Jump to content

I don’t like the way demisexuality is typically defined


Maristine

Recommended Posts

alwaysbookishbecca
On 7/5/2018 at 6:17 PM, Maristine said:

That’s true. But at the same time, straight and gay people also can’t rule out that they’re actually bi and just haven’t met the right person or been open-minded enough. Sexualities are sometimes subject to change. But that doesn’t invalidate the identity you have now. Also it’s possible your sexuality never changes. 

 

It is is hard to respond to the people who say “you just haven’t met the right person yet,” because, yeah, it’s possible. But you don’t want to tell them that or else they’ll discredit your asexuality. Ugh. The nuances of sexual identity is frustrating.

I like to say 'the possibility of change doesn't make something less genuine or important while it is what it is.' 

 

People love children and how young and innocent they are, and allow them to fully live their childhoods, no matter that children will ABSOLUTELY change from a child to an adult at some point. At the very least they could give people that courtesy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/5/2018 at 1:17 PM, Maristine said:

You can't know beforehand that you are demi.

Ehh, yeah you can.  I did, even though I never knew it had a name back then.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/10/2018 at 9:17 AM, Hyrrokin said:

I really dislike being labeled "abnormal". Asexuality is not a "problem", it's a state of being, just like allosexuality. 

Abnormal doesn't mean it's a problem.  Abnormal means literally what it implies -- not normal; outside the norm.  Tons of things are abnormal.  Asexuality sure as shit isn't normal; it's way too rare to be considered such.

 

People immediately equating "abnormal" with "problem" is a people problem, not a language problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, describing people, or their behaviour, as abnormal carries a lot of negative prejudice. It's commonly used as an insult, rather than to simply describe something unusual 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Gay" is commonly used as an insult too.  Does that make the term invalid?

Link to post
Share on other sites
To Each Their Own
5 hours ago, Skycaptain said:

Unfortunately, describing people, or their behaviour, as abnormal carries a lot of negative prejudice. It's commonly used as an insult, rather than to simply describe something unusual 

The quote said “an abnormally long time.” It really wasn’t even in relation to people or asexuality at all. It was about a length of time. 

 

If you replace the word “abnormal” With the phrase “super duper” the sentence would still make sense and there would be no demeaning words at all. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
binary suns
On 7/10/2018 at 2:50 AM, FictoVore. said:

But that's really normal. We certainly don't all start gagging for sex with strangers just because they're attractive to us :o 

 

Only some 'allo'sexual people are sexually attracted (to the extent of wanting to have sex with them) to total strangers, though we can definitely find them aesthetically attractive!

I can’t speak for anyone but myself, but there is a clear difference between how I feel aesthetic atttraction and how I feel sexual attraction. And they are unrelated to each other, like different emotional functions of my body. Unrelated. 

 

 

 

Edit: also, the whole point in a demi  - or literally anyone for that matter - saying “can’t people understand that not everyone wants to bang as soon as seen” is that other people are acting like that’s universal, and we’re  negating it - so, you’re agreeing right? 

 

Youve said, that there’s variety in sexuals. Well, there’s variety in all orientations, so yes. I guess I can’t speak for others, but your posts seem to be defending against a mirage. 

 

 

 

Edited two posts into one. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
binary suns

 

 

@Maristine said “Like asexuality, demisexuality is a lack of sexual attraction, except under certain circumstances.”

 

 

So, basically, demisexual used to be about romantic attraction, then it came to be about emotional connection, but you think it’s better identified as a lack of attraction outside of unusual circumstances

 

 

This includes romance and etc as an unusual “switch” so to speak, but includes a broader spectrum of variance while also better identifying the identity. So I like it

Link to post
Share on other sites
binary suns
On 7/15/2018 at 4:38 AM, Skycaptain said:

Unfortunately, describing people, or their behaviour, as abnormal carries a lot of negative prejudice. It's commonly used as an insult, rather than to simply describe something unusual 

I’m super duper abnormal!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/13/2018 at 5:14 AM, bare_trees said:

someone could easily be demisexual and poly

Thank you. I have a partner but that doesn't mean I cannot be attracted to someone else (I took months of bonding as close friend but it actually happened).
The experience of being demisexual seems to vary depending of people, and probably how their social life is constructed (I could be wrong, I don't know many demisexuals IRL).

