.

Amazon picks up The Expanse. There'd be a Season 4.

-Lord

usbcable:


We have been more concerned and rightly so of Marcelo vs Salah.

Non one has been asking how the right back of Liverpool will handle attack from Marcelo - Ronaldo/Isco/Bale/Asensio.

Hence Liverpool also needs to provide enough cover n that flank too else Marcelo will finish the young lad..


But it is share disrespectful to say none of the Liverpool 11 will make it into Real Madrid first eleven.

Salah is being chased. Ask why
Ferminho as at today is better than Benzema.

The others I cant talk much about as I don't watch much of EPL

It's all mind games.

This Liverpool team can't handle pressure. Madrid can. So if the English media is content with trying to make it seem their front 3 would run all over our back line, then we should rightly hit back with the our 11 is better than theirs. They don't have the monopoly of hype.

When you come down to it, it's a Spanish team versus an English team, we all know who'd carry the day 95% of the time.

They've not played a team of RM's quality this season. Zidane is not Pep. Liverpool can't contain an in-form RM with CR7 up front.

-Lord

LordAdam:


If you reply this message without proof that the average price of crude between 1999 and 2015 was $100, then you are implying that you are an ID*OT!

Go ahead and quote me as I expect you to.

-Lord

SirBunky85:


I am unable to provide proof that the average price of crude between 1999 and 2015 was $100, proving that I AM AN ID**T!

There you go. Fixed it for you.

-Lord

SirBunky85:
[s]truth hurts.just admit it dat u are duller dan the person u accused of being dull .[/s]

If you reply this message without proof that the average price of crude between 1999 and 2015 was $100, then you are implying that you are an ID*OT!

Go ahead and quote me as I expect you to.

-Lord

SirBunky85:
[s]wat u just did is medicine after death.a smart person as u claim to be shud've provided his own correct figure without being called out.as i initially said,u are duller dan the person u call dullard.[/s]

Like leader like follower. Daft fellow. Provide proof and stop running in circles.

-Lord

ITbomb:
This shows that Buhari has no idea about the economy of the country he is governing

Such a disgraceful lie from the president

The worse part is that he has been repeating this lie since he got elected in 2015. Despite the many times he has been corrected, he continues repeating it. He would not stop, even if he loses in 2019.

The daft's lexicon is entirely made up of corruption, high/low oil price, 16 years, PDP, and Jonathan. Trust me, he'd repeat this lie on the campaign trail.

How anyone with a functioning brain thought this ancient artifact would be the one to change Nigeria is beyond me.

-Lord

SirBunky85:
enlighten urself first.u attacked someone without giving ur own correct figure and u think dat u are not duller dan the person u called dullard abi?

GTFO my mention if you can't read.

I've provided the true average, $61, with proof.

Now can you provide proof that average price of crude was $100 from 1999-2015?

-Lord

SirBunky85:
u are the clown here.u just attacked pmb and cald him a liar without giving us the correct figure..iranu

Do you think this is the first time the du**ard in chief is making this gaffe? It has being debunked severally in the past.

Here's an article to enlighten yourself.

Average price of crude oil from 1999 to 2015 was $61 per barrel, not $100 proclaimed by President Buhari

http://www.inclusivepress.net/article.php?aid=110&title=Average%20price%20of%20crude%20oil%20from%201999%20to%202015%20was%20$61%20per%20barrel,%20not%20$100%20proclaimed%20by%20President%20Buhari%20&source=home

-Lord

So Nigeria was earning 2.1 million times 100 times 16 years, 7 days a week.

Chronic, shameless liar!

Which Nigeria was selling 2.1m barrels every day at $100 for the last 16 years? How can such an ignorant illiterate be ruling this country?

And btw, he wants us to applaud Abacha for constructing roads even though international governments have refunded billions he stole, but he wants us to crucify GEJ who also constructed roads, and did more--railways, universities, and revamped agriculture but has no property abroad. Abi is codeine part of their diet in Aso Rock.

Anyway, at least the blame game has gone past GEJ now. Very soon, it'd get to the colonial masters.

Clown!

-Lord

Abimloaded:


Lol... So Messi went missing because Barcelona failed to reach the finals and probably win the UCL for 3 seasons in a row.
That's 2015-2018.

