2buffagain:


Firstly: We would be taking care of each other financially.
Secondly: No man worth his salt will need to "pay" a woman for her to be hygenic.
It just means she isn't ready to get chosen.

no woman worth her salt will meet and obviously exceed his taste in women and still take care of him financially...com'on now?! She doesn't have to depend on you but you still have to do the man thing...how can she cater to you and still Jack up her ass to take care of you financially?

BlaqCoffee109:
no woman worth her salt will meet and obviously exceed his taste in women and still take care of him financially...com'on now?! She doesn't have to depend on you but you still have to do the man thing...how can she cater to you and still Jack up her ass to take care of you financially?

The Nigerian in you seems incapable of thinking outside the scope of binary thinking.

Your subtle use of language depicts you are trying to inject a very binary perspective about women and their money that has been proven to be illogical.
Here is the more direct translation of your language: The woman putting her money down to invest in the relationship, like the man is doing, automatically means the man is totally dependent on her. Both can only be 100% dependent on the other. The concept of interdependency is incomprehensible.

So in your brain:
- It is only the man that should buy gifts for the woman or take her out to eat?
- The woman (who makes her own paper) should never contribute financially to things in play?
- A woman in a serious relationship with a man must put ALL her financial needs on the man's head and not be able to stand on her own because Man has come....talkless of now even investing her money just as well in said relationship.



That's the height of narcissism and entitlement, and is exactly the kind of mindset I look for in a woman before disqualifying her.

2buffagain:


The Nigerian in you seems incapable of thinking outside the scope of binary thinking.

So let me get this straight: In your world, it is only the man that should buy gifts for the woman and take her out to eat correct?
The woman (who makes her own paper) should never contribute financially to things in play?

ok, ok...this is hilarious! This has nothing to do with being Nigerian, trust me on that. Talk on being materialistic, the Nigerian woman is below par with her fellow women else where in the world...a Nigerian woman can marry you
..stick her neck for you...even cover you with her own money just to massage your already over bloated ego as the "man" that emphasized, there are a number of things men want and there are peculiarities in need. A couple of days ago, I had a similar conversation with a man...a fulfilled man on all standard and he goes...all he needs is a loyal woman, a subservient woman! In his case,he does not need a woman to bundle 50/50 with him financially as a man of his status that could pose as an affront...a woman robbing shoulder with him financially ( of course he is wealthy) ...now that is beyond buying this or that gift for him or taking him out for dinner...for a normal 9ja man with real dough though he will respect that but it will be nothing short of amusing to him...push that further, it may pose a terrible risk in the relationship...then the woman will be termed a usurper or arrogant ...not submissive etc...so my dear this goes beyond buying gifts,dinner dates and all

BlaqCoffee109:
ok, ok...this is hilarious! This has nothing to do with being Nigerian, trust me on that. Talk on being materialistic, the Nigerian woman is below par with her fellow women else where in the world...a Nigerian woman can marry you
..stick her neck for you...even cover you with her own money just to massage your already over bloated ego as the "man" that emphasized, there are a number of things men want and there are peculiarities in need. A couple of days ago, I had a similar conversation with a man...a fulfilled man on all standard and he goes...all he needs is a loyal woman, a subservient woman! In his case,he does not need a woman to bundle 50/50 with him financially as a man of his status that could pose as an affront...a woman robbing shoulder with him financially ( of course he is wealthy) ...now that is beyond buying this or that gift for him or taking him out for dinner...for a normal 9ja man with real dough though he will respect that but it will be nothing short of amusing to him...push that further, it may pose a terrible risk in the relationship...then the woman will be termed a usurper or arrogant ...not submissive etc...so my dear this goes beyond buying gifts,dinner dates and all

I don't have a bloated ego. My wife can pay for whatever in the union and it won't affect my ego one bit.
A man with an ego so fragile that he needs to keep up with appearances of being "The ATM of the relationship" cannot marry a confident ambituous woman who, for example, is the CFO of a fortune 500 company.

Taking your mind to automatically think of 50/50...and limiting it to money... is just another way of binary thinking.
50/50 in a grander sense of contributions sure, but from experience, monetary contributions can be any combination of sum100 percentages.

So your statement, again, is that a woman who pays for some things in the union will undoubtedly go cheat outside and be rude to her partner?

I don't know where you get your data or experience from.
That kind of woman will cheat or be rude whether or not she is financially catered to 100%.
You are talking about an "attitude", not a condition. The attitude is independent of the condition.

2buffagain:


The Nigerian in you seems incapable of thinking outside the scope of binary thinking.

