My ghost above curtain blades
7 March 2017
They holler
Thieves in window frames
Looting free
Rage in spree
Rampant rise against justice
Excuse injustice
March Hatter
Demented eyes glow
The smoke slow
The holes blow
Extrusion mind and matter
Nothing that we know
Pinnacle
Of the moving shades
Jack of spades
In red wades
My ghost above curtain blades
Flickers as it fades
Reading of the poem:
Play Dead – Björk
St Patrick’s day
St Jeanne’s way
11 September 2010
♣
You took a second look
A wish that came true
For in that small book
The colour was so blue
♣
Twas a new age Avatar
In a world full of change
Living in a coloured Bazaar
That may a mind derange
♣
You feel good and I feel blue
Rhyme in woods for me and you
And as you will that blue admire
Some just stack it for their bonfire
♣
Bring the wood and stuff the hay
Hasten now your step you crowd
St Patrick or else St Jeanne’s day
All fire we’ll cheer clear and loud
♣
It might be that it’s St Patrick’s day
They danced and feasted in delight
For finally they’d have their way
The witch will burn now in its light
♣
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPjgO3j67oE
Reading of a modified version of the poem
Dans certaines traditions indiennes comme dans certaines arabes (berbères aussi), les familles qui vivent de grandes tragédies engagent une pleureuse qui, à travers ses cris et lamentations permet à la famille de rester composée et digne. Voici ma pleureuse. Une gitane, comme il convient pour mon esprit libre et voyageur.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Scus9teTdjo
In some Indian traditions as in some Arab (as well as Berber), families who live great tragedies resort to a mourner who, through her cries and lamentations allows the family to stay composed and dignified. Here is my mourner. A gypsy, as befits my free wandering spirit.
“Rather windy isn’t it?”
28 August 2010
♥
Woman all over the world, suffering
We yield not in vain shuddering
But pliable reeds, we flex in pain
To spring back to our tall selves again
♥
While the strong oak may tower
Over us and want us to cower
We welcome with love and consent
All hate, anger and resentment
♥
To turn darkness into bright light
Despite the hate, despite the spite
For when HE gave us to hold a womb
HE knowingly gave within us a tomb
♥
For the world’s hatred as we can bear
From suffering more than our share
But with the womb he gave us the seeds
To grow within us those slight, silken reeds
♥
A gift of love so, many a storm, we may weather
With a heart, though sinking, light as a feather
So when the mighty oak from storms splits
We resume our grace that us so befits
Lien vidéo et texte anglais plus bas / Video link and english translation below french text
25 août 2010
Depuis le jugement que l’on m’a communiqué le 12 août – jour de mon anniversaire, j’enregistre toutes les conversations avec mes enfants. Je veux d’une part pouvoir toujours établir la vérité (puisque mon ex-mari essaie de m’affubler de la réputation de la méchante sorcière) mais surtout d’autre part, je voudrais conserver un souvenir, quelque chose pour meubler ces tristes instants où je suis privée de leur vue et de leur voix.
Cette tranche de vie-là, comme vous l’entendrez, elle a trait à une discussion entre mon fils de 13 ans et moi où je lui demande encore, pour vérifier, s’il veut revenir chez moi ou s’il a changé d’avis. Je l’informe de mon blog, essaie de lui expliquer les détails de ce qui est arrivé avec le jugement, de lui expliquer les différentes parties de la procédure, son déroulement, comment on aurait dû examiner les faits, quels étaient les critères.
Il est très intelligent et a été tellement frustré et choqué du jugement qu’il avait pleuré et était resté silencieux pendant très longtemps car il n’arrivait pas à comprendre ce qui s’était mal passé. Pour son cerveau intelligent mais si innocent encore, tout était évident, précis et chronométré comme une montre suisse. Il n’y avait pas de possibilités d’accrocs qui auraient pu leur porter tort. Je lui parle et lui explique, essayant avec l’humour de le sortir de ce coin sombre où il s’est réfugié plein de colère et d’amertume. Je suis triste et c’est difficile pour moi d’invoquer l’humour en ce moment mais j’y ai déjà eu recours avant et sais que je dois l’atteindre avant que la colère et le côté sombre ne prenne le dessus sur ce petit être si plein de fierté et de lumière avant. Si mur, si intelligent, si sage mais encore – quelque part – un enfant.
J’essaie de savoir ce que leur père leur dit car je sais mieux depuis cette année qu’en fait il n’a eu de cesse de les manipuler, d’essayer de les retourner contre moi, d’utiliser toutes les occasions même quand il était hébergé chez moi pour leur faire croire que j’étais une mauvaise mère, une méchante femme qui voulait uniquement lui faire mal.
Pour bien comprendre cette tranche de vie et les bizarreries qui pourraient exister dans ce récit, il faut savoir plusieurs choses :
– Le père ne laisse pas ses enfants me contacter librement
– Parfois quand on parle, le père est là à côté debout pour on ne sait quelle raison puisque lui et moi n’avons plus rien à nous dire ; du coup les enfants se comportent étrangement ou ne parlent plus que par monosyllabes
– Souvent mes appels restent sans réponse alors que j’entends sonner de l’autre côté (je ne sais pas si le téléphone est coupé) et souvent le téléphone est en dérangement
– Quand le temps entre deux appels devient trop long et que je fais intervenir la famille, mon ex-mari est obligé de me faire parler aux enfants mais le fait en exerçant encore ses talents de manipulateur : 1) pour le grand, il essaie de lui trouver une activité dont il raffole et ne lui permet de l’exercer que juste avant qu’il ne m’appelle 2) pour le petit, il allume la télé sur la chaîne de ses dessins animés favoris juste avant de m’appeler et fait ensuite semblant d’obliger Léo à venir me parler ce qui provoque de la colère, des cris, une crise de la part de Léo et je dois alors moi-même demander à ce que Léo retourne à son dessin animé (il est trop petit pour comprendre et son hyperactivité ne l’aide pas à être plus conciliant et capable de discernement) 3) pour Léa il lui permet de voir ses émissions favorites juste avant qu’elle ne parle avec moi.
