“Can You Love Two Men at Once?”

13 Mar

That is the title of this Huffington post article, by Iris Krasnow (who wrote the book, as they say.)

It’s a subject close to my heart. I have “men friends” and, at times, the friendship has been very close. I have never been sexual with another man, but I have been flirty. And I have been very very emotionally attached. I’m not going to go into that right now. Instead, I’ll share a few excerpts from the article, while I process it a bit.

“The chapter on flirty friendships in my book “The Secret Lives of Wives” has prompted a deluge of mail from wives who swear by their boyfriends-with-boundaries, men they love in their hearts and not with their loins. These flirtations can spice up the gray corridors of a long marriage. Feeling sexually and cerebrally charged by others beyond a primary relationship is a natural response of the human animal. And when kept within limits, who can deny that it feels good?

Men we aren’t married to find us smart and extraordinary because they don’t live with us in the grind of ordinary life, with kids, mortgages and sinks strewn with toothpaste and their newly shaved facial hair. In old boyfriends, we find our lost youth; in new men friends, we get the endorphin rush of being on a first date. The trouble starts when sexual crackle between two people who aren’t married to each other erupts into a roaring bonfire love, an urgent attraction that is both dangerous and delicious.”

And this, her concluding thought:

“Fantasy is too often better than reality. A new boyfriend becomes an old boyfriend who probably shakes gross facial hair off his razor into the sink like that yucky husband of yours does. Holding a flirtation at arms length allows you to sustain the alluring mystery.”

Thoughts?

About these ads

20 Responses to ““Can You Love Two Men at Once?””

  1. Megan March 14, 2012 at 1:45 pm #

    I think one answer is, “Of course you can love more than one man.” But I would argue there would be many consequences to doing so that would likely (though not inevitably) leave both relationships in less stable, less intimate, less happy and less satisfying circumstances. Maybe there would be some fast-burning fits of excitement and passion during the gradual erosion of the relationships, but I wouldn’t consider polyamory an equal alternative to a deliberatively faithful and dedicated monogamous relationship. For one, incentives surrounding child-rearing and providing financially for spouse and off-spring easily become misaligned in polyamorous relationships, though proponents of polyamory like to cite a lot of (in my opinion, unconvincing) anecdotal hearsay to refute that.

  2. Megan March 14, 2012 at 2:06 pm #

    One other thought. Ms. Krasnow’s line of thinking is so self-centered and individually focused as opposed to relationally focused. Sure fantasizing about an old boyfriend or feeling the thrill of a new attraction may make MY heart flutter, and I even may go home and translate that into a great orgasm with husband, but when the passion clears I’ll be a step further away from husband. Husbandly annoyances bred from familiarity, like dirty socks on the floor, will only aggravate the wandering wife more in comparison to the naively idealized and romanticized old or new flirtations. That seems like self-defeating selfishness to me.

  3. Jules Godson March 14, 2012 at 2:39 pm #

    The correct answer: It depends.

    Many people can’s even successfully love or have a relationship with ONE person. Look at the combined divorce and mediocre marriage rate, which I would peg at about 85%. You do the math, the probability of disaster if you choose complicate things further. *Sometimes* a second relationship will actually stabilize the first, or it may render it a hollow shell; or perhaps you are the sort of people who have relatively mild “needs” when it comes to intimate attention, by which i mean your partner’s mindshare not sexuality. Emotional fidelity (which is not proven by and does not require exclusivity) is important to most of us.

    I’m not per se against polyamory (google the term if unfamiliar) nor do I believe lifelong monogamy is for everyone (it probably only really works for a small number), but in reality you must be very very careful. I think you have a lot of company however. There are a lot of people who have emotional or physical affairs and move on with their lives.

    I think marriage in amazing beautiful thing when it works. It usually doesn’t. A wandering eye by itself does not mean you are bad or your marriage is hosed. What you do about it–infidelity or divorce–will perhaps be one of the most difficult an important questions of your entire life (or maybe you’re a swinger who worries more about what to watch on TV that night … the older I get the less I judge, though my personal preferences are clear).

    Be wary of idealizing others, especially Exes! Looking to other people to fix your life for you is usually foolish. We’ve all seen the horrible rationalization some use for horrible behavior. Real life is tough but you eventually must return to it and the wreckage you’ve caused, if you care about such things. (If you’re a selfish jerk, you should have saved yourself the time of reading this!)

