Lately, I've been seeing a lot of memes and Facebook statuses from females giving other females tips on how to "keep a man." It's funny reading all these cliche quotes like "A way to a man's heart is his stomach" and "A blowjob a day keeps the hoes away." What's so funny to me is females associate a man's happiness with his loyalty. They assume that if they keep their man happy that he won't have a reason to look elsewhere for new pussy. I'm sorry to say this, but uh............EHN! WRONG!!!
While keeping a man happy in a relationship is fairly simple and straight forward; getting him to remain faithful is going to be more of a challenge. And I'm speaking from my own experience and from spending the majority of my social time with other guys who are completely different from me. Unless you are an expert in manipulation, it's damn near impossible to "keep a man." My dick does not care how happy I am with you. It still thinks I'll be happier inside the girl that works at the grocery store down the street or your best friend or whoever is about throwing some ass at your boy.
Now, I'm not saying it's impossible for a man to be faithful. Obviously, it can be done. I've done it and seen it done successfully quite a few times. What I am saying is as a woman, there is nothing you can do to prevent your man from cheating or just flat out dumping you for someone else. It doesn't matter how good of a cook you are or how easily you can suck the skin off his dick or how good your pussy game is. It doesn't matter if you keep your hair and nails done or if you have an amazing personality. Do men appreciate those things? Yes. Does doing these things make a man happy? Of course. But you are missing the underlying issue. Happiness does not equal security.
If it's that easy to "keep a man" then it only makes sense that it would be just as easy for another woman to take him. As far as cooking goes, how hard could it be to season something and then heat it up without burning it? How much better could your head/pussy game be compared to the next chick? No matter what you are doing for your man to "keep him," there are plenty more women where you came from that can do the same if not more.
You could argue that a fully satisfied man has no reason to look for a new woman even if something better out there exists. That would be a good argument if men were actually that two-dimensional. Think about it this way. If you are completely satisfied with how steak tastes and you decide it's your favorite food, does that stop you from trying chicken? No, because no matter how much you enjoy one thing, you'll always want to try other things. It might not even be to find something better, but for variety. And yes, I did compare women to pieces of meat, but that's exactly what humans are made of; muscle and fat.
Some would argue that spicing up the relationship will add enough variety to keep a man entertained. EHN! WRONG AGAIN! Switching positions doesn't make you a different bitch. Role playing doesn't make you a different bitch. Coming up with new date activities doesn't make you a different bitch. All of these things are necessary for a long relationship, but they don't guarantee it. At the end of the day, it all comes down to this: DIFFERENT IS BETTER. The next bitch doesn't literally have to be better than you because in your man's eyes, she is new. Look, I like McDonald's menu the way it is, but if they add some new shit to it then I'm definitely trying it at least once.
Growing up, I've always wanted to be a celebrity, specifically a rapper. But as I saw that there were different types of celebrities; I wanted their lives too. There were comedians, chefs, producers, actors, voice actors, directors, writers, pro ball players, wrestlers, porn star, etc. I wanted to be them all. On some level, I still do want their lives. Rapping is looking like my best shot at becoming one of the rich and famous and I realized that early on. Music was something I always had a knack for. What I didn't have, was perspective.
When you are a fan, the life of a celebrity looks ten times better than any life you could acquire as a successful nobody. To a certain extent, that's true. The problem with being an idolizing fan is that you only see the good stuff. Not only that, but you usually don't recognize someone until thousands or millions of other people acknowledge them first. Obviously, that's what it means to be a celebrity, but that's not the whole picture. What you don't see, is the grind.
Most of you know what the grind is. You probably heard your favorite rapper say he started out poor so he had to hustle drugs to get by. We've all heard of the actress busting tables in LA while she awaits a callback from some team of movie execs for a part she auditioned for. You know the pro athlete that had to workout twice a day for years just to be good enough to tryout for the team. That's the grind. We HEAR about the grind, but we never actually SEE the grind. And this is what throws off our perspective.
