Leoniine:



I would tell you same. Because you're painting women to be the lazy ones here, who only knows how to be demanding.



Oh, wow. You're justifying why women should work now. I thought a man is the head and a woman must only cook and take care of kids. Why are you complaining that the struggle is much?! C'mon. Are you not the man? It's in your DNA to hunt and provide. No matter the societal system. You can never be overwhelmed. Your biological makeup will make sure of that. Let me ask you this. You first said men were providing monetarily while women cook. Now you say, ladies are also picking up the bills. So, in other words, a woman is NOW sharing in the role of a man. She's doing a man's work and doing hers. A woman work and cook now. But men are not raising kids and helping at home. Do you think this is fair? If a lady can pick up the bills, why can't a man nurture kids?





Foul. Out of bounds.



If tastes are high, make more money, sir. It's economics. Time changes. We are not our mothers. It only make sense that you shouldn't be our fathers.




But that's the point of the traditional system. It's not same-balanced. If you provide, she will take care of your kids. Shikena. Are you forgetting that you're supposed to take care of the woman? That's how God designed it na. You give her everything as her protector, in return for her faithfulness and fertility. Be a man!

You make money, and she helps you allocate and manage it. Why are you complaining against the natures of a woman? She's the homemaker.



Okay. I hear. So it's on women's tastes that those guys are unmarried, instead of on their irresponsibility?

I believe we are here to learn things and not been biased.
Of about 3.5b men in the world, do you think it is possible for all of them to make enough money to satisfy a woman? Who will print this money? And even if given this money, there will be too much money in circulation chasing virtually same things and products like land, cars, house, foods etc thereby kick starting Inflation which will render both money and efforts Useless and we are back to square one again.
If you say the men are the providers and need to work like a horse, the question remains why are we Employing women? Into workforce since they are not providers thereby Blocking potential Providers from doing their work, why?
Like what i said before which you are also confirming, Providing is all where the Scams are because it is not quantified or clearly stated.
If it is clearly stated that all a man needs to settle down is One room apartment, A bed and only affordable 3 square for the woman, then you will see that it is Achievable by virtually All guys, even the so called deadbeats.
The issue of having a car, vacations, shopping, expensive schools for kids can be done by the man has he wished, a lot of problems automatically will be solved.
You may keep denying this but it is the truth.
Am out

emmaodet:


I believe we are here to learn things and not been biased.
Of about 3.5b men in the world, do you think it is possible for all of them to make enough money to satisfy a woman? Who will print this money? And even if given this money, there will be too much money in circulation chasing virtually same things and products like land, cars, house, foods etc thereby kick starting Inflation which will render both money and efforts Useless and we are back to square one again.

You're not getting the point. Are men providers or not? Are women nurturers or not? Do you believe it is in the nature of a man to work and provide?

Stop veering off point joor. Inflation ko, inflationary gap ni.

If you say the men are the providers and need to work like a horse, the question remains why are we Employing women?

Shebi you just said the pressure on men is much now. And that's why women are picking up the bills. Do you think it is right or wrong for a woman to work? Do you want a woman that work?

Into workforce since they are not providers thereby Blocking potential Providers from doing their work, why?

Don't infuriate me. Women are not taking anything from men in the workplace. They are discriminated against rather because they are not males.

Like what i said before which you are also confirming, Providing is all where the Scams are because it is not quantified or clearly stated.

So, a man is not meant to be a provider? Great.

If it is clearly stated that all a man needs to settle down is One room apartment, A bed and only affordable 3 square for the woman, then you will see that it is Achievable by virtually All guys, even the so called deadbeats.
The issue of having a car, vacations, shopping, expensive schools for kids can be done by the man has he wished, a lot of problems automatically will be solved.
You may keep denying this but it is the truth.
Am out

You seriously want to do this, dude? Lmao. Excusing irresponsible men and deadbeat fathers. You want to be defining what providing means. One house, two houses. Did anyone define nurture for women? Was it mentioned that a kid or two is enough? Or that she should only nurture for three years and then leave?

Everything was clearly stipulated. Simply provide material things/money for a fertile woman. If you are capable of getting one house, then marry your kind of woman, have 2 kids. If you can buy a mansion, marry four wives and have sixteen kids. Marry your kind. Cut your coat according to your size. Don't expect any woman to lower her expectations if you can't meet up. Especially a woman who wants to be provided for. It's not hard.

Leoniine:



You're not getting the point. Are men providers or not? Are women nurturers or not? Do you believe it is in the nature of a man to work and provide?

Stop veering off point joor. Inflation ko, inflationary gap ni.





Shebi you just said the pressure on men is much now. And that's why women are picking up the bills. Do you think it is right or wrong for a woman to work? Do you want a woman that work?




Don't infuriate me. Women are not taking anything from men in the workplace. They are discriminated against rather because they are not males.




So, a man is not meant to be a provider? Great.



You seriously want to do this, dude? Lmao. Excusing irresponsible men and deadbeat fathers. You want to be defining what providing means. One house, two houses. Did anyone define nurture for women? Was it mentioned that a kid or two is enough? Or that she should only nurture for three years and then leave?

Everything was clearly stipulated. Simply provide material things/money for a fertile woman. If you are capable of getting one house, then marry your kind of woman, have 2 kids. If you can buy a mansion, marry four wives and have sixteen kids. Marry your kind. Cut your coat according to your size. Don't expect any woman to lower her expectations if you can't meet up. Especially a woman who wants to be provided for. It's not hard.

Ok.
Motigbo