DescentBB

Posted: **Wed Oct 30, 2013 3:40 pm**

Foil, are you a Russian? Do you live in Russia? If not, let some answer that is and does.

Posted: **Wed Oct 30, 2013 4:10 pm**

Spidey wrote:Holy crap….gay people have been know as “Blue Boys” for as long as I can remember. There are even a few songs that come to mind, that use that reference.

Which songs? I don't think I've ever heard "blue" used like that in English.

Posted: **Wed Oct 30, 2013 5:07 pm**

I see that Isaac wanted to change the subject, and he changed it. Although I'm sure he understands the meaning of my posts. Okay

Posted: **Wed Oct 30, 2013 5:29 pm**

Jeff250 wrote:
Spidey wrote:Holy crap….gay people have been know as “Blue Boys” for as long as I can remember.

Agreed. I had no trouble understanding the use of the word blue in this context. Maybe it's because I've known more gay people than the average person? Or maybe I'm more keen on cultures? Also, military discharge for homosexuality is a blue ticket.

Posted: **Wed Oct 30, 2013 7:01 pm**

Since Sigma chooses to ignore my questions, again, I did some googling:

"Goluboi in Russian slang language means blue and a gay is called goluboi"
source: http://www.moscasdecolores.com/en/gay-s ... boi-russia

So the "blue man group" in Russia probably sounds like "gay man group" when translated. It might explain why I can't find a single performance of that band in Russia.

Posted: **Wed Oct 30, 2013 7:17 pm**

Jeff250 wrote:
Spidey wrote:Holy crap….gay people have been know as “Blue Boys” for as long as I can remember. There are even a few songs that come to mind, that use that reference.
Which songs? I don't think I've ever heard "blue" used like that in English.

I can't think of any songs but when I was a kid I heard 'blue' as a reference to gay. I'm old though...people using it were old then...it's probably a 1940's origin.
I took sigmas meaning right away due to having heard that phrase. I imagine there are lots of things in Russia that are lagging behind us by 50 years or so, not just sigmas attitude or language for gays.

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:21 am**

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Actually that's exactly what's happening, and it's the only reason I'm so vocal about the subject. If you tell a child that perverted behavior is ok, you've left them without a mooring in their development. A young boy should not be without discouragement to countenance thoughts of homosexuality. A young boy needs to learn how to be a man, and a man is interested only in a woman. Not another man, not a girl, not an older woman. A comparable, compatible woman.

I read things like this and wonder just what century we're supposed to be in right now.

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 6:48 am**

Top Gun wrote:
Sergeant Thorne wrote:Actually that's exactly what's happening, and it's the only reason I'm so vocal about the subject. If you tell a child that perverted behavior is ok, you've left them without a mooring in their development. A young boy should not be without discouragement to countenance thoughts of homosexuality. A young boy needs to learn how to be a man, and a man is interested only in a woman. Not another man, not a girl, not an older woman. A comparable, compatible woman.
I read things like this and wonder just what century we're supposed to be in right now.

most of us are in the 21st, some are still in the 18th.

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 8:11 am**

sigma wrote:...

I think differently. Leave alone the sexual orientation of creative people. No need to focus public attention on sexual orientation creative people. Gay people - it's very sensual people. Leave them alone. And then you'll see the true masterpieces of art. This is my opinion.

why not have that opinion of all people? Leave the sexual orientation of straight people alone. Leave the sexual orientation of gays who are not artists alone.

Unless you are attracted to someone their orientation isn't any of your business! Why do you presume to have the superiority to suggest dismissing their orientation only if they produce something you appreciate? As if to rationalize your acceptance of them in only a small controlled way?!?

You are presumably a straight man. Based on what you have displayed of yourself to me I don't know of anything you produce that is worthy of my attention. In spite of your mediocrity and apparent lack of talent I don't mind what your sexual orientation might be because it is none of my concern. If you ask me for a date I'll simply decline based on my disinterest in dating men. No harm, no foul.

