₦airaland Forum

I came to see that the difference was simple, here in America, electioneering and the democratic culture is a way of life, its nothing different from what every average American has experienced all through his or her life.

Indeed.

The democratic process education starts very early in life, from primary school all the way through university. By the time an American is of voting age (18), he or she already understands democracy, the process, elections and expected conduct.

carefreewannabe,

Had you read my posts carefully, you'd have noticed I didn't differentiate between marriage and cohabitation to make my points. I don't see much difference between the two. In that case, it would be foolhardy for me to try and explain why marriage is or isn't necessary, without going back to examine human evolution.

Answer me this: What's the difference between being married versus simply living together and raising kids? Is it the wedding? The marriage certificate? What?

I even mentioned common law marriages, where a state feels that a man and a woman have lived together for a long time so for all intended purposes, they should be regarded as husband and wife. As you can see, even governments have blurred the lines between marriage and what's called "shacking up".

I believe the only reason we humans came up with this concept called "marriage" was because, we have been practicing it at a biological level far back into our caveman days. I'll even venture to say, pair-bonding is in our genes.

Even if all world governments were to legally abolish marriage today, it will still go on. Why? because humans are social creatures. Our need to pair up, to procreate, to raise our off-springs and live as a couple is just too great a force to legislate.

In conclusion, marriage is not something one can search for alternatives. There are none, other than flat out rejection of the opposite sex in making and raising babies. Whatever viable alternatives one can think of, I'm sure it would be very similar to what we currently call "marriage".

So humans just woke up one day and became the dominant species? Isn't it from how we adapted to our environment? Isn't it from changes we made to our environments and how we employed new survival techniques and habits? You'd rather prefer we go about mounting each other with no long term commitment just like the hyenas in the Serengeti plains of East Africa?

My point is, marriage or to be precise, long term pair-bonding was one of the techniques we used to rise above other animals. I'm talking from a time frame of several thousands of years but you seem to be debating from about 200 years of recorded history. I don't recall saying that marriage is the antidote to all human problems, but you seem eager to arrive at that conclusion.

Any way, I strongly believe that single-parenthood is not conducive to the proper development of children. Let me repeat, human societies that marginalize the sanctity of marriage become extinct. Human societies that undermines the importance of a man's role in the family unit eventually die out or accrue all other sorts of problems. Look at what's happening in those liberal socialist Scandinavian countries where the government have taken center stage in family affairs. What happens when there's no government or a disruption in government services?

The Roman empire fell mainly because values were compromised, which led to more money being needed to keep the empire afloat. Some of those values included family values.

I am tired of typing. Will continue tomorrow. Good night.

carefreewannabe: Thank for your answer. It's very interesting and I feel like I can learn something. Let me ask you some more questions.

1. You say that the marriage institution has served us quite well. In how far, exactly? What has it contributed to that we wouldn't have without it. Could it be that some other form of bonding could be more beneficial and less disadvanatageous?

If you have some ideas as to what might work, please say it for debate sake. My explanation is from the point of view of what's good for the human species, not what's good for the Mensah family or Adeyemi family. I'm looking at this from ten thousand miles up, not from a closeup where marriage's imperfections are glaring. Now, I'm quite surprised at your question especially after my previous posts. Marriage has served humans well in spite of its shortcomings. It has given us a code of conduct to ensure our dominance. Humans are the only species that have regulated pair-bonding, why? Humans are the only species capable of making tools to survive, why? I think those two might be related. Marriage can be considered a survival tool, same as how the discovery and use of fire was revolutionary in our species' history.

2. I don't think that there are no other alterntives. Simply speaking: Two people can decide to be parents and but refuse to be lovers. They BOTH take care of their common children but at the same DO NOT have a love relationship. They raise their children as (best) friends. As for the child, it can FULLY enjoy the care of his father AND mother. The workload is also spilt and well divided between the biological parents.

Aha! In the words of Tina Turner, "what's love gotta do with it?". Love has no bearing on the intended goal of marriage. Please, don't use that word "love" because it really muddies our debate. Your example falls right under long term pair-bonding, so it's not different from what I have already said. Again, marriage is an artificial construct meant to prolong and encourage long term pair-bonding. It's an endorsement by societies that says, "Good job! You two have done the right thing. Remain together for eternity and you shall eventually be rewarded. Oh, by the way, here's your certificate of recognition".

