Tags
Forget all that yappity yap Beyonce was singing about, feelings and ish, I posed to question to myself, if I were a guy, what would I do? What would I be like? Would I date myself? Here’s the break down of Guy-Jess…I’ll name him Justin lol Justin would not do monotony monogamy. He would dabble in different chicks as he saw fit, Justin would be selfish as hell and as long as he got off that’s all that would matter. However, Justin would be F.L.Y. I’m talkin smellin good, lookin good, and I would be all up in a hoe’s psyche LOL-I’m talking riDICulous game…and I’m not being incredulous-I know women…they take a LOT before they’re “done”. Bein real. Tellin her all the simple shit she wants to hear, getting what I want and moving on. Of course my ladies right now are appaulled. Sorry?! But I look at all the things that men get away with now and it would be too tempting not to do it myself. Furthermore, I’m sure that somewhere along the line Justin would meet some dame that was his match and didn’t take his shit, and I’d be intrigued but wouldn’t know how to act for her. So it wouldn’t work out. Kinda the same for Jessica-except I’m not a whoremonger as a woman LOL.
So would I date myself? No. I’d try (as Justin) to get with someone like Jessica just for the challenge but Jessica is way too smart for the likes of Jus and I’d have to step my game up, which is fun when you’re used to just having things easily. So it’d be a game, but never anything serious. There would be too much ego and too much of a power struggle. Not saying that Jess is tryna be a guy, no no no but Justin wouldn’t know what to do w/ someone as strong-willed as he (i) is. Whereas, as a woman I crave a strong guy, even though I’m strong, I know when to back down-Justin wouldn’t lol.
Would I be disrespectful and treat women like hoes? Nah, but I’d treat hoes like hoes. I imagine its way more fun to “invade” than “be invaded”, E (my guy friend) feels that I’d be a selfish lover and not take into account my partners needs. Thats effed up, right? Is it true? Well I don’t know about all that. I’d like to think that I still have a reputation to uphold and if I’ma do something I’ma excel at it lol…but who knows penis makes u stupid. But how much of the “boy me” is embedded in the “girl me” and WHO decided that sex was for boys??? We’re the ones with the ONLY body part created solely for sexual gratification (f wit it) so I say we’ve got a 1up on men.
As a woman, who is happy to BE a woman, I still wonder about these double standards. Something inside a woman’s superego is constantly checking her and moving her away from a hedonistic lifestyle of pleasure. Do men have this same thing? I mean of course they do but is that inner voice as loud? If you take away the social stigma of ‘hoe’ and you always keep safe sex in mind…would you be more of a hoe, Ladies? There’s something to be said about a woman who lives a Samantha Jones lifestyle. With no apologies or excuses, hell its just sex and men do it…why must the woman be the one thinking of “relationships” and “the future”? Who says females can’t just want impulsive pleasure??
So what do you think…if you “were a boy|girl” what kind of guy|girl would you be?? Would you date yourself??
I’m surprised you would take the road of using women and using the term “Hoes.”
Knowing “the game” its sad that you would choose to continue allowing woman to act in ways that will haunt them later. Its not that women should not enjoy their sexual side, but they would get more respect by taking power and choosing, not simply acquiescing to , sex. As to your question, people tend to be attracted to the qualities in others that they like most in themselves or aspire to be more like. People with a positive self image would date themselves. People with a negative self image would not.
I think the ho thing is not necessarily sleeping around a lot, it’s that people KNOW you sleep around a lot. For dude’s it’s acceptable to be out with it, for females, not so much.
Honestly, I’d be more open to hoe-strolling if not for my extremely high standards. Not that I need love and all that, but that you have to be hella secsy for me to want you without strings.
I have yet to meet anyone like that.
In real life anyway…
I think we’re special though because Taurus is known for their ridiculously high secs drives.
2 Ed: I didn’t say I would be using women, I just said I wouldn’t be monogamous, and not serious. Yup tell em what they wanna hear but I didn’t say lie about the reality of the relationship. And while I disagree with your high/low self-image theory, its appreciated…I think that yes, birds of a feather flock together, but two very strong or two very passive people in a relationship may not be the best fit, there has to be some balance, give and take…
2KaNisa: I agree, standards completely keep me in check, that morals, and a good reputation. I’m very aware of the double standard and I’m not willing to fight the system-so to speak. However, I double agree we Tauruses are pretty passionate beings-but @ least for me, it is confined to the perimeters of a relationship.
Wow! I do not know where to begin. I love this article. I am kind of blown away of yuor alter ego because I would do the same thing. I think I have some of that in me now but I am still a woman at heart. Double standards exist and they never go away. That sucks because we are a whore to sleep with a guy on the first night and they are looked at as a hero. I am so over this bs. I am trying to just do me and hopefully find someone in the process. I love the article. Great job.
