Kimoni:

CFCman:

NashvilleTN:
Wow, happy workers day my people; great insights on this thread.

For me, I will say that one of the biggest attributes that defines a man is his ability to provide financially for his family. Once he cannot do that for an extended period, there will be problems. Don't get me wrong; marriage is not competition and a wife can earn more than her husband without any issues. But when the woman is the sole bread-winner and the man ain't earning much. I tell you; there is a 99% chance the marriage is doomed.

We can defend the woman or commiserate with the man all day long; but what makes that male a man is almost gone! He will have issues with himself and his wife will have issues with him. Even the kids will have issues with him.

CFCman:
Help! I have a crush on these ladies:
Zainab Balogun
Toke Makinwa
Chidinma
Cossy Orjiakor
Linda Ikeji

A40:

True. Just amusing that in this day and age people are not adjusting to the reality of the times we are in


To some anything monetary is solely the man's responsibility. Spending is and should be their only contribution


For me I believe there should be no boundaries, Ideally if you are buoyant enough as the man you should settle all the bills. However in the event that you are not I don't think there is a need to beg your life partner to play a role in a venture in which she is also a stakeholder. I don't like it when people have a close mind when it comes to these things. Do not feel like you are doing your husband a favor especially if its on a temporary basis



It always is but a woman is supposed to be the Helpmate for a reason. Might as well get a surrogate mother than a woman who thinks contributing to her children's education is a taboo

tearoses:


So you have obtained your freedom from Bellong the resident babalawo
I better be careful then

bellong:


She is still an half baked graduate, patronize her at your own peril.

Disclaimer notice, Kimoni is yet to complete her apprenticeship. She may not know how to use the little power given her correctly.

She only knows the bad part as at today.

Stay clear of her till I bring her back to the shrine.

NashvilleTN:
Wow, happy workers day my people; great insights on this thread.
For me, I will say that one of the biggest attributes that defines a man is his ability to provide financially for his family. Once he cannot do that for an extended period, there will be problems. Don't get me wrong; marriage is not competition and a wife can earn more than her husband without any issues. But when the woman is the sole bread-winner and the man ain't earning much. I tell you; there is a 99% chance the marriage is doomed.
We can defend the woman or commiserate with the man all day long; but what makes that male a man is almost gone! He will have issues with himself and his wife will have issues with him. Even the kids will have issues with him.

TV01:

...for me it's fundamental to the nature of the union. I cannot consider a woman with that mindset - mine is ours and hers is hers - as fully invested in me and our union. In essence I wouldn't consider her a wife, or that a marriage. The key is to discerning that before and not after.

It would be great if a man could comfortably fund everything. But even if he can and the woman is earning a "mite", that mite should be pooled and go towards the betterment of the whole family. So I agree, "no boundaries"

If a man can do all of the above and more, and the situation changes, with the woman being the one who can, what has changed in a one-flesh union? Nothing really. Certain structural changes may be required but nothing fundamental has changed.

If a woman willingly enters a union with a man with whom she does or may potentially earn more, that does not change the dynamic in the least. She's a wife and he's a husband.

It's why I differentiate between the burger marriage and the chateaubriand union. If you know what goes into burgers, you won't chop


TV

NashvilleTN:


Bro, you are talking about the ideal situation and I agree with you nothing has changed. But in the real world, a lot changes. Even if she were the wonderful wife; her surroundings will influence her. Her friends and family will start asking questions and putting ideas in her head. On the man's side, he may begin to read meanings to simple things - even his family may join him in that.

God made the man the head for a reason. When the equilibrium is completely inverted for an extended period; it brings alot of troubles. Each case may be different but the end results are similar.

Kimoni:

TV01:

...for me it's fundamental to the nature of the union. I cannot consider a woman with that mindset - mine is ours and hers is hers - as fully invested in me and our union. In essence I wouldn't consider her a wife, or that a marriage. The key is to discerning that before and not after.

