₦airaland Forum

Host78:
You talk too many things that are untrue.

Regardless of psychology or politics, strength is the sole determiner of power.

Politics, religion and psychology only works when there's already an underlying physical strength.

For instance, regardless of the psychology or religion or politics of the Venezuelan president, without the strength, he's an underdog.

During the race for the atomic bomb, the world was almost at an equilibrium regardless of politics, psychology or religion. Nations possessing these deadly weapons have the strength and they make and break rules as long as their interest is ensured.

Forget those tiny games in your brain. It bears no bearing in the real world unless there are made up rules by the strong.

And queen Elizabeth wasn't a queen because of anything spectacular or because she played any spectacular games.

She was because there was long an established order by her father's and forefathers which the people have come to accept and respect.

It's much like the african kings whose sons get elected almost by nature regardless of their age.

I mean, 7 years old boys were being made kings, were they also playing some spectacular psychological games to keep the people in line?

Again, this only happens because of the consequences of 1. A long established order and 2. Dedication of the physical force (the armies) to preserve these orders.

Now in a world where the dominant force start banding together and having the same thoughts towards the female gender they should watch out.

These same strong men once band together to create the background leveled society they can play their games in (protest for rights, legislate and so on)

The same men can scatter that background and pull every right away.

It happens all the time. Look at war times.

Ordinary, you cannot kîll anyone anywhere in the world and go free. But in war time, the strong men suddenly pull the constitution away and suddenly it becomes legal to kîll.

You think anything changed other than the withdrawal of the constitution?

I use to say this to my friends "while the Christians in Nigeria are trying to be politically correct and sensible, the Muslim terrorists don't care.

And who do you think are dying?

Politics, psychology, religion etc all mean nothing without raw strength in the background holding things together.

So much delusion. If strength alone ruled, why can't a physically strong man just walk into Aso Rock and take power? Or why can't Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson stroll into the White House tomorrow and declare himself president? He can't because real power isn't muscle; it is systems, alliances, legitimacy, and strategy. Even the strongest person cannot override the structures that organize and protect authority.

Armies obey commanders, not the strongest soldier. Governments function because of laws, bureaucracies, and collective compliance. Without these systems, even the most physically powerful person would live under constant threat. Strength alone produces temporary chaos, not lasting control.

Yes, strength matters in war or self-defense but it is merely a tool. Even the most physically strong people can live under someone else's command because strength itself is not power. Tools are regularly bought, recruited, coordinated, or bent by strategy and intelligence. Resources such as networks, loyal supporters, and money buy influence, recruit allies, and direct strength. Muscle may intimidate, but strategy controls outcomes.

The idea that nature favours men over women collapses under basic reality. Every man was once a child who came through a woman. Harm a woman, and eventually her children, including her sons; become part of the social force that answers back. Power does not disappear; it reorganizes. Strength has limits. Consequences do not.

History shows that muscle rarely lasts in power. Many of the strongest were overpowered, betrayed, or killed. In a world without rules, even the toughest become prey. Civilization is what turns strength into order, rules into stability, and chaos into lasting power. Without it, even the strongest are vulnerable.

Women like Hatshepsut ruled Egypt through religious legitimacy and political strategy. Wu Zetian rose from concubine to Emperor of China through intelligence and administrative skill. Catherine the Great seized and expanded the Russian Empire through alliances, bureaucracy, and controlled military support. Muscle didn't make them rulers; brains, loyalty, and planning did.

A child king or queen may inherit a throne, but without alliances, advisors, and strategy, they remain vulnerable. Clever individuals can create authority and sustain it without even being among the strongest. Strength may win fights, but intelligence, networks, and influence outlast brute force every time.

Even in a society without laws, clever men and women survive by forming alliances, exchanging favours, and gathering loyal supporters. Try attacking a woman who commands loyal allies, you won't be the one in control; she will be the one writing your fate. Power belongs to the one who commands strength, not the one who merely has it.

