Is he leading you where you want to go?
A few months ago, I wrote an article titled “The Truth About New York: How Big City Dating Corrupts Single Men.” It was about how big cities make it easier for men to buck traditional trends when it comes to dating. Put more succinctly, it was about how big cities make it easier for men to be assholes. One of the last comments on that article posed a question that I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about, but haven’t been able to put into enough words to make it a substantial article until now:
“Does there EVER come a point when we expect men to hold _themselves_ to a “higher” standard that is _NOT_ based on women’s actions/inactions?
No. Expectations communicated through words and actions will forever be key. They’re what set the tone for things to come. Managers are often promoted to their highest level of incompetence. Men are often promoted to the highest level of what they’re allowed to get away with. People don’t perform unless you require them to. And even then, sometimes they still don’t perform and you gotta drop ’em from the team. That’s the simple answer. But then it occurred to me how often I get questions or scenarios from women involving men they took an initial liking to that eventually fell short of hopes and evaded dreams.
I really like this guy, but he just keeps on texting instead of calling. How do I get him to pick up the phone?
I give guys my number and they don’t call. What can I do to get them to take it to the next level?
We got physical, I thought we were on the same page, then next thing you know he had a girlfriend. What the f*ck gives?
The advice I’ve given more and more frequently: Stop worrying about us and do you. You can’t make us do anything, but you can point us in the right direction. If we choose to go the other way, that’s on us.
When it comes to men stringing women along in a fluid state of ambiguity, I hear a lot about how men need to “man up” and say what it is…even though we initially tell women exactly that. But apparently and for reasons I’ll never understand, many women believe men are responsible for periodically checking in and saying stuff like “You know I’m not looking for anything serious right? Right? You know what? Let me put this thing away. We’re not on the same page.” Yeah, that’s the noble thing to do…in a fantasy world where every guy looks like Idris and shares his feelings. Sometimes reality tastes like booboo. I say that with a smiley face.
For all that I’ve gotten away with over the years, there’s always been a woman on the other side with equal opportunity to put the kibosh on us — whatever we were. But they didn’t. They allowed me to be a minimalist. I knew I could save my best for the last woman I’d date before hanging up my jersey and becoming a color commentator on marriage.
Nah. Ain’t having it.
People say it’s a man’s job to lead and set the tone. I agree, in part at least. Women have an equally important role that often gets forgotten. They have the opportunity to walk away, wag a Mutumbo finger, and tell us they’ll have nothing less than our best, and that we’re not taking them down the path they’d like to walk. But for whatever reason, many don’t. They toss us the role of leader and allow our lackluster vision of “us” to lead them down a dirt road to drink from a pond of disappointment and lava. The result? “How come he didn’t step up?!”
My answer and reiteration: Don’t worry about when we’ll step up, because we’re going to do whatever you allow us to. Worry about what you can do for yourself even if that means cutting us out of the picture.
The women that I’ve worked the hardest for are the ones that told me — verbally and/or through actions — that they’d have nothing less than my best effort. It was that simple. It continues to be that simple. Not too long ago, if I knew it’d require work, I’d walk away. That’s what a lot of men do today. It’s not right or wrong. That’s a man’s prerogative. Sh*t, that’s a woman’s prerogative too. We all have free will to make decisions. We just need to be comfortable living with the consequences…whatever they may be. Telling a man that infrequent communication isn’t gonna fly or that there will be no sideways pokey without some type of commitment may lead him to the door. But that’s okay because you’ve saved yourself time. You’ve asserted your worth. And at the end of the day, the value you place on yourself exceeds anything that a man could ever tell you.
So even with putting the proverbial foot down, things may still go awry. That’s life. But the power is in being able to say you did what you needed and that the other person wasn’t the right person. Know that all you can control is the precedent you establish and the limits on what you’re willing to put up with. That’s in your circle of control. What we choose to do isn’t. So stop running in one trying to figure out why we won’t do what you want. Just do what’s best for yourself.
Thoughts?
It ain’t always a crystal stair,
Thank you… Slim… It’s not about him stepping up all the time. A man is going to do what he wants to do, you just have to make the choose if you will deal with his crap or not. Some women act a little too helpless in these types of situations. Like “hey girl” you know you don’t have to deal with him right, if you mention what you wont and he doesn’t want to do it, you know you can find someone else to do it.
Also not every man is going to step up because honestly every man you date or talk too won’t see you as worth the extra effort. Most of the situations I see where the man is putting in little effort are ones where he might be interested in the woman as nothing more than a little adult company or he’s just not into the female.
Appreciate your continuous involvement in the comments section by the way. It does not go unnoticed.
My recent post She Wanted My Tea. I Wanted My Lunch.
I agree 10000% with this whole article and Smilez (I'm a 26 y.o female). I try to engrave this into my friends minds all the time when they're making comments on how a man they're dating isn't doing " what he's supposed to" or what they think he should. They continue to go with the flow which is just letting him know that you're down for whatever HE is willing to give.
He's not doing what you think he should because he either feels like he shouldn't have to for whatever reason or he just plain doesn't WANT to!
Good job Slim 🙂
"if you mention what you wont and he doesn’t want to do it, you know you can find someone else to do it."
I don't disagree at all that a man SHOULD be kicked to the curb if he's not meeting the standards you have for men in your life, but I will say that, from the female perspective, sometimes LONELINESS is a factor when you realize that, as Slim wrote above: "Not too long ago, if I knew it’d require work, I’d walk away. That’s what a lot of men do today."
If A LOT OF MEN choose to walk away when you ask for more effort, then that whole "someone else will give me what I need" thing might involve a lot more waiting, since "someone else" might not be right around the corner. Heck, I was stuck in casual dating land for 1.5 YEARS before I ran into a guy who had any long-term potential.
LONELINESS tricked me into trying for long-term with the several casual men I dealt with. They weren't about that. In the beginning, I knew that. But as we continued together, I hoped it'd change. Once I knew it wouldn't change, I hoped I'D change, and learn to be OK with what they offered, because I didn't enjoy having the worry that, although I deserved more, men OFFERING more were few and far between. I eventually stopped selling myself short though, and said, "I'm either going to get what I want, or I'm going to be alone. I don't have time for anything else."
I guess that's just something women have to go through, though. Getting to the point where you say, "F it" and maybe a great guy comes along, maybe he doesn't. I will say it's an EXTREMELY unpleasant lesson to learn, and NO, I don't think all the men you come across before you learn are blameless.
Agreed but women keep saying men need to “take responsibility” when what they really mean is “I want him to say sorry, feel bad, make me feel like I had nothing to do with it , or come back to me and realize what he missed out on”.
For the most part even on this blog I've seen men own up to the dumb/silly actions they have done to former or current lovers. A lot of men have no problem saying I did what I did because it’s what I wanted to do; it benefited me and my wants.
Even him saying “I treated her like she allowed me to treat her” and " I see her in a ceratin way therefore my actions matched how I felt about her" is taking some form of responsibility. In certain situation a man or woman holds a bigger piece of the responsibility pie.
Yup, being lonely drove me to hang on to "relationships" that should have never been. It was actually pretty selfish on my part because a few of the men I dated were willing to give more than I was…
Since I've started dating like a grown up, I've spent a lot less time actually dating.
My recent post Virgins
"Since I've started dating like a grown up, I've spent a lot less time actually dating."
+1000000000000000000000000000000000
A little late on this, but dating like a grown up? I get what you mean, but would love to see an elaboration. It might spin off something magical.
My recent post She Wanted My Tea. I Wanted My Lunch.
Actions speak louder than words. If I am truly feeling a woman, I will put in the time and effort. Calls instead of texting, taking out instead of bootycalls, etc. My circle of friends are the same way. If you are just a jumpoff, you have to realize that. A man isn't going to step up if he isn't interested or isn't ready for a relationship. Communcation and looking into his/her time and effort will open a person eyes to his/her place in the relationship. Too easy.
I agree. My aunt always said if a man really wants you he's going to what needs to be done to get with you.
"If I am truly feeling a woman, I will put in the time and effort. Calls instead of texting, taking out instead of bootycalls, etc. My circle of friends are the same way. If you are just a jumpoff, you have to realize that."
All truth. Know your role. You dont have to except that role but just be aware.
THIS is the absolute truth! When will women understand that if a man is actually interested in you for more than a quick thrill, he will SHOW you. You won't have to decipher is actions or words…there will be no room for doubt. You won't be able to stop him from calling and trying to see you. If you haven't heard from that ninja is days or weeks, it's because he's NOT INTERESTED IN YOU. NO MAN ON EARTH IS TOO BUSY TO CALL OR SCHEDULE A DATE. Accept that you were some quick, convenient @ss. PERIOD.
I feel that question, and I can't know what the poser meant by it, but somehow I don't know if you really delved into it fully.
“Does there EVER come a point when we expect men to hold _themselves_ to a “higher” standard that is _NOT_ based on women’s actions/inactions?"
I feel like you answered that as though it's on a case by case or relationship by relationship basis. Like, you have new expectations to deal with for each woman that you mess with. And you will, and that makes sense. But do you have any expectations for and of yourself? For example, I'm finding it hard to believe that you Slim, do as least as required in your career. I'm not buying that "managers are promoted to their highest level of incompetence" thing. I perform above and beyond the minimum requirements in everything I do, professionally and academically, and every successful person I've met has told me the same.
We all have expectations of ourselves, in our careers, in school, in our friendships and relationships with family members. So I think that question addresses (at least in my interpretation), whether or not *some* men have expectations of themselves in how they view, treat, interact with women and their relationship affairs. I certainly have goals for myself, and have a certain base level of respect for every person I'm dealing with, whether it is demanded or not. And it doesn't change with different people. So the question is, do you? Or can you?
And my comment isn't trying to plead with men to step up on their own or whatever… Do you lol. I'm just genuinely interested in exploring the topic
I see what you’re saying. But there was a similar post on here in reference to that maybe it was “I want a girl when I want one and when I don’t I don’t” (It might have been that one) but the writer or commenter’s mentioned that they have no problem showing a lady (even if he doesn’t want a serious relationship with her) a good time. Things like continuous dates, phone calls just to check up/talk to each other and just plain ol enjoying each other’s company type of action even if she could possibly be a jump off/place filler or just not a women he would like to make his gf. Now when this was mention a lot of people said a man shouldn’t treat a woman who is not potentially going to be his girl with these actions because it sends mixed signals basically if I’m a booty call/jump off treat me like one nothing more nothing less.
