How tznius are todays sheitels?

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee How tznius are todays sheitels?

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 66 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #594370

    Huvi
    Member

    $5,000, 24-26 inch. European sheitels? Are those the sheitels Rav Moshe Feinstein gave a heter for??

    #731026

    Ofcourse
    Member

    How many people are spending $5,000 on a sheitel these days? The big name Sheitelmachers who used to do loads of business, are all producing cheaper sheitels to satisfy needs of people hit by the bad economy. The $5,000 sheitel wearers are probably the same small minority who spend upwards of 3 Mil on their homes, $150,000+ on their kitchens, etc. A tiny percentage.

    #731028

    Huvi
    Member

    but how tznius is it??

    #731029

    even if they r not 5000 they are still upwards of 2000 and i think the sheitels are nicer than a lot of womens actual hair. just because ur covering ur hair doesnt mean that u can go out and buy the shaitel that will make u look very good. i think women shud buy shaitels that are equally as nice as their actual hair

    amuligiyuren in the alter heim not only did people not have custom shaitels but they covered their hair with shmatas and nobody thought any worse of them

    #731030

    ☕️coffee addict
    Participant

    while were at it, I don’t get it this morning I say a lady with a shiny tichel, isn’t the poiint so that youre not attracted

    #731031

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    I don’t get it. What could be wrong with a sheitel? If you can find one that looks natural, that would be great.

    #731033

    MDG
    Participant

    <joking>

    The Ervat Davar is the hair.

    Therefore, if a lady shaves, she need not cover her head.

    </joking>

    #731035

    mewho
    Participant

    so are you saying to wear a sheitel that makes you look UN attractive on purpose?

    #731036

    asyyeger
    Participant

    I think all of you complaining about other people spending too much money on sheitels have a little too much time on your hands. Yes, I think spending $5,000 dollars ona sheitel is a tremendous waste of money – I’ve been married almost 14 years and I haven’t spent that much money on all the sheitels I’ve bought! But, 1) it’s none of my business, the best I can do is try to keep my own priorities in order and teach my children good values – I really don’t care how other people choose to spend their money (unless they’re also getting tuition breaks, but that’s a whole other topic!), and 2) you’re missing the point of a woman covering her hair. It’s not to look unattractive, it’s because once a woman gets married, her hair is something private and special,covered by the halachos of tznius and reserved only for her husband – just like the rest of her body. Nowhere does it say that a woman should not be attractive. While there is a distinct difference between being attractive and attracting when making choices in tznius, the cost of the sheitel is not the issue.

    As for the fact that our grandmothers in Europe wore shmatas on their heads, that’s really irrelevant. They also had no plumbing or electricity. Advances in technology can be used to improve our lives and enhance Yiddishkeit, or our appreciation of it.

    Again, I’m not advocating buying a ridiculously expensive sheitel, I’m just saying that some of the reasons by people against it seems to be covering something else (pun slightly intended).

    #731037

    Imaofthree
    Participant

    When wigs looked like horse hair, many frum women did not cover their hair. Now that they look so nice, many women now cover their hair, so that is a big plus. And some have a hechsher, cause we don’t want that indian hair avodah zorah tarfus on our heads!

    On the other hand, I saw a shaitel yesterday that had almost neon orange high lights….way too much! (and the woman likes it like that).

    #731038

    Brooklyn Yenta
    Participant

    chayav, amuligiyuren in the alter heim a fat woman was the height of beauty. do you really want to go back there? face it, times have changed, and while i don’t advocate wearing super long trashy shaitels, looking nice in an eidel way is not a bad thing. a woman would probably attract more attention looking like garbage.

    #731039

    apushatayid
    Participant

    Sigh.

    #731040

    charliehall
    Participant

    popa,

    Many great rabbis have objected to wigs. You can read their responsa.

    #731041

    Well said asyyeger.

    Its simply none of mine or any other critics buisness what someone wears if its halochakly permissible.

    Just for the title. Whats the connection between a price paid thats not being flaunted and tznius?

    #731042

    Chayav-

    Actually, there was a long period in “der alter heim” where most women did NOT cover their hair…

    #731044

    mdd
    Member

    Enlightenedjew, only in a certain country.

