Logo

Okay ladies, we've all had that conversation with our men about inviting another woman into the bedroom for some menegè trois action. While some of us are willing to take the plunge, and maybe even have a potential third party in mind, many of us shutter at the thought of sharing our men.

On one hand, maybe an open relationship has its perks. If you invite another women to your bed then this means your man will never cheat, right? This is not to be mistaken as a con to engage in freakish encounters to buffer your guy's cheating ways, but rather a way to explore sexual fantasies together as a couple. But these scenarios tend to get a little tricky when either you or your man begin to rendezvous with the outsider without warning, then suddenly it becomes cheating.

On the other end of extremes, some couples think it's healthy to swing around and couldn't be happier in their relationship. The premise of the sexually open arrangements is most often the "unnatural" rules of monogamy. Maybe the most puzzling piece of all, is most open couples have long-lasting relationships and are more than in love with their partner.

What's the magic, communication? Clearly no one should even dare dive into this type of venture if the communication isn't solid to begin with, but if it is, could it work? If you decide to give it a go, is this a one time engagement or have you forever opened pandora's box? So we asked a group of women "Can an open relationship work? Here's what some had to say...

Oh you've opened the damn box! My mother always said "don't start shit you ain't willing to continue," and it's true! If you start messing around with other women with your man, you think that one time is going to be enough to satisfy his greedy ass? No! He going to want different women who do different shit, the freakier the better. Y'all gon' learn, messing with marriage. One is enough and two is too much. -Karen, 29, Stylist

It really depends on the people's personalities. Most of us are not secure enough for that kind of relationship, we're just trained to accept that. We're [women] trained by society to be monogamous. I think it could work with a lot of communication, but keep in mind that most of us are poor communicators. For the majority of Americans in particular, I would say no. -Dana, 33, Teacher

I would say yes. I think an open relationship can work if boundaries are set and communication is clear about expectations. When I was 20, I had a polygamous relationship, and it was one of my greatest, but I chose to leave. However, the two remained together and have been married for 8 years now and we're all still really good friends. So yes, these set ups can work. -Liza, 30, Psychologist

I don't know. That's a tough call. Not to say that I am desperate enough to do what it takes to keep a man, but what you won't do somebody else will. I just think in order for an open relationship to work the two people should have similar beliefs, in terms of stringency. If you're one of those people who's cool with your man doing his thing from time to time, and you have the clearance to do your own thing too then that's a perfect match. But you can't have a swinger and a monogamous person in one couple, it's bound for disaster. Yea, being "open" is not for me personally, but I do think it could work, but with the right people. -Farrah, 25, Entrepreneur

GOP Representative of Iowa, Steve King, was the only congressman to vote "no" against a plaque, to be placed in the Capitol, recognizing the history of slave labor. The House of Representatives voted 399-1 for the Capitol Visitor's Center to house a plaque acknowledging the slave labor that went into the actual construction of the Capitol building. The resolution itself has information that has been quietly kept for many years. For example, slaves built the "Statue of Freedom" that sits on top of the Capitol Dome.

The "yes" votes crossed party lines, and some of the staunchest Republicans like Ron Paul and Michele Bachmann voted without hesitation, according to the Huffington Post.

Just one day later, Steve King issued a statement in reference to his opposition vote:

"In the Capitol Visitor's Center, we agreed to change the name of the Great Hall - which honored the immigrants that came legally to America - to Emancipation Hall to honor the 645,000 slaves and their descendants who were brought to the United States more than two centuries ago."

"Last night I opposed yet another bill to erect another monument to slavery because it was used as a bargaining chip to allow for the actual depiction of 'In God We Trust' in the CVC. The Architect of the Capitol and liberal activists opposed every reference to America's Christian heritage, even to the extent of scrubbing 'In God We Trust' from the depiction of the actual Speaker's chair in the U.S. House of Representatives."

"This is just the latest example of a several year effort by liberals in Congress to scrub references to America's Christian heritage from our nation's Capitol. Liberals want to amend our country's history to eradicate the role of Christianity in America and chisel references to God or faith from our historical buildings."

"Our Judeo-Christian heritage is an essential foundation stone of our great nation and should not be held hostage to yet another effort to place guilt on future Americans for the sins of some of their ancestors. Christian abolitionists gave their lives by the hundreds of thousands to end slavery. Great American leaders like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. worshipped God just as our Founding Fathers did. We must never forget this important aspect of our heritage or use it as a political bargaining chip."

"I would just add that there were about 645,000 slaves that were brought to the United States. And I’m with Martin Luther King, Jr. on this," he said. "His documents, his speeches – I’ve read most of them. And I agree with almost every word that came out of him. Slavery was abhorrent, but it was also a fact of life in those centuries where it existed."

I love this commercial...check it out!

