Search FAQ

Login | Register


All times are UTC [ DST ]


It is currently 22 Oct 2018




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 131 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Message

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject:
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 22 Jun 2006
Notes left: 1924
Last seen at: Katz Street
Burning Man wrote:
I welcome any sort of constructive criticisms.


for once,i have nothing too criticise.i love your theory in progress better than the others.its basicly what iv always thought too.nice job getting it all together too.

_________________
Image
WARNING: Some Parts of Reality May Seem Violent or Cruel.


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject:
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 20 Jul 2005
Notes left: 3898
Burning Man wrote:
I think there's a misunderstanding in that some of you guys are thinking I said abstract daddy depicts a dead father. What I'm trying to say, however, is that abstract daddy represents Angela's want for an 'ideal father' which is a dead father. That's why I suggested that perhaps it's a depiction of Angela stabbing Thomas, sending her father to his death.


I guess I'm still confused on your depiction of the word ideal.

If the monster depicts Angela's stabbing Thomas, it could be ideal, based on previous discussions, in two senses:
1) The monster is ideal as a manifestation that reminds Angela on what she has done; thus it is ideal for her subconscious' desire to be punished via induction of guilt.
2) The monster is ideal because it shows the end of the father's life, thus it is ideal to Angela because it shows that it no longer can inflict harms to her.

To me, 1) makes more sense because it validifies Angela's reactions and exclamations to the monster. It is logical that she is scared by the monster because consciously, she doesn't want to feel guilty; yet subconsciously, it is able to explain why the monster is ideal to her.
For 2), the word ideal does not match up to her reactions. If ideal means harmless, then certainly her words are contradicting it.

From your original post, Burning Man, I thought you referred the word ideal in the 2) manner, that's why I tried to argue against you because it doesn't make sense why Angela would act that way. Anyway I guess I misunderstood.

This is just another idea from me, though I don't personally believe in it, this could be another possible scenario to describe the use of the word ideal. The monster could be an ideal father because it allows Angela to see that someone finally comes to rescue her. I've always imagined that when Angela was abused, noone came to help her, her mother and brother either failed to recognize or ignore this domestic abuse. With this manifestation, Angela allows someone to rescue her: James. Her desire to be rescued now can be fulfilled and thus why the monster is an ideal father - an ideal father is the one she can be saved from. Ideal=Redemption
Even more we could say that Angela sees James as her mother (remember the stairs cut-scene?). We know that Angela is in Silent Hill looking for her mother. Or better yet, she comes to Silent Hill to find an aspect of her mother that has always been absent: care. Therefore abstract daddy is an ideal tool for her to fantasize maternal protection so she could no longer be deprived.
This scenario would also explain why James can see the monster since Angela projects her fantasy on James (as a motherly figure). Since she would need someone who is physically real and morally enough to save her, James is drawn to her world because he is the only one who can play out the role.

_________________
QUICKLINKS | SH1 |SH2 |SH3 | SH4 |SH:H | SH:O |SHMovie |SHGeneral |FAQs




Top
   
 

Woodside Apartments Janitor
 Post subject:
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 29 May 2006
Notes left: 1096
Last seen at: Mormons HQ
Burning Man wrote:
I don't know about that. With the same logic, I can say that there isn't any violent 'thrusting' movement either. How can you say that the monster shows Thomas molesting Angela then? Just because one figure is on top of another?


No matter what kind of reasonable explanation appears I think or shuld I say 'believe' that this monster simply represents Thomas sexual harassments. Sexual harrasments taking that monsters form that are haunting Angela in Silent Hill whole the time. We saw things Angelas eyes, it was stairs of fire scene - her hell and some room(propably her?) with odd looking holes simbolizing penetration.

So, "two covered reciling figures on a bed-like form" simply looks like Thomas taking Angela on standard sexual position(with hands tied to the back of the bed or shes simply giving up). I'm taking this solution as a game fact and sry but (mis)interpretation of word "ideal, abstract" isn't really good reason to confront all that. The only thing that bugs me is why there are these
monsters haunting actually James later on? Gameplay issue or because he 'killed' it? I guess gotta stick to assumptions only


Top
   
 

Cafe5to2 Waitress
 Post subject:
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Jul 2003
Notes left: 221
Quote:
That's probably the furthest thing from the truth possible. She's obviously being consumed by guilt, self-hatred and self doubt..or she'd have no reason to be there.

