queensmith:

I'm talking about contribution not compensation, leaving the divorce case to one side what reason can a woman give to have a child for a particular man. I know many will claim financial reasons but let's be real, most women don't get paid to give birth so that argument is weak to say the least.
I hear some say a woman will do so to 'tie a man down'. Tie a man down for what? What is she to gain from her pain, talkless of the life long responsibility a child indicates.
Some will come and tell me love- I don't know what this love thing is when I see it I'll believe it but till then I'll appreciate a solid tangible reason.

Sagafag you can sit this one out, adults only.


and if children were as important as you mention- most women won't bother getting married? Especially the Nigerian ones that are desperate to give birth.

pro01:

Says who tori Olorun?

TV01:

Neither gender can prosper withought proper marriage.

To clarify, both parties within the marriage will benefit most when it's done properly.

I absolutely accept that marriage is not necessarily for all and one can live a fulfilled life before or without marriage.

Having said that, I do believe marriage is and should remain the norm. Very few should opt for singlehood or celibacy. For mature individuals, there should be just cause for not marrying.

TV, I have to say: You do struggle with logical thought.

How can you postulate 100% of women are bad? What kind of logic is that?

For how many months or years did you court before you married your wife?

Yes, you can!

I am from the clan of men that state their ground rules and if you don't accept it you have the liberty to leave. How is that faulty thinking? You have been taught "real men" don't say things women don't want to hear?

I am not a real man. I am ALL man!

An agreement that is not legally binding is faith. Faith is wishful thinking as you have no control.

Your due diligence was done after ONE date.          

Awww! How lovely. What a lovely thing to say. All the women reading this have their hearts melting and a lump in their throats. What a real man! You be "real man" gba.  

"No divorce. We took vows. I simply can't see it.". Fck me LAWD! Triple fck me LAWD! So those that divorce did not take vows. That is the protection that guarantees you? Mate, you are not a logical person. WISHFUL THINKING! That is what your whole philosophy is based on. You no fit 'show me the practicals'.

You have absolutely no clue what your wife would do 10/15 years from now. You are living on faith. Many like you have lived on such and majority have regretted it in divorce.

Sagamite:

No!

Even when done properly, a woman would still benefit more.

Unions are of more value to a woman that it is to a man.

Both parties would benefit but woman would benefit more. Lets call a spade a spade even if it offends some women that like not to hear the truth.

Furthermore, lack of marriage does not necessarily imply singlehood and celibacy. Companionship and sex can be obtained outside marriage. Not like if I know anything about that, I just heard it through the grapevine.

TV01:

lol! true dude, but not at this level.

You are the one postulating the debilitating effect of the law and the numbers of "not fit for purpose" women. I am merely saying no matter how damaging the law, if you can find just the one woman who you can align with, then marriage is still viable and remains the best option.

TV01:

If I believed that, I wouldn't be married. I was merely extrapolating your thinking.

TV01:

The actual decision was taken within 3 months after we met - I personally never spent longer than that "viewing". The wedding was 10 months later. I knew she could be the one when I first clapped eyes on her. Just needed to check, consider, consult and confirm.

TV01:

I had my aspirations for marriage. My wife both accepted and met them. Neither of us was forced, neither of us was conned. The tone of honesty and transaparent communication was set from day one.

Unilaterally dictating your rules does not mean the marriage will be happy or successful even if you find someonme to accept.

In lieu of you dedicating your life to some worthy humanitarian purpose - and even that does not necessarily preclude marriage - you will prove your manliness by successfully marrying and raising a family !

TV01:

It's trust and I have control over my side.

TV01:

My audience is not primarily the women. I'm  not here to build a constituency nor a fanbase. Not for favour or applause. Accolades or awards.

TV01:

Your fear is not divorce, it's the consequences of divorce. I don't share that fear. And I appreciate the fulfilment and blessing within a happy marriage.

My position remains. Marriage is the best option and the  norm. And the way to go if you can find someone who shares your values.  Whatever part the law plays can be kept to a minimum. neither will you ever be able to legally construct a perfect marriage or remove the downside.