Some people have internalized and adopted the marriage concept without any ceremony or fanfare or a certificate, but it's still a "marriage". In fact, some societies call that a "common law" marriage. Common law marriage is one where both parties live together and perform all the proper rituals of an endorsed union, but without an official government paperwork. However, it's given the same legal standing as an official marriage.

3. I don'T agree that modern societies and their governments AIM at eliminating the father from the nuclear family. IN FACT, if you DEEPLY get into the politics of countries such as the NETHERLANDS, GERMANY, GREECE, SPAIN, POLAND, ENGLAND and some more, you'll very soon discover that their governments favour the traditional form of a nuclear family, through regulations, labor market policies etc. ONE of the reasons why governments in modern societies CAN interfere in the family unit is, for instance, protection from child abuse, which per se is NOT a bad thing. Modern societies are not "anti - father", neither are their governments.
What you're saying about "set-up givernment people" to "uproot" children from their families is absolutely UNTRUE.

Let me ask you this question. So prior to say 50 years ago, children weren't being born and raised properly without government intervention? Most of our great inventions where done by people who were born over 50 years ago. So who do you think raised and nurtured those geniuses? Aliens? Contrary to your belief, I think western societies and some are slowly dieing out.

Throughout history, empires have fallen because the institution of marriage was corrupted or compromised. An example is the Great Roman Empire. The quickest way to bring down an empire is to corrupt their women folks, which in turn affects the institution of marriage. You are witnessing that right now with low birth rates in developed nations. We sometimes make fun of how Nigerians (or the third world) breeds like rabbits, but it's actually a long term human survival strategy.

4. Single parenthood CAN SOMETIMES; IN SOME CASES, be better than an abusive family THAT is UNHEALTHY FOR THE CHILD.

No situation is perfect, but over all, dual parenthood trumps single parenthood.

5. A lower birth rate is INDEED problematic. What these countries look for now are WELL EDUCATED foreigners. A way to face and solve the problem. As the world is over-populated and climate change (among other reasons due to overpopulation) is one of the biggest DANGERS to the life of the human race, this may have enormous advanatges for the world as a whole. (Same-sex marriages are a whole new topic, lets omit it here.)

Last but not least, it's worth noticing that people from rather traditional societies look down at people from rather progressive societies and THE OTHER WAY ROUND. No matter the differences, IN THIS THEY ARE THE SAME

Well said. They have to import people because they're not producing enough. That's all good because after all, were are all human beings with one destiny, regardless of our varied genetic traits. That may be bad depending on which part of the fence you sit. However, in America today, the population of non-whites is on the rise and one beneficiary of that shift seems to be Barack Obama. He won the US election due to an ongoing ethnic demographic shift. You could even say his dad was also successful by scattering his seeds all over the globe.

carefreewannabe: I like this explanation a lot. Some very good points. You have also added some new aspects that are very important, such as for example the development of a child.
The quesstion that remans now is, is it necessary to stick to the instituition marriage to raise children properly? Could other concepts work as well? Considered the fact that some or even many people are not monogamous, which leaads to a lot of drama in marriages and also affects children negatively, could there be a different solution?

Should the institution of marriage be abolished simply because humans are not monogamous? Remember that, over all, marriage has served us (humans) rather well. I personally refuse to accept that infidelity is the cause of most marriage dramas.

So to your question about alternatives to the institution of marriage (long term pair-bonding) -- there is none. The fact of the matter is, continuous contribution of a child's biological father and mother is needed for a well-adjusted development.

HOWEVER, other concepts have been employed, not as replacements for marriage, but as safety net or support or backup plan. There's a popular saying, "it takes a village to raise a child" (ITAVTRAC). This means, raising children takes a lot of effort so lets spread the workload. This concept is not new, and pre-dates the modern concept of marriage. Today, ITAVTRAC is employed mostly in less developed societies.