Your default position that gays are a threat is like a learned form of psychosis. You have been programmed by others to feel that way. There have always been a small percentage of people who are gay. They have never collectively caused the demise of any society. However, people who have an unfounded fear of others not like them have done so numerous times through out history!

It is people like you who have unfounded fear of others who need a name. Yellow perhaps. Not normal people who happen to be in a sub group of humans who are behaving quite peacefully.

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 8:27 am**

Will, well put......you know, it's sort of like the unreasonable fears around black people, or immigrants, huh?

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 8:33 am**

in my opinion, this your message do not have prospects for discussion. Very quickly, we'll move on to personal insults here. I will not comment on it.

You know my attitude towards gays.

By the way, the name "Blue" is a common colloquial term for gays in Russia. However, the term "gay" is used mostly by politicians or on television and radio, or press.

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 8:44 am**

my issue is that, based on what you've written, you disdain not only gays, but anyone who deviates from a strict definition of traditional 'Russian' behavior. That attitude is a ticket to stagnation, not national strength.

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 8:46 am**

sigma wrote:in my opinion, this your message do not have prospects for discussion. Very quickly, we'll move on to personal insults here. I will not comment on it.

You know my attitude towards gays.

By the way, the name "Blue" is a common colloquial term for gays in Russia. However, the term "gay" is used mostly by politicians or on television and radio, or press.

have I personally insulted you?

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 8:54 am**

tunnelcat wrote:Well, I guess you'll forever be uninformed about gay people, or should I say "pidrik"?

No, you're wrong uttered insulting attitude towards blue in Russia. There are many names. In my opinion here there is no need to teach Americans Russian street slang

In order to better understand the Russian offensive words or criminal slang, you need get better meet with real Russian mobster. Many of them in the United States. But not with the Russian-American Jew, of course

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 8:56 am**

Isaac wrote:
sigma wrote:in my opinion, this your message do not have prospects for discussion. Very quickly, we'll move on to personal insults here. I will not comment on it.

You know my attitude towards gays.

By the way, the name "Blue" is a common colloquial term for gays in Russia. However, the term "gay" is used mostly by politicians or on television and radio, or press.
have I personally insulted you?

I do not understand the reason for your annoyance.

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 8:58 am**

callmeslick wrote:my issue is that, based on what you've written, you disdain not only gays, but anyone who deviates from a strict definition of traditional 'Russian' behavior. That attitude is a ticket to stagnation, not national strength.

That's right. For me ( and including, for the vast majority of Russia's population), much closer centuries-old Russian tradition than any fashion trends from the United States.

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 9:01 am**

sigma wrote:
Isaac wrote:
sigma wrote:in my opinion, this your message do not have prospects for discussion. Very quickly, we'll move on to personal insults here. I will not comment on it.

You know my attitude towards gays.

By the way, the name "Blue" is a common colloquial term for gays in Russia. However, the term "gay" is used mostly by politicians or on television and radio, or press.
have I personally insulted you?
I do not understand the reason for your annoyance.

no, the question was:

have I personally insulted you?

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 9:17 am**

Isaac wrote:
sigma wrote:
Isaac wrote:
sigma wrote:in my opinion, this your message do not have prospects for discussion. Very quickly, we'll move on to personal insults here. I will not comment on it.

You know my attitude towards gays.

By the way, the name "Blue" is a common colloquial term for gays in Russia. However, the term "gay" is used mostly by politicians or on television and radio, or press.
have I personally insulted you?
I do not understand the reason for your annoyance.
no, the question was:

have I personally insulted you?

If you can not or do not want to lead a discussion about the main point of my posts, I will be forced to ignore your posts, Isaac

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 9:18 am**

sigma wrote:in my opinion, this your message do not have prospects for discussion. Very quickly, we'll move on to personal insults here. I will not comment on it.

You know my attitude towards gays.

By the way, the name "Blue" is a common colloquial term for gays in Russia. However, the term "gay" is used mostly by politicians or on television and radio, or press.

