₦airaland Forum

CFCman:
On a personal note, I'm happy for 2 of my friends that who recently passed the Bar examinations.
It isn't easy feat at all

Congratulations to your friends, it really isn't easy.

So long as I'm eating out of the food, I'd rather cook it, that way I'm sure I'll enjoy it and that it was properly prepared(I'll choose my food over anyone's anyday).

Still, there's nothing wrong in cooking for your man, if you are the better cook.

Hypocrisy at its peak.

Anyways, that's what most Christians are known for.

Toks2008:
The biggest delusion a lady can have is to think that because guys rush on her means they really want her.

100 guys can woo a lady in a month and none of them will be interested in keeping her but just want to have their way with her...

moral of the gist is that you should stop feeling eerie that guys always come around.

I wonder how your post is connected to mine.

kayStelly:
Which kind dead topic be this

Had to read slowly to understand wat dis op is saying

vs vs vs.... nonsense !!

No be small thing.

I still don't like him, he's a criminal as far as I'm concerned.

I just tire.

A man can't do shakara for me, for whatever reason.

They always come around.

No regrets.

SirShymexx:
https://i.imgur.com/iirONoj.png Lol, let's accept the truth cos the world was built on truth by the supreme being and the truth shall set us all free.

https://i.imgur.com/pSHmkrD.gif

On a serious note: don't you think the fact that a lot of chics running around today have been molested by depraved men, is the reason why a lot of them are batshyte crazy and their existence is dependent on hating men a la misandry?

Shyte, you can't even act ya age as a guy and live that hip-hop lifestyle these days without chicken heads labelling you as a misogynist and the useless word, misogynoir, coined by black women.

Why can't I be allowed to say "bytch" to chics like I openly say "nyggah" all time while addressing my dargs? You just have to be PC everyday and suffer for the crimes of other men. What a crazy world we live in.

Lol, so your problem is that you can't call a lady "bytch" with no problems? How does that translate to misandry?

Story.

If he's not ready to marry you, if you like walk on your head, no ring is coming your way.

DarkRebel101:
To be honest, I don't even know what you are talking about. You are just too boneheaded.



I never called you ajebutter or a charlatan.

So you're catching feelings because I mirthfully called you a market woman? Aha, like I've said in the past, you are emotionally-weak and take things to heart. It's why you always see offense in everything. Learn to be cheerful.



I don't know when to stop, but you do? Spare me the lectures from your morality buffet. You are a textbook narcissist.



As far as I'm concerned you are the only one catching feelings here because you expect me to blow bubbles in your äss and tacitly accept everything you say.

You said I sound stüpid and yet say that is not an insult. But when I say you argue like a market woman, World War III begins.

LOL, like I said, you are probably a humourless narcissist who only thinks about herself.

I never insulted you, you only think I did; and I've also grown bored of playing this humdrum game of musical chairs that's obviously yielding no result.

Good day.

1.I'm just a foolish/stupid person.

2.I'm emotionally weak and take things to heart.

3.I'm a text book narcissist and think only of myself.

4.I'm humourless., me humourless.

Such names and somehow I'm the problem, okay o. You say I insulted you by saying you sounded stupid, well I didn't say you were a stupid person, I clearly meant that at the time of the exchange you sounded stupid, which was how your words came across and I gave you a reason why, but you have labelled me as a person all sorts, yet you didn't insult me.

Anyways, I just want to correct the impression you seem to have, that I want you to silently agree with me and blow bubbles up my ass, chai! , dude you quoted me o, I didn't want to get in a debate but did anyways, I was even saying agree to disagree when you even authoritatively declared my stance on the issue wrong, asking me to learn to admit when I'm in the wrong, like you are the determiner of right or wrong opinions, yet I'm the one wanting you to agree with me, I see, but you couldn't be more wrong on that, I don't give a hoot who disagrees or agrees with me on here(that's like my trade mark), hardly even in the real world, as long as we can always agree to disagree, I'm good, so please don't kid yourself.

Meanwhile, I hope you stay on your lane, so you have no reason to remember how mentally weak I am, since that's what it means, when you tell someone they can pass on a message without being very condescending/rude.

titosantana:
If only she maintained her natural complexion...Anyway congrats, happy married life.

But she doesn't look bleached na, you don't expect she remain exactly as you remember her, transformation gats dey no matter how small.

Nothing we no go see for this world.

This one learnt from the best.

Laugh wan kill me though this isn't a laughing matter.

This girl needs psych eval.

