Think Before You Rant

Relationship problems. We all have them. Or have dealt with them. Most relationship problems are your garden variety, "Why didn't you take out the trash/You always hog the remote/You want me to put that WHERE??" type of disputes. But every serious relationship has gone through or will go through at least one Big Problem. The type of problem that has you wondering if you've made a mistake by even being with this person and whether you want to continue with that mistake. They are perfectly normal, and most of the time you work through them and live happily ever after.

But what about that time period between wondering and happily ever after? That time period when you are wrestling with your feelings and thoughts and doubts and fears and anger and sadness? Many of us make the mistake of turning to our friends. But you ask, isn't that what friend are there for? To support you and help you through your troubles? Well.... yes and no.

The mistake people make is by telling their friends every single sordid detail about their dispute with their mate. You do an emotional dump and just get all that nasty stuff off of your chest. Your friend makes you feel better; takes your side, validates you, tells you that you are right and that asshole/bitch was wrong and who the fugg needs 'em anyway?? And then you decide to work through your problems with your mate and everything is sunshine and kittens once again.

But, remember how you told your homeboy about how your lady slapped your momma and then made out with your third cousin? Or how you told your homegirl that your dude took your car and was spotted joyriding with scallywags on 38th Street? Yea, you may have forgave and forgotten, but your friend didn't. They didn't have the Power of the Poon/Peen benefit of in depth communication between the parties in interest to change their perspective on the situation. And the last thing your friend remembers is your vehement arguments as to why your mate is a piece of shit. However, now all of the sudden these friends are expected to act like nothing happened. It's like asking a court reporter to strike testimony or evidence from the record that the jury has already heard; it doesn't work in the courtroom, and it doesn't work in life either.

Most friends do play along with the legal/life fiction that nothing happened, and chalk it up to it just being typical relationship shit, because we have all been on both the giving and receiving end of this scenario. Nevertheless, the reality is that friends are placed in an awkward situation when you dump your relationship problems on them. Their loyalty as your friend is to you, and it is only natural that they don't want to see you hurt. By telling them about all of the details of your dispute with your mate, you are positioning your mate in your friend's mind as the Enemy, that person that made you hurt and cry. Friends aren't there for the make-up sex and reconciliation; they are there when you are at your worst, and that is what they remember. Even if your friends go along as if nothing happened just as you are, you have still made your mate seem like a horrible person to them, and that memory lingers. And in a way, you also make yourself look like an idiot fool for going back to them. Either way, it's just not a good look for anyone involved.

So, unless you have retained an attorney and are drawing up the divorce papers, don't tell your friends about every argument and craptastic thing your mate has done to you. And even then, people get back together (I recently had a friend do that, and the first time I saw her out with her no-longer-estranged husband was kind of aw-kward). Better yet, it is probably best to just keep it to yourself, because you don't know what is going to happen a day or week or month later, and most likely it'll be that you two will kiss and make up. Your friends can still be there for you for emotional support, but keep it generic. They can know that you are going through it with your ladyfriend/gentleman lover without having to know EVERYTHING. Also, pick and choose to whom you tell what. Some friends just know when you are talking shit or being irrational and have no problems telling you so, while others will take everything you say to heart and be ready to ride out on a bitch declare your mate Public Enemy No. 1. It is called discretion, and we all need to exercise more of it (and I won't even get started on Twitter and Facebook.... some people treat that as their personal open forum relationship therapy sharing session; we don't need to know all that about you and your boo).

Yes, the urge to relationship rant is strong, and we all succumb to it at times, and as human beings and social creatures we will continue to give it and receive it. However, next time you have to urge to get something off of your chest, just think about where that something goes, and what it does when it gets there.

Indecent Proposals??

 

No.  Just...... no.

Last night I was sitting at home searching for bootleg movies to watch online watching one of my favorite TV shows online (which I can't watch due to my crappy sans FX satellite package), Nip/Tuck (and I watched it on Hulu, so it was perfectly legal..... well, except for that last episode.....). In one of the episodes, Sean's girlfriend proposes marriage to him..... presented a ring and everything. After which he ended up taking too many sleeping pills and booze and damn near killed himself (sorry if that was a spoiler for anyone, but you knew they were not going to let him actually die).

So that got me thinking... do women actually do that, or was this just another wild scenario on this wild ass show (see photo of Mario Lopez, supra)? And, if not, SHOULD women start doing this? After all, I always hear men talking about how they would love if a woman approached them and asked them out, a situation that I'm sure was unfathomable 50 years ago. Is the marriage proposal next on the feminist agenda's chopping block? Should I get on the next wave and come up with a line of male engagement rings, make lots of money and retire to Mexico with a Mario Lopez body double?

I conducted a scientific survey.... ok, so I asked some folks on Twitter.... to see how people felt about women getting down on one knee (but not two, cuz that's an entirely different discussion). The overwhelming response was NO....this is a man's job, period.

loryn24 @DaughterOfPriam times have def changed, I believe in wmn's equality, but there r SOME things better left to a man. Proposals are 1 of them

kellinikole @DaughterOfPriam I think that tends to be a little emasculating. I don't think there is anything wrong with bringing up the convo, but I'd leave it up to the dude, to do the knee and ring deal.

WifeofUriah @DaughterOfPriam NO way. We are equal 2 men in some ways, other ways we are not. Marriage is equal, roles are different. proposal is his.

gabeflowers @DaughterOfPriam It can work 4 some but I would never have the balls! There's something about a man knowing he's ready and taking that step.

gabeflowers @DaughterOfPriam Plus, I wouldn't want to rob him of that moment!

And these responses came from educated, free-thinking, independent women. And as another woman who fits that description, I'm inclined to agree.

I would consider myself to be not so much old fashioned, but more like retro. I recognize not everything from the past is outdated and that timeless things should be preserved. I shake my head at the ultra feminists.... women who refuse to take their husband's name (aside from some VERY compelling professional reason, and even then there's hyphenation), women who name their daughters junior, women who really need to go put on a bra and women who just take "equality" to its illogical extreme. I believe in fairness, but fairness does not equal mirror image equality. There are just certain roles that a man should play and certain roles a woman should play in this complicated game we call relationships.

For example, as a woman I don't feel like I should have to do things like make all the the trips to Home Depot, and I don't expect my man to be all up in Pier 1. Sure, there's overlap and we can help each other (I really do enjoy putting furniture together). But if I'm the one constantly pulling out the lawnmower and putting in the rocks in the landscaping and installing the ceiling fan (these are true stories, BTW), there's a problem. And if he's wearing my fishnets, there's DEFINITELY a problem. Yes, I can stain and polyurethane, but dammit I shouldn't HAVE to. Not as my primary role, anyway.

Men and women each bring something unique to a relationship, and when you try and serve in the other person's role you're going to either get a) a bootleg job, b) that person not receiving what they need from you because you are too occupied with doing their job, c) resentment, or d) all of the above. You should be able to own your unique gender attributes without the distraction of having to take on and compensate for the other gender's, too.

So going back to my original point.... Men should be the ones doing the proposing. Period. You can discuss the issue and arrive at an agreement together that marriage is the next step for your relationship (I don't believe in blindsiding someone with a ring), but the actual question popping should be reserved for the man. I'm inclined to agree with the one response that opined that the woman proposing is somewhat emasculating (but not quite as emasculating as what was done to Mario, supra). There may be women out there who LIKE their men neutered, but personally I don't. I like gender roles, I like the idea of the man being the head of my household, I like the idea of just being able to be a woman.