Believe me, I don't have a problem with that so far you can agree with me, going by this same logic you used that Ronaldo went missing for 5 straight seasons in the UCL.
2009-2013 reference.

Ignoramus. The last time Real Madrid crashed out before the UCL SF was in 2010.

For 8 consecutive seasons, we've always made it to the UCL SF.

Where do all you dumb, ignorant cules crawl out from?

-Lord

CeeKay17:

How can you even lie when what you wrote is just right here. Dude I'm done with you cuz its obvious you're a troll and your just looking for who to pick issues with even when I've corrected myself.
Either your a troll or you simply have comprehension issues, or maybe both.
Cuz you keep repeating the same thing over & over like a broken record.
I'll let you have the last word. Goodbye

And if you remove "f*cking" from that sentence, how does it read?

Bloody snowflake. Got a loudmouth but a thin skin.

So that's the "swear word S" that have you scurrying for the hills. You made a completely asinine statement and you're rolling on the floor wailing that I tore you a new one. How about you make logical statements you can prove. Is that so hard for you?

Oh, I'm supposed to ignore it, so I wouldn't hurt your feelings. What a blanket stain!

-Lord

lefulefu:
sure i know ..i just brought dat up. Anyway Its only in telemondo movies that a single lady would agree to be a sidechic for a man cos of his sweet nature or cos he's romantic.telemondo storylines are always sentimental and ridiculous.

Chief, sweet nature and romantic is one reason. There are several others. And as I said earlier on, it could be a mix of several factors.

The only reason I quoted you is because I suspected you didn't get that the OP was referring to a general term. That's why my first statement to you to was:

If you say for most ladies, I'll agree 100%. If you say for all ladies, then I'd have to respectfully disagree.

Now that you get the point, I don't see the need to press this further.

-Lord

CeeKay17:

NL is a public forum, if you choose not to air your opinions, it's your problem. Where in any of my posts did I imply I'm an authority on this matter?
We all know the word side-chick is an all encompassing term, and the OP's write-up was interpreted using the wrong context. I wonder what's your point really?
Using swear words clearly means your are pained.
I already cleared that up. I agree I used the wrong word "side-chick" and I explained exactly what I meant. If you choose to keep on harping on a statement I've already corrected, good for you.
Lool, I dint't take back my statement because you called me out, I did so cuz I the OP explained that he was referring to a broader term not what I thought
How exactly did I attempt to change the conversation? If anything, it's you who decided to turn what was previously a civil discussion into a cat fight which I would definitely not be dragged into.

Do you have issues with comprehension?

Because here's my statement:

You're the one making wild aspersions like you're an authority on the matter or have met and interviewed every Nigerian woman out there.

Is it that you don't know the meaning of like or are you just trying to pick issues where there isn't any?

And if I choose not to air my opinion and instead choose to lambast your opinion, only for you to think I'm attacking you because I'm pained, then it's not my problem. I have no interest to pander to your emotions. You say something silly, you'll get trashed for it. No one is here to organize a pity party for you.

Swear words? Where did I use swear words? Is "judgmental" a swear word? Is "19th century thought" a swear term? Or are you just making stuff up now? Don't be a bloody snowflake who can't take criticism but can call people who make personal choices that have zero effect on you as individuals with "zero self-worth".

The OP has always referred to a broad term. If you read the topic and the OP thoroughly, you'd know he was referring to a broad term. You went on a tirade based on an ultra-conservative take of the term in a complete tangent to what the thread is about, culminating in you shading personal choices; a poor decision which you're just realizing now. Now instead of letting that go, you think cheap shots such as "Women Rights Activist" is a brilliant way to cover up your gaffe. It isn't.

It's typical, isn't it. You make an illogical statement, get hassled for it, recognize you have no defense, then cry foul that you were hassled. Trying to deflect attention with tantrums.

