Massachusetts is an Expensive Place to Live
Reader Jim writes in with a link to this Boston Globe article entitled, "The chilling effect of state's divorce laws." The article describes the antiquated Massachusetts laws that have men paying alimony indefinitely to women who are often educated and/or working. Naturally, no one gives a damn that men are often being screwed, having to pay up to 30 to 40% of their income to these women. The big issue is that (gasp!) women who marry men having this obligation might also get screwed!
A man is really in a catch 22 in Massachusetts if he cannot pay alimony. It's not fair if his current wife has to pay the ex alimony but on the other hand, only when more and more women start suffering from these laws will anyone decide to do anything about them.
FORGET KAFKA. Welcome to Massachusetts. In the 1980s, it was known as Taxachusetts. These days, it's known as the state whose divorce laws are so out of date that many people decide against marrying here - or marrying anyone anywhere whose alimony obligations originate here. I'm one of them. Two divorce lawyers tell me that the state's laws are so extreme they have "a chilling effect on marriage." Prenups offer no guarantees. Judges routinely ignore them.
Cathy Ortiz, a secretary in Fairhaven whose husband is out of work, was ordered in 2007 to make alimony payments from her own paycheck to his ex-wife - who has a full-time job with benefits.
Alimony law is largely case law, not statute. Many legislators are shocked to hear the feudal details, unique to Massachusetts. But not shocked enough to reform the law.
The laws are gender neutral, but the facts are not: 96 percent of alimony payers are men, who often must give 30 to 40 percent of gross earnings to educated and sometimes employed women. [my emphasis]Alimony does not automatically end or decline at retirement, even after an ex-wife has gotten an equitable share of marital assets. This applies in no-fault divorces, to the middle-class, and to millionaires.
A man is really in a catch 22 in Massachusetts if he cannot pay alimony. It's not fair if his current wife has to pay the ex alimony but on the other hand, only when more and more women start suffering from these laws will anyone decide to do anything about them.
Labels: men's rights (or lack thereof)
posted by Helen at 1:54 PM
37 Comments:
Not that I have any intention of divorcing my beautiful wife, but stories like this make me very glad that I didn't get hired for the job in Boston.
Sigh... It's the usual story: nothing's going to be done about any injustice to men until it starts to impact women.
I'd like to see all alimony laws thrown out in favor of pre-nups. Start treating people like adults, and they might even start acting like them too.
Gee, I thought we lived in a Patriarchy, of, by and for the benefit of Men...
How very strange.
If there is any doubt that we no longer live in a patriarchal society, just look at how men are treated in these proceedings, and how powerless they are to get change.
Wow. I've seen men get hammered in California, but even alimony has time limits here.
Things like this make me wonder why there's anyone LEFT in Taxachusetts.
I'm going to lift my glass to the health of both of my brothers' marriages.
Cuz it sounds like they're royally hosed if anything goes South while living there.
Men getting screwed over in divorce-you're SURPRISED?! Come on!!
dave cornutt wrote, Sigh... It's the usual story: nothing's going to be done about any injustice to men until it starts to impact women.
That's because men are pussies. Men do not tell women the truth. Instead they mouth platitudes about fairness and shit. Men won't organize to protect their shared interests.
markymark wrote, Men getting screwed over in divorce-you're SURPRISED?! Come on!!
Many, many women deny that men get screwed in divorce. Just go over the Villainous Company blog and read Cassandra. She spouts that bullshit all the time.
We're not winning the war for fairness, guys. What the hell's wrong? What are we going to do about it?
I've asked before, where are the professionals? Lawyers, doctors, professors, etc.? They have the wherewithal to do something, and we could support them. But of course they don't step forward, and we don't support them.
We're getting what we deserve. Pussies get kicked around.
Jeff, you're a jackass.
I know you think you're the only RealMan(TM) here, but if you're ever in Springfield, IL, let me know. I'll give you the opportunity to call me a pussy to my face. Then we'll see which "pussy gets kicked around" (you're words, not mine).