Well well Jess… you have pretty much hit the nail on the head.
A few things- If I were a boy, NO I wouldnt be in a relationship until i was good and ready to be in one. But this is how I live my life currently- its just the social pressures of being a woman that somehow mask my own desires… confusing me, making me think I ‘m ready. Because that’s what we middle 20 something WOMEN, are supposed to want and what I have realized is that is that when you start being in the game for someone else- thats when you start slippin. so, NO, I would not lead some chick on- its not fair. I hate relationships where people are just in them just to be in them- Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Uh, well no I probably wouldnt be able to date myself until I’m ready to settle down. There would be no point, I’m not goin.
If I were a boy, I would take advantage where advantages could be taken… as a female I would get called a GOLD DIGGER. As a male, I’m a PIMP.
I would stay fresh to death for sure, I would wear nice cologne, I would probably be a NUPE, I would drive an SUV, I would have some degrees, I would mainly text message and talk on occasion, she would meet no family until she could be the one, and uh i wouldnt leave voicemails.
You know what, besides the sex thing? What’s so wrong with acting like a dude?
Being emotionally distant until you’re ready to settle down.
Being upfront about what you’re there for.
Just having fun and not reading into things at all.
Would that really be so bad?
Seems like the only difference is the use of sex and again…if you’re up front about it what you’re there for, why is that so bad? Why is a woman “acquiescing” if she wants sex outside of a relationship? Why can’t she just have a good time and move on?
Honestly, scientifically, sex is a basic need just like food, shelter, etc…even Maslow says so.
I’m blogging in your comments. I’ll just write an entry. LOL.
Pingback: And So It Is Live » Blog Archive » If I Were a Boy
I did not say a woman is “Acquiescing” when she wants sex outside of a relationship. Notice, I did not mentions relationships in my comment. A woman is “acquiescing” when she is not willing to take charge and be upfront about her desires. Too often I encounter women who only want sex, but they are unwilling or afraid to say so upfront. Honestly, I think most women who think they only want sex are lying to themselves. Women are not men. Women are built to have babies. For this reason, women have to be more careful, because their consequences are much greater. Women know this at their core, but some try to play it off. People would do themselves an enormous favor by limiting their sexual encounters to partners they would consider responsible enough to be a parent, because the only anti-pregnancy system that works 100% is abstinence. As for your “science,” reproduction requires sex and its wired into all life forms to reproduce when possible. Human happiness simply requires intimacy. Intimacy does not have to mean sex. It could include sex, but sex is not the be all and end all of happiness. Any one that makes sex the core of their happiness/ relationship is a fool. I say to women, if you want to have sex, then go ahead, more power to you, but have sex like an AMAZON! Don’t just wait until your invited to the show, go do some inviting yourself. Take full charge of your sex life. Do not simply wait for the next guy to invite you to his bed. Remember, there are women out there that do not want to have sex outside of a relationship. You would be doing these women a favor by clearly distinguishing yourself from them. This way, men that only want sex will go see you, and men who want a relationship wont.
We agree, women are NOT men, such is the reason for the post. We, well at least I-don’t wanna speak for KaNisa-was saying that as a woman I am highly selective and don’t engage in those kinds of behaviors that I would if I were a man. Whether it be wrong or right to think that way, I dunno but it is what it is.
Where biologically you are correct women are genetically, and evolutionarily predispositioned to be more selective when it comes to mates, now in our CULTURE women have begun waining away from that. Not debating whether that is wrong or right either…it just is.
I also agree that 99.9% of the time its not just sex. Reason #954 that casual sex is a myth and better left to theory than practice-like communism.
Ed I’m not disagreeing with you.
I agree many people fool themselves when it comes to sex and how they go about having it. People thinking sex=relationship/commitment when their partner doesn’t feel this way…and them not being on the same page because it was never discussed.
I agree that we don’t traditionally put out as much as we have 9 potential months invested with each encounter.
I also agree that many, I might even say the majority of women can’t do “friends with benefits” and fool themselves into thinking they can.
Some though CAN do this without issues.
Yes women are not men…but women “need” “require” “pursue” “want” sex as much as dudes do. It is in fact a scientific fact and need…no matter what the driving factor may be (lust, reproduction, etc.). Intimacy is actually a separate requirement. Even the bible mentions that if the husband or wife wants to get it on, it’s your biblical duty to get it on…or if a virgin is lusty, they should get married…and get it on.
I am confused by the whole, women not taking charge and being up front when it comes down the time of getting the deed done. Are they not taking charge when they open their legs? They can choose not to. A dude can never be in charge of that unless he takes her by force.
Or is it that she enters a situation under the guide of wanting to be in a relationship but then is only really there for sex?
Enlighten me.