RisenPhoenix:


Any man in Nigeria could feed his family if the family's collective tastes were limited to his income. It is mere dicontentment that often drives the need for multiple income sources.

No matter how ambitious or passionate a woman is about her career, it remains a hobby. When the family is out on the street for non payment of rent; or when the kids are sent home due to overdue school fees, the wife is not expected to take the responsibilty and so does not get any blame. It is the husband who gets the blame because the responsibility is all his; whether the woman helps out or not. A woman also has the luxury of thumbing her nose at her boss and resigning at the smallest slight and she will be applauded for doing this; but can a man say that he is tired of work and wants to resign before getting a more viable alternative ready? However much we try to imply equality, women in the work place remains culturally voluntary and not a necessity.

Sounds just exactly as what an elder told me... A woman is never asked if she's built a house or what she's achieved financially, so they rarely have any tension upon them... Only a man goes through that kind of pressure and trust me, it kills men so quickly....marry a woman richer than you, then you'd look useless... Marry the one you're richer than, again you'd be bald with so many loads to carry... Marriage is beautiful, but being alone is much more beautiful...marriage for men is only a rescue path away from fornication...

When it comes to arguing against women nairaland men argue anywhere belle face

They are always confused

Yesterday they thought women must bring heaven and earth to the table today they see women contributing financially as a hobby, not a thing of importance

they will come back tomorrow to claim a woman is under obligation to financially support her husband otherwise she is a liability

Confused lot

whatever opinion most currently contributes to the woman hate of the day. That’s the winning argument .

CHoccolaTE:
When it comes to arguing against women nairaland men argue anywhere belle face

They are always confused

Yesterday they thought women must bring heaven and earth to the table today they see women contributing financially as a hobby, not a thing of importance

they will come back tomorrow to claim a woman is under obligation to financially support her husband otherwise she is a liability

Confused lot

RisenPhoenix:


That really was not my intention as I am indifferent to what place she is in. I just prefer logical discussions over ad hominem arguments; and bitter extremist ideologies are not at all to my taste. If she had maturely and logically presented her own opinion as to why my view is wrong rather than attack me, she might have more effectively achieved her stated aim of 'educating me'.

Obviously low on understanding too.

I was only commending those tho are trying to educate you. I wouldn’t attempt to , seeing as you’re obviously beyond redemption. Only trolls )such as the troll account you replied this to) and those whose full time job it is to prowl this forum looking for the woman hate of the day to endorse would think you are logical.


To think that you post disrespectful posts about women and think you deserve a debate on the issue. the entitlement of it. I wouldn’t blame you for it. Those who engage you and debate you like you’re speaking meaningfully are to blame.

ibkayee:

What would you say is the ratio of dual income households to households where men are the sole providers? Approximately

One to 99

Mindfulness:


You have met happy hungry people? Wonders shall never end.

@bold
So why does society blame men who can't provide when it's the woman's fault after all?

A lower income does not necessarily translate into hunger. If you go to some parts of the country, you will see a whole family subsisting on less than N10K a month, and they are not hungry.

CHoccolaTE:
When it comes to arguing against women nairaland men argue anywhere belle face

They are always confused

Yesterday they thought women must bring heaven and earth to the table today they see women contributing financially as a hobby, not a thing of importance

they will come back tomorrow to claim a woman is under obligation to financially support her husband otherwise she is a liability

Confused lot

Your confusion lies in the fact that you lump all men into one stolid mass, unless of course, you are only trying to vent. Mention one place where I ever mentioned that a woman is financially obliged to support her husband. That is not now, and never was my opinion.

Thegamingorca:


One to 99

Guy are you sure you are in Nigeria ,this is gross mis information you are giving IBK.Except if you are just playing around.

cococandy:


Obviously low on understanding too.

I was only commending those tho are trying to educate you. I wouldn’t attempt to , seeing as you’re obviously beyond redemption. Only trolls )such as the troll account you replied this to) and those whose full time job it is to prowl this forum looking for the woman hate of the day to endorse would think you are logical.

Of course, back at your ad hominem attacks. I notice that only those with a paucity of ideas resort to them. As for troll accounts, I guess you'd know better. Sometimes it takes one to know one as the saying goes.

cococandy:

To think that you post disrespectful posts about women and think you deserve a debate on the issue. the entitlement of it. I wouldn’t blame you for it. Those who engage you and debate you like you’re speaking meaningfully are to blame.

I do not believe that women deserve respect because of the singular fact that they are women. Respect is earned, not genetically inherited; which is what entitlement really means. If you feel entitled to respect because of the mere possession of a reproductive organ that designates you as 'female', then you are going to face a lot of disappointment in life.

