₦airaland Forum

RiloKiley:
Whether married or not, there are always other options to violence. But these situations occur at a time of great anger and irrationality, especially when the man has been provoked and pushed to the wall.


All men have the potential to beat up a woman. Self control is key. However we are human and self control cannot be maintained 100% of the time especially if the man is being continually provoked.

The one-off slapper is usually stunned when he does it. The one off slap usually ends the quarrel with both partners being shocked and surprised at the same time. It happens and is usually unplanned.

The chronic abuser however would have been rendering slaps even in the pre-marriage era. It is part of his/her repertoire and such people usually defend their slaps as a means to an end. They give out their fists generously. These are the husband/wife beaters. These are the ones whose spouses are at risk of losing thier lives.

Some much needed nuance to this discussion. But I doubt it will be appreciated. The feminist hordes and their ideologically transgenderd enablers are after divorce at will.

No-fault divorce is already here legally, they are just trying to force the message home socially, and ensure it's embedded into all belief systems. Like abortion really.

Abortion was in case of rape or threat to the mothers life. These two reasons account for an almost negligible number of abortions, and the real push is for abortion on demand - at any point and for any reason.

Here they cite cases of serious physical abuse or death as examples, then make abuse itself the justifier, abuse without any real or objective definition - i.e. based on what the woman feels.

Soon, if you can't afford a walk in wardrobe full of designer bags for your wife, abuse will be cited and divorce justified . Poor men, you are on your own .


TV

missjo:
You quote the Bible a lot for someone who likes to bully, insult, and talk down on women,is this the Christian way?

Love the bible me. Untrammelled - and often unpalatable - truth . And please, I'm an equal opportunity bully, insulter and talk down-oner" .

Can't rightly tell if you are after a discussion, fight or just looking to score cheap points. Any which way, I can't say I really give a toss, you haven't shown you possess the heft.


TV

Is it too difficult to parse situations with objectivity? The core question should be; is single parenthood a good thing?

We are all touched and grateful for seemingly heart-warming stories such as this one. But for every one we can give thanks for, there are a hundred that left poorer outcomes for both the parent and child/ren involved. Is it overly difficult to separate the personal from policy?

All the data is already in, single parenthood (and I refer mainly to wilful single-parenthood, not widowhood or rape, which in any event are a relative minority) underpins many social pathologies.

It’s a major indicator of poverty, high-profile celebrity instances non-withstanding. It more likely to lead to issues for the children, especially as they approach their teenage years.

Males being more likely to be delinquent, and females being more likely to be promiscuous, are two of the most well known outcomes. Search data for the presence of fathers in the lives of prison inmates.

But there are numerous others, inter-alia, feelings of abandonment, self-worth/esteem issues, developmental and socialisation issues, poorer academic achievement, etc.

And yes, for your average person it has to have a potential impact on future relationships; from the financial burden, babymama/dada issues, all around acceptance etc.

The stigma surrounding single-parenthood may hurt, but at the societal level it is a protective mechanism, not intended to be wilfully malicious to individuals. There is a net cost, which society bears. It’s why families tread warily.

Who grows up dreaming of being or marrying a single parent. And yes, women bear the brunt here, so it behoves them to act more circumspectly and, make wiser choices, as opposed to unthinking indignation and the push for its acceptance which seems to prevail here?

Yes single parents should be given all the support possible, everything should be done to ameliorate the situation, especially to ensure positive outcomes for the child/ren. But no, single parenthood should not be sold as an attractive alternative to intact biological families, or even, as it seems to be today, preferable, even aspirational

And in the rush to herald this, the intimacy at 11 seems to have gone singularly unremarked upon


TV

thesicilian:
Marital infidelity is sexual immorality/unfaithfulness in marriage. And I think its the only ground for divorce recognized by Jesus Christ while he was physically on earth.

But I say that a man who divorces his wife, unless
she has been unfaithful, causes her to commit
adultery. And anyone who marries a divorced
woman also commits adultery.
- Matthew 5:32 (New Living Translation)

This may appear to be the case at first glance, but look at parallel scriptures;

Matthew 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Mark 10:11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.

Luke 16:18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.

If these verses in Mark & Luke are to be believed - and they are - divorcing a woman and remarrying makes one an adulterer. Along with the divorced spouse if they should marry another.

