₦airaland Forum

Mindfulness:
No. When you feel connected to God, you feel great. There is no better feeling.

Hi Mindfulness,

My initial request was for you to answer some questions. That would be in order to grasp a better understanding of your beliefs and how you came about, live and /apply them.

I am yet to gain the sense of a coherent belief system. You’ve retreated to that place of asking instead of answering, using unexplained jargon, being otherwise cryptic or non-specific, and also rather defensive. Any slight probing and you seem anxious, the most innocuous questions seem to cause discomfort.

You are happy to reference my family, and even declare the basis of my desire, my motivations, contrary to what I myself claim, yet an innocent question and you wobble?

You have a footprint here. Issues you’ve waded in on, calls you’ve made, as well as what we know of you. If you are confident and secure in your beliefs why do you get so jittery? Simply outline them.

At best, you’ve presented something based and motivated totally on “feelings”? And contrary to your beatific posturing, you’ve been weirdly judgemental. Sounds like a therapeutic style spirituality that appeals to the emotional, weak and self-serving. Feelings gba ni!

I also looked up Eckhart Tolle, needless to say, nothing new there, so in a sense, no surprise. Enough said.

So once again, a pointed “thank you for your time”.


TV

Kimoni:
Loool...the story of Samson and Delilah comes to my mind.

...you see, if the brother had read my "young run man run" series, he for no jam. He went with his feelings


TV

Mindfulness:
Yes, I do have a "template". Anything that disconnects humans from their divine core within them is wrong in the way that it violates their most natural desire , which is well-being.

Please explain this divine core further, and perhaps the notion of well-being. Perhaps there is more than I am hearing, or I may be hearing it incorrectly?

Mindfulness:
Define objective truth, please.

Truth not based on feelings or individuals desire for their perceptions to constitute truth.

Mindfulness:
What is the nature of the divine? Which morals are universal?

Who can fully know God or grasp Him in His totality. We can but employ words, which are themselves limited by our finiteness. But some things make sense, like love, justice, etc.

Probably a whole list; I would imagine faithfulness - especially in relation to vows is a good one.

Mindfulness:
It is based on the knowledge that EVERY living being desires to feel good. This is the most natural trait that all humans and possibly animals and maybe even plants have in common. It starts and ends with our connection to the divine. Whenever there is a disconnection, there is a disconnection from well-being.

Feelings? And a desire to feel, and a desire to feel good about oneself, and this desire being satisfied, is evidence of, orthe actual connection to the divine? Help me here please?

Mindfulness:
You took these vows and you made the commitment and investment because you desired it.

You appear to place the desire above the commitment? The desire may change or wane, should the commitment change because of that?

Mindfulness:
It feels good and right to you and this is why it works so well (I have the impression that it does based on your submissions). You derive pleasure from taking care of your wife and children and I imagine that they enjoy and appreciate this care immensely - but you and they wouldn't - if you didn't come from a place of joy.

It comes first and foremost from a place of commitment, I get joy from keeping the commitment and seeing the outworking.

Mindfulness:
You should stress the pleasure and joy you derive from your family more than anything else. I think that this is the most effective way to advertise successfully for marriage and healthy families, which is what you are trying to achieve here most of the time, don't you?

Stressing the joy is fine - and I certainly convey that - it is not based primarily on the joy or feelings, and they also redound as a result.

Mindfulness:
If I may add, I have the impression that you often miss your goal by focusing too much on the negative. Your latest submissions on this thread had a good intention but the good was clouded by a huge amount of negativity. You chose the heading "Run young man, run" and then directed the young man's attention to the unwanted which brought him / them to a long description of women you wanted them to avoid. It would be a much more positive and much more effective and aim-oriented approach to bring them to the wanted by directing their attention to it instead of directing their attention to the unwanted, one-sidedly. You could have written about the desired traits in a woman because you cannot get to the wanted by focusing on the unwanted. In this way you would have helped them to look for the "right" traits in a woman, the only way to find them.

- Even in nature, danger is instilled first. Knowing what to avoid, is the first step to knowing what you should be looking for
- If you avoid the undesirable you have all to play for in seeking the desirable.
- If you jam the undesirable, you may seriously hinder your chances of ever finder the desirable
- Even if you do, there may be pain that will linger for generations
- You assume I'm done on that? - I typically say make yourself worthy", or "find a worthy spouse". I realise some may need greater depth.
- And in a sense, they are flip sides of the same coin.

Mindfulness:
You have freely, consciously and - I believe - joyfully made the decision to take on some certain responsibilities and this is why you stick to it. Your joy is the most important factor in the success of your marriage. It is your motivation. This is where an important lesson can be learned for all of those who are not yet married. Some people consider marriage a sacrifice when in fact they desire to enjoy marriage. The only way to a long lasting marriage and a healthy family is the pursuit of exactly this desire.

First sentence kinda right, second totally wrong, I don't necessarily stick to it because I "get joy", in fact, more because I give joy. And it is a sacrifice of sorts, I have less resources to myself, but I consider that a worthy sacrifice - and I still enjoy it tremendously. I don't have to put myself first to be well, healthy or joyful.

Mindfulness:
As for the rest, your wife would have every right to feel whatever she would feel in such a situation - be it sadness, resentment or hatred. The question is, would it help?

Feelings don't come because they help? Does grieving help?

Mindfulness:
If you stayed with her even though you felt unhappy, and even though you didn't fancy her and considered her a burden and annoying, do you think you would give her anything that would serve her? Is it what she truly wants? A man who stays with her even though he resents her?

You are reaching. All women are a burden and extremely annoying. it why they were put on earth . But whatever scenario you paint, and however I feel, it does not void the commitment I freely entered into.

Mindfulness:
She is not supposed to do anything, I would just recommend for her to find ways to soothe herself because this is what she has control over. She can't control you but she can control they way she feels. I don't consider people who feel sadness emotionally unhealthy. This is not what I said.

As above

Mindfulness:
This is where subjective truth sets in. I have a totally different image or concept of the divine. I don't share the notion that God is someone who created humans evil and is punishing them for the mistakes he made even though he is almighty. Is he a psychopath? He is responsible for the creation and yet others have to be punished for the way he made them?

