₦airaland Forum

Kobojunkie:
But wait... You posed the following question, did you not? And then you went on to state the following ... Come on... this was never truly about inheritance, as the one who brought up the mention of inheritance was you... And yes, even children from poor backgrounds hope for some form of inheritance, even though more times out of not, their fathers never leave behind more than just the clothes on their backs when they die.

Now, as for the previous post, To this day, what is described above continues to happen even among the poor, where you rightly pointed out that there is next to no inheritance to fight over in those situations. Yet widows are held back from moving in many years after the demise of their husbands, while widowers are literally allowed to do as they please whenever they please. How you came up with insisting this has nothing to do with the system having a double standard is still beyond me.

Stop being a bebeto and read the initial comment, it shows exactly what I responded to, I'm not interested in gender bantering, just strictly inheritance and how things have changed for most wealthy men since 1990.

nairalanda1:
I've seen many men who when they fall, a lot of people help them up .

So?
Were the people who helped them up women

ChybuzzDD:
So?
Were the people who helped them up women

Why do the people need to be women? Or why do you need them to be women? 🥱🥱🥱

ChybuzzDD:
So?
Were the people who helped them up women

Another one who hates all women, including his mother and sister.

Remember,you brought women into this conversation

I could remember a late professor decades back,
telling me
that he always used money to cool his wife temperature.



What a deep thought.

abbey621:
We are talking about now compared to 30 years ago, WHY WOULD ANY WOMAN MARRY A MAN WITH NO EDUCATION, NO WILL & NO PLAN? Una no dey learn? The people you're describing are mostly poor or average at best, MAJORITY of village men are not leaving behind a mansion or enough money to secure his family for the rest of their lives. We are not talking about a million or two or that old village family house but REAL INHERITANCE!

My friend you are just being deceptive. You know full well that what drives inheritance is to keep the wealth inside the family name. If lineage were traced through the female (as it ought be because you're never sure who the father is) then there'd be an incentive to have females inherit as much as males. Otherwise WHY would a man transfer his wealth to another family name?

Kobojunkie:
... Come on... this was never truly about inheritance, as the one who brought up the mention of inheritance was you...

I was actually the first to bring up inheritance by stating the following:
"A first-child woman can't inherit anything. Everything goes to her younger brothers.
Life is unfair to women simply because it is men that set up the system."

Kobojunkie:
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/g28565280/matriarchal-societies-list/

Good research but if you go back they were originally male-governed then something happened.
Why? Simply because men are stronger and originally everything was by brute force therefore it is simply impossible to have a human society that has always been ruled by women

FreeIgboho:
✓ Good research but if you go back they were originally male-governed then something happened.
Why? Simply because men are stronger and originally everything was by brute force therefore it is simply impossible to have a human society that has always been ruled by women

Read the article. You are told that patriarchy is the more recent development compared to matriarchy.

If you look far enough back into history, you'll find that women were revered and honored for their ability to bear children. Even if you just crack open a Greek epic, the pages are teeming with goddesses and female warriors, elevated to a position of worship and respect.

But over the course of history, societies across the globe started to bend towards a more patriarchal structure, which is pervasive in most communities in modern times. However, there are still surviving matriarchal societies to be found where women, literally, are the dominant steering factor in all matters, social, political, and economical. Read up on how these six individual communities across the globe and how they have diverged from the western-patriarchal architecture that is pervasive throughout most of the world.

So, it isn't that those matriarchal systems of today were born out of patriarchy but that matriarchal systems existed long before and those that exist today either continue on from before or either reverted back to what they had previously had or known.🥱🥱

Kobojunkie:
Read the article. You are told that patriarchy is the more recent development compared to matriarchy.
So, it isn't that those matriarchal systems of today were born out of patriarchy but that matriarchal systems existed long before and those that exist today either continue on from before or either reverted back to what they had previously had or known.🥱🥱

I hope you agree it doesn't make logical sense. Men were stronger and in the old days everything was by how strong you were. Plus women were weighed down by pregnancy and child-care and needs a man's protection durring those times if not always. Anyway Google below says true matriachy (akin to patriarchy) never existed and doesn't exist.

