Monthly Archives: December 2013

by | December 31, 2013 · 3:27 PM

The Banksters Are the Enemy of All Mankind

From the great Tragedy and Hope by Carroll Quigley, a must read for anyone interested in world affairs. It’s only 1,062 pages, so it’s not an easy read. But my, how that silver prose sings off the pages.

Quigley was Bill Clinton’s professor at college, and Clinton was much influenced by this man. Quote:

…[T]he powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole.

[T]his system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations…

It must not be felt that these heads of the world’s chief central banks were themselves substantive powers in world finance. They were not. Rather, they were the technicians and agents of the dominant investment bankers of their own countries, who had raised them up and were perfectly capable of throwing them down.

The substantive financial powers of the world were in the hands of these investment bankers (also called ‘international’ or ‘merchant’ bankers) who remained largely behind the scenes in their own unincorporated private banks. These formed a system of international cooperation and national dominance which was more private, more powerful, and more secret than that of their agents in the central banks.

[T]his dominance of investment bankers was based on their control over the flows of credit and investment funds in their own countries and throughout the world. They could dominate the financial and industrial systems of their own countries by their influence over the flow of current funds though bank loans, the discount rate, and the re-discounting of commercial debts; they could dominate governments by their own control over current government loans and the play of the international exchanges.

There you go. A conspiracy theory you can bank on.

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

3 Comments

Filed under Capitalism, Conspiracy Theories, Economics, Government, Politics, Sociology

by | December 31, 2013 · 3:09 PM

Phil Robertson Urges Men to Marry Underage Teenage Girls

Here.

More crazy and disturbing comments from this nutty reactionary.

Video footage has emerged of the Duck Dynasty star speaking at a Sportsman’s Ministry speech in 2009.

“You got to marry these girls when they are 15 or 16. They’ll pick your ducks,” he said.

This is a reference to picking the feathers off of dead ducks, and I am not sure what this redneck figure of speech even means, if anything. Robertson urged men to marry teenage girls because they are easier to control. In addition to being young, the teen brides should know how to cook and carry a Bible, Robertson said. The 67 year old Robertson started dating his wife when she was 14 years old.

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

6 Comments

Filed under Christianity, Conservatism, Girls, Religion, Romantic Relationships

by | December 31, 2013 · 9:31 AM

Why the Keystone XL Oil Pipeline Should Be Stopped

Thelyniezian writes:

Exports make money and if nothing else, constructing a pipeline gives employment to construction workers?

Even so, the root of the problem is still demand for oil, be it on a national or world scale. And I suppose if it’s going to, say, China, it is probably fueling production/shipping of exports bought by Americans.

Either way, unless you can re-order global society to become genuinely socialist (and I think a majority of people have to want that), and looking out for the needs of society as a whole, that’s how it works- it’s only going to happen if someone makes a profit somewhere. No demand from somewhere, no profit.

The pipeline means “game over” for the world climate because tar sands oil is so dirty. It causes 3X as much global warming as regular oil due to the extraction process.

Furthermore the pipeline is going to leak all the time. Similar pipelines leak constantly. I do not know why, but the oil industry cannot seem to make pipelines that do not leak.

The few jobs created (1,500) are not worth blowing up the whole climate of the world, which is actually a total catastrophe if you are not aware.

They already export tar sands oil as it is. It is used in the US and Canada. But the pipeline will allow them to truly mass produce the stuff as they will be exporting it all over the world.

There are also proposals for a transporting the oil by pipeline to Vancouver, Canada. Obviously we cannot stop that, but the Canadians seem to have stopped it by now. They can already export the stuff by putting it on oil tankers and driving them to ports, but the pipeline will be much more efficient.

China doesn’t need tar sands oil to run factories to make crap to export to the US. There is plenty of oil for sale in the world. The Chinese already buy lots of oil that is far less dirty than tar sands oil.

There is no mandate that under a capitalist system, every crazy resource extraction industry project has to go through because the market demands it to be so. Democratic capitalist societies kill resource extraction projects all time, not caring about the lost jobs, just because the downside of the projects seem to far outweigh the upside. Believe it or not, under capitalism there is no rule or law that says that the capitalist always get their way. Many times they do not.