Luke and Mark seemingly contradict Matthew 5:32 & 19:9, or at least says that even if you divorce your wife for infidelity, you cannot remarry, and neither can she. So again;

Matthew 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

Matthew 1:18-19 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.

The seeming exception in Matthew was due to what we see in chapter 1. Joseph was espoused (betrothed to Mary), it was not a consummated marriage, even though he was called her husband - "before they came together" - it's why paternity was not in question - for ordinary Joe anyway .

He was putting away a fiancee, not a wife. Both parts of the transaction were considered binding, but voiding could occur at the betrothal stage (prior to consummation) if "fornication", note it was not "adultery", was proven. They were considered husband and wife at both stages.

In todays terms we say better a broken engagement. There was no concept of dating or loosely engaged. Biblically, after consummation, marriage is until death do part - hence this saying by the disciples;

Matthew 19:10 - His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.

That's bible, it can be hard,, so take it or leave it. But please stop trying to interject worldly morés to make it more palatable to those who cannot receive it .


TV
^{...Olaadegbu, please stop prating about divorce for abuse - it's not there.}

OLAADEGBU:
Does an abused wife have to stay with her husband?

OLAADEGBU:
There is emotional abuse, physical abuse, financial abuse, spiritual abuse and so on.

OLAADEGBU:
Emotional abuse in often underrated. It is sometimes worse than physical abuse.

Timbuktou:
Do you think it would be ok for a man to divorce Jo's wife over emotional abuse?

OLAADEGBU:
No.

Timbuktou:
But you do for physical abuse. I mean, we do know emotional abuse could well lead to HBP and ultimately. So, you're against violent deaths but not quieter ones? After all, HBP has been referred to as the silent killer.

See logic fail – Emotional abuse (usually by women) is as bad as physical abuse (usually by men), but women are allowed to divorce for physical abuse(contrary to scripture), but men are not.

See policy fail – divorce is permissable for abuse (of which there are numerous types), but at what level of abuse (for individual categories or universally) is not clear? Is it subjective, or is there an objective measure?

Olaadegbu are you a feminist - your shoddy logic & ill-formulated policy would suggest so


TV

OLAADEGBU:
It is easy to identify serial abusers.

Chapter and verse please - or find your level


TV

OLAADEGBU:
You seem to bask in the fact that the Bible does not allow for divorce hence you think that an abusive relationship is permissible.

Are you irretrievably dull ? What you wrote up there is akin to saying "my bank doesn't allow overdrafts, therefore it's ok to steal" . Let me ask you - does the bible permit or condone abuse?

OLAADEGBU:
What should happen where there is no reconciliation, remorse or healing?

You persist. If you desist, you remain happy to be separated - their is no divorce, and separation (and even if you forcefully claim divorce), does not grant one leave to re-marry. Else both the remarrying spouse and the person they enter into a sham union with are committing adultery . All simple and clear from the scriptures .

OLAADEGBU:
Do people deliberately get into abusive marriages? How do they prevent getting into abusive marriages?

Refer to your BIBLE - Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth (and while one is still on it) . There are no abusive marriages, only abusive people . Don't marry them and your marriage won't be abusive. Learner .

OLAADEGBU:
Where did I say that I am campaigning for divorce? It is you that I should be accusing of condoning abuse.

Not only are you campaigning for Christian divorce, you are also blaspheming and adding/subtracting from the scriptures.

You are arguing that divorce is scripturally permmisable. If divorce is permmisable, then serial divorce is permmisable. If divorce is allowed then the scripture is broken

1 Corinthians 7:39 - A wife is bound as long as her husband lives; but if her husband is dead, she is free to be married to whom she wishes...

Romans 7 - 1 Do you not know, brothers and sisters—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law has authority over someone only as long as that person lives? 2 For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law that binds her to him. 3 So then, if she has sexual relations with another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress if she marries another man.


Your audience are the cohort of divorcees and people with "bend down and pick spouses". They are here talking about how the bible can be interpreted in "different ways" - as if covetousness, theft, lies and adultery are ambiguous .

OLAADEGBU:
There is emotional abuse, physical abuse, financial abuse, spiritual abuse and so on. If the abusive spouse refuses that the abused be separated what should they do, remain?

You have categorised 4+ types of abuse - at what degree of abuse is divorce scriptural for each (and any other you care to mention) category. Who decides how much? Is it subjective, or is there some objective rule?

