Going short-time only, shallow or succulent?

[fredwiggy]

Just now, Bday Prang said:

Actually I am calling you and your ilk weirdos for overly  concerning yourselves about the sexual activities of others, and judging them , 

My ilk understands what happens to people involved in the trade better than your ilk does, as we take the time to research and having children and wives or girlfriends, we actually care about them and don't like to picture other women or children in this predicament, which damages them at the very least. I couldn't care less what others do otherwise but if it involves hurting or controlling other humans, that's what I don't like. People who buy aren't concerned what happens to these women, but only how it benefits them and their sexual wants. They don't see the lives or into the minds of those that are in the sex trade. Again, try reading the link before commenting again. You and others can tell me what they think about what professionals involved in the psychological effects it has on people have come up with, but of course some will still be in denial and promote anything that again, benefits them. People voted for Donald Trump, although I could see what kind of lunatic he was long before he was elected president, and most are beginning to really understand now, but many are still on his side., which shows just how some people think. Again, Hitler was loved by many until they saw the real him, and some still think he was okay.

[fredwiggy]

11 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

I wouldn't ever suggest you live a normal life or are in any way normal.

That's because you wouldn't understand normal if it fell on your head. Normal is treating a woman as a partner and not an object. Normal is doing anything you can to help your children have a good future. Normal is romancing and treating a woman well so they have someone they can rely on. That's what I've always done. My problem has been my choices in women I trusted, as I've always explained. You can't comment here, or make it unbiased, as what you've described in your past posts hasn't been anywhere near what's considered normal behavior, besides the fact you helped put your Thai children through school, yet forgot about the ones you left behind. Also, your wife (girlfriends) here have always been bought, so you're prejudice against the other side is noted. Some will never know, nor care about, what constitutes a normal relationship between a man and a woman, because theirs have been cash purchases. I'm not against someone marrying a bar girl. At least it gets them out of a bad trade (not always), and into a home with just one man.

Edited August 21 by fredwiggy

[BritManToo]

2 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

That's because you wouldn't understand normal if it fell on your head. You can't comment here, or make it unbiased, as what you've described in your past posts hasn't been anywhere near what's considered normal behavior, besides the fact you helped put your Thai children through school, yet forgot about the ones you left behind. Also, your wife (girlfriends) here have always been bought, so you're prejudice against the other side is noted. Some will never know, nor care about, what constitutes a normal relationship between a man and a woman, because theirs have been cash purchases. I'm not against someone marrying a bar girl. At least it gets them out of a bad trade (not always), and into a home with just one man.

You're right, in future I will ask the fairies living at the end of my garden for all my 'life advice'.

Then everyone will see me to be as normal as you.

[fredwiggy]

Just now, BritManToo said:

You're right, in future I will ask the fairies living at the end of my garden for all my 'life advice'.

Then everyone will see me to be as normal as you.

No one will ever consider you as being normal with what you keep saying on this forum, unless they also live the same kind of lifestyle. Some of us here have good memories.

[Chwooly]

6 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

People aren't all the same exactly of course, but there are just a few personality types that are shared by all. People are indeed influenced, either positively or negatively, by others around them. Childhood is where all behavior, either right or wrong, originates. The breakdown of the family and immorality within it is a precursor to what happens in the world, as all problems worldwide start at home. What's normal to others might seem wrong to some, and vice-versa. That still doesn't make it right behavior as there is an accepted right and a wrong no matter where you originate.

 

Eating dogs is an example. Some cultures haven't evolved totally and still think eating an animal that's considered domestic is normal. It all goes back to Gods words, although some don't believe any of that so that leaves them out, and all they have to go on is what they learned at home. If dad ate dogs, it's okay. If dad beats mom, or molests my sister, it's okay and so on. Suicide is taking a precious life out because they feel life isn't worth living anymore. Some are in such pain, they feel it's the only thing they have, and I feel for them, as I understand suicide well after researching it for 30 years to try and help those I care about who have it, until this day. God frowns on it and a lot of the times, it's a cowards way out, as it hurts the people more that you leave behind. My point was mainly that prostitution isn't the simple thing many see it as. It's hurting women, girls, boys and families every day, and those that profit by it don't care about anything besides that profit. What many don't see are the behind the scenes things that go on.

