𝖳𝗈𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗍𝖾̂𝗆 𝗇𝖺𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖻𝗅𝖾𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖾́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌. 𝖤́ 𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝖾𝖼𝖾 𝖾𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗂𝗌𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋 𝗈𝗋𝗀𝖺𝗇𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗌𝗈𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖾, 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖺𝗓𝖺̃𝗈, 𝗇𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗋 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌. 𝖠 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺̃𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗅𝗈𝖼𝖺, 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖾 𝖿𝖺𝖼𝗍𝗈, 𝖾́ 𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝖺𝖻𝖾𝗋 𝗌𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗍𝖾̂𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖾́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌 𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖿𝖺𝗓𝖾𝗋 𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈. 𝖱𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖾́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗆𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗋𝗋𝗂𝗀𝗂𝗋 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗏𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗎𝗌, 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗏𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺 𝖾𝗑𝖼𝗅𝗎𝗂́-𝗅𝗈𝗌, 𝖾 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗋 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗋𝗏𝗂𝖼̧𝗈 𝗉𝗎́𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝗈, 𝗇𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅 𝗌𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗏𝖾𝗃𝖺𝗆 𝗈𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗎𝗌 𝗆𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖾 𝗈𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗎𝗌 𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌. 𝖤𝗑𝖺𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗈, 𝗍𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗋 𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝗋𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌. 𝖯𝗋𝖾𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾-𝗌𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖻𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾, 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗌𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗇𝖺 𝖿𝗎𝗇𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗎́𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺, 𝖺𝖽𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗂𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺 𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗅𝖾𝗍𝖺 𝗇𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗌𝖺 𝖽𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖾 𝗉𝗎́𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝗈.
𝖤𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺̃𝗈 𝗁𝖺́ 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝖾𝗆 𝖺𝖻𝖾𝗋𝗍𝗈 𝖾 𝖺𝗀𝗋𝖺𝗏𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗆-𝗌𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗈 𝖼𝖺𝗌𝗈 𝖲𝗈́𝖼𝗋𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗌.
𝖯𝗈𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝖺𝗅𝗀𝗎𝗇𝗌 “𝗆𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗂𝗇𝗁𝗈𝗌” 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖺𝗅𝗍𝖺𝗆 𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝖼𝗋𝖺𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌: 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗆𝗂𝗌𝖼𝗎𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖾 𝗇𝖾𝗀𝗈́𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗌, 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗀𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗈́𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗀𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗎́𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝖺𝗅𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗀𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗏𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌, 𝖼𝖺𝗆𝗎𝖿𝗅𝖺𝗀𝖾𝗆 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝗎́𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌, 𝖺𝗆𝗂𝗀𝗎𝗂𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝗇𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗋𝗎𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗁𝖾𝖿𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗇𝖺 𝖺𝖽𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗎́𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺, 𝖾𝗑𝖾́𝗋𝖼𝗂𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝖽𝗈𝗋 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖺́𝗏𝖾𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗀𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗎𝗍𝖺𝗋𝗊𝗎𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌, 𝖻𝖺𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗎́𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖺𝗃𝗎𝗌𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝗂𝗋𝖾𝗍𝗈, 𝖾𝗑𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝗃𝗎𝗋𝗂́𝖽𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖾 𝗇𝖾𝗀𝗈𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅, 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗍𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗆𝖺𝗋𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝖺 𝖼𝖺𝗆𝖺𝗋𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗍𝗈𝖽𝖺 𝖺 𝗀𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾.
𝖢𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝖾́ 𝖻𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖾𝗇𝗌𝗂́𝗏𝖾𝗅, 𝖽𝖾́𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗍𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺 𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗎𝗌 𝖻𝖾𝗇𝖾𝖿𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗆 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗉𝗈𝖽𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗅𝖺𝗆 𝖽𝖾 "𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖾𝗋". 𝖠𝗉𝗈𝖽𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗎𝗌 𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈𝗌, 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗌, 𝖾́ 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗎𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖾 𝗀𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗍𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗅𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌.
