₦airaland Forum

Fountainofyouth:
That in itself is the disadvantage.

Not to the OP's question, because someone can be both intelligent and smart without being egoistic and egotistic.

sassysure:
Sane men, no, lots of sane men have been caught in this scenario cos they don't understand their wives positions or conditions.

If u put a little fight, u will be beaten.

The truth is this. Those men who engage in this forceful/ rape thing have a fetish. So bad they met somebody that don't share their ideology.
Cos it baffles me how your prikk will still be erect when your woman is in pain.
Isn't that fetish?

I have said it sometime ago that ladies should endeavour to know if their intended love violence when making love to avoid stories that touch. Some can't be an expert as Christian Gray.

You ought to know that it's not every man (or woman) who's conventionally assumed sane, who's literally/truly sane. And I was specific about the kind of sane man I mean, the altruistic and conscientious man. There's a thin line between a conventional insane/mad man and a small-minded/inhumane (egoistic and egotistic) man who's conventionally assumed sane. The former is visibly insane/mad to the knowledge of everyone, while the latter isn't - the latter is the insane man I mentioned, even though he's conventionally sane.

Once more, an altruistic and conscientious man cannot be caught in the scenario under discussion, even if his wife is conventionally or unconventionally insane.

To the question, no. However, an intelligent and smart woman (or man) who hasn't conquered egoism (greediness, self-centeredness and selfishness) and egotism (conceit) personifies wickedness, so she'll either cause you death or cause you to lose your sanity or ruin you in any possible way if you're emotionally connected to her.

Fountainofyouth:
Lord, let's say, I am your wife, after doing house chores, caring for the kids etc. and very much physically drained and tired, and I just want to sleep, you come to me for sex, I say no and give obvious reasons, you insist, and then there is a struggle, you force me down, insert yourself into my dry self, thereby injuring me in the process, what will you call that scenerio? Be sincere with yourself this time, cos I know you like supporting buka tyne, after that ordeal, what do you think will be my state of mind? Don't you think I will feel violated physically and emotionally? What will you then call it, rape or consent?

Truth is that, an altruistic and conscientious man - a sane person - cannot be caught in such a scenario you painted up there because he'll definitely understand his wife's position/condition. Understanding breeds love.

Meanwhile, an insane man can mete out such inhumane treatment toward his wife and when does, at best/worst, it will be said that he assaulted his wife and will be charged for sexual abuse rather than rape. As you can see, I don't hold brief for an insane man in this case. As for this allegation "I know you like supporting buka tyne" - na two of una I de support.

[quote author=Fountainofyouth post=83662139][/quote]Contextually and in principle, there's nothing like rape in marriage because unification automatically takes place the very moment a man and a woman officially/legally contract marriage - the unification remains sacrosanct until the word "couple" changes its form from being a singular noun to a plural one.

So, sexual assault from one half of a couple toward another is, at best, an abuse rather than rape. In the same vein, monetary/resources wastage from one half of a couple toward another is, at best, mismanagement rather than thievery.

You no go win dis logic today, lol.

She's a highly sensitive woman who's in tune with her subconscious. Her idiosyncrasy is akin to that of any advanced telepath or diviner. She's no informant anywhere.

Create your own life path and encrypt it. In other words, strive to live your life on the periphery of conventionalism and make sure you do so altruistically and conscientiously.

Fountainofyouth:
Lord better start disliking me o, cos any way you put it just doesn't sit right with me, manual or not, I wouldn't do it, I'd do any other thing except that.

In fact na manual washing go fit you pass now so dat detergent go peel ur hands

Fountainofyouth:
I would never wash any man's clothes, not becos of all what you typed, but cos I do not like doing laundries, what say ye to that? Since you feel choosing not to do something like that means coming from dyfunctional homes and other evil unnecessary words I bolded.

"I would never wash any man's clothes" . . . "I do not like doing laundries" The first statement in quote sounds more like it comes from the place of pride and self-centeredness. As for the second statement in quote, since your dislike for doing laundries never stopped you from doing your own laundries either directly of indirectly, what then will be a big deal in doing so for your husband? If it's strictly manual that would be a bit understandable.

As much as it isn't (or may not be) a woman's responsibility to wash her husband's cloth - either manually or mechanically - or a husband's right to expect such, yet doing so is one of those selfless acts/little things that matter. It's a simple act of either altruism or conscientiousness subject to circumstances. One shouldn't lose humaneness all in the name of emancipation/wokeness. And I don't see a big deal if a man does same or something different of same nature for a wife. A husband and wife aren't supposed to be either frenemies or enemies living together. Anyway, it's obvious that most of you personify inhumaneness and are from dysfunctional and unhappy homes.

