None of the delineated reasons are good enough to warrant a woman to cheat. Only a woman with no self-control would be found wanting based on these reasons. No one railroaded you into taking an oath of faithfulness upon the day of your wedding. You might as well strive to honour your words.

My wife can cheat on me so long as I don't find out. Because if I do then that union, that pact, that marriage ends that instant.

You sound like an ingrate.

Mindfulness, I have read that analysis before.

Sure, the economic malaise which matted Obama's regime also contributed in setting the people against the Democratic party, and seeing that Hilary's economic policies were not clearly stated, Trump who was touted as the poster-boy for change and who appealed to what the people wanted to hear, ousted Hilary in that regard.

The people craved for change and were tired of the Democrats, just as I am tired of discussing this whole Hillary-Trump brouhaha. That water's already under the bridge. Life moves on.

Parpor:
Team older ladies all the way,cos they tend to be more matured from a particular angle. That should be at the right time though

And they know how to fück as well. Why is no one stating this which also happens to be one of their sterling qualities due to their many years of experience and practice?

Amelian:

I hear.. But I don't buy your idea on a younger guy of below 26, hoping to have sexual fun with an older lady of 30s.
Its weird having to make love or have se3x with such a young guy? Wow, I can't even imagine it..sorry but it doesn't look appealing to me at all.. It's gross

LOL, is that your photo on your profile? You don't look like you're in your 30s. Too bad you're not into young bulls or I would have decided to shine your Congo.

...

Many women find guys younger than they are to be hot and attractive, so I can surely live with Amelian finding it gross.

And younger ladies of 20s dating men of say 55years and above is so gross..
Anyways do whatever rocks your boat..best of luck !
And am comfortable with what rocks mine.

What rocks your boat is boring. Why not try engaging in something that's not restricted to the confines of the conventional box?

You could start by allowing me show you what you've been missing in younger guys – I'm not saying you're older than I am anyway. I'm merely assuming that you are.

If that's you in your profile pic then you are in your 20s, not 30s.

Amelian:
Some younger guys are like the op.
It's funny and weird when I notice younger guys of 20 to 26 saying they are inlove with older ladies in their 30s...
Sorry op, I find it weird

Do you also find it weird that women of 23-24 are dating men in their mid 30s?
What's the difference between the two, or is it a divine mandate that women can date older men but men cannot date older women? That's rather selfish don't you think?

...

I say it depends on the nature of the relationship and what your definition of ‘love’ is.

If it's love that leads to marriage then no, I cannot have that for an older woman, but if it's ‘love’ that just means we relate on an intellectual level, do not become emotional encumbrances to each other, and also a share a no-string attached sexual intimacy, then yay, I'm completely game for that.

Does that sound weird too?

One of my colleague's son, he's in school. 20years old and he's infatuated with me. Cos I can't call his feelings love. He looks at me those teenage lovestruck eyes.. Lol
There was one time, he summoned courage and complimented my looks and outfit. I was like what? I didn't see it coming, then.. And there was a more matured friend of his father next to him that day. His dad's friend just looked at him and was like, wetin carry your eyes go there! See this small boy o..
Lol
The young guy had a defiant look in his eyes and replied back and so? Don't I have eyes? There is nothing wrong in me complimenting her. I felt a bit embarrassed, I then butt in and told the man, he's just like his dad.. His dad likes my outfits to work.. So u shouldn't take it that far.. The dad's friend then said, I will tell your dad when he comes
He replied, tell him nah! What's there.. I just smiled and walked away.. Lol
The young man has shown me all signals, that he's inlove... But Me, I pretend I didn't notice.. Lol
Op, I feel your story.. Lol

Infatuation, inveterate leachery, and sexual perverseness over older ladies are a different kettle of fish. That brand of anililagnia seems to be what your colleague's son had for you. Or it could be that he sincerely liked your outfit and you're merely over-thinking things.

Those three that I listed up there are way different from having a harmless attraction toward older women. Which is what I'm sure OP speaks of.

Ask Nick Cannon, older püssies rock.