Ces techniques de manipulation réussissent avec le petit, parfois avec le grand (il n’y peut rien quand on vous prive d’un hobby et qu’on vous le donne juste à un certain moment, vous le prenez, c’est légitime et je ne lui en veux pas) mais jamais avec Léa qui est toujours tout de suite là au rendez-vous. Mais même Léa vit mal et réagit contre ses manipulations d’une manière tout à elle, en rébellion, en nervosité, en agressivité
Vous aurez plus l’occasion de constater, dans d’autres vidéos, les effets de ces techniques de manipulation utilisées par ce père au mépris de la souffrance immédiate que c’est en train de causer mais – et c’est surtout cela qui me torture – au mépris total de l’effet à long terme de ce comportement sur la psyché de ces enfants.
Toutes les occasions étaient bonnes pour lui de leur montrer combien il souffrait de leur absence, il a utilisé à outrance la carte du chantage affectif et malgré tout les enfants n’avaient pas flanché parce qu’ils avaient déjà eu l’occasion de voir – pendant mes voyages d’affaire – combien il était mieux pour eux de ne pas être avec lui durant les périodes scolaires. Non pas qu’ils ne l’aimaient pas du tout, c’est juste qu’ils connaissaient mieux leur intérêt et leur salut. Une sorte d’instinct de survie de cette jungle urbaine quand vous sentez dans vos os ce qui est mieux pour vous quand vous possédez le don d’une pensée indépendante que vous êtes intelligent.
Il a donc eu recours à la force pour les soumettre à sa volonté et a été bien aidé par la justice en cela. Puisqu’ils ne voulaient pas venir avec la douceur, le chantage affectif et les mille promesses, eh bien ils viendraient contraints et forcés.
S’ils étaient majeurs, on aurait qualifié ceci de kidnapping. Quel autre mot en effet pour une personne qui prend d’autres personnes contre leur gré ? Peut-on l’appeler autrement juste parce que c’est sanctionné, même favorisé par la justice ? Peut-on l’appeler autrement parce qu’il s’agit de leur père ?
La justice a un comportement ambigu quant à la liberté individuelle et une notion un peu particulière de quand et comment elle peut s’exercer. Je veux bien croire qu’on ne peut pas sanctionner un enfant mineur récalcitrant qui veut s’affranchir de tout parent et vivre sa vie nu, tout seul dans la rue. Mais un enfant mineur, capable de discernement, qui veut juste pouvoir vivre une vie normale et heureuse, plutôt que cette rengaine malheureuse Métro – boulot – dodo que son père, sorcier apprenti, nous convertit en Pajéro – école de beaux – dodo ? A-t-on le droit dans la toile de vie appartenant à un enfant d’égarer la palette et les pinceaux, écarter les couleurs pour ne laisser que les nuances lasses de gris que l’enfant martèle sur la toile à coups de tête à défaut d’un instrument plus approprié ?
On pourrait me reprocher que je tiendrais un discours autre si c’est un autre choix qui leur cœur habitait. Mais loin de moi cette veule hypocrisie. Mes convictions, je les revendique, je les vis. J’ai toujours cru, très fort, aux paroles sages du poète Gibran Khalil Gibran quand il décrit le rapport des parents à leurs enfants. A part l’habituel rengaine des bonnes manières, afin d’en faire des êtres dont tout le monde pourra être fier, je limite mes interventions à leur expliquer les chemins leur en laissant le choix, l’orientation.
Et de ces vidéos que je compose, comme un désespérant bouquet de rose, il n’en restera que l’ambigüe question, quelle était donc leur vraie intention ? Et moi, connaissant ma vérité, tout ce que je vous dirai, c’est que j’ai voulu la partager, vous la faire expérimenter. Vous regardez, en tirez vos conclusions et décidez si j’ai eu tort ou raison. Car je continue encore mon combat, je continue le cœur frêle et las. Ne sachant des deux crimes, quel dilemme ! Que choisir se taire ou exprimer ce problème.
Aujourd’hui je m’exprime et partage malgré mon silence de tout temps avant ce drame qui le fait éclater, mon vœu de silence. On me prend mes enfants et en plus contre leur gré, pour les soumettre à une tyrannie pour aucune autre raison que celle-là : « Parce qu’on peut le faire. Parce que pour une personne qui connaît bien les rouages de la justice, il est facile de soumettre l’autre à sa volonté » alors je m’insurge et romps mon silence. Un silence absurde de pénitent qui n’est ni de saint ni de moine mais simplement de femme conditionnée à ne pas dévoiler, à ne pas raconter aux autres ses malheurs. Comment vas-tu ? Bien. Saignes-tu ? Tes yeux sont-ils pleins de larmes ? Qu’importe ! On ne s’attachera qu’à cette phrase anodine de bienséance qui sort de ta bouche comme une vipère que tu craches de dégoût et d’impuissance, de bienséance.
Bienséance, pudeur, stupide Omerta organisée par les familles, les amis parfois par les femmes mêmes contre les femmes. La bienséance pour la bonne conscience ; pour que les hommes puissent se regarder et se supporter pour qu’amis et famille ne soient pas dérangés dans leur quotidien, dans leur gentille quiétude, par la sordide et injuste vérité que vit leur prochain, leur voisin.
Cette vidéo-ci est divisée en plusieurs parties puisque j’ai les moyens limités et ne peux mettre ensemble les 25 mn entières que j’ai pu discuter avec lui. J’ai essayé de lui apporter un peu de réconfort, un peu de pensée claire, de rationalité dans ce monde absurde qu’il ne comprenait plus. Il était blessé, taciturne et replié sur lui-même et au fur et à mesure que la conversation se déroule, je me rends compte combien lui, l’aîné de la fratrie, a essayé désespérément de raisonner avec son père sans succès. Je me rends compte combien il faut que je lui explique tout, que je le soutienne dans l’exercice de sa volonté avec l’humour de cette maman qu’il a toujours connu ainsi, sans trop lui faire part de ma propre colère. Encore un autre exercice d’équilibriste. Je n’ai jamais été douée pour les jeux de cirque mais poussée dans ce ring, sous ce projecteur cru, je me découvre, moi aussi, une nouvelle capacité de survie.
Vidéo en 3 parties/video in 3 parts: cela a pris du temps car ce fut un exercice techniquement et émotionnellement difficile, la discussion ayant duré plus de 20 minutes et aussi parce que j’étais confrontée plusieurs fois de suite à la souffrance de Léo / It took time as it was a difficult technical and emotional exercise given that the discussion was more than 20 minutes and that I had to witness and bear over and over again Léo’s suffering.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLskvWieuWM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNNyeE0MUDI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzBcqG_9pPg
Since the judgment that was released on 12th August – my birthday, I record all conversations with my children. I want one hand to always establish the truth (since my ex-husband is trying to create for me the reputation of the Wicked Witch), but above all else, I want a souvenir, something to fill those sad moments when I am deprived of their sight and their voices.
