₦airaland Forum

Nigeria is in 2500BC - pls do not compare to the US - forget gender, we are age-ist, tribalist, anti-intellectual

chaloskyx:
Dont forget their oga papatapata madam Allison Madueke

check the no1 on the list, na squad leader she be

Yes o...women woundnt be totally foolish like our men...why because
1. Women can never abandon her children..except the one wey dey smoke Colorado
2. Ngozi okongo eweala is an example why we need to give women chance
3.women are built to manage and build whatsoever well..

Let me site an example...I have worked as a personal assistant to a brand manager at Unilever.. This lady in question is richer than her husband, the husband too is a good lawyer, he has a pretty nice office too at highland and was doing pretty well too..they have only a daughter..I was close to this woman till the extent she allows me to go for interviews with her car..with all these gestures, I respect her so much..there was a day we argued about dealings of men and women in different situations..she emphasized on the fact that men are too hasty in making decision either by pride, or the current situations running through their mind at that particular moment..but women are built to withstand pressure.
How do I mean...
A woman who is older can marry a man she's older than and she will accept that as a destiny or something..but have you heard of a man dating a younger lady and be submissive to her not to talk about dating some one he is older than or even when the lady is older, he would be reasonably submissive..

My madam said there was a time the husband friend was at getting married at uyo and they had to go..so the husband decision was to fly down there, attend the wedding and start coming back asap..bus she instead advised the husband that why won't they use the new corolla they have to travel down with their only daughter, since they two are always busy..this can be an avenue to enjoy some good time with their daughter..and also it will be cost effective since its not an official movement...the husband out of ( the man thing now) said no..that they will fly and that's that..so two days before the travel date...the man called her and told her that they should travel by road...they enjoyed the journey last last, the daughter ma enjoy too...them save extra cash afterwards... So i think they should giv women chance...
Na on cruise I write this wan o...

Hathor5:
Don't bother dear. Some of them still live in the Stone Age. Let them. Trumptards are also crawling back in their holes. Let them.

Meanwhile ..

Who is running the world?

I find it funny that any time a woman gets into or is recommended for a position of power, her qualifications are questioned and over scrutinized.

Ask them where they were with their perusal when a *** like Trump was put into the White House. No one questions men’s qualifications. But the moment it’s a woman, riffraffs from all corners want to make sure she’s being given the position on merit not because she’s a woman. Trifling

Men get positions for just being men all the time. And these idiots never blink about it.

Sorry for the rant

Cutehector:
credible women, not just any kind of woman.

and credible men too. Not just any man. So far Nigerian govt has been obviously run by any and every man who can buy his way in. And look how worse off we are for it.

Y’all want to be so by-the-book when it comes to women.

Sheggy13:
The way some of you use words anyhow. Do you really know the meaning of merit? If you do, you won't say this gibberish. You mean the Democratic party elite wanted an Affirmative action candidate and they just picked a nobody Kamala Harris on the street because she's a woman of colour? We're talking about a woman who was a distinguished attorney, District attorney for San Francisco, elected as Attorney General of California State for 2 terms ( the state with the biggest electoral college votes in the whole of US), current serving senator in same California since 2017. Which CV can be richer than this for VP position and someone is talking about not getting it by merit.

That is nothing. She slept her way to the top. She was dating mayor willie brown of San Francisco even though she knew he was married. Who then gave her juicy positions like two state regulatory boards—the Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board and the California Medical Assistance Commission

She was in the race for presidency and was the first to drop out of the race. She couldn't convince anyone or get support

The democratic party elites wanted a woman as vp because of their promotion of gender equality and also ideology like immigration and they found it in kamala harris, a good message to sell, a daughter of immigrants.

How come someone who couldn't even win the presidential race with other competitors was selected as Vp to biden? It has nothing to do with qualification but ideology.

Also, the dnc policy was to select only women for the position for vp, that is affirmative action, employment based on gender rather than merit.

cococandy:
Really?
She didn’t merit it?

Joker

Yes she does not merit it.

Was she not the first person to drop out of the race during her party primaries for selecting the party flag bearer.

The dnc idealogy was to look for a female vp since Hillary lost the presidency to trump in 2016.

If you noticed only women were selected for the position of Vp, until the party decided to pick Kamala Harris.

Is she more qualify than susan rice, and the other women who contested against her during the primaries.

She was selected based of the party idealogy of immigration(daughter of immigrants) and so called gender equality rather than experience.

Since only women were selected for the vp position, are they trying to say if women are given equal opportunity to compete with men for that position they wont succed, why didnt they do the selection based on merit.

