₦airaland Forum

damiso:
They don't spend impulsively and I have one kain confidence that my hubby always has something somewhere no matter how much he says he is skint. Despite that you can't find people who like the finer things of life as much as them.

Abi? How can the biggest "throwers down" be stingy...does that make any kind of sense ?


TV

^{...or should that be "throw downers"? Whatever...}

ChristyG:
heehehe,ijebu boi feeling funky,u even added all d strengths of other yoruba groups to ijebu,smh...anywaiz apart from d business and industrious part,i dont see how they are better than other yoruba groups.are dey more travelled than ogbomoso or d ejigbo(within nigeria),are they more learned or educated than ondo/ekiti)egba,nah i dont think so

Ha, ha, ha, lemme guess, you are married to one !

So you agree on the superior industriousness? That in itself informs the others and answers all
And when I said "travelled", I wasn't referreing to p'oku l'owo e from Ijebu-Ode to Sagam...Globally !


TV

Joy83:
@TV01, you have said a good and encouraging point. I want to believe you are from Ijebu?

Thank you
Why on earth would you think I'm from Ijebu?

Joy83:
As to your question, I belong to people of Akoko land in Ondo state. So am I good to marry your Ijebu person?

E wa ba wa re 0!

TV

Joy83,

I can confidently tell you that the Ijebu are quite sniffy about marrying out, and don't unduly concern themselves about those thinking of marrying in.

They are respected amongst the other Yoruboid clans, whom they themselves consider as "awon ara oke".

Amongst the paramount Youruba they are;

The most well-read
The most widely travelled
The most astute politicians
The best bureaucrats
The chieftest and shrewdest entrepreneurs

They are aspirational for their sons and their daughters, with clear role expectations for both. Any vestigial baggage - i.e. jazz - is being relinquished and becoming a thing of the past.

They never willingly surrendered to foreign invaders and till this day remain unbowed and unbroken.

As per my opening and last points, they are secure in their homeland and comfortable within themselves. More than content to keep it Ijebu and happy to be isolationist .

While our women are consulting with our lawyers, our men are sharpening their spears. Ewe So Omo Alare

You inquiring, who are your people?


TV

kingchi32:
Prior to our visit, we have discussed that we will perform some of the marriage rites that he can afford and leave the rest later,

There was already agreement between you both. Good

kingchi32:
but during the visit my mum suggested we should try and conclude all the traditional marriage rites because we are not from the same tribe, so we don't stress ourselves calling and coming down home again and cooking again for people.

Then Mama weighed in ,with well meaning advice I'm sure - this is were you should have given pause for thought, instead of mentally assenting to your mums idea without first re-visiting the earlier discussion you'd had with your fiancé

kingchi32:
When we got back, my bf did not bring up the topic again so we discuss and know what to do, on Sunday night, i have to bring up the issue as i will b travelling on Monday morning.

How did you bring it up? And what did you bring up? Was it your original plan and if you should change it in the light of your mums suggestion -or simply your mums plan taken as read?

kingchi32:
He said he doesn't have the cash and doesn't need my help, that he wants to do everything on his own, so he is not sure when the marriage will hold.

Which you already knew as you'd both discussed this prior - and planned with that in mind.

kingchi32:
I told him i cant be in a relationship that i m not sure, I threatened to quit which he accepted without committing himself.

The uncertainty was introduced by you and your mother. The impasse is your fault. You know your finacé situation, mummy doesn't. She just advised on what was best. And you gave him an ultimatum challenging his manhood? I wish more women were as forthright as you - just more considered !

kingchi32:
The quarrel has gotten to the extent that we r planning what to tell our parents as cause of separation.

Mainly due to your poor handling of the situation

kingchi32:
He said he will tell them our genotype did not match, whereas i said i will tell them that i was impatient and have to move on.

If you've both decided to call it quits, that may be a good thing, as this kind of triviality should never have become an issue.

kingchi32:
I love him and never wish to leave him but i cant just sit and wait as i believe he is still young (27yrs) and may later change his mind if i don't get him to do the needful now.

