₦airaland Forum

moca:
Abeg TV01, come and finish what u started
I'm interested

Moca, notin' to report o jare!

After being introduced to almost all the eligible women in the Pentecostal - and Nigerian community circles - London and SE UK (reesh Ireland sef) with nothing forthcoming - I was beginning to wonder? Different, different types of excuse; too short, too dark, scrawny, not in IT, drives small car, no property doesn't dress well, eats salad etc. etc.

As if finishing me wasn't enough, there were also questions about my family and lineage. "Is he not so and so's grandson", "wait 0, isn't he related to so and so"? Then one didn't actually make any complaint, just burst out laughing - I was in absolute despair - was marriage really meant for me or I for marriage?

All my mates were long since married and I was in that situation were even most of my younger ones were married. I know what it's like when they call you "uncle" with the silent "useless" before it. I was always the first call when someone was doing intro or naming. Afterall, "what is he doing"?

We thank God for technological advances

TV

Internet !

TV

Ihedinobi,

as ever bringing depth and spirituality. Salute!

I would cavil around the use of the word weakness. It does nothing for the man to show weakness or be seen as weak. And I mean weak in the sense of failure to rise to the situation, to drive - a lá CAR - especially in the sight of people whose opinion she values or other men.

There are exceptions of course - who will be forthright about what's wrong and support their man in regaining his strength. Be these are rare, truly ascended women, ones who truly believe and and are invest in their man. Distinguish between these and those who are just playing the percentages - realising they don't really have more tenable options.

Now, vulnerability,compassion, tenderness, that's another matter.


TV

pickabeau1:
This just skirts the issue


There is a battle on the horizon

He either faces it now or wait till she's so strong and leaves him

Women are extremely status conscious and constantly re-evaluating, especially those in the throes of hypergamy - who are more likely to act on changes or indeed, have a plan in their minds from the outset.

If she got with him from the beginning solely as a platform for her ambitions (or as a failsafe), he may have been on countdown from day 1. It's just a matter of her biding her time and choosing her moment. She'll stay as long as long as it serves her purpose to do so.

https://www.nairaland.com/1935277/making-choice#26908237

Here's a woman who was essentially planning such - her own long-term comfort, well-being and security first and foremost.


TV

pickabeau1:
Good debate guys


For me I still believe he is the one putting himself down

TV
Why do you think he should not demand accountability from the businesses
And saying he should have a comparable platform to show his wife
Is it a competition

Netotse..I see you too

...read again with emphasis on the bold.

I didn't say he shouldn't, I said he shouldn't start with that - she will just see it as an ego driven "land grab", and likely respond with fire.
If other things are being correctly ordered first, she will likely be more receptive.

I also gave him a way to legitimately request an account of her business efforts. Hopefully he's being appreciative, commending and supportive here and not resentful?

TV

I won’t go back to pre-marriage or marriage, or even the seed money he provided - what is done is done and I’ll advise with the understanding that the idea is first to stabilise things.

He needs to start driving - CAR. But in no way should he try and do this by taking control or even trying to engage in the 3 businesses.

He should look for other avenues first. The big and obvious one is to garnish some status for himself, be that in business or even a job. A job sounds like a long shot, so maybe leveraging his family – not necessarily asking for funds – but partnering, doing business with/alongside them.

That should give him so comfort, as it’s clear that he’s probably not up to going it alone. Much in the same way that a job may be a stretch. It sounds like a clear case of 2nd/3rd generation profligacy. I’d happily get me some of that !

He should also be more proactive on the home front – taking an interest in everything from day to day domestics and most especially long-term projects. I think he already has a foot in here.

The long-term projects and family vision is also a way for him to demand her attention/input and ask for accountability about the businesses and her income.

One of these projects, or part of this vision will be his enterprise. First he is seeking support, not permission. Men should never seek validation from their wives, it works the other way round. One cannot be equalist here.

After all, she has not taken responsibility for coming up with something for him, whilst she has established her own – which she has not invited him to be part of. Question what she though of him all along if she was happy to take his seed money, build a business, not repay, not involve and not account?

(And although he cites her lack of support thus far as an inhibitor, I still feel it’s his own lack of oomph that has stopped things taking off – and the authority he has thereby ceded to her, and respect lost is fuelling her discontent )

He needs to think long-term - if he has the luxury - but implement gradual changes - mostly to himself. I speak about the vision and how it's never too late. Hopefully it isn't in this case and she will buy into it. But if she's made her plans and is just biding her time, it will be difficult to dissuade her - "When a womans fed up"

This type may require prayer and fasting as well!


TV

pickabeau1:
I dont totally agree with all your findings

No qualms - that's just my reading of the situation. But let us know what other insights you have.

pickabeau1:
From his own words, he is self disparaging - Maybe a fucntion of the evil words the woman is saying

No. He's a man CAR - she didn't get there overnight. She stated with hope and expectation (even if he wasn't aware of this). He hasn't delivered. A womans frustrations will manifest one way or another. They are not cut out to happily to the lead in a relationship

pickabeau1:
However i feel it is a temperament - he seems to be a phlegmatic while she seems to have a choleric bent with a dash of nastiness and disrespect

Men control their emotiond's - or are not led by them - and don't fall back on disposition as an excuse. In any event giving leave to feelings or temperament will not resolve this situation will it?

pickabeau1:
He seems not to be an aggressive fellow but is a good provider and has a measure of financial intelligence not just in the way she wants

He's not a good providor if you consider his starting point. He's a trrust fund baby and many of lesser or equivalrent beginnings will be doing more. As I stated earlier. Women are constantly revaluing your status. One of theose with lesser beginnings who is doing more is his wife!

pickabeau1:
oing back to my earlier question

What are the practical unworldly way to stabilise things

Immediately following - 2 mins.


