₦airaland Forum

women w pancake nyansh

iyatrustee:
i hope all this men here truly practise what they preach? my own husband would not do any house chores oh. infact last night he woke me up in the middle of the night to give him water from the frigde in our room to drink!

sorry to say, but your husband is a lazy man. I know dudes like that. He cannot get his own water to drink? So if you are not at home he waits for you to come home to give him water to drink?

Are you sure you are a wife or a house girl? You may need to confirm it with your husband master

If a husband comes home and lies on the couch waiting for his wife to come home and prepare meals for him, then let him lay hungry.

With refrigerators and microwaves, the problems associated with preparation of meals should end. The wife can prepare a large quantity of food and store it in the refrigerator, and the husband can microwave it if his wife is not at home.

And if the wife works more than the husband, then he should share in the chores. But that does not remove the doing of household chores from the wife's province, as she his principally responsible assuming they both have equal amount of spare time. But if she has less spare time, then it is only fair and right for the man to step up.

Ileke-IdI:
Which problems are you looking at? If it's to clear the doubt on the parental facts, Amniocentesis will solve that. yes, it comes with a problem, but Amnio is not the only prenatal test, you know. If you're so concern about your contribution to the pregnancy, then do the test, if not, shut up and support the mother of your baby.

The jury is still out on this, esp since it's just a matter opinion. Because you see, I too can say "the law NEEDS modification".
Why are you on the medical bills, I only gave that as an example to the different types of support a pregnant woman would need. And yes, medical bills is one of it. Esp if there might be complications such as a family history of abnormalities. The finance for amniotic test to test for the baby's condition should be shared between the mother and father to be.


Exactly. If the child needs support before the actual birth, then the man should also help. no?

If medical bills is one of it, what are the others? So the law should force the man to take the pregnant woman to her hospital visits?

And if either party cannot afford to pay for the expensive DNA test?

Bottom line is that you have assumed facts that the law did not address and come to your unsubstantiated conclusion. You have concluded that forcing the law is meant to provide support for the child, not the woman.

Ileke-IdI:
All these ones na excuse.
You never heard of Amniocentesis test? An Amniocentesis test allows medical experts and physicians to withdraw DNA from the amniotic sac before an actual birth occurs.  So a man CAN know if it's his baby or not. The only problem is the cost of the test and if such technology exists in Nigeria.

Aminocentesis test would not solve the problem as a practical matter because it causes a high risk of miscarriage and is extremely dangerous, it can be done only in the second trimester, and it is extremely expensive. That would not solve the problem in the matter at hand. There are other tests that can be used to determine paternity during pregnancy, and they are very expensive. I don't even think that technology exists in Nigeria. Abi will you want them to use taxpayer money to solve the many frivolous claims that may be levied against innocent men?

Ileke-IdI:
And that's where the law needs modification. and someone should define the field of "abandonment" pertaining to this law.
If a man is tested to be the father of said baby, any medical bills that pertains to the baby and mother of the baby should be shared between the man and woman involved. You decide to get a woman pregnant, then be ready to deal with anything that comes with it.

the law needs no modification; it should be repealed with immediate effect. No doubt the law has good intentions, but it punishes desertion of the woman. It is not clear whether a man who deserts a woman but still pays the medical bills incident to prenatal care will still be held to be in violation of law.

Ileke-IdI:
[b]In the United States, there is a strong public policy interest in making sure that both parents support a child. [/b]This means that rigidly enforced child support laws are in place in all 50 states. Parents generally cannot waive a child's right to child support, and parents who are ordered to pay support but do not do so can face a host of enforcement actions and penalties including the loss of their driver’s license or garnishment of their wages. Support determinations are made by looking at factors such as the income of the parents, the responsibilities of the parents, the number of children and the needs of those children. Each state has slightly different laws and calculations, including the Income Shares model, the Percentage of Income model, and the Melson Formula model.


The same country that prevents the abortion of a baby past a specific periods views them as a living creation. The last time I checked, such living breathing organism in the womb of a human is a child. If the child, while in the womb of it's mother, needs financial support, then the law should enforce men to provide support. That is, if amniocentesis test proves he's the father of the baby.

No one is not saying the man should not support a child he fathered; you are missing the point. When the child is born, a DNA test is cheaper and readily available and can prove paternity. At that time, the man should support the child. In addition, the woman may sue for contribution to defray the costs she paid for prenatal care. The issue is whether the man should be punished for deserting a pregnant woman. That amniocentesis test is too expensive and dangerous.

