Convenience of Not Acting: Why Not Appointing is A Miscarriage of Justice

"I may not like what you do, but I know you have a job to do." - Unknown

Convenience of Not Acting

 Why Not Appointing is A Miscarriage of Justice

Carolyn Kaster | AP

Antonin Scalia passed away this past weekend at the age of 79 in Texas after a hunting trip. As he passed away and within mere moments of his passing, the most important part of our three-branch governmental system (which was given power in 1803 by the Marbury v. Madison case that gave rise to the right of judicial review) became incomplete. The absence of an intellectual mind who is controversial and whom many disagreed with is gone. While some are egregiously and heinously joyous over his death (and I use the words heinous and egregious purposefully because it shows that people have no honor for the dead. I did not agree with Scalia at all, but I do not rejoice in his death neither), others are tearful and are left with the taste that the scheme of jurisprudence within the United States is set to change for the first time in nearly a generation. 

 

As quickly as Scalia was shipped to a funeral home in El Paso, was in the same breath that people asked "Who is Obama going to appoint?" ( As a humanist, I believe that just demonstrates that people of the world believe that other humans are disposable and once they die, they are just merely to be replaced by another who can do the same job without much consideration or care... rather than wait until after the funeral, they look for a replacement with immediacy upon the last breath of someone.) As quickly as that was said, partisanship came up and reared it's ugly head with many a Republican stating that the appointment should be delayed for a period extending over 300 days until after the next President is inaugurated. Others have said to let the President immediate appoint. I am here to state that I am in support of the latter, as Scalia would have liked us to abide the Constitution and not expand or detract from it's power. 

One of the more interesting arguments that people make in support of waiting is that the confirmation of a Supreme Court justice during an election year would spell an undue burden on the Presidency. However the United States Presidency is no stranger to judicial incumbency caused by death. There have been at least 10 appointments made during an election year spanning from the November before the election all the way until the date of the inauguration ( 1 , 2 , 3 ). Each time, the justice was appointed amidst great political upheaval and to the spite of many. To me, it sounds rather absurd to prevent the President from acting in accordance to a power that is within the confines of the Constitution merely because of a partisan concern. Any person who is in Congress has a duty to act within the confines of the Constitution (and I will get to this later about how filibustering an appointment is a miscarriage of justice and tantamount to treason and sabotage... yes, I am going there). 

Another point that the opponents of election year appointment is that it does not allow the public to have a meaningful choice and stymies the Democratic process... That is not true. Elisabeth Warren said it the best "Senate Republicans took an oath just like Senate Democrats did. Abandoning the duties they swore to uphold would threaten both the Constitution and our democracy itself. It would also prove that all the Republican talk about loving the Constitution is just that — empty talk. " As a result, Warren makes a statement that any person who is a formalist, textualist, and a strict constructionist would enjoy because " Article II Section 2 of the Constitution says the President of the United States nominates justices to the Supreme Court, with the advice and consent of the Senate. I can't find a clause that says "...except when there's a year left in the term of a Democratic President." ( 4 ).  Once again going back to my point about breach, there is a breach of the duty and it seems to be flagrant disregard for the Constitution which the highest law of the land.

Any Senator who is partisan and says "Any nominee for the court will be voted against" is operating in violation of their Congressional duty and is tantamount to Congressional treason. It makes sense to say that because it is operating against the interest of the Justice system and it cripples it from operating the way that it should. By having cases that have already been granted certiorari last month sit on the docket until the next year without proper consideration or call for unnecessary recusals, it leaves the message that "Rather than try to comply with the Constitution, we would rather operate with a handicapped Supreme court that is one or two justices short. It sets a bad precedent and allows an entire party who is stomping their feet and crying about not getting it's way to get what it wants. 

This is unjust also because now, it will lead to a slippery slope. There is a good chance that this will limit federal appointments because of the trickle down mentality of new policies and regulations that get put in place to control the actions of the President. The precedent being set would seem like "If the President's appointment is subject complete deferral until a new term comes, then every year when federal judges make their exit, they could be blocked from new appointments during an election year making the federal court system a mess of incumbencies and vacancies. It does not make sense and it flies in the face of judicial, political, and practical reason. 

As a result, my final statement on the matter is that we must allow the President to act within his Constitution powers. For Senators who wish to impede that, they are violation of their duty to allow him appoint. In not carefully considering any appointment he makes and merely invalidating it because he is a Democrat and is seeking a more liberal justice on the Court and who has the proper vetting, it is almost tantamount to treason by holding up the legal system and handicapping it from the top-down. 

It is my sincerest hope that we honor Scalia and his jurisprudential trend to "say what the law is" and abide by it as it was promulgated in our Constitution. 

. 

