₦airaland Forum

Op, you get cold sore for your lip?

Awkward and very painful situation. I am certain there are more reasons that made her leave not just because the ex is a cultist and this her new guy is like a rebound guy. From experience, It could work either way, your rebound guy can become the right one or your ex is the right one so it is up to you and how you feel about each guy. If the rebound is the wrong guy in the end and your ex is still wanting you, your tail should be between your legs and head bowed when he dey take you back because you phuckup

Cococandy I did not insult you, if I did you would know.
As I have written try to read because it just seems like you just want to oppose my statement just for opposing stake. Nothing is wrong with being a mother and wife, I never said it was. My problem is with this statement, "a mother has two roles in life" the op meant a woman because a mother doesn't necessarily mean a wife and a wife doesn't necessarily mean a mother. If you don't find that statement demeaning then I guess you are the type I am talking about. You are arguing baselessly because the point I made has nothing to do with a wife and mother but to those whom's only aim in life is to become a wife and mother and those who believe that's the only things women are there for. It's like saying, all I want to do is become a gold digger, in many relationships it is the man who provides financially therefore your role in society is to sit and eat that money.

Rhythm:
Oh, wait there then, I'd come find you some day...when I have time.

Lmaoooo.....







Bukatyne made good points. Men do want to be fed and pampered so I don't understand how that is derogatory.

bennyrazz:
The reason why they are doing it is to make other women who cannot conceive jealous. And to make the others especially lesbians realise that getting pregnant and having a baby is a beautiful thing #ampregnantandamlovingit #canyougetpregnant?

I hope you know Lesbians do have wombs and va.ginas and can get pregnant.

crackhaus:
This is the part before that bit you quoted Sambarry @ bold text:



If you still don't realize that the part you quoted is all about her feelings (questioning herself on what she might have done wrong) and not my opinion...then I guess I'll just let you think what you want to

One thing you have to know about women is that just because they ask, " what have I done wrong" doesn't mean they believe they have actually done something wrong . It's mainly a rhetorical question needing no answer because they already know the answer and that is, they have done no wrong. To you, you might think to chip in your two cents on what she did wrong but it's not necessary because there is nothing she couldn't have done right that will validate cheating Shey you grab? Good

cococandy:
A person can be a wife and mother plus other things. Being a mother and a wife is not a small role so there's nothing that makes it a lazy person's ambition. Unless of course they intend to do a shoddy job of it.

If you cannot read don't refer to a post. How can it be a lazy person's ambition when my post read lazy people without ambition.

@topic:
Question:
Man: what do you want to do or be in life or what role would you want to play in society?

Woman: i want to be a mother and wife.

Only an aimless person would think this is perfectly ok.

Yep that's it... A woman's role in life is to be a mother and wife. Rubbish post! This thread is for lazy people without ambition.

None of your business. You didn't see anything, let your dad find out for himself.

Yep

Mprex:
lime and lemon doesnt react with the sun. Infact if you apply lemon juice to your hair and stand in the sun, it will give your hair colour a brighter shade


moreover, she isnt going to apply it like cream and walk around with it.

If you put lime on your hair and it turns a different , why do you think it won't do the same with your skin. Lime or lemon is not the best solution in that African sun. It will burn your skin if you don't take care.

It doesn't matter, whether it's applied as cream or not, even if you wash your it off, the properties will still react with the sun.

What do you get when you cross sucking on slices of lime with sun exposure? Unfortunately, a nasty sunburn ... or worse. How could that be? Read on and see!

While most of us and our kids love drinking a fresh limeade or lemonade and sucking on the fruit slices afterward while soaking up the sun ... or noshing on celery served in a drink or from a veggie tray while picnicking or by the pool ... the result may leave you wishing you had stayed inside instead. That's because certain photosensitizing plant compounds, much like certain medications, make the skin extra sensitive to sunlight. The result can leave you feeling burned and bummed. But there is an easy solution: wash your hands and your entire face! http://childcare.about.com/od/caregonewrong/a/sun.htm

Mprex:
your face is darker than the rest of youur body as a result of the sun. Dont waste your money buying chemicals that wil destroy your skin.

