₦airaland Forum

sandijey: She said after all, what's d difference between a cheating husband and a polygamyst. .

The expectation with monogamy is fidelity, with polygamy it's infidelity. In the former you don't expect it, with the latter you embrace it. Is it me, or does a cheating husband actually sound like a better deal?

bellong: I do not have a single good story to share about polygamous home.

Not one?


TV

...CFW, always runs out of cogent arguement before she runs out of steam

carefreewannabe: I don't have any ideology. You have enough for the two of us.

Look in that cupboard that needs cleaning - your crusty incoherent feminist ideology is probably there doing strengthening exercises. Or are you denying it now? !

carefreewannabe: This is exactly what I am doing.

Good on you. Please feel free to share this super new & improved marriage methodology with the rest of the world - Especially us fanatics !


"the only thing ot fear is fear itself"


TV

alutacontinua: Marriage is what you both make it to be.
I disagree with the 'not totally sweet' part
Challenges don't mean bitterness-it means CHALLENGES
When you're both of the same mindset, you'll still find sweetness in your challenges.
So yeah, I believe marriage can be totally sweet.


And the responsibilities lie with both of them, not the man only.
The use of words like 'all' is not my style, but yeah, I believe in marriage, people get more comfortable with each other.


Tell your friend to man-up and do the needful, I wish him the best

Who is this? And what have you done with Aluta ?
Mods, Supermods, CIA, Interpol, please launch an investigation. Someone has compromised Alutas account.

No way our Aluta would pen something so deep (and so brief )...This is most certainly not Aluta...I mean, could it be..is it? Aluta? Liked and endorsed. Plagiarised sef !


TV

100Cents: I have dated a lady in the distant past who bars her phone from other users with a code. I won't go into details, the experience was totally bad because whenever I had opportunity to peep into that phone, the sight was disaster.

What will normally prompt a lady to bar her phone with a code

I am asking pertinently because the lady currently falling head over heels for me right now barcodes her phone. Its marriage on my mind. I don't want what happened in 1960 to repeat again..

Must say I'm more interested in how you had mobile connectivity in 1960 and how big the handset was !

Do you really want to share your life with someone who is unable to share her most intimate secrets with you? It may seem bearable at the outset - when loff is blowing like a cool breeze ! - but not too far down the line it's quite likely that this and other things will leave you with shattered trust and as warring parties. Bro' be wise.


TV

^{**Discalimer: my wife has a passcode on her phone; but she had it when we met and she told me what it was unprompted. I don't have one and my little boy is making a lot of nuisance phone calls** !}

carefreewannabe: TV,

whatever you think of marriage and divorce is your business.
My only problem with you is that you think that you have the right to stigmatize people.

This is it.

Your problem is due to your flawed ideology and inability to string together a coherent discussion about marriage in any sense. Which is why you are fearful and allow that fear to inform your approach.

Your "subjective" mantra says that what each individual thinks and makes of marriage is down to them. Ergo, what I think and make of marriage (or divorce) is none of your business. The notion of divorce – and particularly as an acceptable/ morally good choice - should be rightly stigmatised in my view.

This thread is replete with evidence of your being totally bereft of even a basic understanding about marriage. Here’s an example;

carefreewannabe: And my idea of marriage is my idea of marriage and it concerns me and my partner. We have to agree on it, not you and not society.

Marriage is a couples public declaration and society’ acknowledgement of their commitment to each other - and the formalisation their union.

In your confused haze, you claim you “want marriage”, but without societal involvement? Like the gay-homosexuals who scream what they do is non of our business, yet want society to accept, endorse and celebrate the non-sequitur called “gay-marriage”.

And then rage that it’s the 21st century, in which case one must question why you want any part of a centuries old institution? Surely it can’t be so hard for a 21st century liberated and high achieving woman to create your own institution – and oner far superior to marriage?

So, I have no problem with your wallowing. Please, knock yourself out. But I do think it would be best all around if you stopped commenting on marriage or marital affairs, as you have neither the ideology to do so nor the understanding from which to speak. You are clearly out of your depth

Hope the weekend was good – I did a lot of fulfilling marriage stuff .


