I have been hearing alot of conversations about brothers spending money on chicks and being called tricks. What is strange to me is that this type of conversation or ideology is something that is only really discussed in certain circles. In a recent conversation with some of the cast and crew of our forthcoming Web Series there was a discussion about the concept of whether the man should pay on the first date etc. Now I wasn’t involved in the initial development of the debate and would have to admit that the actual discussion was interesting.

Yet jumping into the middle of the debate, it had appeared that the chivalry of certain men was in question. One part of the table were suggesting that “a man should pay on the first date”, the other part was suggesting that the issue was irrelevant, whilst another part was totally fully against the idea. My initial reaction was there is no right answer on how a man should treat his woman. A UK underground rapper once said “If you ain’t fly, you ain’t fly just Be you G! (B.U.G)” and those words couldn’t be more applicable than in this argument.

Issues such as the location (as discussed on the Nandos article), the amount of money spent (as discussed in the Recession Dating) or being a Heskey, are irrelevant because the key answer is this: If a chick doesn’t like you, it doesn’t matter whether you take her to a Micheline 5 star or to Morleys, she can still Par you at the end of the day.

Some women love to be spoilt, others don’t. Doesn’t make them any less valuable than the other and vice versa, as long as she knows what she wants, she has the right to check a brother that is overspending or underspending.

He is a Trick…

I have come to realise that the issue of how another man spends his money is only an issue to those people who don’t know how hard that man has worked to get his money. People always want to find an exaggerated reason as to why a particular female has gone for another man other than them. We have all been there, you see a nice car pull up on the main road and you look in and you see a hot woman in the passenger. Then when you look over to the driver and it happens to be some standard dude and instantly we think: “..she is with him for the money.”

How about the fact that she might actually like the dude? Oh no, it has to always be linked to some conspiracy because some men are so short sighted enough to think that most women – who they barely know- are so fickle that they will only go with a celebrity / a guy with money because of the image they portray. How do you know this? Were you with him shooting in the gym?

The Kobe, Tiger and Kanye Biography

A quick look back at either of these men’s relationship history with women would suggest that these dudes “have no game”.

1. They have upgraded some average women into high statuses
2. They have been caught cheating with less attractive women
3. They have acted “moist” in the aftermath of their own doing.

Another thing they have in common is celebrity status and alot of “Monies”.

But let that not deter you from the fact that here is a perfect example of three men at the top of their craft. Kobe Bryant is arguably the best BBall player of our generation, as is Tiger Woods for Golf. Kanye West has been the most consistent artist in hip hop over the last decade, yet they all share a trait … their encounters with women is rather weak in comparison to the average Joe. Here is why…

These guys are perfectionists and spend every given second to be the best they can be in their craft. They traded their youth to be in the position to achieve those goals, which meant cutting out the everyday school of hard knocks game that the rest of society picks up by being idle in the streets. Drake said it best, “While all of my closest friends are out partying, I am just here making all the music that they party to.” (Another example of a dude we will describe as soft)

Now when you work so hard, the time to be creative is the only currency of any value. The little time you get is the time when you get to start playing catch up on the bits that you may have missed out and in many cases, the party, the girls, attention etc. The money and fame merely acts as the magnet that draws the attention and female towards them. Now the issue seems to be that their lack of “game” makes it very difficult for them to differentiate between the golddiggers and the real thing. But we have to think to ourselves, is that really a big issue? If you could be:

a) …the best in your craft and be in a position where money is not an issue for the future generations of your bloodline, but have a tendency to fall for the wrong women.

b) …be the guy that had so much game and slept with infinite amount of women, but failed to leave any legacy that is sustainable for future generations.

Which one would you pick?

I know I may have positioned the argument a little bit bias, but I just wanted to bring to the attention of the readers that, some of the debates we have on what is or is not “game” is worthless when put on scale against people with the real “game” of life.

No man is born with any more game than another, it is a learnt skill. It is your choice in which part of the court you’re going to be practicing your game.

The Yak

What’s your thoughts? Share them.