Me too! Older women tend to have an edge over the younglings intellectually, emotionally and most importantly, sexually. They are usually not shy, are way more mature, plus they are hotter and ‘fuller’ than most of these young babes.

They also hardly pester one for money and have better taste.

Try discussing with a 39 year old lady then go discuss with a 22 year old chick and you would marvel at the vast difference. Obviously the former would make for a more deeper and worthwhile conversation.

...

Do as you wish, bruv. You need not seek validation or advise from anyone because you are perfectly normal. If fact, you are only ahead of your peers. Your mates would drool in envy when they see you with an older lady. So, stave off the doubts you have about it.

Onegai:


You clearly haven't been paying attention. Nigerians are calling it the will of God and praising the Lord and thanking God fo Trump. Their favourite white pastors endorsed him so that was enough. Buhari has already booked service and Mass with Oyedepo, Adeboye and Mbaka, armed with his PR crew, so he too will win re-election. Give the masses bread and circus or religion and watch your approval rating soar.

Arggg, your comments are hardly ever clear or straightforward. At least I understand this one.

Mindfulness:

If Hillary and her team were smarter, they would have applied pathos too but they didn't so they were not as smart as they were thinking.
The problem with the establishment is that they forget what appeals to ordinary people and then they lose.

That and the fact that the Americans had some major trust issues with Hilary. Her usage of a private mail as secretary of state and the other controversies that gave rise to a wave of misgivings.

...

It's rather obvious that sexism also had a hand in deciding the swing of the pendulum. Why have people chosen to downplay its influence?

Men who would not for the life of them vote a woman, black women who would never vote a white woman, right-winged white women who believe women have no business doing ‘the jobs of men’.

I am curious how it will play out. The way I see it, America has been on the road to decline for a long time now and I see them accelerating.
The fact that someone like Trump was even allowed to run for president shows how messed up the country is. It is nothing but a symptom of deeper core issues.

I am curious as well.

America is fifty shades of fücked up. The whole world knows that, and the era of their domination is approaching its terminal point.

Bush fvcked the country up, Trump has the potential to destroy it. My guess is that he will be impeached.

Let's wait and see.

Onegai:
That people prefer to trust their feelings, their religion and their anger over any facts, knowledge, experience and preparedness.

Ah, emotions tend to run roughshod over logic. It's the bane of humankind.

‘Tis why a General can jolt his army out of fear and cowardice, and instigate them to launching an attack simply by singing or chanting an emotive song. It doesn't matter if the opponent has the numerical advantage or whether their defeat is certain, the soldiers would still plunge in fearless into the battle because the song would have put them in animal spirits.

Humanity should have evolved from making decisions based on emotions. Sadly it has not

And it's okay to do whatever the hell you want to do, as long as you can tap into the popular feeling going around, you will win people over. And then screw them later. Very Nigerian behaviour. Which is what I have constantly said about Americans.

So most likely Ayo Fayose is our next President. You heard it here first!

Strangely, I keep seeing pictures and videos of white teens in schools chanting "go home niggurs", "cotton pickers", "white power", "build the wall" and a uni in San Diego has had an attack on a Muslim girl. Wonder what's causing all this? I mean, Trump is great for America, he's a Christian, we Nigerians (whom are Black) love himmm!!!

It's rather difficult to discern when you are earnest or when you are regaling the readers with your sarcastic gibes.

I learned – well, weeks before the campaign – that while Hilary was the World's choice, Trump was America's choice.

I learned America is a conservative nation at its core despite the veneer of liberalism that it hedges up.

I learned populism is an almost fail-proof stategy in winning, especially when the masses are the prime determinant.

I also learned -- no, not learned -- I witnessed what I had always known about Democracy — that it could be evil when franchise is accorded the informed, the uninformed, and the ill-informed.

...

Mindfulness, you are correct in all, especially in your last reply to cococandy.
In the end Americans voted for theatricality and rhetoric. The same way Nigerians did in 2015 when the mantra of change was tactically used in creating an emotionally-charged campaign atmosphere.
What better way to win over the hoi polloi than through an ample dosage of pathos?