Developed societies, within the past 50 years or so, have taken ITAVTRAC and applied it in a different way. Their version is meant to eliminate the male from the nuclear family. They have passed laws so the government can interfere in the family unit. Their government has become mom or dad by proxy to a child, or husband by proxy to a wife.

Responsibilities as parents, and as husband or wife, has been signed away to the federal government. Whole departments have been set up to uproot children from their parents on the slightest complaints from nosy neighbors.

Single-motherhood abounds because the male authority in a family has been severely weakened. Marriages in those societies are on the decline, which has resulted in lower birth rates. To make matters worse, they have embraced homosexualism -- an antithesis to the propagation of our species.

Marriage is a purely human institution whose purpose is debatable. After all, lower form animals don't get married but have been pair-bonding since the beginning of time. The boy goat in my village just chases the girl goat around and mounts her when needed. A few months later baby goat is born and life goes on fine -- until Christmas . Some, such as lions or species of birds would stick around with their partners for a while before and after a baby is born.

So the question remains -- what exactly is marriage? I'd say marriage is what has made us superior animals. The human baby takes a very long time to mature or reach adulthood. Our brains are bigger and takes a while to fully mature in order to invent stuff. Since our goal is to propagate and continue being the dominant species, we needed to take pair-bonding (as practiced by lower form animals) to a higher level. A level where mommy and daddy stick together longer to properly raise and shape junior. Secondly, sex is a biological need just like food and water. Marriage also fulfills that need and we can now have more time to invent cool stuff instead of having to worry about where to get sex.

Fair enough? but there's a problem to that idea. The problem is, we humans are not monogamous by nature. The human male is coded to seek out as many human females as possible to increase his genetic survival. See, in nature, success is not measured by how much money one has or the size of their house or by which car one drives. Success is measured by how far and how much your genetic code carries through generations.

So to ensure that human couples stick together, we have created an institution called marriage, which is founded on strong societal forces -- religion and culture. We respect those two forces so much that, we will do anything in their names. Heck you even get a paper certificate, after swearing that you'd remain together "until death do you part". This is all meant to instill a sense of pride and give encouragement.

However, underneath it all is the simple idea of pair-bonding. The idea that, a species would be much more successful if parents cooperate to raise their young. An idea which started a long, long, long time ago.

360command: Africa, africa all I am saying is TRY AGAIN.
Nigeria is becoming a dollarized economy if truly people are paying for their child school fees in dollars. He went far to give Zambia has an example though it has been changed by their constitution not to transact biz in dollars. Ghana is one country where I c the economy is finished as ever. A country where for you to rent a house or transact biz, one needs to pay in dollar or as they put it 'cedi equivalent'. Its not too late africa, we can still TRY AGAIN!

Leave Ghana alone and mind your forking Nigeria.

Wiz-Prince:
Hi Peeps, Lets Test Our English Knowledge.

I Know Some of You Thinks English Is Simple But i Bet You'll Find It Difficult in This Aspect!

...Please Translate

"HOW MANY YEARS YOU TAKE SENIOR ME"

To Simple and Correct English... Let The Fun Begin.

I'm older than you.

GIANT petrol shortage OF AFRICA

CFCfan: Blessing Okagbare
www.nairaland.com/attachments/882154_Okagbare_w445_jpg6f956069c6c9e9fe185ae997496aa4df

aaahhhhh... are you fvkking shtn me

Petraeus Resignation: Harassing Emails Led to FBI Prob


(WASHINGTON) — The FBI investigation that led to the resignation of CIA Director David Petraeus started with a complaint several months ago that Paula Broadwell, his biographer and paramour, was sending harassing emails to a third person, a U.S. official told The Associated Press.

FBI agents discovered exchanges between Broadwell, a West Point graduate and Army Reserve officer, and Petraeus, the retired four-star general who commanded troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, that revealed they were having an affair, according to the official.

Investigators said the emails raised the possibility of security breaches that needed to be addressed directly with Petraeus because his emails in the matter were in most instances from a personal account, rather than his CIA one.

Details about the third person were not immediately available.

(MORE: The Military Legacy of David Petraeus)

The official was not authorized to publicly discuss about the investigation and spoke about the probe only on condition of anonymity.

