₦airaland Forum

Busy_body: And I could picture TV01 on that mommydearest thread scratching his head mumbling stuffs like "my people wait oh is this it, when did it come to this, but this can't be right, but, but, but, but. . .

Hello. Long time. How body? Trust all is well with you and yours .

...Picture am well 0! I also picture certain people breathing a sigh of relief. Dem don take style dodge qweshun abi? Saved by the mods - or perhaps moved the hands of the mods The lengths some folks go to, huh I am so trusting! Well I will be sure revisit that theme at a opportune time...

Best
TV

Tgirl4real: Oga TV01, what is it with e-runs with NL "small mummies"?

Hmmm... I think u have turned Saggy's case to a personal ministry. More grease. I will support u with prayers.

In a sense you are right. Saga is a focal point for my mission to help men understand and embrace proper marriage. It equally applies to all the other men - like HaraKiri - on NL who are cynical, disilussioned, jaundiced or just plain scared of marriage.

I think he has the capacity to be a great husband and father and it would be a shame for it not to happen.

I don't think the e-attention Saga receives on NL is beneficial to the cause. It winks at his error and won't comfort him if he realises too late.

All prayers and support appreciated.

TV

Sagamite: Because she did it twice is not evidence it is by force.

I never said it was, merely suggested db08 enunciate the attraction.

Sagamite: I go on holiday to Vietnam and get robbed at gun point but yet I decide that was just unfortunate and go again the next year does not mean going to Vietnam is by force. It just means I like it there. Others might not and will not go.

Exactimondo! The benefits of a holiday and the attraction of Vietnam remain undiminished by the bad experience. Per my point above, I was asking for the benefits and attraction of marriage to be outlined. As opposed to saying "going on holiday is not by force". We know that (and I didn't use that phrase in the first instance).

Sagamite: I will answer that.

My relationship with women is what can be termed reciprocal-reactivical. I treat them the way they deserve to be treated based on their personalities.

https://www.nairaland.com/969496/men-it-love-acts#11176666

If a girl is giving good and positive signals, I respond with good and positive signals. They are not entitled to it, they have to earn it or earn the retention of its default provision.

That is unlike Paul, you are not abstinent. Treating women in one of three categoriese in relatioship terms; mother, sister or wife. You have an additional category/ies right?

Sagamite: You are wrong!

No dude, you are wrong!

Sagamite: Environment is a KEY PRIMARY determinant of virtually all human behaviours and approach.

Stats, facts, empirical studies

Sagamite: The evidence of that is abundant. From those that see it as acceptable to perform honour killing, to those that will not solve their problem with their brains and go and give money to pastors for "spiritual intervention", to those that will think it is okay to loot a bit as long as you perform, to those that think they make sense by saying they are liberal/conservative instead of adjusting their views as required etc.

Anecdotal, and too be honest, lacking your usual clarity. I am a christian, yet have no recourse to "mogs". Casual sex is all pervasive, but I abstained before marriage and remain faithful after. Multiply that by the many.

Sagamite: I think you have failed to understand what marriage now is based on the new environment.

I appreciate that environment and realities may change. Your error is to think re-engineering marriage is the answer. It is not.

Sagamite: You are right in saying that my approach is Logical-Transactional. Hell yeah it is. It is the most sensible thing to do considering the risk and consequence of the risk in the pertinent environment.

I find it a struggle to comprehend how you can condemn that approach and think your Snakes-and-Ladders approach to marriage makes more sense.

A throw of the dice can never make more sense than application of logic and control. In the first place, there is no sense being applied in the former, just a dependence on fate.

Your approach is faulty as it attempts to change the deal. It effectively ceases to be marriage. It becomes "legally codified runs" at best. What was that about "the worlds oldest profession"?

Not "snakes and ladders" sir. Faith based tenants, applied with, wisdom, discernment and of course Gods grace. It's why MBJ and yourself are struggling with "who is to blame" on the "steps to marriage" thread. Your LT approach cannot deal with unfactored change.

"A throw of the dice"? That would suggest, an element of randomness, or shooting in the dark. Not the case. There was a certain degree of logic, but not of the stand alone variety.

Sagamite: Honestly, please educate me on the painful dawn you think awaits me if I don't marry or marry soon. I am interested in knowing.

I'll tell you one thing; at that time, e-runs with NL "small mummies" will hold no attraction.

I wouldn't want to preempt anything, but purple and silver is a great colour scheme !