I doubt you're the badass you portray here. i bet you're a coward. Its easy to be a RealMan(TM) on the Internet.
If you're in the area, let me know. I beg you.
To everyone (except Jeff), please forgive my last post to Jeff. I just got over annoyed. I don't think I've ever seen a post from him where he didn't universally refer to my entire gender as "pussies."
Again, I apologize, I just couldn't resist giving it back to him. I probably shouldn't have. I doubt helen wants it on her blog.
I have seen a number of articles that discuss how unfair alimony situations affect men directly. Why does Helen believe that it is helpful to men to be hostile to any article that discusses how women are affected by it, as if women don't have the right to discuss the problems that affect them? It is a BIG problem to pay alimony to an ex-spouse, but it is selfish to complain about having to pay alimony to someone you never married at all? Why do men think they own the alimony issue when the vast majority of men are not paying it, and some women are? The only reason that alimony started was because successful men decided to abandon their wives for the young, hot chicks at a time when women did not have adequate access to the workplace. Men's selfishness was the innovator of alimony. The standards have evolved over time to adjust to women's increasing economic status. It is not that people are unwilling to resolve the problems that do exist. There are just so many problems, and people focus on the problems that affect them and their families. Women are selfish for talking about how this issue affects them, but men ignore the fact that most men do not take an interest in the issue because they are not personally affected it?
A musician friend of mine once told me that there is no such thing as bad publicity. It is all good. You just need to know how to work it. People do not need to hear the same story repeated over and over again. People need to look at each problem from many different perspectives to figure out the extent of the problem and exactly how people are affected by it. Everyone. Not just one side or the other. If you really wanted to solve this problem, you would focus on the actual problem and stop alienating your potential allies.
When men talk about their problems not being solved, I do not know what problem you are talking about. Clearly, the problem is not about the issues being discussed. I have been wasting my time reading this blog for the past two years. That is two years of my life that I will never get back. So far, men have not been able to put together a coherent case on any issue. That strongly suggests to me that you are not interested in the issues. You are just looking for a way to express hostility toward women. I have no idea what your real problem is because you are not even being honest with yourselves about it.
If you want to know why your advocacy issues are not being resolved, it is because your advocacy sucks. It is the MOST INCOMPETENT approach to advocacy in the history of this country.
trust wrote, If you're in the area, let me know. I beg you.
This is what I'm talking about. This idiot accuses me of bravado, and then he unleashes this stupidity.
trust wrote, I don't think I've ever seen a post from him where he didn't universally refer to my entire gender as "pussies."
But I wrote, I don't think I've ever seen a post from him where he didn't universally refer to my entire gender as "pussies.
Notice the word 'we?' I'm a guy, too. It is a fact: collectively, we are wimps at standing up for fair treatment under the law. No angry, reflexive, anonymous bravado will change it.
trust wrote, I doubt helen wants it on her blog.
Why don't you let her decide that, tough guy.
Oops. The quote from me should have been, We're getting what we deserve. Pussies get kicked around.
Notice the 'we.'
So Jeff, you sit here and call all men pussies for not standing up for themselves, yet when someone stands up to your insults and name calling, you call them an idiot and berate their "bravado."
So, let me get this straight, when you call all men pussies, you are in no way showing any kind of "bravado." Before you dismiss me as a "tough guy", go back and read some of your provacative posts.
It's almost funny. You can dish it out but you can't take it. If you want to call names and insult people, don't be surprised when they return it in kind.
I don't know why i'm bothering with someone as obviously stupid as you, but your ignorance and inconsitency both fascinates and perplexes me.
I can swallow a sentence here and a sentence there, cara. Especially the advocacy part. Men don't seem to do that well. Never have. We are Tarzans, after all. And take care of ourselves. For the most part, a man's more noble side is being used on him like a weapon.
This relatively new thing is like terrorism on the home front. It can't be fought with guns and tanks, bombs and rockets. We are perplexed. It is a confusing threat. There is no clear cut answer such as "destroy the enemy".
