₦airaland Forum

eddie mafio,

You are a person!

So would you give Klitschko a slap or 2 if he pushes you too far or calls you a useless and daft cretin as well?

dayokanu:
Aregbesola wins another one over PDP

Anuofia, how can you talk crassly about such a nice girl?

I am going to put ebo with your name in the calabash in the River Thames at 3.33am tonight. 

[quote author=Niger_d link=topic=887110.msg10340839#msg10340839 date=1331038125]wHO IS THE slowpoke ?

YOU OR THE NIGERIAN POLICE?[/quote]No. It is you.

[quote author=ndu_chucks link=topic=881188.msg10337609#msg10337609 date=1331000661]It suffices to say here that capitalism is not intrinsically evil. Being a capitalist does not mandate one to be a philanthropist, period.

If people[b] legitimately[/b] invest in oil blocks risking millions of dollars, when their exploration activities yield fruit, there is absolutely nothing wrong with enjoying the fruits of ones labour.

ekt_bear, you of all people are not known to espouse communist ideals. Some of the people[b] you are jealous of[/b] and are vilifying provide employment to hundreds of thousands of you people. Many give out hundreds of millions to charities and NGOs. You people should focus on your state governments and demand accountability from your governors. Leave these legitimate capitalists and business men alone.[/quote]The functional word you missed in your summarisation is "legitimately".

There is nothing legitimate when you get permission to invest in oil blocks without following due process and procedures. If you pay peanuts or nothing to the nation (which is cheated of other more profitable opportunities) because you know somebody and you to be awarded national assets with potential, that is a criminal activity. Most of the people that have oil blocks in Nigeria got it in a crooked way. That is not jealousy, it is criminal and injustice. Those are not businessmen, they are thieves and crooks.

For all these moronic and outrageous demands for money I think courts should start reducing compensation award rulings by N10K for every million naira of the lawsuit demand over the final court award.

So if you go to court and sue someone for N103m for slapping you and you are awarded only N3m, then you automatically are fined 100 X N10K = N1m. So you only get N2m to go home with for your mockery of the justice system.

N15bn for what? For stopping you entering a city? How did they do that calculation. They should be punished for moronic demands.

This Dangote guy is just a Top Guy.

kunlewoye:
Hi Sagamite,
I really would love to hear your opinion on my case. I have a lower division 2nd class in Chem Engr and I tried all the Canadian schools for MSc in Petroleum/Offshore Engineering but they don't take my "kind", sadly. I have since turned my attention to the UK and which schools would you advise I try? I've got between 15k-20k budgeted. Pls note that the main issue is my 2:2, and bear in mind I would only take a pre-master's as a lost resort. You always seem to give valuable info, you know, like a sage watching from the backstage. Kind regards.

Frankly, except you have some significant work experience, you may have no option but the pre-masters or look at the lowest tier universities that offer your course (e.g. Liverpool John Moores, South Bank etc). The top universities would be crowded with students with stronger profiles applying, especially from Asia.

Also try and see if you want to explore other Engineering fields that are less competitive. Restrain yourself from following the herd. It seems a significant number of Nigerian students all want to do Petroleum Engineering, when they finish it then they will all have to compete for the same jobs in the oil sector that might not be able to accommodate all. Guess the selection criteria they would use to sieve the candidates.

Answer: 2:1 and MSc merit/distinction (if lucky, sometimes maybe the "and" is substituted with "or" ).

I will let some like jay bee add anything else you might need to know.

Gerrard59:
The high rate of mädnes$ is really on the rise. What happened to all the dancing schools in the US? Dnt harvard teaches intl.reltations? Indians,malaysians,chinese,russians r going to the Us,u nw precipitate to 9ja? south africa nko? is there bad? Nxt tin she wil want to study film nd acting in ds jungle,when the new york film academy s there.

Lets just hope she is not taught to write and compose grammar as appallingly as you do.

@ DaraAlina,

Whatever you do, do not pay any fees to anybody. Those rushing to give you their phone numbers and email address seem like hungry scammers.

You should consider University of Lagos, University of Ibadan and Obafemi Awolowo University. Those are the premier universities.

Calm down, it is not yet a bad case.

Wait till about 6/7 years old when he can fully relate then you can test him and see if any limitation is a serious issue.

Don't stress the kid, don't stress yourself, you might just make it worse.

Don't feel you have to impress your peers that "my kid is smart". Not like if I am saying that is what you are doing now.

Make learning fun for him for now. Develop ways to make him enjoy learning what he needs to learn. When he does well, encourage with kisses and praises. When he does not, correct him gentle and sweetly. No stress!

desertboom:
@Theblessed. . .  Theblessed indeed. After reading your written  junk, I really felt pity for your husband only if you have one. The way you've acted/behave on this thread does not speak good about you. What make you think you're any better with your arrogant and know-it-all attitude? You're not any better than a motor park tout. So, even somebody like you (with your useless attitude) will ask for settlement upon divorce too? No wonder, you dey sound like greedy goat. Please, go off this thread if you've got nothing to offer. Mumu she-goat like you

You are not serious!

You are not a serious man at all!

You think that thing can have a husband?

My friend, no offend me!

debosky:
I don't see getting a prenup as precluding having all of the above - my view is that it needs to be mutual to give the marriage any hope. Despite some widely held views that divorce is glibly entered into, I think couples still try to make things work before giving in.

That is why I said at the slightest whiff of serious or angry objection to my request for prenup, I would retract my offer of marriage.

I am a pragmatist. Dem no born me with persin. If I no dey, she would find someone else to be with.

TV01:
The essence of marriage has been lost to many. Without understanding and embracing that - even intuitively - a lot of the value can be lost. It means the benefits are not fully grasped and people are more likely to not commit to it or give up if there are problems.
I find the notion counter-intuitive. "I will spend the rest of my life with you and give all that I have. For better, for worse etc". "But oh yeah if it doesn't go right, I won't re-double my efforts and search myself, I'll take my stuff and go"! It's almost like second guessing yourelf before you even guess?

I will challenge you on this.