    #731045

    yitayningwut
    Participant

    mbachur, MDG –

    Isn’t the point so that you’re not attracted?

    The Ervat Davar is the hair.

    There is an unrelated Gemara (Kesubos 72a) which states that a woman is not allowed to go out with an uncovered head, and brings a pasuk, ???? ?? ??? ????, which from the context of the passage in the Torah it is clear that it was done in order to denigrate the woman who is a sotah, so we learn from there that for a woman not to wear a covering on her head when she goes out is derogatory to her.

    Note that the Gemara in Kesubos which makes the derivation from sotah never once mentions an obligation to cover the hair, rather to cover the head.

    Also, note that the Gemara in Berachos which is attempting to prove that the hair of a woman arouses a man, brings support from a pasuk in Shir Hashirim, and not from a pasuk in the Torah, which would have been a much better proof. If the reason a woman must cover her hair is because it is attractive to men, then we have a source from the Torah itself, i.e. ???? ?? ??? ????.

    There is more to say, but for now suffice it to say I think it is clear from these and other points that the two Gemaras are not related, at least not on the surface level.

    The Ritva at the end of Kiddushin says that the halacha follows this Gemara. However, he says that one should not rely on it if he is not a ???? ???? ????? ?????.

    If anyone actually read all of this, I hope you appreciated it. Thank you and have a good Shabbos.

    #731046

    ☕️coffee addict
    Participant

    Let me try this again. I’ll try to be clear this time

    Unless you have an alias you haven’t posted on this thread before.

    also this whole thread is that women are supposed to be tznua (At least thats how i interpereted it) so therefore one of the aspects of covering your hair is negated

    (take for example a shirt that a woman would wear that has a picture of a makom ervah at that place)

    #731048

    asyyeger electricity has nothing to do with this electricity has enhanced our lives without damaging yiddishkeit but sheitels have greatly ruined our spirituality for many reasons

    1)women have to outdo each other causing sinas chinum,kinah

    2)It takes away the whole point of covering their hair

    brooklyn yenta-

    a woman would probably attract more attention looking like garbage.

    WHAT??? ARE U SAYING LADIES THAT LOOK LIKE GARBAGE ARE ATTRACTIVE???? I DONT KNOW WHERE U HAVE BEEN

    #731049

    yitayningwut
    Participant

    mbachur-

    I do not have any other usernames, my intention was that I posted this point more briefly on other threads (as rabbiofberlin noted) and it didn’t seem like too many people ‘heard’ me.

    As for your point about the shirt, it is a valid point, but the question is not a question according to the arguments I present in my long megillah. And btw, I posed the same question (rhetorically) to Popa a month ago here http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/the-real-fraud just over halfway down.

    rabbiofberlin-

    Thank you for your generous compliments. I’m glad you appreciated.

    As for the differentiation you make between ‘relative’ and ‘absolute’ ervah, I actually thought the same thing and used those exact words when I explained it to my chavrusa. I think this is clear from the gemaros in Berachos. I don’t have much time now but I’ll post a paragraph from a paper I wrote a while back:

    ???? ??? ?’ ??? ???? (???? ????? ???????, ??? ????????) ??”? ??????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ??????? ??, ??? ????? ????? ????, ??”?. ??”?, ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ????????, ??? ??? ??? ???? ?? ?????. ????? ???? ????? ??? ????? ??????? ????? ????, ?????? ??? ???? ????? ?? ???, ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????? ???? ???? ?????? ????? ???”?, ??? ?????? ???? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? (????? ??:??), ?????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ??? ?? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ???; ????? ??? ?? ??? ????? ?? ???? ???? ?????, ????? ????? ????? ??”? ???? ????? ??? ??? ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ???? ?? ????? ????. ???? ???? ?’ ??? ??? ???? ????? ???, ???? ???? ?? ??? ???? ????, ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ?????

    ??? ???? ?? ??? ???? ????? ?? ????? (??”? ??’ ?? ??”?) ??”? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ??????, ?? ??? ???? ???? ???? ???, ???? ???? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????, ???? ?????? ????? ????, ??”?. ????? ??? ??? ???? ?? ?? ???? ????? ???, ??”? ??? ???? ????? ????? ????, ???? ???? ???? ??? ???? (??? ?:?) ???? ????? ????? ?? ???? ?????, ????’ (????? ??) ??????? ?? ????? ????? ?????. ???? ????”? ????, ??? ??? ???? ????

