Let me take you into the world of Lusty where anything is bound to happen...this is rather old but nonetheless interesting....
26/Aug/2009
Today I had dinner at McCormick and Schimdt with XXXXXXXX at the Nat'l Harbor. I'm not sure as to how I feel about the outcome of the conversation. There wasn't much expectation going into it so in turn, not much was taken from it. My opinion about it hasn't been swayed either way to say the least, in fact I'm even more confused now coming out of it than I was prior to me entering. So here is my assessment of it all...
Commitment is such a scary word to men when dealing with me. Their insecurity drives their thought process into a state of disbelief that a woman such as me can be faithful. He says it's because I'm "too popular" and I have "too many dudes" (male friends)....Ummm, newsflash sweetie, am I not single? Do I not have the same divine right of happiness? Since when did attractive=cheater and popular=untrustworthy? Ahh and so we enter the world of insecurity where your dreams become countered by threats of your mind playing tricks on you. Everyone wants a "bad chick" but not everyone can handle the notoriety of what comes with a "bad chick." Just because you're friends with a male does NOT/NOT mean you're fck'n, yet the pride of a man seems to always circumvent any truth in that statement. Men will avoid being "hurt" at all cost and protecting their "reputation" is equally as important, so the idea of feeling like their in competition with any other man is certainly out of the question.
I would like to think that as an adult while you're single that you have the liberty of having as many male friends as you so choose to have--but hey maybe I'm wrong. *shrugs* I especially take into consideration the fact that we as females almost always give some indication of the willingness to settle down and enter into a relationship. However, that doesn't seem to be good enough this day in time--guys want the fruit of the harvest before bearing the labor. They want a female to play "wifey" before she is crowned "wifey."
So now you are placed in a on-going game of "proof BEFORE purchase" where you're subconsciously forced to prove that you're "worthy" enough to be his lady. Yet already comfortable in his ways what reason does he have to change now? Why should he make you his girl when he doesn't have to? The ball is in his hands and he has home-court advantage because he's coerced you into going against your initial statement of "you can't have your cake and eat it too." Oh, but on the contrary he does have his cake and not only is he enjoying yours but he's also enjoying the cake of whomever else bakery he so chooses to eat from. Let's not forget there is NO commitment so "technically" there is no cheating involved. So now he's granted that protection of not looking like the "sucka" in front of his boys in the event that your name should come up in relation to another male--who still might ONLY be a platonic friend. Yet unfortunately, he still gets the satisfaction of being able to say you are his "joint" meaning off-limits, whenever it's convenient....of course.
-Lusty
