Last Seen Blogs
Text
Facebook Posts July 2010 - December 2010
4th July 2010
The illusion that everybody's opinion matters has created a society in which stupidity must be considered just as seriously as brilliance. Gone are the days where stupid people weren't allowed to talk while big people were talking. Now they have their own facebook pages.... On the bright side, we no longer have to rely on television for entertainment
_________________________
10th July 2010
♫ Just gonna stand there and watch me burn....well that's alright because I like the way it hurts......Just gonna stand there and hear me cry....well that's alright because I love the way you lie...♫ - ‘Love the way you lie’, Rihanna ft. Eminem
_________________________
14th July 2010
If there's no such thing as no such thing, then there is such a thing as no such thing, which means that there really is no such thing as no such thing.
_________________________
15th July 2010
Bad?: So I was standing next to a fat girl and I turned to her and said "moo". At first she started to cuss and call me names and tell me about my mother. I quietly said "moo" again without lifting my gaze. This time she started screaming and clawing at me. For the last time...I said "moo". She stopped and looked at me, then after a minute of silence she said "father?"
_________________________
25th July 2010
You know you're doing something wrong when your fiancée tells you "I'd rather be his whore than your wife"... ♥ Titanic
_________________________
30th July 2010
You ever meet someone so dumb that you think they're up to something? "What?....no....what you playing at?....wait.....you're serious?"
_________________________
5th August 2010
The 1st tao of Jarid: {For all those in a relationship...the sentence "It doesn't matter anymore, I have a man, I'm gonna let loose" is not acceptable unless you're talking about a party or sex.}
_________________________
6th August 2010
I know I'm not the only person that finds irony in the fact that the guy that recently beat the JAMAICAN Bolt, is called Mr. Gay. lol "Gay shocks Bolt in Stockholm" is the Headline....So what did we learn? U can run from gays all u want my Jamaican brethren, but it'll catch up with you eventually...
_________________________
15th August 2010
Life is too short to waste on people who don't realize how awesome you are. I knew an awesome person who never followed the crowd or did what was 'expected'. She's gone now, but I can say she lived her life the way she wanted to, surrounded by people she liked who definitely liked her. When my time comes, I want someone to say the same about me. So fuck off and thank you.
_________________________
17th August 2010
Can someone explain to me how purposely doing something that makes your guy friends happy and like u, but at the same time leaves ur woman unhappy and unsatisfied, isn't gay? "Bow cat" it would seem is the opposite of "battyman"....not synonymous.
_________________________
20th August 2010
"Ur like a giant fucking cock blocking robot developed in a secret government lab or something" - Zombieland (lmao)
_________________________
21st August 2010
♫ That's alright, thats ok....g'on head believe what ur home girls say...a nigga like me drink alotta liquor, meet alotta bitches, take alotta pictures....I might break bread with 1 or 2 strippers, but that don't mean u gotta pull my zipper...thinkin that I dicked down the whole town, even tho I got dick to go round ♫ - ‘Smell yo dick’, Kay Luv
_________________________
22nd August 2010
♫ You say its my fault, ok then I'll go...its better to know...how theres nobody to argue with...cuz im not home...dont care who ur with....dont call my phone...or did u forget...u know you're wrong...I'm gone....and you're all alone....hearing your own damn...eh echo eh echo ♫ - ‘Echo’, Gorilla Zoe
_________________________
8th September 2010
♫ A penny for my thoughts, oh no I'll sell them for a dollar, They're worth so much more after I'm a goner, And maybe then you'll hear the words I been singin', Funny when your dead how people start listenin'...If I die young ♫ - ‘If I die young’, The Band Perry
_________________________
10th September 2010
The tao of Jarid: "Facebook is not a place to publish things you wish to remain private. By its very nature, anything put on here voluntarily is for people to notice, see, and by extension comment or ask about. Getting defensive when asked about something YOU put up in the public domain makes no sense."
_________________________
11th September 2010
The tao of Jarid: "Women treat the male gene pool like a real pool. They all jump in and splash around the shallow end in their youth...then wade out to the deeper end as they get older."
_________________________
15th September 2010
“Watching your daughter being collected by her date feels like handing over a million dollar [violin] to a gorilla.” - Jim Bishop
_________________________
17th September 2010
Taxi driver on the way home today: "You see men? Especially young men like you? You need to eat raw foods. Lemme tell u the other night I was with my gf and no matter WHAT position I put her in...me deya fight fi cum! FIRST time me haffu TRY cum. All when me done, cocky stiff stiff"
_________________________
22nd September 2010
Birthdays on facebook are really opportunities for people that never speak to you to subtly say "I care! Don't delete me! Look how I wrote on ur wall!" lol
_________________________
23rd September 2010
The tao of Jarid: The lawyer most people know is the American lawyer. That's why lawyers have a bad name. Caribbean lawyers are nothing like their American counterparts (the laws and practices here are vastly different). People should remember that before they band all "lawyers" together.
_________________________
23rd September 2010
Listen, I understand that having a BB means that u can talk to anyone at anytime for free, but seriously...10 grown ppl sitting in a room engrossed in their phones not speaking to each other, is ridiculous. What happend to common courtesy, what happened to meeting new people and saying hi to a stranger? Sheesh. U remind me of little kids in church playing their gameboys.
_________________________
26th September 2010
U know what I hate? The fact that hypocrisy is so prevalent. Any time you see someone stand up and strongly take a stand against something...9/10 times they do it. If they vehemently denounce homosexuals, 9/10 times, they're sleeping with little boys. Its SO common now, that I never want to take a strong stand against anything, lest ppl think I secretly do it. Chupz.
-
The tao of Jarid: For those of you who believe that "no means no, but unconscious means yes".....a prison cell awaits.
_________________________
28th September 2010
The legal way of saying “nigga stole my bike”: “ A human being of the male gender wth black pigmentation on his skin appears 2 have acquired without my consent my 2-wheeled, non-motorized private and/or recreational transportation, also known as "bike", and appears 2 have driven away with said 2-wheeled, non-motorized private and/or recreational transportation, despite my attempt of chasing the said human being, completely ignoring my request 2 give sed item bk” - username iani103. Man, I love my profession.
_________________________
1st October 2010
I think women should develop the same "fuck it" mechanism guys have. If there's a baby in the house crying for hours on end...what you will not find is a man around. Y? Cuz we can't fix it and its driving us crazy, so we roll out and go by Tony's house to watch football, i.e. fuk it. More women should do that instead of staying in the stress and snapping and shaking their babies to death or driving them into a river.
-
The tao of Jarid: Facebook should have a 'WHO CARES?!?' button....and make my page immune to it.
_________________________
2nd October 2010
The tao of Jarid: The more "LMAO"s and "LOLOLOL"s your status contains, the less funny the actual subject matter is. Contrary to popular belief, nothing gets funnier the more you laugh at it by yourself.
-
Grown men's fascination with penitentiary pussy confuses me... Sex with it = go to prison. What's the problem? Where's the option? All I see is "Sex with prison". No thanks. That's like the "option" 'get in this dark van so I can drive u to my abandoned cabin in the woods or I shoot you'. All I should be hearing is *gunshot*.
_________________________
4th October 2010
The tao of Jarid: Drama vampires are not cool. While the rest of us need food and water to live, these creatures survive solely off drama and other people viewing it. The only effective way to deal with them is to block and delete them from everything. If you can't see their drama, they weaken and die. True story.
-
“I think when you put sex and spirituality in the same bottle and shake it up, bad things happen. Yes, I said I kissed a girl. But I didn’t say I kissed a girl while f-ing a crucifix.” - Katy Perry (on why she dislikes Lady Gaga’s music video for ‘Alejandro’)
_________________________
5th October 2010
"This is my facade of civility; do not mistake for complacency, for once this veil is taken down, you'll see a vicious turn around...of all you grew to know and love...the hand lying beneath the glove.... An animal living in a shell. A beast who's come to raise all hell."
_________________________
6th October 2010
The tao of Jarid: Forget CNN, BBC or any other news organisation....nowhere else are world issues more discussed than on YouTube's comments section
_________________________
8th October 2010
You are one person, out of 7 billion people, on one planet, out of 8 planets, in one solar system out of a hundred billion solar systems, in one galaxy out of a hundred billion galaxies.......you are ENORMOUSLY insignificant, and don't let facebook ever make you forget that. [De-motivational Speech for the day]
_________________________
11th October 2010
Anybody remember when they FIRST came on fb YEARS ago? How it used to be? How Fb made hi5 look like the social networking ghetto? It was so clean and neat and classy. "Jarid Hewlett", likes, interests, lil about myself. Send ur friends who u havent seen since primary school messages. It was a magical innocent time. Why did you people have to rape facebook? Why?
-
Now? as NC17 says, no more "Jarid Hewlett", we have "Jarid fuckspussyallday Hewlett", we have "What kind of telly tubby would u have sex with?" quizzes, we have people fighting over who their baby's daddy is for the world to see. (Btw when did this shit become acceptable? Not knowing which guy ejaculated inside and impregnated you is something people used to be ashamed of and settle in private...why is it cool to broadcast this now?), we have break ups where guys blatantly put their numbers under "X is no longer in a relationship".....
What happened to CLASS??? I understand they don't teach that in school, but they bloody well should. No one comes on fb to keep in touch with people anymore. And the ones that do, spend 20% of their total fb time doing that. The rest of us laugh or bow our heads in sadness at the ridiculous shit people post. I'm black and I hate racists and racism, but goddamn it....sometimes, as much as I hate to admit it.....I see where they're coming from. <sigh>
_________________________
15th October 2010
♫ We're going out tonight...to kick out every light, take anything we want, drink everything in sight, we're going till the world stops turning while we burn it to the ground tonight! ♫ - ‘Burn it to the ground’, Nickelback
_________________________
21st October 2010
The tao: Men get bitter, just as women do. The difference is, a bitter woman will say "fuck men" and never have sex again. A bitter man will say "fuck women" and do just that.
_________________________
26th October 2010
The tao: "All inclusive" does not mean "free cheap rum and vodka with juice". Stop the false advertising.
_________________________
27th October 2010
The tao: Having high standards doesn't necessarily exempt you from whoredom. While we all agree that having low to no standards makes one a ho, having high, meaningless standards makes one a ho too. "I only sleep with guys that drive BMWs" is a high standard. It is not a substantive standard.
-
♫ And who do you think you are? Running round leaving scars....Collecting your jar of hearts, tearing love apart........You’re gonna catch a cold, from the ice inside your soul.........So don’t come back for me, who do you think you are? ♫ - ‘Jar of Hearts’, Christina Perri
_________________________
28th October 2010
"Labour all de way"? "UPP all de way?".....come on, man. I'm "all the way" with whoever makes Antigua a better country. Politics has come to mean arbitrary following of a party that makes your immediate life better regardless of the long term. Don't even get me started on 'patriotism'.
_________________________
31st October 2010
The tao: He who is slow to anger gets annoyed the longest.
_________________________
1st November 2010
♫....you just hurt my goddamn feelings, and that was the last one I had ♫ - ‘Here we go’, Eminem
_________________________
2nd November 2010
Lawyer talk: My Lord, my client was not anywhere near the building when the window was broken, and if he was, he did not break the window, and if he did break the window, he did so by accident, and if he didn't break it by accident, it wasn't the complainant's window, and if it was their window, it was their fault for putting it where my client throws stones.
_________________________
8th November 2010
Mr. Kartel, you sir, have lied to me.....apparently women do not want a man whose "buddy long like a thousand match stick line up"....apparently that hurts and more than 90% of it will be outside anyway. You have misled me sir, and I demand an apology.
_________________________
10th November 2010
On a serious note.....which do you think is more "loving" and less "heartless"? (Option A) Being in a relationship and cheating gratuitously on your significant other? Or (Option B) breaking up with your significant other who probably didn't see it coming, because you want to sleep with someone else?
_________________________
11th November 2010
The tao: No one really sees anything. Everyone thinks they see something. I might think I see a pudgy, ugly woman, you might think you see a curvy goddess. Who knows whats actually there...The difference between sane and insane people is that insane people are just a little more creative with what they think they see....and nothing can change their mind.
_________________________
14th November 2010
The tao: If someone tells you something you don't understand, don't repeat it. It might have been wisdom when they told you...but after your brain is done with it, there's a high chance it comes back out as crap.
_________________________
15th November 2010
"You're Cuban AND Jamaican?? That's a really.....illegal mix, lol. So you speak Spanish and bloodclaat?" - Mike Yard (*dead*)
_________________________
17th November 2010
The tao: One should never let emotions get in the way of reality. Sometimes people just don't appreciate you no matter how you feel about them. That's ok. Someone does.
_________________________
19th November 2010
♫ Well I'm a poet to some, a regular modern day Shakespeare.....Jesus Christ, the King of these latter day saints here ♫ - ‘Renegade’, Jay-Z & Eminem
_________________________
25th November 2010
The tao: Whenever you think "don't let a good thing pass you by"....remember that many things are only good now BECAUSE you let them pass you by at first. Don't be afraid to let go.
_________________________
26th November 2010
"If my wanting to see you was on a scale of 1-10.....I'd still say no". It takes a while to fully appreciate just how horrible this statement is.
_________________________
27th November 2010
U know what I just realized..?..The first time I listened to the Marshall Mathers LP was on *cassette*...in my * Walkman*....that Michael Henry had copied for me.....I'm gonna reserve my rocking chair in the old folks home from now, see...
-
The tao: Stop saying "I'm just me". Everyone is just them. If you choose to be someone who tries to be like other people, that's still who you are. You are just a personalityless ninny, but it's still who YOU are. You can't ever be anything else but you. "I'm just me" is like saying "I breathe oxygen". No shit.
