First and foremost, do the right thing. When Silver goes off to Portland with Tom, I kiss her goodbye, and wish them both a good trip, and take care of her cats while she's gone. Sometimes it feels good, and sometimes it doesn't, but I (try to) act like the person I want to be, not the person I feel like at the moment.
Matt wrote this back in 2006 on his Sex With Matt Blog. I read it back then and then happenstanced upon it again today and decided to post it.
Click here to read the whole Poly Is Hard post.
Here's the link to his blog.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Check This Out--Pleasure/Pain
Here is a nice little article written by Mistress Mastisse about the euphoria of being on her side of the whip.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Just As Happy
The other night I was talking with Lover Who Is My Lover and his wife about polyamory and she brought up the aspect of ego satisfaction in regards to having multiple lovers. A married friend of hers has a continual string of lovers and she is wondering how much of his falling in love and engaging in sexual escapades is related to boosting his ego. He's not so young anymore but is still in high demand with young beautiful women who are willing to take him for an exciting ride. With most of these women, the ride ends with him moving on and leaving them brokenhearted. She was curious about H. and if this ego boost was part of the appeal in his having multiple lovers. I told her that I thought not and that although H. appreciates our sexually open relationship, he would probably be just as happy being monogamous.
Humm. Why did I say that and is it true I wondered? I started thinking of all the lovers H. has had in his life. He's had a lot to be sure, many more than I have. I was always monogamous in my relationships before we got together. Plus I started thinking about this whole ego satisfaction thing and how people identify as sexual beings and how our lovers help us validate our self worth through their desire for us. Well, this is definitely true for both H. and myself. It's not like either of us go out looking for lovers to validate our worthiness and desirability but once in relationship and in love with another, hell yes, it's big. For instance, H. desires me all the time. Not only does he tell me that regularly and repeatedly, it's the obvious truth of my experience with him for the 16 years we've been together. That has worked well for me, comforting my ego in a very satisfying way. I desire H. sexually of course but not to the extent he desires me. We share a very deep and profound (and hot) sexual relationship, yet my sexual desire for him waxes and wanes. I'm more sexually moody with him than he is with me.
I get to experience the other side of not being constantly sexually desired by Lover Who Is My Lover. In that relationship, I seem to be the one who is pretty much always available and ready for sex and I pretty much consistently hold myself back with him. It's a bit of an ego buster for me but one I'm willing to rise above. In fact, I'm fine and happy just hanging with him, not always needing to take it to a sexual place, BUT it's usually a step back for me, not my first and natural inclination. The sex is nice when it happens and our time together is sweet when it doesn't happen. It's a pretty good deal compared to what I've gone through with Lover Who Is Not My Lover. And it's not that there aren't quite a few men out there willing to validate my sexual self if that's what I was looking for-- ones who are willing to adore me and fuck me at the drop of a hat. But I have no desire for those types of relationships and I shy away from "glommers" who offer me too much attention. I've never been the type of woman who is capable of taking much more advantage than a drink or two at a bar from an admiring man. I've had a few big (fat wallets along with their fat cocks) opportunities too. Some I've later been a little sorry I passed up. But once I've offered my heart to someone, sex and love get all tied up in a convoluted mix. I get attached and have a tender heart.
Where was I? Oh yes, the idea of H. being just as content being monogamous as he is in our sexually open relationship. So I asked him. I asked him what he would do if I told him that I wanted to be monogamous and wanted him to be monogamous too. His answer was that he would think that I had lost my mind because I would never say that to him. "But play along with me here honey" I said. "What if I did ask you that? People change, it's possible. What if I really wanted, for whatever reason, for us both to be sexually monogamous with each other, would you be willing to make that agreement with me?" He said that it was impossible for him to give me an answer, that he would need to experience the heart energy and all that was motivating me to make such a request of him, that it was just too unreal (and surreal) to go there without a lot of contemplation. I understand. Although I know what my answer to him would be if he were to make the same request of me. Been there. Done that. Here we are.
