大阪 専門学校グルメ 大阪ホテル 大阪一戸建て 大阪大阪 宿泊大阪 マンションデリヘル 大阪印刷 大阪不動産 大阪賃貸 大阪ブライダル 大阪リサイクルアダルト SEO賃貸SEO 大阪イベント コンパニオン 大阪転職 大阪大阪 ラブホペット ショップ 大阪豆腐京都 不動産運転免許 合宿ヘアアイロンダイエットダイエットデリヘルキャバクラシャンパン老人ホーム精力剤大阪 ラブホテルブランド品 買取ワイン京都 不動産ペットリサイクルショップ歯科求人結婚式場バイク便動物病院美容整形外科エルメスダイエットダイエット食品腕時計ヘアアイロンクレイツアイビルa
アドストバッグネイルアクセンツヘアアイロンクレイツシャンプーアイビルジェルネイル育毛剤ドライヤーアゲハ嬢ダイエットサプリリサイクルショップ 大阪リサイクルショップ 東京リサイクルショップ 名古屋fx 口座開設fx 資料請求FX 比較大阪 不動産不動産 投資不動産 比較投資 信託 大阪投資 信託 初心者下着 女性下着 男性下着 ブログ消費者金融 審査消費者金融 ランキング消費者金融 大阪ローン 比較ローン 自動車ローン 金利引っ越し 比較引っ越し 口コミ引っ越し 挨拶保険 資料請求保険 比較保険 ランキングジェルネイル やり方ジェルネイル デザインジェルネイル 激安人材派遣 関西人材派遣 仕組みネット証券 選び方ネット証券 初心者ネット証券 手数料アフィリエイト 初心者アフィリエイト 稼ぐアフィリエイト 比較国内格安航空券格安航空券 海外格安航空券 沖縄ウィークリーマンション 東京ウィークリーマンション 大阪ウィークリーマンション 福岡レンタカー 格安レンタカー 沖縄レンタカー 東京オフィス家具 中古オフィス家具 激安オフィス家具 買取合宿免許 激安合宿免許 沖縄合宿免許 大型ペット用品 激安ペット用品 犬ペット用品 通販高速バス 時刻表高速バス 名古屋高速バス 大阪デリヘル 仙台デリヘル 大阪デリヘル 東京キャバクラ 求人キャバクラ 東京キャバクラ 大阪圧力鍋 歴史圧力鍋 構造圧力鍋 ランキングフェラガモ バッグフェラガモ 靴フェラガモ 財布セレブ 海外セレブ ファションセレブ ゴシップ青汁 ランキング青汁 効果青汁 口コミブルーベリー 栽培ブルーベリー 利用ブルーベリー 生産家具 イケア家具 ニトリ家具 イームズ脱毛クリーム 永久脱毛クリーム 男性脱毛クリーム 比較除毛クリーム ランキング除毛クリーム 男性除毛クリーム トラブル弁護士 大阪 制度弁護士 大阪 費用弁護士 大阪 トラブル車買取 大阪 相場車買取 大阪 査定車買取 大阪 比較エステ 大阪 フェイシャルエステ 大阪 求人エステ 大阪 メンズリフォーム 大阪 キッチンリフォーム 大阪 マンションリフォーム 大阪 外壁大阪 歯医者 ランキング大阪 歯医者 料金大阪 歯医者 矯正派遣 大阪 求人派遣 大阪 短期派遣 大阪 ランキングアルバイト 大阪 検索アルバイト 大阪 短期アルバイト 大阪 口コミ転職 大阪 求人転職 大阪 ランキング転職 大阪 女性大阪 住宅 検索大阪 住宅 ローン大阪 住宅 中古専門学校 大阪 美容専門学校 大阪 看護専門学校 大阪 調理大阪 グルメ カフェ大阪 グルメ お好み焼き大阪 グルメ たこ焼きホテル 大阪 シティホテルホテル 大阪 ビジネスホテルホテル 大阪 モーテル大阪 一戸建て 検索大阪 一戸建て 口コミ大阪 一戸建て ランキング大阪 宿泊 格安大阪 宿泊 高級大阪 宿泊 口コミ大阪 マンション 新築大阪 マンション 中古大阪 マンション 賃貸大阪 デリヘル 人妻大阪 デリヘル OL大阪 デリヘル 3P印刷 大阪 チラシ印刷 大阪 名刺印刷 大阪 格安大阪 不動産 検索大阪 不動産 分譲大阪 不動産 比較大阪 賃貸 学生大阪 賃貸 格安大阪 賃貸 マンションブライダル 大阪 ホテルブライダル 大阪 ヘアブライダル 大阪 プランナーリサイクルショップ 東京リサイクルショップ 大阪リサイクルショップ 比較アダルト SEO 方法アダルト SEO 大阪アダルト SEO 口コミ賃貸 検索賃貸 大阪賃貸 学生

7:18 AM, May 11, 2009  
Blogger Talia.float said...

Bought the Tennis Racquet is important, exercise can reduce the harm, especially for the wrist injury. But the good of Tennis Racket in general in the real prices are more expensive, so a lot of websites now have cheap tennis racquettennis racquet discountcheap tennis racketdiscount Tennis Racket .

2:22 AM, May 18, 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..........................

11:29 PM, May 19, 2009  
Blogger 1122 said...

小弟弟貼影片成人遊戲影片分享一葉情貼圖片區0204movie免費影片飯島愛免費影片笑話影片小弟弟貼影片區成人dvd-av博物館85cc免費影片觀看情人輔助品playboyvlog影片aa片免費看影片免費成人影片嘟嘟情人網影片大奶妹做愛影片微風成人區情色文學aa的滿18歲影片免費線上看a片

3:06 AM, June 08, 2009  

Post a Comment

<< Home