Jump to content

Twilight the Movie


BC_chick

Recommended Posts

I took my niece to see the teen vampire craze Twilight last night. The theatre was packed with tween and teenage girls who swooned over Edward, the dashing and dangerous vampire who falls in love with the movie's protagonist, Bella. For a quick synopsis, let's just say an awkward shy young girl transfers to a small town to stay with her dad after her mother remarries. There, she falls in love with a gorgeous vampire who endangers her life, yet protects it at the same time.

I told my niece that I loved the movie after she was so excited about it, but in reality I walked away shaking my head at the message of the movie. Before I begin, allow me to say that I know movie plots like this existed when I was a little girl as well, so maybe this is just the rant of a woman who is just beginning to see the hidden messages which have always existed. But I have to share this one because I found it very disturbing....

All the non-vampire kids in the school, including the boys who show an interest in Bella, are portrayed as losers and geeks with whom Bella can't relate. The only one who seems to get her, or tries to anyway (he reads minds but he can't read hers) is the vampire who is fighting his own demons to not kill her because he loves her so much. IOW, she rejects all the normal guys for being losers and geeky and she falls in love with the boy who stalks her and loves her so much he wants to kill her.

With such a message being sent to young women, is it any wonder good guys finish last and so many women are drawn to dangerous men, including murderers sitting in jail?

I know that there is a certain attraction to danger during adolescence whereby some can argue the movie captures the psyche of young people everywhere as opposed to instilling a message in them (what came first, the chicken or the egg). But overall, I was disappointed in the message because in real life, dangerous men are not like Edward and they kill their spouses and partners on a daily basis.

This movie sends the message that 'true love' will heal even the murderer when it reality we know that it doesn't.

Edited by BC_chick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I took my niece to see the teen vampire craze Twilight last night. The theatre was packed with tween and teenage girls who swooned over Edward, the dashing and dangerous vampire who falls in love with the movie's protagonist, Bella. For a quick synopsis, let's just say an awkward shy young girl transfers to a small town to stay with her dad after her mother remarries. There, she falls in love with a gorgeous vampire who endangers her life, yet protects it at the same time.

I told my niece that I loved the movie after she was so excited about it, but in reality I walked away shaking my head at the message of the movie. Before I begin, allow me to say that I know movie plots like this existed when I was a little girl as well, so maybe this is just the rant of a woman who is just beginning to see the hidden messages which have always existed. But I have to share this one because I found it very disturbing....

All the non-vampire kids in the school, including the boys who show an interest in Bella, are portrayed as losers and geeks with whom Bella can't relate. The only one who seems to get her, or tries to anyway (he reads minds but he can't read hers) is the vampire who is fighting his own demons to not kill her because he loves her so much. IOW, she rejects all the normal guys for being losers and geeky and she falls in love with the boy who stalks her and loves her so much he wants to kill her.

With such a message being sent to young women, is it any wonder good guys finish last and so many women are drawn to dangerous men, including murderers sitting in jail?

I know that there is a certain attraction to danger during adolescence whereby some can argue the movie captures the psyche of young people everywhere as opposed to instilling a message in them (what came first, the chicken or the egg). But overall, I was disappointed in the message because in real life, dangerous men are not like Edward and they kill their spouses and partners on a daily basis.

This movie sends the message that 'true love' will heal even the murderer when it reality we know that it doesn't.

Dare I say this is a very right wing synopsis coming from you.

I thought it was the leftist thing to do was to give dangerous men, including murderers a chance.

Dare I say are you coming over to the "dark side", a rightist would say to hell with the dangerous men, including murderers; let them rot.

Would you take this position on other forms the right has to offer on issues such as this? On the right we screw over the bad guy and are demonized for doing so. It's almost a double standard, screw the bad guy over when it comes to relationships, but give him a chance for everything else. Lets see some consistency here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My wife came across a story about a troop of monkeys that were being studied that happened across a garbage dump. Apparently all the alpha males were killed when they got into something poisonous and this had a dramatic effect on the social structure of the troop that survived and apparently moved away from the dump.

