"At Home With Temptation"

Devin Joseph Metz

As Poets, we all have our own methods, practices, rituals, routines, etc. that we engage in to extend our focus while we write. One of mine involves listening to music. Doesn't really matter what kind of music it is. I usually key in on my Poetry no matter what I'm listening to. I do, however prefer Neo-Soul and lots of underground Hip-Hop. 

Anyways, I'm listening to Phonte's album "Charity Starts At Home" while writing a piece for my Poetry blog(you should check it out when you get a chance, by the by: http://thirstforinspiration.blogspot.com/) when I came across one of my favorite album skits:

“The thing about relationships that all men need to realize ’cause I’ve had the problem too…of feeling guilty about this. The reality is: Men, we are always gonna wanna f**k other women; and a lotta times when you find a woman that is the woman of your dreams and you love her and she’s, she’s all you EVER wanted in a woman, you’re afraid to go forward with committing to her, and marrying her because you really feel BAD about wanting to smash other women. It don’t mean anything’s wrong with your girl; she’s still your great, find. But n***a, you ALWAYS gon’ wanna smash somebody else.”

-Comedian Affion Crockett From His Phone Skit At The End Of Phonte’s song “Eternally.”

There are evidently opinions rendered on multiple sides when it comes to how this quote may be interpreted and perceived; but I tend to agree with Affion to some degree. We recite in The Lord's Prayer "Lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil;" but one should not be so sure as to believe that this is solely the responsibility of God himself. Any true believer will tell you that it is not God's intent to undertake our tasks but rather to support us in our own undertakings as long as we are putting forth the effort required for our success in said undertakings.

*steps down from pulpit*

As I was saying, I am inclined to agree with Affion. Temptation will not yield to any choice, decision, lifestyle, change or anything else that one would think is set in place to stifle it. That doesn't mean that we as people are destined to fail as a result. It merely helps us understand that temptation is something that doesn't automatically vanish in two blinks. I am in no way sexist(my demeanor isn't extreme enough for that sort of stuff); so I won't attack women with a barrage of "They're just as bad as we are" or "Why are men always singled out" quotes because unless good ol' science has proven us wrong, temptation doesn't adhere exclusively to one gender, either.

There have been studies conducted and ratios recorded regarding the percentage of men to women who have engaged in infidelity. These studies were loosely based on a number of variances including if it was premarital infidelity, after being wed, whether or not infidelity influenced the decision to get married or not, so on and so forth.

A search conducted in early June of last year by Lisa Penn of yourtango.com yielded the following statistics:

*Roughly 17% of divorces are caused by infidelity.*

*70% of married men have admitted that they have cheated on their wives. Similar data alongside this finding revealed that roughly 2/3 of these women were unaware of their husband's affairs. Lisa placed herself among this portion of women; stating that she was unaware for an extensive amount of time until she decided to check her husband's phone.*

So what of women?

*Lisa's search uncovered statistics claiming that roughly 50% to 60% of women have admitted having an affair as well. She admitted that she was thoroughly shocked by this statistic in particular.*

Courtesy of Fox News Magazine. Link Below:

http://magazine.foxnews.com/love/cheating-statistics-do-men-cheat-more-women

If my opinion is to be considered, I generally don't buy into statistics and ratios very much if even at all when it comes to things like temptation and infidelity. There is a laundry list of possible motives that can be attached to why men and women engage in infidelity(whether or not some of these motives can be considered plausible or not is contingent solely upon subjective opinion, of course); but cheating is just one facet of temptation. Conversely, not all people cheat on their spouse, girlfriend/boyfriend, etc. because of temptation. A myriad of factors that have absolutely nothing to do with temptation - as shocking as the that may be to some - may contribute to one's decision to practice infidelity.

  The honest(or in any other case: frustrating, awkward, unshakable, undeniable, unwavering or any other adjective that you'd like to include) truth is that attraction(especially in the physical sense) does not cease with "I do." Lust won't begin to backpedal when two people decide to establish a relationship. Those stirring urges and stints of daydreaming won't cringe in the presence of a promise ring. Temptation is ominous and omnipresent above most other things in life. A lot of it is a product of our human impulse. A good portion of it is actually mulled over and premeditated, however. What I find fascinating about those that mull over the possibility of yielding to temptation is what goes through their mind during these periods of intensive thinking.