This slice of life there, as you will hear it, concerns a discussion between my 13 year old son and me when I ask him again, just to check, whether he still wants to return home to me or whether he has changed his mind. I inform him of my blog, trying to explain the details of what happened with the trial, to explain the different parts of the procedure, its progress, how one should have considered the facts, what were the criteria. He is very intelligent and was so frustrated and shocked with the judgment and had cried and was angry and silent for a long time as he could not understand what went wrong. To his intelligent but yet innocent mind everything was so obvious, neat as clockwork. There were no possible glitches that should have worked against them. I speak to him, explaining trying with humour to get him out of his dark corner where he lies in anger and bitterness. I am sad and it is difficult for me to invoke humour but I have done it before and I know I must get to him before the darkness and anger takes over this small being once so full of light and pride. So mature, so intelligent and wise, yet still somewhat a child.
I try to know what their father tells them because I know better since this year since that he never ceased to try to manipulate them, to try to turn them against me, using every opportunity even when he had been staying with us, as a guest in my house, to make them think I was a bad mother, a wicked woman who only wanted to hurt him.
To understand this slice of life and odd elements that might exist and that one cannot understand in this video, one must know several things:
– The father does not let his children contact me freely
– Sometimes when we speak, the father is standing there next to them for some unknown reason since he and I have nothing more to say to each other; hence the children are behaving strangely or only speak in monosyllables
– Often my calls go unanswered, so I hear ringing on the other side (I do not know if the phone is off) and often the phone seems engaged
– When the time between calls is getting too long and I have to get the family to intervene, my ex-husband is forced to make me talk to the children but does it while exercising his talents as manipulator: 1) for the older one, he tries to find an activity he enjoys a lot and allows him to exercise that hobby only right before he calls me 2) for the little one, he turns the TV on and sets it to the little one’s favourite cartoons just before calling me and then pretends to force Leo to come and talk to me therefore causing anger, screaming, and a fit from Leo thus forcing me to ask that Léo be returned to his favourite cartoons (he is too small to understand and hyperactivity did not help to be more accommodating and discerning) 3) for Léa he allows her to see her favourite shows just before she is supposed to speak with me.
– These manipulation techniques are successful with the little one and sometimes with the eldest (there is nothing you can do; when you are deprived of a hobby and given it back at a certain point in time, you take it, this is legitimate and I do not blame him) but never with Lea who is always immediately there for the skype appointment. But even she lives badly the situation and reacts to this manipulation in her own way, with rebellion, restlessness, aggressiveness.
You’ll get the chance to see the effects of these manipulation techniques, in other videos, used by the father not only with complete disregard for the immediate suffering that is being caused but – especially and this is what tortures me so – in complete disregard of the long-term effect of this conduct on the psyche of these children.
All the opportunities available were good enough for him to show them how much he suffered from their absence, he used to oblivion the card of emotional blackmail and yet the kids did not flinch because they had already had the occasion to see – during my business trips – how much better it was for them not to be with him during school times. Not that they did not love him at all, it is just that they knew were lied their best interest and salvation. A sort of survival instinct of the urban jungle when you know in your bones what is better for you when you are endowed with free thought and an intelligent mind.
He therefore resorted to force to submit them to his will and was well supported by justice in this. Since they would not come with the smooth talk, emotional blackmail and a thousand promises, then they would come constrained and forced to.
If they were adults, we would have called this kidnapping. What other word in effect for a person who takes other people against their free will? Can we call it anything else just because it is sanctioned, even helped by the court? Can we call it anything else just because he is their father?
Justice has an ambiguous attitude towards individual freedom and a somewhat unusual notion of when and how it can be exercised. I agree that we cannot accept that a recalcitrant minor simply eliminates from his/her life any parent and live a life naked, alone in the street. But a minor child who is capable of discernment, who just wants to live a normal and happy life, rather than this unfortunate buzz word “Metro-boulot-dodo” translated as Tube – work – sleep, as his father, an apprentice sorcerer alkazams into “Pajéro-école de beaux – dodo” or Pajero – school of the fine – sleep? Do we have the right in the painting of a child’s life to seize the palette, the brushes, set aside the colours leaving only sad shades of gray, as the weary child pounds on the canvas with his forehead, failing a more appropriate tool?
One could blame me that I would be talking another language if their hearts held another choice. But truly I abhor such spineless hypocrisy. I claim my beliefs and live them. I always believed, very strongly, the wise words of the poet Jibran Khalil Jibran, when he describes the relationship of parents to their children. Besides the usual refrain of good manners in order to make of them human beings that everyone can be proud of, I limit my intervention to explaining the pathways leaving the choice of direction.
And of these videos that I here link, like a desperate bunch of rosy pink, the only matter that will remain is the ambiguous question, what was their real intention? And I, knowing my truth in it, all I will say is that I wanted to share it, allow you to experiment it. You look, draw your own conclusions and decide whether I was right or wrong. Because I continue my fight, martial art, I continue with my frail and weary heart. Unsure from the two crimes, what a dilemma! What to choose: be silent or show the stigmata.
Today I am speaking and sharing despite my all-time silence before this tragedy that shatters my vow of silence. They take my children against their will, to submit them to a tyranny for no other reason than this “Because they can. Because for a person who knows the tricks of justice, it is easy to submit the other to his will “, so I make an exception and break my silence. An absurd penitent silence that is neither that of a saint nor that of a monk, but simply of a woman conditioned not to reveal, not to tell others her misfortunes. How are you? Good. You bleed? Your eyes are full of tears? Whatever! They will only attach themselves to this innocuous sentence of decency that comes out of your mouth like a snake that you spit in disgust, in helplessness, in propriety.
Propriety, decency, stupid Omerta organized by families, friends, sometimes even by women against women. Decency for a feel good conscience, so that men may look at themselves and bear themselves, so that friends and family are not disturbed in their daily lives, in their nice tranquillity, by the sordid and unfair truth lived by the neighbour, their fellow human being.