The non alpha males, the losers and geeks in other words that survived kept using the social traits that had served them well in keeping them from being attacked by the alphas. Apparently the females came to prefer the sharing submissive entreaties of the losers to the violence they endured before to the extent that they drive off any outside alpha's that try to muscle their way in to the troop.

I'll ask my wife to see if she can track down a link to the story.

In the meantime I bet there are more than a few human love stories that follow a theme and message more similar to the dating/mating habits of a preying mantis or something. They're never seems to be any lack of losers who end up falling for the wrong women. That said lots of guys probably wish they could, there's more than one way to lose I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it's not. Believing in due process and rejecting capital punishment does not equate 'giving murderers a chance'....

Rightists believe in due process, we also believe in speeding it up and making it more efficient, however when said person is found to be "dangerous" we like to throw the book at them. I don't believe in capital punishment because of the possible chance of error. I do however believe in more liberal use of the dangerous offender legislation, which means said offenders rot in jail for the rest of their life.

Look at the case in Quebec where the rapists get house arrest

cbc

A rightist would toss them in jail for the maximum allowable sentance, a leftist would give them the chance of house arrest.

Hence why I see the irony in your OP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need the death penalty to return in certain cases involving the most heinous of crimes including gruesome rape/murders. Rape/murder of women and children would top my list. These people should be put to death. I'm talking about the Clifford Olsens and Paul Bernardos of Canada. These people deserve death. It wouldn't be used often at all but it would give the victims some real justice and closure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need the death penalty to return in certain cases involving the most heinous of crimes including gruesome rape/murders. Rape/murder of women and children would top my list. These people should be put to death. I'm talking about the Clifford Olsens and Paul Bernardos of Canada. These people deserve death. It wouldn't be used often at all but it would give the victims some real justice and closure.

Paul Bernardo has been placed under the dangerous offender legislation. He won't know what freedom is for the rest of his life. There have been wrongful convictions, the last thing the justice system should be doing is quite possibly put an innocent man to death. If he is jailed, he has a chance for appeal, death no chance to appeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With such a message being sent to young women, is it any wonder good guys finish last and so many women are drawn to dangerous men, including murderers sitting in jail?

Good topic, Chick! It is unfortunate that it got derailed with capital punishment.

Why do women like "bad" men, and why do "good guys" finish last?

I think that it is not "bad" men that attracts women, but strong and confident men.

There is something inherently attractive about a confident man. However, a lot of confident men are also dumb men. In my experience, the men who have the most confidence are often the ones who are too numb to recognize how flawed they are, just as the most perceptive men are often the least confident. As Annie Savoy says in Bull Durham, "The world is made for people who aren't cursed with self awareness." Men who are both confident and highly aware are rare jewels. Men who are confident and not particularly aware are easy enough to find, and for many women, the aura of confidence is enough. It triggers the same biological stuff in women that draws us to providers and protectors.

As for "good guys" or "nice guys", in my experience they are not actually particularly good or nice, or at least not any more than average. The "nice guys" I have known have as much dark-side stuff in them as anybody, lots of supressed anger, lots of bitterness, lots of resentment that is lurking just below the surface. They bottle it up, they hide it, but it is there, just as much as in most other men, and perhaps more. They're good at hiding parts of themselves that are not "nice" from other people and maybe even themselves.

If a woman breaks a date with a "bad" guy, he'll probably tell her about her bad behavior in no uncertain terms. If she breaks a date with a "nice" guy, he'll probably tell her that it's not a problem and that he understands she's busy and that he didn't actually want to go much anyway, while inside he's actually a seething mess of bitterness, rage, and rejection. He's probably plotting some kind of passive-aggressive stratagem that will hurt her feelings the same way so that she'll know what it's like. There is some kind of conceit, some sort of underlying assumption that he is doing something noble by bottling up all these negative feelings that the "bad" guy would air out. He will spend days puffing himself full of indignation about what a good person he is and how ungrateful and unappreciative she is, and how stupid she is to not recognize how kind and special he is. Guys confide in me. I know this stuff. It is frankly not pretty.

