₦airaland Forum

moremi2008: This is why unwise children shouldn't be allowed to get married. A truly simple situation has now blown-up into an extended family conflict. What kind of families do you both come from? Don't you have wise men and women to talk some sense into you all? Why are you jeopardizing your marriage with childish grudges and fights?

From what I have read, I can say confidently that the OP is a bit foolish and immature. She's not yet ready to live in a man's house as the woman of the house. Her sister-in-laws are obviously wrong but they did nothing that couldn't have been nipped in the bud with a few calm, soothing words to the husband in bed, a little patience, a little bit of humility, a little bit of maturity and a soft but firm touch. Now that your husband has sided with his sisters against you, what are you going to do? Pack out of the house? This is a horrible start to a marriage. I am very afraid of the future ahead of you. You need prayers, wise counsel and divine intervention. Good luck!

Well said

[quote author=BABE!]Dayokanu . . .

The SIL is not normal. lol. It'a very obvious a guy just broke her heart she needs [i]se[/i]x. OP needs to match-make her arse.

You're right. The relationship between her and the OP is obviously not a good one.

That itself should caution her on how she acts around the wife. Dayokanu, it's very abnormal for me to go finish your pot of soup while I know we're not on good terms. I'll feel uneasy. Plus, it's plain rude! The wife just had a baby for Jupiter's sake. The SIL is a troublemaker. She is the one blowing things out of proportion and not the OP. Only God knows what she told the husband.

She also stopped eating in the house to make it look like OP stabbed her with a sharp knife. Yeye people!

[/quote]Its obvious OP was embelishing. No one would come into your house without greeting you unless you have a prior issue. You should learn to read in between the lines. Are you not Nigerian? Havent you heard the familiar "I was just going [i]jejely [/i]before John slapped me and tore my clothes" obviously you were not going on your own and a complete stranger slapped you


One question if you were the SIL after the "calling and talking" over food, Would you continue eating in that house?

Outstrip: What is your take on the husband taking the food his wife served him and giving it to his sister?

Obviously you got it wrong, She was referring to the baby and not the husband or why would the sister need to feed her husband? is he an 1mbec1le

debby999: My baby started crying I bathed him and gave him the baby so I can prepare his food(this would mean the baby IMO). On bringing the food to feed him,my husband pushed me out, took the food frm me and gave his sister to feed him.

[quote author=Sisi_Kill]Of course she didn't come in and head straight for the kitchen. . .it would even be better if she had done that sef.

What she probably did is come to the house, doesn't greet her sister in law, chats with her brother while pointedly ignoring her sister in law, plays with the baby when her sister in law is not there. . .maybe that one quickly went to check the soup in the kitchen and as soon as she comes out, pereku walks away. . .with attitude too (she gotta show SIL she doesn't have her time naa just in case the ignoring and the not greeting is too subtle), she goes back to chat with her brother some more. . .still ignoring her sister in law and then no sooner has the sister in law turned off gas than she carries her wogowogo leg to the kitchen to serve herself. . .ina ruwa, the slave they brought from the village has finished cooking.

Come now!!!![/quote]And what would make a SIL come into her brothers house and not greet the Wife?

Would you ever go to your brothers house even if he married Jezebel and not greet his wife

Simple question : After the "Calling and telling" would you still continue to eat in the house? Knowing the kind of "telling" we are talking about here. Which in most cases would involve indirect refrence to her upbringing and greed

2mch: Please when did personal property now become synonymous with food? Which was cooked for the house? a house in which the inlaws were staying in at the moment? Food that the brother most likely paid for? Lets compare apples with apples. If the sister in law entered the kitchen to cook for herself another problem abi? . Crazy OP.

The sister went to take food and she rained all the vile words on her, now the sister refused to eat from the house again and now its a problem

How many ppl wld continue eating in that house given the same situation, if I were I would also stop eating from the house too

Its not like the sister went to her wardrobe and took the wifes Jewelries to use (That would be analogous to the Brother in law car issue)

[quote author=BABE!]She didn't fight them; according to her post. She only called them to tell them what they did was very idiotic.

Take a look at Sisi_kill's scenario. What sort of uncivilized behavior is that?

