FROM CONCUBINES TO BENEFACTORS-A MATTER OF EVOLUTION AND REBRANDING


​We all are familiar with the trending concept of sponsors and benefactors that has seen a lot of young women’s social and financial status considerably go high. This has, however, come with cries of foul play from the younger(and less financially endowed) male sub-species of the sapiens. But could we really be facing an age-old problem disguised as a fresh idea?

Let me first introduce the definition of the term “rebranding”.

Wikipedia defines “rebranding” as “a marketing strategy in which a name, term, symbol, design, or combination thereof is created for an established brand with the intention of developing a new, differentiated identity in the minds of consumers, investors, competitors, and other stakeholders.”

Evolution is a rather common term that roughly means adapting to change in order to survive.

The concept in question is prostitution and the lessons in session are evolution and rebranding. I’m about to state some very sensitive truths so gauge your ability to withstand heartbreaking information and decide whether or not you want to proceed.

Pause…

Okay,

I’m assuming you have chosen to continue so I will go on.

Prostitution is a trade. The longest and second most successful ever after alcohol brewing. However, it is the trade that has encountered the most challenges and had to employ myriads of survival tactics to pull through. The many battles between the society and this trade have seen prostitution deal the society knockout blows and become the more successful.

Prostitution came about as probably an accident in the olden days. By then, it was popularly known as mistress or concubine keeping. According to Hebrew tradition, from which most of us credit our knowledge of concubines to, a concubine was a woman who was kept by a man for sexual purposes but was not a wife. A concubine, according to the law of Moses, would be freed if she wanted to go but would be given a one time alimony payment. She would not leave with her children and would be free to do as she wanted with her life.

So the need to survive would creep in. The need for wealth, to be precise. Some of these concubines would leave their husbands as soon as it was legally possible, get their pay, and move to the next. The concept of concubines was maintained but the time for one partner reduced. And profits increased.

Soon, some of these community concubines realised there were men who were not rich enough to own concubines themselves but would pay off for an week or two when the master was not around(and could not call to say he was coming). This led to wa realisation that it was possible to make money out of the men’s savage natures.

And a group of totally liberal and mobile concubines fashionably calling themselves “prostitutes” emerged. These were more mobile, independent, stress free and with more wages than the conventional concubine of the time. Some of them accidentally conceived and none of the men were ready to accept the children. I’m not sure what became of their sons but there is no debate on where the daughters went. They were absorbed into the trade and prostitution, for a while, was a family affair. Something like “Gomer and daughters associates” (pun intended)

For close to three millennia, prostitution was an accepted trade in the people’s way of life. Prostitutes were known and their doors were marked. People let them be and the need for evolution and rebranding was dispensed with. The term prostitutes stuck all this while and business was good. The Roman empire time marked the greatest success in the sex tourism as nudity and sex were celebrated like no period before or after then. (The term “sex tourism” has been used roughly 1900 years before it’s time, I’m sorry)

Then came the whore, who existed somewhere between the 16th and 19th century. These formed a specific place where you could find a cocktail of them and choose. The 20th century saw the emergence of the call girl and the hooker. Telephones saw the trade take a more technological approach and it never looked back. 

The 21st century is seemingly on its way to catching up with the Romans when it comes to paid sex. The accessibility of the internet to virtually every human being has made it easier for sex tourists and sex workers to hook up more easily than ever. From dating sites, to outright notorious advertisements on social media, there is clearly no way back for this trade.

Locally, it is fast gaining acceptance as a result of one of the most successful rebranding techniques in history.

Sponsors.

Knowing the high number of money-thirsty girls out there who would not accept to be put in the same category with those girls who brave the cold at night to walk around in nothing, prostitution took yet another leap in evolution. A husband with whom no obligation is tied to. Remember concubines? Yes, those ones, but these ones have boyfriends now. Now, for this contemporary concubine, the main person is not the sponsor but some young guy who takes the whatsapp profile picture and gets the Facebook features. The broke guy who spends his entire day in a library getting ready to step up as the future sponsor as soon as the current old horse collapses of viagra-induced stroke. Clever, right?

The concept is the same. Sex for money, age notwithstanding. No legal restrictions or “strings attached”. Basically, sponsors are loyal and loaded prostitution clients. They’ll pay your rent, buy you everything you need and will call you or pay you a visit anytime they feel like doing something they cannot do with their wives or main girlfriends because they RESPECT them. Yes, sponsors don’t respect you. They provide money in place of respect. I’m sorry.

I understand this has hit some people very wrongly. The person you call “sponsor” could very easily be the person you call ” client”. The only difference is the period you were born in.

Benefactors, concubines, escorts, hoes, callgirls, name them whatever you want. I’ll name them all prostitutes. I call it the depending-on-who-you-are system of mono-nomial nomenclature.

Advertisements

I’M OPEN TO CONFLICTING OPINIONS

I write this in response to an article by a close friend of mine. This is not, however, in attack to the said person, rather to present a conflicting opinion of his publication. Do not, therefore, dear followers of either belief, engage in an online battle in support of or in attack of anyone.
Thank you.

A lot has been said about love and Christianity and there’s generally a lot to choose from.

First, of love. A lot of critics against love agree to one common thing. It doesn’t make sense. Exactly. Love was never meant to make sense. Love was never meant to be studied as a subject. You simply can never explain love. Neither can you tag any intelligence to it. It was meant to be felt. There is no fixed syllabus for love and everyone feels it in a different way. It is relative, to be precise.

Love is something more than the split seconds just before and immediately after an orgasm. And that is where we go wrong. When the most important part of a male-female Union is a rhythmic contraction and relaxation of skeletal muscles in backward-forward motion to half a moment of confusion and pubertal fluids excretion, we simply cannot fathom the concept of love

That love should literally be considered “strings”. 