You yet have all to play for sir.

Best
TV

TV01:

Done properly, both parties are better off married. Not only them, but their offspring and society at large.

"Singlehood" does not preclude "companionship", it simply means "not married". Celibacy is another kettle of fish and demanded by the worldviews of some. Unlike "innocentee" here, I have had it all ways and reccommend marriage  !

Best
TV

Sagamite:

And there was absolutely no time I said one cannot find one woman that is right or marriage is not viable.

Sagamite:

Wow!

You did your due diligence in 3-10 months and came to the conclusion you know what your wife would do in 10, 15, 20, 25 years time?

You must be fcking kidding me. And you say you are not living on faith?  You are not surviving on wishful thinking and hope? .

Sagamite:

And you think because your wife accepted and met your aspirations and you did not force them or con her that guarantees your marriage would be happy and successful?

I am assuming by default you are smart enough to say "No".

Sagamite:

I am sure you are not, subconsciously. But a lot of your arguments have no comprehensive logic and are of the populist genre normally batted around and upheld by those that do not critically evaluate the platitudes the populists through about.

Sagamite:

If you live in the West, you are married or want to get married, you have no prenup and you say you are not worried about the effects of divorce despite the realities and stories widely and publicly available, then you are one of the following:

1) Just an individual burying his head in the sand and would not listen to any logic and would rather live in lululand.

2) An individual that approves of the divorce laws and is willing to abide by it.

3) Just purely ignorant.

4) You don't expect to be worth much, so what da fck, she aint gonna have anything to milk.

TV01:

So what are you hanging around for? Find her and get viable ?

TV01:

1. More like 2 to be honest . The rest was planning the wedding
2. Who knows tomorrow? Do you know if you'll be here tomorrow, let alone, 5, 10 , 15, 20 or 25 years time.
3. In as much as I could I ensured the commitment and compatibility were there to begin and we'll both continue to strive for it.
4. Whatever you believe, whatever your worldview, it's by faith you believe there'll be a tomorrow. Or what guarantee do you have from day to day?

TV01:

Prayed for it, planned for it and will continue to pave the way for it. I don't take it for granted. It will take some work. Not to keep it going, but to keep it sweet.

So maybe I'm just thick, but happily married. Why are you so skeptical? There are happy and succesful marriages everywhere.

TV01:

Nope. I am reading from my own script. Critically evaluating and practically applying are two different things. I'm living it. I don't just believe, I have experienced.

TV01:

I am fully aware of the potential consequences of divorce. I also know how to build a strong marriage. Do winners overly concern themselves with losing? For all competitors, it's about preparing and executing, then finishing.

TV01:

A solid and well constructed marriage is blind to location and mostly oblivious to laws. A prenup goes against the very essence of marriage as I understand it.

In turn;
1. Marriage in my experience is heaven, not lululand !
2. I abide by all laws regardless. Very few of them will ever hinder me living the life I choose.
3. I spent 17 years learning about and preparing for marriage prior, and continue top do so. "Guru Marri-agE"  ?
4. Worth is relative. When we met I was financially further along than my wife - obviously that all changed after I paid for the wedding ! But seriously, I have repeated time and again, money is not the main driver of or the primary consideration when valuing a marriage.

I'll be happy to deliver the sermon on the day !

Best
TV

Men and women have not evolved yet to adapt to the new relationship rebalancing of women being financially independent and sex being blasted at us left, right and centre by the decadent liberals.

Relationship culture has not caught up and stabilised with the rapid change and it is currently in a turbulent flux.

Kutey:

AHAHAHAHAHAH AHA AH YOU LIVE IN FREAKING PECKHAM?!!!!! , , OMG OMG I'm gonna cry of laughter, I fu<king peed in my pants OMG

You want to sign a prenup for what? so that you can keep your council house or the bus pass for route 436?"

