₦airaland Forum

[quote author=12 inches!]Control or no control, I have come to realize that women no matter how good they should be kept on a short leash. That is why we hv so many "real men" coming to whine on nl. For example wen i want to leave a relationship, nowadays, i jst leave.[/quote]GBOSA, GBAM, GBOSA!

No be only women have entitlement to such. Only mugu real men would think they are the only ones.

Don't make me happy or be disrespectful and think I will stay there because I am a real man. You will be very surprised.

Johnpaul88: But when one decides and leave for a more developed and civilised country like the Uk and from there throw back comments insisting that his country of origin remains perpetually uncivilised & underdeveloped, then you wonder why God will not deal out his vengeance on such a person?

Why doesn't he stay in his country & help build it to become what he loved it'll become.

Why enjoy a liberal society like the Uk & wish that your country remains the worst country on earth?

What a professionally stuupid comment.

How does stating lack of interest in adopting homosexuality equal to a wish that your country remains the worst country on earth?

Is this one of those moronic assertions that acceptance of homosexuality is the metric of "progress", "civilisation" or "development"?

You can sell such stuupid arguments to fucktards like Scun, not me. Don't put such across again.

So because I like living in the UK, that means I have to support everything about the UK?

I have to even say I like the fact that kids slap their parents because I choose to live in the UK?

obayaya: I get your point but the truth is most public office holders in this country engage in such excesses.

And when they are caught, they should be sacked and jailed like this fat Oshodi-make-up biatch. Instead of claiming their is a conspiracy against them.

Morgan567: ilorin is a yoruba land, it was dominated by fulani cattle hearders who was received as guests but later turned on their guest, the yoruba ppl. this led to the afonja war. read ur history book.

He can't read.

He is a cretinous product of a failed education system.

packman: [size=15pt]MR PRESIDENT g .E .j FOR 2015

PLEASE DONT BLAME HIM FOR THE FAILURE OF YESTERYEARS

YET OUR YOUTH DIES OF FRUSTRATION......

CRIME THE OTHER OF THE DAY........

DAY LIGHT LOOTING NIGERIA LATEST TRADITION....................

OGA ON TOP.................. THE SYSTEM TO GET A JOB..........

NO OGA ON TOP............NO WAY TO GET ON TOP............

GOD HELP NIGERIA [/size]

Maybe if this person called Jonathan is not helping people like Etete loot Nigeria of $1.1bn, then the economy would be more robust.

Do you know how much employment $1.1bn can generate?

Our person President stepped in to help a convict rinse Nigeria of that amount of money.

I can't wait for the day I see both of them hanged for that corruption.

Poor babe.

That is just heart-wrenching to hear.

I hope Perm Sec Ajayi is held to his words.

Even if the state can just give her training on entrepreneurship and then support her with N10K a month for a year to get her feet on the floor after psychological evaluation and support.

Just so sad!

[quote author=Ms_Steph]u wont even notice if she is the same person. any ways we hide a lot of things even with our cloths on[/quote]And some mugus will say I must wait till marriage before sex/seeing the value proposition.

Yeah right!

yhuci: This picture has been floating around the internet for sometime and it’s caused quite a stir. Believe it or not, both of the women in the picture above, are the same, unnamed person. Melissa Murphy, the makeup artist, posted the images on Reddit, with the caption: “Makeup. That’s it.”
The woman’s nose has been contoured, her new, false lashes, make her eyes pop, she’s been given higher cheekbones and the foundation has masked the freckles from her forehead to her chest.
I doubt anyone would argue that the woman doesn’t look drastically different. But some are debating whether or not wearing this much makeup is deceiving. Which raises a good question. If a man met the woman on the right and approached her, he would certainly feel a deceived if she showed up for their first date or woke up in his bed the next morning looking like the woman on the left.



