Multiplex: What's New | Site Map | Community | News My Multiplex Account | Sign In 
in Search

Integral Parenting Thread!

Last post 04-11-2007, 11:13 PM by miriam. 161 replies.
Page 9 of 11 (162 items)   « First ... < Previous 7 8 9 10 11 Next >
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  •  08-16-2006, 9:00 PM 4497 in reply to 4490

    Re: Issues

    rosecpw:

    I've got to think a bit more about this idea of hating our parents. I think there's something to it-- but is it hating exactly? Or judging? And judging from the persepective of a child.

    maybe i need serious psychotherapy but i never thought that i even disliked, much less hated, parents or parenting, mine or anyone else's.  with regard to parenting, having become a parent later in life, i regret not having done it sooner. 

    later,

    gene

    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  08-17-2006, 9:52 AM 4526 in reply to 4497

    • imom is not online. Last active: 10-09-2006, 1:13 PM imom
    • Top 200 Contributor
    • Joined on 06-19-2006
    • Posts 15
    • Points 375

    Re: Issues

    Lynne wrote:

    "Does this disttinction make sense?  And how interested will folks be when I Ed launches here on-line thre end of august, and we begin to plan the more academic, AQAL-aligned invesstigation of 2nd tier parenting??"

    Yes, this does make sense.  And I am very excited about this!

    Thanks,

    Cori

    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  08-17-2006, 11:47 AM 4535 in reply to 4526

    Re: Issues

    like a holons-news issue:  an article about spanking in this month's Parenting mag:

    http://www.parenting.com/parenting/article/0,19840,1215279,00.html

     

    an article about different learning styles in children:

    http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/08/17/how.kids.learn.par/index.html

     

    later,

    gene

    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  08-17-2006, 12:18 PM 4536 in reply to 4474

    Re: Issues

    integrallynne:

    More specifically, your comments about personal resolution of issues on this forum raises a great distinction with what katie and I are seeing as the future diffrerence between Community and IU forums.....from I Ed you will get a more disciplined, praxis/theoretical blend of info on the topic, whereas this forum will be more like an IN forum, I sppose, where allcan put their perspectives out in a vast rainbow for others to learn from.


    Does this disttinction make sense?  And how interested will folks be when I Ed launches here on-line thre end of august, and we begin to plan the more academic, AQAL-aligned invesstigation of 2nd tier parenting??



    Ok, though I'm getting a little overwhelmed with all the forums (fori?) and webstites and so on! I kind of wish that they would all be more integrated :-)

    I see that maybe seperate forums for UL/LR type communication (intuitive/emotional espression) and UR/LR forums (practical, testable theories) might be helpful to some folks. (especially ones who are more comforatble in one, but not the other).

    Also, I am exceedingly interested in a more Left quadrants discussion! It's really, really what I'm looking for in a support network/working group/whatever you want to call it. Now if we could bring the Integral Sustainability and Integral Government and Integral Psychology into the Integral Education discussion group, I'd be all set, since I see them all as being crucial to my career as a teacher and artist.

    Thanks!

    Peace, Love, and Bicycles,
    Turtle
    (going back into listening mode...)
    • Post Points: 5
    • Report abuse
  •  08-17-2006, 5:07 PM 4549 in reply to 4474

    Re: Issues

    integrallynne:

    Does this disttinction make sense?  And how interested will folks be when I Ed launches here on-line thre end of august, and we begin to plan the more academic, AQAL-aligned invesstigation of 2nd tier parenting??

    Lynne

    I like this distinction too. Very good and can't wait.

    Also Turtle, I have been thinking along your lines as well. I do think, though, that we can all make a little bit of an integrated and "interwoven" difference by simply placing links to others threads -which would also be nice and be enhanced by the option to link to spcific posts and so forth. Ya know what I mean. (Or is the option available now and I ma just missing it?)

    Peace

    Tim


    "With whom or with what are you in communion at this moment?"
    . . ."I?" he replied, almost mechanically. "Why not with anyone or anything."
    "You must be a marvel . . . if you are able to continue in that state for long."
    -Constantin Stanislavsky
    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  08-17-2006, 5:14 PM 4551 in reply to 4535

    Re: Issues

    coppersun:

    like a holons-news issue:  an article about spanking in this month's Parenting mag:

    http://www.parenting.com/parenting/article/0,19840,1215279,00.html

    Hey Gene,

    I had actually read this article, well, just a few days ago before you posted your question -in fact, I was wondering if this article was why you posted your question. And it did inspire my views -noted especially in the first post. But there are also some secret issues in this articel I would like to highlight later.