It would be great if a man could comfortably fund everything. But even if he can and the woman is earning a "mite", that mite should be pooled and go towards the betterment of the whole family. So I agree, "no boundaries"

If a man can do all of the above and more, and the situation changes, with the woman being the one who can, what has changed in a one-flesh union? Nothing really. Certain structural changes may be required but nothing fundamental has changed.

If a woman willingly enters a union with a man with whom she does or may potentially earn more, that does not change the dynamic in the least. She's a wife and he's a husband.

It's why I differentiate between the burger marriage and the chateaubriand union. If you know what goes into burgers, you won't chop

TV

TV01:

Nothing has changed - agreed. So any changes are a result of mindset, attitude and beliefs. You cannot call her a "wonderful wife" if the situation changes her attitude. She is at best a "contingent wonderful wife" - and all women are .

Now, to be sure, I am not talking about a lousy or immature husband. That should have been a non-starter in the first place. But if a man is conducting himself aright and the financial situation changes - say her earning go stratospheric due to winning a talent show - he is still the same good man and dutiful husband as before. However her earnings are now transformational to their situation, and if she is indeed a "wonderful wife" (unqualified), nothing much changes in their union.

That is what I preach, that is what I practice. Aspirational marriage true to it's essence, not some contrived, self-serving transactional arrangement. It may fall a little short, but it is worth shooting for. If you eat cheap greasy burger, be prepared for tummy ache, flatulence and spots

@temi4fash - I dey come.


TV

temi4fash:
What of cases where the man cannot help it?

With everything he does she still earns more than him what does he do?

temi4fash:
Mr TV01,

I have been following writing for more than a year now and I want to say I have really been blessed by it.

temi4fash:
1. What should be the core values a marriage in these our time be uphelod with?

temi4fash:
2. How would a man with out enough experience in the womantology field be able to decipher a woman with a high body count and a woman woth no good.

temi4fash:
3. From your experience, what are the basic things a man is supposed to look out for in a woman before he walks down the aisle with her

temi4fash:
4, lastly, I have these stuffs about God revealing your spouse to you and thr likes in church when you wait upon him. Is it balid and if it is, Does it mean the woman automatically have those characteristics?

temi4fash:
Thank you in advance

But if a man is conducting himself aright and the financial situation changes - say her earning go stratospheric due to winning a talent show grin - he is still the same good man and dutiful husband as before. However her earnings are now transformational to their situation, and if she is indeed a "wonderful wife" (unqualified), nothing much changes in their union.

tearoses:
[center][/center]

Please don't believe everything you are told
Some just say silly things to form "enlightened"
If the man is going through financial difficulty then Let the kids stay at home if they wont put their money towards their own kids school fees.
Are they not her kids too? or are they my kids? as if on graduation day wont she tie her gele and say my son, my daughter?
If I was a man, I would never respect a woman who cant stand in the gap when I am unavailable.

oyb:


so what happens with our fairytale jumoke the bread seller?

there is no way her husband can keep up with her stratospheric rise.

Kimoni:


Hahahahahahaha I have not read and don't know where A40 is coming from but just want to quickly make this distinction.

Tearoses, 'enlightened' women are the ones who actually believe a woman can step into a man's role, temporarily or permanently. They don't mind being the breadwinner while their husbands become househusbands. I'm sure this is the new generation way of thinking. However, women who still believe in role segregation are termed 'traditional' and 'unenlightened'.

Concerning Dayo's post, let's not even get too theoretical. So in this Tsquare's case, they should have combined funds right? Tearoses/Dayo, what do you think would have happened to the joint account if they both had one?

Tearoses, i'm trying hard not to apportion blames to this couple but one of Tiwa's errors is taking up her husband's responsibility for too long. She asked for pampers money too late in the day. She should have been asking him to fulfill his responsibilities from day one. Not when you realise he still has enough money for hotel bills and posh cars. You have to force some men to fulfill their responsibility(guys, kill me for this but it's true), they may not like it initially, and may not like you for it, but they will never accuse you of taking their "manhood" from them. And that ego which matters to them a lot remains intact.

