Some of these items are pretty standard - must have a good job, able to pay his bills on time, has his own place - while other items seem absurd (i.e. must have a car - what if he likes taking the bus/train?  Must know how to cook - what if he earns enough money to order delivery food everyday?)

The one thing I notice about all these things women say, however, is this: when a guy comes along that they’re REALLY feeling, almost ALL of those items she said she wanted go right out the window!

This presents an interesting problem for a single guy.  On the one hand, if he runs into a woman he likes and tries to woo her, he fears not being able to have her as a result of breaking some rule she had that he may not have even known about.  On the other hand, single guys have close girl friends who they see dating guys that don’t have or do ANY of the things she may have told him she needed in a dating partner.

Guys, guys, guys, guys, guys!  Wake up, men! 

If you’re trying to impress a woman by following her list of standards, I got news for you: you will either (a) never get that woman, or (b) you will get that women and eventually LOSE her!

Why, you ask?  Because these rules that women set forth for their dating lives are arbitrary.  As easily as she creates them, she can just as easily get rid of the ones that aren’t allowing her to get with a guy she finds attractive.  Yes, that means if she actually LIKES you, that rule she has about dating guys who aren’t messy will be removed so she can date your sloppy behind!

“But Aaron,” you ask, “all the girls I try to get with swear up and down that their dating rules HAVE to be followed!”

Oh really? Do they, now?  And you actually BELIEVED them? 

Here’s the question you should ask yourself the next time a woman tells you some ridiculous dating rule she has:

IF I WERE (insert the name of her favorite crush-worthy male celebrity - all women have at least one), WOULD HER DATING RULE MATTER?

In other words, if it weren’t YOU that were hitting on her, but a high-earning celebrity instead, how important would her dating rules be?

Let’s look at a few well-known dating rules women have, and see why they would not matter were she dating her ultimate catch:

1. DATING RULE: A MAN SHOULD ALWAYS CALL A WOMAN THE NEXT DAY, OR THE DAY AFTER, GETTING HER PHONE NUMBER

Ah, yes, we’ve all heard this one before.  I used to fall for it, too - you think, “man, if I don’t call her right away, she’ll lose all interest in me, or even forget my name!”

But think about this, men: how many girls have you called the next day, or the day after, and they either (a) don’t remember your name, or (b) weren’t really interested in seeing you? 

It’s because you MOVED TOO FAST, EINSTEIN!  By calling her right away, you showed her you were desperate, and women hate dating men who show desperation. 

I usually tell men to wait at least 5 days before they call.  Of course, panic usually sets in - “What if she forgets me, or is mad I didn’t call right away?!?” 

But again, think back to the question.  What if T.I. got her number, then waited even 2 weeks to call her? What would she do when he finally called?  Would she be all upset like,

Thanks for finally calling, T.I., but you didn’t call me within 2 days of getting my number, so I don’t want to talk to you anymore - and don’t call here again!

Or, would she be more like this:

OMG, OMG, OMG!! You called!  I’m SOOOO glad you called me!  How are you?!?  Where are you?!? Can we go fly somewhere in your jet?!?

Notice how she wouldn’t even bring up the fact that it’s been 2 weeks?  Hmm, maybe it’s because, when a girl REALLY likes a guy, it doesn’t matter how long it takes him to call, so long as he eventually calls!

(And as for the whole “forgetting who you are” bit, that’s bullcrap - I have girls’ numbers I got YEARS ago whose names I still remember. If she’s forgetting you after less than a week, she didn’t really like you in the first place!)

2. DATING RULE: A MAN SHOULD HAVE HIS OWN PLACE.

I’m all for a guy having his own place prior to him dating someone.  It shows responsibility, and an ability to support one’s self.

But don’t get it twisted, gentlemen: it is NOT a prerequisite for dating a woman, especially one who REALLY likes you. 

After I graduated college, I was depressed for a minute because I figured my dating life would be down the tubes.  Yet, lo and behold, I actually went on quite a few dates, despite the fact that I didn’t have my own place.  Furthermore, while I was at college, there were plenty of girl friends of mine who were dating guys that were still living in their mom’s basement.

But again, if a woman gives you the ol’ “guy I’m dating must have his own place” excuse, ask yourself: If Denzel Washington had to move back home for a while to help out his dear old mom (because she prefers her house as opposed to his big mansion), would this same girl pass him up, or decide that she could deal with it?  I’ll let you decide that one…

3. DATING RULE: HE MUST BE (INSERT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT) OR (INSERT WEIGHT REQUIREMENT).

Everytime I hear a woman sprout off about how she can only date guys a certain weight or size, I burst out laughing.  Why?  Because I KNOW they are BSing me AND themselves!

Oh sure, she might have an ideal size ratio that she’d PREFER her man to have - but again, it’s stupid for a guy to think he doesn’t have a shot at her just because her mouth is telling him a “rule” she made up!

Again, think back to the question.  Remember when Ja Rule had a string of hits on the radio?  This dude is barely 5 feet tall - yet, lo and behold, not only is he married, but he was getting action from women of ALL different sizes, both shorter AND taller than him! 

In fact, most rappers/singers/actors are usually average height or SHORTER.  Yet, despite this, they manage to have a line of females following them up and down the block!  Do you think a woman who’s six feet tall is going to turn down a tryst with Nelly just because he’s 6 inches shorter than she is? HA!

My point, gentleman, is that when you ask a woman out, and she says you’re not meeting some moronic right of passage she’s set up, don’t believe it.  It’s just her nice way of saying, “YOU are not the one I want to date.”  Instead, go out and find someone else who actually wants to be with you.  Remember: those rules wouldn’t apply if you were her dream celebrity man, or someone she truly found attractive!

-Aaron P. Taylor

Note: The views and opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of EMQTV, its network, or its affiliates.  They are the sole thoughts of its author, Aaron P. Taylor, who is more than happy to take credit for them…

One can assume that the main reason for this is that people continue to be uncomfortable allowing the words “marriage” and “homosexual” to appear side by side. (Ha ha, get it? Side by side - as in, two women or men next to each other in bed? I crack myself up.)

The majority of the laws passed in this country continue to be heavily voted upon and/or enforced by the religious right in this country, most of whom are of the Christian faith.  Since they are the majority (for now), they are the ones who will actively protest against things they find immoral or contradictory to their faith - things like abortion and, in this case, Gay & Lesbian rights.

As a Christian myself, I understand why they think this way.  If you are a true follower of the Christian faith, it is only normal to believe that homosexuality is a sin.  Heck, it’s right there in the Bible - God destroyed a whole city simply because everyone there was having sex with a member of the same gender.

Since almost all Christians have been taught about the evilness of sodomy and other forms of Gay & Lesbian sex/love, it’s no surprise why they would be in such an uproar about taking a term God supposedly deemed to express an enternal bond between a MAN and a WOMAN, and altering it to include a MAN and a MAN or a WOMAN and a WOMAN. 

It’s also the same reason they try their darndest to change the minds of these sinners living their sinful lifestyle - God forbid they end up burning in the eternal fire known as “HELL” should they die with a member of the same sex in their lap!

And this would be all well and good… if it weren’t for the fact that these so-called “faithful” Christians are hypocrites!

It would be one thing if all the religious people who were against homosexual partnerships were actually living the lives they tell other people to live.  But the reality is, many of these same people are chastising others for their sinful lives, all the while doing things in their own life that - if they are following the Bible to a T - will also send them straight to Hell!

What kind of things am I talking about? Let’s take a look, shall we:

1. SEX BEFORE MARRIAGE.

God states, in no uncertain terms, that a man and a woman should wait until they’re married to have sex.  Yet, many straight couples have years and years of unmarried sex.  Why no protest at these people’s houses?  Shouldn’t we be knocking on the doors of all heterosexual couples and asking:

“Excuse me, but do you two have a marriage license? You DON’T??!?  Then get thee to a church, or you’re going to burn in HELL!!”

If the religious right in this country was REALLY concerned about saving people from a sinful lifestyle, forget going after Gays & Lesbians - they should start combing their own congregation for straight couples who are just “living together!”

2. WATCHING PORN.

God doesn’t specifically say in the Bible, “Thou shalt not watch porn.” (To be fair, porn as we know it today didn’t exist back then - no cameras, people!)  However, he DOES say its wrong to lust after another person’s spouse as though it was their own. 

Surprisingly, many people who “act” in pornography flicks ARE married!  Therefore, if a person is trying to live by all the technicalities set forth in the Bible, watching porn is DEFINITELY out!  For all we know, that person could be getting themselves off watching another man’s wife (or another woman’s husband - both genders DO watch this stuff) have sex! 