TV

pickabeau1:
I agree 100 percent at the bolded. She does not respect him and i will not be surprised she is preparing for or has a lover

In the old days... you could send them home for retraining

In these days of trying to comply with till death do us part and trying not to rock the boat for peace, one may need to accept some pain.

Now the question is this: what can one do to this woman practically

One is tempted to withdraw all her priviledges and maybe send her home for a while


MrNiceGuy79

It's first and foremost about him and what his lack of pro-activity is engendering in her (although I note she has some not very wifely/selfish behaviour according to him).

The actions and more so the consequences depend heavily on how socialised they both are. As Explained earlier, how much religious, ideological or cultural imperatives shape their responses. That overlays the hypegamy she is clearly demonstrating.

If for example divorce is out of the question for her due to socialisation, she will continue to “run him down”. The flip side is that he has more time to rectify things and she has more motivation to let him.

If it’s not, she may well be making her move as we speak. It’s pertinent that she has 3 thriving businesses for which she does not render account – what is happening to the proceeds?

If he becomes redundant as a provisioner it could trigger her move. With CWS no longer provided by him and SP no longer a big deal – in any event for SP to be in best effect, attraction needs to be working, and his loss of status, and more pertinently her consequent disrespect, means she won’t be feeling him. He doesn’t mention it, but I somehow doubt they are swinging from the chandelier with any kind of regularity.

I won’t go back to pre-marriage or marriage, or even the seed money he provided - what is done is done and I’d advise with the understanding that the idea is first to stabilise things.


TV

Just like you can press attraction buttons, you can press repulse buttons.

Indecisiveness, inarticulacy, too much hesitancy, seeking re-assurance or validation from a woman are all no-no’s. As are anything other than very limited instances of humorous self-depracation. Don’t boast, but don’t talk yourself down.

Don’t allow her to belittle or denigrate you – be emphatic in correcting this. Don’t cede power to her by default or too frequent fumbles. You can show a soft side, but do not mistake it for weakness – they love the on and hate the other. Please don’t confuse the two.

Re-affirm you status without bragging. If you accomplish or achieve something new, don’t be afraid to say or show. Don’t engender a long-term loss in status by promising/proclaiming and then not delivering – especially on your personal progress. This can seriously undermine her respect for you

A guy and girl are talking, it doesn’t flow. He; it wasn’t a great convo, She; he’s dry. End convos if you have nothing to say, don’t let feelings make you linger for no good reason.

So, take a woman out and tell here where you are going. Simple. It may seem “equalist to take her to the strip or ask her to choose a restaurant or negotiate where you will go. But she’s likely thinking indecisive, he’s making me think too much instead of relax and enjoy etc. Not to say you can’t ask at times or give options (limit them to 2 sha!). Whatever thier ideological leanings - they typically respond to the same cues.

Don’t forget, women are constantly revaluing, comparing and re-positioning. If your status should change, it will have an impact, if hers does likewise. It’s easy for men to get comfortable once they have sealed the deal. Women on the other hand are always perusing the terms and conditions.

If she isn’t heavily socialised to value commitment, fidelity etc. negative changes can have serious consequences. Even if she is largely socialised or restrained – she will most likely not be content.

You have heard the “you can change your mind even at the altar – just go with your heart” maxim proclaimed on this forum. Some women can do that at any point – married or not!


TV

Women typically respond if their attraction buttons are pushed. These are the obvious ones such as status, wealth, looks, strength, dominance etc. Backed up by others like smarts, humour and so on.

However, once the deal is sealed, they typically look for comfort and re-assurance. Gifts, acts of kindness, proclamations etc. This is where things like the popular love language concepts come in.

But be clear, these things don’t open or close the deal, just add value when it’s a done deal. Hence why women are often perceived as lying or being deceitful when asked what a man should do to “please them”, and it doesn’t appear to work.

They typically already have the picture of the guy they want in mind, or think of the deal as done, and then proceed to enumerate the comfort and re-assurance things that please them, not the attraction things. Hence guys that try and use comfort/re-assurance moves to open/close deals get frustrated, lose out, or labelled mugu/Mr. Nice. You can’t buy love or coerce attraction.

Another key once the deal is done, is to not lose sight of the fact that the attraction/arousal triggers need to be maintained. Not just maintained, but balanced with the comfort re-assurance moves. Unbalance can cause problems.

So she’s falling out of love, and you double up on comfort, it won’t work. She needs re-assurance and you are forming dominant bad-boy, she won’t be happy. It’s what this guy is going through;

https://www.nairaland.com/2096633/wife-user-advice-please#29843689

He's lost status in his wife's eyes (if he ever had it) and she's starting to consider him not worthy. Doubling up on comfort; giving her stuff, pleading etc. will just exacerbate the situation and make her rspect him less. He needs to demonstrate more status.

Clear?

TV

A man must be bold –often times that is the only difference between who gets the girl. As they say; “faint heart never won fair lady”. Take charge “C”, act “A”, and take responsibility “R”. Drive the situation, don’t let it drive you. If you see someone who looks right; approach. Directly or indirectly. Act within context, tactically or situationally as required.

For example, if you both serve on the ushering team at church, then theres no rush, keep it personable and polite, but don’t rush in. You have time. If it’s at the airport and you are taking different flights, you need to get your charm – not jazz 0! – on, and work at sprint pace. The aim is to get to know her and make that initial assessment. CAR is particularly important for men. Not least because women respond to decisiviness in men. And it’s something you’ll need to carry with you into marriage.