Honestly I think there’s nothing wrong (in terms of dating) treating certain people a certain way. Every woman isn’t the one, so a man is not going to treat every woman he dates like that. Now he should be respectful, courtesy of their time, nice, pleasant, hopefully honest and overall cool person but he’s not going to go above and beyond when that’s not what the situation requires.
" I'm not buying that "managers are promoted to their highest level of incompetence" thing. I perform above and beyond the minimum requirements in everything I do, professionally and academically, and every successful person I've met has told me the same. "
I believe Sir Slim was referring to the Peter Principle here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle
In short that's fine you work hard and everything, but eventually there comes a point where you're not qualified to obtain a certain position for one reason or the other (lack of credentials, work experience, degrees, license, etc..etc..)
Good comment and counter.
I think that part is so innate for me that I don't think about. I'm never disrespectful and I always try to make people feel good unless they warrant otherwise, but I still like what I like, want what I want, and do what I do. So to answer your question at the end, yes. There's a baseline of respect and how I conduct myself, but anything above that does vary. And much of that variation is around the expectations communicated to me.
My recent post She Wanted My Tea. I Wanted My Lunch.
Okay I can agree with that. And I think we're on the same page. It's just there seems to be two different interpretations when guys say stuff like "we’re going to do whatever you allow us to." Some dudes–the nicer ones–like yourself, are saying there's a baseline of respect or whatever and then variation afterward based on a woman's actions. Others take that as a justification for being truly horrible and disrespectful to certain women, because "they let us." It is that interpretation that I would want to challenge.
*pushes chair slowly back from table* http://www.inmalafide.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/…
You're a brave man, Slim. This seems like a simple concept, very simple, but we've been going round and round on this subject for years and sadly, I feel we will go round and round for many more years. This is just one of those things women and men will not see eye to eye on. I've come to accept that. I think it's a subject were we talk at each other instead of to each other, because we want each other to think like the other (irony?) instead of accept and respect the other's viewpoint.
This:
My answer and reiteration: Don’t worry about when we’ll step up, because we’re going to do whatever you allow us to. Worry about what you can do for yourself even if that means cutting us out of the picture.
The women that I’ve worked the hardest for are the ones that told me — verbally and/or through actions — that they’d have nothing less than my best effort. It was that simple. It continues to be that simple. Not too long ago, if I knew it’d require work, I’d walk away. That’s what a lot of men do today. It’s not right or wrong. That’s a man’s prerogative. Sh*t, that’s a woman’s prerogative too. We all have free will to make decisions. We just need to be comfortable living with the consequences…
This is not a complicated or even ground breaking idea. As I've said before, and you said above, I learned more about being a man from women who walked away than women who stayed. Perhaps we're not being clear, so I'll take it a step further.
1) Minimal: Respecting you as a woman and a person – I offer this to every woman I interact with but that's the minimal. That's why I think it's comedic how low the bar of expectation for men can be sometimes.
2) Beyond minimal: Incorporates 1, but expands to include what you (women) want – whatever that may be. It's that simple. If you want more than the minimal – which you should and is your right – then you should settle for nothing less. To be with you, men should have to raise up to your standards, you shouldn't lower yourself to theirs. I told women to settle and some threw a hissy fit, but if you're not getting what you want out of a relationship and/or interaction with a man (and he is), then guess what? You are already settling.
My recent post Mad Men: Far Away Places
"but if you're not getting what you want out of a relationship and/or interaction with a man (and he is), then guess what? You are already settling. "
GOSPEL!!
love this too! "I learned more about being a man from women who walked away than women who stayed. " In this case I've shown a man or two about BEING a man, and in the end i got what i wanted and always deserved, the very best.
I just clicked that image and water hit my keyboard.
My recent post She Wanted My Tea. I Wanted My Lunch.
Slim and Wis your lofty idea's about how women need to say to men who aren't treating them the way they want to be treated, and treating them wit the respect they feel they deserve, "F U" is all good, in theory.
But the reality is women are very emotional creatures, and almost everything they say and do many times revolves around our emotions. This is a major part of something that is innate and created by God in women universally and it will always and forever be. Not something that will ever be changed or removed. It's as natural as breathing for women to be emotional and the driving force behind what they say and do and how they react to be emotional.
The reality is women many times quickly and easily fall madly, deeply, dangerously in love much like Beyonce. If u listen to that album and that song it describes to a T what it's like when most women who are truly and deeply in love, fall in love.
Having said that everything you say Slim is "Easier said than done." A woman in love cannot just walk away all the time and tell a man she loves and feels she needs and wants in her life to "kick rocks" because he doesn't cater to her every whim and want and desire. Plus other women, especially older women in her family like her mama, grandmama, and auntie's are probably tellin her " girl dont' be no fool and let a good man wit a good job who is a good provider go just because ur not getting everything u want from him." "Nobody is perfect, so some stuff u need to learn to deal with or your gonna be single forever." And there is some truth to this.
So in order for your advice to work perfectly all the time women would have to stop being women as you know them. We would have to become you ie men; and that is not how God designed us to be for reasons that we may not fully understand.
The other flaw I find in you guys opinions is that it relieves men of the responsibility to just be a good, decent, honest man. And be the man the woman wants, needs, and that God expects you to be and the he created you to be. It's like your saying men are gonna do what the hell we want how we want, when we want, regardless of whether it's right or wrong, and either women can take it or leave it.
The ironic thing is if women had this attitude I think marriage and commitment would seriously become obsolete. Most men would walk away and refuse to permanently tie themselves to that type of woman. They would strickly try to find ways to only get azz from women all the time. It would completely remove mens desire to commit to and marry any woman. I can't see too many men dealing with a woman with that type of attitude, and if they did it wouldn't be for very long.
Due to those pesky little things called "double standards", men can get away with this lax, careless, and irresponsible, devil may care attitude without much consequence. If women did this we would be losing big time and we would suffer the consequences because either way u have a lot of men who could give a fu** as long as they are getting sex. Out of most all their relationships most women ultimately want a committment. They want unconditional and everlasting love and devotion, and they want a mans heart; whereas he just wants the womans body and time and attention as long as she gives it freely and he is stress and worry free. See the stark difference in the wants, needs, and desires of men and women at their core. Like after you strip away all the excess bs and simplify it.
And I'm not saying my above idea's are applicable to every man and woman, but imo they do apply to more than not.
I completely understand your points of view Slim, however, it's dead wrong and men do need to step up and do right by women without always being told and expected. They need to do right because it's right. What more reasons do you need than that……
It's sad and pathetic that the desire to be fair, sincere, honest, respectable and honorable men of standards, (when it comes to love and relationships) is just not there in too many men. It seems like they would rather be prideful and egotistical, manly, masculine, hardcore men. They define their manhood by the superficial bs, rather than by being respectable and honorable. Yet you want an honorable and respectable "virtuous" woman right? If a woman had the exact same attitude and ways of thinking I suspect that would be a serious problem right? If women were like men, some men would probably turn gay. Men in jail can obviously function fine without women…they just get into each other.
Again the reality is as long as a man is getting some type of sexual satisfaction and release then he is alright. Not to say that a straight man wouldn't prefer a woman, but he will adapt without one. Whereas most women have emotionals needs that must be met beyond just sex. Women aren't all about the physical. In fact many older women in their late 40's, 50's and up are fine never having sex again in their life. Men, however, typically want to continue to have sex as long as they are fairly healthy and able bodied no matter what their age for as long as they live. Hence why viagra is more popular and profitable than any products on the market women may use for vaginal dryness. Plus most women that use those products and take hormones for that are still fairly young and married and want to keep their husbands faithful. I definitely do not think as many 60 yr old women as men are concerned with their sex life.
Well Damn..!!!!
Aiiiight Ms. Bree. I See You.
*3 snaps in a Z Formation*
You got it Bree…
This is just one of those things women and men will not see eye to eye on.
I know Wis and it's a shame….it's not like it would kill men to be better men and do better and be more unselfish. "Ain't nothin to it but to do it." There's always constant excuses for this perpetual cycle of destructuve & bad behavior, but never any real discussion of resolution. And even if there is a discussion of resolution, it's back to excuses and why you can't.
Like my friends grandma said once – "you always talkin bout what u ain't gon do, what you gon do?"
You misunderstood… but I'm just going to quote Hugh_Jazz from below with a few minor edits…
Hugh Jazz: First question to ask is what's a "
higherbetter" standard? What the other person wants? If someone isn't ready to settle down, or at least not settle down with you, does that mean their standards are "lower"?Many women use the term "
step upbe better men and do better and be more unselfish" to simply mean "choose me". Sometimes men and women have to understand that just because you really, really like someone and see forever with them, they don't owe you that. A man could be successful, intelligent, fine asHugh JazzWisdomIsMisery, and you conclude he is the one. But if he hasn't chose you, it doesn't mean his standard is "lower". It just means his standards doesn't line up with yours.-CoSign, WisdomIsMisery
Couldn't have said it better myself. I was going to say something about Bree's comments, but I said, meh, I'll let it slide.
Wis, I have no qualms at all about men not wanting a relationship. If you as a man make a personal decision for whatever reason to Never get married and have kids ever that is your decision and I can respect that and there is not a damn thing wrong with it.
What I do have a serious problem with is The Games People Play. (btw this is the name of a book which is pretty good.)
I know women play games too, and yes they are wrong too. However when you as a man lie to and bs women just to get azz that is dead wrong. When u are not completely and totally honest with women about your intentions and how you really feel, and what u really want, and your excuse is "if we told women the truth, we wouldn't get what we want" or "they would tell us no." That is what I have a problem with. And my response to "if we told women the truth we wouldn't get what we want" is, so the hell what. I wish men knew how childish and selfish that sounds.
What so many men don't realize is there are some women out here who will still give you azz and whatever else u want for with no strings attached even if your honest and tell them exactly what u want and/or don't want. Yall should try it sometime.