I will advice you to exfoliate your skin. You can use lime or lemon but lemon is better. Scrub your face with the juice and carry it for sometime before you wash it off. The result wont be abrupt but over time you will notice it.

And also get a sun screen. Irts necessary. Thank me later

Lime or lemon will react with the sun and make her skin even darker. All she needs is to get a couple of facial peels done and protect herself from the sun with sunscreen.

So she shouldn't wear bra with that light cloth abi? She should wear it without?

24/7

TV01: We can exchange opinions all day. The court systems are not unbiased in term sof custody and visitation judgements or enforcements. I previously posted the link to fathers for justice - http://www.fathers-4-justice.org/our-campaign/our-mission/ - at the very least it's plain to see that such a movement woul dbe redundant if there was no bias.

You may well be speaking about whats supposed to happen, but I have seen first hand what happens in practice. Often times a fathers involvement is reduced to purely monetary terms - even when they want and are able to give much more.



TV

I disagree..

TV01: First, there is no such thing as heterosexuality. It's normality - human males and females are designed to copulate. Fact. Evidenced by outcome, preceeded by functionality and structure.

Oh please, normality? Do you know that if allowed a woman can conceive without a sperm? What you call "normality" is what is called heterosexuality,

What is called homosexuality is better termed "abnormality", not least because it affects a small percentage of people and they have the exact same functionality and structure as normal people.

so there is not such thing as heterosexuality yet there is homosexuality. You are arguing over something that everyone knows. Yes heterosexuality is what humans are designed for genderwise but there can also be glitches in regards to orientation as you have written just as there are glitches in those born with two genders so what exactly are you arguing?

However you view it, it's a disorder.

So if it is a disorder how can you say it's not something that occurs in the womb? The same way downs syndrome occurs? Do you honestly think a person would genuinely choose to be homosexual?

I believe we are all on the same page regards who we deem paedophiles in terms of pre-pubescents.

Are you claiming the wiring of ones brain is genetically determined? It can be programmed and developed in certain ways. What you've stated is no different for those that cultivate drug habits - are they also genetic?

I am not claiming anything, I am stating facts.
How can wiring of the brain be something that is developed, what you think i am talking about a hypothetical wiring or a learned behaviour? I am talking about physically wiring, the connectors and circuits of the brain as real as the frontal lobe. I am not talking of "oh, he was wired to be a racist, no I am talking about the physicality of the brain itself, an abnormality of the brain. You dont Smoke weed because you have an abnormality in your brain.

I have made the point - I appreciate that in many case, it's not a choice as in waking up one morning and deciding for rectum as against vjay.
It can be any number of impressions, actions, traumas, feedback, wiring issues etc that accumulate over time that lead to a strongly embedded inclination that may seem innate. But the crux is it's no the way we designed to operate. So it can never be deemed to be normal - as prevelent or as right.


TV

Homosexuality may not be something certain societies calls "normal"(what the hell is normal even?but it is something that happens in nature that people should be okay in accepting.

TV01: How likely is it that fathers are the primary caregivers and who would actually think that is the best thing?

What is wrong with a father being a caregiver? This your statement contradicts what you have written previously.
You say fathers hardly get custody yet denounce the idea of a father being a primary caregiver. We are not living in the times where only the father can go bushmeat hunting. Both are equality educated to work out in the field and a father should not be made ashamed to choose to be the primary care giver. I believe you saw my link where fathers who become primary care givers have the same brain patterns as mothers who are primary care givers.

Men being the primary caregiver can rarely be what's best - before any question of divorce. Where they are, it's usuall an economic, not care based decision. And it's rarely what happens in practiceThis is the crux, it's not the battle of the sexes, but the way cases are decided are weighted in favour of the woman gaining custody. I haven't even said that's always a bad thing.

And why is it rarely the best? I don't understand your third line here but if you mean a man cannot be a primary caregiver because of the economy then that is false. Unless you want to marry a stay home wife, many women are working and earning good enough to rent, get a mortgage and look after their children. If in a situation where a woman earns more than the man and they collectively decide for one of them to stay home, nothing wrong with the man staying during the tender years.