Remove laws entirely. Can you overpower a woman who commands loyal bodyguards or allies? No, because power belongs to the one who controls people, not the one with the biggest muscles. Muscle can intimidate, but great minds decide outcomes.

In short: strength may scare, but strategy, alliances, loyalty, and institutions win history.
That is why civilizations endure; and why women, whether inheriting power or acquiring it on their own, can rule, survive, and shape the world without ever throwing a punch.

Traditional Christian Vow (Outdated)

Bride
I, (Bride's Name), take you, (Groom's Name), to be my lawful husband,
to love you, honour you, obey you, and submit to you,
in sickness and in health, for richer, for poorer,
for better, for worse, till death do us part,
according to God's holy ordinance;
and this is my solemn vow.

Groom
I, (Groom's Name), take you, (Bride's Name), to be my lawful wife,
to love you, honour you, and be faithful to you,
in sickness and in health, for richer, for poorer,
for better, for worse, till death do us part,
according to God's holy ordinance;
and this is my solemn vow.

Suggested Christian Vow

Bride
I, (Bride's Name), take you, (Groom's Name), to be my lawful husband.

I vow to make our home a sanctuary of laughter, trust, and understanding,
where love, calmness, and care guide every word and action.

I promise to love you faithfully, honour you, cherish you, respect you, support you, and give you peace abundantly.

May our love never be broken by violence or Infidelity,
for these are the boundaries that keep our forever sacred.

This is my solemn vow.

Groom
I, (Groom's Name), take you, (Bride's Name), to be my lawful wife.

I vow to make our home a sanctuary of laughter, trust, and understanding,
where love and care guide every word and action.

I promise to love you faithfully, honour you, cherish you, support you and protect you in every season of life.

May our love never be broken by violence or Infidelity,
for these are the boundaries that keep our forever sacred.

This is my solemn vow.

Curtis03360:
Only men without adequate money thirsts for career driven ladies when a submissive woman would give you all the bliss of life and could be set up in her line of work or business…hard to see any real money bags or odogwu chief marrying a career driven woman.

Perhaps by 'submissive' you mean 'an obedient woman without her own ambitions or career'? History disagrees with you. Modern billionaires like Bill Gates (Melinda French Gates), Mark Zuckerberg (Priscilla Chan), Sergey Brin (Anne Wojcicki), Jeff Bezos (MacKenzie Scott), Elon Musk (Grimes), Mukesh Ambani (Nita Ambani) and many more are married to or dating highly accomplished, independent women.

The truth is, it is insecurity, not wealth, that makes some men feel threatened by successful women. Top men value ambition, independence, and partnership, not blind submission.

I encourage respect, not submission.

The problem with the word submission is not emotion, but definition. Submission is often used to justify control. To submit to someone is to surrender yourself entirely to them. Not all women ends up with a wise men, so submission can be a dangerous game. Imagine submitting to a foolish man. If he is cruel, jealous, or insecure, submission becomes perilous. If he says destroy your business, you must obey. If he says tear your certificates, you must comply.

If a husband chooses harm, submission offers no defense. In the hands of another human being, submission is enslavement.

Respecting a partner is not the same as submitting to them. Submission is spiritual; relationships are social. In absolute terms, submission belongs to God alone; the surrender of one's will to God, not to another human being. Human relationships are built on respect, responsibility, and accountability. What is healthy in marriage is cooperation and respect, not surrender of will.

Respect allows wisdom and dialogue; submission silences them. In submission, a man could foolishly command his wife to "hit your head on the wall," and obedience would be expected. Submission easily leads to abuse. A marriage where abuse must be endured in the name of submission is not holy, healthy, or humane.

Host78:
Before now everyone say don't touch a woman no matter what.

That landscape is changing really quickly. Men today are saying "if you hit, you should be able to take back"

And this taking back is where the danger lies for women in the future.

Women have rights not because they are deserving of these rights or because they "fought" for these rights.

Women got their rights because stronger men allowed it.

Yes, women have rights because men allowed it.

They may think they fought for their rights. But there was no fighting at all.