Your subtle use of language depicts you are trying to inject a very binary perspective about women and their money that has been proven to be illogical.
Here is the more direct translation of your language: The woman putting her money down to invest in the relationship, like the man is doing, automatically means the man is totally dependent on her. Both can only be 100% dependent on the other. The concept of interdependency is incomprehensible.

So in your brain:
- It is only the man that should buy gifts for the woman or take her out to eat?
- The woman (who makes her own paper) should never contribute financially to things in play?
- A woman in a serious relationship with a man must put ALL her financial needs on the man's head and not be able to stand on her own because Man has come....talkless of now even investing her money just as well in said relationship.



That's the height of narcissism and entitlement, and is exactly the kind of mindset I look for in a woman before disqualifying her.

...that is quite prejudiced and a terrible presumption on your part. Now investing financially in a relationship is a natural thing to do...it comes naturally. Be that as it may, no 2 persons in a relationship can be on equal financial footing...the point is the will to do. A man may earn not so much as the woman but he takes it upon himself to do certain things because that is his responsibility...the woman on her part may encourage her man in wisdom but contributing to the financial well being of the relationship without emasculating her man. On the flip side a man may be doing better financially and his woman be broke but out of love and appreciation for her man may save up and buy him his favorite designer watch... you see it is give and take and nothing is ever cast in stone especially if you find a person that embodies what you need in a partner. Now it is a totally different ball game for those that are status conscious.

2buffagain:


I don't have a bloated ego. My wife can pay for whatever in the union and it won't affect my ego one bit.
A man with an ego so fragile that he needs to keep up with appearances of being "The ATM of the relationship" cannot marry a confident ambituous woman who, for example, is the CFO of a fortune 500 company.

Taking your mind to automatically think of 50/50...and limiting it to money... is just another way of binary thinking.
50/50 in a grander sense of contributions sure, but from experience, monetary contributions can be any combination of sum100 percentages.

So your statement, again, is that a woman who pays for some things in the union will undoubtedly go suck dick outside and be rude to her partner?

I don't know where you get your data or experience from.
That kind of woman will cheat or be rude whether or not she is financially catered to 100%.
You are talking about an "attitude", not a condition. The attitude is independent of the condition.

in your earlier summation you narrowed it to finance...where you asked if it's only the man to buy gift or invest in the relationship and the woman totally dependent on the man without contributing anything like buying him gifts or taking him out to eat? @ the bolded, what are you on about?
2buffagain, this is just your opinion, you have no clue what it means to be an ambitious strong woman in a society as ours...

BlaqCoffee109:
in your earlier summation you narrowed it to finance...where you asked if it's only the man to buy gift or invest in the relationship and the woman totally dependent on the man without contributing anything like buying him gifts or taking him out to eat? @ the bolded, what are you on about?
2buffagain, this is just your opinion, you have no clue what it means to be an ambitious strong woman in a society as ours...

I don't think you are logically following your argument.

YOU made the subjective claim that a man basically has to totally cater to a woman's finances or she will have a bad attitude:

...A couple of days ago, I had a similar conversation with a man...a fulfilled man on all standard and he goes...all he needs is a loyal woman, a subservient woman! In his case,he does not need a woman to bundle 50/50 with him financially as a man of his status that could pose as an affront...a woman robbing shoulder with him financially ( of course he is wealthy) ...now that is beyond buying this or that gift for him or taking him out for dinner...for a normal 9ja man with real dough though he will respect that but it will be nothing short of amusing to him...push that further, it may pose a terrible risk in the relationship...then the woman will be termed a usurper or arrogant ...not submissive etc...

after reading what you wrote, read my post again.

If you are trying to say I am changing mouth, I have been clear from day one that she has to either bring resources OR resource generating/management skills to the union. This inferes that percentages apply here, because she can also have resources AND skills, all of which simply make the relationship sweeter.

MY opinion? YOU are the one making the point that a woman who contributes financialy will be rude and cheat.
That's on YOU not me. You are arguing like a woman at this point. Your thoughts are unstructured. Can you just make an argument and defend it(or yield) without trying to make it look like someone else (me) made it? This is all on text.

All this one is long story. The long and short of everything is I don't cater to female financial parasites. She has to be willing to contribute to things. If it doesn't come natural to her, then I simply see her as one of those girls who want to marry so she won't have to hussle or be useful to herself....which is a massive turn-off to me.

2buffagain:


I don't think you are logically following our argument.

