₦airaland Forum

chaircover: why cant she add value to him too?

If she adds her 60-70k to his 60-70k is that not 120-140K per month?

Will she be adding 60-70k and still be sent back to the village?

We cant have our cake and eat it.

that's the definition of feminism.

kulyie: o,so in your own world,they dont plan ahead of time. For example is it not when the woman is pregnant they start buying baby things,abi is it when she has delivered,mr husband will start rushing around to buy baby cloth,towel,feeder etc.i didnt know when you about to marry,you wont plan ahead for your future and put things in place.

Yes,we cant see ahead of the future,at least no one knows what will happen tomorrow but at least plan for tomorrow so that when the wind blows,you still have something hanging on.

I also encourage women to be financially INDEPENDENT,MARRIED OR NOT MARRIED.it is very possible to be financially independent while adding value to your partner.

you have 2 choices.....

find a young man that is just starting so you guys can build together. most marriages started with both parties struggling financially to pull things.

the alternative is to find a billionaire who would treat you like crap & send you to the village. you have told us he's very rich & he's spoilt for exotic choices of women. you didn't help him build his fortunes so he could care less about you.


kulyie - option 1 or 2?

kulyie: coogar,i am being realistic,objective and balanced here,its not about petty sentiments,put sentiments aside.i dont support that anyone should be a leech on any body but for goodness sakes add value to yourself so that you will be able to add value to your partner,she too add value to you,that way you get to complement each other,jeez!

his objective is to take care of his wife got me laughing - why can't a feminist take care of herself? maybe he's not interested in rushing to have kids yet or is there a law that says a woman must start popping babies out a month after her wedding?

chrisley024: Haha! And u can bet ur money he would score a tap-in?

of course, yes!
he's been busier than valencia. winning corners, freekicks, etc. his combo with evra & welbeck have hurt stoke fc more than rafael/welbeck/valencia axis.

chaircover: So a man earning 60K-70k a month should not marry . . . .

Then you now wonder why a man earning 5 million a month man cannot send the woman back home to her parents when he is fed up of her. . .

Sisi Kulyie dont let real hard core feminists see what you wrote o!

feminists choose when it's convenient to be strong & when it's convenient to be a blood sucking parasite.

no lady would agree to marry a man earning a low wage but men are marrying women regardless of her status.

sex equality? yea right!

nitrogen: Bro, 4-3-3 is cool o, it is even the best sef, na those useless wingers wey no pure joor.

valencia can't even cross with a marker to beat. young was the only one in the box to score a tap-in. on a dry night, that would have been achieved. the pitch has soaked water & we won't get quality football until 2nd half when the groundsmen must have done some work on the pitch.


we have played well considering the harsh weather condition.

superstar1: Coogar's much favoured combo of Anderson and Cleverly is horrendous.

valencia, welbeck, jones, etc have all touched the ball, what have they made out of their passes? stoke players are also touching the ball with no accuracy.

rafael just crossed there too & the cross was horrid. should we blame him too? can't you see the wind speed is affecting the passes & the pitch is soggy?

JayKayMaybachz: The wind has quelled a bit na....what bout that free-kick??

every flighted ball in this game has been affected. look at the passes stoke are attempting too - are they accurate?

JayKayMaybachz: Done well ke....Okay what bout the useless crosses?

can you not see the wind? who has delivered a perfect cross on that pitch tonight?

JayKayMaybachz: Abeg .... Ashley young na player at all??

he's done more than valencia in this game. let's stop putting blames unnecessarily. the conditions out there are horrible.

referee should have cancelled the game since & this is why messi won't do it on this ground on a windy night.

abeg - let's play it tomorrow.

coded guy: All these passes sef! No incisive forward passes.

the ball is difficult to control. it's not sticking to their boots for most team. only dribblers can thrive here. i hate this condition so much.

dademola: d "hole" appears to be vacant- we seem to be playing with 2 CMF's and a DMF

the formation is 4-3-3.

chrisley024: Surprised to see Evra in line up.