We are not in deep waters yet and you already appear to be panicking . Well, at least you'll have big audiences of seeker type religionists who live to have their feelings tickled and wicked ways validated. Awon oni "itching ears"


TV

OLAADEGBU:
Would separation not be better than losing your life? What's the use of living with a murderer at the expense of your marriage?

...ah! Sophistry, key tool of blasphemers and divorce campaigners . My first response to you on this thread; https://www.nairaland.com/3362781/abuse-acceptable-reason-divorce#49552647 - only now you want to twist "separate" to mean "divorce" right . Separate means just that, not divorcdeor dissolution of the union.The bible says marriage is for life. if you can find anything contrary, please share, or explicit reference to dissolution for "abuse", likewise .

OLAADEGBU:
I asked you the question. It is not a crime to say 'I do not know.'

More sleight of hand; I asked you to buttress your own question, below, with scriptural references - I know the answer

OLAADEGBU:
Is there any biblical reason for Christian couples to file for divorce when there is the possibility of 'becoming brutalised or ending up dead'?

...and following, is there any Chriistian writ to marry or conduct marriage with abuse as a subtext ?


TV

RiloKiley:
Good job, my dear fellow. Good job.

Gracias sir..seems he's back for more .


TV

OLAADEGBU:
Abuse is abuse there is no use embellishing it.

Did you know most marriages do fine and deliver even with low levels of conflict - I would term that abuse - should we end them all?

OLAADEGBU:
All types of abuse is wrong and should not be condoned. It is against the law of the land, especially in developed countries.

No one said it's right, or should be condoned. The bible just says it's not grounds for divorce, and forgiveness, healing and reconciliation should be the initial recourse. Or are forgiveness, healing and reconciliatrion against the law .

OLAADEGBU:
No one should remain in an abusive relationship. It's either they do something about it or separate for good.

Don't get into a potentially abusive marriage, and if the signs appear, nip them in the bud. If it happens seek remedies quickly. If you choose separation, fine, it does not mean divorce, or pre-suppose re-marriage without one spouse passing away . Beautifully simply biblical truth .

OLAADEGBU:
Whatever age or religion you belong to there is no excuse for an abusive relationship. The fact that it is allowed in your religion or culture does not make it right. It is against the law of the land which makes it a civil offence and this should be reported to the necessary authorities wherever it occurs before it becomes too late.

This is not about abuse is it. You wiley ole' divorce campaigner you .


TV

Joavid:
yea. virgins can't get pregnant. and to have kids, you gotta have sex.

...typically before kids, a relationship of sorts is formed. And hopefully it will result in marriage and kids. Married parents in an intact biological family is still the best way to raise kids ATBE - hence why governments encourage it.


TV

crackhaus:
Lol, but that's the point I've been making nah.
In those developed countries and with their high levels of PMS, there's also less number of virgins.

The guy that was interviewed on CNN was talking about his virginity, TV01.

Ok. My point was, PMS or not, if there is not a strong culture/religion pointing to marriage, it will suffer and birthrates will fall. The same root cause, with some variation, may take differening pathways, but leads to the same outcome.

The Japanese are highly heterogenous - or xenophobic if you prefer to think badly of them - only 1 in 60 or so is non-Japanese, and they look down on even the Koreans (ethnically the same). I wonder how they will retrieve the situation?


TV

freecocoa:
Why did you quote me to type what you wanted to? Couldn't you have spoken to your brethren Without involving me?

I didn't involve you, you involved yourself. I even made it clear I was speaking to Christians generally, and not anyone in particular. Your post just gave me opportunity. In no way personal. But anyway, ma'binu, no vex .


TV

freecocoa:
You know I'm no christian but you quote my post ans respond like this, smh.

Did you read the last sentence? It wasn't even for you, just Christians who may get thrown that question - no need to be jumpy around me .


TV

OLAADEGBU:
Is there any biblical reason for Christian couples to file for divorce when there is the possibility of 'becoming brutalised or ending up dead'?

Why don't you show us from the bible?

TV

proddey:
1. You're really not meeting people is the main reason.

Mobilise people and resources. Be at places where you will likely meet people. Be bold - ready to approach in all and any circumstances.

proddey:
2. Your job takes about 80% of your time.

If you are serious,youy will make time, or use what little you have smartly and purposefully. It willbe an issue even after you marry. Wise up.

proddey:
3. You must want someone that wants you etc

I would have though that was de rigueur for any serious and mature person?