I have a problem with guys who play immature and childish games and are like 10 yr olds or teenagers in grown mens bodies. Men who are more like boys, not really men because they have not yet grown up, and constantly make poor excuses for assinine behavior.
I have a problem with men who bold face lie to women all the time with complete disregard for how it affects that woman, her feelings, wants and needs. I have a problem with men who got more game than Parker Bros. and use their charm and good looks to get into a womans pants and use her, knowing good and hell well they have no desire to ever be in a relationship with that woman, much less wife her.
I've had many of my male friends complain to me about a woman "trippin" after he wined her, dined her, sweet talked her, told her everything she wanted to hear, hit it and dipped out on her. Or he wined, dined and all that other stuff, hit it and still dippin his majik stick in other chicks. And they have the nerve to say, "I don't understand why she trippin?" It should be obvious, and thats a problem too that men don't understand why a woman is upset in those scenario's.
And even on SBM you guys say, "women need to learn to weed out the dudes who are full of sh** and lie and cheat and bs"…..thing is thats a whole lot of men. Even the nicest, sweetest, corniest, nerdiest, ugliest men can be liars and cheaters and bsers.
Mike Baisden said on his show "the pool of good, decent, honest, sincere, single black men who want to be in a committed relationship and get married and have kids is so small it's no wonder statistics show that most black women may never marry a black man." "There aren't enough really good, decent ones who want what they want available to marry."
It's funny to hear women talk about how there are no good and decent straight black men. They think white women and other ethnicities of women are taking them, they are broke, in jail, or gay. That is not the case though. There are plenty of great, educated, handsome, successful, single, black men out here, (some with no kids). Thing is they don't wanna get married, and/or they are so extremely picky to the nth degree they always find reasons why they can't be with and/or marry the women they do meet and date. Or they are playa's. Even men who are 40 plus nowadays still wannabe "playa's from the himalaya's."
It's also funny to me how men, including you guys, say in certain ways women are winning. When it comes to Real Love and relationships though, we are losing to a degree just like we've been for centuries.
What men for whatever reason can't seem to comprehend is this: Women want a man's commitment, devotion, honesty, faithfulness, loyalty, and His Heart.
Men may want those things too, but they aren't necessarily always a must and/or a priority for a man to have that with the women he meets and dates. Men are typically satisfied if they get some azz and have a woman who "takes care of him" and caters to his wants and needs. Granted yall may get "whupped" and get wit a few women who yall love and respect and/or who "put it on yall." But not too many men are trippin and losing sleep over being single. Every man I know, (even ones who say they want a relationship and want to be married someday) would be perfectly content if he never ever got married. Either way yall can still have women in ya life to fulfill your basic wants and needs.
Whereas the wants and needs in women are more on an emotional level and women want men for security and to provide for them and protect them.
So the reasons why men and women desire a mate can be totally different, which is where the problem can lie. Let's be real, a man can get everything he wants and needs from a woman without "puttin a ring on it." A woman is frowned upon and looked down on by friends, family and society if she "lives in sin" with a man who doesn't marry her. She is called a fool and nobody criticizes the man, (except maybe the womans family and friends who are looking out for her well-being and happiness). Basically a double-standard that works in men's favor, but not women's.
I have a more general reply to his and it ties back to the post.
I don't think women are running around falling in love at first date or even the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th. Wiring aside, it doesn't have to get to the point where love and deep emotions are involved. The point on marriage and commitment becoming obsolete is interesting. Maybe less people would get married, but I'd venture to say the divorce rate would go down as well.
My recent post She Wanted My Tea. I Wanted My Lunch.
+1 Slim.
This is my last attempt at this… I'm not upset because I'm fine with respectfully disagreeing with some people but here goes nothing.
*********
While I've reiterated this point a number of times today – here and on Twitter – we are talking about men of character as the premise of this entire debate. Men of character =/= every man that enters a relationship with you. I can be "chivalrous" or a man of character or whatever other statement you guys want to toss out today, THAT DOES NOT MEAN YOU AND I WILL END UP IN A RELATIONSHIP, which, in my opinion, is the basis of Slim's post.
To be clear, as men of character, we can still date. We can even have relations or not have sex, because honestly, at 29, sex is not even the most important thing on my mind, which is weird that women seem to believe otherwise. In fact, if all you offer is sex, why are you wondering why (or any man) only want sex from you? Plus, if you do only offer sex, you can't do much for me personally.
However, whether I choose not to take it further or not does not make me (or any man) a bad person. It just means I don't want to take it further. More importantly, it only means I don't want to take things further with you, specifically. If you want something more, you are free to leave – and I am free to let you go. Peace and salutations, Asa Lama Lakum.
Today, (some) women used examples of men who do not have character to justify why they feel someway about all men. This premise is flawed in my opinion, unless women believe the majority of men are dogs – I don't date men, so I have no idea but this seems to be the equivalent of me using hoes to judge all women. Conversely, while I know hoes exist, I actually believe the majority of women are good people and as such, when I look at the population of women, I believe there are more good than bad.
In conclusion, I think it is far more likely I will come across a good woman than a bad woman. Not only do I think this; it has also been my general experience in life. I'll close with analogy since that seems to bring everyone to a central place of understanding: If I go to an apple orchard and I only pick rotten apples, me, myself, personally, I'm going to start looking at my own choices instead of blaming the apple orchard for my choice of bad picks. It seems some of y'all think it's the apple orchard's fault you can't find a good apple. Others seem to be outright confused why the apple orchard doesn't have oranges. IDK what to tell either one of you but I do hope you eventually find a good apple, because I genuinely think everyone deserves happiness.
*shrug life*
– WIM signing off –
I'm just amused by the fact that today saw you actively contributing to the discussion. Somebody give Slim an award.
WIM, a lot of orchards are full of bad apples, and you are lucky if you find 1 or 2 good ones. Don't get me wrong, I've met some wonderful men in my lifetime and do not think all men are dogs, or liars and cheaters. I know some very honest and sincere wonderful guys.
I know women who are azzholes and do as much if not more dirt than men.
I realize there are good people out there, unfortunately sometimes it seems like there are more bad than good. I've heard about more bad experiences than good ones.
As I said I have no problem with men who do not want a relationship and don't want to be with all the women they date. I have no problem with a man who is in his 60's and never been married and wants to date different women. I have no problem with men who like to swing or have more than one woman. I know muslims who would like to have more than one wife. A friend of mine's husband wanted this.
That in and of itself is not what I have a problem with at all. I myself didn't want to be married and get too seriously committed to a man until I was about 30 yrs old.
What I have a problem with is game-playing and guys lying and bsing women. I have a problem with men who sleep with women who they know have deep strong feelings for them and/or are in love with them and/or love them and want to be with them and he sleeps with this woman knowing that he does not want a long-term relationship.
Same advice you guys give to women applies to men as well.
I tell my guy friends to alleviate the problem and stress of a woman "trippin" after you hit and questioning you and going through your phone, and getting possessive simply Do Not Sleep With Any Woman You Have No Intentions On Being In A Serious Relationship With.
Just like you tell women, men should take responsibility for your actions.
One of my ex's slept with a woman he knew from the door he didn't want to be in a serious relationship with. He knew prior to sleeping with her that she really liked him and wanted a relationship and was interested in that with him. He knew prior to sleeping with her that she wanted to be his lady. He wasn't feeling her enough to be in a relationship with her, yet he liked her enough to sleep with her. I told him myself he was wrong for sleeping with her. Once he knew she liked him and he wasn't feeling her the same way and she wanted a relationship and he didn't that is the clue to move on to another woman and walk away and Not sleep with that woman. It's not that hard to figure out what a woman wants with you. If you aren't sure simply ask her. Once you find out what she wants and doesn't want ask yourself if it falls in line with what you want and don't want. If it doesn't, then let the woman know that and walk away and move on to someone else.
Much like you tell a woman to walk away from a man who doesn't want a serious relationship if she does, as men you should be able to walk away from a woman who wants a serious relationship with you, if you do not want the same thing. And the last thing you should do is have sex with that woman and think u can do so freely and easily and then just walk away when you meet someone else and/or no longer want to deal with her or switch over to a "just friends" situation.
WIS, when I've told men the solution to many of your problems with women is to Not sleep with them unless, and until you know for sure you want to be with them long-term, and you share their feelings, and you both want the same things, they act like I've told them to stop breathing or cut off their dic**.
They act like this is an impossible thing. But this is one of the ways for men to not have the issues they have with women.
When you sleep with a woman who really likes you and is into you and wants you, she is not going to be cool with u sleeping with other women, she is not going to be cool with you treating her like just a friend, and she is not going to be cool with you dating other women.
The other thing is, be Honest from the door. If you want to or do date other women tell the women your dating this. If you just want to smash and don't want a relationship tell the women you date that. If you know you don't want to get married anytime soon tell the women u date that. If your "just not that into her" tell her that and tell her all these things BEFORE you hit it. The minute you know your not feeling a woman tell her honestly, but tactfully that your not interested in her.
Many men, (not necessarily u wonderful guys at SBM) but a lot of men selfishly think about getting some azz First. We know men are visual. You guys have said yourselves a man looks at a woman and thinks how fine she is, she got a fat azz or whatever and thinks about hittin it.
I know men aren't savages and animals and won't just try to hit as soon as they lay eyes on a woman they are attracted to. However, many men tend to focus too much on sex, and the physical things they like about a woman and not much else.
I think men can sometimes give the head between their legs too much power and it can overrule your good judgement and common sense.
"It's not that hard to figure out what a woman wants with you. If you aren't sure simply ask her."- Isn't the opposite also true ?
As women we often try and overanalyze things that are very simple and justify the crazyness with the emotional card. I'm a woman. I'm emotional. But that doesn't mean that because feelings are involved my common sense can go out the window. In my experience, if a man isn't telling you or showing you that he's looking to be in a relationship with you it's because he's not. Period. And if you're unsure, the answer is a simple question away. I think the problem is too many women don't want to be the one to ask the question because they either don't really want to hear the answer or they believe that by being lax and accomodating they'll eventualy change his mind. Personally if I have to convince you to be with me you're not someone I want be with.
