Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Happy Hump Day!
I haven't been blogging lately because I've just been so busy! I miss you guys! I'm looking forward to a couple days off this Friday and Monday - and then the week after Christmas. I'm also looking forward to the PRINCE CONCERT tonight! A very nice treat...I need it!
If any of you caught The View yesterday, you know that Diddy was a guest and sat down with the ladies to promote his new CD Last Train to Paris. He also answered some very personal questions thrown at him about his children and his stance on marriage. In case you missed it, take a look and then we'll discuss:
First let me say that I like Diddy. I don't always agree with his life choices, but they're HIS life choices. I don't love all of his music, sometimes I think he's a clown, but for the most part he entertains me. I think he's great at building a brand, marketing himself, keeping himself relevant and is a savvy businessman. And in his response in the interview, I like that he didn't back down from the question and I feel he was honest.
However, 6 children (he claims Al B. Sure's son as his own) with 3 different women always raises an eyebrow...especially in our community. I was discussing Diddy's interview with a friend last night and he said that Diddy should have married at least one of those women in order to make an "honest woman" out of her.
Now, who knows what Diddy was telling these women in any of the relationships he's been in. Maybe he promised to marry them one day, maybe he didn't. That Kim Porter seems to be holding on for dear life in the hopes that he'll wake up one day and put a ring on it. But then again, maybe she couldn't care less about a ring, so long as she and her family are provided for. Like Diddy said, their situation seems to work for his family. So who are we to judge?
Personally, I don't think a man can make a woman "honest"...whatever that means. I feel that if a woman wants to get married before having children, she should state what she wants and then stick to her guns. Some women don't necessarily believe that you have to be married to have children...especially if that child would be the child of a mogul. Child support will do them just fine.
But for those women who DO wish to be married, then the responsibility lies with them to make sure that they either keep their legs closed, or use some sort of birth control until they walk down the aisle. Most women I know who don't want to get pregnant...DON'T. There's a pill, a patch, a shot, a diaphragm, a foam, a ring...you name it. If you don't want to use condoms, you're still covered...so the whole "I got pregnant by accident" excuse is just that...an excuse.
I know contraception fails, but something tells me in Diddy's case, these women didn't accidentally get preggers. They allowed themselves to get knocked up - without a ring - which leads me to my question of the day:
Should Diddy have married any of them in order to make honest women out of them, even if he wasn't ready to be a husband? Or is he doing the right thing by not marrying women he knows he can't fully commit to?
Some would argue that being the father to a woman's child is a much bigger commitment than being a husband, so he might as well complete the unit. But I'd argue that a person is VERY capable of being a good parent, but a terrible boyfriend or spouse. Should people who want children be forced to get married first, even if being a husband or wife isn't something they can fully commit to? Or should people who don't want to get married never have children as well?
Do you feel that children can't grow up to be wonderful, successful, well adjusted children without two parents in the home, or does that simply increase the chances?
Or is Diddy a rare case where these women are simply looking for a come-up and they see Diddy as their meal ticket - so no ring is necessary - and Diddy is smart for protecting his neck? Let's hear it! Go!