₦airaland Forum

Gluhbirne:
Utilitarianism = Greatest good for the greatest # of people.

This would work with both parties. Only one person is a recipe for burn out.

Gluhbirne:
"Do what makes you happy" is definitely the wrong motto to be chanting in marriage. If it were possible to do that then there would be no unhappy marriages. The most successful marriages involves one or both parties being an utilitarianist of some sort.

@bold: meaning?

tollahni:
What I want?

,

Yes, what do you want?

olagbemi118:
she's beautiful though...

She looks 100% better without the paint on her face.

She is extremely beautiful.

tollahni:
My mil is just so annoying, I don't know why she hates me so much. My dad would never get involved, he doesn't really like kay and my mom wouldn't be so understanding with my mil. It may get dirty

What do you want?

kennygee:
And the cultured brought about respectful and cultured kids.

Now we want our kids to be our friends. Your kids are not ur friends.

The culture brought about hypocrites except if the 'respectful and cultured kids were else where'

The my child my friend culture is bringing selfish, self serving, narcissist kids

We need to balance both methods.

Family wahala na wa

Just heard my uncle's wife of 20yrs though just legally married have started misbehaving because she is now an 'iyawo oloruka'

Hmmmm....

People need to be more careful to ensure they build strong families and well behaved children

jdluv:
nice write up .......educatin

Glad you learnt from it

Rokia2:
Lol so you had to tag me enh?

This is obviously wrong of the man for God sake. This was total humiliation. The man obviously have no respect or empathy for his wife. I think he could have handled this in a better manner then he did.


I will end it with this pic below. Let us choose our life partner carefully.

True at quote.

I had to tag you naw...

@Rokia2: What do you make of this husband's obvious disrespect?

Oro yi so senu, o tun bu yio si....

I don't know o!

python1:
Life generally. Marriage for instance. Most successful and long lasting married couples have stories to tell, endurance, taking responsibility etc. Money is part of it of course, infact it plays about 60% of the whole show.

Lol @ money playing 60% of the whole show.

The marriage part is very apt.

Sometimes, responsibilities can be unpalatable. The results at the end is what makes it worth it.

python1:
OP, the title of this thread is just sufficient and this must be one of the wisest statements I have hard this in a long time. No need for this story, infact, I didn't read even the first line. A good number of successful people do what they don't like doing.

Thank you.

Are you referencing success as per money or life generally?

Cutehector:
You are right in a way though.. But its not always the case

When is it not applicable?

Rokia2:
A wise woman? Lol traditionalism suddenly comes into play cause it benefits her. She sounds to me like a selfish woman not a wise woman. And now women have also started complaining of men not helping them around the house. A lot of man nowdays help women around the house and with the kids as well.

So why shouldn't the woman help in times of need like this scenario? Shouldn't marriage be a teamwork? Beside this is just for some time and not a Permanent thing.

But with that been said no man should allow his wife be the solo breadwinner of the house unless a situation like this arise or he lose his job. Most females tend to be disrespectful when they are the solo breadwinner. Why I don't know but that's the damn fact.

We honestly don't know for a fact that she is playing the traditional card only when it suits her. The OP did not give us her views on other matters.

Like I said to the other guy, not every woman wants a man who helps; not every man believes in helping a wife...... I have read a woman here who said she don't want a 'helping' husband, she rather cleans the whole house with the husband appreciating.... I also have a number of colleagues (male) who don't do a darn thing; one is even telling his wife to resign cause caring for their kid is stressful with both jobs...... I also know a lady who told me that she hates her husband cooking or cleaning .... 'it is not a man's work' to her.


The wife wants to be a team player in something else...


Women tend to be disrespectful; did you engage any of them why? Do you know what is really going on in their homes? Or are we fine with disrespectful husbands and abhor wives when they turn same?

That's why courtship is important; find what works for you.

2buffagain:
Obviously! That's why I told her we would not be compatible and ended the matter (much to her annoyance).
Also Obviously your tone i.e calling her "wise" and referring to me as "playing ...." infers that you are both of the same limited mindset.

I wish you both the best.
There is a kind of flexibility needed in the 21st century home that has no place for that way of thinking.
She is a lawyer (6-digit USD), not a stay-at-home mum. So that "whats mine is mine, what's his is ours" mindset won't be healthy going into a marriage.

What it simply means is that the wife is incapable of seeing herself as a co-investor in opportunities that elevate the family to financial freedom.
It is an indicator of a lack of shared vision and mismatched compatibility. Not every woman can be a wife. If she manages to be a wife, not every woman can be a partner. There are levels.