The sudden and unexpected end of a career that many thought might culminate in a run for the presidency came on Friday. Petraeus admitted to an extramarital affair in tendering his resignation, which President Barack Obama accepted.

Petraeus’ deputy, Michael Morell, will serve as acting director, Obama said. Morell was the key CIA aide in the White House to President George W. Bush during the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The change in leadership is taking place as the administration and the CIA struggle to defend security and intelligence lapses before the Sept. 11 attack that killed the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three others Americans. It was an issue during the presidential campaign that ended with Obama’s re-election Tuesday.

Petraeus, who turned 60 on Wednesday, has been married for 38 years to Holly Petraeus; they met when he was a cadet at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y. She was the daughter of the academy superintendent. They have two children, and their son led an infantry platoon in Afghanistan.

The retired general told CIA employees in a statement that he was guilty of “extremely poor judgment” in engaging in the affair. “Such behavior is unacceptable, both as a husband and as the leader of an organization such as ours.” He said he had offered his resignation to Obama on Thursday and the president accepted it Friday.

(MORE: Petraeus Stumbles Off the Stage)

Administration officials said the White House was first notified about the Petraeus affair on Wednesday, the day after the election. Obama, who returned to the White House that evening after spending Election Day in Chicago, wasn’t informed until Thursday morning.

For the director of the CIA, being engaged in an extramarital affair is considered a serious breach of security and a counterintelligence threat. If a foreign government had learned of the affair, the reasoning goes, Petraeus or Broadwell could have been blackmailed or otherwise compromised. Military justice considers conduct such as an extramarital affair to be possible grounds for court-martial.

Failure to resign also could create the perception for the rank and file that such behavior is acceptable.

Petraeus, who became CIA director in September 2011, was known as a shrewd thinker and hard-charging competitor.

In the preface to “All In: The Education of General David Petraeus,” published by Penguin in January, Broadwell said she first met Petraeus in the spring of 2006. She was a graduate student at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, and he was visiting the university to discuss his experiences in Iraq and a new counterinsurgency manual he was working on.

In 2008, she wrote, she was pursuing a Ph.D. in public policy and embarking on a case study of Petraeus’ leadership. After Obama put Petraeus in charge in Afghanistan in 2010, Broadwell decided to expand her research into an authorized biography.

(MORE:Reporters Want Petraeus to Be President Real Bad)

Broadwell made many trips to Afghanistan, with unprecedented access to Petraeus, and also spent time with his commanders across the country. When Petraeus took the job at the CIA, she remained in close contact with him, sometimes invited to his office for events like his meeting with Hollywood actress Angelina Jolie.

With the book done, she told friends she had been concentrating on turning part of her research on Petraeus into a dissertation, to complete her doctorate.

Petraeus, in his email, told his CIA employees that he treasured his work with them “and I will always regret the circumstances that brought that work with you to an end.”

Other CIA directors have resigned under unflattering circumstances. CIA Director Jim Woolsey left over the discovery of a KGB mole, and John Deutch left after the revelation that he had kept classified information on his home computer.

Before Obama brought Petraeus to the CIA, Petraeus was credited with salvaging the U.S. war in Iraq.

President George W. Bush sent Petraeus to Iraq in February 2007, at the peak of sectarian violence, to turn things around as head of U.S. forces. He oversaw an influx of 30,000 U.S. troops and moved troops out of big bases so they could work more closely with Iraqi forces scattered throughout Baghdad.

Petraeus’ success was credited with paving the way for the eventual U.S. withdrawal.

After Iraq, Bush made Petraeus commander of U.S. Central Command, overseeing all U.S. military operations in the greater Middle East, including Afghanistan and Pakistan.

When the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, was relieved of duty in June 2010 for comments in a magazine story, Obama asked Petraeus to take over in Kabul and the general quickly agreed.

In the months that followed, Petraeus helped lead the push to add more U.S. troops to that war and dramatically boost the effort to train Afghan soldiers and police.

Morell had served as deputy director since May 2010, after holding a number of top roles, including director for the agency’s analytical arm, which helps feed intelligence into the president’s daily brief. He also worked as an aide to former CIA Director George Tenet.


