₦airaland Forum

m.k.o2005:
You will find out in marriage and work on what so ever you see. Those who thot they were compartible and went ahead to get married,filled in for divorce days,weeks,months or some few yrs after.Ask for divine direction and start to work it out in marriage.God bless you.

immediately people start chattering about hearing from God,i start getting suspicious.many people claim to have heard from God when they are only hearing what they wish God to tell them.

sweet-tease:
And if you teach your partner in marriage it will cause earthquake right?

wat if he is incapable of learning or improving ?can u live with it?or i guess u could marry a gay and teach him ?i ask because ladies are notoriously impatient with
men that r dullards in that dept.

actually many of the people preaching here r trying to smart.they think God will forgive them for the sin of premarital sex which they have commited and which they r still goin to commit if they preach over here.Its like saying"Baba God pls forgive me u know i cant help it.if i could i would stop.u know my heart.dint i preach against it in nairaland forum?"(laughs)

LondyC: It's a BIG NO! Its just a crazy thing to do. Body no be firewood! So wat? So body no even get control ke? Its not an impossible thing to avoid cos even in marriage some people's spouses have to travel for 3 months, 6months even up to a year. So they should start sleeping around cos body no be firewood? Rubbish! Every human being has d power to control his/her body and these sexual hormones especially are not 'haywire' like growth hormone and odas dat we don't have control over their production. They are responsive to ur senses. If u love him or her abeg wait! When u marry u can enjoy whatever u wanna enjoy cos restraint is also needed in marriage in case u don't know.

With the way you girlz always take a righteous stance whenever sex is discussed how come a 22 yr old virgin is nearly an extinct specie.hw come sex is flying around everywhere.or doesn't it take 2 to tango?

Kaycee7: The worst thing to do to sum1 is give them false hope. We're not celebrating immorality. But the thing is we can't always get what we want. He should readjust his requirements or he's gonna be single for a long, long time. Capisce?

Do you think I'm happy that I can't even recommend one of my sisters or cousins to him?


lol.

is it me or does every lady contributing to this thread seem to be on d defensive ;Dis it me or does every lady contributing to this thread seem to be on d defensive

tpia@:
mr orgrinbm

what you and your co-conspirators are failing to acknowledge due to your bullheadedness and over eagerness to bully others, is :

1. 90 to 98% of ladies take on their husband's name when they marry. So you are giving yourself hypertension over something that doesnt concern you.

2. a woman automatically takes on her husband's name when she marries him. This is expressly implied, as in it is assumed by all who know of the wedding and/or marital status, that she now takes on another name in addition to the one she had before.

Did you perhaps call someone by her married name and received a thorough beating in return? Thats the only thing that would explain your aggression over this matter, imo.

Before giving an epithet u should at least try to justify it.i outlined ur conspiracy.u should at least hv outlined mine b4 calling me a conspirator.u earned your own name nd ild love to earn mine also.well at least thank you 4 admitting me into the brotherhood.
Taking ur precint no 1:I am so happy with the statistics u gave and i hope it will improve.Secondly i am not giving myself any hypertension,instead i am having fun.how can i hv hypertension from talking with someone as intelligent as u r?infact u just made my day brighter with ur response.

No2:Whats the notion behind altering a norm which governs a particular activity and coming round to infere that the original norm which has been altered should be infered from the activity?its like throwing away ur invitation card to an event ,and going to the event to argue with the security that the fact that you are at the venue means that u have an invitation card even when u dont have it to present.Y resort to the implicit recognition of the marriage ceremony attendees only?
Except the bride has something to hide from the outside world...

No 3:I should know wen to pacify or vamoose(to use the language of jidegirl12) from an angry woman or a potentially angry one.Like i said before no man can ever win a war against a woman.its foolhardy to try.

tpia@:
mr orgrinbm

what you and your co-conspirators are failing to acknowledge due to your bullheadedness and over eagerness to bully others, is :

1. 90 to 98% of ladies take on their husband's name when they marry. So you are giving yourself hypertension over something that doesnt concern you.

2. a woman automatically takes on her husband's name when she marries him. This is expressly implied, as in it is assumed by all who know of the wedding and/or marital status, that she now takes on another name in addition to the one she had before.