Best
TV

debrief08: Na wa oh, was there any need to attack me? I only stated that marriage is not by force and backed it up by scriptures. I am not Paul and I didnt write the Bible, only quoted the scriptures, Saga has his life I have mine, I cant impose my will on him or anyone else. I didnt in anyway drag you or your personality into the discussion,however, if insulting me and my life makes you feel better, please have fun, I like making people feel better, no wahala anyway it is well.
About your questions about my life, I married twice because both times I found people who were at the same page with me. I would always advice people to be sure and wait till they are ready, If Saga doesnt want to get married I fail to see how that becomes a serious issue for me or anyone.
Anyway have a pleasant day.

@debrief08, firstly, on reflection, I was probably a bit harsh and perhaps somewhat insensitive. Let me offer a sincere, unreserved apology in this instance.

To call a man "snide is all but call him a "beesh". And it seemed that you were set on injecting rancour into what has been an altogether good natured dialogue between the Sagman ad myself. Not to mention you've "swiped" at me severally, so I just swatted back this time. Still, that does not excuse my being a jerk does it? No vex.


To the convo;

Indeed marriage is not by force, but outside of a relationship with ones Maker (if one believes), marriage is mankinds central relationship and key to society. My point was that you should tell Saga why you thought it such a worthwhile endeavour, and what if any are the benefits/blessings.

As for The Apostle Pauls case - and a few others - there are only ever a few reasons, a few times and a few people who are not eligible, disqualified or should refrain from the blessings of marriage. I believe with the right mindset, Saga could make a good husband and father. As we all know, berra husbands no be beans.

Kind regards
TV

Sagamite: Sorry, bruv. But I honestly think you are the one that lacks an understanding of realities. Realities are a product of environmental influences. The type of environmental influences you have repeatedly advocated should be ignored and people should bury their heads in the sand.

Not solely - or even primarily - a product of environmental influences. Otherwise you cede all hope. I never advocated ignoring them. Simply find someone whose worldview made the more debilitating environmental influences less relevant.

Sagamite: Let me give you an example of how environments shape thinking and reactions. If me and my friends that grew up in Nigeria state reminiscing over our youth and talk about how our fathers or in some cases mothers beat the shyt out of us when we were wayward or mischevious in youth or how seniors in boarding school beat the shyt out of us for not giving them part of our pocket money, we all laugh hysterically at stories. They are actually fun memories of discipline or even fun adversity.

If a butter Western-raised child talks about his own insignificant smackings, it might evoke tears from him and his peers as people see it as abuse and suffering.

The difference there is the expectations and norms. We laugh because that is what we expected and that is what is happening to every other child (and our peers) and everyone tells us it is what we deserved if we ever complained to others. The UK child will cry because it only happens to them, other kids do not get smacked and everyone tells them it is bad and unwarranted.

I get your point, I lived that same life and have had that same experience. Due to an inclement environment, do we chuck in the towel? We forego marriage or having kids? The imperatives or goals don't change, we simply adapt how we go about them. Strong marriages, well raised children.

Sagamite: DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENTS!

As long as the environment of marriage has undeniably changed, I will use my intellect to adapt to the change, not bury my head in the sand and sing prayerful wishful thinking hymms saying despite the changed environment and changing outcomes, the outcome for me would remain unchanged. Just listening to majority of women (go and read comments in female publications) or studying divorce cases in the West will make anyone with logical reasoning to adapt his style. A logical-transactionally approach is fundamental as part of the present day arrangement of marriage for any talented man. It is more pragmatic than bury-your-head-in-the-sand wishful thinking. I am from Sagamu, I DO NOT DO FAITH, I DO FACTS!

It's not so much the application of intellect that is the issue here, it's rather of failing to understand - even strip out - the essence off what marriage is and entails. Almost like saying EI make it hard to marry a woman, so I'll marry a sheep. That is not marriage.

Sagamite: If any woman is frustrated at an logical-transaction that protects me, then that women most likely DOES NOT HAVE my best interest at heart. I will not put a ring on it. She can sing Beyonce all she likes (all the single ladies, all the single ladies. All the single mudafcking ladies, all the single murrafcking ladies), that fact aint gonna change.

Still do't get it do you? Marriage is not 1. solely - or even primarily about "You" and never transactional. No connfuse am with runs.
If you are so talented - read wealthy - surely you recoup any loss?