Hello, bruv. I am sorry to say: Marriage has never been, by and large, some wonderful institution from time immemorial. It has always been generally faulty. I really don't know what essence of marriage you refer to. The benefits of marriage has historically been detrimental to one party: the woman. From the stone ages to recent history, they had the short end of the stick. Marriage has never been good. Women stuck around because they usually depended on the man financially and for social respect. The marriage of our ancestors and even the generations closer to us is filled with men having extra-marital affairs and offsprings outside marriage, especially those living in big habitats (e.g. cities) and are decently wealthy enough, and the wives accepted it. The unwealthy ones used whores and beat their wives. Majority of the long-term, so-called successful marriages of some recent generation gone-by we tend to point to are not immune from this fact as well. If the woman is of high-society or aristocracy back in the day then there are numerous cases of infidelity as well because they tend to be the beautiful ones and/or less dependent on her husband's finances since they live in circles of men with means that can replace him. Go and read about Roman women for example. Societies tried to use religion to control these but mostly only applied it to the women.

Essence of marriage? A lot of women have been miserable in marriage but hang on. Now that women are no more dependent on the man financially or for social respect, we have a relationship culture flux, hence the rise in divorces.

So when you refer to the "Essence of Marriage that is forgotten", all I can think of is an obedient, subservient wife sticking to it for better, for worse while the husband ruled at home and shagged his life out outside when he felt like. I have no interest in making anyone miserable for my own happiness.

The essence of marriage you refer to are fantansies written in Mills and Boons or practiced my a very small minority of pious individuals with fear of Hell. It was never the norm. The muslims just said "Fck it. Man take 4 wives and stop your greediness".

This is the real world, not Fantasia.

TV01:
Hmmm, isn't it encouraging the possibility of divorce by bringing it to the fore? By making it a more readily available and clear-cut option when problems come? Divorce should be be a very last resort if at all. Why not discuss and agree recourse to structures, counselling or other remedial measures. Divorce is not a corrective measure, it's a destuctive one. If one feels one is best served by being able to exit a marriage with their worldly goods, quite frankly, they really don't get it and should probably not have been in it in the first place.

Best
TV

I don't think you really like reality. You really refuse to realise you have no control over the mentality and decision of others.

What if your partner does not want to discuss and recourse the structures?

What if your partner are not interested in counselling and other remedial measures because they are simply not interested anymore?

Let me guess. You would say you know that would not happen, you have selected carefully after 3 months?

You tend to ignore biology and facts and stick with some populist idealism.

Kutey:
Ehrm ,  TV01 remember the phrase: "Never argue with an 1diot , they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"

That is why we keep debating with a person like you that can't defend your moronic statements to a minimum. You don't need to warn us any further, cretin.

debosky:
Sagamite a pre-nup is different from car insurance or making alternative plans to get to a destination.

The two latter examples is protecting yourself from external, unknown factors largely out of your control,

I believe a prenup is protecting you against external factors largely out of your control and helping you gain more control. The only difference is it is a known factor.

debosky:
while a pre-nup involves one party keeping separate what both are vowing to join together - it goes against the basic vows of marriage of 'what is mine is yours'.

If you vow to join together, good for you.

I am not vowing to join together, I am sharing together (i.e. with the terms and conditions of being together). And I retain the privilege to stop sharing when those terms and conditions are broken. It makes more sense.

I am confident enough to change the basic vows of marriage. I do not need to abide myself by the intrinsic and tacit basic vows created by others (worse still, medieval people in my current world). Just like I refuse to let my life be guided by some religion created by some delusional medieval people or cultures created by some illiterate and ignorant buffoons. I choose and mix what works for me like if I was in Woolworth buying sweets. I create my own basic vows with aplomb. I will analyse what tradition has on offer, evaluate and pick the ones that make sense, and revamp the one that does not. If something does not work for me, I find something that is expedient, I don't sit down and say "this is how it is traditionally done". That is where and why I am unique, special and sexy.

Remember what I told you at that wedding? I said, if I was the one I would not be sitting at the Gallant Couple's Chair doing nothing, being redundant and just smiling for about 3 hours. It made no sense to me. I would stand up and mix with my friends and family; eat and joke with them by going round tables at intervals, instead of saying "Oh, couples are suppose to sit in the spotlight like statues" because some wedding planner or tradition thinks it is cute.

I create my own expedient and pragmatic rules that make more sense rather than stick to senseless, static traditions! I am Sagamite from OriSagamuEwa!

debosky:
If, however, both parties willingly want a pre-nup, then it is a mutually understood basis for the relationship might be a good thing in my view.

Why? Because it removes the fear, suspicion and attempts to hide things from one's partner when problems occur in a relationship. If you know the other person can't cheat you, then you're free to devote yourself fully and be open because they can't take it away from you.

If any woman, no wan sign. She is free to move on. No be by force na. I no go break law and kidnap persin.

TV01:
No, no, no. "The Sagman" is altogether a great guy, otherwise I wouldn't bother. He just needs a lil' nudge to fully appreciate that the human dynamic  - life even - and particular the marriage relationship is not a business transaction and not optimised  by "control", risk mitigation, algorithmic logic,etc. etc.

The pool of  5% on the male side is to shallow to allow an inherently good one like Sag to not get snapped up . His concerns though are valid, I'm just trying to help address them.

Very shortly Saga is going to stare that fear in the face and get his. Can't wait.

Best
TV

Mate, with my intellect, I am in the 0.0001% of men o. Not 5%.

I am a God on Earth, no denying it. I would be rude if I denied it.

TV01:
Dude, the 5%ers are the good ones 0!

Yes, but you are still giving bad advice.

You are saying people should not sign prenup. Is every man going to marry the 5%ers?

Bad advice.

TV01:
Story! which one has an absolute guarantee of getting there at all, let alone within 6 hours? Plus the second chap should have gotten a pre-booked, off-peak train ticket .

However they go - the risks are still present. Getting there late, not getting there at all, or not going anywhere ever again are still risks they both face.
Traffic holdups, accidents, inclement weather, illness en-route, other rogue drivers, corrupt cops, terrorists, ad infinitum.

I am not against mitigating risk and "exerting control", but the best laid plans. Nuff' said.

