₦airaland Forum

Mindfulness:
I jumped into the discussion when I saw Crackhaus referring to Greece, a country I had the pleasure to spend two years of my life in. And I was sure that he was wrong since most women I met there had their husband's name. And there STILL is no law - like in Quebec - which stops a woman from taking her husband's name in Greece. The evidence are famous celebrities, which I have mentioned on this thread. Feel free to google up on them.

The point of the OP and, Crackhaus thrust, was feminism coming to bear on naming conventions. The Greek legislation restricts choice as it stops women dropping their maiden names if they so desire. End of. Your entry point and take did nothing to disprove that fact.

Being free to append your husbands surname is not synonymous with being free to drop your maiden name and adopt his surname. Legislation in this regard restricts choice, it does not not expand it.Clear?


TV

Processor01:
TV01 - Your attention is needed here sir

Holá Bro'. How far? Hope all is well. I didn't like the OP as it seemed to suggest little that one could do to "risk-proof" ones home.

From a purely Christian perspective, I believe and have experienced the following;
Ecclesiastes 7:26 And I find more bitter than death The woman whose heart is snares and nets, Whose hands are fetters. He who pleases God shall escape from her, But the sinner shall be trapped by her.

It is fitting for a mature Christian man to boldly search for a wife, if he commits his ways to God, he will not go wrong.

I actually like to believe that as marriage was instituted by God, he may even intervene on behalf of unbelievers. I never heard of a union that went wrong that didn't flag up potentially damaging issues beforehand. But without discernment or maturity, they can be ignored, or overridden by feelings.

I met a few women who at first glance I thought "wifey for sure". But I simply could not ignore the warnings, regardless of what I felt or wanted.

Yet still, people from strong families, with a proud heritage and robust marriage culture, will possess the wherewithal to raise and guide their children aright when it comes to marriage. Truly, it is not Brain science, or rocket surgery .

Read this post. It's the Emir of Kano defending - or explaining - his marriage to a 4th wife of 18 years. Not that I agree with polygamy, or even the age gap in this case, my point here is the clear elucidation he gives regards marriage tradition and expectation amongst his people.
https://www.nairaland.com/2632649/emir-sanusis-response-marriage-saadatu#38507290

Marriage is a serious business, not a pot-luck meal. Treat it as such.


TV

darkenedrebel:
Let me use old Oyo empire as an example: before the advent of the Whites, before colonization, before the missionaries landed on African soil, the woman NEVER took up her husband's name. NEVER!!! That people don't know this beggars description and really questions the validity of the educational system in Nigeria. If the woman's name was Titilayo Owolabi and her husband's name was Adekunle Adewale, she would be adressed in public as: Titilayo, Omo Owolabi, Aya Adewale. Translation: Titi, child of Owolabi, wife of Adewale. She was NEVER adressed as Tilayo Adewale, it is only her children that would now take up the father's name. If anybody doesn't know this and refuses to believe it then let him/her go and buy the history of the Yorubas written by Samuel Johnson or any book at all on Yoruba culture and tradition, or better still conjure the spirit of their dead great great-grand-parents to ask them in person.

So a long wordy post, strategic use of smileys, snide invective, overweening self-congratulatory smugness, and - so far - 6 affirmatory smileys. Your candidature for the NL hall of fame seems assured, even if only in the family section. But not so fast sir;

Historically in the West, a woman would have a label - "Mrs" - that signified her marital status, and a name - "her husbands surname" - that identified her with a particular man.

Historically amongst the Yoruba, a woman would have a title "Aya" - that signified her marital status - and a name "her husbands first name" - that identified her with a particular male.

Pray tell, what was you point again? Particularly in light of the OP? The OP is clear, it is feminist ideology that is driving moves away from this norm. Especially via legislative intervention - thanks Crackhaus, I honestly was not aware.
http://time.com/3940094/maiden-married-names-countries/

Mindfulness:
Obviously, there is no law that makes it illegal for women to take on their husband's name.
Whatever the law says, is definitely not that it is illegal to drop your maiden name and take on your husband's name solely.

You are free to dig up the law. Let's see if the law is about women having a choice or women having no choice other than keeping their maiden name.

Mindfulness, more thought, and consideration before posting please. First, kindly refer to the link above. Especially referencing Quebec and Greece. Second, if women were free to adopt any naming convention they choose post marriage, why would a law be needed? It's not as if it would expand choice? Ergo, the law - again refer to the link - can only be about restricting choice. Which is one of the lies of feminism, in that it belabours the point about choice for women, but in actuality, it restricts choice by ideological diktat.

If we are talking anecdotally, it's interesting to note that many in this same West, and, who have no truck with, religious or cultural norms, marry and take their husbands surname - especially when children appear. They typically cite the unity and fullness this engenders. Some are now denied that choice by feminist driven legislation. How ironic.

As a man, the woman that will be my wife will take my name. End of. If she wants to bear her fathers name, he may as well marry her. The name change signifies her moving from his authority and responsibility to mine. Not that it's crucial in and of itself, but fitting. It also signifies some of the marital obligation and responsibilities that fall on the husband.

Likewise for offspring, my children will carry my name. End of. Even if FIL has no male sons, it is solely within my gift, if I choose to name my family or children to honour him. And I won't - at best one of my children will bear his name as first name. Men are and should remain jealous and territorial. She and they are mine .

And at days end, where has the convention ever been that a man drops his surname upon marriage - an anecdotal question .


TV

byvan03:
True, very disturbing issue. His parents won't forgive this, I doubt any parent will. A lot will change after this, his parents might hate her passionately and that will spell doom for their marriage if they decide to make up. It might be less scathing to just end the marriage, I just fear for how his parents will react to the news. The more I read the story , the angrier I get, I got your point fully TV.

Given OP' report of his mothers love, I'm sure she will readily forgive and hope for restoration as much as anyone. The Daddies and Mummies tend to see long-term, and think as much of their grandkids. As for "marital goodwill", old couples probably get that more than most. In their time they will have been through and probably seen a lot.

I believe the danger here is mostly from his wife' immaturity and the malevolence of her sisters. Once those are managed and contained, hopefully it should be full steam ahead.

Timbuktou:
Egbon TV01, hailings o. Life called and I had to answer. I also missed your wise counsel and merciless ribbing of these liberated women on here.
This comment of yours,
"...one wonders if the GDT that patrol these parts will come and advise divorce due to her violence, afterall, once it starts, it escalates till death, no?..."
I can only shake my head at the response.
Don't mind Byvan, she seems to be lacking nutrients. But I'm glad others have been more temperate with her than I could. But I hear good cop-bad cop is an effective strategy.
How's the family?