TV

carefreewannabe: TV01

Come and see one of the reasons why you should not judge divorced people.

Not sure why I was called out here? And after reading your conversation with Nash, I'm still not sure?

I also don't recall saying we should "judge divorced people" - rather stigmatise the notion of divorce as a logical outcome for marriage - as you would have it. As it's deleterious for all involved and society as a whole.


I couldn't help but read through some of the comments. And I have this to say.

If one marries and enters into the full communion of marriage and together has children with their spouse. If ones spouse cheats, is abusive and violent, then passes away, there is mourning. Mourning for the unfulfilled promise of the marital union, mourning for what was given that was never properly requited and mourning for the children left without a parent.

I don't really sense that from many of the posters here. And once again thank God, that I didn't marry some hard-hearted, stiff-necked person without empathy or a real grasp of marriage. I'm so thankful I'm not someones ticked box.


TV

carefreewannabe: This got me thinking. Is there a purpose of marriage? I am not so sure.

This alone proves what I've been saying about your grasp of marriage. And really pulls the rug out from under your position.

So you don't know what the purpose of marriage is, but you want to apprehend it - as you subjectively see fit - in order to make yourself happy? Marriage has no agency in and of itself, you can "conditionally commit" to your partner without marriage and presumably be happy? So why marriage CFW?

This lack of understanding has to be one of the things that make you so scared. And likewise, it's why you want the divorce option - and that option to be totally subjective - with it and and sans stigma.

Even your strawmen were apparent. Making it subjective and implying that it did not mean people could simply walk away, when subjectivity means exactly that. Subjectivity does not apply or force limits, otherwise it's prescriptive and judgemental, the very things you decry. Likewise, saying that what I deem best overall, is only what I think is best. If it's subjective, what I think is best can be no worse than what you think is best - no?

When you can show us the anthropological purpose and historical function of marriage, then it's game on. Even if you decide it should be updated for the 21st century, as long as you can show that your updates enhance it, I will accede and have no issue.

Otherwise you really should stop traducing marriage. Or even commenting on marital affairs. After all, if there's cheating, abuse or violence, it may well be what the two individuals want and have agreed to. Afterall, it it's subjective. You have no right to judge situations. Or as you like to call it - throw stones.

Have apleasant weekend.


TV

carefreewannabe:

CFW, think about all you’ve said so far. Your whole purpose for marriage was your own happiness. Accordingly, your reason for dissolution was “not being happy”

That is what leads you down the road of divorce being good – if you are not happy! It makes perfect logical sense if the purpose of marriage is too “make you happy”.

Marriage didn’t come into being to make people/you happy, although it does that. So trying to justify that point by talking of a spouse “beating you up” is still too miss the point. As is saying your partner can leave if you fail to give him what you promised.

You’ve already clearly stated that you can leave if “you are not happy”. That is subjective. So saying your partner can leave if you fail to give him what you promised is contradictory, as it’s for him to make that judgement not you. So you can be giving him all that you promised and a bag of chips, and he can still leave if he chooses.

So if happiness is the yardstick, it’s intellectually dishonest to claim that you didn’t say that a man or woman should “simply leave”, especially as you later said people leave “for many reasons”.


If you don’t grasp the purpose of marriage and reject the historically accepted definition, what you have is not really marriage, it’s something of your own construction.

So please, I am not in any way judging or prescribing for you. Who am I? I am merely parsing your position. Just as you claim that “your idea of marriage “ is as you and your partner decide it is, should everyone not be accorded that exact same right?

And if everyone can decide what marriage is too them – in purpose and definition – then there is in truth, no such thing as marriage is there?

And as for throwing around words like “consent” or “judgemental”, you do exactly that. Who are you to say that a man or woman cannot simply leave if that’s what they want? If that’s how they purpose and define their own marriage?