In fact, if a woman who's an opportunity cannot volitionally/voluntarily and joyfully wash her husband's cloth, all because of conceit/pride/egotism and self-centeredness/selfishness/greediness/egoism, I wonder why she would expect/accept any form of humane act either in tangible/material or intangible/immaterial form from the same husband.

Sanely, brutishness/meanness/heartlessness/wickedness - small-mindedness in general - shouldn't be something to brag about, so I wonder why most of you now always proudly and openly arrogate same to yourselves - wannabe modern/super/emancipated men and women. SMH.

bukatyne:
I am serious.

I grew up in an all Igbo community (we were just two Yoruba on a very long street) so I have first hand experience on some of their way of life.

We've had a similar discussion where I told you that housewifery or a man fully responsible for home financially is not a Yoruba thing.

In fact, an housewife or financially non-contributing wife is called alabodo (someone you feed to fvck). To not say that there are no outliners.

Igbos however pride themselves in fully financing the home (I see this even in my colleagues with working wives). Growing up, most of the Igbo wives literally did not leave the house except to market or parties while you saw the husbands hustling (legit and non). The downside was that the men's words were law and upon the breakdown of the marriage, the wives did not leave with a pin so the marriage must not break.

Comparing this to pre-colonial times when everyone farmed, where was the cultural shift for them?

Igbos can also pitch in.

You're almost right, however on this "The downside was that the men's words were law and upon the breakdown of the marriage, the wives did not leave with a pin so the marriage must not break." It will always depend on the man's ethical leanings - a humane Igbo man will never leave his wife empty handed in the event of divorce, regardless of who/what caused it and who made the most money in the cause of the marriage/while the marriage lasted. Also, a humane Igbo man will never subjugate his wife, so the wife will always have her voice, strong-minded (independent-minded) Igbo women who're happily married to Igbo men abound everywhere - what's true in this regard is that she'll lose her liberty to crassness in particular and expedient manner in general. Crassness isn't something to brag with.

The family system aristocratic Igbo families have been practicing is akin to what's obtainable in the core Western families - so, you're right where you asserted that "Western women more open to being housewives." There's no shame in being a housewife anywhere in the world, even though, personally, I lean on both sides. Emancipation of women in all facets is attractive, regardless of economic standing of each woman as an individual.

That said, emancipation of women in every facet isn't an issue for me as an egalitarian, however, there's nothing more repulsive than seeing a woman (or a man where and when applicable) working towards emancipation for anything with the sole purpose to subjugate others, those around her, near or far.

Liberty without decorum is a disease - in other words, liberty doesn't negate conscientiousness in particular and altruism in general. The havoc ill-aimed emancipation has caused the family system in particular and the world in general is unquantifiable.

Plead:
If we are saying the same thing then you’re wrong . People who are truly financially independent are abound.

Volatility of money/material thing makes it an aberration for anyone to claim financial independence - so, financial independence is a cliche. Tell me that financially emancipated people abound and I will agree with you wholeheartedly.

Plead:
She was talking about financial independence in marriage not independence in life .... most of those women using the term “independent woman” are mostly using it to showcase a life of financial independence (meaning they don’t depend on anybody/man for their funds)

E bi like say u don dey get comprehension issue ni, lol. Na de same tin we de talk.

Plead:
Why are some women always calling themselves independent “woman” then?

I’m sure you yourself must have at one point or the other tagged yourself an “independent lady”

Formally and rationally, there's nothing like independent woman (man) anywhere - human beings will always remain interdependent on each other - one is either independent-minded/strong-minded or expedient or headstrong. So, when some people throw around the "independent woman" cliche, they mean they're economically emancipated.

One can be economically emancipated without being independent-minded (and vice versa) - it's a case of materialism vs immaterialism respectively. Independent-mindedness is the major hallmark of a principled/spiritual person. However, there's a thin line between it and expediency; for example, both expedient woman (person) and independent-minded woman are usually vocal, but you'll always know the expedient woman for her hypocritical disingenuousness.

The reason (for his actions and inactions) isn't far-fetched because, citing your submissions, it'll take him either continual voluntary slavery or outright servility to sustain a close and healthy relationship with you in particular and the rest of the family members in general. However, on his part, his inability to prevent differences from metamorphosing into problem shows that he's undiscerning and quasi-inhumane.

Both parties have to consciously and voluntarily embrace behavioural change/attitudinal change for a sustainable, amicable and beneficial change to take place.

Plead:


Personally I’ve never fancied the idea. Myself and my brothers live with this ideology even in marriage and we ain’t sad about that.