This video is divided into several parts because I have limited resources and cannot put together the entire 25 minutes that I could talk with him. I tried to bring a little comfort, a little clear thinking, and rationality in this absurd world that he could no longer understand. He was wounded, silent and introvert and gradually as the conversation unfolds, I realize how much he, the eldest sibling, tried desperately and unsuccessfully to reason with his father. I realize how important it is that I explain everything, that I support him in the exercise of his will with the humor of this mother that he has always known this way, without expressing too much my own anger. Yet another tightrope. I’ve never been good at circus games but pushed into the circus ring, under this crude projector, I discovered, too, a new ability for survival.
(Lien vidéo et texte anglais sous le texte français – English text below video link and French text)
Depuis le jugement que l’on m’a communiqué le 12 août – jour de mon anniversaire, j’enregistre toutes les conversations avec mes enfants. Je veux d’une part pouvoir toujours établir la vérité (puisque mon ex-mari essaie de m’affubler de la réputation de la méchante sorcière) mais surtout d’autre part, je voudrais conserver un souvenir, quelque chose pour meubler ces tristes instants où je suis privée de leur vue et de leur voix.
Cette tranche de vie-là, comme vous l’entendrez, elle a trait à une discussion entre ma fille de 11 ans et demi et moi où je lui explique quels sont ses droits – vu que le droit français est vraiment trop compliqué, peu propice à donner satisfaction directement aux mineurs dans le choix de leur vie.
Je veux lui faire comprendre parce qu’elle est déçue par la justice française à laquelle elle ne croit plus et me reproche de ne pas avoir choisi, dès le départ, la voie la plus facile –dépôt de la demande à Dubaï – qui leur aurait permis de rester avec moi et qui m’aurais permis de ne même pas avoir à me battre pour gagner haut la main. Je m’évertue aussi à lui expliquer les valeurs en lesquelles je crois pendant que la mère en moi maudit l’être humain empreint de valeurs.
Moi, fille de l’Inde de Gandhi de par mon père, pétrie de non-violence, d’envie de justice pour tout le monde même si pour contrer l’injustice, je fais comme lui, le choix de Satyagraha (désobéissance non-violente civile, essentiellement verbale ou en actes de protestations, en cas d’injustice commise par le système en place et acceptation d’aller jusqu’à l’emprisonnement si tel est le châtiment réservé aux personnes qui élèvent leur voix ). Moi dont le père n’a jamais eu de cesse d’expliquer les droits dans la vie, qui ai pris de lui le concept inaliénable que tous les êtres humains sont égaux sans égard au rang social, au sexe, à l’appartenance de caste, à l’argent ou au pouvoir que les uns possèdent et les autres pas
Moi, fille de la Tunisie de Bourguiba de par ma mère, pétrie de croyance en l’égalité homme-femme et aux droits des femmes d’exister, de vivre une vie entière, de revendiquer leur droit d’être mère mais également être social affranchi dont les droits existent non pas malgré l’homme mais avec l’assistance bienveillante de l’homme dans la revendication de ces droits. Moi, façonnée par ma mère à croire en la valeur de la femme, croire en nos droits de femmes tout en étant musulmane, ne jamais accepter la tyrannie, ne jamais vouloir pour soi-même ce qu’on gruge à l’autre, connaître la différence entre le bien et le mal, résister pour préserver ses valeurs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTz7i3i-3W8
Since the judgment that was released on 12th August – my birthday, I record all conversations with my children. I want one hand to always establish the truth (since my ex-husband is trying to create for me the reputation of the Wicked Witch), but above all else, I want a souvenir, something to fill those sad moments when I am deprived of their sight and their voices.
This slice of life that I am sharing, as you will hear it, concerns a discussion between my 11 and a half year-old daughter and I, where I try to explain to her what are her rights – as the French law is just too complicated, not the best way of giving a direct route to minor children to choose their lives.
I want her to understand because she is disappointed by the French justice in which she no longer believes and blames me for not having chosen, at the outset, the easiest way – filing in Dubai – that would have enabled them to stay with me and would have allowed me not even to have to fight to win without a problem. I strive also to explain the values in which I believe and that are tearing me apart while the mother in me curses the human being with the values.
Me, daughter of Gandhi’s India through my father, soaked in non-violence, in desire of justice for everyone, although, to counter injustice, like him I make the choice of Satyagraha (non-violent civil disobedience essentially verbal or through acts of protest, if injustice is committed by the system in place and accepting up to imprisonment if such is the punishment reserved for those who raise their voices).
Me, whose father never ceased to explain to the rights in life, who took from him the inalienable concept that all people are equal regardless of social status, gender, caste, money or power that some have and others do not
Me, daughter of Bourguiba’s Tunisia through my mother, immersed in belief in gender equality and women’s rights to exist, to live a full life, to claim their right to be a mother but also their right to be a socially free being whose rights exist not in spite of men but with the benevolent assistance of men in claiming these rights.
Me, shaped by my mother to believe in the worth of women, believe in our rights of women while remaining Muslim, to never accept tyranny, to never want for oneself what one denies the other, to understand the difference between what is right and what is wrong, to resist to preserve these values.
The responsibility of a legislator in determining the residence of minor children
August 22, 2010
“They have not enough bread? But then, let them eat cake “Marie Antoinette would have said in speaking of the demands of the people. This sentence, described in a book for children “Pünktchen und Anton” (1931) by its author, Erich Kaestner, has never been historically verified. There was indeed no procedure in which a scribe would note all the words of the queen.
True or not, this sentence highlights the gap that may exist between a sovereign or high dignitary responsible for the fate of the people and the truth, the suffering experienced by the same people. If it were true, the sentence would have indicated a total ignorance of the suffering, the sad truth of the people. A guilty ignorance since it would have been necessary for such a person to recognize and acknowledge that suffering, the truth. Such a sentence, whether true or not, would allegedly have cost the sovereign’s head and was the catalyst in bringing about what is now the French Republic.
Does it amuse me to bring you this anecdote from history and if not why do I do it? I never intended to improvise the role of de la Fontaine but mean to urge you to think and to explain to you the link with my reality today. Mine and my children’s. Also that of my ex-husband who still lives in the fairytale that he invented for himself and tries to make others believe. The fairytale of the wicked witch who would do anything to remove from him Hansel and Gretel. My nose may be somewhat hooked, but the similarity ends there.
