₦airaland Forum

EnlightenedSoul: Negative.
Quite the contrary, thankfully. Strange how even even a crass guess of yours, in its falsity, falls in line with pretty much everything else you've expressed thus far.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

carefreewannabe: I know, you would. My opinion of you is too good to doubt it.

I just want to see to what extent.

There is no extent to my objectivity and logical thinking.

That is like question the extent of God's rule over life.

okotv: please stop the use of foul language cause you are better than that

I hold no prisoners.

If she wanted respect, she would have not insulted me for not respecting her moronic sexist views and she would have been answer my questions.

Doing all this while making moronic points is trigger.

She is a person!

https://www.nairaland.com/1850336/wife-got-fat-now-dont/2#25966745

carefreewannabe: I would like to go there now and hear your views on gender related legislation and its enforcement in Nigeria.

Is it just? Is it possible for ALL women to enforce it? Does it favor one of the s.exes or does it treat both equally?

What about the media? Are they sexist?

Your views now, sir.

Why do you want to go there?

You think I would not be objective?

carefreewannabe: Ok, this was the West. Let's go back to Nigeria now.

When were we in Nigeria?

EnlightenedSoul: Pitiful! You don't like facts, do you? You're rubbishing the law earlier, but now I tell you that the law covers that, you want an "example"? There was a time I thought I wanted to be a lawyer, and worked as a part-time paralegal assistant/receptionist at a small firm. I swear, it almost seems as if the laws aren't as sexist to men as you wish they were!

Despite the unfortunate disparity in reporting, there are convicted cases of female ra.pists out there (and all manner of other crazy crimes committed by female criminals for that matter). Google is your friend.

You are a cretinous person!

You must really have a big arsse because I find it amazing the amount of shyt you are pulling out of it.

What the fck is wrong with this foool?

carefreewannabe: I haven't heard of this case. I am not into sports. I rarely watch TV but you can explain to me what happened, please.



We have to differentiate now. Is the law not giving equal protection to male and female domestic abuse victims or the society. These are two different things.

www.nairaland.com/1897498/violence-again-double-standards

The law in written form might be, but the law enforcers and the press definitely do not.

Without enforcers and the press, a law is meaningless.

Look at this person "Real Man" arguing that men should take shyt to be man and a logical women has to correct the dumb person!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D33L4zxjpH0

I hate real men!

The woman even said it clearly that the pat-on-the-back-desperate Wussy men in the West can't speak up.

Bloody moronic cretins trying to show they are "progressive".

carefreewannabe: It's because men are usually stronger. It's because people assume that a man can defend himself.

I am not saying that this is right but this is how MOST people think. In the UK, in Nigeria, in Germany, in Poland, in Russia, in Spain, in Turkey.

That's why it's good that we talk about it.

I have recently seen a talk show on child abuse committed by women. Most people think that there is no such a thing but there are mothers out there who DO sex.ually abuse their little sons. People aren't informed well.










I just burnt something in the oven ...... great!





It's late, I will suffer at work tomorrow. Don't like being tired. I might abuse someone.




I hope, nobody will be offended by this.

Oh, and when Ray Rice "defended" himself against domestic violence, what happened?

Can you see why it is senseless for the law to not give equal protection and leave men to deal with their own protection?

person ediots of the West that call themselves "real men" now face absolute discrimination legally:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbyMiiDXETQ

EnlightenedSoul: I take it you have nothing to say...lmao

I can't and don't need to be pointing to dumb people something they have openly done in front of everybody.

I have better ways to use time.

EnlightenedSoul: False. False. False.
Male or female, all the above is ra.pe under law. It's proving it that's another thing altogether. Evidence involves physical evidence, circumstantial evidence and third party testimony if available. Guilt must be proven beyond reasonable doubt for conviction.

There are quite a few ra.pe categorizations under law, with more than 128 different combinations available for prosecution:

Female Aggressor vs Male Victim
Male Aggressor vs Female Victim
Sodomy vs intercourse
Adult vs minor aggressor
Adult vs minor victim
Ability impaired aggressor
Ability impaired victim
ETC
And so forth..,

The estimate is that 10% of sexual assault cases have a male victim. Of that 10%, "male on male sodomy" sex.ual assault covers the vast majority of that 10%, followed by "adult male on male minor", and "adult female on male minor" (which are further prosecuted as child abuse and child se.xual assault).

Men are held responsible for their action and ability to give consent when drunk, so it is purely moronic to now make a law where women are not held responsible for their actions and ability to give consent. It is SEXIST!