The women on another site brought up the point that perhaps this woman isn’t wearing this much makeup attempting to attract a man. Perhaps she’s doing it for herself because this is how she wants to look. But then another commenter took issue with that as well. She claimed that if this woman went through these lengths to mask her natural appearance, then she’s clearly not comfortable or hasn’t accepted who she is.
One man tried to come up with an equivalent saying, what if a man wore prosthetic muscles that he later removed. Wouldn’t the woman feel deceived?
What do you make of this? Is this much makeup deceitful?

That is not deceitful. That is just fcking outright fraud!

lynk106: last time I checked, you live in the UK. so why don't you move back to your backward village in Nigeria then?
why you sitting in UK? I bet you suffer from mini-heart attacks every single time you walk the streets of London. hahaha good for you.
all homophobes ought to be taught a lesson.

Maine Gubernatorial candidate Announces he is Gay
https://www.nairaland.com/1504646/maine-candidate-governor-announces-hes#19304755

Obama announces support for Same-sex marriage
https://www.nairaland.com/934071/obama-announces-support-same-sex-marriage

You are a person!

They can do whatever they like in the UK. They have systematically conned the gullible people and brainwashed them like you, there is nothing people like us can do. But I take solace it would not be happening in my homeland. Fucktards like you have no chance there.

lynk106: It is not for you to decide. This is the FUTURE.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/04/economist-explains-why-iceland-ban-po.rnography

Why does liberal Iceland want to ban online po.rnography?
Iceland's proposed ban can be seen as a continuation of earlier legislation to regulate the sex industry. In 2009 it introduced fines and prison terms for those who patronise prostitutes (though not the prostitutes themselves, which the law treats as victims). In 2010 it outlawed strip clubs. And distributing and selling po.rnography in Iceland has actually been illegal since 1869.

The main reason behind the proposed ban seems paradoxical: it is a result of Iceland being a highly liberal place. The country is run by the world's only openly lesbian prime minister, while 65% of Icelandic children are born outside marriage (more than any other country in the OECD). Children are given extensive sex education in schools. Mini-vibrators and condoms are sold at supermarket checkouts. Along with Norway and Sweden, Iceland has one of the highest rates of female enrollment in higher education (women outnumber men 3:2). Salary gaps between men and women are some of the lowest in the world and the rate of female participation in the labour force is one of the highest. Just after Finland, and at the same time as Denmark, Iceland was one of the earliest countries to grant women the vote in 1915. Iceland's powerful feminist movement is now championing the ban on online po.rnography, specifically that which is violent or degrading, mostly towards women.


---
^This is an idea of what the world will look like if the tables turned and more women were in power. This is a taste of what is to come
Backward Africa will catch up in 100 yrs but it will eventually catch up.

fool is trying to lecture me on what is "natural" yet I bet he has never considered whether P.orn was natural. if we spend as much time as we spend on persecuting gays on doing constructive things like condemning degrading p.ornography and strip clubs then yes I will say that is what I consider natural. Your opinions are different from mine. The world is changing from a straight male dominated world to a more equal world. I'm sure blacks didn't consider it "unnatural" for Obama to be elected president. Racist whites would find it unnatural. hahah
just as sexist homophobes would be d ones finding anything that is not a straight male as "unnatural"
haha the table is turning.

You are a person!

That is the future in your lulu world?

You pulled that moronic opinion from your arsse?

person, I bet you will say getting on the bus is natural. Throw in a stone is natural. Buying a computer is natural. Voting is natural.

Pure person like Scun.

lynk106: I actually personally KNOW a gay couple raising an adopted child. He is a teenager now.
so that is not even a question.you know my answer.

women have raised children with other women for generations. who do you think raise children in those nigerian polygamous families. isn't it just the wives who live together while the father is just some distant figure that is mostly absent from their childrens' lives.

children need care and nurture irregardless of whether its a single parent, two parents, heterosexual, homosexual, adopted or biological.

I live in a liberal state in the US. the homophobic people in my city are d ones who would be scared in public because we will not tolerate homophobia. You will get fired from your job for making homophobic remarks. best believe.

person, that is why we will not give you an INCH in Nigeria.

Stay in your state and enjoy your homosexuality.