-
♫ Me start da day wit a flask, cranberry an ice inna glass....satellite can't find me me lost....buy me own liquor cuz me a me own boss....drink fi drunk dat me endorse....OH ♫ - ‘Rum & Red Bull’, Beenie Man &Future Fambo
_________________________
30th November 2010
Seriously....if I read one more comment under a political story with someone urging people to "wake up", I'm going to slap somebody. I always find it fascinating that politics turns otherwise sensible people into jackasses. "Belief is the enemy of reality".
-
Lesbians have life so easy.....girls are very gay normally, lol. Dressing in front of each other, dancing up with one another, feeling up one another etc.....you could pretty much spend ur whole life being a lesbian and no one would ever know once u lie every now and again about some boy u find hot.
-
"The fact is governments deal with the United States because it's in their interest, not because they like us, not because they trust us and not because they think we can keep secrets," - US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. If that's not gangsta, I dunno what is...
_________________________
2nd December 2010
♫ I love my life....none a we don't know wey tomorrow might bring cuz the future deh hours away...so me go live my life today...me ah live my life today...so lowe me mek me talk what me want fi talk, me have nuff fi say...so me go live my life today...me ah go live my life today ♫ - ‘I love my life’, Demarco
_________________________
7th December 2010
The tao: Never overestimate the power of friendship.
_________________________
9th December 2010
♫ De boy ketch me a stamp up him gyal postcard....want arrest me but....him anna sarge....he nah stop tell me how him a camouflage....never voice ya hear from him vocal cord because.....a we mek nuff man start drink Guinness ♫ - ‘A we’, Hawkeye
_________________________
11th December 2010
The tao: The next time someone you thought you mattered to lets you down, always remember that its not their fault you don't have better friends.
_________________________
17th December 2010
Men beware: "Your mouth says no, but your eyes say yes" will never ever stand up in court.
_________________________
19th December 2010
The tao: Stop bitching about the 'true meaning' of Christmas. People like presents. Deal with it.
_________________________
21st December 2010
The tao: Put on a jamaican accent and include "bloodclaat" or "bumboclaat" and any sentence becomes five times funnier. E.g. "Where are u going, u unhygienic homosexual?" "Yow, a where dis dutty skin, yellow teet, shitty draws BUMBOCLAAT battybwoy a go?" Same message. Five times funnier.
_________________________
25th December 2010
The tao: "I have a boyfriend".........."Babes....you can have ALL the boyfriends you want...not "a", not "some".....ALL.....me still want u". - This conversation will always go like this. Saying you have a boyfriend is not a substitute for saying no.
_________________________
30th December 2010
New year new me! "Are u getting a sex change?" What? no..... "Are you changing careers?" Um..no.. "Are you radically overhauling your entire personality?" Not really... "Shut up and sit down"
0 notes
Text
Soul Collector
13th November 2010
-
My name is Jack Ferriman
A reaper of souls
For those who don’t know
And for those whom I’ve told
There’s something about me
That brightens your day
My seductive smile,
The way that I sway
I’ll convince you of anything
Whether true or invented
Get into your mind
Once it’s evil I’ve scented...
Trust in my lies,
You gullible fool
I’ve thought of them well
I’m Lucifer’s tool
Say your goodbyes
To all you have loved
Save your biggest farewell
To the place up above
For when your time comes,
And I guarantee soon
You’ll be slowly descending
In a fiery cocoon
And this is my promise
To all those who dare
Keep trusting in me
Please have no fear
I look with contempt
At the love in your heart
To my promise you're drawn,
From that love you depart
The one thing that is true
My one honesty...
Is that I’ve come here for you
You’re coming with me
My name is Jack Ferriman
A reaper of souls
For those who don’t know
And for those whom I’ve told
- Jarid Hewlett
1 note
·
View note
Text
Intentions
4th November 2010
-
As I set out on the road of life
I notice good intentions
They’re strewn all about the path ahead
No chance, no hope, redemption
Broken, abandoned, alone and cold
They seem so lonely lying
Just a shell of former self
Quietly just dying
The more I travel, the less I see
It’s as if hope has lost all meaning
Good intentions are few and far between
At least where this road is leading
As I look at the road behind
At all the orphaned feelings
I wonder what could have been
If they had some time for healing
No time for what could have been
As I set out on my way
“Carpe diem, you limey bastards!"
I’m going to seize the fucking day
- Jarid Hewlett
0 notes
Text
Smiles
18th September 2009
Have you ever seen someone smiling?
Happy remembering some nice memory
Or enjoying a pleasant moment
Its very peaceful...
A simple smile
Do you ever wonder what they would do
If they knew when death would meet them?
Would they still be the person you know them to be?
Or if you don’t know them...
Do you think they would want to know you?
Before the end...
So much can happen in such a short space of time
The mind can handle anything...
Not death
How do u rationalise losing someone?
They were here one minute ago
Had you called one minute ago, they would have answered
And heard you, and spoke to you
That minute has passed
So have they
You will never see or speak to them again...
Where have they gone?
If you knew they were leaving, would you have said anything?
What if they don’t know you
Would you have told them something?
Or let them meet their end...
Oblivious...
And smiling...
Have you ever looked at pictures after they’ve gone?
And wonder if they would be smiling
If they knew they wouldn’t be here today?
If they knew that with every passing minute their life was ending?
Would they have taken that chance they were afraid of?
Would they have approached that girl?
And told her she’s beautiful?
Would YOU have said something to them?
Something you wouldn’t dream of saying normally?
The kind of thing one says when they know the other is leaving
Would you?
What would they have said?
Do you think if you told them you knew when they’d die
They’d believe you?
Laugh?
Cry?
Smile?
What would you do?
If you knew you wouldn’t be here tomorrow
For a fact
Not as an abstract thought
Or a life philosophy
What would you do if you REALLY would not be here tomorrow?
Would you really “live ya life”?
Would you take God seriously?
Or would you have one last drink...one last dance?
One last kiss? Have sex one last time?
Who with?
I wonder what they would have done...
Do you think they knew it was time?
Just before they left us
What was the last thing they thought of?
A favourite song?
A good movie?
A fun time?
A wonderful person?
Were they sad? Did they have time to think at all?
To feel?
To understand?
When I look at their pictures I wonder.
I know how their story ends
The chapter behind the smiling face
I wish I knew at the time
I don’t know what I would say
Goodbye maybe
I’ll miss you
Something
But all I can do now is look at their picture
And smile...
As I remember who they were
And when they were happy
I’ll miss them
I may not know who they really were
But no one knows who I really am
Or who you really are
And I’d hope someone misses me
When they look at my picture
And smile at my smile...
- Jarid Hewlett
0 notes
Text
Hours
26th July 2010
Staring.
For hours, I sit staring solemnly at the phone
Waiting for it to ring.
Time is short they say
A decade but a drop in the ocean of eternity
What then must an hour be?
A cell on the hairs of a flea in the infinity of the universe.
An hour ago, I could have picked up that phone
And heard your voice.
I could have made a joke and heard your laugh.
An hour ago.
A portion of time so insignificant to the universe
A wind in the vast emptiness of space
A portion of time I would give anything to have again.
There is so much I could have told you
Asked you
Showed you...
An hour ago
So still I sit....staring at the phone
Wishing it were an hour ago
Or a day ago, or a week ago, or a month ago, or a year ago...
It’s said that life is short
Life IS short
Love is not
I loved you before I met you
I loved you before we spoke
I loved you before we laughed
I loved you before we cried
I would have loved you even if I had never met you at all.
I will love you now...long after you’re gone
Death is for the living
The dead know only life.
It’s difficult to feel sad for you
Knowing that you’re free from all the limitations of life
Whether you’re in a better place,
Or just at peace
You are certainly not angry, or sad, or frightened, or in pain.
Those are sensations and emotions interpreted by your body
The body you’ve left behind
Something tangible for the living
To aid our memories
I’ll go to your funeral and tell you bye
But you’ve already left
I’ll sit at night and speak to you
But you’ve heard everything I have to say
You know the meaning of life
You know the answers to the unanswerable
I wish
Just for a moment
That you could come back and tell me who’s right
That you could speak to the world and let them know how pointless their arguments are
Because you know
But you can’t
Or you won’t
Maybe the answers are so wonderful, the suspense is necessary
I don’t know where you really are
Whether here with me
Or someplace better
But I do know your memory remains.
I’ll never remember the clothes you wore
Or the things you bought
I’ll never remember the balance on your bank account
What I will remember are the small things
The things I took for granted each day
Your smile,
The way you walked,
The sound of your laughter,
The way you shook my hand,
The way you hugged me,
Your company
Your you-ness
I’ll always remember those things.
If only it were an hour ago...
I would do them all one last time.
But if everyone had an hour back, time would stand still forever
My hour’s gone
And so are you
I’ll miss you
Just like I’ll miss all those hours I spent knowing you
The minutes I spent talking to you
The seconds I spent laughing with you
Time is always moving forward, mercilessly, compassionately,
Hatefully, Lovingly...
Unbiased and unaffected...
Hours march on not caring about our feelings, our wants or our desires
I don’t hate the hours though
They gave me you
They took you away
And still they march.
Hours may come and go
But love lasts forever.
I’ll stop staring at the phone
Waiting for a call I know won’t ever come.
Instead, I will raise the receiver to my ear
And speak to someone I love.
So that the next hour that passes
Doesn’t leave me wishing...
It were an hour ago.
Dedicated to Michael Hewlett and Ordette Wade
- Jarid Hewlett
0 notes
Text
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYRZ
6th July 2010
Annoying aspirations attuned attentively always bestow between boys bequeathed carelessly, courageously, contemptuously...confounding Confucius’ diatribe, disastrously determining daring extravagances exceeding expectations elegantly. Fortuitously, forgotten feelings fantasized garnished gluttonously help heroes, heroines, ignite incessant incendiaries into jackass Johnnies jumping jubilantly. Killing Kings look lustrously leeward...lessening love many meticulously managed, noting nomenclatures nonsensically nosing nervously, opening opportunities outward. Prudish patriarchs parrot pale policies pestering queens quickly reserving restitution rigorously saving something sinister. Suddenly towards the towers, thousands throng threateningly understanding Underland, vociferously voicing vehement villainous visages. Will we waver? Wonderland’s weeping willows welcome Xavier yonder, yelling “you yellowed yakking youth! Zanzibar’s zygnomic zoon.”
- Jarid Hewlett
0 notes
Text
Facebook Posts January 2010 - June 2010
7th January 2010
"All men are liars! All they want to do is get into your pants. If he says he loves you, he just wants to get into your pants. And if you're stupid enough to believe him and let him get into your pants, while he's lying there after JUST getting into your pants, he'll be thinking about getting into someone else's pants! Listen to me! I used to be a man before I got married." - George Lopez
__________________
9th January 2010
"I was in a casino, minding my own business, and this guy came up to me and said, 'You're gonna have to move. You're blocking a fire exit.' As though if there was a fire, I wasn't gonna run. If you're flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit. Unless you're a table" - Mitch Hedberg
__________________
24th January 2010
♫ Her best days will be some of my worst...She finally met a man that's gonna put her first....While I'm wide awake, she's no trouble sleeping.....Cuz when a heart breaks, no it don't break even ♫ - ‘Break even’The Script
__________________
5th February 2010
"You've gotten fat" is not an acceptable greeting....rather, after much research, its been shown that "You've gotten fat" is an anagram for "punch me in the face cuz I'm a douche". Please act accordingly.
__________________
9th February 2010
If you didn't care what people thought about you, you wouldn't be putting up facebook statuses about how much you don't care....U ever see me with a facebook status about how I don't care what brand toilet paper the Queen uses? Nope...why? Don't care. See how it works?
__________________
19th February 2010
Public service announcement: If you really are that hot, we won't forget....100 statuses and comments about how hot you think you are generally takes the focus away from what you look like, to how much we'd like to punch you in the eye.... *Ur welcome*
__________________
24th February 2010
Q: If we all had novelty gravestones, what would yours say?
A: I went to heaven and all they gave me was this lousy tombstone....
__________________
26th February 2010
Q: What do you look for in a girlfriend?
A: honesty and loyalty above all else
__________________
12th March 2010
♫ For those who think life is unfair, 'cause I blow my smoke in the air, As if no one is standin there, Then I'll roll one tonight, fo' yo' sorrows...In my chair, as I sit back smiling from ear to ear, With a fistful of your girlfriend's hair, Yes, she'll blow one tonight, fo' yo' sorrows.........Just to let you know that everything is straight/ I say stank you very much 'cause we appreciate the hate ♫ - ‘For your Sorrows’, Big Boi
__________________
16th March 2010
♫ Like a boss! ♫ - ‘Like a Boss’, Lonely Island
__________________
19th March 2010
♫ Me have....thirteen Dawn... fourteen Sophia, plus fifteen Kerri work a Nova Scotia, everywhere me tun, gyal a tell me pull ova ♫ You nuh see a me every gyal a mad ova? You nuh see a we every gyal a mad ova? ♫ - ‘Mad Ova’, Mavado
__________________
22nd March 2010
An objective way to see if what you're thinking is a good idea, imagine explaining it starting with the words "Well your honor...."