False @ bold. The law hasn't changed anything regarding the necessary attainment of consent, it merely made "YES" the word of operation. I've already explained my stance on this law. It changes nothing. At the root of it all, it's still a he-said/she-said situation.

Shut the fck up!

I am still waiting for the example of a Western country where a woman is arrested for raape by sleeping with a drunk man that I asked you many pages ago and you were dodging and beating bout the bush.

Show me ONE country!

Western society is now full of wussy fcktards!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQt29-TAyjY

So many sexist adverts on UK tv discriminating on men.

Adverts which would not be allowed by the advertising board or the press if it was women being discriminated against in the same manner.

carefreewannabe: This is very true.

A big no! BUT as far as I am informed, the law does not make any difference between a male and female domestic abuse offender, does it?

It does!

Have you seen Solange arrested and in court for the same thing Chris Brown and Ray Rice were arrested for?

Have you seen her even face any backlash from the press?

carefreewannabe: This is absolutely mad and distasteful and I am with you on this 100 %.

That is your Western society I have repeatedly been telling you about.

SEXIST!

carefreewannabe: No, they were brought up to believe that men are and must be strong and that men are not allowed to be weak. They were brought up in the belief that women are weaker and make the wrong conclusion that a woman is unable (at least physically) to abuse a man.

I am pretty sure that MOST men would make fun of other men who admit that they experience domestic violence. This is the reality. You are your own enemies, at times. I know you know it.

And you are here talking about the West when in Nigeria the police AND the judge would laugh in the man's face who claims that his wife beats him up, if not even openly call him a "wussy".

Yeah, and many abused women stay with their abuser, would lie to protect their abusers and some would even attack any man that beats him up to stop him abusing her.

So, by your logic, you women are your own worst enemies. We should just dump these domestic abuse laws since it is your faults.

carefreewannabe: There are double standards that lead to the discrimination against men. You are absolutely right. You have also shown a perfect example of when these double standards are at work.

However, I have also seen women in this video who are intolerant of violence against men and I have seen men in this video who were completely ignorant of it. And the expert person who was interviewed and speaking on behalf of men, was a woman, too. So much for "typical woman" slogans.

Would you also tell these women that they want to get a slap on the back?

This is what women are laughing at on Western TV:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muuFygvXPAM

They did it so boldly and laughing because the Western society is SEXIST!

The women in the audience were even laughing.

These women have not been sacked from their jobs on TV.

Imagine it was men that were laughing at domestic abuse, not to talk of a husband cutting off his wife's breaasts.

What do you think would happen to those men's careers on TV?

EnlightenedSoul: Oh??
How so?

Duh!

carefreewannabe: There are double standards that lead to the discrimination against men. You are absolutely right. You have also shown a perfect example of when these double standards are at work.

However, I have also seen women in this video who are intolerant of violence against men and I have seen men in this video who were completely ignorant of it. And the expert person who was interviewed and speaking on behalf of men, was a woman, too. So much for "typical woman" slogans.

Would you also tell these women that they want to get a slap on the back?

What you don't get is that those intolerant women are few like aisha2.

Not many women are logical and know what equality is.

Majority of women would see be like indifferent as the video shows. And obviously the men in the video are either too embarrassed to get involved or are real men. They would want to be seen as the super hero if it was vice versa.

Many men in the West are ball-less fcktards that have been trained to be "real men" and are now facing and accepting discrimination against themselves because they are too terrified to stand up.

Fcking moronic Wussies!

EnlightenedSoul: That is disgusting. On what basis am I like the actress in the video? Smh!

You are the type that advocates different rules for women. More rights and less responsibilities for women.

EnlightenedSoul: I've been giving direct answers, but it apparently took bold text and the caps lock key. This isn't the first time I'm finding myself grateful for Mendel's Hallelujah!

The same way female ra.pe cases are often dismissed. The perpetrator must be proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt, often relieving them of accountability for their action and creating a serial ra.pist who knows how to hide his tracks and cheat the system. The first step is reporting it. Both man and woman are held accountable for ra.pe, the problem is a system that has failed the victims. The issue is the fear of convicting the innocent, which isn't an issue at all, though it consistently allows countless guilty individuals to walk free.

How are women not held responsible for their behaviors in the West?

You are dimwitted!

What your tiny-winny brain don't get is that:

a) In no Western country is having sex with a drunk man regarded as illegal or regarded as lacking consent.

b) In no Western country is having sex with a drunk man going to be regarded as raape and end up in court.

c) In no Western country is having sex with a drunk man and leading to a child being conceived would the man not have to pay for the child, neither can he demand an abortion.