Instead of fairytales and risky anecdotes, let me give you my reality. Facts. Findings. Pray, please take the time to read and let me know what you think. Statistical analysis of a public and external opinion holds a particular interest for me in that I now try to look at this critically from the outside. But while recounting these facts, please allow me to keep my heart, my mother’s heart because it is difficult for me to rip it out again and tell my truth without any emotion.
Throughout history, rulers have had different attitudes about the responsibility that was theirs. In my case, I always felt that it is the responsibility of a sovereign or high dignitary – in the exercise of the responsibility entrusted to him – to know the facts, to analyze all of them, not to stop at the form, the letter of the law but to use the spirit of the law, the intrinsic substance of the law before making a decision.
If we stop at a superficial inspection of a matter, the premises of which we know nothing of, it is difficult to offer a fair judgment. Justice. A very heavy task that requires that we take every precaution, that we go beyond the sterile framework supplied to us by the law (general rules, legal considerations) to try to go further in the reasoning, to strive to make a full and complete analysis of the situation. In performing such analysis, it is very important to decouple any bias that one may have against any person, any instinctive categorization that may color one’s view from the objective analysis of the situation.
To try a case means to be completely familiar with all aspects of the present situation, to weigh the pros and cons of various possible changes in the present situation in accordance with the analysis of dichotomous effects of two diverging decisions before one makes that decision. A static examination of what has been, what seems to have been agreed, what is generally done in such a case, what we personally think is the best choice from a generic point of view absolutely does not give the best results. Far from that, this can sometimes even lead to catastrophic results.
There are today specific criteria determined by law in the review of the situation to guide a judge in the choice when determining the residence of children. This choice that is easy when parents get along well, becomes very difficult when there is discord. The question is somewhat easier when the children are of age (case 1), they simply decide where they want to live and nobody can erode that right. The problem is a thousand times more difficult when children are minors and incapable of discernment (case 2). When they are, instead, capable of discernment while still remaining minor in the face of the law (case 3), the problem is not as acute, but remains a minefield. The legislator has therefore put in place rules which a judge may refer to for help in this difficult task of making a fair decision. This decision would take into account the critical review of a series of elements in the middle of a parental disagreement where, inevitably, each will only support his own theory and accuse the other of being wrong, while trying to evidence this claim.
As far as I am concerned, I will only consider case three that applies to my situation. So what is currently provided by the legislator? I refer you to a website designed to inform people like me who do not know their rights and are, in retrospect, forced to learn about the reasons for decisions that we they are handed and do not correspond to what they could expect following human logic or the laws of human nature (the whole article, unfortunately only available in French, can be examined at http://www.avocatsdivorce.com/garde-des-enfants.php ) :
“The choice of residence
For the residence of the children, parents can agree on the location of such residence. Only in cases of disagreement or if the interests of the child are not preserved, the judge decides on the issue.
The judge then decides to award custody of the child to one of the parents, the other retaining the right to monitor the maintenance and education of the children. A visitation and accommodation may be denied only for serious reasons (alcoholism and smoking, parent’s incarceration).
The judge may also determine the residence of the child alternately at the domicile of either parent. “
The criteria used by the judge
“The judge takes into account not only the agreements made between spouses, information gathered by the social investigation and counter-investigation that he may have ordered for but also the ability of each parent to assume his duties and respect the rights of the other. The judge considers, of course, the feelings expressed by the children themselves. Indeed, the minor may be heard by the judge in any proceedings concerning him/her. There is no age requirement but a concept of discernment based on several parameters: age, maturity, level of understanding. When the request comes from the minor himself, his hearing may be waived only by a specially motivated decision from the judge. The child can be heard alone or with a person of his/her choice. He/she can also be assisted by a lawyer. The judge is not bound by the opinion of the child. “
In applying these generic principles to my specific case, the following items were considered:
1) An agreement that the other party would like to make believe that it was intended to give custody to the father in 2010. I said in the hearing to the judge that this had been and remained a manipulation of the truth since this agreement speaks only of the children returning to their home, the family home in 2010, i.e. at the scheduled end of my expatriation in Dubai. I also point out that I was forced to sign the agreement and I had no choice, under the pressure of time and not knowing how it would be interpreted and manipulated later on. I emphasize how important it was for me to take the children with me, how I have always argued and sustained that I would never have relinquished the custody of the children to their father because he had neither the desire nor even the actual material time to take care of his children. Such failure to do so had been proven by the actual transitory attempts during my to and fro between Europe and Dubai for my business trips
For the sake of clarity, here are the facts: My husband, senior partner in a large international law firm, therefore fully aware of the meanders and mazes of law, prepared and forced me to sign on July 13, 2007 this agreement while I was preparing my suitcases to go to Dubai on July 14, 2007 as attested by my employer’s statement. When would I have had the material time to consult a lawyer to verify the possible repercussions of such an agreement? I may have not taken the bar exam like my husband, but I know of a principle that should apply everywhere: When two parties sign a contract that binds them ultimately and that the weaker party (the one who knows less his/her rights) is manipulated by ignorance of his/her rights or constrained by use of a very strong pressure forcing the signature of the contract, such contract should be declared null and void.
In my case, this agreement should have simply been discarded because all the premises of undue influence are there: lack of time to get information, ignorance of the implications of this document, careful selection and very clever wording by my husband in order to orient later the understanding of it, a higher knowledge of the party forcing the agreement on the other of the laws and how to manipulate them, etc..
Why was such an agreement validated, although visibly the result of a manipulation, given that the constant and proven intent of the mother – as reflected in all the other documents including those filed by the defendant – is never to entrust custody to this father who was never present in the past and who does not know and never had time to care for her three children?
Is there review and if there was, how was the review according to this criterion?
You know the decision: custody awarded to the father
2) Investigation and counter-investigation from a social point of view that a judge could order for: this would seem not really necessary, because we’re not talking about blatant child abuse in this case but only of negligence.
However, it has to be noted that the last of the siblings suffered from hyperactivity, in a diminished form of the acute illness. He needs constant monitoring and attention, needs to be preserved from sudden changes and from emotional duress. The older children are in the difficult phase of preadolescence / adolescence.
In the documents in support of the case, there is a letter from the child psychologist who has been following for some time the last of the siblings. This letter clearly shows the negative effect of summer holidays at his father’s house as this latter does not at all take the necessary precautions to maintain the balance of this child with special needs. The letter also indicates the result of interviews with the older siblings regarding their father’s decision to submit them to a return to France under his care and recommends a continuation of custody with the mother.