Maybe he will, maybe he won't? Maybe he should, maybe he shouldn't

kingchi32:
Please i need your advice......

Since you asked so nicely !

Call loffaboi, tell him you understand his desire to "take care of business". Explain you are willing to play your part to facilitate things, but understand if it seems right in his sight to bear this burden - to wife you as is customary and proper. That's a good thing no?

Then tell him you are happy to proceed as he sees fit, but you just need to know what his timings are.

If the timings are not acceptable. Discuss further. If you reach agreement - and do not settle for anything to far in the future and ensure you are comfortable with any plan - happy days.

If not, go with the impatient excuse. First, it's the truth. Second, the genotype is kinda final and if you change your mind and later reconcile, it may be hard to explain away.

You're welcome. Go and learn to communicate, think about matters and discuss things thoproughly. You'll need it whoever you marry.


TV

carefreewannabe:
Last time I checked, polygamy wasn't permitted in France. Consequently, the stepmother must have divorced the father to marry the son and in this case she is no longer his legal stepmother and therefore their child cannot be his sibling.

Either this is not CFW, or you didn't read this thoroughly.
The woman in question had a child with her new husbands father - her former husband.

Her new husband is now step-father to his own half- sister. And it's polygamy you are concerned with?


TV

pickabeau1:
Good helpful advice TV01

Good to see his thread is back up

I was meaning to dig it up for a while but was wondering if the ladies will let the thread be..

maybe if Nashville don't bring stories here...open new thread for them...
Royal Roy abi Na Woy on a high... 200m pounds is working...


Let's see how this man cave spell will be
Not too optimistic though

On Wenger...only a kind of person does the same thing annually and expects a different result..


Mou's little scudereria is purring fine.....


Pellegrini still in d mix....Silva and aguero have been superb.if toure picks up...they will do well

Liverpool without Suarez...struggling...

Southampton with all the sales have been splendid

I don't think we need worry about "real ladies" ! Let's be more concerned about our input as men.

I've noticed the "ponies" doing well. But they typically fall away. Infact, Arsenal epitomises the fast-galloping pony that ultimately can't keep up. Even I wince when I see them being ripped by Fabregas...it's just so unfair


TV

ihedinobi2:
Trying to start a company. Let myself believe that I could build something new with someone else and tried. That tanked too.

Keep on working - on yourself and on whatever plans you have.

There's no generic roadmap as such, but there are guidelines - based mostly on charater and principles. And even the guidelines will be based on your character and principles, or you'll be unlikely to stick to them. Set high worth on yourself and high standards/value for who you will take as wife.

I'm not sure what things are like in terms of meeting the right calibre of woman. That itself can skew things - too few and you tend to rush in when you spot one. Too many and you can be paralysed by choice.

Cultivate a network of friends and acquaintances. Don't be too quick to isolate and attach to any one person. Take things gradually and study them closely. If at any point you think thay can't be it, zone them appropriately.

Don't commit emotionally until 1. You are quite sure and 2. Have done your due dilligence. 3. Pray about it and be as righteous as you know how. 4. Always keep your posture as a man - whatever the case, it's more likely to go wrong if you don't.



Best
TV

ihedinobi2:
Ok. So, seriously, how do you find a sensible, decent woman to marry these days? I always thought you started with someone from way back and built a relationship steadily until you got the job and the house and she was sure what career path she wanted to pursue then you got married.

Thay obviously didn't work out for me. Way Back crashed and burned a while ago. So how is it done now?

First, don't become despondent. What have you been up to since then?


TV

Nashville:
United that Lost to Leicester City!

And probably used up 75% of their luck for the season to beat Everton


TV

RoyalRoy:
Always thought of kick starting the "cave". So nice.


After 7 games....Man United managed to be sitting in the 4th place ahead of Arsenal and Liverpool despite the embarrassing start.

A great turn around for the Reds after their numerous injuries and woes.

GGMU.

There's a sense the Reds may be turning the corner. But ther's also a sense that they are still fragile and riding their luck. This weekend was point in quesion.