Then again, if we were to follow the path of most religious hypocrites, it would be okay to watch so long as the sex being viewed was between heterosexuals, right?

3. WORKING 7 DAYS A WEEK.

How is this a sin, you ask? Maybe you forgot the commandment God placed in his top 10:

Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy. For six days you shall labour and do all your work. But the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work—you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the alien resident in your towns. (Exodus 20: 8-10)

But wait - you mean to tell me that you somehow manage to work 6 days of the week, and STILL feel the need to work on the 7th one?  BOOOOOO, I say, BOOOOOOO!  You heathen!! How DARE you work when the Bible tells you to rest!  You might as well put on your gasoline-soaked underwear right now, pal, ’cause you’re GOING TO HELL!!

“Okay, okay, Aaron, enough with the examples! What is your point?!?”

My point is, people who are religious have every right to not agree with someone’s lifestyle choice.  However, that doesn’t mean they have the right to deny that person a right to live their life the way they want to. 

Furthermore, even if they view it as a “sin,” we ALL fall short of following the rules set forth in “The Bible.”  That doesn’t mean we should use that as an excuse to live a life of sin; however, it should make us aware of how hypocritical it is to rant and rave about one group of people’s lifestyle choice, given that most straight people have their own habitual choices not deemed proper by God.

-Aaron P. Taylor

Note: The views and opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of EMQTV, its network, or its affiliates.  They are the sole opinions of Aaron P. Taylor, who is more than happy to take credit for them…

You go on a 3rd date with a woman, and, as far as you’re concerned, everything is going great. You’ve done everything a “perfect gentleman” would do on a date - opened doors for her, asked if she was comfortable, asked her what she wanted to do, made sure you didn’t talk about sex or anything that would “make things feel weird”…

…and - most importantly - you didn’t “treat her like an object” like some other guy would have. You didn’t try to touch her, and you definetely did NOT try to kiss her, lest she not be ready for such an event.

At the end of the date, you give her a friendly hug, and tell her that you’ll call her tomorrow. You go home thinking to yourself, “Yes! Another successful date! I can’t wait to talk to her tomorrow so I can set up another date!”

And so, tomorrow comes, and you call… and she doesn’t pick up. You call a few more times, no answer. You leave her several messages, but she never returns your calls. Finally, a few days later, you run into her at the mall, and confront her about why she has suddenly disappeared.

“Well,” she replies, “it’s just… look, you’re a great guy and all, but you’re just… too…”

I don’t even have to finish the sentence, do I, fellas?

“NICE!”

There - I finished it!

And so, once again, you walk away, puzzled by a statement you’ve probably heard time and time again - you’re just… too… NICE.

- - - - -

Despite what you may witnessed from girls and their “bad” dating choices throughout your life, girls really DO want a nice guy.

HOWEVER, what they do NOT want is the version of the nice guy you have probably been giving them.

You see, guys, girls DO want a man that treats them with respect, and can show them a good time. (Note: there are a few girls out there who constantly look for bad relationships - but those are the girls you should REALLY be trying to avoid, lest your life be miserable).

What they do NOT want, though, is a man who is constantly sucking up to them, always asking them questions to try and make them feel “comfortable” (which, ironically, makes them UN-comfortable), and is always too nervous to make the first move.

When a woman says you’re too “nice,” what she’s really saying is:

Look, moron - you’re playing it too safe. You’re so worried about screwing things up that you’re not making me feel any kind of exitement when I’m around you. I need a guy that doesn’t always care what I think and just goes by whatever emotion he’s feeling at the time - and YOU, my friend, are not that guy. See ya!

- - - - -

If you’re a “nice guy,” I know what you’re thinking: it will be very hard to untrain yourself from your nice-guy behavior. You’re so used to trying to be a person that pleases everyone, yet you don’t realize you ultimately please no one when you do that.

Nice guys have been told time and time again that the best way to win a girl’s heart is to “be yourself.” Yet, what kind of “self” have they been taught to be? I’ll tell you:

1.The kind of guy who never makes physical moves on a girl, and hides his sexual feelings so that she won’t feel weird around him

2. The kind of guy willing to pay for ALL his dates, and spend money on a girl so he can buy her affection

3. The kind of guy that always has to get a woman’s input on something before making a move

4. The kind of guy who gives compliments to all of his dates, hoping it will build up her self-esteem

5. The kind of guy who wants to talk to a girl on a daily basis so she’ll know just how much he wants her around

In short: they’ve been taught to be WUSSIES!!

No wonder all of your dates end up giving you no action and/or wanting to revert you to friend-status - all your dating moves are WUSSY!!

The main reason nice guys fail is because they extend themselves too much when starting the dating process with women they are interacting with for the first time. Yes, I know you want to impress this new girl, but remember: she is not the only prize to be won in this interaction. YOU, too, are a prize! You should make it a point to see that she impresses you, too, before you decide to be extra-nice to this person.

But fear not, my friend! There is hope on the horizon!

If you want to break down your bad dating habits, here is what I suggest: find at least 5 girls that you can take out on dates. They can be girls you know, or girls from online (always a great way to test out some of what I’m about to tell you - and if it doesn’t work, you never have to see them again!). The point is to make at least 5 date appointments - and the girls have to show up for them to count!

Once you’ve arranged these outings, these are the 5 types of dates and/or activities you need to do to help boost your confidence, and get you out of “nice-guy” territory:

1. GO ON A DATE WHERE YOU DON’T PAY FOR ANYTHING SHE DOES.

That’s right - be it a movie date, dinner date, or arcade date (do people still go to arcades?), make it clear that you are going dutch.

Why You Should Do This:

“Nice Guys” often assume that the more money they spend on the date, the more she is going to like him. Guys, you NEED to get it into your head that just because you pay for your date’s fun time…

…doesn’t mean she is going to like you more! I’ve been on dates where I’ve paid for myself, AND I’ve been on dates where the woman paid for ME. Why? Because she liked me! I’ve also been on dates where I’ve spent over $50, and the girl just ended up wanting to be “friends”.

My point? You need this type of date so that you can understand that, if a girl REALLY likes you, she won’t feel weird about having to pay for herself - she’ll just be happy she can spend time with you!

2. GO ON A DATE WHERE YOU GIVE HER NO COMPLIMENTS.

Yes, I know, she comes up to your car door in that outfit that’s showing off her boobs and she smells like sex - you KNOW she looks good… but, for this ONE time out, don’t compliment her on ANYTHING.

Why You Should Do This:

Believe it or not, women can smell B.S. from a mile away. She’s had guys complimenting her boobs and good smell since 5th grade. And all those guys that complimented her have ONE thing in common:

She’s not currently dating any of them!

So, be original for once - don’t compliment her. Make her earn the right to get complimented by you. If anything, you should be looking to see if she compliments YOU!

You may think you won’t be able to turn her on if you don’t throw a few “suck up to her” lines here or there… but actions speak louder than words, and you may find that, just by treating her the right way, she’ll get that you find her sexy.  (Women tend to pick up on that a lot better than men). Otherwise, you would have thrown her out the car when you went to pick her up!

3. GO ON A DATE WHERE YOU DON’T ASK HER ANY QUESTIONS.

Don’t ask her what she would like to do; don’t ask her where she’d like to go; and, if you can, try to phrase all your questions in the form of a phrase (i.e. instead of asking, “So, how long have you lived here?”, say, “You must have lived in this town for quite a while.”)

Why You Should Do This:

A typical complaint I hear from my female friends is:

“Ugh, I wish the date I had last night could make a decision! Everywhere we went, he kept asking me if I was okay, if I was enjoying the date, where I wanted to go next… ugh!”

Women like men who take charge - CHAAAARGE, I say! You trying to be all nice by asking this girl all these questions shows her:

• You have NO confidence in yourself that you’d be able to please her, be it on a date or - in her mind - the bedroom; and
• You aren’t the type of guy to take charge.

So, do yourself a favor: for ONE date, try not to ask ANY questions. If you can’t decide between bowling or a movie because you don’t know which one will make her have more fun… just pick one and go! You may be surprised to find out that she actually LIKES the fact that you planned out a fun evening without her input!

4. GO ON ONE DATE WHERE YOU KISS THE GIRL… ON THE 1ST DATE.

I don’t care if you’re sitting in the car with her or at her front door… when the end of the night of that 1st date comes, pucker up!