Mindfulness:

No but children are born with different dispositions. Some are more timid than others, as an example. All babies are not equal so they cannot be a tabula rasa.

Timidity, intelligence, feistiness et al have more to do with genetics. All of which manifest as the child grows older.

Besides, a child being timid or confident is most times contingent upon the environmental circumstances he-she finds him-herself. I don't think anyone is congenitally predisposed to being timid and whatnot.

I believe the mind is a clean tablet at nascence; a newly, wet cemented floor whereby anything and everything which falls on it leaves an impression – some more pronounced than others.

Yeah, same symptom of fear and insecurity. Taken to an institutional level, it is called marriage, ha ha ha.

I already told you to learn to hold out for the second marshmallow.

Mindfulness:



Maybe the father disvirgin -ed many girls and left them heartbroken and maybe he impregnated some and had them have abortions. Guilty conscience can haunt people for ages.

LOL.

And Love is the child of freedom. Better context?

Yeah, it was used out of context.

Mindfulness:

I would disagree with John Locke but I agree with your last paragraph. I would not teach my children all this 'the world is so messed up' nonsense. I would rather kill myself if I thought of the world as messed up instead of bringing any kids into it. And every generation repeats the same nonsense. I will tell my kids what is better avoided and why but also emphasize all the opportunities life has to offer and let them explore new places so that they grow confident believing in themselves.

If I may ask, why do you disagree with Locke's theory? Are you of the opinion that we are born with ideas of good and bad already imprinted in our minds?

I will not tie them to a chair just because there are sockets in the house and they may experience an electric shock when sticking their fingers in but use baby socket protection and still have them move around the house freely. That's the difference between protection and overprotection.

So true!

I do not believe that you can have the one but not the other but if I had to choose, I would go with happiness for sure.

Beautifully said. It reminds of an article I read about idleness.

I knew where you had read it from which was why I specifically emboldened that part of your post.
I have a quasi-photographic memory, remember?
Maria Popo...va. . I have also read the article.

There seems to be a false notion of what the term dysfunctional family means. Most NLanders think it means child neglect and divorce. I have provided more examples and overprotection is one characteristic among many.

Yes, I agree. Overprotection is also symptomatic of a dysfunctional home. It's almost similar to possessiveness in a boy-girl relationship, don't you think?

dangotesmummy:
exactly. Look at lecturers children, pastor's children, evangelists children. Many of them are good actors WHEN they're around their parents. Wait make them marry or go for nysc.ayayayaya

You go dey wonder shey na pastor born this one.but for some reasons like looking like a perfect parent outwardly you will see lecturers begin to become overbearing with their kids till the kids leave the house and then they become the exact opposite of what you were trying to instill in them

For example Davidos mother was a lecturer and a rigid seventh Day Adventist member
she wanted to mould David to an s.u kind of boy.that his only life will be church and school. She caged that boy so much till he ran out of the house. He was sleeping IN musicians studios about.

The mother wanted him to be a regular church boy,go to school and live an average life like anyone else but he was intrested IN music

So anyway he kept practicing till he released his first album and then boom every one knows Davidoff today.

The mother is late now but if you were opportuned to see the mother she's no different from the typical deeper life mothers.if she were to be alive and she sees all the tattoos and ear/nose piercings she will collapse because David is a complete opposite OF his mother's ideals an belief system. Though they look alike facially but his life is very different from what his mother wanted him to live.David is a very good example of caging a child to frustration and almost at the brink of killing his inner potentials because she's a church deacon and wants to appear as a perfect mother

Na pastor daughter dey spread leg pass.

...

All you have said are generously tainted with the pixie dust of truth, and I make bold to say that fear is the primary cause of the over-protection of a child. Fear makes one paranoid.

Maybe a mother had been raped in her adolescence. Maybe a father had had to run through the gauntlet of an unsavoury experience in his youth.
So for fear that such evil might befall their children, they dot neurotically over them, and are blind to the fact that even though their intentions be noble, they tend to make liars and hypocrites out of their children – who like every other human being, would rebel once they feel that their freedom is threatened.