The truth of your position is that men and women should be allowed to leave for any reason. I’ve already had this discussion here on NL. And that was even the starting point.

And you still haven’t accurately defined or stated the purpose of marriage, although what you are saying is that it’s “whatever”. Neither have you outlined how it's best instituted, although you've made clear what you believe is best for you.


TV

alutacontinua: There should be a fine for epistle writers on NL
it just makes me hit the 'back' button

..and without the epistle writers, how would the mat spreaders be occupied?

Hush chil'


TV

carefreewannabe: I don't know if I fully understand it.

I agree. I wouldn't even say you have a good understanding

carefreewannabe: I don't think so but you can continue throwing stones if it makes you feel better.

I'm not throwing stones. The notion of divorce should be stigmatised. It's for the overall best. I maintian my position that if you understood marriage you'd appreciate that.

carefreewannabe: Exactly, I want the do without the die. You got it.

Then what you want is not marriage, it's something else - and no one is denying you that something else. And neither are we denying you marriage - only you want marriage to be structured after your own desires. Sorry, no can do.

carefreewannabe: Ok. Then we have a different understanding of love.

And as love is in some sense abstract, we can have differences as to what it is. There is not necessarily right or wrong, good or bad in ones definition of love.

carefreewannabe: It is marriage as long as two people stay married.

No, by definition, it's a marriage as long as vows are taken and the two remaion alive. Although I appreciate the legalistic approach that can be taken to it. And I also appreciate that the legalistic approach has not only not improved it, it has seriously impaired it's utility.

carefreewannabe: I am sure that many marriages would be much happier if people didn't take it for granted that their spouses will stay no matter what.

Your funny thinking...so you really think a man or woman in a marriage would feel secure and at peace knowing their spouse could simply up and leave at will? Or that succumbing to temptation would be less likely knowing that you could just leave if the attraction was intense or strong enough?

carefreewannabe: I understand.

Actually you don't..and if the discussion progresses, I'll show you why.

carefreewannabe: This is why I believe that marriage is not a good idea. I don't want anyone to be with me because he thinks that he has to due to the vow he took.

Actually, here's a convenient place to start;

Firstly, marriage is not solely or even primarily about you. And you first error is to parse it solely in terms of your desires and the outcomes for you alone.

Secondly, are you not revealing more confusion, by saying you respect it and at once claiming it's a bad idea? Would you respect an idea like a "mesh parachute" or a "windscreenless car"- would you use one?

Thirdly, love - as a feeling - is not and has never been the basis of marriage. You vow to love someone when getting married. Love in itself does not warrant marriage. Love is an action, a commitment to honouring that vow.

carefreewannabe: Nobody can promise anyone to love them forever and marriage understood as obligation to be with someone forever is not what I consider a good plan for the rest of my life.

If you cannot promise to actively love someone for ever - as opposed to feel it - why take the marriage vow that demands that very thing? Free marriage, leave it for those that get it, don't traduce it. Reject it, don't calumnise it.

No one is under any obligation to marry. You can be freelance FWB or FB for as long as you wish. You are not obliged to choose a lifelong relationship of mutual commitment and fidelity. How can one be obliged by something one voluntarily entered into?

carefreewannabe: It is for those who feel it is ok to stay with someone even if it doesn't make you happy, which can happen and which happens very often.

Like I said, you don't really get it. Your happiness is paramount. And your subjective assessment of happiness is the measure. That's not a mindset for marriage. Please don't take it personally.


TV

carefreewannabe: Believe it or nor but I respect it.

But you don't fully understand or reverence it.

carefreewannabe: I just have a problem when you say that people should be stigmatized. I don't think anyone has ever dreamt of divorce so if people divorce, they have their reasons and it is not for us to judge them.

Divorce should be stigmatised. And if breaking a marriage is to have no moral value, why should solemnising one?

carefreewannabe: Why not? The decision to be committed does not mean that it is a do or die affair.

So you want the "do" without the "die"? The decision to commit does not mean you have to marry.

carefreewannabe: I think you confuse love with infatuation. Infatuation will definitely fade. Love is a different thing.