2 things you said that are telling, saying a culture isn't evolved because you disagree is IMHO elitist and there is an accepted right and a wrong no matter where you originate.

 

The cultures that eat domesticated animals as far as I know don't actually domesticate the breeds they see as food animals. II have never seen a Pomeranian hanging up for sale in Vietnam. 

 

Who says your view based on your culture and religious belief the right one? I had a girl come to my room and she wasn't feeling well, I asked her the next day if she was ok and she responded with "Yes, yesterday i went home and had Diarrhea." Now to her there was nothing wrong with telling a guy she just met about her bodily functions. Yet in the western world that would be unheard of, Just like a girl talking about her period. To you and I that is wrong, But is it really?  To us it is not an accepted topic of conversation. 

 

 

Your attitude towards Suicide calling it a cowards way out is to be honest, quite reprehensible. The fact that you researched it for 30 years and still have that attitude is actually disturbing. But that is a completely different topic 

[fredwiggy]

1 minute ago, Chwooly said:

2 things you said that are telling, saying a culture isn't evolved because you disagree is IMHO elitist and there is an accepted right and a wrong no matter where you originate.

 

The cultures that eat domesticated animals as far as I know don't actually domesticate the breeds they see as food animals. II have never seen a Pomeranian hanging up for sale in Vietnam. 

 

Who says your view based on your culture and religious belief the right one? I had a girl come to my room and she wasn't feeling well, I asked her the next day if she was ok and she responded with "Yes, yesterday i went home and had Diarrhea." Now to her there was nothing wrong with telling a guy she just met about her bodily functions. Yet in the western world that would be unheard of, Just like a girl talking about her period. To you and I that is wrong, But is it really?  To us it is not an accepted topic of conversation. 

 

 

Your attitude towards Suicide calling it a cowards way out is to be honest, quite reprehensible. The fact that you researched it for 30 years and still have that attitude is actually disturbing. But that is a completely different topic 

Who gets to choose what breeds are eaten and others as pets? People make up their own rules and there are followers(sheep) that will follow anyone they like or believe in, just like Buddha. People are people, and are seen to do very strange things, some of which are accepted by other like thinkers. Does this make a wrong behavior right, just because thousands consider it to be? Of course not, as there are behaviors that a human with a conscience won't consider normal, even leaving God out of the picture. What I think about suicide being a cowards way isn't what you might see. I know they are suffering as much, or more, than most anyone, because I have researched it and have personally lost friends to it. They had everything going well in their lives, and left behind others who were devastated because they didn't understand why. These days, there are many things to help a person with depression, if they take the first step. I'm not talking about those with terminal diseases and pain if that's what you're thinking but those who have been around long enough to know there is a better way.

[MalcolmB]

6 hours ago, NowNow said:

That's because you are a low value male. If the woman sees value in you, you might have had a different experience. Just your description of 'chasing tail' marks you out as a low value male. This tells me that there are all Beta males and below

Looks like we have a loser who worships Andrew Tate nonsense.

Probably an incel

[MalcolmB]

16 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

What I think about suicide……..and have personally lost friends to it.

They probably couldn’t take anymore of your bizarre theories.

[Chwooly]

5 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Who gets to choose what breeds are eaten and others as pets? People make up their own rules and there are followers(sheep) that will follow anyone they like or believe in, just like Buddha. People are people, and are seen to do very strange things, some of which are accepted by other like thinkers. Does this make a wrong behavior right, just because thousands consider it to be? Of course not, as there are behaviors that a human with a conscience won't consider normal, even leaving God out of the picture. What I think about suicide being a cowards way isn't what you might see. I know they are suffering as much, or more, than most anyone, because I have researched it and have personally lost friends to it. They had everything going well in their lives, and left behind others who were devastated because they didn't understand why. These days, there are many things to help a person with depression, if they take the first step. I'm not talking about those with terminal diseases and pain if that's what you're thinking but those who have been around long enough to know there is a better way.

 

 

According to Peta eating any animal is wrong, do they have the moral high ground? Why do we draw the line at cows, pigs, fish, and certain fowl? Why is eating rat not more popular in the west but you can buy it fresh off the grill in Lao and norther Thaiiland. People domesticate pigs and yet we still enjoy bacon. 