When I made the comment about H. appreciating being in a sexual open relationship, but that he would be just as happy being monogamous, Lover Who Is My Lover said that that's what it is like for him. Well, as I thought about that comment it triggered me a bit. Damn, where's the fucking passion boyfriend? I don't want to be expendable. Extraneous. Superfluous. Was he in essence saying, "Well, it's pretty nice having you around and all but I'd be just as happy if you weren't"? He's said similar things to me too. Once he told me that if he was ever to get into another polyamorous relationship that he'd like to be with someone who lives fairly close, but in another city. He's also told me that I'm like his wife in so many ways that he's thought he might prefer being in a relationship with someone who is totally different than her. For Christ's sake. Hello? What I am anyway, 'Rent a Girlfriend'? Not that you're seriously considering it or anything but you'd kinda like to turn me in and try out a different model?
When I say these things out loud (or type them here in this blog) they sound kinda awful. Way worse than they really are. Actually they aren't bad at all unless I make a story out of them. Essentially, I'm joking even though I'm serious too. I mean, I know these things are both true and not true. It's all a grain of salt in the big picture. I've made it clear to Lover Who Is My Lover that it's important to me that we have a honest and open relationship. I want us both to speak the truth to one another and I've told him that I want to hear his "truths of the moment" whether these truths turn out to be the ultimate truth or not. I consider him my good friend first and foremost and I want him to know that he can speak his mind and share his heart with to me without editing out stuff that might hurt my feelings. I mean, I'd rather have my feelings hurt and hear the naked truth of his thoughts and what's up for him than have him withhold his truth from me. I love him and I appreciate that he trusts me enough to be open and tell me the thoughts that cross his mind. I mean, it's not that I'm of the opinion that what he thinks is strange anyway. For instance, if I'm really like his wife in many ways, I think it's normal that he might sometimes wonder or wish that he had a girlfriend who was totally different. Whatever. I mean, as much as I like him (I do like him a lot along with being in love with him) it's not like I wouldn't appreciate having another boyfriend who possesses qualities that are different than his. But I don't want to replace him, I'd just take ANOTHER boyfriend. But then there is the whole issue of having the time and energy for another boyfriend. Besides, I already have Lover Who Is Not My Lover to deal with!
But I really didn't so much like hearing that he would be just as happy being monogamous. On the one hand I can appreciate this about him and even more so because even with this inclination he is still choosing to be in relationship with me. And I also know that that one line isn't the only line in the story of who he is, what he's about, and what I mean to him. He's made that obvious and he treats me well. If he wasn't a sweet lover I wouldn't be with him. But at that moment, no other lines followed and it served to raise the idea in my mind--that I am possibly irrelevant. Non-essential. Impertinent to him. I know that is not the truth but I'm a flawed human being with a tender heart, along with being a woman in love, and sometimes I take comments personally and out of context.
With all that said, I'm just as happy too.
Humm. Why did I say that and is it true I wondered? I started thinking of all the lovers H. has had in his life. He's had a lot to be sure, many more than I have. I was always monogamous in my relationships before we got together. Plus I started thinking about this whole ego satisfaction thing and how people identify as sexual beings and how our lovers help us validate our self worth through their desire for us. Well, this is definitely true for both H. and myself. It's not like either of us go out looking for lovers to validate our worthiness and desirability but once in relationship and in love with another, hell yes, it's big. For instance, H. desires me all the time. Not only does he tell me that regularly and repeatedly, it's the obvious truth of my experience with him for the 16 years we've been together. That has worked well for me, comforting my ego in a very satisfying way. I desire H. sexually of course but not to the extent he desires me. We share a very deep and profound (and hot) sexual relationship, yet my sexual desire for him waxes and wanes. I'm more sexually moody with him than he is with me.
I get to experience the other side of not being constantly sexually desired by Lover Who Is My Lover. In that relationship, I seem to be the one who is pretty much always available and ready for sex and I pretty much consistently hold myself back with him. It's a bit of an ego buster for me but one I'm willing to rise above. In fact, I'm fine and happy just hanging with him, not always needing to take it to a sexual place, BUT it's usually a step back for me, not my first and natural inclination. The sex is nice when it happens and our time together is sweet when it doesn't happen. It's a pretty good deal compared to what I've gone through with Lover Who Is Not My Lover. And it's not that there aren't quite a few men out there willing to validate my sexual self if that's what I was looking for-- ones who are willing to adore me and fuck me at the drop of a hat. But I have no desire for those types of relationships and I shy away from "glommers" who offer me too much attention. I've never been the type of woman who is capable of taking much more advantage than a drink or two at a bar from an admiring man. I've had a few big (fat wallets along with their fat cocks) opportunities too. Some I've later been a little sorry I passed up. But once I've offered my heart to someone, sex and love get all tied up in a convoluted mix. I get attached and have a tender heart.