No, I do not.

carefreewannabe: I am not scared of marriage as I have the possibility to leave it when I decide to.

If there is an open door, then it's not marriage. If there isn't then you are fearful or don;t actually want marriage. Not for the right reasons anyway.

carefreewannabe: You said love was a feeling.

No, I said if it's a feeling, then it will fade or wax and wane. And is no basis for commitment. The commitment is love.

carefreewannabe: I commit to who I love, not the other way round.

Then when the feeling goes, the commitment follows.

carefreewannabe: And I commit to a person that deserves it and as long as this person deserves it. The person stops to deserve it the day I discover that the relationship/marriage is in some way destructive.

So it's really based on how you feel? Not on the commitment? In which case, why make it? Why marriage? You can have any number of alternative arrangements and your variable commitment. Why seek a vow of permanancy, when even as you make it, in your heart, it is not necessarily so.

carefreewannabe: Commitment does not mean that you accept and tolerate anything. You can be committed for some time and then decide that it is better not to be.

If what you accept,tolerate or feel are all subjective, why take vows. You can co-habit, live apart and visit, be partners, lovers or anyhting you both decide to construct. Why seek marriage when it doesn't fit the model of your relationship?


TV

Songitto: Do your finding and post it here with the source the let's compare to each other

I'll pass thanks. Comparing numbers does not change the nature of the beast - or my position on divorce.


TV

carefreewannabe: You could have made your point without snappish remarks.

Apologies. I am passionately jealous for marriage.

carefreewannabe: My commitment depends on several factors. One of them would be my partner's behavior.

Then why make it? In truth, it sounds more like it depends more on your feelings.

carefreewannabe: Love does not necessarily have to fade. It can change and become even deeper and stronger.

In all likelihood it will wax and wane

carefreewannabe: Did you say, I was confused?

...and scared. It's probably your main driver regards marriage !

carefreewannabe: If love is a feeling, how can I commit to loving? It is either I feel it or I don't.

If...

carefreewannabe: True and depending on the individual situation a person can have more reasons to leave than to remain and vice versa.

Commit then love. If you love then commit, your commitment will fade with the love. Regardless of your spouses behaviour.

carefreewannabe: Like I said, my commitment is not unconditional.

Like I said, it is therefore not a commitment. More of a wish...and the union a fairytale !


TV

carefreewannabe: The website quoted is one of the most unreliable sources I have come across. And you have just proven why.

The last time someone quoted an article from this website, Germany was a very dangerous place.

Unfortunately, people think that everything on the Internet is right and true.

You actually clicked on it?
As soon as I read #10, I knew it was wrong. And it was all the way to #1.

Everyone knows the country with the highest divorce rate !


TV

carefreewannabe: You cannot predict the future when you get married. Circumstances can change, people can change, love can fade away. There are plenty of reason why a marriage can turn very sour in the course of time.

Your confusion and lack of understanding are glaring;
- Circumstances can change, but commitment does not have too.
- Indeed, not only can love fade, it will fade - as a feeling - your commitment to loving however, remains.
- As many reasons as there are for a marriage to turn sour, there are more for it to remain, deepen and become sweeter over time.

I'd counsel you to apply advice #1 until you get it.


TV

Songitto: Are you a native of UK?? I guess

Resident of the UK. All the figures are dodgy. Right from Canada at no 10.

Songitto: 10. Canada:
Canada is a developed nation, but with various
social problems. The people here remain too
busy in coping up with the challenges of
tomorrow and don’t spend time with their
families. This is one of the reasons of
increased divorce rate in Canada, in addition to
various other family issues. It is considered
that the rate of divorce in Canada during this
year has increased 50 % from 2013.

We can't have figures for 2014 yet as it's still 2014 and no way it increases 50% y-o-y, even in a secular-liberal place like Canada.


TV

carefreewannabe: TV on his mission again.

Yeah, let people spend their lives in misery because some people think it's a stigma to be divorced.