Why You Should Do This:

Because, if you really ARE a nice guy, you’re reading this right now and thinking to yourself:

“AAAAAAAAAAAAH!! I can’t do that! She barely knows me! She’s not expecting me to do that so soon! What if she rejects me?!? I’ll be mortified - and she’ll probably think I’m a pervert and put a rape charge out on me!!”

Fella - CALM THE HECK DOWN!!

I used to be where you are, remember?? I used to be the guy that was so worried about a girl not wanting to see me if I kissed her too soon… that I NEVER made the kiss-move, hoping she would make it first.

Needless to say, I didn’t get kissed for a LOOONG time.

But here’s the thing: most women already know if they’d be willing to sleep with a guy within the first 5 minutes of meeting him.

THEREFORE…

If she meets you, talks to you for 15 minutes, gives you the phone number, and you call her, and she AGREES to go on the date… don’t you think she’s already thought WAY beyond the 1st kiss? Heck, if she’s REALLY feeling you after that initial meeting, she’s probably fantasizing about what dress she’d wear down the aisle!

Again, THEREFORE…

If the woman likes you, she won’t mind if you try to kiss her on the first date. As my own research indicates, most girls who haven’t been kissed by a guy by the second date are already putting him into the “nice guy” part of their mind - and you do NOT want to be in the “nice guy” part of a girl’s mind, ’cause then she’ll NEVER kiss you.

Oh - and whatever you do, don’t believe any crap your women friends tell you about any of this being a lie. I know women who will read this and go, “but Aaron, I ALWAYS wait until at least the 4th or 5th date to kiss a guy, because I want to get to know him first.”

Please do NOT listen to that rhetoric - they are LYING to you.  Almost every girl has been to a party or event where she spotted a cute guy, one thing led to another, and the next thing she knew, she was tounging him down and taking him home for a night-cap.

“Oh, but that was only one time, and I was just so…”

So what - ATTRACTED to him that you had to have him right then and there, and all your “rules” about kissing on the first date went right out the window?

I’m telling all you nice guys out there, women are a LOT freakier that you think, and - if they like you enough - will let you get away with ANYTHING on a first date… especially something as tame as a kiss!!

5. GO ON A DATE WITH A GIRL WHERE YOU SHOW HER A GOOD TIME… AND DON’T CALL/TEXT HER FOR AT LEAST 4 DAYS AFTERWARD.

That’s right - take her out, show her the time of her life… then, make her wait a few days before you call her.

Why You Should Do This:

Actually, there are several reasons:

One - so you can get out of the mode of being desperate for women! You calling her up the next day , and the next day, and the next day, gives her the impression that you have NO OTHER DATING PROSPECTS! Imagine how much pressure that puts on her to be your girl, and she’s only been out with you for 2 hours! Put the phone down, maaaaaaaan!!

Two - you need to see what the affects of waiting to call will do. If you wait 4 days to call - which, in the grand scheme of things is really NOT a long time - different girls will react differently. Some will be argumentative - “I can’t believe you waited so long to call me, I’m hanging up!” - while others will be extremely happy - “Oh, I’m SO glad you called - what have you been up to?!?”

However, one thing is certain: the ones that aren’t mad you waited to call are probably the ones you should be seeing, as they DEFINTETELY have a high level of interest.

One more benefit of waiting to call: sometimes - just sometimes - if the girl really, REALLY likes you… you might discover that she will actually call/text YOU first! And - oh my gosh - can you believe that the phone actually work both ways?!? Who knew women actually owned phones that could dial out to people - I thought they only had phones that accepted calls!

- - - - -

So there you go, guys! Try out each of these things on some of your next date outings. They may be scary, and your former “nice guy” self may try to combat the feelings you have when doing these things.  Remember, though: if you want to help get rid of the “nice guy” disease that’s ravaging your dating life, you NEED to step up and at least try some of these things.

Besides - if what you’ve been doing hasn’t been working, what have you got to lose??

-Aaron P. Taylor

It happened again this past weekend: I was out with friends, and one of them, a teacher, mentioned how much they liked working with kids.  He mentioned how great kids were to have around, and that he looked forward to having his own someday.

And my response?  That I, too, enjoyed working with kids - as long as they weren’t my own - and that even though I liked spending limited time with them, I definitely knew I did NOT want to have my own, and never planned on having any.

You could have heard a pin drop onto the carpet floor of the car.

At this point, the words I hear are always similar:

• “How could you not want kids? They’re so great!”
• “Don’t you want to have someone around to carry on your legacy?”
• “You’ll change your mind - people that say they don’t want kids always change their mind…”
• “Well, I guess if you want to be selfish, that’s your decision.”

Ah yes, the old “I don’t want kids, therefore I’m being selfish” ploy - as if having a kid just so you can say “look at what I can create and mold into a mini-me” isn’t just as selfish.  But more on that later…

People always seemed genuinely shocked whenever I mention that I don’t want kids.  It’s as if they feel like every single person on the entire planet should have an overwhelming desire to reproduce offspring.  Yet, the way I look at it, that can’t be possible - heck, our planet already has 6 BILLION people on it - if every one of those people decided to mate, our economy would be in even WORSE shape than it is now!!

At the same time, though, I have the opposite thought most of these people have.  Whereas they ponder how I could NOT want to have kids, I’m always racking my brain trying to figure out why people would want them in the first place.  Owning a baby, kid, or teenager isn’t always a positive exerience.  They cry, whine, fight, argue, make dumb decisions, are selfish at times… the list goes on and on.

Yet and still, people continue to ask me for reasons why I don’t want kids.  So, to help myself out - as well as anyone else who made the decision not to have kids, yet still have friends and associates questioning them - I created a website!

I present to you: www.WhyImNeverHavingKids.com!

Yes, that is a REAL website I created.  As of this typing, it has over 70 reasons why I, Aaron P. Taylor, do NOT want to have kids.

The purpose of the site is simple: to highlight detailed reasons why people who don’t want kids have made that decision.  Now, when people say, “Hey, wait a minute - why don’t you want to have kids,” I don’t have to give out a litany of reasons right there - I can just say, “check out my website!”

I’m sure you’re curious as to what type of things I would put on my site.  As an intro, here are 5 of my top reasons I don’t want kids, as posted on the site, and in no particular order…

—–

REASON #1: THEY CREATE TOO MUCH DAMN DRAMA

I live a relatively drama-free life.  I don’t smoke, I don’t drink excessively, I don’t do drugs, and I don’t partake in activities that would have my mind altered to the point where I’d make too many stupid decisions.

I also don’t allow people into my close-knit circle that do these types of things, or have an excessive amount of drama going on.  Oh sure, it’s THEIR drama, but those types of things always end up spilling over to a person’s friends even when they’re not trying to invite it into their own lives personally.

They say a little rain must fall into everyone’s life, and mine has been no different - but I’d like to think that I’ve done a pretty good job of trying to keep the amount of rain to a minimum.

Is should, therefore, be no surprise why a person such as myself who does not want to purposefully add drama to their lives would be against having any children.  Why? ‘Cause when it comes to stirring up troublesome situations, kids are the KINGPINS of drama!

Who else but children can make what would be an otherwise peaceful restaurant outing and turn it into a brawl-fest with the help of their siblings?  Who else but kids can throw a tantrum and ruin a perfectly good day simply because you ask them not to touch something that belongs to YOU?

Who else but a kid can do something stupid enough to nearly get themselves killed, yet try to come up with a logical explanation for doing it - and then get mad at YOU for being mad at them?!?

Ah, kids… they are such drama-creators!  When I think about kids, I immediately think about:

• The number of fights I’ll have to break up between them (”them” being if they have siblings)
• The amount of crying I’ll have to hear
• The number of parent/teacher conferences I’ll have to attend for them messing up in school
• The amount of safe boxes I’ll have to buy if I want to prevent my kids from breaking things
• The number of stupid arguments I’ll have to get into
• The number of events that will be ruined or brought to a heightened amount of drama simply because my kid wants to throw a tantrum of some kind
• Having to deal with other parents as a result of my kids’ friends, and the drama THEY bring

And so on and so on!

In short, kids bring with them love, joy, and plenty of affection… and they also bring fights, arguments, stupidity, and drama, Drama, DRAMA!! 

I was a theatre major in college - if I want drama, I’ll head back to the stage.  I will NOT, however, have kids for it!

REASON #2: BEING A KID REFEREE DOES NOT APPEAL TO ME

There was a 6-month period of my life where I lived with my Uncle and his two kids, aged 11 and 15.  Being that I was 23 at the time, I got to be like the “co-parent” of the house, watching after my younger cousins when my Uncle had to go out the house.  And, since he had a sales job, he was out of the house a LOT.