Where was I? Oh yes, the idea of H. being just as content being monogamous as he is in our sexually open relationship. So I asked him. I asked him what he would do if I told him that I wanted to be monogamous and wanted him to be monogamous too. His answer was that he would think that I had lost my mind because I would never say that to him. "But play along with me here honey" I said. "What if I did ask you that? People change, it's possible. What if I really wanted, for whatever reason, for us both to be sexually monogamous with each other, would you be willing to make that agreement with me?" He said that it was impossible for him to give me an answer, that he would need to experience the heart energy and all that was motivating me to make such a request of him, that it was just too unreal (and surreal) to go there without a lot of contemplation. I understand. Although I know what my answer to him would be if he were to make the same request of me. Been there. Done that. Here we are.
When I made the comment about H. appreciating being in a sexual open relationship, but that he would be just as happy being monogamous, Lover Who Is My Lover said that that's what it is like for him. Well, as I thought about that comment it triggered me a bit. Damn, where's the fucking passion boyfriend? I don't want to be expendable. Extraneous. Superfluous. Was he in essence saying, "Well, it's pretty nice having you around and all but I'd be just as happy if you weren't"? He's said similar things to me too. Once he told me that if he was ever to get into another polyamorous relationship that he'd like to be with someone who lives fairly close, but in another city. He's also told me that I'm like his wife in so many ways that he's thought he might prefer being in a relationship with someone who is totally different than her. For Christ's sake. Hello? What I am anyway, 'Rent a Girlfriend'? Not that you're seriously considering it or anything but you'd kinda like to turn me in and try out a different model?
When I say these things out loud (or type them here in this blog) they sound kinda awful. Way worse than they really are. Actually they aren't bad at all unless I make a story out of them. Essentially, I'm joking even though I'm serious too. I mean, I know these things are both true and not true. It's all a grain of salt in the big picture. I've made it clear to Lover Who Is My Lover that it's important to me that we have a honest and open relationship. I want us both to speak the truth to one another and I've told him that I want to hear his "truths of the moment" whether these truths turn out to be the ultimate truth or not. I consider him my good friend first and foremost and I want him to know that he can speak his mind and share his heart with to me without editing out stuff that might hurt my feelings. I mean, I'd rather have my feelings hurt and hear the naked truth of his thoughts and what's up for him than have him withhold his truth from me. I love him and I appreciate that he trusts me enough to be open and tell me the thoughts that cross his mind. I mean, it's not that I'm of the opinion that what he thinks is strange anyway. For instance, if I'm really like his wife in many ways, I think it's normal that he might sometimes wonder or wish that he had a girlfriend who was totally different. Whatever. I mean, as much as I like him (I do like him a lot along with being in love with him) it's not like I wouldn't appreciate having another boyfriend who possesses qualities that are different than his. But I don't want to replace him, I'd just take ANOTHER boyfriend. But then there is the whole issue of having the time and energy for another boyfriend. Besides, I already have Lover Who Is Not My Lover to deal with!
But I really didn't so much like hearing that he would be just as happy being monogamous. On the one hand I can appreciate this about him and even more so because even with this inclination he is still choosing to be in relationship with me. And I also know that that one line isn't the only line in the story of who he is, what he's about, and what I mean to him. He's made that obvious and he treats me well. If he wasn't a sweet lover I wouldn't be with him. But at that moment, no other lines followed and it served to raise the idea in my mind--that I am possibly irrelevant. Non-essential. Impertinent to him. I know that is not the truth but I'm a flawed human being with a tender heart, along with being a woman in love, and sometimes I take comments personally and out of context.
With all that said, I'm just as happy too.
Friday, September 25, 2009
A Landmark Year
I'm realizing that this has been a landmark year for polyamory in our lives. H and I are celebrating our 16th/13th anniversary in October. Sixteen years since we first dated and fell in love, and thirteen years married. We got engaged one year in. I wanted to behave responsibly for once and I liked calling him my fiance.