You may have seen someone early in their career before they became what they are today, but at that point, you more than likely missed the actual grind. You never see the hard work they put in. You never see them constantly fail. You never see them at the brink of completely giving up. You don't see the rejection, the bankruptcy, the homelessness, the jail time, the broken families, or the suicide attempts. All you see is the product of their determination.
I say all of that to make this point. I hate when an average ass person tries to diminish the hard work put in by another by saying things like, "I'd have a body like that too if I could afford a personal trainer" or "It's easy to fuck a super model when you have a million dollars" or "I'm more talented than that guy; he just got lucky." Don't get me wrong, I understand hating on someone else's accomplishments because they're better than you. But talent means nothing if you don't have hard work to back it up.
Celebrities aren't inherently better than you. They become better than you by wanting to be better and then actually acting on that desire to be great. That's it. That action star didn't get his six pack from his trainer. He got it from working out and dieting. That singer may naturally have a good singing voice, but she's famous because she practiced her dance moves, performed at countless open mics and networked with the right people. That CEO of the billion dollar company didn't just inherit everything he has. He dropped out of college to pick up 3 part-time jobs so he could afford to build a prototype of an invention he imagined. Then he created a business plan and implemented it. There is nothing these people did that you couldn't. You just don't have their drive.
Quit acting like success falls out if the sky. Quit acting like the only difference between you and a celebrity you envy is dumb luck, good genes, inherited wealth or knowing the right people. The only difference between the elite and you is the fact that they try harder. You set a goal. They set a higher goal. You try. They try harder. You fail and give up on the 1st or 2nd attempt. They fail and continue failing until they succeed. Admit it. The only thing you've ever put 100% effort into is making excuses. No matter how glorious someone looks at the finish line, you'll never know how hard they had to work to get there unless you take a walk in their shoes.
Recently, I've come to the realization that there is no such thing as a bad thought. There is no such thing as a good thought either, for that matter. Thoughts are simply, neutral. Sure, you can think of something that makes you feel good/bad, but I'm referring more to inherent good/evil.
Your thoughts don't have the power to help or harm someone the same way your actions do. There's a huge difference between "bad thoughts" and "evil deeds." You can argue that thinking is an action and since the word "think" is a verb, that's technically correct. But it would be hard to argue that thinking about giving that homeless guy some change does him just as much good as actually dropping a few pennies in his cup.
It seems the idea of thoughts being good/bad is biblical. I'm pretty sure somewhere in the bible it says thinking about sinning is just as bad as committing that sin, which is dumb. We all know that thinking about something and actually doing it have vastly different results. Planning out a murder in your head will never hold as much weight as actually going through with the murder.
Another reason I don't think there is such a thing as good/bad thoughts is how the human consciousness works. You can't fully control your thoughts and choosing to be good/evil is a conscious decision. Too many many of our day to day thoughts are passive. We aren't consciously deciding on the exact thoughts we have throughout the day.
In order for thoughts to be good/evil they would at the very least have to be fully conscious. Compare passive thoughts to a conscious action. If you know society's definitions of right and wrong, then performing a good/bad deed is a conscious decision.
At some point, guilt and come into the picture. Some people feel guilty for their "bad" thoughts, because they know of a person or group that would be offended by those thoughts. What people must realize, is no one is offended by thoughts they aren't aware of. Just because you think a "bad" thought, that doesn't mean you are a bad person.
At the end of the day, your thoughts don't affect the world outside of your mind. Shit, if you can't be completely free of societal bindings in your own head, then where can you expect any type of freedom? It's your mind; do what you want with it.
Growing up, I would hear rappers brag about how much money they had and how many hoes they were fucking. Usually the phrase, "It ain't trickin' if you got it," would get thrown around. Now, I thought I knew what that meant. I assumed this was a bunch of guys whose only means of getting pussy was to pay for it and they coined this saying to justify their actions. This was partially true, but I was missing the bigger picture.