I think they'll figure, and even be a force once they gell. But Chelsea are out ofd the traps running - and hard. It's hard to see beyond them right now.

Everyone else looks, patchy, suspect, fragile or slow starting.


Even Wenger is rattled already


TV

...shout out to all the men who made this a real cave. I've been meaning to rummage through and enliven this thread, but someone - albeit for some odd reason - has done it anyway. All good.

Mourinho' Blues are looking relentless at the moment - is it going to be the year of the lil horse ?


TV

Stillfire:
Submission ko, sobolation ni. This has nothing to do with submission abeg but the mental IQ of the wife. The woman must be a person of low mental assimilation to not have weighed the consequences and detected the rationale behind her partner informing her of the risks and endangerment she places herself. When they tell you people to marry intelligent wives, una no go gree.

Stillfire:
It seems you just want to talk for the sake of being a talkative.[b] How on earth did you arrive at the conclusion that I have excluded responsibility from this woman? [/b]Should I have spelt it out like this for laymen to understand... that the woman who couldn't see reason with her husband is to be blamed and should take responsibility for her actions? I believe my previous words were succinct enough to encompass all angles you can ever ever think of.
And yes there are various policies in force that prevent a response to good, trivial and NONSENSE questions because Nairaland is not that deep for me. These policies have helped me in not getting caught in useless unending arguments and e-battles that for some of you may be the highlights of your day . When I'm no more interested, I apologize in advance, but I'm no more interested. This is not a place to prove any iota of my intellect, I have enough of that in real life dealing with geniuses who are certainly not of NL calibre.

All you've demonstrated here is that you wrote the first time without thinking and the second time without understanding - whilst managing to contradict yourself both times. I've no doubt your claim to regularly engage geniuses is in the same vein.



Actually you do have some semblance of a point. I said the stock responses are 2, they should realy be 3

1. It's society' fault
2. The woman is mad/psychotic/bipolar/on medication/was provoked/a dullard
3. It's the mans fault.


TV

tomatoJos:
I have a little working experience,and I already have a ready network. That's why I would rather marry someone with capital and drive.

You have great plans and ambitions - and you have every right to have those - but he's not actually someone you'd ideally like to marry? Although he "ticks a lot of boxes" (you understand, but do not fully appreciate the value he brings). Your real aim is to use marriage to him as a platform to achieve your ambitions (with a mind to having him as backstop if your ambitions don't materialise).

Whilst I don't actually think you are a necessarily bad person - I find this kind of approach dangerous and even detestable to be honest. But I know it's a common mindset for many entertaining/entering marriage

Long-term, if your "dreams" are not realised, you'll likely become frustrated, you'll blame him and convince yourself that he caused your dreams to go unfulfilled. It's not a great basis for a happy marriage.

If I were advising him, I'd say "run a mile - and in record time. It's all about her and not actually you or the union. You have a modicum of achievement, and "contentment". Great gain the bible says. Find someone more suitable and more in tune with your pace and long-term desires.

If things don't go according to her plan you may well end up a broken man and very likely with a broken marriage. It could even happen if things do go according to her plan, as she may see you as not "worthy" of her. Bro, please spare yourself"


I wish you well with your dreams, but it makes sense to find someone who shares them - or at least someone with the "capital & drive" you ideally want.


TV

kandiikane: I disagree..

No problem. I appreciate your perspective.


TV

kandiikane: Oh please, normality? Do you know that if allowed a woman can conceive without a sperm? What you call "normality" is what is called heterosexuality,

Naturally, women cannot conceive without male genetic material.Please tell us how - without the use of technology
Normality is properly ordered use of our obvious functionality.

kandiikane: so there is not such thing as heterosexuality yet there is homosexuality.

I use the terms normal and abnormal. My use of the terms het & hom are an accommodation for discussions sake.

kandiikane: You are arguing over something that everyone knows. Yes heterosexuality is what humans are designed for genderwise but there can also be glitches in regards to orientation as you have written just as there are glitches in those born with two genders so what exactly are you arguing?

