LisaShea Forum Logo
Search

Forum Areas
Parakeets
General Parakeet Chat
Keet Stories and Photos
Parakeet Photo Gallery
Budgie Training
Health and Medical Issues
Parakeet Breeding
In Memory Of ...
Non-Budgie Pets and Animals
Non-Budgie Animal Photos
Off-Topic for Keet Owners
Games
Animal Rights
Bird / Animal Books

General Discussion
Books, TV, Movies
Da Vinci Code
Dreams
Japanese Culture
Life, Universe, Everything
Online Courses
Politics
Religious Research
Show Your Own Work
Work From Home / Writing

Budgie Photos
My violet female budgie
my cage
two blues
Sponsored Link
Support Our Friends
The Child Health Site
Page 3 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >
Topic Options
#348384 - 01/22/09 02:47 PM Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
I'm sorry, but you are only allowed to post photos if you own the copyright or if permission has been given, which can be accessed by Lisa.

I have removed the photo but retained the link. smile


Edited by PDM (01/22/09 03:32 PM)
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Twitter Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Facebook Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to MySpace Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Del.icio.us Digg Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Yahoo My Web Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Google Bookmarks Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Stumbleupon Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Reddit
#348389 - 01/22/09 03:28 PM Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Originally Posted By: PDM, Post ##348291
"Do you think that the copies, the remains of Leonardo's cleaned original, and the restored version of 'the beloved disciple' are very different from each other?"

Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU
This writer respectfully suggests - ultimately - it doesn't matter.

I think that, if it didn't matter, no-one would be looking at the subject, so I think that it probably does matter ~ as far as the discussion, etc, is concerned.

I think that the combination of the early copies and the latest restoration probably give an indication of what Leonardo wanted his 'beloved disciple' to look like.

Whether he intended it to be a female, or an effeminate-looking male, I don't know. I don't think that the conclusion is an obvious one, though.

His notes may indicate a male beloved, but his notes also show a typical John ~ which is not like the one in the final painting.

And, if it was meant to be a woman, he was hardly likely to put something heretical in writing.


Edited by PDM (01/22/09 03:33 PM)
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Twitter Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Facebook Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to MySpace Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Del.icio.us Digg Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Yahoo My Web Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Google Bookmarks Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Stumbleupon Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Reddit
#348404 - 01/22/09 04:41 PM Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene [Re: PDM]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Here's a sketch ~ but which one is 'the disciple Jesus loved'?

http://www.renaflacaria.com/da%20Vinci%20page/LastSupper-sketches.JPG
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Twitter Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Facebook Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to MySpace Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Del.icio.us Digg Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Yahoo My Web Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Google Bookmarks Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Stumbleupon Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Reddit
#348429 - 01/22/09 06:01 PM Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene [Re: PDM]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Hello PDM,

Since the purpose was to honor the dedication of Pinin Brambilla Barcilon to the restorative effort for twenty years, this writer has no objection to removal of the acutal picture of her at work but retaining the link.

Research did turn up the sponsoring site after much effort and permission has been requested. This writer hopes that if that is granted, the image will be restored to the post for reader's immediate viewing.

Tks

...and Grrr82CU smile



Edited by Grrr82CU (01/22/09 07:13 PM)
Edit Reason: Needed Changes
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Twitter Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Facebook Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to MySpace Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Del.icio.us Digg Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Yahoo My Web Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Google Bookmarks Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Stumbleupon Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Reddit
#348736 - 01/24/09 09:02 AM Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene [Re: Grrr82CU]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
In the interest of being sure previous comments made by this writer were understood as intended, a brief review:

Originally Posted By: PDM, Post #348291
"Do you think that the copies, the remains of Leonardo's cleaned original, and the restored version of 'the beloved disciple' are very different from each other?"

To which this writer responded:

Quote:
Grrr82CU, Post #348353] “This writer respectfully suggests - ultimately - it doesn't matter

Which elicited:

Originally Posted By: PDM, Post #348389
“I think that, if it didn't matter, no-one would be looking at the subject, so I think that it probably does matter ~ as far as the discussion, etc, is concerned”

.To clarify what was intended to be understood (apologies if not expressed clearly enough), was that ”ultimately it doesn’t matter” if none or all of the images of the figure to Jesus’ right look the same or even similar. Why? Because centuries before Dan Brown attributed a different interpretation to what he painted, Leonardo committed to writing his own intention to paint the gender of the figure which he describes simply as ”he”.

