anal with love doll Relevant Information
(16 People Likes) How can I buy high quality silicon sex dolls in India? Can I get home delivery?
yes. i got one for myself. they will deliver anywhere in India. +91 9747 660 616
(20 People Likes) Why is the meaning of “dutch wife” a rug bolster or a cheaper grade plastic sex doll? Where did that come from?
also has one hundred or more acres , making the population i Sex Doll my area small . Anyways , since the women around here are married or taken , I have no one else to have a relationship with . Feeling rather lonely , I purchased myself a high end silicone sex doll that fulfills my desires and needs . Since I’m now being satisfied with my high end sex doll , I feel I don’t need to go out and search for a date , I can just stay home in ho
(76 People Likes) Why do some people think Meghan Markle was never pregnant and they used a surrogate?
eghan Markle could hardly get pregnant at age thirty-seven, after no other viable pregnancies after six weeks of trying. Based on her saying she was twelve weeks along at Princess Eugenie’s wedding, Meghan would have become pregnant six weeks after her wedding. That isn’t realistic. Meghan Markle supposedly had multiple abortions, making it more difficult for her to maintain a viable pregnancy at age thirty-seven. Remember, that a mother is considered old past the age of thirty-five. After three years, after age thirty-five, 75% will still be trying to get pregnant. Meghan’s odds were never in her favor. If Meghan was really born in 1977 and not 1981, and discrepancies do exist, then she stood basically a 2% chance of getting (not even staying) pregnant. Meghan would have been 40 with no known successful pregnancies, making it harder for her to stay pregnant. Throughout Meghan’s pregnancy, the size and shape of her bump changed drastically. Somedays it was a rectangle, as though it had been in a suitcase, and other times she would have a very large bump, only to have it shrink in size over the week. A truly pregnant woman’s belly does not ever shrink in size. It cannot do so. The baby grows every week and even a malnourished mother will have a larger bump in a week’s time. A pregnant belly will never shrink. Never. And Meghan’s did, many times. Meghan was filmed squatting down at eight months of pregnancy and her belly was deflated, and as she stood, and her belly re-inflated, an audible, Pop! was heard, and noticed by her visitors. It is on tape. Meghan squatted down, legs together, in high heels and rose again unassisted when she was eight months pregnant. That’s quite an accomplishment, and one most pregnant mothers could not have ever done. Just reading the observations of women who have been pregnant. Online. It’s all there for you to read. Meghan walked out with her belly around her knees one day. Not a belly on top, about a 7 months pregnant belly had fallen to her knees. Pregnant women do not have their uterus fall to their knees, ever. Meghan, at the NYC baby shower, had a huge baby bump, but not the night she went out with her flame, Markus Anderson. She had a flat stomach, but tried to hide it with a handbag. There could be no hiding her belly, it was simply too large at that point. But then it went flat. Meghan did not want to give any information on where she was giving birth. When the paparazzi were watching Frogmore Cottage for signs of activity in the weeks leading up to the delivery, no one was at Frogmore. No lights on, no activity, no cars. No Meghan. No Harry. Where were they? Meghan refused to use Queen Elizabeth’s OB/GYNs. Why? She said she didn’t want any “men in grey”, a Diana term, to attend her private birth. It was so private, no doctor would sign a birth certificate. There exists no record that Meghan gave birth to a baby in May 2019. As attested and affirmed by a physician. Harry and Meghan lied about when Meghan went into labor, saying she went into labor after she reportedly gave birth. Why the timing issues? Fake? No birth happened? Making it as complicated as possible to confuse people? Meghan left the hospital FOUR hours after she gave birth for the first time in her life. No doctor would have released Meghan. It would have been unsafe for mother and baby. at that age. Meghan lied about when she left the hospital or lied about giving birth. Or so people claim. When Harry and Meghan brought “Archie” out to the three photographers and one videographer to see their new baby, the child never moved, as all newborns do, even when they sleep. The cameras could not get a good image of the baby. It is reported the couple used a doll. Dolls don’t move or make noises. And this baby didn’t move once or make any noise. Prince George on the steps of the Lindo Wing, and Archie’s closeup, below…. Prince Louis, newborn, below… When asked about the baby, Harry slipped and said “Archie” had changed so much in two weeks time. Meghan looked down at the gaffe, and never fully regained her composure. They left shortly after. So was there a real baby somewhere that had been born two weeks before Meghan’s presumed “birth”? Why the supposedly photoshopped images of Prince Phillip and Queen Elizabeth and Doria all gathered in a random hallway at Buck Palace (as if Doria would be wondering around on her own in there!)? Why not take real pics? Why use photoshop? Some allege that there was a surrogate who carried the egg of Meghan and the sperm of Harry to create this “Archie”. The surrogate lives in the UK and not North America. When the surrogate saw how mean Meghan was as a real person, the surrogate refused to give up her baby. In the UK the woman who carries the fetus is the mother and not the egg donor. Is this why the Queen refused to use the customary wording about a baby being born to a royal? Is this why no signatures confirmed a live birth involving Meghan? Is this why “Archie” is not a prince? He cannot ever be a prince if the child was born of a surrogate. That is not permitted. Ever. See the difference??? Cambridge baby, top. Sussex baby, bottom. Did the surrogate have a baby with Down’s Syndrome? That has been reported by others also, along with some photographic evidence. Can Meghan and Harry visit the baby? Does the surrogate live in the UK, as thought, and we see so few images of that baby because he is not Meghan’s child? Reportedly, Meghan and Harry used their friend’s baby when they went to Africa to show off “Archie” to the people there. When in Africa, the people had huge sings welcoming “Archie’s father” but