If there are glitches and these glitches are a statistically minor part and deleterious, we should accept them perhaps, but not re-engineer social morés and conventions to accommodate them.

kandiikane: So if it is a disorder how can you say it's not something that occurs in the womb? The same way downs syndrome occurs? Do you honestly think a person would genuinely choose to be homosexual?

Are all disorders from the womb? Are all genetic? I can claim exactly that. And a disorder - especially one that adds no value and is possibly harmful - should not be normalised or encouraged.

kandiikane: I am not claiming anything, I am stating facts. How can wiring of the brain be something that is developed, what you think i am talking about a hypothetical wiring or a learned behaviour? I am talking about physically wiring, the connectors and circuits of the brain as real as the frontal lobe. I am not talking of "oh, he was wired to be a racist, no I am talking about the physicality of the brain itself, an abnormality of the brain. You dont Smoke weed because you have an abnormality in your brain.

Assertion. The brain does learn and codify that learning. Re-enforcing it and expressing it. If the brain is wired in opposition to the obvious functionality it's still a disorder.

There is no homosexual form of reproduction and no homosexual gene so it has to be a disorder.

kandiikane: Homosexuality may not be something certain societies calls "normal"(what the hell is normal even?but it is something that happens in nature that people should be okay in accepting.

Accepting it is one thing, making major changes to incorporate it, embedding it as normal and forcing everyone to celebrate it is another.


TV

carefreewannabe: Even your friends from the "ex-gay" movement have confessed that they have done more harm than good (in almost 40 years) by trying to change people's se*xual orientation. So much for facts.

So you have no answers?

Exodus and it's operation are not more than a strand of this discussion. Devoid of answers you try and settle it thus? Please apply the renowned Bavarian work ethic and technological aptitude .


TV

Ha, ha, I have not answered your questions, yet you claim all my plainly observable facts are merely "my beliefs". Way to dodge CFW.

carefreewannabe: No, it is not. It's your conclusion.

Observable, repeatable. Proven

carefreewannabe: This is what you believe. This is what you want to believe.

It's the truth you can't face up to.

carefreewannabe: But even if we agreed on that, how would it make someone change?

I agree it may not be easy, but it is certainly possible - google it. Fix what is broken, replace the disordered impressions and resulting desires.

carefreewannabe: This is a state of emergency, in which these men find themselves in. It can't be compared to homes*exuals who live free.

Nope, it's adopting a behaviour. Choosing. Giving leave to sexual desire. Which is a very strong urge and can, unfortunately be disordered.

"Homosexuals in the wild" - you are funny today.

carefreewannabe: There is something called homes*exuality, heterose*xuality and bis*exuality. The third group has all options open. They don't have to force themselves to feel attracted to anyone, they feel attracted to "everyone".

So it's not a spectrum then? And where do paeds, zoos and other parphillias fit in? Are they not sexualities?

carefreewannabe: If you start talking about religion from your point of view, you will make me hate Christianity so let us keep religion out of it.

But your take is allowed, or your beliefs with unstated origins are permissable. I have not stated anything on belief or religion, only on plain observable fact.

carefreewannabe: I am not arguing based on any belief system, am I?

Too easy. Everyone has a beliefs system and you've repeatedly stated your points as beliefs.

carefreewannabe: You have not answered my question properly. Would you be able to turn gay IF YOU HAD TO?

I don't have to, neither do I want to. But it is possible as demonstrated in the prison example which you tried to wish away.


TV

kandiikane: What is wrong with a father being a caregiver? This your statement contradicts what you have written previously.
You say fathers hardly get custody yet denounce the idea of a father being a primary caregiver. We are not living in the times where only the father can go bushmeat hunting. Both are equality educated to work out in the field and a father should not be made ashamed to choose to be the primary care giver. I believe you saw my link where fathers who become primary care givers have the same brain patterns as mothers who are primary care givers.