The Choice: Existing or Living

Wake up to the noise, well before the sun

Away from my spirit, I drag myself to my bed

I bathe the shell on slow motion, wiping the sleep from my eyes

As I wonder... I exist, but have I died?

-Unknown

The Choice: Existing or Living

"I choose to Live"

Semantically, it sounds pretty funny asking this question. To the average person if you ask them if they are living, then the answer would be a resounding "Yes." However, then you ask them a follow up: "Are you existing or living" and they will probably answer "Well, Both... Duh."  Now this is where things get interesting. 

Dictionary-wise the word "exist" in some contexts could mean "to have life" or "the state of being present". Interestingly, contrasted to the word "living" which means "effective in operation" or "exhibiting the life or motion of nature." What placing the dictionary definition shows that there is quite a different between the two and one has to be a pre-requisite of the other.

In the last few months, I have been asking myself this philosophical question about "am I living or merely existing?" It's a new question I have been grappling with in light of me being in law school. Currently, I can take a look at the condition of my life and say that I am in a a state of flux. In one regard I am "living", acting on my own will, wants, dreams, aspirations, and forging connections with the outside independent of a utilitarian purpose. However in some ways I merely "exist."  To "exist" in context I am referring to is to "be in the world for the utilitarian purpose of someone else." While it is understandable that we are not entirely autonomous and the natural world is curtailed by society, we have to ask ourselves two things. First, "Am I existing for the convenience, enjoyment, and pleasure of someone else?" Second, "Is that something that I want?" 

One of the central reasons why people in this generation are so unhappy is because we exist at one extreme or another. A majority of millennials exist for the enjoyment for someone else, whether it be to live out the dreams of your parents, to amass wealth to impress someone, to take a "poppin' cèlfie" or even something smaller like waiting on a friend that doesn't show up. There is also a small percentage of us that live to an end that isn't entirely healthy, such as those who have copious amounts of sex with nameless partners, take drugs because it's "a new experience", or spend money like it's going out of style because they need to be stylish. 

 Stop existing for others... it will be the death of you. In the words of Benjamin Franklin "some die at 25, but aren't buried until they are 75." When you live for the sake of others, you're effectively dead and have become a zombie to obligations that are not necessary to your happiness and survival. From personal experience, I've felt my happiness begin to leave when I feel pressured by others to do things or bend me towards their will. When I was younger, it was harder for me to say "No, I'm not doing that." Now that I'm older the word "No" has become liberating. 

Even though I am not going to detail how I am seeking to "live" in the new year as opposed to exist, I can say that it is trying to understand life in my own way while making my own decisions independent of the will and wants of others. I'm liberating myself, and to truly allow that it will mean some let downs for others. However, in letting some down, it will teach others to not be so dependent on me. My "living"  will cause people to know that I am a human being and that rather than being a robot made to complete tasks, I come fully loaded with needs, drives, and feelings that need to be fulfilled in their own way. 

It is my sincerest want for others to know that the difference can determine the quality of life. That quality of life could mean a great deal of stress relief, more self-efficacy, and more positive affirmations of self that seem to be elusive in a world where we need gratification based on someone else.  

I'm choosing to "live." Many might not understand the results and the ramifications may not make sense to myself or others around me. But, God willing, happiness and enlightenment will come my way and change my old ways to new ones allowing me to become the full unabridged me that I've been seeking all along. 

-  EMH 

The Job Is Not Done

The Job is Not Done

The Myth of Post-Racial America 

I was once told that when you do not speak about a problem it does not manifest itself. If this was in reference to karma and the way how luck or blessings operated, then I can take this statement as it was and this commentary at the following period. However, this was in reference to race (which is found to scientifically to not exist, it is a social construct. Look up Franz Boas who was a prominent anthropologist). The person had basically told me that if we do not speak about race, then the problem would magically go away. This what I can a "myth of post-racialism" and the "poof theory". 

(Jeff Roberson / Associated Press)

Race as a social construct exists. Many studies have found that the construct of race affects how certain groups are socialized to see other groups of people. So for the sake of this writing, it's uncontested. You can see it every day when you look at how many African American men and women are incorrectly profiled (Like here.), how African American children get suspended and expelled at a much higher rate than their non-African American counterparts (Check here), and the myths about African Americans being non-contributors to society.(Here, And Here, and the Biggest One is Here ).  Even worse, it's manifestly inherent that as we act like "race" is not something that is affecting the social strata of the United States we still have things like this going on. 

In like throws of an affliction symptomatic of a job that has not been completed, it is important to realize, be it young or old, that the first step is to admit a problem in order to know that one exists and it must be addressed. In the last 55 years,three generations of Americans have grown up to believe that with each successive generation the problem has been taken care of when in reality, "race relations" have shown differently. Hence, the claim itself is farther from the truth. In fact, in some ways some of the issues that we have been seeing are looking more reminiscent of the early and mid-1960s. 