The selection of only women based on their gender for the position of VP is affirmative action

cococandy:
I find it funny that any time a woman gets into or is recommended for a position of power, her qualifications are questioned and over scrutinized.

Ask them where they were with their perusal when a *** like Trump was put into the White House. No one questions men’s qualifications. But the moment it’s a woman, riffraffs from all corners want to make sure she’s being given the position on merit not because she’s a woman. Trifling

Men get positions for just being men all the time. And these idiots never blink about it.

Sorry for the rant

Shut up, we're in an Era of Equality... If you think meritocracy should be sacfriced on the alters of gender favoritism and blackmail then let's see your woman candidates at the polls competent or not competent.
Power is not just given to anyone... You'd need to spend humongously to earn it and go through the rigours of electioneering campaigns and even party primaries. Men have been doing these things even with all the conspiracy theories, hate, propagandas against them by men and women alike. When Trump wAs going to become America's president his candidacy was riddled with all manner of allegations including sexual assault by the opposite gender, yet nobody attached a gender based defamatory tag to it even when his opponent Hilary Clinton being a woman, her team could have been leveraging and orchestrating this narrative to discredit Trump's reputation using moral rectitude as a yardstick.
Trump was called all manner of names including the famous one "pussy grabber" and we all didn't attach a gender coloration to his travails at the time. Imagine if Hilary clinton was called "a Mouth Gig specialist" or "penis grabber". Women and feminists would have said she's been demonized and discriminated based on her gender. But Donald Trump didn't blink an eyelid did he?
The rest is history...
Buhari is the most insulted Nigerian president ever and there's been several gender based narratives targeted at discrediting him including "the oza rumz" blunder he made as well as his convictions as a Muslim which informs his resolve not to exchange handshakes with women. The opposition party attached a gender coloration to this and be still strived beyond all reasonable doubt without raising an eyelid.

Power is only wrestled by the Strong and it is not given on a platter of gold. If you think just coz you're a woman is enough reason to avoid criticisms and scrutiny then stay at home and be a mother. Otherwise be prepared for whatever criticisms that koms with vying for political offices and save us the "it's because I'm a woman" bullshit

You don’t even know the meaning of affirmative action that you’re regurgitating.
It doesn’t mean to give someone of a specific group a position because they belong to that group. It means broadening the selection criteria to include groups of people who have always been marginalized. And once they are included in the consideration, a qualified person from amongst them will be chosen.

Much like affirmative action with African Americans, it doesn’t mean that unqualified AAs get stuff for being AA. It’s means the qualified ones among them are given consideration whereas they would otherwise be automatically disqualified for being AA as in the slavery and Jim Crow era. Women’s considerations are now increased so that the qualified ones amongst them will be given opportunities rather than automatically (but subtly) disqualified for being women.

But go off. You learned a new phrase . Affirmative action!

thebosstrevor1:
Yes she does not merit it.

Was she not the first person to drop out of the race during her party primaries for selecting the party flag bearer.

The dnc idealogy was to look for a female vp since Hillary lost the presidency to trump in 2016.

If you noticed only women were selected for the position of Vp, until the party decided to pick Kamala Harris.

Is she more qualify than susan rice, and the other women who contested against her during the primaries.

She was selected based of the party idealogy of immigration(daughter of immigrants) and so called gender equality rather than experience.

Since only women were selected for the vp position, are they trying to say if women are given equal opportunity to compete with men for that position they wont succed, why didnt they do the selection based on merit.

The selection of only women based on their gender for the position of VP is affirmative action

Here’s another one

Yamiriflathead:
Shut up, we're in an Era of Equality... If you think meritocracy should be sacfriced on the alters of gender favoritism and blackmail then let's see your woman candidates, competent or not competent.
Power is not just given to anyone... You'd need to spend humongously to earn it and go through the rigours of electioneering campaigns and even party primaries. Men have been doing these things even with all the conspiracy theories, hate, propagandas against them by men and women alike. When Trump wAs going to become America's president his candidacy was riddled with all manner of allegations including sexual assault by the opposite gender, yet nobody attached a gender target/defamatory tag to it even when his opponent Hilary Clinton being a woman, her team could have been the leveraging and orchestrating this narrative to discredit Trump's reputation.
Trump was called all manner of names including the famous one pussy grabber and we all didn't attach a gender coloration to his travails at the time.
The rest is history...
Buhari is the most insulted Nigerian president ever and there's been several gender based narratives targeted at discrediting him including "the oza rumz" blunder he made as well as his convictions as a Muslim which informs his resolve not to exchange handshakes with women. The opposition party attached a gender coloration to this and be still strived beyond all reasonable doubt without raising an eyelid.