My comments were not meant to be insulting in a gratuitous sense. They are meant to illustrate that you know as little about gays as I know about you and if you find it insulting for me to incorrectly attribute mediocrity or lack of talent to you based on the little I know of you...imagine how gays must feel having someone like you who doesn't know them attribute all sorts of horrible things to them?

You should really be brave enough to rethink your position because you have no scientific support for your fear.

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 9:24 am**

Omg... I don't think sigma has a clue what I'm saying.... I wonder if he's depending on a translation program to talk to us.

Sigma, the only correct answers to my last question was yes or no. It was a (yes/no) type of question.

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 9:32 am**

sigma wrote:
callmeslick wrote:my issue is that, based on what you've written, you disdain not only gays, but anyone who deviates from a strict definition of traditional 'Russian' behavior. That attitude is a ticket to stagnation, not national strength.
That's right. For me ( and including, for the vast majority of Russia's population), much closer centuries-old Russian tradition than any fashion trends from the United States.

It isn't a fashion trend to realize the earth is round and thus stop fearing the edge will suck your ships off into oblivion....

Bell bottom pants are a fashion trend. Rejecting bigotry taught from a previous generations irrational instinct is much more than a fashion statement. It is a statement of an advancing intellect.

we have a saying here. "Why do you want to be so wrong?"

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 9:36 am**

Will Robinson wrote:
sigma wrote:in my opinion, this your message do not have prospects for discussion. Very quickly, we'll move on to personal insults here. I will not comment on it.

You know my attitude towards gays.

By the way, the name "Blue" is a common colloquial term for gays in Russia. However, the term "gay" is used mostly by politicians or on television and radio, or press.
My comments were not meant to be insulting in a gratuitous sense. They are meant to illustrate that you know as little about gays as I know about you and if you find it insulting for me to incorrectly attribute mediocrity or lack of talent to you based on the little I know of you...imagine how gays must feel having someone like you who doesn't know them attribute all sorts of horrible things to them?

You should really be brave enough to rethink your position because you have no scientific support for your fear.

I have no desire to associate with gays, I do not want to see gay people on the streets of my city, I do not want gays are not stated here about their rights, I do not want gays in the street could affect the education of my children, I do not want some of my co-workers were gay.
Gays have always been and will be in Russia. People here are generally well disposed toward gays. Unless, of course, these gays do not get money from the United States, that they are politically active gay.

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 9:54 am**

Mostly because your government forces you to say you think that way.

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 10:02 am**

sigma wrote:
callmeslick wrote:my issue is that, based on what you've written, you disdain not only gays, but anyone who deviates from a strict definition of traditional 'Russian' behavior. That attitude is a ticket to stagnation, not national strength.
That's right.

I assume you are agreeing with my assessment of your position, not my conclusions regarding a stagnant society here.

For me ( and including, for the vast majority of Russia's population), much closer centuries-old Russian tradition than any fashion trends from the United States.

progress and diversification in a society, as others have noted, is not a 'fashion trend', it is an absolute necessity to maintain a vital society. One need look no further than some of the Muslim societies to see what clinging to 17th century values provides. They have watched modern society pass them by, and by doing so, have produced one large, angry generation of young people in the process.

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 10:08 am**

sigma wrote:You know my attitude towards gays.

yep your comments below make that abundantly clear

I have no desire to associate with gays, I do not want to see gay people on the streets of my city, I do not want gays are not stated here about their rights, I do not want gays in the street could affect the education of my children, I do not want some of my co-workers were gay.
Gays have always been and will be in Russia.

People here are generally well disposed toward gays.

apparently not if you are an indication of an average Russian

Unless, of course, these gays do not get money from the United States, that they are politically active gay.

so you're accusing the US of subverting the Russian population by sponsoring Gays in Russia.. can you say paranoia?????

