Test Drive Before You Buy

The phrase "Test Drive Before You Buy" refers to sexual chemistry. It's no secret that sex is one of the most important components of any committed relationship. According to couples, sex is a way to connect on a deeper level. When two people are passionate about each other and vibe well, it's just a matter of time before they lay down with each other. Why wouldn't sex come next? The chemistry is there, so it's only natural. There's a lot I look for in a car: Reliability, low mileage and good fuel economy. The older the car, the more mileage it has which makes it susceptible to frequent maintenance and other car issues. With a new car, it's fresh on the lot. It's waiting for the RIGHT owner to purchase the vehicle. There's nothing like that fresh, new car smell. You're the one who gets to break it in, and put YOUR special touch on that vehicle.

You can't put your own touch on a car if someone else already had it. With the "test drive before you buy" theory, some people want to test sexual chemistry before they agree to a committed relationship. To each their own, but that couldn't be me. I see sex as something very special, an act to be shared with the woman I cherish. If I'm vibing with a woman, we're already compatible, and sex would be a bonus. See, I think on a deeper level than most people. I don't have to "test drive" a woman for sexual chemistry, because I'm not thirsty like most people. Keep it real, you want a reason to get her/him between the sheets. The problem with test driving before you buy is that everyone before you has "test drove" before they bought, and all that mileage equals wear & tear.

When I think of a (wo)man who wants to "test drive before (s)he buys", I think of someone who is content with sloppy seconds, thirds, etc. The more mileage on a vehicle, the greater probability that the car won't last as long because although you may treat the person well, who's to say the previous person did? You don't know. Besides, what makes one think (s)he hasn't test drove other (wo)men?



Attraction Should Never Trump Wisdom

Everyone has someone they're attracted to, and want to pursue something more with them. The issue is when attraction trumps wisdom. You ignore red flags and proceed, and when that person's true colors show; you're looking crazy wondering what happened. If you used wisdom, you would have saw the signs. A friend of mine was telling me about this guy she's feeling. They mesh well on some levels, but she can't get past his player ways. He's over 40, and engaged to a fiancee that he's been living with for 10 years, but he's not interested in her. He's checking for other women on dating sites. My friend is somewhat attracted to him because he's got a lot going for him. Through her prayers, he's getting into church and trying to get closer to God, but...he's a porn addict and is shacking. Here's my question: He's been with her 10 years, engaged for 3 and according to him, he's not feeling her. Wouldn't common sense tell him to cut ties with her?

My friend asked him the following question: Do you consider me one of your random Internet hoochies or are we special friends? Anytime you're trying to get to know someone, you don't set up dating profiles and troll for booty. Think about it, you say (s)he's the complete package, so being honesty should come naturally. There's nothing wrong with having a dating profile, just don't lie about it. If my pic circulated over dating sites, and I was trying to get to know a woman, a bulb would go off to let me know that I need to stop trolling for women online and focus on the total package in front of me. Lastly, life is too short to waste years on someone you're not feeling.

There's nothing wrong with being attracted to someone. Attraction + committment will make you work at stuff that should be long over. At the same time, know what you're getting into with a person before you sign on as their (wo)man.

Giving Your All: By Angeln Disguise

I often hear people say, "I gave my all". Did you really give your all?

According to whose standards?

Some people seem to think that the "one size fits all" rule applies in relationships.

We are all different beings. What you did to make your past lover happy may not make your current or future lover happy.

For example. Your old lover may have highly valued you buying them nice things (gifts),... taking them to nice restaurants or being there when they call you (acts of service), but your new lover may not. They may value you giving them compliments or words of encouragement (words of affirmation), your physical touch (intimacy) or spending quality time doing nothing more than just talking.
 As such, instead of saying "Nothing that I do makes them happy",
Learn what makes them happy by putting more emphasis on what they SAY makes them happy or by observing their level of satisfaction when you do certain things.
 

Then you are justified in saying, "I gave my all".

 



Forgive & Keep It Moving

 

Too many people miss the last sentence of this statement. If someone hurts you, it's important to forgive them. It's said that forgiveness is for you, and not the other person. I agree, but...what's with trying to reconcile a broken relationship? That's crazy because if someone breaks the relationship, THEY made that decision, so they should be the ones to fix it. Then again, it's a blessing when someone breaks a bond through no fault of your own, because not all relationships are built to last. Once a relationship has been severed, it cannot be fixed. Leave it alone, and build a new relationship with those who will appreciate you. Life is too short to try and continually reconcile with those who hurt you. You can forgive, but value yourself enough NOT to reconcile with the same people who could care less about you.

When I think of someone who hangs with people who hurt them, I think of a person who has low self-worth. They don't value themselves enough to believe they are deserving of caring folks who have their best interest at heart. Around their friends, they talk a big game about cutting toxic people out, then they get around that person and are buddy-buddy with them. Then again, some toxic people are very good at hiding their nature. They can hurt you, and dress it up like they didn't mean it. They manipulate them with a sincere apology (even though (s)he knows it's not sincere) and they're back on good terms. You can tell when someone's truly sorry for offending you, because they follow up their apology with repentance. They make a conscious effort not to make the same mistake again. In most cases, if someone hurts you, they did so intentionally.

Forgiveness will always be for you, and not the other person. The best thing to do is forgive, and move on. Cut all ties with the offender because if not, you're giving them permission to offend you over and over again, and you don't need that in your life.