Let's not get too theoretical with these things ma'am. Real people, real issues, real solutions. What works wonders in A's home will turn a disaster if applied in B's home. Tailor made solutions for every family.

Kimoni:
"Everything" here is relative. Pls define everything?

Kimoni:
TV, if you had grown up kids who are starting to earn "mites", would you also mandate them to compulsorily spend it on family projects you the family head will outline for them, because they are still under your roof? Or you will give them the freewill to spend it believing that the training you have given them over the years is enough to guide them on the right priorities of expending the money?
If no, what has changed? If yes but they say no, would you consider them not your children because they refused? Or you would consider yourself a failure maybe?

Kimoni:
I'm not sure I totally get this 'no boundaries' you just explained here but how is it different from those who preach "anybody can do anything" in the home? i.e no role demarcations?

Kimoni:
TV!!!!!!!! You are always talking of perfect scenarios which is hardly obtainable in real life. Perfect husband, perfect wife - which market do you buy this biko? Pls show me

Kimoni:
LMAO@contingent wonderful wife. Everybody is a contingent somebody else. Is that not why we pray not to be tempted above that which we can bear?

Kimoni:


do your part in the house, where I see we need to upgrade, I'll gladly upgrade. But don't start planning and drawing budget on my pay, e no go work

If the man also married right, he should trust her to do something tangible with her earnings. If she spends it frivolously, then he needs to question his choice of wife and his own decision making. So we are back to square one, marry right
It's not only women that should be getting knocks for marrying wrongly naa

A40:

Really I couldn't explain or put my disappointment that day into words. Like is it Aso-ebi or jewelry you would be buying with your money? Their theory was that you are no longer the man the moment they start to chip in their contribution for their own children's school fees. Lol so if I chip in with funds for the groceries and housekeep that means you are no longer the woman?

In today's Nigeria. Anu won se mi

NashvilleTN:
To talk about Tiwa and Tbillz.

As for Tiwa, a man that will leave his wife and two kids will surely cheat on you at some point. I really don't have all the details of the story, but I still Tiwa was harsh to have fired him as her manager knowing fully well he had no other source of income. She said he was stealing from her; but I am not sure that is enough for you to just fire him like that. Once she fired him; she left him completely naked and he became depressed. I think they could have resolved the money issue internally without firing him. And I really don't think she was sleeping with Don-Jazzy and Dr. Sid; at least not after marriage.

oyb:


in a different thread, a guy said that there is NO TRUE NIGERIAN FEMINIST.

i guess you could say naija women want liberation [freedom to earn a salary] without the responsibility [ using that salary to support the family] that comes with it.

A40:

Please when someone is stealing from you that is more than enough grounds to fire them. We are talking of a potential police case if not for their relationship. Alailojuti ni bobo yen jare. Let us not encourage iranu

If she so wished she could set him up with something completely different from the music industry. Get a lawyer or someone to police him. Its for his own good. He became depressed?

You dey drive Benz dey accumulate hotel bills and you are talking of depression. Ayo lo n kuku se. Oo n yo ni

NashvilleTN:


Well, I already blamed Tbillz for his lifestyle so we are agreed on that. All I said is that they could have resolved it amicably without ending the business relationship. They are now husband and wife so they cannot see things solely from a business perspective. They could have worked things out on the business side. The marriage ended the day she fired him; they were just living on borrowed time. Trust was gone, jealousy stepped in. From then they became competitors as he now needed to prove a point to her. And of course, Don Jazzy will be a suspect as the new manager

I am not saying Tbillz is a good guy neither am I justifying his shameful behavior. If my wife and I were partners in business and she took money from me; I may not necessarily terminate the business relationship especially if she would have nothing else to do or if I remember she set me up.