₦airaland Forum

kandiikane:
yeah yeah

...One structural impediment. Please...just one..


TV

Dheartless:
sorry about the mention, I knew you already saw it.

please read this again.
Mathew 19;9
and I say unto you, whosoever shall put away his wife, EXCEPT IT BE FORNICATION, and shall marry another committed adultery, and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

when a wife fornicate and she put away, it is no longer an adultery if the husband marries another woman and I believe from that verse also, it is no longer an adultery if another man marries the woman.

What you are saying above is once divorce happens, both parties are "scripturally" free to re-marry. This is a charter for serial marriages. It belies what scripture clearly teaches about marriage being for life.

And I believe - I stand to be corrected - that it may only have been men that could put away wives then, not vice-versa. Read the scriptures in total. My position is the sum total of everything I can find.


TV

FrancisTony:
I have enough testosterone, so, thank you.

But, wait, if you believe a male can actually secrete excess oestrogen than testosterone and still claim male gayism is unnatural, isn't it contradictory?.

Choose one?

Choose? Based on your fallacious dialectic?

Homosexuality is disordered. If you like claim it is 100% genetic, even sef, claim God "made you that way".


TV

kandiikane:
TV, as you can see I did not bother quoting your name because I have decided not to get in anymore debates with people like you because it's like arguing with a brick wall. In fact, here, scratch your rectum with this:
https://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130927015151/finalfantasy/images/d/d0/FFX_Weapon_-_Spear_2.png

Ah, Kandi sweetness personified - bless !

Quoting me blind or otherwise is not the point - neither is debating me. Simply refute, or closet your discomfort if you are unable. Lots of emotion but no answers ? Typical.


TV

FrancisTony:
What's the big deal about the prize?

And what's the big deal about sales?

FrancisTony:
Someone is confused here. I wonder when she spoke for African gays.

Last time I checked gayism is legalised in some African countries with SouthAfrica been the only place they can marry.

Err', for all I/we know she spoke for only Naija anti-gay law.

such as my position on the equal rights of gay people on the continent of Africa

Your rehab continues - you will grow a pair even if we have to force feed you testosterone !

TV

^{...be sure to keep away from mortuaries now !}

Dheartless:
I wonder why won't pastors talk about the possibility of divorce, instead they advocate for a never ending marriage between a man and a woman, even in cases when it is obvious that one partner may die before time while trying to endure believing the union will eventually work.

I will leave the old testament out of this because people might say "it was before the birth and teaching of the lord jesus, so those rules were amended by him"
But according to Mathew 19:9, a man is allowed to divorce his wife under the reason of unfaithfulness/adultery.

my belief is, I won't die or suffer unnecessarily in a marriage for a partners misbehavior, not only in cases of adultery but any intense level of insanity introduced into the marriage by my partner, Nobody, no pastor can talk or preach me out of divorce.
it is better for me to take that chances of committing a sin ,"which to an extent I don't believe is a sin", than bear hell given to me by my partner.

(with reference to the bible) I really don't know about how possible it is for a woman to divorce her husband.

But in all, I still think no one deserves to bear and suffer for their partners misbehavior and/or abuse [so long it is not an illness of the body organ(s)], SINCE EVEN ON JUDGEMENT DAY EVERYONE WILL BE JUDGED SEPARATELY/ INDEPENDENTLY.

if you don't agree, state your reasons .

I meant no insult to anyone else's belief.

What happened to my mention - planned to come back to this, did, and it was missing? Anyway, I'll respond and delete if for some reason I am persona non grata !

- Adultery is the only reason for divorce in a properly constituted marriage
- Divorce does not suppose re-marriage (a woman is bound by the law to her husband as long as he lives - Romans 7:2)

So even if "divorce" happens because of adultery, or due to other contrived or seemingly valid reasons, re-marriage is not permitted.


TV

^{...there is one possible exception, but lets not go creating snares now, shall we}

coogaluta:
My brother, Pa TV01, how are things?
How are my lil angels doing?

as per the topics on ground, as usual, I have no comments
Pick-a-boo-boo, I hail thee!