Confident men often convey qualities that people associate with "bad guys". They're not afraid of confrontation and not afraid to express anger. They are not afraid of standing up to women, because they know that there are plenty of women out there. They are not afraid of being pushy when it comes to getting what they want.

Men who lack confidence often convey qualities that people associate with "nice guys". They seek to avoid confrontation, so they suppress anger and go out of their way to accommodate others. They are willing to be doormats to women because they are not confident that they will meet other women who will accept them. They do not fight for what they want if doing so might bring them into conflict with others.

I no longer believe that deep down inside "nice guys" are actually any nicer than average. I just believe that they lack the confidence to exhibit behaviors that people don't think are "nice."

So, uh, the movie. I have not seen it and have no idea what it's about. However, the straight-laced woman falling for some dashing rogue who both fascinates and frustrates her... that's Jane Austen formula A, isn't it?

-k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With such a message being sent to young women, is it any wonder good guys finish last and so many women are drawn to dangerous men, including murderers sitting in jail?

Both men and women often aspire to the unattainable. For some, they never get over seeking that what they can cannot have or what does not exist. In some cases this desire takes on the characteristic of a pathology.

Twilight is probably mostly a harmless diversion for young people who are told to wait for the right person. In the case of Twilight, it is thinking about a love worth dying for.

Parents shouldn't worry about this sort of deathwish since it really isn't about dying for love but filling the ache of loneliness and longing with someone who will truly knows them and waits for them.

It will grate on some who have life experience but then so does Barney and Teletubbies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good topic, Chick! It is unfortunate that it got derailed with capital punishment.

Why do women like "bad" men, and why do "good guys" finish last?

I think that it is not "bad" men that attracts women, but strong and confident men...............Confident men often convey qualities that people associate with "bad guys". They're not afraid of confrontation and not afraid to express anger. They are not afraid of standing up to women, because they know that there are plenty of women out there. They are not afraid of being pushy when it comes to getting what they want.

I haven't seen the movie either, but I'd rather talk about this subject than go over capital punishment again!

It's one thing to acknowledge the impulses that attract you to aggressive men, but another to just follow your instincts and hook up with a dangerous thug like a lot of teenage girls from broken or dysfunctional homes do these days!

In Bull Durham, Annie Savoy realizes that she is drawn to jocks who have little more to offer her than physical attraction and being good in bed, and she tries to keep herself from becoming too emotionally attached to her studs.......I wonder if this is the same sort of relationship that Madonna is having with A-Rod!

Awhile back, I heard a psychologist offer up the theory that women are attracted to two different kinds of men: the "nice guys" as you call them, would have features that would identify them as being more nurturing, more faithful, and have qualities that would make them better fathers; but they find the aggressive, dangerous rogues to be more sexually arousing, and part of the reason according to an evolutionary psychologist would be that the woman identifies these qualities of aggression and physical strength as an ingredient to producing children who would be fitter and have a greater ability for success.

Most women who are able to think of their future wellbeing will settle for a compromise candidate: a guy who has a mix of the bad guy and nice guy qualities. But some women who live from day to day and just go on impulse will start off as teenagers by hooking up with the thug, and either face the prospect of having him walk out on her when she becomes pregnant, or she will have to flee him for her own safety and that of her children. Then she might end up with the unaggressive "nice guy" if she's lucky, because he is usually the only one who will devote himself to raising another man's children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Men who lack confidence often convey qualities that people associate with "nice guys". They seek to avoid confrontation, so they suppress anger and go out of their way to accommodate others. They are willing to be doormats to women because they are not confident that they will meet other women who will accept them. They do not fight for what they want if doing so might bring them into conflict with others.

I no longer believe that deep down inside "nice guys" are actually any nicer than average. I just believe that they lack the confidence to exhibit behaviors that people don't think are "nice."

So, uh, the movie. I have not seen it and have no idea what it's about. However, the straight-laced woman falling for some dashing rogue who both fascinates and frustrates her... that's Jane Austen formula A, isn't it?

