How does sexual fantasy relate to real life sexual desires?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Are the things people fantasise about things that, given the right circumstances, they would actually like to happen? For example, if you fantasise about having sex with Kirsten Dunst, does that mean that in the admittedly extremely unlikely cricumstances that you had an opportunity to do so, and you weren't seeing anyone else, then you would in fact do so? I think the answer to that is probably yes. But then where does that leave rape fantasy or the fantasy of coercive sex (common enough for handcuffs to be a sex toy cliché)? Clearly no one really wants to be raped or coerced into having sex. So why fantasise about something that would in fact be horrible in real life? How does this fantasy connect with real life?

― Frederick J., Tuesday, 26 October 2004 10:41 (twenty-one years ago)

I don't think the handcuffs = coercive sex thing is fair or justified, mostly. Maybe I'm wrong/naive, but the whole "being tied up" thing relates more to a sense of giving yourself completely to the whims of another person you trust and desire rather than because you want them to force you to do things you wouldn't otherwise?

― Markelby (Mark C), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 10:45 (twenty-one years ago)

Not trying to derail thread, but some of the responses here might interest you: I Got Ta... Kn kn kn know what what's your fanta-ta-zeee

(whatever happened to hamish?!)

xpost Markleby: why not both?

― You've Got to Pick Up Every Stitch (tracerhand), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 10:47 (twenty-one years ago)

I met him at the Sy show, he was nice. And that's the end of THAT story.

― Andrew Blood Thames (Andrew Thames), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 10:49 (twenty-one years ago)

Also the psuedo breaking of taboos I guess. Everyone likes to do something they've been told is naughty or wrong I suppose.

― papa november (papa november), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 10:49 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, both, yes, but surely if you are letting people do the tying up then there isn't actually any coercion involved anyway. Unless, say, the other person then beats you, or buggers you, and you actually DON'T want them to do that. I can't really answer the question as that kind of thing doesn't pop my cork, I suppose I can't reconcile the paradox of both not wanting and wanting something at the same time.

― Markelby (Mark C), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 10:52 (twenty-one years ago)

Using handcuffs during sex is not literally coercive, but it is an indicator of the fantasy involved. You can bend to your partner's every whim without being handcuffed, therefore the play handcuffs symbolise the fantasy coercion. If you fantasise and act out your coercion fantasies, does this mean that deep down you really do want to be coerced, only it's so taboo you can only express it in fantasy? I think probably not. But then again, can there really be a total dislocation between fantasy and 'real' desire?

― Frederck J., Tuesday, 26 October 2004 11:13 (twenty-one years ago)

OK, re the Kirsten thing.

(Sorry to go on about this, but it does fit the subject)

I saw Claire Grogan at a swimming pool (before I knew it was her). She was nice, and if I was single, maybe. But on a straight comparison with Dawn, (if I was single, etc) I'd still fancy Dawn more.

― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 11:17 (twenty-one years ago)

This is pretty off-topic, but yesterday I came up with the theory that stocking fetishes are tied to man's desire to have sex with a multiracial woman, but a woman whose body is half one race and half another race. Hence, a white woman wearing brown tights would have a white upper half but a black lower half, and vice versa. I should note that I was completely sober when I came up with this theory, but somewhat overcaffeinated.

― n/a (Nick A.), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 13:52 (twenty-one years ago)

Also, just because I have a theory doesn't mean I believe that theory.

― n/a (Nick A.), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 13:53 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh god, what have I done?

― n/a (Nick A.), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 13:53 (twenty-one years ago)

n/a, don't get too close to your fantasy

― mean, Tuesday, 26 October 2004 13:56 (twenty-one years ago)

if you fantasise about having sex with Kirsten Dunst, does that mean that in the admittedly extremely unlikely cricumstances that you had an opportunity to do so, and you weren't seeing anyone else, then you would in fact do so? I think the answer to that is probably yes.

I don't think so. There's the very VERY good chance that your fantasy would be incredibly different from the reality. You risk obliterating that precious fantasy.

