₦airaland Forum

cococandy:
I don't know what's going on here.
All the annoying posts on this thread. Gosh!

DarkRebel101:
Nairaland is home to the good, the bad, and the mentally-indigent. To retain one's sanity, it's best one takes the commentaries of the mentally rëtarded with a cubic metre of salt.

What are you still doing up at the time? Studying?

cococandy:
I hear you and agree.

Lol. It's only 4:40pm here.

DarkRebel101:
My bad. I'm finishing up on some office work and should hit the bed sheets in no time.

Goodnight.

DarkRebel101:
My bad. I'm finishing up on some office work and should hit the bed sheets in no time.

Goodnight.

cococandy:
I like when they confuse themselves like this.

Example "I am not good but I'm definitely not bad". What are you? a mystery. Is what you are.

Babe There's no in between when it comes to inferiority and superiority. You're either one or the other. It is simple English. If you're superior to me that means I'm inferior to you. C'est finis.





By who? The ignorant forefathers who used to burn people for being witches and kill twins for bearing bad luck. I think time has proven that the older generation doesn't know it all. In fact one can argue factually that it could be dangerous to follow in their footsteps in some situations. The best thing is to learn from them and not perpetuate their ignorant mistakes.


1) Really? I'm finding it hard to believe that.
2) yet you believe men are superior?
3) pick a side already.
4) geez I'm confused.

sisisioge:
You too? At least you aren't like the OP who was too blind to see the side of the coin my belief lies.


By the way, I still don't feel the need to explain myself one bit... It's really a man's world, the sooner we all come to terms with that the better for us all.

As it is , God created a woman first and made her lord over all animals. He thought she might need a guy and thus removed from her several bones to create men. Hallelujah!

Notice how the Bible and Koran refer to humans as womankind....duh, mankind

The evolution traced the first woman to the homosapiens ba? God bless science.

It has always been majority women kings ...the few men that made that feat are idolized . God bless the present Queen of England. Don't even try to read her story...the kingmakers couldn't wait to make a woman king!

Americans would rather elect an available hateful man than make a woman their president. Jeeeez...

Our foremothers were the custodians and the active makers of our history.

Today's woman had to fight tooth and nails to get heard enough to be considered equals with men so she could get some political seats! Whooopsidaisiesss! Wasn't she an equal all along? Why the struggle pls?

Today's woman is really an equal, she's the alpha in marriages. EOD

Yes! Now we have some smart successful women who know they aren't inferior but still recognize that in the race of first amongst equals, a man would most likely win. God bless Madam F. Alakijah, she appears to be winning on all levels possibly because she knows what she's up against and strategized . Really this battle for the superior is fruitless, know what you are up against and shoot! By the time you get to where you're going...they won't see it coming.

Whew, Coco baby...I must really like you to launch any explanation at all Enjoy your day.

cococandy:
You're only citing examples that show women have been marginalized throughout history.

Nothing in there is empirical proof that men are superior.

Following your logic, white people are superior to blacks because they took us as slaves and took our lands and culture from us?
Brainwashing us that their culture and religion is the only true one which we now practice fervently and protect with our lives. (I digress...)

But if all you typed there is 'proof to you that men are superior to women, I hope you consider yourself inferior to a white woman too. Since it's the same logic. No?

Bottom line, you can't use oppression as evidence of superiority. If anything, it proves quite the opposite. That a bunch of people are so threatened by the mere free existence of others that they make up laws, story, religions and culture all centered around the oppression of the certain folks who's freedom threatens their fragile egos.

How you can't see that is beyond me.
Well not really.

Which still brings us back to "if a man is superior to you, what are you to him?"
Puzzle of the century.

sisisioge:
Alright, will have to leave alone. You went off rails entirely. By the way, I hope your husband is cool with him taking up your name? As in Mr. Cococandy? God forbid you take his to foster oppression . Pls enjoy your day

cococandy:
I went off rail? By following you?

You're still proving nothing.

Are you superior or inferior?

Does me taking my husband's name (or not) change the fact that it is a culture designed around elevating men and does not in any singular way prove that men are superior? Just like all the examples you gave up there.

You can't even support your stance. You're going offhand involving people's families without proving your POV correct while doing so.