By KIMBERLY DOZIER and PETE YOST

http://nation.time.com/2012/11/10/petraeus-resignation-harassing-emails-led-to-fbi-probe/?xid=gonewsedit&google_editors_picks=true

The answer is quite simple -- young women have very little or no emotional baggage. Their outlook on life is simple, naive and uncomplicated.

It's not always about the sex. I guess it's sometimes about the feeling of being with a babe who can make him feel young again. That's why my 65 yr old dad dates 20yr old women and it doesn't bother me. I'm all for anything that can give him a longer, healthier, stress-free and happier life.

STENACO: People have to be very careful the way they speak against the men of God. I dont go to synagogue church but I dont judge him as well. We are not meant to judge but if every pastor you accused to have got powers from satan should do what he is doing then it is worth it. Our country would have been better. So all this critics in nairaland should mind themselves.

Please define what a man of God is. Aren't we all God's men and women?

Kslib: Abeg. Make the op go post am for Ghanaweb too. Nice memories sha...

The article came from Ghanaweb.

sadeiyare: I feel personally that the goods melcom put in that building was too much for it ; the place was chocked up

The first 3 floors was the store. The top floors was the warehouse. It's evident the weight-bearing columns couldn't hold the weight of the Christmas merchandise.

Les: do u realise u have no right wat so ever to call him fake?

Ooooh, I'm so scared. What is TB gonna do? Cast his juju spell on me. It's funny how we African Christians claim to be so devout and yet believe in the supernatural or occult.

Entire scripts of Nollywood movies glorify these evil figures. In Nigeria today, there's a charm for every aspect of life. Want a USA visa? No problem -- there's a special juju for that. Can't get your wife pregnant? Well, instead of praying to God, why don't you just kidnap and sacrifice your 2 yr old nephew?

So in such a nation, can one trust a person who claims to be a Christian "man of God"? I wouldn't.

TB Joshua is a fake. Emmanuel TV is ridiculous. I entered uni at 16. I got my first degree at 19 and masters at 21 so I know a thing or two about medical science, human physiology, psychology and even religion *gasp*. I think I'm smart enough to believe that nothing.. absolutely nothing about TB or his station makes any damn sense.

Only the most gullible and the most destitute (which implies 90% of the population) would fall for such antics. When people are faced with hard times and poverty, they become more religious and are willing to believe ANYTHING. Africa is a fertile ground to find such people. TBJ and ilk have discovered the formula and he's capitalizing on it all the way to the bank.

There's a particular church in Accra with its own bank right on the premises! You are even encouraged to offer in foreign currency. How totally unchristian is that?

Jesus Christ stood for simplicity, humbleness and the poor. He was anti-worldly. He presented himself as a peace-loving man and drove moneychangers and merchandisers out of the temple (John 2:13-15). But today, these our so-called leaders of Christianity are all about money, money and money!

The response of Jesus when his enemies tried to trap him by asking whether it was right for the Jews, whose nation had been taken over by the Roman Empire, to pay tribute to the Roman emperor. He took a Roman coin that would be used to pay the tribute and asked whose picture was on it; his questioners answered, "Caesar's."

The reply of Jesus implied that in using Roman coins, the Jews accepted the rule of the Romans, and so the Roman government had the right to tax them, as long as the Jews were not compromising their religious duties. Jesus' more general point was, "Give to worldly authorities the things that belong to them, and to God what belongs to God."

TB Joshua is a worldly authority, not a prophet, and shouldn't be carrying a Bible. Hell fire awaits him.

solbil: As for those who are quick to say "typical nigerian mentality" well, i think you all are just a bunch of xenocentric feminist people who by chance have found yourselves abroad and now think anything nigeria is inferior! You have become so blinded by your xenocentrism feminism that your intellectual development have been seriously affected! How else can we explain your inability to suspect the simple obvious? That by nature , children are more attached to their mothers than they are to their fathers. And the one who is closer, has more influence.

I second your opinion.

Any way, looking at the big picture, this topic is more about feminism than anything else. I don't want to deviate from the topic but any time someone asks "why men can do this but women blah blah blah..." types of questions, it's an attempt to deny the natural order and balance of humanity, so it's okay to stray off course in your reply.