That's assuming that guilt is the one and only prerequisite for being 'summoned' to Silent Hill. It is certainly a factor, but out of the three we see in SH2 - James, Angela, Eddie - it really only applies to James. Perhaps some measure of guilt is what brings them there, but the repeated exposure to their apparent wrongs has two demonstrable outcomes- acceptance of guilt, or denial of it. In James' case it can go either way, depending on which ending you get, but the other two go from a position of some guilt to an eventual denial of it. Eddie especially reaches a point where remorse is completely alien to him, and he revels in what he has done.

Guilt may very well be an ongoing factor in Angela's dilemma, but I don't think it's guilt over killing her father at any stage. The misplaced guilt rape victims often experience seems much more believable to me, given her conduct.

As regards this discussion overall I think it's being complicated by two issues, which aren't necessarily dependent on one another- What does the creature visually represent, and what was the nature of Angela's relationship with her father. Possibly you could maintain the 'Ideal Father' theory and accept the sexual abuse, or vice-versa accept the 'Abstract Daddy' interpretation of the creature and yet maintain that the abuse was not sexual.

Which means that there are four possible points of view, rather than the two which seem to be predominant.

_________________
Live the nightmare conceived by Adam Crowley:
Image


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject:

Missing since: 15 Jul 2003
Notes left: 2368
The Necronoir wrote:
It is certainly a factor, but out of the three we see in SH2 - James, Angela, Eddie - it really only applies to James.

Except for the fact that Silent Hill Chronicles strongly suggests that Eddie came to Silent Hill through guilt as well.

I realize that what I should have done before creating this topic is explain why I don't necessarily believe Angela was sexually abused. It seems as though some people are under the impression that I'm saying this by the name of the monster alone. That's certainly not true.

_________________
© 2003-2009 Burning Man.
The contents of this post may only be used within the boundaries of www.silenthillforum.com.
Any usage outside of the aforementioned forum is strictly prohibited.


Top
   
 

Cafe5to2 Waitress
 Post subject:
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Jul 2003
Notes left: 221
Yeah I agree. Ideally the two topics should be dealt with in separate threads before they are combined- ie 'Was Angela Sexually Abused' and 'What Does the 'Father' Creature Represent'.

We're going to keep clashing heads on ideas if you tend to cite evidence outside of the games, too. Unlike most, apparently, I tend to take the post-modern view that if it isn't in the game, it shouldn't really effect our understanding of it. And I definitely rebel against the 'but the author/creator said so' line of reasoning.

That's just a statement of personal preference, not condemning you for using such evidence. If you find me disagreeing with you often (which we seem to have done right of the bat) it's because of these two factors.

_________________
Live the nightmare conceived by Adam Crowley:
Image


Top
   
 

Cafe5to2 Waitress
 Post subject:

Missing since: 19 Aug 2006
Notes left: 157
FBA 6100 wrote:
I do like this explanation very much except for one minor discrepancy, being the fact that Thomas was stabbed in the front of the neck and on the side.

"The probable cause of dea____as
multiple stab wounds to the front
of the neck and the left side of
the torso by a sharp edged
weapon. The estimated____e of
death was somewhere between
11:00 p.____nd 12:30 midnight."

The Abstract Daddy appears to be one person on top of another, the one under lying on their stomach.

There was a reason that newspaper appeared shortly before meeting Angela! Silent Hill is trying to warn you!

_________________
Two wrongs don't make a right, but it sure as h*ll makes it even!

Silent Hill RPG: www.silenthill123.proboards50.com


Top
   
 

My Bestsellers Clerk
 Post subject:
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 13 Nov 2005
Notes left: 429
Last seen at: Teen Town
Really.

That's not what I intended people to get from it, but oh well.

