₦airaland Forum

lovelygurl:
Interesting



Behindertes Stück Scheiße

gleich zu Ihnen

lovelygurl:
Oh which language is that?

Just your classic philosophical language. It basically mocks your conclusion that I need to go back to primary school

lovelygurl:
Dude you need to go back to primary school as fast as possible!

ignoratio elenchi

lovelygurl:
Cos of the poor countries

Only in poor countries when the woman doesn't have a full time job sometimes even the man

You will always love 1 way more than the other and that's who you are more emotionally attached too. Is it by force they love you looool. If you only bring home money and don't even build a relationship to them then hell naaaaah

Financially = respect
Emotionally = love


Repeating myself over and over again because obviously you didn't do comprehension in school

Ok so you are no longer arguing against my position that more men provide for their family financially than women globally. Good, that is all I wanted. The rest of your argument is none of my concern....shalom!

lovelygurl:
Yh I can see where you are coming from

MIDDLE EAST AND SOUTH ASIAN!!!

Of course! Very clever searching 'globally' because those poor countries will push the numbers up uhn Just like you want them.

Only 50 per cent of women of working age are in the labour force, compared to 77 per cent of men. The gender gap in labour force participation remains especially large in Northern Africa, Western Asia and Southern Asia.

However, women and men aged 15 to 24 years have experienced a decline in participation, which is likely linked to expanding educational opportunities at the secondary and tertiary levels.


Of course those countries will push the number of men working more up because most of their females are UNEDUCATED Mr. That's why I said' poor countries uhn' in my last post

Besides like you said, 'I never said women aren't working too'

The statistics I was expecting was 'Being a bank and sperm donor leads to kids being more emotionally attached to their dads'

If your excuse is that the dads work MORE then your excuse is absolutely ridiculous since women work too (except your wife is UNEDUCATED and doesn't have a full time job like you were trying to prove with your 'statistics' ), doesn't change the fact that you wouldn't be a father to your kids but a bank and sperm donor!

http://unstats.un.org/unsd/gender/chapter4/chapter4.html

Ok glad we got that out of the way, so we are in agreement that globally more men provide for their family? The statistics I was expecting was 'Being a bank and sperm donor leads to kids being more emotionally attached to their dads'? I'm sorry but that was never my argument, I'll repeat it again just in case you chose to ignore it. Women and men have roles, traditionally the woman is more at home with the kids while the man is the provider. Both are equally important and any kid that thinks one is more vital than the other is still naive. This is my argument and it was in response to someone that claimed he loves his mom more because she went through childbirth and took care of him after. Any other arguments you might wish to make is none of my business, call it whatever you may but kids sooner or later realize the value of both parents either financially or emotionally they all miss their mom or dad when they are gone either as a kid or as an adult....peace!

[quote author=lovelygurl post=53395522]I want YOU to bring up YOUR statistics first b4 I go researching the OBVIOUS for you. Who got the time for that. Already told you to bring up yours first and I'must not going to repeat myself like jeez do you have problems with comprehending sentences

Besides nope it does not mean you are a bad father. It means you are NOT a father but a sperm donor

And a bank of course

Oh and the countries you are naming. We see how well they are doing financially, don't we?[/quote]

I can see you have nothing to offer just trying to make conversation for conversation sake, sorry I've got better things to do but Google is your friend but I'm kind so I've also included a link below....happy education!

http://www.gallup.com/poll/178637/worldwide-men-women-full-time-work.aspx

P.S: In case you can't read or comprehend, I've also taken out an excerpt:

Across all global regions, women's deficit in the good jobs market remains largest in South Asia and the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), where their P2P rates lag behind men's by more than 20 percentage points. But is important to note that women in these two regions are also the least likely in the world to be in the workforce. Roughly three in four women in each region are out of the workforce, many choosing not to participate for cultural or political reasons.

lovelygurl:
Oh please tell that to an European man he'll laugh right back at your face because it's = to rubbish




No such thing as global picture because they way you see things doesn't mean everybody does


Also with your mentality you have already failed as a FATHER all you are to them is a bank nothing else. How pathetic