I thought she has two kids.


Happy birthday.

missjo:
You have ample time and patience.
Passing points in the shortest sentences possible with plain words that can be understood by anyone with even just a high school diploma, is the definition of EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION.

Someone is overcompensating I have noticed.

What can I say?

DarkRebel101:
I never said modicum of intelligence; I said decent level of intelligence.

You seem to have an uncanny knack for tweaking and shape-shifting people's words.

...

To claim intelligence would be to be like the charlatans and sciolists I so despise; I know that I know nothing and I have never laid claim to any form of intelligence or knowledge whatsoever -- I even cringe inwardly when people say that I am Intelligent and sally forth to have me slathered with encomium.

Asking that anyone with a decent level of intelligence should be able to grasp my post is not the same as me stating avowedly that I am intelligent. Whoever thinks otherwise should know I'm too high up that Ivory Tower of I–don't–give–a–fück to be perturbed by petty inferiority complex.



I said in relationships and in matters concerning love that people are usually 80% emotional and 20% logical, how then did I completely preclude rationality?

In most case scenarios, people succumb to emotion than they do to logic. We are first animals before we are logicians -- it's how biology weaved the tapestry of our human nature.

Look at Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of human needs:

First on the pyramid of needs is physiological needs. Physiological needs are emotion-driven.

Second is safety – the need for safety is occasioned by the emotion of fear and security.

Third is love – of course one doesn't need a soothsayer to tell that this is the palladium of all human emotions, rivalled only by hate, its unrefined cousin.

Fourth on Maslow's pyramid is self-esteem -- also emotion-driven

The fifth is self-actualization – also emotion-fuelled.

So you see, a man-woman is emotional at core.

Emotions breed morality, because if we were to be logical, we would round up the physically weak, the sick, those perceived to be unintelligent, the miscreants, the old, and all those we say are the dregs of society and have them executed in order to rid the earth of diseases in human form and in order to depopulate the world for the better.

But do you know why we would never do that?
We wouldn't because of our emotions which as we know fathers our sense of morality.



I am not pained you don't share the same idea. I am pained a lady as beautiful, as curvy, and as smart as you -- with nice, succulent batty and all -- argues like a dotty Mile 12 market woman going through her menstrual cycle.



I never called you names. You were the one who called me stüpid but I chose to play possum because I knew that only proved my point that we are creaturely emotional. So emotional that we would vituperate whoever opposes our ideology and poses a threat to the beliefs we hold.

I'd have to use your words word for word before they have to mean the same thing when being repeated by me, how foolish of me to not know that, then there's the fact that all the plenty things you are mentioning has no bearing in the matter, if a person can be rational even with all his emotions, just why then are we arguing? Plus I didn't call you stupid, I said you sounded stupid, which was the case at the time(2 different things) , if anyone with a decent level of intelligence can grasp what you are saying, that doesn't make you the writer intelligent? But no, you never claimed to be intelligent.

I've tried to put into consideration the fact that I thought we were cordial, which is even reason I responded to you in accordance as I honestly wasn't in a place to debate, yet you spat in my face for reasons best known to you by insulting me, saying things like "you and your like", "charlatans" "ajebutters who know nothing about life" "hypocrites" "market women" and all the rest just because we disagree, hmmm, I don't know how you understand things o but you certainly didn't come to reason, as can clearly be seen cos you set the tone this discourse took.

You can keep laughing all you want but you just proved me right yet again, you don't know when to stop and it's such a shame, since we can't disagree peacefully, it's best to stay on one's lane, I don't insult people I'm supposed to be cool with simply cos we disagree especially when there's really no need to and you my dear have insulted me enough today, I can't deal no more.

SirShymexx:
Freecocoa, since you don't want to give me my medal of honour...Imma have to ask Obama lama like Osama to give me one for my service to humanity and for being an upstanding member of the human race.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/files/2013/02/medalofhonor2.gif

You like that (Kirk Cousins' voice)? https://i.imgur.com/AwqyRyB.png

*Rolls eyes*

SirShymexx:
https://i.imgur.com/TbNc4il.png But this isn't about the occurrence, it's about the disproportionate way in which it happens.

Live ya truth, freecocoa.

I deserve a medal, tho. Don't you think?https://i.imgur.com/Mfug1mC.png

It's not my truth because there's no way to tell that it happens more in the east than the west for a fact, so....

SirShymexx:
https://i.imgur.com/WhnltrW.png Lol, don't put words in my mouth.