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/18/2018 at 2:00 PM, rinnie said:

I can’t speak for anyone but myself, but there is a clear difference between how I feel aesthetic atttraction and how I feel sexual attraction. And they are unrelated to each other, like different emotional functions of my body. Unrelated. 

 

 

 

Edit: also, the whole point in a demi  - or literally anyone for that matter - saying “can’t people understand that not everyone wants to bang as soon as seen” is that other people are acting like that’s universal, and we’re  negating it - so, you’re agreeing right? 

 

Youve said, that there’s variety in sexuals. Well, there’s variety in all orientations, so yes. I guess I can’t speak for others, but your posts seem to be defending against a mirage. 

 

 

 

Edited two posts into one. 

 

What I meant is that it's very, very common for sexual people to need to develop some kind of emotional bond before actively experiencing full sexual attraction (desiring actual sexual interaction with a person), not all of us just walk around wanting to fuck strangers. So demisexuality the way it's being defined by some here is 1) very common and 2) a regular part of sexuality and has nothing to do with asexuality.

 

On 7/18/2018 at 2:29 PM, rinnie said:

 

@Maristine said “Like asexuality, demisexuality is a lack of sexual attraction, except under certain circumstances.”

This is the main reason why demisexuality is such an offensive label when people claim it's super rare or part of the 'ace spectrum'. Every sexual person alive only experiences sexual attraction under certain, specific circumstances. And to claim that experiencing this makes you some unique and rare sexual identity makes it sound like you're claiming 'regular' sexual people are these beastlike sex maniacs who will rut with anything that moves Y_Y it's incredibly offensive, yet people in the ace community act like it's offensive to question this label, especially when it's defined the way you have here.

 

It's like when people say black people can't be racist, even if the black people are saying stuff like "all white people are inbred scum, they need to be wiped out" or whtever, and then they get offended when people say "um, you're being racist". That's what these discussions are like Y_Y

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/19/2018 at 12:21 AM, FictoVore. said:

What I meant is that it's very, very common for sexual people to need to develop some kind of emotional bond before actively experiencing full sexual attraction (desiring actual sexual interaction with a person), not all of us just walk around wanting to fuck strangers. So demisexuality the way it's being defined by some here is 1) very common and 2) a regular part of sexuality and has nothing to do with asexuality.

 

This is the main reason why demisexuality is such an offensive label when people claim it's super rare or part of the 'ace spectrum'. Every sexual person alive only experiences sexual attraction under certain, specific circumstances. And to claim that experiencing this makes you some unique and rare sexual identity makes it sound like you're claiming 'regular' sexual people are these beastlike sex maniacs who will rut with anything that moves Y_Y it's incredibly offensive, yet people in the ace community act like it's offensive to question this label, especially when it's defined the way you have here.

 

It's like when people say black people can't be racist, even if the black people are saying stuff like "all white people are inbred scum, they need to be wiped out" or whtever, and then they get offended when people say "um, you're being racist". That's what these discussions are like Y_Y

Seriously? Hyperbole anyone?

It seems to me that if sexual people don't feel validated enough on an asexuality forum, then the real issue is why are sexual people spending all their time on an asexuality forum? Perhaps a forum for sexual people would be a more appropriate setting for them? This is analogous to heterosexual men spending all their time on a lesbian forum, and then complaining that they're not receiving enough validation within lesbian discourse.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Pramana said:

Seriously? Hyperbole anyone?

It seems to me that if sexual people don't feel validated enough on an asexuality forum, then the real issue is why are sexual people spending all their time on an asexuality forum? Perhaps a forum for sexual people would be a more appropriate setting for them? This is analogous to heterosexual men spending all their time on a lesbian forum, and then complaining that they're not receiving enough validation within lesbian discourse.

Image result for marvel facepalm gif

 

I know how hard it is for some asexuals when they are faced with the idea that their assumptions about how regular sexual people function are completely and utterly incorrect, but there are many on these forums who actually appreciate learning a thing or two from actual sexuals instead of being forced to live in an echo chamber where the only voices are other asexuals who also have no idea how normal sexuality actually works.