So ladies, I'm sorry if you are just dying to get engaged....this is still something you're just going to have to wait for him to do.

(originally posted November 3, 2009 on Idiosyncratic Thoughts of an Unheeded Prophetess)

All's Fair in Love and War

Maybe she wasn't such a cootie queen after all.

History is always told from the perspective of the winner, not as it actually went down.  Our history books are all written in such a way that applauds the actions of the ones in control and condemns those of the loser.  This is simply one of the spoils of war; the winners get to tell the story the way they want it to be told, and very few actually question it.  This is not only the case in our civilization's history, but love as well. 

Some time last year a good friend of mine was telling me about a new guy she was kickin' it with.  He was a musician, handsome, sexy, and despite the fact that he was staying with her (temporarily til he found another place, supposedly), he had a girlfriend.  I told her run for your life, he's playing you as live-in booty while he plans a life with this chick, you're gonna get your feelings hurt.

Well, last week they got engaged.

There are two schools of thought when it comes to people who are in pre-marriage relationships:  One is that these people are in committed relationships and their relationship should be respected and left alone, and anyone who tries to interfere is just foul and dead wrong.  The other, which was best summed up by my mentor who was a notorious flirt, is "You're single until you're married."  In the Infinite Wisdom of my 20's (and by "Infinite Wisdom" I mean "I thought I had shit figured out and then I actually lived life and was proven terribly wrong") I was of the school of thought that the latter attitude was just awful and an excuse to sleep around for as long as possible.  And even still today I get irritated when someone persists in trying to holla even after I inform them that I have a boyfriend.  But my friend's good news got me thinking about whether this issue is as black and white, right vs. wrong, as I originally thought.

Take my friend as example.  When she first started "dating" her now fiance, 9 out of 10 disinterested women polled on the street would probably tell you she was being a scandalous scallywag for messing with someone else's man.  Now in hindsight though, I would merely have to say "She won."  The ultimate purpose of dating (for most people) is to find someone to build a life with, ideally to marry.  But the fact is that many people are in lackluster, half hearted relationships that they are holding onto for whatever reason, maybe because it's not bad but not really fantastic, or out of habit, or because that's what they think they want, or whatever.  If someone else comes along that is a better match, should they bypass it because of some sense of obligation to the lackluster relationship, or go forward and pursue greater happiness?  Should the interloper walk away from someone showing interest in them because that person is supposedly in a relationship which the interloper has no knowledge of its depth or complexity?

Let's take another example: my very own sister.  She dated a guy from high school for over 5 years, but then her junior or senior year of college she had another guy incessantly in her ear, calling her all the time over the summer, not really caring at all that she had a boyfriend.  That other guy is now my brother-in-law, they have 2 beautiful boys and a wonderful life together.  Had he abided by the "rules" and left my sister alone out of "respect" for her relationship with a guy who honestly was slipping, my sister would not have the life she has today.  My brother-in-law presented himself as the better option, plain and simple.  He won.

I'm not saying that anyone who is not married is 100% fair game and that the follow up question to "Yes, I'm seeing someone" should always be "But are you happy?" because really, that just comes off as rude and disrespectful.  I'm just making the observation that when it comes to love and dating, history rewrites itself such that seemingly questionable behavior all the sudden becomes justified and endearing.  I would be willing to bet that a great number of "how we met" stories involve the scenario "he/she was dating someone already, but I really wanted to get to know him/her" or some other reason why the situation wasn't exactly ideal at the time.  During none of the umpteen times your dad tells the story of how he met your mother do you think "Man, what an asshole", but rather "Wow, he really, really wanted to get with mom."  After the fact we applaud the persistence, the determination, the romanticism, and the poor ex ("Ole Whats-His-Name") just becomes a forgotten casualty of love.

So I guess I do have to agree that, in the grand scheme of life, you really are single until you're married, not in the sense that you can willy nilly do whatever you want in a relationship and use that as a defense (try saying "It wasn't wrong because we're not married" to your boo and see what happens.... you won't be in that particular relationship much longer), but rather there are no guarantees until you say "I do".  Married people are definitely off limits, and at that point you merely become a homewrecker.  But for everyone else, relationships come and go and the reality is that there aren't always clean breaks in between them.  In the end, when it's all said and done, the only person who matters is the one who won.

All is fair in love and war, loved ones..... and the victor gets to rewrite history.

*Disclaimer: AID will not be held responsible for any head busting or beat downs you may catch going after someone else's (wo)man.  Please proceed with caution.

If you like it then you shoulda put some ink on it

Don't let this happen to you.

Commitment issues.....probably the most rampant mental disorder of men everywhere (and many women as well). Commitment, and marriage specifically, is seen as The Enemy; the sign that you have given up, surrendered, foreclosed all other options.

I can somewhat understand commitment phobia.....to an extent. The trust and faith hurdle can be a big one to overcome (yet not insurmountable). What I will never, EVER understand is this: name tattoos.

Specifically I'm talking about the folks you see with "Tammy" or "Trina" tattooed across their neck/arm/wrist/chest without nary a piece of jewelry on the left hand. And yes, I am zeroing in on the guys because let's be real: At the end of the day, men are the ones who control when a marriage is to occur. Women are usually on board first, waiting for their guy to finally propose. It seems like getting a guy to commit to marriage is a major feat. Yet, despite the proclivity of men to avoid saying "I do" for as long as possible, I still see guys with their lady's name tattooed on their bodies while declaring that they aren't ready for the commitment of marriage.

In case you weren't aware of this patently obvious fact, let me break it down so that it is forever broken and put things into perspective: Marriage, despite best efforts and intentions, is not guaranteed to be permanent. A tattoo, however, is with you for the rest of your natural born LIFE.

How is it that you are scared to make the commitment to make a life with someone, yet you will go have her name permanently implanted in your dermis?? Am I missing something here?? If you intend to be with this woman's name for the rest of your life, have given yourself a 25/8/366 reminder of her existence, have committed to this "artwork" (that term is used very loosely), why is the commitment to marriage so difficult? The whole concept seems very ass backward to me.

And ladies, I'm not letting you off the hook, either. Why would you permanently tattoo "Jon Jon" across your ass when Jon Jon doesn't think enough of you to make you his wife? Is it really wise to forever mark yourself with the name of a man who can up and leave tomorrow on a whim?  And if it doesn't work out, do you really think your new beau will want to look at that every day?

Word to the wise: Leave the name tattoos alone unless you're talking about your child, parent, or anyone else who, by default, ain't going anywhere. Even for married folks, don't do it. At one point I considered getting my ex-husband's name tatted on me (though he also shares a first name with my son) and I thank my lucky stars I had sense enough to get an Adinkra symbol instead, because I probably would have clawed the damn thing off myself (eff a laser). I have a friend who had the name of her husband, with which she has 5 kids, tattooed in HUGE letters across her back; I recently saw her in Facebook pictures with her new fiancé. Yes, there is the option of laser removal, but why put yourself through that unnecessarily? Go get a tiger or a butterfly instead.

There's also the matter of the superstition that when you get a tattoo of your lover's name, your relationship is cursed and you are doomed to split up. I'm not sure how true this is, but judging by the amount of cover up work tattoo artists do, I'd say it's best not to test the theory.

If you absolutely MUST express your love via the pulse of an ink covered needle piercing your skin 100 times per second, just do like my sister and brother-in-law and get matching non-name tattoos. Yes, if you break up it will be a reminder, but at least your new boo won't have to be subject to "Property of Booski" every time you undress.

But for real..... just get her a ring instead, m'kay??

Where I Wanna Be......?