__________________
30th March 2010
"If we are to tell the truth...the rich man is not the one who has collected many possessions, but the one who needs few possessions; and the poor man is not the one that has no possessions, but the one who desires many" - John Chrysostom
__________________
5th April 2010
"They must find it difficult....those who have taken authority as the truth....rather than truth as the authority." - Gerald Massey
__________________
7th April 2010
"When pictures look alive with movements free...when ships like fishes, swim beneath the sea...when men, outstripping birds, can soar the sky...then half the world, deep trenched in blood, shall die" - Prophecy of 'Mother Shipton'
__________________
8th April 2010
While researching the institutions relating to ocean governance in the Caribbean, I came across an interesting organisation....the Bahamas Reef Educational Foundation, or BREEF for short. Who came up with this name? Clearly they added an extra E cuz apparently BREF wasn't as catchy. How can you tell people with a straight face that you're a BREEF supervisor? lol Who said research wasn't fun.
__________________
11th April 2010
"No Johnathon, I'm not a twitter person, no....I'm more of a "shh" person...I've subscribed to this "shh" network where you write something down but don't send it anywhere" - Hugh Laurie
__________________
26th April 2010
You ever notice that if you whistle at a group of girls or say something suggestive so they can hear, its always the one girl you WERE NOT looking at in ANY way, that turns around pissed off? not you, godzilla, not u!
__________________
28th April 2010
Why am I not afraid of spiders, cockroaches and other creepy crawlies? I make a point of not being afraid of things a hundred times smaller than me....except HIV....the f#&ker may be microscopic, but its scary as hell. If I saw some HIV running across my bedroom floor, I'd Baja Shoman up the place any time!
__________________
5th May 2010
♫ Ah jump in a bus, heading to Sando...Bottom in yuh face!.....People sitting down and standing up also...Bottom in yuh face!.......A man siddung in a seat in front of me.....Bottom in yuh face!.......A sexy lady stand up next to he....Bottom in yuh face!.......De man shout out what nastiness is dis?!....Bottom in yuh face! ♫ - ‘Bottom in yuh face’, The Incredible Myron B
__________________
11th May 2010
♫ I'ma be what I set out to be, without a doubt undoubtably, and all those who look down on me, I'm tearing down your balcony...no 'if' 'ands' or 'buts', don't try to ask him why or how can he ♫ I'm not afraid...to take a stand...everybody...come take my hand...we'll walk this road together, through the storm, whatever weather, cold or warm ♫ - ‘Not Afraid’, Eminem
__________________
23rd May 2010
"51% of the population are women, and they suck dicks, then they're the gay guys that suck dicks, then there's the straight guys that have been forced to suck dicks under various situations....so if you think about it, there are only about a thousand of us out there that get blowjobs and have never given any...thats weird to me" - C.K. Lewis
__________________
31st May 2010
♫ I'm putting on my shades to cover up my eyes, I'm jumpin' in my ride, I'm heading out tonight, I'm solo, I'm riding solo ♫ - ‘Riding Solo’, Jason Derulo
__________________
5th June 2010
"Where do you go?? You go HOME! You have shit in ur pants! You go home, take a shower, burn your clothes, pray......You can't take shit with you...its not like pee, where you can keep a little on you and still go about ur day...its shit! The only place to go is HOME!" - Stand up comedian on comedy central at 3:30 in the morning, lmao
__________________
8th June 2010
From working in the High Court just 2 days, I can already tell you......if you go to prison, its not cuz you're guilty....it's cuz the prosecution has a better attorney.
__________________
10th June 2010
About a complainant's credibility giving testimony about an alleged rape: "Counsel, your client is a termite"......"Termite?"......*under his breath* "she jus love wood" (hahahahahahaha)
__________________
12th June 2010
♫ Can I get a little bit of knowledge.....somebody tell Roth that I DON'T love college ♫ Yo I once was a kid...all I had was a dream, more money more problems, when I get it I'ma pile it up ♫
__________________
13th June 2010
I want the position "Supervisor of Children's names". My position would entail walking around hospitals with a small container of powder. I'd then go into the maternity wards and ask the parents what they plan to name their children. Upon hearing certain names, I would be legally allowed to powder my hand and pimp slap said parents; saying only "lets try that again".
__________________
19th June 2010
What is so hard about saying what's on your mind? What is the point in saying one thing and acting completely differently? Alot of the people you think are annoying you, I can guarantee would leave you alone if they only knew you found them annoying. Why is everyone such a pussy? Making up stupid excuses for things they don't want to do. Just say you don't want to do it, nuh. Geez.
__________________
20th June 2010
Truth is, everybody's going to hurt you....you just need to find the ones worth suffering for - Bob Marley
__________________
22nd June 2010
Barber today: "So what school you go to? Christ the King High School?"
Me (22 years old): "Um...no....that's an all girls school......I don't go to school"
Barber: "Ohhhh sorry sorry, I here taking you for a little boy, sorry, you jus look real young, u kno"
Me: "<sigh> I know"
__________________
30th June 2010
"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy" - Benjamin Franklin
0 notes
Text
The Never-ending Cycle
Over the last few years, I’ve been noticing an interesting trend. Being a guy with mostly female friends has allowed me a rather unique vantage point from which to observe life. That vantage point, although one might consider it advantageous and educational, usually leaves me feeling more confused than anything else. The phenomenon that has demanded my attention the most in recent times though, has been women’s tendency to reward men’s bad behavior. I know this isn’t unique to women (I think all problems are endemic to humanity and not gender-based), but since my experiences have been with women, this piece will focus on that. So I’m letting everyone who wants to disagree with me know from early that “but men do it too!” is a point I’m well aware of, and in no way affects what I say here.
I think whether or not you have a bunch of female friends, most of us have heard women complaining about men at some point. Whether it be family members, co-workers, or just random Facebook friends, etc. Someone is either asking why men cheat so much, or why men are so whoring, or why we lie so much, etc; essentially complaints about our bad behavior. This is nothing new; men have been behaving badly for centuries and women have been complaining about it for about as long. I can’t tell you how male/female relationships worked decades ago; I’m only 27 after all; but I can tell you how they are now, and it’s confusing.
I will paint you a picture. Jack and Jill are in a relationship. Jill loves Jack and Jack loves Jill. During this relationship, Jack cheats on Jill with Mary. Now, when Mary met Jack, she had no idea that Jack was in a relationship, due mainly to the fact that Jack lied about not being in one. She liked Jack, and slept with him. Sometime later however, after sex had been going on for a while, she found out about Jack's girlfriend. At first, Mary is upset that Jack would lie to her. He always seemed like a good guy, and they made it clear that honesty was important, since they weren’t together and there’s "no reason to lie”. She confronts Jack about it and Jack tells her some excuse as to why he didn’t tell her, but maintains that he doesn’t want what he has with Mary to stop. Mary’s anger fades and she sleeps with him again. While this is going on, Jill’s friends have been whispering to her that they don’t think Jack is being faithful. Jill knows Jack though, and although he does have some bad ways, she’s sure that he wouldn’t do that to her. Not after she told him he could do anything he wants “as long as he was honest with her”. He knows how much she values honesty, and how easily she would forgive him for any infraction as long as he was honest about it.
At some point during this story, Jill finds out about Mary (the world is a small place, after all). She’s heartbroken. She cries for days and complains to anyone willing to listen. She doesn’t want to see or speak to Jack, but at the same time REALLY wants to see and speak to him. She really "hates" him, and hates Mary for coming between her and her man. She has so many questions! Why? When? How? With all the men out there, did she REALLY have to pick mine? Anyway, she eventually does talk to Jack, and after he says his piece, she decides to forgive him, and she too sleeps with him.
Now I’m going to pause here for a minute and give you an objective breakdown of what just happened. I find that when women from either side of a scenario like that are speaking, they always come from a place of “feels”. For example, Mary’s reason for sleeping with Jack again might be that “well it’s just sex and he didn’t HAVE to tell me about his gf anyway…and if she was handling business at home, he wouldn’t be by me” or something along those lines. Meanwhile, Jill’s reason might be that she and Jack have been dating so long and she’s been so happy, that this ONE transgression doesn’t warrant ending everything and throwing all those memories and happy feelings away; especially not over some hoe like Mary. Now the friends of both women might be yelling at them saying things like “he’s obviously a dog, leave him alone……cuss him out…etc.” And for one reason or another, neither of them heed this advice. Anyway, back to my point. Objectively, what has happened here is that Jack has cheated on his girlfriend, and lied to his side woman. Both actions I’m sure we can all agree are “bad”. But here’s the kicker… so what? What consequence has Jack faced for his bad behavior? None.
This is the part that confuses me. Everyone focuses on Jack and “why would Jack cheat on Jill when she’s such a good girlfriend”, or “why would Jack lie to Mary when he didn’t have to”? I mean yes, delving into Jack’s mind to find his secret, selfish motivations might be interesting to some people, but not me. I think the answer is pretty simple….because he can. He can do these bad things and face no consequence. Let me pose this question: if our laws right now remained the same, with the only amendment being that all the CONSEQUENCES for breaking them were removed, would you still follow them as rigidly as you do now? Think about it. Driving without a license was still an offence, but if the police caught you without one, or driving on an expired one, the only thing that would happen is that they tell you “you really should get a valid license”. That’s it. Would you really spend the money to constantly renew your license? Chances are you wouldn’t. Human beings are built to respond to consequence. Billions of people worldwide follow religions whose main message is consequence. Being good and faithful has good consequences, being bad and having no faith has bad consequences. Our entire legal system is built on consequences, from the police force to the judges. Without consequence, people are liable to do whatever suits them best. Paying money for a license does not suit me best…so if there were no consequences for not having one, chances are most people wouldn’t get one. Laws that have no consequences are usually the laws everyone breaks.
This brings us back to Jack’s scenario. Sleeping with two women he finds attractive suits him better than sticking to one. Lying to one woman to ensure that she sleeps with him suits him better than being honest and possibly having her decide not to do so. Jack’s reasons are simple and straightforward. The only LOGICAL reason for jack to rein in his behavior would be consequences. If he sleeps with two women he might end up losing one or both forever. If he lies to one of them, he might end up creating a new enemy who has nothing good to say about him, etc. However, modern women have removed this consequence. The phenomenon of “wifey and matey” is the new order of the day, where essentially a man can do as he pleases with as many women as he pleases as long as the WOMEN know their role and don’t cause a fuss. As a man, I’m grateful for this new outlook on life, but as someone who has many female friends and tries to understand the female thought process, I’m confused as to how this benefits them.
To bring us back to Jack’s story, let’s fast forward a few months. Eventually, Mary meets Bill. Bill’s nice, and treats her great, and sure enough, she decides to stop sleeping with Jack and focus on Bill. Now mind you, there was a time at the beginning where she was dating Bill but still sleeping with Jack, but nevermind that, she has made up her mind and has told Jack that she’s gonna be exclusive with Bill from now on. A few months of that and she finds out Bill has been sleeping with another woman. Now despite her OWN behavior and thoughts towards Jill previously, now that Bill has done this to her, she’s heartbroken and in disbelief. And thus continues the cycle.
There are so many variations of this scenario it would take an entire book to list. The main feature throughout all of them though is simple. If you don’t want a man to do you wrong, stop rewarding the ones that do. I have seen women sleep with someone else’s man, and then turn around and curse men who cheat. I’ve seen women who have been treated extremely badly, hurt, shamed and embarrassed by their men, go back to sleeping with them afterwards. If every time your kid shits in his pants, you give him candy and take him to an amusement park, explaining to him why it’s wrong to shit his pants is completely pointless. It’s one of our most basic notions. Rewarding [bad] behavior leads to more [bad] behavior. The more you sleep with guys who have many other partners, the more guys are going to want to have many other partners. So to spend your time sleeping with whoring men and then complain that men are too whoring makes you part of the problem. If you want guys to be “nice” and “honest”, maybe you should start rewarding THOSE behaviours, and no; a pat on the head and telling him he’s “a great guy” is not a reward. (For the love of all that is holy, please don't begin any feminist ranting about a woman not being a vending machine that you put niceness coins into until sex falls out. We know.)
The moral of this story is simple. The things you reward are the things that will flourish and the things you don’t are the things that will die off. Chivalry is dead? That’s because there is no reward for being chivalrous. Guys cheat too much? Stop sleeping with cheaters. The more you perpetuate the cycle of bad behaviour = rewards and no negative consequences, the more bad behaviour you'll have to deal with. Or, you know…continue doing what you’re doing; ignore all this and keep complaining. It hasn’t worked in the last hundred years to curb bad behavior, but you never know…maybe this is your year.
0 notes
Text
Friendzone Burger Shop
Imagine your favourite food is hamburger. Every day at lunch time, you go looking for a nice meaty burger. You quite like going to this place called "Suzie's" because the atmosphere is good, the place is clean, and the cashier is hella cute. Only problem is, every time you go there, they don't have any burgers for you and offer you a salad. At first you thought there was a maybe a problem THAT day, and you kept going back, but soon you realize they NEVER have burgers. What's even more frustrating is that while you're there eating your consolation salad (because what you WANT is a burger), you see other guys coming in there and having burgers. You start to protest "so how come they get burgers??" and you hear things like "well they were here since last week" or "they're regular customers so we save some for them specifically" etc.
What do you think is the sensible thing to do? Sit there munching on your salad every lunch time? Or LEAVE, go across the street to Linda's Burger Palace and eat as many burgers as you like? "Oh but Suzie's has the best burgers!" I hear some guys cry. How do you know? You've never had one. "Well other guys have told me that it's amazing" or "the building looks so great, the burgers HAVE to be fantastic". Ok sure. But have those guys also had burgers from Linda's Burger Palace? Alana's Burger Emporium? Burger Paradise? etc. No. So maybe Suzie's was the best burger THEY've ever had....but it doesn't mean they serve the best burger out there. Do you REALLY think the look of the BUILDING has ANYTHING to do with the ingredients, cooks and burger preparation going on in the kitchen? Come on. So really, if you're looking for a burger specifically, and Suzie's isn't serving you any, then go somewhere else that does. Some guys choose to argue with the cashier at Suzie's: "No! You owe me a burger! Your sign says that you sell burgers yet every time I come in here y'all never have any!" This makes no sense. It's not your establishment. You can't demand that they serve you anything. All it is, is that if every time you come they don't have what you want, you can simply stop going there.