If there is a safer, alternate test that can be used to prove paternity during pregnancy, which I think there is, then i am up for it. But those tests are usually very expensive.
Also it is not clear whether a father who provides financial support but still "deserts" the woman will be held to be in violation of the law.

Ileke-IdI:
Obviously, you cannot read. Teacher teaching himself nonsense.

I asked if it was the same thing. . . .even though child support is supposed to provide for the child after birth, some court still expect men to financially provide for the woman during the period of pregnancy. i.e hospital bills.

What is the point of Fashola's law if men dont provide financial support for the mother of their soon to be born babies? So men suppose to just siddon and stare at belle?

Continue weeping, what else can you do? When you're done weeping, fix your mascara.

which court expect men to provide financial support for a woman during pregnancy?

Educate me

How can you require a man to provide financial support to a pregnant woman who may not be carrying his baby?

Educate me

How will you guard against frivolous claims levied against men who did not impregnate the pregnant claimant?

Educate me

I did not say that the point of the law was not to provide financial support for the mother during her pregnancy. In fact, I said that it is the point of the law, but that it is a silly point.

I said that people here have interpreted it to mean that the man should provide child support.

even as to a father who claims the pregnancy, the law punishes abandonment of the pregnant woman, not failure to pay hospital bills or provide financial support.

If reading comprehension is your issue, go back to a competent school

aikuda:
this is overgeneralization. I have received many gifts from Nigerian girlfriends in the past.

another point is that if you are not "servicing" the girl very well then she will not buy you a gift. if you bulala her very well and she screams daddy, trust me she will buy you a jangi rover epo moto and a lexus jeep

sleekch1c:
That's because 9ja guys re major a55holes, I for one will not spend a kobo on one unless he is my frnd or brother.

I swear you must buy me a gift today today with your last kobo. I am now your friend.

reading comprehension is apparently a disease that has brought Nigeria to its knees, as evidenced by the comments on this thread.

topic says Fashola signs a law against abandoning pregnant women

people here have interpreted it to mean that it is a law requiring men to pay child support.

Oh how I weep for my country

shawonlese:
This law does not make sense in a way until the baby is born and DNA proves the father.

The man can deny the baby is not his.

A typical scenario, An unknown woman comes out in public, saying Fashola impregnated her and abandoned her.  Headline news!

If Fashola comes out to deny it, what will happen? How will they prove it is Fashola or not? Will he go to jail.

Another half baked law from half baked lawyers i would think.

after the law is born, the law presumably no longer applies, for the woman is no longer pregnant.

even if the law applied, you can't force a man to be with a woman he does not want to be with.

you may only require him to care for his baby after DNA test has established paternity, unless the man voluntarily obligates himself to take care of a child he did not father

bottom line, the person who drafted the law is a moorron. And for Fash to sign such a bill into law, has lost some points in my book. I hope it is not true.

hannydarl:
For those of you who are too young to know about DNA there are tests that can show who the father, mother or relative of a person is. So the governor can order the test to be carried out when katakata enter bele story. Secondly [b]I think the law is for deadbeat dads [/b]who completely abbandon the women with no form of support be it moral, physical or finnancial. Not men that accept responsibility and are contributing to the upkeep of the child eventhough they are not in relationship with the mother anymore.

The poster said Fash signed law against abandoning pregnant women. Nowhere does it say the law is for deadbeat dads, but you think the law is for deadbeat dads. You don't know and are assuming. I hope you don't assume facts not presented on your exams, because you will get a F9

why not make a law that makes the father responsible for providing support for the child he fathered

the law--at least from the topic--is geared at protecting pregnant women, not aimed at requiring fathers to provide support for a child they fathered.

and DNA test does not determine paternity until the child is born, so you don't know what the bleep you are talking about. Maybe you are the one who is too old to comprehend how DNA tests work.

I need to see a link to the story

The law is BS and cow poo, to put it mildly.

You cannot force anyone to stay with anyone who you do not want to be with.

Also is abandonment defined in the legislation? What if the putative father does not want to be physically with the pregnant mother but will provide moral support?

What if the lady abandons the man? Aha! Would it be OK for her to do it but not the man?

How can you prove paternity? What if the man denies ever sleeping with the gal much less impregnating her?