FreeIgboho:
✓ I hope you agree it doesn't make logical.sense. Men were stronger and in the old days everything was by how strong you were.
✓Plus women were weighed down by pregnancy and child-care
✓ ...and needs a man's protection durring those times if not always.
✓ Anyway Google below says true matriachy (akin to patriarchy) never existed and doesn't exist.

Are all men strong? 🥱🥱

.2. Do all women have pregnancies and raise children? 🥱🥱

3. Are all men protectors? 🥱🥱🥱

4. Why does Matriarchy need to be qualified with the word "true" when there are different kinds of matriarchal systems that exists for good reason....women have to coexist with men for even such a system to work. 🥱🥱🥱

FreeIgboho:
My friend you are just being deceptive. You know full well that what drives inheritance is to keep the wealth inside the family name. If lineage were traced through the female (as it ought be because you're never sure who the father is) then there'd be an incentive to have females inherit as much as males. Otherwise WHY would a man transfer his wealth to another family name?



I was actually the first to bring up inheritance by stating the following:
"A first-child woman can't inherit anything. Everything goes to her younger brothers.
Life is unfair to women simply because it is men that set up the system."

Youre the one that's not facing reality, you keep talking equality bullshit when I'm trying to show you there's improvement from one decade to another, I've never onced said it is 50/50 or entertained the notion of such absurdity. Nature itself made it that way, women don't keep their father's name so why would a father expect them to keep his legacy?

This does not mean daughters shouldn't get shin shin, the fact that you keep mentioning women can't inherit anything is ABSURD and clearly limited to those still thinking with cavemen faculty! For wealthy men within the last 20 or 30 years, awareness is on the rise, from having a will that specifically states how properities would be shared to actually seeing the importance of a female child, this is 2025 not 1990, Otedola will not ignore his daughters neither would I!

abbey621:
Youre the one that's not facing reality, you keep talking equality bullshit when I'm trying to show you there's improvement from one decade to another, I've never onced said it is 50/50 or entertained the notion of such absurdity. Nature itself made it that way, women don't keep their father's name so why would a father expect them to keep his legacy?

This does not mean daughters shouldn't get shin shin, the fact that you keep mentioning women can't inherit anything is ABSURD and clearly limited to those still thinking with cavemen faculty! For wealthy men within the last 20 or 30 years, awareness is on the rise, from having a will that specifically states how properities would be shared to actually seeing the importance of a female child, this is 2025 not 1990, Otedola will not ignore his daughters neither would I!

So at least we agree that women are cheated by the inheritance system, that it is UNFAIR to women. And please it is NOT nature that made it that way, it is the patriachy, men! What Nature made is that everyone would know for certain who the child's mother is, but not the father. Therefore Nature actually supports lineage through female line not male. It is man that changed it!

FreeIgboho:
So at least we agree that women are cheated by the inheritance system, that it is UNFAIR to women. And please it is NOT nature that made it that way, it is the patriachy, men! What Nature made is that everyone would know for certain who the child's mother is, but not the father. Therefore Nature actually supports lineage through female line not male. It is man that changed it!

You can argue with your forefathers about that because as far back as our history could remember, it is MOSTLY men that build up assets which needs to be passed down so naturally they would want that asset to continue in the family, you simply cannot do this with the female child back then. Recently, women have been more open to keeping their fathers name and legacy so things are changing little by little but to think you'll someday get a 50/50 equilibirum when it comes to inheritance is OFUTUFETE!

Kobojunkie:
Are all men strong? 🥱🥱

.2. Do all women have pregnancies and raise children? 🥱🥱

3. Are all men protectors? 🥱🥱🥱

4. Why does Matriarchy need to be qualified with the word "true" when there are different kinds of matriarchal systems that exists for good reason....women have to coexist with men for even such a system to work. 🥱🥱🥱

You are now being funny. Why don't they use that logic to have men and women compete together in boxing, wrestling, running, etc. "All" is totally unnecessary. Alpha males get together and run things and make rules because they can enforce them. "All" is totally unnecessary.

