₦airaland Forum

Everything is fair in war. I don't see any sane person that goes to war and expect a kid gloves treatment from his enemies. IPOB be warned.

As a bona fide Igboman, I support proscription of IPOB. Although, I believe that things can be done differently and better by all and sundry in the country. Nigeria's main problem is ethical (not ethnic and other assumed things), so things can easily be changed for good if and only majority of the citizens can embrace a change of ethical leanings - the good thing is that a change of ethical leanings doesn't cost a dime.

#IstandforanindissolubleNigeria

Partners deserve each others trust. Truly, to each his own. @OP, a thought process like yours is the reason why I do say that the word "love" (true love not love as in either of the single constituents fancy or compassion) is ambiguous, therefore, what constitutes love for you for example would surely be different from what constitutes mine. Personally, I don't see love or friendship where there's no trust.

What's true is that trust is transient and its earned not given. Therefore, it need to be maintained and sustained in order to retain it - unlike confidence which one gives adventurously before or without merit.

In summary, sane and sound people in a relationship (relationship of any type) must first merit each others trust before they can become friends/partners/lovers. . . I insist I don't see love or friendship where there's no trust, therefore, partners deserve each other's trust.

babyfaceafrica:
you are just contradicting yourself.. I don hear you sir..thanks

To each his own. Obedience, concentration, effort and perseverance will always result to brilliance. And this is all it takes to be formally educated - alternatively as obtained in most Nigerian formal institutions, one can have his way without observing all of these values and still be quantified by the appropriate authorities as formally educated. . . This is a validation of my pronouncement that most (not all) formally educated people are brilliant.

Intelligence on the other hand takes more than the values of brilliance to achieve - creativity and self-resourcefulness that constitutes intelligence goes beyond a value like obedience and others. This is the reason why intelligence is superior to brilliance.

In summary, I didn't contradict myself. This topic is beyond you.

Bye.

babyfaceafrica:
most formally educated people are brilliant?.. Really??..it is okay

You amuse me. Well, it takes a lot to understand the difference between intelligence and brilliance. If only 10% among the roughly 70% of brilliant Nigerian population is intelligent, the country wouldn't be this mess as it is currently.

babyfaceafrica:
they are not false..just generalizations..I know an uncle of mine who married a gal with masters(my just get money,no formal education).. His wife is always saying he doesn't know this or that and she rarely listens to his advise.. The man will start his part time education this year.. He is tired!!!!!..some people do exhibit such things

It's obvious that you don't know what conceitedness is and how conceited people behaves. An intelligent, confident and self-effacing person doesn't domineer, belittle and undervalue others that are formally less educated/those she perceive are formally less educated than her but conceited people do. My point remains that someone can be formally educated without being conceited vice versa.

In the instance you presented, let me assume that your uncle is always right with his opinions (of course he may even be playing victim for the sake of it) that simply means that his wife is conceited thus her negative attitude towards him, and that's not necessarily because she's more formally educated than him, no. After all, it's not all formally educated people that're intelligent and confident. . . At best most formally educated people are brilliant. Intelligence remains superior to brilliance and someone can be intelligent without possessing higher formal qualifications.

That submission is 100% false.

1. Responsibleness can't make a lady unromantic. It's obvious that you're talking about IndecentStar-like, that shouldn't be expected of a responsible lady.

2. Quality education can never make a sane and sound lady to claim monopoly of knowledge and wisdom, no. Obviously someone has mistaken conceitedness for intelligence and confidence.

3. An illiterate in what exactly? I mean, someone can be literate on economic matters but an illiterate in English - in this case, why would a sane person use English to correct someone that's only literate in Yoruba. Unless you have mistaken illiteracy for imbecility. . . I hold no brief for imbeciles in this regard, in fact, I don't see any sane person that'll go to a slowpoke for partnership.

4. Smart people never tell lies - they can be diplomatic when time permits, fortunately diplomacy is always embedded in sincerity. Obviously, you have mistaken disingenuousness for smartness.

@OP

What happened to knock and the door shall be opened, ask and you shall receive. Come on! Put your/religious words in action.

God without religion sure pass.

400billionman:
They broke up and stayed apart for one year and the guy later came back.

The question is what did he come back to do ? Is it to start dating again or get married ?

He is not ready. Ur style can't get him do jack.

LOL. Don't worry they came back together to form a music group. Come on! They continued where they stopped before, therefore, it's only humane for them to define their long term wish for each other before another wasteful six years will occur.

OKANGPRECIOUS:
Desperation mode activated.

Why are you making yourself cheap before him. You are talking of door knocking
I guess after that you will take in and start delivering children for him.

Babe wise up. Don't be too clingy to him incase other suitors want to come in.

Don't tell him again about coming to see your parent. You are pushing him against his wish
He may marry you out of pity n tomorrow he will regret marrying you.

Give am space joor. If he loves you he will go and do the needful

Unassumingness is sexy but pretense isn't. Literally,there's nothing like desperation about her thought process. She's just being factual.

@OP

Be bold to tell your BF that you in particular aren't getting any younger and that you long to marry sooner rather than later, therefore, ask him where your relationship with him is heading to. If he indicates interest to marry you, demand for an exact time frame from him when he intend to make that happen. If the time frame he will give you is OK for you you stay put with him and plan together for the marriage, while in the event that he fails to keep to his promise at the agreed time frame, you walkout of his life honorably.

Since the difference between an unmarried person with a child and an unmarried person who's sexually active but without a child is that while the former intentionally or unintentionally has a result for his/her intercourse act(s) the latter intentionally or carefully avoided having a result of his/her own intercourse act(s), then, I don't see anything that will inhibit me from marrying a lady in this kind of condition - so long as she tickle my fancy in many other areas.

@OP

So long as you're not mistaken ingeniousness for disingenuousness and conceitedness then you're right with your observations and submission. Truth is that all small-minded men abhors ingenious ladies simply because they (ingenious ladies) don't allow them to practice their shenanigans around them and go scot-free. However, as for disingenuous and conceited ladies, I sorry for una. LOL.

I doff my hat for all ingenious people.

@OP

The last thing to expect from a self-centered person is loyalty. Today her negative actions and inaction are towards your siblings and mother, but I can assure that you're going to be her main victim in the long run. Obviously, you're yet to achieve self-realization, therefore, the reason why you married - you're married already since you have done traditional marriage - someone that is a contrast to what you need.

I don't see a man of noble class saying that a virtuous woman has nothing to offer him other than sex. But of course I sure understand what happens when a small-minded man is in a relationship with a small-minded woman.

It's insanity for one to long for what he doesn't have without an option for barter, or that which he has but can't give, or not be pleased to receive in equal measures that which he gives. Hypocrisy is evil.

Responsibleness can never be absent in nobility and virtuousness.

Of course yes, depending on what constitutes love for one. But then one's sanity in particular sanctity of relationship in general should be reason enough for one to keep to the first person s/he fell in love with.

DanseMacabre:
Arrant nonsense! How was she forced? Him collect the jeep at gun- or knife- point


The woman get luck say na local pastor wey no get mouth. If to say na topshot, by the time police connive with am obtain the woman further, she go just accept her L move on with life.

You're quite myopic. It takes an informed person to know that emotional abuse is worse than physical abuse, just as corruption is worse than stealing.

No kind of love is literally unconditional anywhere, no matter how notionally unconditional it may sound or appear. At least there're three kinds of known love. Viz:

1. Agape love - here majority do give the love unconditionally in the short run, but just like respect, good behavior is necessary to maintain and sustain it in the long run. Mother's love and one's admiration for every human being fall into this category. Of course, we all know that you can't remain in your mother's good book of love if you decide to permanently become an evil towards her.

2. Fancy love - here you have the shallow erotic love, love at first sight and love based on beautiful persona (physical beauty). This kind of love may notionally appear unconditional by the giver, yet, it's never so since the bond that hold it is based on beauty and mostly sustained by material things like money and fame. Compatibility is never taken into consideration in this kind of love, thus, the reason why its chances of survival in the long run when beauty fades, fame wanes and money vanishes and reality sets in, is always hard. Majority of those involved in it always pack up or stay put together but as frenemies.

3. True love - here I am talking of the love that is still conditional, but it's always built on mutual compatibility (immaterial things) with less emphasis (but still necessary) on fancy and material things. The main bond that always hold the two people involved in this kind of love is mutual immaterial things - either one or all of good attributes, intellect, personality and belief system. This is the love on which any healthy relationship/marriage you see out there is built upon. This is the domain of selfless love.

ivolt:
You don't get it, how many friends do you have ?
Are they all at your level of financial capacity ?

There is a clear difference between helping a friend out in times of need
and taking up the role of a parent by sponsoring his/her education.

I am not against doing good to your fellow humans on a neutral ground
but when emotions are involved, one should steer clear usurping their
parental roles unless one do not care about the outcome, which is nothing
but a pretence to save face since nobody want to be a loser.

You amuse me! That my submission you quoted was clear and direct and anyone who's insightful would sure understand it without need to infer that "I don't get it" like you stated up there. Well, I'm informed enough to know that there's a tiny line between foolishness and kindness, so I never crossed the line. I have no reason to be self-centered.

By the way, the word friendship just like love is ambiguous, therefore, what constitutes friendship to me would sure be different from yours. When you realized that closeness doesn't necessarily equate to loyalty then, you'll begin to understand me better.

@OP

The reason why you're this much frightened and drained over her actions and inaction - of which she's entitled to - is because you didn't lay your principle before venturing into dating. Don't always allow anyone the opportunity to either belittle or undervalue you when you haven't disrespected yourself or such other party. And always strive to be on the offensive side of life instead of the defense side of life. . . Although, it's a heavy task to be on this leanings but it worth it.

You can adopt my simple principle:

Reciprocity of goodness in all forms - not necessarily in equal measures - isn't negotiable. With this principle, I haven't experienced heartbreak from any lady before. For one, I'm never afraid of sticking out my neck fully for any cause I believe in, yet, I play no sycophancy for anyone or anything. Become a no-nonsense guy not a bad guy or a servile one as you are currently. Reciprocity of goodness is the soul of a healthy relationship.

Besides, the very moment you tell yourself that no human being is indispensable in your life and vice versa, the sooner you'll become emancipated from the grip of manipulators and outright evil people around you, whose main source of happiness is when they drained you emotionally and otherwise.

MissCokie:
My advice is this, even in the presence of a mutual agreement or not, do not attempt to sponsor her. Your family would appreciate you more, if you invest that money in any of them.

Dear, mind games is only for small-minded people. If I cannot be of goodness to a lady/person I termed a friend then, I have no reason keeping her close. Pretense and hypocrisy aren't my thing. Nothing justifiably inhibits someone that has the wherewithal, from genuinely changing for good, the cause of people around him/her (blood relations and friends in particular and genuine needy people in general) simultaneously.

My previous submission stand.

@op

Your number one point made you to appear parochial. Being a nightclub goer (I hold no brief for the addicted one's though) doesn't make one irresponsible. Also, one's persona (dressing sense, not holding brief for people that goes around half or fully naked) shouldn't be a yardstick to ascertain one's nobility. Attributes (good or bad) always lies beneath persona. So, your number point is invalid.

On your second point, believe you me, the importance of physical beauty can never be undermined - by the way beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and of course, the eyes must eat and feel filled up first before the stomach. My point here is that beauty is as important as good attributes when choosing a wife, this will always ensure sustainable loyalty. I don't see the good in a woman that has good attributes but repulses me physically.

About your number 4, even though it's not a bad idea to go down to a lady's hometown to inquire about her before making a final decision, yet, you shouldn't forget that people do change either for good or bad. Therefore, personally, I would rather make my decision based on a lady's current attitudes than how good or bad she was said to be from her hometown.

Your number 5, 6 and 7 are on point. Only feeble-minded people allow others - parents in particular or other people in general - to decide a fate for them. Actually, it takes a conscientious person to live life at the periphery of conventionalism.

From my own perspective, the easiest way to choose the right life partner is for one to achieve self-realization first. When you achieved self-realization, you'll find it easy to understand what constitute the ambiguous word "love" to you and based on that you will lookout for someone that possesses the good physical and innate attributes that made up your constituency. There's always "the right one" for everyone, what's not obtainable is the "perfect one" and no sane person look for that, because perfection is only of the creator of the universe.

@OP

Literally, where there's no agreement between a girl and boy that they would marry each other even if they mutually remain loyal to each other throughout the cause of their dating period, with the normal accompany assistances from both parties towards each other, there's nothing wrong if a guy (vice versa) selflessly, conscientiously and altruistically sponsors his girlfriend's education/career, and still leave her to decide whom to marry between him and other suitors in the end. In this kind of scenario if the girl chooses another man to marry, I see no evil in her action - one who denied another free will is an evil personified.

However, where there's a mutual understanding that the boy (vice versa) is to sponsor the girl through school/career, so that in the end they would marry each other, then, the lady would sure be blamed if she reneged from such an arrangement in the end - so long as she wasn't cajoled into the relationship by the boy and also so long as the boy didn't give her reason to question his loyalty towards her in the cause of their courting period, because loyalty is like a two way traffic, its reciprocal. In this particular scenario, the boy shouldn't regret his action or have others crucify him, because s/he who betrayed you will always remain your slave till the end of time.

Personally, I have a maxim that says "betray me shame unto you, outsmart me shame unto me." I'm never afraid to stick out my neck fully to any cause I believe in. It will take only my fellow adventurers and reciprocity proponents to understand me better.

pocohantas:
This brain shall remain oiled. I greet you...

Milady, I wish you all the best.

Nice (good) guys don't finish last but servile guys always do. People should stop mixing up servility for goodness. Also, no sane and sound person (male or female) puts up with a literal bad person, no and never - what many assume notionally to be bad guys are principled guys (people of goodness who're principled and witty).

OP, you're just a servile guy. Servile guys are always pretentious, hypocritically disingenuous and opportunistic/entitled. For instance, the happenstance you narrated in your first paragraph validated my submission herein - and I didn't care to read beyond the first paragraph.

If you aren't ready to give altruistically materially/immaterially, set your price/standard and make sure an understanding is reached between you and whosoever you're dealing with first before you take-up a task that's beyond your free giving limit. With this approach no one will feel used or belittled in the end. Truly, that girl you mentioned in the first paragraph owed you no obligation. There's a tiny line between kindness and foolishness.

The most effective and efficient means to be at the top of your game as a start-up is to reduce your dependence, at the bare-minimum, on the in-house personnel in particular and hiring at large. Learn how to outsource. . . . The advantage of this approach always outweigh its disadvantage.

I'm always bemused whenever I see people humiliates those that steals - only wretched people steals. But of course hails those that're corrupt - which is an evil act mostly perpetrated by the well placed people with dubious character.

No matter how anyone wishes to twist it, corruption is worse than stealing.

It's obvious he meant girls (people in general) that has too many people they share close familiarities with. Because to know too many people/thing is a mere sign of broad reading, socializing or traveling - it's not evil.

However, close familiarities with too many people - outside one's professional/service duties - point to one with an opportunistic and superficial traits. So, if he actually meant close familiarity, he sure has a point.

Loyalty is the least thing one should expect from an opportunistic and superficial person.

Well, he's entitled to his own opinion, just like every Tom, Dick and Harry does. What's truest though is that some of us lives and plays politics on principle and conviction. Personally, I know that I've what it takes to lead effectively.


I'm only bidding my time.

dangotesmummy:
religion doesn't breed dogmas and subjugation. It's the people/adherents practicing them that start the dogmas using fear as a tool to ensure uniformity e.g every woman who wears trousers will go to hell

If you enter some churches (I don't want to mention the name of the churches) they'll say if you wear make-up you cannot enter our church premises
If your hair is not covered e.g with scarf or hat you cannot enter our church. All this is to ensure uniformity

I practice religion, I'm a Christian by faith,I believe in the existence of God BUT the fellow Christians make Christianity tiring and a joke

If we can practice science and religion hand in hand instead of trado/religious Christianity or trado religious Islam and take some damn responsibility instead of saying God willing,God chose our leaders,and basically throwing everything at God at the expense of critical thinking, research and logic,how beautiful will Nigeria be but unfortunately we chose our leaders based on religious sentiments, ethnic inclination etc instead of meritocracy then one fool will come out and say God put him there.when he now under performs or gets corrupt we'll now start praying for God to remove him or kill him

For me,I don't give a fok if a person is Muslim or Christian, Igbo or Yoruba,Hausa or whatever. If he can do the job then so be it,give him the job.but unfortunately religion is more important than logic in Nigeria

LOL. It's obvious that you didn't understand the context on which I used the word "uniformity." More so, I don't see a religion where there's no heads - this is about your misconception of dogmatism and subjugation.

All the same, to each his own. I'm a proponent of live and let live philosophy. And also an unapologetic proponent of free will.

Personally, spirituality sure pass and it only take a conscientious person to be one. In people's act of goodness I see God.

Bluffly:
If I were you I won't argue that. With all thy gettings, get understanding Prov 4:7 Can a newly recruited Lieutenant say to his/general that he has war strategies. Can you argue with your father when it comes to life experiences? They've been there before you. Remeber that when you are not making some certain mistakes, you've actually learnt from other peoples mistakes or you are been directed by the holy spirit. So whatever knowledge you may have, be careful in translating it to wisdom where the age is.Give honour to whom honour is due.

In conclusion, you haven't derailed from the truth but only segregating the truth.

I wonder who told you that I'm parochial, just like you and your ilks, to have the bible as my standard. Unapologetically, I don't need your wack opinion to validate my submission.

It takes an informed person to know that insight is superior to experience.

bkool7:
Not all Leaders are readers in Nigeria

The last time I checked "leaders" are different from "rulers," so my submission still stand, all leaders are readers.

dangotesmummy:
but can't they practice religion and science together, hand in hand?

The presence of subjugation and dogmatism makes any form of religion unattractive. Literally, there's no difference between authoritarianism and religion.

Personally, I'm longing for a world where people will be original and spontaneous in their actions not one - as presently obtained in very many places - where uniformism and order are the order of the day.

The new world is heading towards non-conformism. Don't worry, non-conformism doesn't encourage unconscientiousness. Free will remains one among the best of gifts God gave to mankind. He who denies other(s) free will and fairness is automatically a devil personified.

As homo sapiens, we all remains imperfect manifestation of the perfect being - God.

Without reading further, let me state my reservation on the number 1 "Wisdom belongs to the aged, and understanding to the old. (NLT)"

I stand bold to say that wisdom belongs to the insightful aged not just the aged - after all leaders are readers but not all readers are leader. And understanding doesn't belong to the old per se, but to the goodness proponents and practitioners - oldness doesn't confer goodness, ethical leanings does.