I'm sorry I've always been the science field so I believe more in facts and statistics than opinions. It is the opinion of U.S and Europeans citizens that women and men contribute equally financially but considering most of the populated countries such as China, India, Indonesia, Japan have a male dominated workforce, I think your argument is null and void! My mentality has served me well because while growing up I saw first hand grown men and women crying because they never had a father to offer financial, physical or moral support so I beg to differ that a man that does his best to provide for his family doesn't deserve to be loved as much as the woman who is always home with the kids. This is my opinion and you have yours but to think my mentality makes me a bad father shows you know nothing about parenting!

lovelygurl:
Aren't you the 1 that has been jumping up and down trying to prove your point? Where are YOUR statistics? That's why I asked which century do you live in! Are you telling me that wives do not work too? Your excuse is absolutely ridiculous! More and more dads are getting emotionally attached to their kids which we see EVERYDAY. It's getting to be the norm. You wouldn't be surprised if you see kids prefer their dads to their mums and noooope not because they go to work and bring money home (because their mothers do too). The best thing you can get if you are or want to be that kind of father is RESPECT NOT LOVE! Love for what? You are just their sperm donor and money bringer loooool

I'm not going to argue with you, if you say more and more dads are emotionally invested as women towards their kids, it still does not mean majority of dads are not less emotional when compared to mothers, unless you have statistics to back it up, the norm still remains the norm. At least admit to that and stop this bickering! I never said wives do not work, I just said when compared overall to their husbands. You do understand I'm talking about the global picture not just a few examples right? Unless something has changed in world dynamics, male are still predominantly the financial provider in the family, women can and should assist but it will never be compulsory regardless of how westernized the world becomes!

lovelygurl:
Which century do you even live in? You are just repeating yourself over and over again and yes there are a loooot of dads who are more emotionally present than their wives

Show me the statistics or show me your source, if you are just going by your opinion then there's no need to even argue with you!

iRepNaija1:
No parent is going to sit down and tell their children to love each parent equally. Did your parents do that? Because mine certainly didn't. You cannot make a person love another person, even if that person is a parent. If you find out a child does not love their parent, are you going to make them do it? And just to be clear, love is not the same thing as respecting a parent or liking a parent.

I'm not going to take your word for it about whether men are the primary financial providers around the world without statistics. And I'm not talking about the US, I'm talking about Nigeria.

The topic of this thread and my point is not a parent playing favorites with their children or how they should train those children "in loving" those parents. It's about which parent the child is close to and why. I explained that point already. If you're so worried about making sure the father is loved and appreciated as much as the mother, then maybe some fathers should stop expecting their children to notice when they pay the bills and actually be present and involved with their children. I promise you, when those parents are long gone, that child isn't going to be reminiscing about which parent paid the bills but that parent who was there for them for emotional support, guidance, and encouragement.

I can't help but laugh, if you ever think a man could be as emotionally present as a woman. Reason women develop those bonds is because they are the ones primarily at home and yes we are talking about Nigeria but no there is no need for statistics because it is just too plain to see! I can see you have no child of your own and most likely you had some daddy issues while growing up; if not you would realize that in a house where tomato paste and dried peppers are used to cook everyday, the children would complain but take away the food and leave them with just garri and they start longing for the tomato paste and dried pepper stew. A father's job is to be a good role model, provide for his family and keep them safe, he is not in competition with his wife for the affection of their kids hence the reason why I said both parents should not create an atmosphere where they have to compete for the love of their children but teach those children to love and appreciate the life they have. To cut the long story short, the reasons you gave for loving your mom more than your dad are valid but naive, as a child you could get away with that type of thinking but when you become all grown up and start experiencing life,such thinking belongs in the zoo...No need for argument here, this is just my opinion, your opinion clearly differs so let's leave it at that!

iRepNaija1:
See? That's your problem right there. You're equating a male influence with financial security, as if it's impossible for a woman to provide that. It's 2017. Husbands are not the only ones paying for everything, and they shouldn't be, despite what you may think. No one is talking about underestimating the father. You're deflecting by saying that. My point is that a husband/father paying for everything does not matter to children as much as you think it should. Children need more than just someone who is there to pay the bills. And if that's the only role he can provide, what if he's out of work? Lazy? Unemployed? A father needs to be more than just a financial provider. Every family is different. Making a statement that children should love their parents equally is narrow-minded.

