She is very silly. How can she agree to 50/50 when her husband earns 3x what she earns? UK feminists no dey use their brain ni

If you earn more than your husband, agree to 50/50 but if he earns more than you, then operate a joint account in the name of love.

Tim, pls tell this dull feminist to take several seats abeg...what's the advantage of marrying upwards if she can't harness the opportunities.

Kimoni:
She is very silly. How can she agree to 50/50 when her husband earns 3x what she earns? UK feminists no dey use their brain ni

If you earn more than your husband, agree to 50/50 but if he earns more than you, then operate a joint account in the name of love.

Tim, pls tell this dull feminist to take several seats abeg...what's the advantage of marrying upwards if she can't harness the opportunities.

Should she be looking to benefit from marrying upward when she is a feminist that believes in equality.

You cant be a feminist, believe in equality and seek to benefit from marrying up. Benefiting from marrying up is playing like the illiterate unenlightened women were doing 400yrs ago

Which feminist that is preaching liberation from the schakles of men still wants to marry and get benefits from marrying a man, the oppressor

Timbuktou:
Thanks everybody for your responses.One more thing, though, I noticed user Peter Null state a couple of times that the 50-50 financial arrangement protects the guy's assets post-divorce. I think the rationale is, if he doesn't put up more than 50℅ of the finances for an item or expenditure, upon divorce the courts rule that that is the "life she's accustomed to" and as such he parts with nothing. Meaning if he had decided to spend more than the greed 50%, he would be required to part with assets upon divorce and even still pay alimony.


Our obodo oyibo peoples, TV01, Grams Tearoses, Raundeuter et al. Am I right in my interpretation or is there something I'm missing?

Crackhaus, another part that got me is when she became jealous of him playing with his chest hairs. . I'm eager to see our sistren's take on this.

While there are laws in place, Judges also make interpretations that favor them and are atimes unreasonable

If you buy an asset in marriage for $20,000 Man pays 10k, woman pays 10k (which was Franco's model)

If the asset devalues to 10K after divorce they sell and both split 5k or appreciates to 30K and post divorce they sell and split 15k each. That makes logic and common sense and its the rational way

Now look if they buy asset of 20K man pays 15K woman pays 5K.

It devalues to 10k should they share the proceed equally like most divorce courts advocate? 5k-5k (Which would mean the woman gets all she invested plus the benefit she gained from the asset, while the man would lose 10K)

If the asset appreciate to 30K and split 50-50 meaning 15k each the woman would have made 10k profit while the man made nothing

Sensible would be to split the proceeds in 75-25% ratio of the proceeds

Kimoni:
She is very silly. How can she agree to 50/50 when her husband earns 3x what she earns? UK feminists no dey use their brain ni

If you earn more than your husband, agree to 50/50 but if he earns more than you, then operate a joint account in the name of love.

Tim, pls tell this dull feminist to take several seats abeg...what's the advantage of marrying upwards if she can't harness the opportunities.

She agreed because she's a feminist na. She obviously hoped he'd be mushy enough to deviate from the equality policy. She was wrong.

Lol. You're just a bloody scammer.

She wants to marry upward and be forming Queen of the Coast. Meanwhile, Franco is a mean ass mofo like myself who knows his worth. He no dey look Uche face.

Raumdeuter, in essence, Franco knew exactly what he was doing. He wasn't going to expose himself and get a surprise if his wife got silly and initiated a divorce.

crackhaus:

Lol, these classes will definitely come in handy...maybe Mindfulness can help with that.

Their criticisms for the guy is borne purely from sentiments. Oh that guy is so insensitive and a total jerk, bla bla bla...

Well if a woman is going to be a jerk by using feminism and equality as her go-to-weapon when demanding equal partnership in the cooking/cleaning, then a man can also be a jerk by using equality as his go-to-weapon when it comes to finances.

In equality, there's no such thing as women should be treated with dignity and consideration when men can't also be treated with same dignity and respect.

She's a Queen, guess what? He's a king.
She's deserves the Princess treatment, guess what? He deserves the Prince treatment.
EQUALITY!

Princesses don't buy their own cars or pay for their own gifts? Well, guess what? A prince doesn't wash his own clothes/plates or cook his own food.
This is dignity and respect all round, everybody wins.