This gave me lots of time to see my cousins interact with each other, and… well, let’s just say, many of those interactions were NOT pretty.  Their age difference resulted in a lot of situations where the younger brother wanted to either hang out with or annoy the older sister, while the older sister wanted to be left alone and/or show her authority over the younger brother.

Consequently, they fought.  A LOT.  And me, being the older, more “mature” person in the house, was expected to break up these little incidents should they be on the verge of killing each other. 6 months of having to do this day in and day out was tiring, stressful, and NOT fun.

So, I can sit here today and type with complete absolution: being a kid referee does NOT appeal to me!

Having more than one kid means having to spend at least 18 years of your life breaking up kid fights, most of it over dumb stuff.  What kind of dumb stuff am I talking about?  Once again, here’s just a partial list, which includes:

• Car seating (i.e. who sits in the front vs. the back)
• Table seating
• Living room seating
• TV channels
• Remote control handling
• Who gets to sit in Mom’s/Dad’s lap
• One sibling staring at the other one for too long
• One sibling ignoring the other one for too long
• Toys
• Video games
• What board game to play

Oh my gosh, I have to stop typing this list now.  There are so many stupid things I could type that kids start fights over, I’ll end up with carpel tunnel!  I’ve seen kids start fights over NOTHING, people - they don’t even NEED a reason to fight, other than “I just feel like it!”

When kids fight, the ideal end result for them is never resolution - no, the end result they hope for is, “I get my way, and this person accepts it or dies!”  And since both sides want to have their way, their fights could, in theory, go on and on indefinitely, were it not for somebody breaking up their fight.

Enter: the parent.

Adults love watching a good fight, yet they know that, as responsible parents, they have to do what is right in the interest of their kids health - in this case, making sure neither of them kills the other one (though I say, if they do kill each other, is there anything REALLY wrong with that??).  They have to somehow wiggle themselves in between their children, who, by now, may have each other in headlocks, and force them apart.

You would think it would be easy for an adult over 5 feet to stop some 3-foot lil’ rugrats from fighting.  FAR FROM IT.  Kids don’t fight fair - they scratch, they bite, they squirm around, the swing their limbs wildly, all in the hopes of being able to break loose from their parents and continue their fight against their sibling.

And I, for one, am not the type of guy that even likes getting into fights, much less being bruised up while trying to stop one.  If kids were able to better rationalize and negotiate for what they want rather than fighting for it, I could see how having one might not be so bothersome. 

But, as with everything else, kids have to be taught how to talk out their problems, and the time (i.e. YEARS) I spend teaching them to do that, I could just as easily be spending time with my girlfriend/wife doing something more enjoyable, without having to worry about whether or not the two lil’ morons I created will break out into a fight over who gets to turn the AC on in my car!!

REASON #3: THEY DON’T “BRING ME JOY”

I want to shoot down this whole idea that kids bring feelings of “joy” and love to all people.  As much as a person who WANTS kids may feel these emotions, people who don’t want kids could give a flying rat’s behind about having them around, lest they bring about emotions of MISERY, PAIN, and RESENTMENT.

There was a show on FOX last year called “Standoff,” about two crisis negotiators who tried to talk hostages into letting their captives go.  There was one particular episode where this elder teenager held up a bank and wouldn’t come out.  In talking to the young man, the negotiators discovered he never had the close connection with his Mom that he wanted as a child.  He couldn’t understand why, despite everything he did - getting straight A’s, joining and excelling at various clubs and activities, his Mom never seemed to care.

The negotiators track the parents down, and the mother writes something on a piece of paper for her to read to her son.  “I think it’s time he hears this,” she told them.  And what was it she wrote on that piece of paper?

“I’m sorry, son - I never wanted children.” 

Upon hearing this, the kid breaks down, and comes out the bank.  The end.

Now, why did I bring up this particular episode?  Because: JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE HAS A KID, DOESN’T MEAN IT’S GOING TO BRING THEM JOY IF THEY DIDN’T WANT KIDS IN THE FIRST PLACE!!

I could have a kid, and he or she be the absolute most perfect child, and there’s STILL a chance I’d be friggin’ upset for having it in the first place! 

Besides, parents-to-be get too hyped up on that “I’ll have something around that’s going to love ME and bring joy into my life!!”  But uh, golly gee… shouldn’t you strive to have that BEFORE having a kid??  People shouldn’t rely on any body else - be it a wife, husband or baby - to suddenly bring their life meaning and happiness.  Those types of people are in for a rude awakening.

What if you have a kid and they decide to rebel against you for 17 of their 18 years growing up?  All the fights, clashes of ideals, trouble-making - is any of THAT going to be bringing this “joy” the commenting person speaks of??

What if your kid decides to do drugs or follow the wrong crowd?  Will those days, weeks, and months of struggling to convince them to do otherwise going to make you think, “gee, this kid sure is bringing a lot of joy into MY life right now?!?”

You see, unlike this narrow-minded person here, I understand that kids can bring both joy AND pain.  I understand that, to some people, having a baby just makes their entire life light up, and that nothing would make them happier than to have 5 or 6 mini-thems running around their house.

But what he, along with other people, need to understand, is that not all people are like them.  I don’t get all excited about the prospect of late-night feedings, taking kids to camp, vacationing with kids around, having them misbehave in public - NONE OF THAT APPEALS TO ME.  And just because I don’t like them around, doesn’t mean my DNA is more screwed up - if that’s the case, there are LOTS of people walking around with bad DNA…

…but chances are, we’re a lot happier not having to share that DNA with an annoying rugrat!

REASON #4: THEY BREAK STUFF

Kids’ brains are at a much lower intelligence level than an adult brain, which affects just about everything they do, including (a) what they think is smart vs. dumb, and (b) how coordinated they are.

And who gets to suffer the consequences of these lil’ underdeveloped brains?  ADULTS, that’s who! 

How do we suffer?  When a kid decides he wants to fool around with something that’s not theirs - i.e. is probably YOURS - and breaks it!

Young kids are especially notorious for grabbing any object they see and somehow dismantling it to bits.  You know that universal control you wanted to buy that can operate every single electronic function you have in your house?  Imagine how great you’ll feel when you come home from work one day, only to have your wife tell you that the baby decided to use it as fishing bait… for your toilet!

Oh, wait, that’s right - YOU WON’T FEEL GREAT AT ALL!  If anything, you’ll probably feel like strangling the kid!!

Yes, having a kid means you’ll now have to be on guard for just about EVERY SINGLE THING YOU OWN that either has significant meaning to you or would cost too much money to replace.  DVD players, TVs, vacuum cleaners, fine China - all of these things seem to give signals to young kids that say, “Your parents LOVE this thing - please come over here and break me right away!”

The sad part is, because most kids don’t have a money guage to tell the what’s expensive or what’s not, they can never seem to figure out why the thing they just broke is causing you to become so angry! A kid doesn’t understand why Daddy got so upset just because he decided to key the words “I love you” into the new $1000 paint job on his car!  An infant can’t figure out why throwing Mommy’s new iPhone on the ground and smashing it to pieces has placed her on punishment! “Geez,” they think to themselves, “can’t they just get it fixed?!?”

Kids also have the worst coordination in the world.  Their bodies are constantly changing in height and weight, meaning they have to constantly re-figure out how to balance themselves.  Unfortunately, it also means they fall and trip a LOT, and - if you’re lucky - you just might find them accidentally crashing themselves into your favorite (insert item here) and completely destroying it!

And this is just if they get near YOUR stuff - they’re just as capable of breaking their stuff, too!  I can’t even begin to remember how many times my parents had to re-buy my brother and I Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle toys as a result of them getting broken, lost, worn out, or having body parts missing.  They probably spent dang near $200 just replacing those toys!

All the money I’d be spending to replace broken items, or having to fix something as a result of my dumb-ass kid being ignorant of what NOT to touch, is money that I could be spending on myself, or taking my girlfriend/wife out someplace, or going on vacation… and the list goes on and on.  If I wanted to have something around that was constantly out to destroy everything I owned, I’d save time and buy a bulldozer instead!

REASON #5: TOO MANY PARENTS LOOK STRESSED OUT

People who already have kids do a very BAD job of advertising the benefits of having them.

Oh sure, they’ll come to me and say stuff like, “They’re a joy to have in your life, and once you have them you’ll never understand how you lived without them.” Or: “They’re more precious than life itself!”

But I don’t go by what I HEAR, I go by what I see.  And, frankly, too many adults out there have let the hard work of parenting show on their person.  And it definitely isn’t something that looks too much fun.

