living together before marriage - a good or a bad thing?

May 31, 2015

There is no way you can really tell how someone is like unless you live with them. Living together shows how you both stack up to sharing expenses, space, responsibilities, and how reliable they are. If you can't work as a team, you just saved yourself the expense of a wedding and a divorce.

couples who live together before marriage have a higher divorce rate

May 31, 2015

It's weird, but my relationship was the opposite. My ex was always the one to bring up marriage. He was always talking about "when we get married. . . ." He honestly seemed obsessed with getting married just for the sake of being married. He's actually the only guy I've ever considered marrying, and what a mistake that was. We actually dated for 2 years before living together, and, even then, I only moved in because he had bought me an engagement ring, told my family he wanted to marry me.

You also mentioned earlier about a guy knowing early on that you are not for him. I completely agree. I think my ex knew all along that he was never going to marry me, but he kept me around for convenience. I was like an ego booster for him, and I was basically raising his son while he worked long hours. I honestly think the guy never had any intention of staying with me, but, as the years went on, it just got easier to maintain the status quo. I think he realized he made a huge misstep when he said he wanted to marry me, and he spent a year trying to figure a way out of the mess he created. While I was going along, thinking we were getting married, he had one foot out the door the entire time.

Ever hear of "pacifier ring" as a term used for certain types of so-called "engagement rings"?

That's why I steer clear of guys who are dating w/kids...IMO, most of them are simply looking for a nanny/cook/maid that they can have sex with now and then.

A gf of a gf went through this...the guy was a widower, and I guess she was in dire financial straits so he was like a knight in shining armor. The kids were cool with her until he actually put the ring on her finger. He also cheated up to the day they married and I think he even cheated after they married. But, they're still together. I guess it's "mutually beneficial" situation there...

May 31, 2015

Ever hear of "pacifier ring" as a term used for certain types of so-called "engagement rings"?

That's why I steer clear of guys who are dating w/kids...IMO, most of them are simply looking for a nanny/cook/maid that they can have sex with now and then.

A gf of a gf went through this...the guy was a widower, and I guess she was in dire financial straits so he was like a knight in shining armor. The kids were cool with her until he actually put the ring on her finger. He also cheated up to the day they married and I think he even cheated after they married. But, they're still together. I guess it's "mutually beneficial" situation there...

I've never heard of that term, but it makes sense. My ex was also a widower, and I honestly think he used me to raise his child in his absence. I don't think he set out to do that, but it just happened. Of course, I also let it happen, so I have to take responsibility for my part in it. When he dumped me, he said it made him sad because he wanted a mom for his son. That was the first time he made a comment like that.

He ended up marrying someone else and got engaged really quickly after we broke up. He was also the typical "vine swinger." He went from one woman to the next and was always on the lookout. I was basically a place holder until another woman came along. His now wife is everything on paper that he wanted, so I wasn't surprised when I found out who she was (a friend of a mutual acquaintance).

Oh, I forgot that one reason he used that we couldn't get married was that his son said he wasn't ready. He claimed he told his son (who was 10 at the time) that he was going to propose to me, and his son didn't want me to marry him. I feel like he just used his son as an excuse because he married another woman so quickly. So I doubt his son somehow, magically, became okay with this dad getting married.

May 31, 2015

There is no way you can really tell how someone is like unless you live with them. Living together shows how you both stack up to sharing expenses, space, responsibilities, and how reliable they are. If you can't work as a team, you just saved yourself the expense of a wedding and a divorce.

You know what's interesting. My ex said that if we had never lived together, he probably would have married me. He said he never would have "seen some things" that were deal breakers for him. Now, who knows if the was just blowing more BS, but that is what he said.

May 31, 2015

You know what's interesting. My ex said that if we had never lived together, he probably would have married me. He said he never would have "seen some things" that were deal breakers for him. Now, who knows if the was just blowing more BS, but that is what he said.

I agree that he may have married you - cuz like the other thread said - 'men only get away with what we allow them to get away with'...

In other words, if you would have held your ground about no shacking-up, then he probably would have caved and married you to not lose you.

Eh, but then again, I don't know him, but based on what you described about him - he is/was in primary search for a mum for his kid.

Difference between you and this chick he's with now is she stood her ground about not moving in I guess. But, I don't think she's any better than you.