I am not marrying cretinous goats like Kutey who would say she is used to a lifestyle and I must fund it while her lazy arse contributes nothing."
We wouldn't even cross paths my dear and as for your contributions I can confidently say I probably earn 5 times more than you do and am way younger, you sound old and bitter.

chiozor: Married men live longer than SINGLE men. Male species die earlier than female, that is across the board in the animal kingdom.
When a man is dying of terminal illness or dementia and has treated his wife and family decently, who does he think will stay at his bedsite taking care of him, clearing and wiping him till death with genuine love? girlfriends or nurses in hospices?
If you think women will cause you an early death start sleeping-with dogs, they are a mans best friend

omar22:

Look this is how I see it I wont beat around the bush,

If this guy is worth over $500m

Then I believe he should pay the $21m divorce payout! for the sake that she gave him 4 children


The guy is lucky that this didn't happen in America and theirs no Pre-Nup signed,  That lady would be smiling by now,


The Company is Owned by the founder whether his village member contributed towards it or not,

The Company started when he was married to this lady and not before he got married to the Brit!

She was a full time house wife at the age of 49years which means she probably gave up her own career so that the man could pursue his,


Look like I said if the man is worth close to half a billion then he should pay, I dont support the 50/50 split because if its the other way round the ex-husband wont get 50% I could remember Sean Penn only getting only $27m out of Madonna's wealth, Mel B's ex Husband only getting 800k pounds and one flat in North London out of 20m,


This guy should be able to part with $21m

Kutey:

AHAHAHAHAHAH  AHA AH YOU LIVE IN FREAKING PECKHAM?!!!!!   ,  , OMG OMG I'm gonna cry of laughter, I fu<king peed in my pants OMG

You want to sign a prenup for what? so that you can keep your council house or the bus pass for route 436?"

I am not marrying cretinous goats like Kutey who would say she is used to a lifestyle and I must fund it while her lazy arse contributes nothing."
We wouldn't even cross paths my dear and as for your contributions I can confidently say I probably earn 5 times more than you do and am way younger, you sound old and bitter.

chiozor: Married men live longer than SINGLE men. Male species die earlier than female, that is across the board in the animal kingdom.
When a man is dying of terminal illness or dementia and has treated his wife and family decently, who does he think will stay at his bedsite taking care of him, clearing and wiping him till death with genuine love? girlfriends or nurses in hospices?
If you think women will cause you an early death start sleeping-with dogs, they are a mans best friend

The company started when they married, and so? That means she has a contribution to it?

For your information, she is a working mother. And she obviously did not have the capability to make anywhere close to the sum she is asking for. The man is capable of parting with $21m but he does not want to, so I don't think he should, it is his mone

omar22:


And why cant he part with $21m, she is not trying to be like Heather Mills who wanted between a third and half of Paul MaCarthy wealth or Tiger Wood's nanny that turned wife that later turned into gold digger who wanted a third of Tiger Wood's wealth, $21m in a billion common ,  in the spirit of fairness


Roman Abramovich parted with £150m, a 767 plane, a flat in Grosvenor palace, a $72m Yatch and this was Roman's offer,  So this Stingy Nigerian should pay joor!!!

Sagamite:

Sheila Johnson helped her husband build BET. She helped finance and worked in it.

She is perfectly entitled to the $400m she got from the divorce.

And she has not proved it wrong as she is using it to build other businesses.

That is someone capable of the money she rightfully asked for. She did not give daft excuses like "I got pregnant for him" raised by fucktards like queensmith and Kutey. She said this is what I did to directly build the business. Now she is building more.

More of your ecclesiastical platitudes.
Blind = Hope
Religion = Hope
Hope = No guarantees
Confidence in no guarantees = Wishful Thinking.

Sagamite:

She should find me.

Do you know how fine I am? Do you know what I am worth in the coupling market?

Sagamite:

All what you said does not disprove the fact that you are living on faith/hope/wishful thinking that your wife is right for you and she would not milk you in divorce.

Sagamite:

The only guarantees you have and you know is what you can/would do. You have no guarantee or know what she can/would do. That is more evident by the length of your courtship. I can safely say, you hardly know the person you married. You have no control if she decides to eff you up. Your future is basically in her hands if you live in the West. And there is no guarantee she would be nice if in future she decides she might want something else. That is not to say she might not be the nicest woman on Earth but I would still have a prenup with the nicest woman on Earth.