We always said we wanted a sexually open relationship but we fell into monogamy by default. We met and fell in love fast and deep. We were extremely busy getting to know one another, bonding, playing, working, raising kids, and having great sex, that we didn't have time for other lovers. But we talked a lot and knew that theoretically at least, we were not sexually exclusive with one another. And as the date of our actual marriage grew closer, we talked more about how we might handle our commitment to being sexually open.
So three years from when we met and fell in love we were married and then fast forward another 3 years to when we threw theory out the window and started practically applying polyamory. That was a little over 10 years ago and we had been together for almost 6 years. Fast forward another 10 years...
Besides a few, fun, loving, sexual encounters with friends here and there along the way, H. and I experienced a 5 year sexually loving relationship with one of my best friends. We were a happy little triad until we weren't. During this same time I fell in love with a young woman, a lesbian, who didn't know what to do with the fact that I had a husband. Our affair was brief and intense and never physically consummated. I had also fallen in-love with Lover Who is Not My Lover and had an on-going, complicated, sexually charged, but basically non physical relationship with him for a little over 4 years. After a long dry spell for both H. and myself, M. came along and she and H. have now been lovers for over a year and a half. I met Lover Who Is My Lover two years ago and we've been dating sexually for a year now come October.
This has been the first year of H.'s and my life together where we've both have had other significant lovers on a regular basis and from both of our perspectives, it's been good for us. It hasn't always been easy. Things aren't perfect--not exactly the way I, or he, would prefer them to be--but to quote myself once again, "We get in relationships, and fall in love with real people, not the made up persona's of our fantasies." I love my boyfriend. He is a good man and a good lover. And his wife is a gem. I love my husband. We've made a sweet life for ourselves. I like who I am, where I am going and what I am doing. I am happy--pretty much--most of the time. And nothing is keeping things from getting better. Lover Who Is Not My Lover is still in my life too and our relationship is sweet and evolving. I feel very blessed to actually be living a polyamorous life. Finally. It's what I've wanted for a very long time. I give thanks.
We always said we wanted a sexually open relationship but we fell into monogamy by default. We met and fell in love fast and deep. We were extremely busy getting to know one another, bonding, playing, working, raising kids, and having great sex, that we didn't have time for other lovers. But we talked a lot and knew that theoretically at least, we were not sexually exclusive with one another. And as the date of our actual marriage grew closer, we talked more about how we might handle our commitment to being sexually open.
So three years from when we met and fell in love we were married and then fast forward another 3 years to when we threw theory out the window and started practically applying polyamory. That was a little over 10 years ago and we had been together for almost 6 years. Fast forward another 10 years...
Besides a few, fun, loving, sexual encounters with friends here and there along the way, H. and I experienced a 5 year sexually loving relationship with one of my best friends. We were a happy little triad until we weren't. During this same time I fell in love with a young woman, a lesbian, who didn't know what to do with the fact that I had a husband. Our affair was brief and intense and never physically consummated. I had also fallen in-love with Lover Who is Not My Lover and had an on-going, complicated, sexually charged, but basically non physical relationship with him for a little over 4 years. After a long dry spell for both H. and myself, M. came along and she and H. have now been lovers for over a year and a half. I met Lover Who Is My Lover two years ago and we've been dating sexually for a year now come October.
This has been the first year of H.'s and my life together where we've both have had other significant lovers on a regular basis and from both of our perspectives, it's been good for us. It hasn't always been easy. Things aren't perfect--not exactly the way I, or he, would prefer them to be--but to quote myself once again, "We get in relationships, and fall in love with real people, not the made up persona's of our fantasies." I love my boyfriend. He is a good man and a good lover. And his wife is a gem. I love my husband. We've made a sweet life for ourselves. I like who I am, where I am going and what I am doing. I am happy--pretty much--most of the time. And nothing is keeping things from getting better. Lover Who Is Not My Lover is still in my life too and our relationship is sweet and evolving. I feel very blessed to actually be living a polyamorous life. Finally. It's what I've wanted for a very long time. I give thanks.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Women's Sexual Freedom
I've obviously been out of the writing mode. I pushed myself to come into my blog today just to write something. Anything. Okay.
The first thing that comes to mind should be fairly simple to write about--women's sexual freedom. Ha. Simple. Yeah right.