Also .. since when can sex not just be sex ? If a woman is sleeping with a man under some delusional notion that it automatically means it will lead to a relationship, the fault cannot be the mans. It takes two. Again if this is an absolute dealbreaker, shouldn't it have been addressed before they got undressed ? Why is the expectation that men have to be the one to address the things when the majority of the time the issue is ours as women ? At some point we have to become accountable for the fact that we aren't asking the tough questions.If you know what you deserve, walking away is never a problem.
LOL @ your closing arguement. well played sir, well played.
I must say that I admire your perspective, and your ability to articulate your points in a manner that does not employ an overabundance of generalizations, insults or stereotypes.
Thanks, I so needed to read this today.
No doubt. Glad you found it helpful.
My recent post She Wanted My Tea. I Wanted My Lunch.
*accept
My tell tale sign is not just looking to see if their actions speak louder than their words anymore cuz that no longer means doodoo (men will put in work for the panties) BUT seeing if their words AND actions align with each other paints a more clearer picture for me.
My tell tale sign is not just looking to see if their actions speak louder than their words anymore cuz that no longer means doodoo (men will put in some work for the panties) BUT seeing if their Words AND Actions align with each other paints a more clearer picture for me.
The truth…the whole truth…and nothing but the truth. #church
Man, listen. This should be required reading for women everywhere. Not to debate what was said…but to simply accept it. Right or wrong doesn't matter here. You acknowledged the ideal and the reality. It just is what it is…and folks need to conduct themselves accordingly.
I have nothing to add here, lol. You've said it all.
I think that paragraph that really hits home for me is the one where you discuss men periodically checking in/reiterating that things aren't serious being a complete fantasy. I am not single, and this still bothers the hell out of me. Not even FOR me, mostly for female friends, or because I hear the stories of my partners past…it just annoys the snot out of me that men say one thing and behave another way. And yes, I understand that we all have the power to walk away, but in a world where we are taught to base a lot of our emotional interaction off of words AND actions, if you say one thing and completely act another way…its like wtf? I think that's totally deplorable. It literally disgusts me.
Otherwise though, I think this is a great post and I hope women do take the message for what it is. If you aren't getting what you want, what you think you require or deserve, you don't have to stay. At all. I think black women are in this frenzy…this rush to get a man and we run around like chickens with our heads cut off. Don't want to end up the black, successful, single woman that the media consistently harps on, you want to defy the odds, so in order to do so, you behave uncharacteristically poorly and accept less than what you are worth in order to attain some ridiculous fictional happiness. *in my best Kanye vocoder bass* THAT AIN'T RIGHT GIRL. …but yea, good read.
My recent post Black Women Have the Ugliest Engagement Rings
"if you say one thing and completely act another way…its like wtf? I think that's totally deplorable. It literally disgusts me."
This is why I now look for alignment in both actions and words. If they don't add up it's up to me to exit stage right>>>>>>>
You got it.
My recent post She Wanted My Tea. I Wanted My Lunch.
Here's the thing.
The average single guy has room in his life for almost every women he comes into contact with. EVERY.SINGLE.ONE — especially if she's at least moderately good looking, at least moderately intelligent, and at least moderately fun to be around. If you're those things or better and we're single, we probably have room for you somewhere in our lives and we're probably going to try to incorporate you into our lives in some way shape or form. Why? Because a man can never have enough cool, attractive, smart, good looking female friends. It never gets old for us. Let me repeat that. IT NEVER GETS OLD.
This is why you can't expect there to be some higher standard that we step up to. Expecting us to just turn away moderately awesome women because we know we're not interested in anything serious with them is an exercise in futility. We're not turning away new, awesome female friends. It's just not happening. Instead we're going to rely on the alignment of your words and actions to indicate to us what role in our lives you're willing to accept and also what role in your life you're expecting us to fill.
So if we feel like, "this is a friend and nothing more," that's what we're going to offer. If we feel like "this is an eff buddy and nothing more" that's what we're going to offer. If we feel like "this is a friend who I also want to sleep with sometimes" that's what we're going to offer. If we feel like "this could be my future wife" then that's what we're going to offer.
Now here's the part that so clutch. Sometimes, the only thing that separates the "friend who I also want to sleep with often" from the "future wife" is what that woman is willing to accept. It has nothing to do with OUR standards or stepping up or leading, or any of that hogwash. It has everything to do with how we perceive your standards and what that means to us, as men, reaching our full emotional potential.
Most men are emotionally lazy. Not because we want to be, but because society allows us to be. We can be emotionally lazy and still win, still get chicks, still run around and have all the sex we want and still be generally happy. But deep down inside, we really want to be great. We want to be overjoyed. We want to reach our full emotional potential. When you as a woman, are just fine with anything less then our very best, that tells our id that you're not the kind of woman that's going to push us to our full emotional potential. It's not about standards. Our unconscious mind tells us to offer low first because it knows that the woman who doesn't accept anything than our very best is the woman that will help us reach the kinda joy we secretly dream about.
So. Bottom line: Stop giving up the box. Be patient. Reserve enough of yourself to be willing to walk away until he makes it clear that he's not walking away.
That's my three sentence advice to all women.
So on point, esp. the last statement!
Co-sign the last statement!
retracts my earlier comment and copies, pastes and emails THIS to all my friends.
lmbo.
My recent post How Garlic Saved My Life (or just my hair)
"Stop giving up the box. Be patient. Reserve enough of yourself to be willing to walk away until he makes it clear that he's not walking away."
This needs to be on a pamphlet. I'll take 30 copies. Okay Thnxs.
your first paragraph >>>
However the whole "stop giving up the box" thing will be a moot point, becuase women won't listen, and even if they do, they could still fall into peril. Too lazy to cut and paste but for interested ladies, search on this site for "Hobby Chick" and you'll see what I mean.
I would say if you have standards, stick to your guns, if he's worth it.
My recent post Pole Position: The Top 10 Strip Club Rules Of Engagement
Thanks for those Trueisms Most.
But just like the dude dating Meagan Goode's character in TLAM said, a woman can do that 90 day rule thing, and a man can be hittin another chick just to get some azz and wait it out. The woman after her 90 day rule happily and proudly gives it up thinking she has "won" when the man she thinks is a Prince, is no different than any other dude who just wants some azz and plays the game and does whatever he has to do to conquer. I think many times when men truly fall in love with a woman it's purely accidental and something they never intended to happen, and when it does, it confuses and scares the hell out of them.
I think it's most important that women get to know the man your interested in and try to find out his true intentions as best you can. Instead of reading books, seeking out other advice, and listening to other people, do what u feel is right based on what u know about the man your dating.
I agree with the men, we have to hold men accountable and let them know that we have standards, morals and expect nothing less than the utmost respect from them and their best. Make sure he knows that you respect yourself and won't settle for anything less than his best because you know that's what you deserve. Make sure the man is with u for the right reasons. That is very important.
I agree with u Most, not giving it up too soon is a good thing, but also holding a man accountable and not being afraid to question things that seem off, and challenging him. Bringing out the best in him will bring a man out of his emotionally lazy state of mind. When a man tells you that you make him want to be a better man, and be the man that you want and need him to be, as the men in TLAM did, that's when the woman is really "winning" with her man.
woow deep. the light bulb has come on… thanks! So now that im in cut buddy land for THREE years..how do i get out of here. how do i change his perception? Should i be making some demands here?
Damn this post is sooo deep!! The young married guys I know say the same thing… they all say they married their wife because they were supportive and they didn't let him get away with bullshit!
Dear Mr Most. Darn. You are completely right! We girls (yes also the lilly-white versions like me) all seem to be struggling with this. We think lower threshold = easier access = higher change of catching a man. I have just spent 6 years being married to a man who I 'caught' that way. Oh dearie, how that backfired. He leaned back, I lost respect for him, tried to make him 'man up', failed miserably and walked away feeling less than a woman. And knowing that I am responsible from start to finish. I have learned: we girls NEED to get the start right, raise the bar, have some balls (yes, girls need these too), keep your 'walking away' power. (continued)
(continued) If we do not muster up all our guts and glory at the very beginning, we do not get another chance. Which ties in 100% with what you are saying. We cannot afford to sink into a dreamlike state just because he says such wonderful things. Yes, Cinderella got away with it and lived happily ever after, but we women need to stay on the ball (even after the clock has tolled midnight hehehe), and use our brains and gut feeling non-stop. I used to think this was purely self-protection but reading your 3 sentence advice I can see it's overall quality protection. Me liky! Thanks!!
We all have free will to make decisions. We just need to be comfortable living with the consequences…whatever they may be. Telling a man that infrequent communication isn’t gonna fly or that there will be no sideways pokey without some type of commitment may lead him to the door. But that’s okay because you’ve saved yourself time. You’ve asserted your worth. And at the end of the day, the value you place on yourself exceeds anything that a man could ever tell you.
A million times this. No need to reiterate my stance here.
However, I am going to disagree with your initial "No." Why? Because I do have that very expectation that men should be guided by internal principles that aren't always manipulated by a woman's actions or lack thereof. It's nice to swoon over how he was a certain way before I met him and then turned into a knight in shining armour just because of me, but on average, I look for and at consistency. That man who is able to walk away from a relationship he knows is headed nowhere because he sees that she is falling deeper and setting herself up for endless heartache? The one who doesn't get involved with anyone he doesn't see the least bit of potential in? Who puts in more than the minimum even though he'd get away with that? Yeah, that's the guy I'm looking for. We all go through stages in life, and that's the one I want to find him in.
The thing is, I don't want it to always be about me. As a decent looking woman, I could get involved with some guys and get away with being spoiled while barely lifting a finger. But I don't. And if I don't like someone enough to have the motivation to do more, I don't pursue anything with them. Because the guys I like tend to hold some general appeal, they have that option as well. If we both have the same options, we can both hold ourselves to a standard that is fairly independent of what we're allowed to get away with. Ever since I rid myself of my naive outlook on the world of relationships, I've put the onus on each person (man or woman) to stand for nothing less than they feel they are worth. I nonetheless have certain general expectations of all parties involved. We don't live in a land of unicorns, but this is where the beauty of seeking out like-minded individuals comes in.
I think this has come up throughout the comments, but I think the stages of life idea is important. A lot of folks try to put the square peg in the round spot…while growing increasingly frustrated it's not panning out how they'd like. The idea of changing a man has been beaten into the ground, but the idea of women changing men when their expectations haven't been met….