𝖠 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝗈𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾, 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗏𝖾𝗂𝖼𝗎𝗅𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝗈𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅, 𝖽𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗂𝗋𝖼𝗎𝗅𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖾 𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖾 𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝖾𝗀𝗈́𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖺 𝗌𝗈𝖼𝗂𝖾𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗂𝗏𝗂𝗅 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗂𝗉𝖺𝗋 𝗇𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗆-𝗌𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗏𝖾𝗅𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗎𝗆 𝗆𝖺𝗇𝖺́ 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗈 𝖾𝗇𝗋𝗂𝗊𝗎𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗃𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝗈 "𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺̃𝗈". 𝖤𝗌𝗌𝖺 𝖺𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗈𝗀𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗇𝖼̧𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗎𝗅𝖺𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝗈́𝗋𝗀𝖺̃𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗏𝖺𝗂 𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗋 𝖽𝖺 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗀𝗆𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖿𝗎𝗇𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗎́𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 “𝖿𝗎𝗇𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌”, 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾́𝖼𝗂𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖺𝗌 “𝗏𝗈𝖼𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗅𝗂𝖻𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗂𝗌”. 𝖤́ 𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝗏𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗈…
𝖧𝖺́ 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗅𝖺𝗆𝖺𝗆 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗏𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗆𝗂𝗌𝖼𝗎𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖾 𝗇𝖾𝗀𝗈́𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺? 𝖧𝖺́ 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖿𝖺𝗅𝗍𝖺 𝗎𝗆 𝗋𝖺𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗈 𝗋𝗂𝗀𝗈𝗋𝗈𝗌𝗈 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖻𝖾𝗇𝗌 𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖺́𝗏𝖾𝗂𝗌 𝗉𝗎́𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌? 𝖮 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝖿𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝗇𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖺́𝗋𝖾𝖺 𝖾́ 𝗉𝗈𝗎𝖼𝗈 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝗉𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾, 𝗍𝖺̃𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝗉𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖾𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝖻𝖺𝗍𝖾 𝖺 𝗏𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗀𝖾𝗇𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺𝗌.
𝖠 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗎𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖺́𝗏𝖾𝗅 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖾𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝗅𝖾𝗏𝗈𝗎 𝖺̀ 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗅𝗂𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗈́𝖽𝗂𝗀𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖽𝗎𝗍𝖺 𝗇𝗈 𝖤𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈, 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗉𝗈𝗎𝖼𝗈 𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈. 𝖠𝗍𝖾́ 𝖼𝖺𝗂́𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖺𝗇𝖾𝖽𝗈𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗎𝗇𝗌 𝗀𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌, 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝖺𝖼𝖾𝗂𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗏𝗂𝖺𝗀𝖾𝗇𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗀𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝖦𝖺𝗅𝗉 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗂𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝗏𝖾𝗋 𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗅𝖾𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗇𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝖾 𝖿𝗎𝗍𝖾𝖻𝗈𝗅 𝖺 𝗃𝗈𝗀𝖺𝗋 𝗇𝗈 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗀𝖾𝗂𝗋𝗈, 𝖺𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖾́𝗉𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝗇𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝖿𝖺𝗆𝗂́𝗅𝗂𝖺 𝖠𝗆𝗈𝗋𝗂𝗆.
𝖤𝗆 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝗂𝗍𝗎𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌, 𝖺 "𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺" 𝗌𝗎𝖻𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝗂 𝗈𝖻𝗃𝖾𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗀𝗋𝖺𝗆𝖺́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝗎 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗆𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗂𝗌, 𝗈𝗎 𝗆𝖾𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝗈 𝗌𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗅𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗍𝖾́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗋𝗏𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖻𝖾𝗇𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗎𝗇𝗌. 𝖮 𝗓𝖾́𝗇𝗂𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗈, 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺-𝗌𝖾 𝗈𝗎 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈, 𝖿𝗈𝗂 𝗈 𝖼𝖺𝗌𝗈 𝖲𝗈́𝖼𝗋𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗌.
𝖣𝖾𝗂𝗑𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗅𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝖾𝗋𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖿𝖾𝖼𝗁𝗈 𝗃𝗎𝖽𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅, 𝖾́ 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗌𝗂́𝗏𝖾𝗅 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖾𝖻𝖾𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖲𝗈́𝖼𝗋𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖿𝗈𝗂 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺 𝗇𝖾𝖻𝗎𝗅𝗈𝗌𝖺 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗂𝗌𝖺 𝗉𝗎́𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺. 𝖢𝗁𝖾𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗊𝗎𝗂, 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗈̃𝖾-𝗌𝖾 𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗀𝗎𝗇𝗍𝖺: 𝖿𝗈𝗂 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗇𝗂𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝖽𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗈 𝖯𝖲 𝗇𝗎𝗇𝖼𝖺 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗎 𝖲𝗈́𝖼𝗋𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗈𝗎 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖻𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗎𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝗈 𝗀𝗋𝗎𝗉𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈-𝗌𝗈𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝗆𝗈𝗏𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗀𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖺𝗌? 𝖠̀ 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾́ 𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖾 𝖺̀ 𝗃𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖼̧𝖺 𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾́ 𝖽𝖺 𝗃𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖼̧𝖺, 𝗌𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌, 𝗇𝖾𝗆 𝗃𝗎𝖽𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌. 𝖬𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗂́𝗉𝗂𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗍𝗈 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾́ 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝖺𝗍𝗂́𝗏𝖾𝗅 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖺 𝖾𝗑𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝗃𝗎𝗂́𝗓𝗈 𝖾́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈, 𝗇𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗀𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗅, 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝖺𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗅𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗍𝗈𝖽𝗈 𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝗎𝖾̂𝗌 𝗌𝖺𝖻𝖾, 𝗆𝖾𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝗈𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗆 𝗈 𝖯𝖲.