Now, here is where deviate from the scholarly analysis.

People of color (not just African Americans, but Hispanic/Latino Americans as well) are tired. We're aware that when we move into neighborhoods, we get redlined and looked at funny (Cite), we are aware we are the first suspects and consistently are suspicious (Here and Abroad). But when will it be apparent that we are not the problem and that these stereotypes and lies are misplaced and taught biases (Here's the proof). It will be apparent when we as American people know and address as a nation that "race" is still a problem. As much as people want to sweep it under the rug and try to shush others about it the problem rears it's ugly head in a new major headline month per month. 

One thing I can say is that the generation I am a part of and the generation I have grown up in is on either side of the spectrum. Either we speak about "race" candidly or we worry about or individualistic and materialistic mindsets and keep to ourselves thanks to the advent of social media. For those who are vocal in this generation, we have been able to birth movements such as Black Lives Matter which have been instrumental in addressing a letter to the world that "we are oppressed, and we're not going to shut up until you provide equity over false equality." (refer to the picture above). 

However, this lack of unity has made our movements towards change and social justice less instrumental. Back in the 1960's and 1970's, it was masses of people (with a few dissenters) that said that "what was going in our society was wrong and that it needed to be corrected as soon as possible." Today, we have half the camp educated on the problems of our society, a quarter aware but inactive, and the other quarter strategically and blissfully made ignorant to what is going on in the world. And in a world where we have social networking and extreme communications technology it is simply awe-striking that we have pockets of people who would be less informed about the social condition of the world they inhabit now than they would be 55 years ago. In perspective, people were more informed in some ways when there were no cellphones, affordable personal video capture technology, or computers that were capable of accessing the internet and the likings of Twitter, Instagram, or Facebook. 

Let's face it, The fight that many of our grandparents fought and went through great struggle to find a resolution has not found a conclusion. The distractions of the world took over in the 1970's and 1980's and by the 1990's we had almost entirely forgotten about what our grandparents had fought for. Our parents (not to point fingers) have stopped performance on a social contract that unfortunately did not have a time clause attached to it and now the struggle has dragged on for two more additional generations. I proffer, how much longer will be twiddle our thumbs?  How many more people will have to die, be discriminated against, be disenfranchised, or have their human rights, according to the U.N. Charter, violated? 

Until we start doing better and being real with ourselves as a society that we are not entirely comfortable with the "race" conversation, we are always going to be dealing with issues. Why? Because people are smiling as the house burns down around them proclaiming that everything is alright. All the while, the selective ignorance of many produces bliss that is alarming. I challenge anyone who reads to start being real with the world around them and actively learning that the problem is still there, admit that is there, and once we have society admitting it is a problem, then it can start to get addressed similar to how it did in 1965 with the Civil Rights Act. 

A Rebuttal: Destruction Myths of Black Men

"Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but just because you have one doesn't make it good or reasonable." - Unknown

Destruction Myths of Black Men

A Response to "Stopping The Emasculation Of African American Men"

It is scary to believe that we live in a world that men cannot give each other their due diligence. We understand that men should be men, and that we have an obligation to be well..."manly". We get it. But the problem is that most of the rhetoric that is thrown around by men speaking about the feminization of black men or the destruction of black men is way out-there. So I'm going break down how some of the most forwarded arguments by my brethren. It's time to estop some of the rhetoric and hyperbole being thrown out there and using fear tactics to talk about how the "feminization of the black male will be our extinction."

Mama Joyce said it best...

Homosexuality has destroyed Black Men.

I'll address this first. Primarily because it's the most complicated issue currently talked about by black men. On it's face, this claim is erroneous but I don't want to leave it right there and not explain how because I'll be doing myself and the rest of the black community a disservice. One of the biggest problems that many black men who are part of the community who have a problem with is the idea that homosexuality has destroyed the black man and made them more effeminate. 

Let's just say it doesn't make sense. It's like saying the chicken has come before the egg. Homosexual black men are not an oddity; they've always been around. An article written by Sylvia Tamale (Homosexuality is not un-African) highlighted the idea that the concept of Homosexuality was something that was inherent and was not a product of us being enslaved in the United States. A little further research can show that even in Ancient Egypt, homosexuality was not an anomaly and some of their history included narratives to the effect of such. (Richard Parkinson: Homosexual Desire and Middle Kingdom Literature. In: The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology (JEA), vol. 81, 1995, pp. 57–76.) 

