A Woman's Gotta Have it


Of course, T.I., T.I.P., Clifford Harris, whatever you would like to call him, is a rapper, a lyricist, an entertainer, but I would venture to say that during a fairly recent interview he made one of the most profound assertions ever to be made regarding love and relationships. “Its two types of dudes who will never have a problem getting a woman, a man of danger and a man who’s funny. If you can make her safe or make her laugh, or both, you’re good.” Wanting to make sure I got the quote correct, I pulled up the interview, took out my pencil and pad, and watched the clip repeatedly. Oh how I love TI’s Southern pastoral, Oswald Bates-In Living Color, type vibe!

I began to reflect on my past relationships and my desires in a mate. Comical. Check. Risky. Check. Not quite right or parent approved. Check. TI was right. I fit the bill. For some reason, those two things had been extremely appealing to me. And if they had both, even better. I will say that I’ve evolved, a bit, but I would really like to use TI’s philosophy to take up for myself and most women. This is a little different from the old idea that good girls like bad boys, but the underlying reason is the same. Women like a man that makes them feel secure. And this is more than just financial. Most women find comfort in knowing that their man is a “man,” with masculine attributes, confidence, and strength. As we get older, we don’t want the “thugs” that we did back in high school, but we definitely appreciate the men that can get “project-ish” if they need to.

And laughter; nothing is sexier than a man that is funny, but doesn’t try to be. He’s confidently funny, not over doing it, but has a clever sense of humor. He can keep us feeling light-hearted, entertained, and carefree. I sense my perfect boo. Men, if you can provide neither comic relief nor security, I suggest you start investing in a 401K.

Hooked on Ebonics...doesn't work for me.




“You talk like a white girl.” “You trying to act white.”

For some reason, many black people have come to adopt the notion that we as a race speak improper English; that if you don’t add enough ain’t’s, imma’s, skreets, skraights, and skrimps to your speech, you are indeed acting or speaking “white.” Being that I’ve always been a target of this claim, I have always felt offended and quite frankly, put in a box, with this type of thinking. For me, it limits what is considered “black,” and what is considered “white.” It stereotypes. It produces shortcomings. It automatically sets up a hierarchy when it comes to language…black people speak poor English and whites speak proper English. Why does my English have to be poor? Can’t I be proper?

Of course, this is in reaction to the new Drug Enforcement Agency undertaking where they are attempting to hire nine Ebonics speakers in order to solve drug and criminal investigations. I have a problem with this. If blacks cannot agree on what is “black” and “white” in language, amongst many other things, how can we come to define Ebonics as African-American Vernacular English(the term that is being used)? So all of a sudden we have a language that is not used or recognized by all of its members? I think not.

The term “Ebonics,” became widely recognized in 1996, when the Oakland school board attempted to write a resolution that would allow instruction to be given in Ebonics and English. Upon my research, I found that Ebonics was not and is not simply considered slang, but it is actually being presented as though it is a language of the African-American community. Apparently African-Americans are “biologically predisposed toward a particular language through heredity.” I guess genetics has contributed to me throwing all of my words together, cutting off my sentences, and adding a “know what I’m sayin’” at the end. The Oakland schools were even trying to consider English as a second language (ESL) endorsement for teachers who were “bilingual.” Come on. While I appreciate someone attempting to legitimize the way we speak behind closed doors, but not really, I’ll pass.

And now the DEA wants to hire Ebonics experts. This step would actually “legitimize” Ebonics as a language, coincidentally confirming the idea that all or most African-Americans speak something other than English. I guess maybe we should have hillbilly experts, or perhaps valley girl or surfer dude experts as well. When teachers have conferences, they’ll need translators for Spanish-speaking people, as well as black folks. When parents schedule their conferences, they’ll need to decide whether or not they need a translator present for the meeting, for those unfamiliar English terms.