In any case, now that you have established that I am poor of understanding, ignorant and incapable of learning, you can go in peace with no feminist face lost. You have defended your group's position equitably with well placed (albeit overused) insults that have overwhelmed the enemy. I retire from your battlefield.

Yes, marriage protects children. And yes, marriage therefore protects taxpayers and society from a broad and deep set of costs, personal and communal. But there is another case for marriage, equally significant, that you probably haven't heard PrepaidGiftBalance

RisenPhoenix:

A lower income does not necessarily translate into hunger. If you go to some parts of the country, you will see a whole family subsisting on less than N10K a month, and they are not hungry.

You said that marriage benefits women in the way that it provides financial stability. Millions live in extreme poverty in Nigeria and many more would without women's financial contribution so I don't know what financial stability you are referring to. It's not like every married woman is better off financially for the simple reason that she got married. When I pointed it out to you, you said that women must be content with whatever the husband brings. This is your opinion but still doesn't prove your initial statement that generally women benefit from marriage in financial terms because most women do not. Your "be content" argument is an acknowledgement of my argument that women do not necessarily benefit from marriage in financial terms.

For you to say that a woman's job is a hobby, does not only ignore the necessary contribution to the family's income many women make but also devalues women's contributions to society as a whole and neglects the fact that women can and want to do more in their lives than running a family. Human beings, unlike animals, have higher aspirations than eating and breeding. We should respect that.

Mindfulness:


You said that marriage benefits women in the way that it provides financial stability. Millions live in extreme poverty in Nigeria and many more would without women's financial contribution so I don't know what financial stability you are referring to. It's not like every married woman is better off financially for the simple reason that she got married. When I pointed it out to you, you said that women must be content with whatever the husband brings. This is your opinion but still doesn't prove your initial statement that generally women benefit from marriage in financial terms because most women do not. Your "be content" argument is an acknowledgement of my argument that women do not necessarily benefit from marriage in financial terms.

For you to say that a woman's job is a hobby, does not only ignore the necessary contribution to the family's income many women make but also devalues women's contributions to society as a whole and neglects the fact that women can and want to do more in their lives than running a family. Human beings, unlike animals, have higher aspirations than eating and breeding. We should respect that.

There's no proof in humanity evolution that suggests women want to do more with thier lives than have a family... literally everything in this world was built by men.. women haven't really done anything so ?

Kennedyiheme:
There's no proof in humanity evolution that suggests women want to do more with thier lives than have a family... literally everything in this world was built by men.. women haven't really done anything so ?

Wrong. Women have done a lot. Women have made enormous contributions despite the fact that they were denied the same opportunities as men. That's how great we are. Even the computer you are using to type this nonsense wouldn't be possible without the first computer programmer who was female. Ada Lovelace wrote the first algorithm for an early computing machine in 1840. In the digital age, ignorance is a choice.

Mindfulness:


You said that marriage benefits women in the way that it provides financial stability. Millions live in extreme poverty in Nigeria and many more would without women's financial contribution so I don't know what financial stability you are referring to. It's not like every married woman is better off financially for the simple reason that she got married. When I pointed it out to you, you said that women must be content with whatever the husband brings. This is your opinion but still doesn't prove your initial statement that generally women benefit from marriage in financial terms because most women do not. Your "be content" argument is an acknowledgement of my argument that women do not necessarily benefit from marriage in financial terms.

Pertinent, intelligent points, but they seem to contain a misunderstanding of terms. I apologise for my potentially lengthy explanation:

Women gain financially because they always tend to marry 'up'; from time immemorial. This ensures the financial stability I am referring to, not what you seem to understand by it as 'having everything she wants'. For example, a woman in the lower strata of wealth; whose father is, say, a well digger; would eagerly marry an okada rider who owns his own okada; he is seen as an attractive status upgrade TO HER (obviously not to you), because he has the potential to ensure that she is able to AT LEAST maintain HER previous standard of living. THAT is financial stability; the high chance of being able to maintain your financial status indefinitely. Even a woman who you might see as 'starving' with her husband on one meal a day, has probably been upgraded from one meal every 2 days; because women never ever marry 'down'. And all she has to give up in return for her ensured financial stability is periodically giving in to his sexual demands when she can't get away with rejecting him (in the early stages, she of course also enjoys it, but that is another issue altogether).