-Lord

lefulefu:
single guys in serious relationships also keep side chics. But bear in mind that there are guys who would lie to the second lady of she being the only one in his life while at d same time dating d main chic. But Some other dudes are bold enough to tell the second lady to know her limits that they involved with a main bae and she would gladly accept. Now do u think an undergraduate who is not financially well off but is double dating would be bold enuf to tell the sidechic to his face that she's a side chic? ..especially if he's the one who depends financially on one or two of the ladies? The ladies or one of the ladies would kick him to the curb if she finds out he's playing hereven if his dic game is A+ she had still react. But a single male who is in financial control of himself and takes care of his side chic....she wont complain and she would accept her boundary cos she knows wat she's getting from the man. That's the way the circle plays in Nigeria sadly.

Long story.

We're talking about ladies that agree to be side chicks; not ladies that are being played. Stop conflating the two.or no money.

-Lord

lefulefu:
there are ladies in Nigeria who think they are in serious relationships but they are actually sidechics because their boyfriend might give them dat false impression while behind her back he's already doing marriage arrangements with another lady. We are not talking of such ladies. What we are talking about are single ladies who know the man they are involved with is already married or about to get married but they still agree to play the second fiddle. In such a situation, financial inducements can never be downplayed.

At what point did anyone make mention of the first instance here? The title is "5 reasons women AGREE to be side chicks." It's very clear.

And it didn't say single ladies/women either. You are making that up. It said women.

Financial inducement is a factor. Heck it is the #1 factor in the OP. The fact is that it is not the only factor. Your first jab at the OP said it was the only factor. That's the genesis of this back and forth.

You make an uninformed statement based on a misinterpretation of an unambiguous viewpoint, realize it wasn't in good taste, and then complain that your uninformed statement was hounded. Of course, it'd be trashed. Whose fault is it that you didn't read the thread title and OP comprehensively before commenting?

-Lord

CeeKay17:

What you believe doesn't matter either. And nowhere in my post did I say my opinion is more valid than others. To be honest I don't know why you are so pained. See as you carry woman matter for head like gala . Goodnight Mr Woman Rights Activist

I've not even shared my belief. I've kept it to myself. All I'm pointing out is common sense. Side chick is an all-encompassing term, and financial security is far from the only credible reason why women become side chicks. You're the one making wild aspersions like you're an authority on the matter or have met and interviewed every Nigerian woman out there.

Calling you out for making a judgmental statement doesn't mean I'm pained. It's just that, calling you out. Your attempt to float this back at me is poor.

What were you expecting? You'd say women who agree to be side chicks for anything other than money have "zero self-worth" and everyone would swallow it like its syrup? Don't go about typing controversial stuff if you don't want to be pilloried for it.

No one is talking about women rights here. This is your second attempt to change the conversation, I wonder what your motive is.

If no one called you guys out, you wouldn't be taking back statements.

-Lord

lefulefu:
u just being sentimental.a young single lady who agrees to be a sidechic to a married man is mostly doing it for monetary gains.lets call a spade a spade. There are married men who are unable to meet their family demands cos of the way the spend on their sidechic/sidechics outside their marriage so i don't understand u why acting as if its a good thing. That some single nigerian ladies allow themselves to be sidechics doesn't mean every Nigeria lady is into it. We are talking about d ones who are involved in the racket.

And yet again you throw up a limited definition of side chic. Are married men the only guys who have side chics?

One minute you realize side chick is a broad term, the next you're limiting your use of it.

BTW, who said every Nigerian lady is into becoming a side chick? And no one except you is talking only about the ones involved in the racket.

-Lord

CeeKay17:

Lool. Is this the excuse you want to use to justify why some girls are so materialistic , Come on you can do better. A girl who likes money likes money, it's that simple. Just this week, I was arguing with some people, that not all Nigerian girls are after money even thou it's really hard to make a case for them. Of course we know not all women are the same, nothing in this world applies to 100%. Even thou most girls would tell you "all men are the same"
Like I said before, I was talking about a specific context based on the example the OP gave. And I'm very sure the girl was single

Really, do you want to change the conversation? Everyone (well, except the Ascetics) likes money! So stop making it seem like anyone came to this life to escort others.

We're talking about the reasons why women accept to be side chicks. Stick to the topic.

-Lord

lefulefu:
and i said that in Nigeria the major factor for a single lady to accept whole heartedly to be a sidechic to married man or a man in a serious relationship is money and he started attacking me. The way u and highbow argue on this issue its like u guys watch a lot of telenovella movies.Seems like its where u guys get your experience on it.