Forget them, they simply can't show face. Hopefully they are all getting, or have had the same stern warnings from their husbands - the ones that have of course

Family are fine thanks for asking - I'm busy sacrificing for them !


TV

Tearoses, thank you for you input on the potential damage to OP. Yetseyi cc'ed.

Byvan03, this has to be aired to a certain degree in public. This man has been trashed to both parents, siblings and almost certainly further abroad. Work colleagues, friends, neighbours, church, the scatter effect could be endless.

The man is could actually be unsafe, and things could seriously escalate. Who knows what the end-goal was or potential complications? Airing it will affords him some degree of immediate immunity.

I once had a female friend who I shared my pre-marital woes with, she asked for permission to share my travails with her besties, for a good laugh . I once asked her to hook me up with one of said besties, the e-mail response was scathing. She didn't just let me know the girl wasn't interested, she forwarded me the e-mail . People who like to hurt, like to gossip, her sisters will be publishing this story with glee.

I apologise to Timbuktou on your behalf . Tim holá, how far, missed a brother up in here.


TV

DevGuru:
NOTICE: Please, my story is still very long despite that I tried very hard to remove some unnecessary portions. But if you can be patient to read it to the end, then you are ready to give a mature opinion.

DG Bro' how far? I can only begin to imagine the kind of turmoil you are in. It's betrayal by any name - and by the one you trusted in most implicitly. It is well. First compose yourself, and be mindful of how you engage your wife until you take action. My thoughts; As a Christian, I do not believe divorce is ever warranted, so I will share with you out of that worldview. Taking your report as read...

There is something I personally term "marital goodwill". It builds up after a couple have journeyed together. Have found inspiration, encouragement, and intimacy in one another. When they have been there for one another, and through together. After such, divorce is never the simple clean-cut option it may appear to be, even without it, it's not

This woman was there with you through trying times and you have both endured and prospered together. Seek restoration. Truth is, women are all "much of a muchness".

First, obtain a secure copy of the recordings. Then discuss with your dad (and possibly your mum if you feel it appropriate). You then call a meeting with you, your dad (and mum), and your wife' dad (and mum).

I would normally eschew involvement of any 3rd parties, but she has already tarnished you as a wife-beater, even if it's only in the eyes of your parents, for their comfort, and so they don't get played again, you should exonerate yourself.

You then have a follow-up meeting that involves the both of you as a couple and both sets of parents. You can rationalise the number of meetings if you feel you can manage it in fewer, or have them close together. But you must strike, and strike early.

First, you want your wife' full acceptance and apology for her actions, and a recommitment to your home, and you as head. Then you want your In-laws full acknowledgement of the actions of their offspring. Freely and openly forgive her, then warn her briefly and tersely; this type of thing will irreparably damage the relationship if it continues.

Then ask your in-laws to speak to their daughters/sons whatever, and however they choose (do not do this yourself. Alternatively, you can have the husbands of the sisters involved present). Long/short, they warn them never to interfere in your marital affairs, and to stay away for now.

Have a DNA check on your daughter (I actually feel she's yours, given you've mentioned the resemblance), and check you are still potent. Then fire her again, she needs to be busier!

Don't accept any entreaties, overtures or mago-mago from her siblings. Treat them Offishly until they get the message, then only cordially at best. If their husbands are solid fellows, factor that in.

Not to sound blasé, but it's not as bad as it seems, but it could be a lot worse. Learn and grow from this. Keep a close eye on the state of your marriage and do everything to fortify it.

Love and treat your wife well, without pandering to her, or letting her see you as weak/malleable - not an easy juggle , I know. She should be maturing, and outgrowing some of these behaviours that can prove so damaging to marriage. See that she is. Watch the company she keeps.

All the very best. Bear your burden like a stout man.


Cheers
TV

^{...one wonders if the GDT that patrol these parts will come and advise divorce due to her violence, afterall, once it starts, it escalates till death, no?...}

thorpido:
Well,i guess these things must be in fulfilment of scriptures but one thing is sure,darkness can't prevail over light.

Ultimately, I absolutely agree. But there will be many persecuted, many casualties, and some may take compromise to far, or even capitulate.

I was listening to the radio here once (LBC 97.3 FM to be precise), and a caller suggested "that those who do not give their children a favourable view of homosexuality should be exposed to the law".

The implications if that came to pass, and I can totally see it given the way things are going, are manifest. Ultimately they could take your children away from you, and they could actually end up given to a same-sex couple.

When they take your children away from you here, it's ordered by judges and the records sealed. You never see your children again.

Yes, light will prevail, but this will not end well - it simply can't.


TV

Mindfulness:
Well, I don't share OP's views but I also wonder where you got your views from.

I'm sure postman will be back to reply you (double portion ), but I also find your views rather questionable.

Mindfulness:
I diasgree. For a marriage to be successful each partner has to selfishly care about him- and herself IN THE FIRST PLACE. Selfish, in this context, does not mean that you disregard or disrespect your partner but that you make sure that you are so abundant, in emotional and pragmatic sense, that giving is a pleasure and not sacrifice.

See evidence of your confusion - I mean, what does the bold even mean - especially in the context of marriage and family

Mindfulness:
A happy marriage does not feel like hard work and sacrifice, it feels easy and it flows (most of the time) and it is enriching and not sacrificial.

More confusion, are enriching and sacrificial mutually exclusive or diametrically opposed?

Mindfulness:
He doesn't want to make a woman his and this is what the thread is actually about. If you want to convince him of the privileges and advantages of marriage, then advertise for it instead of confirming to him the negative reasons why he doesn't want to get married.

No he doesn't want to "make a woman his", or himself hers. He wants to use her for his selfish ends. The OP is about satisfying his lusts and desires without thought to others involved or the longer term consequences.

And postmann' point was about "marriage and parenthood", which you artfully dribbled past

Mindfulness:
It doesn't take any responibility and sacrifice to become a father. It takes a few minutes of pleasure. Being a father is a whole different thing. And no, I wouldn't tell my kids that I had to sacrifice anything to be a parent. I would tell them that it took love and that having them made my life more beautiful and not harder.

Please note the difference 'twixt a father and a sperm donor. This love you keep prating on about that you have so far failed to define - as Carefree and as Mindfulness .