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

7 Comments

Filed under Asia, Canada, Capitalism, China, Economics, Environmentalism, Global Warming, North America, Pollution, Regional, USA

by | December 31, 2013 · 9:21 AM

The Truth About Matthew Shephard and Harvey Milk

Matthew.

And Harvey.

These are of course two of the modern heroes of the gay movement in the US. Both were murdered.

Milk was a San Fransisco supervisor murdered by another San Fransisco supervisor in 1978.

Shepard was a college student in Wyoming supposedly murdered by homophobes for being gay.

Milk is treated by many as a modern hero, but I am not exactly sure why. A movie was made about him called The Mayor of Castro Street. I liked that movie a lot; it was very well-done.

The Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Bill passed by the US Congress after Shepard’s murder calls for enhanced penalties for assaults and homicides against gay people.

But the truth about Shepard is more complicated. First of all, his murder was apparently not a homophobic crime. Instead, one of the killers was his gay lover, obviously not a homophobe. The other was obviously not a homophobe either. The motive for the crime was robbery. Not many know this, but Matthew was a male prostitute, a hustler, a rent boy. He arranged for a sex meeting with these two men. He would give them gay sex, and they would give him methamphetamine. Matthew wanted the meth because he was a regular meth user. Matthew was trading drugs for sex. Although his body was hung from a tree in a crucifixion position, there was no homophobic or anti-gay motive for that.

The story we are told is that Matthew propositioned the two men, who were both straight. These straight men were so homophobically outraged by being propositioned by a gay man that they murdered him in retaliation. That story is apparently not true at all.

Of course, it is a very sad story how this young man was brutally murdered by a couple of monsters. But he was not murdered for being gay. And he wasn’t exactly a saint either.

Milk, age 33, was actually a pederast like many gay men.

Milk was a hardcore chickenhawk. He preyed on confused teenage boys, often runaways with mental issues and drug problems. At least one of boys he took in was simply a troubled adolescent, and there is no indication that the boy was gay at all. Instead, Milk seems to have recruited him into a gay lifestyle.

So Milk was far from an angel. Instead he was a serial predator of vulnerable underage teenage boys. This behavior is quite illegal in the US, and people who do it are often called child molesters. Although that characterization is incorrect, this is how the public sees it. In other words, for a majority of the US public, Harvey Milk would be seen as a child molester.

The US is now honoring Milk with a new postage stamp. I am not exactly against it, but it would be nice if we knew the truth about this man.

Of course whatever he did with these boys, I do not think he deserved to be murdered, and his chickenhawk ways were not the motive for his killing at any rate.

The stories we have been told about these two gay heroes are obviously not accurate, and both of them were a lot less saintly than we are led to believe.

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

7 Comments

Filed under Crime, Ephebephilia, Homosexuality, Jailbait, Law, Sex

by | December 31, 2013 · 9:20 AM

Man-Boy Sex and Its Long Tradition among Gay Men

Fully 25% of gay men are pederasts at some point in their life. 25% of gay men have had sex with a boy under age 17 when the men were 21 or older. For straights, only 5% of straight men have had sex with girls under age 17 when the man was 21 or older. In addition, these gay men (called chickenhawks) engage in much more sex with underage boys than the straights do.

Here are some more figures:

In 1970, the Kinsey Institute found that 25% San Fransisco gays  admitted to having had sex with boys under age 17 while they themselves were at least 21 or older (see comments above).

The 1948 Kinsey survey found that 28% of the gays had had sex with boys under age 16 when the men were 18 or older.

In The Gay Report, 23% of adult gay men had had sex with boys under age 16.

For the gay men, it is often a long term thing going on for years or decades involving many underage boys. For straights, it tends to be more of a one-time thing. There are not many adult heterosexual men who repeatedly have sex with girls under age 17. In addition, the gay community is strongly supportive of chickenhawks. If you are around a gay community, you will notice that the number of adult men having sex with underage teenage boys is very high. You will see it all over the community. No one bats an eye, and no one cares.