In case I was unclear, I don’t like this idea. It will inevitably have a serious backlash against the African-American community. “They talk so bad, they need translators.” “They’re so different, they have their own language.” The thing is, it would be recognized as a “language,” but definitely not given legitimacy. A person speaking Ebonics will still be seen as an ignorant person, with non-standard, lazy speech. This is more than just an aid to the DEA, it’s an open door for controversy, discrimination, and continued separation.

Boxer briefs vs. Panties

While boxer briefs are fairly comfortable, that is not necessarily the point of this post. I’m sure we all know someone, or maybe we are that someone, that after a lot of heartbreak and headache, there comes a time that we as women try to disengage ourselves from men emotionally, and try instead to pursue a mainly physical or social relationship with a guy. In essence, we want to date like a man. We want to be able to have sex with a man, go out on multiple dates, or get our foreplay on, without any attachment, any feelings, any real connection with the other person. But can we really do it?

My girlfriends and I definitely all went through an “imma do me” phase of our own, some to a greater or lesser extent, some to a more reckless extent than others, some for a longer time than others, but what it meant, for all of us, was that we wanted to get ours. We wanted to experiment. We wanted to be able just have fun, let ambitions go, and not have a bunch of emotion attached to it. We wanted to be as detached as we had perceived men to be. And of course, since we were all coming to this idea at the same time, we were our best cheerleaders…"mmmhmm girl! Do you, cuz imma do me..imma do me! That’s all I can tell you. I gotsta get mine!" We were so into it, and so convinced that we could actually do this, and be successful at it.

What we didn’t know was, or perhaps we were in denial that we already have one up on men when it comes to dealings of the heart for two main reasons. First, since birth we have been conditioned to think with our hearts, rather than our heads, and secondly, whether we like to admit it or not, the estrogen in our bodies contributes to our emotionality. So we kind of set ourselves up, thinking that we could let go of the first 27 years of our life, and turn over a brand new leaf of behaving and interacting with men. Granted, we were decently successful at it, some more than others, but after awhile, not only had reality set in, the feelings had also.

Though we were slow to admit it, we had each far surpassed the “dating like a man” phase, and had actually entered into the “dang, this is actually my boo” torment. So I began to wonder; what would have made it easier? Dating multiple men, with each having the same level of fervor or chemistry? Keeping the physicality out of the “relationship?” Always making sure that we had the upper hand in the direction of the “relationship?” I don’t know. I don’t have the answer, but what I do know is that somehow, what we each were trying to avoid, actually found its way back to us. And we ended up having to not only grapple with these feelings, but also the disbelief and shock that these feelings had actually formed. So I ask you, America, boxer briefs or panties; can women wear both?

Community Went Out With the Village People


I was talking to my cousin the other day about a family issue that I’d rather not disclose in this public forum. However, his suggestion what the family forge together to speak to an individual in the family about an issue we perceive he/she is having. The entire family notices this problem, and has said little things here and there, but perhaps more than just talk, an intervention was necessary. If things did not get called to the carpet, if you will, the effects could be detrimental. The time was now to speak up. This got me to thinking about family structure and really, its breakdown.

I’m too young to truly remember the days of “it takes a village,” but I’ve heard of them. This of course was when family and community members took ownership and pride in helping to raise kids that weren’t necessarily their own. Not even just kids, but to help contribute to the maturation and growth of its members in general. Whether you were 6 or 26, an older individual in the family or community, was willing to share their wisdom with you, because after all, your behavior affected more than just you. What I’m seeing, unfortunately, is a huge step, matter of a fact, a huge gallop in the opposite direction of this philosophy.

There are so many things that we see wrong in our families or communities or even amongst our friends that we ignore and let continue on into destruction. How many times have we turned a blind eye to neglectful parenting, and not said anything if only for the sake of the kids? How many times have we seen family members or friends engage in risky behaviors without so much of a second glance or a simple questioning intonation in our voice? Why are we so afraid to have those controversial conversations in which we let loose our true opinions of their life’s choices?