"I would rather be able to appreciate things I can not have than to have things I am not able to appreciate."

~ Elbert Hubbard

When Donnell Jones' "Where I Wanna Be" first came out, I was really pissed.  I liked the song in the abstract, but the lyrics greatly upset me.  I was 21 years old, recently married to my one and only boyfriend, and had two kids ages 6 and 1.  I just thought Donnell was the biggest asshole in the world.  What the hell is this "finding where I wanna be" bullshit?? WTF do you mean that if you love someone you need to leave before you cheat on them?? I felt outraged on behalf of whatever woman was the inspiration for that song, and I'm sure I'm not the only high school sweetheart that felt a little..... threatened.

But then, like with so many other things, I grew up.  And hindsight is a mutha.

High school sweethearts are like puppies.... everyone ooohs and ahhhs and "that's so cute!" at them, but don't think about how they piss and shit all over your house and chew up all your furniture.  The idea of high school sweethearts is nice and all, but in reality you may not only be selling yourself short, but selling your relationship short.  Before you start mentally composing your "Nuhh-uhhh!!" comments telling me about how long you've been married to the captain of the football team for which you were a cheerleader, or how your grandparents got married at 12, just wait for my twisted logic and hear me out.

We often cannot appreciate what we have until we experience and appreciate what we don't have.  And this is where the utility of dating different people comes into play.  Every relationship-- even the crappy one with the psychotic stalker -- is instrumental in your growth as a person and as a potential companion.  You get to learn what you like AND what you don't like, what behaviors are normal and which are extraordinary, and the successful and unsuccessful ways of interacting and communicating.  The ability to compare and contrast is invaluable whether you realize it or not.  I realize it in hindsight because I was not able to compare and contrast, and neither was my ex-husband, because all we knew were each other.  He didn't know how tolerant I was, or how well I could cook, or how phenomenal good I was as a lover, because he had nothing to compare it to.  And I didn't know how I deserved to be treated by a man, because I had no way of comparing.  Our relationship existed in a vacuum, as do most high school sweetheart relationships. 

When I started seeing other people, it was like a whole new world opened up within myself.  You mean to tell me I'm NOT a crazy psycho girl that my ex always told me I was, but am really actually a pretty laid back chick?  So I really AM a fantastic oral advocate (he tried to tell me I wasn't) and can turn a man on at the drop of a hat (he tried to say.... well, never mind... he had some "issues")??  And yes, I can cook my ass off?  Oral sex in and of itself is enjoyable?? No, dudes aren't supposed to sit back and watch their woman fix shit around the house??  All of these things weren't revealed to me until after I had something to compare my first and only relationship with.  And yes, I'm sure there were some positive things about him that I didn't see til I started dating............. I just can't think of any right now.

There is also something to be said about the power of choice.  When you're dealing with toddlers, one technique parenting "experts" tell you to do is to give them the ability to choose between two options when in actuality they'd really rather do neither.  If Suzie doesn't want to put on her sweater, you make the situation a little more tolerable by giving her the choice between her red sweater or her purple sweater.  People, starting before they can even communicate, like to feel like they have control over their lives, and choice is one way of exercising that control.  Being able to choose Option A between A and B is a lot more satisfying than just only having Option A.  It's the psychological benefit of that choice, that control.

While human beings are just slightly more complicated than sweaters, the same concept applies.  I have a friend who is dating a woman he originally dated back in undergrad.  Since then he's been married, divorced, dated woman locally and across the country.  But he said that they now finally realized and accepted how good they were for each other.  Dating (and sometimes marrying) other people gives you an appreciation for what you have now. I'm not saying that before you settle down with the person you potentially want to spend the rest of your life with that you have to go out and play the field one last time to be extra sure. I'm saying that the experience of dating more than one person (not necessarily simultaneously) at some point in your life (hopefully before you meet your soul mate) helps you to be more comfortable with your ultimate choice because you have a better awareness of what your likes and dislikes are, as well as how your mate stacks up in the grand scheme of things.  And also just because you actually have a choice.

So back to Donnell.......I get it now.  Perhaps he went out and dated a few skeezers chicks and realized that his original lady really was the one for him (tho good luck getting her to come back.... that's a whole 'nother issue) or perhaps he realized she wasn't The One, thus saving them both from wasting a lot of time together (and making him, not Usher, the artist behind "Papers").  But at least now he KNOWS [insert GI Joe quote here].

That's not your wifey

I have a serious, major, infuriating pet peeve right now, and it concerns the word "Wife".

Today on Twitter, the trending topics of the day included #dontwifeher/#wifeher and #dontcuffhim/#cuffhim. Now, for all of my non-urban readers (or those of us who still have not had our Black Card reinstated), let me give you a little background on the terms:

1. wifing -- when a guy decides to make one girl, his number one. At this point he will be talking about loving you, buying you stuff.

2. wifey --
a. A REAL Lady, Not your only but your favourite, different from them hood rat chicks. Sexy in everyway possible, when she smiles it's sexy, even when she's mad at you it's sexy.
"I'm gon make her my wifey, she's not like them chicken heads round da way, she's a diamond in the rough"

b. a girl you care a lot about, she's more than just your girl.
"thats my wifey... so BACK UP"
(from Urbandictionary.com)

("Cuffing" is just the male equivalent)

Contrast this with the Dictionary.com definintion of the word:

wife  /waɪf/ –noun: a woman joined in marriage to a man; a woman considered in relation to her husband; spouse.

–verb (used without object), verb (used with object): Rare. wive.

—Idiom: take to wife, to marry (a particular woman): He took an heiress to wife.

Now, whether the Twitizens were talking about wife in the traditional sense of the word or in the "urban" sense of the word, this discussion pissed me off from both perspectives. First (for the traditional usage) who are all these never-been-married yahooligans to have an opinion on what makes good marriage material? Now I admit some of them were just being silly (like "#dontwifeher if she has a moustache") but other people acted like they were imparting some real knowledge and pearls of wisdom the people of the world. And to that I say GTFOHWTBS. If you have never been married--let alone had a serious relationship that has lasted more than a year-- to know what qualities make for a good relationship......STFU.

However, what really irks me and irriates me to no end is the use of the term "wife" or "wifey" to describe someone who is just a girlfriend. You can tell just by the definititions given on Urbandictionary.com how ignorant this concept is ("buying you stuff"?? Really???). I don't give a flying fig if she's your "number one" girlfriend, "only" girlfriend, "serious" girlfriend, or a girlfriend that you would consider "wife material"..... she's still JUST A GIRLFRIEND. I cannot stand how the terms are just thrown around loosely, which to me undermines and degrades the meaning of what a wife really is. "Wife" is a term that should be reserved for the person you are married to, not just the person you kick it with all the time and whom you've decided to ignore other women's text messages for (or don't cheat on "as much"). Your wife is the person to whom you have made the ultimate commitment to, not just in words but in actions before God and/or the law. Your wife is who you build a life with.... your friend, lover, companion, supporter, comforter, the one who you sacrafice for and who sacrafices for you. A wife is not someone who you just think about or talk about maybe loving, it is the woman you LOVE. When you have a wife, you are ALL IN.... you don't have one leg over the fence just in case you need to hop back over it real fast. I don't care how serious your relationship is... until you say those vows and exchange those rings, the term "wife" should not be used.

