Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Kathleen Connor's avatar

You’ve completed the introspection that is required to become an authority on manhood. You did well, Umair, and have provided a manual here for others to use as they grope for Eros Inclusion. Brutality is not a turn-on for a woman. A Rolex is a symbol of patriarchal arrogance or inclusion in The Boys Club of Wealth Extractors (or a wannabe who wears a fake).

Women begin their search for a mate with the unbridled hope of uniting with a man who will treasure and protect them. Who will voluntarily give themselves to the support of the union. Sometimes (read often) women will be disappointed. The mate remains a Man Child, requiring the woman to pick up his slack. The drift begins and ends in dissolution, with each partner left wiser and less eager to begin another round.

His wisdom is rarely similar to hers. His manhood has been exposed as deficient, and therefore a new partner will have to be less insightful, more malleable, and much younger than the woman who rejected him. Her wisdom is sharper and directed at personal fulfillment, similar goals, oneness in all sense of the word. Opposite directions.

Exceptions to the rules are always there, and deviances will always exist. But I can attest to the personal nature of what I’ve written. Married several times, my search ended with the fourth. A selfless, supportive man who knew who he was. Needed no earthly possessions to prove anything to me or anyone else who knew him. He was my oxygen. My betterment, my love.

What you wrote here is truth, Umair. I know because my life experience fits neatly into the parameters you’ve described.

No posts

Ready for more?