― Je4nne ƒury (Jeanne Fury), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 13:59 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh, and I have no idea how you connected coercive sex/rape fantasies to fucking your idealized man/woman.

― Je4nne ƒury (Jeanne Fury), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 14:02 (twenty-one years ago)

I will have to think about it.

― the bellefox, Tuesday, 26 October 2004 14:07 (twenty-one years ago)

"Oh, and I have no idea how you connected coercive sex/rape fantasies to fucking your idealized man/woman."

I didn't particularly connect them. They were just two examples of sexual fantasy, one that might relate to real life desire more than the other. Why do we (sometimes) fantasise about things we don't really want? Why are we turned on by the idea of something we wouldn't actually want to do? That was the sort of question that interested me.

― Frederick J., Tuesday, 26 October 2004 14:18 (twenty-one years ago)

(Sorry, didn't read the thread properly: I don't have to think about it after all: I don't have horrible fantasies like the ones mentioned above.)

― the bellefox, Tuesday, 26 October 2004 14:27 (twenty-one years ago)

It's hard for me to answer. I am perfectly comfortable with the idea that many people have fantasies they wouldn't want to enact, given the right circumstances, but mine are always, without exception, things I would be delighted to do.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 16:19 (twenty-one years ago)

What's wrong with Dunst, Pinefox?

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 16:59 (twenty-one years ago)

oh come on, everyone surely has fantasies they wouldn't want to enact! And not because they involve dressing priests as snowmen and then beheading them or something nuts either.

I mean doesn't everyone experience a situation where they may be sexually attracted to somebody, perhaps even only in fantasyland, and there is no way that something can happen, and you want to keep it as a matter of fiction. Surely that's half the point of fantasies?

I have to say I don't regularly have sexual fantasies about people I actually care for.

― Ronan (Ronan), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 17:39 (twenty-one years ago)

And not because they involve dressing priests as snowmen and then beheading them or something nuts either.

You say that as if you disapprove.

― Michael White (Hereward), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 17:41 (twenty-one years ago)

It's not my fetish, so I can't say, but for everything I've read about it, Mark's thoughts on bondage are OTM. Also, fantasizing about being "coerced" into doing something you want to do (but perhaps are inhibited to doing with the excuse of "coercion") isn't quite the same as fantasizing about being coerced.

And sexual fantasies can have little or nothing to do with actual things you'd like to do -- they're ideas that turn you on, rather than actions that turn you on. Sometimes they happily converge, sometimes you're glad they don't!

― Casuistry (Chris P), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 17:44 (twenty-one years ago)

Suddenly it seems to me that if your fantasies are literally, scientifically possible, you are not using your imagination properly.

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 17:49 (twenty-one years ago)

I think if they're socially possible or all 100 percent desirable you aren't either, I mean you might as well find yourself disgusted while sitting in your living room than after you wake up in bed with someone.

― Ronan (Ronan), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 18:06 (twenty-one years ago)

kirsten dunst. a room full of barking dogs. disgraceful!

― Freelance Hiveminder (blueski), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 18:08 (twenty-one years ago)

STEVEM YOU ARE A HORRIBLE MAN EW EW EW EW MAKE THE IMAGES STOP

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 18:10 (twenty-one years ago)

forget about Hamish, whatever happened to Toraneko?!

― Matos W.K. (M Matos), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 18:18 (twenty-one years ago)

I don't understand what is wrong with only fantasising about things you would really like to do. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the other side of this, but I don't see why my fantasy life is lacking because it is in tune with my real desires.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 18:20 (twenty-one years ago)

I'll just be straightforward here, Martin: basically I just can't see why you wouldn't fantasize about having another penis.

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 18:22 (twenty-one years ago)

Because if you can do it for reals, why bother fantisizing about it? You only have one fantasy life to live, after all!

xpost: I think Martin has had other penises, actually. But is there something you'd like to share?