I told ya. You are the feminist.
After this post you can't deny it.

When she is the Queen, he is the King with all things being equal fair.

raumdeuter:


Should she be looking to benefit from marrying upward when she is a feminist that believes in equality.

You cant be a feminist, believe in equality and seek to benefit from marrying up. Benefiting from marrying up is playing like the illiterate unenlightened women were doing 400yrs ago

Which feminist that is preaching liberation from the schakles of men still wants to marry and get benefits from marrying a man, the oppressor

Contradiction is the nature of man woman

raumdeuter:


Should she be looking to benefit from marrying upward when she is a feminist that believes in equality.

Equality in finances - easy to achieve.
Equality in non-monetary things - how is that achievable?

We both pay a surrogate to carry our babies?
Pay for life cooks, cleaners, nannies, drivers etc

Or is there a way these tasks can be shared equally too? She allowed herself to be scammed Jor

You cant be a feminist, believe in equality and seek to benefit from marrying up. Benefiting from marrying up is playing like the illiterate unenlightened women were doing 400yrs ago

Which feminist that is preaching liberation from the schakles of men still wants to marry and get benefits from marrying a man, the oppressor

illiterate, schakles, liberation - strange words to moi

if she marries upward and still ends up in "debt", she needs help.
Why would I be looking for something in Malaysia when it's right under my nose and mine for the taking?

So, Kimoni, she was scammed by feminism?

Timbuktou:


She agreed because she's a feminist na. She obviously hoped he'd be mushy enough to deviate from the equality policy. She was wrong.

Lol. You're just a bloody scammer.

She wants to marry upward and be forming Queen of the Coast. Meanwhile, Franco is a mean ass mofo like myself who knows his worth. He no dey look Uche face.

The man is a bloody scammer. You know the way you deal with a stubborn child - use "ogbon agba" for him and he goes away thinking he got the upper hand.

lol@mean ass mofo - na una dey easy to scam pass sef. Just form one yeye humility and be codedly scamming the daylight outta you

Timbuktou:
So, Kimoni, she was scammed by feminism?

No, by Franco. She didn't apply wisdom to her feminism

Let her come and learn in Naija

Timbuktou:
Thanks everybody for your responses.

One more thing, though, I noticed user Peter Null state a couple of times that the 50-50 financial arrangement protects the guy's assets post-divorce. I think the rationale is, if he doesn't put up more than 50℅ of the finances for an item or expenditure, upon divorce the courts rule that that is the "life she's accustomed to" and as such he parts with nothing. Meaning if he had decided to spend more than the greed 50%, he would be required to part with assets upon divorce and even still pay alimony.


Our obodo oyibo peoples, TV01, Grams Tearoses, Raundeuter et al. Am I right in my interpretation or is there something I'm missing?

Crackhaus, another part that got me is when she became jealous of him playing with his chest hairs. . I'm eager to see our sistren's take on this.

I suppose it's a ploy worth considering if the prospect of divorce is real or something one fears? But if anything it would only serve to undermine the marriage and precipitate the very thing you fear Why not simply refrain from marriage?

Many women will agree to co-habbing, and more so feminists, who always have a point to prove . Although in many western nations, laws are being put on place around -"de-facto" relationships, which effectively give legal rights to co-habbees. Make her get her own place !

No escape really, even with the best of ploys, once you are legally married (or in a de-facto relationship where recognised) the system/judge has a wide scope, and an array of tools to deal harshly with the man/husband. Amplified if there are children involved.

Don't marry a feminist - pseudo-internet-feminists are usually manageable - or like Franco, marry a dumb one . Though many of us would consider the term "dumb feminist" a tautology , making this sentence a non-sequitur .


TV

Kimoni:


Equality in finances - easy to achieve.
Equality in non-monetary things - how is that achievable?

We both pay a surrogate to carry our babies?
Pay for life cooks, cleaners, nannies, drivers etc

Or is there a way these tasks can be shared equally too? She allowed herself to be scammed Jor

illiterate, schakles, liberation - strange words to moi

if she marries upward and still ends up in "debt", she needs help.
Why would I be looking for something in Malaysia when it's right under my nose and mine for the taking?

Yes she can tell him they should share expenses for all things too including maids and surrogates cooks and drivers

UNLESS either party on their free will choose to do these tasks.