"True" simply means "that mirrors patriachy". Example, inheritance through women can be considered Matriarchy - but not in the patriachy sense, which is all-encompassing

FreeIgboho:
So at least we agree that women are cheated by the inheritance system, that it is UNFAIR to women. And please it is NOT nature that made it that way, it is the patriachy, men! What Nature made is that everyone would know for certain who the child's mother is, but not the father. Therefore Nature actually supports lineage through female line not male. It is man that changed it!

You are still living in the past...There is no patriarchy anymore. The current system favours women more than men...look around you and see for yourself. Feminism is all a lie,stop promoting it.

abbey621:
You can argue with your forefathers about that because as far back as our history could remember, it is MOSTLY men that build up assets which needs to be passed down so naturally they would want that asset to continue in the family, you simply cannot do this with the female child back then. Recently, women have been more open to keeping their fathers name and legacy so things are changing little by little but to think you'll someday get a 50/50 equilibirum when it comes to inheritance is OFUTUFETE!

Actually inheritance and lineage were originally through women because they were custodians of the home and family wealth plus everyone was sure their children were truly their children. Men came and went and fathered children they weren't even aware they fathered. So it actually made more sense that lineage and inheritance were through females

FreeIgboho:
✓ You are now being funny. Why don't they use that logic to have men and women compete together in boxing, wrestling, running, etc. "All" is totally unnecessary. Alpha males get together and run things and make rules because they can enforce them. "All" is totally unnecessary.
✓ "True" simply means "that mirrors patriachy". Example, inheritance through women can be considered Matriarchy - but not in the patriachy sense, which is all-encompassing

So when some women beat up some men it means those men are stronger than those women? 🥱🥱🥱

2. I see .. so you use Patriarchy to decide which particular configurations of Matriarchy is true or not? 😩😩😩😩

FreeIgboho:
Actually inheritance and lineage were originally through women because they were custodians of the home and family wealth plus everyone was sure their children were truly their children. Men came and went and fathered children they weren't even aware they fathered. So it actually made more sense that lineage and inheritance were through females

You're spewing jargon, which civilization was that? Is it the old Oyo Empire, Ife, Benin, the Aztecs or the Vikings/Saxo? Originally where? You have to specify rather than make broad assumptions not backed by historical evidence! Out of 1000s of ethnic groups, women being custodian of inheritance is less than 10%, you can use Google if you need help validating this!

Hhh4444:
You are still living in the past...There is no patriarchy anymore. The current system favours women more than men...look around you and see for yourself. Feminism is all a lie,stop promoting it.

I'm not promoting feminism at all. I'm just sensitive to unfairness especially when the person favored is still the one always complaining. Look around me: how many women are presidents, senators, governors, mega church heads, lucrative markets like Alaba, etc. Women are systematically excluded from all these because the system was set up by men to favour men!

FreeIgboho:
I'm not promoting feminism at all. I'm just sensitive to unfairness especially when the person favored is still the one always complaining. Look around me: how many women are presidents, senators, governors, mega church heads, lucrative markets like Alaba, etc. Women are systematically excluded from all these because the system was set up by men to favour men!

Nobody is stopping women from being any of these things. How many of them are showing interest in politics to start with? How many of them have the capacity to lead? These are things you should ask. How many women are sent to die in wars? How many women can do certain dangerous jobs to make money?The system is not unfair to women in anyway.

abbey621:
You're spewing jargon, which civilization was that? Is it the old Oyo Empire, Ife, Benin, the Aztecs or the Vikings/Saxo? Originally where? You have to specify rather than make broad assumptions not backed by historical evidence! Out of 1000s of ethnic groups, women being custodian of inheritance is less than 10%, you can use Google if you need help validating this!

The circled below is from Google and answers your question. But even common sense ought tell you that a man can't be out hunting and gathering and fighting and dying, and at same time be custodian of the home and what was gathered

Hhh4444:
Nobody is stopping women from being any of these things. How many of them are showing interest in politics to start with? How many of them have the capacity to lead? These are things you should ask. How many women are sent to die in wars? How many women can do certain dangerous jobs to make money?The system is not unfair to women in anyway.

The SYSTEM is stopping them. Even something as lucrative as boxing, women were excluded until recently. Why? If a woman wants to go to war or do a "dangerous" but lucrative job, she can't because it is monopolized by the brotherhood. Even joining army, police, etc. Things were set up that way by MEN, not by Nature!