Maybe it would be wise to start questioning your Government instead of being brainwashed by it

Posted: **Thu Oct 31, 2013 10:30 am**

sigma wrote:
tunnelcat wrote:Well, I guess you'll forever be uninformed about gay people, or should I say "pidrik"?
No, you're wrong uttered insulting attitude towards blue in Russia. There are many names. In my opinion here there is no need to teach Americans Russian street slang In order to better understand the Russian offensive words or criminal slang, you need get better meet with real Russian mobster. Many of them in the United States. But not with the Russian-American Jew, of course

Sorry sigma. That's what I get for Googling the meaning of a word in another language.

Posted: **Fri Nov 01, 2013 5:21 pm**

Will Robinson wrote:
sigma wrote:
callmeslick wrote:my issue is that, based on what you've written, you disdain not only gays, but anyone who deviates from a strict definition of traditional 'Russian' behavior. That attitude is a ticket to stagnation, not national strength.
That's right. For me ( and including, for the vast majority of Russia's population), much closer centuries-old Russian tradition than any fashion trends from the United States.
It isn't a fashion trend to realize the earth is round and thus stop fearing the edge will suck your ships off into oblivion....

Bell bottom pants are a fashion trend. Rejecting bigotry taught from a previous generations irrational instinct is much more than a fashion statement. It is a statement of an advancing intellect.

we have a saying here. "Why do you want to be so wrong?"

You're using the words "irrational" and "bigotry", Will, but I don't think either should be applied to matters of sexuality. Men that I know agree that homosexuality is naturally repulsive, from a normal heterosexual point of view. Doesn't give a person a pass to do them wrong, but it certainly isn't irrational, and it doesn't rely on any special form of bigotry, IMO.

When I think about it I believe that this may just be one more remnant of classic/Christian morality being shed by our society. I believe you all would have done well to dispense with any bigotry without changing your opinions on sexuality and gender. Being a man is not something that is well understood in our day, or very common. If you ever meet a man who is a man you will know it, and when a man who is not a man meets a man who is, there is shame involved at having fallen short of it. In my pursuit of it I believe I have come to understand that one cannot really be a man without acknowledging certain basic gender/sexual norms. A man has his place, a woman has hers, and the two should not become confused.

Posted: **Fri Nov 01, 2013 5:38 pm**

Sergeant Thorne wrote:A man has his place, a woman has hers, and the two should not become confused.

Caveman.

Posted: **Fri Nov 01, 2013 6:21 pm**

It's nice that they simplified things for you so that you can just deride anyone who doesn't drink the queer kool-aid. Being a lazy parasite on the lumbering ass of the haughty vocal majority is not an enviable existence. (I mean the majority of those who are vocal)

Posted: **Fri Nov 01, 2013 6:23 pm**

Sergeant Thorne wrote:
Will Robinson wrote:
sigma wrote:
callmeslick wrote:my issue is that, based on what you've written, you disdain not only gays, but anyone who deviates from a strict definition of traditional 'Russian' behavior. That attitude is a ticket to stagnation, not national strength.
That's right. For me ( and including, for the vast majority of Russia's population), much closer centuries-old Russian tradition than any fashion trends from the United States.
It isn't a fashion trend to realize the earth is round and thus stop fearing the edge will suck your ships off into oblivion....

Bell bottom pants are a fashion trend. Rejecting bigotry taught from a previous generations irrational instinct is much more than a fashion statement. It is a statement of an advancing intellect.

we have a saying here. "Why do you want to be so wrong?"
You're using the words "irrational" and "bigotry", Will, but I don't think either should be applied to matters of sexuality. Men that I know agree that homosexuality is naturally repulsive, from a normal heterosexual point of view. Doesn't give a person a pass to do them wrong, but it certainly isn't irrational, and it doesn't rely on any special form of bigotry, IMO.

When I think about it I believe that this may just be one more remnant of classic/Christian morality being shed by our society. I believe you all would have done well to dispense with any bigotry without changing your opinions on sexuality and gender. Being a man is not something that is well understood in our day, or very common. If you ever meet a man who is a man you will know it, and when a man who is not a man meets a man who is, there is shame involved at having fallen short of it. In my pursuit of it I believe I have come to understand that one cannot really be a man without acknowledging certain basic gender/sexual norms. A man has his place, a woman has hers, and the two should not become confused.