Did you perhaps call someone by her married name and received a thorough beating in return? Thats the only thing that would explain your aggression over this matter, imo.

Before giving an epithet u should at least try to justify it.i outlined ur conspiracy.u should at least hv outlined mine b4 calling me a conspirator.u earned your own name nd ild love to earn mine also.well at least thank you 4 admitting me into the brotherhood.
Taking ur precint no 1:I am so happy with the statistics u gave and i hope it will improve.Secondly i am not giving myself any hypertension,instead i am having fun.how can i hv hypertension from talking with someone as intelligent as u r?infact u just made my day brighter with ur response.

No2:Whats the notion behind altering a norm which governs a particular activity and coming round to infere that the original norm which has been altered should be infered from the activity?its like throwing away ur invitation card to an event ,and going to the event to argue with the security that the fact that you are at the venue means that u have an invitation card even when u dont have it to present.Y resort to the implicit recognition of the marriage ceremony attendees only?
Except the bride has something to hide from the outside world...

No 3:I should know wen to pacify or vamoose(to use the language of jidegirl12) from an angry woman or a potentially angry one.Like i said before no man can ever win a war against a woman.its foolhardy to try.

tpia@:
mr orgrinbm

what you and your co-conspirators are failing to acknowledge due to your bullheadedness and over eagerness to bully others, is :

1. 90 to 98% of ladies take on their husband's name when they marry. So you are giving yourself hypertension over something that doesnt concern you.

2. a woman automatically takes on her husband's name when she marries him. This is expressly implied, as in it is assumed by all who know of the wedding and/or marital status, that she now takes on another name in addition to the one she had before.

Did you perhaps call someone by her married name and received a thorough beating in return? Thats the only thing that would explain your aggression over this matter, imo.

Before giving an epithet u should at least try to justify it.i outlined ur conspiracy.u should at least hv outlined mine b4 calling me a conspirator.u earned your own name nd ild love to earn mine also.well at least thank you 4 admitting me into the brotherhood.
Taking ur precint no 1:I am so happy with the statistics u gave and i hope it will improve.Secondly i am not giving myself any hypertension,instead i am having fun.how can i hv hypertension from talking with someone as intelligent as u r?infact u just made my day brighter with ur response.

No2:Whats the notion behind altering a norm which governs a particular activity and coming round to infere that the original norm which has been altered should be infered from the activity?its like throwing away ur invitation card to an event ,and going to the event to argue with the security that the fact that you are at the venue means that u have an invitation card even when u dont have it to present.Y resort to the implicit recognition of the marriage ceremony attendees only?
Except the bride has something to hide from the outside world...

No 3:I should know wen to pacify or vamoose(to use the language of jidegirl12) from an angry woman or a potentially angry one.Like i said before no man can ever win a war against a woman.its foolhardy to try.

tpia@:
mr orgrinbm

what you and your co-conspirators are failing to acknowledge due to your bullheadedness and over eagerness to bully others, is :

1. 90 to 98% of ladies take on their husband's name when they marry. So you are giving yourself hypertension over something that doesnt concern you.

2. a woman automatically takes on her husband's name when she marries him. This is expressly implied, as in it is assumed by all who know of the wedding and/or marital status, that she now takes on another name in addition to the one she had before.

Did you perhaps call someone by her married name and received a thorough beating in return? Thats the only thing that would explain your aggression over this matter, imo.

Before giving an epithet u should at least try to justify it.i outlined ur conspiracy.u should at least hv outlined mine b4 calling me a conspirator.u earned your own name nd ild love to earn mine also.well at least thank you 4 admitting me into the brotherhood.
Taking ur precint no 1:I am so happy with the statistics u gave and i hope it will improve.Secondly i am not giving myself any hypertension,instead i am having fun.how can i hv hypertension from talking with someone as intelligent as u r?infact u just made my day brighter with ur response.

No2:Whats the notion behind altering a norm which governs a particular activity and coming round to infere that the original norm which has been altered should be infered from the activity?its like throwing away ur invitation card to an event ,and going to the event to argue with the security that the fact that you are at the venue means that u have an invitation card even when u dont have it to present.Y resort to the implicit recognition of the marriage ceremony attendees only?
Except the bride has something to hide from the outside world...