 

I don't understand your comment about Buddha? If your are saying that people that believe or follow his teachings are sheep then the same can be said about other religions/philosophy's with equal justification. You chose to believe in a Judeo/Christian god. But that doesn't give  you any right to disparage someone elses' belief's.

 

Obviously those that had everything going well in their lives didn't or they wouldn't have turned to suicide as an option. As someone who has researched and has lost people close to you you should be able to understand that once you start going down that rabbit hole is is very difficult to find a way out and while it hurts those left with the loss to the suicided they were doing those they loved a favor and was saving them from great hurt at the suicided see it. 

 

But this is my last response since it appears we are just going around in circles. Thanks for a thought provoking discussion. 

[save the frogs]

43 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

That's because you wouldn't understand normal if it fell on your head. Normal is treating a woman as a partner and not an object. Normal is doing anything you can to help your children have a good future. Normal is romancing and treating a woman well so they have someone they can rely on. That's what I've always done. My problem has been my choices in women I trusted, as I've always explained.

Yeah, but you're shooting yourself in the foot.

"choices in women you trusted" might be 50% of the female population cannot be trusted to be in a committed relationship.

many women are better off in bars than in marriages. 

 

[Celsius]

6 hours ago, London Lowf said:

 

 

To me, holding hands during the day is a far greater demonstration of love than anything you may do in the bed.

 

 

Please no.

 

I tell my wife never to hold hands with me in public. Typical virgin  sexpat behavior. 

[fredwiggy]

5 minutes ago, Chwooly said:

 

 

According to Peta eating any animal is wrong, do they have the moral high ground? Why do we draw the line at cows, pigs, fish, and certain fowl? Why is eating rat not more popular in the west but you can buy it fresh off the grill in Lao and norther Thaiiland. People domesticate pigs and yet we still enjoy bacon. 

 

I don't understand your comment about Buddha? If your are saying that people that believe or follow his teachings are sheep then the same can be said about other religions/philosophy's with equal justification. You chose to believe in a Judeo/Christian god. But that doesn't give  you any right to disparage someone elses' belief's.

 

Obviously those that had everything going well in their lives didn't or they wouldn't have turned to suicide as an option. As someone who has researched and has lost people close to you you should be able to understand that once you start going down that rabbit hole is is very difficult to find a way out and while it hurts those left with the loss to the suicided they were doing those they loved a favor and was saving them from great hurt at the suicided see it. 

 

But this is my last response since it appears we are just going around in circles. Thanks for a thought provoking discussion. 

Yes, the same goes for Christianity but someones right. When we all die, we will see. I just believe in God so that's my choice. Maybe we're all sheep too, but i don't think so. Many people that take their own lives did have everything going well, besides their thinking. Wrong thinking is what a person with depression does, and a lot of the time. Overthinking causes panic, fear, anger, anxiety and depression and that leads some to find a wau out, instead of looking at all options.

[fredwiggy]

11 minutes ago, MalcolmB said:

They probably couldn’t take anymore of your bizarre theories.

A good comeback coming from an obvious teenager with no life wisdom. Research before you comment, or it makes you look like others here who are in denial or are lacking restraint.

[fredwiggy]

10 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

Yeah, but you're shooting yourself in the foot.

"choices in women you trusted" might be 50% of the female population cannot be trusted to be in a committed relationship.

many women are better off in bars than in marriages. 

 

Better to be used by strangers or taken for granted by a husband? Maybe, but I sincerely doubt it. Truth is, many people should never get involved with others of the opposite sex, because some are only out to use or hurt because they were taught to be narcissists by their parents. Of course, they just have to have sex to fulfill their needs, so off they go. Ask yourself this. is it right to use women just for your own wants? Some women are good, and they deserve better than to be used or taken for granted, but people being what they sometimes are, aren't going into a relationship to help the other but to again, benefit from it for themselves.

[fredwiggy]

7 minutes ago, Celsius said:

 

Please no.

 

I tell my wife never to hold hands with me in public. Typical virgin  sexpat behavior. 

It is one of the better ways to show your love, and it doesn't matter where you do it. Even here it's done more and more, and the younger generation sees no wrong in showing love to your significant other. Old school thinking is wrong in this. Let the others think what they want, as what they think means nothing. I'm not talking about making out on a public transportation but holding hands.