She clearly knows what she wants.... she is wise.

The woman has told you that she is 'traditional'.... I know wives who don't want their husbands' 'help' in running the home.... just do your responsibility and leave the rest to them.

She is willing to invest not just her finances..... Abi will you put the money in the plate to eat or the money will clean your cloths?

I opened a thread a while back and one of the points against a working wife was that it was not her duty to invest financially in the home.

Now if a couple wants a non-traditional marriage, then they need to discuss how to would really work it out.

Deep

I'll choose joy over and over again

ByMATT WALSH

There was an article in Cosmo this week with a title that summarizes all that's wrong with Cosmo and modern society as a whole: "I eloped at 25, divorced at 26, and dated my way across Europe all summer." Of course, by "dated my way across Europe" she means that she slept with half the continent.

The author, Elise, says she "started fighting" with her husband and within a few months they both decided that their differences were irreconcilable. Despite counseling, she says, "neither of us was happy." So, exhausted from 12 whole months of marriage, Elise embarked on a voyage of self-discovery and STD cultivation. She met random dudes in half a dozen countries and had sex with them, learning quite a lot as she went, though she can't really explain what exactly she learned or why sex was a necessary component in learning it. Finally, she came home and started dating some other guy. The end.

Well, not really the end. 20 years from now I'm sure we'll get the follow up article: "I'm alone and miserable and it's everyone's fault but mine." After all, you may be able to fill the emptiness in your soul with frivolous sex when you're young and physically desirable, but that phase is fleeting. People who don't want to "waste" their beauty and youth on a spouse, so they waste it instead on strangers who don't love them or even care what happens to them tomorrow, will be shocked when a tomorrow comes where even strangers aren't interested anymore. This is where the single-minded, utterly selfish pursuit of "happiness" at all costs inevitably leads: to rejection, despair, and a quiet, unnoticed death on a lonely hospital bed.

As Elise helpfully demonstrated, "do what makes you happy" is poison in a marriage. Many a vow has been broken because one or both partners decide to chase "happiness" instead of commitment, fidelity, and love. "I deserve to be happy," reports the legion of serial divorcees, as they drift on to the next spouse, and the next, and the next, and the next, looking for the one — the one, finally — who might cure the misery they've inflicted on themselves. Increasingly unhappy, yet increasingly convinced that they deserve to be.

Many people in my generation, determined to "do what makes them happy," have elected to forgo marriage and parenthood entirely. They've predicted that family life will not always be an amusement park of sheer excitement and euphoria, so it isn't worth it. Recently, I posted something on Twitter jokingly complaining about the fact that my kids always lose their shoes, and a guy responded by saying that this— the shoe thing, I guess — is why he never wants kids. "Too much of a hassle," he explained. The deeper fulfillment of parenthood will not compensate, in his mind, for the annoyance of looking for a toddler's sneakers.

It is not a coincidence that the "do what makes you happy" mantra is rarely offered as a justification for a healthy, generous, or productive decision. It is always the bum, the drunk, the couch potato, the loser, who is doing what makes him happy. Stable, successful people are doing something else, something bigger. Indeed, if you ask someone why they go to work every day, or why they stay faithful to their spouse, or why they're attentive to their children, or why they care for a relative with dementia, or why they give to charity, or why they exercise restraint, or why they keep their promises, or why they save themselves for marriage, or why they engage in a hundred other good and worthwhile pursuits, the answer will never be, "Well, I'm just doing what makes me happy." Which isn't to say that these activities always make them unhappy, just that they are reaching for a thing deeper and fuller than momentary gratification.

It's relevant to note that the word "happiness" comes from "hap," meaning chance or fortune. By definition, happiness is fleeting and dependent upon environmental factors. Happiness is an emotional response to happenstance. It's not bad in itself, but neither is it solid enough to serve as the foundation of our lives. We'll never get anywhere, then, if we only ever ask ourselves whether this or that action will make us happy. And whatever direction we go, we won't stay on that road for long because nothing will make us happy all the time.

The only sustained and entirely reliable happiness we'll find is the passive, numbed, brain dead variety that we derive from television. That's why so many of us can't manage to commit ourselves to any obligation yet we'll watch every episode of a TV series like we're married to it. Think of the person who has never been in a job for longer than 12 months, or a relationship for longer than 6, yet has been watching the Walking Dead religiously for 8 years (in spite of the fact that the show has been terrible for the last 7).