A. Oga, "only thing" is not the same thing as "major thing".
B. I've never watched a telenovela and I'm not a romantic. You simply can't go around saying all women accept to be sidechicks solely for financial security. That smacks of ignorance. It's that simple. If you say all the women you've interacted with, I wouldn't have a problem, you can't give what you don't have; and we are who we are attract for the most part. But to extend it to every Nigerian woman, 99.99% of which you haven't met, is over the top.

-Lord

CeeKay17:

I never said it's only money. You are mistaking me for the other guy. I said most of the time it's for the money but there are always exceptions.
And yes I don't believe in people settling for less. I'm the kind of person that doesn't stick around if I feel you're not invested in me the way I am. Maybe I misunderstood the context of side chick here, But If a girl is playing wife/gf duties for a guy who only treats her like a side-chick, yes she has zero self-worth. That's what I meant. If you choose to call it judgmental fine.
I actually realize some girls who are side chicks, know where they stand in the r/ship, so they don't go playing wifely duties to a guy who doesn't take them seriously.
So I take back my earlier statement seeing that the word 'side-chick' is a very broad term and can easily be misinterpreted.

Dude, what you believe doesn't f*cking matter! You don't live in the heads of the 80+ million females in Nigeria.

So if you're thinking she's settling for less by not screwing for cash, that may not be her thought. And you have no reason under the sun to think your thought is more valid than hers; after all you are not the one entering the relationship on her behalf. You can still hold your 19th century thought, after all there are guys half way across the world who think ladies shouldn't drive because it arouses them.

There are also gfs and wives who are main chicks who get treated worse than side chicks. Do they also have zero self-worth? And by the way, not all guys treat their side chicks like sh*t. And there are side chicks out there who are treated better than most so-called main chicks.

You guys just jumped into a discussion without specifying the terms of your engagement and are now eating your words out of sheer embarrassment.

-Lord

lefulefu:
well he didn't put married ladies or ladies with serious boyfriends accepting to be sidchics. For those ones there could be a number of reason. But for a young lady who is single accepting to be a sidechic for one married man who is probably advanced in years we all know d reason. The sidechic issue has no definite definition anyway.but when we hear the word, 'sidechic' the first image dat comes to our mind is a married man probably dating a single young lady.

Why does he have to spell out all the categories of ladies who become side chicks?

He said "5 reasons why 'women' agree to be side chicks." He used a general term 'women.' And it's not like he made any reference to the relationship status of the lady he was wooing. Assumption is the mother of all screw ups!

-Lord

Highbrow:

Just imagine their reasoning as you have replicated in sarcasm above. Yet, if you argue intelligently, they resort to their claim that Nigerian women are not varied so there must be only one reason. They will also tie this to the bad state of the economy. This is just an abasement of the varied nature of our Nigerian women.

Your last statement says it all.

How anyone can reduce all women from individuals having different desires to a singularity with one idealistic frame of mind is beyond me.

And later they complain that our women only care about money. When you firmly believe anyone who is a side chick for anything but money has "zero self-worth"? Why should she risk the stigma to be with you for any other reason but money? If she had other reasons, she'd dismiss or hastily bury them.

-Lord

CeeKay17:

Nobody is judging or slut-shaming here. No need getting emotional. Zero-self worth simply means someone who doesn't know what they are worth. It doesn't mean the person is worthless.
That's why I said it's always for the money, otherwise no lady who knows her worth will agree to become your backup babe. This ain't the movies bro.
Do guys do it if there are no benefits involved? Will you agree to become a side nigga to a girl who has a BF, if you're not smashing her as well? I guess not.
So why do you think any lady who knows her worth would do so if there's no benefit attached?
You guys are sounding like girls enjoy being a side babe. Believe me, nobody does. It's just a means to an end. For guys it mostly to cure Konji, for girls, it's mostly for financial benefits

There's nothing emotional about what I said. If you think a lady agreeing to be a side chick is an incontrovertible indicator of their self worth, then you are unreasonably judgmental. There's no two ways about it.

Dude, you didn't say low self-worth. You said zero self-worth. You basically said anyone who agrees to be a side chick for any reason other than financial security has zero self-worth. In what alternate universe is that not judgmental?