Sagamite:

I would have more reasonable control by signing a prenup. I strongly believe in risk management especially when I am the one that has something to lose and the other key decision maker has evrything to gain and nothing to lose.

Sagamite:

Majority are miserable or so-so. As I said, men and women have not evolved yet to adapt to the new relationship rebalancing of women being financially independent and sex being blasted at us left, right and centre by the decadent liberals. Relationship culture has not caught up and stabilised with the rapid change and it is currently in a turbulent flux. Divorce and break ups are the order of the day. I don't live in Fantasia, I live in Peckham.

Sagamite:

You are living it based on hope, just like most other people. There is no methodology and no guarantees. All you have said you did to get it, including the due diligence, is in no way inspiring, reassuring or protective. Hope might or might not fail you. It is just hope.

Sagamite:


This is another populist fanciful air that has no logic.

Winners do concern themselves with losing. Stop barging the kind of junk evangelistic pastors throw about, that will not work a fraction of millimetre on me.

Sagamite:

More of your ecclesiastical platitudes.

Blind = Hope

Religion = Hope

Hope = No guarantees

Confidence in no guarantees = Wishful Thinking.

You are proving me completely right.

pro01:

Lol. Classic. When you refuse to have 'confidence in no guarantees', they accuse you of pessimism and negativity. What a laugh.

Theblessed:

[b][size=16pt]So, this divorce wrangling is still being analysed? 

Oh please, we all should get a life now - make we leave it for the UK courts to decide, abi?  

In the end, we shall all see whether she's gonna go home with a $2. 5million divorce settlement or $21million, abi?

However the matter ends, all we know is that, the courts here will administer justice and justice must be seen to be done in this 15yr marriage? So, make una go home, keep watching this space - my verdict is, the lady is not going home with a $2.5 peanut lai, lai, lai!!!

Even if the guy like, make igo drag all his village people and list them as his partners in the business - ino go work here!

You know what? The lady would receive a good and handsome handshake for a job well done and, that's a promise!   In fact, it's so good the guy laid most of his eggs in the Western markets, abi?

The investigation that follows this drama will be very thorough - there is no hiding place and there is not bribery, here! 

In fact, the investigation in this divorce war will not only expose the guy and open up a lot of worms in his business but also, make him vulnerable to the British Tax system - the British Taxman, will be very interested in him!!! Goodluck!! 

And definitely, the lady would receive justice here, as for Nigerian courts? Ignore! Rapu okwu!!!! 
[/size][/b]

TV01:

Ah! Progress !
Your high phy-nincial net worth + your high financial net worth just increases your chance of securing a 5%er .

TV01:

Please tell us what single endeavour does not have an element of faith/hope. We are mere men, with only a modicum of control.

I did what I knew to and had to do. It may have seemed fast, but it was on the back of a large number of other "viewings".  

We recently bought a place. After viewing around 60 properties across a wide area, you get to know what's out there, what prices the market holds and refine your personal requirements. 58 of the places we didn't even discuss. One was beautifully presented, but not quite right. The 60th one was per-fick. Offer on the spot mate! We are not to far from Peckham, once we settle in, we'll host you !

TV01:

She doesn't have any more of a gaurantee than l do. My wedding was the culmination of 17 years of preparation and searching.

A prenup cannot make someone care for or commit to you. Can you legislate for human behaviour? Listen there are a ton of things that could go wrong. What guarantee offspring, health, ongoing prosperity or even sufficiency? What about accidents or other mishaps?

Your inordinate obsession with the possible financial implications of a possible divorce is bordering on the irrational. Plan and work towards the good and prosperity of the union. How will you even enjoy it, if you are constantly on edge about a possible divorce?

TV01:

"Control" - over one solitary - and unlikely if you prepare and plan well - aspect? Manage the risk prior - of not being ready or not choosing the right one - or during - of it becoming stale or taking each other for granted of of being unfaithful.

TV01:

Hence the the "JAMB" analogy. You are responsible for one. Yours!