This interview of the older siblings, requested by me, was to determine whether they were taking the decision independently and were not, unbeknownst to me, under any kind of emotional pressure. It was designed to determine whether they were truly mature as I personally believed them to be, could objectively look at their situation and decide for themselves, in an independent way, what direction they wanted to give their lives.
Why is this recommendation not at all taken into account in the case? If one had doubts, it would have been useful and normal to ask for a second opinion whether requested by the other party or directly by the judge himself. Nothing done on that side.
Is there review and if there was, how was the review according to this criterion?
You know the decision: custody awarded to the father
3) « The ability of each parent to assume his duties »
This point must be considered carefully. What does this mean, the ability to assume his duties?
It would seem that this is construed as the ability to pay for tuition in a private school, driving them from one place to another, having money to put them in the canteen every day in the private school and condemning them in advance (even before the custody is actually granted) to stay after school until late within the premises of the private school waiting for the father to fetch them after dusk.
The ability to perform his duties, would be the ability for a partner in a law firm to hurry in running back and forth between the little one’s school in France and the private school in Geneva where the older siblings would be. What time would school have to begin for the father – other than being ubiquitous – to be able to arrive at the same time before the bell rings on both sides?
It seems to be accepted that a senior partner in a major international law firm, who on top of that writes books on a specific topic of law, articles, is a consultant with a Swiss branch of the government is able “to assume his duties”.
Hang on a minute. Let’s look again … Did you mean the ability to perform the duties of a parent or is it the ability of being a good lawyer that we are talking about? We are speaking about practical time and efforts dedicated to children are we not and not just about the ability to give money? Or are we? I wonder…
As for me, I think that performing my duties is what I always did: give time to my children, keep them all in the same school, leaving them in a French schooling system that they have always known, allow them to learn other languages that are those of their mother (English and Arabic), return earlier from work and, if necessary – as I did by resigning – reschedule my working hours further to constant discussion with the child psychologist and realizing that the little one needs more attention, accept being paid less and working as self employed in order to give more time to my children.
Have, me, their mother, lunch with them at home. Allow them in the afternoon to play with the dog to swing in the garden, do homework with them and fill the empty instants in between with a thousand games.
Take the time, me, the mother, to eat a healthy meal in the evening with them. Have time to read stories to the little one before he falls asleep. Then spend time with the two older siblings to discuss problems they might encounter at school or just take the time to watch a movie together until it is their time to sleep.
The father claims to have taken good care in the past of his children during the professionally motivated absences of the mother. Absences that could not be avoided as she was forced to work
The children testify that the father had not dealt adequately with them during this transitional period – that was very small in the life history of this family. The business travels for a total of 163 days between February 2006 and July 2007. Let’s remind that the older siblings were born in 1997 and 1999 and that their mother had sacrificed everything for them, including her career, during all the years before 2005 when she finally resumed interest in a real career – noting that her marriage was sinking despite all her best efforts – realizing that she would have to be able, in the near future, to provide for her children on her own.
Was there a review according to this criterion made with the approach that one should have had? What conclusions should we draw from the side-by-side analytic review of these two situations? Both parents offer different versions as to what the review according to this criterion should be. Who to believe? A third party? Maybe the persons whose lives are in stake themselves: the children? Is the testimony of the children taken into account?
Is there review and if there was, how was the review according to this criterion?
You know the decision: custody awarded to the father
4) « respect the rights of the other party »
I buy my children a computer so they can freely talk to their father on skype. I buy them cell phones (the older siblings) and give their numbers to their father suggesting that he send them little text messages during the day or to call them whenever he wants. I make aware my ex-husband of all that happens in their life, indicate to him the website of the school where they study, keep him informed of schooling trips, of their evolution, their school records, the subjects they have mastered , those where they would need to put in more effort…
I host my ex-husband in my Dubai home, despite the total lack of affection I feel for him because it is important for the children to have the presence of their father in their lives. I host him without discussion, whether for a week or more, each time he mentions his intent to come over – my daughter’s birthday, the little one’s, or simply a request he makes with no other reason – without question, without being difficult . I believe that my personal feelings are not important in examining whether to accede to his wishes. It is their welfare that counts and I therefore allow him to remain at my home where we take meals as a family, a semblance of normality that I force myself not to deprive them of.
Yet, when children are with their dad during summer, often my Friday skype appointment with them is forgotten. I suffer from not being able to speak freely with them because the phone does not work on their side for international calls and they cannot call me from there. Often when I call from my end, the phone seems to ring but nobody picks up and the children tell me much later when I have them over the phone that it was not ringing….
Now what did the legislator have in mind when introducing this criterion? What was the spirit in which the legislator brought about this criterion?
Is there review and if there was, how was the review according to this criterion?
You know the decision: custody awarded to the father
5) The judge “considers, of course, the feelings expressed by the children themselves” but « the judge is not bound by the opinion of the child »
The children, a 11 and a half year old girl and a boy almost 13, testify that they do not want to stay with their father who is not able to care for them. They testify about a lack of nurturing on behalf of the father, the too little time devoted to them (during holidays so what to say about school time), dirt in their father’s house and cockroaches compared to the clean and well-kept home of their mother, unpleasant conditions of their lives with their father compared to the pleasant conditions that they had with their mother. The children strongly stress that they would like to be with their mother “anywhere” in the world. A clear, limpid request, a plea that any mother would understand and even any woman, waiting to be a mother, would approve.
Was the criterion of taking into account the feelings of the child ever satisfied?
Of course the judge is not bound by the feelings of the child but when we examine this second part of the sentence, in what context should we consider it?
No doubt in the case where a mother is abusive and nonetheless loved by her children who ask for maternal love as this is what all children aspire to. Possibly in a context where the child wants to use his/her influence, in a hollow way, for an unconditional surrender of one of his/her parents. Or in a situation where the child chooses a dangerous situation for him/her because he/she lacks the mental capacity to discern or is under an influence. It is useful to remind that the children have been living for a month with the father (by decision of the judge to delay the hearing, believing the father who is screaming on the rooftops that his wife is manipulating the children) before both giving this strong testimony.
Could one be guided by this sentence in a context where we are faced with a loving mother, free from vices such as drugs, alcohol and even simple cigarette smoking? In a context where the mother did not use the common tactics of manipulation, such as say total isolation of the child, disabling of regular contact with the other party, etc.. All these tactics of manipulation that the father is constantly using whenever he gets the chance. In what spirit, would the legislator have introduced this criterion?