I have been sacrificing my sleep this past month, as for various reasons both my kids have not been sleeping well. Raising kids means I have less disposable income, less time to myself, to do the things I like to indulge in. It's a sacrifice, but one I consider well worth it. Indeed, a shorthand way of putting it is sacrifice = love. Refer to the bible verse John 3:16

Mindfulness:
Again, too many people make marriage and parenthood look like it is some sort of experience that you need to have strength for, when all it takes for it to be successful is love, passion and joy.

Yes, it may vary, but certain degrees of sacrifice, perseverance, patience and strength may all come to play in being married and raising children. It varies, but it is required. After all, if that was not the case OP wouldn't be trying his damnedest to absolve himself of the burden/responsibility would he?

Mindfulness:
I don't wake up in the morning, saying 'God, give me strength to sacrifice my sleep to make breakfast for my family.' I wake up and I look forward to having my family at one table. I enjoy it.

Ask the women here; https://www.nairaland.com/3187447/men-sex-life-after-vaginal if looking like an extra out of Spartacus after a cross-section, or having their down bellows stitched from one orifice to the other is not a sacrifice? Ask them how many enjoyed pregnancy, labour, delivery or the initial aftermath. Ask the men if not having the closeness, the intimacy or even your wife for a while is thoroughly enjoyable. Mindfulness talk true, you never born

Mindfulness:
This is not what he said. He wants kids and not a relationship / marriage and with the way you people talk about marriage, I can understand him.

What he wants is the fulfilment of his lusts and desires without consequence. The particulars of being male, without the burdens of manhood. And of course, it's women who will bear the brunt. Ask the women I cited above if after all they went through to deliver, it would be great for the father to be elsewhere knocking boots - ye I'm old - with a more nubile chick, instead of supporting her and caring for their child.

Mindfulness:
What about children raised in high-conflict marriages? Are they better off? Anyway, that's a different topic.

Standard false narrative, always compare a fatally flawed and simply bad idea with the worst possible outcome, and an outlier, of a good one.

Do try and have expansive convos, and not simply weave self-justification into your every utterance. Some real life experience would go a long way too .


TV

Ishilove:
That's not going to happen. There's a lot of things wrong with Africa but accepting homosexuality is not one of them.

Really? What about South Africa? What about threats from The West - most notably the US and the UK - that are threatening aid and trade sanctions if "gay" rights are not expedited? What about the UN championing and weaving "sexuality" and "orientation" into it's principles and policies. What about the charities, aid agencies and NGO's that are promulgating this by stealth?

Ishilove:
I am not going to raise my children in a society where men straffing men and vice versa is the norm, and if may God forbid they are born into such evil, I will drum into their consciousness to loathe all things gay.

Those in countries where it happens - roughly 20 or so of 186 - are having it forced on them. It's been woven into school curricula from as young as 6, with no excuse permitted for concerned parents. Small businesses such as bakers and photographers are being persecuted & bankrupted. People are losing their jobs and livelihoods, for simply disagreeing with, or failing to celebrate gayness.

Ishilove:
What nonsense!! Must they shove their perversion in our faces? Do you know that in a certain state in America, court documents have removed 'Mother/ Father' slots, and replaced it with 'Parent 1 and Parent 2'?

What arrant rubbish!

That already happened in Spain and some of the earlier country which already adopted this. It's a natural progression. Mother/father, husband/wife, are eradicated. After all, they are discriminatory in a homosexualised world aren't they? Or better understood as, for a lie to prevail, truth in language, and what words mean have to be butchered, parenthood becomes a legal construct. It's why we have NL championing "gay" parenting, aka child abuse.

Resist the narrative, there is no such thing as a "hetero" or "homo", person. It's not a fixed identity, or orientation. It's not intrinsic, immutable or inherent. It's not genetic. It's dysfunctional and disordered behaviour. It is not the basis for marriage or an equivalent setting for child nurture. Gird yourself, acquire understanding, resist at every opportunity - watch and pray!

thorpido:
If they appealed the judgement,I guess those up there might still award the case against them.
A lot of people say it's not anyone's business what two consenting adults do but we're seeing where it's gonna be other people's business when they force it down their throats.

Appeal or no appeal. It's already an utter failure that it's gotten to court. No sane society embeds homosexuality, and persecutes those who do not subscribe and celebrate it.


TV

Ishilove:
Uwa meeebiiiiii! What nonsense! What arrant rubbish!

There have always been "gay" dating sites and physical hook-up spaces. No one ever cried discrimination. But now it's been normalised and mainstreamed, everything must be homosexualised.

It's heading your way. But now you have been forewarned, gird yourself. Resist it, or even the whiff of it at every opportunity.They will demand you bow at this altar and sacrifice your children on it.

Sin abounds and it cannot abode the light. It will seek to banish all dissent and demand unwavering allegiance. We even have storm-troopers - both the ignorant and the plain evil - with us here on NL.

God pass dem.


TV

trekkie:
Profound. And yet you must admit that the modern marriage model will scare the average unmarried.

Yes and yes. But the fear can easily be expelled with a clear understanding of marriage, the way to go about it, and the right expectations to have. These should be grasped before marriage is entered into.

Most marriages that suffer do so because they are not right, ready or possess the required mindset. Clear that up and you are good to go. The failure rate should be in the low single digits at worst.


TV

Mindfulness:
Where is TV01 when needed?

Please Mindfulness, you really need me to answer this sophomoric tripe?

Take point 1 for example - Peace of mind: I googled one of the role models mentioned - Davido - he recently had big palaver with his baby mama and her family. Ugly, embarrassing, and to be frank, low class, mud slinging. Access restrictions and concerns about how the child' welfare were cited.

How can a man of integrity and repute have peace of mind if he is not daily, actively and 100% involved in raising his offspring? Willful baby-daddyism is the height of irresponsibility, and at it's heart denies what it means to be a man and father.

A charter for producing bitter women and malformed children. A pox on all proselytisers of such.


TV

theEYe21:
The Greek word for submission is hupotasso, “to subordinate…put under…” God exhorts women to voluntarily follow their husband’s leadership (Ephesians 5:22, 1 Peter 3:1). A woman is actively doing this choosing to put herself under leadership, choosing to be subordinate in a circumstance or relationship. This is not forced upon her by the recipient.

Not sure whether you are a sir or ma'am, but whatever and whoever you are, I'd like ot thank you for this beautiful expository piece.

Most excellent. Clearly tied to scripture and didactic. Much appreciated. Christians and those following a Christian pattern of marriage will appreciate this.

Saluté


TV

Healthy and robust marriages are, and continue to be the basal, normative, and pivotal unit of any flourishing society. Its monogamous male/female form ensures that a great number of men have a stake in society’s future.

It orders men to harnessing their efforts towards providing for their families, increasing productivity – yes, marriage is a wealth creator, an agent of progress.

It’s the best and safest domestic setting for women, and without gainsaying, the optimal environment for raising well-adjusted children and future citizens.

Whilst on the margins, there is room for other relationship forms, once a society foregoes marriage as normative, and consequently fails to sustain a high proportion of marriage relationships, it is already far gone.

Indeed, study any community where “marriagelessness” has already made headway – the pathologies are glaring. All societal ills, from crime, violence, sexual degeneracy, and even disease, will be able to trace some of their cause back to a preponderance & adoption of non-marital relationship types.

Nobody has been able to lay any charge against marriage. And all attempts to do so, evidence the following;

1. A desire to justify their non-marital relationship choices
2. Fear or failure to grasp what marriage is or for, and best of all,
3. A screaming big blank when it comes to proffering alternatives – that do the job

Have whatever type of relationship you choose. Or non, if you so please. Style it as you will. Champion it abroad. Laud its virtues, sing it from the rooftops if you so desire.

Outrightly and strenuously reject marriage as right for you. But please, don’t let the truth of marriage overly discomfort you, or feel the need to disdain marriage because you can’t live up to its demands. Or even worse, try and co-opt the perks, while attempting to jettison the obligations and responsibilities.

Those of us who get marriage, embrace it, and find it fulfilling in a way no other relationship can be, will always be here, smug testament to its superiority - and quite frankly divine institution.

I’m coming, it’s been a while I spammed this place with pix


TV

Mindfulness:
Let me sum it up. You need specific conditions to be happy and I don't. Simple.

Odd, and unsurprisingly, still unclear. Yes, one can be in a state of happiness, even despite undesirable circumstances. But one cannot experience marital happiness without being married (and happily so), or the joy of birthing and raising children without having them.

I was happy before I got married but sought - and thank God - found the distinct happiness only marriage and children can provide. But I do get your issues with risk .

crackhaus:
Mindfulness and TV01
Not bad at all.
I read every single line from you both for a change this time around.

Cheers bro'. I did too, hopefully you grasped what Mindfulness was trying to say better than I did. And I hope I was clear.


TV

Mindfulness:
Someone can be happy if their marriage is or isn't.

...and if the marriage is, or becomes happy, someones overall happiness increases no?

Mindfulness:
This is an intersting analogy. A team needs its players to collaborate but the individual players do need each other to be the fittest they can be. These two dimensions are also present in relationships. You have a relationship with your spouse but the more important relationship you have is the one you have with yourself and God. And this is the crux of the matter. People tend to neglect the latter even though it is the most important one.

Your first line in this response makes absolutely no sense. And yes,the relationship with God is more important, but in truth, that is not tied to or dependent on feelings like the mostly physical relationship with ones spouse is. Studies show that up to 80% of an individuals happiness is tied to the state of their marriage.

Mindfulness:
I would prefer to say that you desire to share your life, pleasure and responisbilities and that's a beautiful thing.

Semantics

Mindfulness:
It is one big emotional experience, the whole life is. The practical reality is a means, happiness is the end. You may not desire to bath your children but you can motivate yourself. Something tells me you are good at it.

I am, although it doesn't actually matter. I also enjoy doing it, that does not matter so much either. It needs to be done, as a small part of our care for our children and long-term plan for raising them as best we can.

Mindfulness:
I thought I would never use this word on this forum and much less with you but I have to say it:

Blasphemy!

Your relationship with yourself AND God can never be seperate from anything, whether people acknowledge it or not.
It is the alpha and omega, in Christian slang.

On a more serious note: Wherever you go, you take yourself with you. Everything begins and ends with the way you connect with yourself and God. EVERYTHING!

Blasphemy? Perhaps, but not of Christianity. The bible is clear that a marital relationship is separate, and may even impact or compete with your divine one. 1 Corinthians 7:33/4. But having a perfect divine relationship, does not fulfill for marriage. The desire to marry is actually a gift, and it's proper fulfillment leads to a distinct joy in and of itself.

Mindfulness:
No, it's realisitc. Our spouses may part from their physical bodies any time, and then what? Life in misery till the day you die?

Death ends a marriage. Get a new spouse post haste.

Mindfulness:
If it does not please me, there are millions of other sources of pleasure and happiness. I mean it in a decent way now.

And even if they are all valid,they do not substitute for the happiness of marriage, as they are not the happiness of marriage, they are the happiness of those million other things.

I delight in my children, I delight in my friends, I delight in my wife. And although I can have all 3 alone, in combination, or together, none can replace or replicate the other.

I am still not clear. Enough sha, lest we loop the loop .


TV

Mindfulness:
We are finally getting somewhere. And yes, they are VERY much more likely to raise them that way if happiness is an integral part of their home.

But said happiness is to a large degree, a result of actions of the spouses within the union is it not?

Mindfulness:
Why do you people need others to need you in order to feel validated?

At all. My wife does not validate me. Validation is not something I actually seek. Especially as a Christian. But the marital estate demands mutuality, co-dependency, as a result of striving together. It's like saying the soldiers in a platoon, or the players in a team are not co-dependent. Needing, co-operating, and relying on each other, does not in this context mean being needy.

Mindfulness:
I don't want to need and I don't want to be needed, I want to desire and I want to be desired. I want my spouse to enjoy our marriage and not depend on it and I want to do the same. There is no need to be needy. We have God, all of us. That's powerful enough and you should know it. I believe you actually do. A spouse can be taken from you by millions of different tragic circumstances but you will always be connected to God, more or less and depending on how much you want to. And even if your spouse is taken or decides to leave, you are free to seek and find happiness no matter what. Depending on others for happiness is too risky.
Depending on yourself and your faith is empowering.

You make it sound like going to see a movie, or out for a meal. My wife and I need each other to be involved, to take active roles, to handle, to manage, and run different aspects of our shared lives.

You are making it sound like marriage is one big emotional experience, devoid of all practical reality. I may not desire to bathe the children, but it needs doing. Especially if wifey is cooking. I could of course sit back, watch Euro 2016, and wait for her to get round to doing it all. Then of course you'd bring your "old before her time argument".