Yeah…
My recent post She Wanted My Tea. I Wanted My Lunch.
It is definitely very important. Like you said, there was a time that you would do the least when you knew that you could get away with it. You've since eased yourself out of that frame of mind, to my understanding. To me, it's not an issue of bad vs. good person, and I'm not even trying to change anyone. I simply have expectations of people in general – men and women – as we all do. Whether or not they meet them is a different story, but it won't change what I believe should be. The long and short of my stance is that both parties have a responsibility towards each other, although self-preservation is of the utmost importance.
cosign Naija…
You seem to have the idea that all men fit in this one box. That all men run around trying to get laid as much as they can, disregarding the women's feelings completely. Lo and behold, there are men out there who actually don't want to have sex with someone they don't care about. Men who do care about women's feelings.
Shocking.
The thing is, these men usually don't hang around in bars and clubs, trying to get tail. So a lot of women think these men don't exist, that all men are after that one thing, and once they get it, they're gone. And a lot of men think that it's ok to just be in it for that one thing, and then be gone, despite knowing they have misrepresented themselves to the women who want more than that. Selfish. Now, I don't think all men are selfish, I don't even think a larger percentage of men are more selfish than women. I do think that somehow it's become acceptable for men to take a woman out on however many dates is needed, smash and disappear. It shouldn't be acceptable.
I LOVE THIS!
So many men are on the opposite side that they've convinced the world there aren't other, more considerate men out there. Those men will look at this statement and shout "panty-pandering", or something. But no. These men do exist. They are few and far between, but they are around.
So on point! Great post.
Because I do have that very expectation that men should be guided by internal principles that aren't always manipulated by a woman's actions or lack thereof. It's nice to swoon over how he was a certain way before I met him and then turned into a knight in shining armour just because of me, but on average, I look for and at consistency. That man who is able to walk away from a relationship he knows is headed nowhere because he sees that she is falling deeper and setting herself up for endless heartache? The one who doesn't get involved with anyone he doesn't see the least bit of potential in? Who puts in more than the minimum even though he'd get away with that? Yeah, that's the guy I'm looking for.
I'll bite.
I thought about this a bit more – and I've already said Slim is a mad genius before – but his question is in itself ingeniously flawed, Do Men Ever Step Up Without A Woman’s Expectations? Clearly, since men get married every day of the week, men "step up" all the time for whatever woman they deem worthy of stepping up for. I'm a bit confused why we keep asking why are men doing the minimum, when it seems we should be asking why is the minimum accepted?
Furthermore, and the reason I captured the paragraph above, is I'm not sure why women want men to feel guilty, wrong, or "guided by internal principles" when men are getting what they want out of the relationship. Basically, unless I misunderstand – and that's very possible – women only want men to engage with women they want a relationship from; however, that makes no sense because it supposes the man wants a relationship. If the man wanted a relationship, he would get in a relationship. You need look no further than 99.9% of marriages, since last I checked, men ask women to marry them not the other way around.
It seems women are upset with men because men don't want the same things they want. This makes me LOL. If men were upset with women for not only wanting sex and not a relationship, you would call us crazy (among other things). Conversely, because you want a relationship but we don't that means there is something wrong with us?
……………….Naw. It just means we don't want the same thing, plain and simple.
Like Slim said, neither party is in the wrong. The only conflict here is two people interacting with two different objectives. Since one of those people, in this case the man, is already having his objective satisfied, what's the point of him changing? There is none as far as I can tell. He is already happy and content with the status of the relationship or lack there of. When he does want to change, he will. Now if one of these people, in this case the woman, is not having her objectives satisfied, there seems more of an impetus for her to change course, not him. I feel like all men are saying is respect yourself enough to stand up for what you want, and women seem to be saying "no, just give me what I want."
That doesn't make a lot of sense, b.
Expanding on Slim's manager analogy: You basically showed up and started performing the job duties for a job you weren't hired for and then get upset because we don't give you a pay check two weeks later. *looks around for contract* You just showed up and started working………when did I agree to hire you?
My recent post Tattooed people most dangerous people on Earth
I'll start by quoting a portion of my last sentence: "but this is where the beauty of seeking out like-minded individuals comes in."
1. Personally, I'm not upset with you or any other man for doing what he wants. Yes, I've gotten annoyed when men sent me conflicting signals, but I eventually excused myself from the situations in question. What I'm addressing is more so people just wasting away time with others while professing to be looking for something meaningful (not necessarily with the time fillers in question). When women complain of not finding quality men, they are told to drop boy toys and focus on other things, including preparing themselves mentally & otherwise for that something special. I happen to think it's advice that's worthy of both sexes.
Also, when I talk about principles, I'm referring to standards of decency that include treating someone with a kind of respect that doesn't depend on whether or not you plan to court them into marriage. We've spoken more than once about it being wrong of women and men to expect a relationship simply because they want one. This isn't about that. There are certain levels of courtesy that seem to be made away with because some men can get away with it. This includes the way they address the women, lack of response to communications, etc. Things that one might find discourteous if one were on the receiving end of the treatment. As for the rest, it's speaking to the responsibility that we all have towards others we engage with. On a neutral non-relationship level, it's the responsibility of the stranger I meet to not engage with me any further if he/she notices that my actions have negative implications for their well-being, but it's also my responsibility once I am aware of the situation to either adjust my actions or minimize our future interactions. This is the kind of thing I believe in, and I do understand that not everyone feels the same way. However, it doesn't change my base expectations.
2. Asking why the minimum is accepted is valid, as is telling people not to accept it. However, I chose not to dwell on that because those are things I've addressed many a time. This time, the focus is on men and their interactions, as cued by the post. I actually did say the onus is on each man and woman to stand up for what they want. But what I wanted to discuss was personal accountability on the man's end, which I believe in. I do see men complaining about wanting relationships while entertaining trysts that knowingly lead nowhere, and also making their own lives more complicated than it needs to be.
But like you said…it's a matter of seeking out people with similar objectives. Which is what I outlined, as far as my own personal objectives are concerned.
Just delete all my comments, copy & pate this in, and affix my picture.
lmao. *claps hands twice to right side of face* Done!
Exactly Naija….where is the personal accountability on the man's end????
Too many times folks act like they don't know when it comes to relationships. They don't know where things are going, what's going to happen, what the future holds, blah blah blah.
Whatever u don't know you need to make it your business to find out.
"I do see men complaining about wanting relationships while entertaining trysts that knowingly lead nowhere, and also making their own lives more complicated than it needs to be. " <<<<<this>>>>>>
In the end no matter the situation men can get what they want when they get sex. Even men who want a relationship and do want to get married, if the man gets to hit it he has gotten one thing he wanted. Not too often do men stress to the same degree as women over the fact that a woman didn't want to be in a relationship with him and marry him.
On the flipside, when the man a woman thinks may be her future husband smashes and they don't stay together it can affect her, and is very hurtful. She may stress about it for a long time and each time this happens it can shake her trust in men.
I have really, really tried excruciatingly hard to agree with this line of thinking, but as much as I understand it, I'm calling bullshit. Why?
Because in order for anyone to be successful at ANYTHING, be it career, money, relationships, etc, there is a certain degree of "act as if" involved. If it is not present, once the desired goal is acheived, maintaining it becomes very, very difficult. That's why most lottery winners go broke; they have no idea the work involved to maintain wealth. If you spend your entire dating 'career' doing the BAREST of minimums, what makes you think you are going to magically affix an 'S' on your chest and become SuperMate just because you found someone that's "worth it"? And what makes ME think that I can go around DEMANDING you change your game in the 9th inning because I'm "quality"? Am I missing something?
I treat men that I am dealing with the way I treat them because of who I AM, not because of who YOU are. What dahell kinda arrogance in the world makes YOU so worth it? I made you breakfast because I like to EAT, not because I think it will make you stay! And if rule #1 of SBM is "don't try to change a man", dahell I look like trying to "point you in the right direction"? I'd rather find a person headed in the right direction, & join the train, than to constantly have to discuss, demand, cajole & walk away from a dude who's eventually going to reject or resent all this stuff he is doing that he didn't have to do before.
There's a difference between changing a man, and inspiring a man. Trying to change a man is an attempt to make him capable of something that he wasn't capable of previously. Inspiring a man is about giving him a reason to be the person he was always capable of being. Men want a woman to inspire us emotionally.
*copies, pastes, emails to ALL my friends.*
My recent post How Garlic Saved My Life (or just my hair)
That's really sweet (& I am really NOT being sarcastic, seriously. I am estatic that that is what you have found in your life, and am very happy for all men who have found the same). Unfortunately, I have reached a point in my life where I'd rather be your cheerleadeer than your inspiration. I need you to want to be that man yourself, and just want to find someone to be that man FOR, rather than inspiring you to find the greatness within that you never thought possible.
I mean, yes we may want a Michelle Obama, but people forget that Barack was already on a path. She joined his train.
Nah you got it wrong. None of us have any idea what Michelle did for Barack or what Barack did for Michelle because we don't know how they love each other. You talking about career and life success. I'm talking about emotional success. In career and life success, sure, Barack was already on the path toward success. But where was he emotionally? And where was she? We have no means of really and truly knowing that.
Being a cheerleader for someone's life success, and wanting them to reach their career goals and that sort of stuff, without needing you as an inspiration is perfectly fine. I'm not talking about that.
I'm talking about emotional success. A man doesn't need an emotional cheerleader, he needs emotional inspiration. Big difference.
Hold up. I gotta challenge this example…
Mixed + Father not in the picture + Mamma dragging you all over the world on missions + Dad #2 there and gone + Ends up with Grandparents as Mom continues on missions = Emotional Issues
I don't need to know him. I'd bet it all on the fact that he wasn't 100% in the "emotions" department when they got together.
Wow. judgmental much? But my overall point was that using examples of other people's love is absolutely pointless. Even if you're 100% right, they are not you, and their mate is not your mate. So what's the point of even judging what they have.
Ok…you took that way too far.
My point is not that all our stories are the same…but that people with those type of stories typically don't come out without some sort of scars. We see the fabulous outcome and forget the struggle that came with it. Therefore, I'm certain there was some "greater" or healing left for Michelle to inspire him to attain.