Power is only wrestled by the Strong and it is not given on a platter of gold. If you think just coz you're a woman is enough reason to avoid criticisms and scrutiny then stay at home and be a mother. Otherwise be prepared for whatever criticisms that koms with vying for political offices and save us the "it's because I'm a woman" bullshit

Should have known this was conservative troll.

Tell me where you amongst those who found issues with her smile on the night of the vice presidential debate?

Oh wait! You must have also had an issue with how harsh she was when she debated Biden during their primaries.

If women are not sleeping their way to the top, they are too harsh and not submissive enough, or their smile is not genuine, motherly and heartwarming enough. Una go tire

thebosstrevor1:
That is nothing. She slept her way to the top. She was dating mayor willie brown of San Francisco even though she knew he was married. Who then gave her juicy positions like two state regulatory boards—the Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board and the California Medical Assistance Commission

She was in the race for presidency and was the first to drop out of the race. She couldn't convince anyone or get support

The democratic party elites wanted a woman as vp because of their promotion of gender equality and also ideology like immigration and they found it in kamala harris, a good message to sell, a daughter of immigrants.

How come someone who couldn't even win the presidential race with other competitors was selected as Vp to biden? It has nothing to do with qualification but ideology.

Also, the dnc policy was to select only women for the position for vp, that is affirmative action, employment based on gender rather than merit.

Beckysexy:
Yeah...he's right!
It high time they give women a chance.

Iike
Allison,
Patricia,
Madam patient..... And many more of them.

cococandy:
I find it funny that any time a woman gets into or is recommended for a position of power, her qualifications are questioned and over scrutinized.

Ask them where they were with their perusal when a *** like Trump was put into the White House. No one questions men’s qualifications. But the moment it’s a woman, riffraffs from all corners want to make sure she’s being given the position on merit not because she’s a woman. Trifling

Men get positions for just being men all the time. And these idiots never blink about it.

Sorry for the rant

madam. women too get the same privilege sometimes through devious means

Oga Festus I beg shift go one corner!!

angelfallz:
Women have been infantilized since in the west by men, it is gradually happening here in Nigeria. Funny enough It is the same men that infantilize women that still complain that women are entitled

Of course.

When someone hands you something or a platter or thinks 'he helped you, gave you, supported you or assisted you' to achieve something, they can make rubbish of your efforts.

It is tragic that most of the women clamoring for all these 'help, support, inclusion etc.' do not understand the effect and psychology of it.

How wouldn't people open their mouths to say 'female leaders in Nigeria' are bad or immoral when they are expected 'to give way for women'?

They mention Dizeani, Pat Attah, Stella Oduah etc as why 'we should not include women' like the men are not worse.

Why won't they?

Why wouldn't an armed robber condemn a liar because he is expected to 'help' him?

cococandy:
Should have known this was conservative troll.

Tell me where you amongst those who found issues with her smile on the night of the vice presidential debate?

Oh wait! You must have also had an issue with how harsh she was when she debated Biden during their primaries.

If women are not sleeping their way to the top, they are too harsh and not submissive enough, or their smile is not genuine, motherly and heartwarming enough. Una go tire

She didn't make any valid points when debating except smile, is smile the qualification or experience needed for a job? i think her plans and ideas are what is important and she didn't convinced no one except claiming sexism during the debate

If she was so good, why didn't she reach the finals in her party primaries?

She was the first to drop out of the race for lack of support.

Don't try to generalize and play victim, i didn't write that women sleep to the top, i wrote that kamala Harris slept to the top, it is a proven fact

crackhaus:
Like less privileged

It irks me all the time.

Because it rubbishes the effort of other women who have achieved great things.

And because I grew seeing women achieve great things without feeling 'victimized' or 'stopped' because they were women.

My headmistress, principal, registrar, women in church I grew up in. (Lecturers, professors, head of institutes), my CEO etc. etc.

On the non-professional scene, women build businesses from scratch to great heights etc.

When I read these whinny women and men who think women must be 'helped' or given space, I feel blest to grow amongst women who are confident enough in themselves to achieve whatever they set their minds to do.

Well, like we would say, it is only God that helps without pinching you about it.

Those that want handouts should keep waiting for it.

cococandy:
I find it funny that any time a woman gets into or is recommended for a position of power, her qualifications are questioned and over scrutinized.

