“Can’t nothin’ a broke n-gga do for me but point me towards a n-gga with money…”
-Ms. Fulsom
I heard this nonsense at a party I was blessed to attend (the salsa was off the chain!) the other night. Seeing as I was the only “stranger” amongst friends, I played it back and kept ears open, mouth shut. The loudest of the group of 9 blurted this crap out, and I was so taken aback, I had to make sure I kept my mouth shut. She KEPT going off about how a broke man was less of a man and she was less concerned with a man being good to her, because she was about going to the mall.
This leads me back to a yin-yang cycle of duality that I’ve stereotypically noticed between males and females. Males want sex, the women want money. The women seem to not wanna look like they’re being used for their body, so they want a valuable asset of the male’s: his money. The male doesn’t wanna look like a trick, breaking bread without a return on his investment, so he wants a valuable asset of hers: her vagina. Round and round we go. Of course this doesn’t apply to all inter-gender relations, but we can all acknowledge that it does exist.
You also have to look at the fact that every good man is not of extraneous means. One of my friends who bartends at a club told me this story:
A guy comes up to his bar with a female he’s obviously trying to get with. In true club fashion, I guess, he is offering to buy her a drink. Her choice of drink? An Incredible Hulk (a mixture of Hennessey and Hypnotiq). He got a shot of Crown for himself. My friend quotes twenty dollars as the ultimate total, to which the guy’s face is shocked into reality. Not wanting to look cheap to the female, he pays the tab and gives the bartender a couple dollars as a tip. He continued to entertain the woman, but never again offered to buy her another drink.
A couple things could have been changed in this scenario: he could’ve not paid for it, he could’ve told her up front what his financial limits were, etc. The thing is, though, spending money or giving of one’s sexual goods is a gamble. Whoever gives in first is at risk of being “played”, which is never a good feeling. So, the battle goes on…
Then, another thing about it is that there is no concrete definition of “broke”. The fact that the woman at anytime can declare you as a “broke n-gga” can put a hustler at her mercy. He can be a good man of modest means (meaning that he doesn’t splurge and would rather save than spend), and because he isn’t bending at her every financial whim, he may be declared “broke” and shunned aside with “the rest of them”.
Then again, I think if a man is foolish enough to not only lead his courting efforts with his money, but to also be LED and strung along, based on this very principle, is JUST AS BIG a problem. Money seems to be more smoke and mirrors for laziness and/or a shortcut, as opposed to a means of acquiring life’s luxuries. This ends up being a double edged sword when moderation is thrown out the window. Then, the woman who gets used to the money subconsciously makes it a condition to enjoy her company, while the man may subconsciously push the envelope, looking for a return on his investment. If you look at it from the two perspectives involved, the money can be more of a hindrance than help. I could go on about the whole “pay to play” nonsense, but I won’t go there (at least not in THIS blog entry!).
I know I’m speaking on all this because I can’t wrap my mind around the thought process that leads to this line of logic, but it just boggles my mind. There’s an answer somewhere, but I’m sure it won’t make much sense. Some things may really require you to BE in the situation to get it. To each…his own (but in this case, his AND hers!)…
-B
Purchase a copy of 