No one is prescribong misery. Either 1. Do not marry or 2. Marry with understanding. See, only joy and fulfillment. No misery, and no divorce with it's attendant societal cost.


Happy?


TV

carefreewannabe: It's true that women are at a higher risk because they can get infected more easily but that does not mean that the risk for men is low and it also does not mean that they are immune.

No one has asserted anything you are refuting here and the point you affirm has already been stated.

So simply put; if it's a pregnancy, females are typically left holding the baby, if it's disease, women are more at risk. Hence the inordinate emphasis placed on educating and protecting daughters. We should of course equally educate our sons.

Happy?

TV

...either the stats or the dates in this article are wrong - obviously. Divorce in the UK has not doubled (or increased by 53%) since 2013.

Divorce should still be avoided, hated and stigmatised though.


TV

carefreewannabe: Low sperm count is not the only issue.

STDs can kill or leave a person with lasting and serious health issues.

Here too; women are more readily infected than men and the consequences typically more far reaching. Nature hasn't cottoned on to notions of equality just yet.


TV

cococandy: I think it is wrong to call someone's wife a slutt.
He may not even fancy it.

And I absolutely agree.

It’s a principle of mine – one I’ve mentioned repeatedly and still hold strongly too - to never denigrate the spouse of one who comes here for succour. It doesn’t help and can actually inflame the situation.

I actually wrestled with it a bit, but as I write at least as much for the “want to’s” and the “would like to’s”, I felt I had to make myself very clear and be starkly descriptive about what obtains.

It wasn’t meant for the OP as such and I apologised for any perceived slight.


Just as no one is a homosexual, no one is a slut. Sluttery is a behaviour. Even if we feel we are naturally inclined in some way, it’s still a choice.

Standards have slipped somewhat, but indulgence in physical intimacy outside marriage means you are playing the ho – sluttery. Very few of us are not guilty as charged, but we can repent of such behaviour and resist such feelings, and we don’t have to adopt it as an identity.

Did it touch?
How would you describe an adulterous spouse and one that is disdainfully flagrant about it?



TV

edwife: Tv very insightful advices you give.Your wife is one lucky lady.

May God give us wisdom and patience to go through life challenges.

Thank you. My wife and I are both blessed and appreciative.

Best
TV

^{**and a hearty amen to your prayer**}

OP hi,

You are clearly having it rough and have been painfully disabused of a number of your romantic notions. For the sake of the good men reading, I will trample on a few more.

Good girl? Please, spare us and yourself. A true good girl remains a good girl under any conditions. Unfortunately hypergamous sluts are wont to form “good girl” when the situation warrants it’s and only reveal their true nature under favourable conditions.

You may well have treated her unkindly when the balance of power was different? Not that that actually matters, a female prone to hypergamy will be true to her nature, whatever yours is.

Her encouraging you to have girlfriends is really to justify her sluttery. Even the most ardent and shameless of them will contort emotionally in order to validate their behaviour.

Right now she despises you and is doing her damndest to get you to end the relationship. Don’t be fooled, it’s not out of any concern for you or the children, it’s simply to establish another layer of self- justification. And please don’t mistake this for shame, it’s mere pretension.

I actually laud your desire to restore your union, although I’d question if this is just out of weakness and a sense of wanting to restore your imaginary idyll.

You also need to be totally objective and unsentimental about the situation. She may well have flown the coop emotionally and just be trying to precipitate end-game.

Any hope you have, does not only not rest in simpering plea-bargaining, it will be totally lost by it – as it will cause her to despise you even more.

Please stop pandering to her and overlooking her wilful disrespect. Take strident and purposeful action, be fully prepared for the worst and clearly demonstrate that you don’t have an f to give about how things pan out - even if you do.

Apologies for being harsh and please forgive my language. I speak so that you don't labour under any delusions and fully apprehend what lies ahead.

Gentlemen, you are men, present as such. Your framing of your manhood should never be influenced by your feelings, no matter how deeply felt or well-intentioned. Never ever cut yourself any slack or give a woman an inch – whatever the situation. You can’t force a woman to stay, but you can remain a man.