My friend stop giving lame excuses.

The train is as sure a guarantee as a car. Virtually always, most people taking car or train will get their under 4 hours. Anyone trying to hitch hike is a wishful thinker. He might make it in 6 hours, he might not. The latter (not making it) is far more likely, hence why people would not consider it.

The risk are vastly different and the risk of the former (car/train) is well within acceptable range, hence why it is ignored.

This is as silly as saying buying food from Tesco is risky because you don't know who or what could have contaminated it in the supply chain and using it to justify the risk of buying a ticket to go on a one month holiday of one-man Christian proselytizing in Helmand Province in Afganistan. Both has risk but one is of reasonable risk, guess which?

Please know when your illogical arguments have been destroyed and stop trying to grasp at straws.

TV01:
So what then? Change will surely come - and for both of you. Some control? Institutional and individual interference in your home can be limited. Whilst I believe the law can be limited in its effect now, who knows what they'll be like in even the near future?

I still hold that getting oneself right and finding the right person and then building a solid foundation is the way to go. Immediately you introduce the prenup, you are screaming "I don't trust you". Seeding a suspicious air that will never go away. You are saying "regardless of our vows" I have to look out for myself. Or will you present it as in her best interest. It's no guarantee and itat best weakens the foundation.

No matter how you couch it, your insistence on prenups and the inevitable change by women (for the worse), has an air of cynicism and inevitability about it In which case surely logic should dictate that it's not really viable?

You still have not given your methodology of control apart from wishful thinking. I am not a fan of the methodology of saying you know what a women would be or do from just one date. That is ridiculously lame and wishful thinking.

If a woman sees my saying sign prenup means I don't trust you, then good luck to her. I hardly know any woman that would not say to her husband she does not trust him in certain situations but trained "real men" would never know that. A "real man" knows how to follow rules created by women but not followed or applicable to women.

Note: I never said women would inevitably turn for the worse. Don't strawman me.

TV01:
So let me get this right, you prepare for a successful marriage by first preparing for a successful divorce?

Being a full-time mother is as worthy a choice as any. If the numbers work out and the circumstances are condusive, I'd love us to have that choice. Couples should discuss the merits and demerits and contingency around this option - if available - even before marriage.

Don't marry a fool or someone you consider to be one.

Yep, I would discuss my risk management in case of divorce before marriage. Nothing wrong with that. Welcome to the real world, not bury your head in the sand world. Fck her concept of romance if she does not like it. We are talking about the core of my future happiness here. I am not a real man that would live in a luluworld and be helpless in future.

TV01:
Neither has an absolute guarantee. Both are still subject to chance and extemporaneous factors outside their control.

Rubbish.

Junk.

I am sure when you are going to Manchester, you will not even consider hitch hiking as an option. There is a reason for that.

TV01:
It doesn't necessarily have to be different, just better and more thorough. Apple have competition in every respect, but they go about it that much better.

For the most part, I don't care what the women here think. For what it's worth, I consider most of them 95%ers (I will get away with that because, either 1. They will all consider themselves 5%ers or 2. They will form "even if I'm a 1%er sef, I no send TV !)

True manliness is knowing that both genders and society are ultimately best served by harmonious non-abusive relationships and actively seeking to model, promote and effect them. Regardless of the forces that are arrayed against you.

Jakande tried now !

Saying you know everything about a woman after one date is not my idea of "just better and more thorough". Wishful thinking.

TV01:
No absolute guarantees. No risk free propositions. No total control. Accept that and work it like it's all or nothing.


If you find someone before the end of the year, summer nuptials in 2013 would certainly be viable.

Best
TV

^{Come, was that you I just saw on Rye lane haggling with one Indian shopkeeper like that over the price of puna yam?}

Take you savings out of Barclays, Lloyds, RBS etc and put it with some Baba Ajo and I will believe this risk comparison you are lamely trying to defiantly put.

2013? You no serious. There is no way I am not dating a woman for 25 years to know her well before I marry her with prenup signed. 

Na me you see o! Why you no say hi?

TV01:
Ah! Progress !
Your high phy-nincial net worth + your high financial net worth just increases your chance of securing a 5%er .

There is no way any girl will come and push me out of my Peckham council flat after waiting 5 years on the waiting list and paying a white girl to claim she dey have my pikin. 

No woman is coming to claim all that hardwork from me and take my flat because she get children for me. 

TV01:
Please tell us what single endeavour does not have an element of faith/hope. We are mere men, with only a modicum of control.

I did what I knew to and had to do. It may have seemed fast, but it was on the back of a large number of other "viewings".  

We recently bought a place. After viewing around 60 properties across a wide area, you get to know what's out there, what prices the market holds and refine your personal requirements. 58 of the places we didn't even discuss. One was beautifully presented, but not quite right. The 60th one was per-fick. Offer on the spot mate! We are not to far from Peckham, once we settle in, we'll host you !

You want to play everything in life has an element of faith? Please no try and play that lame stuff with me. Emi lo fe ma fi gba philosophy football? (Na me you wan dey use play philosophy football?) O o mor nkan ti awa ka ni ile iwe agba? (You no know wetin we read for Higher Education?)

If two people decide to go to Manchester from London and have to be there within 6 hours. Note: It takes on average 3 and the half hours for the journey.

One decides that to get there he would jump in his car and drive down. The second decides he would not use his car. Mba! Lai Lai! Petrol cost too much. His plan is to hitch ride from his front door to the destination. Obviously both have an element of faith. The first is hoping not to have an accident, the second is hoping not to have an accident but also hoping he would meet enough good Samaritans within the 6 hour period. You know what? He might actually make it. Are they comparable, which on is a wishful thinker and which one is in control?

TV01:
She doesn't have any more of a gaurantee than l do. My wedding was the culmination of 17 years of preparation and searching.

A prenup cannot make someone care for or commit to you. Can you legislate for human behaviour? Listen there are a ton of things that could go wrong. What guarantee offspring, health, ongoing prosperity or even sufficiency? What about accidents or other mishaps?