And where did you get your "majority of the time cases are settled out of court" from?

Research, do some.

Men don't fight as much because most times it just costs them money and it won't go their way. It's standard advice.

Lmao! Come off it, be honest and sincere to yourself, how many men do you think are readily willing to be full custodians? As much as men are fighting for the custody of their children many more rather leave them with the mother to have that freedom. That's just the honest truth.

I'm talking from experience and what I said about "sitting" previously still stands

Again your opinion

Nope, it's only your assertion about my opinion.

In all, I don't agree with your implication that custody issues are settled in a totally unbiased fashion.

And even where fathers don't fight for custody, it's not that they don't want as much access as possible, which they often don't get, even if court granted, and the same courts can't help. Hence fathers4justice type campaaigns.

And I've seen it live. Mothers can play all sorts of games to frustrate fathers seeing their children - even contravening court orders. The courts however are reluctant ot enforce them as it means the best interests of the child are compromised.



TV

Refer to my statement on fathers willingly allowing the woman to take custody. If fathers were wanting to be custodians of their children there won't be as much lone single parents. Yes, some women, a minority frustrate some fathers but once they take it to court it is the welfare of the child that is a priority not the anonymity between the parents. Majority of parents would want help to raise their children. Not every woman is bitter over a breakup or on a revenge mission against the ex by using the child.

TribalEAST: the thing pain am what makes you think you are better than me? Oh, cos you've got a juicy womanliness? Ok, I agree

Once in a while use your brain rather than your nuts.

TV01: Carefree, I can't scientifically disprove what hasn't been scientifically proven?
No reputable scientist has, can (or even will)make the claim that homosexuality is biologically determined. Despite lots of funds and effort being spent to prove it, no proof!

It's like asking me to prove that Paedophilia is not genetic?


TV

If genes are not at play then genes are also not at play in hetereosexuality. It could possibly well be just our environment that influences our sexual orientation.

Actually in regards to paedophilia, I am not talking about those who in their culture can marry a girl once they have started their period but those who are actually just attracted to minors. There has been scientific research done on them. There is a difference in their brains to a normal healthy adult. The side of the brain which registers sexual response is triggered by pictures of children. There is a cross wiring between the sexual response part of the brain and the parental and nuturing part. There is a huge difference in the white matter of a paedophile to that of a typical adult male. Also paedophiles have a lower iq than average.

TV01: The "rulebook" states that the best interest of the child - especially when young - are served by being with the birth mother. Unless she demonstrates serious incompetence or potential to harm the child/ren, she typically gets custody. In upwards of 85% -90% of case where she wants it.

If she has initially been the primary caregiver before the divorce....It doesn't necessarily have to be the birth mother. For example, If the father has been the primary care giver at a tender age breaking that bond at that period can cause issues for them as they grow up. If more fathers become the primary caregivers then it is unlikely the courts with assign the child to their mother especially at such an age unless of course they are unfit parents.

At best Fathers are given shared cuatody or visitation rights. Shared Custody being more likely when the children are older. Capability - of the father at least - is not the big or an equal driver here.

There are many cases in which fathers do take full custody of the child but again the phrase here is "best interest". This isn't the battle of the sexes, I am certain if more men take on the role of primary caregiver then more kids under the age of 6 will be with them.

Even the 10% that don't go to women do not all go to men. Some of that is split goes to other relatives such as grandparents.

I don't know where you got your 10% from but majority of the time, custody issues are settled outside of court and majority of the time it is the father who allows the child to be with the mother. Those who want full custody and cannot agree with the arrangements outside are the ones who go to court.