Be it man or woman, there may be a number of different things taken under consideration during this thought process contingent upon the individual him/herself, of course. What Affion alludes to is something that I can definitely relate to from both my observation and experiences regarding the matter:

There are people(not just women in this case) who believe that when a person engages in temptation, the person they are involved with isn't considered. This assumed lapse in consideration includes one's feelings, the amount of time they were together, what ramifications the decision may incur, etc. If Affion's testimony serves no other purpose outright, it proves that there is definitely a back and forth bout with one's conscience that takes place when temptation looms; be it angering, spiteful, awkward, somber or contrite.

What makes it awkward is when we(yes; I am including myself in this. I am among the many that have had this internal conflict) yield to our temptation initially - something I would consider to be only in the mental aspect this early into things -, one never really knows what will be the first thing considered. 

Some of us think about how far along or how extreme our lust is for someone other than the person we are with. That may not necessarily be for the sole manifest of it being someone "not in a relationship with you;" of course. When one scopes in on lust, whether or not we are single isn't even on our emotional ledger of sorts. Honestly, the same applies to the person or people that we choose to lust over. Lust does not care about who is available by moral or societal standards of fidelity because as far as lust is concerned, everyone is available.

What is also possibly pondered during this mental and emotional war of attrition is why we may lust after someone else. This is almost always based upon who we find ourselves attracted to. An obscenely large amount of lust-driven attraction involves what we find physically enticing about the person involved; but there are times where one's lust may be heightened by other contributing factors such as a person's attitude, decorum, style of doing things, how the person interacts with us, and to a much more severe extreme: things that person may do or be in to that we wish the person we are currently with would or could do. This stage of the thought process becomes increasingly volatile, emotionally taxing and just plain awkward should one yield fully to their temptation; especially if your mate inquires about your motives for cheating. 

In correlation with the tone of Affion's reflection, one may experience shame to a varying degree; especially if the person knows just how badly they are lusting after another. The shame may even in some cases be directly proportional to the amount of meticulous thinking one lends to different facets of their lust. This may include how the person would go about a planned rendezvous with their object of ill-founded desire if given the chance, things the person would do with that person and how he/she would go about making sure that his/her mate never found out about what happened afterwards. The amount of attention placed upon one's adverse desire can directly effect how guilty one may feel for even finding the time to think about doing something that would be damaging to their relationship.

What I would attach to Affion's message is another thought most of us ponder: "Is it wrong for me to find someone else physically attractive?" "It's not his/her fault nor is it mine that I find him/her physically appealing." "I'm not touching; so should I really feel this bad for saying to myself what I would do if given the chance? I am just looking, after all." "Can't I eat this orange and still want that slice of pizza?"

Okay. I doubt anybody is really lusting after food in the same manner that they are after other people; so we can eliminate that one.

The overall point is that it is healthy to find other people outside of your relationship attractive. I wouldn't go as far as to say you should endeavor to notify your mate or spouse every time you find someone attractive. That's just weird and it can quickly become annoying. One shouldn't feel so pressured about finding another person attractive that they find ways to make them unattractive, either. That involves too much work for one thing; and it forces the person to unnecessarily lie to him/herself.

I do not stand to agree that wanting to sleep with another person is a healthy thought, of course. I'm not one of those "as long as I don't actually do it" sort of people; per se. I do understand slightly how those kinds of people think, however; even if I don't condone it.

What I also thought held some poignancy is how Crockett took the time to offer some reassurance that one's inclination to lust for another doesn't mean that there is something wrong with the person that he/she is involved with. Even those lucky enough to find the love of their life stand as great of a chance of being tempted as those who absolutely hate their current relationship; and everyone in between falls into the exact same bracket.