    At any rate, it seems we have been reading the same stuff becasue it was the same with all the other issues -the breast feeding, formula etc.


    "With whom or with what are you in communion at this moment?"
    . . ."I?" he replied, almost mechanically. "Why not with anyone or anything."
    "You must be a marvel . . . if you are able to continue in that state for long."
    -Constantin Stanislavsky
    • Post Points: 5
    • Report abuse
  •  08-17-2006, 6:34 PM 4553 in reply to 4549

    Re: Issues

    Thanks for the feedback, y'all, and I'll forward your idea about hyperlinking to Yotam (hey, Bud, are ya listening out there??).  I don't know if this version of the technology will permit the cross/hyperlinking, but it is a cool idea.

    And I must ask forgiveness for not being a better typist, for having longish fingernails that span 2 keys, for not having more time to spell-check......I know that the # of fora (???)(flora, fauna and fora??) has been expanding of late, and one earnest fellow in NYC is wondering where everyone disappeared to, but I think that things will sift out, settle down, and we will find the connections that serve us best at every particular moment.

    Thanks for lots of input into IU, and we'll be asking for alot more come Aug. 28th.

    Lynne

    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  08-17-2006, 9:34 PM 4565 in reply to 4553

    Re: Issues

    coppersun:
    rosecpw:

    I've got to think a bit more about this idea of hating our parents. I think there's something to it-- but is it hating exactly? Or judging? And judging from the persepective of a child.

    maybe i need serious psychotherapy but i never thought that i even disliked, much less hated, parents or parenting, mine or anyone else's.  with regard to parenting, having become a parent later in life, i regret not having done it sooner. 

    later,

    gene

     

    Well gene, then I think you have probably always had and been around a healthy view! And that's - great!

    I have heard it said that "Parenthood is the curse of the world." And I have heard repeatedly said, agreed upon, sometimes vehemently said and agreed upon by others as some sort of notion of ultimate truth again.

    And it is all of a piece of the Romantic View.


    Somewhere often buried deep within and behind the Romantic View and the idea of being born into and as enlightened goodness,besides a deep confusion, is a very deeply repressed and often utterly disowned anger. It logically follows and concludes into -my parents screwed me up, I would have been so good without my mistaken parents, the world would be just great if it just weren't for parents!-screwing everything up! And that translates into a very, very subtle and sometimes not so subtle hatred.

    Parenthood is the curse of the word. (And I have heard this said to children . . . .)

    These very powerful ideas being perpetuated from much higher and so very powerful levels of consciousness have filtered down to all of the lower stages and also been backed or reinforced by other inherent realities now more visible to all (i.e. yeah, some parents do do bad things, some kids DO end up damaged, there have been heretofore unknown truths revealed by modern science and psychology, etc.) have slowly but surely led to a cultural astosphere where parents are simply walking around on eggshells. Breath wrongly on the children and you are a committer of the most vicious and heinous of crimes. If the kids are good from the start, the parents are simply doomed from the start. Doomed to being a bad parent.

    And, don't we all know it? One way or another, the day will come, the sentence will be turned in and we will finally be found guilty of being a bad parent.

    I really don't think I am being neurotic here.

    And as such, parents have been removed from all agency.

    And as I will try to explain my views of later, if there is to be no agency, there is to be no communion.

    And that is what's tearing the world apart.

    If the kids have all of the agency, the kids will have no communion.

    And before you know it, that is what sends them spinning out of control.

    And I have seen the reality of this too many times. But somehow, it is the parents who show agency -and sometimes even a very powerful and almost out of control agency(actually, sometimes even totally out of control!) -that end up keeping their kids. And the kids in turn - are greatful. Becasue somebody told them they loved them. Which is to say, somebody showed them communion.


    "With whom or with what are you in communion at this moment?"
    . . ."I?" he replied, almost mechanically. "Why not with anyone or anything."
    "You must be a marvel . . . if you are able to continue in that state for long."
    -Constantin Stanislavsky
    • Post Points: 5
    • Report abuse
  •  08-18-2006, 9:01 AM 4590 in reply to 4565

    Re: Issues

    Hi Robin,

    I really, really appreciate your careful considerations.