So let's say you decide, you know what? You're right! I'm leaving! The cashier sees you and starts to shout: "How come you're leaving? I thought you liked it here?" You tell her that yea, Suzie's was always your first choice, but they NEVER have what you want, so you have to go someplace else. "Oh so what? You can't eat anything else? A burger is the ONLY thing you want?? Burgers aren't even good for you! It's only because you're such a valued customer why we serve you some nice healthy salad and not a greasy old burger." Now some guys are convinced by this and tell themselves "You know what? She's right. Do I REALLY want a burger? Maybe not. Maybe I'm just hungry and a salad sorta does the trick anyway. And plus, its better for me, AND I'm the only one who they serve salad to so they must REALLY appreciate my business." That's great. If you realize that you DON'T really want a burger, then by all means....enjoy your salad. As for the rest of the guys who know that what they want is a burger, and don't like sitting down eating salad when everyone around them is chowing down on a Big Mac, that's the last Suzie's will see of us. Don't get me wrong, if we are in the mood for a salad, we know where to go. But as long as it's burgers we want, somewhere else will be getting our business.
0 notes
Text
Finding Narnia
On a normal Thursday morning, the most extraordinary thing happened. I stumbled into Narnia. You laugh, but I came upon a realization that struck me like a ton of bricks. A friend of mine was telling me about her cousin who, for the third time, was getting back together with her ex. The boyfriend had cheated previously, which is what led to the first break up. They reconciled, and then a few months later he lied to her about going out alone with another woman (although he swears nothing happened), which led to their second breakup. They reconciled, but a few months later, he lied to her about going to a movie when really, he was at a friend’s house (presumably with company). Now my friend was very distraught because she had been advising her cousin NOT to get back together with him…that once a cheater always a cheater…but her cousin was insistent that she doesn’t think its fair to end a 3-year relationship over a “feeling” without concrete evidence. While my friend went on about her cousin’s “stupidity”, I opened the closet door and fell into Narnia.
What I mean….is that I realized something I had never realized before. My friend’s cousin ISN’T stupid. That realization floored me, because for years, upon hearing of situations like this, I would be the FIRST one to call the perpetrator stupid and retarded etc. I was so adept at my characterizations, numerous friends simply stopped telling me of their situations like that because I was “going to be an asshole and call [them] names”. In my mind though, the truth, no matter how harsh, is always preferable to coddling and encouragement in stupidity, and I felt justified in my approach. So you can imagine my shock when I realized that I was completely wrong. For years I’ve wondered why SO many women find themselves in the same situation, i.e. being with a man they love who is cheating on them, but refusing to leave until some massive, undeniable, unavoidable event happens (for example, getting the other woman pregnant). And EVEN THEN, breaking up isn’t necessarily imminent. Time and time again, I’d talk about how “woman fooly see” and “I just don’t understand it”.
Well I understand it now. Those women aren’t stupid. Think about it. When you constantly do the same thing (that you don’t “have” to do) over and over…what’s the most common reason for doing it? Because you like it. They aren’t stupid…they simply….LIKE it. Obviously the first time that thought came to me, I backtracked and started running over hundreds of articles and quotes from women over the years who have unequivocally stated that they HATE cheating men…that men are dogs….lamenting over where all the good men went….etc. I remembered numerous movies where the good guy ended up getting the girl of his dreams and treating her like a queen. I recalled the hundreds of love songs by women asking God for a “good man” and how well they would treat one if they ever found him. Lastly…I remembered good old Disney. Aladdin getting the princess….Belle falling for the beast…etc. Then I tried to think of one good relationship I know of PERSONALLY in REAL LIFE where I know for a fact that the man has NEVER cheated on his girlfriend, ever. I came up with less than 5. Then I thought of all the good relationships I know where I know for a fact that the guy cheated. That number was astronomical. I thought about all the guys I knew whose personal philosophy was that cheating was wrong, and not for them. None of them were in relationships. Then I thought of the guys I knew that would hop on anything that was sexy and winked their way. 99% are in relationships.
Now, as an attorney, we’re trained to look at the facts, and then craft a case theory around the facts in a way that allows those facts to correspond with your theory. If the FACTS of your case are that your client and another man walked into a room, a shot was heard and your client was the only man who left the room…then your case theory might be that the man who was shot started attacking your client in the room, and he shot him in self defence. Your case theory should NOT be that your client accidentally ran the other man over with his car while attempting to reverse, because that story does not AT ALL correspond with the FACT that the other man was SHOT in a ROOM.
Similarly, the FACTS as I see them, are that by far, women in happy long lasting relationships have been cheated on by their partner at some point, and men who don’t believe in cheating or who have never cheated, are more often than not, single, or for one reason or another, thought of as undesirable. Also, as much as women talk about cheating in completely negative terms, nearly all of the women I know who have been in relationships, have stayed with their partner after a cheating situation on his part. Some, even after more than one instance. Other women continue sleeping with a man even after knowing that he sleeps with other people and have knowingly fooled around with a man they know is in a relationship;...then gotten into a relationship with him after the one he cheated in ended.
If those are the facts, then my case theory NEEDS to correspond with them. What I was doing before was trying to make the facts suit my theory. The theory that was taught to me is that women abhor cheating men, and think very poorly of them. The only men they respect and desire are those men who don’t cheat. Once you’re discovered as a cheater, a “sensible” woman will leave you and once word gets out about your status, you’ll be like a leper to other women. The only women who stay with cheaters or share the same man are “stupid” and I shouldn’t equate the majority of women who are “sensible” with those others. The problem is…that theory does NOT at ALL suit the facts. Sensible women (women with degrees, women with doctorates, women in powerful positions, attorneys, doctors, accountants, politicians, scholars etc.) stay with cheating men. Not only do they stay with cheating men, but when confronted with accusations of his cheating, 95% of the time, choose to stay and “work it out” or “get to the bottom of it” rather than leave. A woman will hear accusations and speculations, and even HERSELF harbor suspicious as to her man’s fidelity for YEARS and do nothing. Yes she might keep tabs on him….monitor him closely….check up on his stories to verify their authenticity…..snoop through his things etc. but they hardly ever LEAVE him until they have “something concrete”. Why? Because they like it.
They like the uncertainty of not knowing FOR SURE whether they’re the only one. They like the fact that the possibility exists that some other woman can take their place, so they have to stay on their toes. You know the most common complaint I hear from women who have a man who doesn’t cheat? “I feel so bored. There’s no excitement.” Being with a guy you KNOW won’t cheat on you or leave you for another woman is boring. There is nothing for you to work on, to fix. There’s nothing for you to build up. But when you have a cheater, you can work on him. You see the potential for him to be the docile one-woman-man you “want” him to be, so you’re willing to stay and work on making him want you and only you. You’ll hate the other women in his life because in your mind, they’re trying to “take” what YOU have. The happiness you feel with him you want to keep for yourself because you know that what those “other bitches” get doesn’t come close to what YOU have with him. He may have even TOLD you something along the lines of “I may have sex with those other women….but I MAKE LOVE to YOU”. And sure, if someone actually said it in those words, you’d scoff and laugh it away, but the way HE put it you just know he means that what y’all have is special and no one can take that away. He knows you like no one else does, and more importantly YOU know him like no one else does. Everyone else might say he cheated because he’s a whore, but YOU know better. YOU know that story about him that all your friends don’t. You understand his struggle and his pain and his way of thinking better than anyone. YOU know why he did what he did….because he told you and you believe him. Now, you may not want to….like me, you were probably brain-washed with what a “sensible woman” SHOULD want and accept and tolerate. But despite you KNOWING that you’re being “stupid”….you can’t help yourself.
Now it’s not socially acceptable to admit that you like men who cheat or that cheating or the possibility of cheating is what gets your heart racing, but it’s the truth, and the truth is all that matters to me. I’m sure many of you reading this are remembering that time your bf cheated on you and you stayed with him….or that time you found out the guy you were sleeping with was sleeping with someone else too….and continued sleeping with him. But that time was different, wasn’t it. YOUR situation isn’t what I’m talking about here. Because I don’t know YOUR guy, do I? I don’t know you either. I just wouldn’t understand. I’m generalizing, right? Ok. Just really think about it. A nice test to take is to ask yourself if you heard your situation from a complete stranger with the same facts, would you advise them to do exactly what you did? If the answer is no because THAT guy isn’t YOUR guy, and so THEIR situation is different and it would be better if THAT WOMAN left, but not you, then you’ve brought me to my final point.
All women want to be special. Once in University, I was talking to a female friend of mine about why whoring guys seem to be able to get so much sex despite all their partners KNOWING they sleep around, and all girls' claim that they don't like whores. Her response was this: “That man probably knows how to make them feel special. Yea he might sleep with 10 girls this week, but EVERY one of those girls feels like they and him have something special. That there’s something about her specifically that attracted him….whether it’s her smile or her eyes or her wonderful personality….he makes her feel like she’s unique and that he’s lucky to have found her. Most guys don’t do that. They might treat you nice, but they never make you really feel like you're SPECIAL. And girls will always run to where they feel special. He might be sexing other people….but he makes you feel like they’re just sex….you’re different.” At the time, I thought that was the dumbest thing I'd ever heard. How can anyone seriously believe that someone who is sleeping with them AND a bunch of other people really thinks that THEY are special? But the more I said it was stupid, the more instances of it I saw. Whoring man….ton of girls who sleep with him KNOWING he’s whoring (ironically all the while denouncing whoring men).
I’m sure you’ve all heard the phrase “women like assholes” or some variation of that. I used to believe that for a while, but I’ve learned it’s not entirely accurate. Women don’t love assholes. Women love men who make them feel special, but let them know that they can be replaced. Sounds oxymoronic doesn’t it? How can they feel special but think they can be replaced? Simple. Because other women want their man, they now KNOW that they have something good. Added to that, he makes her feel like a princess in the kingdom of Delusionstan. So the train of thought is as follows: (1) Clearly I have a good man cuz all these women are after him, and women wouldn’t be troubling him or taking him on if he wasn’t hot stuff, (2) what we have is special because he treats me so well, and I almost feel like he doesn’t NEED sex from me because he doesn’t really hound me or harass me (I think he might be getting some elsewhere – maybe my sex isn’t all that great: I need to step my game up!) (3) I need to do all I can to keep those other women at bay and keep him interested in me. You notice how there’s very little room in that logical thought progression for HER to cheat? Let’s try that again with another man. (1) Well I’m not sure if this guy is the one for me….no one ever flirts with him and I feel no way about leaving him around a bunch of beautiful women unattended because I know he won’t do anything, (2) he treats me well, but because I’m his ONLY source of sexual release, sometimes he’s a bit clingy and annoying, and with any threat of no sex, I can easily get what I want….there’s no real challenge, (3) maybe this guy is too nice for me and I need more of a challenge. You ever wonder why soon after you get into a relationship, you notice a bunch of women showing interest in you, but when you were single no one noticed? Hmm.
So that’s it. That’s where my journey to Narnia took me. Once a man makes a woman feel like she’s special, and she has something to work on and fix, and feel like she has to fight or defend or work towards her perfect relationship, she will be happy. She will be happy and stay as faithful as can be. To those men who don’t think cheating is for them…we’re going to have to watch our women very closely because we’re going to be the victims lol. As counter-productive and awful as it sounds….the fact of the matter is: if you want to keep your lady happy, treat her well and cheat, or let her think you might be cheating. DON’T let her actually CATCH you cheating though. For some reason, the demeanor of a cheating man is more attractive than one who doesn’t. Actually letting her catch you doesn’t always end a relationship, but it’s a lot more risky. Women will go for years on suspicion. Not as many need a confession even after they have concrete evidence (some do though). For all of you who completely disagree with me, keep trying to put that square peg in the circle hole and tell me how that works out for you. As for me, female behavior just got a whole lot more understandable.
0 notes
Text
To sex or not to sex? When is the Question.
When should a woman have sex? That’s a question I’ve been asked many times over the years, and every time, I’m always intrigued by it. Men have never had that dilemma. We have sex when we can, really. The default state of man is to try having sex. It’s what we do. Women won’t understand it because men and women operate by different rules. That’s why a man can leave his house with none of his clothing matching and NOT come home crying from all the ridicule he got all day. You have woman-rules, we have man- rules.
A common misconception that women have is that men always want to have sex. We don’t. I would venture to say that pretty much EVERY guy likes good conversation and company without sex at some point. The problem is that men and women have different “points”. A woman’s point for that is long before the sex ever happens. A man’s point is long after. See where we get into difficulty? It doesn't make sense to argue about that though. Women will always believe that their rules and norms make sense and ours are stupid and arbitrary. That’s fine. You can continue to hate, we’ll continue to shake after we pee, and not wipe. Anyway, I brought that up to give a sort of brief understanding of why women find themselves in this “when should I do it?” dilemma.
As I mentioned just now, a man’s natural state is “trying to have sex”. The less thirsty of us tend to stay in that state rather subtly and comfortably. These are the kinds of guys who will have entire conversations with you without mentioning sex. Our thirsty brethren are the ones posting comments under every picture on Facebook that has your cleavage exposed. But at the end of the day, all men like sex. We also don’t like too many complications, so we tend not to talk to women we wouldn't sleep with. I’ll pause here, because again, this is another male/female discrepancy. Talk to any random woman you know, and I will bet you the number of her male friends she would never sleep with vastly outweighs the number of friends she would. Ask any random man, and the opposite is true. While women have no problem investing energy and time with someone they have no sort of attraction to, most men do. It’s not something that most of us are aware of. It just sort of happens. We see someone beautiful and say hi, and start talking and realize they're awesome and at some point we become friends. We see someone beastiful, and there’s no hi and that’s the end of that. You can call it shallow or whatever (remember my earlier vow to not bother arguing about women’s views on man-rules).