You may come across the type of women that will try and make things happen by “sheer force of will”. You’ll tick all or most of their boxes – regardless of what they have to offer – they’ll decide they want you, and then expect things to proceed apace. If things don’t, they try and force it, usually by applying subtle or not so subtle pressure. Comments such as “you don’t know what you want”, “my friend/cousin/sister is saying”, or my personal favourite “other guys are asking me out” . Other times they show palpable frustration and may act up. In all, my view is that these are warning signs. Please take heed.

As a Christian, the one firm stance I had was NSBM. It worked wonders. Many women use sex to control a relationship. Once devoid of this tool, many are simply left exposed as lacking any depth or real quality. I seen others where the woman will give sex, then withdraw it to speed things up or otherwise manipulate the man. Beware.

The same with food – I have seen women use food shopping/cooking/provision seal a deal in lieu of other major qualities. One I witnessed, shopped at the weekend, hauled everything back to his, cooked for the week and stored as appropriate. Learn to be self-sufficient. No household task should be beyond you – even if once married you don’t have primary responsibility for it. Don’t be swayed by what is a at best a good quality - which can in any event be learned - over essential characteristics.

So back to CAR. If you have marriage in mind, and feel at any point that she is not the Ankara, lace, damask that you are looking for promptly replace as found. Don’t prolong it, try and force it or turn a blind eye to it. Move on, the quest goes on. It’s best for you and particularly her if she is feeling you. Don’t lead a woman on or let her build up false hopes/expectations. If she’s cunning, giving her time will enable her to get her hooks into you. Potentially belle if you are not practising NSBM.

tbc

TV

I would say a good marriage is foundational – foundation, foundation, foundation.

Having said that, things can get off to a rocky start and be turned around. Hence the “first year of marriage is tough, a time of adjustment etc.” mantra commonly uttered. For many though, it can just go from strength to strength.

It’s always good – essential even - to first become a person of great value as a spouse yourself ( I think others have touched on some of the pre-requisites), and then set your expectations high, way high – don’t fall for the old “you are too choosey”, you have to be, we are talking a lifetime. And do not, I repeat do not, succumb to desperation or pressure. Hold the line at all times– act in haste repent at leisure

If you are still growing/developing in a major sense, especially in faith or worldview terms, subsequent changes can mean a divergence in your views. Changes in taste/status can mean you no longer see your spouse as worthy. Both of these things can lead to long-term fundamental issues. It’s best one is solid in their thinking and rock sure about what they want first.

Have a picture of your spouse, in terms of qualities and of course physical preferences are important, although mine got blown out of the water in some ways when I met my wife. Just as important is to have a vision for your home. Sharing this at the appropriate time – and especially during courtship – is well advised. As well as being a deal clincher, it can also show quite clearly if a re-think is in order.


tbc


TV

bellong:
He didn't suspect his wife. He was telling his wife who he suspected.

My bad, I put the comma in the wrong place !

Then I need this explained before I comment further;

aisha2:
She says she needed help with lawyer fees. Lawyer says he did most of it pro bono as they were long term friends and the only money he received from her was from the guys brother who living abroad who sent money to help out with legal fees.

aisha2:
She insists she is innocent.

She has cast doubt on that by not explaining why she took money from the main culprit and why he would help someone he set-up?

aisha2:
I knew the guy before I knew her, we are all friends but I know him not to ever bend if he believes in something.

What do you think about his call in this case - and you must have had impressions of his wife, what are your thoughts?

TV

^{...please, what happened to General Buhari}

aisha2:
Okay, here goes the story, I am caught in between two friends.

Husband used to work for a bank, he got set up for some fraud which he didn't commit. He tells his wife he is innocent and he will fight it legally. He told his wife who he suspects set him up.

Why does he suspect his wife? Does he have proof? Was it before, or is it as a result of the money transfers between his wife and the main culprit?

TV

carefreewannabe:
No, I don't like the way how you do it and that you neglect the age of men as a risk factor.

A few posts before this you reminded me of the unrestrictive freedom of the WWW. You had every chance to rebut my opinions and present compelling ones of your own.

carefreewannabe:
Moreover, a woman having a child in her 40s is at risk but there is a difference between a woman in her 30s or 40s and a woman in her 60s. The latter has much higher risks and more of them.
There are always risks - and not al of them are age related.

Why am I not allowed to highlight the risks for those between 25-40, and you are allowed to point out those for 50-60 year olds? If the technology - which you lauded - is available and the desire and physical capability are there?

carefreewannabe:
Regarding the topic with the freezing of eggs, my opinion regarding this topic, is more nuanced than it seemed but since the thread developed the way it did, I didn't feel like discussing it in a sensible way. It's a different topic though and not part of this thread. Besides, the discussion there ended very bad and I wouldn't like to go back there with YOU now, it's a new year.

This is something of a cop-out. Regardless of the tone, well evidenced and presented arguments are always appreciated and win the day.

carefreewannabe:
It's not just raising the child till 16 / 18. Everyone wants to have their parents for as long as possible. Losing one's parents at the age of 16 or 18 is very bitter. It is always bitter but I believe that 16 and 18-year-olds still need their parents. I lost my mum in my early 20s and it was terrible. I still feel that I need my mother. I am just fortunate to have a grandmother who is very close to me.

Condolences. I lost my dad relatively late by comparision. But you know what? I lacked some things I could have been given way before he died - and may not have even if he'd remained alive. It's not only how long, it's how much and how well.

carefreewannabe:
What do you mean by congress?