The Daily Wire ran a piece on Tuesday about young men who've elected to play video games rather than get jobs. Their reason? Video games make them happy. Doubtless, many of these "happy" people are on anti-depressants, convinced that the constant pangs of despair lying under their "happiness" must be the result of some sort of mental disease. It couldn't have anything to do with the fact that they've been sitting on a beanbag chair in a basement staring at a screen for the last quarter century.

As we can clearly see, "will this make me happy?" is the wrong line of inquiry. I can't tell anything about a given action based on whether or not it will make me happy. There are a million bad and destructive things that would probably make me happy, at least for a time. There are a million good and fruitful things that will probably make me unhappy, at least for a time. The question is irrelevant. It's like asking whether a certain food will fill my stomach. Yes, maybe it will, but with what?

I think the the better questions to ask, before we do anything, are these: Is this right? Is it my duty? Is it productive? Is it healthy? Is it worthwhile? Will it bear good fruit? Will it make me a better person? Is this what God wants? If we can check all of those boxes, we should do it. Even if it causes us unhappiness sometimes, it will also bring us something better: joy. A joyful person, even when he is unhappy, still is sustained by the lasting contentment and peace that comes from a life grounded in faith, love, and virtue. You can never go wrong by doing what brings joy, but those things always require some measure of effort and sacrifice.

The person who chases only happiness would like to have joy as well, but he's not so crazy about the effort and sacrifice part, so he makes do. And that is why we live today in a society filled with happy, optimistic, positive-thinking, joyless, miserable, lonely, smiling, empty people. They have settled for mere happiness, and even that they rarely find.

If only they'd aim a little higher.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/22789/walsh-if-you-want-be-miserable-failure-just-do-matt-walsh

2buffagain:
I asked a single nigerian girl who claims to be "traditonal" (yoruba?) and she said no she will not allow her husband make her the solo bread-winner for as long as that (regardless of if her income alone can hold the fort during the time) because according to her: "if that is what he wanted to do, he should have saved up for it to cover his end of family expenses during the time" She says she can make her money "available as extra" but will never allowed it to be "depended on". (or some razzness like that) The only way she sees that happening is if it came about through uncontrolled circumstances e.g husband losing his job. But as for her, this can never be a deliberate plan.

I had to tell her straight up that we can only be friends, because she and I will be incompatible as a married couple.
There is nothing "traditional" about this way of thinking. It is just pure, destiny-killing selfishness. As in, why are you now a working spouse if your income cannot be "depended on" to propel the family forward?

Or maybe I lack perspective?

The lady has told you she is traditional meaning she is willing to bear the burden of running the home alone while the husband concentrates on his job.... making money.

So you are telling this woman that she will do her own job and do yours in addition while you are 'playing startup'.....

Does she have the opportunity to relinquish her job to you while she gallivants with a pet project?

I would say she is a wise woman who knows what she wants and you are obviously not the man for her.

This article was written for American Christians.....

I find it apt for us too. I find that while I don't support some things e.g. homosexuality, I don't take a public stance too.... 'everyone is free to do whatever they like'

God help us to stand firm.

We need to be more close minded to the right things.

ByMATT WALSH
@@MattWalshBlog

Christians in this country are often accused of being closed-minded. The really tragic thing about this insult is that it isn't true. I wish very much that we could wear that label, but our critics give us too much credit. Indeed it is probably more accurate to say, sadly, that the contemporary American Christian is the most open-minded person to have ever existed.

A typical Christian in our culture is so open-minded that you can hardly tell he is a Christian, or that he has a mind. He is open to pretty much any suggestion the world makes. He is open to the idea that marriage need not be between a man and a woman. He is open to the idea that perhaps a man need not actually be a man at all. He is probably open, at least partially, to the idea that babies aren't people. He has for a long time been open to the idea that marriage isn't permanent and sex isn't meant exclusively for marriage. He is basically open to whatever notions are popular and widely accepted. And wherever he finds disagreement with the world, he will not communicate the disagreement in any way that may cause offense or discomfort. He is open, and where he is not open, he is silent.


He is open in other ways, too. He is open to pop culture. He is open to mass entertainment. He watches whatever everyone else watches, listens to what they listen to, wears what they wear, does what they do. He sends his kids to the same schools, very open-mindedly. He has, open-mindedly, stopped going to church. Or if he goes, he goes to a church which has, in the most open-minded way, adopted secular music, secular vocabulary, and a secular aesthetic. His church is so open-minded that it is not a church. His Christianity is so open-minded that it is not Christianity.


