|
|
Post by kAHANyAH on Jul 22, 2004 11:49:07 GMT -5
word to the mama land! You know the best candidate for a polygynous relation is a bi-sexual chic. She dont get jealous over sharing her man wit the other woman cause she can get into and dig the other woman too!  I TOTALLY AGREE, there are some hot mama's that are just in it for a nut also. But majority of woman are just seeking an emotional comforter. Thats why you have to be strong enough to hold on to your draws because that brings it to another level. Sex is not just for bussing nuts, it is a sacred emotional, spiritual thing it is the highest offering a woman can give. calous acts with it, unsurities and giving it in vain makes it depreciate on a grand scale. Most woman cuchies are connected to their hearts and minds. It takes to much to try to seperate just for seeking pleasure (we are not made for multiple partners it destroys our innards). Also i believe that it does tear a woman up inside to know her man is giving away her stuff, makes me nausous thinking about it and would create a sense of insecurity in the bed wondering if you can compete, if he thinking of her ect. Woman are to delicate for this and should not concentrate on hardening up to to play this infedel role. Sex is not that great when the spiritual, sacred connection is missing. When misused its sweaty, nasty and makes a mess, produces unwanted pregnancy and disease and it doesn't last long enough for the pain it will cause your relationship when you cheat. |
|
|
|
Post by Zakiah Levanah on Jul 22, 2004 11:51:43 GMT -5
Because I am not fully against polygamy, it doesn't eat me up to think of "my man" fucking someone else. However--polygamy isn't for me because I am too emotionally attached. After so many years--I could not imagine Derrick sharing his innermost feelings with another woman. Early on, I probably could have grown accostomed to it--if we would have followed the path of polygamy when we were Muslims. However--now is way too late. I could kill over him. Not because of a physical act--because in actuality I would feel more soerry for the woman if she thought that meant something. I could kill because I am too emotionally bonded with this man. I feel him when he is far away, and when he is near. I sense things he is doing-good and bad. I look out for his best interest at all times, and I would never trust another woman to do the same. Most women are scandelous in the beginning of a relationship. By that I mean they are truly looking out for their best interest. In polygamy--I would always suspect that the other woman was trying to "be the best" not because she truly cared for "our" husband, but because she is looking out for number 1-herself. I put Derrick's best interest first--and I trust him to do the same with me--to put me first. Mistakes can be made along the way--we haven't lasted 13 years without some trials and error! If he were messing around with another woman--I could get past the sex much quicker than the thought of knowing they are making future plans of a lasting relationship. The sex part would be very painful. I would hate having to look my doctor in the eye and say "can you check me out for STD's and throw in that HIV test too". I would hate to think that she may have pleasured him in a way that I had not. Yes--that would be painful, however I can get over physical acts. I can forgive carnal desires. I know--I could not forgive if he was talking bad about me to the other woman. If he took my trust of things I shared with him--my innermost feelings, thoughts and desires and tole her about them. I could not forgive him for giving another woman power over me by telling her too much of my inner self. I also take great pride in the fact that I am the only mother of all of Derrick's children. In the days that we live in, that is often taken for granted and I do not pass judgement on those who have children by several women, or on those women who have more than one babies father. I know all too well that could easily be me. I fought long and hard to be where I am up--and many times over I was tempted to call it quits. Many choices I made may have seemed dumb to someone from the outside looking in. However--I am happy right now at this very moment--and that is what always counts. You cannot change the past, nor can you predict the future. To me--it is about the now. That was a very strong statement. I also donot totally disagree with polygamy but that is an agreeance between us all, none to be left out if it is done right. When you chose to mend a relationship broken by infedelity there are all kinds of emotional upsets. You battle with, how well you think you know someone. You battle with the why, is it all your fault. You battle with why does is it redeemable now, when it was worth throwing away then. The sex thing is emotional, I don't know about for a mans perspective. They know all to well there woman and if there woman is giving heart with body through there encounters. I guess if i knew my partner just drifted for some azz because I wasn't up for the task that would be very easy to get over. You'd figure it must not have been that great if he's back with you. But to know intimacy, secrets, plans ect was made that would do a job on the strongest woman. I like your point about whats going on now. Its hard not to dig in the past to decide the future  |
|
|
|
Post by Zakiah Levanah on Jul 22, 2004 12:00:48 GMT -5