Feminism is a deadly ideology which has a corruptible effect (especially on the female psyche). You don't believe me? Try taking your Naija chick or wife to America, Europe or Australia today and see how fast she flips from that sweet village girl to a monster. Why? Because she has been exposed to the toxicity of feminism.

Here is a story (not mine). I'm not sure what value it has on this thread, but it's quite interesting to read:


WARNING: LONG QUOTE

I was born, raised, and went through school with feminism. I believed all of the propaganda about the idyllic new world we were creating, a world in which no one would suffer discrimination; a world in which anyone could take on any role that they wanted in life. I really believed that stuff. As well, looking around me and looking back, I must say that for Canadian and American women this dream has pretty-much been realized, at least as best it can be in an imperfect world.

The rub is that for men the quality of life has gone in the opposite direction. Now, I'm not talking about men's fortunes going downhill in the feminist sense. You know: men having been at the pinnacle of power, controlling everything, running the home, running the political world, the financial world, and pretty much every other world there was to run, and now having to share that power with women. I don't believe that bunkum any more.

After all, Fred Everyman who dragged his butt to the factory every morning and back home every evening thirty years ago is still dragging his butt around the same way thirty years later, if he's lucky enough to have a factory to which to drag it. It is true that the high-rolling, über-boss men of yore now have to share the corner office with high-rolling über-boss women, and this may upset them (I wouldn't know), but life options for the average working Joe haven't changed much in three decades.

One thing that has changed a lot for Fred Everyman is married life. There once was a time when Fred would wake up in the morning, sit down to a nutritious breakfast made for him by his wife, head off to work carrying a lunch made for him by his wife, work all day, then return home to a dinner cooked for him by his wife, in a house that he didn't have to clean, perhaps with kids that he helped raise but didn't have to tend.

What we refer to as "modern women" see this scenario as a kind of slavery. Jane Everyman was stuck at home, cooking, cleaning, and wiping runny noses. Many of today's women have sworn that they would never cook, clean, and raise children for any man, and many of them have managed to avoid these things, principally by convincing men that men ought to help out with the household chores while at the same time she goes out to earn a bit more money. This still seems like a fair trade to me, and this was why I supported feminism: not to free women from slavery, but to allow men to become more involved in their homes and their childrens' lives.

Then two things went terribly wrong. First, rather than signing up for boring but profitable work like computer programming, or dangerous but profitable work like underwater welding or garbage collection, women signed up en masse for people-contact professions that had always paid—and continue to pay—lousy wages. Second, in addition to insisting that men learn to cook, clean, and look after kids, many women decided that the best way not to be caught in the housewife / mother trap was not to learn any of this stuff, and ultimately not to do it.

What we've ended up with is something that boggles my mind: thousands of women who made career choices that stressed "easy" over "profitable," who as well know next to nothing about keeping house, complaining that they can't seem to meet the man of their dreams.

This does not surprise me. Who the hell would want them?

Don't get me wrong: love is a wonderful thing, and it's one of the biggest rushes in life to meet someone who turns you on sexually, enjoys spending time with you, and likes many of the same things that you like. However, the harsh reality is that eventually some meals must be cooked, some dishes washed, some babies changed, leaves mucked out of gutters, toilets repaired, and oil changed. This is the stuff of everyday life, and someone has to do it. Love and friendship are wonderful things, but one must also address the practical matters of living. The garbage won't take itself out.

I know far too many "modern" women who make lousy money, are hopeless in a kitchen, couldn't change a tire if their lives depended on it, get vertigo on step ladders, and don't want children. These same women think that they deserve to be married to some wonderful guy just for existing. I had a short discussion with a school teacher friend of mine in which I asked why men had to bring women flowers, but women never bring men flowers (I like flowers). Her response? "Our presence is our gift to you!" I guffawed. I haven't been invited back. Women who are of no practical use to anyone think that they deserve everlasting happiness with some dream prince because, well, they're just such great company.

Except that they're not.