It never seems to amaze me is how ignorant people are...specially Bill O'Reilly. I know we all do things to "create a buzz" or "hike up ratings", but this man is a very demeaning type of person, an angry white man if you please. Not everyone will agree that Michael Jackson was the Greatest, but credit should be given when due. MJ has brought the world together, he did care for his fans, the children, he wanted the world to be a better place...If the man is gone, why can't we uphold his legacy with good memories of him...why do we need a jack-ass like O-Reilly degrade him in such a manner. I give props to Al Sharpton for holding his ground {although Sharpton has his hidden agenda at all times}. My point here is just leave Michael Jackson ALONE! His family, his children, his fans, the world is mourning his loss...give these people their space without shoving your fuckery down their throats!

Pitbull’s claims that he was “erroneously arrested” in December of 2007 on DUI charges have been validated, as the rapper was found not guilty of DUI charges today (July 9).

"I had my day in court and justice was served. All my life I have fought for everything I have achieved and we fought this accusation to the end,” Pitbull stated. “I want to thank my attorneys Jim Best and Joseph Vredevelt; and all the fans; and, most important of all, I thank God for letting justice prevail."

The rapper went on trial yesterday (July 8) for an incident in 2007, when he was arrested for traveling 93 MPH on the Palmetto Expressway.

The police report claimed Pitbull, born Armando Perez, failed a number of field sobriety tests, after officers smelled alcohol on his breath.

The Cuban-American rapper took the stand and told the jurors that he was targeted because he is a celebrity, despite the fact that the arresting officer clocked him traveling at 93 MPH.

The arresting officer claimed that Pitbull refused to exit his Mercedes-Benz and when he finally did, he failed field sobriety tests.

Pitbull had refused to take a “Breathalyzer” test and according to testimony, the incident was not caught on the arresting officers dash board camera.

After three hours of deliberating, jurors found Pitbull not guilty.

Pitbull’s attorneys James "Jim" Best and Joseph Vredevelt of Best and Associates were pleased with the not guilty verdict.

"It is a vindication for Mr. Perez who has contested these allegations for the past two years,” Vredevelt and Best stated in a joint statement. “Justice truly was done in this case and we thank the jurors for their time and the people of Miami for their support of Mr. Perez during this trial."

Pitbull's latest single "I Know You Want Me (Calle Ocho" is #17 on Billboard's Hot Digital Tracks chart.

Despite earning 57% less between June 2008 and June 2009 than he did in the same period the previous year, Jay-Z has topped this year’s Forbes list of Hip-Hop Cash Kings.

The Roc-A-Fella co-founder raked in an estimated $35 million in the 12 month qualifying period.

While his income was almost $50 million less than what he made to qualify for last year’s list, Hova still managed to reclaim the top of the list from fellow entrepreneurial rapper 50 Cent, who fell to the number four position this year with estimated earnings of $20 million.

According to Forbes, one of the biggest reasons for the drastic change in income for both rappers was that they each had huge one-time deals to include in their 2008 earnings.

Rapper 50 Cent received $100 million from Coca-Cola for his stake in Glaceau, the company behind VitaminWater; while Jay-Z signed a one-of-a-kind “360” deal with concert promoter Live Nation, receiving the lion’s share of $150 million last year.

But like most other business men, Hip-Hop’s top earners have definitely been affected by the current economic climate. Last year, the top five artists on the list earned a combined $500 million.

This year’s top 5 earners – Jay-Z, Diddy, Kanye West, Akon, and 50 Cent – made a total $300 million.

According to Forbes.com, the Forbes Hip-Hop Cash Kings list includes male recording artists whose work is primarily classified as Hip-Hop or Rap.

The earnings estimates used to compile the list are calculated from record sales, digital downloads, touring, films, TV shows, endorsements, books and other entertainment ventures.

Management, agent and attorney fees are not subtracted from the gross totals. Forbes’ analysts assessed that what has kept Hip-Hop artists afloat is licensing.

Jay-Z earned approximately $1 million from Budweiser’s use of “Show Me What You Got” in a recent ad campaign.

In addition to earnings from Bad Boy Records, Sean John and his reality TV ventures, which include Making the Band and Run’s House, a portion of Diddy’s earnings came from his relationship with Ciroc Vodka.

Kanye West added to his income last year with the release of the limited-edition Nike Air Yeezy, and is expected to add to his 2010 income with his new shoe partnership with Louis Vuitton.

Common also earned some licensing money through his Lincoln Navigator ad campaign.

“Despite the economy, Hip-Hop is just as powerful as it’s ever been in the endorsement and licensing world,” says Ryan Schinman, who’s company Platinum Rye is the world’s largest buyer of music and talent for corporations.

“Teen stars and rock legends are very reliable, but the impact of Hip-Hop on pop-culture and fashion continues to lead the charge,” Schinman told Forbes.

Two of the few rappers to actually see their income increase this year, Akon and Lil Wayne, did so simply by outworking most other artists. The bulk of their earnings came from hectic tour schedules and financially rewarding collaborations.