Give me something empirical. Then you're talking.

sisisioge:
All I did give were simple observations of happenings around you. Shouldn't that serve as enough data? I used politics, religion, family, business, power, science... sweetie I can't believe I'm still here. The question you kept asking was answered on my first post you quoted. By the way, going on and on round a circle is a sheer waste of time. Can I beg you not to mention me on this thread again? Pls pls...I already gave my opinion, which I'm entirely responsible for. Yours is all yours

sisisioge:
Oga, I couldn't read past the first few lines because your weren't logical.

Men are indeed superior to women: na so God create am.

sisisioge:
Yes, there are more women who are more powerful, intelligent, rich,known and what-have-u than men but the fact still remain that men are more superior. End of discussion.

Pls be more constructive next time. By the way, in the animal kingdom we are all equally...but some more equal.No need to sound like a dunnce next time...little girls can make better presentation.

IAmOged:
[color=#000055][b]Men are superior to women and therefore have more responsibilities than women. Women are superior to children, and therefore have more responsibilities than children. Superiority means "leadership over" due to increased maturity and reason, it does not come with a connotation of hate.
Women do not hate children because they're superior to them in the same way that men do not hate women because they're superior to them. Although plenty of men have their hang-ups with women (just as the reverse is true.) Men are more mature than women, who are more mature than children. This is about a hierarchy of maturity, of which men are at the top. The less mature you are, the less reasonable you are. You wouldn't want an immature person in charge of you, and assuming you found someone competent, you wouldn't say you were equal to the person in charge of you.[/b][/color]
[b]The problem with people today is women have been told it's bad to let a man be in charge of them, and men have been told to treat women as equal partners rather than subordinate dependants they care for.
You are superior, and you have to be in order to be eligible. That's reality. For the sake of ego preservation on her part, she will want to think of herself as your "first mate" or "partner", but you're not the captain, you're the ship. Without you there is nothing, no base nor foundation. She relies on you VASTLY more than you rely on her, and any functional relationship between a man and a woman is always based on this model.
It doesn't mean she's not important, it means you're depended upon more than you depend on her. It means the distribution of burden is disproportionate in order to reflect your difference in maturity, your burden is greater because her need is greater, her need is greater because she is more immature, and by extension of being less mature, less competent.[/b]
fact, it's dangerous for you to depend on her emotionally, but the reverse is perfectly acceptable and fine. This is the burden that comes with being at the top of the maturity hierarchy. Emotional loneliness.
Accepting you cannot confide all your deepest secrets and fears, not unless you're a schmuck who wants to see your relationship fall to shit. Some Women are so upset they're not really equals. they're just completely ignorant to the fact that not being the final person everybody depends on is a privileged position.
That when push comes to shove, women want someone to lean on and someone to blame, that true equality to men is something they could never handle.
Like a child who wants to stay up late and eat unlimited amounts of candy, they only see the privileges of being a man, not the burdens.
Notice how women always go on about maturity in a way men don't seem to give a Bleep about? They're like the damn maturity police.
This reminds me of little kids who insist they're grown-ups out of insecurity. "Women are equal to men!" touted by women is the same infantile narcissism as a child claiming "I'm not a little kid anymore!". It stems from the desire to be taken seriously by people you're less mature and they capable than.
This is all ego, remember you will find the truth in action rather than words, for in words they claim equality to man, but in action they demand superiority from him.
In relation to this general statement "women are children", this is hyperbole, what this concretely means is "women are childlike" - if they weren't, you wouldn't want them. Feminine charm comes from a certain present-orientation, feminine beauty comes from a lack of ageing.
Women play up innocence and play down their cunning because this is what makes them attractive to men. Innocence is an inherently childlike quality. Men don't try to seem innocent because it's not masculine, things that are childlike are inherently unmasculine, but they aren't unfeminine. Why? Because women are closer to children than men. Stop thinking this is some way of talking women down or some sad attempt at dehumanisation. It isn't. It's a truism regardless of whether it suits your sensibilities.[i]
Shrewd women constantly leverage the appearance of innocence to get people to help them. Women pout, men don't. Women have strops, men don't. Women cry more than men. Women are less rational than men. In summary: women are more mature than children, but less mature than men.
[b][i]You can teach a woman to behave well, but she is still a woman and so requires discipline in the same way a child does. She craves it. She will not "be good" because "she's a good woman" she will only "be good" because you convey authority, and in order to convey authority, you must be superior, superior meaning more mature and more competent.
This is the natural order of things. Egalitarianism is an indoctrinated ideal, it is normal to you because you grew up brainwashed by feminist garbage, but it is not normal in nature, and it is not indicative of reality.
Women's childlike qualities are not just physical (smaller, less hair etc), but their neonatality is likewise echoed mentally.
The hottest women have greater neonatal traits than uglier ones. She's not your psychological equal. You can love her, care for her, even depend on her for small things, but she's not your equal and never will be.[/b]
As Trump said, she is somewhere between a child and an adult, an adolescent perhaps.
WE NEED GUYS TO ACT MANLY AND STOP BEHAVING LIKE A SISSY JUST BECAUSE THEY WANT TO GET INTO OUR PANTS