TV

@Adufemi hi,

I read your post and it's heart-rending. Your distress is palpable. From what you've shared, it's quite clear that both you and your husband were immature when you married. And he was spoilt and somewhat irresponsible to boot.

I started to shake my head as I read the opening account of the run up to your marriage and the issues you went through. Courtship really should be the best time - your hardship started before you even tied the not, instead of it being a time of joy and the prologue to the most fulfilling time of your life.

The one good thing that comes out of all you've suffered is that you've grown-up somewhat- having learnt some hard lessons - and still demonstrate an admirable desire to restore your union. My short response would be; pray and hope for the best, expect the worse and work with the truth of your present reality.

There are children involved, please think of their long-term welfare. But too be honest, I'm in some ways more concerned about you in the immediacy of this situation. You are in poor health, severely distressed and with barely a support network. Your "love" for your husband, may appear to give you reason to persevere, but you must not let it blind you to some of the hard choices you need to make based on what gives here.

Love does no harm to another. If this man treats, scratch that, humiliates you as described, he certainly does not love you. And I would ask, what is it about such a one that you yourself love? It's a distorted love, more of a unilateral dependency, as evidenced by your hurt at a lack of intimacy. Really? That should be the least of your worries and perhaps something that is a small mercy.

You not only need to be out of there, but you also need to be somewhere where you will be given the care and love you sorely need at this point. Please attend to your health as a matter of urgency. You'll need strength for the times ahead. I hope your immediate family can be there for you at this time.

Take time to consider your situation and what's best for you and your children. I won't be prescriptive, but please think long and hard about the future. Even if you do get back with your husband - assuming he is actually willing - it has to be on the basis of adult and responsible love for you and your children. You will be best served by making your own way than living a repeat episode of what you have just gone through. I'm not sure you'll live to tell the tale if you do.

The Lord be with you. All the very best.


TV

^{I posted this on the other thread. I'm on my phone so can't read through this one, I'll just repost. I see some stalwarts on here, so hope you are being encouraged.}

chaircover: TV01 LOL @ pestering her like she owes you money

Whilst you are here please respond to the OP here - https://www.nairaland.com/1885551/please-meam-confused-depressed.i-dnt

Done.

Now you know why I run from marital issues and prefer to focus on the wannaweds. I purposely left that thread unopened. Where to start na ah,ah! ?


TV

@Adufemi hi,

I read your post and it's heart-rending. Your distress is palpable. From what you've shared, it's quite clear that both you and your husband were immature when you married. And he was spoilt and somewhat irresponsible to boot.

I started to shake my head as I read the opening account of the run up to your marriage and the issues you went through. Courtship really should be the best time - your hardship started before you even tied the not, instead of it being a time of joy and the prologue to the most fulfilling time of your life.

The one good thing that comes out of all you've suffered is that you've grown-up somewhat- having learnt some hard lessons - and still demonstrate an admirable desire to restore your union. My short response would be; pray and hope for the best, expect the worse and work with the truth of your present reality.

There are children involved, please think of their long-term welfare. But too be honest, I'm in some ways more concerned about you in the immediacy of this situation. You are in poor health, severely distressed and with barely a support network. Your "love" for your husband, may appear to give you reason to persevere, but you must not let it blind you to some of the hard choices you need to make based on what gives here.

Love does no harm to another. If this man treats, scratch that, humiliates you as described, he certainly does not love you. And I would ask, what is it about such a one that you yourself love? It's a distorted love, more of a unilateral dependency, as evidenced by your hurt at a lack of intimacy. Really? That should be the least of your worries and perhaps something that is a small mercy.

You not only need to be out of there, but you also need to be somewhere where you will be given the care and love you sorely need at this point. Please attend to your health as a matter of urgency. You'll need strength for the times ahead. I hope your immediate family can be there for you at this time.