From the male perspective, anyway.
Anyway, and once again - the best way to win is not to play. I can take care of myself, I can do whatever it takes. Let's see if you can, and those who think like you. When no man wishes to marry, you won't have much choice. Without the overhanging threats from divorce - property and income confiscation, alimony and child support, results [or claims] of bodily fluid exchanges, women pose no threat to men that won't land them in jail. For some that day has arrived. Sometimes I forget, but am quickly reminded. Thanks for reminding me.
Cara wrote: "Why do men think they own the alimony issue when the vast majority of men are not paying it, and some women are?"
Cara, please read the article. 96% if people who pay alimony are men. That is statistically significant. It is a men's issue. But then so is math. 8)
Trey
Trey,
I never said it wasn't a men's issue. I never said it should not be fixed, either. I asked why men think they "own" the issue. You are the one who needs help with reading comprehension and the math, too. The article does not say that 96% of people who pay alimony are men. It says that 96% of "alimony payors" are men. Meaning "ordered to pay." The article indicates that women are paying some of men's alimony for them. Women have been indirectly affected for a long time, but the law did not automatically update itself to accomodate them, did it? If women are successful at changing the law, maybe that means that women do a better quality job at advocacy.
Do you think that women paying men's alimony for them counts as men paying their own alimony?
It figures.
br549,
What do you know of the way I think? You know nothing about me. I was DV and stalking victim who almost ended up dead because of men's violence. My daughter had severe developmental delays and emotional problems because of her exposure to violence before I could get her out. She has worked very hard to overcome adversity, worked her way up from the bottom to become a good student, and has accomplished a great deal. We did this work together with very little money. During my divorce, I was not a candidate for alimony, and I never even thought about it. My ex tried to get alimoney from me even though he had a full time job. Although I did not make that much more money than he did, maybe he could have gotten something if he hadn't forced me out of my job with the stalking.
It doesn't matter to me how the alimony issue is resolved. Take it all away. What do I care? All I would do about it is tell women to stay away from men who have enough power to hurt them. You think I am hanging around looking to marry another death trap? Get over yourself. You may have a lot of money, but I would leave you alone. Your money is no good to me. I am a highly intelligent person. If love of money was the most important thing in my life, I could have made a lot of it on my own. I could have outdone the best of you. I prefer my simple lifestyle to extravagance. There is plenty to appreciate in the world without money.
The reason I stopped by was because I noticed that your advocacy is in crisis, and I just happen to have a lot of experience with crisis management and advocacy systems. I thought some of you might be interested in fixing your terrible advocacy so that you could take some pride in it, and get some real work done. If you are just going to insult me, then maybe I should just cut you loose and let you slide into oblivion, since that seems to be what you want to do.
BTW, I have had a lot more hardship and unfairness in my life than what I just told you. I have plenty of very good reasons to be angry with everyone. I choose to have a sense of purpose and to focus on positive goals.
DV does not cause developmental delays.
Trey,
Perhaps I have used a term to describe the issue that is not preferred in your profession. I was referring to a "failure to thrive" situation that occurs with very young children exposed to extreme stress, instability, and emotional deprivation(from damaged functioning of the primary caregiver) that causes development to lag behind, specifically in language, behavior, and cognitive areas. Motor skills seem to be least affected. This is also associated with the culture of poverty, and everyone knows about the DV connection there. Apparently, the other factors in the culture of poverty do not have to be present for this to happen because it happened to my daughter. I have heard that there is research that establishes the connection to DV, and have seen it mentioned in a few books.
My daughter's issues with development were severe enough to put her close to mild MR, but she has overcome those issues with intervention, and it has been confirmed that her reasoning ability is intact.
If you use a different term to describe this condition, please enlighten me, and I will be sure to use it in the future.
cara, you are correct. I know nothing about you. In your post directed at me, I learned a few things. I won't say back at ya', though, OK?