And what makes you think money is the only benefit a woman gets from a man? Do you think all women are primarily moved by the same thing? If sex is enough for a guy to be a side nigga, what makes you think it wouldn't be enough for some lady to be a side chic? What makes you think it is ONLY financial security?

I'm genuinely curious about how you see women. How is it that you believe that the only BENEFIT a woman who agrees to be a side chick can extract from a guy is MONEY? What you think you're offering, and what she thinks she is getting are not always the same. But somehow you think you have this all figured out.

I guarantee you, if all your past flings were asked to list the things about you that they found attractive, they'd have different lists. If you asked them to rank them by degree of importance, it'd be even more different.

-Lord

Highbrow:

Don't they know that one must be careful when using extreme words such as ALL, EVERY etc

No, they're experts in these matters who have done extensive peer-reviewed research using a sufficient sample size that'd stand up to any level of scrutiny.

All women have a single motivation when they chose to have a go with a guy in a relationship--FINANCIAL SECURITY.

-Lord

CeeKay17:

That isn't really we call a side-chick. That's just's a lady cheating on her bf with another guy, who also has his own girlfriend. That's more like "friends with benefits"

Then it's clear you have a very limited understanding of what the term "side chick" covers. Which explains your misguided postulations.

-Lord

lefulefu:
then it could be obvious the deadbeat husband is spending on the sidechic. Make he no drop na and lets see if the sidechic will remain. Auchi poly where i from there this hostel porter who is in his 60.na so d man dey drink and e no dey gree give im wife money for upkeep. Even his children e no gree take care of them. Can u imagine this man that is so tight fisted and lives in a rented single room..this man bought land for one young single mom. It was revealed that the single mom was his sidechic. How d man take get d money u might ask. He had to borrow the money he used in purchasing land for his single mom sidechic from money lenders.the tin cause serious yawa b/w him and im wife but d man no care.but then he's a govt worker and at least he can borrow. Guys who are not that much well off still go that extra mile to satisfy dat sidechic financially.

And that one instance is reason to accede that ALL side chicks stay with deadbeat husbands ONLY for financial security?

-Lord

CeeKay17:

Yes ladies do a lot of sieving. Yes it's perfectly normal for a girl to fancy a guy who's already taken. But for her to go as far as dating him, knowing fully well that she's the backup plan? [s]Only a lady with zero self-worth would do that except the guy is a rich dude[/s].
Mind you, being "rich" is relative. A man might be considered as rich to a girls and still be a like a pauper to another girl

How do you feel sitting up there in your elated moral stool, Judge CeeKay17?

Ladies routinely double date and can as well date someone who is already in a relationship without having "zero self-worth." Guys do it. Why can't ladies?

I find it curious that when ladies decide to do things that are not the norm, we find it necessary to slut-shame or insult them; but when you flip the tables, we make excuses for men. I bet you don't think side niggas have zero self-worth! I bet you think they've got their A game on.

-Lord

Highbrow:

His understanding of the meaning of side chicks is insular! Side chicks aren't only kids in fact.

Says a lot about the ladies in their extended social circles.

-Lord

philfearon:

So easy to make excuses for a flop.
It's overall performance dummy, not a 13 match tournament performance.

Explain na?

E dey hard you?

Answer simple question. No.
Explain your own misguided, useless statement. No.

But to type rubbish no dey hard you.

-Lord

CeeKay17:

He's mistaking normal cheating with being a sidechick. They are two very different things. A girl can cheat on her man for different reasons it's not always about the money.
But for a girl to willingly become a sidechick to a guy, it mostly always about the financial rewards, nothing else.

You do realize ladies in relationships can also be side chicks right?

-Lord

CeeKay17:

Being lonely? The only girls who are lonely are the ones who choose to ignore every single guy that comes her way. Even an ugly introverted babe will still get lots of toasters every week, so being lonely is not a valid reason

You can't use definitive words like "only" when discussing most sociological issues.

Ladies do a lot of sieving. And if you think no lady gets lonely to the point of considering some guy they fancy who unfortunately has a girlfriend, then you have a lot of catching up to do. Unlike most guys who'd screw most of the gals they interact with if given the chance, most gals don't have the same predisposition with the opposite sex.

Most men are simple. Ladies are anything but.

-Lord