Men simply passed laws to protect them. And these laws are not built in nature. They are merely documents protected by strong men.

And like every document, they can be torn up and thrown into the trash bins by the strongest (which are always men).

Take for instance, in democracy the government is protected by constitution which is merely a piece of paper protected by the strongest (our armed forces)

Once sufficient numbers of armed forces get together and say no to it, the president and civilians suddenly become powerless.

Yes, now the president can reign supreme, pretend to be all powerful and behave like he's the almighty.

But that's because the armies are playing the pretend game of living by the constitution.

And I think women today are pushing most men towards each other.

They are daring more men and these men are getting into the same mental space.

And more importantly, they are banding together on social media.

A few years ago, it was believe all women, today fewer and fewer men are believing women.

A few years ago, a man gives up his chair to a woman, opens doors and will stop to help if she's been attacked.

Today, no man does this.

That protective nature which made men draft women's right is getting lost and once that is completel eroded, it becomes the survival of the strongest.

Wow ... you have single-handedly condensed centuries of history, law, and human civilization into the idea that everything depends on the ego of the strongest man. Lazy ass, you simply don't understand power, society, or rights.

Let me unpack your masterpiece of nonsense: Women didn't receive rights because men woke up generous one morning. They protested, resisted, voted, and risked their lives to force societies to change. Laws weren't written out of kindness; they were written because chaos, oppression, and brute force don't work long-term.

Muscle isn't power. Real power is political, moral, and social. Without laws, institutions, and societal order, even the strongest would be unsafe, and nothing could be controlled.

Your obsession with "survival of the strongest" exposes the biggest flaw in your argument: if humans truly lived by brute strength, there would be no laws, no armies, no governments; and people like you wouldn't last long at all. Life doesn't reward ego; it rewards cooperation, intelligence, and systems. That is why civilization exists.

What we call armies would just be organized mobs if they weren't operating within laws and societal systems. Strength alone never guarantees control. Even armies are not powerful on their own, they are tools of power
shaped by political leadership, and the legitimacy that directs their use. Which is why they surrender when larger systems, alliances, or collective pressures demand it.

Rights aren't pieces of paper protected by men or fragile gifts from strong men. They are social contracts that protect everyone, including ordinary men like you. The "survival of the strongest" idea is a naive fantasy: the same laws that protect women also prevent someone stronger from taking what you have. Strip those away, and you don't become powerful; you become expendable.

Strong female leaders, like Queen Elizabeth I, ruled and survived because they understood power, laws, alliances, and institutions; not through physical strength. Strength alone never guarantees survival or power; something your whole argument completely ignores.

Civilization isn't about brute force; it's about cooperation, intelligence, and systems. Social media hasn't erased men's protective nature; it exposes insecurity in men who confuse dominance with strength and fear equality because it removes imagined leverage.

If rights only exist because men allow them, then your entire sense of security depends on pretending civilization is optional. It isn't. And if "survival of the strongest" were true, trust me; you wouldn't even survive a week.

Stop fantasizing about power and start understanding why society exists in the first place. Laws and rights aren't optional gifts; they are the backbone of civilization.

CandidNotes:
if this makes you sleep well at night, knock yourself out!

Predictable; just the usual pick-me line to dodge logic. Slow down, doll, I'm not even chasing but facts don't care.

Host78:
Do something for me please.

Place one hand on your head and lift the other one up like you are pointing towards the sky.

Now say this carefully, "God, please deliver me from every spirit of stůpidity disguised as wisdom. Amen"

This is why psychiatrists often emphasize that when you take them home, you ensure they keep taking their mediations.

Why daily prayers alone? What about his daily meditations?

Now, he has entered the delusional stage. See him just reciting his daily prayers to everybody he comes across. Sorry dear, where is your carer?

Host78:
As usual, these girls all think there's a special billionaire CEO waiting for them somewhere.

A billionaire who will see them, fall in love hopelessly and marry them with huge fanfare wedding.

Their wedding will be the talk of the nation and then they will jet out to some luxurious place for honeymoon.