I told you about my observation and what I know based on my relations with certain folks.

And I'm not the type to make things up cos I'm realer than most.

However, you vehemently denied it. But the truth keeps writing itself.

So, are you going to accept the truth, or do you want to continue living in denial? https://i.imgur.com/a0a6jGO.png

The only truth here is that, there are men who molest their kids and this cuts across all tribes, nothing more.

SirShymexx:
https://i.imgur.com/82Bq7S8.png Cray!

Freecocoa, do you have an explanation for this disproportionate anomaly, since it seems like a norm now based on its frequency? https://i.imgur.com/YWU64Xf.png

And folks are going to send these chics who have been mentally/psychologically damaged by their dads out there into the world when they grow up. Scary world!

What you want me to say now? That all igbo men molest their kids?would that you happy?

DarkRebel101:
I never claimed to be intelligent, so it's either you are hearing voices in your head or you've had a long day and need some rest.

I also never said my arguments were facts, all I did was reproach the OP for his insensitivity and ungratefulness.
This is not rocket science.



That she has AIDS means she's a prostitite?. What an ignoramus.



Can you prove she got it through her job?



I never said prostitution doesn't put one at risk of contracting AIDS, neither am I assuming like a dimwit that prostitution is the only way of contracting the disease.



80% of marriages are based on emotions. Love is an emotion and that's why people marry.

Even people that marry for money are driven by emotions.



My point is no man is completely rational, emotions are part and parcel of the human vessel. Have you or have you not ever had sex without a condom before? Answer honestly or don't answer at all. Because if you have, then you are no different from the man and woman with AS blood type who still choose to marry.



Do away with all these market women style of argument. It's not sexy.

Yodel to the high heavens all you want, the fact remains that all your claims are mere assumptions. It's only in Freecocoa's universe that a person living with AIDS must have been a prostitite. What of children that have HIV? Are they prostitutes too?

Your style of argument reminds me of my grandmother's bad hip.



Au contraire, you seem riled up.



I don't want you to feel sorry, I want you to not pretend to be logical and to use ordinary common sense to discern how immoral and idiötic the OP is for creating this thread.

You and your ilk sound like ten-dollar charlatans with your nebulous and baseless arguments.

...

If it's of no importance to you then you shouldn't have commented on the thread in the first place.

You claimed intelligence the moment you declared that anyone with a modicum of intelligence would get your points but hey! I'm the one that doesn't know what she's talking about.

And I don't know how you arrived at the conclusion that because humans are emotional, they can't be rational which seems to be the bone of contention here, I don't get how you are so pained that I don't share the same idea, since when is it a must to agree with someone? Then you are even calling me names because I wouldn't toe your line of thought, wonderful!

I see you Rebel, you have done noble.

DarkRebel101:
You are being unnecessarily belligerent.

Arguments are for the sake of bringing illumination to the mind, and not to erect walls of animosity. Quite ironical you claim you live in a fortress of logic, yet I can deduce your replies to my posts are emotionally-tinged. Do you deny that you aren't riled up at the moment?

...

I already proved you wrong, I did that in my previous posts where I made a case for OP's sister. A little backtracking on your part would suffice as I do not feel inclined to repeat myself.



The post proclaims me right and anyone with a decent level of intelligence would agree as well. No offense.

...

The quotation in my previous post showed you how even the most logical people on earth – the philosophers – chose not to marry; it also shored up my earlier assertion that to marry is to succumb to one's emotions, and that no man-woman can truly be divorced of his-her emotions.

Logic can be applied in matters of love and relationships in that we use logic in trying to figure out if a man or a woman is right for us, but it – logic – takes a backseat to the whims of emotions. Why do you think two people who are deeply in love but who share the same AS blood type would still go ahead to marry, despite the risk of birthing a child with SS blood type?

Relationships are usually 20% logic and 80% emotions. Deny it all you want but in your hearts of hearts I know you know that it is true.



What different path could she have taken? Please tell us. Our ears are not taxi doors, so please, speak.

...

Your entire argument is anchored on speculation that she contracted AIDS before she was spreading her legs for every Tom, Dick and Barry. Why not stretch your imagination a bit in order to accommodate other reasons as to why she got infected with HIV?



You are talking bollocks, woman. If you are so much of the logical supercomputer you think you are, you would be sussing out hard facts rather than making assumptions.

Facts are after all a logician's tool. You have no real facts; you don't know whether she contracted AIDS via unprotected sex yet you assumed that she did -- it seems to me that you are contradicting yourself. You say you are approaching the subject with logic, yet the manner in which you are approaching it is anything but logical.