May 31, 2015

In other words, if you would have held your ground about no shacking-up, then he probably would have caved and married you to not lose you.

he probably would - & things would've went to **** because he'd probably divorce her, too.

this way, she dodged a bullet. "shacking-up" can really save a life - Lord knows it saved mine. how? saw red flags, fits of anger, madness, abuser behavior... something i couldn't have seen WITHOUT living with him because he always made a point for me to see him ONLY at his best behavior and in the best light. can't fake it 24/7 & he started slipping up...

long story short - he had an unrecognized PTSP caused by his war traumas & was on the brink of killing someone. luckily, we all reacted just on time.

ALSO, my friend's dude dumped her because she didn't want to move in with him and he recognized it as a sign that she isn't all that into him or serious about him -- ended up dating & living with another woman for 2 years or so and they're now married with kids. many different situations, shacking up definitely works for many.

May 31, 2015

I lived in with my stbxh for about a year before we got married. Based on my experience, living in does not guarantee that the marriage is going to work. Yes you get to know each other better, and seeing how the other is and being in each other's personal space still does not give you an insight on how the future will turn out. People change, its either you grow with each other or outgrow each other.

May 31, 2015

That's why I steer clear of guys who are dating w/kids...IMO, most of them are simply looking for a nanny/cook/maid that they can have sex with now and then...

And being on the other end of the scale, I am a solo parent, I will steer clear of moving in with a bf. I am very independent and I do not want my bf to think that I want to move in with him so he can share in my parental duties. I've already proven that I can take care of myself and my kids without my stbxh's help.

May 31, 2015

I would never get married before living together for a while.

I would also not offer engagement ring until we lived together for a while [since engagement = let's set the wedding, we are definitely getting married].

If they demanded marriage before moving in and it was not debatable and my opinions were dismissed ... as much as it would hurt, i would end it.

I've seen way too many marriages end badly to do otherwise.

YOU didn't read it properly - "50% of OUR assets", which surely is fair, no?

Until you realize that 'our' is defined as assets owned before marriage too.

So if you inherited something or worked your ass off for something, she gets half of that.

Off-course bringing this point up in a relationship is 'un-romantic'.

Edited May 31, 2015 by Radu

May 31, 2015

Until you realize that 'our' is defined as assets owned before marriage too.
So if you inherited something or worked your ass off for something, she gets half of that.

Off-course bringing this point up in a relationship is 'un-romantic'.

Not to mention that his assets are one of the things a man might want to protect until he is sure about marriage. Having to commit to this on a trial run pretty much defeats the purpose of a trial run, from a financial perspective.

But I especially like the victim mentality.

May 31, 2015

I'm pro living with someone before marriage but under certain conditions.

I've lived with an SO and don't regret it in the least.

If you're gonna do it, I'd advise it only with the intention of marriage and make sure the couple has been dating for a while, for me that means years.

Make sure that finances are in order. Both partners should be financially able to take care of themselves if the relationship goes bad. If you lose your financial independence, you are totally screwed.

Would I break up over something petty like "he doesn't put the cap back on the tooth paste tube when he's done"? No, probably not. But there's truth to that. But those little things CAN blow up into huge fights, and often WILL. If you can get through that, than great, otherwise the environment becomes toxic.

Once you're living together some of the fun does get sucked out of the relationship. What I means you have more practical things to talk about like money, housekeeping, negotiating logistical things, etc. Those aren't fun and romantic so if either partner isn't mature enough for that, than it's not good to do it. It's not the same as playing house anymore.

Life WILL change. What to do in free time will have to be compromised and negotiated. Is one partner comfortable with spending Saturday night sitting down and watching some sappy movie that the other loves? Is one partner okay with doing their own thing while the other plays video games for 6 hours after a long day of work to decompress? Those might not seem big, but believe me, they are.

Say goodbye to privacy. A lot of people really value alone time (myself included) and if partners can respect each other's alone time, it should be fine. Don't let go of hobbies you enjoy spending time on because it'll bother the partner. Time and what to do with it will have to be negotiated. Yes, you should be your own independent person, but also make sure to make time for each other and the relationship.

Chores will become a HUGE deal so making sure to divide them evenly is a big one. Does one partner DETEST doing dishes? Does vacuuming hurt the other's back? Does one partner have a more stressful job than the other? That sort of thing.

Also be prepared for family disapproval if they're religious. My (practically) puritan grandfather actually encouraged my SO and I to live together. His parents were more liberal religiously and respected our decision, but were against it morally.