And why is it rarely the best? I don't understand your third line here but if you mean a man cannot be a primary caregiver because of the economy then that is false. Unless you want to marry a stay home wife, many women are working and earning good enough to rent, get a mortgage and look after their children. If in a situation where a woman earns more than the man and they collectively decide for one of them to stay home, nothing wrong with the man staying during the tender years.


Research, do some.



Lmao! Come off it, be honest and sincere to yourself, how many men do you think are readily willing to be full custodians? As much as men are fighting for the custody of their children many more rather leave them with the mother to have that freedom. That's just the honest truth.



Again your opinion


Refer to my statement on fathers willingly allowing the woman to take custody. If fathers were wanting to be custodians of their children there won't be as much lone single parents. Yes, some women, a minority frustrate some fathers but once they take it to court it is the welfare of the child that is a priority not the anonymity between the parents. Majority of parents would want help to raise their children. Not every woman is bitter over a breakup or on a revenge mission against the ex by using the child.

We can exchange opinions all day. The court systems are not unbiased in term sof custody and visitation judgements or enforcements. I previously posted the link to fathers for justice - http://www.fathers-4-justice.org/our-campaign/our-mission/ - at the very least it's plain to see that such a movement woul dbe redundant if there was no bias.

You may well be speaking about whats supposed to happen, but I have seen first hand what happens in practice. Often times a fathers involvement is reduced to purely monetary terms - even when they want and are able to give much more.



TV

carefreewannabe: I don't think that ALL humans were designed to cop*ulate with the opposite s*ex. Consequently, I can't call homo*sexuality wrong on grounds of such a belief.

But whatever your claim, male + female = babies. Whatever your belief, so called homosexuals males and females have exactly the same reporductive system as everyone else and are capable of functioning like everyone else with exaclt the same issues. Moreso, they desire children.

So again, if the functionality is there and the desire is there , but there is dissonance in the orientation, is that not prima facie evidence of dysfunction or a disorder

carefreewannabe: What ideology?

It's simple logic.

Could I re-orientate my attraction for the opposite s*ex and become homose*xual if someone told me to? Of course, not.

Could you change your se*xual orientation if you had to?

And as i have clearly stated in an earlier response - to KK I believe - it is not necessarily as simple as flipping a switch. In manu cases it is a long-term combination of choices, internalising of impressions, stimuli, feedback and trauma, which lead to the mindset, which may appear innate.

It is well documented that men who do not identify as gay will engage in gay behaviour whilst in prison and revert back once on the streets.

My function, "orientation" and desires all align as they should. If someone who is likewise ordered consciously decided to engage differently - for whatever reason - they could. There have been many instances - of particulalrly women - switching between a preference for men or women. Take the mayor of NY' wife for example.

It's funny how my beliefs are excluded, but you are allowed to submit your own. Nice !


TV

donpeey22: The truth is that men get more pressure from the society about getting married than women. I will agree if somebody says that Biology puts more marriage pressure on women than men, but saying society? That's not true!

Exactly! They are the ones chided as being "irresponsible" if they don't
And exactly again - men simply have a different - and all told a more favourable - window of opportunity.

If anything, they are pressured to accomodate the female window into theirs.


TV

carefreewannabe: Who says "humans are designed to co*pulate with the opposite s.ex"?

Please don't answer a question witrh a question - you are German now, not Nigerian. ! Demonstrate otherwise

carefreewannabe: Who says gender is fluid?

Your same ideology that says "orientation" is fixed - And as above.


TV

kandiikane: If genes are not at play then genes are also not at play in hetereosexuality. It could possibly well be just our environment that influences our sexual orientation.

First, there is no such thing as heterosexuality. It's normality - human males and females are designed to copulate. Fact. Evidenced by outcome, preceeded by functionality and structure.

What is called homosexuality is better termed "abnormality", not least because it affects a small percentage of people and they have the exact same functionality and structure as normal people.

However you view it, it's a disorder.

kandiikane: Actually in regards to paedophilia, I am not talking about those who in their culture can marry a girl once they have started their period but those who are actually just attracted to minors. There has been scientific research done on them. There is a difference in their brains to a normal healthy adult. The side of the brain which registers sexual response is triggered by pictures of children. There is a cross wiring between the sexual response part of the brain and the parental and nuturing part. There is a huge difference in the white matter of a paedophile to that of a typical adult male. Also paedophiles have a lower iq than average.

