No, misters, yesterday could not prove to me distinctly, than the prostitute is worse oby...

[SERGY]

No, misters, yesterday could not prove to me distinctly, than the prostitute is worse than the usual maid. - to mine, much it is better:)))

[Fairly clever]

I with you. Better. Unequivocally. I can prove, why, to the one who considers or counts, what is it not so, on items or points. Only I do not hope for comprehension of a problem in view of psychopathic bents different Dash.

[SERGY]

About Dash I do not know, but ekzaltirovannye young women at once start to speak, that I defective or incomplete:))

[Ygy]

/ // ljuhami invalids who cannot receive desirable itself use muzhchiny-. So though for money. Prostitutes can and muzhiks who them polzujutsja-is exact zakompleksovannye moral impotents are not worse than the usual maid (especially if about it or this speaks Fairly clever, and to that as not to her it is the nobility), and here.

[kuka]

I can not judge to what never addressed.

[SERGY]

Ygy, and you try or taste, chyo as not the muzhik - that, can, it is pleasant? But the girl will start to be fractured - that is not pleasant also it, and the item are not broken out!!!

[kuka]

WELL that is why so all odnoobrazno-that!
Girlfriends, otjagoshchennye experience, advise innocent girlfriends necessarily "to sit down" on change... And muzhiks - to go on p-kam.
CHe - more variants are not present?
It is possible to jump for example with a parachute or at the worst - with Tarzanki:) - the life other horizons can will open:)))))
And that is directly boring:)

[kuka-> well here]

Oh, the darling Well here, forgive or excuse - previous not to you it is turned, it is simple under the text so has left:)))

[liska]

Sergy, yes nothing is worse. A body anyway, absolutely identical. If by and large to judge, all women for something are on sale, only at everyone the price (not only money)

[kuka]

Liska, well though you to me have opened prospects:))) ZHivu-I live, not to time was not on sale:))) Means - from your words - all ahead:)))
It, similar, encourages:)

[liska]

Cook, yes it is not necessary to bend soul. You have left zamuzh-were on sale for an opportunity of the quiet protected life, with quite worthy you the person by means of whom you will try to carry out the dreams of happiness. It too your price only expressed not in money.

[JUlka]

liska, was on sale in this case I think not pertinently, she has chosen such way of life and he worthy. .hi which which day dithyrambs Sergey successively sings, are on sale. They do or make that that want from them, they speak that that from them wish to hear and receive for it of money. In family slightly differently is not that so? And in general as on my modest view, they are necessary to weak men, which want samoutverditsja by means of " the paid words said in hearing ", even if he was in bed (or in a gate) nikakish - to him will tell or say that he the giant and in general super so he after that to live will want!:) the Normal muzhik will get or start the mistress more likely, and here " Uzho leaving or care is necessary ", and much it not on a teeth...

[liska]

JUlka, I think, you too not too seldom speak the husband that he wishes to hear, and anything bad in it or this is not present. Terpimee it is necessary to be.

[Well here]

All are "almost right, I liked a position liski-all correctly, it is necessary to look at a life fairly. To use prostitutes in direct naznachenii-this poverty, the proof of own inferiority.

[kuka]

No, I did not have a choice from variants of a way of life. At me always was orientation to normal family. And I the first the second did not choose the husband:) Simply differently has not developed. Vybirat-that was from whom, but it would not be desirable, and here here bats-bats-and two times married.
To tell to you as I about 2 m has met - in general obhohochites:) He to me has moved later 2 weeks after acquaintance, and week from this 2 h he was on business trip, and for remained - we saw 2 times:) And here 10 years:)))
So - your example - by me, he simply is not correct as any absolutization:)))