[save the frogs]

8 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Better to be used by strangers or taken for granted by a husband? Maybe, but I sincerely doubt it. Truth is, many people should never get involved with others of the opposite sex, because some are only out to use or hurt because they were taught to be narcissists by their parents. Of course, they just have to have sex to fulfill their needs, so off they go. Ask yourself this. is it right to use women just for your own wants? Some women are good, and they deserve better than to be used or taken for granted, but people being what they sometimes are, aren't going into a relationship to help the other but to again, benefit from it for themselves.

 

Jordan Peterson, who many people hate, I think said sth like men who are in perpetual one night stands (which is similar to hookers) are sociopathic.

He's probably not far from the truth. 

So yeah, I don't disagree with this last comment of yours.

Cheers.

[Walker88]

11 hours ago, FriscoKid said:

A man who believes in imaginary beings has imaginary thoughts and ideas. I regret all the time I've spent trying to relate to you as if you were a semi-normal hunan bean. 

 

I'm seeing the Walter Huston character in the classic movie "Rain", based on the Somerset Maugham story. Joan Crawford thought her performance was poor, and she thinks she benefited from the movie being largely banned for decades, but it's actually a tremendous performance. Good film.

 

Various superstitions keep rearing they're judgemental head in this thread. So far most are from one superstition, so as yet we've not seen anyone claiming that a deity that supposedly created 200 billion galaxies, most with a trillion stars, cares so much about one gender of one species on one planet circling one star in one galaxy that this gender must be covered head to toe in black, save for an eye slit. Phew!

 

To the best I can figure, 'sin' comes up if body parts that have a slew of official and slang names come in contact. Elbows have pretty much one name, but males' appendages have dozens. Females also have a body part or two or three with a dozen names. If I parse comments correctly, never the twain shall meet, unless there is love, and perhaps even an official state sanction of the relationship involved. If contact happens outside of that restricted manner, apparently there is some eternal punishment in that Universe of so many stars and galaxies.

 

Not sure the words I would want to use in the equation would pass censorship, but if I just use the official names' first letter, it might go like this:

 

P + V - Love + $ = Eternal damnation.

 

Some equations from physics and cosmology are literally universal, but that equation seems limited to the one species, one planet, one star, etc., and that among the superstitious, morally sanctimonious, or whose Moms caught them diddling themselves as teens.

 

It always struck me as odd that a guy who supposedly issued admonitions against such body part contact did not also take the time to state unequivocally that humans owning other human beings was wrong. In his famous book, believers are just advised to treat their slaves well, but if they treat a woman well with whom they touch special body parts, eternal damnation follows.

 

One of the more virulent posters on this thread stated he's had 'many girlfriends and a few wives'.....imagine the pain of all those breakups! A guy who does short time with a woman trying to earn a living could hardly cause more pain. The guy sounds like he's 'loved up' more women than the most prolific sekspat. Of course, he's on solid ground, because he only talks with and follows an officially sanctioned imaginary friend, who no doubt condones his various marriages and relationships, even if there have been dozens. Choose an imaginary friends outside of the officially-sanctioned few, and all Hell breaks loose.

 

 

[Lacessit]

20 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

This is the best I've ever come across, as far as explaining how men think, and I agree, as it's a choice and we aren't dogs or other animals that go by instinct and not care about our partners....................................Men are neither polygamous (nor monogamous) in nature.

First, a man's polygamous tendencies are from nurture, not nature. This habit of justifying marital unfaithfulness, in the Christian context, by citing African culture is misplaced. Here, African men in the remote past chose to be with or marry more than one woman for social and economic reasons. To highlight their affluence to society and have more hands to help in their farming/subsistent agriculture venture. A husband who cheats on his wife makes a choice to succumb to temptation. If polygamy is actually natural to men, then we would have no cases of monogamous men.

Second, every man contains reason and instincts according to neurology and biology. Reason is a human being's edge over lower animals like dogs, goats, sheep, lions and so on, although we share trait of instincts with them. Someone may argue our bodily instincts, a biological feature passed from parents to offspring, push us toward pleasure and preservation of the human specie. This can extend to being with more than one woman, hence men are polygamous. This view is myopic. True, our instincts can suggest such but our reason can say no when we've intentionally developed it to morally serve us that way. Thus, a man chooses to be polygamous when he develops his reason to serve him accordingly. Humans, men are not the at the mercy of their instincts, as promoters of "Men are polygamous in nature" opine. A man can choose to obey or disobey his instincts courtesy of his reason.