I believe we are all on the same page regards who we deem paedophiles in terms of pre-pubescents.

Are you claiming the wiring of ones brain is genetically determined? It can be programmed and developed in certain ways. What you've stated is no different for those that cultivate drug habits - are they also genetic?

I have made the point - I appreciate that in many case, it's not a choice as in waking up one morning and deciding for rectum as against vjay.
It can be any number of impressions, actions, traumas, feedback, wiring issues etc that accumulate over time that lead to a strongly embedded inclination that may seem innate. But the crux is it's no the way we designed to operate. So it can never be deemed to be normal - as prevelent or as right.


TV

carefreewannabe: Please spare me with "Christianity today" sources.
If you want to provide evidence, then leave religion out of it.
I am talking about facts here and not religious sentiments.

Here you go:

After 37 Years of Trying to Change People’s Sexual Orientation, Group Is to Disband

IRVINE, Calif. — For 37 years, Exodus International was the leading beacon of the “ex gay” movement, which maintained that gay men and lesbians could change their sexual orientation through prayer and psychotherapy.

But on the opening night of the group’s 38th annual conference here, Exodus International announced that the organization would disband, amid growing skepticism among its top officials and board members that sexual attractions can be changed.

For the past year, the group’s president, Alan Chambers, has been increasingly vocal in proclaiming that therapy could not change a person’s sexual orientation. In a statement posted Wednesday on the group’s Web site, he cited a recent letter he had written to gay men and lesbians.

“I am sorry for the pain and hurt many of you have experienced,” he said in the letter. “I am sorry that some of you spent years working through the shame and guilt you felt when your attractions didn’t change. I am sorry we promoted sexual orientation change efforts and reparative theories about sexual orientation that stigmatized parents.”

In an interview on Thursday on the campus of Concordia University Irvine, Mr. Chambers said that he believed Exodus International had helped many Christians with same-sex attractions, including himself. But, he added: “Any good we could do in the future would be greatly overshadowed by the real stories of trauma and real stories of shame. So we decided, we can’t do anything but close this down. We can’t just change our name or change our mission.”

The closing of Exodus International signals a major upheaval for the ex-gay movement, which has been the target of increasing criticism.

Professional associations have denounced its focus on reparative therapy to “cure” homosexuality as not only ineffective but potentially harmful. At the same time, polls have shown a rising number of Americans are more accepting of homosexuality and approving of gay marriage. Last year, California banned gay conversion therapies for minors, although a legal challenge is pending.

(...)

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/21/us/group-that-promoted-curing-gays-ceases-operations.html


Which question?

I have presented evidence of people who have come out of a homosexual lifestyle - repeatedly. And shown where someone has clearly stated that she chose it. And I can;t show a Christian review of the same article you presented?

Question 1
since humans are designed to copulate with the opposite sex, if they have that function, but not that desire then something is wrong - no?

Question 2
How can orientation which be innate and fixed, but gender be fluid? Afterall orientation is not genetically determined - at best claims are made for it in part - but gender is?


TV

cococandy: Teaching someone what is proper or normal doesn't mean you chain them to do what you've taught.that's what I mean by letting them do what they wish as long as it's not the law.

After having taught them believing they've learned,when they are adults they have the 'freedom' to choose what to follow but must be prepared for the consequences.
So a guy who's chosen randiness shouldn't complain when women are wary around him.(Consequence)

There shouldn't be laws stopping people from let's say wearing what they want to wear or having sex before marriage(things like that)

But parents must teach hoping that when these kids are adults they'll remember but if they decide willingly to go the other way,they are aware and prepared for the consequences.

Gotcha!


TV

parismarc: come on, the Nigerian society doesn't look down on un married men, we all know that.

You honestly believe that?
You didn't just claim that it's not as bad, but that its'non-existent? Really? What did I go through then? From family, friends, younger, older. The relegation , the lack of respect, the plain ridicule - by mostly women?