E.g if a woman insists on having her own children naturally without surrogates then she cannot turn around later and ask to be compensated for doing what she wanted.

If it was the man who insisted she should get pregnant them she can insist on compensation.

Why would a feminist marry upward or even if she did why would she seek to be compensated and get unequal benefit against her equality beliefs

Kimoni:

No, by Franco. She didn't apply wisdom to her feminism
Let her come and learn in Naija

What's she learning in Nigeria. Isn't the general belief that Nigeria is very suppressive to feminists ideas

Her feminism would be better nurtured in environments like the one she is where couples split bills down the middle and other responsibilities

Kimoni, you're right to an extent about people like me being easy to scam. I used to tell my ex that all the time, but the Ijebu-Egba in her had to be confrontational at the drop of a hat . Anyway, my game has evolved to being the gentle one. I let you think you're dealing with a fool and then when I've studied the woman who thinks she has all the power, I make my decision to stay or continue. So far, none has passed, save one who failed on account of poor hygiene. I went visiting and I was dazed with a repugnant odour from her apartment. I couldn't stay 5minutes. But at this age, I'm not trying to change any woman. Just do you, I'll do me and God will crown our efforts. . But, I digress.

Still, I disagree that Franco scammed Vanessa. Don't forget, she pressed for marriage and the 50-50 arrangement was Franco's condition for getting married. He was perfectly content with sipping the milk for free. The marriage was for her, which makes me question all this "I don't need a man/marriage to make me happy" that feminists continually spout. Me, I dont even know again sef.

TV01:
I suppose it's a ploy worth considering if the prospect of divorce is real or something one fears? But if anything it would only serve to undermine the marriage and precipitate the very thing you fear Why not simply refrain from marriage?

Many women will agree to co-habbing, and more so feminists, who always have a point to prove . Although in many western nations, laws are being put on place around -"de-facto" relationships, which effectively give legal rights to co-habbees. Make her get her own place !

No escape really, even with the best of ploys, once you are legally married (or in a de-facto relationship where recognised) the system/judge has a wide scope, and an array of tools to deal harshly with the man/husband. Amplified if there are children involved.

Don't marry a feminist - pseudo-internet-feminists are usually manageable - or like Franco, marry a dumb one . Though many of us would consider the term "dumb feminist" a tautology , making this sentence a non-sequitur .


TV

TV, marriage is a mess right now. Everybody wants to go in safe. Women have been wailing about how bad theyve had it and have sought to improve their situation. Men are catching up with the game now and are also taking steps to protect themselves. It's always going to be lose-lose unless each party goes in with the other person's in in mind.

Why go into marriage when there is a super high chance that it could leave me much worse off than before I got in?

These scenarios will increase until there is common sense applied to the institution, I'm afraid.

bukatyne:
@Timbuktou:

I have read the story

AND

The wife was foolish for the following:

1. Not discerning the kind of man she dated for 7 years
2. Saying yes when he brought that stupid idea.

I see no where he mentioned splitting of chores or housekeeping so I want to assume the wife handled most of it. I see many that serves her 'right' as a feminist so I know it is all about that.

Yes, I and many others think it serves her right for bringing her feministic views to her marriage. As we saw in the story, it kills intimacy amongst many things.

You seem to suggest Franco is a bad person, I disagree. He presented his conditions for getting married to her, a marriage she initiated. That was the only reason he would have got married to her and she gladly accepted, probably thinking he would be more generous post-wedding. Sorry, I disgaree, Franco's idea wasn't stupid. If she wanted more from him she should have stated such from the beginning. It seemed all she wanted was to be called Mrs., I have the feeling she's Nigerian . If anything, she should be blamed for her desperation. Why was she desperate though? That's the question that needs answering. It's also obvious she likes to date men with means , or maybe that's just a coincidence.


PS: Do you mind answering here?

Timbuktou:


TV, marriage is a mess right now. Everybody wants to go in safe. Women have been wailing about how bad theyve had it and have sought to improve their situation. Men are catching up with the game now and are also taking steps to protect themselves. It's always going to be lose-lose unless each party goes in with the other person's in in mind.

Why go into marriage when there is a super high chance that it could leave me much worse off than before I got in?

These scenarios will increase until there is common sense applied to the institution, I'm afraid.