I hope thats more clear. Man. LOL… smh
I completely understand your point. However, a lot of times, you will need to emotionally evolve to reach life success. The two are not mutually exclusive. For example, A guy broke a lunch date with me once. Although it was work related, he took the time to walk out of his meeting and give me a quick personal call to let me know of changes. Why? "I have really been working on being a man of my word and being where I said I as going to be at the time I said I was going to be there. And if not, I at least want to be courteous".
HE is making his own personal journey to be better. I support. I also realize that in many other instances, the BEST I would have gotten is a text 2 hrs later, and an "well, you know how my job is". Many would argue that I am mistaking common courtesy for preferred treatment in relations, but I would argue that some courtesy is just not common. Maybe we are just discussing different things. **shrug**
We definitely are talking about the same things.
That a man needs emotional inspiration does not mean that man is emotionally under evolved. It just means he hasn't been inspired.
So yes, emotional maturity helps in life success and love success. But we're not talking about emotional maturity. If a man is emotionally immature he should be off the table and out of the picture as far as this discussion is concerned and as far as your heart is concerned. We're talking about what an emotionally mature man expects from the woman he ends up marrying. I'm saying, he expects her to inspire him, emotionally. That's all. I guess I just don't believe we love people "just because." Love for people outside of our closest blood relations is not intrinsic. It's inspired.
Most what about if a woman wants/needs to be inspired…..do men know how to do that? And are they willing to do that?
AGREED!!!
@Amaris: "I have really, really tried excruciatingly hard to agree with this line of thinking, but as much as I understand it, I'm calling bullsh-t."
"I'd rather find a person headed in the right direction, & join the train, than to constantly have to discuss, demand, cajole & walk away from a dude who's eventually going to reject or resent all this stuff he is doing that he didn't have to do before."
I sounds like you agree with that line of thinking. Assuming you mean Slim's statement of "Don’t worry about when we’ll step up, because we’re going to do whatever you allow us to. Worry about what you can do for yourself even if that means cutting us out of the picture."
You ok? LOL! Girl, you are all kinds of fired up!
Never demand. No ultimatums. Just do you. Make decisions that are best for YOU…regardless of what he wants or what he may do. Thats really the core of what Slim is saying. If a man really wants to be with you, he WILL make adjustments to be with you…not based on demands…simply based on what you allow in your space. He'll make sure he meets those "requirements". Actually, both men and women do it subconsciously…but women tend to compromise themselves more for the sake of having that man or a man…which causes women to feel powerless…and like "women can't win".
I'm not saying I don't understand what he's saying, or that I don't do me. What I'm saying is in NO OTHER AREA OF LIFE do people expect another person to control their actions. People are encouraged to take charge of their careers, to learn money manegement skills so when they DO get a little bit they don't waste it trying to be hood rich, to exercise everyday so that everyday physical exertion isn't that difficult….but in the area of love, women can "wait" for the right man, and men don't have to do anything until a woman demands no less. Am I the only person missing something?
What I'm saying is a learned behavior is a learned behavior. If you have never smiled for long periods before, your mouth will twitch when you do. You will NOTICE the effort, and eventually, you're just not going to put the effort in anymore. Anyone ever consider that this disconnect may kinda impact the demise of relationships? If men are emotionally lazy, what do I look like trying to make him magically emotionally fit for the marathon of a relationship? Sorry, I'd just rather be with a person that treats me a certain way because of who they are, than to do some line-drawing because I'm trying to make him see my 'worth'.
I'm sorry for the soliloquy, but for example, the men of SBM made a post not long ago talking about how they want a woman who works out or maintains her appearance regularly, not just to impress a man- because when she feels she no longer has to impress him, she may go from "elegant to elephant". What I'M saying is that I'd rather be with a dude who doesn't wait for "standards" to be a decent human being in a relationship- so I don't have to spend the rest of my life in fear of when he'll turn back into an emotional elephant. Those men do exist.
Sorry, I'd just rather be with a person that treats me a certain way because of who they are, than to do some line-drawing because I'm trying to make him see my 'worth'.
I think that’s what the post is saying over all. Too often women accept the bare minimum with dating and then magically expect things to change. For the most part a guy is going to put in his all if you are the person he really wants to give it a go with, if he's doing the bare minimum nine times out of ten he just looking for a low effort come up. Some women are so quick to give a guy a chance because they think he's great that they start lowering their standards and taking whatever he puts out on the table just to have him. Then they get mad when their needs aren’t met and his are.
Ideally, I agree with you. I actually do. And both you and Naija have every right to simply date guys who fit this ideal. Unfortunately, this ideal is not the norm…though there are exceptions.
I expect good men to control their actions…but based on who's expectations? Its their life so they base them on what works for them. Which, yes, sucks for us sometimes, lol. We, women, don't dictate that for them. And the same way men put themselves first until they are inspired to do differently, women need to do the same…only willing to put a man's wants ahead of her own once he's reciprocating that completely and officially based on her expectations. You don't have to do anything but be yourself…you don't have to make him do anything. If you being you…with your standards…isn't enough, dude is NOT the one.
"The only conflict here is two people interacting with two different objectives. Since one of those people, in this case the man, is already having his objective satisfied, what's the point of him changing?"
This right here ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ is some straight game betrayal.
I had a philosophical argument with a dude who was completely against birth control being covered by insurance. He argued he shouldn't have to "pay for women to have sex" with his premiums. He thought if women don't want to have babies, they should not have sex. He then asked when we were going out (he's in another state, Id have to flyi & stay overnite to do this). I replied, "dahling, I would love to go out with you, but after seeing the light on your previous point, I have decided to switch to your preferred method of birth control, so I kindof don't see the point."
Just musing.
Naw, sis. There is no "game betrayal" here.
For one, I support BC for women and having it covered by insurance – but that literally has less than nothing to do with this particular discussion. I support BC being covered for women because vasectomies are largely covered for men and both are a form of preventative care so things should be equal in that regard. Having sex and taking preventative measures not to have children has nothing to do with the act of having sex in itself. In that regard, your male friend is wrong.
However, you're comparing having children to engaging in consensual sexual relations with another human being, and that, in my opinion, is where you are wrong. If you want a relationship and the man only wants sex – which is what we are talking about here (not having children, which I'm not sure how or why that's been brought up lol) then why are you giving him what he wants without obtaining what you want?
That has nothing to do with having children, a point we agree on.
"Does there EVER come a point when we expect men to hold _themselves_ to a “higher” standard that is _NOT_ based on women’s actions/inactions?"
First question to ask is what's a "higher" standard? What the other person wants? If someone isn't ready to settle down, or at least not settle down with you, does that mean their standards are "lower"?
Many women use the term "step up" to simply mean "choose me". Sometimes men and women have to understand that just because you really, really like someone and see forever with them, they don't owe you that. A man could be successful, intelligent, fine as Hugh Jazz, and you conclude he is the one. But if he hasn't chose you, it doesn't mean his standard is "lower". It just means his standards doesn't line up with yours.
"Many women use the term "step up" to simply mean "choose me". Sometimes men and women have to understand that just because you really, really like someone and see forever with them, they don't owe you that. A man could be successful, intelligent, fine as Hugh Jazz, and you conclude he is the one. But if he hasn't chose you, it doesn't mean his standard is "lower". It just means his standards doesn't line up with yours."
Uncle Hugh…the Butcher Pimp and Wiseman…has spoken! Take heed, little children…take heed!
"Many women use the term "step up" to simply mean "choose me". Sometimes men and women have to understand that just because you really, really like someone and see forever with them, they don't owe you that"
Boom goes the dynamite! Thank you all for coming out, God bless you, good night.
100% this is on point.
To Hughe and the others, the ladies I know say "step up" to mean be responsible and be accountable and do the right thing. Meaning open the doors, treat the woman with respect, put some time and effort into courting her, or just court her period, (nowadays many men do not really take women out and "court" them), making her feel special, doing little things u know she likes, supporting her and being there. letting her completely into your life and becoming a part of hers. If you really care and are really that into her, and your feeling her and think she could possibly be "the one" then treat her as such.
Stepping up as a man means not stringing a woman along for years and years in what u know is a meaningless relationship with no happy ending in sight. If you Don't choose to be with her then as soon as you realize she is not the one, communicate that to her. Let her know if your not into her and don't waste her time and yours.
Even if you never get a chance to smash, if you know you can't be the man she wants and needs you to be and you can't give her what she wants, tell her that and remove yourself from her life and move on.
That is stepping up.
I agree that men should “step up” without a woman’s expectations. But I also feel women should set those expectations from the beginning. You can’t friend zone “good guys”, give passes to @ssholes, put up with BS, etc. and then say “step up”. You should have the same standard for everyone. Once some guys see other guys winning with no effort or dealing with women using the “least common denominator” then they look for the same thing. A man is not going to “step up” if knows he doesn’t have to. Some men march to the beat of their own drummer and believe “this is what I’m supposed to do”. Others will do the least amount possible to get over. If a man has never had to “step up” before why would he? If his rank is high in the dating hierarchy why would he need to “step up”?
You either think this: "I agree that men should 'step up' without a woman's expectations."
or you think this: "A man is not going to 'step up' if he knows he doesn't have to."
You can't believe both.
Sure you can. One is how things "should be" and the other is how things "are".
i.e. I agree that a woman should get paid an equal amount of money for the same work a man does. However, as an aggregate, employers pay women $0.77 on the dollar on what a man makes for the same kind of work.
I believe both statements. One is what should be the standard…the other is a fact. *shrugs*.
I was telling someone about this post before it went up and they said the same thing @KitKat said. I then responded with a version of what Larry said…or at least I did in my head. They're two different states of mind.
My recent post She Wanted My Tea. I Wanted My Lunch.
I LOVE this post. I see this happening all of the time with my girlfriends and three things either happen: (1) they are bitter as hell or (2) a child is conceived or (3) bot.. I know it sounds quite harsh but it really happens. You have women who don't know there worth and put in time, money,and their heart to men who COMMUNICATED with them their desire to not engage in anything but a physical level.
CHARACTER IS HOW A PERSON BEHAVES WHEN NO ONE IS HOLDING THEM ACCOUNTABLE.