Will there be recourse for men who were falsely accused of abandonment if a DNA test subsequently disproves the claim that they were the father?

Will the lying woman be jailed if she knowingly claimed another man fathered her child and abandoned her?

This law is celebrating reactionary and stupidity politics, as mere good intentions should not predominate over reason and the law of unintended consequences.

Genny is 32 and so beautiful. Good lawd! I will take her over plenty 18-yr olds sef.

I read the comments of some people who have no problem with this jagbajantis website, and, like Tupac said, I shed so many tears. I also weep.

If your government cannot portray itself in a presentable manner on something as simple as a website, which all it takes is to hire some reputable geeks and graphic designers to do the darn job, then how is that same government supposed to tackle more complex issues?

Those same people will also say they have no problem with the embarrassing state of our international airports, where NEPA dey take light, sliding doors no dey work, and A/C no dey work. They will say that "at least dem try."

An airport, like a website, is a gateway to a country and where first impressions are formed.

@ OP

send him a text message; I am sure you will get a response. Also in the past have you been very combative while he tried to talk to you in person? If so, maybe he is just trying to avoid another confrontation.

I will advise texting him. I know it sounds corny that you will resort to communicating via text when you can speak in person, but apparently speaking in person isn't working, so trying other means won't be a bad idea.

If he does not respond to your text, then send him an email.

I am sure some people would not pick up the money for fear that the money was jazzed and picking it up may make them turn into a cat or a dog.

tpia@:
keep weighing the "plausibility" of f.ools, since you're one yourself.

the poster himself said he or she is an efulufu, but i.diots are considering his/her posts "weighty matters" for "serious" deliberation.

who be mugu and maga.

you are an iddiot and a big fooool. You and your foolish cronies on NL resort to personal attacks when people express differing views. And rather than challenge the argument on its merits your foooolish self resort to personal attacks.

You are so foolish that because the poster's screen name is "efulefu" you think his argument has no merit. You are probably a product of the faulty educational system in Nigeria--you cannot reason.

And to answer your question, you be the mugu and the maga. .

tpia@:
whiners are just that- whiners.

the fact that you thought fit to support efulefu, a known misogynist and hater of nigerian women, speaks volumes about your character.

efulufu himself is probably laughing his butt off at the number of so-called men who just jump up anytime they see a women-bashing thread.

or are you the op?

sharap! It is faulty reasoning to conclude that a topic has no merit based on the poster's past. I don't reason like that. I weigh the plausibility and analyze each topic based on its content, not on the poster's past.

You are a mukaila . Anytime men voice their opinion you call them whiners. When women open a thread and do the same thing you will probably support them and be a woman wrapper--and I'm sure you won't call them whiners.

You obviously know nothing about women; who knows--you may even be gaay. Go and sit your behind somewhere.

ogugua88:
Well, while all these men speak the bitter truth about three or four girls they've had bad encounters with, the hundreds of good ones will continue to pass them by. I'm not being biased; the same goes for women.

such a fallacy. A good girl is a good girl, and as long as you give every new girl you meet the benefit of the doubt, then you should have no problem. at least you will eventually meet that one who will fit your desires. I have met retard girls, and I've met good girls.

Women should be the same way, too. Give a new guy you meet the benefit of the doubt.

tpia@:
you people have suffered- maybe because of your bad character.

if you spend all your time abusing naija women, then why are you expecting anything from them?

whiners.

go and see a psychologist or go back to school or consult a dictionary. When someone speaks the bitter truth, you call that abusing. If guys don't condemn a behavior they do not support, how are these girls gonna change.

It is dudes like you who will die of heart attack trying to be a nice guy instead of calling your girl out when she phucks up. People like who want to turn a hooo into a housewife. Good luck

I am sure there are Naija women who buy their men gifts, maybe like 0.5 % of them.

@ Sagamite


you no go kill me with laughter oooooooo

Sagamite:
What a fcking brilliantly put post.

People just hear about concepts or ideologies and scream it without questioning it, critiquing it or evaluating its sense or applicability.

So when the UK or US police arrest people planning to bomb innocent people and locking them up, why are the liberal crusaders, anti-logic brigade not asking for the potential terrorist "rights" because the person planning the terror is has not yet done it, hence is not yet guilty of any horrible act and could "possibly" have changed his mind at the last minute.

Utter tosh arguments all in the name of trying to show they are liberal!

