Sex and the Seven

Sunday, April 15, 2007


The Webster definition of a man could not possibly capture the scenarios of the individuals that run rampant in this world, charading as grown people, disguising their little boy intellect and level of maturity . When I was little, I envisioned dating to be simple. As I grew older, I realized that it, unfortunately, is just not that easy. The "men" of 2007 are plagued with disorders such as commitment phobia, excessive pride, cockiness and my personal favorite, "disappearing acts due to personal issues". I often wonder, how can you claim to care, or claim to love someone, but hurt them at the sometime? As a female, I am guilty of alot things, mainly being entirely too trusting and forgiving. It is exhausting to emanate pure disgust for someone for an extended period of time. However, the forgiveness, or what's better known as the second chance, is often mistaken by "men" to translate into "I can do whatever I want, take all the time I need, and she'll still be there." How would you feel if someone disappeared on you, or if you had to someow find solace in the fact that they "really care", but they're just going through something, knowing good and damn well that it all sounds like a poor excuse for bullshit?If the roles were reversed, I guarandamntee there would NEVER be a chance to make it up, but yet I, the female am supposed to believe an apology, and that from this point forward you'll never do it again, and that you really care? Not really sure, but the last time I checked, Jesus hadn't stepped down from the throne and knighted you as Lord and Savior. Therefore, what makes you think you have the right to have more than one free pass to act like a selfish ass? And what ever happened to the traditional man who was content with taking care of a female even though she didn't need it? The one who didn't mind actually going through the acts of dating, and playing a masculine role instead of the sorry alternative of wanting a "sugar mama" to "treat" and cater to their every need? Don't get me wrong, I'm an excellent significant other. I'm thoughtful, I'm considerate, I'm observant and all of the above, but only given when credit is due. When I think of a man, I think of the nonexistent type, the one who is honest, supportive, well versed, considerate, intelligent and respectful. The one who recognizes a good one when he sees her, and will do everything in his power to keep her around. The one who would never mess up a second chance, because he wouldn't need one in the first place. The one who isn't a raving coward scared of the word "commitment" and the one who won't mind extending themselves and their pride to get her back. This ghost definition of a "man" rests in my eyes and the eyes of women like me who still think that there is someone out there who will treat them the way they deserve to be treated. The "men" of 2007, or at least the ones I encounter, are content with being cowards, running scared from the idea of settling down; assholes, this could cover a variety of activities from cheating to being MIA; and annoyingly confident that one day the one who they should have been with five years ago, will still be around when they get ready. I, for one, am tired of being the girl in the box, the one who they want to be with, but just not "right now", the one who they can switch on and off when they feel like it. I am not meant to be put on hold, and if anyone would risk losing me more than one time, it tells me all I need to know. So I ask the question, will the real men please stand up?