Yes, you could argue that it's just a word used in the popular vernacular to mean girlfriend and it's not that deep. And to that I shake my cane at you disagree..... I'm not buying the Humpty Dumpty argument this time around. Having been a wife, I am insulted by the use of the word outside of the marriage context, just like I am insulted when people use the suffix "Esq." behind their name and they are not attorneys, same way someone with an MD or PhD would be insulted if someone used the title "Dr." in front of his name. You do not earn the title and status of wife, or status of having a wife, without that work and commitment, and until you do you don't deserve the same level of reverence and respect.

*drops mic*

Never grown enough for Grown Folks Stuff

As a parent, there are just some things that you don’t do when it comes to your kids. Whether your child is 3, 13 or 35, you just don’t put your child in the middle of your marital problems. That should be something you deal with between you and your spouse with as little involvement and input from your children as possible.

Apparently, my dad did not get that memo.

Yes, loved ones, for once I’m not talking about my own divorce here. And while my parents aren’t divorced, there are many times where I sure the hell wish they were just so I wouldn’t be subject to the boolsheet I was subject to last night.

The convo started out innocent enough…. My dad brought Daughter home and was telling me how they traded their timeshare in the Ozarks for some spot in Mexico and some cash…….

(First of all, this was upsetting enough. We’ve had that timeshare for almost 30 years and that was our family vacation every summer when I was growing up. I’d planned on FINALLY going back next year, so I was heartbroken to hear that they got rid of it.....)

Then he starts telling me WHY they got rid of it and how my mom threw a fit about it, which then led to more complaining, which then led him to asking me to step outside with him for a minute. My heart just sank because I knew what was coming. He starts telling me that he’s unhappy and she treats him like shit and how she’s always alienated him from his friends and family, and on and on and on and on with info that I really didn’t want or need to know. All I could do was stand there and look at the ground, saying nothing, and wait for him to finish. On the one hand I felt bad because I know he doesn’t have anyone to talk to, but then on the other I was angry because he doesn’t have anyone to talk to. Why does a 60 year old man who lives in his home town where all his family and friends live have NOBODY to vent to besides his 31 year old daughter?? But as he explained the history of their 35 year marriage for the umpteenth time I was reminded why, which then made me think about my own personal struggles with interpersonal relationships (including how their relationship was a HUGE deciding factor in my divorce decision), and overall just made me really angry that 1) my mother is the way she is, 2) my dad put up with it unchecked, and 3) I’m effed up because of it. My dad may have walked away feeling better for having gotten some things off his chest, but I felt (and still feel) like absolute crap. Now *I* am looking for somewhere to dump this shitty feeling…….

I think it’s easier to remember not to put your child in the middle of your relationship mess when they are young, because there’s that separation between “grown folks stuff” and “kid stuff”. Youth automatically serves as a buffer. However, when you get older and become an adult, that distinction no longer exists so parents feel like they can now talk to you about “grown folks stuff” not realizing and appreciating that some “stuff” is still best kept to yourself. When I was married, The Ex actually did take my dad aside once and told him to quit using me to vent to because it was causing me a lot of stress and grief…. For once he stepped up as a husband and protected me from something. But now, I’m back on my own with nobody with the authority to be that buffer and stand up to my dad on my behalf. And it sucks.

I mean, what can I really say in these situations?? I shouldn’t be EXPECTED to say anything in these situations, in which case it’s just a dumping session. Rule #1 to venting…. Do not vent to interested parties, or else it becomes a dump, not a vent. And as the child of the two individuals involved, I’d pretty much say I’m an interested party. I could not IMAGINE saying the same things to my children about The Ex that I say to my BFFs--or even the blogosphere--when I vent. Because I know it would hurt them to hear those things about someone they still love, yet they can’t come to his defense because then it seems like they are taking sides. No matter how grown they get, that’s still “grown folks stuff”.

I just wish my dad afforded me the same consideration and would leave me out of it.........

*le sigh*

Marriage......what's the point?

Ahhh.... the seasons are changing, the weather is getting warm, newness is abound, which means one thing...... wedding season is upon us. Ok, so it means more than just that one thing (inter alia the one year anniversary of Le Divorce) , but it *is* wedding season. Thus far I've received invitations to attend two weddings and despite the demise of my own marriage, I'm actually looking forward to attending.

Yes, despite my experiences with failed marriage, my first hand witnessing of marital tomfoolery, my Adventures in Divorce, and my previous musings on the subject, I do still have hope and faith in the institution of marriage and see weddings as a celebration of a new life together for two people. My prior post about crying at weddings was written while I was still married and my own marriage was in a sharp nosedive headed straight for the ocean (it was written a little less than a year before my separation) and I was sad because I knew I'd lost what these two individuals on their special day had just found. So, while on that particular day I was mourning, generally I am happy for the couple getting married.

But then there's that part of me that knows that regardless of the degree of perfection that exists on that special day, marriages are anything BUT perfect. Four words..... Fifty. Percent. Failure. Rate. And even amongst the remaining fifty percent, I've seen enough of my share of underhanded tomfoolery to know that those people aren't all together because everything is hunky dory. So, statistically speaking, if 50% of marriages are doomed from the start, and the other 50% are riddled with problems and issues, one may ask themselves..... what's the point?

The point, in the great words of Andre Benjamin, is that everybody needs somebody to love. But marriage isn't just about love, its about building a life together and having someone who is always, no matter what, there for you (in theory anyway). Let's face it.... the free-for-all gets tiring after awhile. Variety and excitement and "freedom" may be fun for a time, but eventually you just want to know that someone is going to be there for you and that you have someone that you can build something with instead of just cruising along parallel with one another. Problems and dysfunction and cheating aside, marriage is a good, worthwhile endeavor.

Marriage is definitely a trade off, though...... you give up the ability to bail whenever you feel like it, the ability to make unilateral decisions that are solely in your best interest (and/or the interest of your kids if you have them).... basically the ability to keep all the marbles to yourself. But at the end of the day, what good is all that if you're lonely? Life is meant to be shared with other people, and sharing means compromising and sacrificing for the greater good. Even when you're in a committed relationship, you're less likely to go all in if you know that the person can just up and leave, no strings attached, at any time. When you're dating, all it takes is to say "it's over, kick rocks, don't call me and I'm not answering your calls" (ok, that's the simplified version) and "I'm taking my TV/couch/bed that I brought with me" (if you happen to be cohabiting). Divorce, on the other hand, takes just a tad bit more effort. Not to mention the whole "covenant before God" thing..... that's kind of important, too.

So what's the point of marriage if the odds of failure and dysfunction are so high...... well, I believe it can and does work for most people, even if it takes some trial and error along the way. Sometimes that first match up isn't a good fit and people got married for the wrong reasons, or thought they could overlook or overcome some problem and it just didn't happen. But if you have two people who are a good match and who are committed to making their marriage work, then there is definitely a point..... a very good point.

Love Conquers All

The other day I went over to my parents' house to pick up Daughter and my dad was outside working in the yard. My mother has been in the hospital for the past 2 weeks, so he's just been there alone with the menagerie (dog, cat, the once stray cockatiel). I was walking to my car and he looked at me with the saddest look I've EVER seen on his face and said "I need a hug." I have never, EVER heard my dad say anything like that before, and it just hurt me to the core of my soul because I could see, hear and FEEL the sadness and fear that I know he has over my mother's condition.

I bring up my parents' relationship a lot, because.... well, your parents are your model for relationships. And my stance has been that I don't understand why they've been married for 30+ years and never ever seem to get along, and the stress and the drama are literally killing them. Last week I was trying to calm my mother down (to keep her blood pressure from going up) as she was crying about how she was convinced that my dad didn't care that she was sick. *sigh* Frustrating.....