It will never be legalised in Nigeria.

lynk106: keep echoing like a broken record. the picture on your profile is the most unnatural thing i've seen. get out of here. you look like a creep

You are a person!

You sure are way too dump, as I said from the go, to know what "natural" means.

Brainwashed cretin!

lynk106: you are a bleating bastard!! get a life or go hug a transformer. 2013 and beyond is not for you. get a time machine and go back to 1600s for your "natural" bush life. FOOL.

You are in for a rude awakening. Women are waking up and our opinion are coming out in the open. You hate gays? too bad. Deal with it. We women don't.
My state voted by popular vote in support of gay marriage thanks to high women voter turn out. Same with all the 14 states in USA that have recognized gay marriage by POPULAR GENERAL VOTE... that puts a big hole in the argument that everyone hates gays.
14 states and counting and it is all happening rapidly. Hilary Clinton will run for election in 2016 hopefully. I bet you 100% she doesn't hate gays.

You are a person!

You mean "we women" as in your moronic "women I know" rubbish?

Fck your state. I am sure there is no way in hell such will happen in any state in Nigeria in my life time, so I lose no sleep.

I couldn't give a flying shyt what your state does.

lynk106: of course I don't....

domestic abuse is natural.
r.ape is natural.
sexism is natural.
persecution of homosexuals is natural.
religious violence is natural.

just because you have a natural disposition toward a vice doesn't mean everyone else should accept it as normal.
chilren use d computer and p.orn comes up. none of the male politicians are doing anything about it. what do they care about children. they will gladly allow child marriage afterall. to them that's natural.
It took a woman president to consider the topic and see that it is wrong. Goes to show why we need more diverse leaders, women, gay etc.
everyone should have a voice at the table. not just straight men getting to decide for eveyone else what should be considered "natural"

Just like a lot of ediots, you do not understand the meaning of natural.

You just are not intelligent enough to.

You see ediots coming up with moronic statements like "going to school is natural".

Here is the lesson, get out your notebook and jot: Actions are not what is natural. It is desires and physiological make-up.

Now I know that is big grammar. Get a DICTIONARY!

You are not the sharpest tool in the box.

lynk106: homosexuality is Not unnnatural anymore than hefner's marriage to young women is unnatural or polygamy is unnatural. so shut it and goodnight.
All you are seeing is a reversal of the sexism that has been accepted in society as normal.
I'm sorry you are having a heart attack over it.

not only will gays be normalized, even older 70yr old women marrying 18 yr old boys will be come normal as well. you are in for a rude awakening of gender equality!!
gay acceptance is merely a symptom of women's vote and opinion being accepted more and more in society.

Iceland has a female president and they are going to ban internet p.orn (that is degrading toward women) over there!
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/25/iceland-seeks-internet-pornography-ban
If a man was the president, do you think such por.n would be banned? is po.rn natural in your eyes? or isn't it perverted? why are we obsessed with gays yet ok with po.rn? SIMPLE: MALE BIAS IN SOCIETY. They will only ban things that cater to their own perverted satisfaction. like controlling women in a country like Saudi Arabia, where women are not allowed to drive, to travel without a man's permission and have restricted rights to vote. Does that sound natural to you?
in a female dominated society, p.orn will be banned and considered unnatural. go and ask the people of iceland.

you are in for a RUDE AWAKENING.
the world is moving FORWARD. PROGRESS. This ain't 1820s of 1660s.
you don't get to decide for others what should be natural. if it ain't violating your personal space or property, mind ur business or go hug a transformer.

You really are a person!

You do not understand the meaning of natural.

GET A DICTIONARY!

lynk106: laws in the USA are based on whether an act violates space and personal property.
if you call yourself straight and decide to penetrate your gf anally, then that's your problem as long as she consents and she is an adult.
in countries where laws are based on religion (muslim countries, northern nigeria etc) it is illegal to drink alcohol and do other things that are based on morality. even if the acts do not hurt or harm others. ex women not allowed to wear skirts or bright colors.and other such stupid "morality" laws. Ironic that in these same countries young girls as young as 6yr old are married off to old men because the quran allows it. Morality is SUBJECTIVE . laws should be based on objective grounds ie measuring how they violate personal space and property.