You are so right. Even in Yankee, where I stay, presidential candidates cannot accept more than $2,500 from any single donor. This is to prevent candidates from seeking out donors who have the finances to buy and influence an election.

There are restrictions on the benefits senators and congressmen can receive from private companies while in office.

Some of these Nairalanders just hear the word constitutional rights on movies, and do not know its applicability and that it is not an absolute right. When we talk about public officials, the state has a compelling interest in preventing corruption, so the state normally restricts the freedoms and rights of public officials.

As one poster suggested, you are to presume or anticipate that public officials are susceptible to being corrupt and the state should therefore tailor laws that will eliminate (or at least curtail) any possible corruption by these public officials. Nigeria is even worse, because precedent has suggest that corruption has now become the norm, so I support any  law that is aimed reducing corruption.

Reading this thread is annoying, as many people don't understand that no one is putting a gun to one's head to accept a position as a public official. If you cannot accept the restraints and requirements attendant to becoming a public official, then for the sake of peace, remain a private citizen.

Public officials should not have the same rights as a private citizen, and any law that imposes restrictions on a public official's liberty should be welcomed as long as the law is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling governmental interest. Here, there is a compelling interest in motivating public officials to improve the areas of education by making sure that their children attend the same educational institutions as the children of their constituents. That way, they will be motivated to fix it and not allow it to decay.

For example, if you attempt to pass a bill requiring incoming presidents to publicly declare their assets, will any aspiring president now claim that his constitutional rights are being infringed because he is required to declare his assets as a condition to becoming  president? If any aspiring president makes such a claim, voters should run away from that candidate.

Same thing with these lunatics called public officials in Nigeria. They have had an open field in which to steal money with impunity and without any obstacles.

Once you start imposing all these restraints, aspiring public officials will now begin to realize that public office is a position that comes with the obligation to serve the people, not to enrich their pockets.

free kerosene;

free education;

free healthcare;

free electricity;

free housing;

free punny, yaay!

some people cannot even reason. they want govt. to provide everything for them free of charge.

this is bad policy. It is not sustainable, causes over-dependence on government, and offers no meaningful solution to the energy problem of Imo residents.

this giving of free kerosene may be a ruse to appeal to the emotion of Imo residents so that he can thereafter embezzle govt. funds with less interference. this is similar to a political candidate giving free "dangote rice" to voters without offering any meaningful solution to the problem on the ground.

tax payer money should be used to implement sustainable projects, not band-aid projects.

Kobojunkie:
I don't think this is the way to go about this, given that the easy around to this is that, right before swearing in, they could easily ensure their wards are already enrolled in the schools so they will not be impacted by this law in the end. 

I see your point, which makes sense on paper. But in application it would not be that easy to circumvent the law if it were put in place. Given that aspiring candidates have no control over the election calendar and little control over when their kids graduate from secondary school (except they plan their political career decades ahead of time), the law will be an added impediment for aspiring candidates whose kids may be graduating around the time they will be in office or plan to run for office. To circumvent the impediment the aspiring candidate would have to delay his running for office till the next election calendar so that his child would have been enrolled in school abroad by the time he or she runs for office.

Even if the only effect the law has is to create an additional burden for aspiring politicians (assuming the aspiring politicians are able to circumvent the law) then I am OK with it. At least politicians will know that they won't have an easy ride anymore.

And I would draft the law that in such a way that it would affect any candidate who has publicly declared his candidacy.

Kobojunkie:
What if the kids were in schools abroad BEFORE the person takes office?

it would not apply to the kids who were abroad before the public servant takes office.

I even propose an extreme version of the bill: anyone who agrees to be a public servant should sign a waiver waiving his right to send his/her kids abroad and his right to receive medical treatment abroad; they should also cancel all these generator and diesel allowances given to our public servants.

Sagamite:
The guy's critical thinking is non-existent.

A result of the failed education system the bill wants to directly tackle.

you got a point. the education system has failed so much that people cannot even think critically.

In advanced societies, public officials have less rights than regular citizens, and laws can be passed that impose restrictions on the liberties of public officials, because the state has an overriding interest in reducing corruption.

A person has the power to make the choice as to whether he wants to be a public official or not, and when he makes that choice to do so, you at least know he is there to serve the interests of the public. In Nigeria, public officials choose to become so in order to fill their pockets with public funds.

I support the bill 100%. The level of corruption in Nigeria calls for drastic measures like this.