Soooooo… the person you have been dating (or that you have been in a relationship with) has expressed that they no longer want to continue moving forward with you.  The only decision you have left to make at this point is; do you go quietly into the sunset or do you find out what the problem is/was and attempt to do whatever you feel is necessary to fall back into favor with that person?

In order to truly know when to hold’em and when to fold’em you have to understand the real reason that the person wishes to move in a different direction.  If they chose to not be honest there is not much you can do about the situation, but if they do give you honest feedback you can decide to accept it and count this relationship as a loss or fight for what you think is a salvageable relationship.  If you decide to fight for what you want you run the risk of being viewed as “the stalker”, or the “crazy -ex” if your former mate is absolutely determined to not give you another shot at love.  There is often a fine line between going the distance to show how much you are willing to do to make things right, and being “the stalker” or simply annoying your former mate to the point that you put the final nail in the coffin and close the door on any opportunity you may have had at a future reunion.

How do you know when you should give up the fight?  Many times a person who has done the dumping is fighting an internal battle within themselves to determine if their decision was the right one, and this can cause their reaction to your efforts to be unpredictable or not in line with how they are feeling deep inside making it almost impossible to tell if you should quit or work harder to get your ex-mate back.  Another possible option you can exercise in this situation is to chose to believe that anyone who does not want to be with you is ultimately missing out and its their loss… That is definitely the most simple solution, but this solution could result in both of you missing out on a good thing if your breakup was due to a mis-understanding or a miscommunication.

Knowing when to fold’em is definitely an issue that I have no solution for, as each person in each relationship is different.  The level of effective, open communication between the parties involved is likely the key factor in how to respond to a breakup.  Ideally your communications during relationships are open and effective enough that any issues are put on the table before they fester under the surface and explode all of a sudden.

I want you all to post some of your thoughts, horror stories and happily ever after stories that resulted from you or your mate working overtime to salvage a relationship.

FastCompany has a project under way to show the amount of influence we have as individuals online.  I am quite interested to see how much influence I have relative to the other few thousand participants.  So I need you to follow this link fcinf.com/v/bkbr then re-Tweet this link, re-Post this link to all of your social media sites, post this link to Facebook and any other method that you can think of to legally spread my influence around the net I would appreciate it.  I wish there were some grand prize or some reward for your efforts, but all I can do is thank you and keep you informed of my level of influence that you all help me to reach.

Although I am certain that this ultimately is a marketing and/or research project of some sort, I am participating in order to see how big of a snowball I can be responsible for.  It will be interesting to see how many hundreds or thousands of people I can get to simply click on this link http://fcinf.com/v/bkbr before August 15, 2010.

P.S. If you really want to help me out, spread my link around either the link I provided above, or the link to this blog to explain what this is all about…. The more people we can get to click on my link the higher my level of influence will be and the better my chance of appearing in the Fast Company magazine as an influential person thank you for your time. Tell a friend to tell a friend to click that link! http://fcinf.com/v/bkbr

For a long while, I have been interested in the discussions regarding interpretations and translations of the bible.  This topic is quite complicated, and I think that it is one of the issues that will likely never be resolved.  This past week I came across an article about a researcher who claims that there is a high likely hood that Jesus Christ was not killed while nailed to a cross.  This is one thing that I had never questioned, and I had never heard anyone argue this point until now.  This particular researcher did an analysis on the words crucifix and crucify(and their variations).  Apparently it was found that the words “crucifix” and “crucify” had nothing to do with the word “cross”, what the word crucifix actually meant thousands of years ago was “suspension device” or what we would call a pole or maybe even a tree in some cases.  According to the researcher at the time of Christ the word “crucify” simply meant “to suspend”. Further the writer says that there is no documentation that says Jesus was suspended on a cross, and in fact most executions using suspension devices at the time were simply tall poles that the person was tied to (or possibly impaled upon).  I will include a link to the article below so that you can read more for yourself, but this is a prime example of how people have improperly interpreted the bible and I feel as if many of our beliefs are based on mis-interpretations of the bible.