[img]
2. Homosexuality, paedophilia, necrophilia, beastility etc are all deviant and pervert in natural terms. The sexual "desire"/"urge" they possess is dysfunctional and unnatural. The act is what is different. Homosexuality when acted upon can be between legally consenting people.[/img]

so is anal sex between heterosexuals, use of equipments, bondage, domination, prostitution, foot fetish and 1001 other things are "perverted"
a 80 yr old man sleeping with a 18 yr old etc. like I said, go and fix cameras in peoples bedrooms if you are so obsessed with sexual deviance. rubbish. yes it is not common but that shouldn't be any of your business as long as it is not impinging on you personal space (body) and property. Tons of older men are married to young women that to me is no different than homosexuality. It is considered a perversion depending on your mindset. do you consider a 60 yr old man married to a 20 yr old woman a perversion? exactly. I do.
if laws were based on perversion then even you would be in jail because you look perverted.

1. That is law in the US. The US is entitled to develop their laws as it suits their people. Nigeria is a different place and its laws are based on different foundations as their people desire.

I don't know what the rant about child marriage and women not wearing skirt is trying to achieve. It sure does not add value to the argument of homosexuality not being dysfunctional, perverse and deviant. It is just a rant that is running off tangent and can only be considered by a simpleton to justify homosexuality.

The objective ground is that homosexuality is dysfunctional, perverse and deviant.

2. As long as the sexual desire is natural and normal, what ever 2 consenting adults do behind closed doors in not anyone's business. Majority seem to agree with that. If you disagree and can convince majority to disagree with you, go ahead and go and change the law.

If you do not see the difference in heterosexuality and homosexuality then you are brainwashedly deluded!

So I can have the liberty of laughing at your stuupidity, explain to me how an 80 year old sleeping with an 18 year old is perverted?

Humour me. I think you might have some more lessons to learn in terms of perversion.

lynk106: I am pretty sure I have answered all your questions to the best of my ability. In fact, multiple times. Go back and read my post. it's not my fault that my answer is not the "right" one for your mindset. I am not here to read your mind and give you an answer that satisfies your mindset and opinion.


one more time:

1. deviancy is senseless because everyone's definition is different. a nun's definition of deviancy is different from a prostitutes. A man's definition of devianncy is different from a woman's. A rich man's definition of deviancy is different from a poor man.
Progressiveness is not about deviancy as it is about human rights. If a prostitute is deviant in the eyes of the masses that doesn't mean the prostitute shouldn't be guaranteed basic human rights. as long as they are not impinging upon the space and property of another human being ex. hurting others or stealing or destroying another person's property. r.ape falls under the category of hurting others. so you need CONSENT.

2. your question doesn't make a lot of sense because paedophilia and necrophilia are not even alike. They are different things. The only thing that they have in common is that they are illegal in western countries. If you go to northern nigeria or middle east, pedophilia is legal. In fact, in the west, pediphilia is dependent on the legal definition of adulthood. some countries set it to 18, some set it to 16 etc. to me a 70 yr old man attracted to a 18 yr old is a pedophile in my books. even though the girl is adult age. so like I said it all depends. it is repulsive but who am I to persecute or condemn if they are consenting adults? CONSENT is the big word I kept repeating that you turned a deaf hear to.
having sex with corpses also is repulsive. if you choose to have sex with your grandma's decaying body in your private bedroom, that's none of my business.
trust me, if the govt could put cameras to see what goes on behind close doors in peoples bedrooms, tons of things will be illegal. including heterosexual anal sex or even use of vibrators. a lot of perverse things go on behind closed doors.
what I see as illegal is if there is no CONSENT. if someone is being forced to have sex against their CONSENT.

If you still don't see an answer in this then you are on your own. adieu

You answers are moronic!

1. Someone using intelligence as an example of deviancy when we are talking about homosexuality is just like Scun, a person. That person would even use intelligence as an example to argue against armed robbery.