I'm a man that is repulsed by a number of things, brussel sprouts and cauliflower for two, and the thought of another man rubbing his junk on me for a third. I cringe at the sight of two men kissing. But I know that is the result of cultural programming, not a natural species reflex like fight or flight. The sight of two girls kissing doesn't give me the same uncomfortable feeling. I haven't been programmed to despise two girls as much as I was taught to reject guys engaged in the same act...

And I'm smart enough to know sigmas attitude is bigoted. And I'm man enough to say it without any fear of "falling short" of the 'real man' benchmark you have.

I suggest you can't be a smart man and not recognize the 'norms' you speak of exist in nature with other naturally occurring characteristics that are every bit as 'normal', albeit not as common, as your heterosexual desires. Thinking that someone with other than average orientation is a threat to your manhood, or to anything else, is the sign of a weak or ignorant man in my view.

Posted: **Fri Nov 01, 2013 6:55 pm**

Is everything in existence normal, Will? Disease? Disease is an abnormality that has been in existence for quite a long time. IMO the idea that homosexuality's place in history has any bearing on the nature of the thing is a bill of goods, so to speak. Use your sense. Where and why does homosexuality exist? What are its behavioral or situational enablers? IMO the discussion of where it comes from is a difficult one. Myself I accept that it has spiritual causes, and you would not accept that without also accepting the existence of the spiritual and specifically spiritual beings. There is apparently some chemical/physical association, if you believe the studies (which does not preclude the spiritual). But as with everything else a study of which character traits, morality, or behaviors typically accompany it is revealing. I would also ask, "what does it do to a man's pursuit of fulfilling his role in life, and does it effect his ability to correctly perceive and meet his responsibilities?" That's about as basic/common-sense as it gets, and it's also way too hard for just about everyone. That's all before you even come to God's say on the matter, which for me is the beginning and end of it, with the middle filled in by what we may perceive and understand.

My dad recently told me that an increase of homosexuality usually takes place before the fall of a civilization (or judgement of a civilization, according to the Bible).

Posted: **Fri Nov 01, 2013 7:20 pm**

Thorne, an increase in everything takes place before the fall of old civilizations, because civilizations grow until they stop growing.

Posted: **Fri Nov 01, 2013 7:39 pm**

Disease is absolutely normal. The living organism has a temporary lease on life.

If God created homosexuality it is certainly a normal thing.

What is the origin of albinism? It's just the way things came together.

Gays are not the sexual equivalent of meth heads.
They aren't the same as pedophiles.
They are the same as you and me with the one exception of sexual orientation.
I'm certainly open to evidence I'm wrong but I haven't seen any and with the volume of people who are invested in proving my reasoning is wrong I think some evidence would have been brought forth by now.

Posted: **Fri Nov 01, 2013 7:43 pm**

Sergeant Thorne wrote:A man has his place, a woman has hers, and the two should not become confused.

Posted: **Fri Nov 01, 2013 7:45 pm**

Sergeant Thorne wrote:A man has his place, a woman has hers, and the two should not become confused.

Posted: **Fri Nov 01, 2013 8:06 pm**

Will Robinson wrote:Disease is absolutely normal. The living organism has a temporary lease on life.

If God created homosexuality it is certainly a normal thing.

What is the origin of albinism? It's just the way things came together.

Gays are not the sexual equivalent of meth heads.
They aren't the same as pedophiles.
They are the same as you and me with the one exception of sexual orientation.
I'm certainly open to evidence I'm wrong but I haven't seen any and with the volume of people who are invested in proving my reasoning is wrong I think some evidence would have been brought forth by now.

Disease disrupts the proper function of the organism in which it resides. ... Murder disrupts the normal life of the victim.

Will Robinson wrote:If God created homosexuality it is certainly a normal thing.

Will I don't think you want to go down that rabbit hole. You're into proper grasp of reality there, and it's a hard thing. Suffice to say that God "created them male and FEMALE", and around the next bend God did not "create sin".