No 3:I should know wen to pacify or vamoose(to use the language of jidegirl12) from an angry woman or a potentially angry one.Like i said before no man can ever win a war against a woman.its foolhardy to try.

tpia@:
mr orgrinbm

what you and your co-conspirators are failing to acknowledge due to your bullheadedness and over eagerness to bully others, is :

1. 90 to 98% of ladies take on their husband's name when they marry. So you are giving yourself hypertension over something that doesnt concern you.

2. a woman automatically takes on her husband's name when she marries him. This is expressly implied, as in it is assumed by all who know of the wedding and/or marital status, that she now takes on another name in addition to the one she had before.

Did you perhaps call someone by her married name and received a thorough beating in return? Thats the only thing that would explain your aggression over this matter, imo.

Before giving an epithet u should at least try to justify it.i outlined ur conspiracy.u should at least hv outlined mine b4 calling me a conspirator.u earned your own name nd ild love to earn mine also.well at least thank you 4 admitting me into the brotherhood.
Taking ur precint no 1:I am so happy with the statistics u gave and i hope it will improve.Secondly i am not giving myself any hypertension,instead i am having fun.how can i hv hypertension from talking with someone as intelligent as u r?infact u just made my day brighter with ur response.

No2:Whats the notion behind altering a norm which governs a particular activity and coming round to infere that the original norm which has been altered should be infered from the activity?its like throwing away ur invitation card to an event ,and going to the event to argue with the security that the fact that you are at the venue means that u have an invitation card even when u dont have it to present.Y resort to the implicit recognition of the marriage ceremony attendees only?
Except the bride has something to hide from the outside world...

No 3:I should know wen to pacify or vamoose(to use the language of jidegirl12) from an angry woman or a potentially angry one.Like i said before no man can ever win a war against a woman.its foolhardy to try.

tpia@:
mr orgrinbm

what you and your co-conspirators are failing to acknowledge due to your bullheadedness and over eagerness to bully others, is :

1. 90 to 98% of ladies take on their husband's name when they marry. So you are giving yourself hypertension over something that doesnt concern you.

2. a woman automatically takes on her husband's name when she marries him. This is expressly implied, as in it is assumed by all who know of the wedding and/or marital status, that she now takes on another name in addition to the one she had before.

Did you perhaps call someone by her married name and received a thorough beating in return? Thats the only thing that would explain your aggression over this matter, imo.

Before giving an epithet u should at least try to justify it.i outlined ur conspiracy.u should at least hv outlined mine b4 calling me a conspirator.u earned your own name nd ild love to earn mine also.well at least thank you 4 admitting me into the brotherhood.
Taking ur precint no 1:I am so happy with the statistics u gave and i hope it will improve.Secondly i am not giving myself any hypertension,instead i am having fun.how can i hv hypertension from talking with someone as intelligent as u r?infact u just made my day brighter with ur response.

No2:Whats the notion behind altering a norm which governs a particular activity and coming round to infere that the original norm which has been altered should be infered from the activity?its like throwing away ur invitation card to an event ,and going to the event to argue with the security that the fact that you are at the venue means that u have an invitation card even when u dont have it to present.Y resort to the implicit recognition of the marriage ceremony attendees only?
Except the bride has something to hide from the outside world...

No 3:I should know wen to pacify or vamoose(to use the language of jidegirl12) from an angry woman or a potentially angry one.Like i said before no man can ever win a war against a woman.its foolhardy to try.

deols: If discussing this was too archaic for 2008, I wonder what cave/village the people having problems with it in 2013 came from.


Weaklings calling themselves men over something very trivial. I pity them wives.