You do get a lot out of it, too. You learn a lot about each other, you get to spend more time and share space with someone you love, you do get a bit of added security in the seriousness of the relationship, you get to build a home with someone, it's more convenient for a lot of things, etc. Those things all made it worth it to me.

But it is important to keep in mind that the relationship will go from being completely fun to being a lot more "mature" and practical almost overnight. It's a huge step and not one to take lightly.

I've seen couples work out doing it both ways. A few waited until marriage to live together and are still going strong. A lot of my friends lived together before marriage (one even moved across the country) and are doing great.

It's important to remember that if the relationship does go sour to make sure both partners' have something to fall back on. That's the biggest thing to keep in mind, at least for me.

May 31, 2015

I've never heard of that term, but it makes sense. My ex was also a widower, and I honestly think he used me to raise his child in his absence. I don't think he set out to do that, but it just happened. Of course, I also let it happen, so I have to take responsibility for my part in it. When he dumped me, he said it made him sad because he wanted a mom for his son. That was the first time he made a comment like that.

He ended up marrying someone else and got engaged really quickly after we broke up. He was also the typical "vine swinger." He went from one woman to the next and was always on the lookout. I was basically a place holder until another woman came along. His now wife is everything on paper that he wanted, so I wasn't surprised when I found out who she was (a friend of a mutual acquaintance).

Oh, I forgot that one reason he used that we couldn't get married was that his son said he wasn't ready. He claimed he told his son (who was 10 at the time) that he was going to propose to me, and his son didn't want me to marry him. I feel like he just used his son as an excuse because he married another woman so quickly. So I doubt his son somehow, magically, became okay with this dad getting married.

Your story is the very reason I wouldn't live with a guy before marriage. They are happy to live with you for practical and financial reasons, but string you along. In fact, I'll stress this even more to my daughter when she's older.

Most fathers of daughters, also want to know a man's intentions towards his daughter. Many dads of daughters know what they themselves were like at a younger age and don't want their daughters taken advantage of or being strung along. I'm sure my hubby will be the same when our daughters are in that situation.

ETA - I've also known people living together, having gotten engaged only to still be engaged 5/6+ years later and these long engagements are never the woman's choosing.

I know if I just lived with my hubby, we may well have split up during some arguments, but we worked through them because we are married. We knew what was at stake. We're absolutely great now.

Edited May 31, 2015 by sandylee1
eta

May 31, 2015

Your story is the very reason I wouldn't live with a guy before marriage. They are happy to live with you for practical and financial reasons, but string you along. In fact, I'll stress this even more to my daughter when she's older.

You're looking at it the wrong way, her story was extremely typical, it couldn't be more generic.

What a man "says" couldn't be more irrelevant in my book, why women even think this way is beyond me...it's like it never crosses their mind it's just a sales pitch or manipulation tactic.

This guys goal was to get her intertwined in his life so that she could serve his purposes, he would have been nearly willing to do that at any cost. Women would be surprised how much they could get men to do if they just pulled off and played hard to get, "negotiating" a good deal for herself in order to continue.

But what marriage means to a woman generally doesn't mean the same thing as a man, a man always feel this is just part of the process...what she demands is the expectation he's going to NEED to meet, not because he feels genuinely that way but because of her ultimatums or standards. Now if you've not given the guy anything and he wants it, he's going to sell his soul to the devil to get it...it's an ego thing for some guys, the harder the chase the higher the victory. But not all men are actually that concerned with the actual word or meaning of marriage, it's quite trivial more than you think, it's just a technicality of the situation.

Now this doesn't mean the guy will get married right away, or the first second or third girl...but usually it's because women give a lot more BEFORE they start to demand anything. Women do it backwards thinking they're building up to something and it's going to pay off, in reality the guy has already set your level and has you pegged...which is why the more demanding women is more likely to get what she wants...IF she plays her cards right, but if this is your tactic, then you're just as manipulative as his tactics.

You might be doing it for a supposed "happiness" and forever after, but that's not how relationships work. Marriage doesn't give a relationship anymore validation or security, it just makes them more complicated and troublesome in the end, and if it came to the point where it did actually SAVE your relationship from ending, what a sad state of affairs and circumstances that must be...but for women, this is what many want, they want to "fight" for a relationship for some reason, which again begs the question what it's all for in the end.