― Casuistry (Chris P), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 18:23 (twenty-one years ago)

[So but really I am mostly kidding on this thread; personally my routine fantasizing goes naturally back and forth between things I could do or have done (or even am doing, just not at the moment), and things of various levels of imaginariness. The question is how we mean "fantasy," I think, because there's this heirarchy between routine/various fantasies and then recurring-daydream fantasies, and then up through things you sort of fixate on to things that loom large as major facets of your sexuality or whatever. I would find it uncomfortable and kind of dissonant to have any major recurring fantasy-elements that I didn't at all want to play our or at least kind of play out in real life; on the other side, anything goes.]

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 18:28 (twenty-one years ago)

I can't imagine why I'd want another penis, unless it's to stop the one I have being so lonely...

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 20:02 (twenty-one years ago)

depends where it's positioned i expect

― Freelance Hiveminder (blueski), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 20:12 (twenty-one years ago)

The idea that lite S&M is almost inextricably connected to rape fantasty is rather disgusting and appalling to me. I'm not saying that there aren't people who use it in such a fashion, but I'd be willing to go out on a limb here and say the vast, vast majority of people who have been tied up do not have such thoughts anywhere in their mind, consciously or subconsciously. There is a huge realm of difference between dominance and coercion/rape.

I mean, not that you'd know from perusing Japanese porn but there is.

― Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 22:35 (twenty-one years ago)

even if you want to make a rape fantasy real, it's still just theater. obv two consenting parties != rape.

whether fantasies abt violent sex are psychologically unhealthy is another matter.

― motown modown (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 26 October 2004 22:41 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, I think there are things that can be good in a fantasy but I wouldn't want to actually do them to my girlfriend. If I think about the fact that she actually wouldn't enjoy them, or they might make her uncomfortable because she wouldn't be into it, then it loses its appeal.

― Hurting (Hurting), Wednesday, 27 October 2004 01:58 (twenty-one years ago)

How can tie-ups not in some way spring from rape scenario fantasies? How is that even possible? Not that the captive wants to be raped, or the captor wants to be a rapist, but some vestigial animality, having to do with dominance and power, is being tantalized there. The idea that it's at least interesting to consider rape (though certainly never acting on it for real) foregrounds not just the situation but the inspiration to even try it out.

― do the sublimation, Wednesday, 27 October 2004 02:03 (twenty-one years ago)

I believe that fantasies can spring from desires that one can't or has difficulty acting out in other aspects of their life. People who are generally not agressive might like to be agressive in bed and vice-versa. I've had this conversation with at least a few friends where I've found that the dominant one in the relationship actually likes being submissive in bed or vice versa.

― Hurting (Hurting), Wednesday, 27 October 2004 02:08 (twenty-one years ago)

Samuel Delany's Neveryona stories are all about this.

― the apex of nadirs (Rock Hardy), Wednesday, 27 October 2004 02:13 (twenty-one years ago)

I have sort-of acted on something that used to just be a fantasy (sif I go into any detail as to what!), and the reality was almost unpleasant by comparison. So its better left in yr head, I say.

― Trayce (trayce), Wednesday, 27 October 2004 03:22 (twenty-one years ago)

Thank you, Hurting.

Again, I fail to see how dominance/submission equates to coercion/rape scenarios.

― Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Wednesday, 27 October 2004 03:26 (twenty-one years ago)

some vestigial animality, having to do with dominance and power, is being tantalized there

Well, except it's (often?) about giving up power to show that you trust someone -- not dominance, so much as showing vulnerability and feeling secure in it.

― Casuistry (Chris P), Wednesday, 27 October 2004 03:57 (twenty-one years ago)

In which case, why bring ropes and handcuffs into the picture? Playing with the idea of physical restraint is surely playing with the idea that the other person can force you to do something you might not want to do.

I think we do all have fantasies about things we don't want to do. It's a bit like the difference between seeing a movie and real life. When we see a movie, we're happy to suspend our disbelief and temporarily put ourselves in an interesting fanatasy situation that we can escape from an hour or two later. In the space of a fantasy, we can take a scenario and forget about all its downsides and just concentrate on the exciting, erotic aspects.