Now ...general question

Does it make sense to give a working class woman monthly upkeep or whatever that stuff is called ? Upkeep should only come into the equation if your partner is a housewife or so....and doesn’t work

Provided that she is/remains submissive, she'll always have unrestricted access to available and accessible money at any time, whether or not she earns money directly/personally.

As a submissive/good/aristocratic/humane/virtuous/loving woman who's independent-minded:

- Her word is bankable, so there won't be any need to take up the task of monitoring and controlling an adult, because she'll always be altruistic and conscientious and knows how to deploy each where and when necessary. And that, broadly, means that one won't dissipate energy in the pursuit of oneness with her in particular, and peace of mind in general, because she understands that liberty doesn't negate decorum.

- With her, personal longing to achieve eternal oneness with an opposite sex of a nonkin automatically becomes an easy task.

So, she deserves the absolute best treatment.

Rubbiish:
See the kind of people we have in this country, Jesus! What has authority got to do with common sense?? You obviously can't differentiate a good leader from a bad one because u simply lack common sense!
Your brain is full of fufu
Shameless sychophant!

I don't join issue with small-minded people like you, so don't think that I'll dignify you with further reply after this.

Yes, Tinubu has achieved - has produced more established political beneficiaries (not necessarily followers) - more than Awolowo and MKO Abiola did, as far as national politics is concerned. I'm not petty and imbecilic like you to see things from the lens of regionalism. However, this doesn't nullify the beneficence and legacies of both Awolowo and Abiola.

Meanwhile, narcissism/sententiousness is a major hallmark of small-minded people like you. So, I won't be surprised to know that this same Tinubu you're trying so hard to malign is more righteous than you hypocritically disingenuous element.

A political beneficiary, especially an established one, is different from a good governance beneficiary. Tinubu holds sway on the former as a benefactor as far as national politics is concerned, while Awolowo only holds sway on the latter as s benefactor for South Westerners. Of course, Abiola's prominence, both in the business and political world, all around the world remains evergreen.

In fact, it's obvious to me that you have no electoral value, so look for your small-minded ilk elsewhere as I have said above.

lexy2014:
Being a sagacious politician isn't d same thing as being a person worthy of leading Nigerian

You lack the authority to decide who's worthy or not to lead the country.

I concur. For all intents and purposes, he's a sagacious politician and he has paid his dues in all fronts. However, if he finally throws his hat into the ring - presidential race - his accumulated influence will be his major bane towards realizing his aspiration.

@OP

The earlier you accept the bitter truth that the man has never been in love with you genuinely, and that you don't have what it takes to command his soft spot, the better for you - this doesn't automatically make neither you nor him a bad person. Both of you have never been mutually in synchronization and altruism. He can do better though, since both of you are already married, regardless of the circumstances that necessitated the marriage. He lacks humaneness.

Only a man who has always been genuinely in love with you - a man who fell in love with you because of your innate quality (attribute/immaterial thing) - can move mountains for you at any point in time, regardless of your financial standing and overall condition.

You've to continue to sort yourself out.

@OP

The first step towards finding a wife material is by defining yourself/creating your personal philosophy - self-realization - man know thyself. Of course, make sure you embed humaneness in your personal philosophy, if you mean well for yourself and the potential wife, because sanely "he who comes into equity must come with clean hands."

At this point, let's assume that you have achieved self-realization based on the terms above and have known your ethical leanings. The type of person you're and the type of marriage/home you intend to build will determine the type of woman you deserve (your wife material):

1. Marriage on principle/spiritualism (not religion) foundation; A husband and wife (a loving man and submissive woman in marriage) - the attributes of selflessness and meekness are the core/major hallmark of a submissive woman, while attributes of thoughtfulness and tactfulness are the core/major hallmark of a loving man. Altruism (selflessness/thoughtfulness) in particular, and goodness in general, is the bond that will hold you two together. Here either of the parties can joyfully sustain the marriage financially at any point in time, without undervaluing the other party who doesn't have financial means. So, if you fancy this type, focus on looking for a woman who possesses the attributes of selflessness and meekness, while negating every other thing, provided that she's beautiful to your eyes - beauty is the eye of the beholder. You, as a man, don't forget to work hard and smart because importance of money can never be overestimated - a good woman deserves the best of care/treatment/provision, whether or not she's money.

2. Marriage on materialism/expediency foundation; A man and woman in marriage as partners (partners in literal/business form, albeit unpronounced) - you don't need goodness in its totality to put up this type of marriage, of course neither of the parties will expect the core benefits of total goodness like loyalty, faithfulness, respect or special attention - only a fool will expect such in this setting. Money is the bond that will hold you two together, so you will be more or less frenemies living together - however, visibility or otherwise of the frenemy (enmity) will depend on sly prowess of both parties individually and collectively. Sharing of bills and competition in everything will be the order of the day here - it'll always be about self and self-interest first, egoism and egotism are the core attributes of both parties.

3. A man as master/brute and his slave (stepford or subjugable or subservient) woman in marriage. The woman may or may not be parasitic and materialistic, but she will be treated as such here - marriage on oppression foundation, with the man as the oppressor.

4. A man as slave (stepford or subjugable or subservient man) and his subjugative/brutish woman in marriage. The man may or may not be parasitic and materialistic, but he will be treated as such here - marriage on oppression foundation, with the woman as the oppressor.

Actually, there are good women everywhere, even on this forum.

Plead:


Neither of them are wise.

Somebody wey no know you well and understand say your foulness na follow come can beat you to death out of annoyance. Make I continue to de pity you for old times' sake.

Fountainofyouth:
I like the fact you called it a problem, some people wear it with pride not knowing it's a bad trait, so I believe you.

Ego isn't a problem itself - ego is different from egotism and egoism - every man possesses it innately. So, the problem/outcome lies on how each individual (man) handles his own. When a man conquers egoism and egotism, he'll automatically become a master of his ego - nobleness of a man lies in a healthy ego - of course, squashing it completely is worse than anything else. Just as when a woman conquers egoism and egotism, she'll automatically become a master of her pride - virtuousness of a woman lies in a healthy pride.

For more information on self-conquest . . . you know nah.

Fountainofyouth:
You reek of it though.

If I catch you dere ehn. Well like I said in my OP, reason be say I haven't gotten a justifiable reason to seek such help. You suppose know say dere is no pleasure in draining odas just for de sake of doing so.

On a general note, I have phobia 4 toxic/I am sensitive to toxic. So, no toxic, no wahala. I no get ego problem or I conquered my own ego problem a very long time ago.

Plead:
I have my own house/car, I earn 300k monthly and I’m happily married .

If that is what you call broke I pity you


No female in my hood is dependent on some nigga to buy sanitary pad unlike e-broke rat like you

You don begin de make noise. Make I tell your old foes who you be? Lol.

Fountainofyouth:
Ego much I guess.

Far from it.

pansophist:
But it's true, men do it as well. So it is not a women-only thingy. I see lots of threads of men complaining bitterly that they sponsored their partners through university, and she dumped them aftermath. Or want a return of all the things they bought after a breakup (E.g, Timaya and Empress Njamah). Everything they did for the other is an investment for the sustenance of the relationship that must yield romantic returns, and if it doesn't, dissolution and recollections of stocks take place.

Romantic relationships are not unconditional, (Except parents to kids), it is symbiotic at best. And when one is not receiving his/her needs, withdrawal and pandemonium will ensue.

Symbiotism and conditionality of a romantic relationship - a healthy one - doesn't invalidate altruism. Actually, one's ethical leanings will always determine his/her thought process in particular and actions/inactions in general.

Ariza:
Still waiting for you to tell me my ethical leanings and your passive divination.

And please don't say you will tell me at the right time or place. because it's like those two conditions aren't real.

Na for one newspaper house I been wan go now to tell dem help me broadcast say my person de miss, but now I hapi say you dey safe. I go do de needful ASAP, no worry you hear.

@LilMissfavvy

You don't like campaign of calumny, yet you're always quick to mete out same towards others, men in particular - every man on Nairaland is evil as far as you're concerned. That's hypocrisy. She who comes into equity must come with clean hands.

Eschew chauvinism, and every act of wickedness, because it always makes you to carry around aura of bitterness, like a typical termagant. It amounts to mental parochialism in particular and insanity in general for you (and your ilk) to always visit your "man-frustration" on every man who crosses your path. And to avoid compounding your obvious man-frustration, eschew "too clever by half" attitude when next you may be lucky to have a responsible man in your life when dealing with him.

I don't do this everyday, but it's necessary in your case. In fact, I wonder how a sane man will wittingly approach a lady of your type (or even a man of your type) for friendship/relationship. I could have easily reached out to you privately to pass this information to you, but knowing your type of person, you would have misconstrued my intentions.

Once more, you always carry around aura of bitterness, so strive and work on yourself for your own good. You can take this as a caution rather than an attack/instruction/command. Of course, you're entitled to choose how to react to it, but I'll certainly not join issue with you under any circumstances.

I wish you the best in your endeavours.

I haven't had a reason to seek financial assistance, or to depend for survival, from any of the women I have dated or had some form of familiarity - of course, except female relatives - however, they're the kind who can move mountains/are always eager to move mountains for me.

There are both good and bad women everywhere.