:Caveat

DarkRebel101:
I'm highly disappointed in you. Why do we even vie for gender equality when many members of the womenfolk deem themselves inferior?

I shake my head in pity.

Acidosis:
This is largely true. A man and a woman may be equal in the workplace, school, but NEVER at HOME.


Feminism theory ends and dies at the workplace. A male Lecturer I has no right to exercise superiority over a female Lecturer I. Reason is because they bare the same rank and by extension, they're equal. That's the end of feminism.

In marriage, your rank and educational qualification are paramountly useless. A female Lecturer I who choose to marry a non-educated mason must accept the leadership, authority and superiority of her man. They can never be EQUAL.

cococandy:
You're only citing examples that show women have been marginalized throughout history.

Nothing in there is empirical proof that men are superior.

Following your logic, white people are superior to blacks because they took us as slaves and took our lands and culture from us?
Brainwashing us that their culture and religion is the only true one which we now practice fervently and protect with our lives. (I digress...)

But if all you typed there is 'proof to you that men are superior to women, I hope you consider yourself inferior to a white woman too. Since it's the same logic. No?

Bottom line, you can't use oppression as evidence of superiority. If anything, it proves quite the opposite. That a bunch of people are so threatened by the mere free existence of others that they make up laws, story, religions and culture all centered around the oppression of the certain folks who's freedom threatens their fragile egos.

How you can't see that is beyond me.
Well not really.

Which still brings us back to "if a man is superior to you, what are you to him?"
Puzzle of the century.

eyinjuege:
People seem to be so fixated on marriage.

There's more to life than having someone to Lord it over, as it seems to some people, it's only in marriage you can do that.

Can you be a Lord outside marriage? If you can't, its time you start working on that.

bukatyne:
Except I am missing the OP, she is opining that men are more mature and superior to women naturally.... It has nothing to do with marriage.

bukatyne:
Except I am missing the OP, she is opining that men are more mature and superior to women naturally.... It has nothing to do with marriage.

AdexHo:
Arrant nonsense
You have no solid backup over your writeup
All i see is a he or she or whatever you're
Who doesn't know what superiority means
SMH
WISE UP

TV01:
With a few slight modifications – which are mostly semantic –I can’t say I see very much wrong with the OP.

I stand to be corrected, but I don’t see that OP is saying men are of more worth, or value than women, or even children. What is being said is that in bearing burdens and taking ownership, the greater responsibility and hence authority rests on men.

This history of mankind has not simply been one long uninterrupted timeline of “men oppressing women”, it has been an accord between them– even if imperfect – based with their complimentary differences in mind.

And if it evolves over time, it cannot do so beneficially, if we attempt to do so by ignoring, or trying to override as “constructs”, the hard wired and different, but complimentary natures.

This is clearly borne out by the dynamics of the interaction between the sexes. And first and foremost, and without gainsaying, women are the ones who most stridently push for, and would suffer most, if men despised this mantle.

Most especially in the interpersonal relationships (most notably marriage) between them. Women want men of higher status, men they can look up to and feel secure with.

The push for equality serves to masculinise women and feminise men. Women don’t want men who they don’t perceive as “superior” in status, either in a relative or absolute sense.

Women find it hard to respect – and hence maintain attraction for – men that they see as “equal” or slightly lower in status. Fact. Women don’t want the men that equality produces. Duh!

Likewise. Women taking on overly masculine traits is typically a turn-off for most men. Equality in the terms it is being presented is a lose, lose. Indeed, it’s a lose-lose-lose, as our children will also suffer, not just us.