Is there review and if there was, how was the review according to this criterion?
You know the decision: custody awarded to the father
My personal feeling is that no criteria has been met if we follow a clinical review of the facts and even less if we follow a subjective review, feeling the pain of the children in this whole ridiculous process, not to mention my pain as a mother who never stopped working on herself to ensure the emotional balance of the children despite the difficult gash of divorce.
It appears only too clearly that it does not seem to be the interest of the children that is at stake today, but only the interest of a father to be close to his children. Can this interest be enforced through the outright exclusion of the interests of the children themselves and those of their mother’s?
Is it reasonable to presume that the legislator, when introducing paternal rights, had in mind that it would be the child’s burden to bear the emotional and practical consequences of a negligent father and that it would be for the child to be the parent of his/her father to ensure the emotional development of such father?
I am willing to accept, that the good Christian theory, makes one desperately want to help another in an attempt to redemption – if such attempt is real, which I question. But we should ask ourselves this question: Is it for the minor children to nurture the emotional development of their penitent father or is it for the father to ensure compliance with their claimed right to an emotional development?
Have we become our children’s children to put on them the onus of ensuring our well-being, upon realizing our folly for having neglected them so and wanting – allegedly – to make amends?
Do minor children, capable of understanding and discerning, have, yes or no, the right to decide what their life will be?
To whom else belongs the life of a minor child who is intelligent, capable of discernment, who chooses a happy and healthy life rather than the annihilation of any joyful life?
Is there any hope for a child who is sensitive and intelligent, proud and confident of his/her right to choose his/her life (the elder said “we have the right to choose. This is our life”), and is deprived of this right?
What scars will this leave? What hope of self-assurance and confidence in justice can such a decision leave imprinted in their minds?
The time has come to reconsider the court proceedings in their entirety.
I personally believe it is necessary to review the following four elements, the review of which should lead to better implementation of the spirit of the law and of justice in difficult situations of choice of residence of minor children.
1) In considering the agreements drawn up by the parents, it is necessary to implement the requirement:
a) that it is stamped by a bailiff or at least by an independent third party in order to prevent tampering or retaliation measures
b) that the rights of both parties are clearly respected and this by providing – in the context of that agreement – the evidence that both the time required for a true reflection on the implications of this document, the information for making an educated and wise decision, existed at the time of signing the agreement
2) In considering the criterion of social context, we should not limit the definition to a situation of child abuse, families in difficult social context, but should also include, via integrated legal provisions, the issue of children with problems requiring some sort of special suport (hyperactivity, trisomy 21 or other types, dyslexia, etc..). If the presence of one or other of these symptoms is proven in the documents filed in the case, this latter should, by law, require an extensive investigation regarding the various modalities of childcare provided by both parents.
It is vital that this criterion has a stronger character than the maternal or paternal rights over the child himself/herself or than the rights of the rest of the siblings and this irrespective of the child’s age.
3) In considering the ability to assume one’s duties and to respect the rights of the other parent, the legislation should not only indicate that it is something other than material or financial obligations, but that it is also very clearly the duty of a loving parent and his/her comparative ability to sacrifice his/her own career to serve the welfare of his/her children. Respect for the rights of the other party should be better documented and categorized to include not only a judicial procedure but also a police procedure to determine whether that right of contact was observed.
For example a hotline or urgent helpline at the service of children deprived of contact with their parents – in the absence of a more sustained follow-up through visits by a social worker for the review of the preservation of the other parent’s rights – could help as extra-judiciary alternative to avoid excesses and power struggles between the parents.
4) When taking into account the testimony of minor children and the freedom granted to the judge in not taking into account, this last matter should be subject to specific criteria that define in a very clear way when such testimony should not be taken account. Such legislation would provide guidance to judges and would be a useful means of preventing human biases.
Moreover, the law should evolve in order to grant minors the right to choose their life if they produce a plausible testimony and are clearly capable of discernment. This capacity of discernment must be clearly set down in unambiguous legislation.
I also find it necessary to amend the existing legislative provisions to ensure that an informed and reasonable testimony of a mature and responsible child, although not a party to the proceedings but simply a witness, should be a material and important fact in custody proceedings between parents themselves, all other matters being identical
Indeed, we obviously do not want to let the children choose to put themselves “into the jaws of the wolf” but apart from such extreme situations to be taken into account with the necessary safeguards, a greater weight should be given to the testimony of a mature minor child. It would be unwise – or almost inhuman – to force the child to restrict his/her right to a procedure that he/she himself/herself must introduce, while living under the yoke of a parent with whom he/she is unfortunately forced to live and who does not give him/her objective means to maintain his/her free will, independent of any pressure or manipulation – whether physical, mental, or both pressures.
It would be unreasonable to ask a minor child – who has already testified unsuccessfully in the proceedings, that opposed his/her two parents – to rise again and request a review of his/her case.
Indeed, it is unlikely that – under the yoke of the parent that he/she chose not to be with and against the influence of which there is no independent monitoring procedures whether judicial or extra-judicial – a minor child will take the initiative to seek to change his/her position again specially if such child has already been denied the right to choose his/her life,.
The only thing that could motivate this child would be an unbearable abuse or intense emotional suffering that is too difficult to live. Would the legislator like to limit the choice of minor children to such extreme cases of agony or can we finally realize that the right to choose one’s own path in life begins when a child is capable of discernment?
To close this difficult debate, I wish to bring to your attention the opinion of a poet that I admire very much, Gibran Khalil Gibran, who said something that is very true about the relationship between parents and children. This poet, like me, claims the right of children to a life of their own. Because that is what it boils down to. The first thing I asked the children before entering into this legal battle is “What do you want to do now that Dad wants you return to live with him.” Their answer was clear: “Mom, we want to live with you, okay. Dubai is nice but if you want to go somewhere else it is not an issue. The important thing is that all four of us are together”:
Je peux aussi témoigner que ce qu’elle dit s’appliquait également aux métisses comme moi, la familiarité immédiate “tu” et pas “vous”, la grivoiserie facile, le harcèlement et le manque de respect etc. Cette vidéo, a été faite par cette femme en 2007 – l’année où j’ai quitté la France. Je peux vous dire que les rares fois où je suis retournée en France, on ne peut pas dire que la situation se soit améliorée…
J’ai peut être moins de droits aux Emirats qu’une femme européenne blanche n’en a en Europe mais j’ai très certainement plus de droits ici que je n’en aurais jamais eu en France en tant que métisse
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPf0aRRkQm0&feature=related
J’ai eu beau expliquer au juge, lui prouver que j’avais cherché, sans succès, un travail à la hauteur de mes qualifications. J’avais beau mettre en exergue que sans travail, je n’aurais pas le droit (en tant qu’indienne) selon leurs propres lois sur l’immigration de vivre sur sol français, européen ou suisse. On m’a fait comprendre à demi-mots que je devais accepter un compromis, un travail beaucoup moins payé, un travail d’un niveau de loin inférieur à mes compétences parce qu’un tel travail, on me le donnerait très certainement. Sous-jacente est la pensée qu’on ne prononce pas haut, qu’on n’indique pas clairement qu’après tout, c’est tout ce à quoi je peux aspirer en tant que femme de couleur.