A relationship with more than merely libidinous knowledge is considered ” strings attached”. This is the greatest height of moral atrophy inexplicable by any theories presented before us by the vast array of literati in the past 20 centuries.

Kindly stop trying to explain love. Or understanding it in the first place. If you can’t feel it at the moment, wait for it. Just don’t say it doesn’t exist. 

Well…

On to my most sensitive topic. Christianity. No, I have never seen Jesus. Neither have I seen heaven. But just as you believe your scientists you’ve never seen, I believe my Jesus I’ve never seen. 

You can never understand Christianity unless you are ready to feel love. Christianity does not revolve around heaven and hell. Heaven and hell come after death. Christianity is here on earth. Christianity operates on grace of Christ and love of God. Unconditional love. Yes, unconditional. That we can wake up and talk trash about His existence and still wake up healthy the next day. That both those who trust Him and those who don’t all die. 

Forgiveness has been given to us freely. All we are required to do is to acknowledge that we have received forgiveness. Again, it is not about works, but grace. Like I said, love doesn’t make sense. Romans 5:20 says “Where sin increased, grace abounded the more”. That in equal measure to our sin, is in stock for us, an equal measure of grace. That all we need to do after all our ” no strings attached” is to say, “I know I am a sinner Lord, forgive me”. There is, in store, for us, grace sufficient in that respect through Christ. And everything is okay.

I see no condition in that. There is simply no way that statement is a condition for forgiveness. 

Conditions come in our worldly lives. Heaven is by grace, as mentioned earlier. Here, I present some common conditions. Obey your parents  so that your days may be added. Seek ye first the kingdom of God and all these things shall be added unto you. Tithe and you shall be blessed abundantly. All conditions given in the Bible do not, as to my knowledge, apply to forgiveness of sins. Conditions are a shorter way to become rich, wealthy and live a comfortable life here on earth. That you trust God with 10% of your earnings and He will safeguard all your wealth, and increase them. Again, I know this doesn’t make sense. It was never meant to. And that is where the concept of faith comes in, but that is a topic in its own.

I know someone is getting ready to question the credibility of my Bible as a reference point owing to the fact that it was written by men. I do hope you’re also getting ready to talk about who wrote your text books.

In conclusion, I would rather live as a Christian, a good life by all standards, and with hope, then die to find that heaven doesn’t exist. Then I will have lived a great life anyway. If heaven is there, I will be part of the chosen ones still. Rather than live a messed up, terrible and hopeless life and die to find that heaven is there, and I missed it.

I have nothing to lose.

POLITICIANS BY BIRTH, VIOLENT EXTREMISTS BY IDIOCY

​We all are political. It is in us, naturally the desire and ability to protest change. Whether or not we can do something about it is besides the point. We protest.

Take for instance, a new born baby. They’ll cry as soon as they’re born. Life is changing. Comfort is gone and they’ll now have to stretch a few muscles to survive. In them is instilled an irrevocable ability to protest unfavourable change. To perceive discomfort and do something about it, albeit cry about it.  

From this point in life, there arises a natural, subconscious and inexplicable desire for politics in them.

There is a desire to become the first in their class, marks attained notwithstanding. The point is to beat the next person. Life is a competition. There is only one beautiful girl in a class of 33 boys. May the best man win. Will he? Probably not. The best liar will.

The teacher extends the lesson into lunch hours, regardless of the fact that they had a good forty minutes but chose to come thirty nine minutes late. The students complain, not aloud, but they do. Within them is the desire they had the ability to unplug the life support of their teacher to charge their mobile phones.(cliché, I know)

Then there is a desire to be in a position to change things. Often phrases like “I wish I could…” or “if I was given a chance to…” illustrate the beginning of a new level of our political lives. It is a subconscious desire for power to change an extremely uncomfortable situation.

Some actually make their break at this point. Those students who argued with the teachers and made life easier for some of us who had not completed the assignments. Those who vied for leadership positions to change a bad situation or to change the course of things in whose direction foretold inevitable doom. Some merely to massage their egos.

Whereas there were those who naturally made it, some didn’t. Repeated failure created the need to sauce things up a little. They realised they had to be more than just their miserable selves to achieve something. These became the politicians as we know them. The natural leaders formerly mentioned are the upper middle class managers and chief executives who have more money than the time they have to spend it. This wealth will accumulate and they’ll one day wake up to the reality that they have money, good money. 

This is where the concept of sponsors comes in but that is a level of politics beyond my scope. In a nutshell, we are left with a brood of second degree leaders to govern us as the real top class leaders chase our young girls around. And God knows they can! We all do.

There is a universal conclusion that politics is in our blood. We are all wired differently and in every social gathering, there has to be conflicting opinions. Even in nations like Rwanda where all the president does is work for the people, there is still 6% of the population that thinks he really needs to go home.

Desire for the ability to change situations is in us. Desire to resist change is in us. Ability to hold different opinions and stick to them is in us. What is fake, wannabe, disgusting, annoying and o so unlike humans is violence. A symptom of common sense deficiency that is slowly creeping into the souls of men. And women(just before the feminists guns come blazing). 

This is 2016 folks. A lot has been said about this specific topic but it’s clearly not sunk in well. Radicalization and supremacy complexes in our different settings form a fresh arena for a little spark to flare up into an inferno that will rid us of all reconciliation measures that have been put since 2008. 

I’m a staunch Christian, the only way to be called a son of God according to my Bible, is to make peace. I am peace, I am Kenyan, I am Kenya.(insert your country for the sake of satisfying your inner politician.)