 

The sexual people who are here are either here because they have asexual partners, or because they have enough in common with asexuals that they get along much better with people in this community than they would on a more sexual forum. Some of us also actually care about asexuality visibility and education and don't want to see this place crash and burn as a result of complete ignorance as to how normal sexuality actually works. ALL sexual people only experience sexual attraction under certain specific circumstances (which all vary massively from person to person), and if some in the ace community continue to try to spread the idea that only experiencing sexual attraction under circumstances makes you ace, this entire community will just become a laughing stock for the rest of the world. Some actually care about preventing that.

 

YOU only want to believe the things you want to believe Pramana, and you make a point of only finding information that backs up your personal theories (and that's all they are, theories, as you have no actual real sexual experience by your own admission and do not identify as a sexual person). You're free to keep doing that. But stop trying to silence the people who, being sexual, actually know what it feels like to be sexual. You're only making yourself look foolish with your persistence in trying to insist we are all completely wrong about our own sexualities, or at the very least, that we don't belong on AVEN if we're going to disagree with asexuals as to how asexuals think sexual people function (because this certainly isn't the only time you've suggested we shouldn't be here).

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/2/2018 at 10:30 PM, Maristine said:

Demisexuality is when you lack primary sexual attraction (when you see a stranger and think they’re attractive), but still have secondary sexual attraction (when you get to know them and then developed feelings for them). The thing is though, that most sexual attraction is or at least starts off as primary attraction. Secondary attraction without primary attraction (at least as far as the allos have told me) is pretty rare for people in general, which is why demisexuals relate more to asexuality than allosexuality.

I know sometimes it's just me, but I'm noticing that a lot of people describe primary sexual attraction to be "seeing a stranger and thinking they're attractive". To me it seems like aesthetic attraction - unless you meant "i see that hot stranger and if I'm a sexual person I'll probably think that they're sexually attractive or a sexual turn-on". I experience aesthetic attraction towards quite a few people, but I identify as demi- with the fact that I lack actual attraction toward the person until much further notice. For example, a lot of the boys/girls/closeted enbys at my school look aesthetically "pleasing", so to speak, but I've only ever felt romantic attraction twice in my life (for my two closest guy friends) and sexual attraction once. 

Anyone else have thoughts about this?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

I know how hard it is for some asexuals when they are faced with the idea that their assumptions about how regular sexual people function are completely and utterly incorrect, but there are many on these forums who actually appreciate learning a thing or two from actual sexuals instead of being forced to live in an echo chamber where the only voices are other asexuals who also have no idea how normal sexuality actually works.

 

The sexual people who are here are either here because they have asexual partners, or because they have enough in common with asexuals that they get along much better with people in this community than they would on a more sexual forum. Some of us also actually care about asexuality visibility and education and don't want to see this place crash and burn as a result of complete ignorance as to how normal sexuality actually works. ALL sexual people only experience sexual attraction under certain specific circumstances (which all vary massively from person to person), and if some in the ace community continue to try to spread the idea that only experiencing sexual attraction under circumstances makes you ace, this entire community will just become a laughing stock for the rest of the world. Some actually care about preventing that.

 

YOU only want to believe the things you want to believe Pramana, and you make a point of only finding information that backs up your personal theories (and that's all they are, theories, as you have no actual real sexual experience by your own admission and do not identify as a sexual person). You're free to keep doing that. But stop trying to silence the people who, being sexual, actually know what it feels like to be sexual. You're only making yourself look foolish with your persistence in trying to insist we are all completely wrong about our own sexualities, or at the very least, that we don't belong on AVEN if we're going to disagree with asexuals as to how asexuals think sexual people function (because this certainly isn't the only time you've suggested we shouldn't be here).

Unlike you, I actually trust asexual people to define asexuality for themselves. That is a fundamental difference in approach. I'm certainly not prepared to be making claims about what is or is not "normal" (a)sexuality, especially when relying merely on anecdotal evidence.