I don't share that notion either. Neither the one where you seem to be implying claims "makes mistakes". One attribute of the divine is perfection.

Mindfulness:
By living life's lessons of we reap what we sow. I believe that humans are intrinsically good. As a father you actually know it.
And yes human beings are capable of self-healing because we always learn and develop.

1. As a father I know that human beings are not intrinsically good, that if left devoid of boundaries, they will incline to things that are not good.
2. You didn't answer my question about your being a mother - what basis do you have for your claim?
3. Learning and even developing does not necessarily change character - people do wrong despite knowing it's wrong, and what they ought to have done - and typically they do wrong based on "feelings".

Mindfulness:
We need to evaluate and re-evaluate our choices to find ways to achieve what we want to achieve. This is what we came here for.

For self-actualisation? And how do we know what "we were meant to achieve?

Mindfulness:
If I don't feel good in the first place, there is nothing I have to offer. If I feel love, joy and pleasure in abundance, I can share it and give people what they need. This is why I love the following Bible passage so much 'Love your neighbor as yourself. There is no commandment greater than these.' It means that we need to love ourselves FIRST. If we succeed, love for others comes naturally and unstoppably.

At least share how you get the feeling in the first place, instead of simply predicating everything on it.

Mindfulness:
As above, if you don't feel good, there is nothing you can do for others that is of greater value.

Maybe you need to define "feel good" to boot?

Mindfulness:
I don't need my spouse to feel good but I love sharing my happiness with him. I also cherish the times when he reflects to me that I am not in a place of unconditional love because it helps me practice unconditional love and it helps me connect with God.

What a spouse brings is something that you cannot find alone or within yourself. And I repeat, if good, is good, is good, with or without a spouse, why would you need or desire one?

Mindfulness:
People should take marital vows, which suit them best, and do it out of pure joy.

I see this as totally odd. Marriage is by definition, if people can make marriage what they want, then it becomes meaningless. If you can call any pet a dog, then the word dog loses all content. People can have any kind of relationship they want (with caveats), but that does not make that relationship a marriage.

Although the way the world is going with it's feelings based legislation and it's "legalise it because it makes me feel good" narrative, I guess your thoughts may hold more sway in society than mine in this respect.

Mindfulness:
What is the traditional concept of marriage?

Lifelong monogamous union of a male and female

Mindfulness:
You are a father, you know what unconditional love means, words can't express it.

My own is conditional - good grades in school and 1st team premier league player by 18 or else

Mindfulness:
His name is Eckhart Tolle. He was a university teacher with a very promising academic career but suffering greatly from depression. He was about to kill himself due to the unhappiness and discord he was feeling within himself. In the midst of his most profound suffering he discovered that it was his mindset, his way of thinking that led to his suffering. He discovered that his source of unhappiness are his thoughts and the identification with them. He found ways to stop this unbearable flow of negative thoughts and found peace.

Vaguely familiar - I look him up.

Mindfulness:
I am connected to God, there is nothing I can't do.

Clear this space of scammers and reveall all those who present themselves and their lives falsely

Mindfulness:
I value some of the Christian values.
Christianity in the real sense? What is it? Why are there so many different churches if there is Christianity in any real sense?

Many variants does not mean there is no true one.

Mindfulness:
I am not here to change your views but I do hope that you enjoy the interaction.

If indeed you could, you haven't with this effort. Thanks for your time.


TV

...what happened up there ?

BoboYekini:
Brings me to the next question... Can you fight? I mean really fight and knock someone tha fùck out. How many of us can really fight and put the fear of God in that assailant? This is a necessary skill brothers.

How topical, just watched a recording of the Cotto vs. Canelo bout with my big bro'. Trained to fight, which is the key, not just the willingness to engage in a fight.

Amateur boxing background - all of us brothers actually. The only sport I ever had a real passion for - loved the training die. They retire you at 35, so I transitioned to a regular gym. Maintain an exercise schedule which keeps me on pretty much the same shape - except for actual fight prep - but with a more muscular frame.

Also eat pretty clean. Blend, juice and close mark my dietary intake. Why are you asking? Are there some MWF that need a few rounds of sense pounded into them !

But seriously, love the feeling of being in shape and the alertness being trained and honed gives. I'm very conscious, very aware, and almost move with a fighters gait.

In this time of random terror attacks it helps to be aware and know how to react under pressure. Not that I'm necessarily looking to engage anyone, but trained reactions in dangerous situations might make all the difference - in all sha', God is our hope.

They called me "2 Sweet"


TV

^{...please any naive young girl or tingle seeking old bird who starts to juice at my post, no pm me 0! I no wan face kangaroo court - plus I'm God fearing, happily married and solvent}

That's it? Almost 10 days, multiple threads, hundreds of posts, thousands of man hours, and attempts to smear people who asked innocent questions and point out proper due process? A scam by scammers to cover up for other scammers - and play on the intelligence of the NL community whilst doing so?

Godless and shameless bunch. I did a disservice to fannies when I called you MWF.

Seun, I've been here almost 10 years, never bothered you or your team. Never made a fuss. However, I really must ask what action you will be taking here. Justice must be done and seen to be done, or you implicate us all.

I'd really appreciate it if you could make it known. I applaud what you've done here, but this must be addressed.


Thanks
TV

Gamesmart:
The people that coordinated the negotiations were coogar's friends.

It was no court. It was a sort this out exercise, which the complainant agreed to basically because she saw it as her only way of getting her school fees back. Paying back what was owed seem to have been seen as an achievement and truce by some of the moderators as the complainant has agreed with coogar's friends to withdraw her complaints.

Unless some other victims come out now, there is no complainant they can assist now.

Is he a scammer? Hell Yes! It appears a psychopathic one as well or someone so deep into in and dependent on it, he has no choice than to be defiant.

There is enough principles to ban his moniker but I doubt there is any evidence if there is no complainant, and the only one that provided it is withdrawing it. Maybe they are hoping he would play a Sauron in shame and disappear.