-k

I agree, people often confuse the 'doormat' with the 'nice guy' when they are two different things. Very well put on all counts, I agree with your synopsis.

As for the movie, I ended up googling feminist critiques and they are mostly about the book series (there are three or four, the first of which was just made into a the movie). I saw a lot of criticism about gender roles where she is helpless and he is her saviour time and time again. She is described as the anti-Buffy, but I didn't really see anything about the points I raise about him technically being a stalker.

As for the nice boys being depicted as losers, my niece said that in the book they're not like that, they're normal guys, so maybe the movie will have more critiques along the lines of what I saw as opposed to simply the gender roles.

I did see one critique expressing some of the same concerns as me... apparently in book 3 or 4 Edward becomes overbearingly posessive of her, he never leaves her alone and at one point he physically intimidates her when caught up in a love-traingle with a warewolf.

IMO, this is beyond the guy who doesn't call 'bad boy type'... think of what we say about men who don't let their women out of their sight, who get jealous, who love so much they want to kill their woman...

This is what we're telling our girls is 'true love'....

Both men and women often aspire to the unattainable. For some, they never get over seeking that what they can cannot have or what does not exist. In some cases this desire takes on the characteristic of a pathology.

Twilight is probably mostly a harmless diversion for young people who are told to wait for the right person. In the case of Twilight, it is thinking about a love worth dying for.

Parents shouldn't worry about this sort of deathwish since it really isn't about dying for love but filling the ache of loneliness and longing with someone who will truly knows them and waits for them.

I hope you're right.

There's now a facebook group, something along the lines of 'forget my boyfriend, I want Edward'... and I find it sad. I can't help but think that this overprotective pseudo stalker who is trying desperately not to kill someone because he loves her so much will be seen as posessing redeeming qualities in a man.

Awhile back, I heard a psychologist offer up the theory that women are attracted to two different kinds of men: the "nice guys" as you call them, would have features that would identify them as being more nurturing, more faithful, and have qualities that would make them better fathers; but they find the aggressive, dangerous rogues to be more sexually arousing, and part of the reason according to an evolutionary psychologist would be that the woman identifies these qualities of aggression and physical strength as an ingredient to producing children who would be fitter and have a greater ability for success.

Most women who are able to think of their future wellbeing will settle for a compromise candidate: a guy who has a mix of the bad guy and nice guy qualities. But some women who live from day to day and just go on impulse will start off as teenagers by hooking up with the thug, and either face the prospect of having him walk out on her when she becomes pregnant, or she will have to flee him for her own safety and that of her children. Then she might end up with the unaggressive "nice guy" if she's lucky, because he is usually the only one who will devote himself to raising another man's children.

Well, this is good news. As I said in my OP, I don't know if this movie is a case of life imitating art or vice versa... so I guess the study you state above explains it a little bit.

It makes perfect sense that aggression and phsical strength are subconsciously evolutionary traits that women find attractive. That's probably why as you state in your second paragraph, many women have children with the dangerous man, but once their biology has fulfilled that need they look for a more suitable partner.

Dobbin, I see what you're getting at.

But I still stand my ground, if childrearing women are drawn to dangerous men subconsciously and we know the lifelong damages that can result from these types of relationships, is it a good idea to glorify them to this level?

So, in other words, no faith in the system.

:lol::lol::lol:

I wasn't going to get involved in the side topic, but that was hilarious!

Edited by BC_chick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, people often confuse the 'doormat' with the 'nice guy' when they are two different things. Very well put on all counts, I agree with your synopsis.

As for the movie, I ended up googling feminist critiques and they are mostly about the book series (there are three or four, the first of which was just made into a the movie). I saw a lot of criticism about gender roles where she is helpless and he is her saviour time and time again. She is described as the anti-Buffy, but I didn't really see anything about the points I raise about him technically being a stalker.

As for the nice boys being depicted as losers, my niece said that in the book they're not like that, they're normal guys, so maybe the movie will have more critiques along the lines of what I saw as opposed to simply the gender roles.