Fear is the thief of joy.

raumdeuter:

The bold is false. If we have 100 juvenile deliquents, at least 80% of them would be from homes that lack supervision.

Understand the message before drawing your gun out of its holster.

No one is condemning the supervision of a child -- definitely not me.
As a matter of fact, any parent who freewheels a lot in the raising of his-her child, or who doesn't supervise their actions is an irresponsible parent.

Oversupervision – or as OP put it – overprotectiveness, is the moot point here. And overprotection of a child only happens when a parent panders to his-her insecurities and fears...and this unwittingly leaves a dark carbon smudge on the child's psyche.

...

And your assertion is also wrong. How reckless it is to pontificate that most delinquents are products of dysfunctional homes. Did you factor in peer pressure? Happenstances? Or the fact the child was stubbornly opposed to the exhortations of his-her parents?

n the US most of the crimes are committed bychildren from dysfunctional homes where the parent are not around to supervise their kids and leave them to the society to raise

Same as in Nigeria. Get 100 kids that are criminals and see the type of family they come from. As much as we all loved the fabled child of strict parents who became wayward, there are at least 10times more example from children from unsupervised backgrounds

Overprotectiveness is not the same as a parent showering his-her child/ward with love and affection.

You're muddling up the argument by equating overprotectiveness with modest parental supervision.

That most criminals – as you say – are from dysfunctional homes, does not mean they weren't ‘overprotected’ as a child. It only means their parents failed to imbibe moral values in them, or that they themselves decided to careen off the straight path that their parents had had them set upon.

KillerBeauty:

Come on...say something. I think our match has been made in the seventh Heaven.

Mindfulness:
I just love it!!

Children are so carefree and so fun loving but adults, who forgot that life is supposed to be fun, think that they can teach them more than they can learn from them. When in fact the little ones enjoy life so much more until we mess it up for them and make them become like the rest who complain about the world and their lives all the time and take everything far too seriously.

We should also not forget that a man-woman is most inquisitive as a child. A child always wants to know; he-she wants to know the color of the wind, and what gives rainbows their colour, and why birds can fly, and why the sky is blue, and a bushel of inquiries that we adults would consider silly and trifling.

An attempt to fetter the inquisitiveness of a child inadvertently takes a heavy toll on his-her mental outlook as an adult.

To paraphrase John Locke: ‘The human mind is first of all a tabula rasa, a clean slate of innocence; whatever is impressed upon a person in childhood is what endures into adulthood.

When a child is bred and brooded with the mindset that the world is a haunted room full of steel traps which one must not advance towards in order to be on the safe side, then such a child would likely not approach life with a venturesome spirit, but would rather choose to be content with the servings of life's buffet, and that as we know is unhealthiest of all philosophies.

The simile you have used in this context is so poignant. Let the little ones be, they have so much of what you wish you still had. Don't kill their zeal for life. Look at those sulky faces around you, they are not the faces of children.

Perfect example!

Yet people wonder why a young man like myself is obsessed and constantly diddling with the idea of having a child of his own.

Children are metaphors for the good side of humanity: hope, care, humility, love, playfulness, tenderness. They are reminders that even though we are inherently evil, we are also inherently good.

Even a baby Adolf Hitler still symbolises that inherent good of humanity.

Would parents rather have a genius or a happy child?
I would not want my children to end up numbing themselves like Michael did until he died because he was not allowed to be a child and enjoy it like he naturally would. Joseph Jackson wanted the best for him, too, I am sure. And he was acting with the same arrogance many parents still do.

Good question. I would rather have both but if I only had one option to choose from, then I would pick happiness over ingenuity for my child.

I don't know if this saying is apt for the occasion:

“The most uninformed mind in a healthy body is happier than the wisest valetudinarian”.

Those were the timeless words of Thomas Jefferson.