In the course of a single day, I can walk around this city and see parents and children out together.  And what sights do I see?

• The mother struggling to get her baby to quiet down
• The father on the train with his two kids who are jumping around
• Parents waiting in line somewhere while they’re kids run around like idiots
• A teenager yelling at their Mom for no apparent reason
• A parent breaking up a fight between two siblings
• A kid crying because Daddy won’t buy them that toy/candy/moronic thing they want

The list goes on and on and on.  And in all these situations, the parents… well, they’re definitely NOT wearing joyful smiles on their faces.

No, the looks they have instead are:

• Stress
• Fatigue
• Frowns
• Droopy eyes
• The “I just finished running a marathon and I’m about to collapse” Look
• Wrinkles
• Grey Hairs
• Various bruises

Parents also seem to always have this “on the edge” demeanor about them.  Kids can go from being perfectly behaved to “bat-$#!+ crazy” in less than 0.5 seconds, and a parent always has to be ready to react to a child’s sudden meltdown.  Consequently, they never look like they’re completely at peace.  If you thought soldiers coming back from war had a hard time feeling at ease, try being the parent of 2 siblings who spent 5 days trying to kill each other, and see how “at ease” you feel about how they’ll treat each other on the sixth day!

With all these down-trodden looks I’m constantly seeing being worn by adults with children, is it any wonder that they can’t convince me with their words about how GREAT it is to have them?  Life is already stressful enough, and frankly, I’d rather not add to it!

—

For 65 other reasons (and counting), visit my website, www.WhyImNeverHavingKids.com!

-Aaron P. Taylor

Aaron P. Taylor here - how are you?  Hope all is going well with you up in the White House. 

I just wanted to send you a brief message to say, “Thank you.”  No, I did not vote for you, nor have I, up to this point, ever voted for a Republican. And no, I do not think you have been that great of a President.  I’d point out to you the reasons why, but I’m sure your ability to stay in a constant state of denial would prevent you from seeing the things I’d point out as “screw ups.”

(Cough) War (cough) economy (cough) Hurricane Katrina (cough) invadingthewrongcountry (cough)

However, I WILL say that, despite what other people may think, and no matter how history will view you, your Presidency was a necessary one.

You see, Mr. Douche - oops, I mean, Mr. “Bush” - it is because of you that a guy like Barack Obama was able to make history by becoming the country’s first muli-racial President.  And for that, I must be greatful.

Oh sure, there were white voters out there that had their doubts about whether or not a man of color could really do a good job running the country…

…but because YOU did such a crappy job - because you put together an administration that not only became corrupt, but had people in it that misused federal funds, shot people in the face (and got away with it), and lied over and over again to the American people…

…and because you seem to face every tragedy as though it didn’t REALLY need your attention… and because you weren’t willing to listen to anyone’s advice (outside of your own circle) when it came to dealing with issues that REALLY mattered to the country…

…because of all THAT, those voters that may have been hesitant about voting for Obama were able to look at the ballot and say…

“Eh, what the heck, I’ll vote for him - he can’t do worse than Bush did!”

So thank you, President Bush, for being an absolutely crappy, immature, selfish, conceited prick of a public servant.  Were it not for you, a guy like John McCain - ya know, the guy who voted with you 90% of the time - would have been lauded as a hero, and probably elected.  Instead, we have a history-making President heading into office instead.

Then again, that was probably your plan all along, wasn’t it??…. nah - knowing you, it was probably an accident.  Oh well!

-Aaron P. Taylor

Throughout the course of the program, they had several promos where artists were reminding people to vote in the Presidential election on November 4th. What I noticed, though, was that all of the promos were only encouraging people to vote for ONE candidate - Barack Obama.

Now, being as this award show was taking place on B.E.T., I figured they’d be more likely to take a stand for Obama, who is the first (half) Black candidate to be taken seriously enough to be a real consideration for the role of Commander-in-Chief.

What was funny to me, though, was that there wasn’t a single person or promo, AT ALL, that said, “on November 4th, vote for the candidate YOU feel will do the better job in the White House.” Based on what I saw, it is assumed that all Black people have already decided which candidate they will be voting for - and it’s not the old white guy named What’s-His-Face that’s running against him.

The real question is, when did all these Black people get together and make the decision that our entire race has to vote for Obama? And, more importanly, should Black people feel guilty about voting for him simply because he has a similar skin color?

In my opinion, a person can vote for whoever they want to vote for. One of my uncles, who is Black, is a Republican. He’s always sided with their party on their issues, and, come November 4th, he will probably be voting for John McCain.

Based on what I just typed, though, many people in the Black community would castrate him for doing such a thing. “How dare you vote for McCain,” they’d say, “don’t you know he’s just going to make this economy worse, and keep us in the war longer?!?”

But I can’t fault him for his vote. He watches more news stories about politics and studies the issues more than most people I know. If, after looking at how the candidates feel about issues that are important to HIM, he decides to go with the Republican choice, I can’t really fault him for it since he feels educated in his choice.

At the same time, though, I have absolutely NO problem if a Black person wants to vote for Obama simply because he’s a Black candidate.

“But wait, Aaron,” someone might say. “You just told us you don’t mind your uncle voting Republican because he studied the issues. How are you going to then turn around and say you don’t mind someone voting for Obama based on skin color alone?? What if that person didn’t study the issues so thoroughly?”

People give our species too much credit sometimes instead of viewing us for how we really are. Ideally, every single person who voted would take the time out to study what their candidates are really about, and, after careful consideration, vote for the candidate they felt would REALLY be a help to the country as a whole.

In reality, though, most people base their voting decision on emotion. They allow things such as fear, misunderstanding, family background, etc. to determine how they vote.

For example: A person might grow up in a family that supports Republicans. Obama, a democrat, comes along and brings up issues and ways to handle them that this person happens to agree with. However, this person may still vote Republican simply because every one else in his family will. Yes, it’s a private vote, but that person might still feel bad if they have to lie to their family later on about who they voted for.

Futhermore, there are plenty of White people who will be voting for McCain simply because he, too, is WHITE.

Granted, most White people these days are smart enough to NOT say this sentiment in public. Why, that would be racist! But, if you listen closely to the language some of them use when explaining why they wouldn’t vote for Obama, it’s clear they’re only saying it because they want to hide their real reason: they don’t want a Black guy running the country.

Don’t believe me? Here are just a few things people have said:

“I don’t want to vote for him because he’s a Muslim.”

Really? THAT’s their reason? What, are they afraid if a Muslim enters the White House, he’s going to create a law forcing everyone to pray towards Mecca 5 times a day?

“I’m afraid of him because he’s a terrorist/associates with terrorist.”

Oh, I get it - he’s a “secret” Muslim, therefore he’s a terrorist! Oh no, wait - he happen to be in a group at one time that just happened to have another member in it who, later, turned out to be a terrorist!  We should take that same logic and never trust another NYC cab driver again!  Besides, better to trust a Christian President, one who won’t get us into an unnecessary war and bomb countries for no reason, right? … Oh, wait…

“I just don’t trust him. Look at his name - it’s got ‘Hussein’ in it!”

Again, just because he has a name that sounds foreign does not mean he’s not worth trusting. The TRUTH of the matter is, you don’t trust him because he’s BLACK! Obama’s never been to prison, has a good record in the Senate… he went to friggin’ HARVARD Law School, people!

To be fair, I’m sure there are people out there who can think of plenty of legitimate reason why Obama should not be in office. But again, most people who are choosing to NOT vote for him are doing so because of irrational reasons.

Therefore, I have no problem with Black people using an irrational reason such as “He’s black” to vote for Obama. He NEEDS black voters who think like this, if only to counter-balance the votes he won’t get from people who will vote against him for the same reason.

Ah, if only people weren’t always run by emotions when making decisions. Now if you’ll excuse me, I have a Black candidate to vote for - good think I studied first!

-Aaron P. Taylor

(Note: The views and opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of EMQTV.com, its network, or its affiliates. They are the sole opinions of its author, Aaron P. Taylor, who is more than happy to take credit for them…)

Man, oh man, where do I begin…

On Saturday, I typed up an article for EMQTV.com called “Advice 4 Women: How to NOT Get a ‘Deserved’ Raping.” I wrote the article after an incident involving me and a woman at a club who repeatedly wanted to dance with me - and only me - several times throughout the night.

For those who may not have read the article (though by now I’d be surprised if you haven’t), the girl got more and more touchy-feely each time we danced, to the point where both me, along with the friends I’d gone to the club with that night (both male AND female), thought this girl REALLY wanted to jump my bones.