Take time to consider your situation and what's best for you and your children. I won't be prescriptive, but please think long and hard about the future. Even if you do get back with your husband - assuming he is actually willing - it has to be on the basis of adult and responsible love for you and your children. You will be best served by making your own way than living a repeat episode of what you have just gone through. I'm not sure you'll live to tell the tale if you do.

The Lord be with you. All the very best.


TV

alutacontinua: I don't like most of TV's epistles on most issues but he has a perfect answer for this kinda question.

TV01, where art thou?

Present Mademoiselle , I see you couldn't resist swiping at me, even as you called

sinceden2: I don't mean to poke into any body's life but I need and honest experience of guys who have been married about two to three years and above. Please do u feel strong magical feeling about your wife now like you felt in your first year of marriage? I mean that kind of sexual attraction dat feels as if you hant to have her all the time.

No poking, anyone that doesn't want to share doesn't have too.

Your question could elicit as many responses as there are 3 year+ marriages.

If what you are asking is;

"is it still possible to have that strong magical feeling about your wife now - at 3+ years - like you felt in your first year of marriage? I mean that kind of sexual attraction dat feels as if you hant to have her all the time".

The short answer is yes! Absolutely.

You didn't say if you are actually married or not, but for those reading, especially the wannaweds, the enduring quality and sweetness of your union will be determined at the onset. Marry well, marry properly, marry with understanding. Marry someone you are totally committed to and dead set on spending the rest of your life with.

You'll still have to work at it, but it will be a labour of love. At 3 years there is no reason why you can't still be on honeymoon. After 3 years and after children - to my pleasant surprise - I was still pestering madam like she owed me money

I'll stop here before allegations of epistle are made .

All the best in your married life.


TV

My reading of the scriptures;

Divorce is permitted - not mandatory - in Christianity were there is adultery.
Divorce does not pre-suppose re-marriage. It means you have chosen to not be married
Marrying a divorcee makes one an adulterer. Only upon death is the marriage covenant broken - and both parties free to re-marry.


TV

^{**Two Christians only, not any other mix. Don't have time to treat mixes at this point. And in truth there should be no need too**}

Nashville: Fantastic point here. I think the solution is actually to empower the women and make them realise they do not need a man to be successful. Make them understand that they can achieve anything a man can achieve and even more..

We are all for opportunity for all. But that won't necessarily change that much or mean the change that does cvome about will be all good. Even with privilege, are all men successful. And there is only so much succes to go around, regardless of if it's the sole preserve of one sex or equally accessible by both

Nashville: I had a female colleague in the UK who was earning about 120,00 pounds a year. The day I met her fiancee, I was shocked. The guy was a dance instructor making about 25,000 pounds a year. And damn, this girl was dead gorgeous and both looked soo happy together.

Truth is that, my colleague does not need a man to make a big difference in her finances. Her job paid her more than enough to date or marry any guy she wanted; and her focus was being with a guy she loved, rather than a rich dude. And I repeat, this girl was damn pretty.

And this can work for some, but I somehow doubt it wil for the vast majority. I also have an exact same scenario where a colleague - probably on 40-50k - stated simply that she can't be long term with a guy - physio - that made only 25k. After she had an affair with him 0!

And although It's very instinctive for a woman to seek a mate of at least equal status, I appreciate that some can overcome that and look at the second most important imperative - physical quality - as appears to bethe case here. But there are still the dynamics of that differential to contend with. Think how it would play out with many couples.


TV

...permit me !

jaybee3: What exactly are you attracted to with the age difference?

That requires no explanation. Everyone is allowed their preferences, and for whatever reason. Just as everyone bears the consequences - good or bad - of their choices.

jaybee3: Age is not an accurate measure of maturity #Just saying

It may not be precise, but it is not totally unrelated.

jaybee3: I'm also fairly sure that age isn't necessarily correlated with achievements

Again, not neccessarily so, but not necessarily not so.

jaybee3: fact of the matter is, whatever characteristics one is looking for can certainly be found in the average Joe irrespective of his age.