Your inordinate obsession with the possible financial implications of a possible divorce is bordering on the irrational. Plan and work towards the good and prosperity of the union. How will you even enjoy it, if you are constantly on edge about a possible divorce?

This is what I was saying about you not being a logic man earlier. I pointed to your linking of prenup with a woman not being capable of having "sufficient" kids as indicator then.

What has led to, or where has anyone said, signing prenup can make someone care for or commit to you?

I would rather be "irrational" and obtain some control than ignorantly bury my head in the sand and say the law does not apply to my marriage and I know what my wife I knew for only 3 months will do despite biology teaching us of their hormonal vortex that make them change over years and the list of stories of people with similar philosophies being burned.

Secondly, I don't know how signing prenup presupposes that one would constantly be on the edge about divorce in marriage and one is not planning for success of the marriage. That is the kind of junk women come up with to suppress your wish of prenup. [Imitates yeye women] "You must be planning for divorce if you want a prenup". But you will here the same foool say she can't be a FT housewife because she does not want to be left high and dry. When she thinks like that (her best interest), she is not planning for divorce. You sure are a well trained real man. You are not a logical man.

TV01:
"Control" - over one solitary - and unlikely if you prepare and plan well - aspect? Manage the risk prior - of not being ready or not choosing the right one - or during - of it becoming stale or taking each other for granted of of being unfaithful.

And all that is not practicable in conjunction with prenup. You came to the lame conclusion only when you do not sign prenup can you choose the right one, keep a relationship fresh, cherish your partner and behave right? Those that sign prenup can not do all that as well?

Wow! Na wah for this logic o.

Lets go back to the philosophy 101 fictional tale I gave above so you can get some clarity and strong analogy.

The first takes his car as guarantee and needs to drive safely and avoid an accident, the second is hoping he would talk to the person (or people) that give(s) him a free ride to [all] drive safely and avoid an accident but is also hoping he finds such person/people that would listen.

Who has a better strategy of the 2?

You are not a logical man. I am rarely wrong when I make an assertion.

TV01:
Hence the the "JAMB" analogy. You are responsible for one. Yours!

And you call my post "populist"? This is pure soapbox. With all this, there are still solid and prosperous marriages. In as much as relationships are driven by the prevailing culture, we still have the choice to inculcate and retain right values in ourselves and those we can influence.

Drugs are glamorised, am I a druggie? Prostitution is considered cool, am I a whoremonger. Drink is the "societal smoother", never touched a drop. Take responsibility for your choices and actions. Why follow the orderof the day if you are "a man who dictates"?

1. Not all women - or men sef - are financially independent. Majority simply have greater leverage as couples.
2. Finance, should not really effect the marriage dynamic, find someone who understands that. l did.
3. Society has always being sexually decadent. It's just more pulished and accepted. Some choose not to embrace that. Agqin find someone who does not

Your Jamb analogy is useless.

If you have been to the same poor educational institutions as the 95%, have access to the same incompetent resources as the 95% and doing exactly the same studying pattern as the 95% are doing, then you are likely to end up like the 95%.

You will have to do something different from the train wreck of the 95% (e.g. go to a top private school where they train you on Jamb) or just be lucky the topics you focused on and studied came out in 75% of questions.

Nothing you have said you have done has proven you are doing something different. As a matter of fact, you are at the worst end of the spectrum based on saying you knew a woman after just ONE date (i.e. like someone in the spectrum going to Jakande Primary school, Jakande Secondary school, Jakande University). I can guarantee you even some women here that love your "real manliness" and enjoy your "chivalry in defending their rights to milk" shuddered and were peeping through the fingers in horror at that statement.

TV01:
I've answered this a number of times. Does car insurance guarantee one will survive a crash? Or health insurance mean one won't catch a terminal disease or illness.

The life of man is a vapour. Everything has a risk of sorts. Mitigate all you like, all you can, but don't let it paralyse you. Will you not eat for fear of food poisoning, or not travel for fear of an accident?

My GOD!



This man, your logical reasoning na gba oooooooooooooooo!

My God! Baba mi! Oba lo ke! Olugbala! Baba Jesu! Oga Mohammed! Oba awon oba Ifa!

What the bleep has car insurance got to do with surviving an accident? What has health insurance got to do with surviving disease? 

Fck me lawd! Fck me triple times!

Insurance is suppose to compensate you financially, not prevent you from harm.

Driving around and saying you need no insurance still leaves you susceptible to the same harm but only that that comes with severe financial loss.

You and logic are like oil and water. 

TV01:
Yes, but they still plan and prepare to win. Competitors still do their all and have a true desire to do the best and be the best they can. I am the original anti-"Mog" , please check my posting history Sir

Then don't say Winners do not concern themselves with losing.

They do!

And still plan and prepare for winning.

Lets apply it to the topic here: Sign a prenup and still plan and prepare for a successful marriage. You get the point?

TV01:
Life is hope. Please evidence how you live any aspect of yours on guarantees? Yes we are not ignorant of risk or the wisdom of mitigating it, but do we cease to live for fear of it?
Give us wedding rice jor. And please obtain a guarantee from your caterer. !

Best
TV

Refer back to philosophy 101 above.

Sheila Johnson helped her husband build BET. She helped finance and worked in it.

She is perfectly entitled to the $400m she got from the divorce.

And she has not proved it wrong as she is using it to build other businesses.

That is someone capable of the money she rightfully asked for. She did not give daft excuses like "I got pregnant for him" raised by fucktards like queensmith and Kutey. She said this is what I did to directly build the business. Now she is building more.

omar22:
And why cant he part with $21m, she is not trying to be like Heather Mills who wanted between a third and half of Paul MaCarthy wealth or Tiger Wood's nanny that turned wife that later turned into gold digger who wanted a third of Tiger Wood's wealth, $21m in a billion common ,  in the spirit of fairness


Roman Abramovich parted with £150m, a 767 plane, a flat in Grosvenor palace, a $72m Yatch and this was Roman's offer,  So this Stingy Nigerian should pay joor!!!

No 1, he can part with the money. He just chooses not to.

No 2, read the story, she is like Heather Mills. She asked for half and was awarded $21m instead by the courts.