Have you been reading my mail? All I can say about what you have been through with your ex, is that it mirrors my own family tragedy. You married a nut case, just like I did. Hindsight can be mean, you know it? Being a male though, all her problems were my doing, you see. All accusations made stuck, even though anyone and everyone involved knew she was way off balance. I have three children. My son, the youngest, is similar to your daughter in his failure to thrive situation. We have not been as successful as you in "bringing him around" as it were. All three are scarred. My daughters are doing well though.
By the way, you are angry. Perhaps not as much as before, but angry none the less. So am I. To the point if I did not have children, I would have pursued my convictions all the way to being a hermit in a cave, as far away from dealing with people as possible.
It continues to affect my outlook on life.
But I still don't like you.
trust wrote, Before you dismiss me as a "tough guy", go back and read some of your provacative posts. It's almost funny. You can dish it out but you can't take it. If you want to call names and insult people, don't be surprised when they return it in kind.
I didn't insult anyone. Please quote a sentence in which I insult someone.
I've only noted that men, collectively, are wimps and pussies when it comes to standing up for fair treatment under the law.
You just making stuff up.
trust wrote, It's almost funny. You can dish it out but you can't take it. If you want to call names and insult people, don't be surprised when they return it in kind.
Well, just cite where I call a person a name. I know you can't.
trust wrote, I don't know why i'm bothering with someone as obviously stupid as you, but your ignorance and inconsitency both fascinates and perplexes me.
Because you are a troll.
cara wrote, Why does Helen believe that it is helpful to men to be hostile to any article that discusses how women are affected by it, as if women don't have the right to discuss the problems that affect them?
Because, mostly, mass injustice to men rarely warrants political action, while a rare injustice to women does.
There's an entire industry out there upholding fair treatment for women in every walk of life. Not so for men.
Is this situation th fault of women? No. Men are to blame, because collectively men are wimps. Just plain pussified. They just don't organize to protect their interests the way women do.
Consider that I get threats of violence from men on this blog just for pointing that out in a polemical style. It does kind of support you suggestion to "stay away from men who have enough power to hurt" people. Sadly, some stupid men, like trust, live up to the stereotype you speak to.
I think men could learn a lot from women about how to handle political action. The first step is to be honest enough to name the problem: wimpy, pussified, failures of collective political action. Guys just aren't there yet.
"because of men's violence"
Should that be 'because of a man's violence'?
@Jeff, aka the RealMan(TM)
"Because you are a troll."
A troll would be someone who never contributes anything intellectual. Someone who makes a rare appearance to say nothing more than "men are pussies." Someone like you.
I protest! I see cuss words, gutter slang and direct calling of names, with no chastising from the referee.
Does anyone have any cheese?
@br549:
I apologize for the crossfire I got pulled into. I should have known better than to fire back at Jeff.
Cara said...
(among other things)
If women are successful at changing the law, maybe that means that women do a better quality job at advocacy.
Women have definitely cleaned our clocks when it comes to advocacy. There are other factors at work than simply the quality of the job they do - men in general, and the vast majority of women, are far more sympathetic toward women than they are toward men. We have pretty much always been the disposable sex and I've seen enough social trends to believe that isn't going to change any time soon. Men's worst enemy, Joe Biden, has championed stripping us of our rights, and even now wants to put 100,000 volunteer lawyers on the streets to help the poor cupcakes make false accusations against their husbands or boyfriends, and the fools in Delaware won't even vote him out of office.
The problem with comparing how good a job the sexes do regarding putting pressure on legislators to favor them in law is that it casts men and women as opponents in a zero sum game - either women have rights or men have them, but it seems that both cannot have them at the same time. The purpose of the court system is to resolve conflicts and there is always a winner and loser in court.
Years ago I was optimistic about men and fair-minded women being able to come together to make a difference - just as a great many men supported what sounded like legitimate grievances from women. However, the moment that the adversarial element enters the picture the vast majority of women have balked at giving away their legal advantages and instead choose to protect their vested interests.
