₦airaland Forum

izzou:


I like to be lapped

I don't just know why

That's why you're pikin na lol.

izzou:
I'm warming up for my own tomorrow

Workforce matter no be here

Abeg,if you'll be going from Festac,pm me abeg

I need someone wey go lap me for bus

Pikin

Christmas is coming, this one is just looking for money to flex, bunch of leaves and talking baby indeed.
Mtchew

izzou:

My dadieee that doesn't treat me like a daughter
There is God

She told no lies

Just addressing this so no one reading this thread will believe them or take them seriously.

I'm not the pregnant woman or whoever those monikers quoting me or indirectly referring to me are accusing me of being.

Now that that's settled, they can keep being delusional.

pocohantas:
Complete squad...
Waiting on my reply like...

Izz not a small thing o

On this same nairaland where some guys were saying that they can't pray for their wife to earn more than them?
Anyways waiting for the replies.

Christmas is coming, this one is just looking for money to flex, bunch of leaves and talking baby indeed.
Mmmmmmmmmmttttttcccccchhhhheeewwww

IamiKayJayCee:
Fight? I wouldn't even bother. That would destroy the thread. I wouldn't indulge their stupidity and join them in turning it to a battlefield.

That's the end of it. I had to respond to that because it was quite annoying for him to ignore the other post and come to pick out something from mine.

True a beautiful thread that has served it's purpose, fighting on this thread will only get it deleted.

IamiKayJayCee:
Lol. Then the direction of the discussion becomes CLEAR and SIMPLE. It's a fact that all Abrahamic religions are patriarchal and sexist, and they're mostly the basis of the arguments against the morality and legitimacy of the feminist agenda, so it would be easy to spell it out for them that I do not accept their archaic holy books as an authority, since I do not believe in the divine, and I am 100 percent certain that these books are MAN MADE. We can go on from there to consider the legitimacy of their opposition to feminism, their ACTUAL REASONS for it, and obliterate every basis of it.

They believe in FIXED traditions and customs, whereas I have little regard for them, believe that they can be changed, and that they have ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT to impose these stupid, man-made nonsensical traditions on those who reject them.

Who will follow you to discuss those ones? Legitimacy, actual reasons? When they don't have and are just against women and looking for how to control women?

That means you will go back to your first post, where you talked about them knowing what feminism truly entails but will act like they don't just to destroy the idea,
That's when they will become dunces and ask to explain this and explain that then twist your explanation and tell you that's what you said or they will run away, shift the goal post and accuse you of something different all together, lol,

I'm even tired just typing this, lol, I can't even imagine myself attempting to have a logical conversation with such people, they will tire me out at the first sign of foolishness lol,

Trustyshoess, your thread has done well, nice one girl.

IamiKayJayCee:
No, he ended their confusion. That's the FINAL word. There's no where to shift to again. The "STATEMENT" I mentioned the other time, he just provided me with - or reminded me of - the right word for it --- [color=indigo]HUMANISM[/color].

That's the END OF THE LINE. [color=darkgreen]There's NOTHING after humanism[/color].

All right I got the connection now, what you wrote in your statement is the same as his only that yours is just like the definition while his he went in and expounded on the topic.
I feel like we got something, from feminism to gender equality to humanism. We found one they won't complain about.
At least, they won't find fault with this. You did good, your definition was perfect




Nighthound, once again perfection. *insert clapping gif*

IamiKayJayCee:
No, he ended their confusion. That's the FINAL word. There's no where to shift to again. The "STATEMENT" I mentioned the other time, he just provided me with - or reminded me of - the right word for it --- [color=indigo]HUMANISM[/color].

That's the END OF THE LINE. [color=darkgreen]There's NOTHING after humanism[/color].

Humanism is what you were trying to define? Be right back, don't quote this, will be back with my final opinion

NightHound:
Thank you.

Nice read. It really was

NightHound:
'Feminism' should rather be replaced with 'Humanism' instead of 'Gender Equality.' That one is DoA since we recognize that there are marked differences between the sexes. Humanism, on the other hand, focuses on the one similarity that really matters when discussing fundamental rights. And since the essence of Feminism is to acknowledge the full humanness of women by extending all fundamental human rights (that are available to men) to women as well, humanism just makes the most sense.