But even average Joe - and in fact, especialy average Joe - with time under his belt will probably be more advanced in terms of maturity and achievement.

m'Lady


TV

Nashville: Abeg where is TV01 when you need him?

TV01 abeg come and answer o!

As the proud possessor of a wife who is at least ten years younger than me, I can emphatically confirm that not only is it not wrong, it's one of the wisest things a man (or woman) of understanding can do.

There are absolutely no downsides !


TV

^{**nothing much to explain, it makes sound biological sense. It lends itself to male headship if maturity and attainment is commensurate. Women age faster given childbirth. The man is likely to be more indulgent and accommodating of his wife as she matures and ages and unlikely to feel the need to prove a point or overly assert himself. The only caveat is the man should be in good physical shape and keep an eyre on trends, but I'd say that about a couple of any age differential** Loving it !}

ihedinobi2: I think that I understand you. The issue that I have with the marrying up/down/laterally theory is that it does not necessarily bear out in real life. Nor does it make sense to me existentially. Since we are both Christians I'll use the Bible to explain what I mean. Indeed, those who insist that the Bible tramples on women are, like their close cousins the atheists, remarkably ignorant about what it says.

Ihe, I totally get and agree with you. But I am not trying to explain how the market should act, I'm explaining how it does. Like I said, it's a spectrum from Sarah to Jezzy, and it's restrraints, from strong or loose. And indeed, a real Sarah doesn't need restraints

ihedinobi2: What I'm getting at is this: it is not the natural that has women tending to a position where they have little to lose. It is the bent that came in through sin. Women were built specifically to help men fulfill their function: just like the body serves to help the head carry out its desires and purposes. The head can mean to have a glass lifted off a table and put in the washer but it can't do it itself, so it instructs the hand to do it. It provides the hand with not only a task but all the resources it needs by drawing upon the entire body in a coordinated manner to enable it to fulfill that task and thus satisfy the goal of its existence.

The same way, it is not by natural imperative that a woman looks for a well-to-do man to guarantee her a comfortable life. It is more by natural imperative that she looks for one through whom she can express her usefulness. If marrying up then means that she seeks a man with whom she can combine her incredible ability to execute to accomplish wonderful things then, of course, she marries up. Such a man would still be assertive and dominant every bit like Christ is too with the Church. But if marrying up is marrying better financial positioning, then evidently that is not the expression of true nature.Indeed, those who insist that the Bible tramples on women are, like their close cousins the atheists, remarkably ignorant about what it says.

Again, you are absolutely spot on. Hypergamy is evidence of the base/carnal nature

ihedinobi2: Yes they are. But even for that they evince something within the woman that wants to lay claim to the fruit of work that a man does. Whether the way they help is by praying or by tending to hearth and home, as you say, she likes to think that she made considerable input in the fruit that a man's work produces.

That's why I say that a woman has something inside her that makes her feel like it is wrong to leave a struggling man merely because she could marry ease right away. Indeed, those who insist that the Bible tramples on women are, like their close cousins the atheists, remarkably ignorant about what it says.

Not if she is on the wrong side of the spectrum. And not just individuals, but the whole of society tends that way these days.

ihedinobi2: I agree. My push now is to assert what I know to be true.

I deliberately refuse to marry someone who is unwilling to get down and dirty with me. I refuse to be with any such person regardless how popular their views are about how a woman should hedge her bets because of the almighty biological clock. If a woman will not buy into who I am and what I'm about I'm well rid of her.

I think for you personally this is key. High virtue, high ideals. If you have an attraction for any that are not such. Kill it. Dead!

ihedinobi2: And I have zero interest in living in the West. Those people have problems I don't mean to deal with except remotely. I much prefer to tend to the more practical needs of underdeveloped economies than the existential problems of sophisticated economies. .

We deal with the situation on ground bro'. God be with us.

ihedinobi2: Indeed, those who insist that the Bible tramples on women are, like their close cousins the atheists, remarkably ignorant about what it says.

In truth there are mostly one and the same.


Best
TV