Homosexuality is a sexual deviancy and a sexual perversion (you really, really need to buy a dictionary to be able to read this up). That is not a subjective matter, it is a fact.

2. Homosexuality, paedophilia, necrophilia, beastility etc are all deviant and pervert in natural terms. The sexual "desire"/"urge" they possess is dysfunctional and unnatural. The act is what is different. Homosexuality when acted upon can be between legally consenting people.

So next time, separate the desire from the act.

The law does! As no one is ever arrested for being an homosexual, they are arrested for homosexual acts in countries that see the desire as dysfunctional and unnatural as any logical country should. The West have chosen to ignore that and even attempt sophism in denying it.

So, your answer was not intelligent enough, hence not right!

PapaBrowne: Don't worry. I don't get miffed at your insults. I actually do sympathize with you. Cos I imagine the kind of environment you must have grown up and how it must have molded your outlook. Fight because your neighbour is trying to take your bathing water. Curse because you neighbour's toilet is leaking into your bedroom. I can really imagine.
However I am sure you are in a better place. But if you are still struggling with hardship, I'm pretty sure things will be well with you soon as the economy is looking up.

You are a person. I am not lying.

I know people like you will struggle with the unknown. You only understand what you have been told to do before.

lynk106: Even then, why should it be a man vs woman thing?
Should we start deciding whether to ban things that men dislike or ban things that women dislike etc. that's just silly and petty.
using logical objective reasoning will be obviously better choice but how can one be objective when stuck with a closed-minded mentality shaped by a certain biased view of the world?

You need to answer the questions, it is still waiting for you:

1. So by accepting deviancy is a measure of progressiveness and being progressive?


2. "So you know sex and attraction are 2 different things?

So what makes homosexuality different from paedophilia, necrophilia and likes?"

lynk106: I include women in the media as well and if you are attentive you will notice that even in politics, when it was time to vote for gay marriage, there were more women carrying the signs than men.
There are also more women in the democratic party (pro-gay rights) than republican party (anti-gay rights).
So this is not something I am making up out of thin air.
I think it is pretty obvious that women are generally not repulsed by gay men.

that guy in the picture is a nigerian man.He is extremely famous in naija among women. Do you think they find him repulsive? NO.
The only man to come out openly as gay in Nigerian media is Bisi Alimi. He was interviewed by Funmi Iyanda (a woman) and her male bosses at NTA cancelled her show simply because she interviewed a gay man. Now tell me if you truly believe women are free to make political decisions in Nigeria?

You start with another moronic argument.

1. People in politics are not famous for voting based on their beliefs or their stance. They (especially in the West) are liable to vote based on what would make them win votes, usually determined by local press pressures and the possibility of unnecessary negative attention. Tags like "outrage", "out of touch", "conservative", "nasty", "sell-out" etc being instilled in the mind of gullible voters are something they try and avoid if they can. They vote based on what position would cause them the least loss of votes most times.

2. Secondly, many politicians also vote based on party politics position as dictated by their leader, not based on their beliefs or their stance. That is why every party has a person appointed as political whip.

3. Thirdly, in a society where the press is dominated by aggressive pro-homosexuals, politicians are dragooned to vote against their beliefs or their stance. Policies and political decisions, a lot of times, is not about common sense, it is about how well it spins in the media.

So your inclusion of female politicians in your "women I know" shows how flawed your argument foundation is.

lynk106: None of the women I know are repulsed by it. I can't speak for all women in the world is why I phrased it that way. I didn't want to make a conclusive remark. But from a woman perspective, I am pretty sure majority of women are NOT repulsed by gay men. we are more tolerant and/or accepting towards gays (esp. gay guys) than men are. Effeminate guys are cute and just full of life. seriously. I would be happy to have even anderson cooper as my friend and he's not very effeminate.
majority of men does not equate majority of people. If we had a society where women dominated, reality will be COMPLETELY different.

besides, outlawing based on so called repulsion is stupid. because I am repulsed when I see a 70yr old man kissing a 18 yr old girl. most women are. But most men are probably not.
should we also ban people from smoking because we find the smell of weed repulsive? or enforce baths and ban poor people from using public places because they don't smell as nice as rich people?
To me, I value human rights. Tatoos are repulsive to me but I would never even think of hatred toward a person with tatoos.
why do you think religious violence exists in Nigeria. there is no tolerance.

just because someone repulses you doesn't mean you should wish them death or go and carry your gasoline and set another human being on fire. that's barbaric and primitive behavior.