    I've got to think a bit more about this idea of hating our parents. I think there's something to it-- but is it hating exactly? Or judging? And judging from the perspective of a child.

    Well, I am using the powerful words -it's just that (even as Ben was pointing out) there is out there in the culture these sorts of ideas that, when followed through logically . . . that's pretty much what it amounts to. It comes mostly from the higher stages or memes but it then filters down and if you look about, listen, observe, it's all over -in movies, music, songs, books, general conversations -there's something fundamentally wrong with parents and it's all simply Boomeritis.

    I do think we devalue parenting as a culture. Which seems so sad and stupid, considering how important children are (to the future of mankind.)

    Yes, exactly. Obviously, you wont really find this from the conservative camp (except to, when you think about it . . .agree!), although they have been heavily effected.

    And my own shadow issue is mixed in here somehow

    This is what is, I think, the most important part. As I said in some of my earliest posts on this thread, I don't think we can even begin to seriously examine parenting and what it is to be a parents without including the last generation (or even two!) -but that includes shadow, genetics, experiences, certainly good lessons, "center" of gravity and so forth . . . it's really quite fascinating when you think about it. This is evolution! And we can certainly speed it up, make it go more smoothly, or at the very least make it healthy by looking deeply into all of these things. This is why I also said in my opening posts, I think we have here the best chance ever of "getting it right." (Or at least leaving some kind of map how to . . .)

    -- let me see if I can tease it out. Yeah, here it comes: I avoid parenting in ways that remind me of my mother because I've been so critical about the way she raised me.  

    I think this is perfectly natural but . . .

    When I hear myself say things to my daughter that my mother said to me, I feel bad and wrong

    Before finishing your sentence, what I really wonder about is how those sorts of feelings have been influenced by the larger culture. And then, is that for better or for worse? I think it is both, but I think we really, really have to examine the "worse"-as in, good gracious, Mom and Dad really weren't so bad after all (especially when we would with compassion consider that they were someone’s children after all too! And with a lot less knowledge than we have.). Or where have we been wrong about them? That's what I think gets far too little consideration from the higher levels (which is, of course green and sometimes even yellow and the whole Boomeritis thing is a major influence).

    -- even if those things are true. I don't like to feel like my mother.

    I have dealt with this a lot -and sometimes the genetics spring forth and rear their ugly head too! Crap! I hated when she did that and now I'm doing it! I AM her! Look like here, walk like her -shit! (I once put on a dippy 70s three piece suit, glasses and put my hair back and stood gawking in the mirror and the absolute fact that I was looking straight at my father!) But there is definitely a lot to "tease out" and I certainly do not think we should avoid it -which many people do. It is one of the potentially transformative aspects of becoming a Mom or Dad -all these hidden things can come out that are you, and you can either reintegrate them, transcend but include (transform) them and/or befriend and eventually dissolve the shadows. The genetics? Well, we're screwed there . . .

    On the other hand, I DO like feeling like my father (sometimes) and often chuckle hearing his words come out of my mouth. (BTW-- my mother wasn't the one who spanked me; my father was!)

    I have been thinking a lot about this and . . . now we're getting somewhere!Wink [;)]

    My whole "complaint" is that parenting has lost or needs to reclaim it's agency. Isn't it interesting that when aligned with your own "inner dad" you feel good!?

    But here is what is even more interesting -a point I have been at pains to try and make since the original posts on this subject but was not sure how to: that shadow, that apoplexy, is nothing other than your own repressed agency. Right?

    Think about it. If he was too hard . . . don't you just want to say . . . NO! and . . . give him a spanking!? (Obviously by some sort of metaphorical definition, but . . .) That's your agency. I saw it in Turtle's posts too- the word all wrapped up in there is- No.

    No. Agency. No. (Is that you're final answer? That's my final answer. No.)

    If he was too hard he needs to be told NO and to be, yes, "subdued" with greater agency until he says . . . . . lo and behold,  "I'm sorry!"

    Turtle's posts, if you look at them (Hey Turtle) are all just different forms of saying no, too.  I am going to "take your toys" or something "you don't deserve" away! You are going to be in "time out" (jail) mister!Angry [:@]

    Does everybody see that? I am hoping this will be a little funny, but the repression of agency is really my point.