I could dedicate an entire blog entry to what involves one succumbing to temptation(and might just end up doing so at some point), but that is neither here nor there right now. Although I believe that there have always been multiple outlets for temptation, that truth has definitely found a way to expand substantially with the ever present expansion of technology and communication that we find ourselves privy to now. We all know what the usual advances consist of:

- "The Late Night Text" 

or as my Twitter folk like to call it:

"You up 'o clock"

As I'm sure many of my female readers will agree, anyone trying to contact you this late just for sake of doing so(instead of for important business or an issue with a severed limb) will rarely have anything wholesome and innocent in mind; and this person will likely do so with no regard to whether or not you are in a relationship, married, spending the night, etc.It's hard to consider someone just randomly sending a text message to someone in a committed relationship or someone's wife or husband at 3:00 AM "just to say hi."

 -"The Direct Message Flirt"

This person will endeavor to contact you via the social medium of their choosing over the most private of platforms(at least as far as he/she is concerned) available: The Direct Message. Much of the flirting that takes place here stems from their observation of what you may have posted in public or that campy "Numbers Game" that people started playing a few years ago. The ill intent attached to this interaction actually works both ways, though; evidenced by the fact that most of us will place things in a public setting with the intention of having people respond to it in this manner.

- "The Random Lewd Photo" 

This one gets very dicey; and(awkward enough) is initiated by people from all "walks of life;" whether the initiator be married, single, in a relationship, lusty, daring or just plain creepy. What really gets the ball rolling here is determined by one's response to one of these seldom welcome surprises.

Oh! Let's not forget everyone's favorite term that I am absolutely tired of hearing altogether:

"The Thirst Trap" 

Ah yes: That intricate web of desire spun by one with the manifest of capturing the ire of multitudes. Posts in the form of racy photographs, suggestive requests in tweets or status updates, daring proclamations in public forums and anything else that one can attach to this common practice all apply. The purveyor of such ridiculousness will usually make some misconstrued attempt to save face by stating that they abhor or don't look for the attention garnered in response to their postings although the frequency in their actions implies otherwise.

Something else I've found very interesting is the often unnoticed fact that the excuses we give to our loved ones when we are caught in our infidelity rarely ever match our initial reasons for engaging it in the first place.Take these fun little tidbits for example:

 

"I just wanted to see if I still got it."

*collective palms meet faces*

This excuse usually comes up in relationships that have no realistic longevity as of yet; although I have been told of instances where this occurs well into marriage. What infuriates me about this excuse is the timing: If it was that important to find out if you "still got it," it shouldn't be as high of a priority to be in a relationship in the first place. You got "It" when you found someone willing to commit to you. That should be more than sufficient enough of an answer to that pedantic stint of curiosity.

"I'm going through some things right now and needed a different outlet."

This is a bit more of a predetermined if not completely strung together excuse reserved for those who want to hold onto some semblance of nobility by owning up to the fact that his/her mate busted them; either through a phone message or by some other means. This excuse is nullified by one's recollection of the manifest of a relationship:

You Must Relate. 

Those who use this excuse haven't even thought things out clearly; even if he/she is legitimately going though something. This is evidenced by their failure to employ one of the most fruitful advantages of being in a relationship: Relating. This is why a line of communication is established therein. Talking about what is vexing you to your mate eliminates the need to do something stupid; which in turn eliminates the need to come up with an excuse this pathetic.

 Among countless others, this next one is by far the most lazy and indifferent of them all:

"I was bored."

Yep. You read that in proper context. For those not quite as astute at the first excuse and not quite as quick-witted and desperate enough to come up with the second that I expounded upon, this is where their buck stops, apparently. In this case, if that person has made it to the point where they are in a committed relationship - or dare I say even marriage - with someone that they claim to enjoy fully, there isn't much more that can be said in response outside of this:

"Let me just take it on...take it on to the house.

C'mon, c'mon Tigallo, be strong.

Be strong Tigallo! Be strong. Just take it home.

I know she get on your nerves sometimes

but man, you got a good woman at home, man.

Just go home. It-it-it's like 4:30.