I think that the majority of such misinterpretations are caused by the fact that the definition of words within our vocabulary tend to change over time, a single word written 1000 years ago may have a completely different meaning today, and when read ancient texts without the knowledge of the vernacular of the author we can miss the mark of the message that was being documented dozens of decades ago.  If the researcher behind the article is correct it means that the fact that modern people have attached the image of a cross to the word crucifix, is an example of such possible unintentional misinterpretation.

The other form of misinterpretation is not always so innocuous.  When we read any text, an opinion or image is formed within our mind of what the author is describing.  On occasion our mental picture can be vastly off the mark of the author’s intent.  As the reader our past influences and experiences, and imagination all work together to form the new image created by reading a text, and sometimes our image is simply wrong.  It is also possible that a person who wishes to influence others can create an image designed to influence others to believe what the reader wants them to believe.  A prime example of this is the idea that the bible prohibits masturbation.  As far as I can tell there is no explicit text in the bible which bans sexually pleasing one’s self.  But there are two passages often used to promote the idea that masturbation is wrong. Genesis 38:6-9 describes a man (Onan) who was killed by God because he interrupted sexual intercourse with his brother’s wife and wasted his seed upon the ground instead of impregnating her… and I Corinthians 15:16-18 basically states that any skin or garment, or female that contacts a man’s semen is unclean and should be washed.  Neither of these passages mention masturbation at all.  Yes, I do realize that I have just performed an interpretation of the text, and I urge you to read the passages for your self.  I am only illustrating how a person who may already hold a particular belief can read those passages and interpret them in a manner that supports their previously held belief, whether their intent was malicious or it happened with no conscious effort.

Just imagine for a moment how the religious landscape would change if more research is done(and is made public), and its proven that “crucifixions” as we have come to know them were not done during the rime of Jesus Christ.  What if all of the imagery of a man with nails through his hands and feet are completely incorrect for the period, as a method of execution.  Not to say that they way he was to have been killed matters most, but this imagery has become so much a part of the Christian faith that it would cause great damage if proven to be not true.  I am not saying that one person’s research should overturn thousands of years of teachings, but if enough independent work is done and the results are not in line with our beliefs, it would be an error to not consider a shift in our beliefs.

This is a complicated issue and the problem is that so many people are not open to even considering new data which could turn their long held religious beliefs upside down.  Discussions of this nature can separate those who are truly attempting to learn and grow, from those who are not dedicated to obtaining knowledge and are comfortable with the potential mis-information they have been spoon fed since childhood.  It is much easier to remain a member of the crowd that holds tightly to the traditions of a particular religion, than it is to be among the few who are not satisfied with the idea that one is not free to think critically of the messages handed down by religious leaders.

One key line from the article is that the researcher (who happens to be a minister) stated that you can get a different meaning to the bible if you simply read the texts and ignore the teachings of theology and art.  I agree with that statement I think we all would have a different view of not only our religion, but the world if we read without the influence of what we have learned or heard or have been taught about  religion in the past.

Please read the article from abc.com below.

This week I was able to attend a performance of  the one man play “Thurgood” starring Laurence Fishburne.  This was a magnificent performance.  I often had to remind myself that Fishburne was only playing a role.  The play is near the end of its run at the Kennedy Center in DC, and unfortunately its sold out for the remaining performances. If you can I would advise you to go to make sure you see this show when and if it comes to a theatre near you.  I did not know until I began doing a little research for this post, that this play has been on going on and off broadway since 2006, when the role was performed by James Earl Jones.  I only wisht that I would have known about the show so that I could have seen what Jones brought to the role.

As can be expected the play details many of the highlights of the life of former US Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall.  The performance focuses on his early years as a budding attorney, and his fight to win Brown vs. The Board of Education, as well as a few other cases that were crucial to the civil rights movement of the mid 1900′s.  Surprisingly there was quite a bit of humor which I did no expect, it just goes to show that there is a human side to everyone, no matter what their public image may be.  The was much I did not know about Thurgood Marshall, and I now have a desire to do more research into the life of America’s first African American Solicitor General and Supreme Court Justice.  I hope that the 90 minute show continues to shine a light on a man who did so much to change America.