Right, so where were we? Yes, men tend not to end up friends with women they wouldn’t sleep with. This brings up another common misconception women have. The fact that we “would” have sex with you does not mean we “want” to have sex with you, or that we’re “trying” to have sex with you. Would is defined as – “(expressing the conditional mood) Indicating the consequence of an imagined event or situation”, the key word here being “imagined”. So to know that most of your male friends would sleep with you does not mean that you don’t have male friends. Or that all your male friends are part of some devious plot for your vagina. It just means that in a hypothetical situation where you were naked and asked them for some assistance, they probably would oblige you. What’s so horrible about that?
So we've established that if a guy is talking to you, he probably would sleep with you (NOTE WELL: would and not is trying to). This is fine. This is our “normal”. It is unusual for a guy to spend time and energy interacting with a woman he doesn't find at all attractive. Also, man-law dictates that you at least float the idea of you and her having sex or else you get regulated to the dreaded “friendzone”. This means that you have to let the girl know as soon as possible that you’re interested in her company and future sexytimes, NOT her company and being her emotional tampon. It might seem that guys are too forward or overly sexual, but really a lot of the time, it’s just to maintain our dignity. If we could be assured that just being cool and friendly would not automatically place us in the “will never have sex with” zone, most guys would do that. Problem is when you’re too cool, and too nice and make no moves, the woman assumes you’re not interested (or gay) and pays attention to the other cute guy she’s talking to that’s making moves, leaving you out in the cold. Nobody wants that.
Now, understandably, a great number of women believe that just because a guy WOULD sleep with them, that she has some sort of power over him. For some guys, this is true. For most however, it isn’t. The fact that I WOULD sleep with Jane doesn’t detract from the fact that I’m trying to sleep with Jilly, or that I’m sleeping with Anne, or even that I WOULD also sleep with Lisa, Krystal, Penny and Jen. So for most guys, when they say hi and you make a spectacle of not wanting to talk to them, you’re not actually gaining any points, or making yourself look more desirable. You just look like a bitch that acted like an asshole for no apparent reason. Sure, he WOULD sleep with you, but he WOULD also sleep with your cleaning lady and your aunt. Big whoop.
Straying off topic again, sorry. Right, so we’re saying that there’s a guy talking to you that you know probably would sleep with you. When do you sleep with him? The problem I always find with that question, is that it’s the wrong one. It’s really not a matter of when you should sleep with a guy. It’s a matter of who you should sleep with. Lemme give you an example. We all know that the social norm is that waiting as long as possible (preferably after marriage) before you have sex is what “good women” do. Let’s say Rana over here liked this guy, waited a YEAR after talking to him almost daily on her way to work, before sleeping with him. Good woman right? What if the guy she liked is a crackhead who sleeps in the gutter outside her house. Not as commendable? See, no matter how long you wait to sleep with a crackhead, you’re still a nasty ho for sleeping with a crackhead lol (unless he’s a celebrity).
The same principle goes for guys. You’d be surprised to know that most guys don’t really care about the number of other guys you've been with as much as they do the KIND of guys you've been with, or even the circumstances surrounding you being with them. For example, two girls, Holly and Iva have slept with 6 men each. Holly slept with 1 (her boyfriend) when she was 18, they broke up, then she slept with another one (her boyfriend) when she was 20 etc. one new guy every 2 years. Iva slept with 3 last month (her bus driver, her school counselor and her best friend’s husband), and the other 3 yesterday (foursome). Who do you think guys will find more desirable? I mean don’t get me wrong, Iva is gonna get the most calls lol (men…sigh…), but in terms of actual desirability, as in I want YOU as a person and not just to have sex with you, Holly’s gonna always win that one. Before you point out that Holly’s sexual partners were 2 years apart, let me tell you that that’s not the point. Sure, in an ideal world we’d find people we’re interested in one after the other, once a respectable amount of time has passed, but that’s just not how it is sometimes. Sometimes you think you've struck gold and then 3 weeks later you find out it was a turd all along. What do you do then? Close up shop for 2 years? Ridiculous.
If you meet a guy, and you like him, and he likes you, don’t sleep with him until you know he’s worth sleeping with. Whatever “worth it” means will differ from woman to woman (we all know how your standards vary depending on who the guy is -__-). If you meet a guy and you just KNOW he’s worth sleeping with on the FIRST night then sleep with him on the first night. “Oh but what if he thinks I’m a whore?” He might. And if you don’t sleep with him, he might think you’re stuck up and boring. So what? You can’t control what HE thinks about you. And people are going to call you a whore no matter what you do or don’t do, trust me. So the best you can do is whatever’s right for you. If you like him but you’re not sure if he’s the kinda guy you should sleep with, hold off until you know. It’s really that simple. Its quality over quantity. If you have a set time limit before you have sex with someone, that’s ironically a very low standard to have. In essence you’re saying your major standard is time lol. John and Jack who are two completely different people, but who both look attractive to you and who both know what to say to make u giggle are BOTH going to be judged solely on the fact that they waited your x months? How about you notice that Jack is a really caring guy that goes out of his way for all his friends if they need him, while John is a womanizer? That’s really what you should be agonizing over. What sort of guy is this one? Not “when should I do it”.
Also, for most guys, we already know when you want to sleep with us lol. We've spent the majority of our lives talking to, or being around women who have no interest in sex with us. We can tell the difference. And there’s nothing more frustrating than being out with a woman you know wants to sleep with you, but just won’t because she has some ridiculous time standard. If you suck at telling quality guys from shit guys, then I suggest you keep your pre-sex times as long as possible, because clearly you need to work on your judgement. For those of you who are pretty good at picking the dicks from the good guys, why wait? I understand the whole notion of not racking up numbers and all that, and that’s fine. But you should know yourself. Are you constantly finding “quality” guys to sleep with every month? If so, you should probably hook your sisters up. Chances are, you're just making excuses to sleep around. Quality is very hard to find, so if you just want some quick sex, it's easy to "see' quality where none exist.
To answer your question though, it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter when you have sex with a guy. If you sleep with him too soon he might think you’re easy and worthless. He might also think you know what you want and that he’s special to you for being one of the FEW guys you actually let have sex with you. If you wait forever, he might think that you’re a quality woman and good things are worth waiting for. He might also think you’re like EVERY other random woman that watches Lifetime and thinks the more you make men wait the more we love you. So either way, it really comes down to the specific guy you’re dealing with. And you’re only going to know how he views certain things if you talk to him and get to know him. If you can do that in one night, what more do you need? (Besides EXTENSIVE std test results -__-). For all you women practicing abstinence, more power to you. When you find that special guy (who’s not crazy) who is happy to be with you (who’s not crazy) and take all your shit, and deal with all your insecurities and problems, and listen to you babble daily, and deal with you even on your worst days…..and not be having sex with you (who’s…..not……batshit……crazy) please let me talk to him to understand, because you my friends have found the male equivalent of a unicorn (definitely gay lol). Nah, I kid my non-sexually active people. Your lives are much simpler than the rest of us. Enjoy your sanity while it lasts. For the rest of you fornicators out there, stop asking yourselves ‘when’ you should sleep with him, and start asking ‘why’ you should sleep with him. I’ll bet you’ll arrive at a much more meaningful answer.
0 notes
Text
God Loves Fags
President Obama recently stated that he believed gay people should have the right to be married. After listening to his views on the subject, I found his reasoning to be quite similar to mine. When homosexuals first started demanding the right to marry, I disagreed with them. I, being raised in a Christian household, in a Christian society, believed marriage to be solely between a man and a woman. I however, understood what it was that the homosexuals wanted. They wanted their love and relationships to be as socially, and legally important as heterosexual ones. This I thought could be easily accomplished with civil unions, as did Obama. Give their relationships the same rights as married couples, just don’t call it ‘marriage’. As with Obama, I overestimated the human capacity to be fair. As most gays will tell you, a civil union is not marriage with a different name, it is something else entirely. I can’t really explain it, because I’m honestly not in much of a position to understand it, and as a result, I defer to those who've experienced it. The common complaint though, from what I’ve read, is that civil unions have fallen victim to the same problems that segregation had in the past. If we think of segregation now, we conjure up images of “whites only” signs in restaurants, schools, supermarkets, hospitals etc. that prevented blacks from the same benefits and commodities whites had. The original aim of segregation was actually not as horrible as it ended up being. The principle behind segregation was “separate but equal”, but one only has to look at the quality of “black” institutions and opportunities in comparison to the “white” to see that this principle had no place in reality. And so it is with civil unions.
I’m going to do something I don’t usually do, because recently, I’ve been more and more irritated with people’s justifications for condemning gay marriage. I’m going to use the Bible as an authoritative text. I am by no means a biblical scholar, and for those who are ready to point that out to dismiss anything I say on the matter, let me first point out that many of those persons most vehemently opposing gay marriage are not scholars either. If all religious discussions were held by persons well learned in their religion, there would be much fewer religious arguments, I can assure you. Anyway, on to my first point.
The Bible doesn’t say “homosexuality is a sin or an abomination”.This might come to a shock to most people who don’t actually read the bible often, but it’s a point I started investigating recently. The Bible does explicitly condemn homosexual activity, such as sex: Leviticus 20:13 “If a man also lie with mankind as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death, their blood shall be upon them.” There are other verses like that that condemn the act of homosexuality, i.e. a man having sexual relations with another man, but this is the most popular. What has happened though, is that Christians, or those claiming to be Christians, have taken verses like this to mean that homosexuality, i.e. being sexually attracted only to members of the same sex, is by extension also abominable. This link from the act being abominable, to the orientation being abominable, is an act of interpretation on the part of the reader. To you, it might seem logical that if the bible says having sex with a man is a sin, then obviously WANTING to have sex with a man is a sin, and since homosexuality is rife with men who want to have sex with men, then clearly being that way is sinful. Here raises my first difficulty. Is an interpretation of something, no matter how logical and reasonable, the same as the thing being explicitly stated?
In other words, is condemning an act committed solely by homosexuals the same thing as condemning homosexuality itself? Paul writes in I Corinthians 6:9-11 “Know you not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the Kingdom of God? Be not deceived, neither fornicators, nor idolators, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners shall inherit the Kingdom of God”. I Corinthians 6:18 “Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body, but he that commtteth fornication sinneth against his own body”. The Bible explicitly denounces sexual immorality, and in doing so, includes fornication and adultery in its definition. Adultery is a purely heterosexual act, as the Bible cleary defines marriage as between a man and a woman, so we can safely assume that passages relating to marriage had only that relationship in contemplation. Adultery, purely heterosexual, is sinful. Does that logically mean that heterosexuality itself is sinful? Obviously not. You may point to passages which encourage heterosexuality as support for the proposition that the Bible clearly supports heterosexuality, despite condemning certain heterosexual acts, but does not support homosexuality in any way. This is a fair point, but I want to raise just one thing.
The constitution of Antigua and Barbuda states the following, “Whereas every person in Antigua and Barbuda is entitled to the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual, that is to say, the right, regardless of race, place of origin, political opinions or affiliations, colour, creed or sex but subject to the rights and freedoms of others and for the public interest, to each and all of the following, namely…“ and then goes on to list such rights. Now the constitution clearly outlines the grounds on which persons should not be discriminated against, and most Antiguan politicians have excluded from those protected grounds, sexual orientation, because it is not listed there. The “sex” used in that section, refers to gender, not sexual orientation. It is clear the constitution explicitly protects against discrimination on the grounds of race. However, it does not explicitly protect against discrimination on the grounds of hair texture. Agreed? Hair texture cannot be read into race, because not all members of the same race have the same hair. I for example, am a member of the black race although I am mixed. Many ‘black people’ are mixed, but because we are ‘mostly’ black, we identify with that race. My hair is not the same texture as my black friend William’s, but we’re both black. Let’s say a white employer opened a business in Antigua and refused to hire persons who had “kinky, tough, or nappy black hair, including hair that has been permed or straightened” and would only hire persons with “soft straight hair of a light natural colour”. Would they be breaching the constitutionally protected freedom against discrimination? Based on the popular interpretation of those freedoms, no they wouldn’t, because hair texture is not a protected constitutional ground for protection, even if the EFFECT is to discriminate against a certain race of people. This doesn’t make sense to me.
I think to fully understand any provision, one needs to look beyond the actual words written there and take note of the true purpose and message the provision was trying to convey. This provision in the constitution is clearly there to protect against “arbitrary” discrimination. Arresting people based solely on their race, or political opinion or colour, or gender for example, is obviously wrong to any forward thinking person. Depriving someone of a right enjoyed by others based on those factors is wrong. Did the constitution envision every possible form of discrimination? No. Very few if any, documents in human existence provide an exhaustive list of every possible scenario. With the future brings possibilities that wouldn’t have been contemplated in the past. So, in interpreting the constitution, or Bible for that matter, one should take regard for the overriding principle espoused therein. Discriminating against hair texture would be unconstitutional because the overriding objective of that provision is to protect against “arbitrary or unconscionable” discrimination. In other words, to protect against “unfair” discrimination. Telling a woman she cannot be a lawyer based solely on the fact that she’s a woman is clearly unfair, as her gender has no bearing on her ability. Similarly, a person's hair texture has no bearing on their ability either.