Clearly, idea of "Men are polygamous in nature" is used by men who have a women weakness, refuse to take personal responsibility and work on it. They hide under culture and science unintelligently to secure tolerance of their bad behaviour (in Christian view) by women and society.

Really. Perhaps you can explain how Islam, perhaps the most restrictive of religions, permits Muslims to have up to four wives.

[fredwiggy]

1 minute ago, Lacessit said:

Really. Perhaps you can explain how Islam, perhaps the most restrictive of religions, permits Muslims to have up to four wives.

Someone started it, others followed because it benefited them, which of course again, doesn't make it right. Islam is a religion, created by man and not God, so it has it's faults, just like Catholicism , Buddhism, Mormons and others.

[ElwoodP]

Off topic posts removed.

 

If you want to discuss religions make a new thread.

[Fat is a type of crazy]

29 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

 

I'm seeing the Walter Huston character in the classic movie "Rain", based on the Somerset Maugham story. Joan Crawford thought her performance was poor, and she thinks she benefited from the movie being largely banned for decades, but it's actually a tremendous performance. Good film.

 

Various superstitions keep rearing they're judgemental head in this thread. So far most are from one superstition, so as yet we've not seen anyone claiming that a deity that supposedly created 200 billion galaxies, most with a trillion stars, cares so much about one gender of one species on one planet circling one star in one galaxy that this gender must be covered head to toe in black, save for an eye slit. Phew!

 

To the best I can figure, 'sin' comes up if body parts that have a slew of official and slang names come in contact. Elbows have pretty much one name, but males' appendages have dozens. Females also have a body part or two or three with a dozen names. If I parse comments correctly, never the twain shall meet, unless there is love, and perhaps even an official state sanction of the relationship involved. If contact happens outside of that restricted manner, apparently there is some eternal punishment in that Universe of so many stars and galaxies.

 

Not sure the words I would want to use in the equation would pass censorship, but if I just use the official names' first letter, it might go like this:

 

P + V - Love + $ = Eternal damnation.

 

Some equations from physics and cosmology are literally universal, but that equation seems limited to the one species, one planet, one star, etc., and that among the superstitious, morally sanctimonious, or whose Moms caught them diddling themselves as teens.

 

It always struck me as odd that a guy who supposedly issued admonitions against such body part contact did not also take the time to state unequivocally that humans owning other human beings was wrong. In his famous book, believers are just advised to treat their slaves well, but if they treat a woman well with whom they touch special body parts, eternal damnation follows.

 

One of the more virulent posters on this thread stated he's had 'many girlfriends and a few wives'.....imagine the pain of all those breakups! A guy who does short time with a woman trying to earn a living could hardly cause more pain. The guy sounds like he's 'loved up' more women than the most prolific sekspat. Of course, he's on solid ground, because he only talks with and follows an officially sanctioned imaginary friend, who no doubt condones his various marriages and relationships, even if there have been dozens. Choose an imaginary friends outside of the officially-sanctioned few, and all Hell breaks loose.

 

 

Your posts are sensible but I think one thing to consider is that sexual contact is not the same as other day to day life events and can affect us deeply and can affect our self esteem and state of mind. Some can deal with intoxicating things like women, drugs, gambling but many find it hard to distance themselves from what they are doing   - and for them - and I think they are sizeable part of the population and this includes the man and woman involved - not partaking in say prostitution is probably good advice - even if the source of such advice can  come from a hypocritical source.  It is not saying it is 'wrong' or 'bad' but simply that it is not going to make you a happier or better person or lead to good outcomes. 

[BritManToo]

4 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

It is not saying it is 'wrong' or 'bad' but simply that it is not going to make you a happier or better person or lead to good outcomes. 

It (sex 2x a week+) certainly made me a happier person, and most of my pals agree.

Not sure about better, why would I want to be better ....... Better than what (or whom)?

Edited August 21 by BritManToo

[Fat is a type of crazy]

1 minute ago, BritManToo said:

It (sex 2x a week+) certainly made me a happier person, and most of my pals agree.