So this writer's original comment as re-quoted above was not meant to be understood in the sense that interest in Leonardo’s “The Last Supper”, or comparisons between original, copied, or restored examples of it, even focusing on the figure to Jesus' right, "do not matter". This writer's intended meaning was - what we “see” is not as important as the standard by which we interpret what we "see". Said another way, whatever gender we think the figure to Jesus’ right appears to be - should be tempered by the knowledge of what Leonardo indicated was the gender as he described it in his notebook. Application of how Leonardo's described the intended figure’s gender is what should be providing the standard by which we view what he painted not what “gender” enthusiastic followers of “The da Vinci Code” assign to it.

What happens - if we set aside for a moment the NT description of the event (that describes Mary Magdalene running to the disciple “Jesus loved” [Jn 20:1,2])?

We still have Leonardo's own words written centuries ago unmistakably telling us that the figure to Jesus’ right was a “he”. Continuing to insist, therefore, that the figure to Jesus’ right is “female” clearly becomes a case of imposing an artificial standard based on the premise of a novel over the words of Leonardo himself.

This writer wonders – “How much attention was paid to such matters as the face and anatomical features of the disciple to Jesus’ right before Dan Brown’s made that the lynchpin of his novel’s theme”?.

That would be an interesting research project ‘il ne serait pas’ ??

Originally Posted By: PDM, Post #348389
“I think that the combination of the early copies and the latest restoration probably give an indication of what Leonardo wanted his 'beloved disciple' to look like. Whether he intended it to be a female, or an effeminate-looking male, I don't know. I don't think that the conclusion is an obvious one, though”

.This writer again proposes that the is issue should not be what we “see” as the appearance that some interpret to be female but are we open to our perception of what we see being trained by Leonardo’s own words reagarding the gender of the figure. If we we are willing to “see” the figure though Leonardo’s “mind’s-eye” then we will “see” as he did, a male disciple/apostle inclining his head towards Peter to hear what was being said to him. That is what Leonardo painted, delicate features after The Florentine School and all, and that is how we should “see” the gender of the figure, not through a Dan Brown's "da Vinci Code" lens.

Originally Posted By: PDM, Post #348389
“His notes may indicate a male beloved, but his notes also show a typical John ~ which is not like the one in the final painting”

.At the very risk risk of becoming redundant, our perception of what he painted again should be guided by what Leonardo wrote – very specifically – about the gender of the disciple he intended to portray as leaning toward another. The “face” he places on that figure – again – is irrelevant to the issue of the figure’s gender considering as we should be - The Florentine School’s influence on his era. Surely in many of Leonardo's paintings he also portrays age progression but the very young and the adolescent have very similiar facial stuctures in his works.

Originally Posted By: PDM, Post #348389
“And, if it was meant to be a woman, he was hardly likely to put something heretical in writing”

.Intending with every respect to be accorded to the quoted thought above, such a possibility is unsubstantiated by even any remotely credible source. Leonardo’s notebooks were not subject to inspection by the church. He was a fiercely private man and more than once recorded as doing battle with his church and its representatives. It fits neither what we know about his bold personality nor how he lived his life to suspect he deliberately referred to a figure as a "male" that he secretely intended to paint as a "female" just because he feared some sanction by the church if discovered. In the final analysis, there is far more historically-defined reason to believe that he believed the figure leaning towards Peter to hear him was a male apostle.

Finally, Leonardo was not the only artist to portray the Apostle John in his youth with “delicate” features many today might label “feminine” – although in doing so – they pay no attention to the "gender" that was intended by the artist five centuries or so ago in reflection the influence of The Florentine School. Here is a list of paintings (which this writer will not attempt to display given recent concerns over material that may or may not be copyrighted) from various artist of the era, many of which never saw Leonardo's painting as far as we know, that can be researched and viewed for comparison.