𝖲𝗈́𝖼𝗋𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖿𝖺𝗅𝗍𝗈𝗎 𝖺𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗏𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝗈 𝖤𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖾 𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝖾́ 𝗂𝗇𝖺𝖽𝗆𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂́𝗏𝖾𝗅 𝗇𝗎𝗆 𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗀𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗂𝗋𝗈-𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗈. 𝖣𝗂𝗋𝖺̃𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝗂𝗋𝖾𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝗇𝖺 𝗏𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝖽𝗈 𝖯𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝖲𝗈𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺. 𝖤 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖲𝗈́𝖼𝗋𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖾́ 𝗎𝗆 𝖾𝗑-𝗆𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾. 𝖦𝗋𝖺𝗇𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝗀𝖺𝗇𝗈. 𝖮𝗇𝖽𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗁𝖺́ 𝗌𝖺𝗇𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺, 𝖺𝖿𝗋𝗈𝗎𝗑𝖺𝗆 𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗍𝖾́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖾́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌. 𝖣𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝖺 𝗆𝖺𝗇𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺: 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗂𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝗅𝗁𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝗆𝖺𝗅 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖾𝗏𝗂𝗍𝖺́𝗏𝖾𝗂𝗌 𝖾𝗋𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝗇𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖼𝗎𝗋𝗌𝗈 𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗏𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝗈 𝗇𝖾𝗀𝗈𝖼𝗂𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗅𝗂́𝖼𝗂𝗍𝗈. 𝖠𝗇𝗍𝗈́𝗇𝗂𝗈 𝖢𝗈𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗌 𝖿𝖺𝗓𝖾𝗋 𝖽𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝗂𝗇𝖺 𝖾 𝗁𝗈𝗃𝖾 𝗈 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗏𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝗂𝗀𝗈𝗋, 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾, 𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾, 𝗍𝖾𝗆 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗍𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗌𝖺𝗋 𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖼𝗅𝖺𝗆𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗏𝗂𝗋𝗍𝗎𝖽𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝗎́𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌. 𝖠𝗍𝖾́ 𝗇𝖺 𝖿𝗋𝖺𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺 𝖾𝗑𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝖺𝗍𝖾́ 𝖺̀ 𝗎́𝗅𝗍𝗂𝗆𝖺 𝗇𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗎 𝗀𝖺𝖻𝗂𝗇𝖾𝗍𝖾, 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝗎́𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝗀𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗅, 𝗎𝗆 𝖾𝗑-𝖺𝗎𝗍𝖺𝗋𝖼𝖺 𝖽𝗈 𝖠𝗅𝗍𝗈 𝖬𝗂𝗇𝗁𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗍𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝖾𝗆 𝗇𝖾𝗀𝗈́𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗑𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗏𝖺𝗀𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖾 𝗅𝖾𝗌𝗂𝗏𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝗈 𝖾𝗋𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈. 𝖰𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝗂𝗀𝗇𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗋𝖺́ “𝖺𝖽𝗃𝗎𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗂𝗋𝗈-𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗈”?
𝖮 𝖯𝖲𝖣 𝗅𝖺𝗏𝗋𝖺 𝗇𝖺 𝗆𝖾𝗌𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺 𝖾 𝗈 𝖼𝖺𝗏𝖺𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝖿𝗈𝗂 𝗎𝗆 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂𝗆 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖺 𝗌𝗎𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖿𝗋𝖺𝗎𝖽𝖾 𝗅𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗃𝖺 𝖽𝗈 𝖡𝖯𝖭/𝖲𝖫𝖭, 𝗈𝗎 𝗈 𝖺𝗎𝗍𝗈𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗂𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗎𝗍𝖺𝗋𝖼𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝖼𝗎𝗌𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗅𝗎𝗏𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝗇𝖾𝗉𝗈𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗆𝗈. 𝖠𝗂𝗇𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗌𝗈𝗌 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗌𝗂𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗆 𝗃𝗎𝗅𝗀𝖺𝖽𝗈.