I just watched Deepa Mehta's internationally acclaimed 1996 film, Fire. It made quite the stir in India where fundamentalist Hindu groups attempted to have it banned and did succeed in forcing several movie theatres to close their doors. Mehta received death threats and other actors in the film were also threatened.
Fire is the first in a trilogy of films by Mehta, the other two are Earth and Water. I haven't seen Earth yet but Water was extremely powerful as well and it caused a stir with the right-wingers also.
Fire, places us in the midst of an extended, modern day, urban, Indian family that consists of an elderly invalid mother, her two sons and their wives, all living together under one roof. There is a manservant who also resides in the home who helps with the family's "take out" food business, their video shop, and caring of the mother.
The elder brother, Ashok, is portrayed as a "pious" religious man, devoted to his guru. Because his wife, Radha, is unable to bear him children he has refrained from sex with her for 13 years but forces her to lie next to him while he masturbates. The younger brother, Jutin, secretly rents pornography out of the video store and is devoted to his Chinese lover, to the neglect of his new, young wife, Sita.
The sisters-in-law, strike up a supportive friendship within this unjust and monotonous existence that provides some relief from the obscene and condescending behavior of their respective husbands, a friendship that eventually evolves into sexual love.
The manservant is eventually caught in his nasty little ritual of watching porn and masturbating in front of the bed-ridden mother who is also unable to speak. He is aware of Radha and Sita's love affair and his resentment towards Radha (whose demands that he be forced to leave the house were overruled by her husband) leads him to disclose this information to Ashok. Shamed, Ashok kicks him out of the house and spies on the two women, catching them in bed together. The women decide to leave together and Sita goes first, waiting for Radha, who believes she owes her husband an explanation. Things go poorly between Ashok and Radha and when her sari catches fire in the kitchen he leaves her on her own to be enveloped by the flames.
The religious and cultural significance of this act is immense. Agni (fire) bears witness to the chastity of Hindu women and has been left to decide the fate of women in literal "trials by fire" since time immemorial. In a ritual called Agni Pariksha, women are forced into a fire. If she burns, it proves her guilt. If she emerges unharmed, she is innocence (chaste). This reminds me of the Salem witch trials (although the verdicts are reversed) which forced the accused woman into a lake. If the water refused her and she floated, she was deemed guilty. If she drowned, her death proved her innocence. In Fire, Agni bestows his mercy on Radha, deeming her innocence by releasing her from his flames and she escapes to meet her lover Sita. No wonder this infuriates the homophobic, sexually repressed religious right. Their God has now been portrayed as condoning homosexuality. The realistic portrayal of traditional, yet abusive relationships such as these that Radha and Sita were suffering from are considered more acceptable than the unconventional love and reprieve they found in each other's arms and hearts. In the end, even though Radha emerges from the flames unscathed, the viewer is left to wonder what will become of these two women left on their own in this culture. Their path won't be easy.
Is the path ever easy for a woman's sexual freedom? Even in this culture from which I have emerged? American culture is also sexually repressed and women have been raised to cow tow to the unenlightened needs of their men. Not that women's perceived needs are anymore enlightened. I view traditional, unquestioned, monogamous relationships as a symptom of this malady.
A friend recently mentioned that she thinks I don't respect monogamous relationships. I admitted that generally speaking, no I don't. That doesn't mean that I don't respect a person's choice to be monogamous. I've written before about many "valid" reasons as to why a person may choice monogamy. And I myself am certainly not the one to decide what reasons may or may not be valid--except for myself of course.
My friend also mentioned that she didn't think that monogamy and sexual freedom were necessarily mutually exclusive. I agree. But there is one particular situation that strikes me as clearly not a choice that leads to a woman's sexual freedom. Although there may be many "valid" reasons as to why a woman (or man) may choose monogamy, the threat of her partner ending their relationship if she chooses to have sex with another, is not a "valid" reason--in regards to sexual freedom. Of course she has every right to make this choice and I can most certainly respect that choice. What I am unable to support or respect is the notion that this choice is not a surrender of her sexual freedom. It is a choice that supports his fear of her sexual freedom, along with her fear of losing him. I'm just calling a spade a spade, not judging the rightness or wrongness of this choice.
The first thing that comes to mind should be fairly simple to write about--women's sexual freedom. Ha. Simple. Yeah right.