Men typically don't spend a lot of time in card stores, but you should pop into one some time. It's instructive. Carlton or Hallmark, it doesn't matter. Drop in and check out the "for women only" section. I'll give you a sample: "Congratulations on your marriage. Your new life will require energy, determination, and skill.... Training a man isn't easy." Or, how about this one: "All men are scum.... Oh, for a moment there, I was feeling generous." Women—the same "modern" women I'm talking about—buy these things. They actually believe stuff like this, and have a hearty laugh over it. I know, because my cousins buy these things and send them to each other. My female friends post them on their kitchen walls.

So who, I must ask, wants to stay home and look after a house for a woman who, even if she did make good money, thinks you're a loser just because you're male? Who wants to listen to "stupid men" jokes year after year? And who, short of the most masochistic among us, would agree to both work and take care of the house only to be told by a woman who is inept at anything that could be labeled "work" that you're somehow sub-human?

Men helped open up the workplace to women when they demanded it. Men even changed the workplace to make it better than it had ever been when it was only men working. Men introduced new laws to accommodate women in the workplace. A good number of us learned to cook, and even more of us took up scrub brushes and pails of Pine-Sol to help with the cleaning. We learned to do laundry and ironing. We learned to change diapers and how warm the milk should be before baby gets it. Many of us now know more about looking after a home than many women.

After all of this, we get sneering disrespect from junior secretaries who have trouble cooking pasta. Then, when they get tired of us, they divorce us and take the kids, the house, and the car the way their grandmothers did.

If I sound depressed by this modern condition, I am. If I sound nostalgic for the Fifties, I'm not particularly. You see, my dream had always been to marry a woman who made good money. I love cooking; I love kids; I enjoy decorating although I'm not that good at it; I can take or leave cleaning, but I did it for twenty years so I could do it for sixty more without much problem; I can also take a passable crack at repairing a car engine and I can climb ladders and move heavy furniture, which is more than the fabled Fifties housewife could do. I can also, in a pinch, make good money.

Neither am I alone. I have a friend on my sports team who brings cakes and squares after every practice. I have another good friend who does prize-winning needlepoint. A lot of my male friends are single and although, as I'll freely admit, some of their places are strictly utilitarian, others would surprise you with their tasteful decor. There are still a few "Neanderthal" men out there, but there are also a lot, like me, who have grown up self-sufficient, tidy, and capable in the home.

After all of this, I find that I look around at the single women I know, and I shudder. I listen to them giggling about how stupid and useless men are, and it makes me glad that I can take care of myself. Women think that they have finally arrived at a place where they don't need men any more. They can make their own money, and modern technology makes much of men's strengths and skills obsolete. However, I have news for those women who think that this gives them a leg up on us men: many of us don't need you, either. We can cook, clean, and look after ourselves.

Mothers, by nature, are supposed to be closer to their off-springs than fathers. This idea that, a mother's bond with her child is sacred and of utmost importance has even been coded into societal laws (especially in developed countries). So why shouldn't mothers be blamed for their child's bad behaviour?

Come Mother's Day, the whole world would be abuzz. Come Father's Day, the silence would be deafening. Most fathers themselves will be like, "wetin be that again? Son why you dey give me present?"

In conclusion, mothers in general get more love than blame.

mekaboy: ENOUGH PROBLEMS THAT HE WILL PREFER ARMED ROBBERS TO SHOOT HIM AND END HIS SUFFERING ? HE SHOULD BE REGRETTING THAT THE ARMED MEN DID NOT KILL HIM AS HE WISHED.

WHEN HE SAID HIS WHOLE FAMILY GATHERED, PLEASE WHICH OF THE FAMILY? YOUR DAD, MUM, BROTHERS AND SISTERS OR WIFE AND CHILDREN.

What's your problem? The dude told us his experience. You can believe him or scram.

solomon111: stfu!
What do you know about Nigeria,you bloody ghanaian.
Is it not in ghana,we have kumawood and gollywood,despite the fact that you guys are of a microscopic population,and even the gollywood is non-existent.

WTF is a kumawood? There's ghallywood (not gollywood) and that's all we've got. We are more united than your ridiculous south south south south music awards lol! I guess if you go any further south, you'll be inviting us to the South Antarctica Music Awards... r3tard!