What is your own experience.


TV

kandiikane: If she has initially been the primary caregiver before the divorce....It doesn't necessarily have to be the birth mother. For example, If the father has been the primary care giver at a tender age breaking that bond at that period can cause issues for them as they grow up. If more fathers become the primary caregivers then it is unlikely the courts with assign the child to their mother especially at such an age unless of course they are unfit parents.

How likely is it that fathers are the primary caregivers and who would actually think that is the best thing?

kandiikane: There are many cases in which fathers do take full custody of the child but again the phrase here is "best interest". This isn't the battle of the sexes, I am certain if more men take on the role of primary caregiver then more kids under the age of 6 will be with them.

Men being the primary caregiver can rarely be what's best - before any question of divorce. Where they are, it's usuall an economic, not care based decision. And it's rarely what happens in practiceThis is the crux, it's not the battle of the sexes, but the way cases are decided are weighted in favour of the woman gaining custody. I haven't even said that's always a bad thing.

kandiikane: I don't know where you got your 10% from but majority of the time, custody issues are settled outside of court and majority of the time it is the father who allows the child to be with the mother. Those who want full custody and cannot agree with the arrangements outside are the ones who go to court.

And where did you get your "majority of the time cases are settled out of court" from?

kandiikane: It is not untrue. I never said men didn't fight for custody, I said men do not fight as much as women because majority of the time when it is settled outside, the father allows the woman custody.

Men don't fight as much because most times it just costs them money and it won't go their way. It's standard advice.

kandiikane: The % you see are those settled outside of course by the parents. In the uk it is only in rare cases do the parent go to court for custody. Just because you are a mother doesn't mean you will get custody, it's about who is the primary caregiver and who has the most time on their hands. I remember reading an newspaper article in which a lady worked and the man stayed at home to look after the children and he was given full custody and the woman paid money to the ex-husband. Before anyone could say anything, he cheated and still got custody and child support, i guess the courts arent as biased as many might think. Whether he cheated or not, he was more fit to take care of the children. Things are changing especially in England and parents are being encouraged to have equal responsibilities. It doesn't make sense to break away the child from the one who is always with them and give it to the other who only spends time with them between 6-9pm and sometimes weekend.

All covered I believe.

kandiikane: I believe everyone should go sit and observe a court hearing when they have time. That is where all the facts are laid out, not the news papers. Even read case summaries instead of making judgements off the top of your head. Know the law.

I'm talking from experience and what I said about "sitting" previously still stands

kandiikane: This statement is untrue and it is only your opinion.

Nope, it's only your assertion about my opinion.

In all, I don't agree with your implication that custody issues are settled in a totally unbiased fashion.

And even where fathers don't fight for custody, it's not that they don't want as much access as possible, which they often don't get, even if court granted, and the same courts can't help. Hence fathers4justice type campaaigns.

And I've seen it live. Mothers can play all sorts of games to frustrate fathers seeing their children - even contravening court orders. The courts however are reluctant ot enforce them as it means the best interests of the child are compromised.



TV

carefreewannabe: You can choose to read this article selectively and even call it sensationalist but geneticists have found similarities in the genetical make-up of gay people, which means that they have more evidence than you have for your statements. Scientific evidence. Not sentiments.

Exactly - similarities in the genetic make-up of "gay people", but those things deemed similarities are also found in non-gay people, so it's not proving anything - and like they strained to say, it's at best suggestive, not conclusive.

Her's the same study from an entirely different perspective - http://www.christiantoday.com/article/research.points.to.genetic.element.in.homosexuality/35856.htm#!
You are the one choosing to read what you want into it.

And you still refuse to answer the question Why?


Orientation which differs from functionality is innate and fixed. But "gender" which is innate & fixed can be fluid?
It's all ideological and you well know it


TV

parismarc: All these would stop the day the Nigerian society stops looking down on single ladies.

If a society has a marriage culture that looks down on single ladies, it will equally look down on single men. Ladies don;t typically marry each other do they?