As you've pointed out, our inequalities as human beings go far beyond gender. There's race, height, weight, complexion, IQ, and all that. But we don't apportion rights to people by considering any of these differences; even when certain physical attributes can have a huge bearing on the persons performance. In the end, what matters is that we are all human beings. And as human beings, we should have human rights. Not men's rights and women's rights. That's really all there is to equal rights and gender equality.

I like what you said about letting nature take its course. But the status quo does not do that. Male privilege is like federal character or affirmative action - hugely flawed. It does not allow people achieve based on the merit of their abilities. And do men really need a leg-up in that sense? Male excellence cannot be presumed, it has to be tested and proven just like female capabilities should be. Human beings should be born with equal value to society; they should enjoy opportunities available to them without any unnatural discrimination; and they should establish their ultimate relevance based on their individual abilities. It's not always about sparring in a ring, sometimes, the battles are mental.

You imply that feminism has no place in Nigeria. I disagree. People talk about all kinds of flavours of feminism: socialist, radical, liberal, and even (I heard today) depressed feminism. I consider this nonsense. It's an unnecessary multiplication of related dogmas that only ends up creating confusion and stifling the movement. I believe that feminism is organic; it grows out of the soil. It's reactionary just like any other movement that pushes back oppression. If women aren't oppressed, they won't react to oppression (Newton's third law). And the kind of reactions will differ across the globe. Feminism cultured by Nigerian misogyny is different from feminism cultured by Arab, or American misogyny. The manifestos are drawn up accordingly. But at the root of it all is that women want to thrive to their full potential in an environment without unjust influence. And in our own context, unjust influence would include (but is not limited to) things like shaming (or stigmatizing) women for some of their choices even when these choices are perfectly legal; and creating double standards of judgement for moral conduct. These things aren't natural, they're impositions.

Thought provoking.

IamiKayJayCee come and see this.

Although shey you see what I'm saying? He says gender equality is dead on arrival that we should move to humanism, you see say we get problem?

IamiKayJayCee:
Lol. Although, I doubt the possibility, given how difficult it is, but if they ever manage to pull off the madness of tainting gender equality as well, we would simply change our position to a STATEMENT, as opposed to terms that are susceptible to corruption, so we would have something like, [color=darkgreen]"Support for FAIRNESS and EQUAL STANDARD of judgement in all facets of life, regardless of your race, tribe, family background, sexuality, age, gender, religion, nationality, height, length, breadth, weight, density, volume, shape, mass......."[/color]

Wetin dem wan talk again?

Chaii

Gosh, if dem say make you define fairness and equal standard now ?? how you want take do that one?

They will now tell you the bible standard and quote bible for you that the bible didn't make anybody equal

It's when it comes to equality that the bible becomes their favourite book, if it's fornication now and fucking before marriage, or even having side chick in and oyt of marriage, no one will remember that there is anything like bible.


I'm just laughing anyhow here

Lol, don't mind me jor.

IamiKayJayCee:
Lol. How was your day?

Itwaz good, how was yours?

IamiKayJayCee:
It would be difficult for them to make such a shift, since gender equality is general and nonspecific. The meaning is quite CLEAR - simple English right there: gender equality. You know, feminism started as a REACTION to something - patriarchy. So, even though the very idea is about GENDER EQUALITY, it was viewed through the female prism, so it's very easy for those who disapprove of it to call it a movement by frustrated, bitter, angry females, as long as the word "feminism" remains. Using the same argument when you throw the term, gender equality, in their face would be so stupid and embarrassing that even they would be amazed by their own foolishness.

True again, I'm wondering if we leave feminism and migrate to gender equality if they won't find a reason to degrade gender equality so that we will run from that as well.

LOL. The inherent contradiction.
It's just like saying, "I'm not a sexist, but I support patriarchy".

LMAO
[img]https://media1./images/a9c091aaeecf2d4b3790452c3e87a143/tenor.gif[/img]
Hmmm, that may be it, You good, you good.
https://memes.ucoz.com/_nw/4/52907887.jpg

ArchangeLucifer:
But you sef wan kill us.

Mae two of una go marry abeg.

Haba!

No be lie. Them fit

Hmmm in the video she was even asking if she should about because she got 100k in one night.