De grâce, de quoi je me plains, après tout je ne suis pas en train de laver les carreaux dans une belle maison de la république blanche, de passer un torchon sur des vitres ou la machine à nettoyage automatique dans les grandes surfaces, travaux réservés normalement à des gens comme moi. J’ai le droit d’évoluer, un peu, mais pas trop quand même, n’exagérons rien….
I can also testify that what she says also applies to half breeds like me, the familiarity, immediate “tu” instead of “vous”, the jeering, the harassment, lack of respect etc. This video was in 2007 when I left France and I can tell you it did not become any better the rare times I went again to France.
I may have less rights in the UAE than a white European woman may have in Europe but I definitely have more rights here than if I were back in Europe as a “half-breed”
On pourrait s’insurger contre ce que j’écris, me signaler qu’en plus d’être la patrie des droits de l’homme, la France est également le chantre de la liberté féminine. Que la France est le champion des femmes maltraitées ou contre lesquelles on discrimine.
Cela dit, force est de constater que beaucoup de témoignages rapportent que ce féminisme qui veut libérer les femmes d’outremer, les femmes sous un régime totalitaire mais pas sur sol français (ex Sakineh en Iran), ne se penche pas trop sérieusement et systématiquement sur le sort des femmes de couleur ou alors le fait seulement quand le cas est vraiment trop flagrant. Les demi-teintes, ce qui ne peut être clairement prouvé par manque de procédures, on n’y pense pas à deux fois.
Comme cette dame de couleur le dit elle-même, venant d’une Amérique où le féminisme voulait et sert effectivement en toute égalité toutes les femmes:
“Ce mythe de féminisme français est vraiment troublant…Le féminisme français a laissé choir les femmes parce que tout ce qu’il a fait c’est d’aider des femmes européennes et françaises blanches et ce que vous voyez ici en France est une terrible, terrible distance entre la manière dont vivent les femmes blanches françaises et celle dont vivent les femmes de couleur”…
Prenez également ce témoignage de ma part pour les détracteurs. Je suis une femme de couleur et je ne satisfais pas aux clichés faciles de la femme de couleur inculte, qui n’est pas d’accord de travailler dur et de mériter une place au soleil. Je suis une tache noire (ou demi-noire) sur cette théorie néo-raciste blanche de “les femmes de couleur en France ne font pas grand chose pour sortir de leur HLM/taudis/gourbi/hijab/burqa/misère” (au choix pour les qualificatifs qu’on voudrait asséner à nos origines)…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGOiqtR6QG0&feature=related
One could stand up against what I write, tell me that France is not only the land of human rights but is also the faithful crooner of women’s lib. That France is the champion of women who are badly treated or against whom there is discrimination.
However, it is a blinding fact that many testimonies vouch that this feminism that wants to free women in overseas countries, women under a totalitarian regime but not on French soil (eg. Sakineh in Iran), does not take to heart too seriously or at least not systematically the plight of coloured women or only if the case is really too visible. Difficult shady situation, where clearly nothing can be proven because of the lack of proper procedures in the justice system, nobody gives that a second thought.
As she says it herself, coming from America where feminism was meant to and does serve equally all women:
“This myth of French feminism is terribly disturbing…French feminism has failed women because all that they did was help white European, French women and what you see here in France is a terrible, terrible distance between the way in which french white females live and french women of colour”…
Take it also from me. I am of colour and I do not satisfy the usually easily dusted away protests using clichés of females of colour being uneducated and unwilling to work hard and deserve their fair share of limelight. I am a disturbing dark blotch in the theory of coloured women in France deserve their plight…
France je te renie, bleu, blanc, rouge, je t’oublie
18 août 2010
…
J’aime de ta couleur, les nuances bleues saumâtres
France que, de mon exil, je me mets à observer
Plongeant mon regard avide dans tes eaux verdâtres
France, de ta Seine, j’ai tant parcouru les Quais
…
France, que j’aimais ton teint de colombe albâtre
France, au rang de Sainte, ta justice j’avais élevée
France de mon cœur qui, rouge, pour toi fut un âtre
France, que mon père, de Pondichéry, nous chantait
…
France, ta justice, ouvre nos veines rougeâtres
Tes sillons, de nos sangs impurs, tu veux abreuver
France, tu renvoies vite à leur déconfiture ces pâtres
Indiens, Arabes, Musulmans, peuples tant décriés
…
J’aime que tu n’aimes pas du tout ma couleur jaunâtre
Car ce sont autant de raisons pour, enfin, me donner
Une raison pour refuser tes relents fort douceâtres
France que j’aimais, France que j’ai enfin oubliée
Ramblings
Welcome to our blog, where we delve into art-related topics with a special emphasis on Asian art. Our focus is primarily on ancient Chinese painting and the profound philosophical concepts that underpin this rich tradition. You'll find a diverse range of content, including the author's own works—from calligraphy and sketches to detailed studies and finished pieces. Discover the beauty and depth of Asian art, and join us on a journey through history, philosophy, and creative expression.
Gray clouds trail across the sky. In the pale winter sun a flock of geese (Ben Grafström--Akita, Japan)
Vibe alone for a while
Author, Poet, Blogger, Father, Reader And More
Remember who you are!
Works of pain, guilt, pleasure and fantasy
Another WordPress.com plight
True wealth is the wealth of the soul
How To Become a Better Writer—Best Epic Fantasy Books
Geetha Balvannanathan's Blog - Isis Tratum 
You must be logged in to post a comment.