₦airaland Forum

Change is truly the only constant in life.

You're a man without a conviction. Go back to your standard setting and create your personal philosophy, which must be just if you're a proponent of conscientiousness. Allow it to be your guide. Man know thyself.

With a conviction in place, look for a lady who equally has a conviction, you need to be discerning to know another person's conviction, spoken or unspoken, that resonates with yours and do the needful.

If you're a man from strong ethical leanings, your conviction will automatically revolve around conscientiousness, and you'll do better with a lady who shares the same ethical leanings with you, only men and women who possess grit can realize this.

Dande55:
I just read through the comments.

That tribalistic guy deserves all the savagery

But concerning you and Lord.ko, didn't expect him to go down that low.

Lordko, you no try atall.

The victim party has started. When she disingenuously posted the first nonsense here, I went to a dead thread somewhere to caution her, but instead of her to calm down, she came down here to proceed with her nonsense, because she has already made up her mind to visit her frustration on me.

Palema007, it's OK. Na ma personal person you still be. Trouble no good, so make we de avoid am.

Palema007:
Well it's nice giving it hot hot sometimes . But picking on people? C'mon ! Worse is he does it selectively because on this thread you for example made the same mistake he called people out for. He even shot himself in the foot in his second response to Klass. What's that?

Truth is LordKO is fast becoming a nuisance! (Harsh words but that how best I can put it right now). I'm beginning to suspect he is behind some monikers here self!

You and I know the reason why you're in pain. LOL.

fykes:
Op. What u saying happens in many Ibo families especially with 1st born who happens to be richer. I am not saying its peculiar to first born but I have seen it in many of them.
It's a character flaw of greed and selfishness expressing itself in the person's insecurities. It happens everywhere and it's a painful thing because no one knows tomorrow and nobody should play god over another.
I also see it as a sign of weakness and immaturity for a grown up man to be so openly insecure to the point of trying to dictate to other men or run their lives and affairs.

You're a typical tribalistic and chauvinistic element, "Ibo" this, Ibo that - you can't be a bona fide Igbo man, so don't come back to tell me you're one, or stop projecting your useless family on others. Personally, my eldest brother is one of the most selfless human beings I've ever known, and I'm certain majority of other bona fide Igbo sons and daughters will honestly say the same about their eldest siblings, covertly or overtly. So, it amounts to foolishness for a bumpkin like you to mete out campaign of calumny against the Igbos in this regard.

Do yourself good and direct your mention to the fools who brought you into this world, or the ones who may urge you on here, because I won't dignify you with a reply. This thread isn't about Igbos.

@OP

I hope you haven't mistaken your unconquerable well-to-do brother for a stingy person; I have always seen this happen. Also, I hope you have not mistaken his informally non-transferable knowledge means of success as unwillingness to show others the way to amass riches. More so, make sure you haven't overestimated his wealth. It's always easy to cast aspersions on others, especially when coming from the receiving end. In fact, I won't be surprised if it's established that you're the self-absorbing one, because self-absorbing people and insatiableness and hypocrisy are inseparable. Stay resourceful.

All the same, I don't hold brief your eldest or well-to-do brother.

Yes, because I've witnessed it.

You're in a situation where you've to choose between winning dishonorably or losing honorably, because you've, as a wife, a woman who has never had an altruistic interest in you. So, your total situation and position notwithstanding, you won't have your liberation until you make a voluntary choice between winning dishonorably or losing honorably and act on it.

It's not in her place to love you, because love has never been a woman's forte; don't expect the impossible from her. She just has an obligation to submit to you. Now, if you've been conscientious and have been giving her altruistic treatment, but she decides not to respect the vow of the marriage and the bond that holds the two of you together, if any, go for squash on her. She's no right to exercise her liberty outside the confines of decorum, likewise you.

If you don't know one thing to do to squash her, temporarily or permanently, then you don't deserve consideration of a sane person, your disability notwithstanding, because there's ability in disability.

Most parents do tender an apology to their children; you need to understand that there're different ways to tender an apology. Children do tender their apology to their parents in oral and direct forms, while most parents do tender their apology to their children through action, and even when they do so orally, they usually do it indirectly.

Meanwhile, in your case, it seems you've abusive parents as your submission connotes; if that is the case, moving away from them is your best bet. Make sure you aren't the instigator, though.

Your friend is just disingenuously self-absorbing; however, I understand his position, since most women are hypocritically self-absorbing as evident in this forum. It's an irony that most of the people who're usually for money as the core basis for marital consideration are now vehemently against your friend who's doing so.

Anyway, his mentality notwithstanding, the answer he seeks lies in his hands; he'll know almost everything about her within a few interactions with her if he's a discerning man. Let him go closer to her.

I wonder why most of you've decided to cast aspersions on the guy's friend as if he's experienced and said something unusual.

Every material/physical contact attraction has always come to a point when it'll no longer be appealing, thus the reason why no conscientious person ever bases choice of a life partner on a material thing rather than an attribute. An attribute is inherent.

Time has come for him to prove whether he's a man of grit or a greedy man. If he's the former, he'll surely stay put and remain committed to her.

NerdyRudeGyal:
I wish him well.

I join you in prayer and wish him speedy and total recovery. Meanwhile, you may change your moniker regularly as you've done on a few occasions, but you can't change your aura and your personality. Anyway, I hope that you'll not deactivate this account soon again, lol.

Ishilove:
Hei, Nairaland males. When they come upon a fancy word they will use and abuse the word until they can abuse no more. 'Simp' is the latest in a long line of abused words.

You always scurry from thread to thread, exhibiting your conceited and sententious attitude. Grow up!

bukatyne:
OP beat up his ex-fiancée
ex-fiancée up his niece

Are we seeing a pattern of the 'strong' beating/bullying the 'weaker'.