Contentment lies in the ability to be happy WITHIN that standard (remember that it was still an upgrade for her), and that is where most women fail the test. Having happily and eagerly married a self employed okada rider, she now sees the 2 bedroom flat that the kabu kabu driver rented for his wife. So she starts feeling discontented and he gradually loses his attractiveness to her. This of course, is a very simplistic example; the process may take longer and be triggered by more than a bigger flat; but it is only an attempt to make the terms 'financial stability' and 'contentedness' clearer by example.

Mindfulness:

For you to say that a woman's job is a hobby, does not only ignore the necessary contribution to the family's income many women make but also devalues women's contributions to society as a whole and neglects the fact that women can and want to do more in their lives than running a family. Human beings, unlike animals, have higher aspirations than eating and breeding. We should respect that.

Let us take the case of the wife above. If she decides to remain with the okada rider (and she usually only does that if she feels that she will be unable to hook a kabu kabu driver), she will possibly offer to take up a job to upgrade their status. In most cases, her husband is happy with his one bedroom face-me-I-face-you, but she badgers and pushes him into letting her work, neglecting the home in the process; all in the name of a 'better' status. The problem is that satisfying this type of mindset never ends. Even if their combined income now finally gets her the 2 bedroom flat she was craving, she will still crave the 5 bedroom storey building of the bank worker; and her husband will start to look like he is lazy and unambitious for being unable to keep up with her cravings for an ever increasing status. She will start to disrespect him and turn life to a living hell for him. She forgets that it is her own craving for upgrades that has required her to take an extra job, and not a necessity as you wrongly said. That is why I say that a woman's job is at best a hobby. At worst, it is a needless attempt at 'improving' her life with needless objects in an attempt to outdo her fellow woman when it comes to boasting in the hair saloon. Men generally are content with a mattress, a couple of filling meals a day and access to sex when they want it. I agree that women these days want more than to run a family. There is nothing wrong with that. It is the strident compulsion behind these aspirations and the shame that women who choose to stick to home running are subjected to that makes these aspirations toxic.

To put it bluntly, I have no objections to women aspiring to lofty career or academic aspirations, but I do not think that these should be at the expense of family wellbeing or that these aspirations should be driven by the sense of discontentment enforced by extreme feminist ideals. If a woman excels in Medicine say, and she feels good helping out patients in need; more grease to her elbows. But insisting that she must neglect the family because of a medical seminar in the UK today and a travel itinerary with her hospital CMD to Japan tomorrow; all in the name of eventually earning a bigger income in order to buy a larger mansion than her colleague; is a big no no for me. Also, women who choose to be full housewives should not be browbeaten into taking up jobs that they don't want. Sadly, the feminist narrative not only does that, it has even succeeded into browbeating the men themselves into expecting their women to share the financial burden equally with them as a necessity, rather than asking women to be satisfied within their husbands' income as in times past.

As for women's contribution to the GDP and other financial indicators as well as scientific research, it all comes at a price...the breakdown of societal and family values. Have you ever considered why children these days are ill mannered, entitled, selfish and increasingly corrupt? It is neither because of the internet nor bad friends. It is because both parents are away working full time; vying with other couples in size and quantity of mansions, value of car models and location of vacations; while the kids are home; unloved, neglected and on their way to borderline psychotic. That is why a woman's contribution at home is the REAL necessity, while that at work is a distraction.

Mindfulness:


Wrong. Women have done a lot. Women have made enormous contributions despite the fact that they were denied the same opportunities as men. That's how great we are. Even the computer you are using to type this nonsense wouldn't be possible without the first computer programmer who was female. Ada Lovelace wrote the first algorithm for an early computing machine in 1840. In the digital age, ignorance is a choice.

lol she worked woth charles babbage, didn't invent anything, she only contributed, which by the waybis a good thing.... nothing in this world was made by a woman.. ya'll are not just wired that way, you always use suppression as an excuse for you inadequacy....everything about you was is all about a man... even the sanitary pads yall use.. the relaxer you use on your dirty hairs was invented by a man.. roads, internet, water you drink is processed by men... you see you've done little for humanity, you have just proved womennare only good with home making, the arabs saw that along time ago...

Mindfulness:


Wrong. Women have done a lot. Women have made enormous contributions despite the fact that they were denied the same opportunities as men. That's how great we are. Even the computer you are using to type this nonsense wouldn't be possible without the first computer programmer who was female. Ada Lovelace wrote the first algorithm for an early computing machine in 1840. In the digital age, ignorance is a choice.

lol besides charles babbage didn't invent modern computer, unless you wonna say hibiscus is a modern computer... alan turin invented modern computer

RisenPhoenix:


Pertinent, intelligent points, but they seem to contain a misunderstanding of terms. I apologise for my potentially lengthy explanation:

No need to apologize, they are mostly appreciated.