You don't need evidence you're wrong, you need some reason this nonsense could be right in the light of proper scrutiny!

Also I never said homosexuals were the same as pedophiles.

Posted: **Fri Nov 01, 2013 8:11 pm**

Isaac wrote:Thorne, an increase in everything takes place before the fall of old civilizations, because civilizations grow until they stop growing.

Nothing personal, Isaac, but the above argument is worthless. It's either painfully obvious or inaccurate in it's dismissal of an argument that it fails to even adequately address, and in either case it need not be mentioned.

Posted: **Fri Nov 01, 2013 8:19 pm**

I think Sigma walks a dangerous line. I'm convinced that in the right conditions, that kind of tolerance will lead to extermination. Not a path I would want to encourage. I agree with him on his opinion of gay activism though. It should be nobody's business as long as neither side affects the other

Posted: **Fri Nov 01, 2013 8:52 pm**

Sergeant Thorne wrote:[...
Disease disrupts the proper function of the organism in which it resides.

And that is a normal thing

Sergeant Thorne wrote:... Murder disrupts the normal life of the victim.

And the point is?

Sergeant Thorne wrote:[
Will Robinson wrote:If God created homosexuality it is certainly a normal thing.
Will I don't think you want to go down that rabbit hole. You're into proper grasp of reality there, and it's a hard thing. Suffice to say that God "created them male and FEMALE", and around the next bend God did not "create sin".

Are you saying that god didn't create gays?

Sergeant Thorne wrote:[You don't need evidence you're wrong, you need some reason this nonsense could be right in the light of proper scrutiny!

It isn't non sense to me. I understand it and am asking for proof my understanding is flawed. Is the proper scrutiny something you can provide and support with some kind of science?

Also I never said homosexuals were the same as pedophiles.

I didn't mean to imply you did. I'm speaking to the general bigoted opinion as well as to you.

If being gay isn't a choice, which I believe, then the 'gays aren't meth heads' example works to add perspective.
If being gay was both a biological occurance like pedophilia likely is, AND it was harmful to others like pedophilia is then gays would have some reason to suffer the revulsion you attribute to them. Again, perspective...

Posted: **Fri Nov 01, 2013 9:55 pm**

My point, I suppose is that the definition of normal is important, and you can lose all perspective by stretching that definition too much. You're using at least two different definitions in your argument. One to say that homosexuality is normal and therefore should not be shunned, and another to say that disease is normal (even though it's ok to be against disease). I could reverse this on you, Will, and adopt your moveable definition of "normal" in order to demand to know why you would claim pedophilia to be a bad thing... Death is normal, why is murder illegal? ...

I am saying that you don't want to go down the rabbit hole unless you're prepared to give it some good hard thought. Most people haven't given it nearly enough thought, and it's not something to be entered into lightly. God did not create people with the design or the desire for them to engage in things which are contrary to his nature and design. First of all that's just foolish, but you can't claim the existence of the God of the Bible without accepting his attributes, otherwise why use the Bible at all if it is a farce, and then how do you know God at all? (is anyone getting dizzy yet?)

Truth be told, any behavior that is not wholesome, engaged in as acceptable/wholesome does harm, because it has the very real potential to distort people's perception of reality (this is actually the natural tendency). This is a very obvious argument that I would assume to be difficult to make stick, with people who can see no wrong outside of being "narrow-minded."

Does the suffering of revulsion demand a special sort of reason? Apparently some reasons may be deemed inadequate and dismissed or filtered out of reality? If you go back far enough before it was accepted by repetitive exposure and indoctrination, pretty much everyone would express revulsion at the thought of same-sex activity. It's a normal reaction. Homosexuality is very other-than the norm, because heterosexuality is actually contrary-to homosexuality, in that heterosexual men are not attracted to other men, because they are DESIGNED to be attracted to most every attribute a woman has, and another man is just the same as them. And if anyone can't grasp that I would have to say they're in a bad way.

DescentBB

[Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia

Re: [Split] On perceptions in Russia