And all this while, they have less than N50k in their personal account.

And on top of that, they can't cook or clean because in their fantasies, they just wanna "relax and be taken care of".

In their imagination, they just wanna enter Uber and say "take me home" and the Uber driver will just take them home and they will leave without paying anything.

Because, they are "queens" with standards

My question is, "where you Wan see billionaire from?"

All your life, you've not seen a billionaire before and suddenly when it's time for marriage you think one will magically appear abi?

Omo, make una dey calm down. Stop creating impossible situations in your head and reacting to it.

Even Chioma of Davido got there by cooking and cleaning.

And you wey no get urgent twokay dey talk nonsense online with your plastic wig.

Like Gehgeh always say, "most of una go marry broke guys because na wetin be una level be that"

Guys with money no just dey. The sooner you realize this and start preparing for it the better.

Peace

There is nothing wrong with women choosing comfort. Hiring domestic staff isn't a luxury; you don't even have to be a billionaire to afford help. Couples who are financially comfortable can easily spare 250,000 naira or more a month for household staff.

Not every woman is thinking of marrying a billionaire. Some women simply want a partner who is responsible, contributes to the household, and allows for a comfortable, balanced life.

Even middle-class couples can manage domestic staff if they budget properly. Comfort doesn't mean laziness; it means living in a way that reduces unnecessary stress and allows both partners to thrive.

CandidNotes:
1. There is a consequence for EVERY ACTION, good or bad. Immediately or in the future.

2. Wife not cook, wife, not maid is a ridiculous ideology; it’s a woman’s responsibility to NURTURE HER FAMILY and she should do it WITH PRIDE.

3. Don’t waste your time fighting men over who is the head of THE HOME. Your husband is THE HEAD OF YOUR HOME. Every other man around you is the head of HIS OWN HOME…

4. Sex is spiritual; life is spiritual. The Netflix and chill you are doing with that guy today, will complicate your life in the future…

5. Virginity is not old fashioned; REAL MEN will be over the moon, with a virgin wife. They’ll respect and treasure you for the rest of your life. By the way, they’ll boast to friends and family about your virginity and those people too would respect you for it…

6. MAKE YOUR OWN MONEY; if you want your husband’s respect, if you want to prevent side chicks, if you want to secure your children and your future, if you want your man to be IN AWE OF YOU, MAKE YOUR OWN MONEY…

7. Finally, but most importantly, know God, walk with Him, trust in Him. E get why…

Can you name ten politicians or billionaires, anywhere in the world, who married virgin?

If "real men" to you are just the average Nigerian men you meet on the street hyping virginity, then I hope you are not being delusional.

Virginity is simply a Biblical value, but it is not a relationship advantage. Quit assuming it guarantees a good husband. If not handled wisely, it can even become a disadvantage.

Real men value women who are confident, intelligent, and accomplished.

Cooking is not wrong, and it may be necessary in some homes, but it should not be treated as the ultimate measure of a woman. Not cooking does not send anyone to hell, nor does it destroy a woman's happiness or her home.

As the saying goes, another man's food is another man's poison.

Some men do not even want wives who cook. A friend once joked, "If I marry you, I wouldn't let you bring this your fine skin into the kitchen." When another man intruded and tried to impose his baseless standards, my friend replied, "When you marry, you can build a bedroom for your wife in the kitchen; but don't tell me how to run my own home."

Families need room to breathe. Many relationship problems are fueled by outsiders and their expectations.

I have even seen men complain that, despite hiring chefs and maids to help their wives, their wives still stress themselves too much.

Wealth may impress, but character sparks true connection. Women want successful men who are responsible and aligned with their values, not just anyone with money.

Being rich isn't the same as being successful. Some rich people aren't successful, and some successful people aren't rich. Success means different things to different people.

A lady won't just feel like dating or marrying a guy just because he is successful. Not all love is romantic; some love comes from respect and admiration. There are people I admire so much that just being around them makes me happy, but marriage; never crossed my mind. I see them as mentors, role models, senior figures, or inspirations. Honestly, if they asked me out, it might feel awkward because I hold them in such high esteem.