But it was not to be: after several hot & heavy dances, I went in for a kiss, and she turned her cheek, giving me the line, “I wouldn’t do that if I were you.”

Me and my friends (again, girls included) were shocked - not because she rejected me (that happens all the time at the club), but because she had been giving me signals all night (not just based on the dancing, though the fact that I was the only guy she was dancing with certainly didn’t help) that, even if she didn’t want to sleep with me, she’d at least be up for a make-out session.

In my frustration at this… since I’m a writer, I’m always thinking about different subjects for articles I can write about. And, as weird as it may sound, when that incident happened, the first two things I thought about was:

(a) how this wasn’t the first girl that’s teased me - or any guy, for that matter - with the intent of “taking things further,” yet not REALLY being up for it; and
(b) that this sort of thing can be DANGEROUS when done to the wrong guy, and that women would benefit from knowing that.

So, I wrote my blog, posted it on the site, then went home for 2 days to help my Mom move.

Imagine my surprise when, upon finally getting to check my E-mails, I find a note from one of the site creators saying simply: “Have you read the comments on your article?”

And man, oh man, have I read them. Perhaps you’d like to be privy to some of the comments I’ve received about the article? Here’s a small sampling from the ever-growing list of responses:

“Here, Aaron, let me help make things much simpler for you: Instead of assuming that any girl who dances with you or flirts with you is clearly after your penis, try assuming the opposite. Because, while it is technically possible that there is a woman, somewhere, who is interested in sleeping with a whining little brat like you, it’s statistically unlikely that you will ever encounter her. Since you’re either so infantile or so stupid that you can’t grasp the concept of ASKING A WOMAN IF SHE WANTS TO SLEEP WITH YOU, you’re clearly either too young or too stupid to be having sex in the first place. Do the human race a favor and go wank alone in your room.”

And another:

“Wow. You’re a totally worthless shit.”

And another:

“You are a pathetic excuse for a man; you are nothing but a rape apologist and a whiny, selfish baby.”

And another:

“Kill yourself, you disgusting rape apologist.”

And yet another:

To Mr. Aaron P. Taylor:
We are sorry to inform you that your services as a human being are no longer required. Please gather your belongings and exit the species at once. Do not use us for a reference.

Sincerely,
The Human Race

Wow… all of this simply because I had an opinion on a touchy subject that was different from other people?

For me, I’ve always been a person who had no problem sitting down with others and having a civilized discussion about heavy topics. Me and my friends in college used to have all-night sessions where we’d bring up an issue, and then discuss our viewpoints on it. We may not have always agreed with what a person said, but we at least understood that everyone was entitled to their own opinion.

However, I don’t believe we ever interjected the words “kill yourself” when we didn’t agree with what the other person said, or said “that opinion sucks - what a worthless piece of shit you are!”

Then again, maybe I’m just more civilized than I’m being given credit for.

To be fair - to me - there WERE people who understood what I was saying in the article. Here are some of those examples:

“It took courage to write this entry. Any time a man objects to the overt and manipulative teasing of a woman he is condemned for being “beastly” (in the UK) or “a pig” here in the U.S. And to frame it in terms of the #1 hot-button topic of RAPE is especially ballsy. You are sure to get plenty of attention for this post.”

And another:

“What Aaron is talking about here is that doing this sort of thing is (not only an incredibly cruel way to stroke your own ego but) dangerous! And that’s not letting the r@pist off the hook! You never know when the guy you’re teasing in this fashion is unstable. I read that up to 5% of the population have undiagnosed mental disorders. To make another example, I am white and would not walk down an all-black neighborhood with a “I hate n*ggers” tee shirt with $100 hanging out of my wallet.”

And another:

“It’s easy to say “keep it in your pants”. thing is, the natural reaction caused by a woman rubbing herself on our crotch in some way is NOT something men can flick ON and OFF like a light switch. the body reacts on its own and it builds up until there’s some sort of release. we KNOW it’s building up and we ALSO know that we can’t just turn it off. people call this “sexual frustration”. guys and men have a varying ability to control that build-up. most men deal with it well enough (our writer here being a good example). for the minority that has below-average control, well, it takes one tease too many to ruin two people’s lives (yes, amazingly enough, men do feel).”

I could literally go on re-posting comments all day long from both sides. The point is, the subject has touched off a discussion about this issue (which is good), but also painted me, to some, as a person in favor of rape (which is not so good).

I wasn’t going to even do a rebuttal to this post… but then I found out that other blog sites have been re-posting this article and saying negative things about me personally. (To read some of these sites, you can click http://news.mensactivism.org/node/10802, or http://tigerbeatdown.blogspot.com/2008/10/andrew-p-taylor-did-not-rape-you-he.html [this one is pretty sarcastic, but kinda funny].)

After reading the comments on here, I sent the article to a few of my friends. One of my female friends was not very happy about it (to say the least), and wrote me back saying so. I wrote her back, and figured what I sent her would make a pretty good rebuttal to my original article.

In short: you should know that I hold women in high regard. I was raised by a single mom (minus the 9 years my dad was here prior to his death) and raised by a litany of aunts, grandmothers, and friends of my Mom, most of whom were - you guessed it - women as well.

At the same time, you should also know that I’m a believer in taking responsibility for one’s actions when something goes good OR bad. I was taught that there are two sides to every story, and that even if you think something happened to you that is someone else’s fault, it’s always a good idea to look at your own behavior/actions and see what part you may have played in it.

The reason I wrote the article is because I felt women needed to know it’s not always a good idea to do certain things around certain guys because they can get hurt. I’ve had so many women over the years tell me how much they enjoy “going to the club just to tease guys.”

And you may or may not agree with the next statement, but doing that sort of thing can be dangerous. Not everyone is patient or understanding when it comes to reading signals or figuring out when a girl is just “playing around” and dealing with it in a respectable manner.

The reality of the situation is, NO GIRL DESERVES TO BE RAPED. I even state that in the article (though I think some people may have just read the title and commented on the article without actually READING it).

I also think no guy should rape a girl under any circumstance. If a girl is teasing him to the point where he thinks he’s about to get some action and she decides not to, he SHOULD be able to walk away.

Read: SHOULD be able to walk away.

However, we don’t live in an idealized world; we live in reality. And reality has shown time and time again that NOT ALL MEN ARE SMART ENOUGH TO WALK AWAY. Some guys will, in fact, take what they want. And women need to be aware of that, and need to be mindful of doing things that will make the wrong man aroused enough to the point of wanting to rape her.

And, just to be clear (because I hate being misinterpreted), I’m not saying that women need to revert back to a time where they had to stay inside, or dress up showing nothing but their eyes, or stop walking down the street lest some guy from afar get aroused, jump her, rape her, then scream in court, “But it’s her fault - she was walking down the street all seductive-like!”

What I’m saying is, women need to stop always playing the victim role - i.e. the “OMG, I was doing absolutely NOTHING to bring this incident upon me“ role - and start taking responsibility for their actions, actions that can - sometimes - contribute to a guy wanting to sex her without her consent.

In the case of the girl in my story: had she danced with a different guy - one who may have been high, drunk, on pills, or just really, REALLY lonely - and grinded on his crotch on and off and on and off for 2 hours, and felt on his chest and rubbed her face all over his face (which, in my opinion, takes what we were doing beyond the realm of “just dancing“ and into the realm of “I‘m trying to hit on this guy“ - don‘t act like you don‘t know what signals give off which intentions, ladies) … and then pulled the “oh, I wouldn’t do that if I were you” crap after giving him all the buying signals…

The reality is, HER NIGHT COULD HAVE ENDED DIFFERENTLY.

That’s not me having a sick mind; that’s me being able to place myself in the mindset of another guy whose ideals are different than mine. And it’s not a justification of rape; it’s simply a statement of how things really are, and how they DO happen.

I’m pretty sure there are a few people out there that are STILL not going to get it. And that’s fine. But perhaps some more analogies are in order. Yes, I know my last one involving women and shopping probably came off as sexist and - according to a few of you - a show of my “complete devaluation of women as a whole.” So, here are a few non-gender specific analogies:

HOPEFULLY BETTER ANALOGY #1:

No one deserves to get lung cancer. Some people get lung cancer as a result of an inherited family gene, and it’s not their fault. And it’s sad and tragic, because they really didn’t do anything to bring it upon themselves.

You know who else has a chance of getting lung cancer? Smokers.