I don't get? Teaching your children to love both parents is narrow minded? No one is saying a woman cannot be the financial provider, all I'm pointing out here is that the financial provider role is still predominantly a man's role when you look at it globally. This could be incidental or just natural but it's just the way it is. A good parent does not play favoritism, it causes so much problem as I have seen first hand here in the USA. Teach your children the value of your spouse, when trained right, they will surely respect the financial/physical needs as much as the emotional needs. In an ideal home both parents would fulfill both roles but life isn't cup a tea, sh*t happens and it is the job of parents to teach family values not play heroes and villains.

An actor must be ready and willing to play any role, as long as he is not asked to kiss another guy or go naked with another naked guy, I don't see anything wrong! People need to stop this sentimental crap and realize this is all about an actor playing the role he was given!

Protest all you want, it won't change a thing! Only thing that can save Nigeria is a revolution, a bloody revolution! Since nobody wants to die, so let's all just pretend celebrity gimmicks and fake protests would save us!

Seahawk:
On the internet only. In real life many Nigerian women cater for their families.
Can't sow grapes and reap corn

You are absolutely right but when we talk about in general, it is still a ratio of 70% to 30%, with males representing the larger ratio.

Saintmary:
Too bad I can't reveal everything on social media. Currently, in Nigeria, many mothers are the financial backbone of the family. The fathers are, as you said, the male role figures. They are trying, but many mothers are wiser with money, thereby, not as affected by the recession as are many fathers.

Yes many mothers are becoming the bread winner of their family but when you look at the overall picture you would see that males especially the ones in Africa still represents the sole or partial financial sponsor of their families. In the olden days it was 99% to 1% but nowadays it's like 70% to 30% due to irresponsible males, frustrated males and spiritually cursed males. But let's not get off topic, the main point should be kids should not feel obligated to love one parent over the other, it is just plain wrong!

iRepNaija1:
First, paying for the bills and expenses [b]does not [/b]equate to an emotional and quality relationship with your children. When kids are young, they don't notice who pays the bills or whatever, they notice who feeds them, who plays with them, who gets them dressed in the mornings, who reads to them, who attends their school functions. (And to add, a father shouldn't be handling all the bills by himself. These gender roles in Nigeria, for men and women, need to go).

Second, there are plenty of absentee fathers in Nigeria who don't necessarily walk out but are barely involved in their children's lives.

Third, a child will love which parent they want and how they go about it.

You are so wrong! Yes when kids are young they don't notice things such as financials and security but as they get older especially through college they start to realize what life is all about. They start to feel the need for a male role figure, the role of a father can never be underestimated! Any kid that loves one parent more than the other is still naive and thus still a kid; as they get older they tend to realize the importance of both parents in their life with the caveat that none of the parents treated them badly.

ayoolanr:
All the stuff you have mentioned is not exclusively a man's role! Even if it were, these are roles that are determined by choice!! And I live in America thank you very much !!! Not interested on arguing, but read my original comment again and you will see what I am getting at!!! This time read with an open mind and bin all the misogynist crap!!!

Thanks for making my point, they are not exclusively a man's role but we know most men put themselves in such roles. It is a choice where the father chose to stick around and take care of his family. So you should love both equally cos they each have their strengths and weaknesses. Before you call someone misogynist perhaps you should take your own advice and be more open minded, understand the point the other person is trying to make and resist words like 'crap'....

ayoolanr:
One reason I justify why I love women in general is this! A man and a woman both make love, presumably they both enjoyed themselves, balanced right? A woman get pregnant for nine months, she carry's the burden alone, balance tipped. after 9 months comes child birth, she carries that pain of child birth alone once again! Balance tipped!!! The man and woman both fvcked but the woman suffers the consequences!!! So why won't I love my mother more? You tell me!!! I am a guy and I expect my kids to love their mother more!!! It's only right!!!