I just watched Deepa Mehta's internationally acclaimed 1996 film, Fire. It made quite the stir in India where fundamentalist Hindu groups attempted to have it banned and did succeed in forcing several movie theatres to close their doors. Mehta received death threats and other actors in the film were also threatened.
Fire is the first in a trilogy of films by Mehta, the other two are Earth and Water. I haven't seen Earth yet but Water was extremely powerful as well and it caused a stir with the right-wingers also.
Fire, places us in the midst of an extended, modern day, urban, Indian family that consists of an elderly invalid mother, her two sons and their wives, all living together under one roof. There is a manservant who also resides in the home who helps with the family's "take out" food business, their video shop, and caring of the mother.
The elder brother, Ashok, is portrayed as a "pious" religious man, devoted to his guru. Because his wife, Radha, is unable to bear him children he has refrained from sex with her for 13 years but forces her to lie next to him while he masturbates. The younger brother, Jutin, secretly rents pornography out of the video store and is devoted to his Chinese lover, to the neglect of his new, young wife, Sita.
The sisters-in-law, strike up a supportive friendship within this unjust and monotonous existence that provides some relief from the obscene and condescending behavior of their respective husbands, a friendship that eventually evolves into sexual love.
The manservant is eventually caught in his nasty little ritual of watching porn and masturbating in front of the bed-ridden mother who is also unable to speak. He is aware of Radha and Sita's love affair and his resentment towards Radha (whose demands that he be forced to leave the house were overruled by her husband) leads him to disclose this information to Ashok. Shamed, Ashok kicks him out of the house and spies on the two women, catching them in bed together. The women decide to leave together and Sita goes first, waiting for Radha, who believes she owes her husband an explanation. Things go poorly between Ashok and Radha and when her sari catches fire in the kitchen he leaves her on her own to be enveloped by the flames.
The religious and cultural significance of this act is immense. Agni (fire) bears witness to the chastity of Hindu women and has been left to decide the fate of women in literal "trials by fire" since time immemorial. In a ritual called Agni Pariksha, women are forced into a fire. If she burns, it proves her guilt. If she emerges unharmed, she is innocence (chaste). This reminds me of the Salem witch trials (although the verdicts are reversed) which forced the accused woman into a lake. If the water refused her and she floated, she was deemed guilty. If she drowned, her death proved her innocence. In Fire, Agni bestows his mercy on Radha, deeming her innocence by releasing her from his flames and she escapes to meet her lover Sita. No wonder this infuriates the homophobic, sexually repressed religious right. Their God has now been portrayed as condoning homosexuality. The realistic portrayal of traditional, yet abusive relationships such as these that Radha and Sita were suffering from are considered more acceptable than the unconventional love and reprieve they found in each other's arms and hearts. In the end, even though Radha emerges from the flames unscathed, the viewer is left to wonder what will become of these two women left on their own in this culture. Their path won't be easy.
Is the path ever easy for a woman's sexual freedom? Even in this culture from which I have emerged? American culture is also sexually repressed and women have been raised to cow tow to the unenlightened needs of their men. Not that women's perceived needs are anymore enlightened. I view traditional, unquestioned, monogamous relationships as a symptom of this malady.
A friend recently mentioned that she thinks I don't respect monogamous relationships. I admitted that generally speaking, no I don't. That doesn't mean that I don't respect a person's choice to be monogamous. I've written before about many "valid" reasons as to why a person may choice monogamy. And I myself am certainly not the one to decide what reasons may or may not be valid--except for myself of course.
My friend also mentioned that she didn't think that monogamy and sexual freedom were necessarily mutually exclusive. I agree. But there is one particular situation that strikes me as clearly not a choice that leads to a woman's sexual freedom. Although there may be many "valid" reasons as to why a woman (or man) may choose monogamy, the threat of her partner ending their relationship if she chooses to have sex with another, is not a "valid" reason--in regards to sexual freedom. Of course she has every right to make this choice and I can most certainly respect that choice. What I am unable to support or respect is the notion that this choice is not a surrender of her sexual freedom. It is a choice that supports his fear of her sexual freedom, along with her fear of losing him. I'm just calling a spade a spade, not judging the rightness or wrongness of this choice.
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Perla Batalla sings Suzanne live in Spain
Saw her sing this today at Chico World Music Festival. Beautiful!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