If the Bible was to be looked at in this way, i.e. what is the overriding objective, what would the answer be? Imagine tomorrow the technology becomes available to preserve human tissue. You get into a car accident today and your family preserves you for the next 100 years. When you wake up in the year 2112, society has changed drastically. Homosexuality is the dominant orientation in your country. Your parents have long since died, and the persons that have been caring for you are gay. Your doctors are gay, policemen are gay, priests are gay, judges are gay, lawyers are gay, almost everybody is gay. You however, are still you. In the year 2112, Christianity has been conclusively disproven as a religion, as have Islam and Judaism. Scientific evidence has proven without a doubt that the events claimed in those books never took place and were complete fabrications. So there you are, straight as an arrow, in a hopelessly bent society with no spiritual guidance. There you meet someone of the opposite sex, who is just as straight as you. You immediately form an attraction to this person. For this attraction, you are prevented from being employed, publicly ridiculed, physically and verbally attacked on an almost daily basis by homosexuals who believe your attraction to that person is wrong. Regardless of how “right” or “wrong” their point might be, can you honestly say that you would be ok with their treatment of you? Do you think that being hated because you naturally find persons of the opposite sex attractive is a good or righteous thing to do, even though the vast majority of your society agrees that what you’re doing is wrong?
Even if you use the Bible as your ultimate source of truth, your saviour Jesus spent his life healing, loving and teaching people, and his ultimate message was to love our neighbours as ourselves. Does that sound like the kind of man that would be promoting “battyman fi dead”? If you really look at Jesus and his works and teachings, whether it be about the good Samaritan, or about the whore about to be stoned, does that sound like the character of a man who would happily deny two people who truly love each other the right to have that union recognized as important, in a society that sees their love as an embarrassment? The Bible has been used historically to oppress people and for all sorts of other immoral and despicable acts. Anytime this fact is brought up, the defence is always the same. “The Bible never supported that. It’s man’s evil interpretation or perversion of scripture that brought about that result, NOT the scripture itself.” And that is true. Many of the atrocities that were committed in the name of God and the Bible were not explicitly stated. They were based on interpretation of scripture by those who thought they were doing God’s work (sound familiar?). The enslavement and genocide of the natives of our islands for example. Endorsed under Christian principles and interpretation of the Bible. When Christians look back on those atrocities, they wonder how anyone can use the word of a loving, fair God to justify harming their fellow man like that. Who’s to say that in 100 years, your great grandchildren won’t look at you and your interpretation of scripture the same? Using a book created by God to spread love and peace through His word to show people willing to listen how to gain admittance into his Kingdom; to justify oppressing, abusing and ostracising members of his flock who you deem unworthy of the same rights you enjoy, cannot be right. The Bible condemns many activities, but somehow I feel Christians wouldn’t be as understanding and unwavering, if employers started firing people who they knew were unmarried and having sex, or who go to parties and get drunk.
To conclude, no one is asking you to support gay marriage. If you think it’s gross and unnatural and sinful, you’re entitled to your opinion. All I’m asking is that you don’t oppose it on the ground of your faith if you’re not willing to stand up for the many other sins heterosexuals commit daily. The Bible does not say “homosexuality is wrong”, it says homosexual acts are wrong, just as it says certain heterosexual acts are wrong. The majority of people born today are born to unmarried parents. Do you think those parents should be abused and ostracised for being fornicators? I didn’t think so. So don’t do it to your fellow sinners. Don’t hide your disgust or discomfort of homosexuality behind religious belief. Saying you love the sinner but hate the sin is a good theoretical position, but realistically, most people are unable to compartmentalize feelings. I have never met a Christian who “hated” homosexuality but “loved” homosexuals. I have met many Christians who hate homosexuals though. “Loving the sinner but hating the sin” is something most Christians say to avoid being labelled bigots, but look at their actions to find the truth. Hatred of anything is like a cancer. It spreads. You don’t “hate” fornicators, or liars, or drunkards. You may disapprove of them, pray for them, be disappointed in them, but you don’t really “hate” them do you? Why then is your “hatred” of “sin” solely for homosexuality? If you really took an objective look at yourself, you might be surprised at what you find.
Jesus died for all our sins, that we may gain entrance to Heaven by accepting him as our Lord and Saviour. He died for ALL our sins so that ALL of us can make it to Heaven if we choose to worship Him. Jesus never said that only the sinless can make it to heaven. He said ALL of us are sinners and despite our sin, once we repent and accept him, the Kingdom is ours. Even if you remain convinced that homosexuality is itself a sin, it is no greater than any other, as the wages of all sin is death. This is not a "gay" issue, but rather a "people" issue. All I ask is that you prevent yourself from falling victim to the same charges your ancestors faced. Don’t use God’s word to justify hatred, oppression and violence against a group of people. It’s not right, and it’s not Christian.
*Disclaimer: All views expressed in this post are based on the Bible being used as an authoritative, truthful text, and as such all points were made under that premise.*
0 notes
Text
The Friend Zone
Today’s discussion is the friend zone, which I’ve been hearing a lot about recently. What is the friend zone? Wikipedia defines it thus:
"In popular culture, the "friend zone" refers to a platonic relationship where one person wishes to enter into a romantic relationship while the other does not. It is generally considered to be an undesirable situation by the lovelorn person. Once the friend zone is established, it is said to be difficult to move beyond that point in a relationship."
(Yes, it has its own Wikipedia entry). So to summarize, the friend zone is really a term for when you become friends as a sort of consolation prize due to unreciprocated feelings.
The first thing I want to say about this is that both opponents and proponents of the friend zone have very valid points. I’ll begin with the opponents’ views. Most opponents are girls, and they disagree with the notion of a “friend zone”, and see human interactions (not including family) as being divided into 3 basic levels. First you have the "acquaintance" level. This person can be anyone from your colleague who you’ve worked with for ten years, to that guy you say hi to everytime you see him, but don’t know his name. Basically someone you interact with occasionally, but know nothing really significant about, nor care to. Next, is the "friend" level. This can range from someone one iota above acquaintance level, to the person you share every intimate detail of your life with. This is typically a person who you like and who likes you for one reason or other, whether it be your personality, or the fact that you share common interests or hold common views. You may know a little or a lot about this person, and depending on the level of interaction, certain perks are given and received. Finally, you have the "significant other" level. This is a person you have romantic feelings for and engage in intimate acts with.
Now most girls I’ve spoken to have a very rigid understanding of these 3 categories. If you’re a friend, you cannot also be a significant other and vice versa. This is why they don't believe in a friend zone. It's either you're a friend or you're not. It is usually these people that are accused of friend zoning. Their rationale however, is that the two categories are separate and distinct, so it is silly to try to “cross over” as it were. Some of them even accede to crossing over from significant other to friend, but are strictly against it going the other way. The logic behind this is that the significant other is not an entity onto itself. It is usually, for simplicity’s sake, an “enhanced friendship”. The basic elements of friendship are there, with the added enhancement of sex or sex-like activity (pretty much anything genital related). Therefore, when the “enhancement” comes to an end, there should be no problem continuing with the basic friendship, since it has already been established. “But”, one is inclined to ask, “if the 'significant other' level is basically the 'friendship' level with some improvements, (which is why it’s reasonable to continue as friends after the significant other phase has ended), then why is there a problem with the inverse, i.e. having friends cross over?” The answer to that is simple. There isn’t. That restriction only applies to unattractive people.
This may come as a shock to some people, and I sympathise, but the fact of the matter is that people cross over from friends to significant others every day. So chances are, if someone strictly forbids you from crossing over on that point, it generally means they don’t find you very attractive. I say attraction, because most of the other usual downsides to being with a person come secondary to that. Usually. Your level of attractiveness determines how willing someone is to try a thing with you. Obviously some people can overcome their visual shortcomings in other ways, and cross over, but the reason for the bar in the first place is usually looks. Ok so we’ve established that the reason someone doesn’t want to move from being friends with you to being your significant other is because they don’t find your attractiveness of such a level that they’re willing to risk finding out your flaws.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. Let’s say Sue is friends with Kareem and Mark. They’re both nice, theyre both interesting and they both have the sort of personality she likes. Their only difference is that Kareem is good looking while Mark is not. If they both wanted to be her boyfriend, which do you think she would choose? People might stop and say “oh that’s shallow”. It isn’t. Shallowness is when you use physical attractiveness as the ONLY or most important factor in your decision-making. There’s nothing shallow about using it as a starting point, especially when it doesn’t overshadow other qualities that should rightly come before it. Notice I started with the more important qualities before getting to looks. Most people (if not all) would be more willing to try a thing with the better looking person (in this case, Kareem). Mark would most likely get the “sorry I don’t date friends” speech. (Interesting note…if that situation was inverted, the guy would probably give the less attractive girl the “sorry I don’t date friends…but we can have sex” speech). So really, there is no such thing as a hard and fast rule about crossing over. Each case is determined on its merits. If you don’t believe me, look closely at the people who claim to get friend zoned. Chances are they aren’t really all that good looking.
The logic for keeping someone in the friend category is sound. You have given me no compelling reason to want to take this friendship anyplace other than where it is. Fair enough. The problem now arises when the person that has forbidden your crossing over makes some remark about how awesome you are. This is true friend zoning. When you have been forbidden from crossing over to significant other but are constantly being told you have the qualities needed for that level. This is what I have a problem with, because you’re lying. If the person met the criteria for the next level, whether it be just sex or an actual relationship, then common sense dictates that they should get to that level. It is like having a test where you need to get the answers correct for at least three questions to pass. You get the answers correct for four, but fail. This makes no sense. Clearly, they have NOT met the criteria if they are not allowed to progress. Either they have something you don’t want, or they don’t have something you want. This is where the confusion starts. By focusing only on the positive, you give the false impression that the person is someone you want to fool around with, when the reality is that there are negatives that prevent you from wanting that. Tell them the negative. Tell them they’re great conversationalists, but they look like they would suck in bed. This, while “harsh”, would disavow them of the impression that they “should” be sleeping with you, and that you’re being arbitrary. That’s really all there is to it. Don’t confuse John by saying he has everything you want in a guy, but you’re not gonna sleep with him, you’re gonna sleep with Donald. That makes no sense. Tell John he has all the things you want in a guy…AND IF IT WASN’T FOR THE FACT THAT HE HAS A SMALL PENIS, you would be sleeping with him too. But he does, and you won’t. Donald doesn't have a small penis, and so he will be getting the pums tonight instead.
For those of you that still don’t understand the logic, let me break it down for you. I am a guy. I speak to a girl and ask her about what she looks for in guys. This girl tells me she likes when guys are nice and treat her well. I accept this as fact, because she has no reason to lie to me. I'm nice and treat her well, not because she said that’s what she likes, but because that’s how I act when I like someone (like a normal human being). I now make the proposition that we have sex, since I am clearly the kind of guy she likes, and one generally enjoys having sex with people one likes. I am rebuffed, on the grounds that “you’re too nice and good to me…I wouldn’t want to spoil that”. "..............." So let’s recap. Girl says she wants someone nice and who treats her well. I am a person who is nice and treats her well. I get rejected for sex on the grounds that I am nice and treat her well. Do you see the problem?
Let me take you off-track for a moment. This statement that “I don’t want to spoil that” has always bothered me, and 99% of the time in my experience, it’s girls that use that line. We can both agree that sex is good. Enjoying one’s company and getting along is also good. If you add something good to something good, how do you get something bad? The ‘catching feelings’ argument is usually brought up. Maybe I’m unusual, but I don’t get that argument either. If you have a person who you’ve thought about and decided definitively that you are better being friends with them than in a relationship, why would sex change your mind? Even if you’re not convinced that you're better being friends than their significant other, but you’ve decided that it’s better not to risk it, why would sex change your mind? I don’t understand how sex can change something that is logically and reasonably agreed on beforehand. But clearly that opinion is not widely held. Anyway, let’s get back to the point.
Right, so I’ve been rejected because I’m “too nice and good to her and she doesn’t want to spoil that”. What this causes now, is me to link the niceness and the good treatment to her not having sex with me. Now the TRUTH of the matter could be that she doesn’t think I’m attractive. But because that’s not what she said, I now re-evaluate my whole treatment of women who say they like when a guy is nice and good to them. 99% of all guys, when interacting with women they find attractive, would like to have sex with them at some point. So anything that damages the possibility of sex is shunned. In this case, that would clearly be nice treatment. Had the girl simply said “no thanks, I’m not attracted to you” it would have had a different outcome entirely. I would have realized that her description of what she liked was incomplete, and moved on to find someone who was attracted to me.....or I could hate her forever and hope she gets AIDS. These things go either way, really.
Some girls might raise their hand and say “but what if you don’t want to lose them because they’re good people… but you just don’t like them ‘like that’?” Well you have a dilemma don’t you? You have to decide whether it’s better for a good person who has unreciprocated feelings for you to go off and find someone who will appreciate them the way they want to be appreciated……or to string them along and keep them unhappy because they make your life better. If that took you more than 10 seconds to decide, you’re a selfish, fucked up person. Honestly, that’s not even your call to make. It’s theirs. You should therefore be a decent enough human being to give them all the information they need to make a real decision. If you do that and they stay, then they have implicitly agreed to your rules and conditions and you can have a real friendship. If you don’t do that and they stay, you’re really not maintaining an honest friendship. Your friendship is based on half-truths and false hope. Why would you expect that to end well?