If you or IlekeHD wants to report him to the Old Bill, by all means do.

IlekeHD:
Take all these points to the court. Thank you. When the time comes, una wey get evidence will be asked to present it. I'm not the judge, don't try to convince me.

I'm not trtying to convnce you, on the contrary, you've convinced me to speak out. I'm not party to what transpired here and was only alerted by one of them visiting the family section.

I am not one of the self-arrogated judges, or party to anything that has been said or done, I want the law to run it's proper course, as I sensed you do - hence my question. I normally wouldn't bother, but I didn't like the cowardly attempt to hound you out of here.


TV

In the UK we have due process, we have the rule of law. If there was any evidence implicating the accused, it should have been handed to the authorities and the law should have been allowed to run it’s course.

Instead, a kangaroo court – with a panel of at best, shady characters - was convened and the accused was summarily arraigned before it - "for our viewing pleasure".

Point 1 –if indeed any of the allegations are true and there is evidence to prove it, evidence which you have seen or handled, you are all now accomplices to a crime.

Your court has zero jurisdiction and even less credibility. The moniker is not even banned from NL? And a purported hardened criminal is still free to scour for prey and make more innocents victims of his nefarious activities – on and offline

Point 2 – what of all the other victims whose cards and credit were compromised, who gets justice for them?

This was never motivated by a desire for justice – that much is clear. Indeed, it was not even in the least bit transparent. Cutting deals off-line and then returning here to gloat about your great triumph. Why was R321 “expecting cougar to post his mugshot”? Because it is evident that in your secret talks the accused threatened to do so - and probably other dirt.

All the bloviate about hating crime, detesting fraudsters and the like was just that, a crock. This was about puny men being spun because they wanted a day of glory, or a total ruse to let a criminal off the hook. What a pathetic shame; on the pack of you, and on NL, and your country.
Like I said, men with fannies. If you like quote me and get yours.

I was going to leave this unposted as I didn’t want to be sullied by the corruption so evident here, but the sheer class of IlekeHD and the way you have cowardly tried to smear her means I am compelled to speak out. Airmark ko, Skidmark ni.

IlekeHD, please, how would you like to proceed? And is there anybody else not cowed by these losers and willing to demonstrate that there is at least a seed of goodness in Nigerians?


TV

MizMyColi:

If you would, I'd prefer I answer questions directed at me.

Thanks and Good Evening From Nigeria, TV01.

No problem Miz, it may be better 1 on 1. Greetings from the "just turned really cold" UK.


TV

Mindfulness:
I ask a lot of questions to acquire a deeper and profound understanding. I was very neutral on one of the threads, which I think you are referring to here, until I was confronted with a huge amount of bias, which I felt needed some balance. Whatever the result of all it was, I had a lot of fun and I learned many things.

I can understand learning about specific situations, issues or topics, but where there is a moral call to be made, does your belief provide a ready made answer?A directive say or perhaps a template?

Mindfulness:
That's the problem and that's the reason why so many discussions end in insults or long-lasting hostility. People defend their positions like they know it all and like they are in possession of an objective truth.

Are you saying there is no, or no such thing as objective truth? I believe truth is eternal and unchanging.

Mindfulness:
It would be more fun and more fruitful if we were able to accept the fact that our opinions are just opinions, which are often based on our very subjective experience and perception.

To some degree perhaps - but some things are fixed. Some objective and undeniable. Truth cannot be based purely on experience and perception.

Mindfulness:
We should also remember that we are evolving beings, who continuously learn and therefore should feel free and be open-minded enough to change our views. I don't think anyone here has the same views at the age of 25 or 30 that he or she had when they were 14.

Even if we as humans grow, if our understanding develops, that does not mean that objective truth evolves with us.

Mindfulness:
This is why I love children and teenagers so much. They are so much more open-minded. They don't have extremely rigid opinions but their brains are also much more plastic - which is why it is easier for them to acquire new knowledge and therefore to change their perspective.

True, but this speaks nothing to the nature of the divine, objective truth or morals. May I ask, do you have children of your own?

Mindfulness:
Everyone has the right to pursue happiness. The rest of the statement is taken out of context and I wouldn't subscribe to it unconditionally.

And where is this right derived from? On what principle is it based? You've said it's not unconditional, where does it start and end?

Mindfulness:
Nobody is responsible for someone else's happiness.

Is this also conditional?
In as much as I am not expressly responsible for my wife' happiness, I owe her a duty of care, not least because of the vows I took, the commitment we made, how much we have both invested into the relationship and our shared responsibilities including our lovely children.

I discharge my duty and obligations as best I can and don't prioritise her happiness per se, but if I fail in my responsibilities, she has every right to be unhappy.

If I were to abandon our home and kids for a younger, fresher, sexier version - and there is always one - just because it would make me "happy/happier", have I done no wrong, am I within my rights to pursue happiness? does she not have the right to feel aggrieved?

Is she supposed to remain happy with the burden I've left her with, the loss our children will suffer, or else be considered "emotionally unhealthy"?

Mindfulness:
I can judge behavior but I don't want to judge or condemn a human being.

I agree with this, judgement is not ultimately with me, but I know who it is with. And I don't believe un-repented wrong-doing or behaviour will go unpunished. I can't gloss this over with "go and heal". It's "repent of your ways" or "go and sin no more".

How does one heal of bad behaviour or a wicked character? Are human being intrinsically good,or capable of self-healing?

Mindfulness:
Emotionally healthy people surround themselves with people and things that are good for them. I don't want to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't do

So why judge behaviour then?

And how do you reach out charitably to those in need, hurting or fallen, if you are only concerned with surrounding yourself with the good,and for your own sake?

Mindfulness:
but it is possible to be happy regardless of conditions and circumstances. It has been a very liberating lesson for me to understand that I do not need anyone to feel good

Ok, as a Christian, I have joy and hope whatever, but how I feel - good or bad - counts for very little.

Mindfulness:
and that my spouse's presence or absence is not necessary for me to feel great. From this place, I can love my spouse unconditionally even when the person leaves and I am so full of happiness and joy that my spouse loves to be around me. I do not place on anyone the responsibility and burden of me feeling good and satisfied. Whatever you do for me, you do it freely and if you can't do it from a place of joy, you don't have to do it at all. I, for my part, have a lot of love to share.

In all then, why do you need a spouse if you feel great regardless?
Why take marital vows and commit if they can depart - with your blessings - if they no longer feel it?
What are your honest views on the traditional concept of marriage?

Mindfulness:
My ideology is that it is good to be selfish and that by being selfish I have a lot to offer. My theology is that we are all Gods / Goddesses.

This would be a good place to revisit what you define as love - not self-love though, that's already quite cler

Mindfulness:
It is my pleasure to share it with you as long as we can remain friendly and respectful. MizMyColi, just like I, discovered a great spiritual teacher along the beautiful journey called life and this is what we have in common. However, my beautiful, spiritual journey didn't begin and end with this teacher and I have taken the whole thing a step further meanwhile.

More on this teacher andtheir teachings please - even if only briefly

Mindfulness:
I feel honored.

You should - but the expectation is high.

Mindfulness:
It doesn't have a name. It is a spiritual journey but my personal one and not bound to any particular school of thought, philosophy or ideology. I am notorious for cherry-picking. I am in love with Buddhism as a life style and I embrace many of the Christian core values, as I understand and interpret them, but I am neither a Buddhist nor a Christian. I am a divine and eternal being and I believe that everyone else is, too. Even those who irritate me at times.

I can't speak for Buddhism,but if you value Christianity as you personally interpret it, its not Christianity in any real sense.

Thanks for your responses so far. Nothing surprising or to change my opinion thus far, but at least I have not left that opinion unquestioned.


TV

What to say? Funnily enough he agreed with the submission? But went on to have a hissy fit about the premise being "fallacious"' Just to be clear and to give him the benefit of the doubt, I clarified - clarified something that was clearly implied throughout - further.

Not sure how he even found his way here? He seemed very much at home amongst the men with fannies (MWF), who seemed to be in a state of orgasmic delight publicly haranguing coogar over something like 7 days, 4 threads, hundreds of posts and what seemed like multiple sleepless nights. You'd think they'd give their hands some respite . They are probably still there now. Families, jobs, life nko

And most of them were at best hypocritical to boot; a convicted felon, an adulterer and someone who claims to eschew all moral imperatives and religious strictures - taking the moral high ground. The sheer hypocrisy of it all. And the effrontery of one both amoral and irreligious to not only do that, but to accuse me of "moral posturing"

I was however more perturbed by the rumours about, and nervous twitching of some of our resident females. Differences, beefs and past wars aside , I'm quite fond/protective of some of them, and wouldn't want to think them capable of some of the things claimed or insinuated. Perhaps I need to reconsider? I can be so naive sometimes.

5minsmadness:
Someone posts a very reasonable comment here on how to make choices in life concerning the opposite gender, and a male rushes in like voltron, like he gets paid to lay off his own gender. And there are more examples like this all over nairaland. It baffles me no end.

there is something someone said about francis here while dissing him that made me think though. Is it possible that more boys are being raised by single moms and in the process these same single moms transfer their hatred of the male species to thier male kids hence emasculating them? I mean, women are vindictive, its the kind of thing most of them can do, raise a child to hate all men because of what one man did to you.

Then again is it because they so desperately want the V? I have seen young men do extremely stupid things just so they can gain favour with the female folk so as to get into their pants. I understand that hustle but I wonder dont they have any male pride in them? Dont they have any shame at all?

Most guys I know will always stand up to defend a woman, dont get me wrong. Its the simpering weakling approach and insisting that a woman can do no wrong that bothers me.

TV

The whole world - with the possible exception of large parts of Iraq and Syria - are gradually becoming femcentric. One of the outworkings of this is that instaed of men' identity being formed primarily by males and the masculine tradition, they are being formed in a way that caters to the service of women.

It's can only change the dynamic of the relationship between men and women. Is that a good or bad thing? I guess we'll see, but we can see some evidence of it not being all good. And funnily enough, women don't particularly like the kind of men that are raised with a feminine imperative .

5minsmadness:
Why are there so many "feminised" males on nairaland though. Is it so in real life?

ApexTitan:
It's bad everywhere; real life, nairaland, mainstream media, everywhere. Too many men who go out of their way to appease women at the expense of their own dignity, it's sad to watch.
Just five minutes ago before I logged on here I was trying to watch a tv show (The Newsroom season 3) but I had to stop in disgust - all the male characters who were supposedly reasonable men were absolute simps or buffoons. I come online and see all kinds of excuses men make for women and I begin to wonder if there is any hope at all. Everywhere you turn there is an emasculated man singing the same song.

TV

Mindfulness, when you came back arrived , you presented a sunny, reconciliatory even, demeanour. And you also appeared to adopt a neutral position, being very “non-judgemental” and asking a lot of questions.

I was always happy to answer any posed my way and I know a few others were as well, Now after hearing more from you, I’d like to ask some of my own.

Most of us would consider our positions to be rooted in truth and morally sound – if we are being serious and not just having a laugh or outright trolling. I would like to believe you do too.

I’ve heard you say things like;

- A person “has a right” to pursue her feelings, regardless of the fallout or impact on others
- That that person has no responsibility for what happens to others
- That you know how to make yourself happy, and a persons responsibility is first to make themselves happy
- I’ve heard you talk “ emotional health” and throw the term “healing” around a lot. And talk of not judging or condemning
- You talk about how emotionally healthy people are not dependent or shouldn’t suffer if people leave them or walk out of their lives.

In sum, your ideology/theology appears to me to be “self(ish)-help” at best and a kind of “do as thy will at worst”?

Would you care to explain a little more, and answer the specific questions. They won’t be all at once and each response may take time to be fully understood., so this may be a convo over time. Appreciate if you would rather not.

As noted this one is primarily for Mindfulness, but I sense that MizMyColi is treading the same path, so I’m happy for your contributions also - and of course, anyone else who is treading this path or simply interested.

