₦airaland Forum

Knowing how to choose your battle is wisdom. Besides, freedom of speech doesn't mean absence of decorum. Constructive criticism can never land anyone, irrespective of social stratum, into trouble. Except of course where one is involved with a lowlife that accidentally come across power.

apatheticme:
Word! Ur comment made my day! Now I understand how to balance the tension at work. Smart one

You're welcome.

Libertarianism is the major attribute one must possess in order to achieve sanity (dominion and dignity) - one who's in charge of her dominion and dignity automatically has sanity. And of course, a libertarian doesn't domineer others, but has his principles intact and set-up which must be conformed to by anyone that chooses to associate with him.

The difference between those who've their sanity intact and those who don't, is that while the former conquered themselves without needing to conquer the world and love the world without hating themselves, the latter tend not to conquer themselves but strive to conquer the world and love themselves while hating the world.

I stopped reading the hogwash where I saw "savings equals to no risk" - until you lose your savings to a bank directly or indirectly or inflation caught up with it then, you'll begin to accept the fact that understanding is superior to knowingness. Kindly preach this hogwash to conformist, that's the kind of information they like to absorb. Unfortunately, conformists aren't known for adventure but covetousness.

Savings is good but it's in no way better than investment - there's no risk-free activity anywhere. The first rule of investment is understanding (not just knowing) the market segment.

Those who understand practices, they don't just teach/preach - teaching is for those who knows but have little or no understanding of what they teach.

I hold nothing against you though. Peace out.

If medical doctors are god-like as some people stated, then, I wonder what pharmacists should be since their output is the foundation on which medics perfect their craft. Literally, no profession is inferior to another - be it law, engineering, medical etc.

Old age doesn't automatically confer wisdom. The most enlightened and "in-form" between/among people will always be wiser than the other party's.

OP, if you observed that in all sincerity you're wiser than your mother, kindly ignore her small-minded acts and carry on with your plans. And create emotional, psychological and physical distance with her - but don't alienate yourself from her, remain thoughtful towards her - I assure you that in the near future she'll come to you for sincere reconciliation and accord total respect to your independence.

Empower women and see hunger in the land reduced to the bare-minimum - I'm in total support of women emancipation. And of course, I see no evil in gender equality - egalitarianism doesn't mean absence of segregation. Segregation in this regard means first between equals - with man as the first - not a superior and his subordinate.

A sane fully emancipated woman needn't to be told that independence doesn't mean absence of thoughtfulness.

Calm down your problem is a small one! Actually, you're of weak self sufficiency, thus the reason for your nonchalant attitude which he constantly complained about as stated - nonchalance is a psychological vice. Believe you me that the weak self sufficiency group you belong to is better than "esteemless" group and those that belongs to it.

But nothing stops you from migrating upwards to strong self sufficiency group, which will enable your relationship to become a bliss - so long as your man belonged to this same latter group. However, if he belong to the esteemless group, then, there's nothing you can do to achieve harmony with him in the long run - even after becoming servile towards him. For a certain he doesn't belong to the weak self sufficiency group, because he wouldn't have complained about your nonchalant attitude assuming that he does.

To migrate to the strong self sufficiency group you simply have to discard conceitedness and replace same with self-effacement. The very moment you become self-effacing, you'll automatically become affectionable, humble, meek, tolerant and contended and beneficent (so long as you have no trace of behavioral vice like greed) etc, at least towards him. However, wrong application of this formula will make you to become a doormat. . . Be warned.

Limited bad attitude can be condoned since perfection is only of the sole creator of the universe. But bad behaviour of any kind is a no no no. Kindly discard her with alacrity.

Lack/inadequate knowledge about good ethics (morality and psychology) - psychology to be precise since you're talking about narcissism, which is an attitudinal vice - breeds narcissism.

Meanwhile, when conceitedness, disingenuousness and narcissism are present in one single individual, there you'll witness complete ethical vices - behavioural and attitudinal vices. Behaviour and attitude are products of morality and psychology respectively.

The very moment you mastered the timeless act of setting your emotional firewall password with "goodness" the better for your sanity. In so doing, separation caused by betrayal/any other toxic act from anyone you once had/shared emotional connection with, will not cause you heartbreak.

I don't need your validation to substantiate the following pronouncement; I've never suffered heartbreak from a romantic relationship.

@OP

Believe you me that conformism is the hiding cause of the assumed high cost of marriage in particular and most other social ills in general, in the country. Conformism breeds uniformity and uniformity breeds superficiality. And of course, superficiality is the backbone of social ills.

Nothing can be more pleasurable than living life at the periphery of conventionalism, especially when doing so conscientiously - non-conformism all the way.

The Canadian government sure need to listen to the protesters complaint and implement their demand - I know they'll do it. Because failure to do so will lead to the collapse of the robust advancement they have enjoyed so far in all sections of their existence.

Unnecessary pay raise for doctors will make lawyers, business owners and other professionals to increase the cost of their respective services too. Unfortunately, in the end, it's the poor among in the society that will bear the harsh brunt effects - and of course, civilization collapses the very moment the gap between the haves and have nots widen so much.

The new and present China should be a case study for any country that wishes to become or remain a healthy 21st century economy.

Submissiveness doesn't mean absence of independence. And of course, independence doesn't mean absence of thoughtfulness.

To the question, NO - except if she's to do so volitionally for a harmonious reason.

Religion remains what it's; an object of subjugation. Any contrary definition to this is balderdash, AFAIC.

Lol. Well, his supposed contentment is rooted in weak self sufficiency instead of strong self sufficiency, citing his clapback - tell him this at your own peril.

Contentment doesn't mean abhorrence of prosperity and approval of complacency.

Hmm! This OP and his ilk have no shame at all. A self-esteemed person in his stead ought to have asked "what's stopping me in particular and every other sane and sound person from finding a solution to the cure of HIV/AIDS?" And in so doing he'll justify the essence of him being accorded a human being status - an animal he's so far as far as I'm concerned. What a way to show ingratitude to the soul creator of the world that gave brains to every human being!

He shouldn't dare pick an offense whenever a White in particular and people in general tag him an animal, because his thought process justified same. Right without responsibility is one among the greatest conventional sins out there.

A woman who acts /desires to be treated as a wife - keeper/helper - sure deserves the best from her sane husband. But I cannot say so for a woman who acts as/desires to be a partner - co-captain/head - in the union.To the man, headship isn't for name and mouth alone, to whom much is given a lot much more is expected. Only people of diplomatic ethical leanings can achieve the former. Egalitarianism doesn't mean absence of segregation - yet, segregation itself doesn't confer superiority.

On the flip side, it seems like "independent woman" is the most misinterpreted word out there now. For a record, financial emancipation - one's ability to sparsely take care of one's basic need(s) doesn't count - doesn't automatically make a woman independent. Yes, all independent women are financially emancipated (directly or indirectly), but not all financially emancipated women are independent. It takes a woman who has achieved ethical emancipation to be truly independent.

Meanwhile, independence doesn't mean absence of thoughtfulness, just as oneness doesn't automatically mean harmony. Shared common ethical philosophies breed oneness in marriage and any marriage that lack oneness isn't healthy. Unfortunately, the last place to find oneness is in any marriage where a woman is a business-like partner to her husband in the union, either by her own making or the husband's making.

A healthy union - be it marriage or dating - is a bliss.

Kudos to him. He has always been beneficent.

Liberalness doesn't mean absence of rationality.

He's a very foolish man. Those who failed to set their emotional firewall password with "goodness" will always experience this kind of ill result. Healthy relationship isn't negotiable.

And unhealthy relationship like the one he was involved in didn't rear its ugly head on the particular moment her frenemy of a girlfriend betrayed him. Therefore, supposing that he had his emotional firewall password set with goodness, he wouldn't have remained in the toxic relationship up to the moment he witnessed the unbearable episode.

@Op

Your postulation is a misconception that emanated from mental parochialism. For all I care and know, financial stratum doesn't define a man's ethical leanings. So, this erroneous postulation of equating a financial poor man to goodness and a financial emancipated man to evil is balderdash.

$17,900 down payment all the way. Let me not burst his bubble. Kudos to him all the same.

Any sucker for positive energy will surely agree with you. Although, I don't subscribe to the philosophy of living for oneself first, except where and when mandatory.

Conceit will always remain God's gift to small-minded people. Their philosophy anywhere one may come across them is the same; to ruin you and run. You either become a victim of their shenanigans or their outright enemy.

Well, small-minded people long for popularity/admiration while aristocratic people long for influence/respect. Kanu should upgrade for good.

#ISTANDFORLIVEANDLETLIVE. . . Don't worry, I'm a bona fide Nigerian of Igbo extraction.

mrphysics:
Let me disagree. Relationships isn't IDP camp where people come and give without expecting anything.

Everyone wants to either gain or benefit from a relationship. You can think otherwise for cheap likes. But the truth is that no one wants to go into a relationship and leave empty

You're a typical articulate incompetent. A sagacious person in your stead would know that beneficialness doesn't mean absence of altruism, and that an opportunist in a romantic relationship isn't aiming for beneficialness it offers, rather, s/he aims for profit where expediency reigns supreme over principle, because s/he sees romantic relationship as a transactional business rather than a contractual one.

Now vamoose and look for your small-minded mates elsewhere. I don't join issue with anyone least of all your ilk.

The thought of losing in a relationship occurs when one's givens (materially or immaterially) wasn't altruistic - disingenuous people will understand better - and when the expected profits from the preceding acts of hypocrisy didn't materialize. . . Case study; A mentally low manipulator crossing the path of a sophisticated manipulator/diplomat without having his/her way in the end. Or, a battle of wit between a leech and predator - leeches always lose to predators.

Leaders are readers.

Nnamdi Kanu wasn't sagacious at all. Sagacious people know how not to build their team around venal and/or feeble-minded people - small-minded people. They're only good for use to execute plans. So I'm not surprised that his disappearance literally marked an end to his struggle.

OBJ is being rational - with his constructive criticisms and earned praises where and when necessary - and should be commended by all sane and sound people.