― Frederick J., Wednesday, 27 October 2004 07:13 (twenty-one years ago)

Frederick, for the variety, the excitement, the uncertainty. It also means that while fantasising you don't have to concentrate so much on "must remember my hands are tied" or whatever.

― Markelby (Mark C), Wednesday, 27 October 2004 08:03 (twenty-one years ago)

I'm going to leap in here and say that, in my experience, wanting to have sex whilst physically restrained does not equal fantasising about rape. Fantasising about being tied up during sex is not the same as fantasising about being tied up against your will during sex.

― caitlin (caitlin), Wednesday, 27 October 2004 10:25 (twenty-one years ago)

Maybe this is a dead issue now. But how does the introduction of simulation of captivity not in some way tap into rape fantasies? Sure it is about trust--I trust you to have sex with me while I'm tied up, tenderly (or whatever, but consensually) indulging in our mutual fascination with the power dynamic of sexuality to the extent rape is among the set of signifieds. It might not be the main thing--maybe there's candles involved, and that's the fetish--but it is part of the spice: What if I were so sexually attractive to someone that I were perceived by that person not as a person myself but as an irresistable sexual object that must be captured, bound, and fucked?

― do the sublimation, Wednesday, 27 October 2004 12:24 (twenty-one years ago)

Objectification is one of my fetishes, but non-consensual objectification isn't. I don't get off on the idea of being raped, even though I love to be tied up. Don't ask me to explain it; it's just the way I am.

(oh, and candles are another thing I like too; but that's incidental)

― caitlin (caitlin), Wednesday, 27 October 2004 19:00 (twenty-one years ago)

I've been thinking about this question all day, and no, I don't think I'd really want to own a weevil.

― nabisco (nabisco), Wednesday, 27 October 2004 19:19 (twenty-one years ago)

I find rape fantasies a complete turn-off, but love a bit of bondage. I don't link it to rape at all, so I'm not at all convinced they are inseparable.

And Trayce, I've had quite a few of my fantasies come true, and enjoyed every one of them - I'm not trying to say that therefore anyone else will too, just that both outcomes are perfectly possible. I guess the initial categories, whether you really want the fantasy to happen, are often the main point here.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Wednesday, 27 October 2004 19:37 (twenty-one years ago)

The idea that the two are inseperable just because they CAN be conflated together as some kind of idea of forced bondage and abuse is just ridiculous to me, still. Let's do some more extrapolation:

1) All people who enjoy spanking/being spanked are fantasing about being beaten by their partners
2) All men who enjoy anal sex with women are latent homosexuals
3) All men who c on their girlfriend's t's are secretly imagining MANY men c'ing on their girlfriends t's

ETC. I don't think any rational person would give weight to any of those three arguments so why would anyone give weight to the idea that bondage scenarios are inseparably connected to rape fantasies? Causistry is OTM.

― Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Thursday, 28 October 2004 03:31 (twenty-one years ago)

4) all boys who like it when their girlfriend dresses like a schoolgirl or does her hair up in pigtails secretly wish she was 11 years old

― TOMBOT, Thursday, 28 October 2004 03:43 (twenty-one years ago)

The idea of a "rape fantasy" is surely that someone will force you to do something you don't want to do. The idea behind bondage is, I think for many people, that someone will do something nice to you, something you want them to do, even though you are powerless to make them do it, and you're in a position where they could do something much worse to you. This is why the stereotype of the aggressive person who wants to be tied up in bed makes sense, in a pop psychology sense: They want to be reassured that the other person cares about them even when they're not in a position to be aggressive or to "make" someone care about them. If you're loved when you're vulnerable, then you're really loved.

(I mean, similarly, it was a lesbian who taught me, a long long time ago, that the idea behind fisting wasn't an act of power and penetration, it was an act of being so comfortable with someone and trusting them so much that you could relax to the point where it was possible.)

Now, there are some people who do seem to have actual rape fantasies. (And I don't really have any insight into why.) But those are different from people who are into bondage.