You find this open-mindedness manifest itself especially at so-called Christian schools. Far from lashing out angrily at foreign ideas, as secular schools often do, many Christian institutions bend over backward to provide a welcoming and non-judgmental forum. Consider the allegedly Catholic school, Georgetown, where the CEO of Planned Parenthood recently came to speak. The school touted its commitment to viewpoint diversity, and was very proud that no raucous protests broke out in response to her invitation. There was a similarly shameful and heretical open-mindedness on display when Wendy Davis spoke at Notre Dame.

The secular Left, on the other hand, has a famously low tolerance for opposing ideas. The Right likes to criticize this characteristic of the Left, especially among college students and millennials, but I think they're criticizing the wrong thing. Hostility to opposing beliefs isn't necessarily a vice. A lack of open-mindedness isn't always a sign of ignorance or arrogance. The problem with snowflake college students isn't they're intolerant of differing views, it's that they're intolerant of the right views.

The whole disaster with our schools—- and many of the students who attend them — is that they hold false ideas as true, and hate true ideas as if they're false. Students are learning to embrace what is sick and evil and reject what is healthy and good. It's not the rejection that's the problem, it's what is being rejected. If the students at Georgetown had reacted to the mass-murdering Cecile Richards the same way the students at Berkeley reacted to Ben Shapiro (minus the vandalism), I would have been overjoyed. She warrants such a reaction. Ben does not.

The Right's constant preaching about the virtue of open-mindedness and the value of intellectual diversity misses the point. We are not asking to be listened to merely because we have "different ideas." We are asking to be listened to because we have the right ideas. Or some of us do. Those of us who defend life, marriage, family, and objective morality have the right ideas. We are correct in what we're saying, and that's why it's wrong to protest us or shout us down.

The real crisis begins when Christians, confused on this point, think they need to set a good example by being open-minded and tolerant toward falsehoold just because they want their opponents to be open-minded and tolerant toward truth. They forget that right and wrong should be treated differently, and to treat wrong as if it may be right is extremely disordered.

Stupid, shallow, deranged, irredeemable, and indefensible opinions — that killing babies is OK, or that men can be women, for instance — should be received as such. They should be met with firm and even hostile opposition. Christians should reject falsehood categorically, with anger and prejudice. We should react to harmful and evil ideas like the people who promote those ideas react to our ideas. We would be right in doing so, even where they're wrong in doing so, because we're right and they're wrong.

GK Chesterton said that the point of opening the mind is to close it again on something solid. The trouble with Christians in today's culture is that they won't close it again on the solid thing. The trouble with the Left is that they've closed it on the wrong thing. What Christianity needs, then, is a little more closed-mindedness. It needs something of the Left's rigidity, just without its mental insanity.

There is a cultural and spiritual war going on around us. The Left realizes this and acts accordingly. Many Christians are still sitting politely at the table, though, hoping the other side will come and have a civilized chat over a cup of tea. And even if they never come, the genteel folks at the table figure that at least they'll have done the right thing and lead by example. But your example is terrible, and nobody is paying attention to it anyway. You're only massaging your ego while you sit alone whispering to yourself about what a good boy you've been. "Look at me! I'm so civil!" The Devil appreciates your cooperation, you coward.

The truth is eternal, not elastic. It is what it is. Once we come to know it, our minds should be absolutely and permanently closed around it. We should be intolerant of Satan's lies and unwilling to "hear him out" or consider his point of view. We should show respect to the people who have been duped by him, and we should love them, but we ought to have no respect or love for their ideas, which are wicked and delusional. We are already accused of being closed-minded. It's time we earn the label.

Jesus says that the gate to eternal life is narrow. Perhaps, in that sense, our minds should be too.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/22991/christians-america-arent-close-minded-or-matt-walsh

Papa and Mama Jacobs,

We see you

Lovely

What did she do to her hair?

Interestingly, Genny looks more appealing to the eyes than Oluchi.

They both look good.

What a topic!

Is a husband the head if he is not earning and the wife brings the bacon?

Yes, religiously.

It would however be very hypocritical to deny that husbands have always used their earning power to have the final say or one of the critically defining factor of a head is breadwinnership.

We always have phrases like 'who paid the bride price'; 'after I paid complete bride price' etc. referencing money.

Before wives started earning enough to make a difference, this thread would not exist.