Success can earn respect and admiration, but it doesn't mean every woman with integrity will want you just because you are successful. True admiration comes from a combination of qualities. There are other traits women value, such as integrity, responsibility, kindness, and more.

Men who are successful but irresponsible or full of bad behaviour are more likely to attract deceivers.

essentialone:
J.D.P.

Just Dey Play

Facts don't need validation

essentialone:
You missed the point. That acronym shows that ladies are generally lazy and disgusting, and their only value is their Yanch and everything related to it.

It is easy to tell when a guy has independent sisters; they tend to be more mature and respectful toward women. Don't use the lifestyle of your sisters to assume that all women are lazy.

Hard work and laziness are individual traits, not gender-based. I have seen women who are extremely hardworking. Some women are even the breadwinners in their homes.

No doubt, there are lazy women, but it is not a gender thing.

I know a man who refuses to work. His wife is even the breadwinner of the family. When offered a job, he declines.

I also know a particular woman who doesn't want to work. She often asks me for money, but when I offered her a job, she declined, saying that starting work at 7:30 a.m was too early. I even introduced her to plantain and potato chips business, bought everything she needed, showed her how to run it, and even taught her a helpful hack to make slicing easier but she complained it was too stressful and gave up on the business.

The plantain and potato chips business was actually one of my first small ventures; my humble beginnings. I still make them at home occasionally. Presently, I am frying some sliced potatoes. I prepared some as a side for the meal I prepared for my friends during the festive season, and one friend liked it so much that he asked me to make some for him again.

It is possible you are only surrounded by lazy ladies, but in general, women are hardworking.

We were just unnecessarily worked up. We would actually be asked to declare our incomes ourselves; it is not like it would be taken it out of the accounts.

Many people earning close to or above one million monthly might move their primary accounts to foreign banks, and the government will have limited ability to stop this because many politicians also have foreign accounts. Lower income earners would also find ways around it.

I think many people are just quietly waiting to see how things will play out. Even God did not demand 20% of our income. They didn't even start at 5%. How many people can conveniently forgo 20% in a system like this? It is very likely to lead to protests if people are unable to find a way around it. Anything over 5% is too much in this economy.

They should not just touch the 10,000 naira that would remain in my account.

BigYash:
If they say go protest now,you no go come out. So make everybody bear am.. If everybody don tire , everybody go cry out..

If there is a well-organized protest like the EndSARS movement, I don't think many people would mind joining. I went to EndSARS protest, and I even shared shawarma and drinks with some other protesters I met there. Some of them mentioned and tagged my brand on Twitter. The protest was well-organized, but later some hoodlums were probably sent to cause problems.

femi4:
Comprehension zero

If you like name the dog kiddaz and shower together daily ..the fact that my background n cultural practice sees them as barbecue won't change the way I would react when I see your dog

Kiddaz might be your pet but it is food to me. Don't blame me, I was wired like that until I come to a point I can unlearn n re learn

Whether in your culture dogs are seen as barbeque or pepper soup, it doesn't change the fact that you should respect other people's boundaries.

Just like someone who doesn't like kids shouldn’t marry a person with kids, if you cannot tolerate dogs, the responsible choice is to avoid them or their owners, not harm or mistreat someone's family.

Those dogs you might eat on the street are one thing, but coming into my home and hurting or referring to my family as barbeque crosses a line.

This is why it is good to have big and brave dogs like German Shepherds or Dobermans as well, anyone unfamiliar with them cannot just misbehave toward them.

Maltreating my pets is the same as maltreating my family, my pets are family. That is a huge red flag for me.

Dtruthspeaker:
See what I am talking about? You read that I said "supposed friend who now gets promoted to a wife" but now you discarded it in your attempt to make your point.

Of which now you have in confessed what I said at the beginning which is that women hate men and don't do friendship.

Meanwhile the man thinks he has found a friend in a woman or can find a friend in a woman not knowing that what he got was an enemy or in the best scenario, he got a person who does not care about him.