I would rather say the "perception of marriage", along with how people view and embrace it. Marriage in it's original form still does exactly what it says on the tin. And even though I speak as one who subscribes to the Christian form, many traditional variations were not to far off that.

One can't allow wrong perception & practices at a societal level to overly impact their individual union. The rebuilding job will have to come from wise and understanding individuals revisiting, understanding and successfully applying the blueprint.

I would say feminist notions are perhaps the biggest anti-marriage factor at present. And it's not just affecting marriage - it's society wide. Conceptually, feminism demands that men and women be seen as and treated as equals in every respect and, even ensure outcomes are the same. To achieve that, there has to be serious re-engineering of on many levels. Legally, culturally and even biologically.

That's why we are discussing children not needing mothers, or reducing relationships to monetary transactions. It's simply not possible or even desirable. The essence of male/female differentiation is the sum is greater than the whole. This is embedded in our complimentarity. If we are the same, then we don't really need each other. One cannot even discuss difference without being labelled.

Individually, men and women should de-risk their unions by setting a solid foundation. All of which requisite elements we have discussed on here.

I remain an advocate for marriage in it's essence- not the kind of relationship that Franco and Vanessa had, which is way different, even if badged the same.


TV

Sorry posted on the wrong thread

bukatyne:
Funny story
This is what you get when you don't allow the man to lead therefore you don't enjoy the warmth & security that that avails.

She also wasn't clever enough to see that the 50/50 model wasn't going to work in an ideal world.
She should have seen that coming
If they did have kids, would he have breastfed them 50% of the time?
or would he have woken up to feed the baby 50% of the time?....of course not

I think her brain was on vacation when she agreed to the 50% finance sharing
I guess she was so concerned about not letting the feminist side down that she didn't take time out to think things through properly.

My thoughts on the matter........
If you let the man be the man, you will be a "spoilt" and pampered wife

@ Tearoses:

I am curious...

How was the wife supposed to let the man be the man? Reject his 50/50 idea when he brought it up before marriage?

As per your first statement: What does it mean? let the man spend more?

Happy weekend
Im not sure which first statement you are referring to, but these are my thoughts about 50/50 in general when it comes to marriages especially.
It can never work!
Why?........ because relationships by their very nature are supposed to be flexible
Its not a business arrangement. Where you are governed by policies and processes.
Its a marriage. Where tenderness, love, empathy, care, passion, warmth, flexibility, service, companionship, happiness and the likes are supposed to be the backbone....not office politics.

You can not also quantify the worth of most things in a relationship. Infact its almost impossible to do so.
So in this case, unless they were earning exactly the same amount for the exact same type of job & working the same number of hours at the same location, it was a DOA before they even started and this is just regarding the finances.

Nothing was also mentioned about other aspects of the relationship for example who takes the rubbish out and who changes the bulbs
Then we get to other things such as how many Xmas presents do they buy the wifes side of the family and how many do they buy for the husbands side of the family
For example How many miles and how often do they travel to visit MIL (Husbands side) and how many miles to do they travel to visit MIL on the wife's side
Do they still apply the 50/50 logic for that too?

The man Franco was cleverer than her and she obviously didn't think things through properly, and like I said earlier, if you loose flexibility in a relationship, then its going to be hard graft for both of them.
On the other hand, there is a possibility that franco too didnt think it through and he just so happened to benefit more from this arrangement.

bukatyne:
Funny story

@ Tearoses:

I am curious...

How was the wife supposed to let the man be the man? Reject his 50/50 idea when he brought it up before marriage?

As per your first statement: What does it mean? let the man spend more?

She is a feminist
He already knew that since they were together for 7 years
For him to come up with the plan that they split finances 50/50, she would have already made it very clear in the past that that is the route that she was happy/expect to go down.

He bought up the silly idea and she only went for it because she was s femininst
I don't know why she is complaining though
Its not as if he forced her to marry him
He didnt move the goalpost
She did

TV01:

I would rather say the "perception of marriage", along with how people view and embrace it. Marriage in it's original form still does exactly what it says on the tin. And even though I speak as one who subscribes to the Christian form, many traditional variations were not to far off that.