He would be blamed and told to pay for the child through his teeth in every gaddam country. They don't need evidence or any kind of such things, it would just be thrown out of court as his fault for being drunk, if one assumes stupidly in the first place that prosecutors would even take it there.

Men are held responsible for their action and ability to give consent when drunk, so it is purely moronic to now make a law where women are not held responsible for their actions and ability to give consent. It is SEXIST!

I am sure your tiny-winny brain would still not get it.

carefreewannabe: https://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lutnsfyOVV1r6qlrvo1_500.gif

The EnlightenedSoul and average women for you:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlFAd4YdQks

pendusky: SmH



I refused to be fooled he's a fool! Bosses doesn't behave like fools...

You making a mistake taking him as a Boss!

How the fck would a person that opened a thread to pray for the foolish leaders destroying his life and that would make his and his family's life expectancy about 54 know what behaviours a Boss should have?

EnlightenedSoul: I am not sexist. How am I sexist?

And being that you're sexist, why should it matter to you if I was?

You are sexist!

Cut the crap!

EnlightenedSoul: AGAIN is right! YES. If he was plastered and taken advantage of, YES.

"If someone is ra.ped, they should not have to pay for or keep the child. That's common sense. You have numerous options that vary from adoption and so many other options etcetera etc. If a child is conceived through ra.pe, the man should take it to court and relieve himself of unfair responsibility. What I was saying earlier was that the government already does enough. I do not support the idea of the government taking responsibility for everyone's ill-conceived children. That is disaster. The accountable person(s) should pay for it."

FINALLY, person, you can give a direct, unambiguous answer?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usfiAsWR4qU

person, the reality is that the US courts would throw his case out of court.

So you see why this law is sexist?

It would never be the same for a man. NEVER!

The man be made to pay for the child. Simples!

A man is always regarded as an adult that should have responsibility for his behaviours in all Western countries. The same should be for women if they are equal.

person, now you get the education?

FOOOL!

EnlightenedSoul: Wowzers.
Alright, that's about enough stu.pidity to last me the month. Goodnight!

person dodge and run, that is the best thing for you.

You are a cretinous person.

You thought you could try that shyt of thinking I would be a real man that would not stand up to your moronic sexist arguments?

I would cower and give up to show "I am a real man that wants a pat on the back"?

EnlightenedSoul: Holy crap, you are too fvcking dense!

I've already answered your questions. They're right there in front of you!

You are a cretinous person!

Where have you answered the question?

With you dodging and ambiguous "ifs"?

person again the questions that need unambiguous answers:

Was the sport star raaped?

Don't give me that "if" and "they should report it".

And should the star now pay for the child?

EnlightenedSoul: Excerpt from Baller Alert Groupie tale:

Are you really trying to spin these types of stories as ra.pe?? Fvck outta here.

You're trying too damn hard to spin my words, but I stand sure of my position.

This cretinous person went to dig up a story to try to divert the conversation?

person, you really do not know who your are debating with.

Me? Sagamite? Is the person you want to try this moronic tactic with?

You are dumb!

EnlightenedSoul: The bold is true at all times. If someone is taken advantage of under those circumstances, they should report it!

You are a cretinous person!

You still think I am the one you can sit on the fence with?

Was the sport star raaped?

Don't give me that "if" and "they should report it".

And should the star now pay for the child?

carefreewannabe: [img]http://friedrice.la/images/posts/1/3568_sz9.gif[/img]

You think I am African?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfbAmfFv2Xw

[img]http://richardlegate.files./2012/06/german-flag-and-soldier.jpg[/img]

EnlightenedSoul: I respond specifically to the instances you provide in your scenarios. When you gave a scenario where an incapacitated woman drunkenly hit on a sober man and tried to justify his having sex with a plastered person, I responded that the law recognizes that as ra.pe, and that the woman should report it if she feels she was ra.ped. In this instance, you gave me a Baller Alert scenario, and in my quest to know of what I speak, I looked it up. Did I find ra.pe stories as scrolled up and down that page and read the stories? Fat NOPE. That's the reason for my "if". There were plenty ambiguous stories where I used "if". I've always maintained "if" you're ra.ped, you report it. Period. Look in my old posts if your memory escapes you.

Shut the fck up! You did not answer shyt, you sat on the fence and took an ambiguous position.

All of a sudden, it was no more "it is raape", it is now "if".

Now you don't have the conviction that a drunk person cannot give consent to someone and if anyone has sex with them, then it is outright raape?

carefreewannabe: https://gifsec.com/wp-content/uploads/GIF/2014/03/Im-Shocked-gif.gif

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTbTsTlQ9I8