Overall, what sometimes seems to happen is that an identity as a "sexual person" assumes much greater importance for sexual people who for idiosyncratic personal reasons spend most of their time in an asexual community, and then what we see are attempts to appropriate asexuality for the purpose of constructing a positive self-image around a sexual identity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Pramana said:

I actually trust asexual people to define asexuality for themselves.

The question is: can they put it in words that non-asexuals will understand? Because if their definition works only for themselves, they will fail miserably in both the Visibility and Education aspects of AVEN.

 

"no sexual attraction, ever" - that's pretty clear. (asexuality)

 

"sexual attraction only under specific circumstances" - that's pretty vague. (demisexuality? graysexuality? anyone except asexuals?)

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, roland.o said:

The question is: can they put it in words that non-asexuals will understand? Because if their definition works only for themselves, they will fail miserably in both the Visibility and Education aspects of AVEN.

 

"no sexual attraction, ever" - that's pretty clear. (asexuality)

 

"sexual attraction only under specific circumstances" - that's pretty vague. (demisexuality? graysexuality? anyone except asexuals?)

Sexual orientations are traditionally defined in terms of sex/gender-based attractions. Now there's some pretty influential research pertaining to sexual fluidity, suggesting a pathway whereby sexual attraction can develop via romantic attraction, absent sex/gender-based attractions. That fits pretty well with the original community formulation of demisexuality according to the primary and secondary attraction model.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
4 hours ago, AVeryConfusedAceOfDiamonds said:

I'm noticing that a lot of people describe primary sexual attraction to be "seeing a stranger and thinking they're attractive". To me it seems like aesthetic attraction - unless you meant "i see that hot stranger and if I'm a sexual person I'll probably think that they're sexually attractive or a sexual turn-on".

That's exactly what it means.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

This is the main reason why demisexuality is such an offensive label when people claim it's super rare or part of the 'ace spectrum'. Every sexual person alive only experiences sexual attraction under certain, specific circumstances. And to claim that experiencing this makes you some unique and rare sexual identity makes it sound like you're claiming 'regular' sexual people are these beastlike sex maniacs who will rut with anything that moves Y_Y it's incredibly offensive, yet people in the ace community act like it's offensive to question this label, especially when it's defined the way you have here.

I understand what you mean. Almost all sexual people are attracted to certain genders, physical attributes, or personality traits. But most sexual people (as far as I have been told; please correct me if I’m wrong) experience sexual attraction regularly (at least several times a week they see a person they find sexually attractive, even if they won’t act on it for one reason or another). I and other demi/gray ace people don’t experience that at all. I have felt sexual attraction to two people. That’s not the number of people I’ve had sex with, or wanted to have sex with. One of them I did have sex with, but if I had the opportunity to have sex with the other one, I probably would have turned him down because at the time I felt I wasn’t ready to become sexually active, but I was still attracted to him. As far as I know, the overwhelming majority of people feel sexual attraction more than twice in the span of 21 years, and they have their first sexual attraction way before 18. Sexual people, even if hey don’t experience “full” sexual attraction in this case, do experience sexual attraction to strangers or new acquaintances. I have never experienced that and I don’t understand it at all. I realize I’m not totally asexual, so I have sort of a weird place in the ace community where I’m in this gray area, but I definitely relate to asexuals more than sexuals because I don’t understand like 85% of what they’re talking about when they’re sexually attracted to someone. I suppose I should have specified how rare the sexual attraction is. For sexual people, they feel sexually attracted to a handful of people every month. For me, it’s a small handful over my entire life (at least if the pattern continues the way it has been).

 

Again, if I’m wrong about anything I said about sexual people in general, please correct me. But too many people have told me I’m weird or crazy for not liking anybody, and I’ve felt too alienated by so many sexual discussions to think that I’m “normal” in my level of sexual attraction.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/18/2018 at 11:21 PM, FictoVore. said:

This is the main reason why demisexuality is such an offensive label when people claim it's super rare or part of the 'ace spectrum'. Every sexual person alive only experiences sexual attraction under certain, specific circumstances. And to claim that experiencing this makes you some unique and rare sexual identity makes it sound like you're claiming 'regular' sexual people are these beastlike sex maniacs who will rut with anything that moves Y_Y it's incredibly offensive, yet people in the ace community act like it's offensive to question this label, especially when it's defined the way you have here.