You know for someone who claims to be intelligent you sound rather stupid for calling me unnecessarily belligerent, when you can't even give me one single reason to accept your points as facts.

You talk of me not having facts like it isn't one that people get aids from prostitution, like it isn't also one that the OP's sister had aids and was a prostitute, what other fact do I need? Can you prove that the OP's sister didn't get HIV via her job? So why are you vexing that I can see it happening? Whether that's what happened is not an issue here, the issue is that it can happen, very straightforward something.

You have proven nothing, till you prove that one can't get aids from prostitution.

How and why you dragged to marry into the matter is even another thing, as if you can say that all marriages are based on emotions as you choose to call it, hian o!

She could've have done other jobs, any other thing you want to think of, that's what taking another part means.

The reason two people with As would marry is because they are stupid, period.

I am not assuming she got Aids from prostitution, I am hammering on the fact that aids can be gotten from prostitution, I have since dropped assuming we know how she got aids, go figure.

Btw, I am not riled up, I see and call your post like it is, just like a reasonable person would. You on the other hand want me to feel sorry for a person where there is no need to, says a lot about your ability to put two and two together, smh.

I'm done talking about this anyways, it's of no importance to me.

DarkRebel101:
Maybe we do, but I'm sure the analogies proffered in my previous post were not wide of the mark.

“Thus the philosopher abhors marriage ... - marriage being a hindrance and calamity on his path to the optimum. What great philosopher hitherto has been married?
Heraclitus, Plato, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Kant, Schopenhauer - they were not; more, one cannot even imagine them married. A married philosopher belongs in comedy, that is my proposition - and as for that exception, Socrates - the malicious Socrates, it would seem, married ironically, just to demonstrate this proposition.” — Nietzsche



Urgggg, because I know that you are wrong, and being well acquainted with your designs, I know you would never yield even with a 30-30 pointed at your head.

You're trying to use logic to approach a matter that is not mathematics or philosophy. That can never work out. This is an emotional matter; and you and your ilk are apparently lacking in empathy. Only one with empathy can make understand that OP is fifty shades of wrong.

You don't know squat, if you don't know that you need to prove me wrong, to conclude I am wrong.

Again I don't see how that quote automatically proclaim you right, can a person be married devoid of all you cited? yes and that's all you need to know to understand that, logic can always be applied.

I'm lacking in empathy because I agree that the lady could have taken a different part? If yes, empathy be damned.

I told you I'm not looking at the emotional story of how she slaved for her family alone, if you want to help her carry the Aids because you are so empathetic, I'm sure you know what to do, you can't force me to cry when there's no need for me to.

DarkRebel101:
It's not epistle. You are just a lazy reader. Besides, this your reply is lengthier than mine.



Everybody living in the real world must be laboratory rëtards if they think unprotected sex is the only way one can get HIV. Abase your lance and accept we don't have enough information to say for sure that she contracted AIDS from sex. Do that and stop guesstimating.



There's no need for this. Unless we are cocksure that she caught AIDS via unprotected sex, then it would be inutile dwelling on counterfactuals.



My previous comment applies to this as well. We shouldn't dwell on counterfactuals.



You also don't know that she was cautioned, neither do you know she contracted AIDS via unprotected sex.

If she was cautioned, I'm sure the OP would have included that bit of information in his post.



Such diarrhea of the mouth.

Pilate was the prefect of the Roman province of Judaea. The Sanhedrin didn't have the power to sentence criminals to death; only Pilate could, and that was why they brought Jesus before him. If he had not graced their cravings with an imprimatur, Jesus would have walked free and they couldn't have done anything.

Pilate sentenced Christ to death and washing his hands did not exonerate him from his crime. It's just like a judge washing his hands before sentencing a criminal to death. What sense does that make and what does that change? Absolutely nothing.



Please, you're not being rational here. There's no need to further the argument.



My bad, I read in a haste and thought she was dead.

And there's an issue here. The issue is that an ungrateful, overgrown baby spouted thrash about his sister and people who are unaware of the nuances and facts about the issue were quick-whirr in joining him in giving her the rough edge of the pineapple. I sincerely hope his sister stumbles upon this thread and sees all the things her ungrateful brother and Nairaland's ragtag band of holier-than-thou puritans have said about her.

You may want to watch your tone and words as there's no need to call names or be so condescending, "diarrhea of the mouth" really?

