Timbuktou:
Lol. Vicky you need to stop drinking Red Bull, you done turn to puma. Relax, chile.

Btw, you saying you don't believe in equality? Just to be clear on your stance, sweety.

I believe in equailty. I'm referring to the woman at your original post.

Justfollowit:
I knew Lady Hale would be a feminist and I am pretty sure she gave the leading speech.


The woman is lucky that her husband was really kind to have let her live #greedybitch#

What has feminism got to do with it?

Running What feminism is in my head and I can't relate it to the story.

What is the woman seeking compensation for?

What of the subsequent men in her life? Read she had other kids?

Why is the son not taking care of his mother?

I think the court should tell the woman to get a job and the son to care for his mother.

Timbuktou:
There certainly something wrong in enforcing the doling, isn't there?

Forcing or enforcing it is just bad.

Vickybee:

I believe in equailty. I'm referring to the woman at your original post.

Oh, I get you now. However, your claims to belief in equality contradict your earlier comments on this thread. You called her badoo, I think. Would you be as ecstatic if the sexes were reversed?

Timbuktou:
That a court would even regard such a case is most baffling

but they have told her it would be difficult for her to claim a dime. they have just given her the go ahead to go to a court & claim - they haven't awarded her a dime. she has to spend her money or get legal aid to take the matter to court and if she loses, more debt on her name.

her husband had nothing while they were together. the money came 5 years after their divorce. this couple generated nothing in the way of assets between them while married, and 50% of zero is what they were both entitled when the divorce was finalised.

i cannot believe a woman can come to pursue the money her husband made 5 years after their divorce. the child between them is 32 & now works for the man. shey na child support this woman wants to claim or what? some women have no shame. after leaving him when he was poör, she suddenly remembers him when he became a multi-millionaire.

pickabeau1:
I gave him sex
I gave him my body
I gave him a child



I gotta get mine



Asking for money to raise your own child

Some women's mentality since the garden of Eden

Lols

Tomorrow, men say the child is theirs and they used a woman when the relationship ends innit?

Hahaha

Bia pick, who owns a child?

coogar:


but they have told her it would be difficult for her to claim a dime. they have just given her the go ahead to go to a court & claim - they haven't awarded her a dime. she has to spend her money or get legal aid to take the matter to court and if she loses, more debt on her name.

her husband had nothing while they were together. the money came 5 years after their divorce. this couple generated nothing in the way of assets between them while married, and 50% of zero is what they were both entitled when the divorce was finalised.

i cannot believe a woman can come to pursue the money her husband made 5 years after their divorce. the child between them is 32 & now works for the man. shey na child support this woman wants to claim or what? some women have no shame. after leaving him when he was poör, she suddenly remembers him when he became a multi-millionaire.

What the woman needs is to appeal to her son to take care of her needs in a village square meeting.

The court does not come into the picture at all

Lols

bukatyne:


Lols

Tomorrow, men say the child is theirs and they used a woman when the relationship ends innit?

Hahaha

Bia pick, who owns a child?

bukatyne:

What the woman needs is to appeal to her son to take care of her needs in a village square meeting.

The court does not come into the picture at all

the woman was 21 & while the man was 19 when they married. she already had a daughter prior to her marriage. they were together for just 3 years & then they separated. no financial settlement was made after the divorce cos the man was poorer than a church rat.

13 years after their divorce, the man started making money. this woman remarried as well & has made children in her new marriage. they both moved on with their lives. why would she even think of going to make claims from her ex hubby?

it's so ridiculous.....

Timbuktou:
Oh, I get you now. However, your claims to belief in equality contradict your earlier comments on this thread. You called her badoo, I think. Would you be as ecstatic if the sexes were reversed?

I was actually trolling...

By the way, some men sleep with sugar mummy to make money.
Some dupe their girlfriend and make away with her money.
Some female sponsor and provide for there boyfriend or husband.

Does that mean male are weak to female and should be subordinate to us? Hypocrisy of men.

coogar:


the woman was 21 & while the man was 19 when they married. she already had a daughter prior to her marriage. they were together for just 3 years & then they separated. no financial settlement was made after the divorce cos the man was poorer than a church rat.

13 years after their divorce, the man started making money. this woman remarried as well & has made children in her new marriage. they both moved on with their lives. why would she even think of going to make claims from her ex hubby?

it's so ridiculous.....

Some people would try anything If they can get away with it.

If This woman wins, more women would be tempted to try.

bukatyne:

Some people would try anything If they can get away with it.

If This woman wins, more women would be tempted to try.

it's the UK, my mind tells me she would win. more ridiculous claims like this have won in the past so it's no biggie. the father of her first child is alive & well.......why hasn't she taken him to court?

bukatyne:


What has feminism got to do with it?

Running What feminism is in my head and I can't relate it to the story.