That's what my father says and that's what I strongly believe. Keeping that in mind, I see MANY people lacking in character. I do agree, however, that it's not MY job to instill character in any man I'm dating.
Here's the thing though. Character has nothing to do with how you love. There are stone cold killers who loved their wives and treated their wives great.
Character is about what you say and do. Love and relationships, for most people, are about what they feel. Feelings and emotions toward people not related by blood are not intrinsic … they are inspired.
"Character has nothing to do with how you love."
I disagree completely with this. If character, as you put it, is about what you say and do, how does this not include how you love, date and deal with women romantically/sexually? I wasn't aware love was a loophole in the character clause and I'm not buying it. I operate using the golden rule in EVERYTHING.
Character has everything to do with how you date and deal with women romantically and sexually … but it has nothing to do with how you love.
What we're talking about here is how you get to the point of loving … all the stuff that happens before you actually love. I took your use of your father's quote to mean that if a man is of good character he won't need to be inspired to love you. I disagree with that. If a man is of good character, he won't need to be inspired to treat you with respect and be a generally good person to you. But that has nothing to do with whether or not he ends up loving you.
I don't quite understand how you took my quote. It was not directly related to love at all.
The question of the post was: "Should a man step up without being externally compelled to do so by a woman?"
My response was: "NO, because who you are, how you behave, etc. (i.e. your character) shouldn't rely on someone else holding you responsible."
I don't know whether a man will end up loving me or not, but I know that a man of true character won't give me the mixed signals and the booty call game and treat me like dirt just because it was supposedly MY responsibility to tell him NOT to.
The question of the post was: "Should a man step up without being externally compelled to do so by a woman?"
My response was: "NO, because who you are, how you behave, etc. (i.e. your character) shouldn't rely on someone else holding you responsible."
I agree with this statement for the most part. I think you and i are just off on what it means to "step up." I took Slims question to mean step up in terms of moving on into a serious, committed, potentially long term relationship. I think that requires love, and I think love requires inspiration. That's how I got to the point of taking your quote to be about love.
So, I agree with what your dad is saying in principle. And i think it applies to dating women, absolutely. But I don't think it applies to the next steps beyond dating.
"I don't know whether a man will end up loving me or not, but I know that a man of true character won't give me the mixed signals and the booty call game and treat me like dirt just because it was supposedly MY responsibility to tell him NOT to."
I understand this. I think understanding a man's character and his intentions are easy when he treats you like dirt. I think not treating you like dirt is the bare minimum. But when he treats you well, that's when things get confusing. My advice, and I think, slims post, isn't really geared toward helping you understand how to deal with dirtbags. It's more about offering insight into the mind of good charactered men who are just working their way through life and love.
To you, step up means to move to the next level with the woman. Obviously that's impossible, given the shear number of women men date. If they moved to the next level with each one, they'd be serial monogamists.
To ME, step up means treating a person well to the point where, if you DON'T want more than sex, you don't get involved with them.
Some might say, "Well, then no one's having any casual sex!" Exactly. Casual sex, to me, is inherently disrespectful. Sex used to be reserved for married folks. People took it seriously and understood the implications of sharing sheets. Now it's handed out as a consolation for dinner and a movie.
Biologically, women and men react to sex differently. Women are more in line with the traditional method that sex=commitment and then shared resources for yourselves and your kids. Men are more about spreading their seed. Before, that was with kids, now it's just for sleeping with as many women as possible with NO repercussion.
So since we react differently to sex on a BIOLOGICAL level, I don't think we're EVER going to see eye to eye on the casual thing, because that biology is almost always going to kick in and wonder why there's sex but no commitment, and when they say, "Because it's just sex and I see you as no more than a sexual plaything", many women are going to be offended.
That's a bit deep, but that's why I think this debate is a bit moot.
I have to side with KitKatCuty84 on this.
Character does reflect how you love, and there is an element of character called emotional intelligence where values and virtues intermingle to INSPIRE human thoughts and actions. The idea that men are emotionally lazy, to me, reflects an emotional immaturity that IS accepted and perpetuated within many (but not all) male-dominated cultures: the do what's required to get what I want mentality.
The Golden Rule, as Kat so mentioned, debunks the acceptance of minimalist ideals. We all know women control the cookie, and too often men concentrate and focus on exploiting the woman for that goal without taking responsibility (as an emotionally mature man) and accounting for the effects on the person involved. I agree it's natural to want to do the least to gain the most, but taking advantage of women not knowing their value as the most, jsut to satisfy our carnal desires…selfish. You can't love someone else if you don't love yourself, and aren't we all in this love, together?
I learned to value women as a child: mother, sisters, and beyond. I met a few [harlots] growing up who I either, A). saw value in as a woman, or B). realized they weren't interested in living up to that "standard". For Class A a man could give a fair, sincere interest, beyond just getting the sexual satisfaction she offered. For the latter, it was trivial to decide they weren't worth my time, effort, or energy, even if their "box" was easy to access.
I agree it takes women locking away the cookie jar (as MOST so eloquently advised), but we as men need to raise ourselves to a level greater than the predator, and be emotionally intelligent men. There's power in being able to say "NO" to meaningless engagements. That could be a place to start a standard.
Yeah, you and I are going to have to agree to disagree on the intersection of character and emotion.
+Infinity to your entire last paragraph. That's exactly what I meant to say in way too many words above.
I agree with you. But let’s be honest you don’t bump into a whole flock of emotionally mature men all the time while dating. Just because you tell a woman she should hold tight to her standards and that a man is going to treat you how you let him isn’t trying to take blame or responsibility " off of sorry selfish men. It's just letting woman know that maybe one of the reasons you feel your time is being wasted, or you are being strung along is because you drop your standards every time a cute guy with a nice smile and a job shows a little interest in you.
Lets also be realistic there are situations where the man is not looking for something serious, still wants to casually date and lets the women know this. He is being respectful treating her like a lady and being an overall good dude. She wants more he doesn’t yet she still sticks around.
"I do agree, however, that it's not MY job to instill character in any man I'm dating. "
I agree. But I don’t think this post is telling women to go out and try to instill character into a man. It's telling them to read a man character (words and actions) and if they don’t like what they see, keep it moving, just don’t change your standards in order to have a piece of him in your life. Again just because a man doesn’t want to put in the extra effort with you doesn’t mean he lacks character, he's just not that into you or he doesn’t view you in a certain light that requires a certain effort. It’s not your job to change his mind though just find someone who views you as a commodity from the beginning.
"Again just because a man doesn’t want to put in the extra effort with you doesn’t mean he lacks character, he's just not that into you or he doesn’t view you in a certain light that requires a certain effort."
Men who string along women and treat them poorly because they're ALLOWED to, IN MY OPINION, are not men of strong character. To be honest, an ideal standard would be if there was NO casual sex, and people only slept with people they felt had some long-term potential. That used to be what sex and dating were saved for. Now that it's a free for all, we've opened it up to all these reasons why we can share bodies, get really personal, and we still get to leave in the morning and have it mean nothing. That's not lining up for everyone because that's now how it was supposed to go.
we can’t act like Everyman is just stringing a woman around and treating woman poorly. Again if he is stringing her along some of that is her fault because she kept holding onto the string he’s pulling her on. Now in some cases yes the man is just a jacka$$ and has some charter flaws . But in some cases the woman is just mad because she wants a man to show her a certain type of attention and the man doesn’t want to, instead of her just letting go she holds on then gets mad when her efforts are unmatched and shes been used. ( again I’m talkin about two respectful, character healthy people )
First, I never said EVERY man strings a woman along and treats them poorly.
Second, while SOME of the responsibility for being strung along is on the woman, I will NEVER agree that NONE of the responsibility falls on the man who's pulling the string. Own up to the fact that you're wasting her time and stop it.
But again, at the most ideal, women would only have sex with men who were serious about them and this wouldn't be a problem, and men wouldn't mindlessly seek sex from women they have no further interest in. That's ideal, not real.
"I do agree, however, that it's not MY job to instill character in any man I'm dating. "
KitKat cosign on this right here and agree 1000%
I think men "step up" at their leisure, on their own time, when it's convenient for them or simply when they feel like it. The whole idea that women have anything to do with a man stepping up or not stepping up is BS, IMOP. A great, beautiful, intelligent, "good" woman could enter a man's life and challenge him to step up to the plate, but if he doesn't want to, then he won't. That's it.
good point 20/20
I think this perpetuation that women have anything to do with it, along with the idea that men settle down when they meet "the right woman" or that it takes a certain type of woman to make each man see that he's ready to committ long term is the most heavily cirulated LIE among, and to, women regarding relationships. It is part of the mindless chatter that women continue to listen to from their single or dating female friends (who have NO factual insight on what it's like to be a man) and from the men that they've dated/slept with who never had any intention of bulding anything with them long term in the first place. Neither of these parties can give helpful or factual insignt as to why or when men are ready to step up or settle down when their lifestyle doesn't even minimally reflect that they're looking for or looking to be someone who is ready to step up or settle down.
So alot of women get BS all around, from every angle, because of who they're taking advice or getting insight from, but they run with it anyway.
I think men are simple and direct when it comes to what they don't want but selfish and cautious when it comes to what they do want and when they choose to want it, most specifically when it comes to choosing a wife. Just like (most) men don't marry women because they're "afraid that they're going to lose her" if they don't ( another lie that women tell each other), (most) men don't step up because the woman in their life refuses to accept less; they either reach a point or consciously decide when they're ready to do either of these things and, if they happen to already have a great woman in their life when they decide they're ready to do either of these things, then of course they do it with her. If not, they date women with this goal in mind until they find someone they feel is worth it/deserving.
"Just like (most) men don't marry women because they're "afraid that they're going to lose her" if they don't ( another lie that women tell each other), (most) men don't step up because the woman in their life refuses to accept less; they either reach a point or consciously decide when they're ready to do either of these things and, if they happen to already have a great woman in their life when they decide they're ready to do either of these things, then of course they do it with her."
Where did you obtain this information?
LOL. All I'm saying is that IF a man does claim that he married a woman because he "didn't want to lose her," he got into that in the mindset to want to settle down ON HIS OWN and more than likely would have married her anyway, not because he feared losing her, but because he'd decided that he wanted to be married and that she was the one ; versus a woman entering a relationship with a man who wasn't looking to settle down or step up and then him morphing into this marriage-minded man all of a sudden because she said she would leave if he didn't.