    I think I am being more generous than you in what I am defining as ‘relative’ ervah, but before arguing with me please be me’ayen in the Gemara that brings down that mishnah in Challah.

    As for your final point, yes, that is what I was trying to say. I believe that the Gemara in Brachos is not d’oraisa, and ‘das yehudis’ is based upon it, but ‘das moshe’ which at least in some way is d’oraisa is unrelated, which is why ???? ?? ??? ???? has no place in the Gemara in Berachos.

    Thank you again for your comments. Shavua tov!

    #731050

    mdd
    Member

    Rabbiofberlin, It is mefurash in the Gemora that at least a certain degree of hair-covering is De’Oraysa,eventhough it is a lav davka a lav or an ase. Something could be min’HaTorah without being a full-fledged lav or an ase. Stop dreing up the Halocha because of your misguided hashkofos.

    #731051

    mdd
    Member

    The OP asked about if contemporary sheitels are tsniusdik, not if a lady has to wear it.

    Yitay and rabbiof, when people went to work on Shabbos in early days in the US, you would want to say that somehow it was not chilul Shabbos either?

    Rabbiof, your way is:a)people start doing an aveira(c^v);b) you cook up heteirim postfactum;c)now it’s mutar.Gevalt geshrigen!!

    #731052

    mewho
    Participant

    how much are those human hair wigs for men?

    #731053

    You can tell yourself stories about how sheitels are fine, but they are not, especially the kind of sheitels these days. what about wearing your sheitel in a ponytail, and other ways that make it look totally natural? How is that supposed to show that you are a married woman? I don’t wear a shaitel (I used to) and believe me I get plenty of dirty looks from other women who seem to think that not wearing fake hair is shleppy. Wearing a tichel shows the world that you are married Jewish woman. There is a lot more to say on the subject, but most of the time no one listens anyway. Sheitels is just not a subject anyone wants to touch. THere is nonsense that our grandmothers in Europe wore shaitels (not the kind they wear today!) Well, the moranos used to bench licht in the closet, should their descendants continue to do that now as well?? Our grandmothers covered their hair with fake hair because they could not just cover as a Jewish woman is supposed to, because of a very real danger to them because of anti-semitism,etc.

    #731054

    rabbiofberlin
    Participant

    I cannot respond to “feelings’ (yiddishemishpacha). If you feel that a sheitel is not for you, don’t wear it. Others may-if so desired- rely upon virtually all posking that a sheitel is allowed. BTW- “peah nochris” (a sheitel) goes back to gemoro’s times….look it up.

    mdd- actually, yes, if I would see someone do something that”looks” like an aveirah, I would 1)first, try to be dan lekaf zechus,like maybe he is driving his car to hospital for pikuach nefesh. 2)if this is not the case, then I would try explaining to him/her that it is wrong and 3) if neither of these is the case, well, maybe there is a way to be mattir this-like ‘cholov’stam’ -the subject of another thread.

    mdd-the only think that I know is a “midoraisa” and neither lav or ashe is “halacha lemoshe misinai’ (like certain aspects of tefillin). But the appelation ‘das moshe’ is very specific only to this matter of a woman’s hair. As I said, I don’t know what it means. “iytai’ has showm you many examples where “deoraisa” in the gemoro doesnt’ necessarily mean min hatorah.

    #731055

    apushatayid
    Participant

    This thread is ridiculous. Don’t assur things unless you are a posek. If you feel it is not tsnius, don’t let your wife wear it. Don’t assur things on someone elses wife.

    To the OP. What is your hang up, the money or the length?

    #731056

    Ofcourse
    Member

    yiddishemishpacha, isnt it up to our Gedolim to pasken whether women should or should not continue wearing Sheitels? I havent heard one American Rov being negative and stipulating limits in regard to Sheitels. Are they unaware of what you are aware of? Are their wives not discussing it with them? Are they never walking on the street?