Even further, if you move into the more contemporary narratives of homosexuality in Africa before any European colonial presence had shown up,
The change came to occur when Christianity from Europe was made the religion of many people in Central and Southern Africa. During the Middle Passage, these re-enforcements of Christianity by force or threat of death (for which many did die) is a precursor to some of the ideas where homosexuality is looked at as the reason why the black man has been destroyed. Morally, the implications of homosexuality was greater than anything else because these men were seen as less than. 

Ironically, the same Bible that was used to justify the enslavement of African and Native American men and women is also looked at as a guide to how a man must operate in a world. From this, they get this rule that masculinity, asserting dominance over women, and the ability to spread their seed for the sake of procreation comes about. While the Bible is beautiful, and I myself read it and take heed to it's testaments, realize that humans have a tendency to emphasize the words that justify their own morals, wants, and agendas. 

Now fast-forward to the more modern era, the issue stems from the "failure to be real men, capable of producing children, and acting masculine, and assuming their role in society as such." The quoted language has it's own set of issues that I'll leave alone, but altogether the net result is that most men who have this belief think that Black men cannot be gay, it is not allowable because we must procreate, and if you fail to do it, then you are failure in your kind. Likewise, the failure to adhere to gender standards and be and assert dominant behavior also is looked as you selling your manhood to the likings to "the powers that be" or "white men that take pleasure in your demise." This is exasperating, why? Because, it relies on an other-ing approach that leave many men on the Down-Low and afraid to live in their truths and they drag their families and girlfriends into a world of uncertainty with the many men they've had sex with while trying to sire children to complete a lie. 

For myself, I am not a masculine man. Yes, I have spoken to men and have engaged with them. But it does not destroy me or damage me in any way. At the end of the day, I still plan to have children and raise a marvelous family. I also plan to do work to help improve the lives of others be it Black, White, Native American, Asian, Indigo, Alien you name it. For trying to blame homosexuality for the feminization of Black men is simply crazy. I don't ( and I don't think anyone I know...) wakes up and tries to convert straight black men to gay - it doesn't happen. Even if it does, the man has already had a wandering eye and the most straight of men would not even entertain it. 

In short, homosexuality has not destroyed black men. Sorry... the argument does not work. 

The Lack of Black Fathers in the Home has destroyed Black Men

I am in partial agreement to this. But not for the reason stated in the article I am loosely responding to. The reason that is stated in the article I am responding to basically says that black men are destroyed because there are no black fathers present to correct homosexual behavior in boys and make them act like men and act in accordance with the status quo. The author also makes an argument stating that this lack of a black father leaves room for the boy to get confused and grow up as a man who is either sexually confused and misguided, or is unable to act accordingly to build the community. 

I already stated my feelings about the homosexuality argument, read the above section. But I am in partial agreement with the conclusion because the author makes a point, the lack of Black fathers in the home leaves a gap that many mothers cannot fill or how the young boy growing up into a man can't figure out on his own. For instance, I was growing up my Dad was great because he taught me two main things:  "be excellent in everything that I am doing" and "say and do things with conviction, even if you might possibly be wrong." To this day I carry those two main things (among others) in my everyday life. Many Black boys do not have this.

Many of these boys are not being taught the importance of responsibility, honesty, hard work, and being able to respect the community and women that cohabit the community they share. But let's keep something in mind, the idea that women must be dominated and that they must be subservient is an idea that doesn't work. As a matter of fact, it sounds rather similar to master-slave relationship and that is inherently not alright. Boys need to be taught to love and respect women and know that they matter. They need a Black man to teach them how to properly court someone and treat them with respect. That's what's important. 

There are somethings that mother cannot teach, and that's true. But at the same time, we need Black men the RIGHT things. The things that can help unite a community rather than divide it with misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, and any other -ism or -ia that can cause issues for a community fragmented by 400+ years of brainwashing and institutional malfeasance.

Feminization is going to Destroy Black Men

The article says that television shows and media depicting men in women's clothing and acting brazenly effeminate are destroying Black men because it depicts us incorrectly. Okay, fair statement. But remember, same thing with the media depicting us as thugs that smoke weed, have sex uninhibited with numerous people, not having jobs or a proficient education, it depicts us incorrectly. Also, this hyper-masculinized image shown in music videos that breeds a culture of misogyny is also not an accurate portrayal either.  The media is at a point where they are willing to do anything to get ratings so they are going to go find anyone willing to receive a check to act up on the television. Then we allow people in our communities to go on TV and represent us without much comment aside from "Girl, did you see what happened on _______ on __day!" 

Yeah.... Exactly. I'm not saying we are wholly to blame ourselves, but we have to lobby for the media portray us properly. That's the only way. Now with men wearing dresses and women's clothing, that's something else.