YOU made the claim that a man basically has to totally cater to a woman's finances or she will have a bad attitude:


after reading what you wrote, read my post again.

oh brother (palm on face)! I need you to get the import of all I tried to make you understand...You want a 50/50 power couple relationship and stated if you are dating a broke woman she should at least keep clean,Yes? I further stated if she meeting you half way by catering to your needs ...you might as well meet her half way if she is broke at least to take care of the financial aspect of the relationship...you went on to say that was the Nigerianess in me speaking...I tried to make you understand that their are a number of factors to it and you being just one man with you peculiarities can never be one size fits all...you go further to allude that I somewhat suggested thean takes care of her financially or she go misbehave...now where was it @ the bolded was inferred?

2buffagain:


I don't think you are logically following your argument.

YOU made the subjective claim that a man basically has to totally cater to a woman's finances or she will have a bad attitude:


after reading what you wrote, read my post again.

If you are trying to say I am changing mouth, I have been clear from day one that she has to either bring resources OR resource generating/management skills to the union. This inferes that percentages apply here, because she can also have resources AND skills, all of which simply make the relationship sweeter.


All this one is long story. The long and short of everything is I don't cater to female financial parasites. She has to be willing to contribute to things. If it doesn't come natural to her, then I simply see her as one of those girls who want to marry so she won't have to hussle or be useful to herself....which is a massive turn-off to me.

@ the bolded...but of course! Neither should a female cater to a male parasite or man-LovePeddler! Any reasonable person wants to be an added value to themselve and society...adding value to the life of whomever one is in a relationship with much more your personal life shouldn't be much of a big deal

BlaqCoffee109:
oh brother (palm on face)! I need you to get the import of all I tried to make you understand...You want a 50/50 power couple relationship and stated if you are dating a broke woman she should at least keep clean,Yes? I further stated if she meeting you half way by catering to your needs ...you might as well meet her half way if she is broke at least to take care of the financial aspect of the relationship...you went on to say that was the Nigerianess in me speaking...I tried to make you understand that their are a number of factors to it and you being just one man with you peculiarities can never be one size fits all...you go further to allude that I somewhat suggested thean takes care of her financially or she go misbehave...now where was it @ the bolded was inferred?

Sis, I think you are distracted and may not be comprehending what you are reading (or writing)...

Firstly:
How is her having good hygiene "catering to my needs"?
Good hygiene is required whether or not she is broke.
Abi is good hygiene now seen as something a man should pay for (as being her contribution to the relationship) in Nigeria? You are something else! That is the same kind of entitled me-me mindset that tries to put value of sex as something she should receive renumeration for in said relationship as if she isn't enjoying it too.

Secondly: Let's summarize this:

- I have standards in what I look for in a woman, like every man should and like every woman already does. One of such standards is the example I gave of her needing to be shaved or trimmed when we get intimate for the most part. (From experience: there are several solid women who prefer to keep things shaved and fresh down there...they don't need to be broke like some one here has been trying to binarily inferr.).

- If she is broke, she must have proven useful skills...professional skills that I or some future employer can use (e.g if she is between jobs). She can't just come and park her life problems on my head because she has a vagina. I don't play that. But this is a bottom of the barrel situation and likely not to be picked because, if she is THAT broke we cannot determine the next constraint...

- If in a relationship with a female, I will be looking to see how she reasons about money. Does she fall under the mindset cult of "My money is my money, his money is our money"? If so, that is a disqualification. No be only me waka come this relationship thing.

- If she is not a match, she should be freed to go find her match. A match is not a one-way thing. Both people must have their hard requirements met....not just the woman.


Everything else you have added to this argument of yours has started to confuse you.

BlaqCoffee109:
@ the bolded...but of course! Neither should a female cater to a male parasite or man-LovePeddler! Any reasonable person wants to be an added value to themselve and society...adding value to the life of whomever one is in a relationship with much more your personal life shouldn't be much of a big deal

So what exactly is your argument about?

Is this just your way of yielding? Because through out, your argument has mostly been about "why a man should financially cater to a broke girl who isn't all that useful".

BlaqCoffee109:
oh brother (palm on face)! I need you to get the import of all I tried to make you understand...You want a 50/50 power couple relationship and stated if you are dating a broke woman she should at least keep clean,Yes? I further stated if she meeting you half way by catering to your needs ...you might as well meet her half way if she is broke at least to take care of the financial aspect of the relationship...you went on to say that was the Nigerianess in me speaking...I tried to make you understand that their are a number of factors to it and you being just one man with you peculiarities can never be one size fits all...you go further to allude that I somewhat suggested thean takes care of her financially or she go misbehave...now where was it @ the bolded was inferred?

You are no longer arguing along the lines of logic, but just arguing because you want to.

Why don't you read that post again, where I quote what YOU were saying about women, financial contribution, and rudeness. You are trying to reflect your own bad argument on me...which you did because you came to your senses and realized your argument was terrible.