A fundamental aspect of friendzoning, is the bullshit. That is when a person says that they like some values in the opposite sex, but none of the people they either date or have sex with have any of those values. For guys, this arises simply because we don’t want to be labelled negatively. Women always say they want us to be honest, but whenever we are, we have an onslaught of negativity. “Oh guys are such dogs! Guys are so shallow! That’s so stupid! That’s so gross!” etc. So usually, we say what everyone wants us to say and keep our deep dark HONEST desires to ourselves. As a guy I can tell you there is no greater source of uncontrollable laughter than to talk to a guy about what he likes and then to hear him talk to women about the SAME thing. Those two conversations go VERY differently half the time. I can only guess as to women’s reasoning for doing this. I’ll assume it’s along the same lines as the guy reason, in that, if they were to be honest about what they like and want they’d be called whores or sluts or what have you. A girl who says she likes “guys that look dangerous and would give her some good rough sex” is NOT going to be looked on the same way as the girl that says she likes “guys that go to church regularly and are good with the lord”, even though they both want what the first girl said. I understand the logic behind this, but at the same time, it compounds the problem. To say you like guys that go to church when your last 5 boyfriends were atheist, makes no sense to anybody. I understand that you cannot speak the truth for fear of persecution, but at least be courteous enough not to wilfully chat shit.
What I have outlined above is “true” friendzoning. There is what I like to call “false” friendzoning however, and this kind of friendzoning is the most widely discussed and complained about. The theory for this goes as follows: A girl and a guy start talking. The guy starts liking the girl and being attracted to her. The girl does not feel the same way. They become friends due to their mutual like, but non-mutual attraction. The guy acts like a nice person this whole time, while the girl continues to ignore him as a romantic possibility and has sex and relationships with other guys. The guy complains that he has been friend zoned. This is not friendzoning. This is being a pussy. If you have feelings for someone who does not have them for you, the solution is not to be this person’s friend with the expectation that if you stick it out long enough and are nice enough they’ll change their mind. A friendship based on the hope that you won’t be friends later on is not a friendship. It is a ploy used by people too weak to up their game or move on from their failure. This isn’t to say you can’t be friends with someone who doesn’t reciprocate your feelings of attraction. You can. As long as you understand and accept that the feeling is not mutual and it is not going to change. I have met many attractive women who did not feel the same way about me as I did for them. Does that mean I stuck around hoping they’d change their mind? No. Either I stopped talking to them because I didn’t think being their friend was worth the effort it would take to ignore my feelings, or I became their friend because having them in my life was still a positive even without sex.
False friend zone claims stem from jealousy and an inability to accept responsibility. The reality of the situation is that you have nothing to offer this person, whether it be by looks or personality, that makes them want to get naked for you. Instead of accepting this, looking at your shortcomings and finding ways to improve them, you turn it around and make the person out to be a bitch/asshole for not accepting your mediocre offer, but then going ahead and accepting better offers. This is illogical. Imagine you need your car tyres replaced. Mechanic A says he will do it in 30 minutes for $100. Mechanic B says he will do it in 1 hour for $150. Why on earth would anyone choose mechanic B? Normal people take better offers. If your offer wasn’t accepted, it simply means it wasn’t good enough for the person you offered it to. It might be a great offer to 10 other people, but it is not what THIS person is looking for. The solution to that is to go find someone else who thinks you have a good offer, NOT to follow the person who rejected your offer around hoping they’ll change their mind some day. They are not the only persons who can accept offers. Your decision to focus solely on them is your choice and yours alone. Usually.
Not everyone is aware enough to spot bullshit quickly. I understand that. But at the same time, blaming someone else for your retarded decision is stupid. If you want to sleep with someone who doesn't want to sleep with you, they aren't being a bitch. They're being human. It happens. Get over it. Following them around and moaning about being in the friend zone is retarded. Someone once said that girls aren't vending machines where you keep putting kindness in until sex falls out. That's true. Every girl has their own criteria for sex or relationship. If you don't meet it, that's by no means the end of the world. You can change and meet it, or she can change and you're in. If neither happens though, blaming HER and calling her names is a bitch move. Sticking around someone and doing all sorts of things you don't want to do, in the hope that one day you will earn her vagina is fail. Oh she comes to you with her boyfriend problems? Tell her you're not interested. Oh she wants you to come shopping with her so you can carry her bags? Say no. Oh she invited you over late at night saying she was 'bored' but doesn't want to have sex? Rape her. Hahahaha WHAT?! No. Don't do that. Rape is serious business. Seriously. Don't joke about rape. Anyway, if you're a dumbass that lets women walk all over you because you like them, you haven't been friend zoned. You're a dumbass that lets women walk all over you.
To conclude, if you’re in a false friend zone situation, you're not a victim. Stop being a bitch and leave. If you are not happy being her friend, leave. If you want to be her boyfriend and she doesn’t want you to be, and you’re not ok with that, leave. If she refuses to sleep with you, but sleeps with people you don’t think are as good as you are, leave. It is her body, her life and her choice. If you don’t like her decisions or standards, you know where the door is. Sticking around and moaning about it, makes you a sissy, not a victim. All those years you spent being a shoulder to cry on hoping for your one chance, you could have attracted someone else who would give you all the sex you wanted. Instead, YOU chose to sit and waste your time with this one person who clearly doesn’t want you. That isn’t their fault. It’s yours.
For those of you in a true friend zone situation, I need to talk to the perpetrators. Stop lying to your friends. You know they’re not that amazing, and you’re well aware of the reason they would make shitty sex partners or boyfriends. Either you say the good with the bad, or you don’t say anything at all. Harping on the good and not mentioning the bad gives a false impression and makes you look like an idiot. Yes he's great in 20 different ways, but pretty lame in 1, and that 1 is the most important thing to you. It's not that hard to say so. You're not being nice. Leading someone on is one of the cruelest things you could do to a person. Similarly, don't be afraid to state what you ACTUALLY like, not what Hollywood or your mother or whatever else says you like. If you think Toby Maguire's awkward, shy, bumbling Peter Parker in Spiderman is lame, say so. Don't say you want a nice sweet guy like that while watching the movie with your popular, charismatic boyfriend whose idea of an anniversary gift is putting a bow on his penis. Don’t bitch about how chivalry is dead when you know you equate chivalry with corniness. Don't bitch about how all the good guys are gone when you're always turning them down. Be consistent, that's all. You say you like X, fine. Date X. Fuck X. Do NOT say you like X but date Y and fuck Z. This makes you look like a twat. No one likes a twat. Except dicks.
0 notes
Video
Sometimes when I listen to music, I get inspired. This was one of those times.
0 notes
Text
Speak now or forever hold your peace
I’m confused about something. Marriage. Ok.... I get that most people see it as the ultimate show of love and commitment and that it’s the most serious and important thing a couple can do. We have countless movies where the audience sits through hours only to reach the climax [a marriage] before the screen fades to black and credits roll. I think we’re all familiar with the 11-step relationship program:
1. Boy meets girl
2. Boy and girl like each other
3. Boy and girl go out a few times and get to know each other more personally and the ‘like’ grows
4. Boy asks girl to be his girlfriend (Relationship has levelled up)
5. Boy and girl continue going out and getting to know each other better
6. Boy and girl fall in love (Relationship has levelled up)
7. Boy and girl start living together (Relationship has levelled up)
8. Boy and girl learn even MORE about each other
9. Boy asks girl to marry him and girl agrees (Relationship has levelled up)
10. Boy and girl get married (Relationship has levelled up)
11. Boy and girl have kids together (Relationship maximum level reached)
I believe that’s the standard relationship program even though some people might say kids don’t really affect the relationship paradigm, and others might skip a few and add in others like meeting parents, etc. But on a basic level, I think that’s the route most relationships follow.
My first problem is the idea of ‘levelling up’. You might say to yourself that no one actually calls it that, but they do. You’ve never heard “let’s take this relationship to the next level”? Levelling up. A relationship isn’t a video game, so I’ve never really understood this concept. Adding to my scepticism of the concept of levelling up, is my understanding of levelling. In video games, when your character levels up, or you get to a higher level, it means that you’re in a better position than the previous level. If I have a level 10 character and you have a level 11 character, your character is BETTER than mine in various ways. This is not so for relationships.
From what I’ve seen, relationships at step 5 are much more pleasant than relationships at step 7. This shouldn’t be so....technically. Technically, the higher up the scale you go, the better your relationship should be. Sure people are going to argue and say well no, you can’t judge it by interactions because we all know that the longer you’re with someone and the more serious you two are together the less you’re going to act like lovey-dovey 16-year olds. And no one would say that two 16 yr olds together for 2 months have a “better” relationship than a couple that’s been together for a year and living together. But see, that right there makes my point, because it’s not the “level” technically that makes the relationship serious, it’s the time invested in getting to know each other. So, in my 11 step program, if someone rushed thru all the steps in between to step 7 in 2 months, I wouldn’t be able to say that their relationship was stronger than a couple that was at stage 3 for 6 months. That two month relationship to me could never be “more serious” than the 6 month one, because I don’t believe you can really get to know someone that well in such a short space of time.
So ok, based on my model, the level thing doesn’t really make sense. And it’s not just a flaw of my model, because most couples I know have gone through those steps more or less, at different speeds, so the model isn’t just a figment of my imagination. Another problem with the levelling system is that you cannot downgrade. Once you’ve reached a new level, you’re stuck with one of 2 options, you can remain there, until you progress to the next level, or leave the person altogether. You can’t just go back down a notch. So for example, once u reach level 4 and you’re unhappy, you can’t just go back to level 3. Its either you bear through level 4 until you reach level 5, or you give up and leave. Kind of shitty since you don’t really know what the next level will be like until you reach it. Talking about it doesn’t do very much when it comes to actually DEALING with it.
Another problem I have with that system is that no level is secure. You can spend 10 years working on your levels and reach level 10 only to have the other person say they’re done and leave. So if no level really guarantees anything, I don’t much see the value in them. Are they for your own peace of mind and sense of accomplishment? Are they a way of letting the world know about your ‘status’? If there was a video game that when you reach the last level, and die, the game erases all the levels you had reached before and you have to start over from scratch, very few people would want to play that. That’s the whole reason for memory cards: to SAVE your progress. Relationships have no such thing.
But ok, all of that was just to illustrate that I didn’t agree with the premise for marriage being the “ultimate” show of love. Let’s talk about marriage itself. Marriage is essentially a legally binding agreement between two people that gives them certain benefits over property they do not technically own and makes it difficult for them to leave each other. The Merriam-Webster dictionary agrees that it’s “(1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law”. It also defines marriage as “(3) an intimate or close union [the marriage of painting and poetry — J. T. Shawcross]”. But that second definition doesn’t really apply here, seeing as all intimate and close unions are not marriages, and all marriages are not close or intimate.
So right away, we’ve established that the difference between marriage and all other forms of relationship is that a marriage is a legally binding agreement two people make, not only with each other, but with the STATE. I’m not really seeing the romance in that. For one, how does making it harder for someone to leave show that there is MORE love and trust between the both of you than when they could leave whenever they wanted to with no consequences? Using that reasoning, wouldn’t the ULTIMATE show of love be to willingly lock yourself in the house with that person and not speak to members of the opposite sex forever? No, right? That would be pretty creepy. So then I don’t get how it’s romantic to say “I love you so much I’m going to make a legally binding agreement with the state that if I try and leave you, you can take half of everything I own!”. Some people will be quick to say “It’s not about the legal binding part!” But...it kinda is.
I’m not even speaking about the religious aspect of marriage, because that’s another story. If you think the only way to have sex without being sent to hell is to be married, by all means, I totally understand your belief in marriage. But most people that run around with this idea of marriage as the penultimate achievement in the world of romance don’t think of it in terms of a covenant with God. It’s those people I’m speaking to now. If marriage isn’t about the legal binding-ness of it, then what’s the significance? Some say it’s about social status, and that people will respect the wishes of a spouse much more than they would a girlfriend or boyfriend. Even if that is so, how is that romantic? First of all, why does it matter how other people view your relationship? If the world thinks you have a perfect relationship and you're very unhappy, does what they think matter? Second, how is “she’ll listen to me more if I’m her husband” or “I’ll take her opinions more seriously if she’s my wife” indicative of love? To me that just shows you don’t really have a good relationship if you need marriage for the other person to take your views more seriously. The best marriages occur when a couple’s relationship is so good, that nothing changes after they’re married. So if it’s so good that you wouldn’t want anything to change....why get married? All that changes is the difficulty with which you can leave, and as I said, I don’t really see the romance in that.
Something else too, I’ve said in a Family Law class some time ago that I agree with the principle that what’s mine is mine and what’s yours is yours BEFORE we get married, then after marriage, anything we acquire together becomes ours, even though I will keep MY personal account and you will keep yours. I was told that it’s views like that that make me un-marry-able lol. But I don’t understand why. If marriage ISN'T about getting at the other person’s money, then why should something like a prenuptial agreement be offensive? If you HONESTLY believe that we’ll be together forever, then having one or not having one shouldn’t matter, should it? But it does. Girls especially, get quite angry at the notion that their man wants to get one. Why? What’s unromantic about planning for a very likely contingency? To put this into perspective, I work at the Law School’s Legal Aid clinic, and the vast majority of cases there are divorce matters. So the fairytale notion about “happily ever after” most of us know simply does not happen very often. Why then is wanting a document sayng that you’re not entitled to take the land my granny left for me that I’ve had since I was 15, if we break up, seen as offensive or unromantic? Does true love mean you throw caution to the wind and just go wherever your feelings take you with no regard for practical consequences and eventualities?