nothing was up about Archie’s mother. Meghan reportedly tore down the banners in a rage, but she didn’t get rid of all the banners. They can be seen online on the public domain. Why? Why hide a surrogate pregnancy? This could have been the perfect time to shine a light on the benefits of having a surrogate mother carry a child for another woman. The front carrier was on upside down. Illustration purposes only…. In Canada, when Meghan was out with her two dogs, she had a baby doll hanging from her front carrier, which was worn incorrectly. Had Archie been in that carrier, he would have strangled to death according to experts. I’m only reporting on what I have read. These are not my opinions. They belong to many other people. Was Meghan using a doll and why not use the real baby? Was he not available? Archie has not been photographed since May, when Meghan taped a segment of her reading a book to the child, who had on a very soggy and drooping diaper, and he only wore a plain white onesie. Why? Why not dress up the child and change his diaper to a fresh and more comfortable one? I do have a grandson of almost the same age, and he likes dry diapers. If Meghan was maternal, it is alleged, she would have taken better care of said child and placed him a nice, clean outfit. And a fresh, dry diaper. It is alleged that Meghan and the baby had very little bonding together. “Archie” did not grab at Meghan’s face, or hold her hands, snuggle into her, play with her hair or her jewelry. There seemed to be no bond between this baby and Meghan. Again, just observations from many people. I am trying to include as many as is possible. “Archie” and his Christening photos are definitely photoshopped. Clearly. Anyone with an eye can see it. But why? Just baptize the child. The time stamp of the images are at eleven pm. As in almost midnight. The Christening photos were created at night. Why? Where are the real ones? Are there real ones? If the surrogate mum lives in the UK, it explains why “Archie” is not seen in any photos since the beginning of May 2020. That was five whole months ago. We would see their toddler if he lived in California, but since the child does not, there are no family photos of Harry, Meghan and “Archie”. It is said the name of the child is not even “Archie”. Meghan was mad at the Cambridges (again), and Prince George’s nickname was Archie. So she used the name “Archie”, strange as it was for a child, and in effect took away George’s pet name. Nice auntie, right? People have said Meghan enjoys playing mind games with people. This would be a mind game. It is also claimed that Meghan loves to lie. This would be a whopper of a lie. Where is “Archie”? And why hasn’t anyone spoken out about the strange child who is never seen? Some claim it will all come out in the trial of Markle v the Mail on Sunday. Will it? When will the royal family address Archie and any strangeness surrounding his birth, Meghan’s pregnancy and the subsequent lack of evidence that a child is living with Harry and Meghan in California? But they would have nothing to reveal if all is at it seems, right? When will Meghan and Harry take a family photo of the three of them all together? So, you see there exists quite an exhaustive list of reasons why people have their theories on “Archie” and Meghan and Harry. It’s exhausting to write them all down. But I cannot think of one more point of contention. This is not my opinion, as there exist many theories here. I wanted to make a list of all I have read, so readers on Quora can see what exists in the public domain regarding the child called, Archie. Now I’ll go back to giving my opinions o
(88 People Likes) As a feminist, what do you think about sex dolls?
‘sex dolls’ or ‘sex bots’ is similar to the arguments against pornography, particularly vio Real Doll ent or ‘kinky’ pornography. That experiencing such a thing will diminish men’s respect for real women, leading to an uptick in sexual violence and a cheapening of relationships. In real life, there’s been no legitimate academic research that I’m aware of showing that pornography does anything of the kind. Now, I’m deliberately leaving the influence on children out of this. Childr anal with love doll n are still learning and developing their ideas of human relationships, and can be influenced in ways that adults aren’t nearly as susceptible to. I’m talking about adults. Adults don’t suddenly decide that rape is OK just because they read some rape fantasies on the internet. Adults aren’t going to suddenly decide that women are worthless as human beings because they get to have sex with a doll or robot instead. Most adult human beings want more out of their relationship with another person than sex. If that weren’t the case, none of us would have friends, we’d just have sex partners. I don’t think that the presence of sex dolls/robots is likely to change our desire to have real human relationships with real people. Even if some people decide that the sex they have with their robot is better than the sex they can have with a person, and so don’t have sex with people… I’m honestly not clear on who that would actually hurt. The search for sex, and sexual variety, causes just as many problems, if not more, than it solves. How many people, after all, have had the same best friend for their entire adult life, but ten or twelve or twenty different girlfriends/boyfriends/significant others/sex partners in that time? If we aren’t so hung up on sex, maybe more of the planet would get over the belief that men and women can’t be friends without having sex. It’s a silly belief that it’s more than time for us to put aside. We’re not going to die out as a species. There are plenty of ways to procreate that don’t involve having unprotected sex with a human of the opposite sex. And they’re getting easier and cheaper and more reliable all the time. The situation might change if we make the shift from “sex dolls” and “sex robots” to true androids with the capability of responding in a human way. At that point, we get into the realm of speculative science-fiction a la Blade Runner and
(21 People Likes) Who has developed a romantic relationship with a love sex doll?
this man, Married to a Doll: Why One Man Advocates Synthetic Love It seems it’s pretty common anal with love doll My sex doll is so much better than my real wife Wait a minute, this is becoming all too real. Married man reveals he has sex with a doll four times a week and takes her on dinner dates... and his wife doesn't