See diss Bro'-Pa' - Aluta, welcome back.
Children are great ! Been busy spamming this place with pics - we are so happy.

Do I address you as Dr, MD or Consultant? Pending the time it becomes Dr Revd Mrs !


TV

Kimoni,

to sum-up on some other points;

I am all for equality, just not blind to the facts; to wit;

1. Outcomes for actions - even if jointly taken - are not always the same - even if responsibility is.
2. There are real differences - at every level - between the sexes, and we flourish when we understand, appreciate and work to harmonise the complimentarity of our differences.
3. If a critical mass within society eschew traditional norms (particularly around marriage and morality), the consequences will be very damaging.


Single Mothers;
Society has traditionally stigmatised single mothers for obvious reasons;
1. It hinders a womans chance of learning and marrying.
2. It typically means a poorer outcome for any children
3. Not least because 60% of single parent homes are in poverty.

Stigma and shame serve useful purposes in society. Now, I am here as an advocate of marriage. I want all to marry - and marry well - including single mothers. Funnily enough, marriage is a prosperity builder - I can personally testify to that.

No gainsaying, apart form the societal cost, single-motherhood does not increase any womans eligibility. I advise women to avoid it and the things that could lead to it.

I advise men to avoid divorcees and single mothers for good reason. Divorcees is mostly scriptural, a woman is bound to her husband until he dies. Widows fine - but not black ones ! Single mums due to the obvious disadvantages and typical make-up of men.

Now I could hail single mothers, tell them they are precious, they are great, they will marry just as if they had no offspring and even that they are "hot-cakes" and spread the gospel of single-motherhood. One thing for sure, It would greatly increase the pool of cheap hits for promiscuous men - only it wouldn't increase the number and quality of marriages + it's not true.


I mentioned feminism, as unbeknown to even it's ignorant adherents, it has percolated to colour pretty much all engagements between men and women. It's why most arguments - including yours - are predicated on "equality", and in such a way as to ignore, instead of appreciate difference.

Hope your paper goes well. I expect credit 0 !


TV

Kimoni,

how far? Couldn't respond earlier - normally don't visit weekends. I'll try and summarise;

of the 3 topics I can only touch on NHS;
1. Inefficiencies, possibly due to size - crazy amounts paid to locums and for outsourced services
2. Bloated middle and senior management, who as well as being costly exacerbate innefficency
3. Settlements for malpractice, negligence and ridiculous payoffs
4. Politicisation - by all parties
5. Recession & cuts.
6. Health tourism - not sure, like benefit fraud - which is only 1% of the welfare bill - I feel it's probably minor and unlike benefit fraud, feel it could be easily dealt with.

TV

I have said a few things that have not been so popular with a number of people. I have been told to shut up about certain things – such as my position on the equal rights of gay people on the continent of Africa

1. And you have the right to speak on behalf of the whole continent because? Not to mention that things differ across the continent as a whole.

2. Not sure what your actual position is here, but if it's the wholesale agenda of same-sex marriage, adoption, surrogacy rights etc., along with a desire to see Africa embed homosexuality into it's laws and culture like The Republic of Ireland has just done, I also say "shut it" - for the Yoruba anyway. Others are free to respond - or not - as they please.

such as my deeply held belief that men and women are completely equal.

Sounds mealy mouthed to me? Men and women are equal - we are just not the same. Different in pretty much every way, even though there is great overlap. Our differences are meant to be complementary, not competitive and they harmonise when properly respected and understood to ensure "mankind" flourishes.

I don’t speak to provoke. I speak because I think our time on earth is short and each moment that we are not our truest selves, each moment we pretend to be what we are not, each moment we say what we do not mean because we imagine that is what somebody wants us to say, then we are wasting our time on earth. I don’t mean to sound precious but please don’t waste your time on earth, but there is one exception. The only acceptable way of wasting your time on earth is online shopping.

Precious twaddle.