No 3, she did not work for $21m and can not make $21m, so she is not worthy of $21m.

No 4, if all those celebrities wish to part with the relative sums, good for them. Prest does not want to. He has given a figure he is willing to part with that is reasonably generous by her earning standards and potentials. That cannot be said to lack spirit of fairness in rational and logical thinking.

No 5, you don't know what happened or happened in the relationship that resulted in him only wanting to part with that. There are rich people that have parted with huge sums because they think the wife is worth every cent. He has judged her worth is $2.5m of HIS wealth. A sum she is not capable of earning.

No 6, don't call people stingy on how they spend their hard earned money. It is not your position to dictate how others expend their money except they are lunatically wasteful or come to loan money from you when they should be financially independent. Determine only how you spend your money.

Open your mind to logical reasoning, not platitudes.

Siena:
Personally, I wouldn't discipline someone else's child. Not even my nephews or nieces. I don't feel it's my place to do so, that's what their parents are there for.

If an adult slapped my child the way that guy did, there'll be hell to pay. My daughter is well-behaved, and does not act up in the presence of others. If on the off chance she did something really out of character, then it would be my duty to straighten her out. Not some grown arse adult who should know better.

I definitely discipline my nephews even when their parents are there.

Sometimes the mother even try to get involved and take over the discipline because she is slightly embarassed and I tell her to back down, I have it under control.

That said the kids are lucky because I have never smacked them. Their parents on the other hand will not hesitate to smack them. My raised voice and facial expression is enough for them to act right at this stage, but I can say that because I don't live with them 24 hours.

omar22:
Look this is how I see it I wont beat around the bush,

If this guy is worth over $500m

Then I believe he should pay the $21m divorce payout! for the sake that she gave him 4 children


The guy is lucky that this didn't happen in America and theirs no Pre-Nup signed,  That lady would be smiling by now,


The Company is Owned by the founder whether his village member contributed towards it or not,

The Company started when he was married to this lady and not before he got married to the Brit!

She was a full time house wife at the age of 49years which means she probably gave up her own career so that the man could pursue his,


Look like I said if the man is worth close to half a billion then he should pay, I dont support the 50/50 split because if its the other way round the ex-husband wont get 50% I could remember Sean Penn only getting only $27m out of Madonna's wealth, Mel B's ex Husband only getting 800k pounds and one flat in North London out of 20m,


This guy should be able to part with $21m

She gave him 4 children?

Really?

So why is she asking for custody of his kids then? Huh?

More like he gave her 4 children.

The company started when they married, and so? That means she has a contribution to it?

For your information, she is a working mother. And she obviously did not have the capability to make anywhere close to the sum she is asking for. The man is capable of parting with $21m but he does not want to, so I don't think he should, it is his money.

TV, what did I tell you about philosophical system and how it affects people's mentality? You see another example?

Kutey:
AHAHAHAHAHAH  AHA AH YOU LIVE IN FREAKING PECKHAM?!!!!!   ,  , OMG OMG I'm gonna cry of laughter, I fu<king peed in my pants OMG

You want to sign a prenup for what? so that you can keep your council house or the bus pass for route 436?"

I am not marrying cretinous goats like Kutey who would say she is used to a lifestyle and I must fund it while her lazy arse contributes nothing."
We wouldn't even cross paths my dear and as for your contributions I can confidently say I probably earn 5 times more than you do and am way younger, you sound old and bitter.

chiozor: Married men live longer than SINGLE men. Male species die earlier than female, that is across the board in the animal kingdom.
When a man is dying of terminal illness or dementia and has treated his wife and family decently, who does he think will stay at his bedsite taking care of him, clearing and wiping him till death with genuine love? girlfriends or nurses in hospices?
If you think women will cause you an early death start sleeping-with dogs, they are a mans best friend

person! The joke is on your daft arse!

TV01:
So what are you hanging around for? Find her and get viable ?

She should find me.

Do you know how fine I am? Do you know what I am worth in the coupling market?

TV01:
1. More like 2 to be honest . The rest was planning the wedding
2. Who knows tomorrow? Do you know if you'll be here tomorrow, let alone, 5, 10 , 15, 20 or 25 years time.
3. In as much as I could I ensured the commitment and compatibility were there to begin and we'll both continue to strive for it.
4. Whatever you believe, whatever your worldview, it's by faith you believe there'll be a tomorrow. Or what guarantee do you have from day to day?

All what you said does not disprove the fact that you are living on faith/hope/wishful thinking that your wife is right for you and she would not milk you in divorce.

The only guarantees you have and you know is what you can/would do. You have no guarantee or know what she can/would do. That is more evident by the length of your courtship. I can safely say, you hardly know the person you married. You have no control if she decides to eff you up. Your future is basically in her hands if you live in the West. And there is no guarantee she would be nice if in future she decides she might want something else. That is not to say she might not be the nicest woman on Earth but I would still have a prenup with the nicest woman on Earth.

I would have more reasonable control by signing a prenup. I strongly believe in risk management especially when I am the one that has something to lose and the other key decision maker has evrything to gain and nothing to lose.

TV01:
Prayed for it, planned for it and will continue to pave the way for it. I don't take it for granted. It will take some work. Not to keep it going, but to keep it sweet.

So maybe I'm just thick, but happily married. Why are you so skeptical? There are happy and succesful marriages everywhere.

Not really.

Majority are miserable or so-so. As I said, men and women have not evolved yet to adapt to the new relationship rebalancing of women being financially independent and sex being blasted at us left, right and centre by the decadent liberals. Relationship culture has not caught up and stabilised with the rapid change and it is currently in a turbulent flux. Divorce and break ups are the order of the day. I don't live in Fantasia, I live in Peckham.

TV01:
Nope. I am reading from my own script. Critically evaluating and practically applying are two different things. I'm living it. I don't just believe, I have experienced.

You are living it based on hope, just like most other people. There is no methodology and no guarantees. All you have said you did to get it, including the due diligence, is in no way inspiring, reassuring or protective. Hope might or might not fail you. It is just hope.

TV01:
I am fully aware of the potential consequences of divorce. I also know how to build a strong marriage. Do winners overly concern themselves with losing? For all competitors, it's about preparing and executing, then finishing.