You have presented no real problem, obstacle or reason to be desperate.


TV

OLAADEGBU:
It is not funny to those at the extreme end of an abusive relationship.

I laugh some more .

Your opener simply stated "abuse". You later classified several types. Presumably they all have degrees, or are they all prima-facie reason for instant divorce? "Laughs some more"

OLAADEGBU:
I am not looking for grounds for divorce on the first recourse. I am looking at when it comes to the point of death or psychological damage.

As above you didn't state that in opening, you "artfully disguised it. And then again when you listed several other types of "abuse".

You are trying it again here when you state "psychological damage" - ones wifes cooking gives him headache - is that an out

OLAADEGBU:
Are you only addressing Christian marriages? Even if they are Christians why should a spouse remain in an abusive marriage to the point of death?

I appreciate that not everyone subscribes to Christian doctrine or commandments - even if they leverage the label - so I think it good practice to disclaim.

You are still flailing about trying to make sense of this. Firstly, a Christian marriage built on the right foundations will not have such serious issues. Non-Christian marriages sef. Secondly, no one wakes up one day at the point of death. There is always a trajectory and a timeline as things deteriorate. Action should be taken early, before harm, serious harm, or death are in view.

And the first recourse at any point is not divorce. It's always, forgiveness, healing and reconciliation - for Christians. And whatever you do, it does not presuppose re-marriage, if your spouse is still alive. So call it abeyance, hiatus, separation, time apart, divorcement, whatever.

OLAADEGBU:
Is your counsel only reasonable to Christian couples?

I reckon any mature person will get it, even if they don't hold to Christian doctrine.

How old, and what religion are you


TV

crackhaus:
Lol, the article is about virginity...the survey was built around it, and any subsequent discourse has to come from that angle.

That was the headline, but the real concern is the falling birthrate. And why are they virgins? Because they are not forming relationships, which begs the question....

crackhaus:
Why are there so many virgins? Large numbers of young people are not married.

As above

crackhaus:
Why are they not married? You have explained why by your own understanding.

Because they are not forming relationships. There does no thave to be PMS for there to be marriage - see below.

crackhaus:
What I need to ask then to better understand your perspective is this; Does being unmarried stop people from having sex in japan? If so, why?

It's almost a moot point, or at best, one that is answered in passing. The issue is what is preventing relationships, ultimately marriages, which is the surest way to raise the birthrate.

No society is strict - as in against PMS - whilst at the same time not esteeming marriage. And where PMS is frowned upon, marriage will happen more, as it's the surest way to actually get sex

crackhaus:
...and furthermore, why has these same reasons not stopped unmarried people from having sex in places like US or Germany that don't record the same high percentage of virgins?

It's not having sex, or even not having sex. It's about relationships that lead to marriage and hence births. In the places you mentioned, even with high levels of PMS, marriage and birthrates are falling for indigene.

In neither case is it about PMS or lack of PMS. Or solely/mainly about the economy - which will always influence some people either way.


TV

OLAADEGBU:
There is emotional abuse, physical abuse, financial abuse, spiritual abuse and so on. If the abusive spouse refuses that the abused be separated what should they do, remain?

Let me laugh first .

Unless one or both spouses are perfect, technically at least one is suffering abuse to some degree. A wife that is poor with money is essentially abusive by your reckoning. Does her husband seek a separation, or help her towards perfection as part of the "sanctification" of wives calling the bible places on husbands. Or a husband with an incipient alcohol problem. Is seperation the first recourse for a godly wife ?

Your presumptions, and whole thrust are from a worldly mindset, and don't even bare the light of milky Christianity . Like I said, any level, degree, or type of abuse to establish cause, then extreme to the point of death abuse as examples.

Perhaps my presumption of discussing with a Christian is wrong?


TV

oyomii:
The OP made it seem like it's a problem

eleojo23:
How is that something to worry about?

Joavid:
am still trying to find out myself.

It's not the levels of virginity, or pre-marital sex. The concern is about the birthrate, and an a priori low level or relationships that will potentially lead to marriage and children - read the first line. The headline is slightly mis-leading.

TV

OLAADEGBU:
Take Muafrika2's case scenario as an example. What would you have counselled the husband to do in that situation (before he ended up dead).