For me, I don't engage in that behavior and I am not entirely used to it myself. But I respect everyone for their differences and I also know that it takes a lot of guts for a man to put heels on and walk out in a dress and make up and have to deal with the world. But once again, we are walking around acting like this is new to us when history shows that for people coming from the African Diaspora

are a product of this. In Ancient Egypt, Queen Hatshepsut ruled Egypt as a man. She wore the beard and the other male adornments and ruled as such. Even in theatre (even though this is in Europe) the likings of Tyler Perry was common because men dressed up and sang as women because women were barred from performing in many public spaces.

I half-understand the argument being made, but the idea of the "men in dresses lose their manhood" should not be a concern over "my brothers and sisters are not depicts as being successful, but as hoes and wannabe rappers."  If you want to focus on building up black men, we need shows that show successful Black men, working, doing community service, and living everyday life rather than Love and Hip Hop. 

The Reality: What Really Is Destroying Black Men

Instead of focusing on some of these things, we need to look at what really is destroying Black men in this country. The first and foremost thing is the education system. We live in a country where a majority of African American live in areas were there are substandard education systems where they are without resources and teachers that care about their well-being or education. This is especially true in many major cities like my native Philadelphia. Study after study has shown literacy at the high school level can determine high school completion rates, and crime. It is no accident that in many major cities many Black and Latino men who are involved with crime and get arrested tend to be in the 15-24 age group. It's because of the fact that the system has failed them. 

To live as a black male is a conundrum. Especially in a system where you lose your innocence the day you begin grade school and are more likely than any other group to get suspended from school. It is even more of a problem when people do not encourage education and literacy. It is even more discouraging when people who sit around you fail to see you're trying to do well in the world and be someone but they dismiss it as a pipe-dream. What is destroying black men in this case is the lack of support from one another when the system has failed. 

Living in a system where we do not seek unity, but look at men that do not adhere to the status quo to the help build a stronger community is the problem. It should not matter that I am gay, muslim, short, fat, bald, skinny, agnostic, asexual... etc. It should not matter. We are subject to the same common hardships: intergeneration poverty, a failed system of education, and an inability unite. In this case the what is destroying black men is the inability to unite as a front to accomplish a common goal while respecting  one another. 

Love and Hip Hop is nice. The Margielas are nice. The Jordans is sweet, and

that's a nice BMW you're pushing. But at the end of the day, what can you say that you've done to constructively help one of your own. When you ask someone "What have you done for the younger men that come after you?" and they fail to answer, that's not good. It's also not good to answer "Well I made my paper, and you got to make that paper over everything."  Here, it's the inability to focus on what is important to strengthening ourselves economically and socially within our community that is destroying Black men.

It is my hope that someone reads this and spreads the dialogue so we can start talking about the real issues that plague all Black men, not just ones who are cis-gendered and heterosexual. 

I close with this, a comparison of our community: The African American community is the car, the culture is the fuel and everyone in the community, representing certain aspects of it represents a cylinder in the engine. When all your cylinders aren't there, the car fails to run. If they are not working together, then the car isn't efficient. But when all the cylinders work right and together, great progress can be made on the road to social improvement for everyone. 

Say It With Your Chest

Res ipsa loquitor
- Latin for "It speaks for itself" 

Say It With Your Chest

Why grown-men can't state their claim. 

To start, I want to apologize if it seems like I'm injecting legal terms into my writing. Law school seems to dominate everything that I do now! When you live it and breathe it every second you begin to learn very quickly that the way you used to think and the way you speak and write changes. But since this isn't a piece of legal writing (which I am thankful for), I'm going to be frank as I can. 

NOW, onto the meat of the conversation: Why can't men seem to say what is on their minds when it comes to what they want out of a romantic communication with someone (notice I didn't say relationship, that special "r" word is reserved for another blog post). 

Being someone who (takes a deep breath) talks to other men, it is a tad annoying to deal with men who want to assert their dominance in so many other ways, but can't say affirmatively what they want. It drives me crazy! And perhaps it's a human thing, but I highly doubt that it's hard to say what you want. 

I'm going to give three ways guys tend to slid around answering this tough question and four fixes for the guys out here who can't seem to say what's on their mind. 

Now the three ways that guys slide around this answer are as follows. Ladies and Gents, pay attention closely:

1. Shifting the subject
2. Acting on their thoughts without saying anything
3. Act as though you're pushy

1. Shifting the Subject

How many times have you every been in a conversation that has gone left and you shift the subject to something else. Many men (not a mention a good share of women too) have the tendency to do this especially when it's time to do the heavy lifting of "sharing your thoughts." I never quite understand why it's so taxing on the mental process to say what's on your mind, but shifting the subject is no way to help address the issue. 