The beast with two backs

carefreewannabe:
Maybe it is. Maybe it's not. I am not speaking against this child. I just raised concerns, as Sophy nicely put it. I believe that it is not recommendable to have children SO late but I am not totally against it.

I doubt the person in question would reccomend it, neither would I. But Neither would I deny her the opportunity to cradle her own flesh and blood if at all possible. I am of the mind it's central to a womans purpose - even if individuals disagree or chose otherwise. Exceptions such as this should serve to focus us on what is best. And if God says yes?

I have never argued against women having children or having choice. I have only ever pointed out the imperatives and impacts. I truly rejoice for this lady.

In a sense and with hindsight, I married late. How would I feel if someone chose to deny me marriage on account of my age?

carefreewannabe:
I would not try to conceive my entire life. I would rather adopt.

Choice innit?

carefreewannabe:
If I conceived accidentally because I wouldn't use contraceptives due to the belief that I cannot get pregnant, I would base my decision on the circumstances I find myself in. Is there anyone who will take care of my kids when I fall ill or die? Do I have enough money to take care of the child? And will I be able to leave some money for the child after I die? How healthy am I to carry a pregnancy and deliver? I would ask myself such questions.

I do not assume the lady in question has not done any of this and more. Plus she has faith .


TV

cococandy:
totally off topic. Unrelated and you can choose not answer.

...my pleasure m'lady.

cococandy:
I've always wondered. Since sin is the cause of mortality, what if man hadn't sinned? What if he upheld the simple rule God gave in the garden of Eden And lived with the immortality we are made to believe was his right from creation.

Then I'd probably be physically teleporting between galaxies in a body even a gym-rat like me can only fantasise about. And probalby not driving some que-que German car !

A good one - as all hard ones are !

I can't say i've thought about it too much.Without researching further, I'm happy to say this much under advice; I believe the scripture suggests, that although Adam was created immortal, he was not yet "like God" or "God-like". I believe this was his ultimate destiny before sin. How that would have played out on reproduction, I can't say.

cococandy:
where in all that did God take population expansion into consideration seeing as he gave us the mandate to go into the world and multiply. Was the earth supposed to expand to meet the teeming population?

In terms of Adam doing what he did and us now being what we are - mere humans awaiting the full adoption and transformation of our bodies - the earth works, does it not? (did the mandate to go forth and multiply come before or after sin - or because of it?).

cococandy:
Or is it possible that the death which is our punishment for sin not the physical kind of death?
There are both physical and spiritual implications of death - in relation to sin, I believe it applies both ways.

[quote author=cococandy post=29813667]I think death is absolutely necessary and if human beings didn't die to make space for new ones,the human race would have imploded on itself,so I find it confusing that the bible says it is punishment for sin. A punishment he pronounced on Adam and eve when they sinned.

Death entered through sin, it was a consequence, but yes, a punishment if you like. So in our sinful state death works in a limited and also fallen physical world (sin effected the whole of creation as we know it/it pertains to us).

cococandy:
So if they didn't sin we would have just continued to grow in population over the millions of years with no death?

That is premised on the earth being our abode - sin or not. I don't know that was the case/plan. After the consumation - which effectively restores all things, we won't inhabit earth, we'll be in Gods presence, which for all I know could be the vastness of the universe itself. Whatever the case I don't think "face-me, head-butt you" issues will be of paramount concern.

I almost missed the "...over millions of years". I don't believe the bible scripture suggests God created man anywhere near millions of years ago.

cococandy:
So I'm wondering again if the earth was supposed to grow with us.

I've never had reason to think so. We are with God who fills all in all - who has "prepared a place for us...where there are "many mansions..."

cococandy:
_{#just thinking out aloud}

As one should - always.

cococandy:
What do you think?

I can't say with 100% certainty, but I have no concerns as such.


TV

goofyone:
Don't get me wrong. I never stated anywhere that cohabitation is superior to marraige. I wouldn't make such a sweeping statement. I did mention though that with the racing developments we are experiencing in the corporate world where man and woman now work as almost equals in public offices, there is very little time left for the typical familial arrangements.

You are championing co-habbing as beneficial to corporate dictates, not society as a whole.

cohabitation, for example, have proven much more suitable for this period of revolutions in the corporate world

strawman.
How does "very little time left for typical family arrangements" typically procreation and child rearing benefit society?

goofyone:
Cohabitation, however, suits this time and is a change an evolved society should be willing to embrace. Both for the benefit of society and of human associations. Of course, opponents don't want to see this form take root. To them, it endangers the very fabric of society, but research has shown otherwise. I could point you to some references or you could search yourselves. Researchers have shown cohabiting couples may in fact experience higher levels of happiness and self-esteem than married couples.

Of course society has scope for some anomalies at the margins. However if these anomalies become the prevailing norm, there will be a deleterious effect

Happiness and self-esteem, particular femcentric values that don't build societies. In a purely happiness and self-esteem way, why wouldn't co-habbers grade higher? But tell us, do they procreate at the required rate or nurture their offspring as well? You are not talking society, you are talking individuals. If co-habbing and it's happiness/self-esteem criteria were the opttimum we'd be equating gay-unions to marriage

goofyone:
Really, I think the philosophy of the point helps make it clear. Globalization and this speedy developments we are experiencing in today's world, where time and space are becoming less and less available for the individual, will soon render traditional marriages unnecessary. Once the stigma of being unmarried becomes history (from people being more tolerant of others), understanding, partnerships and cohabitation will replace other traditional forms.

If indeed traditional marriage is rendered unnecessary, the service it rendered society will still be reuqired. What you've described will not adequately replace it - as the numbers are already proving. Long-term deleterious effect on society.