I don't know if it's "super rare," but I'm not sure I can get with your assertion that demisexuality basically describes all sexual people.  (Am I reading this right?) The vast majority of my relationships ended because of my demisexuality--my significant others didn't want to deal with someone who would be perfectly content to go a year or more without having sex.  That's not saying that sexual people are sex maniacs, but it does seem to mean that I am not in the same category they are.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

That's frequency though, and there are demis who are every bit as sexual and rampant as sexual people, but only after a long while in a relationship. Demi doesn't mean low libido.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/10/2018 at 2:58 PM, MsKittenFluff said:

Definitely. What I'm trying to convey here though is an internal feeling/realization that it's just at the basic levels, different from allosexuality.

I don't see how it is, frankly. Not in the way that asexuality is different from "allosexuality" (I don't like that word). My partner is asexual. That means that there will never be anyone under any circumstance she'll be sexually attracted to or desire sex with. If she were demisexual, there might be someone at some point. Even if it's only one person, or the chance of one person but actually it never happens, that's vastly different from it being in your nature that this thing just fundamentally can't happen.

 

To be honest, what I'm hearing from you is that you're considering yourself to be so completely special and unique compared to "normal allosexuals" that you belong in a different category. And I kind of have to agree with Ficto in that in my opinion, every single allosexual is special and unique and incomparable to the baseline, because we're all individuals and sexuality is such a complex matter and so deeply interconnected with our personality.

 

For instance, maybe only meeting one or two people over the course of your whole life you're attracted to is unusual compared to the experiences of most people. On the other hand, going for decades being attracted to a lot of people, and then meeting that one person who literally redefines your world and you can only find yourself attracted to that one person from that point on would also be unusual. Yet, both experiences are perfectly normal and human ways of being a sexual person.

 

In conclusion, I consider demisexuals as a subcategory of sexuals, and not even as an unusual one as that. It just seems unusual because of cultural and social norms and expectations, but in terms of just looking at someone as a human, it's just a normal way of being sexual.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bare_trees said:

I don't know if it's "super rare," but I'm not sure I can get with your assertion that demisexuality basically describes all sexual people.  (Am I reading this right?) The vast majority of my relationships ended because of my demisexuality--my significant others didn't want to deal with someone who would be perfectly content to go a year or more without having sex.  That's not saying that sexual people are sex maniacs, but it does seem to mean that I am not in the same category they are.  

I don't think demisexuality is the right word for that. A more descriptive term is gray-(a)sexuality. There are demisexuals who in a relationship desire sex a lot more frequently than once a year, and would be very distressed if they couldn't get that. You're certainly not in the same category as them, either.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Telecaster68 said:

That's frequency though, and there are demis who are every bit as sexual and rampant as sexual people, but only after a long while in a relationship. Demi doesn't mean low libido.

Precisely

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tarfeather said:

In conclusion, I consider demisexuals as a subcategory of sexuals, and not even as an unusual one as that. It just seems unusual because of cultural and social norms and expectations, but in terms of just looking at someone as a human, it's just a normal way of being sexual.

Technically yes, because I’m not asexual, I’m sexual. But I experience sexual attraction so very rarely, that I relate much more to asexuality than to a typical sexual person (which yes, they are diverse, but most sexual people I talk to have described certain feelings and experiences that I don’t understand, whereas when asexuals describe their experiences it describes a lot of my experiences almost exactly).

 

Demisexuality is not the norm. Otherwise, my mom would be able to understand what it’s like when I say that I’m not attracted to boys or girls, or that I never get butterflies when I see someone who is “cute.” The people I’ve dated wouldn’t get frustrated that we’ve been dating for several weeks and we haven’t even held hands yet. Demisexuality is just a specific subgroup of gray asexuality. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tarfeather said:

I don't think demisexuality is the right word for that. A more descriptive term is gray-(a)sexuality. There are demisexuals who in a relationship desire sex a lot more frequently than once a year, and would be very distressed if they couldn't get that. You're certainly not in the same category as them, either.