Dismissing every issue with a modernist sneer is a knee-jerk and an infantile reaction to issues.Or are u trying to posit that any development that arises with the passage of time is welcome?Here is the scenario:A wife picks up a decision to initiate a break from the norm for no compelling reason without understanding what the norm represents because she is too mentally lazy to realize that conventions in an institution dont just come out of the blues but r meant to preserve and also nourish the institution and its member.and that unless she is questioning the intrinsic validity and the conventions of the institution ,the standards should be maintained.the husband who is actually as intellectually vapid as the wife can then only do either of two things then;either he resorts to the self-serving,knee-jerk masochist attitude of dismissing and even violently opposing the wife's view point,and thereby creating the negative feed back mechanism that accompanies such situation in which the wife feels encouraged in her perversity because she feels she is being unjustly persecuted.(women, being intelligent creature,(to the injury of unintelligent men )would actually hold more tenacoiusly to an issue if they r being dissuaded from it,especially when the man has no superior arguement or notion to the contrary.and its easier to lead than to rule an intelligent person and easier to rule than to lead an ignorant person.)the woman consequently labels his husband a masochist or even a chauvinist weakling for his stance.
Or secondly the man may decide to take the alternate direction of avoiding a grouse and swallowing wat he feels.(i use feel because he does not even understand the issues at hand himself ).When this happens the man is labelled a real man. like the poster above is actually implying.
Now in the both situations both the wife and husband are guilty of crass ignorance.the first situation is perhaps worse because proactivity in ignorance may be more immediately destructive and more demeaning to the agressor.thats y the typical reaction of the woman is always" wat a trivial issue".Docility may buy a little time for the man and is much more appealing to the woman.hence he is labelled as 'the real man'.but both men are united in ignorance.In both situations the husband and wife r to b pitied.
A man must always be equipped with the right knowledge so that he can be able to lead his family well.Where a man is knowledgeable it is easier for him to lead his family.But when a man is ignorant bullying and destructive docility becomes the only option.There are so many deceptive arguements and pseudomodernist notions always peddled in the society (like those on this thread),from the media and everywhere,so much so that an ignorant husband,and by extension ,an ignorant family does not have a chance of survival.(not to even talk of the children who will be even under greater assault since they are in their formative years).
So wen u talk of real men and weaklings i dont even suppose u know wat they mean...

jidegirl12: Originbm?(I hope I got that right)

I have no idea what you wrote up there... Cant you quote a post again? Jeez



I understand you're trying very hard to make a point but that côćk of bull assertions just glitched-up everything you piled up there. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

Divorcees raise well rounded kids too just like parents who stayed together. Keeping your maiden name is just another life choices solely made by oneself, leave the parents out of it... Stop bullying to make a point.

As for making changes to my expression, You're very rude I must say, nobody corrects me
I'm so done with you.

Anyways, you condemned people from broken homes , compared their Divorced parents to professors in different field with absolutely little or NO knowledge bout another field. BUT in contrary to your stûpid assertions, parents who stay together will have all the tools and knowledge to teach their kids ''how to NOT'' keep their maiden name









I give up...i could start discussing the forces that shape the mind and percption of a child and give u a logical model of wat is expected from a divorcee kid and how he or she will differ from a kid that grew up in a family...but i dont think u would understand me also.....but just a little rejoinder :the choices that a man or lady would make 2moro would always indicate the values of his or her upbringing...just like the quality of any student would automatically indicate the quality of the academic background that shaped her or him...so u cant take parents out of the issue...and an analogy is like an extended metaphor...for u to understand the usage u must first of all understand the point...

y dont u try organizing ur thoughts better...it takesa little practice to attain...but u could learn it and our discussions would be richer for it.the first rule is to make sure u understand a point and its context before u respond so as to give an intelligent answer.

I didnt mean to be rude wen i corrected ur expression,sorry if i came across as that.nd i dint mean to correct u either.i just added the rejoinder by way of light comic relief.thats y i added d face.this is just a discussion not a war...


And by the way even if it was, no man has ever won a war against women.and i dont intend to try...

Menh ....What correlation has that ^^ côćk of bull assertions got to do with this Topic for crying out loud?

Oh jeez I'm exhausted mtcheww.

So let even try and relate this to the Topic, ( which still doesn't make any sense) .... Sooo *sigh* Divorcees are complete brain dead bout child raring that they have no morals and values to teach their offsprings because they failed ONLY in their marriage??

how old are you??

I've got my hands full already Abeg...vamoose joor .

By the way I noticed your moniker, nice try.







U r arguing ad hominem.I dont blame u for not understanding the arguement...but let me give u an advice:it is always better to keep quiet and let others think that u know a particular thing than to open your mouth and remove every doubt about your ignorance...i like your fervour and look forward to dicussing with u on other threads.and the correct expression is c^oc^k -and-bull not c^oc^k of bull.i don vamoose joor...

plappville: This is not all about wealth, it is done all over the world, unlike me i kept my dad's name together with hubby's name, there is no need changing ur informationg completely as ur previews name still persist in all ur document.

what happens when u devoice?? u will have to change informations again from hubby name to surname. no one will ever call u mrs by ur surname but mrs by ur hubby's name.

