Published Monday Dec 1st, 2025 00:51

The Real Turning Point: How a “Ladies Man” Introduction Set the Stage for Disrespect on CHEW THE FAT With Smoove

By Relationship Talk With Geez

A new viral moment from the CHEW THE FAT With Smoove podcast has sparked intense discussion across the relationship podcast community. But while many viewers point to a later argument as the source of the conflict, a closer examination—supported by commentary from Relationship Talk with Geez—reveals something far more obvious:

The dynamic went wrong from the moment Shape introduced himself as a “ladies man.”

The analysis video, titled “Diary of a mad black woman? Or another Cocky Man Sensitive RED PILL Podcaster?”, doesn’t just recap a heated debate. It exposes exactly how one man’s arrogance, defensiveness, and disrespect derailed what could have been a meaningful conversation.

And let’s be clear:

Asia was not the problem.

Her communication, accountability, and clarity were consistently mature and honest. The conflict stemmed entirely from Shape’s behavior, tone, and insecurities.

⸻

The Problem Started Before Asia Even Spoke

From the moment Shape uttered the words “I’m a ladies man,” the energy shifted.

This wasn’t confidence—it was performative masculinity. It was a subtle declaration of dominance, signaling that he came on the show with ego first and emotional maturity last.

This introduction wasn’t harmless. It immediately:

• Set a condescending tone

• Positioned him above women in the conversation

• Revealed that he viewed the discussion as a competition, not an exchange

• Triggered the red-pill posturing that shaped the entire interaction

The argument didn’t begin later.

It began right there.

⸻

Asia’s Presence Showed Poise, Intelligence, and Accountability

In contrast, Asia entered the conversation with clarity and self-awareness. She spoke openly about her past relationships, even acknowledging her role in the outcomes—a level of accountability that is rare and commendable.

She explained her standards, her intentionality, and her worldview without attacking anyone.

She even expressed openness to dating a man as short as 5’5”, highlighting her grounded approach and lack of superficiality.

Asia was:

• Clear

• Emotionally intelligent

• Respectful

• Honest

• Mature

At no point did she insult or dismiss men.

At no point was she condescending.

At no point did she create conflict.

The contrast between her grounded communication and Shape’s defensiveness made the imbalance unmistakable.

⸻

Shape’s Pattern: Defensive, Incorrect, and Disrespectful

Throughout the conversation, Shape repeatedly:

• Misinterpreted Asia’s statements

• Talked over her

• Redirected the dialogue into ego battles

• Responded with emotional reactivity rather than comprehension

• Tried to assert dominance rather than communicate

None of his points were rooted in facts, accountability, or emotional awareness.

They were rooted in insecurity, and it showed.

His reactions weren’t logical—they were ego-driven.

And because he entered the discussion with a defensive, self-inflated persona, he framed even Asia’s neutral comments as attacks.

⸻

The “Smart People” Comment Was NOT the Turning Point

Many viewers mistakenly believe the conversation combusted after Asia said that “smart people” are hesitant to have children under the current social and economic conditions.

But that moment was not the cause.

It was merely the point where Shape’s insecurities became undeniable.

Asia’s comment was:

• Sociologically accurate

• Logically sound

• Not personal

• Not directed at Black men

• Not disrespectful in any way

If anything, she highlighted the emotional and financial readiness required to intentionally raise children—a reasonable and mature stance.

Shape’s extreme overreaction only revealed how threatened he was by women who speak with clarity and intelligence.

⸻

A Lesson in How Ego Undermines Communication

This viral moment is more than a podcast clash—it’s a case study in how some men approach conversations with women:

• Ego first

• Listening last

• Dominance before understanding

• Sensitivity masked as strength

• Disrespect disguised as “realness”

Shape wasn’t debating.

He was deflecting.

He wasn’t communicating.

He was performing.

He wasn’t contributing.

He was competing.

And Asia handled the entire situation with grace.

⸻

The Breaking Point: A Reaction Provoked by 30 Minutes of Disrespect

One of the most explosive moments came when Asia, after nearly half an hour of continuous antagonizing, interruptions, and disrespect, finally snapped and used a censored version of the n-word toward Shape. While the word itself is inflammatory and not ideal under any circumstance, the context is critical:

Shape provoked, needled, and disrespected her for almost 30 minutes straight, repeatedly pushing boundaries until he finally broke her composure.

Immediately after provoking the reaction, Shape attempted to shift into victim mode, framing himself as the wounded party despite being the primary aggressor throughout the conversation. This tactic—provoke, trigger, then play innocent—is a pattern often seen in manipulative or red-pill-influenced communication dynamics.

Asia’s reaction wasn’t unprovoked; it was the result of sustained emotional pressure, disrespect, and intentional agitation.

What This Moment Says About Modern Dating Conversations

The breakdown makes something very clear:

When one person enters a conversation with emotional maturity and the other arrives with bravado and insecurity, the dialogue is doomed from the start.

Asia represented the kind of intentional, self-aware communication that many people strive for.

Shape represented the very performative, defensive red-pill energy that derails countless conversations online and offline.