It always helps to define the topic of discussion as to not cause confusion so here is my definition of "tricking."
Tricking - Exchanging money for a sexual favor.
This was the first definition I used and has been the only one I've used until recently. After spending some time and listening to old heads with money who have and still do pay for pussy, I learned that we had different definitions of the word. The rich man's definition of tricking is as follows:
Tricking (rich man's definition) - Spending money you don't have on women you can't afford.
My problem, besides being broke, was that I was letting pride blind me from what these rappers were actually saying. What I originally heard was, "I didn't have enough game to fuck bad bitches when I was broke and I still don't, but now that I'm rich, I can just buy the pussy."
What they were really saying was, "I'm at a point in my life where time IS money and it's a lot more efficient to just throw away a handful of cash that I have to burn vs spending a bunch of time I don't have to seduce a bitch that might not fuck."
Once I started making a lot more money, things became more clear to me. It isn't just rappers who think this way. It's ALL rich guys. When you're capable of making a ridiculous amount of money in a short amount of time, then your time becomes just as valuable as money, if not more.
It comes down to simple math. Let's say you chose your own work schedule and whenever you work, you make $100/hr. You obviously have to eat, sleep, shower etc. so let's also say after those things are done, you have 10 work hours left. That means you can potentially make $1000/day.
You meet a girl you want to fuck, but she makes you jump through hoops for the pussy. She requires that you text her every day, talk on the phone every other day, and take her on a date once a week. After 2 weeks, you finally get the draws, but it altogether took 20 hours to get to that point. That's $2000 you lost not working; not to mention the money you spent on dates.
On the other hand, you meet an equally fuckable woman who will do whatever you want for $100/hr. You don't have to text, call or take her on dates. You fuck her for 30 minutes on day 1. You lose $50 for the work time lost and another $50 to pay her. All in all, you're only down $100, which can be made back in an hour and you didn't have to wait 2 weeks to fuck. It literally costs you more than 20 times that to get pussy from the first chick through traditional means. Some might say $100 is too pricey for something you can essentially get for free, but $100 ain't shit if you make $1000/day. Why go through the hassle of working for pussy when you can work for money instead and let the pussy work for you?
Mature thought lead me to realize that you always pay for the pussy one way or another. The reason I had such disdain for tricking and those who did it was because I was forced to develop my game in order to consistently get the same results. It never occurred to me that earning enough money to trick in the first place was even harder; not to mention its harder still to earn more than that just so what you're doing is no longer considered tricking.
That may seem a little confusing to some. Let's back track. I am in no way condoning the art of tricking. Like I stated earlier, my new definition is spending money you DON'T have on women you CAN'T afford. Read that carefully. It's not considered tricking if you still have a butt load of money leftover when you're finished. It's also not tricking if you can afford to do it on a regular basis without it hindering other aspects of your life. That's why, "It ain't trickin' if you got it!"
I still haven't made that move to start a separate pussy Paypal account, but I'm highly considering it. Shit, when I look back on the amount of money I spent on dates and boyfriend duties, I might has well have been paying for the pussy outright. It definitely would've been cheaper, saved me a lot of time and gotten me badder bitches. Head my warning, though. If she ain't fucking, don't pay for shit. Many hoes will try to exploit your lust. Don't let them. And if you are tricking, please stop; at least until you get your bread up. Then your just making a purchase at that point.
Bad bitch - Any highly attractive female; ideally one who's looks don't require much effort.
When I say "effort," I am referring to the level of maintenance that goes into her appearance. A true bad bitch is still noticeably more attractive than the average female, even when she isn't at 100% fleek mode. We've all seen a bad bitch dressed down. You know. The whole "sweatpants, hair tied, chilling with no make-up on" look.