Personally, I have a hard time understanding that what a woman wants...before she even met me, has anything to do with me, which I feel it does not. Therefore I don't owe a woman anything, and personally wouldn't have a problem just living separately if in order to live together it meant marriage. However if I were a different guy, and there are a lot of guys out there that would simply just dive in, in order to get what he wants in the end...without thinking about the consequences or what it actually means.

Two people have to be on the same page together, emotionally, mentally and what they both desire to work towards. However many women are looking for a short-cut, and rather try an attempt to solidify those things before much of the important parts of the relationship have been explored...and just because a guy tells you ANYTHING, doesn't actually make it true.

Female friends often come to me with questions, and the first thing that comes out of their mouths is "well, he said this...", I'm already rolling my eyes, because it's a complete joke to use this guys word as some kind of proof of intent, it really means nothing and as a man would practically let in one ear and out the other, ESPECIALLY during the first six months or even a year, it just doesn't hold as much weight as you think it does...but women want to believe and justify their actions simply by what a man says even though they feel in their gut something is off or too good to be true.

Women don't understand that for men, most men...it's hard to get a woman that they want, it's much easier to get a woman that he doesn't want very much but would settle for, for the time being. But these guys don't get the opportunity often enough to let either girl get away, depending on his needs he may be desperate and willing to say and nearly almost do whatever it takes to "prove it to you" just to get you deeply embedded in the situation.

This is why women should be looking at the entire whole package and picture of where this guy is, rather than just what's in her face...she should be observing and sizing the man up, but all too often she gets sucked in and "blinding" by what is essentially a desperate sale pitch by the man...a man who intends to get as much as he can at the cheapest prices.

But if you consider "marriage" the final reward, you will be played the fool in the end...you will question why you ever wanted it or desired it to begin with at times, because this man will not live up to your expectations.

Most fathers of daughters, also want to know a man's intentions towards his daughter. Many dads of daughters know what they themselves were like at a younger age and don't want their daughters taken advantage of or being strung along. I'm sure my hubby will be the same when our daughters are in that situation.

ETA - I've also known people living together, having gotten engaged only to still be engaged 5/6+ years later and these long engagements are never the woman's choosing.

Every guy knows how men think, how women are so clueless to it seems absurdly confusing. Men couldn't be more transparent in their behavior outside of that relationship dynamic, when they are acting alone or around a bunch of other guys...the problem is women classify men and think because a man behaves a certain way that it means he's a good guy or he thinks a certain way, which is why guys tidy up the exterior package and try to be what a woman WANTS him to be, regardless of his intent.

But those are the manipulators, the stupid guys are just simply simple and stupid and women think that it's just going to happen one way for one reason or other...they don't really have a "game", women just kind of stick around like stray cats on the porch waiting to come inside the house because they're given water and food, like it's some magical kingdom or palace once they get in...only to find out there was nothing really special, it was all fantasy.

I know if I just lived with my hubby, we may well have split up during some arguments, but we worked through them because we are married. We knew what was at stake. We're absolutely great now.

And this is the sad part...you might as well be saying to me "Phew, if he wasn't chained to the wall, he might have gotten away...but he was stuck there long enough before he was able to break away that he was willing to stick around and give it another try"

I mean, is this the whole damn point to marriage? is this really want you want? You want a guy who wouldn't have been with you otherwise, if it wasn't for him being married and having to go through obstacles before he was able to remove himself from the relationship?

And then you say "We're absolutely great now"...when will women learn to stop talking about WE, haven't you figured out by now you don't know what a man thinks or feels?

It's a sad state of affairs in this world, conformation by conditioning...basically "breaking in a man", and then she wonders why she finds him cheating or talking to other women, and it's so "shocking".

If that man stays or came back because of "marriage," instead of how he felt...then you never had em to begin with. But that doesn't seem to matter to many women, as long as he sticks around and "looks like" everything is ok, women don't understand that men are often appearing to be ok, because they are getting their needs met somewhere else.

May 31, 2015

Not to mention that his assets are one of the things a man might want to protect until he is sure about marriage. Having to commit to this on a trial run pretty much defeats the purpose of a trial run, from a financial perspective.

But I especially like the victim mentality.

This only happens in the English speaking world though.

May 31, 2015

I have to admit that i'm agreeing with ninja's text walls in this thread.