Ain't nothing open this time of night but legs and hospitals.

Just go home. Just take it on home.

Martin Luther King did not die for n****s to be trickin off on H**s, n***a.

Just, just take it home.

You're an upstanding family man. You got a good thing, man.

C'mon, Tigallo. C'mon Tigallo, be strong.

Be, be real strong.

I-I mean n***a, be REAL strong.

N-N***a, be STRONG..."

- Phonte's skit at the end of his song "Sendin' My Love"

We know, Tigallo. The struggle is real. 

Like I've outlined beforehand, it is not my intention to condemn anyone for their encounter with temptation. If that were the case, I would definitely be as guilty as anyone else if not more than. It serves well to remind ourselves every now and again that it is okay to have the attraction. That is as natural as the air in our lungs. As far as the other side.......those unspeakable.......unsavory........what some would say are disgustingly awesome thoughts that swirl about.....well that's why it's called a process, right? Like all processes, it takes time, focus, dedication and lots of work to maintain what you and your loved one have built. I've always believed that true perfectionists must acknowledge the same truth that he/she finds themselves frustrated by: Nothing perfect will always be perceived as such; and that which isn't perfect in perception may be closer to perfect than we are able to perceive. Few relationships have existed without stints of lust, guilt, questionable behavior and a list of other things that pose as a threat; but where there is something to defend, there is sure to be something to cherish.

"Small Potatoes. Hot, Small Potatoes."

Devin Joseph Metz

"When We Allow use of the "N-Word" to become the litmus test for racism, we make it possible for the Rush Limbaughs of the World to claim that they are not racists. Racism is more than the use of a word." - Benjamin T. Moore, Jr.

Rush? Thoughts?

Never mind. 

The fact is, Mr. Moore is absolutely correct. The term is not where the buck stops when it comes to racism. It shouldn't be, at least. We are all presently aware and have been for a very long time about the sensitivity attached to the term(that is what I'll be calling it because I like many of us have used the word too often; so call it a scale back of sorts); but I'd hazard a guess at how many of us have actually taken time to ask ourselves why the term is as amplified as it is; especially in our current day and age with mainstream media, social networks and additional advancements involving communication technology at our grasp.

Before anyone gets bent out of shape or condemns me as "Pro___" or "Anti___", let it be understood that I am siding with no race, entity, faction or anything else when it comes to one's use of the term or racism altogether for that matter. I stand to believe that anything - be it a word, phrase, expression, thought, conversation, song, belief, lifestyle, etc. - that is expounded upon unnecessarily will at some point prove very controversial; therefore making everyone involved responsible for it being that way. Few things that stand alone command a slew of criticism, praise, sweeping indictments or any other kind of grand scale attention without having a fan for its flames; and I'm willing to admit that my arms are definitely weary years after my first initial interaction with something so controversial in exposure.

Those of you who viewed the recent documentary "Richard Pryor: Omit The Logic" this past May on Showtime will recall therein a portion of the documentary where his trip to Africa in 1982 was discussed:

"When I was in Africa, this voice came to me and said, "Richard, what do you see?" I said, I see all types of people." The voice said, "But do you see any n*****s?" I said, "No." It said, "Do you know why? 'Cause there aren't any."" - Pryor performing "Live At The Sunset Strip"

 Richard vowed never to use the term any more after that experience; and he never did. 

It took a trip to the motherland for a comedic genius such as himself to abstain from usage of the word in his stand up and overall schtick. He said that all he saw when he looked around were people.

People. 

To place this in perspective, use of the term was so prominent in what his acts constituted that he was initially perceived to a large degree not as funny without use of it. Needless to say, it wasn't even a dent in the legendary comedian's armor as he flourished extensively and abundantly without use of the term.

Whether the term is used to harm, make a joke or just in casual conversing, the sensitivity attached to the term is ominous but not insurmountable. Failure to recognize or the choice to blatantly ignore the ramifications of the words we choose to use will always constrict us at critical points in our lives.

But..... 