One of the judges, Lady Hale in particular would have done a good job in convincing other judges because she is a feminist and she likes interpreting legal rules so wide than she should be allowed to.

I can see the legal reasoning behind it but for policy reasons it should be overruled.

coogar:


it's the UK, my mind tells me she would win. more ridiculous claims like this have won in the past so it's no biggie. the father of her first child is alive & well.......why hasn't she taken him to court?

She is picking them as the spirit leads.

I fear that in making all these foolish rulings, We will be back to where We started from

Women being treated like kids with no sense.

Justfollowit:


One of the judges, Lady Hale in particular would have done a good job in convincing other judges because she is a feminist and she likes interpreting legal rules so wide than she should be allowed to.

I can see the legal reasoning behind it but for policy reasons it should be overruled.

I still wondering the feminism angle here

It would apply If a man had won such a ruling before. The woman is at best playing a victim here. If she never remarried, I would understand (which is not even the man's fault because he couldn't stop her If she wanted to) but she remarried So What ties does she have with him?

Is the ex married?

bukatyne:



Women being treated like kids with no sense.

Forgive me, I know you're married. But I just kissed you. That's exactly the way wom$en should be treated, and is, in fact, how the law wants women to be treated when one considers the millions of femcentric policies littering the western world.

Women are never held to account for anything.

bukatyne:


I still wondering the feminism angle here

It would apply If a man had won such a ruling before. The woman is at best playing a victim here. If she never remarried, I would understand (which is not even the man's fault because he couldn't stop her If she wanted to) but she remarried So What ties does she have with him?

Is the ex married?

This has set a precedent which may not have been successful if it were a man.

The child is 36 years old for goodness sake. He is no more a dependant. What stopped her from claiming child support when they divorced.

Of course it has a feminist angle to it. The law has to be interpreted to support our claim whether the claim is logical or not.

Vickybee:

I was actually trolling...

By the way, some men sleep with sugar mummy to make money.
Some dupe their girlfriend and make away with her money.
Some female sponsor and provide for there boyfriend or husband.

Does that mean male are weak to female and should be subordinate to us? Hypocrisy of men.

First of all, you'll never find any sane man proudly show this off. All these one na coded hustle, y adig?

Secondly, a man's superiority goes waaaay beyond financial strength. Just saying.

Timbuktou:
That's exactly the way wom$en should be treated, and is, in fact, how the law wants women to be treated when one considers the millions of femcentric policies littering the western world.

Women are never held to account for anything.

That's end-game dude. Women are ascribed rights with no attendant responsibilities - Just like kids. We are close to it in the West and no doubt some of the "useful idiots" who love to ape things wholesale will soon start clamouring for it in Africa.

Accordingly, men have tot fund women (and "their children" ). This will be enforced by state fiat if need be, so that men will pay directly or indirectly.

Through child support orders, where no proof is demanded that the money is actually spent on children, and even if the child is not actually his. Or indirectly by taxes.

It's telling that even as men are compelled to provide for any child they father - even if against their will - women are allowed to murder them in the womb or abandon them after birth, with absolutely no legal consequences. That is, women can decide against any or all responsibility - from conception to birth - if they so choose, whereas men have no choice and no voice.

I watch with interest.


TV

Timbuktou:
The Supreme Court judges must have some gas leak in their chambers or something. The woman had been denied this right by lower courts; just to get things in perspective.

@Vickybee: just to be clear, she hasn't got any money.

I swear this travesty couldn't happen in Russia .

Crackhaus, Pickabeau1, how una dey?

My nigga Timbuktou, I pin o. . . hope you good bro?

Timbuktou:

First of all, you'll never find any sane man proudly show this off. All these one na coded hustle, y adig?

Secondly, a man's superiority goes waaaay beyond financial strength. Just saying.

And which girl show off that she sleeps with sugar daddy or extort money from her boyfriend.

Anyway, what's your strength except that thing dangling in between your legs.

I've always lived to expect this injustice on men. Last week, I had this same thought of me divorcing a woman, go out and work, and then earn a lot of money, and suddenly out of the blues, she comes, charges me to court and gets out of my hard earned money, all to my despair, and its happening here, right before of my eyes. This is a great evil. But opening the pages of the Holy Bible, the book that shows the present is just a modification of history, I found the story of a pained young man, who came to Christ, who was well respected, to help persuade his brother to give him his rightful share of his father's property, but rather than the Son of God to console him, he condemned him for his short insight, and narrowing his thinking on vanity. Whether he got his rightful share or didn't, I know not, but all I know is that he is dead and so is his brother. Therefore, my appeal goes to time, which softens and deadens one's feelings and regrets. I wish women the best of luck and hope they find the happiness they desire and deserve.


P.S. How I wish lalasticlala could just push this to front page.