TV

goofyone:
Societies that practice cohabitation today have not imploded.

Just like Adam and Eve did not die immediately upon consumption of the fruit - a society that permits societal ills will not show the consequences immediately. In fact, in the very near term, there may be seeming benefits of the new morés.

As for Marriage vs. co-habiting we already have the numbers and are starting to feel the effects. Primarily on the nurture of our children.

I note in hailing co-habbing as superior to marriage, you didn't state why or even from what perspective, noting we are specifically discussing society here.

goofyone:
Polygamy (man-women-children), Polyandry (woman-men-children) and group marriages (men-women-children) characterized many societies from the orient to the Americas before western civilization raided and overtook these areas. These were active societies that fashioned marriages in such a way as to enable their societies survive. You might want to google it and you'll find a number of societies still practicing these marriage types even today.

True, other forms have existed and are extent, but if anything they are the exceptions that prove the rule;

1. Even where they have occured or occur, they never characterise the society (if a reasonable size)
2. They do not lead to the optimal societal flourishing
3. They are in fact long-term deleterious and such societies typically decline - even if they don't fully die out - and don't really flourish


TV

Morning all,

had to be away yesterday evening, but I am heartened to see the discussion has progressed and progressed well.

On the man
Great stuff written thus far, little to add here. The mature man - even if he is not, even if he does not have too - will inherently possess the capability - not necessarily the experience - to be a husband, father, priest and warrior. To lead. And lead proactively.

If I were to encapsulate leadership in one word it would be responsibility - and men by default shoulder that better. No woman really wants to take responsibility for providing for her spouse, it can only breed resentment and seriously undermine the relationship dynamic.
Whereas a mans heart swells with pride when he can establish and provide for his family - and it has an attendant affect on his relationship with his wife.

On the natural woman:
We view the hypergamic response dispassionately. We need to understand it, not justify or condemn it in the first instance. A womans love is always considered and rightly so - she is simply more vulnerable - a woman cannot love in the pure and untrammelled way that a man can. The hypergamic motivators are basically comfort/wellbeing/status and sex/procreation (CWS & SP).

Her primary driving is her own utility and comfort, not her childrens - although that is deeply felt - and certainly not her mates. As noted, desire and feeling driven, with a mechanism to justify those desires. It's why trying to deal logically and rationally with a women is for the most part doomed to failure.

Societies have long understood this and acted to restrain the response, along with the attendent excesses in men. Socialisation, be that via religious injunctions or cultural morés has served to keep these excesses in check - and until recently, quite well.

In some ways, too well. Socialisation has given us many false tropes to romanticise these restraints, typically taking the form of "women are...loads of good things" and "men are...many not so great things".

Of late, huge pressure - in part ideological and driven in part by technological advances - have come to bear. The injunction are being discarded and the morés all but disdained. One of the effects of this is the loosening or removal of restraint, especially around sexual conduct and mating, which society has rightly regualted for it's own well-being.

In this kind of climate, the true nature of hypergamy is once again being revealed. And unrestrained, manifests excessively - and in a way that threatens to unbalance societyt in the long-term, and the male-female relationship in the short.

As societies become more fem-centric, the eyes of men will open to hypergamy' true nature and the falsehood of some social tropes. Short term, men will adopt strategies to avoid the worst effects, long-term society will rebalance, the question is, how long and how much damage will be done before it does?


tbc

TV

For a while now – and particularly since my return from my last sabbatical - I’ve been keen for us to discuss in greater detail about men in relationships. Specifically how best to relate too, and manage the dynamics.

There are myriad approaches one could take to this and it could get quite expansive. But rather than over-analyse it, I think we should just kick it off.

In some ways, I feel we’ve touched on a lot of it already, but perhaps in a piecemeal form – I hoping we can do it here in a way that allows people to join the dots.

I’m particularly speaking to men here, which is why I brought it here. I think we’d be best served by taking an unalloyed male viewpoint.

My charge here, as always has been strong families and a flourishing society. I speak as a Christian, this is not about picking up hot chicks or “dealing with women”. I believe the sexes are complimentary and work best together for the greater good.

I do however, appreciate there will be those with different beliefs with interesting perspectives and insightful stuff to share.

As we are all constrained by time, I’d like everyone to pitch in, share the lead and contribute areas for discussion – and particular for those who have questions or real life experience to share if willing.

I’ll suggest some areas – as follows - with no order in mind, and I’m nore than happy to subsume them to more pressing or interesting items;

- The mature man – his character, his stance, his approach
- The burden and expectation of marriage
- Men and marriage – pre-marriage, within-marriage
- The natural woman – triggers and responses, hypergamy, are they loyal? Mars & Venus
- What to look for in a wife – and why you need one

I’ll pause here to allow a bit of brainstorming – but if anyone is itching to kick it off (we can keep a rolling list of topics), no problem.


Cheers
TV

carefreewannabe:
They are equal under the law despite the age difference but there is an age difference, a biological one.

So let me get this right; you don' t like the fact that I preach the typical natural limits for childbirth should be prescriptive for women - i.e. stick the the best natural window - but when someone manages to circumvents that you question it? So why champion egg-freezing as a good thing

carefreewannabe:
I never said they should be held responsible for having a child. I just raised concerns because at this age there are risks involved, health issues and they are closer to death, naturally and these are the reasons why there should be question marks.

There are always risks with childbirth/rearing - and being fully aware of this particular one, she is better able to make provision.

carefreewannabe:
I don't want to suggest any sanctions, there already are sanctions against these groups of people in some countries. Kids are taken away from homeless people and drug addicts. And I would not even compare them to an elderly couple.