We could also say that the most uninformed child with a happy and unencumbered spirit is better off than a whizkid with a soul honeycombed with grief -- grief wrought by the quantification metrics of the adults around him-her which have and still are clipping the wings of his-her childhood.

The benefits of play time and social learning have been long underestimated. It is with other children that they learn how to compromise, how to resolve conflicts, how to win through and gain acceptance. And it is in their free time when they do not know what to do that they develop imagination and creativity. Give them some space and time to explore and develop

Exactly! Boredom and inactivity spurs creativity and imagination.

When people say they are bored, I envy them greatly because it only means that they have the time to think and create. A bored child or adult is raw genius waiting to explode.

Not everything is learned at home and from books and you can't teach them everything. They will learn things you won't like but they will amaze you too. Just remember that you are not a perfect role model either. Guide them but also show them that you trust them.

Like dangotesmummy has perfectly said, controlling them too much, will only make them live a double life and lie to you because they were not born to be imprisoned but learn and develop within an age appropriate time frame. They will trust you as much as you trust them.

Dangotesmummy must be a wise woman.

If we observe the thread of juvenile delinquency, we would find that most of the kids found wanting are usually kids whose parents are seen as the high-minded personalities of society, and who in raising their kids, had believed that shielding them from the impurities of the world would bestow upon them a halo of sainthood.

But alas! It proved largely counterproductive as it only gave the child the necessity to fan up stratagems in order to evade punishments.

Take away a child's freedom and you turn him into a liar: because he would defy your instruction by visiting his friend, and on returning home, he would be compelled to lie that he went to church or to the local library.

Dum vivimus vivamus.

KillerBeauty:
What if your mother and your father are married. They gave birth to two kids before you. But your mother had an affair with another man, unknowingly to your father. So the seed of another man not your father formed you. But you grew up thinking your father is your gather.

Would you have been born or someone else?

When Killerpriest meets with Killerbeauty, what happens? The union becomes sealed with a Gordian knot.

bukatyne:
I would protect both my daughters and sons.

In my opinion, tit's futile to protect your daughter while leaving your sons to wander; the wandering sons invites trouble to the daughter at home.

Looking back, I am adopting a lot from my own upbringing...

No yeye friends or outing.....'Read your books! '

The topic is not on whether or not one should protect his-her child. ‘Overprotectiveness’ is the operative word. You can eat sugar, but eating excess sugar jeopardizes one's health.

When you make them read books but do not allow them to live out what they read, when you deprive them of human contact and fun and the other bells and whistles characteristic of childhood, then you might as well be raising robots, forgetting that one's childhood is like a woman's hymen — once it's gone it can never be recovered.

...

Michael Jackson was a bibliophile, the King Of Pop, a musical god, but his parents – his father Joe especially – was overprotective of Michael.
Michael was home-schooled, didn't have the luxury of friends, and was shielded from the world. No wonder he turned out to be emotionally-unbalanced and appeared to be a fourteen-year-old trapped in the body of an adult. Everything has its season, and if a child is not allowed to be a child at the right time, he-she would ultimately be a child at the wrong time i.e during adulthood.

Overprotectiveness makes a child weak, naïve, inexperienced, to mention but a few.

Mindfulness:


I saw this thread before but decided not to comment because I wasn't feeling in the mood to be rude.
You have put it more mildly than I could and there is nothing more I can add to it.

Mindfulness:


I concur wholeheartedly and I could not have said it any better.


This is a well thought out, coherent line of argument underpinned by knowledge and topped with respect for the less privileged among us. Anyone who cannot respect people who find themselves in less fortunate circumstances should consider himself emotionally and intellectually impoverished.

but what the heck is the Dunning-Krueger effect?

Thanks, Mindy. I was hoping you'd drop your piece of mind as well.

...

Dunning-Kruger effect: A cognitive bias where low-ability (unintelligent) people miscalibrate their skills and abilities, and mistake themselves to be far more intellectually superior than they actually are. While on the other hand, high-ability (intelligent) people underplay their skills and abilities, and mistake themselves to be intellectually inferior whereas the reverse is the case.