On like where i live, they automatically keep ur surname in ur identity card as (((name of birth and hubby's name as mariter name)))) i think is really the best.

I rest my case

jidegirl12: ^^^ Okay now what??

I don hear new one Medical doc procreate Surgeon

Hai! NL I don hear wen!

So procreation is the only kind of production there is?When you produce akara from beans,or palm oil from palm fruits,is that procreation?I am talking of academic production.When i say that a medical doctor produces a medical doctor i mean that u can only teach wat u hv.can a medical doctor teach in the faculty of engineering?or can a lawyer teach in the faculty of medicine?it takes a medical doctor to produce a medical doctor.everthing produces its kind...

A word of advice to everyone:Before discussing a thread like this its best to know the background of people participating in the debate.something tells me that many girls arguing here are products of a broken home,a divorcee parent or an absentee parent.it takes a medical doctor to produce a medical doctor and an engineer to produce an engineer...a broken home will always tend to produce its kind...I wouldnt want to discuss the issue of pseudo-feminism which the girls here r trying to convert this trend into...the ongoing assault against the change of name practice is actually not an assault against men.it is an assault against women who r married.its actually a women against women war.let me explain.
1.Because of d increasing number of aging spinsters they are actually trying to create a way in which the stigma of ageing spinsterhood will be reduced,there is a desperate attempt to demean the attending dignity that comes with wifehood.The implication is that if they suceed then there is no way of knowing a married and an unmarried woman.These apostles of maiden name retention will now be able to do any of these
1:Lie about their status in areas where they r not known since there is no change of name.
2:Reduce or even eliminate the dignity which clothes a lady when she gets married which these ageing spinsters and divorcees hv always been jealous of and which they hv not been able to attain.Taking on the name of a man has always been a thing of joy and pride for wives,and this trappings of the married woman which divide women from girls is wat they actually want to do away with.The next arguement will be that married women should stop using the title mrs.

3.They clothe their devices in pseudofeminism.They want to strengthen the notion of feminine independence at the expense of devaluing the office of a wife.This is an assault by a group of people on the marriage institution.

Women and potential wives and homemakers should be the ones attacking this conspiracy.Men should only be concerned because it is an attack on the fundamental values of the family as we know it.

For the future homemakers and jewels out there let me elucidate some issues:Change of name during marriage is
1:A symbolic occurence
2:Designed for the benefit of the new bride

n.b.being a nigerian nd a christian their cultural millieu is implied in my discussion.

1.Change of name signifies that not being of the same parents you both still hv the closest relationship any two people should have.minus mr and mrs, both of u r one in name.Bearing different names changes this symbology.the symbolic imagery is degraded.the singularity of the name is like a banner.a banner whether in times of peace or war always sends warning to enemies to keep off ur territory.thats y i said that a woman who starts to assert her independence from the door step is already preparing for divorce.
2.If any ritual does not involve a definitive change in perception,then the importance of that ritual cannever imprint itself effectively on the consciousness of the participants.Change of name is supposed to imprint on the mind of the bride the enormity of her decision and to establish that intensity of feeling which she can always relive in nostalgia.this creates in her the feeling not only of having performed a rite of passage but gives her pride in being a member of the marriage institution.this is very necessary both for the marriage institution and for the self awareness of the bride.
3.Change of name signifies submission.but what actually is the lady submitting to?Is she submitting to the authority of the man?to masochism?to abuse?none of these and ill tell u what she is submitting to.she is submitting herself symbollically to the love,care and protection of her husband.

4.Change of name distinguishes the bride from the spinsters.Difference engenders hate.A lady will hate another lady for hving a mere handbag which she does not hv.hw much more then will she envy and possibly hate another lady for possessing an epithet which by large in her immediate society symbolizes superiority(in this case the nigerian society?).This is the war they are fighting.To demolish the gap between wives and spinsters.

Royal Roy: You are quite an intelligent person!!!
You do make lots of sense in your contributions........ until you get to the politics section & turn to a tribal warlord..
All in all, u make nice analysis on this forum!! Thumbs up.