 



Response to "Question"

One of my faithful readers Khrystle Nichole posted a very good response to my blog message "Question"

 

Khrystle Nichole With the state of black marriage already being what it is, pretty low, I think such a law would only further discourage blacks from getting married. Furthermore, as you stated, there would have to be provisions in such a law that would allow a woman who was being abused could exit that marriage. However, yet still, having provisions to allow divorce for an abused spouse would likely only further victimize the victim. You would also have those who will lie about being abused in order to get a divorce. If we are really a free country, we can’t start telling people how often they can get married. Next, we will be telling people how many children to have too. We will be no better than any other dictatorship. I think most women initiate divorce because in the final analysis, women are more honest than men. They are more honest to say the relationship isn’t working. When a woman is done, she’s done and she wants to just get on with her life. Men will hang around in a bad relationship for years complaining to his friends, family, other women and anybody else who will listen about how bad his wife is. Yet he won’t seek to resolve that union. I do think people should take more time to know themselves and be honest with themselves about what they want in a life partner. Too many people settle for less when they want more.

I'm Just Being Honest!

 

Today's blog message is a spin on Future's song "Honest". Here we go:

 

1. 1993-2001 were great years for the US: Unemployment low, college grads getting jobs fresh out of school, I'm being honest.

2. Employers have no right to complain about the lack of qualified employees if they're going to pay them peanuts. Someone with solid education, skillset and experience should demand a higher salary. I'm being honest.

3. There was a time where marriage was valued. Those times are long gone; I'm being honest.

4. Everyone and their mother has a reality show. It seems like making a fool of yourself yields fame & fortune. Sign me up! I'm being honest.

5. How can a man call himself the head of household if he's making less than his woman, or he's a stay-at-home dad? I'm being honest.

6. 1 in 88 children have autism & of that number, the diagnosis is 1 in 54 for boys. Crazy statistics; I'm being honest.

7. Grown men arguing for the right to fuss like women on social media. That's crazy, I'm being honest.

8. When you have peace of mind, everything else falls into place. I'm being honest.

9. Apollo Nida (Phaedra Parks husband) is looking at serious jail time. I feel bad for his sons because kids don't need to see one or both parents locked up. I'm being honest.

10. Miami Heat is going to have an easy road to a 3peat. The only teams I see as a problem are San Antonio and Indiana. Indiana struggled to beat Atlanta, so that's probably one less thorn. I'm being honest.

11. Jameis Winston needs to grow up, seriously. Stealing crab legs? He's not in high school anymore so he should conduct himself better. I guess he feels invincible since he got off for sexual assault. I'm being honest.

12. Debt freedom is something everyone should strive for. There's nothing like getting paid and not having a mortgage, student loan or any type of debt.



Spilling The Beans: Angel In Disguise

This was too good NOT to share. Read On:

 

I'm sorry ladies, but I have to spill the beans again. This is not an attack on any one person, but just my observations. If this isn't you, just move on. If this is you, I hope to invoke deep thought.

After reading through some responses from my last post, something spoke to me and said to provide a logical reason why SOME black women feel that we are the most loyal women.

Here's the scoop.

Usually if the man is the bread winner, you will hear words like "Leader", "Head of Household" or "Submission.

Conversely, it is more likely for a woman to ENFORCE a sense of role equality, if she is the bread winner.

When I say equal. I mean equal in roles. This is not the same as equal in value. I think that it's fair to say that men who value being the leader also view their women equal in value.

Black men who are the bread winners in their homes, generally, will never go for equal roles. This doesn't mean that they don't respect their wives or that her opinion doesn't matter. In fact, healthy relationships often thrives when each partner strengths are put to work.

Because of what I noted above, some women who have good jobs work better with men who aren't as accomplished as them. This isn't necassarily a bad thing. I would never judge the merits of this type of relationship because what works in these homes, works for them.

I do take issue, however, with the women (just as well as men) who PURPOSELY seek out less established men for the wrong reasons.

Why? Because those relationships often ends in a disaster and perpetuates this vicious cycle of children being born OOW (Out Of Wedlock) or single mother homes.

The ugly truth is, some women who have good jobs only seek men who aren't as accomplished as them, and more often than not, those relationships fail because these women have bad intentions. When I say that they seek these men, I don't necessarily mean that they flat out tell themselves that they only want less established men. It is done more subtly by avoiding or by not going for the well established men. These women are intimidated by well established men, because he seems cocky or they view themselves as being out of his league.

Their bad intentions are often realized later on though, and their men will not place themselves beneath their woman regardless if she makes more than him or not, unless he feels like he drastically needs her. If he is able to get himself more established, he will move on.

Heck even if he doesn't get more established, he will move on to a woman that will let him be the leader.

Then, instead of realizing this, when the man moves on, these women will only blame the men.

That's why (logically) SOME black women feel that they are the most loyal, because unlike many white women, black women don't mind getting a man who isn't as established as her because in her mind she can call ALL of the shots.

 

My View: Many men don't mind if their woman makes more, he wants to know that she won't lord that over his head. Men are looking for a woman to help him build. What Angel wrote ties into a previous blog. What are the intentions of a woman who gets a less-established man? Some women want to help their man make it, others want to help him come up, but as soon as the relationship turns sour, she can say "I made you, you wouldn't be nothing without me."