So, in the end you yourself have confirmed that all I have said is True

I didn't mean to come across hard; it's just that the words "promoted" and "protector" you used in your statements sounded totally off to me.

Women don't hate men at all; most women are simply trying to stay happy as well. The moment you understand that women are human, with their own struggles as well, you will understand better.

Most disagreements aren't about hatred; they usually come from misunderstandings or selfishness.

Both men and women are human, and we both crave comfort and convenience. But we need to be understanding and considerate toward each other so that, while building our own comfort, we don't hurt the other person's.

In many cases, relatively small things end up causing tension in marriages, and often pride gets in the way, making people refuse to compromise.

The fact is, two people who genuinely care for and understand each other; whether as friends or partners, rarely have major conflicts.

Dtruthspeaker:
A man's wikednes is clear. We all know the source and it's cause and how to even solve it

How does a supposed friend who now gets promoted to a wife not protect her husband? It is even that she waits for him to cheat.

And as we have all seen, till men start understanding the ways and mind of a woman, they would continue to tumble in the washing machine storm women have spun them in. Which in turn means that the men will react in as way that they did not expect

I am not amazed; there is really nothing new under the sun. This is just one of those weird things in life, though it might be rampant in your own environment. But I assure you that it is not the norm. In a normal setting and to normal people, cheating is disrespectful. No normal self-respecting woman would happily condone it, let alone plan it.

In your mind, this is how marriage happens, right? A man walks up to a woman he likes on the street and says, "You have been promoted to my wife" and she would be like, "Thank you, Sir, for this double promotion."

Then from there, she becomes his protector. You know say man na one kind luxurious glass like that, so she go hold am tight well well make e no break

Or she fit even dey babysit am, she go dey tell am, "Sit down here, don't go there, don't look at the maid like that." Things like that.

We should have been told that guys are kids so we would know how to control them. We would have protected them at all costs, even if it meant buying a cane and keeping it at home. I still wonder why some guys keep shifting unnecessary blame.

Shame on you. So as an adult, you can't control your own self or take responsibility for your own actions, you still need someone to babysit you. Justifying nonsense.

marlow1962:
Whatever rocks your boat.

I would have invited you on board, but my boat sails solo. Smooth sailing!

Dtruthspeaker:
Is that not what I said already that you poor women always hook to your rich man? And did you not know that he was the kind of person who chooks up and down before you covenanted yourself to him? Plus, where you not aware that the housegirl too had the same plan you used? Do you people ever tell your husbands that?
Of which some of you even bring/send your own sister to sleep with him so that he would live under you perpetually guilty so that you people would have the upper hand and can now permanently control him. Like this guy

https://www.nairaland.com/5246864/wifes-sister-crash-marriage-please#79364069

You people are wike.. and much more dangerous than a spitting cobra

The unhealthy and irresponsible things some men and women do in relationships show that both genders have irresponsible, problematic and harmful individuals. If we keep listing examples, we could write entire journals about each gender. Wickedness is individual; attaching it to gender makes no sense.

There are men and women who are irresponsible and even more dangerous than a spitting cobra. This is not a gender issue.
Stop being selfish and acting as though the world revolves around men. Many women are also heartbroken and deeply hurt.

Pain is not gendered. Women feel pain too. Just as women do things men hate or dislike, men also do things women hate or dislike.

Heal. Pick yourself up. Stop blaming a whole gender for individual behaviour.

Dtruthspeaker:
This appears to be True but it is not really true. Yes circumstances dictate reactions however, whilst men are channeling themselves to directly face and respond to life's obstacles, you women's plan is to find a man you would hook and use him to slingshot you to the man better than him. And when he does not, you dump him.

And then the poor man who thought he had gotten love will then do his own wickedness to another girl

Meanwhile, all these began with you women.

And that is why men are now saying that it is better to be alone and as they have seen, their lives are better and ok. No troubles anywhere.