Ask them where they were with their perusal when a *** like Trump was put into the White House. No one questions men’s qualifications. But the moment it’s a woman, riffraffs from all corners want to make sure she’s being given the position on merit not because she’s a woman. Trifling

Men get positions for just being men all the time. And these idiots never blink about it.

Sorry for the rant

Men do not get positions for just being men, they get positions for being qualified and experienced.

I have never seen in the international stage where only men are told to apply for a job

but there are many positions in the international stage where only women are selected for the job. for example the WTO and DNC VP.

Why are they not allowing open competition between men and women?

why do they have to select women based on gender rather than merit

Yep. Conservative troll. First line is proof.

thebosstrevor1:

She didn't make any valid points when debating except smile, is smile the qualification or experience needed for a job? i think her plans and ideas are what is important and she didn't convinced no one except claiming sexism during the debate

If she was so good, why didn't she reach the finals in her party primaries?

She was the first to drop out of the race for lack of support.

Don't try to generalize and play victim, i didn't write that women sleep to the top, i wrote that kamala Harris slept to the top, it is a proven fact

And the other men who didn’t reach the finals in their primaries?
If any of them was chosen as his running mate, would you consider them the affirmative action candidate?
Of course not.
Because she’s a woman, then it must be because she was pitied and chosen for being a woman.

You lot are embarrassing honestly.

thebosstrevor1:
She didn't make any valid points when debating except smile, is smile the qualification or experience needed for a job? i think her plans and ideas are what is important and she didn't convinced no one except claiming sexism during the debate

If she was so good, why didn't she reach the finals in her party primaries?

She was the first to drop out of the race for lack of support.

Don't try to generalize and play victim, i didn't write that women sleep to the top, i wrote that kamala Harris slept to the top, it is a proven fact

Yea right

thebosstrevor1:
Men do not get positions for just being men, they get positions for being qualified and experienced

I have never seen in the international stage where only men are told to apply for a job

but there are many positions in the international stage where only women are selected for the job. for example the WTO and DNC VP.

Why are they not allowing open competition between men and women?

why do they have to select women based on gender rather than merit

cococandy:
You don’t even know the meaning of affirmative action that you’re regurgitating.
It doesn’t mean to give someone of a specific group a position because they belong to that group. It means broadening the selection criteria to include groups of people who have always been marginalized. And once they are included in the consideration, a qualified person from amongst them will be chosen.

Much like affirmative action with African Americans, it doesn’t mean that unqualified AAs get stuff for being AA. It’s means the qualified ones among them are given consideration whereas they would otherwise be automatically disqualified for being AA as in the slavery and Jim Crow era. Women’s considerations are now increased so that the qualified ones amongst them will be given opportunities rather than automatically (but subtly) disqualified for being women.

But go off. You learned a new phrase . Affirmative action!

Maybe we are both using different dictionary

according to my dictionary

Affirmative action is a policy initiative in which a person's nationality, sex, religion, and caste are taken into account by a company or a government organization to extend employment or education opportunities

Affirmative action also implies reducing the standards to accept people of different nationality, sex and religion so that they can be represented

Affirmative action is not about merit or choosing the best qualified in a group, it is all about lowering the standard so that those people can be represented.

There are research out there that shows the different standards of qualification for white students and black students during admission into the university. this what schools do, they lower the bar for grades and test scores for underrepresented groups and by creating an admissions standard "based on racial preference rather than academic achievement

Yes Affirmative action considers all that in addition to, nay after qualification is first considered. It’s actually illegal to give an unqualified person such a position/s because they belong to any of the said groups. However if there is a tie between two similarly qualified people, affirmative action could use their marginalized status as the tie breaker. But.... qualification must come first before group.


Why is this being done? Because historically and currently, belonging to such groups have served and still do serve as hindrances to the progress of individuals who belong to said groups. It was enforced by law and upheld by society that such people should never be in such positions.

People of color still get passed over for jobs they qualify for because of their color. True until today. Women get automatically sidelined from consideration because of assumptions by ignorant folks about how they would lead when chosen, etc etc.

For having endured centuries of such limitations, affirmative action is a way to consciously make amends where possible. It’s not a handout. It’s not pity. It’s not quota. I wish people would speak on things they actually understand.


The “implication” that standards are lowered to accommodate such people is your personal bias showing. In this case your bias is because it’s a woman. If anything, people of marginalized groups have had to work harder and are always expected to prove themselves worthy of the position they are being considered for. They consistently have to show they are fit for the job, or the position, what have you.