  • Duccio, painting dated between 1308 – 1311 CE
  • Pietro Lozenzetti, painting dated 1320 CE
  • Giotto, painting dated between 1320 – 1325 CE
  • Jaume Serra, painting dated between 1370 – 1400 CE
  • Gertram von Minden, painting dated between 1390 – 1400 CE
  • Master of Raigen, painting dated between 1410 – 1420 CE
  • Sassetta, painting dated 1423 CE
  • Andrea del Castagno, painting dated 1447 CE
  • Jaume Bago Jacomart, painting dated 1450 CE
  • Dieric Bouts the Elder, painting dated 1464 – 1467 CE
  • Cosimo Rosselle, painting dated 1481 – 1482 CE
  • Domenico Ghirlandaio, painting dated 1486 CE
  • Leonardo da Vinci, painting dated 1495 - 1498 CE
  • Master Paul of Lõcse, painting dated 1508 – 1517 CE
.There are other examples but as this list demonstrates, both before (1308-1311 CE) Leonardo portrayed the Apostle John seated to Jesus’ right at “The Last Supper” and continuing afterwards (1508 – 1517 CE), he was not the only artist to reflect The Florentine School’s influence on the era of how youth, innocence, and age was to be portrayed in art.

All of those artists in their own minds were not painting a “female” apostle, they were painting a male – just as Leonardo in his mind, according to his notes specific to the moment he intended to portray when the disciple to Jesus’ right leans towards Peter to hear what he is trying to ask him, was going to paint a “he”.

Every piece of credible evidence available, therefore, validates the position that Leonardo painted the disciple/Apostle John, displayed as young man - not Mary Magdalene.

…and Grrr82CU smile


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:25 PM)
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Twitter Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Facebook Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to MySpace Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Del.icio.us Digg Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Yahoo My Web Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Google Bookmarks Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Stumbleupon Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Reddit
#348740 - 01/24/09 09:10 AM Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU
... This writer would also suggest consideration of the fact that Leonardo paints John at different ages, one as the child sitting to the left of Mary in “Virgin of the Rock” and then older seated to Jesus right at “The Last Supper". ...

Could you elaborate on this, please? confused

“Virgin of the Rocks” by Leonardo da Vinci, displayed in the Louvre, Paris.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f5/Virgin_of_the_Rocks.jpg

“Virgin of the Rocks” by Leonardo da Vinci, National Gallery, London.
http://www.nd.edu/~agutting/VirginRocks.jpg



Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:25 PM)
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Twitter Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Facebook Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to MySpace Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Del.icio.us Digg Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Yahoo My Web Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Google Bookmarks Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Stumbleupon Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Reddit
#348742 - 01/24/09 09:23 AM Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene [Re: PDM]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
I know that John's features are often effeminate in such paintings ~ I have given a link to quite a few, myself, above.

I accept that Leonardo may also have painted a young man with effeminate features.

I accept that Leonardo used the pronoun 'he' in his notes.

However, since he did not paint 'John' as sketched in his notes, he must have had a change of mind.

Who knows how far that change of mind went?

We do not have all of his notes.

I think that the way 'John' looks is important because 'he' looks like other people painted by Leonardo.

Admittedly, he looks a bit like Leonardo's picture(s) of John the Baptist, but he looks more like his pictures of 'the Virgin Mary' in the 'Madonna of the Rocks' paintings.

Perhaps he used a female model.
Perhaps he used two related models ~ one make & one female ~ who looked alike. Maybe that is the explanation.

As for his personal diaries and notebooks, having been arrested once, he might have had to be especially careful in future.


Edited by PDM (01/24/09 10:47 AM)
Edit Reason: typo
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Twitter Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Facebook Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to MySpace Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Del.icio.us Digg Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Yahoo My Web Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Google Bookmarks Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Stumbleupon Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Reddit
#348746 - 01/24/09 10:04 AM Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene [Re: PDM]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Some images for comparison ~ some were tiny, so I re-sized the others:

Leonardo's Beloved Disciple, Angel, John the Baptist, Giampietrino's Beloved Disciple, Tongerlo Beloved Disciple, Louvre Virgin of the Rocks, Nat. Gallery Virgin of the Rocks



I hope that posting these very tiny details of much larger paintings does not contravene any copyright legislation!