FreeIgboho:
The circled below is from Google and answers your question. But even common sense ought tell you that a man can't be out hunting and gathering and fighting and dying, and at same time be custodian of the home and what was gathered

You're the one not applying common sense if you cannot distinguish between taking care of the home and being the custody of inheritance/home. I have input an exact query in Google to show you what you overlooked. You're wanting us to believe that women who couldn't own land or legally put their name on most assets as far back as 400BC were originally custodian of inheritance? Does that make sense to you?

FreeIgboho:
The SYSTEM is stopping them. Even something as lucrative as boxing, women were excluded until recently. Why? If a woman wants to go to war or do a "dangerous" but lucrative job, she can't because it is monopolized by the brotherhood. Even joining army, police, etc. Things were set up that way by MEN, not by Nature!

Women are not fit for these things jare....Nature denied them the capacity to do somethings not men. Blame nature not men. Do you know that in as much as I love football,I don't enjoy female football cos it's boring;Same goes for boxing that you mentioned. They just don't do it well like men. The system is even protecting them by not sending them to wars or allowing them do dangerous jobs. Go and check places where women work in industries, it's usually soft
Places where there is no much physical pressure. So with all these will you still say the system doesn't favour them?

Kobojunkie:
I disagree because the few matriarchal systems that exist in this same world, including those found in the animal kingdom, show that women actually tend more towards systems that benefit all — children, included—, not just women or men.

Please ma, can you mention those few matriachal systems that we have in this same world? And those few systems benefitting all?

Kobojunkie:
You are being entirely disingenuous and this isn't in any way unexpected. 🥱🥱🥱

2. In a system where society demeans women in their 40s as literally being past their prime, what mother would want her son to bring home such a woman as daughter-in-law? The man would literally need to disavow his people to get that to happen. Or the woman would need to pay the family off well-well to make that happen.

3. But the women marrying those baby daddies are ok with the responsibility of taking care of a child by another woman, particularly since that may be the only way to have the man. Abi? 🥱🥱🥱

It is not a choice (both are not equally weighed), but a double standard...let's call it what it is. 🥱🥱

4. Most women would also want to marry the rich, handsome guy whose preferences they do not meet. What you described there with slay queens preferring only those men who can afford them applies also to men who have standards as far as women they will or will not date. Those have nothing to do with double-standards or society, but personal preferences individuals have. Let's not come here to confuse one for the other. 🥱🥱

I tell you with confidence, if a 40 year old woman wants to marry a 21 year old guy, she go see marry

If u think say i dey lie, ask those Oyibo women that come here to pic young guys every day

funsho75:
➜I tell you with confidence, if a 40 year old woman wants to marry a 21 year old guy, she go see marry. If u think say i dey lie, ask those Oyibo women that come here to pic young guys every day

I am sorry, what? OM-F0cking-gosh! 😮😮😮😮😮

Why do you people do this when cornered? When did Nigerian women begin having the same rights as Oyinbo women, even in Nigeria?

Hhh4444:
Women are not fit for these things jare....Nature denied them the capacity to do somethings not men. Blame nature not men. Do you know that in as much as I love football,I don't enjoy female football cos it's boring;Same goes for boxing that you mentioned. They just don't do it well like men. The system is even protecting them by not sending them to wars or allowing them do dangerous jobs. Go and check places where women work in industries, it's usually soft
Places where there is no much physical pressure. So with all these will you still say the system doesn't favour them?

Chai! See someone conditioned by a system without even realizing he is conditioned! Go to places like US, soccer is for women and they don't quite get why men should be playing such feminine sport. Just like an Arab in the West can't stand that a women can be so free. Or even a Nigerian watching a couple being interviewed can't stand that the wife talks a lot. It's all CONDOTIINING! Just as the Bible says a woman should not preach or even speak up in church, even though there are women gifted in those things more than men. Likewise ALL those things you mentioned, there are women who can do them better than most men. But the System won't let them. Those things were long ago monopolized by the brotherhood and passed down generations!

advanceDNA:
..sometimes the system are designed, sometimes they are just there .. either way, people will complain from their point of experience i.e., based on how nature/society has dealt with them...