And if she (they) prove incapable of raising the child, normal sanctions can apply.

carefreewannabe:
Viability and morality in the first place, which leads to the question whether it is responsible to have a child at this age.

The viability of concieving and delivering has been proven. So it's just the raising to 16/18. But what are your moral concerns? You are ok for them to have congress, but not children - which is the whole point of congress?

carefreewannabe:
I would really like to know if the couple has made any provision and plan for any eventualities.

I'm sure family, friends and the overrjoyed brethren who shares her testimony and have had their faith strengthened will step in. And wil God who did it not complete it? How do you know the child is not one "of promise", like Isaac was? Bible study - "the promise & the covenants"

carefreewannabe:
Personally, I wouldn't want to have kids at this age even if I could make sure that someone takes care of them when my health becomes critical or when I die and even if I were very rich. I would like to minimize the risk of leaving my own kids back with someone else, whoever that is.

And that is your personal preference - and you are wholly free to it.

Would you feel the same way if you'd tried for a child - unsuccesfully all your life and then finally beyond hope a child was concieved? Even if they were nottrying, but she took in, would abortion be a better option?


TV

carefreewannabe:
Was Sarah old at 80 at her time?

Yes Carefreewannabe - and the Bible makes the unmistakeably clear; note it says 90 (Bible study 001 for you )

Genesis 17:17 Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed, and said in his heart, "Shall a child be born to a man who is one hundred years old? And shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?"

Genesis 18:11 Now Abraham and Sarah were old, well advanced in age; and Sarah had passed the age of childbearing. 12 Therefore Sarah laughed within herself, saying, "After I have grown old, shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?"

carefreewannabe:
I am not sure I understand you correctly here, you need to write complete sentences.

Literature 001 for me !

carefreewannabe:
Wrong!

Right, it's bible not grammar

carefreewannabe:
Elderly couples should be treated equally, meaning like young couples and should be free to have unprotected s*ex when they choose to, meaning that it should not be punishable by law but they also should act responsibly. I can see that they are equal under the law (apart from the age difference) and to procreate when they want to (it is not punishable under the law) but are they responsible having a child at this age?

First, if they are equal under the law "apart form age", that is ageist and hence "discriminatory".
Secondly, my eyes are wide open wondering how you can consider sexual congress between 50 something year olds as old

They are "responsible for the child, but not to be held responsile for having a child, in the same way there are no question marks against younger couples, why should there be against older ones.?

Young poor people, homeless, people, drug abusers etc. have children all the time - what sanctions do you suggest for them?

carefreewannabe:
That's just a question. I have my doubts, don't you?

Doubts about the viability, responsibility, morality, or scripturally?

If she can physically concieve, why not? If she can make provision and plan for any eventualities why not, if she is wedlocked, why not, it's clear from the bible.

Busybody .


TV

carefreewannabe:
Some or most? Was there something like the average life expectancy?

No, not in the sense you appear to be thinking.

Adam was created for immortality. The entrance of sin and hence corruption gave rise to death. Life expectancy was in the high hundreds at that point - reducing over time - but by antidiluvian (post flood) times, life expectancy was pretty much what we'd consider within normal range now, if a little higher

Imagine humans with perfect genomes/DNA, in a perfectly balanced world. Huge, mad healthy...Do you not claim "Christian"? Have you not studied the scriptures??

carefreewannabe:
I can pose and answer whichever question I want, it's the world wide web, it's a quite free sphere, you know?

Not in that sense, in an ideological one. I am not totalitarian, not evewn prescriptive ! Equality, freedom, responsibility - remember?

carefreewannabe:
And I do question willful single parenthood, even homos*exual parenthood. I am fan of freedom, not of anarchy.

So you need to square your ideology as equality supposedly demands that non-traditional family types have the right to "anarchy" as you term it.


TV

carefreewannabe:
The people in the Bible got hundreds of years old, didn't they?

Some

carefreewannabe:
The question is whether it is responsible to have kids at this age.

And how is it your place to pose or answer that question?

You don't question willful single parenthood, or homosexual parenthood, both of which deny a child the presence of one of it's biological parents.


TV

ihedinobi2:
Actually, I would have thought that there's a place for forgiveness. What do you think about that?

Absolutely!

In fact, a man properly positioned would not even take offence at her behaviour, just deal with it appropriately. Hence my use of the word "dispassionate" - no emotion.

And to be clear, not that you don't have feelings or express them - just don't let them cloud your judgement. He can even apologise to her. Seriously, for not applying "CAR" taking Charge, taking Action and taking Responsibility.

A man must be clear on where the relationship is going at all points and end it if it becomes untenable for any reason. He let this drag on longer than it should have - no "C" - did not act appropriately or promptly - no "A" - and now we are left with a steaming hot mess. He takes "R".


TV

^{**maybe we should start with CAR? Lets just dive in, and discuss free-form, no need to over-engineer it**}

@Mos123,

I disagree, it's not advice you need, it's heart, and you won't do anything crazy, just something weak - like you've done for the duration of this relationship. It takes balls to do something really crazy. To be blunt you present as pathetic, a wreck of a man.

A woman - not your wife - cheated on you and your took her cheating aass back? No dude - you unceremoniously dump her and get yourself a younger, prettier better endowed and more accomplished model - if you're a man.

What on earth makes you think the pregnancy she aborted was yours. Weak and thick. Ironically if it was yours, that may have sealed it's fate - women don't want to carry children for weaklings.

That's right, she considers you a pathetic weakling - taking a cheating, lying ho back after cheating immediately signals to her that you are spineless - hence her continued cheating.