_________________
Image


Top
   
 

Cafe5to2 Waitress
 Post subject:

Missing since: 19 Aug 2006
Notes left: 157
FBA 6100 wrote:
Really.

That's not what I intended people to get from it, but oh well.

That Groovy picture of James holding his chainsaw looks so cool. Could I use it as a sig, with your approval of course?

_________________
Two wrongs don't make a right, but it sure as h*ll makes it even!

Silent Hill RPG: www.silenthill123.proboards50.com


Top
   
 

My Bestsellers Clerk
 Post subject:
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 13 Nov 2005
Notes left: 429
Last seen at: Teen Town
Sorry man, only one SH Heaven resident can sport the Groovy James sig.

_________________
Image


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject:
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 19 Feb 2006
Notes left: 1444
Last seen at: Californication
Take it to PM's, you guys know better.

_________________
I am one of Christian's most awesome Peeps.

SHHF FAQs | Sig/Avatar Restrictions | Request Avatars and Sigs | SHHF Guidelines


Top
   
 

My Bestsellers Clerk
 Post subject:
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 13 Nov 2005
Notes left: 429
Last seen at: Teen Town
Rather than PM I thought I'd just end it right here, but that obviously didn't work. If a question is answered in one post, rather than people prolonging it through telling said people to PM, it would end a lot sooner.

_________________
Image


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject:
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 24 Sep 2004
Notes left: 481
Last seen at: Boston
Not to further clutter the argument with philosophy, but speaking only to the translation and use of abstract and ideal, both are interrelated and synonymous when it comes to the Platonic forms.


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject:

Missing since: 15 Jul 2003
Notes left: 2368
Hir0Protagonist wrote:
Not to further clutter the argument with philosophy, but speaking only to the translation and use of abstract and ideal, both are interrelated and synonymous when it comes to the Platonic forms.

That's quite interesting. I did not know that.

Though, I have a hard time believing that Itô put that much thought into creating a name for that particular monster. I mean, if you read the other names for the monsters (mannequin, bubble head nurse, flesh lips, etc.), none of them are what I would call names that are 'philosophical'? The names are quite elementary. They're names that even a kid can figure out. But what you suggest is something that even grownups won't know without some knowledge in Platonian.

The Necronoir wrote:
We're going to keep clashing heads on ideas if you tend to cite evidence outside of the games, too. Unlike most, apparently, I tend to take the post-modern view that if it isn't in the game, it shouldn't really effect our understanding of it. And I definitely rebel against the 'but the author/creator said so' line of reasoning.

Don't worry about it. You'll have your chance to refute it. If you have a compelling reason why you'd rather ignore a particular developer statement, I'm willing to listen.

One reason why I cite external evidence is because I want to know if the other person can cope with new information. The other person can take the evidence two ways: give a good reason why he chooses to rather disregard it or use it to his advantage.

What I don't want to see is people just ignoring it because they "just don't like it." That would indicate that I just wasted my time, and that the developer wasted his breath. So, why would I want to listen to them?


Last edited by Burning Man on 26 Jan 2007, edited 2 times in total.

Top
   
 

Cafe5to2 Waitress
 Post subject:

Missing since: 19 Aug 2006
Notes left: 157
The mind of Silent Hill works in strange, unfathomable ways.

_________________
Two wrongs don't make a right, but it sure as h*ll makes it even!

Silent Hill RPG: www.silenthill123.proboards50.com


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject:
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 24 Sep 2004
Notes left: 481
Last seen at: Boston
Burning Man wrote:
Hir0Protagonist wrote:
Not to further clutter the argument with philosophy, but speaking only to the translation and use of abstract and ideal, both are interrelated and synonymous when it comes to the Platonic forms.

That's quite interesting. I did not know that.

Though, I have a hard time believing that Itô put that much thought into creating a name for that particular monster. I mean, if you read the other names for the monsters (mannequin, bubble head nurse, flesh lips, etc.), none of them are what I would call names that are 'philosophical'? The names are quite elementary. They're names that even a kid can figure out. But what you suggest is something that even grownups won't know without some knowledge in Platonian.