First of all, the sample pool of the women you know is not a sensible pool to use to argue a law. I note you consistently and carefully stick with that choice of words "the women I know", which suggests if you go outside this bracket, you know you will get a different result. So don't try and BS someone that has triple your IQ. Never use that as an argument when talking to me again. I expect people to use more sense and logic when debating with me.

Secondly, even if (by a miracle) majority of the women in the country you live in do not find it disgusting then let the government of that country feel free to institutionalise it (as long as majority of the people, including the men, also do not find it disgusting). In Nigeria, I am sure majority of the women find it disgusting, so Nigeria is free to reject it.

When you start with stuuupid arguments, I tend not to read the rest. I only read the first paragraph here.

lynk106: put simply: homophobia is illogical.
the pervasiveness of homophobia is intertwined with the pervasiveness of sexism that exists in society.

Phobias are obviously illogical.

But calling something unnatural and causing pure healthy, normal and natural disgust, which leads to rejection of the thing, a phobia is obviously moronic!

I suggest you get a dictionary (this now appears critical) so you understand the meaning of phobia, so you stop using lame terms like homophobia because the stuupid Western press use it as part of their pro-homosexual propaganda.

obayaya: well, why is it only when a particular sector starts performing that allegations corruption starts coming to the public domain.

it happened to Prof. barth Nnaji, the sec boss oteh, farouk of the house of rep to an extent and now it's Stella.

the truth is that there's some vested interests in this sectors that the reformation is affecting and their only way of barking back is pulling down the reformers.

don't get me wrong, corruption is a bad thing that should be eliminated but when it is targeted at ppl leading reformations in different sections of the economy then there's something wrong.

Why can't a person lead reformation and not be corrupt simultaneously?

Does it make sense in your head that a person fighting corruption and trying to stop corruption engage is corrupt and shady businesses?

Such person should now turn around and blame "victimisation" for their own downfall after they are caught for corruption?

lynk106: this is exactly my point. you are repulsed because you are not attracted to men. I am somewhat repulsed by lesbian women too. esp. the butch manly ones. but I am not repulsed by gay men.
he is actually a nigerian man. He is famous in nigeria among women as a make-up artist and hairdresser. he ties gele too. In fact he is married to a woman although I am 90% sure he is gay based on videos i've seen of him the way he talks and his mannerism.
Imagine the thousands of gay men married to women in Nigeria and pretending to be straight ( ) simply because they would be persecuted if they were open about their sexual identity. This is what I see as perversion. a gay man having sex with a woman.
would you have sex with a lesbian. many straight men have sex with lesbians to "cure" them. imagine that perversion. urghhhh
see how illogical it is.

Just from his look, I know for pure certainty that he is an homosexual. That was the first thing I noticed and was wandering "Fck not, he can't be polygamous. That is a poofter".

Whoever he is married to is living the biggest lie and a high risk of AIDS or is some friend (most likely a lesbian) who is helping him cover up.

That is an homosexual man!

lynk106: I am a straight female but I have gay friends. I see nothing wrong with gay guys. I have never met a woman who was repulsed by a gay man the way straight men are repulsed.
I am more uncomfortable around lesbian women which makes sense because of my gender but I am still tolerant of it. I can't say that I accept it because I have absolutely no lesbian friends and am not interested in having lesbian friends but I recognize their right not to be persecuted by society.
Straight men probably feel the same way towards gay men. but their perspective is the more dominant in society and laws are based on this straight male perspective.
So when you present something a fact, just know that it is subjective because there are people who have different point of views.