I believe that a great deal of that sensitivity is hinged upon our feeding into the controversy that surrounds it. A significant portion of that controversy we have built ourselves collectively to the point where lives have been threatened, personal images have been destroyed, livelihoods have been compromised, whole factions have opposed each other, careers have undergone tailspins, and the possibility for many more severe responses still looms ahead.

Excerpts from Paula Deen's deposition in lieu of a lawsuit filed against her by a former employee at one of her establishments revealed that Deen admitted using the term in years past; dating back as far as the 1960's according to her. She recalled using the term to refer to a black male that robbed a bank that she was working at back then. She stated that she "did not feel favorable towards him;" which one would understandably surmise after being held at gunpoint by anybody for that matter.

She went on to state that she used the word at times following the aforementioned incident. When her former employee's attorney asked her how the term could be used in a "non-mean way," Deen stated that use of the term was employed while conversing with other black people.

I'm not going to delve into how that may have gone over in closed quarters.

What likely hit a nerve, however is when Paula went on to describe wedding plans for her brother that she envisioned as a "true Southern plantation-style theme;" complete with black male servers to play the role of slaves during the antebellum era.

Although she did not use the term when detailing her vision for her brother's wedding, she no doubt may have stuffed her foot so far down her mouth that no amount of Southern drawl will loosen it considerably.

As was only slightly surprising but nowhere near shocking, Food Network elected not to renew Paula Deen's contract; which is set to expire at the end of June. Ensuing severed ties include Smithfield Foods removing her as their spokesperson, Wal-Mart ending their association with her and most recently, Caesar's Entertainment terminating their contract with Paula; announcing that they would rebrand four of their affiliated establishments as well.



Circumstances notwithstanding, there are opinions from a number of vantage points about whether or not Paula Deen deserved such an extreme response in lieu of her comments. Many believe that what happened to her was justified. Others feel that it may have been too harsh and likely could have been augmented to something more considerate: sort of along the lines of losing her endorsements but keeping her contract with Food Network. Whatever the predominant stance or opinion may be, the reality is that a term so amplified - even to some degree by Paula herself - mortified her and destroyed her public image and may have potentially shaped her livelihood and that of her family long term.


That is far too much power for one word.

Contrary to the fact that Paula Deen is a very fun-loving, animated person, one would have trouble disputing that her usage of the term would likely be considered pedestrian and rather demure in comparison to many other public figures that have used or discussed their usage of the term in public settings before her.


Hi, Michael Richards.

A term so damning and volatile only gains such weight from the purveyors of it; and a purveyor in this sense can be the person using the term, the person going out of their way to overtly and often unnecessarily express their hatred for its usage, a group of friends using it in casual conversing; whether to describe someone, each other or as a greeting, those placing the term in their everyday rhetoric whether in person or over a social medium, placing of the term in music, literature, film and other forms of mass media and just about any other platform or avenue that one can think of where this word is allowed and issued.

The overtly negative reaction to the term has served as the most consistent purveyor over the years. I'd venture to say that usage of the term in rap lyrics would serve as an extremely close second in my opinion.

I'm not at all saying that we - meaning black people or those who find the word offensive for sake of the history behind it - shouldn't find the term offensive at all. I just believe that we tend to over saturate the sting and overall bad vibe harbored by the word when we go to extremes in light of the utterance of a word. Expression is expected. Overt expression rather is exhausting to all parties involved, honestly.

We are all privy to our opinion on this matter while it still is considered an issue and long after it no longer is(whether or not that day comes remains to be seen). What should be kept in our collective minds, however is one's ability to give power to something that otherwise would not be considered as grand scale of an issue.Stating that an issue is small does not always mean that it is insignificant or that it does not matter. In this instance, the term is the issue obviously; and quite powerful for sure. Alongside our ability to amplify this term, our ability to look at this term for what it is still must be recognized; not for the sake of being passive about it but for the sake of one day coming to the point where the issue is done with altogether. I'm not in any position to speak on another person's behalf; but I for one am definitely looking forward to the day when we can see a small potato for what it literally is.