Mr. Gerard hoped to make a case for social Darwinism and eugenics, but his clumsiness in the art of rhetoric caused him to screw up what was already out-and-out a self-defeating message.

Mr. Gerard also did not sound the least objective in the making of his argument, and even though he reminded us more than once that the buffer between him and the haves-not is an animus-free zone, the tenor of his write-up suggested otherwise as he came off across as chafed and as an embittered hater of the poor and of ‘unintelligent’ people.

The questions we ought to ask Mr. Gerard are twofold:

1. Is he wealthy?

2. What makes him think that he is intelligent? -- because he seems so cocksure about it.

[...]

I must say that I wholeheartedly agree with the commenters who said OP is conceited and arrogant.

...

My bill of particulars has and will always be against those who nest themselves in this high eyrie of arrogation, holding onto the belief that they are better than everyone else.

We definitely do not need to know that you started watching CNN or BCC when you were 5 -- it doesn't in any way bolster your argument, or further its cause -- that's just hubris in its most superlative degree of comparison, and that is why I think those who said you are an egoist are not wide of the mark.

An apothegm comes to mind: “Who knows doesn't talk. Who talks doesn't know”.

Because a person had the privilege to access Newspapers at a tender age, or to be exposed to a lot of things does not necessarily bedight him-her with that stamp of intelligence.

There are many people who received the choicest education that money can buy, but yet are impoverished in imagination and critical thinking, and can only rattle off a bunch of memorized information acquired through hours of rote memorization.
These people learn in parrot-fashion, are rigid in thought, and are thoroughly enslaved by education, which is counterintuitive given that proper education is meant to liberate the mind and ought to serve as a foil for the natural intelligence of a man-woman.

The point is, getting an Ivy League education is not a ticket to intelligence -- knowledge may be guaranteed, but intelligence is not. You seem to believe expensive education makes one intelligent.

...

Another Charley horse in your argument was in your attribution of ‘expensive’ education to ‘quality’ education. You chastised ‘the Nigerian mentality’ but yet you have fallen guilty of the very thing you maligned.

...

Then you made this statement which reduced your entire argument into a pile of rubble: “No matter what, a Harvard/Oxford trained individual cannot be poor”.

I bet you are also among those who think that the streets of America are brimming with dollars.

Not only does the fatuity in your assertion makes for a good laugh, it also confirms the fact that you are insecure. But insecure about what?

...

To end this, I would say that you need to change your attitude. It's usually the unintelligent ones that think themselves to be intelligent and go about puffing their chests — the Dunning-Krueger effect.

And you nor anyone else has no right to decide what set of people should mate or not, or whether some people deserve to be married or not.

If you think you are right in sowing seeds of discrimination amongst humans like you, then the world should show no sympathy should the White Man have you chained like a common criminal and have you picking up cottons on the field, because according to them, you are a ‘worthless nigga’ and a second-class human being whose brain is too small to comprehend science or literature or astronomy.

Remember that even the slave master is a potential slave to another person more powerful than he is. So when you think yourself to be better than that innocent kid who hawks Gala in order to survive, and then come online to talk condescendingly about their poor state of living, you should also know that there are also those who consider you to be their inferior.


cc: Mindfulness

Onegai:
Yes, but not in anger and not too often. Fear has its limits and the person Ooga Booga Baby E is afraid of us Himself, who glared her into silence 2 nights ago. My hand-smacking only stops for a few minutes.

however, all that will change the day i find a phone with nudey pics or makeup, a mini-skirt and an older teenage boy's contact That day, I turn into a Bolton

How is it possible to not smack someone in anger? Is anger not the emotion that's responsible for physical assault?
Anger at the behaviour of a child/ward are why parents/guardians smack them in the first place.

@emboldened. . . that's almost inevitable.

eph12:

Many were flogged and they took correction while others got used to the rod and even longed for it. Nobody wishes to inflict pain on the child but there are some situations you just have to.
Like I said before the environment matters.

Don't you think it's tad ambitious to use the word 'many'?

