Buckle Up! We're about to experience some turbulence.
So here are a few thoughts I never thought I’d share on a public platform.
- I believe in non-monogamy.
- I like independent women.
- Homophobia, as it exists today, is a construct, and I don’t buy into it.
Buckle up, buttercup; this one’s a doozie.
Let me explain.
1 non-monogamy.
I’m sure you all read that and thought something along the lines of, “Oh, here we go, another guy who just wants a green card to have multiple partners”.
I don’t blame you for thinking that at all. From the way it sounds and the way the world looks/behaves these days - that’s the logical conclusion.
However…
The way I see it, non-monogamy isn’t an invite to polygamy or polyamory - I’m a 1 woman kinda guy myself - it’s an invite to the conversation around the topic.
For example, say I’m in a committed relationship with my partner, and she happens to find someone else attractive enough that she’d like to experiment, non-monogamy - as I see it, says she comes to me, and we talk it out before it happens.
I wholly admit that chances are I’m not on board with it - I wouldn’t do it if the tables were reversed - but this way, we’re not harbouring or hiding anything from each other.
Of course, your next logical conclusion is, “Well, if you’re partners, you should be open about everything”, or “If you really love and are committed to each other, you wouldn’t be browsing the menu” - which is true - at least it’s not the wrong thought process, but we’re all in the midst of a human experience, and things hit us differently.
I know with almost absolute certainty that most people wouldn’t be comfortable hearing that their partner finds someone else attractive enough to want to try them out - so that throws “open about everything” out the window… And, about being in love and committed to each other, I’ll continue the ‘menu’ metaphor - I choose an Oreo and berry cheesecake every time, I love and am committed to it - but that doesn’t mean that a different flavoured one won’t be served to me - or am entirely different dessert altogether.
As a man, I’m responsible for the choice I make - whether to taste what’s in front of me or stay committed to the cheesecake I love.
And yes, I say “as a man” because it’s super weird… we’re not nearly as attractive when we’re single as we are when we’re in a relationship -when we’re single, we look for partners - but somehow, there’s no one available. The second you’re in a relationship, potential partners come to you.
“Uh dude… it sounds a lot like you just want to be with multiple people at once…” - I’m getting to my point; hang in there.
Personally, I choose commitment every time. But, through non-monogamy, I’m at least open to hearing my partner out and given a chance to voice my opinions or grievances.
“What if he’s a better guy than you? Maybe he’s taller, richer, smarter - what then? How do you avoid jealousy.”
The truth is, you don’t. You work through the jealousy - together.
“Why even risk it!?” Well… because almost 50%, if not more, marriages end in divorce, and far fewer last more than x amount of years. And with those numbers, it’s hard to believe in long-lasting love.
So, for whatever time we have together, I’d rather deal with the emotions of jealousy and honesty than the lies and self-doubt that come from being cheated on.
An open conversation can be really freeing and informative. It’ll give you insights into what the other person really values about you and the relationship and allow you to discuss and reevaluate your position.
Long story short: non-monogamy is a conversation, not a green light.
2. I like an independent woman.
Damn… I really do! I like a woman who makes her own money and can fully look after herself - all that jazz… but I hate this “queen bitch”, “boss bitch”, “bad bitch” - any kinda bitch nonsense we see in the world today.
“Ah, you’re just another butthurt weak man who can’t handle a REAL woman!”
Firstly, if you need to be handled, you’re a child, not a woman; thank you and goodbye.
Secondly, queen bitch, boss bitch, bad bitch - all that energy is just ratchet/raggedy in a different tax bracket. Take away the expensive weaves, jewellery, nails etc… you and Becky from around the corner are the same.
A woman, on the other hand, makes the world go round. They’re strong in their softness. Powerful in their humility. And in my personal opinion, the greatest examples of what true leadership should be.
Leaders are integral, humble, accountable, brilliant communicators, resilient, respectful, empathetic, intelligent (emotionally and intellectually), creative, committed, and most importantly (to me at least), they inspire others to achieve greater things and to be greater within themselves.
No doubt, these qualities aren’t gender specific - anyone can learn them - but as a man, and from my perspective, I had to learn them from scratch. In contrast, it seems to me that most of the women I’ve encountered in my life only have to master them because those qualities are innate but unrefined.
The way I see it, “woman” and “leader” are synonymous. And like every great leader knows, your role as a leader isn’t to do it all and be better than everyone else; instead, it’s to do what you’re best at doing and inspire the people around you to do the things they’re best at to the best of their ability while supporting each other in places of weakness.
“Independent woman”, the way I see it, is a leader. She is someone who knows her worth, her skills, her qualities and her capabilities (good, the bad, and the ugly), and through it all, she is able to stand on her own two feet.
That kind of person doesn’t need a partner. They’re capable of handling their shit, and where they have shortcomings, they’re able to direct resources to find solutions to their problem.
In saying all that, however, being able to stand on your own doesn’t mean that you should. What it does do for you, though, is allow you to choose your partner based on intangible attributes like character, spiritual positioning, or simply having complementary traits.
For example, I’m quite house-trained. I can cook, clean and all the rest, and I’m sure there are still women my age who can do the same. Neither of us NEEDS a partner with those skills… but I hate doing dishes, and I love cooking. Someone who likes good food and doesn’t mind washing dishes but hates the time and effort it takes to make good food… that person and I fit together.