What we consider “intervening” on a family or community issue might be a quick comment to an individual in which we disagree with their actions, but no real intervention. We might say, “You need to stay your butt home with yo’ kids. I get tired of babysitting!” But that’s not intervention, and it will definitely not get the response we expect and desire. The correct intervention would to have a thorough sit-down, a “talkin’ to,” if you will, with that person so that they truly understand 1)your genuine concerns and sincerity and 2)what consequences you perceive their actions are having on their kids. This is also a time in which the other individual can speak candidly about their fears, their desires, and their hopes. Both individuals are respected and heard, not just a one-sided oral vomit of the mouth.

I guess we have taken that “judge not, lest ye be judged,” quote out of the Bible and run with it. But this doesn’t mean letting loved ones run themselves or their family into self-destruction. What we have got to understand is that sometimes conversations might need to be uncomfortable, but if the intention is to save or enhance a life, isn’t it worth it? I argue that this has contributed in large part to the breakdown of the black family, but we need to reclaim our community-type child, and really adult, rearing practices. Our future depends on it. And in the best Laurence Fishburne from School Daze voice I can give you, we need to “WWWAAAKKKEEE UUUPPP!!!”

March Madness



Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. You need to forgive and forget.
Cut your losses, and move on. Let bygones be bygones. Never make the same mistake twice. Don’t hold grudges. We have all heard and said these mantras over and over again, but they feel like they are actually in opposition to one another. How does one let bygones be bygones, but also not play the fool? I have, as everyone else in the world, been disappointed by friends and family and colleagues and have struggled with this notion. So I began to wonder, who is right? Should you learn from your lessons and let go of certain people and/or things in your life or should you hold on to them and forgive and forget? Or more appropriately, can you forgive and forget a person for their infraction or an offense, and still move along?

I don’t understand why the two have to be mutually exclusive. Forgive and forget implies that the offense is forgiven, forgotten, and things can go on as usual. But does that allow you to learn from experience? If a person borrows money from you and never pays it back, should you forgive and forget that infraction, and still loan money as you usually would? I would hope not. History has warned you against it. You can forgive the person, but forgetting the action keeps you from learning the lesson.

In my house, I have inspirational vitamins, if you will, posted all over the walls. Periodically, I look at them, and am uplifted. One of my favorites says, “If you meet someone whose soul is not aligned with yours, send them love, and move along.” This says to me, if there is someone who doesn’t stand for what you stand for, doesn’t exhibit mutual care and respect for you, don’t be concerned with developing a relationship with them. Stay positive and don’t harbor any ill feelings for them, but move along. I call this intuition. I call this learning from life’s lessons. Other people call it holding a grudge...not fair. Should you keep someone in your life because they have been there? I am a firm believer in some people being in your life for a season, a reason, or a lifetime. Madea claimed that we keep people in our life for a lifetime, when they were intended to be there for a season. “Letting go” of someone could be that you simply understand that their season is up, and for me, that’s growth, not grudge.

But I guess what’s important is that you shouldn’t feel the need to defend your growth/grudge to anyone. You do need to assess it, however. 1) Do you feel like the relationship can bounce back from the offense? Sometimes, quite honestly, the hurt is so deep, the cut so bad, that recovery seems far beyond reach. I would say, let that thang play out. Eventually time will tell if the relationship is reparable. 2) What does the offense say about the person? One thing that cannot be negated is that we all make mistakes. Is the offense typical of the person? Is it apart of their character? Or was it happenstance? For example, if a person offends you, and at the core of the offense was selfishness, you would need to figure out if it’s a character trait. If it is quite simply a character trait, you can rest assured that selfishness will come up again in the relationship. Which brings me to the third question…3) Can you handle that character trait? If that person is like Jack from Will and Grace, at the center, with everything else revolving around him or her, can you handle that? Is it okay that your needs or desires may take a backseat to theirs? If so, be okay with it, and do not get upset when their selfishness rears its ugly head. 4) What is the purpose of this “moving along?” Are you brutally angry? Are their additions to your life much less than the subtractions? Do they take more from your spirit than they add to it? If that is the case, I say, send them love, and move along.