Women gain financially because they always tend to marry 'up'; from time immemorial. This ensures the financial stability I am referring to, not what you seem to understand by it as 'having everything she wants'. For example, a woman in the lower strata of wealth; whose father is, say, a well digger; would eagerly marry an okada rider who owns his own okada; he is seen as an attractive status upgrade TO HER (obviously not to you), because he has the potential to ensure that she is able to AT LEAST maintain HER previous standard of living. THAT is financial stability; the high chance of being able to maintain your financial status indefinitely. Even a woman who you might see as 'starving' with her husband on one meal a day, has probably been upgraded from one meal every 2 days; because women never ever marry 'down'. And all she has to give up in return for her ensured financial stability is periodically giving in to his sexual demands when she can't get away with rejecting him (in the early stages, she of course also enjoys it, but that is another issue altogether).

Women tended to marry up because they were excluded from education and thus opportunities to upgrade themselves so men in the higher classes would not have many choices in their category. In the royal houses in Europe spouses were matched according to status and kings would marry women of noble status and not maids. Recent research shows that people marry people of similar educational background. I agree that you will rather see a male doctor marry a nurse and very rarely a female doctor marry a male nurse but most often you will see a doctor marry another doctor or lawyer or whatever falls in their category. Unfortunately, there is no such research in Nigeria yet.

Contentment lies in the ability to be happy WITHIN that standard (remember that it was still an upgrade for her), and that is where most women fail the test. Having happily and eagerly married a self employed okada rider, she now sees the 2 bedroom flat that the kabu kabu driver rented for his wife. So she starts feeling discontented and he gradually loses his attractiveness to her. This of course, is a very simplistic example; the process may take longer and be triggered by more than a bigger flat; but it is only an attempt to make the terms 'financial stability' and 'contentedness' clearer by example.

Human beings are insatiable. It is not a female characteristic. We are "programmed" to want more. Once we satisfy our desire for something, we want something else. That's what drives us and it is not only limited to materialistic possessions.

Let us take the case of the wife above. If she decides to remain with the okada rider (and she usually only does that if she feels that she will be unable to hook a kabu kabu driver), she will possibly offer to take up a job to upgrade their status. In most cases, her husband is happy with his one bedroom face-me-I-face-you, but she badgers and pushes him into letting her work, neglecting the home in the process; all in the name of a 'better' status. The problem is that satisfying this type of mindset never ends. Even if their combined income now finally gets her the 2 bedroom flat she was craving, she will still crave the 5 bedroom storey building of the bank worker; and her husband will start to look like he is lazy and unambitious for being unable to keep up with her cravings for an ever increasing status. She will start to disrespect him and turn life to a living hell for him. She forgets that it is her own craving for upgrades that has required her to take an extra job, and not a necessity as you wrongly said. That is why I say that a woman's job is at best a hobby. At worst, it is a needless attempt at 'improving' her life with needless objects in an attempt to outdo her fellow woman when it comes to boasting in the hair saloon. Men generally are content with a mattress, a couple of filling meals a day and access to sex when they want it. I agree that women these days want more than to run a family. There is nothing wrong with that. It is the strident compulsion behind these aspirations and the shame that women who choose to stick to home running are subjected to that makes these aspirations toxic.

No, they are not. Like I said, this is one of the things that differentiates us from animals. Once our basic needs are covered, we strive for more. Take Donald Trump as an example. He owns much more than that and could retire. As a matter of fact, he is way past retirement age. Yet something drives him to work beyond retirement age. And there are many more examples of men who aspired to more than what you have listed. In Western countries with strong welfare systems, people are provided with housing and money to feed themselves and free healthcare if they are unemployed. Yet, most people in these countries work and want more than just their basic needs covered.

To put it bluntly, I have no objections to women aspiring to lofty career or academic aspirations, but I do not think that these should be at the expense of family wellbeing or that these aspirations should be driven by the sense of discontentment enforced by extreme feminist ideals. If a woman excels in Medicine say, and she feels good helping out patients in need; more grease to her elbows. But insisting that she must neglect the family because of a medical seminar in the UK today and a travel itinerary with her hospital CMD to Japan tomorrow; all in the name of eventually earning a bigger income in order to buy a larger mansion than her colleague; is a big no no for me. Also, women who choose to be full housewives should not be browbeaten into taking up jobs that they don't want. Sadly, the feminist narrative not only does that, it has even succeeded into browbeating the men themselves into expecting their women to share the financial burden equally with them as a necessity, rather than asking women to be satisfied within their husbands' income as in times past.