From experience, I was speaking to a guy one time and I asked him how he felt about me generally. No mention of romantics or in a context of dating even involved, he changed the subject. Three weeks after talking, we realized that it was going nowhere and I ended it. Why? Because, I discovered that I couldn't offer him what he wanted (which was aesthetics, or rather the lack of an athletic physique). When I finally figured it out I was a bit bewildered. It wasn't the reason why that irritated me, it was more on the fact that I had to wait three weeks for an answer that could have been said in 5 minutes. 

2. Acting on their thoughts without saying anything

This is what I call "assumption of an ESP." Or even better, you believe that I am psychic. The problem with this is that a majority of people don't have ESP or they're not psychic. So, when men act without saying anything it causes the frequent case of "he stopped hitting me up" or "I've been stood up." Similar to wasted time, it's annoying. It also makes you look like an ass when you don't say anything. Now men have a bad habit of believing they don't have to explain themselves and that by doing so they sell their manhood away (I'll address this in the solution section.) 

3. Acting as though you're pushy

He's trying to say that you're putting words in his mouth or you're being pushy. Well... you have to be. If you're pushy, that's the only way to get an answer whether it be a simple yes or no. A good share of the time, it isn't necessary to have to go though all of that, and plenty of arguments could simply be avoided by just saying what is on your mind rather than having me sit here looking at a tore up face or a "stank" attitude. 

Now some of the solutions:

1. Saying it Directly
2. Being Honest with Yourself
3. Saying it Honestly
4. Regulating your communication

1. Saying it Directly

Whatever it is, just say what is on your mind and say it directly. They say too much sugar is bad for you because it causes diabetes. Well same is true here. Instead of switching the topic, just say what your thought is about the question. For instance, if someone were to ask me if I am seeking a relationship there two ways I approach this. Shift the topic ( Well, relationship... Well you know, What do you think about it?...) or Be direct ( I am looking to date right now, but a relationship isn't entirely ideal).

See how easy that is, you've literally managed to give the person information that they can make a definitive decision based off of. This is just a lesson in simple effective communication!

2. Being Honest with Yourself

Before I get to the third part of this, I want to address this. The first step to addressing a problem is admitting that there is one. So in line what that fellas, you have to be honest with yourself about (gasp!) how you feel about something. I know a good portion of guys out here (myself included) are socialized to not access our emotions in a way makes us emotionally competent in a manner that we should be. However, that isn't a reason to not try. For instance, you if you think I am a great guy but I am not physically attractive or I have a quirk, be honest with yourself first. It sounds strange, but in being honest with your feelings it let you sort out the next part much more quickly. 

3. Saying it Honestly

Honesty is your best policy. Why? It saves you from looking like a total douche and deceitful all in the same breath. While I am not saying be hurtful (remember the right amount of sugar, which I will address in the next part), you do have to make sure that you're getting your intended point across. If you want a relationship, then just say it. Or if you want to have sex, but not right now, then say it. It's not rocket science, it's merely you stating your preference on a matter. 

4. Regulating your Communication

Now this is short, find a balance between not being too indirect and sugary with being too sharp and unforgiving in providing the truth. Just make sure that you address the person respectfully and give them the ability to also go through the same process you did in making your decision and your follow up statement.

See! How hard was that?

 

The Unfortunate Truth: Why Accolades Can't Save You While Dating

" I've got two degrees, three certifications, and a nice car and home... I can get a call back for a job every day of the week, but I have yet to have a call back from a man."

The Unfortunate Truth: 

Why Accolades Can't Save You While Dating

You work in an office overlooking the city, you've been at the top of class for your degree program (yes, every last one), and now you make a great salary that is the envy of your friends and the dream actualized by your family. You're successful, no doubt about it. And the sweetest thing out of all of this that you've achieved these feats by the tender age of 25 or 26. Others don't have he luxury until they reach their 30's or 40's, but you've managed to take the fast track to success. Then the dream of having someone else in comes into play and that's where being the top of the class doesn't apply. 

There are many people who I know who have this problem, the sense of entitlement that comes with having degrees and having accolades and then not finding someone who is willing to entertain them. Even though you have what a most would be consider to solid footing for a good life, others don't seem to care much. Well here is some insight as to why, after constructing the perfect life for yourself, you still can't find what you are looking for. 

1. You're not offering the right things.

This may sound crazy, but perhaps instead of offering a generous income or dates aplenty with opulent and grand meals that the other person cannot pronounce properly, perhaps you've placed too much emphasis on the dollars and sense and trying to demonstrate your financial or institutional wealth over demonstrating nurturing and loving behavior. I've seen people make this mistake where they shower the person with gifts and expensive dinners rather than just trying to get to know them for who they are over a glass of wine and something minute. 

Even on aesthetic front, having degrees won't save you if you aren't the drop dead gorgeous type. And while it sounds shallow, studies have shown that people are drawn to conventionally attractive people because instinctually a solid appearance can indicate good health and positive signs of selection when it comes to having children. Now... here's the big "but". Personality comes in to save the day because most people when engaging in relationships usually don't fall in love on first sight and the personality is the biggest predictor of whether or not a pairing can last. 