Ando in the hole (his natural position)! Wish Nani was in place of AV cos he has better cohesion wit Ando. Well let's see how Ando in the hole spans out.

we need to settle this affair asap! the wind blowing at the britannia at the moment is scary. we have enough on the bench to win the game. i can see fletcher, kagawa, hernandez, zaha & nani.

this wind is horrible - jeez, the ball is getting caressed by the wind.

anderson & cleverley in the midfield?
this might be good to watch. evra needs to rest. he's playing too many games & this must be the reason he is fatigued & plays rubbish these days.

where's fabio?

ileobatojo: LMAO!! You do realize you are NOW arguing my own position that shouting at a spouse does not automatically equal verbal abuse? You have side stepped and weaved your way around facts so much that you have ended up on my side of the argument and are now arguing against yourself? Good lord, you are pointless!

Good bye. I'm done.

what a cop-out!!!
i brought out that article to destroy your claim that lady hale's ruling about shouting isn't domestic violence is indeed accurate not because i agree with the female journalist's point of view. she's just ranting.....

the law is the law....
one thing i know about UK laws is they emphasise on the perception of the victims of abuse. if a woman fears for her life because the husband shouts at her then she's being abused. if another woman feels it's the norm in her own home then she has not been abused - happy days!!

so telling me daily mail spun the ruling of the judge is at best desperate. they did not spin the gist. the supreme court allowed the ruling to stand. the perception of the woman that fled her house because her husband shouted at her was taken into consideration.

ileobatojo: The above statements are the daily mail's spin on the news. It is not what the judge herself said or meant. Her words and meaning are clear. You left the original source of information and focused on the pointless distractions to try to prove your point. Not impressive.

why do you like arguing like this? you don't even stay on this island so how would you know what obtains?

Here, educate yourself and read the ACTUAL judgement of the case which includes the details of the case. You will clearly see that this was not a case of 'just shouting' at your spouse and the judgement is not about 'just shouting' at your spouse.

http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2011/3.html

what's this gotta do with what we are saying? the judge said violence has been expanded & it's not until one physically touches his partner before he's abused her. the ruling then said raising your voice, name calling, denying one's partner money, etc are now indices of domestic violence.


this is the reaction of a female journalist about lady hale's ruling from daily telegraph....

Thank goodness Lady Hale has never set foot in our home, or I'd be sleeping under Blackfriars Bridge tonight. I am, you see, guilty of domestic violence: I shout at my husband on a regular basis, with everything from accusations ("You slob!" to threats ("I'm going to throw that Blackberry out of the window!".

I blame my Italian upbringing, which means my normal mode of speech is somewhere between excited yelps and high-pitched hysteria. It's tiring and tiresome for my nearest and dearest, no doubt; but I never thought it was an act of aggression. Until Lady Hale, that is: now I know that my behaviour is not only abusive, it is downright criminal, and could cost me my home and my freedom.

This judge is an äss! (And I'm not afraid to shout it, at the top of my lungs!) As anyone who's ever been to Italy or India will tell you, shouting is a cultural thing. Given the din of everyday life in certain countries, everyone from a working class wife to a high-paid industrialist shouts simply to make themselves heard.

Foreigners will take a shrill voice as proof of anger or aggression; natives know better: how else to drown out the roaring of the Vespa or the backfire of the rickshaw? Sensitive Anglo Saxon ears may be unaccustomed to noisy exchanges; I remember an English friend, at lunch in the bosom of an Italian family, sitting silently petrified as Mamma and Papa shouted at one another. "Gosh, why do they hate each other so?!" she asked me afterwards to interpret. "They don't hate each other at all" I explained, " they were only comparing notes on what they'd been doing in the morning."

Lady Hale's decision betrays real ignorance. Not only of cultural differences but of domestic violence itself. If this judge thinks a shouted response amounts to battering a spouse, she's never encountered the real thing: once you've seen a woman with a black and blue body, or a man with a bloodied eye, you know what domestic abuse is. To rank a raised voice with this is an insult to the victims of real violence. Shame!

ileoba, i dunno what obtains in your own neck of the woods o but if you come to the UK & raise your voice against your spouse, you could be thrown out or slapped with a fine. that's the law regardless of how you might think it's ridiculous.

ileobatojo: Nice try.