I wasn't suggesting that it was deliberate, but perhaps when translations were being worked up it was presumed that the words were more related in common usage than they, in fact, are.


Top
   
 

Just Passing Through
 Post subject: Re: Abstract Daddy - fact or fiction?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 16 Jan 2006
Notes left: 137
Burning Man wrote:
The general belief is that Abstract Daddy depicts Thomas Orosco molesting his daughter. I shared the same belief until recently, when I've decided to go back to Angela's story using the other official script.

Granted, the general belief does make Angela's story a tad more horrific, but I came to wonder if Abstract Daddy really does represent the sexual abuse (actually, if there were any is another matter of question) that Angela went through during her childhood.

If you read the translated Silent Hill Chronicles at wallofdeath's site, and lookup the description of Abstract Daddy, you'll see that it says the name means "Ideal Father". And you have to ask yourself exactly how is a depiction of Thomas molesting his daughter be "ideal" unless Angela has warped sense of idealism.

It really does seem like irony to me, especially since going from the name "ideal father" to the theory that he's ideal only when dead is a huge stretch. Even more so that monster depicts Angela killing her father. I can't see that being the first thing to come to people's minds when hearing "Ideal Father", it's too elaborate. All of the symbolism connected to Angela's abuse is fairly blatant about what it portrays, so why would there be the amount of sexual imagery there is if the "Abstract Daddy" doesn't portray her abuse?

Finally, in Lost Memories/Silent Hill Chronicles, the entry I believe you're citing continues onward like so: "metaphor: "Ideal father." On top of its bed-like form are two covered
reclining figures. A symbol of Angela's past. " The reference to reclining, covered figures on a bed seem fairly clear to me. With less evidence towards a more obvious and believable answer, your theory might make more sense. But with almost all the evidence besides that one debatable title pointing to the "Abstract Daddy" being a representation of Angela's sexual abuse, I'm just not seeing it.
Burning Man wrote:
In my opinion, this explanation fits with the overall theme of the monsters in Silent Hill 2. That is, all the monsters are there to remind James of what he did to Mary and not what Mary did to him. Symmetrically, if Angela has a monster, then it should remind her of what she did, and not what Thomas did to her. Aren't all the characters that are called to Silent Hill there because of what they did?

That's one way to interpret it, but you could also say that the characters in Silent Hill 2 are called their by their guilt - James for killing his wife, Eddie for killing the dog and shooting it's owner, and Angela for the sexual abuse she received. Or you could say they were all brought there by emotional turmoil. Since the criteria for being called there are never listed off, any and all of these are valid interpretations.

Also, in my opinion it once again makes sense that Angela would be fighting a figure representing her sexual abuse. It shows her incredible guilt and conflicted feelings over the situation she was forced into, not to mention the very room the first fight with "Abstract Daddy" takes place in has blatant sexual imagery.

Burning Man wrote:
This may be a reason why James is able to see Abstract Daddy as well. If Abstract Daddy, in the general sense, depicts one person taking the life of another, then it could also depict James taking the life of Mary.

In the same logic, couldn't it also represent James' sexual frustration, and his own disgust at that desire?
Burning Man wrote:
However, I found it weird that the Japanese script doesn't make mention of her being 'forced' nor that men like James "were only after one thing." With that comment out of the way, it suddenly didn't make sense that she was molested.

I'm curious here, what Japanese script are you referring to? I was under the impression that the game was originally recorded in English, which would imply that the lines used in the English version are the original Japanese. It may not be the same language, but if the first official version was released with English dialouge then that is the original game.


Top
   
 

Cafe5to2 Waitress
 Post subject:
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 27 Jan 2007
Notes left: 274
Last seen at: Ry'leh
Okay, I'm not going to get into the Ideal/Abstract debate, I'm just going to say my impressions when I first found the newspaper up to the Abstract Daddy fight. From the movie, Angela screaming "No, Daddy, No!" and all the valves thrusting in and out, I got the impression that they were implying sexual abuse. The monster seemed to me to be two people lying down and a lot of activity going on underneath. Since Angela is more of a sideline character and we don't get her complete past I think that what she says before and after the fight is fairly important. It gives us a big chunk of her past in about two minutes. That could be what the makers wanted to do. So they wouldn't have to waste time on a minor character slowly building up to the point. I never pondered over the name too much because none of them seemed particularly "deep".
I just think the writers were trying to make it fairly obvious but without coming right out and saying "Angela was sexually abused". A lot is left up to innuendo.