― Casuistry (Chris P), Thursday, 28 October 2004 03:47 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, there are probably other reasons why people are into bondage -- I'm not into it, personally, so this is just what I've gathered from talking to people and reading up on the subject. So that reasoning might not be entirely accurate. But it seems more likely than secret rape fantasies, certainly.

― Casuistry (Chris P), Thursday, 28 October 2004 03:49 (twenty-one years ago)

------the idea behind fisting wasn't an act of power and penetration, it was an act of being so comfortable with someone and trusting them so much that you could relax to the point where it was possible

...to penetrate them powerfully?

― Andrew Blood Thames (Andrew Thames), Thursday, 28 October 2004 03:52 (twenty-one years ago)

Uh, no. Or, at least, in my mind, "penetrate" means to break through violently, involving thrusting and whatnot. Fisting is gentle.

― Casuistry (Chris P), Thursday, 28 October 2004 04:19 (twenty-one years ago)

ok I have to admit that last sentence just made me snort water out my nose.

― Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Thursday, 28 October 2004 04:21 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, it is! People imagine fisting as being, you know, like punching or something. But it's something that you have to do slowly and carefully or it just won't work.

― Casuistry (Chris P), Thursday, 28 October 2004 05:29 (twenty-one years ago)

So it wasn't a powerful act of penetration in the first place then?

― Andrew Blood Thames (Andrew Thames), Thursday, 28 October 2004 05:41 (twenty-one years ago)

pardon me while i deliver this to nick a.
http://grampaslap.com/ilx/whiteblack.jpg

― lolita corpus (lolitacorpus), Thursday, 28 October 2004 05:50 (twenty-one years ago)

Well googled!

― Casuistry (Chris P), Thursday, 28 October 2004 05:51 (twenty-one years ago)

does that fall into the fantasy or real-life desire column?

― Remy (x Jeremy), Thursday, 28 October 2004 05:51 (twenty-one years ago)

I've never thought of myself as being aggressive outside the bedroom, but perhaps I'm not the best person to judge.

(on the other hand, I *have* just been shouted at by a cow-orker for being "too arrogant". where's the best "i've just been shouted at by an idiot cow-orker" thread?)

― caitlin (caitlin), Thursday, 28 October 2004 10:34 (twenty-one years ago)

I remain unconvinced by the argument that the desire to be tied up during sex has nothing to do with a coercion fantasy. That's not to say I think the person wants to be coerced into doing anything. Rather, s/he wants to play a game in which fantasy coercion could play a role. If I play a shoot 'em up game, am I expressing a desire to kill people? No. Am I indulging in a fantasy in which I kill people? Yes. What is the connection between the two things, the reality and the fantasy? I don't know, but obviously there is no direct correlation.

― Frederick J., Thursday, 28 October 2004 10:46 (twenty-one years ago)

For me the whole thing about being tied up (or tying someone else up) is that you are restricting what you/they can do. If you are tied up & your partner is doing soemthing (not intercourse) to you & all you want to do is grab them & have sex, it stops you being able to do that forcing you to just enjoy what it happening. When I say force, I mean against your own urges, not forcing something onto someone else. Tying someone up is absolutely nothing to do with a rape fantasy, the two do not automatically go hand in hand. For some ppl maybe, but not in general.

― PinXorchiXoR (Pinkpanther), Thursday, 28 October 2004 10:53 (twenty-one years ago)

it's all about teasing the person that is tied up.

― PinXorchiXoR (Pinkpanther), Thursday, 28 October 2004 10:55 (twenty-one years ago)

otm

― caitlin (caitlin), Thursday, 28 October 2004 10:56 (twenty-one years ago)

Tying someone up is absolutely nothing to do with a rape fantasy, the two do not automatically go hand in hand

haha that's cos one of the hand is tied up.

there are probably some fantasies which are more related to real life than others, and it's probably not possible to categorise any form of sexual fantasy to whether it's related to real life desires.. everyone's different right?

i don't think i have any kind of lingering fantasies, they just come and go, to so speak.

― ken c (ken c), Thursday, 28 October 2004 12:21 (twenty-one years ago)

Who would buy a t-shirt that said "Fisting is gentle"?