Here's the judge's defence for their ruling.
"Lady Hale said that according to the dictionary, violence means physical attack, but can also apply to extreme fervour, passion or fury."

and

"Lady Hale, leading a bench of five justices, said the definition of violence must change so that a range of abusive behaviour now counts in law."


I fail to see where it says all shouting is abuse.

selective reader....

Men and women who shout at their partners risk being thrown out of their homes under a sweeping ruling by judges yesterday.

Raising your voice at a husband or wife, or a boyfriend or girlfriend, now counts as domestic violence under the landmark Supreme Court judgment.


[quote author=tpia@]No i cant, why do you ask?[/quote]i want to teach you na. can you afford my tutorials?

dayokanu: Physical.
It can directly lead to death or injury

so those kids that commit suicide after being called names in school by their mates are indirect to death or injury?

ileobatojo: Do you know the difference between verbal conflict and verbal abuse?

hahahahaha....
ileobatojo, stop arguing jare. shouting is verbal abuse. verbal conflict & verbal abuse are just terminologies. if you shout at your partner @ anytime, it's an abuse.

read that article & learn....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1350761/Women-entitled-council-house-partner-shouts.html

i could be thrown out of my own house if i shout at my girlfriend. why should that be if it's not an abuse?

deols: hmmmn.lol. I am not surprised you are on this thread. I relate with such threads as this, putting myself in the woman's position.
Such will not happen to me o(since i won't marry a bush man) but just imagine that he turns bushy I no go gree o..lailai.

it will not happen to you cos i expect you to know the basics of home keeping. if she cannot cook, it's only right she's sent back to where she can cook.

He will have to go back to his own parents too. To learn how to deal with a woman

hahahaha - nice idea!
i will personally love being sent to my parents in the village to learn how to deal with a woman. this is an opportunity to fiddle with village maidens.

On a serious note, couples should learn about each other b4 marriage. Once married, there is no going anywhere, no third parties until one thinks divorce or dies. His actions are so juvenile..very silly..They will become entertainment for the whole village.

how much of your partner can you learn before marriage. do women not beg their friends to help with the cooking when they are expecting their boyfriends? how is he to know the food was not cooked by his partner? you really dunno how this desperate babes pretend before they cop the ring. true colours glow after marriage, rarely before.

Mothers will keep telling their daughters to be careful of ending up like the wife and to avoid men like the husband. Their children would be taunted by the stories.

nah - this lesson is for every yet-to-be-married woman out there. go & learn how to cook. the standards of nigerian men are now high. we will not put up with rubbish regardless of the academic qualifications of the wife.

ileobatojo: Exactly. It is a type of abuse. It doesn't mean all shouting between partners is abuse. And I said the exact same thing even before you posted the link.

a shouting match between partners is a verbal abuse. if you know anyone doing this, tell them to stop it. don't digress, we are not talking about partners shouting in unison to a goal scored by super eagles or when jack bauer kills a terrorist. we are talking about shouting with anger when provoked.

Everyone can see where you made assumptions about "Nigerian women". They are pointless and not helpful to this discussion.

is this an assumption?
watch any nollywood movie & see how they shout. messages cannot be conveyed in nigeria without shouting. it's a fact!!!!

No, what you trying to peddle as verbal abuse is false. It only lends credence to my previous statements about people having no idea about what they are saying.

shouting is verbal abuse!
you are the one clueless about what verbal abuse entails. show us one link where it's written a shouting match between partners isn't verbal abuse.

dejioguns: Thank you. Can't see your email yet though!

check your spam!

deols: This is pure nonsense.
Send her to her parents?? she is what?? a commodity?

a piece of bad yam!

dejioguns: I just need your input on something. Thanks.

nice!
my consultation fee is £700 per hour.

i fix everything! nothing is impossible with me. check your email.

dejioguns: Hi, I sent you a PM. Could you please reply? Thanks.

concerning?

byvan: Coogar, verbal is betteroooo,you get to dish as you get.Physical nah different ball game,i hate physical injuries of any kind.