_________________
Are you ready to begin your trip to the Otherside
Death is an old friend of mine


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject:

Missing since: 15 Jul 2003
Notes left: 2368
I'd like to reply to each of your posts, but the truth is I need to first explain why it doesn't make much sense for Angela to be sexually abused in the first place. But I will take your replies as an indication that you are interested in hearing my thoughts, and as soon as I find some time I promise to post it up. It's really so much more than a name of a monster.

I will answer this one, though:

agawa wrote:
I'm curious here, what Japanese script are you referring to? I was under the impression that the game was originally recorded in English, which would imply that the lines used in the English version are the original Japanese. It may not be the same language, but if the first official version was released with English dialouge then that is the original game.

No, the English dialog is not the original one in the sense it was created first. Hiroyuki Owaku, the scenario writer, and Takayoshi Satô, the CGI director, created the script and dialog and wrote it in Japanese first, and then Jeremy Blaustein from (then) Wordbox Inc. translated the script and dialog into English with which the recording took place.

The Silent Hill games have an option to trigger subtitles in Japanese and English. Most of the script are the same, but there are differences within the finer details. Some of the differences were introduced because Jeremy was interested in making the script sound more natural to the western audience. Others were introduced because he just missed them. (Mistakes do happen. I asked him about it myself.)


Top
   
 

Cafe5to2 Waitress
 Post subject:

Missing since: 11 Sep 2005
Notes left: 231
Hey there Burning Man.

There is a thing called the "Karpman Drama Cycle". I think it really applies (in theory) to Angela's situation in the game, and why she acts the way she does, and why we see what we see when we encounter her.

In this cycle, there are three people who supposedly fit these three roles, sometimes interchangably:
Quote:
The roles of Persecutor, Rescuer and Victim are portrayed in psychological games.
Serves as a training ground for powerlessness.
Prevents psychological equality in relationships.
Will go on as long as someone is willing to be victimized.

Think if you will about a triangle. On each end are roles that we play in life. One is the persecutor, another is the victim and the last is the rescuer.

**If anyone in this triangle changes roles, the other two roles change as well.

PERSECUTOR - "It's All Your Fault" Angela's Father
Sets strict limits unnecessarily.
Blames
Criticizes
Keeps Victim oppressed
Is mobilized by anger
Rigid, authoritative stance
"Critical" Parent

VICTIM - "Poor Me" Angela
Feels victimized, oppressed, helpless, hopeless, powerless, ashamed
Looks for a Rescuer that will perpetuate their negative feelings.
If stays in Victim position, will block self from making decisions, solving problems, pleasure and self-understanding.
"Dejected" stance.

RESCUER - "Let Me Help You" Angela's "Mama"
Rescues when really doesn't want to.
Feels guilty if doesn't rescue.
Keeps victim dependent.
Gives permission to fail.
Expects to fail in rescue attempts.
"Marshmallow" parent

The Rescuer moves into victim wearing the cloak of martyrdom ("After all I've done for you ..."), whereas a Persecutor claims victim as a way to justify vengeance (If it weren't for you, I wouldn't have had to ...."). Whereas a Rescuer may persecute by withdrawing their care-taking, a Persecutor's rescuing is liable to be almost as painful as when they are in attack-mode. And a starting-gate Victim is perpetually pitiful and incapable. They even rescue from a one-down position! ("You're the only one who can help me, because you're so talented, or smart, or whatever!")


<<Gimme a couple more paragraphs and I will get to the point.>>

In theory, I think this may apply to Angela and her relationship with her parents. But I think that Angela's predicament made it almost completely impossible for her to recover from her being abused in a normal way. We of course don't know the whole story, but I think this is probably why Angela would still be seeking out her mother, even if her mother told her that she "deserved" what happened. She's become so dependent on her parents for this cycle, that she is still perpetuating it after they are gone, in Silent Hill.