Why in the heck would my dad put up with this for all these years?? That's what I always ask myself. But I think I got my answer Tuesday: It's just Love. He loves my mother to death, despite all her antics and anger and accusations. He told me once years ago that he made a promise to my grandfather that he would take care of his oldest daughter and grandchild and that he intended to never go back on that. But even aside from his word to my grandpa, I could tell standing in that driveway that the answer was love. Love makes you do stupid things, put up with stupid things, and perform stupid superhuman feats that make absolutely no sense to the outside world. Love. Conquers. All.

(... which I think is what caused things to go awry in my marriage. I just didn't love him anymore. There was no glue, so all the crazy pieces fell apart. I guess.)

A step forward, a step back

With all the excitement over Barak Obama being our next President of these United States, one major newsworthy election result that has been somewhat glossed over is the passage of measures in 4 states that dealt a major blow to the civil rights of the LGBT community. Three states-- Arizona, California and Florida-- passed constitutional amendments banning gay marriage. Arizonans passed Proposition 102 on Tuesday, further amending the state's constitution to define marriage expressly as "a union between one man and one woman." In Florida, 62% of voters cast their ballots in favor of Amendment 2, which also limits the legal definition of marriage to the union between "one man and one woman as husband and wife." And less than six months after the California State Supreme Court declared in a 4-3 decision that a 2000 gay marriage ban was unconstitutional, the state's voters passed Proposition 8, which will overturn the Court's decision. In addition, Arkansas voters passed a measure that would prohibit unmarried, cohabitating couples from adopting. Ouch.

It saddens me that while we've taken a major step forward in the realm of civil rights by electing the first African-American president, we've taken a step back with the passage of these measures, which I foresee spreading throughout the country as other states follow the precedent of these initial four. And yes, I will state it unequivocally..... I support gay marriage and adoption rights. Period. If two people want to love and commit to each other, I say kudos to them. If a couple wants to love and raise a child that might otherwise end up in the questionable foster care system, I'm all for it. My son grew up with a boy whose parents are a lesbian couple, and I ALWAYS saw the both of them at every one of his events, while I'd look over and see the mom sitting there solo because her husband was too drunk to get up and come to the games. You can't tell me that the latter situation is the better situation for a child to grow up in just by virtue of the fact that the couple consisted of a man and a woman. C'mon now, people.

There is nothing about gay marriage or adoption that wears at my moral fiber or does anything to compromise the sanctity of my relationships (or lack thereof), I know that same sex couples are just as capable of raising healthy, loved and well adjusted kids as any other couple (family dysfunction is equal opportunity)..... bottom line, it's just all about love, and I say the more love in this world, the better.

"The Most Beautiful-est Thing in this World....."

On the night of the election when they announced that Barak Obama would be our 44th president, I think it was so surreal that I didn't even have an emotional reaction. I didn't cry or scream or high-five or fall down on my knees and thank The Most High...... I was really quite subdued. That was until Barak called his First Lady and daughters out onto the stage..... that to me was one of the most powerful and inspiring moments of the night and I was overwhelmed with emotion. Beautiful..... absolutely beautiful.

Not just my First Family....... AMERICA'S First Family.

Don't Do It!!! (on being the "other woman")

So yesterday my friend calls me up (let's call her "M") wanting to talk and get some advice about a guy she's been seeing. Here's the background: She met this guy online (and I'm not even going to say this is a red flag.... maybe a yellow one, but you can meet some legit people online. But I digress....), she said they had a wonderful connection and chemistry and the conversation just flowed easily and effortlessly..... it was perfect. Or so it seemed. So he goes to visit M (I told her don't sleep with him, but nobody listens to me cuz of my namesake... the whole "unheeded prophetess of doom" thing) and they have a great weekend getting to know each other, and she's all geeked until 2 days after he gets home and she gets a call from his WIFE. *screeeeeeeech!* I told her back then to RUN.... lose his number, block her number, cut your losses and move on because it's JUST NOT WORTH IT (no matter how great all those "interconnections" are). Again, she doesn't listen, and instead listens to his insistences that even though they are still living in the same house, that he and Wifey are separated and going to get divorced. Uh huh.... I told M "That's the oldest line in the fugging book." At that point I threw up my hands, because unfortunately having experience in this area such that you can give solid advice also simultaneously give you no credibility, and it seemed like she really wasn't trying to hear me. Ah well.... eventually I did get the "You were right" call and I didn't respond with any "I told you so" and I thought that was the end of it..... disaster averted.

Not so much. Yesteday she calls me because dude is still calling her AND Wifey is still calling her. Turns out dude is pulling double duty by telling M that he thinks they could really have something, but then turning around telling Wifey they can work it out. My advice: Tell them both to kick rocks. AND don't answer any of their calls. The cold turkey method is the best way to go. You cannot "wean" yourself off a person.... every encounter and interaction just reinforces that connection and makes it harder to leave that person alone. I told her that if they are really meant to be together that they will be together, but she needs to insist on seeing some dry ink on a divorce decree before she tries to have anything with this man (because separated people DO get back together allll the time).

So here's my open letter advice to any woman (or man) who finds themselves in a similar situation with a person who is either married or in a committed relationship: DON'T DO IT!! And before you leap off your moral bandwagon and chase me down with sticks and torches, it's just one of those things that happens and you don't even realize how you got there until you're in the thick of it. I love Jill Scott because of her realness and honesty in her music and poetry, and that's one thing she talked about at her last concert when introducing her song "My Love".... you find yourself in situations that you said you'd NEVER find yourself in.

And here's how it happens: You're minding your own business in life, chillin', enjoying the sights, and a guy (or lady) steps to you. Let's even say you knew that this person, at some point, got married, but it's impossible to know what's going on with a person at any given time (I still have people who ask about "my husband"), and people do date while they are separated/divorcing because that ish takes a LONG time (trust me, I didn't just start dating in May). I think it's a somewhat reasonable (if not the wisest) assumption to make that if a person is actively pursuing you that their marriage is pretty much on the outs (but that's also because I feel that if there's constant cheating going on, the marriage is pretty much worthless and you just need to get the fugg out and quit wasting each other's time). So you engage with this person only to later find out that they AREN'T on the brink of divorce and their marriage ISN'T on the outs, but by then you've already gotten involved with this person. And, voila! You've got "My Love".

So getting back to M (and anyone else finding themselves in this situation)....... you deserve more than relegating yourself to the status of "other woman". The odds of that fantasy fairy tale idea that he's going to leave her for you is a bunch of malarkey. And even if that does happen in some bizarro alternate universe, like one of my other friends says..... the way you get a person is the same way you're going to lose them. That person has made their choice..... divorces/break-ups are hard, but they happen every day. If the desire to be with you is that strong, he'd make that leap. But otherwise, all you can do is respect his decision and move on. There's no sense in trying to compete, convince, or give ultimatums, because in the end you're the one left alone while he goes off and plays happy family with his #1. Don't be that "missing piece" to his relationship, because think about what you're actually doing..... you're making it easier for him to STAY in his relationship because now he's got everything he needs. And you DON'T. You. Deserve. More.

Life lived..... lessons learned, loved ones.

The C Word

I was reading a post on Finding My Way, another blog about divorce (I discovered she has a link to my site on her blog..... thank you, thank you). Something interesting she had to say:

"When I discovered in May 2005 that my spouse had cheated on me, I didn't respond like most wives would have. I felt immense relief that it was over. Adultery was not acceptable and therefore I could leave this marriage for what I considered a good reason. Not "we just don't get along" (although true) or "we just don't love each other anymore" (partly true but I don't think he ever really loved me). I could feel less guilt about the divorce's impact on my children, because I didn't leave the marriage, he left it when he cheated."