And you call my post "populist"? This is pure soapbox. With all this, there are still solid and prosperous marriages. In as much as relationships are driven by the prevailing culture, we still have the choice to inculcate and retain right values in ourselves and those we can influence.

Drugs are glamorised, am I a druggie? Prostitution is considered cool, am I a whoremonger. Drink is the "societal smoother", never touched a drop. Take responsibility for your choices and actions. Why follow the orderof the day if you are "a man who dictates"?

1. Not all women - or men sef - are financially independent. Majority simply have greater leverage as couples.
2. Finance, should not really effect the marriage dynamic, find someone who understands that. l did.
3. Society has always being sexually decadent. It's just more pulished and accepted. Some choose not to embrace that. Agqin find someone who does not

TV01:

I've answered this a number of times. Does car insurance guarantee one will survive a crash? Or health insurance mean one won't catch a terminal disease or illness.

The life of man is a vapour. Everything has a risk of sorts. Mitigate all you like, all you can, but don't let it paralyse you. Will you not eat for fear of food poisoning, or not travel for fear of an accident?

TV01:

Yes, but they still plan and prepare to win. Competitors still do their all and have a true desire to do the best and be the best they can. I am the original anti-"Mog" , please check my posting history Sir

TV01:

Life is hope. Please evidence how you live any aspect of yours on guarantees? Yes we are not ignorant of risk or the wisdom of mitigating it, but do we cease to live for fear of it?
Give us wedding rice jor. And please obtain a guarantee from your caterer. !

Best
TV

Sagamite:

You want to play everything in life has an element of faith? Please no try and play that lame stuff with me. Emi lo fe ma fi gba philosophy football? (Na me you wan dey use play philosophy football?) O o mor nkan ti awa ka ni ile iwe agba? (You no know wetin we read for Higher Education?)

If two people decide to go to Manchester from London and have to be there within 6 hours. Note: It takes on average 3 and the half hours for the journey.

One decides that to get there he would jump in his car and drive down. The second decides he would not use his car. Mba! Lai Lai! Petrol cost too much. His plan is to hitch ride from his front door to the destination. Obviously both have an element of faith. The first is hoping not to have an accident, the second is hoping not to have an accident but also hoping he would meet enough good Samaritans within the 6 hour period. You know what? He might actually make it. Are they comparable, which on is a wishful thinker and which one is in control?

Sagamite:

This is what I was saying about you not being a logic man earlier. I pointed to your linking of prenup with a woman not being capable of having "sufficient" kids as indicator then.

What has led to, or where has anyone said, signing prenup can make someone care for or commit to you?

I would rather be "irrational" and obtain some control than ignorantly bury my head in the sand and say the law does not apply to my marriage and I know what my wife I knew for only 3 months will do despite biology teaching us of their hormonal vortex that make them change over years and the list of stories of people with similar philosophies being burned.

Sagamite:

Secondly, I don't know how signing prenup presupposes that one would constantly be on the edge about divorce in marriage and one is not planning for success of the marriage. That is the kind of junk women come up with to suppress your wish of prenup. [Imitates yeye women] "You must be planning for divorce if you want a prenup". But you will here the same foool say she can't be a FT housewife because she does not want to be left high and dry. When she thinks like that (her best interest), she is not planning for divorce. You sure are a well trained real man. You are not a logical man.

And all that is not practicable in conjunction with prenup. You came to the lame conclusion only when you do not sign prenup can you choose the right one, keep a relationship fresh, cherish your partner and behave right? Those that sign prenup can not do all that as well?

Sagamite:

Wow! Na wah for this logic o.

Lets go back to the philosophy 101 fictional tale I gave above so you can get some clarity and strong analogy.

The first takes his car as guarantee and needs to drive safely and avoid an accident, the second is hoping he would talk to the person (or people) that give(s) him a free ride to [all] drive safely and avoid an accident but is also hoping he finds such person/people that would listen.

Who has a better strategy of the 2?

Sagamite:

You are not a logical man. I am rarely wrong when I make an assertion.
Your Jamb analogy is useless.

If you have been to the same poor educational institutions as the 95%, have access to the same incompetent resources as the 95% and doing exactly the same studying pattern as the 95% are doing, then you are likely to end up like the 95%.