Untrue and a real bad trope. Men do fight for custody, but as noted before, the mother is best rubric mitigates against them - even where they are more competent or able. In the UK there is a whole mens rights movement about this very thing - http://www.fathers-4-justice.org/

It is not untrue. I never said men didn't fight for custody, I said men do not fight as much as women because majority of the time when it is settled outside, the father allows the woman custody. The % you see are those settled outside of course by the parents. In the uk it is only in rare cases do the parent go to court for custody. Just because you are a mother doesn't mean you will get custody, it's about who is the primary caregiver and who has the most time on their hands. I remember reading an newspaper article in which a lady worked and the man stayed at home to look after the children and he was given full custody and the woman paid money to the ex-husband. Before anyone could say anything, he cheated and still got custody and child support, i guess the courts arent as biased as many might think. Whether he cheated or not, he was more fit to take care of the children. Things are changing especially in England and parents are being encouraged to have equal responsibilities. It doesn't make sense to break away the child from the one who is always with them and give it to the other who only spends time with them between 6-9pm and sometimes weekend.

As above - and that's not something I'd reccomend for anyone unless they had to or did so for a living. It may well be worth the unmarried seeing it though, they'd be sure to give greater consideration to their choice of spouse if they did.

I believe everyone should go sit and observe a court hearing when they have time. That is where all the facts are laid out, not the news papers. Even read case summaries instead of making judgements off the top of your head. Know the law.

I did make clear that I wasn't entirely satisfied with the claim in this case.
And the West has priorities - the promotion of LGBT agenda is one of them. From what I've seen the welfare of children is secondary to this.

This statement is untrue and it is only your opinion.

ronald4lif post=/post/26831140:
I admit I could be wrong but not sure if I am wrong on the basis you highlighted above. Its not always about what attributes we love or hate in someone that could lead to lust, on your post the points of attraction is his smile. And bear in mind that attraction is not love, we get attracted to loads of people but can't say we love them all. Lust and love is being misunderstood by many today hence most relationship barely last and even marriage grumbles like pack of cards. I would hardly believe that one can love someone at the very first sight of them without getting to know them. In your case, its possible as there's always an exemption cases, though I still think it is lust.

E fit be say na his fat lips you been just dey imagining it locking at yours, forget matter say you no like fat lips lol

I get it now. She was only attracted to the smile. She is infatuated.

SexyFox post=/post/26830753:
I think you are wrong. My reasons below:
1. I hate light skin guys but he is fair.
2. I stay awy from short guys. He is short.
3. He has fat lips and fat nose which I normally hate.
This is not lust.


By the way I did not even talk with him. And I have seen way handsome guys before. I wouldnt even call him handsome in my dictionary of handsome.

If you didn't think he was handsome how did you find him attractive without getting to know him?This doesnt make sense.

Yes, Eva Alordiah, after seeing her in her high video.

TribalEAST post=/post/26831340:
iss that an explanation? When theysay feminists are dumb, some fools argue.

You are a very stup!d and useless individual who has nothing going for him except those two nuts he calls balls between his legs. Get the phuck out of here! Do you think everyone wants to entertain insecure men who have nothing better to do than come online to be internet warriors insulting people who don't want to entertain them. As a matter of fact, you and i are not equal, i am better than you in every aspect you can imagine, Bloody goat!

TV01: In the West, the mother is almost always given custody. It's not so much about who is the best caregive, as long as the women is competent. Who makes more doesn't matter, as they simply move the funds from husband to wife.

Unless she's not telling something here, I don't see how the judge would have granted him custody - not if details of his lifestyle were known. Other than that, I can only think there may be truth in the activist aim of the judge?


TV

Not necessarily, nowadays, parents are judged irrespective of their gender. They look at the best interests of the child and not the gender. If both are equality capable then they are given shared custody.Many times, the fathers are the ones who allow the child to be with the mother. Men hardly fight for the custody of their children during divorce proceedings. If more men are willing to fight for their kids, then there will be more men with custody over their children. All we always see is the outcome but not the procedure. Maybe, you should go to a few hearings and see for yourself. If the woman believed the judge was been biased then she should have laid down her facts and made an appeal. For the judge to have given the father custody meant that he was in a better position to look after the children. The west doesn't also play with the welfare of the children.

TribalEAST: explain how?