The sister in-law didn't necessary have to go her and say "m'aam, I observed that you're done cooking. May I please have a portion of your nicely prepared soup?"

The SIL could have gone to the kitchen while OP was cooking and jovially said "Haaaa.. there's no way I'm not finishing that food. Better start preparing another round for your husband and yourself. It smells so good! Chei My brother is lucky".

I'm sure the SIL just dashed into the kitchen frowning, with an attitude, and mounted a hip of goat meat on her plate. See ehn, the problem here is not the food. It's common courtesy. The relationship you have with a person determines the kind access you'll have to the person's things.

You can't be giving me serious attitude all they long and jump at my food. You no get shame? Which kind shameless behavior be that?

Some people need to be put in there place, and apparently the husband is no where near putting his sister(s) in check. [/quote]The thing is the situation didnt start from the food, The wife and sister have been having issues before which possibly stems from the wife being too overbearing?

No one would come to your house and go stright to the pot of Soup,

And I am sure you know the manner which the "Call to tell her" was done. It was done to the extent that the SIL stopped eating in the house, That should tell you that that was no ordinary "Calling to tell" like she wanted us to believe

If you go to your brothers house and go serve yourself food Maybe thinking everyone has taken theirs or the Wife wasnt around to inform her, 30mins later the Wife comes and gives you a dressing down over mere food.

The wife's post reek of "This is my territory" too much and that was what drove the husband against her. And now all the family

[quote author=Sisi_Kill]I have a question for the guys and I hope you answer sincerely. . .How would you react if your wife's younger brother comes to your house, not greet you or acknowledge your presence, I mean giving you serious attitude, after all the house belongs to his sister too. Ten mins later, you hear a car starting and before you can say Jack Robinson he has driven away with your car without asking permission.

Please be honest and don't say it is not the same thing. . .we've already established that this is about being territorial.[/quote]There is no way the Sister would come into the house without greeting the wife and just jump into the pot. let the OP come back and swear that was what happened.

There are issues with territries but if you push your hand on territorial issues too far You would get yourself on the OP situation.

With guys I am sure such situations would never happen, Guys are not as territorial as women, In girls hostel you would see girls demarcating the room in all such disgusting manner while 13 guys would simply get along on 4 beds and the floor

At some time in school I had a bed but never slept on it for like 3months and never complained but with women If someone puts a drop of water on their carpet its the Police that would settle it.

WHY IS IT THAT ITS WIVES WHO USUALLY HAVE PROBLEMS WITH INLAWS NOT HUSBANDS.

If my brother in law for whatever reason should drive my car without telling me, Surely I won't yell on him.

[quote author=BABE!]She didn't fight them; according to her post. She only called them to tell them what they did was very idiotic.

Take a look at Sisi_kill's scenario. What sort of uncivilized behavior is that?

The sister in-law didn't necessary have to go her and say "m'aam, I observed that you're done cooking. May I please have a portion of your nicely prepared soup?"

The SIL could have gone to the kitchen while OP was cooking and jovially said "Haaaa.. there's no way I'm not finishing that food. Better start preparing another round for your husband and yourself. It smells so good! Chei My brother is lucky".

I'm sure the SIL just dashed into the kitchen frowning, with an attitude, and mounted a hip of goat meat on her plate. See ehn, the problem here is not the food. It's common courtesy. The relationship you have with a person determines the kind access you'll have to the person's things.

You can't be giving me serious attitude all they long and jump at my food. You no get shame? Which kind shameless behavior be that?

Some people need to be put in there place, and apparently the husband is no where near putting his sister(s) in check. [/quote]The thing is the situation didnt start from the food, The wife and sister have been having issues before which possibly stems from the wife being too overbearing?

No one would come to your house and go stright to the pot of Soup,

And I am sure you know the manner which the "Call to tell her" was done. It was done to the extent that the SIL stopped eating in the house, That should tell you that that was no ordinary "Calling to tell" like she wanted us to believe

If you go to your brothers house and go serve yourself food Maybe thinking everyone has taken theirs or the Wife wasnt around to inform her, 30mins later the Wife comes and gives you a dressing down over mere food.