This is another populist fanciful air that has no logic.

Winners do concern themselves with losing. Stop barging the kind of junk evangelistic pastors throw about, that will not work a fraction of millimetre on me.

TV01:
A solid and well constructed marriage is blind to location and mostly oblivious to laws. A prenup goes against the very essence of marriage as I understand it.

In turn;
1. Marriage in my experience is heaven, not lululand !
2. I abide by all laws regardless. Very few of them will ever hinder me living the life I choose.
3. I spent 17 years learning about and preparing for marriage prior, and continue top do so. "Guru Marri-agE"  ?
4. Worth is relative. When we met I was financially further along than my wife - obviously that all changed after I paid for the wedding ! But seriously, I have repeated time and again, money is not the main driver of or the primary consideration when valuing a marriage.

I'll be happy to deliver the sermon on the day !

Best
TV

More of your ecclesiastical platitudes.

Blind = Hope

Religion = Hope

Hope = No guarantees

Confidence in no guarantees = Wishful Thinking.

You are proving me completely right.

TV01:
lol! true dude, but not at this level.

You are the one postulating the debilitating effect of the law and the numbers of "not fit for purpose" women. I am merely saying no matter how damaging the law, if you can find just the one woman who you can align with, then marriage is still viable and remains the best option.

And there was absolutely no time I said one cannot find one woman that is right or marriage is not viable.

Guess who brought those up when they were not even a point of debate.

TV01:
If I believed that, I wouldn't be married. I was merely extrapolating your thinking.

Well, your extrapolation had no logic behind it.

TV01:
The actual decision was taken within 3 months after we met - I personally never spent longer than that "viewing". The wedding was 10 months later. I knew she could be the one when I first clapped eyes on her. Just needed to check, consider, consult and confirm.

Wow!

You did your due diligence in 3-10 months and came to the conclusion you know what your wife would do in 10, 15, 20, 25 years time?

You must be fcking kidding me. And you say you are not living on faith? You are not surviving on wishful thinking and hope?

TV01:
I had my aspirations for marriage. My wife both accepted and met them. Neither of us was forced, neither of us was conned. The tone of honesty and transaparent communication was set from day one.

Unilaterally dictating your rules does not mean the marriage will be happy or successful even if you find someonme to accept.

In lieu of you dedicating your life to some worthy humanitarian purpose - and even that does not necessarily preclude marriage - you will prove your manliness by successfully marrying and raising a family !

And you think because your wife accepted and met your aspirations and you did not force them or con her that guarantees your marriage would be happy and successful?

I am assuming by default you are smart enough to say "No".

So what was your point with these statements?

TV01:
It's trust and I have control over my side.

You have no control. Faith is not control, it is purely hope!

TV01:
My audience is not primarily the women. I'm  not here to build a constituency nor a fanbase. Not for favour or applause. Accolades or awards.

I am sure you are not, subconsciously. But a lot of your arguments have no comprehensive logic and are of the populist genre normally batted around and upheld by those that do not critically evaluate the platitudes the populists through about.

TV01:
Your fear is not divorce, it's the consequences of divorce. I don't share that fear. And I appreciate the fulfilment and blessing within a happy marriage.

My position remains. Marriage is the best option and the  norm. And the way to go if you can find someone who shares your values.  Whatever part the law plays can be kept to a minimum. neither will you ever be able to legally construct a perfect marriage or remove the downside.

You yet have all to play for sir.

Best
TV

If you live in the West, you are married or want to get married, you have no prenup and you say you are not worried about the effects of divorce despite the realities and stories widely and publicly available, then you are one of the following:

1) Just an individual burying his head in the sand and would not listen to any logic and would rather live in lululand.

2) An individual that approves of the divorce laws and is willing to abide by it.

3) Just purely ignorant.

4) You don't expect to be worth much, so what da fck, she aint gonna have anything to milk.

TV01:
Done properly, both parties are better off married. Not only them, but their offspring and society at large.

"Singlehood" does not preclude "companionship", it simply means "not married". Celibacy is another kettle of fish and demanded by the worldviews of some. Unlike "innocentee" here, I have had it all ways and reccommend marriage  !

Best
TV

I know, on average, it is the woman that wants companionship more, it is the woman that mostly would struggle to find the type of companionship they want, and it is the woman that has the shortest window for finding companionship, it is the woman that will struggle to find new companionship if the one they have fails. Hence women benefit more from stable marriages. Men benefit immensely too but not as much as women.

So you should know many men would opt for singlehood. They have been doing it from time and even more nowadays. The women tend to attack them for wanting to be single. Words like "irresponsible", "immature", "selfish" etc are thrown their way. Real men heed to such words. And I can confidently say a lot of married guys I know marry because the girl is pressuring them for marriage, not because they are ready, or in some worse cases, not because they are completely besotted by her. Come to think of it, some of these girls marry these guys purely based on the fact that "he is good enough, he will do".

Fck Lawd! Not in my life would I put my life in such a way.

Some worldviews might demand celibacy, but the point you made that marriage should remain the norm because very few would opt for celibacy is irrelevant when people can choose not to be in marriage and still not be celibate.

TV01:
Neither gender can prosper withought proper marriage.

To clarify, both parties within the marriage will benefit most when it's done properly.

I absolutely accept that marriage is not necessarily for all and one can live a fulfilled life before or without marriage.

Having said that, I do believe marriage is and should remain the norm. Very few should opt for singlehood or celibacy. For mature individuals, there should be just cause for not marrying.

No!

Even when done properly, a woman would still benefit more.

Unions are of more value to a woman that it is to a man.

Both parties would benefit but woman would benefit more. Lets call a spade a spade even if it offends some women that like not to hear the truth.

Furthermore, lack of marriage does not necessarily imply singlehood and celibacy. Companionship and sex can be obtained outside marriage. Not like if I know anything about that, I just heard it through the grapevine. 

queensmith:
I'm talking about contribution not compensation, leaving the divorce case to one side what reason can a woman give to have a child for a particular man. I know many will claim financial reasons but let's be real, most women don't get paid to give birth so that argument is weak to say the least.
I hear some say a woman will do so to 'tie a man down'. Tie a man down for what? What is she to gain from her pain, talkless of the life long responsibility a child indicates.
Some will come and tell me love- I don't know what this love thing is when I see it I'll believe it but till then I'll appreciate a solid tangible reason.