The result?

A clash that was never about content—only character.

Published Tuesday November 25th, 2025 22:15

The Five-Man Cycle: Understanding the Hidden Relationship Dynamics Some Women Depend On

In today’s dating landscape, conversations about modern relationships often focus on commitment, compatibility, and emotional maturity. But beneath the polished surface of social media couples and romanticized expectations lies a more complicated reality—one we will explore today. It highlights a pattern of behavior in which some women maintain five different men at the same time, each fulfilling a specific need, all while none of them know about the others.

This dynamic isn’t about love. It’s about survival, validation, emotional avoidance, and sometimes unresolved trauma. And while it may seem advantageous on the surface, we will point out that the lifestyle often leaves these women overwhelmed, stressed, and deeply unhappy when they are alone.

Let’s break down the five roles and the deeper relationship psychology behind them.

⸻

1. The Weed Man: Comfort Through Escapism

“He keeps her high so she doesn’t have to sit with her thoughts.”

The Weed Man—or “plug”—is always on call to supply her with free weed and, occasionally, pills. He’s not chosen for emotional connection or attraction; he’s valued for what he provides: constant escape.

This man believes his generosity and laid-back nature place him in a special position. But in reality, he’s part of a coping mechanism. Instead of dealing with the chaos of her life, she numbs herself, and he unknowingly fuels the cycle.

2. The Money Man: Small Cash, Big Dependence

“Whatever she needs, whenever she asks.”

This man isn’t balling out. He’s the guy who sends $5 here, $20 there, maybe $50 when she’s struggling. The amounts are small, but the dependency is big.

He thinks he’s helping her get by, but she sees him as a financial safety net. A backup plan. Someone who will always “come through” because he likes her and wants to be needed.

The emotional hook?

He believes the money means he’s important.

She believes the money means she never has to stand on her own.

⸻

3. The Emotional Support Man: The Listener Who Never Gets the Girl

“He listens, he cares—but she never changes.”

Every time her life feels like it’s falling apart, she calls him.

Every time she needs guidance, validation, or a comforting voice, he’s there.

This is the man who gets the unfiltered truth, the tears, the drama, and the apologies—but never the relationship.

He offers emotional labor she doesn’t offer anyone else, yet she continuously returns to the same self-destructive choices, making the support cycle almost addictive.

I’m emphasizing that she chooses him because he listens, not because she plans to build a future with him.

4. The Transportation Man: The Chauffeur of Convenience

“Anywhere she needs to go, he’ll take her.”

This man provides reliability and mobility. He’ll drive across town at midnight. He’ll pick her up from situations she shouldn’t have been in to begin with. He’ll take her to work, a friend’s place, a date—sometimes even to another man’s house.

He doesn’t think it’s exploitation; he sees it as attention, proximity, or a chance to spend time with her.

She sees it as free Uber powered by male desire.

⸻

5. The Sex Man: Attraction Without Attachment

“The only one who gets what every other man wants.”

This is the man she calls strictly for physical satisfaction. There’s no emotional conversation, no favors, no financial help. Just sex. He is the only one fulfilling her physical needs, which makes him the most straightforward role in her lineup.

But this simplicity is often the problem—he gives her intimacy without intimacy, fueling an emotional emptiness she tries to ignore.

The Bigger Question: Why Do Some Women Build These Networks?

This is deeper than simple labels. It explains that behind the five-man system is a reality many avoid discussing:

1. Emotional conditioning

Some women are raised or socialized to depend on multiple people because they never learned stability or emotional independence.

2. Survival mode

Others genuinely feel they cannot make it on their own—financially, emotionally, or mentally—and build a patchwork support system to keep them afloat.

3. Mental health struggles

Many of these women may be dealing with unaddressed anxiety, depression, trauma, or burnout, which pushes them into self-destructive repetition.

4. Fear of accountability

Fixing one’s life requires hard decisions, self-discipline, and responsibility. By relying on five different men, she avoids confronting her weaknesses.

5. Loneliness and validation

Even though she juggles multiple people, these women are often the most unhappy, stressed, and emotionally drained when they’re alone.

The Hard Truth: None of the Men Truly “Have” Her

Each man thinks he holds a unique place in her life.

But in reality, each of them only provides one piece of what she constantly needs.

The most ironic part?

The only thing she is loyal to is the cycle itself.

⸻

What My Theory to Fact Ratio Ultimately Challenges

My commentary questions a cultural narrative:

Should having a child alone be enough for a woman to break the cycle and become independent?

One would argue that while many people expect motherhood to be the turning point, real growth requires more than responsibility—it requires healing, accountability, and stability, things that can’t be outsourced to five different men.

My Final Takeaway

This system isn’t glamorous or empowering. It’s exhausting, unfulfilling, and deeply rooted in emotional survival rather than true connection.

The Following makes it clear:

A woman who needs five men for five different things doesn’t have five relationships—she has none.

And the men who think they’re winning are actually being used as temporary bandages for deeper wounds.

It’s a cycle that benefits no one in the long term.

And it’s a conversation that more people need to hear.