The wife's post reek of "This is my territory" too much and that was what drove the husband against her. And now all the family

Nateevs would tell you playing on rigid style, 800m transfer, Player power etc are more important factors in a team

I said it always WHY IS IT WOMEN THAT ARE ALWAYS HAVING PROBLEMS WITH INLAWS AND NOT MEN?

OP you have a problem with intolerance and thats how a small cut has turned into a huge wound and if you are not careful it would turn to a cancer

Your SIL went to take food from the pot is now a reason to fight her?

The fact is that your husband has noticed your horrible attitude towards his family and it got to a limit with the food issue. If you used a lil discretion you should have known that an Inlaw living with you is a delicate issue that needs to be won on your side. hardly do you fight inlaws and win especially in Africa.

Now from small food issue it has degenerated. What a little tolerance and patience(Suru) would have done easily.

Even if the husband wanted to defend you, Your pettiness has turned the tide against you and now you are almost at the risk of losing the marriage and your home.

Everyone would come here and blame your husband for this and that but have you taken some time to look at your own attitude?

The violence part is where I draw the line though and thats where i blame your husband and you need an explanation regarding this act of violence

Like some have advised you, the ball is left in your court, if you don't mind the marriage shattering, Pick a fight with your inlaws, That is a fight you would never win though.

[img]http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&drKey=885&loc=http%3A%2F%[/img]

Well said Aregbe

..

Was Gustavo obstructing him?

If na Aregbesola, I am sure someone would be running around naked in ecstacy now

Even Hilary didnt divorce Clinton

But all these 21yr old girls keep yelling divorce

Go ahead

Does he need 11 flair players to achieve his goal?

Lampard for meireles, Torres for Drogba, Cahill for Terry, Romeu for Mikel and his lack of flair has been taken out

DOes he need Cech and Ivanovic to have flair as well?

https://cdn.wordonroad.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/photo-72.jpg

Who would have thought Drake was a fan of Boateng

Isnt man utd already crumbling?

Look at Mumuface's face and you can see the signs of crumble.

Its a miracle Dudu walks on the street of London without crumbling on the sidewalks

BTW where is the dudu guy sef lately

coogar: villas boas then started benching the players without flair(lampard, drogba, kalou, mikel, etc) and
the media turned against him for benching their poster boy(lampard). they heaped unbelievable pressure
on his shoulders which later infected the team spirit. pressure was potent enough to convince the owner
chelsea weren't heading in the right direction and hence the sack.

If the players without flair were the problem, How come the players with flair couldnt deliver the result for their beloved manager.

Pressure wasn't what convinced the owner to sack AVB, It was simply the horrible results

What was AVB last 12 games at Chelsea like?

Who wont shy away from the vultures of today

[quote author=Sisi_Kill]Rotflmao. . . The drama between Ronke and Lastpage is getting inneressing! [/quote]Both of them think we dont know how they have been spending hours on IM and phone sexting one another?

They would now come here and be forming lovefight

Make una enter room and give us Ibeji jare

Oh He did not buy new players? Where did Mata, cahill, Lukaku etc come from?

coogar: that is the point. stoke did not play catenaccio with valencia.
they didnt even regard valencia as a big team - stoke treated them like they would
treat wolves or wigan or newcastle.

make a cursory glance to stoke's results at the britannia stadium against the
traditional big teams in england this season and get back to me. the results form
a pattern. the pattern is not coincidence.

stoke 0-0 chelsea
stoke 1-0 liverpool
stoke 1-1 man utd
stoke 1-1 man city
stoke 2-1 tottenham

still waiting for arsenal's game there but you can be sure it would be pure gore
meanwhile teams like sunderland, west brom and qpr would go there and win games just like valencia did.

Oh So Stoke didnt play their game vs Valencia they played someone elses style vs Valencia?

coogar: so i compared villas' boas first 6 [/b]league games to ancelotti's [b]last 6 games(dayokanu's alpha-performance testing).
ancelotti copped 10 points out of 18, villas-boas copped 13 points out of 18. in your own words, ancelotti was reckless economically
and villas-boas revived the dying economy. in other words, villas-boas is a better manager than the great carlo ancelotti?

dayokanu - you should donate your brain-cells to a colony of red-head lizards.