The practical short-term solution for men is to obey the spirit of the laws as they exist and realize that any interaction with a woman is a potential criminal offense if the woman decides to make it one.
It's like Jr. Samples said -
Anyway, and once again - the best way to win is not to play. I can take care of myself, I can do whatever it takes. Let's see if you can, and those who think like you. When no man wishes to marry, you won't have much choice. Without the overhanging threats from divorce - property and income confiscation, alimony and child support, results [or claims] of bodily fluid exchanges, women pose no threat to men that won't land them in jail. For some that day has arrived. Sometimes I forget, but am quickly reminded. Thanks for reminding me.
The way I used to try to forcibly make this point was to state that as long as I treated women like they might have the plague, I had most of the rights I needed. (Completely false and bogus accusations are a different matter. Black men are very aware of what can happen when a woman points her finger and says "he done me wrong.")
The legal situation now WRT to relationships is a lot like smoking crack cocaine - some people want to do it badly enough that they will take the legal risks, but few that don't do it have much motivation to change the laws. The solution is pretty simple - just don't do it and you won't run afoul of the law.
They can't even figure out their own divorce rules and yet they have decided to restructure the basic partners in a marriage.
Jeff,
If by industry, you mean hard work, I would agree. But I doubt that the most endangered DV/stalking victims, most of whom are women, would agree that fairness is being upheld. Many of them can't say anything at all anymore. Also, your perspective about the purpose and principles of group advocacy as being entirely about self-interest is distorted. That is only part of the deal. I will explain that at another time.
br549,
I am not personally invested in keeping alimony around, so I decided to address the general issue of the serious problems with your group's approach to advocacy. I did this in the interest of your group's well being. You are the one who decided to take it to the personal level with a gratuitous, self-serving insult that had nothing to do with anyone's well being. I was just defending myself.
I have been reading this blog for a while, and you come across as sincere about your victim experience. I sympathize with the hardship. The most endangered victims on both sides have very poor conditions. I do appreciate that you confirmed my position on the failure to thrive situation, since Trey and the entire system is in denial that this problem is related to DV.
Your attitude is the reason that it is so difficult to do safe outreach to male DV victims. The vast majority of hardcore abusers are on your side, and the risk of abuser infiltration into victim services is extreme. You like to blame women for the problem? What have men done to help any victims on either side? The answer is NOTHING. Women have reduced the number of domestic homicides against men by a dramatic 75% in the past 30 years, but there has been no significant decline in men's domestic homicide against women, which has resulted in a severe discrepancy. Helen pointed out the huge declines a while ago, and you all decided to ignore it. What have men done to hold their own group back? The answer is still NOTHING.
You have no loyalty to the other victims. You don't care if you compromise us. You were the first one here to attack me. Another victim. You expect us to care about your problems, but you NEVER cared about ours.
Pockosmum,
Actually, I used the plural on purpose. Although these were the actions of an individual, I see society as complicit because of the failure to adequately address this intractable social problem for the most endangered victims.
Hang on a minute, cara. My "problem" is not with a woman. It is with the system, that has been kissing up to women, who have been mobbing that system. The situation, as it exists, is not about honesty, fairness, or justice. It is about hate, power, and revenge via destruction. We can't talk about racism. We can't talk about sexism. We can't talk about "genderism" All we can do is safely and gleefully beat up the male. The white male. Because at some point in all of this, the "other" color of male skin is allowed to join in with the "other" side. Although it is a weave in and out. They are allowed in when it serves the current purpose, but forced back out at times when only females (of any and all colors) are the subject victims.
Can we then discuss fat and ugly? The term "bitch"? Character flaws, that exist in all people to one degree or the other? New photos are up on the web, gay marriage photos. Look at the women marrying.