Proposing marriage on top just gives her carte blanche to do whatever she likes. You may have well tattooed "I'm a loser, please cuckold me" all over your forehead - was it even your idea?

And that's probably the funniest part of your post, "taking revenge in marriage". Revenge on someone that's been playing you like a 2-chord tune? She will cheat on you, deliver another mans spawn into your care, chop your money and and eventually leave you a stuttering wreck, while she moves on to something better, which by the sound of you won't be too difficult.

Revenge? You chump, you don't have the gonads to take revenge - in fact you are already beaten bloody, she's just applying the finishing touches - and with your full co-operation. That's why she's marrying you, she's just wants to toy with you some more and then finish you off.

You opened with "confused and emotionally unstable" and you are plotting coup? It's not too long a shot to wonder if you'll make it out alive. Either way, there certainly won't be much left of you when she's done.

You are not in any way shape or form ready for marriage yet. You actually sound stuck between puberty and adolescence. Marriage, I don't think you could adequately deal with a kindergarten romance. I'm seriously scratching my head wondering how one gets from unfaithful to proposal - with decent women forming orderly queues and taking tickets to get married

Get rid of her - without any sentiment or emotion. Dump her unceremoniously, in fact as harshly as you can without committing a crime. Your healing and growing up starts with you coldly and dispassionately dealing with her - as you should have done ages ago.

Then go back to basics. Understand what it means to be a man, a husband and a father. Get some character and life-experience. Find yourself - I always recommend Christ. Avoid any sort of serious relationship for now.

Start thinking about marriage when you can look at a woman and clearly consider if she'll be a good wife - and turn away without a second glance if shes not. No matter how nubile, endowed, pretty or accomplished she is.


TV

^{I really need to put pen to paper}

mos123:
I'm really confused and don't know how to start. I'm not emotionally stable now, pls moderator or people incharge can help me correct any grammatical blunder in my story.
I'm into long distance relationship and we've been dating going to 2 years now.But my fiancee was being unfaithful but after so much confrontation she changed drastically, though there's still some traces of unfaithfullness but what pained me most is that she aborted pregnancy without my consent. And as a matter of fact she has been taken me for granted all because it seems I love her more than the way she loves me.
But our wedding is in couples of months. I'm really thinking of postponing the wedding or even calling it quit but because of the advance stage we're. But I'm thinking of going for the wedding and pay her back in her own coins after the wedding. Because she makes me feel bad whenever I remember. And she has promised me to be faithful and change a new leaf if I can meet her parents and she meets mine which I granted her. I'm really confused. Pls any advice from mature mind is welcome.

Have a smoker & drinker as mother and role model to my children? No.
Have a smoker & drinker as one who should be acutely aware of and actively managing the health of our household? No.
Have a smoker & drinker in the wife I want to spend a long and active life with, as opposed to nursing due to irresponsible lifestyle choices? No.
Have a co-journeyer who doesn't understand that her body is the temple of God. Hell No.


TV


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIyqcST29wQ

I was unavoidably called away just as this thread reached it's crescedo. It's gone a bit quiet, but I'll make a few comments;

Ohwhy, hope all's well and you have gained some encouragement from what's been said. Please update us with good news

Alutacontinua, thanks, appreciated and well recieved, but we are not even 2 weeks in yet. Anyway, I'm sure I've made better submissions already this year - please follow me more closely !

Ihedinobi, thanks for coming to my defense, but at best they are as worthy as attention - and have as much content - as spittle in the noonday sun. One gets used to the pained shrieks of the damaged and "past-their-expiry-date" harridans on this forum. When I find their time, they will know pharisee !

CocoCandy, for what it's worth, I think you make really insightful points and I've been a fan since day 1 - when you posted your wedding pics. However, I agree with 5minutesmadness in this instance. I was actually about to touch on the same thing before I was called away.

Even generically, I think we should steer away from the 'D" word as much as possible. And after 6 years courtship and barely 2 months of marriage? And with no evidence of abuse, adultery or abandonment? And yes I know hubby had been loose with the word, but the OP was clear that divorce was simply not an option. Even talk of separation would be premature here.

5minutesmadness, I totally got you and admire the way you seek expansive discussion without playing identity politics or forming SJW. Please take this in your stride. I know you get me. Thanks.

Shirley07, missed me huh. You know there's a queue for my attention . That last paragraph to Coco was for you as well, you'd be more thorough in your analysis if you were'nt so baleful. Please, what is the genesis of this anger that's so strong you literally chomp down on words and crunch your sentences . Do you splutter when you speak ? Happy new year and please do let me know if I may be of assistance in anyway; theology, ideological deconstruction, relationship dynamics, spousal hunt etc. We need to sort you out before you implode !


TeeVee

Ohwhy, welcome back, in all the back and forth, we have neglected to congratulate you on your nuptials. How remiss of us. Hearty congratulations; may your union be long, prosperous and fruitful. May it stand storms and inclement weather and as a testimony to what a fulfilling marriage should be all about. Can I get an Amen !

First, let me draw your attention to your two posts; in some respects almost totally contradictory. If you truly knew each other over those six years, then nothing about you both has changed

What has changed, is the situation, and what needs to change is the attitude and approach of you both. This is no longer boyfriend/girlfriendage, it is marriage. Yes he knew you character and background as noted, but he also figured you'd step up once you solemnised your union. Sure, he noticed some things that he probably didn't want in a wife, but he figured once you'd tied the knot you'd "upwife".

You both had slightly unrealistic expectations, and - probably like many - didn't share deeply enough on your vision for your union or confront certain issues. Issues which you possibly both secretly hoped would somehow resolve themselves once wed.