And who pays for the medical bills? The antenatal? In Nigeria, who pays most of the house bills including rent? Who must ensure his family is safe, has a roof over their heads and discipline is maintained? Come to America and see how kids, teenagers and even adults long for a male role figure, most of their dads walked out on them. The roe of a father cannot be underestimated, it's best to love both parents and show no partiality!

The U.K knows who is BOSS, they wouldn't dare ban a sitting U.S president no matter how obnoxious Trump might be! Even Theresa May was forced to sit up right when she met with Trump, the whole world will soon realize Billionaires like Trump hardly backs down from a challenge. Good or bad, he'll change America forever!

The same Nigerians that voted in Buhari would definitely vote in Fayose if given the opportunity. Instead to look at Ekiti State, the state that he governs; they prefer to ignore the warnings and jump head first into doom....Wetin concern me, Sai Fayoshe

I'm still shocked the guy is still with you. You don't seem to be ready to settle down anytime soon not to talk of maintaining a successful relationship or marriage. I completely blame the guy for still tolerating someone that lives based on advice from media/social media!

Abagworo:
El-Rufai can only be equated with the fool Suleman if Suleman said that anyone who kills his church members no matter how highly placed must give account. Suleman rather ordered for genocide which if applied might lead to wipe off of his ethnic group.

Who is the governor of the State? Who is in charge of security in the State? I fully blame El-Rufai for not doing enough to protect lives of citizens in Southern Kaduna!

Both El-Rufai and the Apostle are mentally challenged. El-Rufai should be ashamed for failing to keep his state safe and the Apostle should equally be ashamed for not knowing how Nigerians react, his statement is too vague and it could literally mean anything. For example, how do you differentiate between a regular Fulani and a Fulani herdsmen? If not that Christians are naturally patient, a lot of innocent Fulanis (Women and children) could have died by now. Overall I think there needs to be an intervention by the federal government otherwise I see nothing but a genocide waiting to happen.

silastemplar:
MMM is this, MMM is that, patronizers are stupid, they are fools...but people made money from it and a lot went in knowing the risks involved. So really, how much have you made for your self asides your monthly salary...assuming you even have a job.

You my friend are a typical example of why this country will not get better anytime soon!

mohemos:
why is nobody saying anything about this? Are they are true?

It takes too long to try to explain some things to somebody that is closed minded so a lot of good Muslims won't even bother. Lucky for you, I've found a link that explains some or all of the gibberish you want answers to:

https://discover-the-truth.com/2014/08/12/quran-2191-and-kill-them-wherever-you-find-them-explained/

adorabledebby:
Muslims are wicked, the fulani herdsmen should be killed. Where was buhari when they killed innocent women nd children in church on Christmas day. All Muslim countries except dubai are full of terrorism and killings

Maldives, Mauritania, Indonesia,Kosovo, Azerbaijan are all terrorist countries? You mean these countries with over 80% of the population Muslims are all terrorist countries? Debbie ori e ti gba le(Your head don knack floor)!

manny4life:
Lmao... No need arguing with you. I see that you really don't know what you're talking about.

https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/about.html

This is from the "NATIONAL ARCHIVES", published in the federal register. This is directly from the SOURCE, open it, carefully read it and tell me if you sound really foolish or not..

Obama's executive orders directed a "federal agency" like homeland security which according to you, saved people from being deported. And you think that same order issued to the same federal agency cannot be enforced in a removal? Lmao, you're actually supporting my view that Trump can actually issue an EO to DHS to expedite removal of illegals in the country just like Obama/Bush did to save deportees. I rest my case, you have finally affirmed my position.