The community rarely or never turns these men in. The mainstream Gay Lobby frankly supports sex between adult men and teenage boys and works tirelessly to change age of consent laws so the chickenhawks can have their fun.

The homosexual tradition of older men and underage teenage boys is a very old one and goes all the way back to Greek times. It is a time-honored tradition in the gay male community and is one that has wide support.

For instance, Dan Savage, a provocative gay male columnist, recently was adamant in support of changing age of consent laws so that teenage boys and adult men can have their little fun and games. If you go to internet sites for gay teens, you will see many articles written for an underage teenage boy audience about sex between underage teenage boys and adult men. These articles offer full support to boys engaging in this behavior. They go along the lines of, “We know that many of you boys are having sex with adult men, and that is perfectly ok.”

By the way, one of the more extreme goals of the Gay Lobby in the US is to change age of consent laws so gay men can play their funny little games with underage teenage boys. The lobby is committed to this one, and I believe that they will never rest until they achieve their goal.

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

12 Comments

Filed under Culture, Ephebephilia, Gender Studies, Homosexuality, Jailbait, Law, Man World, Sex

by | December 31, 2013 · 8:40 AM

Transmen at the Seven Sisters

Here.

The Seven Sisters are seven historical women’s colleges back East that were established in the 1800’s. All are relatively elite institutions. They include Mt. Holyoke, Bryn Mawr, Smith, Barnard, Radcliffe, Vassar and Wellesley. Radcliffe merged with Harvard, and Vassar started accepting male students a while ago. However, all of these colleges are now accepting a certain kind of “male” student, as this post will make clear. Famous grads range from anthropologist Margaret Mead (Barnard) to actresses Stockard Channing (Radcliffe) and Meryl Streep (Vassar) to Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (Wellesley).

There have definitely been some major changes at these colleges in recent years. For instance, one of my mother’s best friends went to Wellesley in the 1950’s. At that time, there was little lesbianism at that school or at most women’s colleges for that matter. However, in recent years, almost all historical women’s colleges in the US have become heavily swarmed with lesbians. It’s not that everyone at Wellesley and other schools is lesbian or bisexual (there are many straight female students there) but the lesbian element is very strong there, and if you are a student there, you will be aware of the lesbians constantly.

What has happened? Are there more lesbians in the US now than there were then? Who knows?

But the experience at women’s colleges has definitely changed, and there is much more lesbianism there than there used to be.

Transmen are female to male transsexuals. Usually they start out taking male hormones and then they move onto surgery. Breast removal, a frightening procedure to contemplate for a woman for sure, is quite common. The final step is the construction of a fake and non-functioning appendage-like penis.

Transmen often look very much like boys or men. There are some photos of transmen at the link, and it is a shock to see them. One transman is now growing a beard!

The presence of transmen on campus has created quite a controversy at these schools. For one thing, the constitutions of the schools have had to be changed and the word “they” substituted for the word “she.” In addition, instructors are told to refer to transmen as “he” and “him.” Transmen often introduce themselves by saying, “Hello, I am Jim, and I use male pronouns.”

The problem is that all of these schools are all girls colleges. Except that now transmen are there too. And a transman is…what? A male? A female? A heshe? A whatsit? Who the Hell knows what they are!

However quite a few female students think they should not be there because they have no business as virtual males having a presence at an all-girls’ school. A common question is, “If they wanted to turn into men, why in the Hell did they enroll at an all-girls school?”

To me, transmen are very odd, but perhaps this is acceptable.

There are two types of transsexuals. One type seems biological, freaks of nature. They claim to have felt like the opposite sex from a very early age. I am sympathetic to these folks. The condition appears to be innate and is incurable.

There is a second type which in my opinion is simply an extreme form of homosexuality. In the case of many transmen, they simply have an extreme form of lesbianism. I am not so sympathetic to this second type because they do not seem to innately of the wrong gender and freaks of nature. To me they seem more like “flakes of nature.”

Readers, how do you feel about this. What is your reactions to the article. Personally, I look at those transmen and while I may support their decision, the whole phenomenon looks bizarre as Hell.