  4. handle with care March 14, 2012 at 5:10 pm #

    I’ve frequently fallen in love throughout our marriage,and it’s been touch and go more times than I should have to remember. I think Mr Darling has been pretty oblivious, we might talk about it one day but at present I think that ‘what the eye don’t see the heart don’t bleed over’. Which is of course not true,and is a reflection of a lack of intimacy. I think most infidelities are actually a turning away from intimacy,for whatever reason. I say that without disrespect,intimacy is the toughest challenge we face.

    I should however point out that I have made the very difficult decision to remain faithful to my family, and have never been physically unfaithful. I have decided that I will not be emotionally unfaithful again,and have invested that energy in my marriage. I find that the more energy and determination I put into my marriage,the less energy and desire I have to be involved with anyone else.

    It seems to me that this is a measure of the intimacy in a marriage-should we find ourselves wanting an involvement with others in preference to our spouses,it’s a pretty clear signal that there is work to be done. It’s then that we decide on our commitment to our spouses. Most of us will then need professional help to put things on track. I understand that this is a really tough call, which only serves to convince me that our marriages are probably the major forum for our growth as human beings.

    On the upside,we’ve achieved more intimacy and joy together than I would ever once have been able to imagine. It’s been more than worth the fight and anything that I may have sacrificed to get where we are right now. Mr Darling is the light of my life,but it’s been a long and winding road. I’m hoping there’s a long road ahead.

  5. Strong Man March 19, 2012 at 5:57 am #

    I’m curious how your readers relate this to pornography. Porn for men generally includes no emotional attachment, and as such, seems less dangerous in many ways because it’s extremely unlikely to result in an actual affair or breakup. Men may quite easily enjoy looking at more than one woman without ever loving more than one.

    And to be clear, I feel the emotional attachment to another person is not at all healthy or good-neither is porn, but the two are not the same.

    I like handlewithcare’s solution above for both problems-men who are into porn may need to be more clear about getting their needs met with their wife, and women emotionally into another man may need to invest more emotionally at home.

    Interested- what if the discussion above was about porn? Would the reaction or advice change at all?

  6. Jules Godson March 19, 2012 at 8:41 am #

    Beware monogamist thinking that being interested in an outsider always means either your mate is inadequate or that you’re a jerk. Expecting one person to be your perfect soul mate is too much. Now it’s hard not to be jealous and insecure when your SO is drawn to someone else, and it is possible they won’t come back. You roll the dice when you complicate things and I remain as skeptical of polyamory as I am of dishonest monogamy. You have choices. Some impulses, healthy or not, are best confined within the heart, light flirtation, or masturbation. Be honest about what you can control. And I’ll be blunt: sometimes it should be snuffed out privately or through therapy – for example, attraction to a child. But if your mate is GGG … in some cases you may be able to explore the issue with them and play it out in private. You might be surprised by their openness to inviting a hypothetical person into your sphere, and personally I’d rather have the truth. Being trusted is reassuring and erotic. Now, others are “don’t ask, don’t tell,” even to the point of tolerating an affair; if no consenting adult is violating important values or exploiting the other (that’s very tough to pull off), well, I hesitate to judge. A perfect monogamy is still preferable, but the perfect is the enemy of the good. We live in the real world.

    Parenthetically: “My wife doesn’t understand me…” Many men tend to be less emotionally developed and confuse sex and love, but do seek both. Generic porn and erotica usually fail on both counts: no love and crappy sex. It’s self-perpetuating I think. Men want the schlock b/c culture has taught them it’s what they want, and it sure as hell doesn’t make them better lovers. Meanwhile a lot of women (I’m talking is overbroad stereotypes here) get sucked into weird pseudo-rape romance stuff (vampires? really?) when they actually would like to read about or watch f**king but know they’re not supposed to be like that. Crappy porn and romance/erotica like Twinkies are inferior but just plain easier to mass produce and have been well-marketed. I don’t men necessarily want drama or that women want wham-bam … some do! … just not the 100% cartoonish sex of porn or formula bodice-rippers.