To be honest, I have no real fears for your union, especially now that you've revealed a little more about yourself. The current situation is a heavy one for any man to manage; a wedding and the attendant costs, setting up home and a new baby;and I say man, as men typically take "ownership", if not all the responsibility for this.

He's responding to the situation somewhat immaturely, I don't find his throwing around the 'D' word healthy or leader-like. And he should otherwise learn to tame his tongue with regards to the name calling.

You both need to appraise the situation and your expectations of each other and make the required adjustments. Call him humbly and lovingly, let him know you are aware of the pressure he's under and your appreciation of his efforts. Tell him you know that you both need to support and encourage each other to be the best spouses you can be and build the home you both want - it's never too late to have that vision talk.

Let him know how his words hurt you and that they are simply unacceptable. You are his wife, he is too love you wholeheartedly, that should be your expectation. And No one really benefits from an abusive relationship, no matter how low-level.Take on board his badly-articulated words about where he'd like you to change. Search yourself and commit to making necessary adjustments over time with his support.

Think about being more assertive, you have a home to run, learn to take responsibility and be proactive. Act like you are more than capable of handling the fullness that is coming your way.

Ohwhy:
You all have spoken well. But I wanna say that if my personality was as bad as some people here termed it, I won't have bothered posting this topic. I was frm a poor background when he met me, I never covered this up like most grls would. Infact I showed him where I live the first day we saw each other. He called me humble. Even with my kind of background, I was never materialistic. He loved this about me. (He had the guts to refer to me as poor after we tied the knots)
My kind of person, am a shy person who can hardly look at a person's face for more than 10 seconds. Am not confrontational ( now he wishes I was as aggressive as his friend's wife) I get scared easily I find it hard to ask questions most times . I don't like outrageous kinda dressing, I like to keep it simple, he loved this about me (now he calls me a small girl). Am not rude, am not insultive as I was raised well by my parents. I knew him well and he knows me well. The years of courtship was never filled with pretense because we spent a lot of time together. There was no room for one to pretend.

Ohwhy:
I just got married recently, not up to two months and its not anything like I imagined. We dated for almost 6yrs before we decided to tie the knot.The man I met and fell in love with was everything I ever wanted in a man. He was caring, selfless, a good listener, very understanding. The man i am now married to is nothing close to the man I dated. This one thinks of himself mostly, he calls me names, hurtful names, names that I find hard to forget even till today. I seem to be talking to myself whenever am talking to him. He raises his voice like he's talking to a kid. It shocks me because he knew my character and my personality before he asked me to marry him yet he did. And now he says these things like they just erupted suddenly. You can imagine your own husband keep mentioning divorce when we are barely 2mnths married. I am not a fan of divorce even if we haven't done our church wedding yet. I am pregnant which makes divorce out of the question for me. But this doesn't seem to bother my husband one bit, he seems to have thought everything out perfectly to his own benefit. Am not happy at all. I don't know how much of this I can take. I wanna do what is best for my baby. This sucks bigtime. What to do? Nairalanders pls help!

Once more, wishing you all the very best


TV

^{**ps, the Family section loves wedding piccies **}

Odunharry:
crackhaus and TV01 una be clown,

Only because the OP is a joker !

TV

crackhaus:
Apparently in her mind, this dude has to keep on putting up with her character and personality as he always did for six years.

The brother tried 0 jare - six years for one fish. Jacob sef only did 7 years for Rachel !

Many women nowadays come with a huge sense of entitlement, especially if lauded as fine, but often for no discernable reason ! He obviously considers her a catch, so put up with her nonsense to seal the deal. Now she's "caught", and it's showtime, she needs to play the role ! The better she plays it, the more fulfilling it will be. I think she can turn this around wioth a simple "attitude adjustment"

crackhaus:
And you're indeed right on that bit @bold, maybe it's her turn to put up with him - after all if he could do it for six years, she should at least try to do it for a quarter of that time until both can find a common ground.

The best thing she could do for herself, them and their unborn child is to take a long hard look at herself and to get to grips with the situation as I've discribed.

His threats are just flexing, possibly compounded by her being a bit of a liability - pregnant, not working, all the stress to keep things going is squarely on him, and all she can do is parrot demands and expect him to wait on her hand and foot as she "suffers" through labour. Abeg, make like a hebrew woman and let us hear word.


TV

^{**I really should put something together - perhaps post in the "Boys night out" thread. If there's the demand maybe**}

crackhaus:
Interesting...

After putting up with your attitude/character (which you conveniently failed to expand on) for six years, can you blame him for getting fed up just two months after getting married?
He probably made the mistake of believing you would change after putting a ring on it, only you can help yourself at the end of the day.

...this one has solipsistic, entitlement princess written all over it

It shocks me because he knew my character and my personality before he asked me to marry him yet he did.

i.e. I was a right cow, and not only did he not complain, he brought me extra grass ! Well now he owns you and he's milking you. Deal wid it !

He did her a favour. Bore with the rubbish during courtship and wifed her. A few more relationships like that and she would have hit the wall - hard - and then had to go through the worse situation of struggling to find someone she liked who would even look at her - desperation.

This way she gets to learn on the job instead of being long-term unemployed ! All she has to do is put up with him as he mans up - just like he did for her. If she's smart she'll adopt wisdom and a concilitaroy approach. He's currently "dealing with her" and she can ameriolate that with a little sense and humility.

Notin' spoil

TV


^{**I'm liking this...I think I'll adopt a more consult role from now on...only post when I'm specifically asked to. Perhaps direct people to the relevent parts of my large body or work here on NL **}