I did see one critique expressing some of the same concerns as me... apparently in book 3 or 4 Edward becomes overbearingly posessive of her, he never leaves her alone and at one point he physically intimidates her when caught up in a love-traingle with a warewolf.

IMO, this is beyond the guy who doesn't call 'bad boy type'... think of what we say about men who don't let their women out of their sight, who get jealous, who love so much they want to kill their woman...

This is what we're telling our girls is 'true love'....

I hope you're right.

There's now a facebook group, something along the lines of 'forget my boyfriend, I want Edward'... and I find it sad. I can't help but think that this overprotective pseudo stalker who is trying desperately not to kill someone because he loves her so much will be seen as posessing redeeming qualities in a man.

Well, this is good news. As I said in my OP, I don't know if this movie is a case of life imitating art or vice versa... so I guess the study you state above explains it a little bit.

It makes perfect sense that aggression and phsical strength are subconsciously evolutionary traits that women find attractive. That's probably why as you state in your second paragraph, many women have children with the dangerous man, but once their biology has fulfilled that need they look for a more suitable partner.

Dobbin, I see what you're getting at.

But I still stand my ground, if childrearing women are drawn to dangerous men subconsciously and we know the lifelong damages that can result from these types of relationships, is it a good idea to glorify them to this level?

:lol::lol::lol:

I wasn't going to get involved in the side topic, but that was hilarious!

I'm loving this. Your starting to come over to the "dark side" :lol: . What I'm pointing out is that you are willing to throw "trash" under the bus like any other right winger, not that there is anything wrong with that.

I agree 100%

I'm looking at this from another perspective in terms of left and right. IMO naive girls like the protaginist are leftists, for some reason they are willing to give more than one chance to somebody even though they are "trash" - your protaginist. IMO, your position on this affair is in fact rightist, for some reason you see someone - the vampire, give him a chance - read into his character, find out he's "trash" and are ready to chuck him under the bus. I love it. :lol:

IMO Nice guy = drives girl to airport at 5 in the morning after being woken up from slumber, not afraid to offer 2 cents if he believes girl is "crossing the line"

Bad guy = "yes man", cheater, spends time in jail, overly possessive, sneaky, manipulative, makes girl take a cab to airport at 5 in the morning

Why women go for "the bad guy" defies logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bad guy = "yes man", cheater, spends time in jail, overly possessive, sneaky, manipulative, makes girl take a cab to airport at 5 in the morning

What about a guy that gives her money for the cab to the airport, where would I fit....I mean where would that guy fit in ?

its five in the am, who the hell would get up for that...unless loss of life werent imminent

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about a guy that gives her money for the cab to the airport, where would I fit....I mean where would that guy fit in ?

its five in the am, who the hell would get up for that...unless loss of life werent imminent

Touche, you at least gave money.

I'm used to winter calving and yanking drunk teenagers out of the ditch in the wee hours of the morning, I guess it's a farmer thing...

I have asked for favors in the wee hours in the morning (tire shop changing combine tire at 6 in the morning, which means he's up early so I don't have downtime)

I guess it's the tit for tat thing (ducking behind something while BC Chick lambasts me about the irony of a rightist helping out somebody in a spot).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess it's the tit for tat thing (ducking behind something while BC Chick lambasts me about the irony of a rightist helping out somebody in a spot).

blueblood, with all due respect (and I mean that sincerely), I haven't responded here because I think your analogy is really silly. But if you insist on making this political, okay, here's how I see things:

The leftist says he's a vampire, I'm going to stay away from him, warn the neighbours that he's a vampire, and if/when he actually commits a dangerous act, we'll put him away for life without chance of parole since he clearly cannot be rehabilitated.

The right-winger, OTOH, says that he heard from a neighbour that a few years ago at some party this guy didn't eat any souvlaki, which means he doesn't like garlic, which means he must be a vampire.... let's burn him at the stake before he gets a chance to hurt anyone.

Edited to add: obviously I responded to the wrong post, I meant the one you posted to me before this one.

But on this note... why do you feel I would judge you as someone who doesn't help others out just because you're conservative? That was kind of a weird thing to say....