I'm a lazy reader because there's a law that says I must read everything at anytime regardless? what do you know about my reading habit to have an opinion about it? Perhaps if I hadn't responded to your epistle in accordance because we are cordial, you know,maybe tell you I can't because it's long and I'm busy, that would have made more sense, my bad, correction taken.

Well, people in the real world know what's obtainable, Ofcourse sex is not the only way to contract HIV but one of the most common way if not the most, but yea, we don't know that she got it from her hustle so let's leave it alone

I don't care for bible stories, at the end it makes no sense to me so no need, but as regards the judge sentencing a criminal and washing his hands off, if a criminal is guilty of a crime, it is required by the law that the judge sentences him, now when the judge does, you don't hold him responsible, but the law. Ask yourself if jesus was responsible or not? That's about it.

I'm not being rational because I'm of the opinion that your actions can determine outcome of events, oh! please excuse me.

Well I don't only see an ingrate, I saw a rational person who knows that prostitution is one of the ways to contract Aids and is telling people to be more careful, how she contracted Aids is another story all together but can one get aids from prostitution? Yes, did his sister get aids? Yes, was she a prostitute? Yes, simple.

I don't want to be bothered about his relationship with his sister because I know for a fact that one can love their sibling but would also speak the truth, not minding whose ox is gored.

DarkRebel101:
A human being can never be separated from his emotions -- even clinical psychopaths; and sometimes emotions trump logic.

If you hope to get married some day and have kids then that's because you are moved by your emotions. If you try to use logic, you would find that it is somewhat a burden to commit yourself to one person for life or have kids who would pester the life out of you. Plus that would mean extra mouths to feed and more stress for you. Logic would suggest you do otherwise and save yourself from stress.

Also, you risk getting married to a man who would turn you into a punching bag, rāpe you when you deny him sex, and also you might have to endure the heartaches of a divorce. Logic would suggest you don't get married at all so as to prevent such misfortune from befalling you, but I'm sure you would lean toward your emotions anyway.

If you also have a bf, it's because you caved in to your emotions, not logic. Your bf could end up cheating, and God help you if he doesn't use a condóm, that means you are at risk of contracting STDs. Logic would suggest you do otherwise but yet one still chooses to have a Bf

...

Stop trying to rationalize an obviously askew opinion and learn to admit when you are in the wrong.

Dude seriously? Could it be we have a different understanding of logic?

And where do you stand to authoritatively declare that I'm in the wrong? you are even advising me to learn to admit when I'm in the wrong, chai!

Acidosis:
As in ehn, I've decided to ignore some mentions here.


You know Nigerians and their "I'm working for you" mentality . Even those who engage in rituals, and drive posh cars will always claim they're working for their children.

To even think this matter is a sister-sister relationship makes it easy to comprehend. I could walk into my brother's home, empty his store, pot of soup, and walk out without saying a "thank you". A lot of persons here don't even remember saying thank you to their parents for paying their school fees. It doesn't mean we don't appreciate their efforts. We only remember to show great appreciation when we receive gifts from strangers.


That OP has decided to not talk about her good deeds toward her sister (e.g. medical counselling, drugs, etc.) doesn't mean she's heartless.

Lol, I know what you mean my dear, in nigeria gifts/emotions cloud reason but not all of us can't separate our emotions.

DarkRebel101:
For what personal reasons? And we are not sure his sister whorëd herself out, it's mere speculation.

...

How many married female Nlanders can say they never had sex before marriage? And how many unmarried female Nlanders can say they do not have regular sex even though they are not married?

Siince we are now talking about morality then how are those married and unmarried female Nlanders any different from a woman who sleeps for money in order to cater for her family? At least the latter was necessitated by dire circumstances. Morality is subjective, Cocoa.



As I said before, we aren't certain she contracted AIDS via unprotected sex.

Is it also reasonable that the OP enjoyed the sweat of her labour, and waited until after her death before he began sermonizing about the moral turpitude that his sister was guilty of?

Why did he not speak while she was still alive and caution her if he suspected something off-kitler about her source of income?

Because Pilate washed his hands before ordering Jesus' execution, does that make him any less guilty? OP is just as guilty as he claims his sister is. Criminality comes in two forms: action and inaction. Silence falls under the category of inaction, and that, dear, is what OP is/was guilty of.



You are being insensitive, Cocoa; and OP's comments are tinged with hindsight bias.