Perhaps the world has been looking at the issue of domestic violence in silos.

It is really the stronger picking on/bullying/beating the weaker in a domestic setting.

No, it has never been the strongest bullying the weakest in a domestic setting or any other setting; instead, the toxic person has always been the instigator, directly or indirectly. The instigator, however, can be the strongest or the weakest person.

The fastest way to destroy the country completely is to return to parliamentary system of government. Parliamentary system of government has never been fruitful in any clime where almost every member of the legislature, or almost every intending member, is susceptible to venality and nepotism. So, the country is better off with puppet legislatures than having puppet executives - presidential system of government currently in practice is our best bet, at least until we solve our core fundamental problem.

The axiom can only hold true for foodies. Personally, the only way to my heart has always been a conviction that resonates with me and is in sync with mine, provided that she lives it in word and in deed.

UjuJoan2:
I didn't say you guys were lazy, I said you are minimalists.

I'm not. I believe in living life to the fullest, so yes, I want to fly first class, go on exotic trips, and drive the best cars.

So you see, besides being successful, I NEED money. That's why I have to work because I'm not depending on any man to give me the things I want. If that makes me egoistic, then that's fine.

Ujujoan! I have hardly seen a success-conscious person who doesn't have money. Like I said before, you may not understand my points. Besides, I didn't say my ethical leaning is automatically superior to yours, or that I am ethically better than you.

UjuJoan2:
Maybe she's content . . Maybe she doesn't mind the occasional lack. Maybe that is not what is important to her at this point.

Maybe she's a minimalist like LordKO

Maybe she's more interested in having kids now, and plans to face a business or career later in life.

Maybe he's the one that needs to support her now, and be patient with her. Rather than forcing her to do the things he wants.

LOL. I'm far from being lazy. I'm currently at work, after all. Besides, the woman under discussion isn't lazy, too.

UjuJoan2:
Human beings are selfish by nature, and yet you want me to think your are somehow different?

It's one thing to find happiness in minimalism, and another to be contented with absolute lack. Trust me, you won't be speaking all that grammar if you don't know where your next meal is coming from.

This man has worked very hard and yet he can't make ends meet, talk more of making do with the little he has.

And please stop making all these assumptions about me, when you don't even know me. You may be mortified to find out that we are more alike than you think.

Ujujoan! Human beings aren't self-absorbing by nature. Human beings are just by nature. The choice to take to self-absorption or conscientiousness is an individual choice.

UjuJoan2:
So you don't like money?

Can you live happily in lack. I mean live below average and be truly content?

Ujujoan, lol! No. Don't mistake money-consciousness for success-consciousness - I abhor the former. Altruism is the soul of my ethical leanings, while egoism is the soul of your own ethical leanings, so you may not understand me better in this regard. I've almost tasted life from different angles, and I have finally come to realize that the core of my happiness lies in minimalism.

Both altruism and minimalism don't mean abhorrence of money and hard work.

UjuJoan2:
Ahh Mr. Experience!!!

It's not really about being crass . . . More like getting away with some things.

I'm not as 'experienced' as you (lol), but I know it helps to be strong, when you know you don't have to ask him for money for make-up and anything at all!

Ujujoan! We aren't of the same ethical leanings; Money isn't the language in my own part of the world, its irrefutable importance notwithstanding.

Palema007:
It isn't expediency when one think something or someone is better if whoever is doing the comparison sees value in one than the other. Come off it! Like I typed earlier it depends on what is perceived as value!


Na you dey change the "meat of your argument nah" , no be me. . My point is in Op's situation, he values productivity which makes woman T more valuable than woman A as your analogy implies.

Trouble maker! Keep changing the meat of your argument while I prepare a hot e-slap for you.

UjuJoan2:
You must be living in some kind of fantasy world you created for yourself.

Ever heard of the saying that 'power corrupts, and absolutely power corrupts absolutely'? Most times people do it unconsciously. All it takes for a person (man or woman) to exploit the other is to be fully responsible for that person financially. Money gives voice, let's not pretend otherwise.

I can be the most "submissive" wife and still get exploited because I'm solely dependent. Let's not confuse things.

That's why the really proud men will never marry a working class woman, just like the OP . . No matter how 'conscientious' she is. The problem is when reality hits, and the hunger becomes greater than their pride, they start regretting their decision.

Ujujoan! If you see as this your name de always sweet me eh, lol. But come, you don't know the literal meaning of the axiom because you stated it incorrectly. "Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely."

At the risk of sounding immodest, you're actually trying sell a facade to someone who has almost seen it all from some of the most successful and elegantly made women you could ever imagine. Once more, a woman from strong ethical leanings, a conscientious woman (human being), doesn't change to a crass and expedient woman because of success or lack of it.

Palema007:
Lol but this topic is about a Man (Op's cousin), don't get triggered. When it's about a woman, I'd type the same because yes like you have typed deceit is not gender base. Well it's one thing to be business oriented, it's another to be a 9-5 working class but completely different to be success driven/ambitious. I modified, Op's causing should have gone for the latter not one who feels comfortable with her stipends. A working class has more values than non working depending on what is perceived as values which is relative. If your hypothesis is true, the Op's cousin wouldn't be complaining. He needs productivity which is a value to him.

In all, may I point out that you are seeing things from a subjective perspective i.e the doer of the action (woman) and not from objective perspective i.e The recipient of the action.

I operate in a world where principle reigns supreme over expediency; so, I always find it offensive wherever I hear someone says woman T (or man T) is more valuable than woman A just because she is directly more economically successful than woman A. Don't twist the narrative further before I vex for you.