A relationship with God is and can be entirely separate to ones marital relationship. being happy spiritually does not mean everything is fine maritally, or make it so.

I note the bold, to me, it screams of someone who is scared to be disappointed, or does not fully trust. And so is scared to fully commit?

Mindfulness:
It's great if it works this way but it is not the end of my life and happiness if it doesn't.

I'm not saying it is. But it impacts for better or worse ones level of happiness.

Mindfulness:
I don't encourage myself to accept anything that does not please me. I don't look the other way if something hurts me. And I don't allow people to walk all over me. All I am saying is that it takes only me and God to be happy. Anything else is a smaller or bigger extra, not a necessity.

But whether you encourage it or not, accept it or not, it does not change reality. And if it does not please you, it affects your level of happiness
does it not?

Again, a relationship with God is distinct, to ones relationship with ones spouse. They both channel into your overall happiness, but happiness in one does not negate unhappiness - if it occurs - in the other.


TV

trekkie:
Always respected your views. I don't agree with all but I respected them. But SERIOULY? You don't see the reason? Have not read through sha but,..seriously?!

Hi trekkie, appreciate your appreciation. Would like it the more if you challenged - with reasons - when you disagree. I like to hear and learn. I can see people rejecting marriage as not for them, but I see no reason to trash it.

Especially when they do so in order to justify their own relationship choices, which are often poor facsimiles of the real thing. Or, simply try and co-opt the parts they like, rejecting the whole (grasping for the benefits and honor, without the responsibilities and commitment). And most especially when they rail against it, but cannot present something as good - let alone better - in it's place.


TV

...skip a few to focus;

Mindfulness:
This is where I will have to disagree. Happiness is a feeling that can be triggered by different conditions. The intensity of happiness can vary but the feeling is still the same. I can't believe you ask me, why marry if not for happiness? I thought, you were the one who said that emotions are secondary or even quite irrelevant. Didn't you argue that a marriage's first and primary purpose is to raise healthy individuals as to establish and maintain flourishing societies?

And being happy within marriage is inimical to raising healthy individuals how? Indeed, would a happy union not mean they are more likely to be raised that way The choice/criteria of who to marry should not be based solely on emotions.

Mindfulness:
I wouldn't. I refuse to give anyone the power to determine how I feel. It's called empowerment.
It doesn't mean that I wouldn't feel sad for some time but certainly I wouldn't let it affect me in the long run.

As stated, if a spouse can separate their happiness from the state of their union or the other spouses action within it, the are either not truly engaged in the union, perhaps "mentally exiting", or always prepared to do so. Or possibly some weird way of compartmentalising feelings,or simply ignoring reality?

Mindfulness:
Are you saying that happiness is the purpose of marriage? I remember you saying something else in the past when you were discussing divorce.

Not the purpose, but it will be present in a good marriage, the outcome of a solid union.

I don't see how a spouse in a marital union can determine that through something you term "empowerment", their individual happiness, will be independent of the other spouses actions. Fulfilling basic obligations, meeting reasonable expectations, and beyond that, making a determined effort to create a loving and caring environment. All toward the end I previously outlined;

Being with a spouse, loving, caring and sharing with each other, creating and building a future together, raising children, all these things contribute to marital happiness. If one spouse, fails, reneges, or betrays in such a way to impair those things, why would the other not be unhappy or less happy?

It almost sounds like a spouse who is being cheated on refusing to let the infidelity bother them. I know that's not you? Like I said, perhaps I simply don't get it, but I am not yet clear on what you are presenting , or your workings sef. Wurur, wuru to the answer !


TV

1bkaye:
My intent was to seek out those who either don't plan on getting married or aren't fussed about whether they get married or not and their reasoning. Especially coming from a culture that assigns great importance to and is almost obsessed with it. No ulterior motive here though, opinions are out of my control lol it's an open forum now

As I thought. Just not sure why people see it as open season to trash marriage

Marriage-Advocate-In-Chief


TV

crackhaus:
Am I the only one who found this funny?

At all, more uninformed than funny though.

Can I raise you one please? A man is not allowed to lay a finger on his wife, even if he finds her in bed with another man on top, but a woman can kill her sister, just because she slept with her - at the time - casual boyfriend?

prettynerd:
tnks everyone for taking ur time to reply, actually heard her side of the story, she said it was consensual, her current boyfrnd had to force her to confess to me after she confessed all her sexcapades to him which is the condition for him to marry her, she didn't even want me to know at all, she even called my fiance ( if i can still call him dat) and was quarelling with him for telling me, she said there was no emotions involved, she was just having weird fun and seduced him cos she thought we won't last too, i've never done anything to hurt her before o, only that i get angry with her a lot for living a careless life, the worst part is that she did same thing to two of my aunts husband. I feel she needs help mentally, but she still behave very normal only for this unveiled secret, STILL SHOCKED!

In some ways, this actually makes things worse. First though, has your sisters "current boyfriend" agreed to marry her now that she has confessed all? Does your sisters bf know about the matter with your aunts husbands?

I actually think your sister may need help and/or deliverance more than marriage right now. Sibling rivalry can be an unhealthy thing, but this is something else! Yes the men lacked self-control, but there is an element/pattern of seduction here.

Once maybe, but 3 times? sounds premeditated. The only good I can take from this is that she has - has she? - confessed all. Perhaps her healing is at hand. Maybe not your immediate priority, but please have her long-term good in mind.

Back to the OP, I am if anything more sympathetic to your erstwhile fiancé after hearing this. Unfortunately, it changes your position only slightly. It still happened, same worries, same concerns, same fears.

In as much as you are "taking a break", you have to decide either way, and soon. Keeping yourself - and even him, if he waits - in limbo, is pointless. You can't forge ahead unless you close that chapter.

All he best


TV



^{I repeat, generally, a womans sexual history is more important to a man, than a mans is to a woman. Even OP expressed concern, at her sisters "wayward behaviour".}

Mindfulness:
If I respond to this mention, I will possibly be trapped in an endless loop of back and forth argument but since you seem to be in a good mood today, I will answer your questions.

No looping, I can see from your responses to MBJ that you are gunning for marriage advocate status . And I'm always in a good mood !

Mindfulness:
I agree. Most people depend on their spouse in one way or another and that's often the reason why they face so many challenges.

Are you seeing this as a good, bad, neutral, or dependent? In any event, is it not inevitable? For example, mortgages are based on combined salaries for married couples. Even if the couple are totally blind to each others incomes, the bank will need to know to determine their loan possibilities. Unless they are planning on buying separate residencies? . So many examples.

Emotionally, and, validation apart, loving, caring, sharing, will ferment a mutual feeling, that will impact a persons overall well-being and happiness for better or worse - excuse the pun .

Mindfulness:
It's not a bad thing. I never said it was. All I am saying is that people should be free to have the relationship they desire instead of trying to live up to someone else's expectations.

And people are free. The dynamic in every relationship is unique, regardless of what wrapper they chooses - marriage, co-hab, FWB etc. I don't see why some - MrBrownJ for example in this thread - have to rubbish marriage to justify their choices, when nothing is forced. Why does the truth of marriage, and their falling short of it, cause them discomfort?

Mindfulness:
If two happy people choose to be together, their happiness will be enhanced and not reduced. Reason enough?

Is does not necessarily follow. And, although not necessarily as likely, the reverse could also be true. It touches, and depends, on a number of things.

Mindfulness:
I agree completely. It's an additional source of happiness but it is not a marriage based on the premise that someone else has to save you from your misery.

Even if that is not the premise, and the couple are individually happy to start with, the union could still make them unhappy. There are certain expectations in marriage and from spouses, all potential points of discord and unhappiness. Having expectations does not necessarily mean neediness or even a desire for validation

Mindfulness:
Why would you expect another human being to make you happy if you can't do it for yourself? why would anyone have to make two people happy if you can't make one person happy, yourself?

Here is perhaps the crux. If ones happiness within, and from marriage, is not tied to, and as a result of whom one is married to, why marry? The things one can do, and the happiness one can derive, are different in marital and single states.

Being with a spouse, loving, caring and sharing with each other, creating and building a future together, raising children, all these things contribute to marital happiness. If one spouse, fails, reneges, or betrays in such a way to impair those things, why would the other not be unhappy or less happy?

Again, please correct me if I am mis-hearing you, but what you present sounds very individualistic, and far removed from marriage, or even any reason to actually get married.

Mindfulness:
I have seen many relationships in my life. I have seen their beginnings and I have seen their endings. I have seen happy and unhappy unions and I have come to understand that happy and healthy individuals have the happiest and healthiest relationships. I have seen miserable people feeling uplifted by a new relationship to only fall back into their misery few months later and their partners resenting because they placed the burden on them to be their cure and therapy, which they can succeed in for a limited period of time but not forever. It creates an unhealthy imbalance if you expect anyone to take the responisibility for your happiness and it is an inside job.

Have you ever been around negative people for a longer period of time? They can suck the life out of you if you are not stable enough to remain cheerful and nobody can all day every day. I don't wish anyone to be married to such a person.

This is at best aphoristic, not axiomatic. I could relay how I have known people grow and mature in marriage. People I would not necessarily have thought ready for marriage, having known them as singles. Marriage can have a quite edifying effect.


TV

bukatyne:
I disagree here...

We all need constant validation/affirmation from loved ones.... that's how we were created; Even God needs constant 'validation'/praise from humans that is why He said He will raise stones to praise Him if humans don't.

Nibo? God has no needs. God needs praise for what exactly?

Human praise does not make Him more God, and neither does a lack of, or unwillingness of humans to praise Him, make Him less God.

The validation, benefits, or emotional well-being and happiness that humans gain from marriage is not akin to, or to be likened to God deserving all praise.


TV

bukatyne:
The problem of marriage is that two people decide that un-known faces must run their marriage for them via 'rules' and 'culture'

What stops you two from doing whatever you like as you like it provided both of you are happy?

Really? Even a cursory reading of this begs the question. How sensible is it to embrace a societal institution – marriage - and then reject the conventions and protocols society places on that institution? Society places no demands on the dynamic within any individual union. Society' demands, and rightly so, are more "structural" in nature - "what marriage is", not "how you live it".

I consider MRBrownJ' position equally faulty, arguing to reject the institution, but insisting on commandeering the conventions. A wife is a woman who has been formally married to a man – her husband. Not a woman who is shacked up with her lover, or one who co-habits.

It comes with a host of inter-connected words, plus societal and legal norms/benefits. MBJ wants the kudos and benefits without the responsibility or commitment. Ole !

Funny how this thread is turned in some ways – possibly most – about people traducing the institution of marriage. I’m not sure that was OP’ intent? 1bkaye n’gbo? Anyway, I see a number of possible “reasons”, amongst which are;

1. Whilst appreciating what it is, and does, rejecting marriage – simply preferring an alternative, or no arrangement
2. Rejecting marriage, because one thinks it is bondage, is scared, has seen others not work out, etc. Essentially fear.
3. The popular, but ultimately odd “ create marriage in your own image” notion.

If 1, that’s fine, eschew marriage. If 2, the problem is really with you, not marriage. If 3, as stated, society does not interferes in the dynamic of any individual union. It only serves to encourage protect and celebrate it. in what can be considered a more structural sense.

So I wonder at the vitriol against the most venerable of institutions that is marriage? And as ever, I would love for someone to come up with a superior arrangement, or even one that comes close to delivering the benefits that marriage does to all concerned, and to society as a whole.

For a second I thought my job was done here, Mindfulness defending marriage


TV

Mindfulness! Mindfulness!! Mindfulness!!! How are you . Do you really believe, and more pertinently, practise what you preach? This doesn't even sound right on paper, let alone on grass where the match will actually be played .

Mindfulness:
The problem is that you have bought into other people's / society's concept of marriage instead of designing your own. You don't have to be financially responsible for your spouse and even less emotionally. In fact, the best relationships are those where everyone takes full responsibility for themselves. You don't have to give up your privacy and freedom either.

Even in unions that are not religiously based, the comprehensiveness of marriage means there will be a great deal of meshing and overlap. Finances and emotions are two of the biggest areas here. And, even if the couple don't "take responsibility" per se, they will still be affected by each others individual financial or emotional circumstances.

And while you may not have to forego all "privacy & freedom", there must be a change/reduction, it can no longer be unfettered. Why is that even a bad thing?

Mindfulness:
I don't know how many but certainly the miserable ones.
He can get himself a happy girl though. They exist.

I perfectly understand it too but he can choose someone who takes full responsibility for her happiness. If he does the same, two happy beings will come together to create a happy relationship. It's the only way.

As for happiness, if 2 individuals, who are totally happy and fulfilled in their own right come together in marriage, it doesn't mean that the 1. the marriage will be happy, or 2. if it is, it's due to the individual happiness of the couple, and more importantly, 3, that the happiness in the marriage is nothing more than their individual states, as that actually begs the question "why marry"?, if true.

There is a happiness that comes from the convergence, a different or additional happiness, that is not totally dependent or aligned with the individual happiness states of the couple before marriage. And it affects their individual states after.

If by happiness you mean "healthy", perhaps, otherwise, I find all this really odd, or I'm totally misreading you?

Please help a broda out


TV

hopeforcharles:
Hehehe he is grooming his side chick
Don't mind me I was joking about his grooming which by the way shouldn't be completely dismmised,
He is not doing well by taking sides, but madam don't u think u are a bit harsh on the girl? If you are device another means of scolding her not necessarily shouting and beating. Have a heart to heart talk with your husband about the issh

Ah! Don't dull 0! The end-game may be more than "side-chick" - OP, you are supposed to mentor your successor, not beat her !

More seriously, a 13 year-old maid . That strikes me as all kinds of wrong in it's own right. But please tell me that her situation with you - which includes schooling right? - is better than her natal circumstances?

And please stop "beating her up" as a means of scolding. It's inhumane, and will instil wrong notions about violence in your own children. Or do you do that via multiple other ways .

And finally, the good cop, bad cop, strategy works quite well in some instances. Don't you watch CSI Iganmu ? By all means discipline her, but treat her as one of your own.

And I know I'm not a "mummy", but I spoke as I also prepare children for school in the morning - and know how e be !


TV

OP I can scarce believe this. What must you be feeling right now? Betrayal by two people that should have been the closest to you for pretty much the rest of your days. You must be disconsolate. Pele, please be comforted.

This must be very hard for you. There's a "sharedness" in this relationship, even in a way that some marriages may not have attained. Growing a business from scratch and going through the ups and downs of start-up, means you are heavily invested. How do you even begin to separate the personal from the business? You have to think long and hard about this.

Your sister:
She may well have your best interest at heart, what she did may have been a youthful indiscretion, at a time when she was insecure, wanted to be like you, or was a little envious of you. Or foolishly drawn to, or overwrought by the guy.

Hear her side of the story. Is this driven by jealousy, the desire to harm you, or genuine concern for her blood sister? It will be painful whatever the case, what she has done is the one fixed thing here, but long-term please find it in your heart to forgive her.

Your fiancé:
As he stated, was his initial approach to the relationship merely casual? What was yours? You've heard him out, do you believe him? Was he a different person, and was the relationship a different thing back then? Why was he not forthcoming earlier? I can however, see how it may have never seemed like the right time to come clean, with events and the changing nature of the relationship overtaking things.

You:
Can you live with this? Especially if you are not totally sure of the truth, and if indeed it was no more than a tragic one-off. Think back, what seemingly innocent things made you wonder about the two of them?

Can/will you ever be able to get your trust back with this guy? Are you sure there will be no lingering doubt whatever the case? Please don't put your business investment before your long-term psychological well-being. He may be all you think he is and all you desire, but you could do a lot worse than a clean break right now.

Looking at your sister and knowing what she did will hurt for a long time, and may always be hard. Looking at them both, and having uninvited thoughts run across your mind, doubly so. Cutting him loose will may hurt in the immediacy, but help in the long-term.

I pray this drives you to faith, so you can take your cues direct from above.

Take heart, be comforted. All the very best.


TV

^{NSBM. Ladies, consummate your unions after marriage, not before. Men and women are totally different in their perceptions and judgements about the opposite sex, and how things impact their decisions. How many men would marry a woman that had dated - let alone slept with - his brother? You know!}

Kimoni:
TV01 - I don't think joint account is for every family. In my opinion, families must be on the same page when it comes to financial goals and responsibilities before they can make a success of joint account. If not, one parties suffers and frustration sets in on the long run.
In OP's case, I do not think his family is ready for it, there is no harmony yet in that aspect of their life. From the look of things, he will be on the receiving side of things if they go for joint account. #mythots

Hi Kim,

I agree - we don't have a joint account, as it would make little or no difference to how we manage the finances.

But to be clear, a joint account does not mean 1 account between them. This is one for their long-term planning(the land, the house, her business, emergencies etc.), something they both "own". Wifey needs a change of mindset and to see their finances as a combined whole - this will help towards that. He will still manage all his incomeand have more insight - transparency - into hers.

fem29:
Thanks oga TV01 for the mention. Though we do not always agree, you are usually logical.

Please don't advise poster to ask his wife to bring money ooo . She is asking for a stipend and it will be unwise for him to say not only are you not getting one, you need to bring money towards family finances .

That will be the beginning of world war 5 in his house. Wisdom is profitable to direct.

Holá Fem29, I think your pointer is key.

The OP wants transparency no? If his wife is spending half her salary as she wishes, saving half of which he has no sight, and demanding a stipend, where us the transparency?

And I hear you about pushing this through "all of a sudden". I was - I hope - clear about "not rushing" and taking "baby steps". Fundamentally madams mindset is not as expansive as it should be, but oga's approach also needs a re-think.

He needs to have a vision of how their finances should be and work with - and as I mentioned "encourage" - her towards that. I don't subscribe resorting to "cunny" ways, or pandering to get her to be where she needs to be; that never ends.

A man has to be able to share his thoughts about strategy and vision. If wifey has competing or better ideas, share on, if not, implement. If fear of a backlash means he hesitates or try's to "game" her, I would question his standing. Give it time, yes, be reasoned, yes,be gentle, yes, but something has to happen.

Sometimes in marriage, hard choices and tough calls have to be made. If it's a well-reasoned and important battle, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Bro needs to set the tone. If they fail to get the land, build the house, or start the business, or just do so way later than planned, the buck stops with him.

Ekú weekend.

TV

banjolek:
Hello guys,

I need your honest opinion on this, how much is really ideal to give one's wife as monthly pocket money?

bro' Leke is that you

Those - particularly Fem29 - who have pointed you to the future have done well here. As have those who have touched on, in so many words, your wifes need to "mature into, and feel more confident" in the union.

So I won't repeat any of that. I would suggest something more radical - and not necessarily something to be rushed. I'm at a loss to see why your wife has sole control of half of her 150K salary?

What is that money intended for? What is the "family" accountability around that? Annually - and if you include any "stipend" you give her - she could be stashing away over a million naira

And this on top of your newly increased expenditure per moving, your on-going spend to maintain the family, assist relatives, and your commitment to saving for a business for her!

Oga, take firm control. I believe it's in your best long-term interest - and will facilitate meeting your goals - for you to overhaul your joint finances.

Firstly, when you say she uses 75k for upkeep, what exactly does that mean? Is it solely for her personal upkeep, or does that include the wider family?

Anyway, some suggestions;

1. Out of her salary, she gets a reasonable upkeep amount - whatever upkeep entails
2. In addition to this, some extra on top - loving 'jara
3. Any surplus goes into a joint savings account account - all short, medium and LT expenditure from here is discussed and agreed by you both
4. Likewise, and as she already knows your income (kudos by the way), you parse your own earnings and contribute to the joint account
5. You discuss how you financially bless your relatives (both your), agreeing based on conduct, availability and need.

Again, suggestions, I am not being prescriptive. Right now you are fuelling a huge entitlement mentality in your wife. I would totally eschew the notion of a "stipend". All you have is hers anyway, and it sounds like you already live it that way.

What if the situation changes - only slightly sef - and you can't keep up? Does that mean you are failing? Or that she has a charge against you?
Bro', don't set yourself up for a fall.

Encourage her and help her understand that there is no difference, even if it's with baby steps. I sense you don't like where she is, and I agree, only I think you are pandering, instead of planning.

And, a regular, joint review of your finances, without fail.

All the best

TV

“Gay murders? The whole notion of people being “gay” as an immutable part of ones character is, if one wants to be polite, a category error. If one wants to be blunt, it’s an outright lie, a hideous deception.

However you look at it, gay, straight, bi, homo, hetero or trans etcetera, are not immutable, intrinsic or genetically determined personas or identities, they are at best labels for peoples behavioural choices.

The West is under attack from a culture that is inimically different and opposed to all it stands for. The attacks are first of all on its people, and also on its ideals, on the liberties and freedoms that it affords it's to citizens.

Attacks have been many and varied, with many lives being lost. How then in this instance does the atrocity get defined as a “gay” tragedy, and not a human one?

Whatever meaning one imbues into the term gay, were those who lost loved ones, were involved in the rescue operation, tended to the sick or even all of the casualties “gay”?

Trying to make this about identity, desensitises us from the horror that occurred here. Instead of placing our shared humanity in view, it makes it about a special interest group, who, by definition, not all are interested in, or even for.

Yes, there is an on-going discussion about why how one decides to express oneself sexually, should lead to categorisation and rights, but this was not about that. And if you choose to make it so, you are playing onto the hands of your enemy.

On another note, OP, if there is a prize for ill-thought out, incoherent, editorially woeful and grammatical painful posts, take a bow . And excusing the error of others so as to avoid charge for your own wrong-doing does not work. Just saying .


TV

tearoses:
TV01, nashville and Bellong pls can you offer some advise
As guys you know how the mans brain thinks better than I do.
Ifemelu Hope you dont mind me CC'ng them. They are wise and family men.

Ah! Not all men are cut from the same £250 per yard material of awon Baba Bellong and Big Daddy Nashville 0 ! But seriously, immaturity and ill-formed character can manifest in so many ways, who's to say?

Paternal responsibility is obviously a big issue here, but it seems the OP to some degree hopes for restoration, or at least closure, and one can hardly fault her. I'll post - wrongly I know - on the assumption that her account is true, and she is blameless.

How do you account for a 3 year friendship, 3 year engagement, family introductions and wedding preparations well underway, with what we've heard narrated by the OP? After all, it doesn't sound like your typical western "engagement today, marriage in 3/4 years while we save" scenario does it?

Long/short, my best guess would be "he met someone else" - if there hadn't been someone he'd been invested in before, or since he met you all along. Whatever the case, fact remains, for some reason, he no longer wants what you'd seemingly both voluntarily and jointly agreed? Perhaps you'll eventually get wind if you still mix in the same social/professional circles?

Cold feet? Possibly, but you could have been in exactly the same position a short while later - after marriage. Cold feet, would suggest an unserious and/or unstable man, and after 6 years you must have seen signs of that. Or even heard something - again, being in the same circles

I wonder why the rush to have a baby? Are you quite mature? Is he?, Is he younger? Is there any unresolved issue from his upbringing or trauma from the loss of his parents? Why the insistence on seeing the baby before proceeding? If there are no doubts around paternity, what is he hoping to find, or thinking that might trigger? So many questions.

Whatever the case, emotionally, it must be extremely hard for OP. How does one move on, or learn to trust again with such huge questions lingering? I'll come to that later.

There was no joining, so technically, what is in view here is the well-being of the child. I would exhort you to not let your feelings becloud how you approach this - easier to ask than to do, I fully realize.

Let him know that he has a responsibility to be a part of the child's life - both physically and materially. Let him know you are willing for you both to reach accommodation without recourse to the courts. Although if he is as described, it may be best to have support settled via the family courts. Your call, but it could impact how cordial your relationship is and his seeing the child.

Be the best mother you can be in the circumstances, and encourage & support his being the best father. For you both it means putting the child first.

Seems like you've set the ball rolling in some ways, but be sure to spell out clear expectations around time-frames, and what will happen if he does not wholeheartedly discuss, agree, and commit.

If you are harboring hopes of restoration, please don't try and force or guilt him into it. Let him see you as being that best mother to his child. Be cordial, be pleasant. Don't simper, be difficult or make exaggerated/unrealistic demands. Perhaps he will see the error of his ways/grow/wise up.

Even then, I'd say don't shut down other options, we don't know why he bolted, or if he'll come to his senses.

All the best. Congratulations on your son. Hope he grows up to do you proud.


TV


^{For the wanna wed ladies. Consummate your union after the wedding, not before. If he talks commitment, let him demonstrate it fully. And makes sure the vision - long-term - is his, or both of yours, not one you foisted on him. I speak as to believers in Christ.}

EagleEyez505:
y
You nailed it bro! I do not care about a person's background, tribe etc. I am more concerned about who the individual is (i.e. the content).

Thank you once again! I am grateful.

You are most welcome sir. Here's wishing you a fantastically blissful union .

njokusboy:
Counsellor TV, welldone oh....
I don't dey consider marriage, how we go do am nah

Ah, ah, Njokusboy, you must be one of the most switched on guys around here. What's up? You probably have too many options . All I've said previously still holds. Will of course post if you ask me to. I may at best bring a little more objectivity.

All the very best.


TV