I laugh in Twi whenever I read, "this story is fabricated". Wetin you want this OP Naija man convince you say arm robbers don attack am in Naija? Isn't the crime section of NL full of incredulous or worse stories such as that?

One thing I have noticed about Nigerians is, you are always in denial about the obvious. You see what's going on in your country but would sing,"no this can't be. We are Nigerians for chrisakes! we are better, smarter, and the big giant giant giant of Africa!.. it's not true... the world hates us because we are NIGERIA!" {then covers eyes with both palms}"

phreakabit: Well done oh! You just bust the guy bubble.

I'm sure you meant I have exposed the OP? No I don't think so. Besides, it doesn't matter as we don't know him, his plans or house layout or even where he lives.

Any way, there are two choices -- remain and fortify yourself on the premises or leave. Each one of those can be considered a "disappearance".

The reason why THE HAMMER was so effective was because the windows and doors were easily found in the first place. Even the walls which held them weren't thick enough. IMO, any room wall less than 3ft thick and not reinforced with iron rods (rebar) is useless against THE HAMMER. So that probably goes for 99.9% of the houses in Nigeria which are just stacks of badly formulated cement blocks.

Only subterranean rooms offers the best security against human intrusion. This underground room can be placed in a fortified inner room to begin with. The entrance can also be well hidden and small. Add a simple ventilation system and one can hide there for several hours, which is more than enough time.

Finally, I'd recommend not to hire local builders for such a room as that might compromise the secretiveness of the project.

Deep Sight: As for me, I am already planning very extra-ordinary security measures for my house. Burglar proofing is not enough. One needs a way to literally dissapear once alerted of entry.

How about a secret underground chamber?

"South South Music Awards? I guess the North West or South East or North East or North or South West or West of Nigeria are not invited. You people with NEVER unite!

Numerous posts have dissed the cybercafe business, but I'd say it can be lucrative if one does a few things differently. It is more than a computer business. It is primarily a service industry in which you can add value to the core business.

When someone walks into your internet cafe, what else besides web surfing or printing would they be willing to pay for? Off the cuff, I think about pastries (not just meat pies), hot and cold beverages and fresh juices etc. This could be your opportunity to experiment with the patisserie business which you could spin-off separately later. Team up with someone who can bake or supply the pastries wholesale or just learn to bake yourself .

Most times, I'd enter business establishments simply to cool off when the weather is unbearably hostile outside. What if you could add a comfortable lounge/library-like section, complete with books, newspapers as a service by itself?

Basically, try to have as many profit centers as possible and not just depend on the revenue from internet usage. One more thing though -- for a cybercafe, try your best to have the fastest possible internet connection. That is what would retain your customers if your location has a lot of competing cybercafes.

Someone already mentioned wifi and that's true. Wifi expands the physical computing area of a cybercafe, and allows those with their own devices to become paying customers without even using the cafe's workstations.

The cybercafe business is more costlier to start than a barbering shop, but can be more satisfying. Of course, the success of these ideas depends on location and start-up capital. In the long run, it boils down to your interest. I for one will not enjoy cutting people's smelly hair all day, but that's just me.

So Nigerians are now going to Gabon to fish?? Hahahahaa

solomon111: whenever i see black stars written as BS,it reminds me of 'BULL-SHITT'.

Whenever I hear "Super Eagles", It reminds me of CHICKEN SUPPER

https://hostedmedia.reimanpub.com/TOH/Images/Photos/37/exps12609_TH10123C53.jpg

http://www.bhg.com/recipes/chicken/30-minutes-less/easy-chicken-suppers/
http://www.cooks.com/rec/search/0,1-0,easy_chicken_supper_ideas,FF.htm

~Royal~:


...Ghana Black Stars Baby....

What an Awesome Name for a Football Club....

"The Black Stars"

...It doesn't get any better than that fam

For real. That is the coolest name for an African football club.

It sends a STRONG and PROUD message to any opponent. It exudes confidence and boldness.

Read the advert on the store.

https://www.quiterly.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Honest-Chinese-store-is-honest.-600x450.jpg

Nigerian low self-esteem on full display. This goes hand in hand with your excessive use of bleaching creams.