    Can agency go too far –be hyper or pathological agency? Yes! So then, what do we do? Well, someone might need some form of discipline;  maybe even a “spanking” (again, metaphorical definition, or . . . Charles gives the ultimate example. Think of the immense care behind that moment. That was not pathological agency. Rather, perfect agency.)

    I mean, it is interesting at least to look at that Turtle (Hi Turtle) was reprimanded for calling DSS. Right or wrong, someone thought "she needed a spanking" –someone thought she was too agentic-after calling DSS.

    This, Turtle, is not a judgment -it is just examining how it is all mysteriously the same thing. We can not avoid the agency of discipline and if it is lost in pathological shadow, if we repress agency and certainly elevate anybody to a status of sinlessness. (Blue may have wanted the parents to be "sinless" but green, in return and answer, wants the  child-and so secretly ME!- to be so.) Re-owned and reintegrated and healthy agency . . . well, that’ what we are after.

    And no, nobody said it was going to be easy.Wink [;)]Stick out tongue [:P]Tongue Tied [:S]

    If we make mistakes, the 2nd hand path is the path of forgivness. And in that "we" of 2nd person forgivness, we finally find communion.

    But it can not happen if somebody is "never wrong" . . . . (very interesting!)

    All for now.

    Tim



    "With whom or with what are you in communion at this moment?"
    . . ."I?" he replied, almost mechanically. "Why not with anyone or anything."
    "You must be a marvel . . . if you are able to continue in that state for long."
    -Constantin Stanislavsky
    • Post Points: 35
    • Report abuse
  •  08-18-2006, 11:39 AM 4601 in reply to 4590

    • imom is not online. Last active: 10-09-2006, 1:13 PM imom
    • Top 200 Contributor
    • Joined on 06-19-2006
    • Posts 15
    • Points 375

    Re: Issues

    Hello All ~

    This examination of parental authority/agency is a very vital one.  Thanks for the excellent contributions.

    Thank you Benji for the quotes from Boomeritis.
    I also want to encourage everyone to read over the Dec. 10th entry of One Taste for an excellent and simple overview of Growth to Goodness vs Recaptured Goodness.

    As I posted earlier, I see it as incredibly crucial to tease apart these two aspects of development in order to enter into any type of discussion about integral parenting because both schools have incredibly important merits that we want to integrate and balance.  Mostly because they trickle down through every aspect of our integral model, coloring our view of levels, lines, states, types, quadrants, etc.

    Tim, as a parent, I can really relate to what you are bringing to the table here with regard to the bad rap that parental agency has in current cultural opinion.  And, I agree that this is largely a green meme attitude.  It's a biproduct of the recaptured goodness model which relies on the theory that we start out in a state of perfect unity/wholeness and are fractured and repressed by culture, agency, speech, society, reason, etc. Development in this case relies on our ability  to recapture, uncover, reveal, our already existing wholeness. Devolution, not evolution.

    As I see it, and as I posted earlier, it is absolutely vital to reinhabit, and integrate parental agency, from a 2nd tier stance,  in order to have a working definition of integral parenting.

    (This is not unlike the role of heirarchies; in the hands of first tier they are used to rank, judge, exploit, etc., but return in a healthy form at 2nd tier to help contextualize and integrate.)

    Agency and authority in the service of the preconventional memes can be opressive, domineering, and damaging because it is used to serve the egoic functions of the parent.

    *Green, the first postconventional meme, attempts to move beyond this, but for the most part, it hasn't.  What we've got instead is a differentiation from the lower memes that never got integrated.  Instead of transcending and including the lower forms of agency, green simply dissociates from them, and slides off into its own pathology by demonizing authority, agency, culture, reason, etc.


    I propse that, once we wrestle parental agency out of the clutches of the green meme, we will find that at 2nd tier we see a wholesome use of agency used in the service of the childs' learning - not in the service of the parents' ego or shadow.

    Right use of agency helps the child develop their own inner gifts and virtues.  It's an absolutely crucial part of parenting, and one of the most controversial.

    Personally, once I got a grasp on this, everything else pretty much fell gracefully into place.

    More later.
    Thanks everyone!
    Cori


     

    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  08-18-2006, 1:34 PM 4608 in reply to 4601

    Re: Issues

    beautiful.