I don't know of the case which you refer too, or if they are/were a Christian couple. However if he felt he was in danger, he could, as I said in my initial post, have separated, with a view to forgiveness, healing and reconciliation.

I always smile when people shout divorce as a response to abuse - divorce that can take ages to process . And it's always a case of extreme physical abuse to the point of death when they give an example, but plain abuse of any description, almost abstract, when looking for cause .

What I've written is the Christian way, take it or leave it, it's not by force. You can even keep the label .


TV

OLAADEGBU:
Why is physical abuse not grounds for divorce?

Because;
1. Physical abuse could be mild
2. it could be a one-off, situationally driven event
3. It could be dealt with effectively - healing and reconciliation should always be the first recourse
4. It's not given as grounds for divorce
5. There are no grounds for divorce in a consummated marriage

Further, even if you separate (you cannot remarry) unless your spouse dies - I am not counselling murder 0! - even if you call that separation "divorce". That's Christianity - I didn't write the rules


TV

crackhaus:
This is where traditional/religious cultural influence comes to play and reveals everything.
A young unmarried 30yr old American or Canadian is almost 50times more likely to have premarital sex than a young unmarried 30yr old Japanese or Chinese.

Why is this?
It isn't because of development, living in urban areas, or equality—which countries on both ends actually share, it has to be because of their completely different cultural perspectives.
Of course the Japanese have been influenced by Western way of life even more so than the Chinese, but traditional Japanese/Chinese culture still frown against casual sex between unmarried people even though it isn't a crime in the Constitution nor something that is physically criminalized.

Even if an average Japanese man engages in premarital sex, he won't be so brazen and publicly non-chalant about it the way an American would - they are both living in developed countries, but mindset is still very much different.

Hopefully I made more sense to you this time...lol . My hand dey pain me

Taking everything that was written prior to the quote as read, I'm still unclear.

Even if PMS is frowned upon (as in Christianity) it doesn't mean relationships, specifically marriage are? Like I said, it's not about virginity, or PMS. It's about "why are they not marrying"? Indeed, PMS is typically frowned upon to ensure purity within marriage. Does the culture/religion frown upon PMS and Marriage

PMS is frowned upon in most traditional/historical contexts. It's a very recent thing for the most part, hence the schizophrenia/hypocrisy in a lot of places, where they have not made the full transition. And, government have no interest in who is or isn't having sex, or who is a virgin, be that immediate, once, or twice removed . What they are concerned with is population demographics, specifically birthrates here.

And Japan and China are at opposite ends of the replacement spectrum. It's not culture driving this, this is actually anti-culture.


TV

OLAADEGBU:
Does an abused wife have to stay with her husband?

A Christian can by all means separate if they feels they are in real danger, but it is not grounds for divorce. Not to mention that "abuse" covers an almost interminable spectrum these days.


TV

proddey:
I am a 37 year old bachelor and I must confess that never in my wildest dreams did I ever imagine that someday I would be desperate to get married.

If you are still 37, the desperation to get married is mostly of your own making. The situation itself is not desperate, far from it. Not to say you can't be keen or even eager, but this is by no means a situation that warrants the term desperate, and certainly no that you act so.

I know each one relays how he feels/perceives, but believe you me, you are actually in a good place. Especially so, if you are of good character and with no glaring defects.

I'm happy to answer any questions, but read here for pointers; https://www.nairaland.com/1582623/boys-night-out-discussions/176#49446614

All the best


TV

freecocoa:
How does someone steal a grown ass man?

"Stealing is just a commonly used term - it's actually far worse than that.

Firstly, it's as a result of covetousness, which is a sin apart from "thou shall not steal" in the 10 commandments. Covetousness is actually a worse sin in a sense, as it can lead to murder, lies theft, and an "any means necessary" mindset to acquire the object one covets.

And further sin/s, once it's actually acquired. Covetousness is used as a metaphor for the whole law in Romans 7:7. Knowingly making off with a covenanted spouse involves inter-alia, covenant breaking - with God and man, which is lies & betrayal - idolatry and adultery.

More practically, how does one form a meaningful covenant with a covenant breaker? Especially where you encouraged/seduced, to break that covenant. So, two covenant-breakers come together to form a new covenant of the same nature they colluded to break .

Hence more second "marriages" end in divorce than first. It's habit forming - he who sins with you will sin against you.

Just pivoting off this post for any Christians that may be reading. Only interested in response to the points raised.


TV

crackhaus:
You will first have to determine what you view to be Chinese/Japanese culture in respect to their most practised religions, then we can figure out if these religions frown on pre-marital sex.

About Jap men having weird sexual obsessions, this is not the majority—unless you're implying po.rn actors represent the majority.
The docu-series I saw yesterday on the subject had a face-to-face interview with a working class Japanese man who is a virgin at well above 30.

It appears to me that virginity per se is not the issue here. The levels of virginity are merely indicative of the fact that Japanese people of "an age", are not forming relationships. And relationships not forming means marriages not happening and child-rearing not taking place - at the requisite levels.

PMS whether permitted or frowned upon is a side issue. It's the outcome - below replacement birthrates that are the concern. The rest of the West have all types of PMS and are also suffering the same below replacement birthrate situation.

Was he above 30 and a virgin because of socio-religious restrictions? A lack of partners? Or simply personal issues. No, lots of Japanese men have given up on the "stress" of chasing women in favour of more readily accessible and less hassle forms of "sex" & "pastimes.

Without the demands of a wife and kids, there is little or no burden, or motivation to over-produce - which is a family man's lot - leading to a vicious circle of more opted out and unmarriageable men - they don't even have the interest sef.

There is obviously not a strong enough religion, or historical culture to stop, or reverse this trend. Equality would suggest the women chase the men, and take on the burden of expectation .


TV

crackhaus:
At first look, it's normal to assume that development has something to do with sexual relations and you won't be wrong..but if you look at it closely, you'll realize this isn't the main reason—if it were, countries like the US, Canada, UK, and Scandinavian countries would also have high percentage of virgins.

The very first reason, before development, is rooted in culture.

Unlike Africans, Asian countries like Japan and China do not joke with their culture—unmarried men and women will most likely not have sex until they are married.

Why dont they get married early? This is where your opinion of development now comes in.
Over 60% of the entire Chinese population (almost the same figure with the Japs) live in well-developed urban areas—meaning, more people which are basically youths, work and have less time for 'unnecessary sex'.

You can imagine how the traditional cultures of these countries which span over a thousand years, still have managed to survive despite their technological and scientific advancements—and the admirable thing about it is that these cultures have absolutely nothing to do with Christianity/Islam which vehemently prohibits pre-marital sex.

I stand to be corrected, but I don't think either Japanese or Chinese cultures prohibit PMS - very few advanced high-tech countries do, if any? The issue in Japan seems to boiled down to an "apathy" - mostly by men - to actually engage women.

Given what has has gone before, this situation, this malaise, is viewed with concern. With no strong cultural or religious imperatives families are not forming. With the isolation that technology can bring, relationships are not happening - not at the levels required for sustainability anyway.

Under certain conditions, men will take the easy option. Spending their time & indulging their sexual fantasies online. Slobbing out, not making an effort. It is not working conditions or the economic climate causing this.

Japanese men are known for the fascination with sexually explicit - and in instances degenerate - material, including schoolgirl obsessions and the like.

Other Western nations whilst having the sex/relationships, are also failing to form the the families and breed at the required levels. Similar outcomes, if somewhat differing pathways. It's not about sex being prohibited, it's about sex being divorced from procreation and family, and taking on weird forms.

Japan and China are at opposite ends of the spectrum here. And it's worth noting that communities with strong Christian faiths typically produce large and stable families.


TV

konkacid:
I got married last year at 26, used to work for an oil servicing firm, about 5'11" and dress well on the average.

On many occasions, while with my wife, I see signals from small girls and big girls too, and I mean it's real. Most times, I tell my wife when these happen and she tells me they are lies.

Should I walk up to one in her presence to prove my point or just let sleeping dog lie?

First, let all the dogs lie, small and big. Then, stop acting like a puppy wanting to show off. Your wife knows full well what women are like and what obtains socially. You need some more of that knowledge to grasp where she's coming from and to stop you messing up at some point.

No charge for this one .


TV

Joavid:
This is not unique to Japan — in various parts of the developed world, economic uncertainty is reshaping the way millennials and other young people conceive of their sex lives and marital choices . But it' s particularly pronounced in the Asian nation, where experts and government officials have spent the better part of a decade fretting over the country's population decline and , as WorldViews once put it, " sexual apathy.

It's not the economy - not in a major sense anyway. People have kids whatever their financial circumstances. We have families of six living under bridges don't we?

The root cause here is the immorality - and the breakdown of the family - that godlessness ultimately brings, along with concupiscent humanism/materialism. Additionally amplified by the isolation that technological progress facilitates. Yes, technology is great, but withut a return to God, it will not restore fallen man, only help him fall further. It's why I laugh at this thread; https://www.nairaland.com/3360368/letter-daughter-mark-zuckerberg.

Pretty much none of the countries that can be described as Western are experiencing real growth (immigration apart). They can't even help re-seed each other. Hence the recourse to people trafficking , hoovering up migrants by the likes of Germany.

Ironically, the cultures they are trying to absorb will turn on them like an organ transplant gone wrong - to horrendous effect. It's hard to see this as anything less than judgement of sorts.

Acidosis:
nice one
Japan is one of the most (I think the MOST) industrialized nation in the world. They are no. 1 in the world of computer chips, electronics (LG, Samsung, etc.). 2nd largest producer of automobile. Interest rates in Japan is less than 2%, while unemployment rate is less than 4%.
Therefore, it is safe to say that high risk sex and sexual relationships are correlated to stagflation, inflation, gross underdevelopment and crass unemployment as seen in Nigeria.
Donald Trump is right after all:
Donald Trump Says Africans Are Lazy Fools, Only Good in Sex

I believe Samsung is a South Korean company.

I'm not sure how you captured "high risk" sex, unless you mean risk in terms of conception? Which is actually the point of sex, so that's probably best termed as "high reward" or "success".

None of those economic indicators you listed are the root cause here. Historically these nations had large, stable families, which were the engine for their early economic growth. And most Western economies including Japan are struggling somewhat at the minute.

How many children does Donald Trump have? He a wigga . Probably blasts gangsta rap and has Melania twerk when the cameras are off .


TV

SirVintageCock:
Brad is a closet gay obviously waiting for his pal, what's that his name......to fess up

George abi? Funny in a sense, but in these times, not an altogether ludicrous pissobolity. I've always seen him as a bit of beta/cuck/whipped. Maybe I over-estimated him .

As a marriage advocate, I always feel a tinge at the break-up of any marriage. But I have no real pity for serial divorcees and home-wreckers. This should be the recompense for all unrepentant ones. My pity is for the children involved here.

Those of you with stolen "bend down and pick" huss-ban, take note. You can't predicate true happiness by ruining someone elses. I wonder how Jennifer Aniston is feeling about this?


TV

Timbuktou:
Thanks TV, for your eager readiness to distill wisdom and hope. I guess one can get jaded upon too much contact with negative forces.

To be honest, the search for a partner whose ideals are antifeminist are is a such a tool. And when one does find such ideological compatibility, other equally important forms of compatibility still have to be established. No be small work o.

The relationship in the article is such a sad one, with all the calculation and warrior-like protection if interests. It's not one in which I could cope. I guess the search goes on.

I went through to be married, but I married well, and I'm very happy, smugly happy in fact. I wouldn't want anyone to go through as I did, let alone go through and then not be happy - for what, what for

Knowing what you want in a home, and ergo in a wife is a great start, along with being "that husband". Forget the "noise", you will undoubtedly hear around you. That is a result of their choices. Make yours. Don't lose hope, don't settle, don't get jaded.

Even when it's at the forefront of your consciousness, it can come unexpectedly and in a way you didn't envision or plan. So don't obsess, and don't be overly rigid.


The supposed "pay gap" issue came up when wifey and I were watching some program together. I just loosed a few arrows . It was very brief, and left here looking at me with corner-corner eye .

Two points from that vignette: I've had the same discussion with a handful of men from the birthing group we attended for our daughter - we sometimes meet as couples or sex-segregated. Some of the men bought into it, others admitted they couldn't argue it at home !

Second, if she has the faintest of feminist notions in her head, as long as she is a wife from the heart as I expect, do I really care? That is the real crux of Vanessa' problem.

In her head, ideologically she wanted to be an equal, in her heart, practically, she desired to be treated as a woman/wife. Classic disconnect. She let her head overrule her heart to her detriment, as many do/will.

Find one, even if not perfect , that is savvy enough to know the difference and act accordingly, whatever she spouts. Often it's just rhetoric to make them feel somehow


TV