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

2 Comments

Filed under Education, Gender Studies, Higher Education, Homosexuality, Sex, Women

by | December 31, 2013 · 3:01 AM

The Impossibility of the Peaceful Road to Left Power: The Coup + Death Squad Roadblock

Robert Jackson writes:

People think America has or has had a capitalist system, they are wrong, what America has is crony capitalism, which is basically just hidden corruption. It is pretty sickening that so much and so many are bought off. From politicians to doctors, to even some businesses and corporations.

America also doesn’t really have as free of a market as many believe, that is due to this cronyism shit. Fedex and UPS are constantly trying to buy political votes to have politicians pass laws that hurt each other as attempts to eliminate the competition for example. This type of activity is rampant in the USA and pretty much the whole world.

A typical nonsensical far right argument is that the US doesn’t have a true free market – that instead it has crony capitalism. That is a rightwing neoliberal Libertarian line. Their objection to the US capitalist model is that the government is involved in it too.

The system you hate is called capitalism. Capitalism typically evolves into crony capitalism because that is the nature of the beast. In addition, there is often mass corruption of the state under capitalism and more capitalist the economy, the higher the degree of corruption. Corruption and capitalism go together like bread and butter.

There is no way to dissolve crony capitalism and go to a pure free market system other than more or less dissolving the state, and of course this is what the Libertarians advocate.

Truth: The capitalists love crony capitalism and would not have it any other way. In most capitalist countries, the capitalists have not only the means of production but also the entire media sector which they use to brainwash everyone. Also the capitalists usually capture the entire state under capitalism.

If any socialists or reformists get control over the state, the capitalists usually engage in election fraud or a military coup to throw them out, and the US always supports this.

Examples: Iran 1953, Brazil 1964, Guatemala 1954, Dominican Republic 1965, Indonesia 1965, Honduras 1010, Ecuador recently (attempted), Venezuela 2002, Argentina 1976, Chile 1973, Peru 1992, Uruguay 1970’s, Haiti 2000’s, Russia 1992, Panama 1979 (assassination).

So you see it is almost impossible to put in a socialist or reformist government by peaceful means. This is why Marxist-Leninists argue for armed revolution and worker’s over the state and controls on the reactionaries to keep them waging coups to get back in power.

After the coup, a rightwing government usually comes in and there is a mass slaughter against the Left. The purpose of this is to terrorize the people – if you ever elect a socialist or reformist again, there will be a coup followed by a military government and death squad genocide against the Left. If you were a progressive person, would you vote for a Left government knowing that they will be soon overthrown and a death squad regime will come in and the killers may well come after you to try to murder you? See how that works.

Guatemala 1954: Coup followed by 200,000 deaths. Death squad killing of the Left continued for 40 years after the coup. US supports via the CIA under Eisenhower.

Chile 1973: Pinochet coup followed the Pinochet killer regime that murdered 15,000 Leftists over the next 17 years. US supports under Nixon and Kissinger.

Honduras 2010: Coup followed by 1,000 murders of Leftists. US supports under Barack Obama.

Haiti 2000’s: Coup followed by a minimum of 3,000 murders of the Left. The UN came in with soldiers to enforce the coup and keep the coup plotters in power! US supports under George Bush.

Peru 1992: 1.5 million arrested over a 2-3 year period after the Fujimori coup – up to 15% of the population was placed under arrest. US supports under Bill Clinton.

Venezuela 1992: ~30 murders occurred right after the coup. US supports under George Bush.

Argentina 1976: 30,000 killed after the Videla coup over 7 years. US supports under Henry Kissinger.

Indonesia 1965: 1 million+ Leftists murdered right after Suharto coup with CIA assistance. Supported by Lyndon Johnson.

Haiti 1957: Duvalier coup followed by 60,000 murders over 30 years. US supports under various Presidents.

Guatemala 1982: Rios Montt coup followed by 15,000 murders over 2 years. US supports under Reagan.

Dominican Republic: Trujillo fraudulent election followed by the murders of 20,000 Haitians in 1937.

Vietnam 1955: Diem coup followed 80,000 killings until 1960. US supports under Eisenhower.