Take a good look. What man would have any of them? Not me. It would not surprise me any of these are man haters. I have seen news blurbs off and on for years, of NOW meetings, etc. The "leader" on the podium is all smiles and sparkly eyes, and talking about how women are treated, and what needs to be done. When the camera pans the audience, without fail, the audience is filled with women who look like those in the recent California marriage photos. Fat and ugly, hair that looks like an explosion in a mattress factory, and dog fetching pork chops hanging around there necks.
The camera never lies. Until a law is enacted banning the final prejudice, the definition of beauty, and an individual's - naaaa, male's - aversion to butt ugliness and obesity in a woman, it will remain so. I expect eventually, affirmative action will take hold there as well. Soon, a certain amount of men will be required to marry a certain amount of "unmarryable" women just to make it fair. After all, every woman who wants to be married has that right. She will just pick out the available single male she wants, and poof, she's married.
Long and short, however, I believe that until women (collectively) have the deeper pockets, men will continue, for the most part, to pay. Occam's Razor, sort of.
You know, cara, I do agree with you about advocacy. Men suck at it. We have never had to band together to protect our "group" as you call it, from the courts. As much as possible, men have, and continue to solve our own problems.
That is just how we are.
That is slowly proving to be an impossible task now. In the legal system, even men are against men. For money, or for votes. Sad. I just read where it is being called the "Guaranteed Full Employment Act" for lawyers. It is not all men, just like it's not all women.
My family tragedy is a one off situation. It should have been a private situation, meaning dealt with in a manner of respect, true discovery, and resolution of, for and about the family, with help from professionals, as was sought out. It became a circus. My concerns were for my (still not) ex's health and well being, and for the emotional health and well being of my children. The doctors, lawyers and judges, however, wanted my pockets emptied and the big "E" for evil burned into my forehead. For things they knew full well I never did. And boy, did they succeed. My kids knew the truth, though. They came back to me as soon as possible, where they have been ever since.
My "still not ex" and I were together for a very long time. When I said "I do", I meant it. And I meant until death do us part, in sickness and in health, yadda, yadda, yadda. I promised.
We are not divorced because she is on disability and S.S. Were we divorced, as she originally wanted, after walking out on her family, she would not be getting what she now gets. And I might have fifty bucks in my pocket right now. I support her, and her live in boyfriend, who she met in the psychiatric hospital. Nice gig, if you can get it. They laugh at me each and every day. I try my best to keep it out of my mind. But the rolling boil just won't go away.
Hmmm, Jeff is right, men are a bunch of pussies about this stuff. I can't beleive anyone would be offended by that, but I'm not anyone.
" What have men done to help any victims on either side? The answer is NOTHING. Women have reduced the number of domestic homicides against men by a dramatic 75% in the past 30 years, but there has been no significant decline in men's domestic homicide against women, which has resulted in a severe discrepancy. Helen pointed out the huge declines a while ago, and you all decided to ignore it. What have men done to hold their own group back? The answer is still NOTHING."
Uh, don't I pay taxes, to support a law enforcment system? Police? Courts? All sorts of shelters? And you say I do nothing? You need a serious attitude adjustment! Women have reduced homicides? How did "women" do this?
cara:
I am still having a problem finding the actual gratuitous, self serving insult you speak of, but don't point out, in my first post to your opening salvo. My shot back, if you will, was a response generated by what I read in your post.
I find it amazing you have been coming in here for 2 years without posting. I guess you've been taking notes. I have been coming here for 17 months, myself. We differ where I do not feel I have wasted the last 17 months of my life coming here. You state you have wasted the last two years of your life coming in here and reading, and seem to blame it on the blog. OK, I guess.
Men and women both get abused by spouses. And when children are involved, it is such a tragedy. Certain types of people seem attracted to, and attracted by, certain types of people. Tragedies abound. Mental problems abound. Character flaws, insecurity, paranoia, etc., on to infinitude.
No matter how slight, or how great, there is something "wrong" with everybody. The wrong people sure do get together a lot. And, yeah, I resemble that remark.
If what you are trying to accomplish is to point out there are "victims" on both sides of the marriage - divorce issue, and these victims should band together, then it has taken me this long to figure that out.