Sagafag you can sit this one out, adults only.


and if children were as important as you mention- most women won't bother getting married? Especially the Nigerian ones that are desperate to give birth.

See the obese person rant her rubbish like Kutey, her fellow person.

How many women are not interested in having a child, foooool. They should be compensated for what they live for? If she does not want the responsibility for the child, why does she fight for them in custody?

Is your blubber poisoning your blood ni?

coogar:
probably because fraud and corruption don't always attract huge prison sentence.
even the mps in the uk who were found guilty of dipping their hands in the public funds got a slap on the wrist. . .

it's not murder or drug dealing.
ibori's name is not abubakar sokoto - he cannot be linked to terrorism.  within 2 yrs, he would be a free man.

but it seems you're correct though. ibori seems untouchable in nigeria.
i saw a wikileak where some naija officials were pressuring the united kingdom to drop the criminal charges against ibori in exchange for the uk returning 400 nigerian inmates back to nigeria.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8303381/WikiLeaks-cables-Nigeria-pressured-UK-to-drop-charges-against-politician.html

I think the MPs own is different. It was just acts of fraud of over claiming or fraudulent claims of chicken change.

Ibori fcking lorried millions of the money with arrogance and felt arrogantly he was untouchable. He gave them hassles and serious expenses. If his wife and accomplices are getting 5-8 years, he would be getting over that. In Nigeria, he would never get over 3 years.

dayokanu:
^^ Any venture can only be worth it based on what you contribute into it.

If you and your husband start a joint business You deserve every single Kobo from the business or split it 50-50

I know a couple both lawyers who have a law firm, In case of divorce the wife deserves every single kobo

But your husband was doing his own business you were working as an accountant somewhere, Now tell me what you contributed to his wealth

Or worst still a wife who was a housewife and wants 21m

How many of her working mates made 21m in their career or what has she invested to make 21m

Don't ask the person such simple questions. She would never get it.

coogar:
our justice system cannot be this porous.
tafa balogun spent eons in prison. . . .i think bode george also did about 2-3 yrs in prison as well.

ibori would spend about 4 yrs in prison.
he's not particularly liked by the ruling government and efcc are dying to put their hands on him.

Tafa got only 6 months as he served his 4 year terms concurrently. Most of it was in hospital.

Bode got only 2 years as he served his 28 year terms concurrently.

With Ibori's cousin as governor supported by Jonathan and who won Jonathan Delta State, I don't trust nada.

coogar:
then again. . . .ibori has been captured for almost a year now. . .
the british justice system would deduct that one year from his original sentence. . . .
i don't see him spending more than 3 yrs max in prison - which could be halved if he behaves himself while in jail.

he's better off here than in naija where he can be killed.

It would be 6 months for each of the 170 charges but to be served concurrently and N3,520 fine in Nigeria, and then freedom to spend his loot. With Jonathan and a few ministers waiting for him outside the gates of the jail to go and give glory to God.

coogar:
it depends on which side he finds himself. . . .
i once saw bola ige, obasanjo, diya, etc coming out of a naija prison.
the picture didn't look like they had brokortor and paanla with pounded yam while in prison.

they looked like they were drinking their own urine in there.

That was under ruthless Abasha that was their enemy.

This is under gutless Jonathan that is his or his friend's houseboy.

coogar:
it's in the uk he would even get the vip treatment.
prison in the uk is like a vacation in a hotel without the freedom to leave the hotel.

he would be alone in his prison cell with coloured tv that accesses satellite tv channels. he can choose his meals.
he's entitled to work in prison, play pool, play playstation or xbox. gym facilities, table tennis, football, etc.

since his offence is non-violent, he would serve most of his prison term in a category d prison - open prison.

And you think he would not have the choice of meal he wants if he is jailed in Nigeria? With the right brokortor and paanla with pounded yam when he would be in a military hospital and his family would camp in the hospital ward, with Jonathan and Umbrerra paying him courtesy visit once a month and going for his thanksgiving dedication in Aso Rock to God upon his release?

Then he would join in helping Jonathan/PDP in election battles of 2015.

Kutey:
OMG  are you guys for fu<king real!! you have been on the forum posting bul1shit all day Don't you have jobs and lives to live? Lol

I have answered all your questions. Whether you are satisfied with the answers or not does not concern me.
She has been used to a certain standard of life and she shall continue to. Why not? She probably married for genuine reasons and that is reflected in the years spent together and children born.

Men NEED marriage way more than women do. Married men are healthier, live longer and are generally more happy. A woman (and a lot do) can decide to have children and actually enjoy them without someone telling her when and how to see them and have a guy on the side. They find that double the amount of women regret who they married than men.

Look at this idiots thinking they are doing a woman a favor by marrying them? Getting into it for all the wrong reason because they already think they are superior because the have a pen1s.
Nigeria is such a backward society, if it wasn't why are you here? go back to your father land.
They make women believe they have to marry marry marry and that's what makes it easy to make the wrong choice. Societies are very very different. In Nigeria its all about ticking boxes,young tick, tall, tick rich, tick, educated tick. Of course you should have standards but marriage is way more than that. Yes you can argue in the west they have higher divorce rates but in Nigeria most women live in ABSOLUTE misery but society has made them believe they need to be Mrs so desperately that they have to stay no matter what.

Who need marriage most? what are the benefits of marriage for a woman apart from religion and society acceptance in some countries?
She has to cook 3 meals a day unless she is a bad wife. She has to go through the trauma of childbirth and make sure (because she is God) she produces male children, if female its her fault. She has to have s3x as much as possible because if he cheats its her fault. She has to be ready to give up her career and be home carer or she is not submissive, who does she expect to bring up her children? On top of that she has to be ready to lose all if her husband is no more satisfied or has found a replacement. Then she can go empty handed back to her parent house where she starts from square one only that this time no one wants her because she is a burden and has baggage. This is what Nigerian men wish for their daughters and sisters.

