gotta love tank
he's from milwauke!!
congrats on the baby
[link to external website removed]
“What you keep in the dark comes to light,” a statement in which we’ve all heard and probably have used once or multiple times. However, when we’re actually in a situation in which the truth is distorted or hidden, is it really better to know? Or should we follow the proposal of Mario Winans of not wanting to know?
In a previous and highly controversial note “Power of the P-U-S-S-Y” I stated that both men and women cheat, however, I went on to elaborate on the different reasons leading to their infidelities. Women, I said, cheat for a legitimate reason; because we are in search of fulfillment when things in our relationship are continuously neglected. Meanwhile, men cheat because they fall victim of a woman’s ultimate power… Her ***.
Within this past week, I’ve held several conversations with a male individual who states and stands by the statement, “it is in a man’s nature to be with more than one woman.” Scratching my head in utter confusion and divergence, I ask him to elaborate. He then goes on to tell me:
“There is no such thing as a loyal or faithful man. A man controls his actions [infidelities] when he feels he has something he doesn’t want to compromise or jeopardize in compensation for his actions; may it be a wife, his family, etc. Although a man may choose to control his infidelities, it doesn’t affect the fact that it’s in his nature to be with more than one woman, thus, any man who isn’t *** or is in his right mind are not exempt and will at some point think about it [another woman].”
Still a little thrown off and curious to get a second man’s opinion, I write my good friend Latavious asking him his perspective on this statement. His response, “It's human nature to indulge in carnal desires. It's human nature to be selfish, and to lust and want something that doesn't belong to them. So in that sense yes, I agree. But it's in a woman's nature also.”
Is it really in a woman’s nature to be with more than one man? Using Latavious’ perspective to challenge that of Man X, I get the following response; “If *** was in a woman’s nature, this place [the world] would be chaotic. If women loved *** and thought about *** as much as men, there’d hardly be any relationships. Women are negative, men are positive, and the two opposites attract. To love *** and think about it a lot is not in a woman’s nature.”
Again I scratch my head. I know a few women who love *** and think about it a lot [I plead the fifth lol]. So why is it too not in a woman’s nature? Of course Man X has an answer for this as well.
“Women have *** because they feel like it or are in the mood. Women have *** to satisfy their man or have a reason to do it.” On the contrary, “it’s automatic for men. Men don’t have to know the girl or her name. It’s simply in a man’s nature. Being emotional is a woman’s nature; being sensitive, wanting affection, and nurturing. Women are natural nurturers.”
So here I am now sitting at my laptop, my mind swarming with questions, thoughts, and utter confusion. I now second guess the views discussed and argued in my previous note “Power of the P-U-S-S-Y.” Do men cheat because they are weak and fall victim to a woman’s ***? Or do men cheat simply because it is in their nature?
Is it a fact that because we cannot think like men, understand and interpret like men, or relate to men completely [because we are women] that we don’t believe it is a man’s nature to be with more than one woman? If you know your history, you know we’ve all derived from Africa, the Mother Land. You know that polygamy is and has always been practiced here. Have we fallen victim to western world teachings declaring one man to one woman is right and anything different is wrong?
Who am I to say? I’m just one woman and I’ll be damned if my man is running around creeping with another woman. And that’s why I say:
“If it is a man’s nature to be with more than one woman, then leave me in the dark before a crime comes to light!”