The best way to judge this is the shower test. Look at any woman when she is fresh out the shower; preferably after she washes her hair and before she shaves. If this isn't possible, then catching a chick in a swimsuit fresh out the pool is the next best thing. Essentially, that is her at her worst or most natural form: no make-up, hair undone, unshaven, no clothes to lift and squeeze things into place, and nothing covering up her scars, stretch marks or love handles. If a chick can manage to still look like an 8 or better in this form (with 7 being average looking), then she is a certified bad bitch.
With that said, on to the plight of the bad bitch. When it comes to finding a significant other, bad bitches don't have as many options as we think. Society will tell you that a bad bitch can have any man she wants, which simply isn't the case. While I do agree that it should be very easy for a bad bitch to attract most straight men, the first problem lies in the type of men they are attracted to.
If bad bitches always made the first move , then they'd definitely bag whatever guy they wanted without issue, but that's not the case. Like most other women, bad bitches want to be pursued. It would be way to easy for her to just walk up to an equally attractive guy and say "Hi, my name is...," and end up riding his face two weeks later. But no, bad bitches want a man who is willing to put in 90% of the initial effort while she puts in 9% so she can later complain about him not putting in 91%.
The problem is, the more attractive you are; the less approachable you are. Guys aren't afraid to talk to ugly chicks. If anything, they are afraid of them keeping that baby after they raw dog them. Average looking females are still easier to talk to than a bad bitch due to a low intimidation factor. Which means, if a bad bitch doesn't speak first, then all she'll get is stares.
The second problem bad bitches have are the types guys she attracts that are actually brave enough to initiate conversation. Bad bitches get hit on by these few groups of guys:
1. Sugar Daddies
A lot of the time, these guys are 30+. If you are bad bitch under 22 then that age gap might be a turn-off. These guys also won't be the most attractive looking men, mainly because they have enough money to offset their looks. That's primarily why they're trying to trick off on you. If your pussy can't be bought, then these dudes annoy you.
These guys come at you like they have nothing to lose. If they're on the younger side, then one of their buddies dared him to shoot his shot. If they are 25+ then he more than likely just gave himself a silent pep talk as he gawked at you from afar. Either way, their approach is rushed, awkward and half-assed, because they're anticipating being rejected.
You actually already know these guys. They're classmates, coworkers, neighbors and other random acquaintances. The ones that maybe had a chance were friendzoned, because they took to long to make a move. The rest are just happy you even associate with them. They're nothing more than a bunch of ass kissers.
These guys are basically resurrected Kamikazes. They reek of over-confidence. They've been shot down so many times, that rejection doesn't phase them any more. They think you're playing hard-to-get, so they just keep hitting on you no matter how many times they hear, "No."
What's funny about this group, is that they're not even the right sex. It may be flattering at first, but if you're strictly dickly, then these "guys" aren't getting anywhere. You already let Chico know that you ain't with that gay shit, but she is convinced she can change your mind. With the lack of suitable men, you just might. There will be a few fems in this group, but if they're hitting on you, then they've already accepted any male gender roles in a potential relationship.
So, that's the bad bitch's plight. She intimidates the guys she likes and is only hit on by the unworthy. She'll either have to wait for her looks to fade to start taking dating serious or learn to settle for the few guys brave enough to grab her ass in the club and not try to hide afterwards. Either that, or get used to making love to a strap-on.
One of my biggest pet peeves is when women try to explain the attributes of a "real man." That's like a cat trying to tell a dog how to bark. If you were born a female, you do not have the right to tell a man that he is or isn't a "real man." Just like men don't have the right to tell women whether or not they can have abortions. Why do I say this? Simply, because only men can set the standard of what a "real man" is.
Now, I do understand from where women get this entitlement. They are under the assumption that men are only here on earth to become their suitable mates. This assumption leads to the belief that a man must satisfy the requirements of a perfect boyfriend/husband/father in order to be deemed a "real man." Ehn! Wrong.