I pay very close attention to the statistics of this blog.  The numbers show which topics draw the most new readers(visitors), and which topics draw the most subscribers to the blog.  But I want to know from my readers , exactly what topics or specific subjects do you want to know “His Point of View?”  Please reply to this post or use the Contact the author link at the top right corner of the page to submit topics or specific questions.

And if you were wondering a few of the most read posts so far have been (in no particular order) incest, alcoholic beverages, lingerie, and relationships…

Over the last few years I have taken part in many conversations (and overheard many discussions) with people who claim to be seeking love, or seeking a long lasting relationship.  One common theme that I have run across goes something like this, ” I want a man, but I don’t want to give up any of the things I have grown used to while single.”  Excuse me???? But I thought that the point of having a relationship was two fold (aside from the part about having raising children and all), partly to not have to do those same things you did while you were single, and to have someone to share in all those things that you do enjoy doing in life.

If you have been single for some time and as a result you have filled your time with twelve different activities and a weekly girl’s night out you should be glad to cut back on those filler activities in order to grow with the right person.  If you don’t want to skip  a couple girl’s night outs, and you don’t want to cancel one of your knitting workshop groups then you may not want a relationship as much as you think. Also if you have lived alone for some time, and you cringe at the thought of having a person in your home, sitting on your couch watching TV or rifling through your fridge then you may need to just give up on the idea of having a serious relationship.

A natural part of the dating cycle is that you grow closer to one of the people that you date, and you incorporate each other into the activities that you enjoy, and you welcome them into your home.  If you can not fathom the idea of not doing all the things that you want to do, when you want to do them then the single life is exactly where you need to be.  No man or woman of any substance is going to live by your schedule and do all the things that you want to do when you want to do them.  Don’t let your regularly scheduled program cause you to miss the the once in a lifetime special programming event.

If you are fulfilled by the activities you take part in, and you are happy & comfortable living the single life that is a great thing.  A problem arises when people who wish to remain selfish with their time allow others to get close before springing the news that they are really unavailable.  It is even worse when these same people complain about being single.  You can’t have it both ways, either you live your life free with no commitments or you have to make sacrifices and changes to your schedule to accommodate the time it takes to develop and maintain a relationship.   As the old saying goes, people will make time for the things they want to focus on, and if you are with someone who makes little to no time for you that could be a sign that they are either not ready to make time for a relationship, or they are just not that much into you.

***Update*** Gil Scott is performing in DC June 17-20, 2010 at The Blues Alley***

‘I’m New Here’ is the title of Gil Scott Heron’s latest album/CD.  If you don’t recognize the name Gil Scott Heron, you need to get familiar… Once you do some research I am sure you will find a poem or two created by him, that you have heard of.  His latest work of poetry is an excellent combination of music and spoken word poetry.  I can relate to so much of what he speaks of, and I do not doubt that you will relate to something on this CD as well.  Gil Scott Heron was fairly popular a few decades ago, and many people who were fans of his, unfortunately are not even aware that he has released a new work.  To whomever is responsible for promoting this album…please get on the ball, there are many fans out there who would surely make a purchase if they were made aware of this album’s release.

You can go to his website to hear the album now, while you are there read some of the press about him so that you can get familiar right quick… And you can order the CD from BestBuy.com, good luck attempting to find a copy of the CD locally.

Oh yeah my favorite tracks are ‘running’, ‘me and the devil’, and ‘On coming from a broken home’.

It seems as if single women who have attained a level of success are  erroneously blame emasculation as a major factor in their failed relationships with men.  I am here to tell you that this is a false line of thinking.  I do not know of a single case in the real world where a man was run off because the woman he was dating was too successful.  This whole idea of emasculation resulting from dating a successful woman is pure hogwash.   I would dare to say that the women who believe that their success causes men to run and hide are either seeking out the type of men who feel as if the man has to be 100% in charge of every facet of the relationship or these women are in denial of the fact that they have one or more flaws in their personality which is repelling men.

What men don’t like no matter what level of success a woman may think she has is as follows (in no particular order):

*Women who think that their degree(s) mean anything within the relationship.  If you think that your Bachelor’s or graduate degree gives you more power within the relationship you need to think again.  If you have a Bachelor’s degree and your mate has a PhD I am certain that you would not be delighted for them to continuously use their level of education as a tool to make them feel as if they have the upper hand in your relationship.