You have just helped me make my point again. Women can only aspire to having a career if they make sure that their family's needs are taken care of which makes it more difficult for women to combine both. A man must provide, as you said, so nobody would ask a man to sacrifice his career for his family. This is why I said that marriage does not always benefit women when it comes to finances, which was your initial claim. An educated woman with a profitable career will have to sacrifice something for her family. You even think it is better she does. Well, many women don't feel that way and decide to choose one over the other. Some choose family, others choose career, a few can have both.

As for women's contribution to the GDP and other financial indicators as well as scientific research, it all comes at a price...the breakdown of societal and family values. Have you ever considered why children these days are ill mannered, entitled, selfish and increasingly corrupt? It is neither because of the internet nor bad friends. It is because both parents are away working full time; vying with other couples in size and quantity of mansions, value of car models and location of vacations; while the kids are home; unloved, neglected and on their way to borderline psychotic. That is why a woman's contribution at home is the REAL necessity, while that at work is a distraction.

Trust me, money is important to many, maybe most people, men and women, but women do not solely pursue careers driven by nothing but the need to acquire more goods. Some women are driven by the passion in their respective field or a vision they have. Some women want to ensure that their children receive the best education possible because they not only know that it will better the chances in their children's life but because they value education in itself.

@bold
I don't buy into the "children nowadays are so ill mannered" narrative because both parents work. It's a complex topic but let me tell you this: I live in a country with a number of different minority groups. The ratio of housewives in these minority groups tends to be higher than in the group of native borns and criminal records show that children from migrant families commit more crimes and underachieve in education. According to you these groups where the earning husband and housewife model is prevalent should excel in society but they do not.

This is partly owned to the fact that well-educated ambitious parents will teach their children more than mothers who stay at home but have nothing to offer intellectually and place their children in front of the TV or in front of a computer. They are around but they do not open doors to a world of useful, enriching activities. When I visit museums, exhibitions, theaters for children, I barely see Africans, Arabs or Eastern Europeans there, all places in which traditional gender roles are more prevalent, but I do see Westerners there, who have loosened traditional gender roles and their eloquent, curious and outspoken children who know how to behave in different settings whereas their migrant counterparts can only behave around their parents in fear of punishment to go crazy once their parents are not around and do not threaten to beat them up. They do not understand the value of morals, they are only taught to avoid punishment.

If you, however, feel that children profit from one parent being around all the time, you can either ask your wife to stay at home or stay at home yourself. As much as you have a problem with radical, toxic feminism, as you call it, I have a problem with fathers who believe that their responsibility ends with the provision of money.

Kennedyiheme:
lol besides charles babbage didn't invent modern computer, unless you wonna say hibiscus is a modern computer... alan turin invented modern computer

You have not invented anything and I am afraid you won't achieve much if you don't educate yourself. Learn to write proper sentences please, then we can have a discussion. Have a nice day.

Mindfulness:


You have not invented anything and I am afraid you won't achieve much if you don't educate yourself. Learn to write proper sentences please, then we can have a discussion. Have a nice day.

lol its not about me.. its about our genders... evolution has proved you haven't done much for the progress of humanity.... the ibos always say the beauty of a woman is a family... there are some things that never changes. No matter how civilisation advances

DenreleDave:


1. She bears the name of her husband.. Switching from miss or Mrs. Hence, she earns the respect

2. Financial opportunities. The man go feed her feed her family

3. Protection

4. Women wants children to surround them.. They need a man sperm for that..

5. They get sex anytime they want, not anytime the man wants... Rubbish

Disadvantages of marriage for women

1. The men demand sex whenever they want and think they own the woman’s body.

2. Women get saggy breast and flabby tummy after childbirth.What of the pregnancy period and ceasarean section in some cases?

3. The children bears the man’s name alone.In some countries ,children bear both the mother and father’s surname.

4. She endures sleepless nights trying to raise the children.

5. She does house chores coupled with her job.

6. The husband’s family take her as their slave and she is blamed for what her husband does to his family.(money)

7. The woman is expected to follow the husband’s decision whether good or bad(submissiveness).

8. The man uses the woman to multiply his seeds on earth.The man is the gardener, baby is the plant and the woman being the incubator continue to nourish the plant till maturity.

9 . She is meant to endure cheating or 2nd wife from her husband as well as domestic abuse in some cases.

10. In case of a cheating husband ,she will partake in his infections and stds.

11. Incase of infertility,the woman is blamed and shamed for not having children ontime even when the man is the culprit.


Marriage is meant to unite a family unit and help the children grow up in a stable and happy environment to attain emotional,Psychological etc wellbeing and stability in their lives.