You will have to do something different from the train wreck of the 95% (e.g. go to a top private school where they train you on Jamb) or just be lucky the topics you focused on and studied came out in 75% of questions.

Nothing you have said you have done has proven you are doing something different. As a matter of fact, you are at the worst end of the spectrum based on saying you knew a woman after just ONE date (i.e. like someone in the spectrum going to Jakande Primary school, Jakande Secondary school, Jakande University). I can guarantee you even some women here that love your "real manliness" and enjoy your "chivalry in defending their rights to milk" shuddered and were peeping through the fingers in horror at that statement.

Sagamite:

My GOD!



This man, you logical reasoning na gba oooooooooooooooo!

My God! Baba mi! Oba lo ke! Olugbala! Baba Jesu! Oga Mohammed! Oba awon oba Ifa!

What the bleep has car insurance got to do with surviving an accident? What has health insurance got to do with surviving disease? 

Fck me lawd! Fck me triple times!

Insurance is suppose to compensate you financially, not prevent you from harm.

Driving around and saying you need no insurance still leaves you susceptible to the same harm but only that that comes with severe financial loss.

You and logic are like oil and water. 

Then don't say Winners do not concern themselves with losing.

They do!

And still plan and prepare for winning.

Lets apply it to the topic here: Sign a prenup and still plan and prepare for a successful marriage. You get the point?

Refer back to philosophy 101 above.

TV01:

Dude, the 5%ers are the good ones 0!

TV01:

Story! which one has an absolute guarantee of getting there at all, let alone within 6 hours? Plus the second chap should have gotten a pre-booked, off-peak train ticket .

However they go - the risks are still present. Getting there late, not getting there at all, or not going anywhere ever again are still risks they both face.
Traffic holdups, accidents, inclement weather, illness en-route, other rogue drivers, corrupt cops, terrorists, ad infinitum.

I am not against mitigating risk and "exerting control", but the best laid plans. Nuff' said.

TV01:

So what then? Change will surely come - and for both of you. Some control? Institutional and individual interference in your home can be limited. Whilst I believe the law can be limited in its effect now, who knows what they'll be like in even the near future?

I still hold that getting oneself right and finding the right person and then building a solid foundation is the way to go. Immediately you introduce the prenup, you are screaming "I don't trust you". Seeding a suspicious air that will never go away. You are saying "regardless of our vows" I have to look out for myself. Or will you present it as in her best interest. It's no guarantee and itat best weakens the foundation.

No matter how you couch it, your insistence on prenups and the inevitable change by women (for the worse), has an air of cynicism and inevitability about it In which case surely logic should dictate that it's not really viable?

TV01:

So let me get this right, you prepare for a successful marriage by first preparing for a successful divorce?

Being a full-time mother is as worthy a choice as any. If the numbers work out and the circumstances are condusive, I'd love us to have that choice. Couples should discuss the merits and demerits and contingency around this option - if available - even before marriage.

Don't marry a fool or someone you consider to be one.

TV01:

Neither has an absolute guarantee. Both are still subject to chance and extemporaneous factors outside their control.

TV01:

It doesn't necessarily have to be different, just better and more thorough. Apple have competition in every respect, but they go about it that much better.

For the most part, I don't care what the women here think. For what it's worth, I consider most of them 95%ers (I will get away with that because, either 1. They will all consider themselves 5%ers or 2. They will form "even if I'm a 1%er sef, I no send TV !)

True manliness is knowing that both genders and society are ultimately best served by harmonious non-abusive relationships and actively seeking to model, promote and effect them. Regardless of the forces that are arrayed against you.

Jakande tried now !

TV01:

No absolute guarantees. No risk free propositions. No total control. Accept that and work it like it's all or nothing.


If you find someone before the end of the year, summer nuptials in 2013 would certainly be viable.

Best
TV

^{Come, was that you I just saw on Rye lane haggling with one Indian shopkeeper like that over the price of puna yam?}

Kutey:

Ehrm ,  TV01 remember the phrase: "Never argue with an 1diot , they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"