    #731057

    mw13
    Participant

    The following article appeared here on YWN:

    (http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/article.php?p=25413)

    Harsh Words Against Sheitels

    (Tuesday, November 4th, 2008)

    The Rav repeated over and over again the severity of the isur of wearing such sheitels, which the wife and her husband share equal responsibility.

    (718) 906-6400 [Kol HaLashon NY]

    Press 3 for Yiddish

    Press 2 for Gemara

    Press 19 for Rav Eliyashiv

    Press 1 for Pesachim

    Press 173 for the shiur

    While listening to the shiur, press 6 (skips 5 minutes) 4 times.

    There is no need to call Kol Haloshon in EY

    #731058

    apushatayid- who says im not a posek??

    yiddishemishpacha- does your whole family gather around the computer and vote on what to post?? its probably hard with a few people to decide.

    #731059

    yitayningwut
    Participant

    mdd-

    Your ostensible yisras shomaim is impressive. I laud you for that.

    However, I learn three sedorim a day, and I know how to learn a sugya. Yes I can make mistakes, but I am not full of garbage. I might sound like I’m bragging, but it has to be said, because I need you to understand that I do not ‘drei up the halacha’.

    If you have a problem with what I am saying, then please have the respect to read everything I wrote, and respond to my arguments in an intellectual fashion. If you don’t want to or care to, then do not issue blanket statements discrediting what I have written when you have no clue what it is.

    I am fine with you saying that your rav disagrees. And I am fine with you presenting an argument contrary to what I have presented. But stop with the bashing. I am not some guy who just makes up things to support an agenda. So please don’t treat me as such.

    Oh, and btw the Terumas Hadeshen is mefurash that according to the Rambam covering hair is not d’oraisa at all. I reiterate this though I mentioned it in the last thread, because the pshat you suggested for what he means is altogether inviable. His exact words are:

    ???? ????”? ????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ?????? ?????? ?”? ?? ????? ?????? ?”? ??? ???????? ?? ??

    The fact that he is madchik the Gemara’s word ???????? show clearly that his words pertain to the ‘das moshe aspect’. Seriously, you cannot get out of that.

    #731060

    charliehall
    Participant

    mdd,

    If you read Rav Broyde’s essay you will find that there are more opinions that say that haircovering is d’rabbanon, and even a few (three, to be precise) that say it is simply a minhag.

    Also, wigs seem to have disppeared from the Jewish world for a thousand years. They returned in early modern times in imitation of European gentiles.

    ofcourse,

    I know of at least one American rabbi who forbade wigs: Rabbi Isaac S. Hurewitz, in his Yad ha-Levi.

    #731061

    mdd
    Member

    Yitay, off-hand, the Trumos HaDeshen was saying that covering all hair is de’rabbonon, not that the whole thing is derabbonon.

    I do not have time to read your whole megilla, say it shortly. From what I did read, it looks like your opinion is not shared by the regular Poskim. Chofets Chaim held it was de’Oraysa. That’s the pashtus of the sugya.

    Do not give me this MO schtik: going into the sugya, finding one shvere da’as yehid or a minority opinion and relying on it. Like you tried to do about the pritsusdik clothing — using the shita that it all goes basar the minhag. Most Poskim do not hold like that and it does not fit the metsius.

    #731062

    oomis
    Participant

    A woman’s body (and a man’s too, for that matter) are erva. But when they are clothed, they are not. Should both men and women not wear attractive clothing, nice suits, pretty dresses? The store sin Boro Park are extremely pricey. I can’t afford to shop there (and it doesn’t bother me, as I am not label-conscious). But maybe it should be assur to wear nice clothing, too, because it covers the reva of the body, just as the pretty shaitel covers the erva of a married woman’s (and ONLY a married woman’s) hair.

    If the purpose of the hair covering is to make her look less attractive to all men but her own husband, then all the people arguing about the fancy sheitlach would be correct. But if the purpose of covering the hair, is the same as the purpose of wearing a dress or a suit, which is to cover up the erva of the body, then it should not matter to anyone what the sheitel looks like. It’s sole purpose is to provide a cover for something which may only be seen by her own husband (or other women). We amke many assumptions about hair covering, but what if the only reason is because when a woman gets married the status of her hair changes? Period.