One can only damage you psychologically if you let them.

the tongue is powerful than any physical blows. you are only speaking for yourself here. what about the hundreds of millions of people who get hurt with words & cannot speak back?

ileobatojo: First things first. What car are you talking about and where in Dinachi's post that I quoted say anything about a car? Why are you reaching? Why the desperation?

Second, I'm not interested in working with assumptions here. Let's stick to facts.

i have shown you links that prove shouting is a type of verbal abuse. if you don't think it is, good luck to you on that.

going round in circles of tedious. there are no assumptions about this. it's definitive & what you think you know about what entails verbal abuse is largely flawed.

byvan: Physical is the worst,verbal can't ruffle me as am pretty much endowed in that department, if need be.

verbal abuse is worse.....
the fact that there are no visible signs on the victim makes it very bad. the victim suffers alone & there's no proof. psychological/emotional damage is worse than any physical abuse.

ileobatojo: No. Not a true statement.

yes, it is....

If her yelling is defensive and reactionary, focused on the provocation and not the person, if she is addressing the issue on ground not using it as an excuse to launch a deliberate psychological offensive, if her intention is not to control psychologically; then she is not a verbal abuser.

look at what you are saying....
if she was addressing the issue, the husband wouldn't have had to park the car & physically beat her up. you cannot shout, argue & not pass insults. we are talking about a nigerian woman here, not a caucasian.

then again, let's assume for argument's sake that she was focused on the topic & didn't pass any insult to the husband - what about the kids in the vehicle? do kids not become scared when adults scream? do they not fret & fidget and sometimes cry when they see their moms yelling?

is that not an abuse?

She needs to learn some manners... But she is not an abuser.

like i said, i could not think of a situation a woman would be shouting on top of her voice in anger & not being verbally abusive. they were not having sex & she wasn't praising her husband. i don't need to hear the details of the conversation to know she was verbally abusive.

shouting/yelling is verbal abuse!

ileobatojo: No. I said the situation posted is not verbal abuse. There is no evidence in what he posted that it is.

she was verbally abusive.

So according to you, all yelling is verbal abuse? Really?

if it's not a one-off event then it's verbal abuse. a woman that shouts on top of her voice at the slightest provocation is verbally abusive.

tintingz: coogar this girl dey poke you oo

BTW hope your cousin doesn't have feminism ideology so that I can know where to handle her

But thanks I don't need your cousin to start any repopulation

kmcutez needs deliverance!

ileobatojo: Where is the change in the story?

from yelling isn't verbal abuse to yelling can be a type of verbal abuse.

This is not enough to conclude she is a verbal abuser. So making a definitive conclusion based on that only shows ignorance.

she's verbally abusive!
what exactly do people say when they are angry & shouting? "i love you & i wanna spend the rest of my life with you?" of course, not!

shouting is definitely verbal abuse. i could not think of any situation where a woman is arguing with her hubby on top of her voice that would depict romance or lovey dovey things.

Verbal abuse is when someone uses words to cause harm to feelings of the person they are speaking to. It may take many forms and the harm caused is often difficult to measure. The most popularly used form of verbal abuse is name-calling.

Verbal abuse also includes shouting, insulting, intimidating, threatening, cursing, shaming, demeaning, or derogatory language, among other forms of communication towards a person.

ileobatojo: It does not. Dinachi told us absolutely nothing to help us determine whether the woman is a verbal abuser or not. Yelling can be a type of verbal abuse. It is NOT automatically verbal abuse.

story don change.....this was the quote you claim isn't verbal abuse.

dinachi: A woman who shouts at the top of her voice at the slightest provocation is a beast. That is verbal abuse.

note the key words - shouts at the top of her voice & slightest provocation. she's an abuser. point - blank - period!!!

ileobatojo: Still doesn't make her a verbal abuser.

I read the article and I find it quite laughable that you think it proves your point here. A real shame. Like I said, over 90% of those that scream verbal abuse here haven't got the slightest clue what it means.

it does....
a woman that yells at the slightest of provocation is not a one-off event. she's short-tempered & she's verbally abusive. over 10,000 links on google classify yelling as a verbal abuse so keep lying to yourself it isn't.