    Right use of agency helps the child develop their own inner gifts and virtues.  It's an absolutely crucial part of parenting, and one of the most controversial.

    modeling 2nd tier agency, walking the talk, is much different than modeling narrow, single issue, single solution, 1st tier approaches.  it's chameleon-like. we should be sensitive to the spiral that the child is moving through so that healthful aspects of that level are modeled, and discussed. 

    later,

    gene

    • Post Points: 20
    • Report abuse
  •  08-18-2006, 2:09 PM 4611 in reply to 4608

    • lajla is not online. Last active: 03-12-2007, 2:56 PM lajla
    • Top 150 Contributor
    • Joined on 06-19-2006
    • Posts 27
    • Points 360

    Re: Issues

    To Gene's above point, I'd add "often" before "chameleon-like".  Being able to predict consequences of a certain action (e.g., an 18mo./2 year old: "if I hit Mommy, I have to sit down for awhile") is also important - perhaps even vital at certain stages.
    • Post Points: 35
    • Report abuse
  •  08-18-2006, 3:38 PM 4618 in reply to 4611

    • imom is not online. Last active: 10-09-2006, 1:13 PM imom
    • Top 200 Contributor
    • Joined on 06-19-2006
    • Posts 15
    • Points 375

    Re: Issues

    Hello again ~

    Because parenting is so inclusive, we can draw upon the integral model in other sectors. 

    For example, most would agree that parenting at its best qualifies as an art form.
    What can we learn about parenting from integral art?


    Something that comes to mind for me is Ken's conversation w Stu on IN in which he describes integral art as art created by an integral artist. Someone might remember his exact wording, but it was something like, the burden of integral falls on the artist's own soul. 

    So how do we know if a piece of art is integral? We look at the artist who created it.
    Can the same thing be said for integral parenting?
    Would we apply this to parent as artist?

    I think we can find many useful tools looking a the integral politics model as well.
    Especially when we apply sd.
    I am reminded of Ken's description of 2nd tier political leadership which has the health of the entire spiral in mind always.
    It lets individuals be at whatever level they are at, and tries to find ways to foster health at each level through different programs.
    Everyone is allowed to think and believe whatever they like according to what level they are at at any given time. However, they are required to behave in accordance with 2nd tier rules, and principles. One example he gave was, you're allowed to hate gay people, but you're not allowed to beat them up.

    And these 2nd tier principles/rules are enforced with a police force and with armies.

    In our own family this is pretty much the way things work.

    We have a very clear set of family ground rules decided by mom and dad, based on the highest vision we have access to, and on the healthy development of everyone's levels, lines, states and types, and with the input from the whole family at weekly meetings.

    Rather than a police force, there are very specific consequences for breaking the ground rules. These consequences are educative, not punitive, restorative, not retributive.


    For example, one of our family ground rules is that we do our chores before we play with friends. when my 9 year old has to tell her friend she can't come over to play soccer because she hasn't folded the laundry yet, she doesn't get mad at me, she's mad at herself for procrastinating.  

    We find that consistently adhering to the ground rules, and letting the consequences speak for themselves, has created a high level of trust and security.  Everyone knows what to expect and so are free to flow within the boundries of our family.

    Does anyone else see any value that could be applied from integral art, and intergal politics models?  Or from other integral frameworks?

    Also, I'd really love to continue to hold the question of what 2nd tier agency looks like.  I really think that clarity on this issue would be incredibly useful. It's an emergent thing isn't it? 

     

    Thanks All,

    Cori


     

    • Post Points: 35
    • Report abuse
  •  08-18-2006, 5:05 PM 4646 in reply to 4618

    Re: Issues

    A lot to think about there imom.

    How many in your family?

    I was going to say above in response to Robin how as the numbers multiply things do change dramatically. This fact is very humorously-and very well- illuminated by Bill Cosby especially in his 1980s Himself movie/concert. One of the main reasons is that each child changes the behavior of the others -and yes, dramatically. To lengthy to get into for sure, but one thing about this that has really helped me is that it also so helps to illuminate the stages; their strengths their challenges and their limitations. (And it also should be noted-and not very difficult to understand-that this can do a lot to illuminate the negative aspects of stage specific behavior, worldviews, temperaments and so forth. This may not be so apparent in other circumstances.)