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 28 October 2004 13:01 (twenty-one years ago)

Ken C.

― PinXorchiXoR (Pinkpanther), Thursday, 28 October 2004 13:05 (twenty-one years ago)

Gentle Fisting: An Instructional Video hosted by Ken C

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 28 October 2004 13:17 (twenty-one years ago)

With his glamorous assistant Roxy!

― PinXorchiXoR (Pinkpanther), Thursday, 28 October 2004 13:19 (twenty-one years ago)

Ewwww!

― Markelby (Mark C), Thursday, 28 October 2004 13:21 (twenty-one years ago)

Fist Him Gently: The Gay String Quartet Tribute to Tenacious D, on Cleopatra Records

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 28 October 2004 13:22 (twenty-one years ago)

Eww no not like that Mark!

― PinXorchiXoR (Pinkpanther), Thursday, 28 October 2004 13:23 (twenty-one years ago)

Good GOD, Pink!!

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Thursday, 28 October 2004 13:28 (twenty-one years ago)

Pink, EITHER way round it's still pretty ewwww!

― Markelby (Mark C), Thursday, 28 October 2004 15:43 (twenty-one years ago)

ILX is bad today. This thread has made me actually blush.

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Thursday, 28 October 2004 15:45 (twenty-one years ago)

Roxy, the tender-hearted innocent o' the South.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 28 October 2004 15:49 (twenty-one years ago)

Ned's just titled my autobiog.

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Thursday, 28 October 2004 15:50 (twenty-one years ago)

how comes roxy gets all the nice titles and i get all the filth about fisting!??!?!??!

― ken c (ken c), Thursday, 28 October 2004 15:52 (twenty-one years ago)

right ok i've just spent a little time thinking of the reason and i got it.

― ken c (ken c), Thursday, 28 October 2004 15:52 (twenty-one years ago)

Ken C, the tender-hearted anus-fumbling pervert o' the South of England.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 28 October 2004 15:53 (twenty-one years ago)

Ned - Mr kiss and tell!!

― ken c (ken c), Thursday, 28 October 2004 15:54 (twenty-one years ago)

hahaha

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Thursday, 28 October 2004 15:57 (twenty-one years ago)

SEX CRIMES MAKE YOU YOUNGER!

All the hard drugs, ritual sacrifices and sleepless nights searching for new dumpsites were worth it.

Enjoying an active practice as a Magickal Sex Criminal can make you look up to seventy-five years younger, it is being claimed by a team of researchers from Feral Light University under the auspices of the
WORLD SIGILIZERS CARTEL.

― LATTER DAY SATANIST, Friday, 29 October 2004 03:38 (twenty-one years ago)

how comes roxy gets all the nice titles and i get all the filth about fisting!??!?!??!

I just read this as "how come roxy gets all the nice titties"

I think I need to gohave a drink or something.

― Trayce (trayce), Friday, 29 October 2004 03:49 (twenty-one years ago)

oh, gohave

― the surface noise (slight return) (electricsound), Friday, 29 October 2004 05:09 (twenty-one years ago)

Good GOD, Pink!!
I'm sorry Roxy, my bad?!! ;-)

― PinXorchiXoR (Pinkpanther), Friday, 29 October 2004 07:20 (twenty-one years ago)

I just read this as "how come roxy gets all the nice titties"

*retitles autobiog*

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Friday, 29 October 2004 12:57 (twenty-one years ago)

three years pass...

in November I'd like to have andwhat in the booth with me so I can shit down his throat as I pull the lever for the Socialist Workers Party.

-- Dr Morbius, Tuesday, February 5, 2008 7:10 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Link

― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Tuesday, 5 February 2008 20:21 (eighteen years ago)

Scatolist Workers Party

― gershy, Tuesday, 5 February 2008 20:41 (eighteen years ago)

http://ilx.p3r.net/ILX/ThreadSelectedControllerServlet?boardid=40&threadid=18708

― gabbneb, Tuesday, 5 February 2008 20:49 (eighteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.