Well, does it make a difference if what I desire is mutual masturbation and not sex?  That's something I desire often.  I can't recall the last time I desired something that would be considered vaginal sex.  It is quite rare for me.  Maybe I am having trouble with the terminology.

Link to post
Share on other sites
binary suns
On 7/19/2018 at 12:21 AM, FictoVore. said:

What I meant is that it's very, very common for sexual people to need to develop some kind of emotional bond before actively experiencing full sexual attraction (desiring actual sexual interaction with a person), not all of us just walk around wanting to fuck strangers. So demisexuality the way it's being defined by some here is 1) very common and 2) a regular part of sexuality and has nothing to do with asexuality.

 

This is the main reason why demisexuality is such an offensive label when people claim it's super rare or part of the 'ace spectrum'. Every sexual person alive only experiences sexual attraction under certain, specific circumstances. And to claim that experiencing this makes you some unique and rare sexual identity makes it sound like you're claiming 'regular' sexual people are these beastlike sex maniacs who will rut with anything that moves Y_Y it's incredibly offensive, yet people in the ace community act like it's offensive to question this label, especially when it's defined the way you have here.

 

It's like when people say black people can't be racist, even if the black people are saying stuff like "all white people are inbred scum, they need to be wiped out" or whtever, and then they get offended when people say "um, you're being racist". That's what these discussions are like Y_Y

If it's very common, that means it's valid. 

 

Are you trying to debate on whether or not demisexuality is asexuality? It's clearly a different thing. It has its own name in fact!

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, rinnie said:

If it's very common, that means it's valid. 

 

Are you trying to debate on whether or not demisexuality is asexuality? It's clearly a different thing. It has its own name in fact!

You must have missed the meaning behind my initial comment here. I was saying it's a normal everyday thing and it's not asexuality, the way it was being defined by some people here. Nothing more and nothing less. You seem to be trying to argue with me without actually disagreeing with what I'm saying so I'm not sure what your intent is here. Maybe drop it if you're just going to keep repeating what I've said back to me as a question?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/21/2018 at 7:34 AM, bare_trees said:

Well, does it make a difference if what I desire is mutual masturbation and not sex?  That's something I desire often.  I can't recall the last time I desired something that would be considered vaginal sex.  It is quite rare for me.  Maybe I am having trouble with the terminology.

Mutual masturbation is still partnered sexual activity. Vaginal penetration is no more or less valid than other kinds of sex, or else gay men in a sexual relationship would not actually be sexually active 😛

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/21/2018 at 12:53 AM, bare_trees said:

I don't know if it's "super rare," but I'm not sure I can get with your assertion that demisexuality basically describes all sexual people.  (Am I reading this right?) 

You are defining demisexuality differently than the person I was responding to, and differently than the way many others here are defining it. The person I was responding to specifically said "demisexuality is the lack of sexual attraction except under certain circumstances"... That is literally how every single sexual person alive experiences their sexuality, regardless of how high or low their libido is. No sexual person alive experiences sexual attraction 24/7 under all circumstances..that's impossible. It was the idea that sexual people must experience sexual attraction all the time to everything which I was disagreeing with. According to some aces here, to be a normal sexual person you have to experience sexual attraction all the time under all circumstances or else you're somewhere on the 'ace spectrum' (because most aces also include demisexuality as part of asexuality). So according to that, everyone alive would be on the ace spectrum because no one experiences sexual attraction 24/7. Every sexual person alive only experiences sexual attraction under certain, specific circumstances.

 

Regarding the rest of the thread, in response to something Pramana said: While aces may be best at defining asexuality, sexual people are best at defining normal sexuality. And when asexuals clearly aren't understanding even the most basic aspects of what sexual people experience it's obviously kind of important that sexual people try to help try to clear up those misunderstandings. If someone is identifying as asexual based on a complete misunderstanding of how normal sexual people function that doesn't mean we are arguing with asexuals as to how asexuality should be defined. We're arguing about how aces (like Pramana and some others here) are mistakenly defining sexuality. That's the issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...