    It’s not too hard to realign one’s tastes to amateur *real* sex, especially men when they realize than bulbous silicone-inflated breasts, fake orgasms, and general misogyny aren’t sexy. Or women when they see they can be objectified sometimes *on their terms* and that’s cool, too. Kinda like when I realized the junk food I grew up used to taste good but is actually gross. (Food should not be the color of Doritos or Mountain Dew!) Turns out that homegrown is pretty hot … surely you can think of at least one couple you’d like to see doing it (and I know there must be someone reading this who is thinking about the time they did…). Compare the two, e.g., tube8.com [NSFW], and think about it.

  7. Steven March 21, 2012 at 1:16 pm #

    Of course women, as well as men, can love more than one person of the opposite sex. Is it approved by God? Good question. Presuming we’re LDS and sealed to our spouses, we say we’re commited to doing what it takes it be with spouse forever. Part of the covenant we made at sealing was to confine our emotions and sexual desires to our spouse. Yet, if our spouse dies, the church allows remarriage. Obviously, if a widow or widower remarries, she or he is clearly saying they “love” someone other than their first spouse. And since sealing policies allow women, as well as men, to be sealed to all spouses they’ve had in mortality, then it seems we’ll be polyamorous in the eternities. So, why are we serially monogamous in mortality but plural and polyamorous in perpetuity? Do we REALLY believe our deceased spouse is alive and well in the Spirit World, or don’t we?

  8. KaralynZ March 21, 2012 at 11:02 pm #

    Steven, those are exactly the arguments I use.

  9. Jules Godson March 22, 2012 at 12:18 am #

    @Steven: Are your questions rhetorical? Or do you consider the answers to be individual? Unknown? Unknowable? (I’m not leading here; I don’t know.)

    Technically, polyamorous refers to simultaneous relationships, as in plural wives (though some of the poly folk might object to the marriage part, or call that polyfidelity), whereas you refer to “serial monogamy.” The more extreme poly argument is that monogamy is a mistake, destined for unhappiness. I’m not taking a position here.

  10. Steven March 22, 2012 at 8:02 am #

    The question is rhetorical. But life long monogamy IS for everyone, according to our church beliefs. Unless and until your spouse dies. Then all bets seem to be off, and we start back over at serial monogamy (meet, greet, date, and remarry.) Yet, because of the sealing policies, we appear to be fine with polyamory. There’s nothing in any official church publication that says anyone will have to “choose” among spouses. In fact, quite the contrary. As long as the parties ‘keep their covenants’ those sealing ordinances are binding. I just can’t reconcile why HF would have us be monogamists in mortality if plurality won’t be a big deal in next life. As an aside, from what I’ve read of the polyamory position, to me it seems a little too much “me first” with respect to relationships. I understand the idea behind compersion, overcoming jealousy, etc. But, what was the first commandment given by God? To love him and no other. I think one of the most important traits we’re trying to develop in this life is loyalty. I know the polyamory position is that one can be loyal to more than one person. But if it wasn’t an issue, I don’t see why HF would care if we worshipped other “Gods” than Him. I think the commandment to love God with all our heart and strength is a pattern for how we should love our spouse.

  11. Jules Godson March 22, 2012 at 8:20 am #

    @Steven: beautifully put. I’m not impressed by the polyamorous “doctrine” but realize that life is complicated. My belief has been that yes it is possible or natural to love more than one person at the same time IF you are that sort, but to pursue such relationships is very hard if you are an earnest person. Only the person who feels the poly love can really be sure it’s possible, and there’s always risk of losing the partner. Serial monogamy poses a similar problem without risk of loss; but is the new love equivalent to the old? What if the former spouse didn’t want the person to remarry? I hope never to deal with it, which i guess means predeceasing my spouse, which puts her in that position….

    It seems to me that it’s pretty tough to make even a monogamous relationship work. Some poly people argue that multiple relationships, being natural, are easier and more honest; I think that’s true of a few but not the sort of relationship I would want; others call it “polyagony.” :-) Love is a natural thing and can’t be forced even with the best of intentions.

    I tend to look for loyalty and truthfulness, too, and on monogamy, well, more often than not marriage doesn’t work well. You need a contingency plan if you can’t get what you hoped for (e.g., a spouse becomes violent). It’s important to distinguish between feelings, which sometimes can’t be avoided, and acting on them, which falls under free will. Do sins of the heart count? Well, I’ll stop digressing.