So, it is you women who are the problem. You people have to find a way to solve all your life's problems without having to hook a man. And this is what badoo and co has solved for you people

What about the poor women who made a forever covenant with you guys, only for you guys to sleep with the domestic staff they hire? Which is worse?

marlow1962:
If it's an oxygen to you, so be it.
If it's good to inhale too, so be it.

Your sisters would need it more.

njokuuche77:
You’re arguing against something I didn’t say. Growth, responsibility, and self-respect apply to both men and women. The post highlights a pattern men experience, not a claim that women don’t need accountability.

You are wrong, the post actually leans toward the biased claim that women are privileged.

You could go into a store, price an item, and explain that it is all you can afford, and male sellers will start saying things like, "Call him now," as if you ever mentioned any "him" to them.

Yet it is still men who come online to claim that all women are oloshos.

Funny how men create the system, benefit from it, and still accuse women of being privileged. If a woman succeeds, she is funded. If she fails, she is still mocked.

You could simply be somewhere and hear men whispering behind you that a man must be funding you.

May God save women; the insecurity is real. Anything, just to downplay the effort of a woman.

bentenny:
So true but stop being pained nah😛
Is it your ego?😁

No vex, na why I say make you continue.

bentenny:
I wish I could do so a trillion times in order for your likes to keep wailing ad infinitum!

Whatever, keep massaging your ego.

Dtruthspeaker:
No, they don't get a woman rather It is you women who got them. Which of course is away from the point that women nearly never marry a man when he is poor. But if he is rich, like Regina Daniels, you all will marry him as the last wife until you are not the last wife anymore.

Why do you cry about things like this? You can't have your cake and eat it. Both genders are victims of circumstance.

Men claim to be polygamous by nature, while women tend to be moneygamous by nature.

vdestro:
see craze ooo and who told you I am a bro.

Okay, which one is your pronoun?
She/Her/Hers, They/Them/Theirs.

Dtruthspeaker:
That is because to a poorer girl, the poor man is rich. I remember when I was in the university I was always shocked when I hear that a poor young carpenter working near my place or the poor young electrician was already married. All of us who did not know him wondered who married him until we saw his wife and then we understood.

This simply means all men can get a woman so what is the complain for.

vdestro:
How does this make any sense? What has this got to do with woman making am in life?

Abeg no be by force to comment if you not get any sense to contribute.

Bro, no need to make noise, just simply explain the term 'na woman'.

virginboy1:
Hmmm..go to obalende bridge at night or early morning and see so many fallen men, abandoned men , men been spat on... because they failed, because they have no value ..no body send them .. they sleep untop the bridge and rain fall on them... because even under the bridge no more space.

It's a cold world for men.
No value... society hates him, women hates him, even his fellow men hates him.

I wish every struggling men, trying to stay afloat well.

How you sound:

The world is really cold to men. He is abandoned and spat on when he fails, but it is very warm to women. She is even embraced when she fails.

While he is hated by society, and by both women and his fellow men, she is loved by both men and women, and the society at large. She doesn't need to have value; she is just loved.

Not a single woman can be found under any bridge in Nigeria. She is living in luxury just for being a woman. He, on the other hand, is out there bravely struggling under bridges and in offices, while she is given a roof over her head, paid without work, clothed, and fed.

It is either you guys just like tormenting yourselves with imagination, or low-key you want to embrace the prostitution line but feel at a disadvantage. I don't understand where this jealousy is coming from; are the government funding women, or is it that women pluck money from trees?

shadrach77:
The other gender will also claim life is unfair to them too

Bro, life literally rolls out the red carpet for women every single day.

Dtruthspeaker:
Is it not because she truly is an oloshee? How many woman married a man when he had nothing? Do you not see how well treated the ones who married their men when they had nothing?

https://www.nairaland.com/6854526/met-wife-when-nothing-nigerian#107705723

https://www.nairaland.com/4325003/man-shares-throwback-photos-himself#64711685

But your data isn't adding up at all. Check the statistics: the number of married men in Nigeria is far greater than the number of men who have nothing and still have nothing. Who married them 'rabbits'?