Children from single parenting always have a need for the missing figure in their lives.

Kennedyiheme:
lol its not about me.. its about our genders... evolution has proved you haven't done much for the progress of humanity.... the ibos always say the beauty of a woman is a family... there are some things that never changes. No matter how civilisation advances

It's better. If you now learn to capitalize your letters at the beginning of a sentence and learn how to use punctuation, I will consider you worthy of debating with me.

Mindfulness:


It's better. If you now learn to capitalize your letters at the beginning of a sentence and learn how to use punctuation, I will consider you worthy of debating with me.

psss weak comback , I've noticed people who have nothing to say always use typo errors as defence, i just relayed my point and just cleared your doubt on how women are the ones who need marriage more.. you're worried about how i use my commas...

cocolacec:



Disadvantages of marriage for women

1. The men demand sex whenever they want and think they own the woman’s body.

2. Women get saggy breast and flabby tummy after childbirth.What of the pregnancy period and ceasarean section in some cases?

3. The children bears the man’s name alone.In some countries ,children bear both the mother and father’s surname.

4. She endures sleepless nights trying to raise the children.

5. She does house chores coupled with her job.

6. The husband’s family take her as their slave and she is blamed for what her husband does to his family.(money)

7. The woman is expected to follow the husband’s decision whether good or bad(submissiveness).

8. The man uses the woman to multiply his seeds on earth.The man is the gardener,woman is the plant and the incubator and continue to nourish the plant till maturity.

9 . She is meant to endure cheating or 2nd wife from her husband as well as domestic abuse in some cases.

10. In case of a cheating husband ,she will partake in his infections and stds.

Marriage is meant to unite a family unit and help the children grow up in a stable and happy environment to attain emotional,Psychological etc wellbeing and stability in their lives.

Children from single parenting always have a need for the missing figure in their lives.

all this problems for women but they are the ones always rushing men for marriage

Kennedyiheme:
all this problems for women but they are the ones always rushing men for marriage

In the Nigerian society ,the woman is incomplete without a crown(husband) and children.

cocolacec:

In the Nigerian society ,the woman is incomplete without a crown(husband) and children.

in every society bro

emmaodet:
Bro, that is trend growing now.
A lot of people are beginning to question marriage but i don't think women will really be worried about that because as far as i know, a lot of women even prefer relationship to marriage because they see it as cage and burden until most clock 30 and above.
Provided there is money, probably a woman doing good high paying job - marriage is a turn off to them because of the stress of been with a man but the low earners, broke and lazy ones will be given a run for there little kobo, they want marriage not really because they like the stress and wahala of a man but because ooverall it is better than footing their own bills alone - i call it the Fear of Poverty and Full Responsibilities.
Women don't want men - pls bro note this down today.
They only want the comfort men provides and barring that, you will be shown the exit door.
That is why a rich baby mama, widow, divorcee don't like to remarry unless it worth the stress by marrying someone times 3 or more of their own worth e.g oyinbos in oil and gas industry e.t.c

It is not a mystery that the more empowered women are becoming, the lesser they all wanted marriage e.g check female footballers, musicians, top earning actresses etc they all have something similar in common - staying single
If you ask why? They give you list of excuses of not ready for men palava, wahala and troubles not to write off cheating by men.
Funny enough - All these traits and qualities are what we have far far more in women - serial cheats, paternity fraudsters, relationship fraudsters, too many wahalas, troubles baggages not to talk of shouldering her family's problems. They don't see all these because they are extremely Selfish and Self centered.
It's high time marriage should probably be scrapped or Reviewed because the present marriage constitution is not sustainable nor in tune with present realities.

Great Discovering (women don't want men, they only the comfort they provide )

raptex:
How come I'm just hearing this for the first time? Makes hella sense.

I am happy you learnt something new from my post.

RisenPhoenix:


Of course. My daughter is in school. She can choose to be a professor or she can choose to be a housewife. It's her choice and that of her future husband.



She is currently doing her pg studies while working as a professional. We got married when she was still in 300L and I was doing my pg so obviously I support her academically. But if it will inconvenience the home, she will have to find alternatives or stop totally. Our home and kids are a red line. This was discussed before our marriage and she agreed that the home comes first for her if I was ready to take on the full financial burden.




She is a self-employed professional so her job is somewhat demanding, but never at the expense of the home. She has pretty much the whole day to work at her job while the kids are at school. I also help her out by employing a day housekeeper to clean the house. Personally, I am an undemanding person. If there is no food for me, I will just find bread and suya or buy whatever I can get at some food outlet, but the kids must be fully taken care of and given complete attention while at home; no compromises there.