Ode now you are no longer arguing that executive orders have the same force as laws?....very good. Now to your latest point, I never argued that Trump could issue an EO to deport millions of people, my argument is that if he ever issued such an order it won't be based on being a Muslim! There's something called rights against discrimination based on religion,you might want to look it up! Anybody that is deported is either for a criminal act or they are illegals, learn the difference!

manny4life:
Lmao... From the wonderful link you posted, it's a "RULE" or "ORDER" issued to "Executive Branches" NOT the entire U.S. that are subjected to it, having a force of law on executive agencies and NOT binding on the entire U.S. like Obamacare does... Carefully read my post again before spewing gibberish. I asked you, if you claim it's law, why hasn't Obamacare been repealed? I mean Trump and Republicans HATED Obamacare, Trump signed an EO on Friday afternoon he was sworn in: Why hasn't Obamacare been repealed if it's law?

Obamacare is A LAW that affected ALL U.S. States where several republican states litigated all the way to SCOTUS, and IRS was taxed with the responsibility of deducting up to $2,500 for noncompliance. This law affects 300+ million Americans in 50+ states, the District of Columbia and U.S. territories. THIS IS A LAW even the Supreme Court upheld it. An Executive Order only affects Executive Agencies of which their main boss is the president. An EO does not affect 300 million + Americans or the 50 + states, or other branches of govt. Next time, read a book, know the difference before you talk rubbish.

You are posting jargon again, if you cannot read and comprehend with the links I've shown you then perhaps go back to school. The link specifically states that executive orders have the same weight as laws. You have not said anything to counter that rather you sit here and type rubbish! Go and read about Bush's executive orders and Obama's executive order that saved millions of dreamers from being deported, go and read about that and come back here and tell me they don't impact millions of Americans!

Omudia11:
Indonesia is the country with the largest Muslim population in the world.

I know that, I was referring to countries with potentials for terrorism!

manny4life:
Really? Has the same capability as law? So why is Obamacare is very active? Heck why do taxpayers have to pay tax penalties for not having Obamacare? No need arguing with you, believe whatever you want. You would wake up one morning to realize that you're the one yarning jargon.

Executive Orders do not require Congressional approval to take effect but they have the same legal weight as laws passed by Congress.

ex·ec·u·tive or·der
nounLAWUS
a rule or order issued by the president to an executive branch of the government and having the force of law.

The above was taken directly from Google and http://www.thisnation.com/question/040.html

Next time you argue online make sure you know what the f**k you are talking about!

manny4life:
First, if you're a U.S. Citizen and you claim to know how democracy works, then you would know that President Trump is the head of the executive, and what he signed is NOT law, but an Executive Order.

Second, Congress is the only arm of govt that makes laws, the president does not make laws but uses an EO to temporarily suspend or resume an activity that often deals with executive branches until Congress decides what to do with it. For instance, in his first day of office, he signed an EO to repeal Obamacare, well, Obamacare is still very existent because he cannot suspend it. As a matter of fact, Republicans are actually reconsidering whether to allow states decide if they want to keep it or not.

Finally, you're mixing two things: deportees and refusal of visa. These are two agencies: Deportation is strictly the responsibility of Homeland Security in which USCIS falls under, while Visa is the responsibility of the Department of State. The president has the Constitutional right to issue an EO to the state department (consular affairs) on U.S. Visa Policy. Whether this EO is constitutional or violates INA is a different story, and considering that we have a republican controlled house and a soon-to-be conservative Supreme Court, anything is possible.Visa or not is irrelevant because when you arrive in the U.S., the person who decides your entry is the CBP agent at airport.

Executive order is a directive which has the same capabilities as a law. Forget the grammatical jargon, I'm telling you exactly how it functions. Next, visa refusal based on just religion is against the U.S Constitution and even the strongest Republican won't support a violation of the Constitution. Stop making it sound as if Trump is going to make it impossible for all Muslims to come to the U.S, even he is not that crazy!

jhurney:
like u didnt pick d 1's dat favoured ur cause??
so 4 ur adult discussion u were talkin bou, would u pls xplain jihad 4 me?

Jihad is holy war, jihad is not what these terrorists are fighting because they are killing innocent Muslims and Christians. You cannot fight Jihad against women and children. Jihad was fought not only by Muslims but by Christians also, you can look up the holy crusades.