AVB was able to buy new players did RDM buy new players?

AVB was starting a season fresh with everyteam on 0 points, RDM inherited a side that was failing hard in the league.

AVB and Carlo Ancelotti played 2 different seasons, AVB and RDM played the same season

Refining stupidity doesnt make much difference, Its still stupidity all the way

coogar: and that has been shown up tonight that you cannot play in one certain way and win the premier league.
teams like stoke, blackburn, bolton, etc wouldn't let you win the premier league if you play in one way like barca does all the time.
if barcelona were in the premier league. games like tonight would have forced guardiola's hands to alternate his tactics.
this is one of the reasons andy gray came up with the windy wet conditions at britannia stadium.

barca play one way in spain and win the league(no team in spain park the bus) - the teams they meet in europe are top teams who wouldn't play
like the stoke, bolton of this world to win so barca often get away with their style in europe till they meet
chelsea or inter. villas-boas came to chelsea and tried to use what worked for him at porto fc but the mafia in
chelsea's dressing room didn't let him. they are now back to looping hopeful long balls to drogba - back to 2005.

We are back to this shiit about Barcelona wont beat Stoke again? When an inferior version of Barcelona called valencia did them home and away

coogar: and what's to say di matteo would be in job next season.
after villas-boas' first 6 league games, were there any negative vibe from the press about him? hell no.
he was praised for inventing a new tactics that chelsea were using to beat up teams.

in his first 8 games, he won 6, drew 1 and lost 1.
he should have won all. squandered chances from his strikers was the reason he didn't
have 100% record in his first 8 games and the prolonged teething period of new players settling in.

Compare that to RDM who didnt even have the luxury of buying his own players, AVB bought his own players

Took a team under soo much pressure and almost at the stage of mutiny- AVB started the season with little pressure and player enthusiasm

Results going awry every weekend - AVB was starting on a fresh note

and he has managed to get Chelsea to the FA cup finals by smashing Tottenham

And is halfway to the CL finals after beating the best team in the world, The same CL which AVB cluelessly almost bungled

afrodoc: nateevs in responding to my post u said unlike me others see things differently.
from the 2 points i made there do u mean a)others like to argue dogmatically rather than concede to superior argument or b)that others will continue ascribing RDM's success to new manager effect if he has a good record after 50 matches?
if u meant neither i don't see wt ur opening statement has to do with my earlier post

Nateevs doesnt havent to make sense, Its not required of him to make sense. Actually he cant make sense

nateevs: You are a dunce. You have come back with your beer parlour analysis again.
You asked what the fundamental problems are and I explained them. .
Where has the AVB sack come into it.

Have I alluded to the fact that AVB was not sacked for poor results? No!
Why then are you mentioning that? I have no idea how you argue sometimes.

Player revolts, massive wages are problems with every Big football club and the owner isnt complaining about it yet.

if he needs a financial planner he would Approach Okonjo iweala or Goldman Sachs not Andre Villas Boas.

Playing in only one way? When did that become a problem? barcelona only play in one way and they are the number 1 club in Europe

nateevs: I want to see RDM after a string of losses and the media is all over him asking if his job is safe.
I want to see his reaction when the likes of Drogba, Lampard and Terry ask him "what have you won"?

For now though, it very well appears he is doing well

Di Matteo is smart enough to know that the first thing with managing a team is getting the players on your side, AVB had it upside down thinking Its about getting the Owner on your side

RDM knows the influence players wield and he has pallied them and they are getting results for him


Tactics might be good, but its the players that execute that tactics. Di Matteo realized this AVB didnt thats why he is out of a job

nateevs: The fundamental problems exist. The fundamental problem is Chelsea are club that have spent over £800m on players and have a bunch of players who can only play in a certain way. No young players coming through, ever reliant on the old guard, massive wages, player revolts.

These are the fundamental problem. They may be insignificant to you, but for me they are not. Despite all the victories.

Was AVB sacked because of 800m or because of poor results? Was AVB sacked because of playing pattern or Result? Was AVB sacked because of young players or Results?

You need a brain job, Not a bloww job cos you can easily get that from coogar but a brain job

Maybe if you eat more Isiewu some Goat grey matter can seep into your skull