We aren't here for you. We are here for ourselves. When a man is fulfilling one of the many duties women have bestowed upon him, that shouldn't be taken lightly. That means he is going out of his way to do so, because most of the things you want us to do don't come naturally to us or we just think it's stupid.
Let's be honest. The average female is..... well.....average. There is is no better way to put that. Most of ya'll want the same things as the stereotypical woman. You want commitment, protection, sensitivity, financial stability, good sex, love, honesty, companionship, excitement and a listening ear. Us guys already know this.
Have you ever wondered why you had to tell your man how to treat you even though he should "just know?" It's not that we don't know what to do. Most of the time we just don't want to do it or the thing you specifically want at that time doesn't come naturally to us. So even when we are completely willing to give you what you want, we just might not be able to reach your standards.
If you tell me, "Hey bae, it would mean everything in the world to me if I could have an omelette right now." I'm not retarded. That obviously means "Make me an omelette." or "Buy me an omelette." I hear you loud and clear, but what if I have no money on me and I've never cracked an egg in my entire life, let alone touched a stove? If I come back with a shitty omelette then it looks like I reluctantly made you a half-assed omelette. If I tell you my situation, then you'll accuse me of lying and then pout about it for the next 2 weeks.
These are the types of situations you females put us men into on a regular basis. This situation may seem trivial, but I've witnessed break-ups over less. And it's just because she hopped on Facebook, made a few hypothetical statuses and, based on the comments of bitter women, decided that she wasn't dating a "real man."
You don't hear men speaking too much on what is to be or not to be a "real woman." That's because your womanhood isn't based on what you can do for us. Just because you don't enjoy sucking dick, know how to cook or have long hair; I'm not not going to accuse you of not being a "real woman." You may not be my type of woman, but I'm not going strip you of your womanhood because of it. You want to know what our idea of a "real woman" is? It's anyone born with a pussy that's 18+. That's all. That's it.
The other day, I’m sitting in the truck and I see an old homeless white guy slowly walking towards me. I try to avoid eye contact with him because I already know he’s coming over to beg for money. I have given change to people who begged for it plenty of times, but I’m just at that point in my life where I don’t feel the need to alleviate any guilt buy giving away money that I’ve earned.
So buddy walks up to the driver side door and I roll down the window. The violins start playing and he starts telling me how he has been living under the freeway and how cold it was that night. He did look bummy and it was around 30+ degrees that night, so I had no reason to believe he was lying. He then goes on to ask if I could spare some change so he could go buy some coffee and food from the nearby truck stop. He made sure to let me know that my donation would absolutely NOT be used for drugs or alcohol.
Again, I had no reason to believe he was lying. Initially, I considered just giving him some of the food I had on the truck. There were a few canned goods and ramen noodle packs I could’ve given him. Just in case he was lying though, I quickly changed my mind as to not waste my emergency stash on a complete stranger.
That night, I was in a decent mood, so I began feeling around in my pockets for some change. All I had on me was a single penny. This, by no means, was my last cent, but that’s immediately how it felt as I grabbed for it. Right as I took hold of it and began pulling it out of my pocket, something hit me. Suddenly, I thought, “Fuck this nigga.”
Even though this was completely internalized, it felt good to “say.” Why should I feel bad about keeping my money and turning down the opportunity for charity work? This guy was a complete stranger and I had no obligation to help him. Giving away my money so another grown man could eat wouldn’t give me any warm fuzzy feelings inside. There would be no benefit for me at all. I truly did not give a fuck about this man’s well-being; not even a little.
It actually made me proud to turn him down as I compared myself to all the pussies whom he guilt tripped out of their cash. Sure, it was only a penny, but that penny was mine. This guy was at least in his mid 40s, which means he had plenty of years to figure out how to not be homeless. Why should I have to pay for his mistakes?