Ergo, men should be just as desperate, why is that no tthe case?


TV

carefreewannabe: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/10637532/Being-homosexual-is-only-partly-due-to-gay-gene-research-finds.html

Sensationalist headline. Some excerpts;

Dr Bailey said: “Sexual orientation has nothing to do with choice. Our findings suggest there may be genes at play – we found evidence for two sets that affect whether a man is gay or straight.

Dr Alan Sanders, associate Professor of Psychiatry at Northwestern University, who led the study said that it was it was an 'oversimplification’ to suggest there was a 'gay gene.’

The study builds on work by Dr Dean Hamer from the US National Cancer Institute in 1993 who also found an area of the x chromosome that he believed was linked to male sexual orientation.

Researchers at the University of California believe that homosexuality can be explained by the presence of epi-marks — temporary switches that control how our genes are expressed during gestation and after birth.

Daryl Bem, a social psychologist at Cornell University, has suggested that the influence of biological factors on sexual orientation may be mediated by experiences in childhood. A child’s temperament predisposes the child to prefer certain activities over others.

Interestingly no similar genes have been discovered which influence female homosexuality.

And I could go on.

All suggestive and beliefs, no real proof. And this is citing most of the best efforts to prove it. Plus nothing similar for women? And a proper reading of the findings - carefully omitted here - show that "straight" men have the same gene. It's not only found in "homosexuals" - it was just common to those who claimed to be that way.

At best speculative and more aptly termed junk/ideologically biased science. And the fact remains that since humans are designed to copilate with the opposite sex, if they have that function, but not that desire then something is wrong - no? Why did you overlook this question


TV

[quote author=kandiikane post=/post/26830383]Not necessarily, nowadays, parents are judged irrespective of their gender. They look at the best interests of the child and not the gender. If both are equality capable then they are given shared custody. .[/quote]The "rulebook" states that the best interest of the child - especially when young - are served by being with the birth mother. Unless she demonstrates serious incompetence or potential to harm the child/ren, she typically gets custody. In upwards of 85% -90% of case where she wants it.

At best Fathers are given shared cuatody or visitation rights. Shared Custody being more likely when the children are older. Capability - of the father at least - is not the big or an equal driver here.

Even the 10% that don't go to women do not all go to men. Some of that is split goes to other relatives such as grandparents.

[quote author=kandiikane post=/post/26830383]Many times, the fathers are the ones who allow the child to be with the mother. .[/quote]Yes, no problemn with this.

[quote author=kandiikane post=/post/26830383]Men hardly fight for the custody of their children during divorce proceedings. If more men are willing to fight for their kids, then there will be more men with custody over their children. .[/quote]Untrue and a real bad trope. Men do fight for custody, but as noted before, the mother is best rubric mitigates against them - even where they are more competent or able. In the UK there is a whole mens rights movement about this very thing - http://www.fathers-4-justice.org/

[quote author=kandiikane post=/post/26830383]All we always see is the outcome but not the procedure. Maybe, you should go to a few hearings and see for yourself. .[/quote]As above - and that's not something I'd reccomend for anyone unless they had to or did so for a living. It may well be worth the unmarried seeing it though, they'd be sure to give greater consideration to their choice of spouse if they did.

[quote author=kandiikane post=/post/26830383]If the woman believed the judge was been biased then she should have laid down her facts and made an appeal. For the judge to have given the father custody meant that he was in a better position to look after the children. The west doesn't also play with the welfare of the children.[/quote]I did make clear that I wasn't entirely satisfied with the claim in this case.
And the West has priorities - the promotion of LGBT agenda is one of them. From what I've seen the welfare of children is secondary to this.


TV

[quote author=carefreewannabe post=/post/26830523]Proof, please.[/quote]Carefree, I can't scientifically disprove what hasn't been scientifically proven?
No reputable scientist has, can (or even will)make the claim that homosexuality is biologically determined. Despite lots of funds and effort being spent to prove it, no proof!

It's like asking me to prove that Paedophilia is not genetic?


TV