Now, in the same way that not every girl who teases guys for fun is going to get raped, not every person who smokes is going to catch lung cancer. However, there ARE smokers who catch lung cancer, just like there are women who get raped after purposefully teasing guys over and over, and eventually teasing the WRONG guy.

In both cases, the aftermath is tragic: cancer is a terrible thing to deal with, just like the after-effects of rape. But no one would dare argue that the smoker actions weren’t partially responsible for such a tragic thing happening.

Yet, somehow it’s unimaginable to believe that the woman’s actions didn’t play a part in her tragedy as well?

HOPEFULLY BETTER ANALOGY #2:

When I first moved to D.C., I didn’t have a place to live. About 3 days in, I was getting desperate, and didn’t care WHERE I lived, so long as I was able to find a place.

One of the places I looked at was a studio apartment in the south-east area of D.C. The apartment itself was very nice - it had its own kitchen, a bathroom, and a living area that was bigger than the place I stayed at in Atlanta. And the rent - $650 a month - was more than affordable.

The only problem: it was in one of the WORST AREAS IN D.C. in terms of crime and murders. Everyone I told about the place begged me not to live there. And so, I decided not to take the place.

Now, had I moved into the area and got robbed or killed 5 days later, everyone in my friend circle - not to mention the people seeing the news report about the incident - would have agreed that it was a terrible thing that happened to me.

At the same time, though, they would not have been surprised. Why? Because they would have already known that something like that could happen to me in that part of town. I would have been tempting fate by deciding to live there, and - while not everyone who lives in that part of town gets killed there - the fact that there was a high risk for it would have made living there a stupid decision on my part.

In the same way, it’s stupid for any woman to believe that she can go through life teasing guy after guy after guy after guy, and not think that at least ONE of them might take what she thinks is a “joking” lil’ tease routine too seriously, to the point where he thinks she’s still “joking” when she says she really doesn’t want sex. If you’re constantly putting yourself in positions or situations where there’s a possibility of something like that happening, it’s only a matter of time before it might eventually happen.

Tragic? Yes. Shocking? Not so much.

—-

Lastly, to all the rape victims who have commented on the article and verbally bashed me for being insensitive to what they went through: please take heed that I am NOT doing that. I am fully aware that there are women (and men - nobody ever brings up the fact that men get raped, too) out there who get raped and didn’t wear a skimpy outfit, or tease a guy, or give a guy any impression that she wanted to have sex with him.

What the article was simply saying was, there are women out there who ARE doing those things PURPOSEFULLY, and, while they, too, don’t deserved to get raped, they DO need to be aware of how their actions can play a part in it happening.

But maybe everybody who disagreed with me is right. Maybe I’m giving women too much credit.

Maybe I’m wrong for thinking that a woman might actually be SMART and INTELLIGENT enough to take responsibility for her actions, or realize that, while men SHOULD be smart enough back off when she says no, not all men are going to do so after she’s been giving them signals all night that indicate she’ll kiss or have sex with them.

Maybe, instead, I should do what one of the commenter’s suggested, and exit the species. Maybe I should look for a species that has an opposing gender that doesn’t put 100% blame towards a man when something goes wrong. Maybe - just maybe - this new species’ opposing gender will have the BRAINS I thought the girls on this planet had, ones that will allow them to think:

“Gee, my actions might actually play a part in me getting hurt - perhaps I should avoid doing such things.”

On second thought, I think I’ll stay here. Who knows, I might actually find some women who still believe in self-responsibility!  Hopefully that’s not just me being too “ideal” in my thinking

-Aaron P. Taylor

P.S. By the way, shame on those of you who thought I was pro-rape.  What kind of sick, twisted thoughts are going through YOUR head?

Perhaps the title of this blog seems a bit controversial. But I’m really not trying to be.

You see, no woman “deserves” to get raped. Any woman who has unwanted sex forced upon her by another does not deserve the actions and subsequent psychological and physical pain she will receive as a result of having a man sexually place himself on and in her without her consent.

With that said: some women out there are doing things that, based on their actions, practically SCREAMS: “Please rape me - I don’t mind at all, really!”

During my last week in Atlanta (I recently moved to Washington D.C.), me and my friends went out to the club for one last hurrah. While at the club, I was dancing by myself, minding my own business, when a woman approached me and wanted to dance. And I said, “sure, why not?”

We got on the dance floor, and started dancing. At first it was no-touch dancing, with both of us dancing in front of each other doing the best two-steps we could. After the first dance session, she went away for a while, and I proceeded to continue dancing by myself.

A few minutes later, she came over again, and wanted to dance to another song. Once again, I agreed.

This time, though, the dancing she did was more suggestive. She was dancing a LOT closer to me, grinding her behind into my pelvis and feeling on me at the same time. I don’t know if it was the beers she had, but she was either really getting into the song she was dancing to, or, I assumed, getting into me.

This happened about 3 or 4 more times, with the girl getting closer and closer to me each time, to the point where our faces were touching each other as we danced. “This girl wants me,” I thought to myself. “Hmm… maybe there’s a chance I could…

“Naaaaaaaaah!”

Now, for you girls out there that may not be aware, when you dance with a guy over and over again, and get more and more suggestive in your intentions via dancing, a few things happen in the male psyche:

1. His brain sends blood from his head to his “little head” and gives him a boner
2. He starts to think: “I know we’re just dancing… but DANG, she must REALLY want me to give it to her right!”

And so it was: the next time we danced, our faces were touching again. Me, being the guy I am, decided to go in for a light kiss.  I puckered up my lips, tilted my head to the side, and…

BOOM! She turned her face and I got the cheek!

At which point, the girl turns to me and whispers: “I wouldn’t do that if I were you…”

Now, I didn’t know if this meant that she had a boyfriend in the vicinity that was watching, or wasn’t really feeling me… but the point was, there was at least 30 minutes of built-up sexual tension between us that gave me the impression she wanted more from me than just dancing.

Being the guy I am, I backed off and just continued to dance with her, two-stepping out the remainder of the song without ANY touching going on.

—-

So, why do I tell you this story?

Simple: had I been a less-than-understanding guy (i.e., a forceful-type of guy who always “gets what he wants by any means necessary”), I could have just as easily forced a kiss on her, or worse - waited until after the club let out to follow her to her car, then followed her to her house. And, when she got out her car, I could have been right there ready to pounce on her, saying: “I think you owe me something, lady!!”

Sound far-fetched? Seeing as girls get raped everyday around the world, it’s not an implausible story.

Now, had I gone through with the second example, I’d be called a “monster” who “preyed upon this girl for no reason,” and would be looked down upon for doing such a thing. And, like I said before, given the actions that were taken in the second example, that title would have been deserved.

But, what about the girl? What about HER part in the scenario?

What about the fact that this girl, who didn’t have any REAL interest in me, simply teased me to rile me up in the hopes of boosting her own ego? What about the fact that this girl grinded her ass on my penis not once, twice, or three times, but several, SEVERAL times??

What amazes me is, women do this kind of stuff all the time. They do certain actions or say certain things to make a guy think she’s going to give up her goods, then turn around and act shocked - SHOCKED, I tell you! - when she says “No” and he still tries to force himself upon her.

By the way, I know there’s probably some girls reading this, thinking to herself: “Hey, Aaron! That’s not fair! Just because I dress sexy for a date or dance close with a guy, that doesn’t automatically mean he should assume I’m going to have sex with him!”

And I agree - to a point.

It’s okay, for example, if a girl decides to wear a shirt on a date that shows a little cleavage. However, it’s another thing for a girl to go on a date wearing a top that shows just about everything but her nipples, then have a 30-minute conversation with a guy about how voluptuous and sensitive her breasts are, then spend half the night stroking her hand against the outer-lining of said breasts…

…and then get mad at the guy for trying to touch them towards the end of the date!!!

You see what I mean?? It’s called “FALSE ADVERTISING,” and that crap is very frustrating to a guy!

Understand something, ladies: men are creatures that are very easily stimulated via visually-pleasing images and certain touches. We get off on seeing erotic images - it’s the reason girlie magazines and adult movies exist in the first place. We also get off anytime any girl even goes so far as to brush up against our private parts, especially in the frontal region.

So, when a girl comes along who is actively (read: not from a distance, not while sitting somewhere by herself, unaware that guy is looking at her, but actively) performing certain actions or saying certain things that signal sexual interest…

WHAT ELSE IS A GUY SUPPOSED TO THINK, other than: “This girl want to give me sex!”