    #731063

    yitayningwut
    Participant

    mdd-

    About the Terumas Hadeshen, open your eyes and stop being so closed-minded. He specifically ‘bavorns’ the fact that the gemara says ???????? by saying it just means a ???. How can you possibly say with a straight face that he really holds there is a ???????? level involved?! What in the world was he ‘bavorn’ing then?! Isn’t there one person on this forum who agrees with me that this claim of mdd’s is narishkeit?

    And no, I will not gratify you with a summary of what I wrote. I didn’t write lengthly because I enjoy writing megillos, I did it because it’s the only way to properly understand how I see the sugya. You want to label me and make blanket uninformed statements about my opinions, go ahead, I ain’t gonna help you.

    But just so you know, the d’rabbanan point really had nothing to do with what I wrote. What I wrote works just as well with those who understand the Gemara k’pshuto, that a partial covering is d’oraisa.

    #731064

    mdd
    Member

    Charliehall, Rabbi Broyde is a Modern Orthodox Rabbi. I do not accept his count-down of the shitos without seeing at how he arrived at his conclusions inside. Again, the Gemora in Kesubos 72 is clear that the ikar hair-covering is min’Ha’Torah. Shitos claiming otherwise would be hard-pressed to explain the Gemora. The opinion that it is a minhag sounds extremely shvere, if it even exists, and is not the result of somebody’s extremely shvere interpritations. And if you start going for far-off shitos, I know of a teshuva from a Hungarian (pashtus, Chassidishe) Ruv who held that a lady who does not cover her hair is misosa b’yad kol adam.

    And if it were de’rabbonon(eventhough, who told you that we go with those shvere shitos), so what?? De’Rabbonon does not mean “mutar”.

    And again, what are these MO ma’asos? Going after minority opinions or da’as yehids., including very shvere ones. Or dreing up even those minority opinions or da’as yehids(like it happens in some cases)?

    #731065

    oomis1105

    you have a good point but you are completely wrong. If a lady would be covering her arm with a more attractive arm that would be the same problem as covering her hair with more attractive hair. Wearing nice clothes isnt using more attractive erva to cover the ervah

    #731066

    Brooklyn Yenta
    Participant

    chayav:

    attracting attention is not always in a pretty way. a person can attract attention by acting ridiculous, or in this case, looking ridiculous.

    #731067

    apushatayid
    Participant

    Chayav.

    You want to be a posek, fine, be a posek. Whatever floats your boat.

    #731069

    Pashuteh Yid
    Member

    Mdd, Rabbi Broyde’s essay is about thirty something pages, so you can see all his sources and reasoning inside. I am not saying you or I have to agree, but nevertheless, the way of milchamsa shel Torah is only thorugh rayos and sevaros, not labels and namecalling. Rabbi Broyde did no worse than any other shtickel Torah on any random topic. Feel free to shlug him up with your own rayos and sevaros.

    As far as someone’s questions about Rav Moshe who is the posek of the USA, not Rav Elyashiv, as great as he is, Rav Moshe writes the following in a Tshuva:

    He tells a Rov that he has no right to forbid his wife from wearing a sheitel, even if it looks exactly like human hair and one can’t tell the difference. He says if one would forbid it because of maris ayin, he would have to forbid men from shaving, as well, since one might think he shaved with a blade. So there is no maris ayin in these types of cases.

    #731070

    YeshivaRodefKesef
    Participant

    The only solution – BURKAS !!

    That ought to satisfy all the “machmirim” with the ugly wives

    #731071

    charliehall
    Participant

    mdd,

    You speak of Modern Orthodox as if there is something wrong with it.

    And if you think that Rav Broyde is mispresenting the sources, why don’t you publish an article that lists the sources that he either failed to include in his analysis or misinterpreted.

    And regarding the opinions that say that haircovering is d’rabbanan or mutar (only three of the latter AFAIK), you are certainly permitted to write an article that points out how they are in error.

    I’m not a posek, not even a talmid chacham. But I object to writing real halachic opinions by distinguished orthodox rabbis out of our mesorah even if most pasken otherwise. And in the case of haircovering being d’oraita or d’rabbanan, the burden is on you in disagreeing with Rav Broyde to prove that he has erred in his survey of the sources. Ad hominem attacks like “MO shtick” are not convincing. A lot of rishonim do not agree with you regarding haircovering being d’oraita.