Now we are shifting the goal post because we know tying finances to headship is very risky

This now brings the question i asked in a thread....

What is the role of a husband?
What is the role of a wife?

ladycomfort:
i need a husband like this abeg . not this lets share the house rent, water bills .......

Lol!

One man's meat is another man's poison

thorpido:
As much as possible,a woman should live not too far from her workplace.Also the work hours should be like 8-4pm or 9-5pm,except there are shifts.
Once the night falls,it's late.......i.e by 7pm is ideal.

In Lagos for instance: The commercial hubs are V/I, Ikeja, Apapa, Ikoyi and Lekki and only about 10% of people live around there.

Also, there is the challenge of not finishing up by 5pm and extra hours required.

So what do you suggest ?

byvan03:
Either way, you are screwed.

Hahahahhahahahaha!

You eh!

@OP: you need to be whole in yourself irrespective of your marriage status.

byvan03:
Lol @ feminine charm, by all means a wife should work but the children 's welfare is also paramount, so a balance should be considered. Giving it all up to an uneventful life doesn't cut it for me. Even if it is for the sake of escape route, it a good enough reason to work.

Don't let the OP hear you @ uneventful life

The way they practice their stay at home mom thingy is different from ours..... They volunteer at church, school, neighborhood etc., form groups for reading, discussion, sewing etc. So at the end, one is not really bored.

I agree with a balance, what do you prescribe? How can a wife have that balance?

P.S.: I really find it funny that a lot of them have blogs and TV shows.....

I remember one who was said to have built a career out of telling women not to have a career.

How are you and family?

Acidosis:
Dora and Iweala are purpose-driven not 'career'-driven women.

Some women these days just want a career that will constantly make them wear high heels, heels that are sharp and long enough to step on the husband's toes. That's not a good reason to pursue a career in my own understanding.

Women must can be formally educated beyond secondary school. What they must do with the obtained education however remains a choice.

I think you are mixing a career with working a job for job sake

Dora & Ngozi have careers; na you turn am to purpose

The OP is referring to women who want careers and are working jobs.

If you say you don't like a career woman, can I assume you don't want a working wife?

Elose11:
http://dailypost.ng/2017/10/09/make-fridays-work-free-allow-hijabs-muslims-list-6-restructuring-demands/

This cleric is a lying religious bigot.

First, no legal institution recognizes 'Christian wedding certificate' that's why Christians either do registry marriage or their church e.g. RCCG affliates with the registry who sends the legal certificate to the church on the wedding day.

Secondly, Christians have only 3 public holidays: Good Friday, Easter Monday and Christmas day.... Boxing day has no significance and everyone on this earth sees the new year. You have more holidays and frankly every normal being is fine with whatever makes them have paid leave.

@Hijab: choose institutions that support your hijab. Non Muslims in Saudi have to wear hijab and they don't make a fuss; Corper in Zamfara had to cover their hair to move around.... no noise about it. Christians find a way around policies that doesn't suit them; find yours....

Does going off work Fridays and Sundays with work on Saturdays make sense? Or are you proposing we have a 4 working day week? Of the later, biko push it.

Who told you that Muslims are more predominant in SW? And if they are so? Do you see Christians clamouring for special rules where they are the majority?

Apparently, you conveniently forgot to mention that every institution caters for your Ramadan fast and allows you pray 5times during work hours. Most organizations let Muslims go to mosque on Fridays however Christians workin Sunday shift have no such priviledge.

Why does an average Muslim think that anything not Islamic is Christian?

I am genuinely happy that we have a Fayose.

Every plan to Islamatize Nigeria will fail

Acidosis:
I like all the points on "when it is not suitable to work outside the home", especially number 3 and 6.




No. 6 is the most ridiculous.

So you don't believe a woman should have a career

Do you think a woman should be formally educated beyond Secondary School?

What do you think of Dora Akunliyi RIP and Ngozi Okonjo Iwenala

thorpido:
A wife should work.
However,I personally think that a wife not just woman,should take on jobs that do not keep her away from the home for long hours.

Interesting....

However, I believe there are two things here:

A woman whose workplace is far to the home: so she closes 5:30pm + X hours to get home (where X is 1hr 30mins and above). Let's call her Mrs. A

A woman who likes to 'work' or close late: so she closes 8:30pm and drives 15mins home... Let's call her Mrs. B

Both of them will get home late;

What will you advise both of them to do?

What's your definition of late BTW?