In the UK...driver's licence are cheaper for women than men because one man woke up and claimed nature made women more kind and gentle claiming they drive more safer ....

Men designed the System that said it's better for men to go and die protecting the society.,...how may times have u heard women soldiers killed by Bokoharam?? Zero....Women are not posted to battle fronts even the west that scream equality...

Men set up system where Single mothers are paid benefits in the UK, nobody pays single fathers for not having a spouse to support him...

If u marry a stay at home mum...she gets half or your property at divorce because one slmp designed a system that established she has contributed to your entire wealth by just staying at home and not chasing her own life...

Check the statistics of all the rape cases perpetrated by women and even other criminal offences .......the sentence are just naturally lesser than men......a phenomenon designed by a male system known as "benevolent sexism" or the "female leniency effect" .....

If u know the amount of women and girl empowerment programmes in this country and in the west.,.u'll start wondering if someone is against the boy child or men...

Just last week...one morally bankrupt mid 30s lady teacher was caught in a statutory rape situation with a teenage boy....
. but alas....even women on nairaland started saying there is no foul because of the gender of the victim.... ...and that's how it is for men,....society expects unwritten things from you they don't expect from women that even overrides established law.....

Last year, I was applying for a programme ......i saw that women are encouraged to apply as they will offer them more slots & scholarship

..as in..?? I'm like..it shouldn't be this obvious naaaa..,.. and the sad reality is that women don't want to be in the engineering fields for long, even when they study it....they eventually branch off to something else more feminine which is why humab psychology says u can only force equal opportunity for men and women, but u can't force equal outcomes, because most women will always chose the easy way out...

And there is the sex system, which women are naturally custodian of.....u spread u get pregnant ..but if you don't want the baby..the man doesn't have a say...
.the man cannot force you or drag you to keep the baby......But hey!!..if u want a baby and a man isn't ready, he doesn't have a say.....infact you can pin another man's baby on him if you like....

there are programmes in the usa on stem courses all you have to be is to be a woman .....automatic scholarship regardless of your grades....
but if you a man youre expected to be having a particular grade
the aim is encourage women into stem courses

abbey621:
You're the one not applying common sense if you cannot distinguish between taking care of the home and being the custody of inheritance/home. I have input an exact query in Google to show you what you overlooked. You're wanting us to believe that women who couldn't own land or legally put their name on most assets as far back as 400BC were originally custodian of inheritance? Does that make sense to you?

You obviously did not carefully read what I wrote. I said NATURE intended it that way, but MEN changed it. Nature gave women everything that makes it natural that lineage and inheritance be matrilinial - because they are custodians of the home and because it's only the mother that is 100% sure is the mother of the children. Even today, you are a Jew only if your mother is a Jew NOT your father. Even so, see below

FreeIgboho:
You obviously did not carefully read what I wrote. I said NATURE intended it that way, but MEN changed it. Nature gave women everything that makes it natural that lineage and inheritance be matrilinial - because they are custodians of the home and because it's only the mother that is 100% sure is the mother of the children. Even today, you are a Jew only if your mother is a Jew NOT your father. Even so, see below

You obviously are making up shit, which nature? Is it biblical, ancestrial or traditional? You need to be specific for me to understand where you're coming from? Name your starting point, even your example of Jew is misplaced at best and WRONG at worst. Are you a traditional Jew or a Reformed Jew? It's like catholic vs deeper life, same faith but different interpretations!

abbey621:
You obviously are making up shit, which nature? Is it biblical, ancestrial or traditional? You need to be specific for me to understand where you're coming from? Name your starting point, even your example of Jew is misplaced at best and WRONG at worst. Are you a traditional Jew or a Reformed Jew? It's like catholic vs deeper life, same faith but different interpretations!

About the Jewish stuff, see below and be shocked.

My starting point? A man has to go out and hunt and gather and fight and DIE. He doesn't know which of his children are truly his and doesn’t really have that deep a bond with them and he's often away from home and likely soon die from one thing or another. Nature forces the woman to stay home and tend the next generation (which she is 100% certain are her children), and tend the homestead and tend what has been gathered and has fewer chances of dying. Please, honestly, who among the two did nature intend for the lineage (and therefore inheritance) to go by?