One can't allow wrong perception & practices at a societal level to overly impact their individual union. The rebuilding job will have to come from wise and understanding individuals revisiting, understanding and successfully applying the blueprint.

I would say feminist notions are perhaps the biggest anti-marriage factor at present. And it's not just affecting marriage - it's society wide. Conceptually, feminism demands that men and women be seen as and treated as equals in every respect and, even ensure outcomes are the same. To achieve that, there has to be serious re-engineering of on many levels. Legally, culturally and even biologically.

That's why we are discussing children not needing mothers, or reducing relationships to monetary transactions. It's simply not possible or even desirable. The essence of male/female differentiation is the sum is greater than the whole. This is embedded in our complimentarity. If we are the same, then we don't really need each other. One cannot even discuss difference without being labelled.

Individually, men and women should de-risk their unions by setting a solid foundation. All of which requisite elements we have discussed on here.

I remain an advocate for marriage in it's essence- not the kind of relationship that Franco and Vanessa had, which is way different, even if badged the same.


TV

Thanks TV, for your eager readiness to distill wisdom and hope. I guess one can get jaded upon too much contact with negative forces.

To be honest, the search for a partner whose ideals are antifeminist are is a such a tool. And when one does find such ideological compatibility, other equally important forms of compatibility still have to be established. No be small work o.

The relationship in the article is such a sad one, with all the calculation and warrior-like protection if interests. It's not one in which I could cope. I guess the search goes on.

tearoses:


Its not as if he forced her to marry him

Interestingly, she pushed for marriage.

Timbuktou:


Now older and wiser, I know what partnership means for me. Ignacio and I are in harmony. At one point, Ignacio offered to help pay my debt to Franco, but I refused. It was not his mistake, nor is it his responsibility. Also, sending off that electronic payment every month helps me to remember my mistakes, and, to some degree, reinforce the love I have for Ignacio.


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/12/split-everything-marriage-money-debt-divorce

Here we go again

tearoses:


Here we go again

The woman likes men to pamper her but she never ready to submit. Ignacio is paying that money indirectly, he doesn't know it and she hasn't admitted it to herself yet.

Timbuktou:


The woman likes men to pamper her but she never ready to submit. Ignacio is paying that money indirectly, he doesn't know it and she hasn't admitted it to herself yet.

Ignacio wants to help her and has taken her problem as his problem and wants her to unburden it to him to deal with.
Again she wont let him be the man and she must fight for her right
Its not that she asked him for the money
He offered!!!!

How must it make him feel that his wife is paying her ex husband a 10 year loan
10 Years!!!
He wants it done and dusted, but she wont let him.....Pride? stubbornness?
I dont understand the babe

Timbuktou:


Thanks TV, for your eager readiness to distill wisdom and hope. I guess one can get jaded upon too much contact with negative forces.

To be honest, the search for a partner whose ideals are antifeminist are is a such a tool. And when one does find such ideological compatibility, other equally important forms of compatibility still have to be established. No be small work o.

The relationship in the article is such a sad one, with all the calculation and warrior-like protection if interests. It's not one in which I could cope. I guess the search goes on.

I thought you were married.

Timbuktou:
Thanks TV, for your eager readiness to distill wisdom and hope. I guess one can get jaded upon too much contact with negative forces.

To be honest, the search for a partner whose ideals are antifeminist are is a such a tool. And when one does find such ideological compatibility, other equally important forms of compatibility still have to be established. No be small work o.

The relationship in the article is such a sad one, with all the calculation and warrior-like protection if interests. It's not one in which I could cope. I guess the search goes on.

I went through to be married, but I married well, and I'm very happy, smugly happy in fact. I wouldn't want anyone to go through as I did, let alone go through and then not be happy - for what, what for

Knowing what you want in a home, and ergo in a wife is a great start, along with being "that husband". Forget the "noise", you will undoubtedly hear around you. That is a result of their choices. Make yours. Don't lose hope, don't settle, don't get jaded.

Even when it's at the forefront of your consciousness, it can come unexpectedly and in a way you didn't envision or plan. So don't obsess, and don't be overly rigid.


The supposed "pay gap" issue came up when wifey and I were watching some program together. I just loosed a few arrows . It was very brief, and left here looking at me with corner-corner eye .