    #731072

    apushatayid
    Participant

    Bed-Stuy. Your correct. Let me rephrase. If anyone out there feels (using the guidelines set by the OP) a $5000, 24-26 inch sheitel is ok, then, wear it (or let your wife wear it). If you feel it is not ok, then dont wear it (or dont let your wife wear it). Dont tell other people what is or isnt right unless you are their Rav. Or, your name is Chayavinish or his sidekick alter ego Bed-Stuy, in which case you are the self declared cyber Rav.

    #731074

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    I kind of do think there is something wrong with modern orthodoxy.

    It seems to me to be infected by the very things that mdd accuses. I am disturbed when I see people relying on rishonim that have not been relied on for hundreds of years. That is not how we do it. We follow our mesorah, as it has developed. We don’t do new things.

    I really don’t care whether something is d’oraisah or d’rabanan, or whether a strict reading of the Rambam allows or prohibits it. I care about what frum jews, particularly my personal rebbeim and their rebbeim, have been doing last year, the year before, and the hundreds of years before.

    I am far more convinced by pointing to a posek from 100 years ago, than 1000 years ago.

    #731075

    popcorn
    Member

    Plain and Simple…the Halacha is for a woman to cover her hair.

    How she covers it is her choice. A shaitel, a tichel ,a Shmatte, a Hat etc. Nowhere does it say that a woman should look ugly in the choice that she choses to cover her hair. Boruch Hashem because of advanced technology we are able to have shaitels that don’t look like a a mop or broom. As long as a womans hair is fully covered, then she is following Halacha.

    If you want to talk about women who pull out the whole front of their own natural hair to blend in with their shaitel, or women who wear head bands with 2-3 inches of their own hair showing…that’s another story.

    #731077

    BrooKklyn yenta its true that u can also get attention by doing somwthing weird but usually a lady that is wearing a shmata on her head although she will get attention nobody will be attracted. Hwvr someone who is wearing an oustantetous shaitel wiL get attention and will be attractive.

    #731079

    Brooklyn yenta its true that even when a personm doies ridicuyles things they attract attention but if a lady is wearing a shmata although shell attract attention people won’t be attracted to her. If she’s wearing a nice shaitel shell attract attention and be attractive

    #731080

    charliehall
    Participant

    “I care about what frum jews, particularly my personal rebbeim and their rebbeim, have been doing last year, the year before, and the hundreds of years before.

    I am far more convinced by pointing to a posek from 100 years ago, than 1000 years ago. “

    Well if you really want to go there, a century ago frum women in much of the world were NOT covering their hair. And there are three poskim within the past 100 years who said that was mutar.

    “That is not how we do it. We follow our mesorah, as it has developed. We don’t do new things.”

    No, it IS how we do it. Sometimes we DO do new things. Jewish women had not worn wigs for a thousand years when they started doing it again in early modern times. Most poskim said it was ok. And there are a lot of innovations in other areas with no precedent.

    #731081

    charliehall
    Participant

    “How she covers it is her choice.”

    There *are* opinions that say she can’t use a wig.

    #731082

    charliehall
    Participant

    “I really don’t care whether something is d’oraisah or d’rabanan, or whether a strict reading of the Rambam allows or prohibits it.”

    The more I read this the more stunned I am. We DO care whether something is d’oraita or d’rabanan, and we DO care what Rambam says about just about everything.

    #731084

    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    That is not what Judaism means to me.

    The application of old halacha to new fact scenarios is fine. It is when old halacha is applied to old fact scenarios that I take issue.

    I don’t care what most frum people were doing 100 years ago; I care about what the rabbonim of the past 100 years have been saying.

    I am not against innovation when it is required by there being no precedent. I am against innovation when there is valid precedent, and people choose to follow very old and not accepted precedent over recent and accepted precedent.

    As far as the d’oraisah or d’rabanan, I follow d’rabonon the same as I follow d’oraisah, and I don’t know why you read my post any other way.

    As far as the Rambam, it relates precisely to my first point.

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 66 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.


Trending