Who thinks things through when he-she hasn't eaten for days? Or when one feels so hopeless and uncertain about the future? Very few people have the mental discipline to remain objective in such dire straits.

...

Life is a chaotic maelstrom and can be compared to the flipping of a coin; you can't predict whether you would get heads or whether you would get tails. 'Tis why hardwork doesn't guarantee success. Almost everything is hinged on chance and luck.

The point is, it could have turned out differently for his sister and he wouldn't be here making this cöck-a-doodle-doo of ingratitude, but now that things turned out differently, a mature fellow would have accepted it and chosen to see the good that at least came from his sister's indiscretions; rather he's on social media trying rubbish his sister's legacy.

I mean, who comes online to tarnish the image of his DEAD sister? That's just debased, Cocoa.

Oboy you need tto take the epistle down a notch , there's barely time to do anything these days.


We don't need to speculate to get what the OP was saying as to how she contracted Aids, anyone living in the real word knows what's up, reading the OP. Having said that, the personal reasons are that prostitution is about the most demeaning job ever and the other is that, morality is subjective, ergo, who am I to say don't do what you decide? So you see, I'm not judging the sister based on her morality, I just believe that as a person, whatever is worth doing, is worth doing well to avoid regrets.

Aids and a life of regret is what she got out of her decision to help herself and family so she should live with that, no sentiments from my side, that is just what it is.

You don't know that she wasn't cautioned, then there's the fact that you will always have to suffer the consequences of your actions, so the onus is on the sister to know that and act in accordance. I would be towing your line of thought if the family had called for a meeting, mandating the sister to prostitute herself for them(even then sef, the decision remains hers) but this is something she did out of her own freewill, expecting everyone to sing her praises is just preposterous as far as I'm concerned. As for the OP eating out of the wealth acquired, I don't know how it is unreasonable to accept gifts, unless you know the are stolen, this doesn't change the fact that calling her sister's actions what it is, is within reason.

Yes Pilate wasn't guilty because he wasn't a part of it, it was not his sole place to determine that jesus not be killed and since he didn't want to be part of the killers, he washed his hands off it, he is very very innocent in that regard.

Very good, if things had turned out differently this wouldn't be the outcome, this only goes to show you that your actions and what follows afterwards are entwined so choose wisely, I don't get why it's difficult to see that the OP's words are as a result of her actions, very simple. As an emotional human with feelings, I feel sorry that the OP's sister found hers where she landed but as an unbiased logical person, I also understand where the OP's coming from.

There's really no issue here, and I thought the sister is still alive.

The most annoying thing about jungle justice to me is that, it is carried out by criminals.

Very pathetic.

DarkRebel101:
We should grow worried sick if someone doesn't think of him-herself. It's normal if someone does. Shakespeare once said that the only thing more vile than self-love is self-neglect. Game theory also says that self-interests are reliably a driving factor in human behaviour. We are innately selfish as humans, self-interest(s) just need to be balanced with public-spiritedness.

The dead woman in question seemed to have struck a perfect symmetry with her own interests and the interests of her family. Other people would have skedaddled and not taken care of their families or even have anything to do with them. We have many of them playing hide and seek with cops and immigration officers overseas.

Are you of the opinion that “she shouldn't have played God”, or whatever nonsense the OP dreamed up from the cesspits of ingratitude?

Or are you of the opinion that she should be venerated and praised?

My dear, I will not praise anyone who decides to sell their bodies, for personal reasons, neither will I condemn anyone in the same vein.

My stance is that, it is reasonable that the OP be mad at how things turned out, because if that was my sister, I wouldn't be proud she be olosho, let alone about the Aids , nor will I be happy, so I understand his/her point of suggesting that it is only wise to think things through before venturing into them.

bukatyne:
This is the most beautiful picture of Eve Esin I've seen

Good one Nuella.

Keep it up!

Lol, I'm not the only one then.

I was thinking 'I know this lady' then it hit me, 'na eve be that o'

quivah:
this acidosis has some big issues!!!

He is just being rational.

She made sacrifices ofcourse but she was thinking of herself too, so let's not pretend we don't understand that.

While the OP may sound ungrateful, I think it is only reasonable that he be a tad bit mad at the outcome of things.

Whatever is worth doing, is worth doing well at the end of the day.

Since your sister decided say na olosho sure pass, she should have been smart about it and since your family accepted the money gladly, you don't really get to complain now, this is the time to pay her back for her sacrifices, finally if we are being totally honest, biko the sister may have helped her family but they weren't the sole purpose of her decision.