I believe in traditional gender roles, yes. I take care of all the family expenses; for which she gives me a monthly budget in advance and the funds of which I transfer to her personal account at the beginning of every month. Her own money is hers; and I have no idea how much her income could possibly be; nor am I interested. She bought a car for herself, pays her pg fees and is building herself a house in her name; which I help out with logistically; so I guess she must be somewhat comfortable financially on her own. We currently live in my own home. The only expense we share is vacations; when we go together (especially when it is at her suggestion).

I believe that traditional gender roles work best when they are applied equitably. The problems start when the husband expects the wife to fulfil her role by taking good care of the home; but neglects his own role of full financial responsibility. The dual work that the wife is forced into in such a situation will obviously stress her out and understandably make her rebellious and dissatisfied with the marriage. It is only fair that if a man wants his wife to share the financial burden, he must also be ready to share the home care burden. Many men however, do not agree with this idea, unfortunately .

Interesting.

So you are fine with your wife pursuing what interests her as along as the home front is fine. And you got home so she is not overwhelmed.

So what do you think of your wife pursuing a career like late Dora Akunyili?

@bold: I agree with you.

Prognose:


What have these questions got to do with the @bolded though?

To further understand his thought process on his stance.

Mindfulness:


No need to apologize, they are mostly appreciated.



Women tended to marry up because they were excluded from education and thus opportunities to upgrade themselves so men in the higher classes would not have many choices in their category. In the royal houses in Europe spouses were matched according to status and kings would marry women of noble status and not maids. Recent research shows that people marry people of similar educational background. I agree that you will rather see a male doctor marry a nurse and very rarely a female doctor marry a male nurse but most often you will see a doctor marry another doctor or lawyer or whatever falls in their category. Unfortunately, there is no such research in Nigeria yet.

No. Women practically always marry 'up'; whether educated or otherwise. And when I say 'up', I do not refer to academic 'up', I refer to financial potential. A female doctor may marry a male doctor, who is academically of the same category, but he is certainly likely to be ahead of her financially. And a female doctor would certainly marry a male nurse, if he was an oil tycoon as well.

Mindfulness:

Human beings are insatiable. It is not a female characteristic. We are "programmed" to want more. Once we satisfy our desire for something, we want something else. That's what drives us and it is not only limited to materialistic possessions.

Men have much less of a drive. Given the opportunity, along with most of his immediate baser needs (food, sex, an opportunity to watch football) a man might never think that the enjoyment of the baubles of this world are worth the effort. Actually, neither sex do enjoy those things so much, but for women, it is not so much the enjoyment of those things as the competing with her fellow women. This is why you hear women make comments like "my son is a lawyer, my daughter is a surgeon, I weny to Dubai last summer", but men almost never see the need to. Men are more geared towards boasting of their 'achievements' rather than their possessions. A man would rather boast of beating another guy or sleeping with the girl next door. For example, I am more accepting of my daughter as a housewife if she so wishes, while my wife insists on her being a world famous neurosurgeon, yet I am happier when my daughter can successfully wolf whistle or ride her bicycle without the trainers; and these achievements impress my wife not at all.

Mindfulness:

No, they are not. Like I said, this is one of the things that differentiates us from animals. Once our basic needs are covered, we strive for more. Take Donald Trump as an example. He owns much more than that and could retire. As a matter of fact, he is way past retirement age. Yet something drives him to work beyond retirement age. And there are many more examples of men who aspired to more than what you have listed. In Western countries with strong welfare systems, people are provided with housing and money to feed themselves and free healthcare if they are unemployed. Yet, most people in these countries work and want more than just their basic needs covered.

What differentiates us from animals is not reckless aspiration but the use of reason. Welfare systems may provide some basic needs, but not all; they neglect; even undermine; the most important one to men; self worth. The need to feel that one's needs are being met through his own efforts. This is why men always prefer to work; criminally if they cannot work legally. They would feel useless otherwise.

Mindfulness:

You have just helped me make my point again. Women can only aspire to having a career if they make sure that their family's needs are taken care of which makes it more difficult for women to combine both. A man must provide, as you said, so nobody would ask a man to sacrifice his career for his family. This is why I said that marriage does not always benefit women when it comes to finances, which was your initial claim. An educated woman with a profitable career will have to sacrifice something for her family. You even think it is better she does. Well, many women don't feel that way and decide to choose one over the other. Some choose family, others choose career, a few can have both.

But a woman's finances are always met whether she has a career or not. They are always improved by her marrying up even if her own career is successful. That is why she is benefited.