To go back to aesthetics, I remember a friend of mines once telling me "You can have all the degrees you want and have that nice job that makes you over 100 grand a year. But men don't want that, you're not offering them the full package..." 

Now. Let's enter the gay man's dimension where things get very picayune. Pretty much in male-to-male relationships both parties are pretty much caught up on looks. While it is a truth that many don't want to accept (myself included), men are hardwired to look for a sexual mate that is capable of tickling their aesthetic fancy. 

Hence, since I stand at a mere 5'8 and am thick around the mid-section, most men probably wouldn't seek me out as a mate, whether or not I have a degree and accolades. The only ones that would would either be the ones who are older and do not have the same preferences that I would like to seek out. Which in essence creates a mismatch: Group A that I'm pursuing is not interested because I'm not offering what they want, and Group B is pursing me, but I'm not interested in what they're offering.

This cycle leaves the successful person in a conundrum. 

2. You're not available. 

There are two ways this can be: Either you are never physically available or you're not emotionally available.

Not being physically available is a fear that people have when they see you with all these degrees and having a good job. And with good reason. Why would I want to be with someone who is never around to take me on a date, spend personal time with me, or even find the time to come to visit? For many, when they see that wall full of degrees, they see that you're going to make them a secondary thought in their mind in comparison to the work that you do. For instance, if I am a lawyer and I am working a 70 hour week for a firm where I am practically always on call, why on Earth would you want to date me? The nice date probably would not be worth it if it keeps on getting interrupted by a secretary or a partner calling to iron out wording in draft of a contract. 

And the even more problematic is not being there mentally for that person. The worst thing is having someone who is in front of you at the table is busy tapping away at a phone, or reading something is is clearly occupied with their work or something on their own mind. Being mentally unavailable is quantifiably worse than not being physically present because that means you're probably right in front of their face effectively ignoring them. In the person's mind they will feel like once again, they will always been second to your work and won't be keep on trying to date you. 

3. You are into yourself too much or you're insecure. 

I will start this one with a disclaimer: Not all people who have this problem seem to be conceded or lack self esteem. But a good many do tend to have either one of these problems. Some people have gone to great lengths in order to hide a shortcoming that they have or to make themselves feel like they are "the shit." But let's be real here, having these awards strewn across your wall doesn't help you especially when it keeps others away. I've seen quite a few people introduce themselves and when the other persons asks "so tell me about yourself", out comes the resumé or curriculum vitae. It's kind of annoying. I've been told this myself, so rather than starting like I'm in a job interview I kind of talk about myself as a person rather than a job prospect. 

For the ones that are overly cocky or conceded... it's not cute. A man/woman likes confidence in who you are as a person, but that confidence becomes self-absorption when you go out your way to try to compete with them. Humble yourself a bit and you'll be surprised to see the results. 

For the ones who have used their accolades to hide certain imperfections, just know that imperfections are a part of human life. There is a reason why some of the most famous supermodels have small quirks about their appearance, it's because the human mind is drawn towards mistakes in a makeup and bored by perfection. So rather than using your accolades to make yourself that person who appears to have it all together, just remember that showing your true colors may just give you a call back. And if you don't get that call back, that simply means that the person wasn't your cup of tea.

So if you feel loveless with your 3 degrees and 5 certifications, and can't seem to get it right don't fret: your time is coming. You don't have to be a single professional a-la-Being-Mary-Jane. The key is just remembering to make yourself more accessible, nurturing, and human appearing so that way you don't scare anyone off. For the ones who struggle in the aesthetics department and you cover it up with a degree, it's alright. Why? Because for every 10 people that bypass you, the higher the chances are you can find someone who is genuinely about getting to know you. It's a matter of quality before quantity after-all, so enjoy your success and don't sweat it. If you feel like you're growing old and no one is coming your way, don't worry about that either: studies show that as men and women age into their 30's and into their 40's financial and career stability are big determinants in relationship compatibility and help people find mates. 

Don't give up hope. Otherwise it will give up on you. 

Relationship Goals: Do Rather Than Say

"Just Do It" - Nike

"Relationship Goals: Do Rather Than Say"

 It's been something on my mind for quite a while, and I've been wanting to write this post for the longest without trying to sound like I'm bitter, but after reading some interesting insight about relationship goals, it's come time to speak my mind... Relationship Goals.