A man comes home to 3 meals, a tidy home, available sex and children. Has nothing to lose. So look at your fool1sh question again and answer for yourself.

IF YOU DO NOT LIKE THE COUNTRY GO BACK TO YOUR VILLAGE, CAPISC? Everything that has been earnt during the matrimony will and shall be divided equally  simples.

And SAGAMITE you are still and will certainly remain a knobhead

Just shut up, person!

TV01:
I don't see how I can be wrong, as you are essentially echoing my "Find the one that shares your aspirations" theme here?
If the facts say that 95% of JAMB applicants fail, will you decide not to go to uni or determine to be amongst the 5% that do?

Having said that if the law is 100% anti and women are 100% bad, than I insist that marriage becomes unworkable and therefore not viable. I don't agree that there's no work around. On a personal note, I resolved not to marry if I couldn't find the one.

TV, I have to say: You do struggle with logical thought.

That is not a disrespectful statement, that is merely fact. I first noticed it when you started saying earlier on this thread that a woman not having the required number of kids ala prenup. What has that got to do with prenup.

Now what has the bolded in you statement quoted got to do with what I said?

I said 95% of women are illogical and go on to roughly calculate 80% of marriages fail or are unhappy, which lives roughly, at a minimum, 15% of illogical women can still be in a happy marriage. Talkless of the 5% of logical ones. What has your bolded statement got to do with that deduction?

How can you postulate 100% of women are bad? What kind of logic is that?

TV01:
Yes, I am "blissfully" married and would not have gotten married if I hadn't found the right one. The law was not a consideration. Not illogical, not populist. Personal. Surely my position is now clear?

For how many months or years did you court before you married your wife?

TV01:
You can't unilaterlly "dictate" and expect a bilaterally "happy" marriage. Faulty thinking, and predisposes the union to issues. Careful.

I've more than clarified my points. If the law is 100% bad and women 95% unmarriageable, find one of the 5%. If it's 100% bad both ways, forget it. I would've.

And no, I am not wrong sir, I am living it  .

Yes, you can!

I am from the clan of men that state their ground rules and if you don't accept it you have the liberty to leave. How is that faulty thinking? You have been taught "real men" don't say things women don't want to hear?

I am not a real man. I am ALL man!

TV01:
1. Inure by agreement. Not wishful thinking.
2. What gaurantees do you have about anything? Life is a risk. But I have been as dilligent as I feel I can be. And I am happy to proceed and give it my all on that basis.
3. No "Impress each other courtship" 0! Could see it when we first met, was pretty sure after 1 "date". Shared my heart, dreams and vision over a few months - also conducting due dilligence and presenting it to our families. Easy peasy. otherwise I would have walked.
4. No divorce. We took vows. I simply can't see it. Expectations were sky high, but if anything they have been exceeded. But to answer your question. I will always seek the best for our children. I won't contest a thing. All I have is already hers. If she thinks she can do better elsewhere. I will take responsibility for choosing one of the 95% and keep moving.
5. Although faith was a part of my journey, I have not called on that here, do not make it dogma for marriage and it doesn't obviate the practical aspects. Righten up yourself, find the right person, marry in the right way. Faith for me lends it a fullness, but the practicals you called for remain unchanged.

An agreement that is not legally binding is faith. Faith is wishful thinking as you have no control.

You said "I have been as dilligent as I feel I can be. And I am happy to proceed and give it my all on that basis", those words are WISHFUL THINKING.

Your due diligence was done after ONE date.  

Awww! How lovely. What a lovely thing to say. All the women reading this have their hearts melting and a lump in their throats. What a real man! You be "real man" gba.

"No divorce. We took vows. I simply can't see it.". Fck me LAWD! Triple fck me LAWD! So those that divorce did not take vows. That is the protection that guarantees you? Mate, you are not a logical person. WISHFUL THINKING! That is what your whole philosophy is based on. You no fit 'show me the practicals'.

You have absolutely no clue what your wife would do 10/15 years from now. You are living on faith. Many like you have lived on such and majority have regretted it in divorce.

TV01:
1. You misunderstand the essence of genuine marriage. All I have is hers, regardless of what she has or contributes.
2. Money does not underpin or singularly drive the dynamic of marriage. It's sacrificial and it's sharing.
3. Societies loss is the warping of marriage and the "jaundicing" of gender interactions as demonstrated by your position.
4. The law did not determine Whom I married or our vision for our marriage. Sod the law.
5. I am not marrying the whole of society and have no wish to alter the philosophical ecosystem. My business is with my mindset and my wifes mindset. Ensuring they are aligned.
6. I have said money does not singularly underpin or act as the main driver in proper marriage

Sir, please ditch the cynicism, the fear and the adversarial mindset. Understand that marriage is not just about you and your dictates. Be bold. A protector and providor. Find a woman who will cherish that and you, then throw down like only the Ijebu can.

I am so rooting for you (And I dey London 0! 

Best
TV

More of the "real man" platitudes.  

1. The essence of genuine marriage in my world is that you can share all I have when we are together. We stop sharing when we are no more together. Real men are too nice to say that.
2. Money does not underpin or singularly drive the dynamic of marriage. It's sacrificial and it's sharing. But I will protect my future from being damaged.
3. Societies loss is the warping of marriage and the "jaundicing" of gender interactions as demonstrated by your position. Blame the stewpid laws for it.
4. The law will not be sodded if you are unfortunate and she decides to eff you up. She has an upper hand over you, stop dreaming she doesn't.
5. But you feel your partner is immune from the interaction of the philosophical ecosystem based on one date of due diligence. Amazing. You are one of, or all of, the following: dreamer, ignorant, naive or foolhardy. All I can say is Good Luck.
6. "I have said money does not singularly underpin or act as the main driver in proper marriage". I never said it does but it sure fcking plays a big part!

Based on the question of the thread, the answer is Sango!

You were freaking 23 when you married, so according to your story, you should be 28 now.

Calm down, it will come. You really do not have much to worry about. The more you stress yourself, the harder it becomes.