    I think the politics model is useful, but the family model has certain specific ingredients that would be included in a model all it's own. For example, the president of the US or the government is not specifically responsible for me - but my parents are. Or as parents, we are.

     

    I wanted to say in response to your response above about agency - I think it would be useful to think about what exactly constitutes healthy surrender.

    Both are key words: healthy -surrender; healthy surrender. I think the key ingredient is that I am surrendering to Love, even if I would not necessarily know it. (i.e. as a child)

    Without going into more examination now, this would be something different than unhealthy surrender which would be some kind of submission or repression or any other number of words which might not constitute unhealthy. So, I have surrendered my own agency for healthy reasons -even if I don't understand them, but will (theoretically) learn and understand later, not for unhealthy reasons, which is only going to produce shadows which will haunt me later.

    Very interesting.

     


    "With whom or with what are you in communion at this moment?"
    . . ."I?" he replied, almost mechanically. "Why not with anyone or anything."
    "You must be a marvel . . . if you are able to continue in that state for long."
    -Constantin Stanislavsky
    • Post Points: 5
    • Report abuse
  •  08-18-2006, 7:46 PM 4654 in reply to 4590

    • rosecpw is not online. Last active: 04-07-2008, 1:57 PM rosecpw
    • Top 150 Contributor
    • Joined on 06-17-2006
    • NYC
    • Posts 30
    • Points 540

    Re: Issues

    Hi Tim,

    that shadow, that apoplexy, is nothing other than your own repressed agency. Right?

    No question-- I have veered too much toward communion in my life and not exercised enough agency. And this has applied to my relationship with my daughter too.

    I had a charismatic, but tyrannical Dad and a weak ineffectual Mom. So I worry about using agency because I saw it so abused (by my Dad) as a child. Nevertheless, I need to use my agency as a parent.

    I wonder this: why, as a culture, do we seem to identify more with the child than the parent? We idealize the child and demonize the parent. Of course, this allows us all to feel victimized (everyone was once a child) and allows us to blame our ills on our parents. Convenient.

    And God knows I did that for years in therapy. (Although that does seem to have been a necessary part of my process. Don't think I could have skipped it.) When I became a parent, I found I was crippled by my own judgments about parenting. Finally now I am examining these value judgments of mine that have been part of the fiber of my being and my world view for so long. I became a parent at age 38, so I had lots of time to develop my ideas before I had a kid.

    I certainly participated in  Boomeritis parenting and diagnosed my own boomeritis while reading the novel by that name. Of course, there's no going back now that I'm on to myself!

    So I'm beginning to use agency with my daughter. It's been pointed out to me that this will also make me a better role model for her.

    I love my daughter more than I love my beliefs, more than I love the interpretation I previously put on my past. So I've given up some of my cherished self myths and rewritted the story of my personal past to integrate what I now understand about parenting.

    I don't think we can even begin to seriously examine parenting and what it is to be a parents without including the last generation (or even two!) -but that includes shadow, genetics, experiences, certainly good lessons, "center" of gravity and so forth . . . it's really quite fascinating when you think about it. This is evolution! And we can certainly speed it up, make it go more smoothly, or at the very least make it healthy by looking deeply into all of these things.

    Thank you for saying this. I was afraid that my speaking so personally was inappropriate. But to me parenting is mixed up with shadow issues and multi-generational stuff. I just don't know how to examine my parenting issues honestly without being personal. I don't mean to offend. But for me, parenting is personal-- not theoretical. I have a real live flesh and blood daughter and what's more important than how I raise her? It's not a theory for me. It's tomorrow morning.

    Writing here is helpful to me-- more than you'd guess. The exercise of my agency in parenting is something I do need support and encouragement with as it does NOT feel natural. For me, that agency requires courage.

    The support of an integral Dad, (thanks Tim) the willingness of all of you to read my words while I struggle to work out what's the most integral, most ethical, most loving parenting I can offer, means more to me than you can imagine.

    Gratefully,

    Robin

    • Post Points: 35
    • Report abuse
Page 9 of 11 (162 items)   « First ... < Previous 7 8 9 10 11 Next >
View as RSS news feed in XML
 © Integral Institute, 2006. all rights reserved - powered by enlight™ email this page del.icio.us | terms of service | privacy policy | suggestion box | help