Not sure about better, why would I want to be better ....... Better than what (or whom)?

The interesting question is the fact of being able to deal with prostitution without a further affect on your heart soul or psyche a sign of strength of character or an already weak character. Not sure. 

[NowNow]

2 hours ago, save the frogs said:

 

Most people are not capable of deep loving bonds. It takes a very spiritual and deep person to do so, and most people ain't either.

 

And therefore most "normal" relationships are much more transactional than "proper society folks" like you would care to admit.

 

And therefore, the argument for or against prostitution becomes blurred and is not black and white at all. 

 

It's based on the false supposition that married couples are not engaging in transactions, and it's all "pure love". Doesn't exist. 

 

I'm not arguing for nor against prostitution at all. I'm simply pushing back against the pathetic justifications and outright lies put forward by weak men in trying to justify their behaviour.

 

 

[BritManToo]

1 minute ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

The interesting question is the fact of being able to deal with prostitution without a further affect on your heart soul or psyche a sign of strength of character or an already weak character. Not sure. 

No problem there as I have no soul (nor does anyone else).

The only reason I no longer do ST, is that I'm happy enough with my wife.

And too old to chase side dishes.

[bkk6060]

6 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

It certainly made me a happier person, and most of my pals agree.

Not sure about better, why would I want to be better ....... Better than what (or whom)?

Oh yes, for sure.  Makes my day better. 🙂

I guess some people just have some religious hangups, lack of funds or impotence.  Too bad for them if they can't enjoy a good time for an hour.

[bubblegum]

@fredwiggy Yakydie Yakydie Yack You an old broken record nobody wants to listen to. Your ex-wifes ran away going crazy from you and your current one will as well, soon. You can live with a zealot like you? 

 

You claim you know all while you seem to know nothing of live. You "research" live, not live it. Nothing can stop you just like the evangelists send to Africa 200 years ago. 

 

Don't bother responding again, I won't read your sermon.  

 

 

[NowNow]

2 hours ago, Bday Prang said:

everybody else except you and a couple of other repressed weirdos.      Its notable that the moral minority are the first to hurl unprovoked insults at everybody else who's  views on this subject do not align with their own.   

 

You've got it the wrong way around. It's the weirdoes who are unable to pull women in the wild. As soon as I see them writing about not wanting to wine and dine...I know they are just full of it. 

These are just undesirable men. That's the crux of the matter.

If you are desirable, you'll have many women in the pipeline. Prostitutes don't count. 

They are no better than dogs in the street, panting and desperate. No game at all, other than shooting fish in a barrel.

[Fat is a type of crazy]

13 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

No problem there as I have no soul (nor does anyone else).

The only reason I no longer do ST, is that I'm happy enough with my wife.

And too old to chase side dishes.

When I say soul I don't mean in the  religious sense but I think we all have a sense of what it is to have a good soul in the normal sense. I am getting a bit obscure so I'll leave it there. 

I do remember when you were ill you said you loved your wife which was nice. 

Edited August 21 by Fat is a type of crazy

[fredwiggy]

3 minutes ago, bubblegum said:

@fredwiggy Yakydie Yakydie Yack You an old broken record nobody wants to listen to. Your ex-wifes ran away going crazy from you and your current one will as well, soon. You can live with a zealot like you? 

 

You claim you know all while you seem to know nothing of live. You "research" live, not live it. Nothing can stop you just like the evangelists send to Africa 200 years ago. 

 

Don't bother responding again, I won't read your sermon.  

 

 

Again, another assuming they know anyone here. News. You don't. My ex wives didn't run, I did, and took the kids because I'm the only real parent they have. I will do it again with the one I also left here, as she's a very disturbed covert narcissist that only cares about the money she receives and not the child, as she gave her other two away at ages 9 and 10, to Thai man's families. People do listen to what I say, because I post reality and don't make excuses for bad behavior like some do. You, and others here, still don't understand what you are sticking up for, and I think you haven't read the link I provided, as the truth is something you don't want to hear. Try reading it before you comment, and then we can really see where your thinking comes from. And yopu don't have to read what I write, because a state of being in denial is hard to break anyway.

Edited August 21 by fredwiggy