Mindfulness:

Trust me, money is important to many, maybe most people, men and women, but women do not solely pursue careers driven by nothing but the need to acquire more goods. Some women are driven by the passion in their respective field or a vision they have. Some women want to ensure that their children receive the best education possible because they not only know that it will better the chances in their children's life but because they value education in itself.

Possibly some do have loftier intentions, but the drive itself tends to induce toxic behaviour. And a more expensive education does not necessarily mean a better one, only one that you can boast more about in front of your friends.

Mindfulness:

@bold
I don't buy into the "children nowadays are so ill mannered" narrative because both parents work. It's a complex topic but let me tell you this: I live in a country with a number of different minority groups. The ratio of housewives in these minority groups tends to be higher than in the group of native borns and criminal records show that children from migrant families commit more crimes and underachieve in education. According to you these groups where the earning husband and housewife model is prevalent should excel in society but they do not.


This is partly owned to the fact that well-educated ambitious parents will teach their children more than mothers who stay at home but have nothing to offer intellectually and place their children in front of the TV or in front of a computer. They are around but they do not open doors to a world of useful, enriching activities. When I visit museums, exhibitions, theaters for children, I barely see Africans, Arabs or Eastern Europeans there, all places in which traditional gender roles are more prevalent, but I do see Westerners there, who have loosened traditional gender roles and their eloquent, curious and outspoken children who know how to behave in different settings whereas their migrant counterparts can only behave around their parents in fear of punishment to go crazy once their parents are not around and do not threaten to beat them up. They do not understand the value of morals, they are only taught to avoid punishment.

I recommend the book "the boy who was raised as a dog" by Bruce Perry MD. It documents the effects of neglect and lack of bonding on children. While the book does focus on extreme cases of neglect, it does bring into focus issues of adjustment.

Migrants are not a suitable sample for study, as they are strangers in a strange place, wary over their children's safety and their own security and stability. For this reason, no objective sociologist or behavioral psychologist would compare them to the locals. A better method would be to compare those of the same nationality in their own countries with that of the locals you mentioned. Author after author have pointed out the issues with parenting in societies like the US; a country with the largest amount of single motherhood per capita. The behaviour of children in balanced, family oriented countries like China or Japan for example, can never be compared to that of children in the US. Here are some studies on effect of maternal absence on children, just so you know that my concerns are backed by research:

https://www.simplypsychology.org/bowlby.html

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2017.00038/full

Mindfulness:

If you, however, feel that children profit from one parent being around all the time, you can either ask your wife to stay at home or stay at home yourself. As much as you have a problem with radical, toxic feminism, as you call it, I have a problem with fathers who believe that their responsibility ends with the provision of money

Every gender has been equipped with special traits that confer an advantage to its bearer. Women are better equipped physically and emotionally to child rearing and nurture. The fact that women have mammary glands and men don't, further ensures that the earliest, most important bonding occurs between a child and his mother. Father bonding is less strong and comes only later. For a mother to yank away that newly formed bond immediately after her maternity leave is over would leave the child deprived and damaged; and no father can completely replace her at this point. Men are also better equipped for the workplace and usually end up with better wages for doing the same job. They have the clear advantage in the workplace; as even feminists are quick to bitterly point out. It is illogical to expect every member of a family unit to fulfill the role that he/she is ill equipped for and avoid the role that he/she would excel at, merely to satisfy some vague notion of unnatural gender equality. The father has a huge part to play in the child's development, but it is not the same as the part which a mother plays, nor can his attention replace hers. That is why the mother's presence is paramount, and not because the father is trying to shirk emotional responsibility as you think.

bukatyne:


Interesting.

So you are fine with your wife pursuing what interests her as along as the home front is fine. And you got home so she is not overwhelmed.

So what do you think of your wife pursuing a career like late Dora Akunyili?

@bolded
I would only permit it if the children were all grown up and out of the home. What she does after that is completely her own business. She can go off for years then if she wants to and I would not interfere.

Of course, I would also not expect her to interfere in my own life at that point if she chooses to take that route.

Don’t even marry

Prognose:
Personally I agree with the op. It's difficult nowadays to see what the advantage is in marriage for men. Except maybe to have your own kids to pass on your genes or to boast to society that you're a responsible person. Men no longer live like Kings in thier own house. They provide food, shelter, clothing, gifts, sex, etc, and in return what do they get? Entitlement mentality, is sex food mentality, cook your own meals mentality. A woman wants to be a queen but won't want to treat her husband as a king.


Societal changes has scammed a lot of men. I would advise any male getting married to look very well before doing so. Don't marry for love. Marry with sense.