    It’s all well and good to pursue hypotheticals, but real life is often high stakes.

  12. Eliza R. March 22, 2012 at 11:33 am #

    i haven’t had a lot of time to jump in here, but am very much appreciating the comments so far. Thank you!

    Honestly, it is something I am still processing a bit. (A close male friend being in town for the week, bringing it back to my mind.)

    I should chime in and say that I don’t find the church’s current stance on long term monogamy holds water. Because of our history of polygamy (JS was married to several women who were concurrently married to other men) and the lingering aspects of polygamy in current sealings to deceased spouses.

    anthropologically speaking, long term monogamy seems to be rather an anomaly for our species. Either serial monogamy, or else varieties of polygamy, polyandry, polyamory, or adultery seem to be more the norm.

  13. Steven March 22, 2012 at 2:10 pm #

    I read over the Canadian court decision that essentially ruled polygamy was against the law. Interestingly, paragraphs 146 – 233 of the decision cite the ‘emergence of modern day monogamy’ and quote a Stanford professor as saying monogamy is of relatively recent practice. 147] Dr. Walter Scheidel is Chair of the Classics Department at Stanford University. Among his areas of expertise is the emergence of monogamy in Western societies. Dr. Scheidel prepared an expert report for the AGBC addressing the origins, development and consequences of socially imposed universal monogamy. The following evidence derives from that report. (Dr. Scheidel means “polygyny” when he refers to “polygamy”.)

    [148] Polygamy has been the norm for most of human history, strict monogamy the exception.

    [149] Nevertheless, while most documented societies condoned polygamy, actual bonding and mating arrangements were largely monogamous due to resource constraints that limited the ability of men to support multiple wives.

    The court decision then goes on to describe the modern day development of laws requiring monogamy. A very interesting read. Of course, we believe from reading the BOM that polygamy was always intended to be the exception rather than the rule. I’ve never been quite clear whether forms of polygamy were being practiced by the Jews up to the time of Christ. It seems that by the time of early recorded Christian history (according to the works cited in the court decision), generally the Christian world has been monogamous because of socially imposed rules and eventually laws. You get all kinds of arguments over whether we’re biologically or culturally predisposed towards polyamory or monogamy. I come back to the notion that if you’re a believing Latter-day Saint, the instruction for what is allowed in mortality is pretty clear. But how to reconcile it with plural sealings is what has me wondering what we really believe with respect to the afterlife. Of course, we’re all wondering what will happen if SSM and/or plural marriage is ever legalized in the USA.

  14. Jules Godson March 22, 2012 at 2:23 pm #

    The naturalistic argument doesn’t get us very far anyway. All sorts of things come to us naturally enough—raping, pillaging, mayhem—and the major point of civilization is to rein these things in. We want to do things we shouldn’t. However, it may help us to understand why the probably arbitrary and recent standard of lifelong monogamy is difficult, regardless of whether it is worthy or required.

    I have a hard time imagine plural marriage becoming legal, and it invites some really difficult legal questions (what if one of three wants out?). Probably a relaxed sense of monogamy makes more sense. (I don’t know.) As far as banning it, however, I think as I do re gay marriage: I may have difficulty explaining why there is any right to it on historical precedent, but I have a lot more trouble explaining why society needs to ban it.

    Parenthetically I like the idea of relationships where logic and love, not jealousy and insecurity, govern. Thus a spouse spending time with another person platonically would not be threatening. Sex seems to be the conventional boundary, and we might do well to explain why. It’s actually kind of weird (setting aside momentarily concerns about pregnancy and STD’s). A marriage without sex is still a marriage. Without love, well, you’re roommates. I actually fear loss of emotional intimacy more, a gutting of the marriage rather than an oath-breaking, possibly impulsive and unique, act. (I’m not saying I’m like that, but I’d like to be….)