Because we are.

cococandy: I won't do much except ask you were you ever saw my post saying fathers are primary care givers.
The way some of you wax mischievous all over the place can discourage anyone from wanting to interact meaningfully with you.
Asking fathers to become more involved with their kids now means mothers are no longer primary care givers?


Or saying a man who demands financial help from his wife should also try and contribute his quota in the home keeping front now makes him the primary care giver.

It's really a stressful endeavor trying to talk sense with folks who DELIBERATELY want to misunderstand you.

I hope you enjoying amusing yourself.

Fathers can also be primary caregivers. Care giving is not an exclusive club that only women can be part of.

Babygal4eva: What ever she did as long as it wasn't murder doesn't justify the judges decision , the mother almost always gets primary custody except in extreme cases so this is just pure bias.

I hope she appeals this decision.

What makes you think the dad wasn't a better care giver? Maybe they both worked and he was the one mainly at home. There is a difference between the relationship with the mum and the relationship with child. He may have been a bad hubby or a good hubby(we dont know the full facts) but I am certain he was a good parent for the judge to have given the man the children. If it was such as the woman says she should have appealed. I think she is just bitter that another man can take her husband.

Crocodile eyes-my primary 3 teacher use to call me this had to report him to my grandma.


I was also called 'Mbuda ke- it was some snack made from peanut, sugar and ground rice. When I fell in a pot of hot soup as a toddler and burnt myself, I got called Mbuda ke buda Jandita: the (snack) wit a burnt bum.

Ratatooi/doff- dopey and halfbaked/mad person

Banta-broomstick

And some goats be like "you can just walk away, yano" as if it is that easy. Rubbish. I know some people actually stay with an abusive partner because they know the abuser can't live without them. Messed up!

Btw it takes a person an Average of 7 times before finally leaving for good.

Acidosis: kandiikane

are you a feminist/do you support the movement?

I believe the two genders are equal....

TribalEAST: look at you below

This is rubbish, all you want to do is make it seem like it's only black and white. There are many women who want equal rights who also pay for their meals and even pay for the guys meals. There are many women who want to contribute. I don't know what kind of women you have been around but there are many of us who are willing to go in our pockets and pay.

I believe I understand carefreewannabe's point about choice although I didn't read everything. I believe everyone should have a choice to choose the roles they want to take part in society and not just accept the roles society has placed on them. The key word here is choice, many feminist cook clean and and become housewives not because it was imposed on them but because they want to, just like having two gay dudes and one of them decides to stay home and look after their adopted children. There is no difference, they are both two human beings, who decided they wanted to stay home and look after the children.

Parents should start teaching their children that it is okay, for any gender to be go-getters and it is also ok for both genders to be home to take care of the child. Any gender can look after their child. I was watching a Nigeria movie called family man in which the guy was the sole caretaker and provider of his sisters after their parents died. He even went to look after the sisters when they gave birth. He took care of the baby, cooked, fed and even wanted to press the sister's stomach for her. This made me realise that this scenario actually happens in real life, if you are left to take care of your children as a man, you will most likely be doing the same. You will have no choice but to make sure you cook, clean for your children unless maybe if you have the luxury of affording a maid.
There are also male maids, washmen etc, if all this happens what makes you think gender barriers are impossible to break? It is happening right in front of you yet people still go to the extent of saying gender roles are genetic. What bullshyt!

Going back to my point on choice, a woman has a right to choose her role as a human being and not imposed on her as a woman. She can choose to work or she can choose to stay home and a man also has the right to choose which role he wants and not what is imposed on him. There are now many good relationships where fathers bond with their kids because they are at home. A man should not be ashamed of this. There is nothing wrong in cooking and cleaning in your house, if a man was brought up in that manner he won't see it as a problem to cook and clean his own house. It is ok for a man to also be nurturing and caring.

The brains of fathers who become the primary caregiver for their children show similar patterns to those seen more regularly in mothers, according to a study testing the neurological basis of parenting.


http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2014-05-26/fathers-brains-change-for-role-as-primary-caregiver.html

If a man wants to strictly adhere to the gender roles, wants full submission and all that rubbish, one should expect him to meet all her needs, if he cannot do such then he is useless to her.