*Women who think that the fact that they make more money (or the fact that she has a certain job title) means that they are superior to their mate.  If you are dating someone who you feel is on a lower level than you are, you must ask yourself why you are dealing with this person.  Obviously you must be benefiting from the relationship somehow or you see some potential to benefit from the relationship, otherwise you are the fool.

* Women who are dirty/nasty.  Having a job is no excuse for being filthy.  No man wants to date a woman who is not at least as clean as he is meaning both maintaining personal hygiene and a clean home.

*Women who are obsessed with their job.  I think any man who dates professional women has met a few who have nothing to discuss other than their work… you must have a life outside of work.  Leave the office at the office…don’t bring the office to your dates.  No man wants to know the name of everyone in your office after the second date.

*A woman who can’t think for herself.  This includes women who have to consult their crew in order to get permission make any decisions related to the man she is dating.  If you can make business decisions with no supervision you should be equally able to make relationship decisions on your own.  Note: if all of your girls are single or their romantic life is a revolving door, how much advice can they really give you???

Those are just a few of the mistakes that women can make that might run off a man who is not intimidated by her success.  The moral of this story is that if you(male or female) continually get the same results from your dating encounters there is a great chance that you need to need to step back and see what you are doing wrong, or what part of your personality might be driving people away.   Ladies, let’s stop playing the emasculation card, because that’s not it.  And in the rare case where a man is truly intimidated by your success and he runs away you should be thankful that he eliminated himself, as you should not want a person of that nature anyway.

Recently I was out with a friend and we visited a bar that has a diverse group of patrons. While at this bar I met a young lady who was born and lived until her teen years in a South American country. We had a decent conversation and then I was asked a question I have never encountered while out socially, or even from someone I have dated. ‘You aren’t a racist, are you?’ I stopped for a second to think about what I could have said to trigger such a question, and I came up with nothing. She indicated that I had not said anything out of line, but it was something she felt the need to ask since she had experienced problems with racism in the past since arriving in the US.

Even though our conversation never touched on racially sensitive topics before that moment, it made me think about how much of a problem racism remains to be if I meet a person and it becomes a subject of discussion in a bar where we just met and we barely know each other.

Of course the answer I gave her was ‘no.’ But, in reality I think that it is extremely difficult to be that cut and dry. I think the vast,vast majority of people give preference to people who are similar to themselves. Even if all of the people in the room are African American, one would likely give preferential treatment to someone from the same city, college, high school, etc.
The problem is that when color or ‘race’ is involved having that same preference for people of a similar background as one’s self becomes a problem.
We do not have to act on our impulse to give preference to those similar to us, but in many ways I think it is somewhat a natural desire. If we do not act on that impulse but we recognize that it exists, does that not mean that we are still ‘racist’ or at least that we still desire to give preference to those who appear to be similar? Sure deciding not to act on that impulse is the right/fair thing to do, but that does not change our desire to be more helpful toward people similar to each of us.

Be honest with yourself, reflect on your thoughts, desires, words, and actions, then ask yourself what the most accurate answer would be if you were asked “you aren’t a racist, are you?”

Why is it that some ladies want to keep their ex-husband’s last name after a divorce?  This is something that I do not understand.  If you no longer want to be with that man, why would you want to keep his name attached to yours?  Today I watched two television shows starring woman who are divorced and I spoke to a woman that I know personally who all are divorced yet have kept their ex-husband’s last name.  I have heard a couple of arguments of why a woman would want to do such a thing including: to have the same last name as her children and to maintain her name recognition (in the case of celebrities or well know business women).  I don’t think that either of those are really valid reasons to keep the name of a person you no longer wish to share your life with.  I think that these women simply do not want to endure administrative hassle of changing their name, or they are purposely attempting to keep a link to their ex-husband for some reason (e.g. spite, residual emotional feelings, marketplace name recognition, etc.) If you are attempting to keep the same last name as your children, what happens when you re-marry?  At some point these women are likely to have a different last name than their children, I do not know of any man who would be satisfied if his wife kept her former husband’s last name.   For the celebrity or successful women who want to maintain name recognition, that says to me that your success is based on your ex-husband’s name recognition.  If you are as successful as you think you are, you should be able to continue to build your business with a name that is all your own.