When it was all said and done, I just told him I was broke and didn’t have any change on me. We all do this for some reason. We make up an excuse so we don’t seem like selfish assholes, but that wasn’t my reason this time. This time, I just wanted to let him down gently just in case he was on some psycho-I’m-going-to-kill-anyone-who-disrespects-me type of bullshit. All in all, I have no regrets. This was one of my shining moments in life.
Loading...Show more notes
First and foremost, I would like to start this post off by saying, “Yes…the fuck…it is.” I love Money so much that I am quick to defend it’s honor. How dare you live in this society and have the audacity to blaspheme the all mighty Dollar.
Has it not provided you with all you have? Has it not given you shelter? Has it not put clothes on your back? Has it not fed you and your children? Has it not allowed you to ball out and stunt on these haters? Then why have you forsaken your Provider?
People love Money until they realize they have to work hard to get a lot of it. Then suddenly “Money is evil” or “Money can’t buy happiness.” There is this stigma that the rich people are a group of evil motherfuckers that stepped on the backs of poor people to build their wealth or that they are bunch of spoiled brats who were born with a silver spoon in their mouths.
Let’s clear this up. Most millionaires in America are not only 1st generation, but they are also self-made. You know what that means? They started off just as poor as everyone else, because their parents were also poor and no one gave them shit. It’s almost as if people forget that the American dream is to get rich and live a lavish life.
How can you hate on a group of people just because they are doing something you wish you could do? No one gets mad at Will Smith because he acts too good. No one gets mad at Lebron James because he plays too well. No one hates Beyoncé for being able to sing her ass off. So why get mad at someone who excels at making money outside of the entertainment field?
A lot of this hate comes from the billionaires (Rockerfellers, Kennedys, Winfreys) and how they became billionaires. Most of them inherited their billions from family members who capitalized on the slave trade, Holocaust and every war in history. These aren’t the people I refer to when I say “rich.” These people are beyond that. Once you make it to the billionaire club, you are now a god. I’m not discussing gods in this posts; only men.
I’m not saying that all rich people are all honest and upstanding citizens, but the same goes for the average person working at McDonald’s. You don’t hate on fast food workers that get free food every day. You hate the rich, because you are jealous and you know you’ll never be one of them. Which is crazy, because most people don’t attempt to obtain riches. You want what they have, but don’t want to put in the work they had to put in. All I can say is, you can’t value money and not actively seek it.
I remember, when I was about 8 or 9, my parents got a divorce and my pops "moved" out of the house. Technically, my mom threw him out, because she caught him cheating....I think. I knew he was cheating, but I'm not quite sure if THAT was the reason they finally divorced. What I do know, is that he was paying the mortgage on the house and those payments stopped once he was no longer living there.
My mom wasn't used to paying ALL the bills on her own, not to mention being a single mother of 2. Naturally, we were evicted from our home despite my grandma sending us what money she could. Now that I think about it, we were evicted pretty quick so we were probably already behind on the mortgage.
So here we were, my mom, little sister and I, with no place to go. In St.Louis, there are plenty of vacant houses (vaco) to squat in. My mom had the clever idea of packing everything up and "acting" like we were moving out. After that, we just squatted in our own house. Surprisingly, that worked and it took the bank a long ass time to officially remove is from the premises. We eventually found a way cheaper house in a way cheaper neighborhood. We were technically homeless, if only for a short period of time.
Lately, I've been thinking about becoming homeless (temporarily) once again. I take my financial growth very seriously and the main resource I need to acquire the kind of wealth I want is retaining more of my cash. I've already cut my spending to just the basics, got a promotion at work and moved some money around to take out half of my debt all at once. Even with all of that, I could still use more cash flow. The only unnecessary expense I have yet to cut is my rent.
As a truck driver, I'm rarely home. After doing the math, I calculated that I only spend between 4-5 days at home in the average month. My rent is about $800/mo and is about to rise, because I haven't renewed my lease. All of my monthly expenses add up to about $2000/mo. After all my expenses are paid, I have very little disposable income left. That's means I've been spending almost 40% of my income on something I only utilize 16% of the year. That math was all I needed to make my decision.