The key is indeed sending them love, however. At the core of this process is the refusal to let bitterness intercede your feelings and actions. It’s the age old adage that you forgive others for yourself, not necessarily for them. You have to forgive them for their infraction, in order to not let bitterness and anger reside in your spirit and heart. If you do, you will find that even though you have “moved along” from them, you have also brought them with you, in the form of disappointment and hurt, in your future relationships.

And the title of this blog…well I compare friendships and familyships to March Madness. You may have 16 (in honor of Ochocinco ) people, friends or family, in your life that have some sort of significance for you. Through trials, events, and circumstances, a person’s place in the bracket will shift depending on their decisions and its affect on you. A little bit different from the actual March Madness though, one bad performance doesn’t necessarily knock a person out of the competition or your life, but perhaps their place in it may change. Instead of your BFF, they are now your BF or just your F, or maybe even an A (associate). You now know the healthiest way to interact with that person, in order for your needs not to get compromised. And for all parties involved…try not to take it personal, you’re just moving people along, based on their performance.

When BMI meets SES


When I was preparing to write this blog entry, I began to reminisce on my old days teaching in Bowen Homes, a housing project in Atlanta that was torn down last year. I remember there being a library, a supermarket, a school, and a community center right there in the midst of the neighborhood. I remember thinking how “sheltered” my students were, because they rarely got out of the hood. Everything that they needed, or so thought, was within walking distance for them.

What brought me to this walk down memory lane was an article that I had read in the Washington Post (WP), called The High Cost of Poverty. The article speaks about how you actually have to be rich, in order to be poor; how it actually is expensive to live in poverty. Because I have lately been “living my life like it’s healthy,” their information about grocery prices and access to quality groceries really struck a chord with me. Were the residents of Bowen Homes, my students, in a similar boat with some of the disenfranchised community members that the article spoke of?

I started to play back the structure of the community, the layout of the surrounding streets. I remember the O.K. Supermarket on the corner, right when you make that right on Wilkes Circle, but I could not remember an actual grocery store. My mind traveled down Donald Lee Hollowell, or Bankhead Highway if you’ve been in Atlanta awhile, Hamilton E. Holmes Drive, and even Joseph E. Lowery Boulevard. I sat there for awhile, trying to will a grocery store into my memory, but nothing. This led me to believe that either most Bowen Homes residents shopped at the O.K. Supermarket, or that they had to drive or ride for miles in order to get to a grocery store.

The WP article claimed that grocery prices are much more expensive in urban areas, and I am sure that we confirm these claims, as we have all had our taste of price gauging. For example, they assert that a loaf of white bread in an urban supermarket might cost $2.99, with wheat costing $3.79. A gallon of milk, which I’m sure is most likely whole, costs $4.99. Conversely, a Safeway in a nearby suburban area basks in cheaper prices. For that same white bread, $1, and $1.19 for the wheat. And instead of $5, the milk costs $3.49. Now these might not reflect the prices near your home, milk is on sale at the Kroger near my house for $1.98, but you get the point. Grocery prices in urban areas are most likely to be more expensive than prices in suburban areas. What ends up happening is that these residents not only spend more money on their groceries, but they end up buying less healthy items for cheaper prices, which contributes to the high levels of obesity in low income areas.

The Office of the Surgeon General released a report in 2001 claimed that women of lower socioeconomic status were 50% more likely to be obese than those with higher socioeconomic status. We know that with obesity come generations of unhealthy living, heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes, and early deaths. People in these communities, somewhat because of access and resources, are set up for an unhealthy lifestyle, which really creates a cycle within the family. A coincidence?

