Mamma I'm a millionaire, but I feel like a bum...

"If you got dogs then you got bitches. Bitches always out to put their paws on your riches"

The problem begins with the conditional. "If 'dogs' then 'bitches'"* is a simple phallocentric condition with women defined by their relationship to men both semantically (dog/bitch) and logically (If dog then bitch). The construct would be considered the basic faulty reasoning of every misogynist, but this reasoning belongs to the 'dog' alone and is a path that leads back to him**.

Tiger is a fool but he's not an exception. He is not the only married man to cheat. He is not the only man  to cheat on an attractive spouse with an ugly mistress***. These instances are, at a guess, a minority (Jeremy Kyle may contest otherwise) but are interesting to note as we ask ourselves why would you risk it (true love; the distant, faltering feeling of affection) for anything less?

"Why not? I'M TIGER BITCH! BARK! BARK!"

I wish Tiger would declare this at a press conference and roar with satisfaction, like a lion after fucking and gutting bear. Then, clambering on to the press table, he would urinate on the front row in an even manner as if lovingly watering his parched plants. The hot, fetid piss would fill the crowded room with the contempt he feels for the world it would reek of the distrust he holds for women and the disgust he feels for himself and the abstraction referred to as "those other people" - humanity. Ultimately, while stood above the steamy aftermath, he knows he pisses alone.

In someway I believe this is true of every man.


Just remember: "Tiger woulds, y'naw?"

* The contrapositive is, 'no Bitches, no dogs'. That shit is the truth.

** This is a convoluted way of saying "the way you think of others suggests something about the way you think of yourself" which is, of course, one of those 'pearls of wisdom' that appears to says a lot but also nothing at all due to its ambiguity. For example, "I avoid and ignore the homeless" either shows my mistrust and subsequent lack of concern for those less fortunate than myself, or that my repulsion is a prudent measure against the probability of being accosted which implies the unconscious assumption that were I destitute I would seriously consider accosting/robbing/annoying someone that appeared to have money. But, if you think about it, I sort of condone and understand this, and if I didn't it's because I'd be a better class of tramp than you "you fucking loser". It's a veritable "good samaritan's" mess.

*** This assumes he estimates their value solely on appearance, which we would argue does not measure up to the standards set by his supermodel wife. But, perhaps they were more attentive, charming or dominating maybe they had matching star signs or they cupped his balls and whispered to them; who knows? However, Tiger did, supposedly, maintain relationships with a few of his mistresses so he may not have 'settled for less' but perhaps gained more.