This is something a white man in the west or any man in other patriarchal societies typically does not have to worry about.

thebosstrevor1:
Maybe we are both using different dictionary

according to my dictionary

Affirmative action is a policy initiative in which a person's nationality, sex, religion, and caste are taken into account by a company or a government organization to extend employment or education opportunities

Affirmative action also implies reducing the standards to accept people of different nationality, sex and religion so that they can be represented

Affirmative action is not about merit or choosing the best qualified in a group, it is all about lowering the standard so that those people can be represented.

There are research out there that shows the different standards of qualification for white students and black students during admission into the university. this what schools do, they lower the bar for grades and test scores for underrepresented groups and by creating an admissions standard "based on racial preference rather than academic achievement

cococandy:
And the other men who didn’t reach the finals in their primaries?
If any of them was chosen as his running mate, would you consider them the affirmative action candidate?
Of course not.
Because she’s a woman, then it must be because she was pitied and chosen for being a woman.

You lot are embarrassing honestly.

That was open competition, they lost and went home, that is what merit is all about, if you don't do well, you go out. if one of the men was chosen by the party as VP, then that is a political affairs but in Harris case, why do they have to make it only a woman thing when it comes to choosing her for VP. Can the party not make it an open affairs for both men and women so that the best will be selected. Why discriminate against men?

Hilary Clinton contested against men and women and reach the finals, she nearly defeated barack obama, because of her record, she was selected as party flag bearer in 2016 but lost to President Trump. that is what merit is all about.

Hilary Clinton competed against men for secretary of state and won it but anyway she was a disaster.

Like i said, they were all equally qualified to be chosen as VP. And she got it.

You wouldn’t be screaming affirmative action if a man got it. This here is proof that it is actually needed.

Obviously it’s a subjective assessment since you believe Hilary was qualified yet there were those who didn’t think she was. And even went as far as electing a buffoon to the white house rather than have a woman in there. Should tell you something

Good bye

thebosstrevor1:
That was open competition, they lost and went home, that is what merit is all about, if you don't do well, you go out. if one of the men was chosen by the party as VP, then that is a political affairs but in Harris case, why do they have to make it only a woman thing when it comes to choosing her for VP. Can the party not make it an open affairs for both men and women so that the best will be selected. Why discriminate against men?

Hilary Clinton contested against men and women and reach the finals, she nearly defeated barack obama, because of her record, she was selected as party flag bearer in 2016 but lost to President Trump. that is what merit is all about.

Hilary Clinton competed against men for secretary of state and won it but anyway she was a disaster.

cococandy:
Like i said, they were all equally qualified to be chosen as VP. And she got it.

You wouldn’t be screaming affirmative action if a man got it. This here is proof that it is actually needed.

Obviously it’s a subjective assessment since you believe Hilary was qualified yet there were those who didn’t think she was. And even went as far as electing a buffoon to the white house rather than have a woman in there. Should tell you something

Good bye

SMH........U women want gender equality but don't want the responsibility that comes with it.

See people posting pics of Kamala Harris everywhere as if she deserved that position .....Did you see her debate with Mike pence ? She was busy flipping her hair and smiling like a seductress. But alas she won the VP slot cos she is a woman

Those Democrats have too many simps

Kamala Harris is not a novice in Democratic party politics, she has been a well known and active political leadership in her state.
She earned her credit in leadership, she prepared for the role the party wanted her to play.
So, all these talk about giving women a chance in Nigeria is nonsense.
No party just call you to leadership if there's no evidence of track record.
Very few Nigerian women have active in mainstream leadership and the ones in politics majority are a write off.
Unless a party brings in some private sector successful business and cooperate sector women and mentor through the rants till show capacity and push them up.
99% of the ones we have been like the typical average Nigerian politician.
Stella Odua, Felicia Ette, Florence Itta-Giwa etc.
The only real women in politics are in small and weak parties and don't stand a chance.

bukatyne:
It irks me all the time.

Because it rubbishes the effort of other women who have achieved great things.

And because I grew seeing women achieve great things without feeling 'victimized' or 'stopped' because they were women.

My headmistress, principal, registrar, women in church I grew up in. (Lecturers, professors, head of institutes), my CEO etc. etc.

On the non-professional scene, women build businesses from scratch to great heights etc.

When I read these whinny women and men who think women must be 'helped' or given space, I feel blest to grow amongst women who are confident enough in themselves to achieve whatever they set their minds to do.

Well, like we would say, it is only God that helps without pinching you about it.

Those that want handouts should keep waiting for it.

That alone is GOLD.