Hanging On = A Travesty

I was “talking” to a girlfriend of mine on one of the infamously impersonal, yet perfectly convenient messaging sites, G-Chat, when the ubiquitous topic of men and dating came up. I asked her if the most important thing in dating was whether or not the other person treated her well. Of course, like any other self respecting woman, she replied, “umm, yes of course.” So then I asked, “has that led your dating decisions?” In dating, there are so many considerations that come into play, so many factors that we must wrestle with, that I began to wonder, “when deciding on whom we date, whom we give our time, do we use their treatment of us as a guide?" I would venture to say that the answer is oftentimes no.

Everyone knows that men and women can stay in a relationship for many reasons, and not one of them may have anything to do with how the other person treats them. For women, the sex may be good, they may feel lonely, or the man may spoil the woman with gifts, but at the core of the relationship, there is nothing substantial. For some reason, usually dealing with a lack of self-esteem, a lack of entitlement that one deserves something better, or some false security, the woman continues to pursue a relationship in which his treatment of her is subpar. For men, they may stay in a relationship because it’s fairly easy with this person, its best to have someone around, she may let him live out his fantasies in the bedroom, or because she seems like the best option amongst a host of bad ones. However, if we were to reflect on how considerate one person is of the other, we would be at a loss concerning the longevity of the relationship.

So, you may be reading this, thinking that this does not describe you at all. And it may not. In that case, I congratulate you. But for the many others of us, that cannot say it with confidence, here’s a test. 1) What does that person do for you? I’m not necessarily asking if the person buys you gifts or treats you to dinner all of the time, but what do they do for you? What about your life is enhanced since you’ve been dating them? 2) Do they seem to consider you in their decisions? I am not talking about decisions to buy a house or a car, you may or may not even be to that level, but do they consider you when they make plans to hang out with their friends or go out of town or work late? 3) When you discuss how you like to be treated, how you receive love, do they make efforts to meet that need for you? If you tell them that quality time is important, do they make an attempt to meet you in that necessity? 4) This one is quite simply…do they even like you? Like genuinely like you: who you are, what you stand for, what you bring to the table? And lastly 5) If you were dating someone else that was unattractive, financially unstable, or the sex was bad, and treated you similarly, would you stay?

If we’re honest with ourselves, we may find that we oftentimes stay in situations that quite frankly, aren’t worth our time. We know that it is not going anywhere, or that if all things were perfect, this person that we are dating would in actuality, be someone else. Now this is not to say that every "relationship" one has needs to lead to something serious, but it at least needs to be something that respects who you are as a person. So I challenge you, realize your worth, realize your needs, and find someone that truly meets them. Say goodbye to Mr. or Mrs. Right Now, and say hello to getting yourself right for when Mr. or Mrs. Right comes along. If not, you'll be hanging on to something that's certainly not there.

Gravity




“Girls you know you better watch out. Some guys, some guys are only about, that thing, that thing, that thing,” Lauryn Hill warned us years ago. She was warning that some men are only after one thing, and in the previous verse, she gave that same warning about women. Men and women, though trying to hide their truths, are all after some “thing.” While I agree with Lauryn, and it’s actually one of my favorite songs of hers, I want to take her song a step further. In relationships, and even in our friendships or familyships, we all have a “thing” that attracts us or repels us from another person. I am not talking about the way a person looks or the kind of financial stability they offer, I am talking about “that thing.” “That thing” is more of a feeling that a person allows us to experience when we are in their presence or in communication with them. This is what turns casual dating into exclusivity, exclusivity into engagement, engagement into marriage, and marriage into forever. The presence or lack thereof has large affects on the strength of the relationship.

For some of us, “that thing” could be “feeling understood.” That person makes us feel as if they understood our experiences, our fears, our troubles. They really get “us,” the essence of who we are as people. We feel as if we don’t have to explain all of our idiosyncrasies to them, because for some reason, they already know. For others of us, “that thing” could be “feeling wanted.” That person is so into our physical, spiritual, or emotional being that we really can feel their desire for us. That attracts us to them. One of our needs is to feel wanted, and their ability to provide that for us is attractive. For some men, “that thing” may be that she makes you feel strong, or needed. Instead of emasculating you, she makes you feel that you are her hero, her strength, and that you are not merely an addition, but more of a complement. You know that you have a place in her life.