Under the guise of "equality", most are seeking to wrest away the authority, without sharing the burden. Not that it would work for the best even if they did.

Any woman here that is with a man of equal or slightly inferior status to her should let us know. Along with those who bear the burden equally and in the same way with their men.


TV

TV01:
With a few slight modifications – which are mostly semantic –I can’t say I see very much wrong with the OP.

I stand to be corrected, but I don’t see that OP is saying men are of more worth, or value than women, or even children. What is being said is that in bearing burdens and taking ownership, the greater responsibility and hence authority rests on men.

TV01:
This history of mankind has not simply been one long uninterrupted timeline of “men oppressing women”, it has been an accord between them– even if imperfect – based with their complimentary differences in mind.

And if it evolves over time, it cannot do so beneficially, if we attempt to do so by ignoring, or trying to override as “constructs”, the hard wired and different, but complimentary natures.

TV01:
This is clearly borne out by the dynamics of the interaction between the sexes. And first and foremost, and without gainsaying, women are the ones who most stridently push for, and would suffer most, if men despised this mantle.

TV01:
Most especially in the interpersonal relationships (most notably marriage) between them. Women want men of higher status, men they can look up to and feel secure with

TV01:
The push for equality serves to masculinise women and feminise men. Women don’t want men who they don’t perceive as “superior” in status, either in a relative or absolute sense.

Women find it hard to respect – and hence maintain attraction for – men that they see as “equal” or slightly lower in status. Fact. Women don’t want the men that equality produces. Duh!

TV01:
Likewise. Women taking on overly masculine traits is typically a turn-off for most men. Equality in the terms it is being presented is a lose, lose. Indeed, it’s a lose-lose-lose, as our children will also suffer, not just us.

TV01:
Under the guise of "equality", most are seeking to wrest away the authority, without sharing the burden. Not that it would work for the best even if they did.

TV01:
Any woman here that is with a man of equal or slightly inferior status to her should let us know. Along with those who bear the burden equally and in the same way with their men.

TV

DarkRebel101:
The OP is a boy, not a female.

checkengine:
It has everything to do with marriage because that is one area the war seem the hardest fought. Workplace equality is just natural as 2 equals, say a male DG and a female DG are treated and seen as same. Some tasks in workplaces however are seen as a man's task due to its demands which by common sense isn't suitable for the adorable female folk even though given the opportunity a few will thrive well in them.

When you read through Nigeria social media sphere, you will agree with me that marriage wasn't absolved from the gender equality war.

bukatyne:
Reading his/her subsequent posts feels like a male moniker who has been here for long.

The tone of posts is subtly changing

bukatyne:
If I get you,

Men and women are 'equals' till they get married?

checkengine:


It has everything to do with marriage because that is one area the war seem the hardest fought. Workplace equality is just natural as 2 equals, say a male DG and a female DG are treated and seen as same. Some tasks in workplaces however are seen as a man's task due to its demands which by common sense isn't suitable for the adorable female folk even though given the opportunity a few will thrive well in them.

When you read through Nigeria social media sphere, you will agree with me that marriage wasn't absolved from the gender equality war.

IAmOged:
k...You are literary saying you are unable to accept aspect of reality that discomfort you....matrix defense

bukatyne:
It seems the OP is saying both:

Men are of more 'value/worth' and they have more responsibilities

bukatyne:
Well, definition of 'oppression' is subjective... A man bringing in a 2nd wife 30yrs ago was being 'a man'; today, he will get all sort of names.... ditto a man beating his wife.

bukatyne:
I agree that we can't evolve drastically without looking at the laid foundations.

bukatyne:
Mantle of marriage or superiority aka higher responsibilities?

bukatyne:
What is your definition of higher status?

bukatyne:
It depends on your definition of 'equality' and I am also wondering the usage of 'superior' here. If it doesn't mean 'more/better in worth', are you saying generally, women don't like men who have less responsibilities in marriage than them?

bukatyne:
If yes, how does this tie in with the fact that wives are often told they build their homes and the responsibility of how the marriage is lies solely on them?

bukatyne:
Examples of the 'masculine' traits you reference here? Examples?

bukatyne:
When you define what you mean by status, we can further from there....

bukatyne:
And no two people can bear a burden equally and in the same way. Even a mother will not bear the burden of training 2 female children equally and in the same way.

Pidgin2:
Are you liking you ur own posts?