The only thing women really have control over is at what point they enter a man's life. If you meet a man who has not yet decided that he's ready to settle down or step up, regardless of how great you are, it's not happening. I find that not many men will admit that this is true because their egos won't let them admit that, when you strip away all the fluff talk and the BS that you feed women about why you're not ready, it's simple: Men are selfish in love; it's not about the woman until they decide that they're ready for it to be about the woman as well as themselves.
So, in a nutshell, while I disagree with some of the things in this article, I whole-heardtedly agree with the conclusion. Men are selfish in love and women need to learn to be also. Not to be spiteful or to "do them how they do us" but for our own good, our own protection, and just to be smart….which I'd guess are the same reasons that men do it. So when they finally do decide to step up or settle down, they're that much better of a half in the relationship because they know that they mean it.
Okay men, please don't get upset when you see a beautiful woman accepting gifts, dinners, etc. from a man when she has no intention of giving him what he is looking for. Afterall, he is allowing it, so she holds no responsibility right?
SHOTS FIRED!
LOL!
Warnings should go both ways…
Tish: "Okay men, please don't get upset when you see a beautiful woman accepting gifts, dinners, etc. from a man when she has no intention of giving him what he is looking for. Afterall, he is allowing it, so she holds no responsibility right?"
Right. If he's fool enough to do it and believes "it ain't trickin' if you got it", let him enjoy his tricktitude and she can enjoy the benefits of it.
*Snickers*
Your comment brings me back to a topic that was discussed yesterday on another blog.
http://www.thisisyourconscience.com/2012/04/24/la…
#Welp
Yup. As long as she's communicated her disinterest, she's not doing anything wrong.
Yup, pretty much. If he's not keen on one of Dr. Jay's lessons he learned (Don't simp) then he deserves whatever is coming (or not coming), lol.
I get the feeling, though, that you were almost hoping the men to disagree with you here, lol. Or maybe not…dah well.
@Tish I agree with you. 100% actually. I ain't no meal ticket with some numbers on each end. Dudes who choose to be that get what they deserve.
My recent post She Wanted My Tea. I Wanted My Lunch.
Women should do more of that.Bravo!
Bree: "The other flaw I find in you guys opinions is that it relieves men of the responsibility to just be a good, decent, honest man."
@Amaris: "…I'd rather be with a dude who doesn't wait for "standards" to be a decent human being in a relationship"
20/20: "Men are selfish in love; it's not about the woman until they decide that they're ready for it to be about the woman as well as themselves."
This really needs to be said based on reading the comments. Just because a man isn't ready to jump the broom doesn't mean he's not a decent guy, has no standards, or is selfish, or has no character. If he was honest with his intentions from the start, you catching feelings doesn't make him a bad guy no more than you leaving a relationship because it didn't progress as you thought or you just weren't feeling him.
Remember when the ladies were defending Sam for leaving Steve because she wasn't ready for how serious he was? http://www.singleblackmale.org/2012/03/15/single-…
Lol poor Sam. But basically it’s the same thing Hugh I agree with you 100 percent.
Just because a man doesn’t want to put you at the top of his priority list and put in extra effort doesn’t make him a bad person, he’s just not that into you. This is no different than a woman saying just because a man is “nice” doesn’t mean she should give him a chance.
Just because you like a guy and want him to treat you a certain way doesn’t mean he has too that’s his choice, your choice is to stick around or keep it moving.
I didn't say any of it was bad or good. Everything doesn't yield the "bad" or "good" title; somethings just ARE. That being said, as I stated in my very last post, I think that men have the right idea in being selfish when it comes to who they choose to ultimately settle down with or step up for because not everyone, and actually, no one who isn't interested in anything long term with you, deserves it anyway. For that reason, I don't think it's bad to be selfish in love when you know you're not looking settle down; in the end, you've done both people a favor by not giving unselfishly of yourself to a person you know you're not serious about anyway.
Because selfish carries a negative connotation, guys automatically jump on the defensive when I say that I think that they're "selfish in love" until the choose not to be but, if you put your emotions aside and look at it logically, not only is it true, it's also not ALL bad. I think it's good for the most part; bad if you never allow yourself to come out if it.
20/20: "…if you put your emotions aside and look at it logically…"
Wow. In 35 years of life, I don't think anyone has ever said/wrote that to me. In fact, I'm usually told I'm far too coldly logical and I need to embrace my emotions.
This is a real ass post. Nothing more nothing less!
My recent post Pole Position: The Top 10 Strip Club Rules Of Engagement
I meant "you" as a general term, not a direct one. So, you=men who jump on the defensive when they hear "selfish." Maybe I used the wrong "e" word though. Perhaps "ego" would've read better than "emotions."
Anywway, you may very well be a completely logical man….I couldn't say for sure. But this, to me, read a little emo & slightly defensive:
"Just because a man isn't ready to jump the broom doesn't mean he's not a decent guy, has no standards, or is selfish, or has no character. If he was honest with his intentions from the start, you catching feelings doesn't make him a bad guy…"
My comment wasn't emo or defensive in the least. It was an observation, germane to the discussion, made from reading and pasting direct quotes from other commenters (with a few deleted, damn you word count!). Some people were admittedly emo, and I put logic back into the situation. I said a man who isn't ready to comment isn't necesarily selfish, has no character, etc.
Now I probably misinterpreted your tone, but I've been around these parts for a while, and very similar comments have been made several times before about men being selfish that were defensive and literally meant men need to mature.
I get that. And I do know that 'selfish" is often loosely (read: falsely) thrown around by women about men just about as much as "insecure" is thrown around by men about women, but that wasn't where I was coming from when I used the term as it relates to my response to this topic.
I suppose it could be a matter of maturity but, for most men over 25 who say they aren't ready to step up and commit to a relationship or aren't ready to get married, I don't think it's because they're not mature…..I think it's because they're not ready to factor a woman into their lives as a priority on the same level as themselves, which, IMOP, has nothing to do with maturity and everything to do with choice & personal timing.
Agreed.
Got em!
My recent post Pole Position: The Top 10 Strip Club Rules Of Engagement
The thing that irks me the most about men.. Is when they confess their love for you and “step up” AFTER you find a new boyfriend. You weren’t checking for me when I was the one there for you, listening to you, being a best friend. But now when someone else comes in the picture…
True words here bruh. I had a discussion like this recently with a woman I was dating while also dating who eventually became my wife. It sounds trife, and it was, but oh well. Anyway, I basically beat around the bush (no pun) in telling her these exact sentiments in what was so different. My wife expected more of me, and wouldn’t take what other women would. Thats how I knew my wife was a different breed. Women sometimes assume that men aren’t about serious ‘lationships. Most of us actually can be, but if giving a woman a half-ass effort in a relationship is enough for us to get the perks, we will.
too many women blame men for their lone li ness. too many women blame men for most of what's wrong with relationships. everything is not for everybody. one size or relationship model doesn't fit all. not a matter of who is bad & good, wrong & right but maybe just not a fit for you. too many women hold men responsible for their happiness. it's your happiness use it when & where you want to. as an adult your expectations are only goals for yourself and are yours to own not to place on others. hold yourself responsible for your own satisfaction. but no matter who else you hold responsible & to what degree, it doesn't mean that everything will "work out right." in the end. because there is no "end." beginning & end are part of the same ring. you can't make anyone hold you to a certain standard. you hold yourself to a certain standard. and other folk either do or don't. everything is not "happening to you." it's happening through "you." through all your filters, traps, self limiting beliefs etc…
"Worry about what you can do for yourself even if that means cutting us out of the picture."
It's very easy to live this way…however, its not always fun. Great post!!!
I totally agree with this. Fortunately I stopped taking a dudes poor behavior personally and that made walking away much easier. And I am wayyyyy better at protecting my heart and emotions, so I don’t let myself get caught up until a man displays a certain level of dedication and devotion.
It really is all abt what you’ll accept. I still come in contact with bum dudes, I just make the choice not to deal with them. I dont think some realize how much power they wield in the dating process. I think this is why we need more female bloggers, so we can spread this gospel and deliver these woman from the emotional bondage of dickmatization and wack men. Cuz it doesn’t seem like the guys are getting this message across. Not an insult to the black male bLoggers, I think you guys are great.
But ladies, y’all need to understand… it’s so easy lol.
+ One hundred, thousand trillion.
Hi Dearest one.
It's my pleasure to write you after noticing your profile while searching through (WWW.google) My name is Miss shadi I'm a young girl of 22 years of age from Haiti and you? I'm Searching for real love and protection, Well i shall tell you something more about me after your reply,I believe we can move from here. Bear in mind that friendship and Love has no colors barrier, no educational back ground barrier, no social-economic Barrier, religious, language, nationality or distance barrier, the only important Thing there is love.n Yours Sincerely
PLEASE CONTACT ME WITH THIS MAIL, (shadi.khalifa90@yahoo.com)
:)______████_______ ████
:)______█$$$█_______█$$$█
:)____█$$$$$$$█___█$$$$$$$█
:)___█$$$$$$$$$█_█$$$$$$$$$█
:)___█$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$█
:)____█$$$email… (shadi.khalifa90@yahoo.com)
:)______█$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$█
:)________█$$$$$$$$$$$█
:)__________█$$$$$$$█
:)___________█$$E$$█
:)____________█$C$█
:)_____________█$p
PLEASE CONTACT ME WITH THIS MAIL, (shadi.khalifa90@yahoo.com)
Anyone else felt like Slim was throwing us under the bus and lowkey tryna start a woman's revolution?! Oh..just me?! Lol, this is soooooooo true though, women don't understand that we'll string them along for as long as they let us, and it not even for the fear of commitment, we're just wired that way and won't push the issue of commitment if SHE isn't, especially if we get served on the regular w/o being locked down.
girl dayum… that was so concise, yet SO layered! you are definitely speaking my language here… and I love the concept of "dating like a grown up". This is a perfect description/definition!
Humph… deep! I needed that. My un-boyfriend told me "you are not defined by your relationships. I guess he was saying the same thing. As I get further beyond 30.. i keep thinking what he told me is sum bulsh*t & I need a husband. Get with it or get gone…