Relief..... that's the overwhelming feeling I had the night the Excrement Hit the Air Conditioning and the end of my marriage officially began. I finally had a concrete reason to get out, that one thing that people could point to and express in a sound bite to explain "what happened" when they sit around and gossip about why my Ex and I divorced, even though the notion that cheating automatically ends marriages is a fallacy.....most of the time, cheating is a symptom of an underlying problem, not the problem in and of itself. Well, I had underlying problems like CRAZY, the extent of which I'm still discovering, but none that were easily explained in 50 words or less, even assuming that they could be adequately explained at all.

However, I differ from my fellow divorcee blogger in that the cheating wasn't my Ex's doing.... it was mine. *GASP* (Yea, I know..... hate me if you wanna, but I'm human and it takes 2 to tango.) Well let me backtrack..... the situation was such that I thought my Ex was cheating, which triggered a big unfortunate "fuckit" moment. I found some very damming text messages on his phone between him and another female, but he swears nothing happened between them and it was just flirting (which I'm still not sure I believe..... when you text someone "I want to see you" that's usually not JUST flirting)..... even still, the fact that was going on in and of itself was a problem which caused me to flip the fuck out and leave for about a week to contemplate what the hell was going on with us. And not to go into any details, but that's when it happened. Basically. Yea. So anyway, he found out about it, there was a big ole scene when I was out with friends (the hearing in my right ear is still jacked up...... yea, it got ugly..... he hit me..... HARD). Even as I sat outside the club hiding around the corner, the overwhelming thought that was paramount amongst the hundreds of others was "It's over.... I'm free." There was an immense feeling of relief even amongst the fear and dread and shame. I even stayed at the spot and kicked it and had a really good time (might have been all the tequila my friends were buying to make me feel better). I just knew he wouldn't want me anymore after that and that there was now a "justification" for us splitting up aside from "we aren't getting along."

(*Sidenote: I feel the need to clarify that this was NOT planned..... I did not plan for my Ex to find out about my indiscretions AT ALL. I was even questioned as to whether I "used" my fellow adulterer as an excuse to get out of my marriage. Not. At. All. I felt absolutely terrible for all the things he had to endure in the fallout as well...... tho, it seems he's faring much better now than I am. Like I said.... cheating is not an automatic deal breaker for many people. But I will say that one should only gamble with what one is willing to lose..... when you go to Vegas, you don't intend to lose, but you should put yourself in a situation where you shouldn't be too terribly distraught if you do. Likewise, I knew my marriage had issues and apparently on some level I was willing to lose it....... didn't intend to, but by my very actions made that a possibility by default.)

It was unfortunate that I let it get to that point instead of dealing with our issues head on, which probably would have lead to the same result...... divorce..... but I would have avoided involving someone else's life in my quagmire. However, it just seemed that the other reasons just weren't "good enough" for divorcing.... it wasn't enough to overcome the "stay for the kids" argument. As the author stated above "we just don't get along" or "we just don't love each other anymore" didn't seem like a justifable reason.... it seemed whiny, selfish, and like I just wasn't trying hard enough. But cheating..... ah, yes, now THAT was a reason!! Nevermind that those same feelings and thoughts were the underlying reason for the act.... nevermind the thoughts and feelings and attitudes that cause you to reach out to another person for comfort and solace.......nevermind the obvious underlying loss and/or lack of respect....... it's the act itself that everyone focuses on as being the deal breaker. I'm here to say that this thought process if extremely flawed..... if a marriage is broken, it's broken, no matter how it manifests. As it turns out, cheating was NOT a deal breaker for my marriage.... my Ex was willing to forgive me and begged and begged for me to come back, but I knew that our issues went deeper than my infidelity and ultimately that is what I based my decision upon. So in the end (?) cheating became merely a wake up call, not a justification.

Who's to say what would have happened if I hadn't cheated..... I could still be married right now, but then again maybe not. I may have just been delaying the inevitable. I could be living the rest of my life unhappy like my parents. There's no point in speculating, really. What happened, happened. Some bad came out of it, but I must acknowledge that some good came out of it as well (in a chaos theory sort of way). I feel myself starting to ramble..... so much I want to say and can't..... won't..... shouldn't. So I'm not. Fin. Maybe I'll come back to this issue..... in fact, I'm sure I will.

(Oh, and if you are wondering why I would put myself out there like this and admit to cheating..... well, The Ex pretty much told anyone who would sit still in his presence long enough to listen, and he talks A LOT, so I've just come to accept it as common knowledge. It is what it is, loved ones.)

"You are NOT the father!"

I saw something in the grocery store today that made me stop dead in my tracks:


Woah. Wow. Err..... huh. For $150, in 3-5 days you can get the answer to the question that thousands of fools get up and air their dirty laundry on Maury for. No free trip to NYC, but hey.... I'd say that's a small sacrifice for your dignity.

(and notice it's displayed right next to a box of condoms. Oh the irony.)

This got me thinking about an article I recently read in Playboy reviewing the book "I Don't: A Contrarian History of Marriage" by Susan Squire. Here's a summary by Publisher's Weekly:


"In breezy, irreverent prose, Squire (The Slender Balance) catalogues the history and religious significance of the institution of marriage from Adam and Eve to the Renaissance and beyond. Writing as if gossiping with a girlfriend, Squire argues that marriage was developed to establish paternity by controlling the sex life of women. We learn that the men of Athens had hetaera (courtesans) to entertain them, concubines for their daily 'need' and wives with whom to breed legitimate children; the women of Rome, on the other hand, learned how to use their power to threaten male rule of society. The New Testament offers equality to husband and wife, at least in the marriage bed; the association of lust with Eve's original sin can be attributed to Augustine. Squire explores sixth-century penitentials on sexual sins, adultery in the Middle Ages and the intersection of wife and witch during the Renaissance inquisitions. Readers are left questioning whether our modern idea of love matches might end up as a chapter in a future book about the incarnations of marriage. 'Love may not be the answer, but for now, it is the story.'" Publishers Weekly (Copyright Reed Business Information, Inc.)


Interesting take on things..... marriage originally being designed to control the determination of paternity. I guess Identigene fucks THAT purpose all up.*

(*and please, spare me the "sacred union" comments about how we are intended to be with 1 person for all of eternity and beyond..... I know, I know. Whatever. It's a nice idea. Go delude yourself all you want..... go on.... I'll leave you alone while you do it. Just don't do it here.)

Only Sometimes......

Sometimes I wish......
that I could've been a better actress
and went through the motions
to convinced myself to love him

~Me

One Stop Shopping

Now comes my long overdue commentary on one of my most favorite songs of the current moment, "I'm Cheatin" by Dwele. If you've never heard the song, please take a few minutes to watch the video below before continuing reading, because I'd hate to ruin the light bulb moment experience that occurs about midway through the song when you realize what he's actually talking about:



*pause* Done? Ok, onward.....

So if you've never heard the song and didn't watch the video, you are lame you missed out and I'm just going to go ahead spoil it for you (last chance.... watch it). What Mr. Andwele Gardner is talking about in this seemingly scandalous ass song is the idea that he's cheating on his girl WITH his girl (i.e. his girl and his mistress are one in the same).