Where do we get this idea that that’s what true love entails? Movies. Songs. There is something I’m surprised no one else notices about those things. Even the very people that CREATE those stories, do not live them. For example, Jennifer Lopez and Jennifer Aniston both are CONSTANTLY starring in some romantic movie, yet those 2 women have a horrible track record when it comes to successful relationships. RnB singers like usher and R Kelly are well known for doing stuff that is very much NOT fairytale-like. Yet people still eat up those romance movies and songs like fat kids at a buffet. Do you think the writers of the movies have done any of the things their characters have in those romance movies? No. Those singers? No. So if the very people that CREATE the illusion of true love do not live up to it, why do you think you can? “Oh! Because some people DO have that! Some people DO have true love and HAVE done those things!” True. But how many people is that? 2 in every 20? 2 in every 200? How many people do YOU know in your personal life that have love like you see in movies. Ok, keep that number in your head. Now how many people do you know have failed horribly trying to recreate that movie love? Right. What kind of ratio is that? How does that sound like something you want to follow? If you were car shopping and the car you wanted to buy had a ratio of [# people that have movie love is the # of people that survive in crashes] to [# people that don’t have movie love is the # people that die in crashes], would you purchase that car based on that safety record? I wouldn’t. So then why try and “purchase” that kind of relationship?
Marriage fails a lot more often than it works. Is that a reason not to get married? Of course not. But, it should make you think VERY long and hard about the PERSON you want to marry, and not just the idea of marriage itself. Because the idea of marriage is what’s failed most people. They thought it was going to be a cure-all for their relationship woes and it wasn’t, or the marriage demanded more of them than they were willing to give. So in every instance of divorce, it’s the persons, the relationship between them....not the marriage. So to me, it makes more sense to focus individually on each PERSON you happen to have feelings for when deciding how much you want to invest in them, than to just have this idea in your head of a perfect marriage where the bride/groom’s face is blank and you just fill it in with whoever you happen to be dating at the time.
In closing, I’m not against marriage. I’m against the way people view it as the “final step” to relationship bliss. It isn’t. It honestly really is just a way of giving yourself legal rights and entitlements to the other person’s things that you wouldn’t have normally. That’s not very romantic to me, and marriage has always been held up as being all about love and romance. If you marriage fanatics start owning up to the fact that marriage isn’t really about love, but about financial security, then I’ll understand your fanaticism better. The rest of us know that we can have true love knowing full well we can leave whenever we want to, and we would appreciate it if you stopped acting like we just told you we want to die cold and alone when we say we don’t see the point in marriage. We find it MORE romantic to know that you’re staying with us when you can leave at any point simply because you do not WANT to leave us, and not because if you leave us you’ll be punished economically. Not seeing the point in marriage doesn’t mean we don’t see the point in companionship, love, commitment or loyalty. It literally means....we don’t see the point in marriage.
0 notes
Text
Knowledge is power....or is it?
Over the years, I’ve heard many varying opinions on the topic of knowledge with regard to relationships. There seems to be a disconnect between words and actions. I’ll start by saying I’m an 80’s baby. I grew up watching the *best* cartoons ever made, one of which was GI Joe. For those of you who don’t know about that cartoon (how do you live with yourselves?), the oft repeated tag line in that show, (apart from “Yo Joe!”) was “knowing is half the battle”. That phrase always stuck with me and I believe in it even now. Knowledge is power.
Knowledge. Specifically, “knowing” certain things about the other person. A friend of mine wrote a blog post a good while back where he mentioned that he believes men need to stop asking women how many people they’ve slept with. What, really? Why? “Because its none of your business” was the response. Anyone who talks to me knows I tend to ask a lot of questions, and hearing “it’s not your business” comes with the territory. But that response has always slightly annoyed me, mostly because of its pointlessness. I don’t “ask” people about things that are my business. I’m not going to politely ask you why my car has no engine after lending it to you for the evening and understand if you don’t want to speak about it. My car not having an engine is my business, so I “demand” to know what happened. Ergo, any question I ask you that is not a veiled demand, is none of my business. “How I’m doing today” is none of your business, but you’d be confused if that was the response you got for asking me that. That phrase is up there with “well that’s YOUR opinion” on my list of useless shit people say all the time. If you were to only tell people things that were their business, conversations would be very very short and pointless. So this reason for not asking makes no sense to me.
Another reason I got from other people I asked about the issue was that “it’s not important”. Important to whom? It would actually make more sense to me if they said that it was because it WAS important why they didn’t want to discuss it. In an average conversation, 99% of the content is unimportant drivel, but we’re very willing to spend hours discussing our tastes in movies and music and people. Do any of those things get humanity closer to solving some major ailment or calamity? No. Do any of them bring you closer to a life-changing epiphany? No. So it’s safe to say that talking about unimportant stuff is what we do quite a bit. Why then is THIS question’s unimportance so significant? I have to conclude that it’s not. Unimportance is not a good reason for not asking a question, because we ask unimportant questions every time we speak to someone else.
The most frequent reason I get is that “it’s private”. Well no shit it’s private. It’s a question about the number of penises you’ve let into your body. The fact that that question can even be phrased in a respectful manner is a feat in and of itself. The way I see friendships is as follows:
Phase 1 - the meeting phase. At phase 1, you’re just acquaintances. You speak if you run into each other someplace or if you’re on Facebook or BBM or MSN or whatever, but the frequency is very low, often maybe twice a month or once every 2 weeks or so. And the content of the conversations are very dull and uninteresting.
Phase 2 – the friendly phase. At phase 2, you speak more often and even set times or events to meet each other at. You’re starting to notice this person as being fun or interesting, and you want to see more of them.
Phase 3 – the friends phase. At phase 3, you have confirmed with yourself that you do like this person. You enjoy their company and their conversations. While mostly you stick to mundane uninteresting things like school and news, every now and again you discuss interesting topics or topics you personally enjoy.
Phase 4 – the good friends phase. At phase 4, you’ve moved away from discussing mundane topics to actual pertinent issues in each other’s lives. You know a little about their problems and they know a little about yours. Personal information, while shared, is still generally quite guarded and scant.
Phase 5 – the close friends phase. At phase 5, the majority of your conversations are about personal issues. Personal information is freely shared although extreme details are often not divulged.
Phase 6 – the best friends phase. At phase 6, you can talk about anything. Anything that pops into your head, whether irreverent, inappropriate or even illegal can be discussed comfortably. Personal information is so commonplace that you start laughing at a story before it’s even finished because you know what your friend did before they tell you; and you know this because you’ve heard so many personal stories in the past you have unlimited references.
Everyone has their own ‘friend model’. Some are simpler or more complex than mine. Some people don’t even include people they’re attracted to in their friend model. For the purposes of this post though, we’ll use mine (since *in my opinion* it’s the most straightforward one). For me, sleeping with people usually happens between phase 4 and 5. So it’s usually around phase 4 that the “how many” question comes up. At that point, we’re already discussing some personal things, so why is that question still deemed “too personal”? I can identify with people that have reached all the way to phase 5 with someone only to have them betray their trust and friendship by divulging personal information to others. Especially for girls... having “your number” out and open to the public can be a big problem. Half the people who hear it will laugh at you for being an inexperienced n00b, and the other half will shake their heads at your whoringness. It’s pretty much a lose lose situation to have that number revealed to the public. So I get that. But the problem here isn’t WHEN it should be asked. Everyone has their own method of determining trustworthiness, and who can be privy to what information. That’s neither here nor there. My question is that once you’ve reached to whatever level you’ve deemed appropriate for discussing things of a personal nature, why is that question exempted? If there’s no issue of trust involved, i.e. you trust the person and believe that they’ll keep the information private, what then is the problem with being asked?
“I don’t want to be judged” is another popular one. The illusion that we don’t judge people is just that, an illusion. Everyone has standards and their own ways of interpreting things, so by default everything you see or hear is judged one way or another. You might not categorize people or label them, but you do judge. The way I see it, the people I have sex with form part of who I am....in terms of the reasons I had sex with them, how I treated them, the kinds of persons they were, etc. all tell a story about me. If hearing that story makes the person I’m supposed to be getting into a relationship with think less of me, then we shouldn’t be together. I think of that the same as not wanting to talk about my love for war movies because “she might not like that”. It’s who I am...take it or leave it. So this whole not wanting to be judged thing doesn’t really sit well with me either. Its something you chose to do.....you can feel proud of it, ashamed of it, or indifferent about it, but your decisions are as much a part of you as anything else. Even regretful ones...because the fact that you regret something says something about where your values lie and how your mind works. So if you're ok with me judging you on all your other personal decisions, why is this one any different?
Some guys don’t ask, and I can understand why. They just don’t want to think about the girl they like or love or are in a relationship with, having sex with other people. Fair enough. But remember GI Joe! Knowing is half the battle. I have many female friends, and because of my inquisitive nature, I know the sexual history of most, even more so than their boyfriends, and many times I’ve been out and see them, their boyfriend and their ex sexual partner all hanging out or talking together. If I was the boyfriend, I would want to know that the same Randy you’re always talking to and hugging up when we go out is the Randy who two months ago was having sex with you on the hood of his pick-up in your yard. Am I going to get mad everytime I see Randy? No (well...depends on the situation, lol). I know you two USED to have sex....I’m the one having sex with you now....if anyone should be upset, it should be him, not me.
[With that said, as an aside, why the hell do guys do that? You have a hot gf. You have sex with your hot gf often. Your hot gf spends 90% of her time with you making you happy. Why is it that on the 10% of the time that she’s not with you or having sex with you and the 5% that she’s talking to an ex or hanging out with someone that used to sleep with her, that you act like a total douche towards her? Dude, YOU have her. “Yea but I don’t want anyone feeling like they have something over me and saying ‘oh me done fuck off his woman’”. Well unless u plan to only date virgins, some guy is always going to be able to say that. But as a grown man, you should be able to understand that it’s just pointless metaphorical dick measuring. You’re REALLY gonna get mad that the girl you have been having sex with every which way for the past year USED to have sex with some guy a year ago? The same guy she stopped having sex with BECAUSE of you? That’s just downright retarded and you don’t deserve a girlfriend. If anyone should be acting like they got one over on someone, it should be you, the boyfriend (although I wouldn’t recommend that cuz you really never know if you’re getting cheated on, and finding out the same guy you were gloating to at the club had sex with your girlfriend later that same night is a very very hard pill to swallow)].
But I digress. I think knowing is better than not knowing. And by knowing, I mean knowing everything; not only the number of people, but who they are. Why? Because first of all, you already know something. You know she’s not a virgin. Which means that there’s at least one other guy that’s had sex with her. “Yea but what is knowing who it is going to do?” It allows you to be able to assess a situation fully. For example: you go to a club, and her friend Ronald comes over, greets her and then buys the both of you drinks. Chats up to you, cracks jokes, hangs around the two of you and then steals a dance when you leave to go talk to some of your friends. Not a big deal right? Is that the same way you would feel if Ronald used to have sex with her up to a few months ago? Probably not. In the first scenario, when your friend asks you “who’s that guy dancing with your girl?” you’d probably answer “oh that’s her friend Ronald, he’s cool.” In the second, you’d probably be like “What? Be right back” and get back over there to give Ronald the “I see what you’re up to” man-face. Sure girls will say "oh well that’s just immature" yada yada. But see, if we had SPOKEN about Ronald before and you explained to me that he was the worst sex ever and you only slept with him because his mother died and he ran over his beloved dog on the way to the funeral the same day he got fired from work, then I probably would have still acted like I did in scenario one.
The point is that I knew BEFOREHAND, so I would be able to anticipate and analyze all situations that follow. I can interpret everything with the goggles of reality and deal with them appropriately. Finding out months later that you and the guy you’re always liming with or speaking to or hanging around with “had something” in the past is going to be upsetting no matter how much you explain. A man’s mind will invent the worst possible scenarios and replay them all the time, because he just doesn’t know. Knowing beforehand gives us the ability to see things as they are. Sure there are downsides with knowing, such as an irrational dislike of anyone who has had sex with you including good friends whom you have no desire to sleep with ever again. I’m not saying that the REACTION to knowledge is going to be great all the time....but knowing must always trump not knowing, not so? I mean in any case, isn't it better for me to get over my irrationality early in the relationship rather than later? I think so.
Which brings me to another important knowledge matter. Cheating. I cannot tell you how many strong, long lasting relationships I know of personally that have had bouts of cheating that the other person doesn’t know about. Sometimes one person cheats and the other doesn’t know...sometimes two persons cheat and neither know....sometimes one person cheats ten times, and the other knows about ONE time etc. down the line. There are MANY. Now, trying to reconcile the dedication to the relationship, the longevity and the happiness of the persons with the almost universal agreement that it’s better to know of infidelity than not to know, is very difficult. With the relationships that have been honest about infidelity that I personally have been aware of, all have ended. Some of the relationships without infidelity have ended. Most of the relationships that haven’t been honest about infidelity are still going strong, and those that ended, both parties are still on good terms. Empirically, it would seem that being dishonest about infidelity is better for your relationship than being honest about it. Therein lies the age old question...is it better to be happy with an illusion or be sad with reality? GI Joe knows the answer. Sad with reality, yo! Because its a hell of a lot better to be happy with reality than happy with an illusion, and the only way you can know if your reality is happy or sad is to have knowledge of the reality. So despite evidence to the contrary, I personally still believe in knowing the truth even if it means the end of a relationship that otherwise would have continued for years. For the people that “don’t want to know”, why is that? Can an illusion be so good that ANY reality MUST be worse and therefore what’s the point? Probably. This is exactly why I’m suspicious of anything that seems too good. There’s nothing worse than getting sucked into your own little fantasy world, because sooner or later someone is going to drag you back to reality, and the higher you were in the clouds, the harder the fall. Let me expect the worst and be pleasantly surprised, than to expect the best and can only be disappointed. Who’s with me? YO JOE!!!
0 notes