For almost a year I've seen people place relationship goals pictures up either on Instagram, Tumblr, or Facebook. While the pictures are face value are sweet (a vast majority of them are "Awww-worthy"), the accompanying caption that the picture comes with is one that typically is accompanied with some kind irony. I remember this one person posting this picture on IG about 7 months ago of these two guys in matching Jordans holding hands and walking down the street with matching jerseys. It was cute, but the caption that accompanied it was "I don't understand why I don't have this now :tearface-emoji?" As I sat back and thought about it, it hit me that relationships are like houses - you scout it out, you inquire, you walk through, you go through a process to get and retain the house and from there you either buy it or the offer falls through. If it falls through, then you incur no loss (unless you sunk some fees into it). However, when you sign for the mortgage and buy it, you've committed to it. 

Relationships operate similarly and many people fail to realize that the key word commitment is necessary in order to have it function well. What I've tended to notice is that a lot people that post these types of pictures with captions asking why they can't have that has the tendency to fall into either one or multiple of these categories which are

• They tend to be hopping around not trying to lock someone down or avoid being locked down
• They can't keep their legs closed 
• Being extremely exclusive to looks rather than other aspects of people and disappointed when their prettyboy/girl is an asshole,
• They simply don't have their stuff together enough for it. 
• They are simply saying what they want and lament not having it

Self-admittedly, I fall into the last category where my life isn't entirely together but I lament not having a dream Instagram relationship where me and my other half are either cute as hell or slaying. However let's break each one down, and explain why it is ridiculous to subscribe to this mentality.

• "Hopping Around"

You want a relationship... but no commitment. It's like saying you want a house and no mortgage. In the world we live in it's a rarity that both come in the same deal. How can you build a relationship when the person you're with either is not dedicated or wants to get to know you and wants to make you their focus. It's silly. For you to want to be successful as a couple is reasonable, but if you're a successful couple who cheats all the time then you're no better than the poor couple that cheats. That's it...

• "Getting Around"

Similar to the last one but to a more slight extreme. The bed is the place where the turn-up happens... or the laundry room... or the kitchen. Either-way, if every time you are busy having sex with someone and you've known them for all of 2 hours and barely know their last name and phone number then you can kind of answer your own question as to why you can't seem to accomplish your relationship goals. If you can't the answer is simple: you refuse to cool down and take time to build something with a foundation. 

• "Either he's 5'11 or taller, got a six-pack, and he got Maison Martin Margielas... or we don't talk" or "Either she's bad as hell, got a fat-ass, and she got Louboutins ... or we don't talk" 

This is one of the reasons why people can't even get  to relationships let alone be able to talk now. The shallow and simplistic world of "She/he has to adhere to this list or no dice..." And the generation of people aged 17 to 25 is one of the ones most keen on appearances, clothing, and prestige of material items. Sadly, what they fail to realize is that the permanence of looks and material possessions are so questionable that when people are in a relationship based on this wake and realize they are together they either realize they hate the person's personality or believe that they "so yesterday" and discard them like last season Guiseppe Zanotti.

•  Can't Get Their Life.

There is a saying that says "Why invite someone into my home when it isn't in order." This is what the issue is for a lot of people who want these types of glamorized relationships. While there is nothing wrong with dreaming, maybe it's just best to know that now isn't the right time. From a spiritual perspective: God is saying not right now. From a practical perspective: If you know you have to complete personal, financial, or academic goals first... a relationship might put a strain on it so why bother? Also I'm saying this to say "if you don't have your life together, you shouldn't be in a relationship." Rather, I am saying "You are your first priority above anyone else, so fix your house first.""

• Saying How They Feel

I identify with this. There are times when you look at what others have and your like "Damn, this is a beautiful pairing." or "Damn, this couple held each other down in school." or even "Damn, they got his/her | his/his | her/her [insert object here]. Why can't I have that?" This is more common for people who just haven't been in a relationship before or simply feeling like the person isn't out there who can bring this to be. Similar to the last one, there is a time for everything and now isn't our (I'm using pronoun this to include myself) time. In realizing that, we have to also know in the back in our minds that some of these pictures and Instagram couples don't always get along as the pictures suggest (as a matter of fact, I hear quite of few of them fight pretty badly... but couples bicker- it's part of the territory)

So this part is short... If you are about making a relationship goal a reality then you gotta do like Nike suggests:  "Just do it..."

Lamenting over something you don't have is not the solution to getting it and it just damages your self esteem. Regardless of your motivation to be in a relationship, it is between you, your potential other-half and whoever you pray to at night as to why you want to be together. Take the proper steps to make it happen, rather than just fucking - get the know the person. Okay, if the person is one inch shorter than you like - still try talking to them (you never know, big and small things can come in the most unexpected package sizes). At the end, you'll thank yourself for it because you'll have a more pleasant experience with yourself and the other person. You also won't be wasting your time even if it doesn't work out because you've learned a life lesson about reality and not to trust everything you see on a phone or computer screen.