Okay, one last thing about my mother. My mother and I do not agree on many things regarding gender. There are certain things my mother believes a person should do, for the simple reason that said person ‘is a woman.’ Such as nod occasionally and smile even when smiling is the last thing one wants to do. Such as strategically give in to certain arguments, especially when arguing with a non-female. Such as get married and have children.

If she wishes to denigrate her mothers advice, patronise her years of experience and do so pubicly to score cheap popularity, I find that sad, but will permit them the privacy to resolve family issues - as a good African/Yoruba man I do'bale for mama Ngozi sight unseen !

I can think of fairly good reasons for doing any of these. But ‘because you are a woman’ is not one of them. And so, Class of 2015, never ever accept ‘Because You Are A Woman’ as a reason for doing anything. Finally I would like to end with a final note on the most important thing in the world: love. Now girls are often raised to see love only as giving. Women are praised for their love when that love is an act of giving. But to love is to give AND to take. Please love by giving and by taking. Give and be given. If you are only giving and not taking, you’ll know. You’ll know from that small and true voice inside you that we females are so often socialized to silence.
Don’t silence that voice. Dare to take.

An impoverished definition of love - I hear she identifies as "Catholic", please someone, point her to 1 Corinthians 13 for starters..


TV

Shollypopzz:
https://media.tumblr.com/6cbb3859de7db728d1359d7cea4b2bf5/tumblr_inline_mok1wl2m9S1qz4rgp.gif



I wonder what you think of HBCUs, minority scholarships, diversity quota and all. I guess all these "opportunities" awarded to African Americans erases racism or erases the effects slavery/oppression has had on the group for years.

Sholly how far? I missed you. Welcome back all is forgiven . The level of female comment here these days is typically devoid of real intellect and now seems morally vapid to boot . Yourself and Kandikane in the same thread!!! All my Christmases have come at once. If Shirley07 makes it here na 7th heaven be dat !

Yeah, 'cos women suffered worse than the soul destroying effect of the trans-atlantic slave passage and actual real life slavery? Puh-leaze...where does one even start?

I've touched on the initiatives, policies and legislation - Coogar abeg, this is your forte - how about that women enrol for and graduate with more degrees (although they aren't sticking in STEM are they - but lets leave that for now - Coogar!!!).

What about family law, or massively disproportionate health spending. There is no structural discrimination against women in the West. Sweden are even forming legislation to force men to pee sitting down. Get outta here !


TV

kandiikane:
what nonsense?

Kandi, Kandii, Kandiii (see what I did there ),
Instead of greeting me with an emotional outburst, why not refute my assertion? If you can !

Pray tell, what structural impediments exist - much less supportive initiatives galore - to hinder the graduands of Wellesley College from accessing any opportunity they so desire? Or indeed any Western based woman.

I'm sure they were thinking "Who is this spear chucker trying to teach us - from the early bastions of womens lib - about feminism" . What next? Teaching the Tutsi how to dance the Watutsi? Or perhaps the Yoruba how to do owanbe . I scratch my butt in Arapahoe!


TV

tintingz:
@TV01 Up gunners.

...wifey is dancing round the parlour singing "oh to, oh to be, oh to be a gooner!


TV

^{...coming to deal with the nonsensical OP !}

...let me start by having a good laugh at this self-indulgent piece

That out of the way - and before I proceed to comment on the actual piece, let me give a high level summary;

At no point in history has any group been afforded the kind of privilege and accommodations that the Western female has today. Privilege to such a degree, that it can only be continued and maintained by the forceful oppression of men.

There are now no structural impediments to women accessing or availing themselves of opportunity in any arena one can think of. Indeed, that puts it mildly; feminist ideology is so deeply embedded - and I mean even in the church - that no law is passed or policy implemented before it passes muster from a gynocentric viewpoint.

Even that still doesn't really capture it. There are a vast array of initiatives, policies and laws aimed solely at giving women affirmative support, many such as VAWA are so structured and enforced,it's hard to figure out if they were drafted to "support" women or simply victimise men?

Now in all of this privilege, we have Wellesley College; one of the original "Seven Sister" - all women - institutions, designed to mirror the Ivy
league colleges.

This is where privilege meets elitism. The women who attend this college are not denied anything because they are women - think Hillary Clinton, Madeleine Albright - or expected to do anything because they are female. They literally have the world at their fingertips.

I must confess to never having read any of Adichies work. And in one sense that's a good thing - I speak based solely on what is written, but I find it hard to see her as anything other than a paid mouthpiece for Western ideology and conspirator in their agenda of cultural imperialism.


Wait 0! Was is it the Wellesley College at Ibafo !


TV

^{...Arsenal don goal dem, make I go miliki with Wifey}

Kimoni:
First, this is not about feminism. Not at all. Topic for another day.

Feminism and it's precepts colour how many - male and female, feminists and non-feminists - approach the issue

Kimoni:
I disagree with your first five paragraphs. It contains a lot of sweeping statements with no empirical evidence (Ekwesili speaking)
Seriously, a lot of what you wrote up there are what I regard as myths.

Please search it out for yourself. Ask specifically and I'll try and provide links.

Kimoni:
Is there any shame in single motherhood these days? I don't think so. Babymamas, side chicks are now trending more than ever

Shame or not, stigmatised or not, there is a societal cost as the outcomes for the children are typically poorer - do you need proof of this? It's one of the ways people these days miss it. It's about the greater good, not simply individual desire and satisfaction.

Kimoni:
Women catch STDs 7 times more than men? I need proof

Not empirical I hope ! The rate of transmission between the parties if either is infected. Please read again.

Kimoni:
Effects of abortions? Little or no effect these days. It's almost as easy as shaiting now and besides, hardly will you even find them getting pregnant.

You'd do well to search this one out. One abortion increases a womans chances of a serious pathology later in life by up to 40%. And I mean pathologies like breast cancer etc. Oral/chemical contraceptives are also dangerous as these can have dangerous side effects on some women - and for many induce unpleasant day-to-day side effects.

Kimoni:
Less marital satisfaction for women as a result of a high number of exs'
Wake up TV!!!!!!! It's the 21st century, a new millennium.
Let's not even argue this, this is a fable

Nope. It's true widely known and ApexTitan provided a link. Women tend to embed physical/emotinal experiences and are prone to romanticising them. It doesn't bode well for hubby, especially at times things are hard, he's struggling or there is a down in the marriage. It engenders "dissatisfaction" in women.

Kimoni:
TV, whether you agree or not, there is a whole new generation of girls out there and they are not smiling. They live by their own rules and have no time for conscience or physiological effect. Something they copied from the menfolk.

I sure everyone has spotted the not so sublte shifting of responsibility onto men !
Women adopting the pathological traits of men will backfire on us all - but mostly on women.

Kimoni:
Now back to my point, it's high time men realize whats going on around them and trace the origin of this mess to themselves. For centuries, different rules have always applied to men and women.

It's mens fault in as much as they fell for the equality ruse and shed age-old traditions for odd notions like equality, freedom and autonomy.

Kimoni:
~ It's okay for a man to cheat but it's at a taboo for women
~ a married woman found cheating should be divorced immediately but a man found cheating should be constant prayed for and pampered more (like seriously)
~ babymamas should be shamed but baby daddies should be accorded the right of marriage
~ girl should spill her past before marriage but guys must never kiss and tell

I never said or championed any of those things. They are natural outworkings of the male female dynamic - and hence embedded into culture.

Kimoni:
We are never going to move forward if we continue to preach all these to the younger generation and continue telling them it's a man's world.
A male should be held equally liable for whatever atrocities he commits with a female.

Agreed. But a male won't have to drop out of school when he gets a woman pregnant Niether will he face the risk of childbirth, single parent stigma or l/t consequences of an abortion. Geddit

Kimoni:
I quite agree with your ending paragraphs but with some little moderation.
Certainly, all parties concerned must come clean at one point or the other during their relationship but again, it should be all parties and not women alone.

It doesn't actually sound like you read it. Otherwise it would be gospel to you . In fact, your moderation is regressive as
1. I clearly stated "both parties".
2. It's not at "some point", but when marriage is in view or a distinct possibility.

Kimoni:
However, in doing that, wisdom must also be applied during disclosure. If I have a partner who tells his mother or friends anything to everything, I'll know where to stop.

If one settles for an immature man, that doesn't in any way negate my advice.

Kimoni:
Or if he is the type that like to use what he knows about me as a weapon during marital spats, I'll disclose with maximum wisdom.
Materiality is also very key when spewing.

As above. All you are doing is making excuses for non-disclosure. It is not necessarily a bad thing to discuss your intended with at least one family elder. I took something about my wife to a trusted family member/condfidante for advice.

Good attempt, but you have rebutted nothing. Neither have you presented more telling arguments. !


TV

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10552-013-0325-7
http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/new-evidence-suggests-a-link-between-abortion-and-breast-cancer/16234

I read the quote below on the other thread - can one even fathom the thinking behind this kind of statement? Pray tell, what does a man with self-esteem look for? A woman dripping male fluid from her last encounter?

Actually a man with no self esteem will be looking for a virgin to marry

Da.y.um, things are really bad - and are looking increasingly bleak.


TV

Timbuktou:
Can't say I'm surprised at the idea of it, and I wouldn't say it's brazen, they do have the anonymity of the internet.

But in truth, it's like strong drink; it serves to reveal their innermost thoughts and desires.

Timbuktou:
However, this and many other comments on here go to confirm that marriage is dead/dying. Divorces are the in thing now, or at least separation.

Marriage is in a parlous state - and with this SSM absurdity, I'm even more saddened - but doubly resolute. I believe marriage is worth championing in it's essence. But aspirationally, not these tick-box, burger munching marriages as espoused by our GRG. What else do we have?

Timbuktou:
And I find it duplicitous and ridiculous that there's a thread for intending wives and another for Treachery101 by the same character.

No, both threads have ulterior motives from the OP's perspective and both contain enough poison to harm the unwary.

Timbuktou:
My mind is asking, "why bother get married when you can have all the diick you want single?" It's not like she's advocating for a till-death-do-us-part kinda marriage. So what is the point? The wedding?

Women will always need men for procreation and provisioning, at the very least. They also enjoy status announcements or upgrades and a wedding delivers on that.

Pickabeau1 - re Sweden, just Youtube "Swedish feminism". They are now legislating for men to pee sitting down . They've taken it so far men are now mere appendages). As ever Swedish women stil prefer "bad boys" ! - our broda with some of the Swedish womens handball team.

Next time I'm in Stockholm, I'll be sure to piss all over any toilet I use - and do it standing up !


TV

Kimoni:
True, everybody was born with a conscience but again, Mr Conscience is dead in many hearts

Coogar, whether you admit it or not, values are fast eroding from our society

I don't even know who cheats more these days between men and women, unrepentantly that is

And I maintain that the change to correct this has to come from men

And the first thing is to acknowledge that whatever is good for the goose must be good for the gander

The same set of rules must apply

Men cannot keep deluding themselves that they can get away with anything and everything and expect women to remain sober

Patriarchy already had a solution for this;

Women where to be chaste and appropriately married at the right time. Men who violated - as in honour not rape - would be held accountable and forced to man up or face serious sanctions. Women who acted without honour would be shamed or stigmatised.

Feminism sees this as "men controlling womens sexuality" - no, it was society' restrictions to ensure least harm to both sexes and optimal societal flourishing.

Why, one may ask, should women bear the greater burden? Because the cost of breaches weighed more heavily on them;
- Women get left holding the baby, blighting their economic or learning opportunities
- Are 7 times more likely to catch rather than give an STD
- Suffer the affects of abortion (and there are long-term pathologies for even 1)
- As well as the stigma of single motherhood
- And all round reduced marital opportunity

Casual sex does not portend as many issues for men, neither does it affect them as deeply in an emotion or psychological sense. It's why, the higher a womans number of partners, the lower her potential marital satisfasction.

And least of all with women - a potential spouses notch count is rarely an issue for women, their focus is typically a mans status and ability to provide. In fact the ability to attract quality women - and even sire children - is actually attractive to women

The notch count is higher by way of criteria for men - they are more concerned about marital quality and the paternity of any children presented to them for provision. And of course their status, which is compromised by a stigmatised (lower value) mate.

The optimal solution - as I've touched on - is high expectations on both sides, not a denial of biological and cultural reality or the chanting of "equality", as the fact remains, ultimately the fallout will always be more for women.

As for trying to queer the pitch by making it about gory details of individual relationships, that's how they operate - deceitfully. No man wants to know the detail, just the number, even generally; more than 6 but less than 12, not into double figures etc.

And both parties should present salient facts - I dated your cousin, abortions, murders, cultism, hereditary illnesses etc. - at an appropriate point (to a potential spouse).

A marriage founded on fraud - be it by lies or non-disclosure - will never enjoy the bliss, freedom, joy, expectastion and fulfillment of one that is founded on truth, and transparency.

There's nothing like a woman that rests assured her man knows and loves her regardless. All I'm hearing is the rantings of those who in the innermost recesses are deeply dissatisfied or have woefully low expectations, and are trying to reassure themselves it's like that for everyone. How sad. Some chose burger, others are being force fed it !


TV

njokusboy:
@tv01, I actually wanted to see your response to that thread on that thread...

I had to sheathe my sword sef, I was both irritated and shocked...

I thought about it, but decided not to - at least for now. Timbuktou is contributing and ApexTitan is doing a grand job. I've always found the rantings of our resident "glorified runs girls" - sounds like a national honour - rather tragic.

Be it an attempt to validate their own whorish pasts, an outworkingof their wicked and capricious naturess or mindless and ignorant trolling, it will wound people who can't seperate the truth from the poisonous lacing (Timbuktou has noted that before).

I despair at the younger ones who have turned partisan and can't see beyond the whole missaplied notion of "equality". That's feminism at it's most damaging for you. Even if it's to be pivoted around equality, the push should be to set the standard high, and push for equal adherence.

I find the twisting of scriptures in order to support this even more telling.


TV

pickabeau1:
I wonder why the solution for sluttery is more sluttery rather than curbing of wild tendencies and recognition of the treatment of sluttery by the sexes

It's really an attempt to re-write their personal histories as "not slutty". Unfortunately, being a woman can be a life time of seeking validation sometimes !

pickabeau1:
For the male players, the state of arrangements suit them fine. they continue to have their pick and fill

Of course, on balance, women will draw the short straw, more of them wil be used and discarded. For it too work, extreme gynocentric laws -such as in Sweden - have to be enacted.

pickabeau1:
promiscuity can never be equal
fact of life

Exactly - men wil never suffer slut-shaming, the dynamic means it will remain mostly a female slur. The aim should be to press for chastity for all.


TV

Timbuktou:
I hope nairaland men are seeing this open call to cuckoldry? . Why won't they call us misogynists when we nip all their rubbish in the bud!

TV01
Coogar
Pickabeau1.

Your thoughts are needed in this gem of a thread.

...holá T, thanks for the mention, just thought I'd spin this off here.

Funny thing is, if a man is seriously considering her for marriage, and she tells all when she knows he is serious about her, that is the point - and it is very likely - that he will forgive all. And if he doesn't or can't, it's probably best that she is not with him anyway. The right man will be able to deal with her past - and indeed cleanse you from it's after effects.

How many women have missed that opportunity and lived fearfully for most of the marriages - or ultimately seen them break - because they couldn't tell the truth. Nothing like a union built on a foundation of total honesty and openess. Bliss.

Funny, instead of challenging women to be morally upright and place a high premium - virginity anyone? - on themselves there's a cadre of "aunties" on this board who encourage women to slut around, "test" and use lies, deceit and manipulation to snare men and secure their marriages.

Instead of them to repent of and confess their own whorish pasts they are busy trying to ensure everyone joins them in their swill. Always trying to redraw the slut-shaming line so that they are on the right side of it ! I pity those who fall for it.

Men should be unstinting in their expectations, no divorcees, no babymama (not even your own sef ), no to high count dick-hoppers. Perform your due dilligence and study them well. Most of all seek God for grace and discernment. Oh the stories I could tell...

Like I've said before you can sell yourself short and have a "burger" marriage or aim high and dine on chateaubriand. The choice is yours, but beware burger stalls are easily set up and purveyors are everywhere.


TV

^{...men wil always be on the right side of the slut-shaming line}

EvilBrain1:
It's very difficult to put a firm number on it, (people lie; and sexual orientation is a spectrum, not a yes/no thing); but it is estimated that about 9% of males is attracted to other men. Basically, if you're in a room with 10 of your friends, then chances are that at least one of you is gay.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/7611844/
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_sexual_orientation

I read the abstracts - it does not substantiate the claim.

Homosexual prevelence is more likely to be about around 1.5 to 3.0% of adult populations. Instances of youthful same-sex attraction don't necessarily translate into adult homosexuality - indeed, it does'nt in over 75% of cases.

Orientation is a ruse.


TV

I asked you this;

TV01:
What freedom was denied anyone prior to this referendum? Or, what freedom necessitated homosexuality being embedded into the Irish constitution?

You - for whatever reason - did not answer directly as asked, I'd appreciate if you could. Meanwhile to your questions;

menesheh:
1st of all what's the meaning of TV you always type here.

It's a spiritual mark - ensuring the spirit of death will passover and NL monitoring spirits will go blind when they see my post !

menesheh:
Religion cum the Catholic church had done alot of harm both both past and present.

That's at best debatable, plus religion has not been/is not the only source of harm to mankind. And it's without question that religion has also done a lot of good.

menesheh:
Catholic are lobbying and preventing the use of certain contraceptions (condom etc) in Africa ravaged by HIV and AIDS via the grip they had in Africa.

The Catholics have a doctrine, they are free to proselytise as are purveyors of every other doctrine. Now, are HIV/AIDS as a result of not using condoms? Or are contraceptives not without their own side affects. Are some organisations not using the ruse of contraception to sterilise African women?

menesheh:
Some Christian denomination refuse the advancement of science and technology eg blood transfusion (jehovah witness)

Firstly, no Christians deny science or refuse hinder it's advancement. In fact, Christian scientists account for as good number of past and recent advances. In as much as JW refuse blood transfusions, that's their right.

menesheh:
Catholic cum religious believes are indirectly sexually enslaving people and making them feeling guilty of doing nothing that harm others but acts they enjoy ought to enjoy.

Catholicism is not by force the last I heard. And this referendum did not give anyone one bit of extra "sexual freedom"

menesheh:
Too many

Please try and answer the single one that is the topic of this discussion.

Cheers

TV

coogar:
you must be very intelligent!

Too kind. But you flatter me . UI dropout, who struggled to graduate from poly. But thankfully, it takes little by way of intelligence to dismantle the schoolgirl ideology called feminism and it's adherents

coogar:
women don't mind being stared at as long as he is a man they like. they only feel offended when the undesirables ogle or flirt at them - that is when they use the word harassment!

Don't mind They both love and need it - actively fish for it. There's nothing as forlorn and frustrated as a woman without male admirers. See as they die slowly as they hit the wall and literally become invisible to men .

If men didn't ogle women, they'd campaign for it .


TV

5minsmadness:
It is useless trying to reason with you.
I don't know why I bother.
I will ignore you from henceforth.

Bro' please. There is always hope. I enjoin you - and other men on this board - to persevere until he is restored to full manhood. Think of it as a labour of love !

Women have absolutely no problem with men ogling them. Their caveats are merely that it should be men they find attractive/like. Otherwise it's considered creepy.

I like the sum of your submissions 5mins. As ever feminists deny biology/natural impulses and society' protective restrictions in an attempt to sieze power. Utter confusion. Which as ever will do a disservice to women generally.

Like I said, if this comes into force, it will be used as a tool to "rank" women and assign "status" to the men who acquire the choice ones .

Bring it on - or get them out. Whatever !


TV

menesheh:
That had already answered itself FREEDOM

What freedom was denied anyone prior to this referendum? Or, what freedom necessitated homosexuality being embedded into the Irish constitution?

Just trying to see if I'll learn anything that will enable me to make sense of what appears to make little sense.


TV

menesheh:
Mountains of them, don't have time enumerate them here

You specified "one evil", it is that one I requested you name. Not mountains of them - and it won't take any time.

menesheh:
Congrats for their suppression of one of those evils penetrated by the church and religion

TV

menesheh:
Congrats for their suppression of one of those evils penetrated by the church and religion

What evil was this exactly


TV

onetrack:
The people of the Republic of Ireland, once virtually controlled by the Catholic Church, voted to legalize same-sex marriages today in defiance of the wishes of the Church. Glad to see that the Irish people have finally broken the hold that the Church has had on people for the last 1000 years. This is despite the fact that the Church still virtually controls the Irish education system.

The church needs to read the writing on the wall: reform or perish.

What the Republic of Ireland did was embed homosexuality into the heart of their constitution. And in a way that will ripple through their whole culture .

They made a nonsense of the age-long meaning of the the natural family. And all so they could delude themselves that the fiction called "gay-marriage" could actually exist.

Ironically, the institution of marriage is predicated on the true understanding of what constitutes the natural family - so in essence they've made a nonsense of both the family and of marriage.

If they'd wanted to kick the Catholics church' behind, a few public priest de-frockings and converting a few Cathedrals to flats would have been a bit more specific. Not that I would personally counsel that !

I wonder if they thought they were doing this for everyone ? Hopefully nations with cherished traditions and a true understanding of both family and marriage won't tread this same path.


TV

pickabeau1:
Sometimes you wonder if these people r using weird ideologies to play out innate fantasies

Nothing to see here - if it happens, men will write a policy for tit-shaming and women will gladly police and enforce it !

TV

^{...some of the "displayables" in that video were downright scary - if I saw those coming towards me I'd high-tail it in the opposite direction .}

bukatyne:
Don't be stupid old man

Your wife is beautiful and I acknowledge that. Her gown was also lovely... me likey her complexion also very nice.

I would compliment her as many times as you post.

Doesn't change the fact about you.

I can love your dog and hate you.

Go figure.

And I thought you were still lifting my posts from that thread.

You know one of the reasons I called you an hypocrite?

You quoted a portion to husbands to prove my husband is overworked yet you dis not post the portion to wives which says the same thing and would show I am also overworked.

If you want an apology, apologise first for calling my thread sickly and calling my husband beta... This is neither the first nor second time.

I am the shrew amongst us yet I would not call your wife names.

Nope, you clearly started it - I entered to offer my heartfelt congratulations on your anniversary, and merely teased you about the thread - the joke you yourself laughed at the last time I made it.

You then said I "lacked common sense", and followed that up by calling me dim-witted". Both of which I ignored 'cos I know how bristly you can be. You then jumped on another post of mine and had a dig at my wife/womenfolk.

Having said all that, I could have been more benign. I appreciate that you are rightly defensive of your spouse and don't appreciate him being ridiculed. I was also a little mean to you. But you you didn't do too badly in dealing with it.

You have been complimentary to my wife - and kids - and a kind word turns away anger. I unreservedly apologise for having a go at your hubby and being mean to you.


Have a good night


TV

^{...any pics ? It's been over a year na?}

babyosisi:
Now tell me why a strange man on a thread will be fixated on the reproductive organs of women not his wife?

Please don't mistake my well-wishes and honest desire for their families to flourish with your one time fixation with Yoruba male genitals.


TV