I see that women are afraid of moving in because he wouldn't buy the cow anymore, but how many have actually set with him a clear timetable with him clearly and in a concise manner had him verbalize the steps he saw in front of him.

For me it's like this, dating, when close to 1yr moving in, then live for a while together to see how it goes, then engagement with the understanding that it is just a formality to get married on a set date and time. Overall i don't think this should take more than 3yrs or so.

May 31, 2015

First things first - nobody forces anyone to get married, apart from in some cases in third world countries.

Most women date a bit and not everyone they date do they want to marry. So it's not a case of jumping on the first guy for marriage. There are people I dated, that I would never have wanted to marry , but as time went on, I wanted someone on the same page as me.

It's a free world and if he didn't want to marry me, he didn't have to. If he said that as much, I would have walked and never looked backed.

It makes sense that people work harder at marriages, than dating or living together. I would have left him after certain arguments, so it's not about being chained to the wall. It's called working hard in your marriage and when I say 'we're absolutely gine' ,I know what I'm talking about. It's my marriage so I know and we communicate very well.

Living together with the intention of marriage is fine, but like I've said before, it doesn't mean you won't split up later. Those who wish to hide their trueselves always will.

I'm just not one for let's see how it goes. I state what I want in any relationship and if I don't get it, I'm done. It's very simple really.

I have lots of talks with my brothers and they have my interest at heart. They know how it works and in my case, they were against living together without a commitment. I take advice from those who know and love me and in my culture it's kind of an insult to just want to live with a woman, so my views will differ from others.

May 31, 2015

We live together unmarried for slightly over two years now. It's not a 'test' run, its a normal progression of a relationship. I wouldn't move in with a romantic partner if I wasn't very serious about the relationship. We may get married in 2-3 years from now.

May 31, 2015

Overall i don't think this should take more than 3yrs or so.

I agree, waiting around for men or women for that matter who are "not ready" for marriage after 2-3 years in, is never a good idea, IF the goal is to get married.

May 31, 2015

sooooo... had an interesting discussion today about couples living together before marriage & children. i think people call it "test drive" these days!

so the question is simple -

• do you think couples should try living together before marriage or not? please explain your opinion.

in the discussion i had earlier, we argued that living together before marriage is a good thing in that sense that people REALLY get to know each other... when you live with someone, you basically cannot "hide" - you REALLY get to know each other, each other's habits... and it can either break or make you. HOWEVER... we also noticed that sometimes, living together before marriage can be a bad thing. it's like people know it's a "test drive" so they really won't make it work or try as hard as they would if they had a serious commitment such as marriage and children on their shoulders; it's easier to break up & walk away. and maybe people get "enough" of each other earlier too.

so asking for your personal experience and opinion - do you want to live with you SO before marriage, explain. also, for those who already experienced it - do you think living together was good or bad for you as a couple?

thanks!

This is one of those areas where the Devil is in the details.

Our grandmothers had a full grasp of these concepts 50 years ago but it seems to have been lost today.

If a couple is engaged, has a date set, has paid all the deposits on the church, minister, caterer, bought tickets for the honeymoon etc etc , pick out a home and start moving clothes and other belongings into the marital home and take up residence into the marital home before the actual wedding, there's probably no harm done.

In that instance the life-plans have already been made and forward steps have been taking towards that agenda and the commitments have already been made and both parties are essentially walking the walk to make it happen.

Contrast that however against couples who are dating and who move in together as a "next step" or a stage where they can be together but essentially avoid the legal and social commitments of marriage.....and save some rent in the mean time.

For many couples, the purpose of the cohabitation is to delay or even derail marriage and life-commitment.

The problem is a lot of people, mostly women, do not realize that.

I'm going to be sexist and pick on the girls here but it does happen to guys too.

For a lot of cohabitating couples, the women see it as a "next step" and they are essentially auditioning for marriage and see it as a stepping stone towards marriage and as another ticket to punch.

For the guy however it is for the most part a marriage substitute and a means to further delay or even indefinitely avoid marriage.

For those couples, cohabitation often turns into chronic marriage avoidance and often years and years go by with no forward steps being taken towards marriage.

So while many women think it is a step towards marriage, it's often the exact opposite and often delays marriage at best and in many instances can permanently halt it.

May 31, 2015

We live together unmarried for slightly over two years now. It's not a 'test' run, its a normal progression of a relationship. I wouldn't move in with a romantic partner if I wasn't very serious about the relationship. We may get married in 2-3 years from now.

see my post immediately above.