Russia 1992: Boris Yeltsin dissolves Parliament because they won’t go along with his plans for a transition to capitalism. Parliament members won’t leave the building, so Yeltsin has army tanks shell the building until legislators leave. US supports under Bill Clinton.

Iran 1953: CIA coup overthrows Mossadegh with Eisenhower support. The Shah murders 100,000 people over 26 years.

Brazil 1964: CIA coup installs Branco with support by Lyndon Johnson.

Panama 1979: CIA murders President Trujillo with support of Jimmy Carter.

Ecuador 2010: Attempted coup backed by US under Barack Obama. Attempted assassination of President.

Paraguay 2011: Lugo thrown out of office in fake move by Parliament which was basically a coup. US supports under Barack Obama.

Taiwan 1949: Chiang Kai Shek seizes power, solidifies power by murdering 100,000 Leftists. US support by Truman and Eisenhower.

South Korea 1945: New government consolidates power by death squad killings of 200,000+ Leftists. Support by Harry Truman.

Uruguay 1970’s: 300 Leftists killed over a period of time. US supports under Jimmy Carter.

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

10 Comments

Filed under Capitalism, Conservatism, Corruption, Economics, Fascism, Geopolitics, Latin American Right, Left, Libertarianism, Marxism, Neoliberalism, Political Science, Politics, Socialism, US Politics

by | December 30, 2013 · 6:51 PM

Is There a Correlation Between Observable Behavior and Sexual Orientation?

I don’t really agree that  “Observable behaviors such as the way someone walks, talks or moves really have little to do with sexual orientation.”  There are some guys who are so feminine, camp or effeminate that you can observe them and know they’re definitely gay or almost definitely gay.  one There was a camp guy in my college when I was about 16 and one of the guys I was with asked is he gay and another guy said ‘well he isn’t fucking straight is he?’  And he wasn’t!  And it was obvious.  Come on, don’t tell me there’s no relationship between femininity in men and sexuality!

There is, but at some point it makes no sense.

Look at all the people who insisted that the New York Dolls, Prince, etc. were gay when they were not at all.

I have met countless straight men who were constantly accused of being homosexuals due to the way that they looked, talked, walked and moved. Homosexuals pestered them constantly and straight people were wary of or discriminated against them. Many people simply refused to accept that they were not gay. These guys would tell people that they were straight, and most people would not believe them and would insist that they were lying.

Also I had some good friends were constantly accused of being gay. They were not even 1% effeminate. Instead, they were very handsome in a pretty boy way with soft, almost feminine faces. Their behavior and the tone of their voices were soft and non-forceful. They were passive and non-aggressive and didn’t believe in fighting. They tended to get hurt instead of angry at people. They were also very sensitive. One guy could best be described as “wimpy.”

I never considered them to be even 1% gay. Of course they were my best friends for many years, and if they were significantly gay at all, they would have tried to fuck me almost immediately because that’s what guys like that do when they make friends with you. Furthermore, we socialized around women and girls and trying to get chicks and get laid. They had both had a long string of girlfriends and combined they screwed more women and girls than your average guy would in 50 years.

One guy eventually got involved in homosexuality even though he had always been against it. I can’t help but think that being called a faggot a million times had something to do with it and pushed him in that direction. You call a man a thief enough times, and he might just start stealing.

I don’t see the point of pushing straight people into homosexuality. Why create more homosexuality? Don’t we have plenty enough gays as it is? The gay population should be minimized, not maximized.

Sure gay men are on average more likely to be not macho, feminine or effeminate than straight men, but there is a tremendous amount of overlap and the number of not macho, feminine or effeminate straight men is vast, surely in the many millions.

And I have recently seen some video of some very straight acting gay men. A number of them were pretty much indistinguishable from the way a lot of straight men act nowadays and they were not particularly effeminate at all. They were just more or less regular men. And there are some gay guys that are as masculine-acting as any man who has ever lived.