  15. bananas April 3, 2012 at 9:37 pm #

    hmmmm good post. a year or so ago i ended up spending time with a group of friends that included an old boyfriend. we hit it off splendidly. a little too splendidly, really. at first it was really fun, and i enjoyed the minor, innocent flirtation and attention. later, it was torture. nothing happened between us, at least nothing physical, but i was really torn apart by how much i wanted it to, and how much i knew that would destroy my and several other lives. my dad cheated on my mom, so i’ve never had much time or patience for adulterers, but for the first time in my life i could see how it happens.

    i’m out of touch with that man now, and i’ve reinvested in my husband. i feel ashamed when i think about what happened, and how close i came to hurting the people i love most (we have a baby son now, too, that we didn’t have then). i’ve never told my husband about it, because nothing physical did happen, and there was never an open understanding between me and the ex acknowledging our mutual attraction. i still don’t know what he was thinking during those times.

    so it’s behind me now, and i’m glad. however, i am still trying to figure out why it happened. i think a little bit of biology. this man was an ex i’d known before i ever met my husband. we had chemistry then, we still have it. a bit was fear of intimacy, as an above commenter mentioned. i think this drives most affairs, big and small (was it an affair? or just a crush?). i think some of it was rebellion, against a system (marriage) which has for so long been used to curtail women’s sexuality, while giving men a much freer rein. i distinctly remember resenting the thought that my husband owned me physically (yes, i ‘own’ him too, i suppose, but marriage has far longer been used to restrain women than men).

    i think in a better, purer world (maybe the afterlife, as those above me are discussing) men and women will be able to love more than one partner without injury. i sometimes wonder if that was what joseph smith was after in the first place, but cultural misogyny quickly turned it into polygyny exclusively (unimaginable to share one’s wife, while women had been sharing their husbands for centuries, like it or not). but i don’t think it’s happening in this world, in this culture. or at least, very, very rarely.

  16. Jules Godson April 3, 2012 at 10:04 pm #

    @bananas: that’s quite a story. It sounds like you’re still sorting through it and have been really strong and responsible. Kudos.

    May I ask, how do you assess your marriage now? (A baby is a good reason to keep a marriage together, but it doesn’t give a marriage its zing.) Attraction to someone else *could* mean that it’s gone flat, or maybe you’re idealizing the ex. A lover is much easier to manage than a spouse — “no dust upon the furniture of love” ( http://www.poemhunter.com/best-poems/adrienne-rich/living-in-sin/ ). Or maybe you’re capable of loving more than one (that’s not strict polyamory, btw, which actually sees monogamy as *wrong*), which I think is a natural state, sounds good in principle and is very risky in practice to consummate. But emotional infidelity is a problem, too. (Although you point out nothing physical happened, I assume you’re not going to tell your husband because he *would* take it as a big thing.)

    A friend advised from experience that a second relationship is better as an affair than openly (assuming your spouse consented); and by implication I’d say you should be cautious about coming clean with your spouse re even having the (natural and likely not marriage-threatening) feelings. Such a difficult thing! We “protect our marriage” by avoiding compromising situations which might, depending on our nature, be as mild as having lunch with an ex. As you know, it can spark things. Once in the danger zone, it’s pretty hard to talk yourself out of love — or lust.

    Kinda tough being *both* responsible and passionate, isn’t it? Sorry to ask so many Q’s, I just don’t have a full picture of how people see these things.

  17. handle with care April 4, 2012 at 4:02 pm #

    Jules,would you mind if I answer some of the questions you raise?

    It’s twenty years since I fell deeply in love with someone other than my husband-I’m glad that,up to this point I never came clean with him about this. It was not consummated,but it would have been if we’d spent longer together. I am deeply ashamed that I treated my husband in such a shabby and disrespectful way. He has shown me great love and affection,but has not been a great lover or a man who embraced intimacy. At the time I felt that these aspects of his personality justified my imbroglio, I realise now that this is not the case. I’ve since been very ill, I know that my lover would have never stuck with me through that as my husband has,and without doubt it would have been catastrophic for my children.

    At the time I idealised my lover,of course there was no dust upon him,he shone like the sun to me,compared with all the bitterness and rejection that I experienced with my husband.

    Since that time,we have been able through bitter experience,to deepen our relationship and become more comfortable with a deeper intimacy. I realise that a part of me could not endure that level of affection within my most intimate relationships,it was inconcievable to me,and so I did not confront that lack of intimacy within my marriage. Illness and grief-life experience-has challenged us both to grow closer, and to my joy,we have.

    Ultimately we were able to step up to the mark,but I could have easily abandoned ship.