My advice to your major perspective: When a woman puts her money down for something she is not supporting the man, she is contributing to things. Parasitic females need to understand this difference clearly.

I think it's safe to say we are going to have to agree to disagree on... whatever it is you've been arguing here.

You get positioned by the way you position yourself when i don't come life only because of girls
No girl fit do me shakara or wash me cos me too i dey do the two thing
Wonder how i don't just give bleep some of those girls always say this guy sha you different oh

2buffagain:


Sis, I think you are distracted and may not be comprehending what you are reading (or writing)...

Firstly:
How is her having good hygiene "catering to my needs"?
Good hygiene is required whether or not she is broke.
Abi is good hygiene now seen as something a man should pay for (as being her contribution to the relationship) in Nigeria? You are something else! That is the same kind of entitled me-me mindset that tries to put value of sex as something she should receive renumeration for in said relationship as if she isn't enjoying it too.

Secondly: Let's summarize this:

- I have standards in what I look for in a woman, like every man should and like every woman already does. One of such standards is the example I gave of her needing to be shaved or trimmed when we get intimate for the most part. (From experience: there are several solid women who prefer to keep things shaved and fresh down there...they don't need to be broke like some one here has been trying to binarily inferr.).

- If she is broke, she must have proven useful skills...professional skills that I or some future employer can use (e.g if she is between jobs). She can't just come and park her life problems on my head because she has a vagina. I don't play that. But this is a bottom of the barrel situation and likely not to be picked because, if she is THAT broke we cannot determine the next constraint...

- If in a relationship with a female, I will be looking to see how she reasons about money. Does she fall under the mindset cult of "My money is my money, his money is our money"? If so, that is a disqualification. No be only me waka come this relationship thing.

- If she is not a match, she should be freed to go find her match. A match is not a one-way thing. Both people must have their hard requirements met....not just the woman.


Everything else you have added to this argument of yours has started to confuse you.

ok, I have tried not to be quick witted and infact I have been polite and tried to lead you from the narrow mindset of yours because reality is most often with all our hard and fast rules, we sometimes have to make compromise... adjustments if I might say...that is life and what every mature and experienced person would understand ( not that you shouldn't have and keep your little book of standards and all; boy you wouldn't even know how much of it is a distate to me to just have any Tom Dick or Harry hitting on a girl because he is male and I am female...every reasonable self respecting person should have their type!)...that stated you summised early as one not limited to your hard and fast rules non-negotiable,she must be shaven no? And from the stand point of maturity and given people room for growth and personal development what if in all the world she meets some of your criteria and falls short on some and the person is a good person you walk out on her because of something that easily can be fixed even by yourself to match your taste? Forget about the money now...so what if she's half smart and have all the requisite requirements and can contribute to the relationship financially (bear in mind the heart never tells you who to love; trust me I have seen men with your same outlook on life fall desperately for a so basic half smart females that are so called polished working a decent job) How she reasons about money most definitely is important but also can be subjective. Money is key... fundamental in a relationship in 9j I have seen basic women even as basic as Iya Basira spend for her man... contribute in her relationship with her husband...so wouldn't an Iya Bashira meet some of your hard equirements even by being shaven but fall short in others?A Roman Goddess just opened her wine shop and can buy you gifts... imagine a DJ Cuppy as COO of a fortune 500 company...sure these examples can match your listed hard requirements...you get my drift? Now key, she must have resources and skills to contribute to the relationship...but ofcourse she must have! She has to be useful to herself and humanity, one wouldn't expect a man as yourself with your preference to date a Bimbo! I mean you wouldn't flow on a first date as you wouldn't be on the same wavelength mentally to kick off a second date! My point exactly, whatever it is your hard and fast rule let it be premised on reality and substance...It wasn't necessarily an argument just divergent views...and...oh yes, I was distracted.

Everything boils down to self worth healthy ego, if I game a girl ,and she is not interested I walk no time but its embarrassing to see fellow guys chase a lady like she's an oxygen in fact you see a guy chasing like 6 babes vigorously I don't know but it irritates me maybe because I don't have that mental and emotional capacity to following women up and down its draining..All the women I have had in my life to be frank I didn't even chase any not even one ,the thing is life just happens and at first meeting we vibe the chemistry is there from day one of meeting them be it in banks ,church etc we just have the chemistry and all is history ...that's why some of my friends think it's weird cause the might just be all out chasing ladies and it doesn't click for them sometimes but whenever I bump into a lady and we vibe real good rest is history..the thing is its younger guys that behave like that mostly when I was 19 I "Chased" girls but now am grown I don't "chase" ladies again from the first moments of interaction and we vibe real good then we are good to go..