Hmm, guess she shouldn't fugg a black dude either hunh, seeing as how some of them are also capable of completely disrespecting black women ...

**standing ovation**

I almost couldn't have written this better myself, love. Almost. <3

"Any world where there is less bitchiness and so on towards celebrities will – I think – also be a world where celebrity isn’t such a big ‘thing"

Interesting concept, but flawed merely because it is a paradox. If a person weren't such a "big thing" then they wouldn't be, by definition, a celebrity.

Anyways, my thoughts on Jada's comments: I agree with her to a degree. As a parent, I too cringe at some of vitriol thrown at J Beiber when he was a teen, at Willow's success, 9 year old's being called "c-u-n-t" by grown adults who ought to know better. Famous or not - they are still children first and foremost, and the verbally attacking and bullying them is not acceptable by any means in my opinion, and if you want to chalk it up to universal tax then that's fine, but I feel that famous children should be in a lower tax bracket then.

I believe that's how Jada was looking at this. Her mistake however is that she's looking at "young" celebs like Rihanna and Taylor Swift as if they are children (which they may very well in Jada's eyes). But once you're an adult, you're fair game.

*laughs* I just think you're making this way more complicated than it needs to be.

It's simple, really. Either both of you get to enjoy intercourse with someone else, or neither of you do. Anything else is inequality and therefore bull, and will only lead to unnecessary drama down the line.

And thanks, but no thanks on the new car. I'm more than capable of buying my own shiny new car ... AND one for you, if you act right!

"In fact, of your argument is that men, with their single orgasm havin' asses are the problem, it makes more sense that an additional multi-orgasmic woman in the mix is the solution, no?"

Sure, IF she truly enjoys being with women. But if she's just trying to sate a man who wouldn't do the same for her ... no.

I do give you a nod though to only referring to shared experiences. If all parties involved are down for that and manage to actually keep it within the agreed upon rules and limitations then I have no issue.

Although I still wish men were a little more open-minded about that shared experience being with both genders, not just one. I know I know, "man rules" and all of that but still - - you think a man would get tired of just one pu$$y for the rest of his life ... but a woman wouldn't get tired of the same one dick for the rest of hers?? This is what I mean about that stance eventually feeling one-sided and hypocritical after a while, even if she IS bi-sexual.

Okay. You are selfish and hypocritical. :)

Seriously though - therein lies the crux of the issue. A lot of men also share this selfish and hypocritical stance on this subject. I would have been with you if you'd said she can dip out on the side, too. But the double standard does nothing but breed resentment and unnecessary misunderstandings.

And I personally don't believe men and women have the same sex drive either, but for different reasons. For instance, I'm pretty positive I want sex more than one man can typically give it. I could also argue that the fact that females can have multiple concurrent orgasms more easily and readily than a man can is evidence that women are better built for multiple lovers than even men are ... but that's beside the point.

"Hell we will even go as far as to say that as long as the man is taking care of the home and properly financially providing for his family and being a good father to his children and treating his wife with love and admiration whilst he is with her, what is the big deal about having a side-piece?"

Just curious - do you feel the same way about the wife having a side-piece? If it's no big deal and he's entitled to it ... then she is too, right?

I personally have no issues with open marriages and/or marriages where menages are welcome. However, problems arise where only ONE spouse feels as if they are entitled to loving on the side. OR worse - only one spouse agreed to the side-piece situation in the first place.

I can't believe I have to do this, but Hex babe?

You are fired.

humph

*folds arms*

I agree that the lack of fathers in the home is a factor, but not necessarily for the reasons I see stated.

A lot of times, these black men being raised by single mothers get a twisted definition of how a "black man should be treated". Not only are they entitled, but they look at the hardships their mother endured being a single mother and apply that expectation to ALL women ... single or not. I can't tell you how many times I've heard men angry that their woman, who works full time just like he does, isn't doing the cooking and cleaning the way he thinks she should. If you ask him why can't he help with the household chores since she is helping with the household bills, he responds with some crap like "My mother worked full time, sometimes two jobs, and still held down the house and cooked every day while keeping the house clean and taking care of us kids. Why can't these black women today do that?" Dude, your mother was ALONE she didn't have a choice - if a woman WITH a man is going to do all of the stuff a woman without a man does, what DOES she need you for? It's no wonder so many black women are on that independent-woman-kick - too many brothers have it in their head about how the relationship is supposed to benefit the man, and can't seem to comprehend that she's supposed to get some benefit out of it, besides dack and a man who comes home (most of the time).

This lack of examples of good men supporting women damages the relationship expectations of black men just as much, if not more, than it does black women.