    It was excruciating, I could have ruined many lives for generations to come. We would have been unlikely to have overcome all that in this life. I realise that as important as I consider it to be,sex can be powerful enough to distract us from intimacy. Working through this stuff deepens our intimacy and sexual experience. My lover would have been an object in my own internal drama, and at that point I did not respect him as a human being with his own subjective reality,any more than I did my husband.

    We live and learn,and these are powerful experiences at the time. But these experiences have immensely powerful consequences. I am so glad that I eventually came to the beginnings of my senses. I’m still working on it. I’ve tried to take the passion home.

    We are all so fragile.

  18. bananas April 4, 2012 at 9:59 pm #

    thanks for your story, h with c, and thanks for your interest jules. it’s tricky, working through the psychology on these things. it’s been good for me in many ways, i think, since i’ve always been something of a relationship idealist, to see how complicated things can really get.

    anyway, to answer your question on how i assess my marriage now, i have to say i feel it is very strong. the baby experience, sort of like handle’s illness, really showed me what my husband was made of. i don’t know whether my ex would have been as caring and helpful during those difficult late months of pregnancy or even more difficult early months with a newborn. i like to think so because i did and still do respect him as a person. but i know for sure now that my husband is a good, good man. in a way i think it forced me to rely on him, which before i don’t think i was very willing to do. i’ve always had a difficult time with real intimacy, i think probably because my parents had such an ugly divorce, and i really do think my imbroglio (great word, handle!) was as much a crutch to avoid closeness as anything else. but being forced to need him, and watching him come through, really allowed me to trust him in a way i didn’t before (through no fault of his).

    had our marriage gone flat before? hmm. like handle i sometimes found him distant and harder to relate to than i would have liked (normal marriage, probably). sometimes it seemed like we didn’t have very much in common, or that he wasn’t supportive of my interests. and like in the poem (great poem), it’s so easy to idealize someone who isn’t around every day. although actually one of the ways i kept my head on straight was by reminding myself just how much those two men have in common. i always knew on some level that a relationship with one would have all the same flaws as a relationship with the other. i guess i have a type.

    i am not completely clear on why i haven’t come clean with my husband about this. i think because i am so over it now, i would hate to hurt him with something that isn’t even important. i also cling to the fact that there was never any understanding of mutual romantic feelings between me and the ex, therefore it wasn’t real, right? how can it be real of the other person isn’t in on it? or was he? at any rate we never talked about it. maybe it was all in my head. why hurt my husband with that? but yes, all that aside, i do withhold it because i am so unsure of how big a deal it was, and i worry it was bigger than i’m willing to admit to myself.

    “Kinda tough being *both* responsible and passionate, isn’t it?”

    i really liked this phrase, because that is exactly what i was trying to do. at its base, i believe i do feel genuine love for my ex, and it would have felt dishonest to treat him coldly or withdraw friendship (we’ve since moved, so that’s my great excuse now for not being in touch). i have had love for him since we dated, before i ever met my husband. and on that level, my love for my husband and my love for my ex do not feel inherently exclusive. i think that is how people who cheat can honestly look at their partners and say ‘it didn’t have anything to do with you!’ even as they hurt them so badly.

    in a better world, maybe we can all just love each other without pain. until then, if i have to pick just one, i’m very glad i chose my husband :)

  19. Eliza R. April 5, 2012 at 10:44 am #

    (just wanted to pop in again and thank everyone for the wonderful discussion, and sharing of experiences. Even though I haven’t been able to say much more on the topic, I am greatly appreciating everyone’s responses. ((HUG)) )

  20. handle with care April 5, 2012 at 12:39 pm #

    Bananas,I should have thanked you for your courage.

    Since I’m such a big advocate of intimacy,I feel I should put my money where my mouth is and ‘fess up to my husband. But like you B, I wonder what would that serve at present?

    I’m glad that I haven’t up ’till now as I feel it would have planted doubt in my husband’s mind which can only feed on itself. That would only have added fuel to the fire of my disloyalty. I’m hoping nevertheless that in the fullness of time we will reach a place where this can take it’s place in our story together as a couple. I imagine at that point we will have become completely safe together.

    Wishing you well on your journey B. I can only say it’s been a thrill to find that things could turn out to be so different from what I imagined to be the case. Every day I learn new stuff,and most of the most important stuff has been through sex. How lucky I am.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 51 other followers

%d bloggers like this: