₦airaland Forum

It's obvious that you, just like many others, have an erroneous understanding of what communication in a relationship is all about. It isn't about needles and endless verbal conversation, correspondence, or being an orator.

Communication in a relationship in its literal, not notional, meaning is about partners being in sync - meeting each other's need, basically/fundamentally, emotionally, psychologically, physically and verbally, is what it means to be in sync. And this by extension automatically means that both of you must be of the same ethical leanings (or must be operating on the same ethical leanings) before you can achieve effective mutual communication - because it takes people who're of the same ethical leanings to be in sync.

Don't allow anyone to either guilt-trip you to continue to self-slave for him or guilt-trip you to marry him, not because he's a family breadwinner. But because behind anyone with sense of entitlement is an abuser - especially emotional and psychological abuses, and they're worse than physical abuse.

Extricate yourself from his entanglement and look elsewhere for another man, if you value your sanity - of course, purge yourself of same attribute (egoism) that breeds it, if you possess it, now that you know how draining it could be on someone on the receiving end. Don't bother talking him out of his irritating attitude with an intention to continue with him, because he can easily take to pretence. Even if he changes (for good), let it be for the benefits of another woman who may come into his life, this is because of the following reason;

If he later becomes financial successful in the future more than you, he'll always remember more of the moments you refused to self-slave for him while forgetting the greater moments you gave in to his self-interest desires - people with entitlement mentality are like that. So, he'll continually resent you when he arrives financially.

The scenario playing out between the two of you is exactly the major type of scenario that usually results to "I was there for him/her when he had nothing but now that he's arrived, he's abandoned me." When someone utters this statement, it doesn't always mean that they weren't useful to the other person in their trying time, like most people do erroneously believe or make it seem, rather an egoist can hardly be pleased - loyalty in particular and faithfulness in general aren't their fortes. When they arrived financially, they tend to remember more of the time their benefactors refused to give in to their shenanigans while forgetting their benevolence. Egoism/self-interest (greed, selfishness and self-centeredness) is a vice.

Any close relationship between two people, or more people, where the parties involved don't mutually have altruistic interest towards each other can never produce mutual happiness and inner peace for everyone involved - in other words, anyone close to you who doesn't have altruistic interest towards you is a frenemy, and vice versa.

The only way to have a relatively harmonious relationship with someone with sense of entitlement is if s/he is more prosperous than you from the inception and continually remains the same, and provided that they value whatever bond that connects two of you while you, of course, remain conscientious.

There's nothing wrong with being humane, like you seem in the relationship, and there's nothing wrong with partners expecting goodness from each other. But there's everything wrong with his entitlement mentality - he has egoistic interest towards you.

You must be joking, because I don't want to believe that you, as a husband, can't tell what your wife can do at any given time, both in your presence and absence and subject to circumstances. If you can't dissect her, I wonder how you expect netizens who don't know her directly or indirectly to extrapolate her action and judge her fairly.

No, because women (and men alike) come in three different mental profiles, viz:

1. Fair-minded woman - the conscientious/principled woman. If you as a man is conscientious and believe in altruism (love and submission) in word and deed, a woman in this group is a best fit for you - of course, she doesn't condone nonsense.

2. Headstrong woman - a woman who's penchant for subjugation and abuse - the crass/expedient/stubborn/egoistic woman. As a man if you are subjugable or don't mind being subjugated, a woman in this group is a best fit for you. In other words, you have to be/become a feeble-minded man to put up with her - unfortunately, behind any servile (feeble-minded) person is a disingenuous person too.

3. Feeble-minded woman - a servile and/or disingenuous woman. As a man if you belong to the second group above, a feeble-minded woman is a best fit for you because she will gladly put up with any kind of nonsense you will mete out on her - of course, she'll ruin you from within to your own chagrin.

I don't need to tell you what'll happen when a man and woman who mutually belong to the second group and third group respectively, date or are joined together in matrimony.

Meanwhile, only classy and sane women belong to the first group. They may have almost all the power/possessions and know almost all things (good and bad), yet they choose to remain good/humane/humble. Always accord them their respect whenever you come across them, whether or not you belong to that group.

Of course, perfection is only of the sole creator of the world.

There's rampant begging/exploitation in corporate form by most runs women both in higher and lower places (online and offline), within and outside the country. They usually realize their nefarious aim by blackmailing/guilt-tripping servile, egoistic and undiscerning men who come into close contact with them into donating handsomely to fictitious charity organizations that belong to them directly or indirectly. They perpetrate it in the guise of encouraging you to help the needy after famzing you, while giving you impression at the same time that they do not need your money. If you aren't strong-minded and discerning, you'll fall prey to their antics and they will live big on your money - of course, they'll deride/gloat you afterward directly or indirectly.

Always strive to know the psychological profile of anyone famzing you, if you're a HNWI of the diplomatic ethical leanings, before establishing a close contact with them.

Ever since the birds have learned to fly without perching, the hunters have learned to shoot without target.

Nothing can best being conscientious to everyone, while being both conscientious and altruistic to one's own partner.

@Bukatyne


Lucidly and reasonably written as always.

Maximum respect to a fair-minded woman.

As much as most of what has been written about Goddy Anabor and his current predicament is true - he's been in the predicament for more than ten years by the way - yet what happened to him has equally happened to many other wealthy people from different climes regardless of their source of wealth, and will continue to happen to many others. So, there's no need to cast aspersions on him because he alone knows the real cause - I don't hold brief for him.

There remains a very thin line between riches and poverty and it takes a very little thing to cross from one side to the other.

Stay resourceful and choose your team wisely. A sane family and one or two mutually reliable associates are better than multitude of "friends" - yet be friendly and benevolent to all and sundry. Money will always be a visitor.

The danger has nothing to do with neither the size of the 12.5 KG gas cylinder nor cooking directly on a fully filled one - people in different climes have been safely cooking directly on even 3 KG fully filled gas cylinders, let alone a 12.5 KG cylinder.

The problem strictly lies in fake gas cylinders and SON hasn't been doing enough in this regard. With original cylinders the problem will be solved.

The danger of electromagnetic radiation to the body is unquantifiable. So, in the absence of its full avoidance, curtailing its circulation in magnitude is highly recommended - this doesn't automatically mean that 5G is the cause of coronavirus.

I don't see any other bad thing your ex did, aside the issue of your needless closeness with her which resulted to her telling you about her husband's shortcomings.

And, you to an extent didn't do any bad helping her financially. It's just that you had no premonition, or weren't discerning enough to psych her in order to know the importance, of what she wanted the money for which would have made it possible for you to decide whether or not to extend the help to her at that point - anyone could have been in your position in that instance, so don't be too hard on yourself.

There's no justifiable reason to cast aspersions on her for seeking financial assistance from you or receiving financial assistance from you (citing the needles closeness that was in place), since you didn't state that you made her to know that you weren't buoyant, just like her husband. So, she didn't guilt-trip you into selling your landed property or extort you.

In summary, according to your submission, you acted voluntarily (but definitely not selflessly), even though you now wish you knew better which would have afforded you the opportunity to act conscientiously. Once more, don't be too hard on yourself. There's nothing bad in extending a helping hand to anyone who crosses your path, more so an ex or associate in good standing, provided that you're in position - and selflessly willing - to do so.

Imogenn:
I’m asking because my friends wife doesn’t like me at all, I have Been friends with her husband, he is like my brother I can never ever see him in that way. But it’s like I’m just crossing the boundaries being friends with him. Is this not insecurity or does she have a reason to be this possessive?

Change from being a friend of her husband to being friendly with him. She, not you, deserves the friendship of her husband - her actions and inactions towards you may not necessarily mean that she's possessive, even if she's, it's her husband's duty to be worried about it, not you.

All of you who said it's not advisable are actually right. The ironic thing, however, is that most of you in this category are still the ones who'll term a married man who objected the idea of his wife keeping a close friendship/non-formal relationship with another mature man (married or not) either a controlling man or an insecure man.

Friendliness with the deserving all and sundry (including associates/colleagues) is advisable, but friendship (which oftentimes results to overfamiliarity, contempt, entitlement, treachery and frenemity in general when established with the wrong person) with anyone other than the partner isn't advisable - friendliness isn't the same thing as friendship. Meanwhile, the only difference between friendship and love is that unlike love friendship has no observable biological necessities, yet it doesn't automatically neutralize feelings - so it's better for one to have only their spouse as their close friend also.

A married person (or a person in a committed relationship) should only have their partner as their close friend. Anything other than this, either one (or both) of the parties in the needles over-familiarity action has a selfish desire to accomplish directly or indirectly - be it sexual or material or immaterial desire.

I don't see a need for long story; man, marry a woman with whom you're in synchronization, provided that she's conscientious and has altruistic interest towards you (and vice versa). A conscientious woman (or man) is a resourceful woman, whether or not she has money/earns money directly. Once you've a source of income/can provide for the family, every other thing is secondary, if not irrelevant in this regard - this doesn't make dual income from both parties bad in any way. Resourcesfulness is the ultimate sign of responsibleness, not money itself.

A husband and wife are partners, but they aren't in partnership/competition. So, the idea of a couple earning dual income for the purpose of sharing bills is nonsense as far as I'm concerned. Money remains what it's, a means to an end. It can never be an end. Whosoever that has it at any point in time should spend it cheerfully for the benefit of self and others around them.

Oneness remains the soul of marriage, and there can't be oneness where there's no mutual altruism.

Bukatyne for president - na me go be de director of finance of your campaign organization. LOL.

On a more serious note, well-written. Kudos.

Meanwhile, I believe that a man doesn't necessarily need to be a Christian/religious proponent to be a Christ-like husband to his wife, like Christ is to the church. With conscientiousness as the hallmark of goodness/soul of fairness and altruism as the soul of both love and submissiveness, I don't have doubt that a conscientious man who's altruistic interest towards his wife is equal to a Christ-like husband, regardless of whether or not he's a Christian.

Man makes religion, not the other way round, and God's for all of us.

Balderdash. This isn't the first time he's ridiculously suggested that the government should literally print new naira notes to cushion the effects of economic meltdown in the country. So, there's no need for this needless denial.

Armchair economic management and development expert.

ProudFather:
Like I said, we have a six year old with a sweet disposition and a tender heart.

That notwithstanding, your lack of willpower is very evident in your submissions. When you squash your emotion towards her and create a distance from her, you'll gain willpower. And your child will have his/her sanity intact through your altruistic and conscientious acts towards him. With this approach, you'll automatically established a formal-like relationship with her (your wife) which will enable you nip in the bud her nonsense actions and inactions, even while living in the same house (not same room though). With her behaviour, you don't owe her altruism and its benefits.

You're married to an unconscientious woman - I hope you aren't one yourself - so you should've known from the inception that the least thing to expect from her is trustworthiness/fairness. And she isn't going to change from her perfidious ways, instead she'll now adopt a disingenuous approach to gloss her shenanigans, thereby giving you a feel of having a repentant wife. Your lack of willpower and discernment has been your biggest weakness so far.

You don't need a soothsayer to tell you that you've been living with a frenemy all this while. Unfortunately, from the connotation of your submissions, you lack the willpower to extricate yourself from both her emotional entanglement and machinations.

If you value your sanity in particular and wholeness in general, start now to squash your emotions towards her, that's the first step of creating an enabling distance you'll need to thrash the situation better.

viccipedia:
Because true reality doesn’t see one or sole creator or God! True reality sees and abundance of gods as well as abundance of belief systems. What you stated is your own belief system, not reality.
As for authority, common sense thinking is not as easy as it’s mentioned.

Of course, I don't expect a mentally parochial element to see reality of a sole creator of the universe. As for "abundance of gods/human beings (dead or alive)," I summed it up with the following statement in that post: "Everything human beings need to exist independent of his minute intervention, he's already made them available - they're obtainable from self and from others (dead or alive), directly or indirectly."

Common sense isn't common.

My final reply to you.

viccipedia:
this is a good idea, but I’m afraid you’re quite far away from reality.

Let me know how you arrived at the assertion that I'm quite far away from reality. . . . As an authority in what sphere(s) of life?

Fhemmmy:
While some more kids will be born, many will die too in a country with very bad health system and foolish database or track on the sick
So at the end of the day, i think the population will actually reduce and not increase because when the Virus takes over, people will die in dozens, except the government and the people do something

You stated it succinctly. This ought to be common sense.

Welcome to the reality. The concept of the sole creator of the universe as propagators and practitioners of religion have held/projected over the centuries is faulty - the way they project it is faulty. Atheists don't have better understanding either.

The sole creator of the universe is just. He doesn't intervene in human beings minute activities and he doesn't expect prayers/praises from human beings. Everything human beings need to exist independent of his minute intervention, he's already made them available - they're obtainable from self and from others (dead or alive), directly or indirectly.

The only way to reverence him remains through acts of goodness towards fellow human beings. Of course, absoluteness is of him not human beings.

It's unfortunate that a woman's at the receiving end in this instance. Truth, however, is that penchant for subjugation/oppression doesn't know gender - there're women who've penchant for subjugation/been subjugating their husbands since time immemorial, just as there're men who've been doing so towards their wives too.

We can only argue about the gender on the higher/lower side of either the receiving or meting end of subjugation. In fact, citing the psychological profile/mentality of most people (males and females) in this forum, I tell you without equivocation that more than 95 percent have penchant for subjugation. So, it's a matter of this percentage being in an advantageous position to perpetrate it, for those who aren't doing it already, towards their spouses.

Small-minded people and subjugation are inseparable. The least thing to expect from an egoistic (greedy or selfish or self-centered) and/or conceited/imperious/chauvinistic person is fairness, even though they always crave it from others when they're at a disadvantageous position.

Yangami:
One of the dumbest comment I have read in a while. You are capable of doing same. I am well domesticated but don’t tell me to do your house chores the first day I visit you. I won’t too or do it grudgingly if I must

Say hello to your fellow bumpkins and direct your further mention(s) to them too.

Codyt:
It seems you're drunk and constipated with respect
Hello? You don't need respect to function in life. At the same time, respect is reciprocal irrespective of age, ethnicity or tribe.
Would you rather discipline an individual whilst subject them to emotional maltreatment? Is this your definition of discipline?
Ask yourself

I've given you attention more than you deserve, now direct your further mention(s) to small-minded people like you.

Bumpkin.

Orlaoluwayimika:
This ur response speaks volume about ur own Character and Upbringing .

Lol. Some of you do amuse me; if only we can always imagine the person at the other end our parents' senior or superior. Oya, no vex you hear, but embrace politeness in case of next time.

Codyt:
You have in fact taken words out of my mouth
I have no idea why this nigga is condoning this inhumane treatment. Weird people everywhere.

Don't give me further reasons to conclude that you are a bumpkin too. If you don't know what it means not to hold brief for someone, then keep quiet.

If we fail to tell the girl her mistake here, she won't become a better person. Her aunt's action (first action in particular) was bad, thus the reason why I've continually said that I don't hold brief for her, but the girl's imperious reply/action didn't do any justice to her also. Knowing where and when to lose honourably is wisdom, I say.

ORIJIN201:
You sound like an unforgiving person. Young people make mistakes, just like you did. But if you were treated the same way just like in your post, then you had a troubled upbringing. I'll never call someone else's grandmother a witch just because he/she refused to do what I had asked. Life is forgiving.

Why won't I sound like an unforgiving person to you since you can't differentiate an inference statement of extrapolation from a statement of approval.

Reigning2020:
The way and manner we reason in this part of the world never cease to baffled me this is not about 2 wrong or 2 right or whatever you wish to call it , its about her sanity and peace of mind and you people want her to trade that for what exactly ?. let's assumed op is a lazy *ss bitch as you have imagined her to be because she said she wouldn't clean wish she later did , she is being subjected to verbal abuse and traumatized with the name calling and you said ordinary name calling ? I have bn in a situation like this and I would rather i got caned any time i was been abuse verbally to been call names even as young as I was then . I pray you never have to experience it or any of your children or loved ones it makes you feel less human and erode your self worth and confidence I would rather drink garri with peace of mind at my parent's than eat rice and chicken in fear and sorrow in a house of any relative most people don't know what it feels like to be abuse in any form so we just look at it as nothing .my greatest fear in life is not even poverty itself but imagining any of my children living with ANYONE I mean anyone for whatever reason not even my own mum or any siblings or relations however close they are or nice they appeared to be believe me I know what it feels like aside myself and their mum the thought alone kills me inside

You and your ilk should shut up. Any discerning person will understand my point perfectly well. Direct your further mention(s) to bumpkins like you.

Viking07:
[s][/s]Just shut up abeg, you've made zero sense.

A typical bumpkin. Direct your further mention(s) to small-minded people like you.

vivypretty:
I totally disagree sir.
There is a reason first impression matters.
The aunt made a wrong impression by literally forcing the girl to clean a very dirty sink on her first day in her house, like she was a slave.
The girl equally made a wrong impression which wasn't her fault because she was seeing the aunt in the same sweet way she used to see her perhaps when she comes visiting her father, hence her outright refusal to do the work.
But the aunt wouldn't have any of it because she had already planned to turn the girl into a slave from the on set.
And we all know it's only a matter of time before slaves rebel.

I stated clearly that I don't hold brief for the said aunt - personally, I abhor subjugation in any guise. However, it's very imperative that we tell the girl truth here. Paragraph three of her submission says it all, just dissect and extrapolate it and you'll understand what transpired between them - just forget about every other thing she said. Knowing where and when to lose honourably is wisdom.