Tribal warlord

Royal Roy: Thanks very much for the observation though

You are quite an intelligent person!!!
You do make lots of sense in your contributions........ until you get to the politics section & turn to a tribal warlord..
All in all, u make nice analysis on this forum!! Thumbs up.

Tribal warlord

[quote author=exu]why did you say it's their father's surname- it's their surname, the one that they have





a lady that insists on keeping her maiden name after marriage for no congent reason is actually already getting ready for divorce.

stranger26: Oh my God! This is unbelievable! Why should a woman take her husband's name? I don't even get it! I have my own surname and it's not like I'm property that is transferred from my father's ownership to my husband's. I'm a human with my own lineage, with my own parents and grandparents. My name shall stay the same from birth till death. I won't even combine my name with his. I have a surname and he has his own. If I have daughters, they must maintain their father's name too.

Its pure and utter nonsense to make such a big deal about a name. A woman's name has no impact on her readiness for marriage. Excuse me, o, for being grateful to my dad for all he has done. If a guy isn't happy with that, he can get lost. Only a petty person would be hung up on such a trivial issue; in fact, that alone would tell me a lot about his character.

I'm not going to take on someone else's name just because I marry him.


Wonderful.so marriage is 'just' a thing.
i think perhaps the problem is that we r attatching so much importance to ordinary marriage.



If the man had met me in rags, uneducated, uncouth and unmannerly, would he have felt the same attraction to me?


Hw can u be accusing the husband who you have not even met and who has not even proposed marriage of being an opportunist?u r already accusing him of selfishness and self-seeking even before youve met him...if u r already this much prejudiced against him i think not even his taking up your own name can save the marriage...the seed for the failure of the marriage has already been planted...
And unfortunately this is d attitude of most girls on this thread to marriage...



My father fed me, took care of me, paid my fees and everything so should I renounce him for a man that wants me only because of all the work this father of mine has done for me?


The best way to be grateful to your dad is to hv a marria ge as good as his,thats if his marriage was great.water doesnt flow backwards.by taking care of u he has done a job and his employer the almighty will pay him his wages.u r not an advertising agent for him.nd if u ladies to start keeping baggages from ur father's house then well start redefining wat marriage should be.u talk like the product of a single parent.u r very quick to shout get lost.but b very careful or it will become athe staple word of ur vocabulary.a woman who is already arguing about equality from the doorstep is not worth the effort...

rudian: Praying seriously for University of Benin to opt out too, this delay is getting me all antsy.

and i'm praying 4 ur prayer not to b answered.no offence intended but am sure no optometry or pharmacy student will b praying for the strike to b called off now

tpia u r being unnecessarily hostile and overly dissmissive of the thread.in matters of the heart there are neva any absolutes.our conditioning makes our problems very different just like our faces r different.except u r arguing just to show that u can demolish any opponent,u should indulge ur capacity for empathy a bit.calling people amebo for proffering their views is a bit overarching...monikers in nigeria has neva been a simple issue...the question is not a simple one and if people should take the approach that u represent in this thread,they'll see that the problem which they now hv is the problem which their attitude has created,not that which the issue of change in name has created...name in nigeria aside from an indicative role also plays a social role.thats y professional courses in nigerian universities which offer a title to ur name on graduation r very competitive...thats y a man will answer sir chief dr so so and so.thats y some people take 'elder 'as a title,and even 'brother so and so'.i think that wen u understand the social implication of name for the both parties then u can give a more analytical answer to their issue...and perhaps only then u will appreciate the implication of the thread and the rich and enlightening discuss it might open all of us to...reducing the issue to 'a problem btw the poster and his wives and the amebos that choose to interfere' is both unfair and inhibitory to the fundamental purpose which a forum like this represents...