When love is free
It’s a matter of time
Before, before…....(that’s wrong)
Some have a girl with a chick on the side (I don’t need it)
My girl is all ......She’s all I need so I don’t mind cheatin' on my
Girl.... with my girl

While Dwele expresses this concept in a way that just makes you wanna run out and buy a few wigs and a freakum dress (or 2) and come up with a sexy alias (and have Dwele's babies), a friend of mine has expressed this concept in another way...... way before this song ever came out, he would say that his wife is his "Wal-Mart Woman". Wal-Mart?? Yea, initially sounds like a bad R.Kelly analogy, but think about Wal-Mart for a second..... where else can you go and get milk, draws, paint, an engagement ring, a TV, a bolt of fabric, a hair cut, a pair of glasses, and your picture taken, all while waiting for an oil change?? If you can't get it at Wal-Mart, well hell you probably don't need it. Likewise, that's how he describes his wife..... she is his one stop shop, everything he needs emotionally, intellectually, financially, and (I won't say most importantly, but it's pretty damn important) sexually. Ok scratch that, I will say that sexually is extremely important, because that's what people do when they cheat 99% of the time, right?

I once heard someone say that a good sex life has a 10% influence on a relationship, while a bad sex life has a 90% influence on a relationship (or something along those lines). Basically the health of the relationship and the health of the sex life go hand in hand in hand in hand. One can cause the demise of the other, and then it just becomes a vicious downward spiral (trust me, I've been there, done that, got the divorce decree). But I'm just going to focus on the easy part, and that's being your man's "Wal-Mart Woman" in the bedroom. If your man likes it, wants it, needs it, well by gosh you better do it. And if you can't or won't..... well, maybe you ought to rethink your relationship because perhaps its the case that you just aren't sexually compatible. Seriously. Lie to yourselves all you want, but sex is a critical factor in a relationship. You can't tell a person that they shouldn't want a certain thing sexually, or that they'll just have to live with it (or rather, without it) or get over it. Because they WON'T.

(pressure busts pipes..... pressure busts pipes......)

I don't understand why so many people (ok, WOMEN) have so many hang-ups anyway. If that is supposedly the love of your life, why not try out that Freaks of the Industry "head under her leg under my arm under her toe" move?? And if you don't know how to do it, get a book, read a Cosmo, watch some porn, ask a friend, hell, ask ME (when you are with the same guy for 14 years, inhibition gets replaced by a whole lotta creativity). More importantly than the physical how to, though, is the mental wherewithal, and that comes in the form of being confident and comfortable with yourself. Personally, I KNOW that I'm one sexy mutha-(watch yo mouth!) even when I do put on a lil extra fluff , because it comes from INSIDE. It is a passion and desire that is not automatically associated with appearances. It is a desire to please, which is another key factor in all this..... this is one area in life (outside of elementary school) where you can get an A for effort. Because really, this ish isn't rocket science. Give enough effort over enough time and you can master damn near anything when it comes to sex. So if your man wants something, at least try..... and really be willing to try, not some half assed, twisting your arm try.

(And I'm not even going to fully address the issue of the Mighty O because I have an unfair advantage in that department from what I understand..... but I do know that guys really like such positive reinforcement, and that a major hindrance is the inability to relax. So relax. And if that doesn't work, sorry fo ya..... if it's any consolation, I read that orgasmic ability is genetic, so if you want you can blame your shortcomings on your mom.)

But, you ask, what if he has some really out there, strange desires? And my answer is: What is strange?? "Normal" when it comes to sex is extremely subjective. Like my friends I mentioned earlier? They just happen to be swingers (not full, tho) so that is their concept of "normal." And again, I have to bring up the concept of compatibility. Anyone dealing with me has got to know that they are going to have to deal with [X, Y, and Z] (you didn't think I was really going to TELL you now, did you??) and if they can't oblige then I guess we're not a match. Most people fall within a few standard deviations of what is generally considered "normal" though, so unless you come across some ole 2 Girls 1 Cup* dude, it's not unreasonable to ask yourself to be a little flexible.

So, you can try and be that Nordstrom Woman all you want, but don't be surprised when you look up and your dude has his ass over at Home Depot.

(*and did you really think I was gonna post a link to that actual nasty shyt?? Hellz naw! Watching the Roots' reaction gives you a good enough idea)

"I will never have a family again...."

The Ex made a disturbing comment to me yesterday about his family being destroyed and him never having a family again. He said he will never give 100% of himself, never full integrate his life with someone else's, and when the going gets tough he'll just get divorced again. He said that some things only come with "the first time around", as if an subsequent marriages and family are somehow not as legitimate. I told him that's a sad way to view life, love and family.

I don't know why this JUST now dawned on me, but that comment really was a slap in the face to me AND my family. He always talks about how he looks up to my parents and my family, but I grew up in a blended step family. I know I've mentioned this before, but for some reason it's true implications JUST really dawned on me. It sounds stupid, but it's like those optical illusion pictures that you stare at and then all the sudden see the picture of the horse or the sailboat. My parents have been married for 33 years, and from the outside looking in (hell, from the inside too) it looked like your typical nuclear 2 biological parent family with 4 kids. But the fact is that my mother was divorced and her ex husband is my oldest sister's father. My parents married when my sister was 5 years old.... when my mom was only a few years younger than I am now (27 I believe), and my dad adopted my sister and raised her as his very own, so well that nobody aside from select family members knew the difference. Unfortunately, the reason nobody knew or had to know was because her dad disappeared from her life, and my dad stepped right into that role.

I'm really baffled at myself right now, how I never thought about this, and didn't even think about it when I was having that conversation with The Ex yesterday. But it just goes to support my view that divorce is not the end of the world, not the scorge upon the earth that The Ex and right wing religious zealots say it is, it is not an impediment to having a happy and healthy family. Sometimes that first try just isn't the right try.

My family may treat this as it's "dirty little secret", though I don't know why. From now on I will proudly say "Yes, I am the product of a blended family". And I think, all things considered, we did okay.

The Fact Is......

Another one of my pre-divorce musings that shed a wee bit of light on "what happened?" (originally posted Monday, July 24, 2006.... coincidentally, our anniversary):

****************
I can pay my own light bill baby
Pump my own gas in my own car
I can buy my own shoe collection
I've been blessed thus far
I can kill the spider over my bed
Although it's hard because I'm scared
I can even stain and polyurethane
But some things just don't change
I need you yeah
Sometimes so hard to say oh
I need you
Some things remain

I could buy my own groceries baby
Get my hair tight, my nails right
I can floss my own bling bling
Write the words to the songs I sing
I can even raise the child we'll make
Make sure he's loved and knows what God gave us
I can teach him how to walk and stand
But he needs you to help him be a man
We need you
So hard to say
We need you
Some things don't change

I could be congresswoman
Or a garbage woman or
Police officer, or a carpenter
I could be a doctor and a lawyer and a mother and a
Good-God-woman-what-you-done-to-me
Kind of lover I'll be
I could be a computer analyst, the Queen with the nappy hair raising her fist
Or, I could be much more and a myriad of this
Hot as the summer, sweet as the first kiss
And even though I can do all these things
I need you
And even though I can do all these things
We need you
We need you
We need you
And even though I can do all these things by my damn self
I need you...

~Jill Scott "The Fact Is (I Need You)"

Interesting segment on the Today Show this morning regarding whether successful, otherwise independent women still want a man to "take care" of them. However, this did NOT deal with the financial aspect of things, but rather having a "handyman".... a guy that can fix things, kill things, and just "take care" of things.

As I put on my makeup (late, again, because that's when these "relationship" segments come on) I heard the psychologist saying that when men do these sorts of things for women, there's something masculine about this, which in turn makes us feel more feminine. Sometimes it's nice to set down the hard role for a minute and be the damsel in distress. They also talked about men being confused over when they should and shouldn't "assert" this masculinity, but that women are equally confused. Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! is what went off in my head. [My Ex] grumbled something about "well, if women would come home and cook for their man...." and blah, blah, blah. I'm not getting into this "If he/she would, then I...." blame crap.