𝖰𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗈𝖼𝗎𝗉𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖿𝖾𝗇𝗈́𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗌 – 𝗆𝖾𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗎𝗌𝖾 𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗎𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗉𝗎𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 – 𝖾́ 𝗂𝗆𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖺𝗍𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗌𝗂𝗍𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗅, 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺, 𝖽𝖾 𝗃𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺, 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖾 𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗉𝗂́𝗍𝖾𝗍𝗈𝗌. 𝖯𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖾𝖻𝖾-𝗌𝖾 𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖾𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗅𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌. 𝖮 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖼𝖾𝖻𝖾, 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗈𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝗅𝗀𝗎𝗆, 𝖾́ 𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗆𝗂𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝖻𝖺𝗍𝖾 𝖺̀ 𝖾𝗑𝗍𝗋𝖾𝗆𝖺-𝖽𝗂𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗍𝖺 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖼𝗅𝖺𝗆𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝖺𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝖿𝖾𝖼𝗁𝖺 𝗈𝗌 𝗈𝗅𝗁𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗈 𝖾𝗇𝗋𝗂𝗊𝗎𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗏𝖺𝖽𝗈, 𝗌𝖾 𝖾𝗅𝖾 𝗏𝗂𝖾𝗋 𝖽𝖾 𝖿𝖺𝗏𝗈𝗋 𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗅 𝗈𝗎 𝗂𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗈́𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖾𝗋 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈. 𝖠𝗂́ 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺́ 𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖺𝗎𝗍𝖾́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝖳𝖠𝖯, 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗈𝖻𝖾𝗋𝗍𝗈 𝖺𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗇𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝖺𝖽𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝗇𝖽𝗂𝗏𝗂𝖽𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗀𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌. 𝖭𝗂𝗇𝗀𝗎𝖾́𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗋 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾́𝖼𝗂𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗎𝗋𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗂𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈, 𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗀𝖾-𝗌𝖾 𝗈 𝗌𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗅𝖾𝗌 𝗎𝗌𝗈 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗍𝖾́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖤𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗈𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗏𝖺𝗅𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗎𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌.
𝖤𝗆 𝗍𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗈𝗌, 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖿𝗂𝗀𝗎𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝖱𝖾𝗉𝗎́𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖾 𝖽𝖺 𝖣𝖾𝗆𝗈𝖼𝗋𝖺𝖼𝗂𝖺, 𝖯𝖾𝖽𝗋𝗈 𝖠𝗋𝗌𝖾́𝗇𝗂𝗈 𝖭𝗎𝗇𝖾𝗌, 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝗌𝖾-𝗆𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗁𝖺𝗏𝗂𝖺 𝗎𝗆 𝗆𝖺𝗇𝗎𝖺𝗅 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖾𝗑𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗈𝗌 “𝗃𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗍𝖺𝗌" 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗌𝖾 𝖺𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗉𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗏𝖺𝗆 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗂𝗌𝖺 𝗉𝗎́𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾, 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖺𝗅𝖾́𝗆 𝖽𝖺 𝗃𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖼̧𝖺, 𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝖽𝖺𝗋 𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺𝗌. 𝖠 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗅𝗂𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗃𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖾́ 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗉𝗈𝗋𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖺̀ 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗍𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺 𝗇𝖾𝗎𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖾́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗀𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖾 𝖽𝖺 𝗁𝗂𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗋𝗊𝗎𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌. 𝖥𝖺𝗅𝗍𝖺 𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗅𝗂́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺. 𝖠 𝖾́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝗎𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗇𝖺 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗀𝗈𝗍𝖺 𝗇𝖺 𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝗈𝗎 𝗇𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝖾𝗋𝗍𝗈 𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾 𝗍𝖺𝗋𝖽𝗂𝗈 𝗃𝗎𝗂́𝗓𝗈 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗍𝗋𝗂𝖻𝗎𝗇𝖺𝗂𝗌. 𝖯𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾, 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗎𝗌𝗈, 𝗌𝖾 𝖺𝖿𝗎𝗇𝖽𝖺𝗆 𝗇𝗈 𝗉𝖺̂𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗇𝗈.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário