₦airaland Forum

Proserpina:
Two people are in a relationship but one should be calm and allow God mould her while the other is doing what?

You are not ready.


I don talk am before, as a man if you have bad character you will be dumped andreplaced. Read that again!!! Work on yourself and always strive to be a better version of you. It's not that hard.

🤣

tunnyl:
I understand you point ma’am and i feel your pain But this method you mentioned has never worked out for women. They try and try and try then time flies then they marry then they become impatient when the guy is slightly broke then they leave then becomes a single mother then the cycle repeats itself again.

No one is saying you should shrink yourself. Its about understanding timing and season. If same thing keeps happening to someone then someone should learn patience.

You know women are impulsive and moved by emotion. If she has a checklist she will immediately fall for the guy that matches that list. and then they begin dating then her test repeats itself again. Cuz There are people who are good at disguising themselves to fit other’s fantasies on the surface.

But the method of pushing blame, twisting the Bible, and running away from accountability has always worked for men, right?

Women are not entering marriage with the intent of leaving. The mindset of women just "being patient" in dating is part of what contributes to these cycles. Some end up making avoidable mistakes and entering wrong marriages because they did not walk away when they saw the signs.

Walking away from what does not align with one's values, goals, standards, or lifestyle is not impatience. It is common sense and self-preservation.

Dating is just like a market. If you go to the market to buy rice and you keep seeing beans, would you stay there practicing patience hoping beans will become rice? Wouldn't you rather leave and continue searching?

Timing and season only applies when there is already compatibility but external circumstances are causing delay. Without alignment, there is nothing to wait for.

The real key is recognizing that incompatibility exists, and accepting that both men and women can be wrong instead of pushing blame to one gender. Men are not saints or angels. There are a lot of irresponsible men in world, drunkards, toxic and aggressive men, womanizers, abusers, and criminals. So the idea that women's "impatience" is the core issue is totally invalid.

Patience does not change character. A bad man does not become a good man because a woman patiently tolerated his ill-behaviour and married him. Some women have been emotionally destroyed, abused, driven into depression, and even pushed to early graves trying to "love a man into becoming better."

Being single is not a disease. It is better to be patient in selection or remain unmarried than to be trapped in the wrong choice. Patience does not fix incompatibility, it only prolongs suffering.

Many single women are actually happy. Many who claim unhappiness are reacting to societal pressure, not reality. The truly unhappy woman are those woman constantly being abused and beaten by her husband. The truly unhappy women are those women whose husbands are unfaithful. The truly unhappy women are those whose husbands are irresponsible and come home drunk after making a public disgrace of themselves. The truly unhappy women are those women whose husbands are lazy and irresponsible. The truly unhappy women are those constantly cleaning up the mess of their useless husbands who add no value to their lives but instead create more problems. The truly unhappy women are the ones living in continuous abuse, betrayal, irresponsibility, and emotional neglect all in the name of marriage.

"You are getting older" are the married ones getting younger?

The world has moved beyond such a mindset. Enlightenment has brought freedom. Nobody should knowingly drink poison and call it patience.

In simple terms: compatibility is not to be joked with. If values, goals, and standards do not align, no amount of patience or time can fix it.

tunnyl:
i wanted to call you bro till i checked your profile and saw a lady. Anyways only men who aren't disciplined tolerates an uncultured woman. Also Its guys that have women in their "beck and call" but decides to be a responsible man women treat badly the most not the ugly ones.

The real problem is uncultured men wanting women to always shrink into a role that fits their own selfish expectations.

You are so obsessed with shrinking women that you miss the essence of dating.

Dating is simply a compatibility check, not a process where a woman must patiently endure and be shaped to fit a man's expectations.

Some of you behave as though you created women, imposing rules and expectations that were never set by God. Why should women shrink like a goat in a world that belongs to both men and women? A woman has every right to choose who to marry or not to marry; she is not required to fit into a guy's idea of a partner.

In dating, two individuals who have been living their separate lives come together to see if they are compatible and can function as partners. A woman is not dating you to satisfy your expectations; just like you, she is also evaluating whether you fit into her values, goals, and standards.

There is a right person for everyone. Every individual should find their own match, rather than trying to resize someone who is not meant for them. Even when a woman is good, issues can still arise because some men fail to understand that women are individuals with their own lives and boundaries.

tunnyl:
Events perpetuates themselves until the individual has finally learnt their lesson. Whatever it is you are doing to her has happened to her in her previous relationship but she is hiding the secret. Most time if you have an opportunity to talk to your current babe's ex he will tell you the exact same thing happened while he was dating her.

MOST TIMES EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS IN A RELATIONSHIP IS AS A RESULT OF THE LADY YOU ARE DATING. SHE IS MEANT TO BE PATIENT LET GOD SHAPE HER INTO A WOMAN THAT HER HUSBAND DESERVES. AND UNTIL SHE LEARNS THE LESSON OF PATIENCE, BAD THING WILL ALWAYS HAPPEN TO HER PARTNERS INORDER TO TEACH HER A LESSON.

Thats why some guys discover that immediately they ended a relationship things change for the better. My advice to men is not to date unGodly woman no matter how nice she appears. Her niceness is a bait and a mask that comes off when she has gotten what she wants. But lack of patience and selfishness will make her lose her partner all the time.

Calm down jor. All this ego you guys are showing is just internet ego. The dating market is not even on you guys' side.

There are more men than women in Nigeria and globally, and some men are even selfishly marrying more than one wife. If you're not careful, another man can even snatch your wife.

Women are the prize😂😂🤣🤣

Babatunjo:
Make I tell una the truth wey nobody want to hear.
That woman wey dey form scarce, dey collect and disappear, dey treat men like options on a menu... she was not born like that. Somebody created her.

The first man who chased her for six months and got nothing but still stayed. He taught her that male attention is infinite and cheap.
The man who paid her bills, asked for nothing, and called it love. He taught her that a man's resources are hers by default.
The man she treated anyhow and he came back begging. He taught her that there are no consequences for bad behaviour.
The man who wife-ed her up immediately, gave her the whole world on a platter before she earned any of it. He finished the job.
By the time the next man meets her, she has been fully programmed. She does not even know it. She just knows that this is how men behave around her. She is simply operating on the data she has been given.

So before you curse the entitled woman, ask yourself who ran the training programme.
Men created the monster. Men keep feeding it. And then same men will come online to complain about it.

Fix your inputs. The market reflects what buyers have been rewarding.

Human behaviours like these are not the result of programming. What people do in relationships comes from personal standards, emotions, and choices.

It is best for people to just look out for a woman who has genuine feelings for them, even if such a relationship ends, it won't be for superficial reasons, but for real issues like incompatibility and mutual understanding of differences in goals, values, or expectations.

Some of you think treating women badly or being hard on them will make them love and desire you, but you have got it all wrong. While some women may marry anyone for validation from society, there are many women who would rather stay unmarried forever if they see no value in a man.

What keeps someone in a relationship is value and emotional connection. Would you also program a lady to see men as useful when they are not offering anything meaningful?

In a healthy relationship, both partners benefit. For a relationship to work, it requires something substantial; emotional connection, financial stability, safety, ambition, loyalty, affection, or any other meaningful quality. If men decide to make themselves useless, then what would sustain attraction and deepen the desire for marriage?

A woman can decide never to be romantically involved with any man forever, while for many men, that thing between their legs might betray them. Unlike men, who within just few hours of seeing a lady even half naked may begin to feel arousal, you can stand completely naked in front of a woman for years and she may feel nothing romantically for you.

Don't get me wrong; women are very emotional, but their love comes from the heart, and once the heart is captured, it is then everything else follows naturally.

QuinQ:
I don't know why you keep using the word "foreign", as if human anatomy is different in Nigeria!
I'm surprised you can't already see that your obsession with "virgin" is irrational. Ancients got many things wrong and female virginity is one of them. The ridiculous thing is that they acted as if a girl who had sex had the sex by herself. No concern whatsoever as to who it was that induced her to have sex or wether she was raped.
Once again, it is impossible to disprove a childless woman who says she's never had sex.
You go with what u can verify. U can verify a woman doesn't sleep around and what sort of family she's from and that ought be enough. If you're obsessed with wether anything happened long ago durring choldhood plays then you're the one who has a psychological issue!

You sound just like a short person trying to guilt-trip a tall person.

This is how you sound:
"Did you just use the word "tall"? It is not a valid word because science actually says tallness cannot universally be detected. Some people are genetically tall, but it is not always visibly obvious. Since there is no way to prove tallness universally and height cannot be used in every case, people can now lie about being tall, so you shouldn't use the word "tall" anymore. You should use words like "above average" or "exceeding average height" instead.

Why are you even so obsessed with being tall? You are being irrational." Don't you know that short people are teased for being short, and some people who even had the tendency to be tall did not grow tall because of malnutrition?"

Mr dear, just as boldly identifying as a non-virgin is not an insult to virgins, identifying as a virgin is not an insult to non-virgins. The word "virgin" is an actual word with an actual meaning, describing actual people. It does not need to be compromised or cancelled. There is no valid reason to cancel the word.
Should the AA genotype be cancelled because people with SS genotype battle pain? Should the word "literate" be cancelled because there are people who did not go to school? Words do not get cancelled simply because feelings may be hurt. There will always be terms used to identify different concepts.

Medical studies suggest that some women have hymenal tissue that appears intact before intercourse and experience noticeable physical changes during first sexual intercourse. Therefore, in some women there are noticeable signs, while in others there are no noticeable signs.

Every day, non-virgins openly speak about sex, relationships, body counts, and sexual experiences, so why should virgins feel ashamed or guilty for identifying as virgins, sharing their perspectives, and speaking about their sexless lives and experiences? These are personal choices. One is not attacking the other. One is not disturbing the other. There will always be different terms to explain different concepts, realities, and choices.

A lie being possible does not erase the existence of truth. Some people lie about being rich; that does not mean rich people do not exist or that the word "rich" should be cancelled. Some people lie about being faithful; that does not mean faithful people do not exist or that the word "faithful" should be cancelled. Your reasoning collapses on itself.

I still do not understand when acknowledging that virgins exists suddenly became an attack on non-virgins. What kind of manipulation is that? That is like a black man calling a white man racist for saying he is white or speaking about the idea of being white. If the word "virgin" affects you so much, what you need is healing. It makes no sense to want the word cancelled or to start projecting your insecurities onto others.

I doubt science is even concerned with testing concepts like virginity because it is not a medical condition or part of medical history.

Isn't it even amazing how countless things have been detected, but first-time sex is suddenly a "complex thing" for science to detect? 😳

Science can detect if someone was born blind, deaf, or mute, be it a child or an adult.

Science can detect if someone was born without limbs, hands, or legs, be it a child or an adult.

Science can detect biological parents, biological siblings, biological relatives, even to the extent of biological ancestry and where they are from.

Science can detect fingerprints, footprints, palm prints, blood counts and blood chemistry.

Science can detect biological sex, language ability, and several other histories.

I cannot idolize theories. If science was consistent, absolute, and flawless, scientists would not still be arguing, revising theories, and correcting themselves in every generation.

I used the word foreign to refer to research conducted abroad, as opposed to observational conclusions developed from repeated experiences of the practice in Nigeria. I do not completely agree with some of those published ideas, but rather than completely invalidating them or forcing my own perspective on others, I explained my own perspective.

QuinQ:
Point is that "virgin" is virtually meaningless in any practical, verifiable, provable sense! Any woman who tells you she's a virgin IS a virgin, unless she has a child or you've seen her with a d*ck inside her.
Better terms are "virtuous", "chaste" "celibate" "abstinent", "continent", etc.
None of these terms is dependent on whether you've ever had sex or not

Biblically, virginity could be proven, and traditionally the old methods of detection were widely accepted and considered valid in Nigeria and many other societies.

The published studies people often rely on today are not absolute conclusions that are superior or cannot be questioned. Many are based largely on self-reports and populations from foreign countries rather than direct medical evaluation. At the same time, traditional practices such as laying a white cloth to observe first blood after intercourse were also forms of observational conclusions developed from repeated experiences, even if they were not universally accurate. No single narrative can be treated as the absolute and unquestionable standard over every other perspective.

The issue is simply that physical signs are not universal enough to serve as definitive proof in every case because some foreign studies suggest that some women are born without a hymen, some hymens may already be stretched before intercourse, and some naturally appear different.

However, there are still women whose hymen remains intact before intercourse and who experience noticeable physical changes during first-time sex. Therefore, the reality is that there are noticeable signs in some women, while there are no noticeable signs in others.

So whether you personally dislike the term or not, the word "virgin" remains a valid and established concept in language, culture, religion, and human society.

marcusverum:
Nobody is arguing against emotional connection.
Nobody is arguing against compatibility.
Nobody is arguing against love.

The couple you described is beautiful.
That is what every man should aspire to.

But here is the question you did not ask.

What were the values that old couple built on?
What was the standard the man set
before he chose her?
What was the foundation before the emotional connection grew?

You are describing the fruit.
The post is talking about the root.

A man who chooses poorly at the root rarely gets to enjoy the fruit you just described.

Emotional connection does not erase poor vetting. It builds on top of it.
A strong foundation makes emotional
connection easier to sustain.
A weak foundation makes it harder to maintain no matter how genuine the
feelings are.

You spent many paragraphs arguing
for compatibility and emotional maturity.

A virgin who has not given herself to multiple men arrives with fewer competing emotional attachments.
That is not an assumption.
That is a more favorable starting point for the very connection you are describing.

We are not in disagreement.
You just do not realize it yet.

- MV

I understand your point about "root and fruit," and I agree that selection matters and people should make thoughtful choices when choosing a partner.

Vetting matters a lot, but vetting is not the same thing as predicting emotional outcomes based on one variable.

My disagreement is simply with the idea that a single factor like sexual history can be treated as a dependable predictor of long-term marital success.

A preference for a partner who is a virgin is completely valid, but it is still a preference, not a mechanism that generally or reliably produces emotional compatibility or marital stability.

Finding someone who genuinely connects with you emotionally is far more complex than it appears on the surface, and limiting the search to one rigid standard only reduces the chances of finding real compatibility. Sometimes, the person who will genuinely stay with you through life's difficulties may not even appear the most "ideal" on the surface.

Marriage is not sustained at the point of selection. It is sustained through years of communication, emotional interaction, sacrifice, conflict resolution, and mutual growth. Those are the things that determine whether a relationship survives and deepens over time.

The assumption that no past emotional experiences automatically reduce future emotional complications does not consistently hold in real relationships, because human beings are not static. People grow, change, mature, and make conscious choices in how they love and behave.

If a man finds a virgin with good character who is also emotionally compatible with him, then yes, she is a highly ideal and excellent choice for him. But turning that personal preference into universal relationship advice is where I disagree.

marcusverum:
You are still arguing against a point nobody made.

Read the post one more time.

The post never said virginity guarantees
a stable home.

The post never said virginity replaces love, compatibility or good judgment.

The post never said a virgin cannot end up in a bad marriage.

All of that is already in the post you are responding to.

What the post said is one thing only.
Given two women of equal character
the virgin comes with less history
that can complicate a marriage.

That is it.
That is the entire argument.

You have written three paragraphs defeating points that were never made while carefully avoiding the one point that was.

That is not consistency. That is a very educated way of missing the point.

- MV

It is interesting how people often post assumptions online. In real life, factors like virginity or other external traits do not determine how a relationship functions.

As time goes on in a relationship, many external factors become less important, and the focus shifts to the bond itself.

What are the odds that most men will find a virgin who also has good character and is emotionally compatible with them? Being a virgin does not automatically mean a woman will connect with every man she meets.

Even good character on its own does not guarantee compatibility, and compatibility cannot be forced. When that connection is missing, no amount of external "good qualities" can replace it.

I have seen couples who are both good individuals, yet still struggle to truly connect because the emotional chemistry is simply not there. I have also seen a woman who is generally considered "harsh" and difficult in personality act soft, loving, and emotionally open towards her partner.

This shows that what is judged externally does not always determine genuine emotional connection. When someone is truly right for you, the dynamic is simply different.

The real question is not who has "less history," but whether two people are actually compatible in values, communication, and emotional connection. Those are the factors that determine whether a marriage works or not.

One thing I have discovered over time is that real marital stability is built on emotional connection, mutual understanding, and consistent effort between two people.

I have seen enduring relationships, I have seen relationships that looked perfect from the outside but still struggled deeply over time, and I have also seen healthy relationships.

There was a couple I admire. They were in their old age, yet they were often holding hands, speaking softly to each other, and showing consistent care. Their bond was so deep that when the husband passed away, the wife passed shortly after, and they were even buried on the same day. They were able to raise their children to be fulfilled and accomplished. This is what deep emotional connection looks like in real life.

This is the kind of marriage people should aspire to, not one that benefits only one party or eventually leads to frustration, emotional distance, instability, and other avoidable problems.

QuinQ:
Point is that "virgin" is virtually meaningless in any practical, verifiable, provable sense! Any woman who tells you she's a virgin IS a virgin, unless she has a child or you've seen her with a d*ck inside her.
Better terms are "virtuous", "chaste" "celibate" "abstinent", "continent", etc.
None of these terms is dependent on whether you've ever had sex or not

If that is how you feel, your feelings are valid. But, I won't avoid using the actual term, which is "virgin," just to make it sound softer. Virginity is a valid word. "Virgin" is not an invalid or meaningless term; it is a standard word used in language, law, Scripture and other religious texts.

Other terms like "chaste" or "abstinent" describe behaviour, while "virgin" traditionally refers to someone who has not engaged in sexual intercourse. They may overlap in some contexts, but they are not identical in meaning.

QuinQ:
In statistics this is TOTALLY nolified by the statement:
"Significant number of people do not experience bleeding during first intercourse"

"Significant" simply means large enough to be meaningful. It could even be 10 out of 100.

The concept of virginity itself cannot simply be "nullified."

Personally, I believe every woman deserves equal human dignity and should not be reduced to her sexual history. That does not mean people cannot personally choose to remain virgins, identify themselves as virgins, or share their experiences.

If you have an issue with it, deal with it. It did not only appear in dictionaries; it also appears in Scripture. Whether you agree with the concept or not, the term will not cease to exist.

A virgin simply refers to a person who has not engaged in sexual intercourse, regardless of hymen status.

Many men and women will continue to choose abstinence and set themselves apart from sexual intercourse. So the term "virgin" can never be cancelled.

QuinQ:
You are the one being totally "stwwp". You just talk off the top of your head. The other guy at least does a semblance of research. See what he himself posted below. That puts an end to the discussion.
Henceforth find another word to use. Don’t "stwwp"ly keep using the word "virgin" as it is virtually meaningless in any practical, verifiable sense!

End of discussion. So henceforth find another word to use. Don’t keep using the word "virgin" as it is virtually meaningless in any practical, verifiable sense. This concludes this discussion.

How did you eyes omit this?
However, medical studies still suggest that when bleeding does occur, it is often linked to physical stretching or small tears of vaginal or hymenal tissue during first intercourse.

This is the common one I have seen people experience. The other ones are what they suggest.

QuinQ:
So if a man has been anal and oral sexing a female for years she remains a virgin but a virgin with a torn hymen is no longer a virgin. You are a real genius



This below is from MedicineNet, a top-doctors-produced health and medical information site. Study it then do further research so you'd no longer unknowingly be making a fool of yourself

Like I said, I have never personally come across a woman with such an experience, but I know it exists since it is scientifically documented.

MedicineNet does not conduct medical studies; it only summarizes existing medical research. The information being discussed comes from peer-reviewed studies published in scientific journals.

You are the one fooling yourself, I am only being logical. Most of the available research on hymen and bleeding during first intercourse is based largely on self-reported data and international studies, not controlled "scientific testing".

In Nigeria, there is even limited published research on hymen-related bleeding during first intercourse. Most available data comes from studies in other countries, and the findings vary widely across populations.

Many of these studies come from mixed or Western populations, and they show that a significant number of people do not experience bleeding during first intercourse, while some do. This is why bleeding is not considered a reliable or standard indicator.

However, medical studies still suggest that when bleeding does occur, it is often linked to physical stretching or small tears of vaginal or hymenal tissue during first intercourse.

spiceadole:
A lot of men who are obsessed with marrying virgins cannot agree to "No sex " relationships.
The obsession with virginity stems from their reckless sexual history with women, hence become afraid and start hunting for virgins that they will stilld deflower in order to "taste& test" before marrying them.

Honestly, virginity often takes a toll on relationships. Many men don't even want a sexless relationship. It is often men with fragile egos who perceive virginity as a source of pride or status.

QuinQQ:
What should REALLY convince you folks you are DELUDED is that ANY woman can tell you she's a virgin and THERE IS NO WAY YOU CAN PROVE HER WRONG (except she has a child)!
Read the below, research on it diligently then imbed it into your skull!!








Those two are seriously DELUDED

I have never personally come across a woman with such an experience, but I know it exists since it is scientifically documented.

The hymen is nothing special; some men just use it as a mere bragging right, in fact, it has often been used to belittle women.

But just to clarify:

The majority of women are born with a hymen. Cases where a woman is born without one are rare.

Less than 1% of women are born without a hymen, while few women may have it stretched or torn through certain strenuous physical activities.

Women who are not involved in strenuous physical activities are unlikely to have a torn or stretched hymen.

marcusverum:
You agreed virginity is a good thing then spent the rest of your comment arguing against it.

Pick a side.

You said virginity has no role to play
in relationships.But you just admitted it helps avoid certain problems and strengthens spiritual life.

Those are roles. You defeated your own argument in the same paragraph.

You said you have seen more non virgins enjoy than virgins. Enjoy what exactly.
And what does enjoyment have to do with building a stable home?

You said there are virgins who end up
in wrong marriages.
Correct.
Nobody said virginity is a guarantee of a perfect marriage.

The post said a virgin comes with
less baggage than a non virgin. That is still true regardless of how many wrong marriages you have witnessed.

A new car can still end up in an accident. That does not mean you buy a used car with heavy history on purpose.

Read the post fully before responding. The answers to your objections are already in it.

- MV

You seem confused. My point was absolutely consistent: when I said virginity can help avoid certain problems or strengthen spiritual life, I was acknowledging personal or religious benefits, not claiming it determines relationship success. I even clearly stated that it has no role in relationship; that is, it has no role in choosing a partner.

Virginity is not one of the factors in building a stable home. A stable home is built on actual factors like love, compatibility, personality, and shared values

I often laugh when I see women remind their narcissistic husbands that they were virgins before he married them, especially when it is clear that the man does not love them.

Many virgins, rather than patiently selecting a good man, marry with the assumption that the man will be good to them because he married them as a virgin.

Some ladies assume virginity makes a partner "better" or compensates for poor judgment in choosing a spouse. That assumption is what leads to disappointment, not virginity itself.

At the same time, being a virgin or not does not determine whether someone will enjoy or suffer in marriage. A wrong choice of partner does. A person can be a virgin and still end up in a difficult marriage, just as a non-virgin can have a healthy one.

The real issue is not whether virginity is "good" or "bad," but making sure it is not mistaken for something it is not.

Some virgins may still end up as experiments.

I agree that virginity is a good thing. It can help you avoid certain problems and strengthen your spiritual life. However, when it comes to relationships, it is best to set virginity aside and focus on genuine love. Don't be misled. Don't let virginity deceive; it has absolutely no role to play in relationship. I have seen more non-virgins enjoy than virgins.

Whether you are a virgin or not, just marry the right person. There are many virgins that become victims of wrong marriages.

marcusverum:
The virginity conversation never ends. Here is where I stand and this is my final submission.

To everyone who immediately demands male virginity whenever female virginity is raised, I have one question.

Where in history has male virginity been a requirement for marriage? In which tribe? In which culture? In which religion?

Even the white wedding dress itself is a symbol of purity. Answer that honestly in your mind. Once you have, you will realize you are simply deflecting.

When a man wants to marry, the woman's family asks what he does, they ask about his capacity to provide. But when a man brings a woman home, his own family ignores his pocket and looks at her character and most importantly, her purity. Each gender carries what belongs to them.

Men are judged by what they can build and provide, this is why they are broke-shamed for underperforming. A man without resources is a man who has failed his primary social function

Women are judged by their sexual discipline, this is why they are slut-shamed for promiscuity. A woman without restraint has compromised the very trait that ensures stability and trust.

Women have a hymen for the same reason men do not. Men and women cannot be measured under the same moral compass, which is why the consequences are not the same.

Virgins are not perfect. They are not angels but they are still the better choice ahead of non-virgins not because of character alone, but because of what they bring to a marriage without being asked.

So to those who argue that virgins do not guarantee good character. If sexual discipline is not good character, then what is sleeping around? A woman who can keep her body in a world where women sell themselves to the highest bidder is not ordinary. She is rare. That discipline alone is the pinnacle of character.

A virgin offers a blank slate, no sexual ghosts, no comparisons to exes, and no emotional residue from past entanglements. Beyond purity, she offers proof of a rare trait in the modern market: the discipline to say no. This level of restraint is only possible because she has successfully navigated a world of manipulation, surpassing the lure of gifts, money and luxuries that compromise others.

As a man, instead of chastising virgins to feel better about your own choices, ask yourself why you aren't seeking a woman with sexual discipline instead of arguing that she doesn't exist.

And as a woman, tell yourself the truth, why are you so worried about virgins? Why do you keep badmouthing them to make yourself feel better? Is it because they still possess the one thing you once had and no longer do?

A woman who could keep her legs closed until marriage undoubtedly has a high level of self-discipline and this often transcends into the marriage.

Truly, change is constant and any woman can go wayward but the majority of women who cheat in relationships are those with prior sexual experience. Most often, they return to an ex or find a new lover nearby. It is a byproduct of indiscipline and recklessness. Old habits rarely die, they simply wait for an opportunity

For one, you can confidently discuss 'no sex before marriage' with a virgin, but you will be living in a fool’s paradise to try that with a woman who is not a virgin. Aside from the words coming out of her mouth, you can never tell if she’s not sleeping with someone else apart from you.

A woman who is sexually active before marriage has a higher tendency to maintain connection with previous sexual partners. That is how paternity fraud happens and when paternity fraud happens, it is men who suffer. No woman has ever unknowingly raised a child she did not give birth to. It is men who get deceived. A man raising another man's child, believing it is his, that is the consequence of ignoring this reality.

No man, regardless of what he argues publicly, will open his eyes and willingly marry a known prostitute. No parent here, mother or father, would celebrate their son bringing home a woman the entire street has passed through. Everyone knows this. The argument only exists online.

The only man who argues loudest against female virginity is a man who regrets his own choice. The only woman who argues loudest against it is a woman who regrets how she spent her prime. Watch the comment section and you will see exactly this play out. Virgins will never argue against this post. Men who married virgins will nod quietly because they already know. The ones performing outrage are the ones this post is about. The truth is always bitter. That has never stopped it from being the truth.

Any man who believes there are no virgins left should examine the life he is living and the places he is searching. Are you finding them at clubs? Hookup spots? Lounges? Men are marrying virgins with good character every single day. Virgins do not announce themselves. They do not perform for attention. Because the loudest women are the most reckless does not mean they are the majority. It only means they are the loudest. Any man who has given up on finding a decent woman should keep that conclusion to himself.

Every woman wants a capable man. She is not looking for a virgin. She wants a man who has worked, built and conquered. So what does she offer him in return? Something she has already given freely to men who offered her nothing. As a man, ask yourself if that is a fair exchange.

Women are ruthless and intentional when they choose a man. A woman with the lowest standards will still desire a man at the top of his game. She will not settle for less than what she believes she deserves in provision. Yet men who are expected to provide everything financially will not even ask a woman what she brings to the table in purity. You are held to a high standard of success, but you refuse to hold her to a high standard of history. You ask for her hand but not her past and then you wonder why your home has no peace.

You will never hear a woman say there are no rich men left. Even a woman who wasted her prime still believes she deserves a wealthy man. She never lowers her standard. She never announces that good men do not exist. She keeps searching. Men should take note.

Think about this carefully. Her womb will carry your seed. Your legacy will grow inside her. A man who is intentional about his future must be intentional about where he plants it. Would you rather eat from a clean table or a dirty one? A brand new vessel or one weathered by years of careless use? If you can sit with that question honestly, you already know the answer.

Most men pursue non-virgin women because access is easier. No waiting. No standards to meet. No patience required but lust is not a foundation. When the consequences of a poor choice begin to surface in your marriage, which they will, and when they do, physical attraction will not save you. The body that drew you in will still be there but so will everything you refused to vet. The same men who mock posts like this are the ones sending anonymous messages to influencers online, broken and betrayed. They chose based on vibes, but they are now living on consequences.

The problem is never the women. The problem is men who are ready to settle for crumbs while women raise their standards daily. This is why most women no longer care about sexual discipline. They already know that somewhere a man is ready to save them regardless of her history. A man who believes a virgin is a long shot will always end up with whatever is left. Men settle for crumbs while women raise their standards and then wonder why the world is where it is today.

This post does not condemn any woman. Not every man will marry a virgin and not every non-virgin woman is unworthy of marriage. Some women are victims of bad relationships or marriages that broke them before they found the right man. There are women who are not virgins but are not wayward. The only intimacy they knew was in a relationship that did not survive. The problem is there is no way for a man to tell the difference from the outside. This is why virginity remains the clearest standard a man has.

If as a man you choose to settle for a non-virgin, that is your right. But do not be careless about it. Your duty is to vet thoroughly. Do not put your future and the future of your children on vibes and lust. Be intentional. Be selective. Choose a woman who serves your present and your future, not just your appetite. The baggage a woman carries into a marriage does not disappear at the altar. It unpacks itself slowly, and you will be the one living with the contents.

So to women who are virgins, keep it. What you carry has value that the world is working hard to convince you to give away for free. To women who are not, stop adding to the count. More men are waking up although some will remain ignorant and learn the hard way. That is their portion.

One thing is certain. A woman will not forgive a man for being unproductive. The day he loses his income, he loses her loyalty. Even a woman with no standards wants a top-tier man. Yet we have men willing to wife women with no standards. Every man bears his own cross but this post will be one that many men will be grateful they read.


- Marcus Verum

You can't reduce the whole world to your personal mindset. My brother's introduction took place today, and his engagement and wedding will happen soon. I have never seen any of my brothers obsess over virginity, nor have I heard any of my male relatives say a woman must be a virgin before they can marry her.

Love is a thing of the heart, not something controlled by society's mentality. A man can genuinely fall in love with a single mother, a divorced woman, or even a woman with ten children, even if twenty virgins are standing in front of him. Many marriages are built on genuine love, companionship, peace, loyalty, understanding, and emotional connection; not virginity.

Love is personal. How many great men specifically married virgins? Prince Harry chose the beautiful, hardworking, and accomplished; though divorced; Meghan Markle to be his wife.

There is a real-life example that recently took place. A divorced woman married a prominent honourable after leaving an abusive marriage. Her former husband was physically and verbally abusive, even toward their daughter. Despite being hardworking and supportive, she endured years of mistreatment. While she was still in that marriage, she met the honourable, who treated her with kindness and respect, and over time she fell in love with him.

The day she finally decided to leave, her friends followed her to help pack her belongings because they feared her husband would try to stop her. They warned him not to cause trouble, and many people in the area already knew about the abuse because the story had spread widely. When she finally left, people around her were genuinely happy because they knew what she had suffered through.

You clearly don't know how love works.

kpankpangolo:
You have to narrow it down to female friends and potential romance partners. If you include every female a man knows, I can fill this page with wise advice from female family members.

One of my sisters is in the tech industry. She has talked more substance than I’ve read in Nairaland’s technology section. Another is a medical doctor. When she talks about situations in her place of work, I cement my mind that this forum does not deserve a health section. The last one does three side hustles for a living. Advice regarding mental and financial perseverance are abundant whenever we sit down to talk.

When it comes to romantic partners, all we do is share life experiences. Doing so mostly throws me into the friend zone. I dust myself and move on. I will never learn what women want past physical appearance.

It is a good thing you have accomplished sisters. Men with sisters like that often speak more calmly, even when they have had bad experiences with some women. You won't find my brothers generalizing negatively about women. A lot of men who constantly insult women online were shaped by unhealthy environments growing up, and it shows in their mindset.

Tekashi89:
Hey guys, my dating life sulks, I haven't been really lucky with girls ever since my secondary School days. Since I was born I've only dated two girls and that was way back in 2016 and last year in 2025.

I tend to attract more guys, single mothers or older women (very old women tend to like me).
I don't know what's it with me that tends to push away younger girls (note I'm 180cm 60kg) light skin most people say I'm handsome. But I don't know why I can't attract young single girls.

Where ever I go I tend to attract only single mothers and when a young girl even start getting attracted to me I'll later discover that she acts that way to every other guy around so there's nothing special about me.

I'm thinking of going spiritual but I just thought I should post it here first.

So guys I need your advice on this issue pls

Be less concerned about whether it is spiritual or not; instead, look out for the physical factor. Even if it is spiritual, there is likely a physical element attached to it, and if you address that physical factor, it is likely the problem will be solved.

Look within yourself; there might be a physical reason that is making you unappealing to ladies or causing them to lose interest. Not everything requires spiritual warfare; some problems just need simple physical adjustments.

There was a time I noticed something strange. Whenever I passed through a market or went there to buy something, whether on foot or in a car, I would feel as though a small stone had hit my forehead, and I would feel sick for a few days afterward. I kept praying, but it didn't stop.

One day, I went out with friends and we stopped by a market. I had forgotten about the issue. It was only after leaving that I realized I had visited the market without experiencing the usual symptoms. After thinking about it deeply, I came to the conclusion that it might be because I had a scarf tied on my head. I tested it again later, and it worked. I also tried a face cap and other head coverings, and the result was the same. Since then, I always cover my head in markets, and the problem stopped.

Some of these things may just be psychological, but they can still have real effects.

Because under the tree is not safe.

FreeStuffsNG:
Smh.

Many of you still do not get it how these things work. If you do introduction, you are already married! Both of you are already entangled.

Introduction is even the most important as it officially commences the exchange of vow rites before God, your parents, families, man and the law. If that is not marriage, what then is it?

Don't get entangled at all till the introduction level. If you have strong doubts about the union, cut him or her off before introduction!
It is already too late after introduction because you are already married to the person.

I agree that the introduction stage is serious and can be emotionally binding. It is no longer the "I'm still getting to know you" stage for the partners, and only something serious, such as deceit or unfaithfulness, should reasonably break it.

However, it is not marriage in any legal, traditional, or spiritual sense. It is still part of the courtship process, where families formally meet and assess compatibility.

It is important not to confuse levels of commitment: introduction is not marriage, and even engagement is still part of the process, not the final union.

During introduction, no vows have been exchanged and marriage rites have not been completed.

At that stage, the individuals are still fiances, not husband and wife, and shouldn't start behaving as though they are already married or begin cohabiting.

Marriage only exists after the full customary, religious, or civil rites are completed according to the applicable system.

.

Whorei is also an English word used as an offensive term to describe women who have had multiple sexual partners, even when the sex is free.

By that logic, it would also make sense for virgins to call out all non-virgins; both men and women; including this lady if she is not a virgin; as whorei or public toilet.

Tell me how this even makes sense. People wakes up, creates a moral standard based on their personal life experience, and others applaud it.

I still don't understand the moral of her post. All I see is just unnecessary self-praise. Let me restate it in a clearer way: "I have sex, but I don't collect gifts and money from guys; so I am a saint, but those who have sex and collect gifts and money are prostitutes."

Personal and double standards are now being glorified. Some ladies may have dated up to ten men and had sex with all of them while trying to find someone who truly loves them, but because they never came across a man who is intentional about them to the extent of spending on them or willing to invest in them emotionally and financially, some of them feel morally superior and judge those women who have partners who are intentional and willing to spend on and invest in them, even if those ladies have had sex with just one or two guys before finding someone who loves them, sometimes even going as far as calling them prostitutes.

There are many self-righteous and inconsistent moral standards these days.

Some single fathers feel entitled to judge single mothers for choices that are often similar in nature to their own.

Some non-virgins; even those who have secretly terminated several pregnancies feel entitled to judge single mothers.

Financial gestures or investments are one way of identifying true love. Guys can dump their sperm anywhere, a guy can approach a lady simply to dump his sperm but he won't make his intention known. A guy that is intentional and investing in a lady emotionally and/or financially is most likely to have feelings for her.

dontrulee:
It's very very easy to hack the female mind.
E no really hard to break them especially the ones with "no sex before marriage"

It is not logical to assume you can outsmart the female mind. Women possess the same reasoning ability and intelligence as men.

People think and respond differently based on individual personality and traits.

Like systems, humans aren't uniform; no matter how skilled a hacker is, they cannot outsmart every system because there are always stronger protections as well.

One or a few celibate women do not represent all celibate women.

There are different types of celibate women.

1. Some are no longer virgins but have now chosen to abstain from premarital sex in alignment with their faith.

2. Some are virgins who have been influenced by persuasive religious leaders or cultural expectations to believe that virginity will make their husbands love and cherish them.

These ones are more of hymen protectors, they don't have a personal conviction, so they are more likely to compromise under pressure or engage in some form of sexual activity as long as it doesn't affect their hymen.

3. Some are virgins who have consciously chosen celibacy based on their personal faith and convictions.

4. Others have their own personal reasons or motives.

My values matter more than financial gain, so I wouldn't marry a corrupt politician for money. Political differences are not morality issues. People can have different views and still both be valid. My partner is a strong supporter of Tinubu, and I fully respect his right to his opinion. It doesn't affect our relationship in any way. If things continue to go well, marriage is likely.

PerfectStranger:
For this hard economy that instead of helping more men with job roles, na women dey collect am.

If we start employing more men in different job sectors, over 70% of spinsters will get engaged.
Majority of today's 30+ men will not be getting married any time soon or at all, highest na to find one girl give belle, case close

Unfortunately, no sensible woman can take this kind of narrative seriously. We will keep advocating for more jobs and better opportunities rather than reduce women's participation in the economy over a secondary matter like marriage. Marriage is not survival.

I choose my career over marriage because marriage is secondary. I can live fully and happily without it.

The system is still unfair to women; men are far more represented in employment, while women remain underrepresented.

This is my view on marriage:

It is wise to be cautious about marrying someone who is still struggling financially, because marriage comes with real responsibilities.

Dating and marriage are not the same. Once people are married, it is meant to be a long-term commitment; through good and bad, in stability and in hardship. I don't see the sense in walking away just because financial issues arise.

The only time it makes sense to leave is if there are deeper problems like abuse, infidelity, or a consistent lack of effort. If it is a good partner that is going through a tough phase, that is exactly when support and loyalty should show up the most.

Dtruthspeaker:
See dis one is looking for who to have useless argument with. 🤣🤣🤣.

I wasn't arguing, just correcting a baseless claim. That is it. 🙂

You can't just throw open an unfounded claim and then cry wolf that someone wants to argue with you when you are corrected.

An argument requires a valid point to engage with. Which isn't the case here.

Tenrack:
leave that one. E go learn the hard way. Dem no dey tell person.

There are absolutely no life lessons to be learned from this narrative. Stop projecting such nonsense onto me; such assumption doesn't apply to me, save them for those your desperate femaIe relatives. I don't see men as something I need to survive. My happiness is my priority, whether married or unmarried.