Like Jill says in her song, even though I could do all these things "by my damn self", there is something about a man doing those things that is appealing, even if its not necessary. I get frustrated when I have to hook up the satellite receiver and the DVD player.... not because I struggle with it, but it's, well (and I hate that this thought is coming out of my head) it's a man's job. There are just certain things around the house that are traditionally taken care of by men and some things taken care of by women (and I'm not talking about chores, but the more non-routine things). I don't expect my husband to pick out curtains or buy kitchen utensils or house plants (not that I do most of those things.... but we'll get to that issue later); likewise I don't want to have to fix the toilet, unclog the bathtub, repair the doorknob, or fertilize the lawn. He shouldn't have to go to Bed Bath & Beyond and I shouldn't have to go to Home Depot. Again, like Jill says "I can kill the spider over my bed/Although its hard because I'm scared...."

I think maybe this idea appeals to me because I am attracted to masculinity, period, and one thing I LOVE is to see a man working and handling business and doing "manly things." Men crying is not a turn on for me.... I'm not that type of chick. I may have mentioned my fetish for shirt/tie/cuff link combinations.... I think its because if a man is dressed to the nines, he's got some business to take care of. I also loved when [The Ex] was a construction worker, seeing him in his concrete spattered jeans and white t-shirt and hard hat.... a nice looking construction worker will still catch my eye. But it's not just attire.... it's seeing a man handling business on the phone, or in a meeting, or engaging in work related conversation (NOT talking about him droning on and on and on to me about what he does). It's probably a good thing I'm not a litigator because I'd surely one day commit malpractice due to watching opposing counsel do his thing.

So this idea translates to the home, and is probably a product, for me anyway, of how I grew up. My dad fixes EVERYTHING; he has a table saw in the garage, numerous power tools, and a snake for the toilet....and the infamous grey toolkit. Growing up, that was my example of a man. But, you may say, roles mean NOTHING.... women make more than men, men cook for the kids, etc. Which is why I agree with the psychologists' assessment that we are ALL confused.

Nevertheless, I still proffer, even at the risk of my words being used against me at a later time (say, around 7pm), that the concept of "roles" is not completely dead. Sure I could manage to do everything (even though I admittedly don't even seem to manage the "woman" things.... see all my work related blogs) it's just nice sometimes to hear "Honey, I'll take care of that toilet/doorknob/giant patch of weeds/3 feet of snow......" It makes you feel cared for, which is what they were talking about on the Today Show about being "taken care of." If I can locate a child's clothing, the remote control, AND your underwear without even stepping foot downstairs, you can put some caulk on the sink.

I'm not attempting to address ALL the issues involved in the modern day relationship, but just this one eenie-weenie aspect: I like men to do man things because it's masculine and I like masculinity. Chivalry may be dead, but masculinity is not.

A lesson in jurisdiction

ju·ris·dic·tion /ˌdʒʊərɪsˈdɪkʃən/ [joor-is-dik-shuhn] –noun

1. the right, power, or authority to administer justice by hearing and determining controversies.
2. power; authority; control: He has jurisdiction over all American soldiers in the area.
3. the extent or range of judicial, law enforcement, or other authority: This case comes under the jurisdiction of the local police.
4. the territory over which authority is exercised: All islands to the northwest are his jurisdiction.

In law, jurisdiction (from the Latin ius, iuris meaning "law" and dicere meaning "to speak") is the practical authority granted to a formally constituted legal body or to a political leader to deal with and make pronouncements on legal matters and, by implication, to administer justice within a defined area of responsibility.

There are three main types of judicial jurisdiction, personal (personam), territorial (locum), and subject matter (subjectam):

Personal - Authority over a person, regardless of his location.

Territorial - Authority confined to a bounded space, including all those present therein, and events which occur there.

Subject Matter - Authority over the subject of the legal questions involved in the case.

*********

Today's topic is, as you can see, jurisdiction. It takes the average law student about 4 months to understand the concept of jurisdiction, but I'm about to break it down right here and now. Ever wonder why the bad guys in the old movies were always trying to get "over the county line"?? It's because the sheriff chasing them lacked jurisdiction in the next county over...... it was outside of their territory so they had no right to enforce any laws over there. That was left to the sheriff in that county. That sheriff has a "defined area of responsibility," namely his county.

Likewise, jurisdiction applies in relationships. Yes, I said relationships. Different types of relationships give rise to the three types of jurisdiction to varying degrees. Let's start with the easiest and broadest one: personal jurisdiction and marriage. Marriage gives each spouse personal jurisdiction over the other. That means regardless of where you are or what you're doing, your spouse has some say in what you're doing and has the right to get upset about whatever you're doing (if he/she finds out, but that's a whole 'nother issue). He or she has the right to say something about who you're spending time with, how long you spend time with them, where you're going, how much money you're spending, and what you doing. It's part and parcel to marriage.... they should just print it on the back of the marriage license: "This document confers in personam jurisdiction to the parties to this agreement." There are no county lines you can cross to escape it. Sorry.

Next we have territorial jurisdiction, which may apply when you have yourself a boo-thang in another city but you're otherwise not exclusive boyfriend/girlfriend or husband/wife. It's summed up best by the line from Common's song So Far To Go: "Sweetheart you know that you're the most...... important, at least on the west coast......." When you're in town with that person, they have the right to have a say in what you do and have a right to get upset about such things. For example, you can't go visit your Chicago boo and be out trying to holla at other men while you're there, but this may be perfectly acceptable for either one of you when you're back in your respective cities. Their jurisdiction exists only in that territory, i.e. that city.

Subject matter jurisdiction is a little trickier to apply in this context (but bear with me, for I am the queen of the metaphor). Subject matter jurisdiction falls more into a grey area, and comes into play in the "just dating" realm or any other relationship that's short of being engaged or married, but is obviously someone you spend a decent amount of time with. Which subject matters you have jurisdiction over (i.e. which you legitimately have a say about) really depends on the nature and stage of your relationship. These subject matters would include, but are not limited to, how often a person calls, whether that person can talk to/flirt with others, your priority in relation to that person's friends/family/pets, whether you get invited to family events, etc. The longer and more involved the relationship, the more subject matters you have jurisdiction over. This is the area where people get confused as to how much say they actually have, and this is where people are most likely to get their feelings hurt. It is very important to have a realistic view of the subject matter jurisdiction that you have in a particular relationship. Stalkers, for example, have NO concept of subject matter jurisdiction, whereas true "friends with benefits" have a very good concept of subject matter jurisdiction.

Being a recently divorced/single woman, I am having issues with subjectam jurisdiction..... not so much over others, but what others feel like they have over me. I can do things that might otherwise be considered disrespectful or hurtful if I had a more developed and committed relationship with certain individuals (like, for example, The Ex)..... but bottom line is I don't, so those people don't have anything to say about certain things I choose to do. That was part of the motivation behind Le Divorce Tattoo (the tattoo I got after my divorce was finalized)..... I no longer had anyone who had a say over whether I decided to get a very prominent (and very beautiful) tattoo. It's just me here, for the first time ever in my life really. I respect the relationships that I have with people, but I realize that there are certain things that I have no say over or about...... anymore or yet, depending on who we're talking about (which I'm not going to go into specific situations). Likewise, I wish certain folk (ok, so namely folk on the ex side of things) would do the same for me.