No situation(s) warrants inflicting of pain upon a child. Our thoughts have been streamlined into believing that corporal punishment is indispensable in child-raising to the point that it appears to be a normalcy, especially in a typical African setting such as ours. In truth, it's an aberration, and I think it's very sadistic of any parent to indulge in such practice.

There are various, and more loving ways to persuade a child into doing away with bad habits without creating unnecessary animus betwixt the parent and the child. Or don't you know that some adults abhor their parents based on the physical punishment inflicted on them in their childhood?

All it takes is wisdom, patience and having an out-and-out understanding of the child in order to know how to go about in upending his flaws.

This is also why domestic violence seems to have shot into the stratosphere in these recent years. When kids are spoonfed with the warped notion that violence and physical altercations are the way to go about in enforcing change(es) or in handling life issues, then such a child is likely to batter his/her wife/husband and children in a skewed belief of attemting to correct them—thus fostering the intergenerational cycle of violence.

You made mention of the environmental factor involved, and asked what could be use to deter poor kids from bad habits. You're missing the point—it's not about using punishments as leverage to elicit good conduct or behaviour. It's about conveying in no uncertain terms the benefits of good behaviour to the child and inculcating in him/her the importance of being morally upright even when punishment or sanction is not included in the clause.
Morality and punishment are two words that should not respond to the principle of reciprocity—that is, punishments or threats of sanction should not be why people are moral, and that, sadly is all corporal punishment is all about.

toyeem:
Really. Can you really raise a well-behaved and well-cultured child in Nigeria without spanking? I think the way you do it and the no of times would be the issue. 'Spare the rod and spoil the child';I didn't really understand that until I became a mother.

That a mother or father had to resort to corporal punishment as a means to right a wrong only proves how much that parent has failed in his/her parental duties towards his/her child. Children are humans, and not beasts of burden. Even dogs don't get beaten!

It's easy to beat your child at the slighest offence, but it's energy-draining and much more time-consuming to correct an errant child lovingly by making him/her see the wrong in his/her actions - through words of wisdom and of love. Many African parents lack the patience to follow through that correctional route, and in their defence they'll almost invariably quote the trite bible passage that says: 'spare the rod, and spoil the child'.

Corporal punishment does nothing but instill fear, and fear only makes the child more careful.

Kachisbarbie:

[Very true @ emboldened. Ode has really lost its insulting element.

WHOEVER you're shagging?
naso you shag reach, broda KillerPrie*t?

Trust me, you don't want to know.

This Shym3 of a dude has his self-esteem at level nadir. All I see is a confuzzled, insecure reprobate with a relatively low IQ that is thoroughly uncomfortable with the fact that he's black, thus causing him to project his insecurities on black women.

Delve into his history and do not be surprised if you discover that his vitriol against black women actually stems from the fact that he has been turned down repeatedly by them. He can deny this all he wants but we all know rejection drives people to the brink of madness. He's just so pitiful and frustrated.

To further prove how unintelligent and degenerate he is, he even went ahead to say:—

from my own experience: I'd say white women are much more traditional, submissive, understanding, beautiful without make-up, and natural than black women

White women are more traditional? White women are more submissive? Humor me.

This spastic isn't worth a pennyworth of attention. Why give it to him? He's but a 21st century niggā living in mental enslavement.

PS: This thread should have died a natural death while it was still on its first page.

Relationships should be dotted with playful moments; and a little name-calling every now and then is not amiss, albeit should be done lightheartedly and must cease to occur if it causes either of the partners some form of discomfiture. A relationship without playfulness is like a plain, nondescript and boring Swiss village.

Who doesn't name-call anyway? I name-call when I have sëx. I use words like slüt, höe, bîtch, but whoever I'm shāgging knows I do not really mean what I'm saying. Ladies love the dirty talk anyway - it spikes their libidö by a few notches.

The word Ode seems to have even lost its insultive element as people use it nowadays either as a term of endearment or to establish camaraderie when fraternizing with one another.

Really, it's no big deal for me.

This sounds like blackmail!