When you see a really effeminate man, all you can really do is put a big question mark by him. That’s all I ever do. Then I do some further investigations to see if I can figure out what is going on with him. In many cases, you can more or less figure it out. I never accuse any man of being gay unless I have some pretty good reason to suggest that. It’s really better to just assume everyone is straight until proven otherwise, because the last thing you want to do is to ever accuse any man of being gay falsely. That’s one of the most horrible things you can say about any man, and to accuse a man of that falsely is a horrendous crime. Personally, I would rather be called a rapist or a murderer than be called a homosexual. To me it’s more honorable.

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

1 Comment

Filed under Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Man World, Sex

by | December 30, 2013 · 7:03 AM

CDC HIV Lies

HIV infections in 2010 according to the CDC.

HIV infections in 2010 according to the CDC.

Supposedly there were 4,555 HIV cases in men acquired via sex with women. Nearly 15% of HIV cases from female-male sex.

No way can that possibly be true.

Nope.

I am quite sure there were a few HIV cases in men during that year that were acquired via sex with a woman, but no way are there 13 new female-male cases every day in the US (one every two hours). Forget that! So where do the statistics come from? I assume that a lot of these men are simply lying. They are bisexual or downlow men who are getting the disease from gay sex and then claiming that they got it from a woman.

See the article on HIV in the porn industry for more on these downlow or gay for pay types.

Also from the article, a gay or bisexual man is 150 X more likely to have HIV than a straight man.

Wow!

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

6 Comments

Filed under Government, Health, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Illness, Public Health, Sex

by | December 30, 2013 · 6:59 AM

HIV in the Straight Porn Industry – The Role of Crossover Stars

There have been quite a few HIV cases so far in the US straight pornography industry – possibly 32 cases so far. However, possibly 2 of those were males getting it from women. And even in those two cases, the females appeared to acquire the disease from bisexual male stars. So nearly all HIV cases in straight porn have had their origin somehow in gay male sex.

Quite a few male straight porn actors have gotten HIV of course (Where do you think the porno actresses are getting their infections?). But in the vast majority of these cases, the men got these cases via gay sex. The number of  male straight porn stars who act in gay porn is very large for whatever reason. Most of these men are not even gay at all – in most cases, they are predominately heterosexual.

Why are they in gay porn? For the money. Gay porn pays men a lot better than straight porn does, where male stars are pretty much dime a dozen. These men are referred to as “crossover” stars since they work in both gay and straight porn. Crossover stars have become very controversial lately, as they are obviously fueling most of the HIV in the industry. In addition, many crossover stars lie and deny that they act in gay porn when they really do. In addition, these men often use one name in gay porn and another name in straight porn to fool people. So they get straight porn roles without the moviemakers knowing that they are crossover stars.

Some female porn stars work with crossover stars, but a number of them are getting quite wary. Because there is so much lying going on via these crossover stars, some actresses are spending a lot of time watching gay male porn so they get to know the actors in the movies. Most of them have tattoos these days, and one actress said she could recognize them by their tattoos.

In addition, it is very common for men in straight porn to moonlight as rent boys, escorts or male prostitutes. Quite a few of the male straight porn infections were acquired this way. Once again, these guys are mostly “gay for pay.” The male gay prostitution market in LA is very large, and there is a lot of money to be made selling your ass to other men. In contrast, there is almost no money to be made as a gigolo selling yourself to women.

A very nasty and ugly site called Porn Wikileaks (NSFW or possibly NSFL) has been set up by the straight male stars and directors in the industry primarily to warn of crossover stars. Quite a few male straight porn directors and talent agency owners also appear to be gay or bisexual. Mark Spiegler, who runs the industry’s largest female talent agency, is either gay or bisexual. His face is presently disfigured because he molested a 10 year old boy. The boy’s father found out and beat Spiegler so badly that he now looks like some kind of a freak. Spiegler also served some prison time for that molestation.

The site also claims that the whole straight porno industry is run by what they call the Gay Mafia. Strange.

Porn Wikileaks is very much opposed to the gay and bisexual men in the industry and you could surely characterize the site as virulently homophobic. Their basic line seems to be, “Faggot crossover porn stars are destroying the straight porn industry!” It is an interesting site (I spent quite a bit of time there recently) but it is raw and rude as Hell.

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

7 Comments

Filed under Health, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Illness, Pornography, Public Health, Sex