Edited by BC_chick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

blueblood, with all due respect (and I mean that sincerely), I haven't responded here because I think your analogy is really silly. But if you insist on making this political, okay, here's how I see things:

The leftist says he's a vampire, I'm going to stay away from him, warn the neighbours that he's a vampire, and if/when he actually commits a dangerous act, we'll put him away for life without chance of parole since he clearly cannot be rehabilitated.

The right-winger, OTOH, says that he heard from a neighbour that a few years ago at some party this guy didn't eat any souvlaki, which means he doesn't like garlic, which means he must be a vampire.... let's burn him at the stake before he gets a chance to hurt anyone.

Edited to add: obviously I responded to the wrong post, I meant the one you posted to me before this one.

But on this note... why do you feel I would judge you as someone who doesn't help others out just because you're conservative? That was kind of a weird thing to say....

That was a little extreme, yet funny, we're not all that bad.

I pointed out a little rightist, with regards to throwing the book so to speak at the vampire, in the left/right game, the stereotype is, the leftist would want to rehabilitate the vampire, as the protaginist is doing, which is what I thought your position would be regarding dangerous men/bad boys, hence the irony and me pointing it out.

As for myself helping others out, the stereotype is that conservatives wouldn't help out people unless they could make a buck out of it, knowing your dislike for the right, you should have been all over that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was a little extreme, yet funny, we're not all that bad.

I pointed out a little rightist, with regards to throwing the book so to speak at the vampire, in the left/right game, the stereotype is, the leftist would want to rehabilitate the vampire, as the protaginist is doing, which is what I thought your position would be regarding dangerous men/bad boys, hence the irony and me pointing it out.

As for myself helping others out, the stereotype is that conservatives wouldn't help out people unless they could make a buck out of it, knowing your dislike for the right, you should have been all over that.

Yeah, I was being extreme on purpose, good to see you have a sense of humour. ;)

As for the protagonist here, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. This girl is beyond trying to rehabilitate a vampire, she's consumed by him, she's in love with him. I'm as soft as they get with my bleeding heart, but even I don't think loving a predator is going to help him. But I still think s/he deserves fair representation, and a chance to live his or her life until the point where they actually commit a crime.

Re the rest of your post... I have a lot of conservative friends (as clicheish as that sounds).... I don't like to stereotype the 'right' as anything because I know that in spite of your similarities in some senses, you're all as individual as us lefties. Some give, some don't. Whatever.

But I do have to point out to you that in trying to say the left stereotypes the right, you managed to stereotype me... no?

Edited by BC_chick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, this is good news. As I said in my OP, I don't know if this movie is a case of life imitating art or vice versa... so I guess the study you state above explains it a little bit.

It makes perfect sense that aggression and phsical strength are subconsciously evolutionary traits that women find attractive. That's probably why as you state in your second paragraph, many women have children with the dangerous man, but once their biology has fulfilled that need they look for a more suitable partner.

I don't think it's a matter of fulfilling a biological drive, since the "family man" archetype will appeal to her also on an instinctual level (especially after she becomes pregnant) as the type of guy she can count on to stick by her and help raise the children. It's more a matter of two, competing biological drives that lead most women to search for a compromise candidate that has qualities somewhere in the middle of these two extremes.l

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's a matter of fulfilling a biological drive, since the "family man" archetype will appeal to her also on an instinctual level (especially after she becomes pregnant) as the type of guy she can count on to stick by her and help raise the children. It's more a matter of two, competing biological drives that lead most women to search for a compromise candidate that has qualities somewhere in the middle of these two extremes.l

Hey, I was going to mention that I think this is the first post by WIP without an exclamation point...

But there is that strange ".l " at the end... Is that an exclamation point typo or not?

If it's not an exclamation point, then I think this is the first WIP post without one - if not it's an exclamation point typo which is equally as exciting. Kind of like a mis-print stamp, vastly increasing it's value.

I hope it's the ! typo..

What do you guys think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,752
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Dorai
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • paradox34 went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Venandi earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • CDN1 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • DUI_Offender went up a rank
      Proficient
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...