Edited by PDM (01/24/09 10:48 AM)
Edit Reason: typo
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Twitter Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Facebook Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to MySpace Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Del.icio.us Digg Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Yahoo My Web Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Google Bookmarks Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Stumbleupon Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Reddit
#348762 - 01/24/09 11:41 AM Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene [Re: PDM]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU
"This writer would also suggest consideration of the fact that Leonardo paints John at different ages, one as the child sitting to the left of Mary in “Virgin of the Rock” and then older seated to Jesus right at “The Last Supper"

Originally Posted By: PDM
"Could you elaborate on this, please?

This was removed and apologies that it was not removed quickly enough before readers in the forum accessed it. A brief trip out contributed to the delay in discovering that a post not completely redacted and developed had been entered by mistake. What was posted that is being referred to, was inadvertantly "submitted" as an entry before several areas that had comments left from moving text around in a preliminary work-up were deleted. When the mixup was discovered a short time later, the post was removed and replaced. The "John" in the Virgin of the Rocks is John the Baptist, not John the Apostle.

Sorry for the unintended entry and subsequent confusion.


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:25 PM)
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Twitter Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Facebook Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to MySpace Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Del.icio.us Digg Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Yahoo My Web Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Google Bookmarks Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Stumbleupon Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Reddit
#348781 - 01/24/09 01:22 PM Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene [Re: Grrr82CU]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Originally Posted By: PDM
"However, since he did not paint 'John' as sketched in his notes, he must have had a change of mind"

This writer knows it is becoming repetitive to say, but it simply doesn't matter what "face" or anything else about the figure Leonardo decided upon relative to its final state. He still considered it a male according to the entry into his notes describing the interplay between the two male disciples he was going to paint.

It is well known, isn't it, that Leonardo would follow someone he saw in the streets, at a market and elsewhere to capture their "face" as well as using models? Isn't it also a matter of record according to his biographer Giorgio Vasari that he delayed painting the "face" of Judas in "The Last Supper" because he could not find the "right" face to characterize the 'evil' he had in mind to portray, even reportedly searching among criminals for someone after which to model Judas' face?

If, therefdore, he at one time sketched one figure in his preparation for painting the disciple John but later found a "face" that he preferred to represent the youth and innocence he had in mind and painted that face in his final portrayal of the disciple, it still represented a "he" as far as he was concerned per his notes. Accordingly, it would not matter if the "model face" he ultimately chose was selected at random from a young male or female or one he had previously catelogued, it was still going to be a "male" disciple in his finished painting, again, according to his notes. There is simply nothing else that exists other than wishful speculation to suggest (much less validate) that Leonardo ever thought of the disciple's "gender" seated at Jesus' right as being anything other than "male".

...and Grrr82CU smile


Edited by Grrr82CU (01/24/09 03:26 PM)
Edit Reason: Needed Changes & Clarification
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Twitter Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Facebook Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to MySpace Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Del.icio.us Digg Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Yahoo My Web Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Google Bookmarks Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Stumbleupon Add Re: The "Beloved Disciple" - Was Not Mary Magdalene to Reddit
Page 3 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >

Moderator:  Lisa Shea 

Want to reply? Register as a Forum Member - it's quick, free and fun!
Latest Posts
Question of the day!
by rstuvw579648
Today at 04:23 PM
bike gear cyanotypes
by rstuvw579648
Today at 04:21 PM
Zuzu and Felix, our two black kittens
by rstuvw579648
Today at 04:18 PM
Happy Halloween, everyone!
by rstuvw579648
Yesterday at 02:20 AM
Youth Soccer And Ring Pops
by gallerr
11/15/17 11:37 PM
Meditate
by Lisa Shea
11/15/17 10:06 PM
Zuzu is a literary cat!
by Lisa Shea
11/15/17 12:28 AM
10 Things Every Amateur Football Team Will Need
by wu yu
11/13/17 01:51 AM
Teaming Up For The Fifa 2010 Soccer World Cup
by Brettt
10/26/17 08:35 AM
Yoga
by Lisa Shea
10/23/17 03:07 PM
Forum Guidelines
This forum takes web safety issues very seriously. Please make sure you have read and understood our Forum Guidelines before posting.
Sponsored Link
Support Our Friends
The Animal Rescue Site