I know of cases where women have kept their ex-husband’s last name even though he was totally against it, and a few men I know of have attempted to get the courts to force the ex-wife to change her name.  In some cases it seems like women do this as a last means to rub salt in the man’s wound after a divorce.  If you have no children and you have no significant name recognition, then it must be spite which causes some women to fight to keep their ex-husband’s last name.

I know that some men could not care less what happens after a divorce.  But I do think that most men care about a few things during a divorce:

1. the kids

2. the amount of money/property she will get

3. his last name

What are your thoughts on the topic?

I am not a person who runs out to buy the latest hot scents, I typically purchase the same four or five colognes until they are no longer available.  During my trip to Las Vegas this past weekend I wandered into the Tom Ford store and I found three new favorites.   Tom Ford’s Black Orchid is the scent that I am referring to, and I like it even more each time I wear it. I am not one who can decompose a scent in great detail, but my amateur olfactory senses can describe Black Orchid as a floral (as the name suggests), fruity, scent with a hefty dash of something that brings it back around to a masculine fragrance.  And if nothing else matters, the ladies like it so far.  If you happen to stumble into a Tom Ford retail location and you are lucky enough to find a salesperson who is knowledgeable enough recommend the right scents for you and is willing to spend time on a potential sale that is only a small  fraction of the cost of any other items in the store you might find the other 2 scents that I have on my list (or you could find some that I missed) to purchase when I do have a run of luck on the casino tables. If you are in Vegas go see Nicholas at the Tom Ford store (on Las Vegas Blvd. in the new City Center complex).

Do women(not all women of course) really feel as if they are doing men a favor when they decide to participate in sexual intercourse?  I ask this question because of the things that I hear people say.  I have heard women say that they should not have sex with a man unless they get “something” out of it.  That “something” is usually money or gifts.  I have also heard comments about how men “use” women for sex.  Both of those lines of thinking make me wonder how personal accountability was removed from the equation.  No one is forcing women to have sex, except in the case of a rape, which is a whole nother issue. If a woman chooses to have sex with a man it is either because she wants to have sex with him, or because she is expecting something in return.  I can only think of a few instances where one can really be ‘used’ for sex and most if not all of them include being in a committed relationship where you are a victim of deception.  If you are not under the impression that you are in a committed relationship then you are not being used(you might just be mad that things did not work out as you had planned in your mind).

If a woman enjoys having sex with a man I do not comprehend how she can feel entitled to some benefit other than the pleasure of the sexual acts.  If both parties are enjoying themselves nobody owes anybody anything.  If you have sex a couple of times and do not like it then you make a decision to either move on, or to stay because you like him enough to overlook that issue.  If a woman is having sex with a man who she does not enjoy intercourse with, and she only does it with the expectation of money or gifts she is nothing more than a prostitute.   What gives any one party who participates voluntarily in an activity the right to feel as if the other participant owes them something, if there is no agreement of an exchange before the activity begins?  You can’t give someone a gift and then charge them for it after they have opened and used the item.

Is it just me or is the whole idea that women should not have sex for “free” absolutely ridiculous?

If you have read much of my blog you know that I have been around the world a couple of times.  I encourage all Americans, especially young African Americans to go beyond the borders of this country, and go farther than the Caribbean. When you travel you change.  When you travel you change the people and the land you are visiting.  When you see how the rest of the world lives you can have a better idea of how you fit into the world.  Not only will you grow and become a better person, but you will teach the people you encounter how diverse America is, beyond what they see on television (assuming that you venture beyond the traditional tourist areas, and you actually interact with the local citizens).  The majority of the world only sees the images that movies, music videos, and the daily news display of African Americans.  As we all know those images are not the complete picture of our culture or lifestyle.