I be all up in ya quote box what up wit dat lol I had said that to 1dell one day... but back then I don't think that was the case. I was trying to figure out the mindstate to endure that. It had to be a serious humble sisterly state that you were raised to know. or maybe it was a status, cat fight state, low self esteem state that woman wished they could move to the west to avoid  word to the mama land! You know the best candidate for a polygynous relation is a bi-sexual chic. She dont get jealous over sharing her man wit the other woman cause she can get into and dig the other woman too! |
|
|
|
Post by kAHANyAH on Jul 22, 2004 12:07:53 GMT -5
Let me ask you something Anav, do you think Yaqub wit his two wives aint get a roll in the hay together ? I mean , you know... the MANAGE TROIS sex romp.  |
|
|
|
Post by Zakiah Levanah on Jul 22, 2004 12:11:39 GMT -5
Let me ask you something Anav, do you think Yaqub wit his two wives aint get a roll in the hay together ? I mean , you know... the MANAGE TROIS sex romp. I don't know is there some biblical indication lol. Was Jacob the one who had sisters for wives  |
|
|
|
Post by kAHANyAH on Jul 22, 2004 12:16:35 GMT -5
Not sure if they were his immediate sistahs but I think they were related, like cousins removed or something. I dunno. Thats why I was asking you  I don't know is there some biblical indication lol. Was Jacob the one who had sisters for wives |
|
|
|
Post by SatiyaH on Jul 22, 2004 12:24:21 GMT -5
another Ode To Derek Post , where's my paper bag? makes me feel all gritty just thinking about it. I can just smell the sawdust and soot, the brick and block and staple guns. You need to stop imagining what Derrick is like   |
|
|
|
Post by Zakiah Levanah on Jul 22, 2004 12:42:01 GMT -5
Not sure if they were his immediate sistahs but I think they were related, like cousins removed or something. I dunno. Thats why I was asking you LOL if he is the brother that worked 7 yrs for the wrong sister and then finally got Rebekah then I doubt he was rolling in the sac with them both. There was already a sense of competition knowing a man settled for you when he wanted ya sister I doubt that created the mood for that kinda bedroom display. Like I said everyone should be getting something outta it. In my eyes, I seen financially, childcare, sisterly support. I have the kind of spirit where I could be in that type of environment if it was really family driven, I would not be competitive or trying to win favor. But it takes a helluva man to create that type of secure environment. Perhaps the messiah in the messianic days to come.... I feel if you are going to knowingly give azz to a married man and you know his wife is there in the household you may as well offer her some too, because in the end your screwing her anyway, he's screwing you and your screwing yourself alot of screwing going on there. It cost to be in a polygamous relationship, so if you ain't gonna come pay some bills, watch my kids, do my nails lol and get my permission to bone my man, or for those who like it if ain't gonna make my toes twinkle get ya own man lol. |
|
|
|
Post by kAHANyAH on Jul 22, 2004 12:47:05 GMT -5
I mean between the wife and her concubine, the one that bears upon her knees . Yaqub' each wife had a concubine. Im just wonderin. Hmmm...  LOL if he is the brother that worked 7 yrs for the wrong sister and then finally got Rebekah then I doubt he was rolling in the sac with them both. There was already a sense of competition knowing a man settled for you when he wanted ya sister I doubt that created the mood for that kinda bedroom display. Like I said everyone should be getting something outta it. In my eyes, I seen financially, childcare, sisterly support. I have the kind of spirit where I could be in that type of environment if it was really family driven, I would not be competitive or trying to win favor. But it takes a helluva man to create that type of secure environment. Perhaps the messiah in the messianic days to come.... I feel if you are going to knowingly give azz to a married man and you know his wife is there in the household you may as well offer her some too, because in the end your screwing her anyway, he's screwing you and your screwing yourself alot of screwing going on there. It cost to be in a polygamous relationship, so if you ain't gonna come pay some bills, watch my kids, do my nails lol and get my permission to bone my man, or for those who like it if ain't gonna make my toes twinkle get ya own man lol. |
|
|
|
Post by kAHANyAH on Jul 22, 2004 12:50:03 GMT -5
Whats your take on this Anav,
Ecc 4:11 Again, if two lie together, then they have heat: but how can one be warm [alone]?
Ecc 4:12 And if one prevail against him, two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken. The verses are in order, one coming right after the other, signifying a continueing train of thought. In the 11th verse it speaks of lieing together. I would assume that has to do with making love. Anyhow Im ramblin now! what you think about it ? |
|
|
|
Post by Zakiah Levanah on Jul 22, 2004 12:54:16 GMT -5
I mean between the wife and her concubine, the one that bears upon her knees . Yaqub' each wife had a concubine. Im just wonderin. Hmmm... Hmmmm could be but then that must mean there is no law saying woman that woman can't be with woman. Unless they were all up in the room to please him. But that would not be menage trois. I always see the little chinese flicks with the Emporer or rich dude with several wives (Like Iron Monkey) they display the wives all playful and seemingly down for whatever. Who knows Kah. If woman were made to beleive there sole purpose was to grow up to please a man they probably was down. I'm sure that fantasy is not new age since polygamy would probably incite such a fantasy. |
|
|
|
Post by Zakiah Levanah on Jul 22, 2004 12:57:57 GMT -5
Whats your take on this Anav,
Ecc 4:11 Again, if two lie together, then they have heat: but how can one be warm [alone]?