Two points from that vignette: I've had the same discussion with a handful of men from the birthing group we attended for our daughter - we sometimes meet as couples or sex-segregated. Some of the men bought into it, others admitted they couldn't argue it at home !

Second, if she has the faintest of feminist notions in her head, as long as she is a wife from the heart as I expect, do I really care? That is the real crux of Vanessa' problem.

In her head, ideologically she wanted to be an equal, in her heart, practically, she desired to be treated as a woman/wife. Classic disconnect. She let her head overrule her heart to her detriment, as many do/will.

Find one, even if not perfect , that is savvy enough to know the difference and act accordingly, whatever she spouts. Often it's just rhetoric to make them feel somehow


TV

tearoses:

I thought you were married.

Sadly, not. I tried to be but it didn't work out quite as I planned.

tearoses:

Ignacio wants to help her and has taken her problem as his problem and wants her to unburden it to him to deal with.
Again she wont let him be the man and she must fight for her right
Its not that she asked him for the money
He offered!!!!
How must it make him feel that his wife is paying her ex husband a 10 year loan
10 Years!!!
He wants it done and dusted, but she wont let him.....Pride? stubbornness?
I dont understand the babe

Ah, I get you now. She's confused by feminism. Just like TV said, she wants to be pampered like a woman but her feminism is getting in the way and she doesn't quite know how to be happy, even though, she left to pursue the further meant of her interests.

I mean she's literally rejecting the very generosity she divorced Franco for not showing to her. Or maybe it's just an ego thing for her, sh didn't really want Franco's money just him offering it. Maybe, so she could say with conviction that she rejected it as a confam feminist.

Timbuktou:

Sadly, not. I tried to be but it didn't work out quite as I planned.

Awwww
So sorry about that
My prayer for you is that out of the billions out there, He Himself will provide you with your own special Miss Right and not only that, but you will also be her own special Mr RIght

Timbuktou:

Ah, I get you now. She's confused by feminism. Just like TV said, she wants to be pampered like a woman but her feminism is getting in the way and she doesn't quite know how to be happy, even though, she left to pursue the further meant of her interests.

I mean she's literally rejecting the very generosity she divorced Franco for not showing to her. Or maybe it's just an ego thing for her, sh didn't really want Franco's money just him offering it. Maybe, so she could say with conviction that she rejected it as a confam feminist.

The truth is that feminism does not appeal to many men (from what ive read anyway)
Therefore she may not see the best side of the man
I think that's what happened with Franco
Men generally speaking have a soft side when it comes to women and children
I see it everyday with doors being opened for me and waved to go first in a queue
but when you go head to head with them then you see the other side
Franco could afford to buy his wife a car and most probably would have done so under different circumstance
Thats what most men would have done
Ive never heard of a man loaning his wife money to buy a car

tearoses:


Awwww
So sorry about that
My prayer for you is that out of the billions out there, He Himself will provide you with your own special Miss Right and not only that, but you will also be her own special Mr RIght

Amin. Amin. Amin. Loruko Jesu.
Hallelujah x7
Eseun Iya was.
Ase ti gun.

The truth is that feminism does not appeal to many men (from what ive read anyway)
Therefore she may not see the best side of the man
I think that's what happened with Franco
Men generally speaking have a soft side when it comes to women and children
I see it everyday with doors being opened for me and waved to go first in a queue
but when you go head to head with them then you see the other side
Franco could afford to buy his wife a car and most probably would have done so under different circumstance
Thats what most men would have done
Ive never heard of a man loaning his wife money to buy a car

This is the conclusion of the whole matter. You couldn't have put it better. That's why you're my special Grandma.

Please, enjoy the rest of your weekend.

Like I always say, you can't be broke and be a feminist. Pick a struggle

The woman is quite frankly confused for lack of a better word

I always tell women. Leave this feminism megedefegede in your place of work. Don't carry it to your husband's house. Most of your so-called champions for this struggle are loving and submissive wives at home.

@bukatyne
I always chuckle when you women bring up the housechore/housekeeping line. Is it housechores
1) That can be paid for
2) That some men can actually do and participate in when they have the time
3) That a lot of women nowadays are actually pretty bad at

Lol that last part in particular because there are so many women out there that are very lazy in that aspect. Even aje pako ones that one would ordinarily expect to be decent at it from my experience are just as bad as babes from rich homes.