FORBES’ HIP-HOP CASH KINGS 2009

1. Jay-Z :: $35 Million
2. Sean “Diddy” Combs :: $30 Million
3. Kanye West :: $25 Million
4. 50 Cent & Akon :: $20 Million each
6. Lil Wayne :: $18 Million
7. Timbaland :: $17 Million
8. Pharell Williams :: $16 Million
9. T-Pain :: $15 Million
10. Eminem :: $14 Million
11. Dr. Dre :: $13 Million
12. Snoop Dogg :: $11 Million
13. Ludacris :: $10 Million
14. Common, will.i.am, T.I., & Swizz Beatz :: $8 Million each
18. Andre 3000 & Big Boi :: $7 Million each
20. Flo Rida, Rick Ross, The Game, & Young Jeezy :: $6 Million

New heat from Ne-Yo!

Pay attention to this NEW information! There has been Major Leaps and Bounds from major international scientists that all corollate the same finding which is that there in fact were nanothermites used in the demolition of the 3 buildings.


Jah Jah
The Info Warrior..

This man is FINE for no reason. Check out Sean's latest video for "So Fine" (mind ya'll...he is referring to me in this song!) Off his album "Imperial Blaze" due in stores August 18th! Video directed by Ray Kay.

Does lust outweigh love when it comes to building a relationship? That’s a timeless question because all men want a woman that’s nurturing and providing to the household but still want someone that’s gonna get you going in the bedroom on a consistent basis.

Sadly, most of time, it doesn’t happen so a decision has to be made. Financial stability, or getting my brains fucked out. Dilemmas… Dilemmas… Dilemmas…

Eye-candy with head game and no job, or Plain Patty with a 401K and benefits and can take care of the household. What’s more important, the package or the candy or do they both have to be appealing? This question was posed to a panel of men, and here’s what some fellas had to say:

Like BBD said, “Never trust a big butt and a smile.” If she ain’t bringing no money or financial stability into the relationship then it will only last for so long anyway. That’s what jump-offs are for. To fulfill those sexual lusts that my wife ain’t providing. Looks eventually fade and so do most sex lives, so you want someone there that can provide too if your money goes, and sex ain’t gonna accomplish that unless you put the woman with the extracurricular sex skills to work. –James, 33, Contractor



I think that the sex has to be there too because, if not, you’re gonna stray. That’s why most men cheat anyway because they aren’t being taken care of at home. That’s why there are mistresses. It’s been going on forever. You have someone that equates you on an emotional level and ya’ll work good as a team but you still want a freak in the bedroom. Most of the time you don’t get both so I’ve stepped out a few times. Love and sex are two different things and the second women realize that. The world would be a better place. –Erick, 28, Producer



Lust has killed many relationships and temptation is always present. Like they talked about 80/20 rule in Tyler Perry’s “Why Did I Get Married,” no one is completely happy in a relationship so you gotta weigh the good with the bad. Me personally, I think long-term and the sex may be good for a minute but I think about the joys of growing old and financially secure with someone who truly cares about you. Love wins out, in my book, over lust. – Greg, 32, Sound Engineer



Fuck that. If it ain’t happening in the bedroom then it’s eventually gonna fail anyway. You gotta bring it home with me, and if she’s got a good job and the feelings are right then that just makes her all the more worthwhile. Let’s be real, if there’s no sexual passion, is there really a relationship? You gotta have a starting point and everything builds off that. If you’re sitting a house on a deck of cards, its gonna fall in time. –Corey, 33, Pharmacist

"Sweet Dreams" is the sixth single to be released from the "I Am Sasha Fierce" album. I'm feeling this video...what are your thoughts?

Hot video!

"Rev Al is a racist" is something of concern on the Internet today. The "Rev Al" that they are referring to is Reverend Al Sharpton, a prominent African American minister that is oftentimes seen in the media. On Sunday, the reason behind the statement "Rev Al is a racist" was born.

Sunday, standing in the pulpit of the First African Methodist Episcopal Church of Los Angeles, Sharpton called coverage of Michael Jackson’s death “disgraceful and despicable”.

“I am here because of the disgraceful and the despicable way some elements of the media have tried to destroy the legacy and image of Michael Jackson,” he told the congregation, charging the media with using different standards for black and white performers.

“You have had other entertainers that have had issues in their life,” he said. “But you [the media] did not degrade and denigrate them… Show the same respect for Michael and Michael’s family that you showed Frank Sinatra and Elvis Presley.”

Naked chicks, drugs & guns....its Hip-Hop lol

*LavishLife*
"What Other Life Is There?"

This is chilling and scary. This information goes deep into the CIA involvement with the controlling of Michael Jackson since he was a youngster.  Jackson suffered for years from isolation, hating himself, being a super famous "commodity", knowing the power surrounding him and the adoring fans screeching at an unbearable pitch, while Michael himself had an incredibly passionate uplifting voice. I recommend you to check this information out.. there is much information about MKULTRA on the internet, as well as how one of the most important things is the control of culture. 


Jah Jah
The Info Warrior..