i think one of the reason ladies keep their first name is in anticipation of a divorce.2.the way some ladies talk also show that they hv not taken time to develop the skills necessary for marriage .a lady should take time to understand the way the mind of a guy works,just like a guy should do the same ,taking a the nigerian socio-cultural millieu into cognizance.in marriage the ultimate sin is negligence.so for anyone to wave aside the issue of name as a nothing smacks of sheer recklessness.watever ur spouse attatches importance to should automatically become important to u.e,g a lady sulking for not getting enuff compliments or indicating those little tokens of affection that a lady needs may seem childish to a guy,but the demands of a successful relationship is that nothing should be overlooked.now one of the most important functions of the female is that they r like a powerful magnifying glass reflecting the image of the male at twice its size.this function is wat many a man will never compromise...the power dynamics in a role based society like ours makes the female a reflector of the image of a man ...hw a man disciplines his expectation depends on both his maturity and the lady's malleability...contrary to wat people hv been saying on this thread name is very important especially in nigeria.in the end hw u resolve the issue is sometimes much more important to the marriage than the final decision...

dedroc,homosexuality was never a crime in the usa..the issue was granting homosexual union the identity of marriage with the attending appurtenances.introducing gay marriage.1.there is no scientific proof that homosexuality is genetically related .gays hv been trying to link homosexuality with genetic presntations in other to gain public acceptance.y the claim to right to the institution of marriage when the union is at variance with what the institution originall stands for.dont be deceived...gay culture is actually a venneer for the introduction of a perverse social system that seeks to confront all that the traditional society has existed and held sacred and i will ll prove it to u in the course of our conva.

oh madam so now igbos are the tribalists....who laid d foundation for triibalism in nigeria?it was awolowo...he condensed tribalism into a philosophy....which people jnitiated the formation of political parties along ethnic and tribal lines?the yorubas of course...
pls dont talk abt tribalism amongst the igbos....u guys metamorphosed tribalism into an art....

the yorubas r the tricksters of the south...dats y no tribe can look up to them as a big brother not even any of the minorities...u like revels and spotlight thats y u always want to come across as people confronting opression...u luv to inherit the spoils....but u can only suceed for so long...in politics the yorubas r d lap dogs of the northern oligarchy...they cannever be counted kn for anything....recently the abiola family called babangida their sole sustainer and therefore father...i laugh...everybody knows who you r...who henefits more from d destabilization of the south?pls let nobody call igbo and yoruba in the same breath....executive house boys!!!mumu

i hv always admired the yoruba tribe for their unbounded capacity for treachery and subservience....everything they have gained from this mismanaged conglomerate of a nation is because of this...the yoruba achieves a lot without fighting...the setup called nigeria has been of the greatest benefit to them...but times are changing...our world is a different one now...any war that comes up again in nigeria,at least everybody now knows who the yorubas are...any yoruba that prognosticating the outcome of another war based on wat obtained from the past war is a fool...now the igbos fully know who their worst enemies are...its not the abokis...or is ur leaders that r just stooges of the northern oligarchy?Obasanjo dat destryoyed odi and zaki biam to impress the fulanis...even the hausas know who u are now or y did babangida refuse the marriage of kola abiola to his daughter?not to mention that they r both muslims...u guys benefit feom treachery...never u confuse it with bravery...

see ur mouth talking of igbos and wars...which wars hv yorubas ever fought...u backstabbers dat remain behind to lick d bottom of remnant...we stood against the whole nigeria including the conspiracy of the western powers...u guyz stayed behind to lap up vacancies left by the confrontation...in all u people hv perfected d art of making any north-south confrontation look like an hausa-ibo confrontation,while u become the saint positioning urself to benefit from the crisis...wr r wise to u guyz now...we will make sure d next time u people eat ur stinking amala thru ur dirty anus...idiots...u know hou to fight in the news paper pages...because u took over most nigerian corporations after the war because the abokis had no knowledge....odekus...

You are a nation of savages and criminals( a yoruba man becomes an outcast if he goes to jail , igbos roll out the carpets for a convicted tribesman)[/quote]TELL ME ABOUT THE PDP VICE CHAIRMAN FOR SOUTH WEST THAT WENT TO JAIL AND RETURNED AMIDST DRUM ROLLS AND CLAPS AND RED CARPET FROM PROMINENT YORUBA ELDERS AND EVEN A FORMER PRESIDENT....MUMU

[quote author=Divaifylor]@Henry tanx 4 ur xplanation of lame,I neva applied 4 medicine in d 1st place so I really don't care whether its lame or it is in life sciences faculty, optometry,dentistry,etc are all gud 4 me because i know where it will take me u guyz dont know anything and if u dont shut up and ask

what of optometry students.not heard from any here.they r also doctors u know