Recently I was having a conversation with a woman I work with, who was born in South Korea.  Once she learned that I had visited her native land not only did we have a lot to talk about, but she also asked me how I was treated when I was there.  She asked because she knows that many South Koreans born in the last 30 years have not seen people of African descent in person and in many cases they have no knowledge of us beyond music videos.  Music videos…Music Videos… Music Videos…It’s terribly disappointing and sad that most of the world is exposed to African Americans via music videos.  Currently there are not many positive or accurate images African American culture i

When I was waling the streets of South Africa I was speaking to a local citizen and he made it clear to me that even many people of Africa think that most African Americans are gangsters and rappers.  The world in general has no concept of the middle class African American lifestyle and they want to learn just as much from us, as we want to learn from them when we visit their land.

There is a lot to see in the world, there is life beyond Jamaica, go and see as much of it as you can, before you can’t.  Not that I have anything against Jamaica…I am just saying that there are other options especially if you have been there a couple times.

Alright, so you made it this far…so now it time for the controversy to begin.  I will jump right in and offer the thought that perhaps no creatures on this planet we call Earth are meant to be monogamous.  Apparently there is no evidence to show that there is a single species of animal known where there is no infidelity.   Since we humans are animals we are also included in the list of creatures which are not completely monogamous.

OK, now that I said it and you are still reading, let’s go a little deeper into this idea.  We all realize that it is difficult to find a person we are compatible with.  Once you have found a seemingly compatible person it is yet even more difficult to make a relationship work.  Perhaps the way we typically structure our relationships is against nature’s design.  Recent studies have shown that approximately 60% of men and 55% of women have admitted to cheating on a spouse at least once in their life (see link here for details).  Basically that means that half of all men and women have cheated, so this is not just a problem that affects us men even though we generally have the reputation of being the half incapable of remaining faithful.

I am sure we have all either experienced or heard someone express their love for one person, while lusting for another.  Is it possible that we are wired to be attracted to a certain type of person to have a family with, and another type of person to satisfy our desires with?  Could it be possible that we are expecting too much when we require one person to fulfill all of our needs?  Of course I don’t have the answers but I think these are valid questions. I know that many people will have an emotional response to these ideas, but if you can pry yourself away from the emotional response and think about these things perhaps we will all learn something about what we really need to be happy.

Just to be clear, having multiple partners is not the answer to happiness for all, and I must add that monogamy is not the the key to happiness for all people either.  Apparently less than half of Americans have been satisfied enough with their mates, and/or have had the self control to avoid infidelity. Perhaps that just means that most of us are not selecting compatible partners, or maybe we are failing to maintain open lines of communication and our bonds become weaker over time.  What do you think?

By now I am sure that you are aware of the rift among US Citizens created by the debate of the Healthcare bill working its way through congress (HR 3200).  Personally I am now quite sure if I am for or against the bill, as so many legislators and talking heads are publicly debating the bill, yet they have not read it themselves.  There are summaries and talking points available that many people are basing their arguments on, but any summary of a document is inherently biased.  Any time a person boils down facts into a summary they are using their opinion of what is important as a frame of reference, in addition to possible personal agenda(s) which might also skew their interpretation of the facts.  The only way to obtain unbiased information is to get it directly from the source your self.

The other issue I have with the controversy is that many people, including myself feel that the problem is not Health Care.  I am certain that the real issue here is control and power in Congress.  I do not believe that there is not a single Republican who wants to support this bill, it saddens me that decisions are made not because they are the best for the citizens of America, but because they fit into a political party’s agenda.  If all of the Democrats can’t agree to vote for the bill, I am sure that there are some Republicans who want to vote for the bill, but will not because it would equate to political suicide, their fellow Republicans would surely turn against anyone who steps out of line on this issue.  I don’t want the bill to pass if it is not best for the majority of Americans, but I don’t want it to pass or fail simply due to partisan politics.

Yesterday I was out enjoying the 75 degree(Fahrenheit) weather in Washington DC, when I decided to stroll around the National Mall.  When I arrived I was greeted by bus loads of protesters with signs and loud speakers making their thoughts on HR 3200 known. Just as during the last Presidential election I heard many completely illogical arguments against the bill.  It saddens me that people can get so worked up about the rumors that they have heard about a piece of legislation that is available for all to read for themselves. Please take a look at some of the photos from the protests included below.