As soon as I can end my current lease, I'm getting rid of my apartment and putting all my things in storage. I've been playing around with the idea of being "voluntarily homeless" for awhile, but I kept making excuses not to pull the trigger. The main cons with being "voluntarily homeless" is that I'd have to reroute my mail and I'd no longer have a bachelor pad to go back to when I wasn't on the road. After weighing the pros and cons, the only thing I had to do was get over the fear of being uncomfortable. Even though I had technically been homeless before, I still had a place to call "home."
At this point in my life, I don't have the luxury of time on my side. Whenever an opportunity presents itself, I have to jump on it immediately. This is my chance to completely get out of debt and start investing my money. Since this is voluntary, I'll always have the option to change my mind, so my risks are minimum. I'll make a follow-up post and keep all you guys updated.
Should men be allowed to hit women? This has been a question I've seen/heard a lot growing up and even still today on social media. It's obviously phrased in a way that immediately implies that a man physically harming a woman is taboo. However, if you rephrase the question, you get a less biased inquiry. The question should be, "Should you be allowed to hit someone in self-defense?"
Why do I structure the question this way? It alleviates the need for a complicated answer. The proper answer is either a "Yes" or a "No." There will always be those difficult people who say "Well, it depends on...." Fuck those people. Most people would answer, "Yes" and I would just beat the shit out of anyone who answered "No" all the while reminding them of their answer.
Now that we have set a moral foundation, we can go into specific scenarios. As to not stray too far away from the gender issue from the original question; let's start there. Should a man be allowed to hit a woman in self-defense? I say fuck yeah if it's in self-defense. No one would argue that a woman shouldn't be able to fight back if attacked by a man, so I see no reason why it would be any different if the roles were reversed.
The main arguments I hear are:
1. Men are stronger than women.
So. If anything, that should deter women from initiating altercations with men. Additionally, not every man is stronger than every woman. Also, the attacker normally has ample time to size up their victim before approaching them. If a woman plans on losing a 1-on-1 fight, she is likely to bring a weapon.
2. A woman's attacks won't hurt a man.
Bullshit. I've seen children beat up adults. If that's possible, why would it seem farfetched for a grown ass woman to hurt a grown ass man. Every human has vulnerable spots. It doesn't matter who hits those spots; it's going to hurt regardless.
3. Real men don't hit women.
I'm not even sure how this is a valid argument. I won't get into the definition of a "real man," because I spoke about it in another post. This statement implies that men who don't consider themselves "real men" by female standards are allowed to hit women just as another woman would. So if I renounce my manhood and identify as a woman, I'm allowed to fight women without persecution? That kind of opens the door for men to say a "real woman" would never attack a man. Therefore, if I defend myself against a female attacker, it's OK to beat her as if she was a man, because she isn't a "real woman."
4. Men can just walk away.
Really? To the women that read my blog, are you seriously telling me that if you attacked a man he could casually walk away from the situation unscathed? This sounds like some dumb ass advice a clueless mom gives to her kid who is getting bullied at school. You CAN NOT walk away from someone who is determined to fight you.
5. You wouldn't want a man to put his hands on your mother, sister, daughter, girlfriend etc.
First off, you shouldn't want anyone you know to get into a fight. Second, if I witness any of the females in my life START a fight with a man and end up losing, then they just have to take that ass whoopin. I might step in if it looks like they'll die. Otherwise, I'll respect the art of 1-on-1 fighting. You shouldn't start a fight with a man expecting another man to bail you out if you end up losing. You take that much deserved ass whooping like the grown independent woman you are.
In conclusion, I only advocate violence if it is in self-defense, specifically in the prevention of one's own bodily harm whether it be against a man or a woman. I also advocate violence as an immediate form of retaliation to a prior violent act. The law of the land will forever be "An eye for an eye." You hit me; I hit you back. Playground rules, bitch.