Ecc 4:12 And if one prevail against him, two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken. The verses are in order, one coming right after the other, signifying a continueing train of thought. In the 11th verse it speaks of lieing together. I would assume that has to do with making love. Anyhow Im ramblin now! what you think about it ? I need to read what comes b4 and afer to get a feel for the context. Babies crying be back soon.... |
|
|
|
Post by kAHANyAH on Jul 22, 2004 13:00:36 GMT -5
Hmmm... I think the same too! Actually the law on homosexuality pertains to the male not female. I dunno of any hebraic law condemning lesbianism nor bi-sexuality for women. But I could be wrong, if I am please provide the law for me. Paul came along and made the law of homosexuality a universal law, including both male and female. Im like this, if you engage in polygyny the likelihood of a manage trois or even a bloody orgy! is high! Damn! if I were in a polygynous relationship, come on - Hell yur! I'd wanna roll in the hay wit a couple of me ladies. But thats just me super freak. Hmmmm could be but then that must mean there is no law saying woman that woman can't be with woman. Unless they were all up in the room to please him. But that would not be menage trois. I always see the little chinese flicks with the Emporer or rich dude with several wives (Like Iron Monkey) they display the wives all playful and seemingly down for whatever. Who knows Kah. If woman were made to beleive there sole purpose was to grow up to please a man they probably was down. I'm sure that fantasy is not new age since polygamy would probably incite such a fantasy. |
|
|
|
Post by 1dell on Jul 22, 2004 14:16:06 GMT -5
polygamy is stupid, it really is. Yall REALLY need to figure out WHY they were polygamous back then and stop trying to be "down" for what yall know not what
the reason for an extra wife was:
1) a way to hasten the grouth of a tribe
2) she was property and a prize given. Some fathers would give their daughters as a prize for someone who performed a certain task
3) women were like livestock, one wanted a FRUITFUL wife and if she couldn't bare young then another wife was needed to give a man progeny
4) a relative died and you were responsible for taking over his household even his wife
5) a nation was conquered and all the men were killed so their wives and young were taken and added to house holds.
6) wives were considered employees and the moor you had the moor wealth you could obtain because of their skill. consequently the moor you had it was a display of wealth.
Rarely was it for sex that a man took another wife. And in some cultures a woman would have an entire year with the husband and then have to wait years to get her turn again. Many wives didn't even live in the same house with thier husband but were taken care of and guarded by his employees.
Women were property and saw themselves as property and birth machines and workers. When that is your lot in life you ain't got much to argue about or protest.
Polygamy wasn't even necessary, the first case of it was one of Cain's grandchildren Lamekh. He had 2 wives.
How the hell can someone be "down' with that? polygamy is stupid a woman is reduced to cattle and wealth
|
|
|
|
Post by kAHANyAH on Jul 22, 2004 15:57:55 GMT -5
It may be stupid but the gr8est men recorded in the bible were practicing it. Do you consider them stupid for practicing a stupid tradition ? polygamy is stupid, it really is. Yall REALLY need to figure out WHY they were polygamous back then and stop trying to be "down" for what yall know not what the reason for an extra wife was: 1) a way to hasten the group of a tribe 2) she was property and a prize given. Some fathers would give their daughters as a prize for someone who performed a certain task 3) women were like livestock, one wanted a FRUITFUL wife and if she couldn't bare young then another wife was needed to give a man progeny 4) a relative died and you were responsible for taking over his household even his wife 5) a nation was conquered and all the men were killed so their wives and young were taken and added to house holds. 6) wives were considered employees and the moor you had the moor wealth you could obtain because of their skill. consequently the moor you had it was a display of wealth. Rarely was it for sex that a man took another wife. And in some cultures a woman would have an entire year with the husband and then have to wait years to get her turn again. Many wives didn't even live in the same house with thier husband but were taken care of and guarded by his employees. Women were property and saw themselves as property and birth machines and workers. When that is your lot in life you ain't got much to argue about or protest. Polygamy wasn't even necessary, the first case of it was one of Cain's grandchildren Lamekh. He had 2 wives. How the hell can someone be "down' with that? polygamy is stupid a woman is reduced to cattle and wealth |
|