In short, ladies: if you don’t want a guy to rape you, don’t do stuff intentionally that you know will make him want to jump your bones. You may think doing these sorts of things is “cute” and “just being a girl,” but it’s dangerous, and can get you hurt. Teasing a guy with soft whispers, body groping, or any other type of enticing maneuver is wrong if you don’t plan on following through.

Hmm… I see some of you ladies may still not get it. How about this: doing these sorts of things to a guy is akin to finding out about a sale at your favorite shopping store. If the place advertised all week long that they’d be having a midnight sale where everything in the store was going to be 50% off, and all during the week they assured you of getting such a great deal

… wouldn’t you be a bit pissed off if, upon the day of the “advertised” sale, you discovered that instead of lowering the prices by half, they actually INCREASED the costs of their goods by double or triple?

It would almost make you want to say “screw this” and rob the store to get your promised discount, wouldn’t it? Hmm, sounds like the thoughts of someone wanting to “take” what they were having teased in front of them…

-Aaron P. Taylor

(Note: Due to the overwhelming responses/comments I’ve received about this article, I have written a rebuttal to further clarify my point. You can read it by clicking HERE.)

One of those things includes the importance of voting.  If you’re like me, you’ve said to yourself time and time again: “Why should I vote? It’s not like my one little vote is going to matter.  Besides, the electoral colleges and/or other big government-type set ups are the ones who REALLY choose the people elected into office!”

Despite this thought, I’ve always felt it my need to vote, if only because I had anscestors who fought and DIED just so I could walk into a polling center without being shot.

However, for those of you who can’t be persuaded to vote by guilt trips, consider this conversation I witnessed recently while attending a Hip-Hop summit at Clark-Atlanta University, courtesy of www.AllHipHop.com.  The popular website has been going around the country doing panel discussions at various college campuses about different issues, and at this particular stop they were talking about how Hip-Hop coinsides with politics.

One of the speakers on the panel made a few statements about voting that even I, as a Hampton University graduate, had never been made aware of.  I can’t remember the words ver batum, but what follows is the general sentiment of what was said:

“Do you know how local government offices determine where to do construction and/or tear down buildings?  They go back and look at the voting records of each county to see which sections of town had a high percentage of voters.  Those sections of town tend to have the people who are more apt to make phone call complaints and/or vote against a certain change being made.  The sections of town with low-voter turnout tend to be the ones who don’t make their voices heard if something they don’t like is going on, or vote to change things.  This is where you’re more likely to see buildings torn down, or worse - buildings not being fixed up.”

So, if you’re Black, how does this affect you and your family?  Well, if you grew up in a neighborhood that was less than stellar (i.e. the “ghetto,”) and always wondered why the government always seemed to be able to build new neighborhoods in the “white” areas of town instead of building up the area where you live, it wasn’t just about racism.  Chances are, either you, your parents, or the surrounding neighbors didn’t voice their opinions about the situation by going out to vote. 

Sad as it may be to say, White people tend to show up and vote more often than other races.  Hmmm, maybe THAT’S why they’re able to have better neighborhoods/schools/malls built near where they live…)

But voting in an election isn’t just about picking a person to run the White House, or your local government.  People forget that, aside from voting for people, the voting ballots also ask you to vote on other issues and/or proposals.  The issues can range from schooling monies, health care reform, and more - the bottom line, though, is that if you don’t participate in the process, you really have no reason to complain.  If you wanted to complain, you could do so by going to an election center and voting NO on a new bill that you don’t agree with.

So, on election day, before you decide not to place your ballot in the box, remember: your vote really DOES count, but only if you actually show up to cast it.  Otherwise, I don’t want to hear you complaining about ANYTHING the government chooses to do to your neighborhood - after all, you vote wouldn’t have counted in the first place, remember?

-Aaron P. Taylor

At 9 PM last night, I turned my television channel to Comedy Central to watch a brand new comedy show.

It stared some old white guy as a man with a long-term job looking to get a promotion.  He meets up with a folksy female, an up-and-comer who, while not too tested on the job, had enough down-home charm to be likable to everyone who came across her. 

Anyway, in this episode, the old guy and the younger woman engaged in a polite but heated debate about their prospective supervisors, and which one was more qualified to run their company.  The old guy, a time-tested vet at the business, told the young woman that his supervisor would be better at creating company policies and seeing to it that everyone was treated fairly. 

Meanwhile, the younger woman talked her folksy talk to the old guy, calling him out of touch while, at the same time, promoting the values and character her much, much older supervisor had that would make him more qualified. 

A third friend would occasionally ask these two co-workers questions about their bosses. For example: “How would your boss handle the money situation our company is facing?”  The old guy would give direct answers to the question - “My boss would see to it that those making more than x-amount a year would have to contribute more to the 401K verses the less-paid employees” - while the woman would give… well, whatever answer she felt like - “”This company has a money problem… but let’s talk about how we’re going to keep the energy flowing through this building instead!”

Back and forth, back and forth they went for about 90 minutes, having questions thrown at them and answering (or not answering) questions… and then, the show ended.

Then I looked at my TV… and I realized: this wasn’t Comedy Central - this was CNN!  This was a REAL debate!!  And these weren’t sitcom characters - these were REAL LIFE political characters in a debate dealing with THIS country!

And that’s when the headache kicked in…

—-

So, who won the debate?  It really depends on who you ask.

I don’t consider myself a Republican or a Democrat because I don’t like the idea that I’d vote for a candidate simply because their name was the one chosen by a majority of my party.  I like to study the issues. 

At the same time, though, I DO like to observe how both parties spin things to make it work in their favor and/or claim victory.  And so it was with the debates last night.

If you went to CNN, they were willing to point out the pros and cons of both Palin’s and Biden’s arguements and debating tactics.  A pretty fair assessment of both parties’ candidates.  However, if you went to Fox News - who, for all accounts is a pro-pro-PRO-Republican network - their assessment was that Biden did “okay,” but that Palin was “flawless.”

Really, Fox News? FLAWLESS??

How about the fact that she rarely gave a direct answer to the moderator’s questions?  How about the fact that many of her facts were eskewed and not completely accurate?  I’m not saying Joe Biden didn’t do the same from time to time… but to call Palin’s debate performance “flawless” is like giving a crayon to someone with arthritis, then claiming the straight line they just tried to draw has no bumps in it!

But of course, the press had to praise Sarah’s performance more than Biden’s. Not because she did better than HIM; it’s because she did better than most people expected.  That’s kind of easy to do, though, when people’s expectation of your debate performance is akin to a limbo pole sitting on the ground.  It doesn’t make it that hard for her to “raise the bar,” now does it?

Just because she didn’t make a complete fool of herself, though, doesn’t mean she did a good job.  We still don’t know any specifics about what John McCain’s plan would be to help the economy.  We still don’t know if McCain would ever even ATTEMPT to get the troops out of Iraq (my guess: not bloody likely).  And we STILL don’t know how helpful she’d be as his vice president. 

All we really know is the constant soundbites she repeated over and over at the debate: she’s a “Maverick,” she’s from Alaska, she’s a Washington outsider, she wants to do something about energy, and she’s a “Hockey Mom.”  That’s five, people - I call BINGO!

As for Biden, he had some mess-ups to, though not as noticible as Palin’s.  He kept making references to how McCain is similar to George Bush.  Personally, I’ve always thought that was a terrible strategy.  In case people forgot, Bush has been in office for 8 years.  And while it will forever be debated whether or not he actually WON the first term, he DID get elected in 2004.  This was AFTER the first four years where he was already doing a not-so-great job.

I say that to say, as much as the Obama camp likes to talk about bringing “change,” the reality is, most people prefer more of the same.  They’d rather go on living a personal hell that’s known to them verses an untested change that, in their minds, could be WORSE than what they’re already used to. 

Think about how many women stay with men who abuse them, or how many guys constanly date the wrong type of women.  They may SAY they want to change, but there’s a certain comfort in at least KNOWING what you’re going to deal with. Therefore, making the arguement that McCain is like Bush could actually hinder Obama in the long run.

With that said, though, Biden was clearly the more experienced debator of the two people onstage last night.  That’s why he doesn’t get as much credit as Palin.  It’s like if Michael Jordan faced off against an NBA newcomer and they tied.  Newcomer gets props for not losing, while MJ loses a bit of cred for not pummeling the new guy - or, girl in this case.

One thing is for certain, though: after watching 90 minutes of the V.P. back-and-forth rumble, I’m glad they’re not having any more.  I really only watch these things to have references for the Saturday Night Live skits that parody these outings, but I hate when the actual debates are so packed with illogical nonsense, they almost make SNL pointless!

-Aaron P. Taylor