So what if they are not (as YOU claim) as repulsed by homosexual men?

They are repulsed by it is what matters?

So how is the outlawing in a society where majority of people are repulsed a forcing of the perspective of men?

lynk106: many straight men do not find lesbians repulsive and ACCEPT IT. Many straight men who hate gays will be fine with befriending a lesbian.
when they hear homosexuality, they think of sex between men. They are only thinking of themselves and cannot comprehend or consider other peoples' perspectives or mindsets.
all of this suggests only one thing: homophobia is illogical. persecuting men for not thinking the way you do. is like persecuting muslims or christians for not sharing your religion or persecuting any other group of people.

Stop ranting like a person. Here are the questions waiting for you:

1. So by accepting deviancy is a measure of progressiveness and being progressive?


2. "So you know sex and attraction are 2 different things?

So what makes homosexuality different from paedophilia, necrophilia and likes?"

PapaBrowne: ^^^^
@Sagamite
No man, you sound more like a product of a failed education system. Screaming you are a person on every speech is a sign of improper education.
You know it's been long found by qualified research that folks with very low IQ are more likely to make use of derogatory terms. Clearly, the more profanity, the lower the IQ.

But, I sincerely don't think you have a low IQ. I think you just lacked love as a child. Must have had a hard life growing up.

You are a person!

When I call people fucktards, do you think I am wrong?

It is not profanity, it is assistance in self-discovery. It is an avant garde and efficient approach in educating Nigerians like you. I do it consciously. Your IQ is lower than my age divided by 3.

cjrane: @ the bolded,
[b]You know, Nigeria is a multi-ethnic and multi-religious country of 170 million people and over 250 tribes and languages. Why is it always only the YORUBAS that must be angry? Are they the only group in Nigeria? Why not Ijaws, Igalas, Idoma,Igbira,Berom or Efik? Why ALWAYS YORUBAS?

Why are Yorubas opposed to any other Nigerian who is not from yoruba tribe being the country's aviation minister? What are they really scared of and what are they hiding from other Nigerians ?

Your statement alone goes to confirm without any doubt that the entire so called N255 million bullet proof scandal was entirely planned by the yoruba cabal in the aviation sector and blamed it on the minister in order to force her to leave or be sacked, so that they can continue to ruin the aviation sector. unfortunately for you, Nigerians know better now and aren't easily deceived by your antics and the faceless liars at sahara lie-porters or your ilk changing monikers at NL from sagamite,agbameta to kolawole or whatever.[/b]

You are a person!

What survey did you take to come to the conclusion Yorubas are angry and other tribes are not?

Cretinous product of a failed education system.

[quote author=2s£xy]or mumuni per se [/quote]Abi o!

lynk106: hahaha everything is right except the last sentence.
tolerance can never be a subset of acceptance. it makes no logical sense



only an illiterate like you calls a dictionary a "person"

ac·cept·ance
akˈseptəns/
noun
noun: acceptance; plural noun: acceptances

1.
the action of consenting to[b] receive[/b] or undertake something offered.
"charges involving the acceptance of bribes"
synonyms: receipt, receiving, taking, obtaining More

You are a person!

Tell me how you can accept something without tolerating it.

lynk106: LOL what haven't I seen on Nairaland. What if my body can tolerate it and I don't accept it?
Or I accept it and my body doesn't tolerate it?

tolerance and acceptance DO NOT MEAN THE SAME THING.
All these illiterates posting on Nairaland. hahaha.

You are a person!

If you choose to accept something, then you choose to tolerate it.

If you tolerate it, does not necessarily mean you accept it.

Tolerance is a sub-set of Acceptance.

The same person that said "acceptance" means "receiving" is talking? The same person that said "acceptance" means "being friends with" is talking?

That same person is talking about others needing a dictionary.

No difference in the fucktadism you are suffering from from the one being suffered by Scun.

Wow! 40+?

She looks very hot for 40.

lynk106: Tolerance is NOT a sub-set of acceptance.

dictionary is your friend.

And your person self even quoted it.