“That thing” can really separate the boys from the men, the girls from the women, the jump offs from the boos. One person could be dating two people with the exact same credentials, in regards to attractiveness, personality, career, but where they land in that person’s life could be completely different, if they are offering “that thing.” A woman can have a man that treats her nicely, cares for her, and shows it in his actions, but if her “thing” is to feel uninhibited, and he doesn’t provide that for her, her heart may be found elsewhere. She may need someone that helps her release her inhibitions, her fears, her self-checks, and if she doesn’t feel comfortable to do that with him, a vital part of their relationship will be lacking. Likewise, a man can have a woman that cooks, cleans, provides “that thing” that Lauryn was talking about, but he may not be completely invested. If his “thing” is that his woman makes him feel “safe,” safe to let go, safe to confide, safe to give his all, and that woman does not make him feel “safe,” it may seem like his presence is there, but his heart is not.

The funny thing about “that thing” is that it differs from person to person. It may be something that I want, but it could be something that another person needs…like gravity. Many times, the “that thing” in our life, stems from something in our past, perhaps a relationship, an interaction, an event, and it has come to shape or determine our future relationships. I would say that before you go from one person to the next, thinking, “I don’t know, it’s just something about them that I don’t like,” do some self searching. So I ask you, what’s your “that thing?”

The Reality of the Situation is...


30 is the new 20…not when marriage and babies are concerned. One of my best friends called me today to tell me that we needed to find new friends because our old ones were either engaged or engaged in serious relationships. A few of her friends from high school were either married or engaged as well. We were single, very single. No man, no prospects, just us. And we needed to hang around women that were just as single and “alone” as we were. For her, having a constant reminder of the life that wasn’t, just wasn’t okay anymore.


This caught me off guard for a few reasons..My friend had recently been on this new “imma do me” kick. She was just chillin. Forget men, forget relationships, she would often say. She was just going to date, have fun, and not worry about getting serious for now. So of course I was on the phone, giving her my “Who are you right now?” look when she was spitting out this new idea. What happened to the liberated person that was having me evaluate my life earlier in the month…Well, I guess she left the building.


We all hear, and quite frankly, hate to hear, stories about women who are counting their eggs, listening to the ticking of their own clock, when it comes to settling down, and having children. But at what point is this reality? To step into Dawn from Danity Kane for a second, “The reality of the situation is,” women do have to be concerned about their age when it comes to procreating. The risks associated with pregnancy increase in a woman’s 30s. So in actuality, there is some validity to the clock concern.


When we were younger, and perhaps even now, we created a timeline for ourselves. “I’m going to finish school at 22, date, get married at 26, start having babies at 28, be done by 31, etc, etc,” or some variation. But then, the reality of the situation is, we cannot predict our love life. We cannot predict whom we meet, how we meet them, and when we meet them. We cannot predict these things, but at what time is it okay to be worried?


I think we’re walking a tightrope. It seems like the chances of everything bad happening with a pregnancy increases after 35…miscarriage, birth defects, stillbirth, cesarean birth, and high blood pressure. Ladies, I think that those are definitely reasons to be concerned, but how those concerns come across is definitely the issue. So I’m not going to give you an age at which you should start carrying around bank deposit cups, but I will help you out a little.
While, “Will you be my baby daddy?” may not actually come out of your mouth, your actions could actually be asking that question. You don’t want to be some woman that is on the sperm hunt, sniffing out any good man so that you can get his spearden. You want to be able to still live life, learn from different experiences, and appreciate all of the time that you have with any good or bad man that comes along.


So ladies, enjoy the single life as best as you can. I know it’s not easy, but in the meantime, try to take care of yourself so that when that time comes, you will be ready. Exercise daily, or almost daily, grow spiritually, eat a balanced diet, pamper yourself, and fall in love with yourself. Now that’s the reality of the situation!