It's the people that cohabitate as a stepping stone and as a "progression" of the relationship that stall out and it gets delayed by many years or often do not marry at all.

May 31, 2015

In regards to the "test run" theory, people who cohabitate as a test run to see if they are compatible for marriage will probably opt out at some point and will not marry.

Marriage as a legal institution was instituted many centuries ago to couple people up and bind them together whether they were compatible and wanted to be together or not.

If you put two people together and let them decide for themselves if they want to be together forever or not, probably 9 times out of 10 at some point one of the other will decide that they do not.

The whole point of marriage was for the commitment to come first.

May 31, 2015

This is one of those areas where the Devil is in the details.

Our grandmothers had a full grasp of these concepts 50 years ago but it seems to have been lost today.

If a couple is engaged, has a date set, has paid all the deposits on the church, minister, caterer, bought tickets for the honeymoon etc etc , pick out a home and start moving clothes and other belongings into the marital home and take up residence into the marital home before the actual wedding, there's probably no harm done.

In that instance the life-plans have already been made and forward steps have been taking towards that agenda and the commitments have already been made and both parties are essentially walking the walk to make it happen.

Contrast that however against couples who are dating and who move in together as a "next step" or a stage where they can be together but essentially avoid the legal and social commitments of marriage.....and save some rent in the mean time.

For many couples, the purpose of the cohabitation is to delay or even derail marriage and life-commitment.

.

what differentiates those two types of couples is the role of commitment.

in the first example the plan was laid out and the commitments were made and both people were actively working towards executing the plan.

In the second example, cohabitation was being regarded as just another incremental "step" with perhaps the possibility of marriage etc down the road at a later undetermined date.

The first example is executing a plan and upholding a commitment that has been made.

The second example is an incremental step with the purpose of delaying or even avoiding the commitment.

The problem with that is a lot of people don't see it as such and don't grasp that instead of it being a step closer to marriage, it is actually a delay at best and often an avoidance of marriage.

May 31, 2015

......so bottom line here, whether to cohabitate or not depends on your end-goal.

If your end goal is to have daily access to your SO, save some rent by combining households but you do not want to be legally or socially bound to them and do not want that level of commitment and want to be able to pack your bags and walk away if something better comes along or if your SO makes you mad or doesn't live up to your expectations. Then you clearly want to cohabitate.

However if your end-goal is a life-plan with marriage and commitment and a permanent, legally and socially recognized life partnership, then cohabitation is a delay AT BEST of that process and is actually often a complete roadblock to marriage.

on simpler terms, if the goal is -

- save rent and hang out together all the time but either of you are able to walk away with 30 days notice to the landlord and utilities = cohabitation.

- commitment, marriage, life-plan and legal and social recognition of life partnership = marriage.

May 31, 2015

We live together unmarried for slightly over two years now. It's not a 'test' run, its a normal progression of a relationship. I wouldn't move in with a romantic partner if I wasn't very serious about the relationship. We may get married in 2-3 years from now.

So at the point of moving in together, there was no discussion of marriage? You MAY get married in 2/3 years.

That's absolutely fine if you're both on the same page.

For me I would see it as 5 years of a relationship leading nowhere. Just my opinion. A coworker just got married after cohabiting for 28 years.

May 31, 2015

Of course the subject has been discussed. We just decided to live together because we both needed to move anyway and deem our relationship good enough to continue with it indefinitely, committed and all. I don't regard it as a waste of time regardless of whether we get married or not. I don't even know if it's possible to have a relationship when the other person regards it as meaningless. If we do get married it will be for social, legal and formal reasons but it won't change the relationship we are in. And that's not because we're just roommates who share rent. I really do see my partner as my companion in life. Neither is this relationship something I'd throw away over some trivial stuff just because there is no marriage. Not in the past, not now and not in the future. I take my relationship seriously.

Sign In

living together before marriage - a good or a bad thing?

Recommended Posts

alphamale

Gloria25

BC1980

BC1980

Gloria25

minimariah

still_an_Angel

still_an_Angel

Radu

Robert Z

SLee

sandylee1

Ninjainpajamas

Radu

Radu

sandylee1

frogs88

elaine567

oldshirt

oldshirt

oldshirt

oldshirt

oldshirt

sandylee1

frogs88

What's New

My Activity Streams

More...