TV01:


That's end-game dude. Women are ascribed rights with no attendant responsibilities - Just like kids. We are close to it in the West and no doubt some of the "useful idiots" who love to ape things wholesale will soon start clamouring for it in Africa.

Accordingly, men have tot fund women (and "their children" ). This will be enforced by state fiat if need be, so that men will pay directly or indirectly.

Through child support orders, where no proof is demanded that the money is actually spent on children, and even if the child is not actually his. Or indirectly by taxes.

It's telling that even as men are compelled to provide for any child they father - even if against their will - women are allowed to murder them in the womb or abandon them after birth, with absolutely no legal consequences. That is, women can decide against any or all responsibility - from conception to birth - if they so choose, whereas men have no choice and no voice.

I watch with interest.


TV

I wonder why this is so hard for 'feminists' to see. All they have is privilege without responsibility. Power without checks and balances is a beast no society should breed.

And for all their 'strength and independence', they have earned very little of the power they seem to wield and abuse so blatantly.

crackhaus:

My nigga Timbuktou, I pin o. . . hope you good bro?

I'm very well brother. Cheers

Vickybee:

And which girl show off that she sleeps with sugar daddy or extort money from her boyfriend.

Anyway, what's your strength except that thing dangling in between your legs.

Oh, most if not all of them. We know all these big girls in the society have no job or legitimate source of income. Women have no scruples showing that they are beneficiaries of largess from one maga or the other. How many guys have you seen uploading pictures on social media of themselves 'chilling' in the passenger's seat of someone else's car male or female.

My sister that dangling thing is worth well more than millions of holes

Timbuktou:
I wonder why this is so hard for 'feminists' to see. All they have is privilege without responsibility. Power without checks and balances is a beast no society should breed.

And for all their 'strength and independence', they have earned very little of the power they seem to wield and abuse so blatantly.

Like men did not have it so for long

Welcome to the before before world of women.

bukatyne:


Like men did not have it so for long

Welcome to the before before world of women.

Men have always earned whatever 'rights' and privileges they enjoyed. Women get it handed over to them by men. Fact

Are you aware that at a time in history, not all males had the right to vote? Only those that owned land actually could vote, and at another time males had to earn a certain amount of money to be accorded the privilege of voting? Or that men were once forced to join the army and fight wars, and so on.

BeeKay, history is there to learn from, let's leave sentiments aside and speak what the truth is.

bukatyne:


Like men did not have it so for long

Welcome to the before before world of women.

do u say this is payback for the way men had it for long

I thought u were condemning the judgement earlier

I hope she does not get a dime .. wrong precedent to set.
Those judges that even allowed the case to be heard at all is preposterous. .

bukatyne:


Like men did not have it so for long

Welcome to the before before world of women.

You are doing great injustice to yourself by thinking this is empowering to women (absolute power corrupts absolutely) or that women are going to continue to earn more and more power (it will only worsen gender relations and raise spoilt children, and a case where neither men nor women are happy since they've left their natural roles). This is not about emotions but pure logic. Let me quote to you my most loved law of diminishing returns: 'the employment of more and more units of a VARIABLE FACTOR will eventually cause the TOTAL PRODUCTION TO DIMINISH AFTER INCREASING AT A DECREASING RATE'. Yes, women are going to have it good, become president, rule household, control companies, howbeit for a short time, then emasculated men would wake up, face de-feminised women head to head (as it is in the muslim and arab world) and force this seemingly unstoppable train of female revolution to diminishing returns, till equilibrium is established, where there will be negligible increase or decrease.

Timbuktou:
I wonder why this is so hard for 'feminists' to see. All they have is privilege without responsibility. Power without checks and balances is a beast no society should breed.

Ultimately I'm not sure it matters if they see it. I'm sure some probably do, but don't see beyond it - which is key. The pre-occupation with their feelings and well-being mean they will rather remain in denial, even if clearly outlined to them.

Ultimately there wil lbe a backlash - not necessarily physical - driven someway by men opting out of a zero value proposition. As ever, women and children will bear the brunt, so many women will finally "get it" and probably fight hard to reverse the feminsit madness.

Order will be restored. The tried and tested, all round beneficial Patriarchy will be restored. As ever, because women want it as much if not mores so than men !

When this will happen or how much damage will be done before this takes place, I cannot say. For now, men of understanding need to take a firm stand and continue to run their families along sound patriarchal principles.

Timbuktou:
And for all their 'strength and independence', they have earned very little of the power they seem to wield and abuse so blatantly.

And it's the abuse that will rot society so badly that there will have to be a re-think - somehow, some way. It will simply become unsustainable, and the damage to male/female relationships and wider society will be undeniable. Right now they are still managing to sell - an untrue - story of female emancipation and empowerment (of which the sum effect appears to be sluttiness and butt implants ).


Commander TV