We’re both independent - capable of living life on our own - but able to depend on each other for a better human experience.
That, and I like the sound of two people choosing to be together because they want to be, not because there’s a need they fulfil for each other.
Side note: I recognise that independence and success are a spectrum. I have no grand illusions or expectations that every single woman needs to hold themselves to the standard I’ve laid out. I certainly am not there yet myself. However, it’s a goal.
You’ve got your solid income - it’s not great, but it’s consistent. You’ve got your shitty little apartment in a relatively okay part of town where you live alone - cooking and cleaning for and after yourself. Dope! So do I. You’ve got goals for your future that you’re working towards - and maybe you want to do some travel while you’re young enough to enjoy it - that’s fantastic! Me too! Let’s get together and improve our quality of life.
Together, we can get a better apartment in a nicer part of town or a small - yet better than our 2 shitty apartments - house in the suburbs. I’ll cook, you wash dishes, and we’ll split all the other household chores as we see fit together. I’m really good at making things clean, germ-free and organised, but I’m horrendous at keeping things tidy. With our combined incomes, we can save/invest more and maybe take international holidays once a year instead of every other year… who knows? But you get the point…
Independent women: yes! Absolutely.
Bad bitches, queen bitch, boss bitches… any bitches - no thanks.
And - no shade if that’s you or that’s your vibe!
Everyone is unique, and I believe we’re all supposed to be who we are. You’re just not for me.
Also, I just don’t like the terminology. I don’t think anyone should be calling themselves any kinda bitch - at least not if the goal is to build a culture where we’re trying to build women up.
3. Homophobia, as it exists today, is a construct, and I don’t buy into it.
Admittedly, this one’s more about semantics than anything else, but it’s a problem that pisses me off, so I’ma talk about it.
Let’s get into it…
So first, the word “phobia” or “phobic” in this sense means:
“having or involving an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something.”
Like arachnoPHOBIA: an irrational FEAR and aversion of spiders.
ClaustroPHOBIA: an irrational FEAR and aversion of small/closed spaces.
HemoPHOBIA: an irrational FEAR and aversion of blood.
The list goes on… and yet, homoPHOBIA… having or showing a dislike of or prejudice against gay people.
I’m sorry, but no. It’s prejudice, for sure. Biased and discriminatory - absolutely. But a phobia!? I refuse.
And the things that pass for “homophobia” or “homophobic” - AND THE TROUBLE THAT FOLLOWS, geezus kryst!?
You can genuinely end your whole life by making a gay joke to a close friend that’s overheard by someone passing by. And yet, race jokes, black jokes, Jew jokes, slave jokes - all of that shit gets a pass!?
Make it make sense.
Now, before I continue, I think it’s important that I state that I’m not against gay people (and the LGBT+ community) or their pursuit of fair representation. As a person who grew up experiencing prejudice, racism and various forms of abuse, I’m almost honour bound to support movements that aim to get rid of discrimination.
My gripe is with the terminology used and the overwhelmingly unbalanced consequences of offending this particular group of people.
For example, if a Caucasian person uses discriminatory language against an African - we don’t call that black phobic or call them an Africaphobe.
No. We call them racist, and they’re dealt with in a manner that befits the degree of the crime.
When you discriminate against old people, you’re an ageist.
When you discriminate against poor people, you are a classist.
Against gender, sexist.
Feminist…? We’re not ready for that conversation yet… but you get the point.
Homophobia should just be “an irrational FEAR and aversion of gay people”.
And something like “homoist” should be the word that describes the discrimination against this group.
The same applies to transgender and transphobic.
As a languager, I believe that the misuse of language causes bigger problems and hinders resolution finding.
I’m sure there are people out there who genuinely fear gay and transgender people, but since the terminology has become synonymous with discrimination, and the weight of the consequences of offending this group - even in private conversations - sure as hell, those people will not speak up about it.
I myself used to be homophobic - afraid of gay people.
I genuinely believed that gay people were rapists because I was assaulted as a child. I learnt the words “rape” and “gay” long before I developed the ability to think critically, let alone dissect language and actively listen to people with opposing views to mine.
And yet, it was only through those conversations that I learned that gay only refers to same-sex attraction, and everything else was 1 person’s sadistic, predatory and abusive narcissism.
I genuinely believe that currently, people are more fearful of having conversations and offending the wrong person than they care about eradicating discrimination - and as long as that’s the case, we’re not moving forward - people are just keeping quiet or being silenced.
Free speech - yes.
Freedom to express oneself and identity - absolutely!
But within reason and not through fear.
Personally, I say we draw the line at children and indecent exposure.
Leave the children alone!
They don’t need to learn how to twerk or what a grown person’s bare naked asshole looks like. The only need to learn acceptance, love, creative problem-solving and conflict resolution, the virtues of community and critical thinking - maybe with a splash of concept development.
All this other stuff is just too much for impressionable young minds.
Using adverse punishment as a means to drive an agenda and silence people who disagree only increases fear, which is a form of oppression, and it only perpetuates the phobia.
Personally, I believe if more people were able to talk open-heartedly - and not from a place of judgment or adverse emotion - rather, from a place of genuine knowledge-seeking and understanding, the world would be a better place.
The only prerequisite is that we learn to thINK.
But that’s my 2 cents. What are your thoughts?