In my opinion, Angela is pretty much the victim. From what she says in the game, I believe she was raped and abused by her father. I am assuming that her mother was the "rescuer", which is why Angela is seeking her out in Silent Hill, because of her dependency. Angela was unwilling to stop being the victim, even after the abuser, her father, was dead. In Silent Hill 2, instead of the drama cycle being stepped out of even if the people in it were gone, Angela instead became her own abuser. She "created" in her mind, another version of her father to torment her, even though the real father was already gone.

Angela's mother told Angela that she deserved what happened, fulfilling the role of the "bad" rescuer. A rescuer makes the victim dependent on them by continuing to make the victim feel victimized. They don't give victims any legroom to step out of the cycle and rescue themselves. They often rescue the victim under the implications that the victim "deserves" what happens to them, but they will "step in" and help them anyway. In this, since Angela was still obviously looking for her mother, she was perpetuating the "rescuer" part of this cycle as well.

If you think about Angela's self-abuse in this way, then I think the term "Ideal Daddy" can be applied pretty well. It's not that he's actually representing an "ideal" father, it's that it represents Angela's inability to change. She's so used to being abused, that she couldn't possibly think of another way for her father to be. Angela spends her time looking for her mother in the game. So maybe by conjuring up a version of her father to abuse her, Angela is subconsciously trying to call her mom to come in and rescue her again. Her father is the "ideal" by abusing her, so that she can be pacified by her mom showing up and saving her, even if she believes herself to be worthless.

As an abused teen, this is probably all she knows, and she's afraid of being independent. She'd rather take the abuse and believe herself to be worthless than forgive herself. Her Silent Hill experience represents the "ideal" behind Angela's way of thinking I think this kind of works because of the whole "guilt" thing with James, Eddie, and herself.

So how does this tie to how James sees the Abstract Daddy? Well I personally believe that James is seeing his own version of Angela's conjured up father, as it applies to him. I think this is true because we see the Abstract Daddies in the hotel as well, even though they really don't have anything to do with Angela anymore. This leads me to believe that they represented some facet of James' mind when he first encountered one as well.

I've always believed that one of the core emotions of this game is not only guilt, but also helplessness. The Abstract Daddy is the perfect symbol of this, because it shows a child being forced upon by someone bigger than them... (I still think this is true and that that is what the Abstract or "Ideal" Daddy monster is doing in the game) In that, it shows what it would be like to have the ultimate feeling of helplessness... Much like what James felt when he was trying to help Mary. There was NOTHING he could do to stop the disease... or even make Mary feel better emotionally. That's what the Abstract Daddy could be representing...

In a way, both Mary and James were helpless... Neither of them were at fault for what happened to them. So the Abstract Daddy, for James, can represent the disease being the "daddy", and James and Mary being the helpless child in the scenario.

So maybe that is why James sees the monster that way, because it shows a little of what happened to Angela in a more grotesque manner that James is used to, and it also shows it in a way that James himself can identify with.

I also believe that James had sexual repression issues. I don't think he ever wanted to rape Mary, but that he felt sexually inadequate. When James couldn't have sex with his wife, I don't think it was not just that he wanted sex, but through his inability to deal with Mary's disease, he lost his sense of self. Three years is a long time for any man to go without sex... especially if you have a wife. In this sense, the disease stripped not only James of his life, but of his "manhood" as well. So through the Abstract Daddy (or even ideal, as twisted as that sounds) his sexual desire could have represented the bigger picture of him not being able to be himself anymore even regarding his BASEST needs. James smothered Mary with a pillow, but through the sexual theme, James seeing a father forcing himself on his child, similarly in a bed, can also be showing James taking back the control he felt he had lost.

I may have overthought this, but I guess that's how I see it.

p.s. I don't really mean to open another can of worms or anything, but I just felt that this is the only way I can "counter" the direction you are going with this, with another interpretation.

_________________
No one wins...It's a war of man.


Top
   
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 131 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: