TV01's Posts
Nairaland Forum › TV01's Profile › TV01's Posts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 (of 138 pages)
finofaya:High profile gay-homosexual finofaya:At all. finofaya:Bait and switch. In a sense, I have no more "abhorrence" for intercourse with men - as a man - than I do with say a lampost It's not first and foremost about choice, it's foremost about design and purpose. Men - whether you subscribe to creation, evolution, both or nothing at all - are sexually complimentary with women. Not other men - or lamposts .And as to "acting contrary", anyone with a mouth can put a dick in it. It speaks nothing of "orientation", desire, willingness, or anything else. finofaya:Source is "teleleologically" obvious - per my above statement. It's by design. It's de facto abnormal for one not to have opposite sex attraction. finofaya:Another fallacious premise. It's not necessarily a choice - as in flipping a switch. It can be a "path taken" due to a number of events, trauma, impressions etc. There are clear instances of people having chosen to be gay. Likewise there are numerous examples of those who have renounced "homosexuality" for normality. finofaya:Like I said it's not necessarily a choice in the sense of "flipping a switch" (although there have been instances of that also). There are a number of reasons why normal development does not occur. It's worth noting that fully 75% of teens who identify as "homosex", identify as "heterosex" by the age of 24. Even with the aforementiond "trauma, events etc." the normal pathweay is not easily deviaterd from. Note "homosexuals" are 2% of the poulation at best. finofaya:Not wired in the sense that it's "hard-wired" or unchangeable. Is Alcoholism or addiction to cigarrets hard-wired? Or are they unable to be foresaken? And reagrdless of whether you claim it to be inborn or acquired, it remains "abnormal". Statistically and functionally! TV |
crackhaus: ![]() crackhaus:It was an eye-opener and great learning experience - I was promoted from dish washer - and it sure beat washing pots and pans, peeling and chipping potatoes and getting home at 4 in the morning !One of the funniest but truest pieces of advice pops used ot give was "if you can cook, no woman can take the piss" - so cheffing certainly helped in that way as well. Lets just say the Missus knows the score !Commander TV |
RAKITIC:No it is not. The saying about single men being irresponsible and married men being responsible is not technically true. But...and this is the noteworthy bit...there is a deeper meaning in that saying. A married men - and especially one with children, has a burden of care that is much weightier that that of a single man, and one that he cannot relinquish just anyhow or on a whim. A single man rarely feels this burden or has tied responsibility in the same way - even though he may well have many responsibilities. Hence, married men tend to be focused - whether they like it or not - by this burden of responsibility. That's not to say all married men "take this burden" they have, or that single men are not able to. It's just that single men do not necessarily have it in the same way. An exception may be where a single man has memebers of his family he is responsible for. He will appear as a married man in terms of his burden and mien .TV |
veave:...but you are learning se? Hence signifying a "desire too" at some point. My prayer holds! TVMIC |
veave:Trouble ke? Me You know I make sense die - even trolling .veave:And thank you very much for proving my point; TV01:All the best in your search. May you land a better spouse. And do let us know; I love a good love story. TVMIC |
Joy1706:Your boyfriend would be best served by changing his girlfriend before marriage !TVMIC |
finofaya:Everyone is wired to be "straight" - it's by design. If you are otherwise "oriented", you are faulty - by default. Whether you argue the fault was from birth or acquired afterwards. Who takes that raging poofter Dan Savage seriously? Whatever you decide your "orientation", sex, "gender" or even desire, does not impair anybody' ability to "take a male member into ones mouth". It's a choice, not dependent on anything else. All sucking it would tell us is that he has a mouth. Faulty design, flawed logic. TV |
Elsquidme:First of all, unless there is a medical reason, there is nothing stopping intimacy during pregnancy. When Jnr was taking his time, the Dr even reccomended it as a way to induce labour. It didn't work sha - maybe I needed to go deeper - eventually he was medically induced.Secondly, abstinence for any period whilst your wife is unable or uncomfortable should be something accepted willingly - joyfully even - as part of your service to her. Thirdly, you don't have rights in the way you make it appear. Is your wife a leasehold property (actually don't answer that ). Your wife also has rights and you both have responsibilities. And "your rights" should always be considered in light of your spouses wellbeing and the longer term good of the marriage.Fourthly, others have touched on alternatives - where you are both comfortable and happy to do so !Fifthly, enjoy your marriage TVMIC |
Timbuktou:Word perfect! And woe betide the wife if she maintains communication with the mother !TV |
...who cares? My wife, mother, MIL, wifey' sisters, female cousins & friends all know that if their "tension" for one second impairs my utility they will get "commanded". I have other things to concern myself with besides female pettiness. TVMIC |
...it is right for a man to command not just his wife, but his whole household. That's how we do !Genesis 18:19 For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him... TVMIC |
Woged2005:If your advice is good for women above 30, why is it not sound for those below? Although I was responding t-i-c, not only is your premise poor, it is also discriminatory and somewhat denigratory - as you've qualified it as for "beautiful ladies". My point was that the campaign should start earlier and the advice should be universally applicable. I hope those eyes are positioned on a burriful face !TVMIC |
crackhaus:Morning Bro', I can't but agree. Whatever the absolute or relative differences between males and females in terms of intelligence, I don't think it is an issue. The real differences tend to be biological and social imperatives; 1. Women will always want to/have to make allowance for thier fertility constraints & child-bearing 2. If it's mentally or physically arduous men generally have an edge and a naturally greater inclination - even if #1 is not a factor It's glaring in a lot of proffessions; even the best chefs are men. I was a commis chef for a while. Standing in front of a hot oven for hours on end - very long shifts. Often burning, cutting or otherwise injuring yourself. Throwing heavy pots around (and multi-tasking ). The environments are also very bullish. Women would start in numbers, but many would flake along the way.At the end of the day, I don't see it as that much as an issue, as typically that outperforming male is using what he produces to provide for a family. crackhaus:Whic is one reason I bother; in pursuit of some imaginary equality/inclusinveness nirvana built on nothing but touchy-feely ideology, they risk doing great harm to the family. They can always take their case direct to "Mother Nature". However, if anyone has anything other than slogans and slurs (or gifs and emoticons), we'll be here to respond - hopefully they won't find it too "arduous" ![]() Make I go troll jor ![]() TVMIC Correction; in my original post I noted 60% of female Dr's leave or go part-time. That should be 60% leave (within 10 years). A number of the 40% that remain go part-time. |
...apologies Ewuro4, I'm piggybacking - but I'mn sure you'll respond if you care too. 5minsmadness:All of which are contradicted by your OP In which you prescribe legitimising infidelity as the remedy to the pain unfaithfulness causes. If there is an expectation of faithfulness which is broken, whether unfaithfulness is criminalised, decriminalised, legitimised or even celebrated, the damage it does will not change. Some things are beyond the remit of the law or state. Please re-think and re-state. TV |
5minsmadness:Right off the bat you are twice wrong; a. Most of the strife in relationships is not due to unfaithfulness, the #1 cause of strife is financial issues b. Unfaithfulness is a character issue, determine a persons character and desires - i.e. if there is a match - for a relationship before commiting 5minsmadness:Love takes many forms and occurs in many relationships, but erotic love is validated in only one kind. And if you are basing your arguemnt on the scriptures, you have either articulated it incorrectly or failed to rightly apply the scriptures. Also, the "egusi soup" analogy is very weak !5minsmadness:It's self-evident, divorce, out of wedlock births, promiscuity etc. 5minsmadness:Whatever egregious attitudes people have or actions they commit with regards to sex, is not the fault of sex. It's the fault of people. Sex is good and holy and essential to our flourishing. You need to re-state and or re-think your premise. TV |
5minsmadness:1. Sex brings many things to relationships, but not strife, hating or backbiting - people do that. Sex does not need to be relegated, rather valued and "morally regulated". 2. If sex were relegated to the background what would be the difference between an intimate male/female relationship and any other kind? Even if relegated, sex comes attached with bonding, feelings and outcomes - i.e. consequences which can't be detached from sex. 3. Societies have long learnt that sex has to be ascribed a moral value and regulated to a degree. If sex becomes merely transactional or a consumable, there will be tremendous harm. To male-female relationships and the natural outcome of those relatiosnhips - children. 4. Sex is not the issue here, people are. Inculcate a proper appreciation of sex, it's rightful context and proper expression. Instill Character, values and morals, so that sex - and people - are treated with the due care that they should be. Or perhaps I should ask how you see this working out - especially in a sense of improving things ![]() TV |
MasterJayJay:Most responses so far have esentially been a cry of "sexism" (against women) and have only served to stifle the discussion. No real debate has been had. In practice most "families" would want to do the best for all their children and allow them to pursue education as far as their talent and desire allows. But in a scenario where there are limited resources (at societal or family level), I would favour educating males over females. Even where "resources" at first dont appear to be an issue, there can be longer-term implications. Let's take Doctors (MD's) for example; in the UK fully 60% of female Dr's stop practicing or only work part-time. The effect, twice as many females doctors have to be trained to maintian service levels; at great cost to the state (approx. £250K p/s). The outcome, a deteriorating provision of GP services. Previously one could always get an appointment for same or following day, nowadays appointments have to be made weeks in advance. Many now simply head for hospital A&E's, clogging up what should be an emergency service. Yes, there are other factors but the fact that women are now filling about 60% of medical places (up from around 10% in the 60's) is a major contributor. And what happens to the 60% that "fall away"- they are typically at home playing "alabado" to some wealthy bloke . Women typically marry up, so a high status female Dr, will typically marry a high-flyer, thus not really needing to work when children come.Additionally, some of the harder medical specialisations are suffering shortages, as women tend to opt for the easier ones or become GP's that more easily allow flexible working. Other studies show that even where female Dr's are practicing F/T they don't put the hours in that men do. It's not always about gender, equality or choice per se, it's about outcomes. Put another way, the cost/value benefit of training male Dr's far exceeds that of training females. Where there are scarce resources, or the danger of not be able to maintain an adequate service, what should be done? Whilst I don't for one second think that women shouldn't be educated, or have equal access, there are oft times longer-term costs and consequences. Shrill ideological cant does not change that. TV |
Woged2005:All wrong . At least give me "partly" ![]() Why should a lady "above 30" settle? As a man - way above 30 - I refused to consider; 1. Divorcees 2. Single mums 3. Anyone not young, nubile and eye-wateringly hot 4. At least 10 years younger than me to boot 5. Minimum degree educated In addition, I had a host of others; non-smoker, no drinker, must exercise, on-point phoné, no tattoos, no abortions. Not to mention she had to be a Christian. The only two parallels we have are; I was not overly fussed about earnings - as long as she had an occupation, and mentoring is expected from a husband-leader. Neither was I overly fussed about cooking funnily enough, but she's trying !Appreciate the market value of a female over 30 - especially relative to a man of the same age - dips in a sense, but you are saying things - howerver true - that are anathema to some here. I totally get your point - but I would campaign before it becomes an issue, not after. TVMIC |
....i.e. lower your expectations - and at 30 Most men haven't even fully formed theirs at that age. And I would never advise a man to lower his expectations - at any age - although I would check for realism. The feeling of having settled can cause real disenhancement and frustation, leading to real long-term damage to a union. I'd love to tag some peeps on this, but lets see if they make their own way here .TV Woged2005: |
Great piece. Really heart-warming and encouraging. There was another one yesterday about the 80 year-odd marriage. The Family section could do with at least one of these a day. Great stuff! TVMIC |
MizMyColi: Chrystover:Not really, stopping marriage will stop abuse. Most abuse - a greater amount of - takes place in non-marital domestic relationships. Marriage remains the saferst form of relationship for women and children - and by extrapolation men. TVMIC |
LAGATA:You do well to seek peace and resolve issues peacably... LAGATA:...but this I don't get ![]() You confronted you wife with incontrovertible proof of her cheating? She vehemently denied to the point of causing a fight? You slapped her during the scuffle? You spent all night pleading with her - presumably to forgive the slap? You took sleeping pills ontop Guy, you are treading a dangerous path. Slapping her was probably not the wisest thing to do, but if you have lived peacably together for 7 years and have evidence of her cheating, the slap is the least of your problems. Sounds like you've been killing yourself to keep the peace for a while. Possibly what makes her think she can behave as she chooses. Your play after the slap - which even if regrettable was not the worst thing you could have done, or even the crux of the matter here - only made things worse TV |
mcdokwe , good morning. I have come to this one a little late, so I won't read the whole thread before commenting - indeed, I don't really need to. I don't subscribe to the mantra that "a man must never lay his hands on a woman". For one, it's not hollistic or complete; there should be zero tolerance for any kind of abuse from men or women. Secondly, there may well be occassions where laying hands on a is actually neccessitated. For example where a life is endangered. I am, however, of the school of thought that believes a man should always rise above any emotional hysterics from the women in his life - and certainly not respond in kind. And where at all possible, refuse such women entry into his space. You give something away as a man when you allow yourself to respond emotionally to a womans provocation. Always try and rise above it. I am heartened by the fact that you realise you could have handled the situation differently - and better. Take the lesson - become a better man. Best TV mcdokwe: |
Simply had to comment on this heartwarming news. Glorious! May God continue to bless their generations even as they stand in testimony of His mercies and love. I have no doubt divine grace is in the mix here. And to everyone that aspires to same; may The Good Lord Himself grant you the righteous desires of your heart - beyond anything you may think or ask. Made my day already. TV NL' MIC - "Marriage Advocate In Chief" ![]() |
...it's not about how one starts, but about how one finishes! May God bless all those who Love The Lord Jesus Christ in truth. TV |
Dheartless:Cheers mate. She's keeping us all up ! But she pweety !Shollypopzz:Thank you. Any plans to breed yourself? TV |
Shollypopzz:Can't say I'm sorry to disappoint you, but wifey and are I already subscribe to this doctrine . Not only do we limit our intimate relations to every third Wednesday and an end-to-end time of 2 mins 37 seconds approx - we use an egg-timer - we only ever engage in the one position. And always partially clothed (I mean whats the point of fully disrobing for a 2 and a half minute interlude ) with the lights of.Making heaven. Is my sole focus in life! Come, are you Bananabender et al? Otherwise I've simply no idea why someone I've never heard of should want me in hell? Not to mention I'm an annihilist? TV **say after me; "sex is for procreation"** |
carefreewannabe:And no one has asserted otherwise !carefreewannabe:No one would guess there are any pro's from your posts. All you do is denigrate it, slur it and misrepresent it. Even as you utterly fail to grasp it's essence, workings or value. You have never said anything positive about it's absolute or relative - to other forms - good. If you - or anyone else wants to discuss marriage, I'm right here, but don't try and sell us this bogus "pros and cons" nonsense,when you never have a good word to say about it and are always harping on about the benefits of so called "de-facto" relationships. carefreewannabe:I make no judgements as to the value of individuals or their unions. I advocate for marriage as the best model for male/female relationships, their children and wider societal flourishing. What people want and choose is totally down to them - as is responsibility for the outcomes. If you have a better model, please expound on it. Or at least be fair and contrast marriage to other forms, instead of oscillating between making spurious assertions about it and being dismissive of it. carefreewannabe:Keep petting yourself ! As ever you demonstrate the shallowness of your thought process and understanding. Hard time finding a spouse? No CFW, I took a long time to search the matter out. I was diligent and arduous in approach - hence it took time to unearth a diamond.Not hard time finding a spouse, a long time to find one worthy of being called my spouse. Although I'm sure the difference may well be lost on you !And having lots of people interested in "relationships" is not quite the same dear ![]() TV |
Nonso23:Certainly - we won't decide until Tuesday evening for Wednesday. And thanks for your well wishes. Nonso23:There are lots of good people and decent folk on these here boards. Damiso, I know it's short notice, but if you are available, we'd be honoured to have you join us. Nonso23:Best TV |
Carefreewannabe, you are all at sea, no facts or figures, no cogent arguments, no principled positions, no real insights - just a pathological dislike of marriage dressed up as emancipation and enlightened thinking. I respond because you are dangerous not because your posts actually merit it. carefreewannabe:No one asserted to the contrary or disputed this . All I've done is champion marriage "the superior model" !Further, this arose do to your rejecting marriage due to the cost - to which I clearly showed, that administrative costs aside, marriage costs only as much as you want it too. carefreewannabe:And you are in no position to denigrate marriage - or even speak of it with any real authority !carefreewannabe:No one is made to believe anything. Marriage does exactly what it says on the labeling. What individual couples make of their unions rests with them. carefreewannabe:Believe what you please, countless numbers have done it and are doing it. Your lack of belief, conviction or faith in yourself or the calibre of man you can attract is your problem, not a failing of marriage. carefreewannabe:You are in no position to do any kind of telling. You suffice merely to back-bite and gainsay. And the usual poor logic - does lots of choice necessarily mean easy? Or speak to the quality of those choices vis-a-vis what one desires? carefreewannabe:Risible. Trying to be spiritual and pious at the same time - and failing at both. With the best reading, it speaks to your rejection of marriage as due to your personal failings - which I've maintained all along carefreewannabe:Why not campaign for "Relationships" as they are far better - especially for the emancipated and enlightened ![]() TV |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 (of 138 pages)
.
!
!
You know I make sense die - even trolling
!
!

at witches....