So far though, within the legal system anyway, the line has been drawn between the genders, not victim / abuser. And of course victim=female while abuser=male.
Let me ask you to do something. I have asked this same thing of many.
Take a week off of work. Go sit in the last row of a local divorce court. Sit there all day, every day, for the full week. Observe. Hell, take notes. Come back and give a full report of your findings. I did that. On purpose. After what I went through, I wanted to see if how my own situation went, was a fluke, or the norm.
Where I was, if the female did not show up when the case came before the judge, the case was continued. If the male did not show up, a bench warrant for his arrest was immediately issued.
In my own divorce, that was thrust upon me, and is yet to be resolved, I showed up six consecutive times as ordered. The "still not ex" showed up the first time. The fifth time, her lawyer asked to be released from the case. The judge granted the release. My lawyer looked at me and shrugged. The last time, I was the only one there. Not only did she not show up (her lawyer was released), but my own lawyer didn't either. He never returned my calls, or my money. Her lawyer never returned my money, either.
The judge told me that since there were no lawyers, and the "still not ex" didn't show up, the divorce could not continue. But I have to pay money. She has a live in boyfriend (can you spell adultery) yet that does not matter to the system. They live of S.S. and disability earned from my toils, plus other monies I have to pay.
My attitude about all of this stems from my personal experience. Not from anything else. Perhaps your view of victims getting together is like sleeping with the enemy from another's point of view. But, war does make strange bedfellows.
If I had a girlfriend, I'd be committing adultery. If I found the right one, and wished to marry her, that would be bigamy. Not to mention I am held to a higher road by my own children.
As you said before, I too have many other problems (health) that are serious and have not been mentioned at this time. I also have a daughter (one of three children)in college, her fifth year, heading for a PhD. That has not been cheap either.
So head for court and see what you see. Let me know what you think. I'd love to hear another opinion of my findings.
視訊做愛聊天室avdvd-情色網ut13077視訊聊天A片-無碼援交東京熱一本道aaa免費看影片免費視訊聊天室微風成人ut聊天室av1688影音視訊天堂85cc免費影城亞洲禁果影城微風成人av論壇sex520免費影片JP成人網免費成人視訊aaa影片下載城免費a片 ut交友成人視訊85cc成人影城免費Ａ片aa的滿18歲影片小魔女免費影片小魔女免費影城免費看 aa的滿18歲影片sex383線上娛樂場kk777視訊俱樂部aa的滿18歲影片85cc免費影片a片免費看A片-sex520plus論壇sex520免費影片85cc免費影片aaa片免費看短片aa影片下載城aaaaa片俱樂部影片aaaaa片俱樂部aa的滿18歲影片小魔女免費影片台灣論壇免費影片免費卡通影片線上觀看線上免費a片觀看85cc免費影片免費Ａ片aa影片下載城ut聊天室辣妹視訊UT影音視訊聊天室 日本免費視訊aaaa 片俱樂部aaa片免費看短片aaaa片免費看影片aaa片免費看短片免費視訊78論壇情色偷拍免費Ａ片免費aaaaa片俱樂部影片後宮0204movie免費影片av俱樂部aaaa彩虹頻道免費影片 杜蕾斯成人免費卡通影片線上觀看85cc免費影片線上觀賞免費線上歐美A片觀看免費a片卡通aaa的滿18歲卡通影片sex520免費影片免費 a 片免費視訊聊天jp成人sex520免費影片
av969 免費短片免費色咪咪影片網 a片美女視訊視訊情色網a片免費看夢幻家族影音視訊聊天室嘟嘟情人色網影片土豆網韓劇播放性愛姿勢 sogo 色論壇美眉共和國美女視訊色美眉部落格男同志聊天室免費成人情色愛情公寓aaa片免費看影片sex movie日本美女寫真集情色a片情色交友色情遊戲aio交友愛情館
Post a Comment
<< Home