Consider it a proper invite to the men’ thread

First question; Does this "path" or journey have a name? If so what is it? Do you consider it ideology/theology/philosophy or just lifestyle. I know I said 1 question and it is really


TV

[size=1pt]mickey45, hi, I need to know what's up, then decide if it's worth us making contact. Please brief me by outlining and mentioning me somewhere. Cheers.[/size]

Stillfire:
TV01 won't agree.

Holá Stilly, how far?

I read an excerpt, and on the whole, I probably wouldn't, although I'm sure there is some truth to it. My main query would be about the demographics of the SAHM' - were they mostly poor, single mothers, or welfare recipients?

Such would generally not have the wherewithal to inculcate even prosaic learning into their children, let alone the more esoteric, or set a progressive expectation of adult achievement. I'm sure if SAHM' in the higher classes were compared to working mums in the same strata, the results would be different - like with like.

I'm all in favour of SAHM especially for the early years. And, I would have liked to have had my children home-schooled for all of elementary school. The socialisation aspect is both myth and a red herring. Children don't even start to really interact with each other for a few years, some of the socialisation is actually detrimental - lots of negative behaviours are picked up in these interactions - and they are just as well socialised by the people around them - especially in large or extended family settings.

It's actually a source of personal regret that we didn't go this route. A family I know has 4 daughters all home-schooled. They are unbelievable. The best behaved kids ever. I've even met them on the train on my way to work heading out to museums.

It's not for everyone, but it can be done and very well, even superior to any state schooling. And it's worth noting, that state school can be little more than a holding pen for children. You have to be able to afford, or be eligible for a very good one to get the best. For many that's not the case. How many stabbings have we had this month alone - in schools 0! At least it used to be just on on the streets.

I loved onegai' first post submissions. Exactly what I would have liked. I'm encouraged to think creatively about other ways we can can have input into educating our children outside the standard schooling convention. There are probably various avenues to bring out the best in ones children.

Thanks for the mention


TV

Nihilist:
Yawn

Nowhere in the post I quoted is the issue of morality posted. Nowhere is the premise of 'bad choice' contextualised in that post against the backdrop of morality.

My initial response wasn't because I really thought you made a point worthy of a reply. Your subsequent post after my clarification - which shouldn't really have been required - just bears that out.

We all have our constituencies and I wouldn't actually consider you someone the post was aimed at, especially given your rejection of any form of morality or religion.

It does beg the question though, why have you been haranguing coogar over 6 odd days, multiple threads and countless hours if that's your position? Please consider that rhetorically.


TV

Nihilist:
Your entire submission is based on that particular fallacious line.

Moral choices are an outworking of ones maturity, world-view and character. I am not discussing mistakes such as right first, instead of left first, whilst air kissing, or any choice that is devoid of moral value or outcome, like decisions such as what to breakfast on .

Further, when moral choices are in view, it is almost always certain to know of the potential outcome. And even where one is uncertain, the a priori understanding that the choice is morally suspect should be enough to caution restraint - my premise stands.

Nihilist:
Have you always made the right choice in life?

That is not the point. In as much as I have had to make moral choices, I have the moral framework to know if such choices are right or wrong, and the character to act based on that framework.

Nihilist:
Are you guaranteed to make the right choices for the rest of your life?

As above

Nihilist:
If your answer to both questions is No, then can we conclude that you suffer from a permanent character deficiency?

If it was - with regarsd to moral choices - then you certainly could.

Nihilist:
Hastily concluding that a character deficiency is the cause of bad choices in whatever sequence is not just wrong, it is utterly illogical...

In the context and dynamic of which we are discussing it is not.

Nihilist:
And the consequence of the decision is always apparent BEFORE the decision is made? A bad decision is only ever recognized in hindsight.

It doesn't have to be - even though it often is - where it is a question of morality.

Nihilist:
The message is very clear and in my opinion a very good piece of advice. The premise however, is very wrong

The message is clear, good and well premised. Your opinion is just that - for what it is worth. Your inference is what is at fault.

Given the history of this thread, my posting themes on it, and not least the specific nature of the male/female dynamic, the context shouldn't have been overly difficult to discern. For the benefit of those reading, to deny muster to those who may try and discredit the message, and to give you this one time benefit of the doubt. I've responded.

In future, feel free to query the premise first, before declaring it fallacious, it would save everyone time and effort.


TV

pickabeau1:
Bros this is a well detailed dossier
I hope guys can learn from this

See experience talking

5minsmadness:
In all humility i wish I could write like you.
Well said.

...cheers guys


TV

Run young man run - Part III

Some signs too look out for;

• Secretive
• Hardened demeanour (cold persona, shifty eyes) - outbursts of bitterness or vitriol (which she may try to control/hide)
• Prone to lying, may border on the pathological. Fantasises, maybe prone to delusion.
• Unabashed, unblushing shamelessness
• Sex - will typically be used to draw you in and/or manipulate you. Sex, affection, kindness may be very much "monetized"
• No respect or recourse to their own parents or wider family. Check her respect levels at home.
• Maybe estranged from one or more of her family.
• Inexplicable gaps in personal history - grey areas she doesn't like to discuss
• Unduly immodest, uses flirtation as a tool
• Expensive tastes, usually not commensurate with earning or earning history
• No real friends, at least of high repute. People close may be weak, or ones she’s using for cover.
• Tries to force the situation (towards marriage) – although that’s most desperate women !
• Talks about scams with no real sense of unease – maybe even respectfully
• Reviles people a lot and is always quick to expose secrets or highlight others shady pasts, flaws
• Victim mentality when challenged about behaviours or past
• Will be overly felicitous to your family/circle beforehand, then cut them off afterwards
• Credit is bad, credit history is poor, maybe debt laden (other than student debt, mortgage etc.)
• May try and hide in church, but will know the form, not the real essence – no real depth! But possibly quite "religious"
• Will also gravitate towards the “power or influence” in church” – will class herself.
• Even if she works in church, will not really serve – part of making herself high-profile. Maybe a "Pastor lover".
• Watch for health issues, scarring from self-mutilation, medication for STI or abortion after effects, soft or hard dependencies


TV

Run young man run - Part II

I’d also like men to be keenly aware of how individual females and also “the herd mentality of women” will work together to blind men to these very pertinent facts.

Be aware of efforts to white-wash the past, resist slut-shaming, campaign for divorce, sell single-motherhood or divorce as of no consequence (or outright good), Be aware of advice that sells immorality, or justifies any action based on “feelings”.

The notion or claim of “love” is often used as a justification for any action, or excuse for any wrong-doing. It’s literally been endued with a moral righteousness in and of itself.

Note the kind of advice that counsels women to be economical with the truth, or simply lie about their pasts. Also beware tropes such as “what happened in the past is past”, or supremely annoyingly “it’s none of your business”.

All of this you will see repeatedly here on NL. A theme repeated across threads and from posters many look up to. If her future is your business, her past certainly is.

Query advise that tries to sell the result of destructive behaviour, of poor life choices as something one needs “heal from” – did she pick up a virus of get hit by a car? Bad choices were made based on character – and if the character was not properly formed, then one must question if that kind of empowerment is good? In any event, the consequences are damaging.

It’s not healing that’s required, it’s a character overhaul. And yes, there are some people who can achieve this via self-will, but they are very few. It first requires acknowledging, and then real effort to overcome.

Many women would rather just lie to themselves and everyone else about who and what they really are, and re-direct fault for the cause of their woes and trauma.

So here’s a caveat, as a Christian, I believe in redemption – people can change, but only the grace of God can bring about a lasting change of nature and true healing. Not just to mask, or forcibly resist destructive behaviour – which will ultimately reveal itself or manifest in other ways - but actually hate or have no desire to engage in it, and be free from it’s echo.

IFF you are sure a woman has been truly redeemed, should you consider her as spouse. And note, not only will she be honest about her past, she will be rightly acknowledge it as something she sees as wrong, and clear about how she intends to live in future. If you are not God-fearing, and looking to Him as you seek a spouse, OYO.

I’ve said it before and I’ll repeat it here; most women would be better served by staying under parental authority (especially their father’) until they get married. Especially in this age where the temptations are myriad and liberty can come at a relatively early age - before character is fully formed. In an era when everything is fluid, morality is relative and the pressure can be tremendous.


TV

^{...if you wouldn't accept a bruised piece of fruit, why settle for a damaged wife?}

Run young man run - Part I

A lot of damage can happen to women – and be embedded when they are young (and sometimes not so young ) and have unfettered freedom. They may well read this as liberty to do as they please. And, I’m not actually out to question that right in this piece

However, where that liberty is availed of by women with a partially formed, or simply bad character, to make poor choices, or engage in destructive behaviour, I would candidly advise men to avoid choosing such women as spouses.

A young woman may undergo trauma in a number of ways; daddy issues, runs, sugary, being pumped and dumped, used, sexually or physically abused, or defrauded.

In some instances, she will actually believe she’s having a good time, or even “in love”, but in truth, she is damaging herself and being damaged, and as a consequence she will acquire baggage. This she will undoubtedly carry into future relationships. And it will in no way diminish the entitlement she feels to a “high-value” husband.

And then she meets you, and figures she can actualise her desires. She knows to be economical with the truth about her past, adopt a revisionist view of her personal history, re-direct blame for anything that’s evident, and paint a picture of herself as someone you are actually lucky to be with.

She’ll know how to describe her poor choices and waywardness as her being “naïve”, or her destructive behaviour as her being wrongly influenced – by friends, or a man. She’ll play a whole pack of victim cards. Yes, she’ll talk of “healing”, but it’s spin. She is damaged goods.

Dude, you are not buying. You don’t even visit that section of the market. It’s simply too big a risk! It’s too big a risk because if you do, here are some of the things that will possibly happen;

She’ll have romanticised the actual trauma she experienced – she’ll remember the trans-atlantic flights, the swish hotels, the shopping sprees, the meals at fancy restaurants, the happening clubs, and of course the hot sessions. She’ll remember the tingles she used to get from being rebellious, a transgressor and hanging with bad boys.

And she’ll have internalised this “romance” as part of her entitlement and the “expectation” of her husband - without the trauma, what trauma? Yes, from you, the hard working, conscientious – and perhaps relatively dull by comparison - guy who just wants to provide as best he can for his family.

Over time she gets disgruntled, resentment sets in. You are spending a lot of time managing, petting, appeasing, or simply dealing with the wider fallout of her damaged behaviour. Time and energy best spent establishing your home and forging ahead.

It is regressive and costly, you’ll find it tiresome and tedious, a real stressor. The peace every man wants in his home seems far from you. She’s bitter antagonistic, wilfully caustic and spiteful. A right nag.

She’ll consider you not giving in to, or prioritising her desires as maltreatment. But since that word no longer exists, it’s simply the wide-ranging term “abuse”. Her longings and revisionist memories will mean she may never consider anything you do good enough.

Her “tingle-memory” will mean she may never consider you to be the man she truly deserves or desires. It spirals – downwards! She gets more resentful and disgruntled – especially if there are any other pressures on the home, or outside interest in her – she ain’t loyal!

Obviously you are to blame, it’s always the man right? You are not ambitious enough, caring enough, or romantic enough. You don’t fulfil her needs. You are not worthy of your “headship”, you are not “leading” right – after all, she decides that right? She’ll be prone to second-guessing you, undermining you, even disrespecting you. She will meet any challenge to her behaviour out of that same poorly formed, damaged character.

Then, her pack of cards comes out – she’s a victim, it’s your fault. That is, you cheated her, you abuse her – yep, she’s in a “shitty marriage”! She deserves a divorce. And with the campaign to moralise divorce, especially, if you’re in a Western country, she will most likely get one. Even if she doesn’t, she will make your life difficult, if not outright hell.

If you are really unlucky, she’ll use the power of the courts and police to humiliate you, keep you from your children, and possibly label you a paedophile. You’ll likely be labelled a domestic abuser as a matter of course. Many women use the threat of and/or intermittent police action to keep their husbands subdued. Many men cower in their own homes, subject to the capriciousness of a damaged woman who was never wife-grade in the first instance.

I repeat – stay away from damaged goods. You are a man of character. Hopefully God-fearing, hardworking and willing to sacrifice to build a happy and solid family. Don’t cast your pearls before swine. Choose a spouse that is worthy.

You are a man, think strategically, consider your family bloodlines, kinship ties, think of your generations. It’s not just about you, that is why you have to be really considered about her. Be a man of worth and set your expectations high

All the best as you navigate your way towards marriage, make excellent matches and establish your homes.


TV

^{…don’t forget, it’s always a buyers market}

Mindfulness:
Whatever you say and no matter how hard you try, nothing can change the way I feel - GORGEOUS!

How you feel as a result of your actions does not necessarily justify those actions - right standing is not based on feelings, nor what you term them.

Mindfulness:
You can continue feeling miserable if you think that it will get you to heaven. Your religion is your choice and I couldn't care less.

How did you deduce misery? You seem to think that making conscious moral choices leads to misery? Quite a stretch, but then to validate and self-justify people will go to any lengths

Au contrairé - right standing and eternity with with My Creator is a source of boundless joy, whatever the feeling. I'll leave you with - or perhaps without - your conscience. Keep self-justifying.


TV

^{...but indeed, if worshipping God means misery is my lot, so be it...Hebrews 11:25 - choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God than to enjoy the passing pleasures of sin...}

5minsmadness:
That una thread that has been infiltrated by women and hen-pecked husbands


#najokeideyo

Omo, that thread serves and continues to serve it's purpose. Some female input is not a bad thing and the querulous ones have been summarily dispatched . And hen-pecked husbands are probably served best and to be encouraged by the thread, no?


TV

^{...hear you on the "prove yourself" thread. Yes men do have to prove themselves, to themselves and at times othe rmen. But no, they don't have to prove themselves to women...and most certainly not be defined or validated from a female perspective...}

artisticallyart:
How do you handle finance in marriage?

A wide ranging question Art...

But first I'd hope the basis were in place; honest and open communication, mutual trust & understanding, and at least idea of what you aspire to as a family.

Start from there, then you can plan or arrange your finances on a solid platform. The dynamic is purely down to the two of you, and can vary, or be varied as suits your circumstances and evolving plans.


TV

https://www.nairaland.com/1582623/boys-night-out-discussions/

Perhaps?


TV

Mindfulness:
Repentance is for those with a guilty conscience, I know no such. I come from a place of pure joy.
Brighten up TV01, you are a good man, you deserve to feel good too.

To have a guilty conscience, you must first have a conscience, no? If you willfully and selfishly base your joy on the unhappiness of others, there wil be a price to pay. Convincing yourself or others to the contrary, in order to normalise it, won't change that.

Why call me good? There is none good but God. I won't join you in justyfying myself or my actions, based on feelings or desires, or what others have to say - let me visit that prove yourself thread sef!


TV

Stillfire:
Hehehe...When marriage turn abusive, we have regulatory arms that deal with the offending party. You guessed right Feminism dealt with the offending party.
So because Patriarchy took the piss and was going on a path of tyranny across culture, Feminism rose up and righted some of the wrongs.
Patriarchy made the rules but made it one sided.
Right now this is how it exists until we reach our utmost balance...
Patriarchy is the executive arm, Feminism - legislative arm. We will co-exist to checking each other.

Yeah they can excel in home economics, but this should not now be the definition of what womanhood stands for.
In the past when these roles were assigned to the genders, our forefathers subsequently interpreted it as taboo for a gender to do the other role. And that is how some people are still operating in the 21st century.
In Igbo land it was taboo for men to cook, due to gender equality we can boast of men cooking and no one raising eye-brows. You think it just came like that? Naa.
So TV it is here to stay to protect, check patriarchy.
Consider us your overseersssssss!

This is to intentionally mis-read what feminism is and is about, or to demonstrate you simply don't know .

Although termed Patriarchy, it was a consensus betwixt male and female. Feminism is not after a regulatory role, it wants to rule. Not oversee, but completely take over. It's not about righting - mostly imaginary - wrongs, it wants to reign.

Feminism is by it's very nature intolerent and unbalanced - fascistic! What you describe - regardless of it's pros and cons - is not feminsim. In fact, it's a tacit agreement that Patriarchy is inherently good, but just requires checking occassionally - that is not anywhere like true feminism.

Either you don't properly grasp it or are trying to sweeten the pill by spinning it - we ain't swallowing !

Decent enough effort though. Lets call it a day for now. Here's a peace offering !


TV

You get sorrier by the moment !

Not even the usual lame attempt to explain or justify your framework, let alone rebut the content of my post.

Mindfulness:
@bold
Very funny.

Very true!

Mindfulness:
For your information, people have assigned different identities to me. You are free to continue.
I am that I am. Divine.

In truth, I don't really care - although I tagged from the first post I read - who you are. I discuss principles not personalities. Indeed, all told, Carefree actually delivered more and better. You are not even yourself

...let alone divine. The bible talks about those "whose god is their belly" - your worship and live by your feelings. That's more akin to bestial than divine.

Mindfulness:
By the way, if you were able to connect to the divine source within yourself, Bukatyne's comments wouldn't hurt you for days but like you said TV01, we reap what we sow.

Why are you trying to deflect by bringing Bukatyne into it? Her sneaky, but characteristic, attempt to lure me to that thread and ambush me backfired spectaculalrly.

Who can fight the truth? - which is by the way truly divine ! Whether she came alone or was sent, she was always doomed to fail - not least because she simply lacks the smarts. As thick as two short planks is our Buka. And if anyone smarter comes, they will also stumble and fall.

Her snide and deceitful allegations where totally groundless, which she proved by aggressively repeating them, and then failing to back them up when challenged.

I was in no way hurt, but rightly made a point of not letting her mislead people as to my views, or misacribe things to me. That could undo a lot of the work I've done here, and mean some people may read my posts with prejudiced eyes. She and her whole coven no reesh !

Bukatyne will serve her well deseved punishment - which I'll dispense at my leisure.

Now repent, or far worse punishment than I could dish out awaits you


TV

Carefree is this how your whole frame simply disintegrates . You position on the other thread - wannabe husband snatcher - was the women "had the right", based solely on proclamations of love. How does that not fit in this instance?

What right did that woman have that made her feelings actionable - regardless of the fallout and potential harm to others? Unless you explain otherwise, I see your position as the height of hypocrisy.

Mindfulness:
Reason should set the standards, not the Western world, not culture, neither religion.

You appeal to reason . Based on what, having rejected law, culture and religion - like all of these are devoid of reason . Laughable. And the source of that reason is whom or what exactly?

Mindfulness:
I am not condemning this man, neither his wife, nor their families but I believe that something is terribly wrong with a 53-year-old marrying a TEENAGER.

But condemning them is exactly what you are doing, albeit in a tacit manner - what is wrong with this based on your previously applied framework?

Mindfulness:
My reasons:

The average life expectancy of a Nigerian man is 52 years. Let us say that he, as a well-to-do man, will reach the average life expectancy men in developing countries reach, which is 78. This means that he has 25 more years to live (going by the Nigerian life expectancy, he already entered the coffin with one leg). By the time he dies, she will be 43, that is, I repeat when he reaches the life expectancy of a man in a developing country. She will be a fairly young widow and her marriage prospects will be bleak in a country like Nigeria. Is she to spend her remaining years alone? Is she not supposed to enjoy her old age with a husband by her side? Or will she soon have to take care of him like a nurse? Is she mature enough to deal with the problems old age comes along with?

What about their kids? They will still be pretty young when he dies. They shouldn't have a father for as long as possible?

What about the risks late fatherhood has on the health of the children?

Then, what do these two people have in common? Will he be her partner or her mentor, a fatherly figure? What is marriage about? Companion and friendship or mentoring and s.ex? What about the different social interests and attitudes?

What about the impact his marriage has on his older kids? What will be the impact on his daughters who see their father with a GIRL who is their age-mate? What about his sons who will date girls who are their stepmother's age? Do they have to worry about their father lusting after them? Can his daughters-in-law look up to him as a fatherly figure? I don't think so.

What about his parents-in-law? Are they his age-mates? How does it affect family counseling in times of a crisis where the elderly are asked for advice?

What about the different levels of fitness? How will it affect their se.xual life?

Last but not least, even without all these arguments, many people can sense that there is something unnatural and weird for a man at his age to be sleeping with a teenager.

Just because nature made it so that men can have children till the day they die, it does not mean that it is recommendable.

Your reasons are all bogus - and based purely on your feelings. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the age difference. If they are both of age and consenting - as are their families.

You term it unnatural, because you don't like it. Bah humbug !

For the record, I would also question this and maybe ask some of the same questions, but my worldview allows that without any inconsistency - yours doesn't

New moniker, same old lame positions - deactivate and try again. Although repentance will do the trick much more assuredly


TV

Stillfire:
Where did I stop?
Naa gender equality is not seeking to impose itself on the other gender. That is you 'patriarchs' mode of operation . Gender equality recognizes our biological difference but that women’s and men’s rights, responsibilities and opportunities will not depend on whether they are born male or female. A man can now aspire to be a cook, a nurse, a hair dresser without being discriminated against.
Also because you Patriarchs took the piss by bastardizing the powers you had, that is why Feminism is here to stay as a check and balance system before you people take us back to the days of boys study science, women study home economics. Not under my watch.

Stilly, look, we both know Patriarchy is an accord between men and women. It's simply what women prefer and it's what works best . And if rights, responsibilities and opportunities are "gender neutral", choices will not be - and biology, sorry to say, drives a lot of choices.

Patriarchy bastardised? Nah! That's akin to saying "marriage is abusive". It's not the institution, it's how it is implemented. And I agree some males, some societies abuse it somewhat. True Patriarchy is benign, protective, selfless - sacrificial even. But it leads, it is bold. Some men need to understand that better.

But feminism is no the key to righting any wrongs with Patriarchy - it is in itself a wrong. Don't fight it, encourage it in it's purest sense . With our women in support, we'll get there !

Lots of women want to study and excel in home economics - allow jor! And last time I looked, the best cooks and hairdresser where all men !


TV

Processor01:
No, I did not. Can we talk offline? Please can you send your addy to [size=2pt].[/size]

Seen. You can delete it now.


TV

Stillfire:
Of course I expect you to fight against feminism and its gender equality stance . I would have done so, fought tooth and nail, build barricades to protect myself so that my PRIVILEGES would not be taken away from me. You are allowed. It is a normal human response.

Me fight against feminism !

The "gender-equality" stance of feminism, is no less controlling then the "Patriarchy" they claim to be fighting. Social morés were agreed and enforced by both men and women. And men were for the most part chivalrous and protective towards women.

At best, "gender equality" - especially the way feminism articulates it - is a consideration, not the main driver of policy. Doing that presents odd notions such as over/under representation. This flags differences in strengths and choices as "issues", and demands false solutions (re-engineering)

All feminists want is to ensure that a wierd kind of sameness prevails, but yet be the ones who dictate what is permissable. All that has done is create an atmosphere of confusion and bewilderment - for men and women.

Privilege ! I laugh - with that comes great responsibility. Which is another way feminism gets it glaringly wrong. They seek what they perceive to be the power and privilege, but actively reject the burden and responsibility.

I am, I would imagine, typical of many men. I work and sacrifice to provide for my wife and children. I carry a burden she does not want, but appreciate she does things I cannot do. A harmonious whole. Not both demanding to do the same things or half of everything

Feminism will eat itself


TV

Stillfire:
So what should she do?

She should in the first instance look to restore her union - it's a precious thing, worth fighting for and preserving.
She should think long-term and consider the well-being of all involved - directly and tangentially.
She should do what everyone who takes marriage vows commits to do.

TV

Stillfire:
Maybe people especially MEN should respect their marriage vows and then we wouldn't be talking about divorce.

I agree - all marital vows should be taken with the utmost sobriety and well-meaning intent. Divorce is and should remain anathema and be extremely rare.


TV