Sagamite: And by the way, at 55, I am an ayounge (a young one)! I am not aged!

I am not far off that myself . And for us mere mortals the passing of time is apparent way before that .

Sagamite: I would actually be interested in what painful dawn you think awaits me.

I'd rather it didn't come to that.

How bodi? Any progress? I know it's not easy finding someone worthy .


Best
TV

debrief08: 1st Corinthians 7 : 8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I
It is not by force, he knows what he wants, respects himself and respects women, if he doesnt want to marry Paul said it is even good.
No be to marry hold title and dey misbehave na him be marriage. Marriage no be by force, when he wants to he will if he doesnt want to no need for snide comments.

1. "It is not by force"? Yet you did it twice? What is it about marriage that makes it a such worthwhile endeavour? Please share.

2. Ask bro' Saga about his lifestyle and relationship with - respect for - women. Is it Pauline? or even Christian in nature? After all you started with scripture. Presumably you profess Christianity?

3. Would you like an exposition of "how Paul was"? The calling, the grace and how his situation simply wouldn't have accommodated a wife?

4. Who is asking him to marry and misbehave?

5. Saga and I have dialogues across many threads and many themes. There's been no rancour, bitterness or hard feelings. If there were, as men we'd "air and clear" and keep moving. Please restrict your "toadying" - such as you demonstrated on the "life for a woman after divorce thread" - and general need to "incite" to those that appreciate it.

6. The thread "purportedly" raised by your ex, which fully exonerated you and and totally validated your side of the story. Would you happen to know who authored that?

7. Your wound has not yet healed. I suggest you give it time. Picking at it will just make it fester and emanate a foul smell that is noxious to all. I really do hope you heal.


Best
TV

...what is this

Despite the best intentions of many, Saga has steadfastly refused to understand the realities and centrality of the marriage covenant. Instead - even as he ages - he continues to apply a "Logical-Transactional" approach, devoid of all notions of sacrifice (serving the other, unabashed commitment), romance or even pragmatism. Which will either (1) frustrate it from happening (2) frustrate it if it does happen.

Yet many - and for the most part " NL small mummies" - come up in here, flexing as e-wives, e-concubines etc, making Saga feel all is well with his erroneous notion and with the world. Whilst they are just vicariously re-living that equally nonsensical fantasy/falsehood of getting with a bad guy. My man is seemingly oblivious to the fact that a painful dawning approaches?

I sincerely pray that I'm wrong here and Saga is working apace to locate and secure his spouse, whilst e-gaming for side entertainment?

All to play for Bro'. I'm rooting for you...

IfeLuvely: I know i probably should not say this as a repectful person, but I cannot contain it any longer as my FIL gets on my last nerves, he really winds me up. His manner of talking and behaviour gets on my last tits, and I feel he is the one running our family instead of my hubby. The man is soo pompous,rude and obnoxious. I knew this before i got married to my hubby but i tought I could handle it, but I cant. I have been trying to ignore him, but i think my hubby is suspecting that something is up, please any advice on how to deal with such people. The man talks just anyhow...the other day he was telling a grown man that he will slap him, i dont get how some people are like this ooo...

First, it's not primarily your problem to solve, it's your husbands.

The root of this issue is long-standing. Over time you FIL' family - and probably friends and colleagues - have allowed him to become a tyrant. Your husband has been party to this and not been cognizant of the effect it may have on you - his marriage - or the fact that he needs to act.

As your husband, this falls under the part of his remit which is titled "Protect my wife". As a WTB you noticed this issue and for pragmatic reasons decided to overlook it. Now as a wife, you are finding it a problem. Perhaps you did not possess the wisdom or foresight to address it at that time. No problem, there's all to play for.

Part of your wifely remit is to be a source of wise counsel to your husband. Another one is to ensure that key relationships are strengthened, nourished and a source of joy and support to you both as a couple.

Your husband;
Needs to "command his household": He both has to be, and to be see to be the head of his household. Period. He needs to make clear to his father that his behaviour is unacceptable and will no longer be tolerated - not as far as his marriage goes anyway. He needs to fully grasp what lengths he is willing to go to and the possible consequences. Will he - even if temporarily - cut ties with his Father and possibly the rest of his family? Is that warranted here?

You;
Need to be that source of sound counsel and be conscious of the relationships involved. Ultimately you want to be one big harmonious family, where cordiality is the norm and boundaries are acknowledged and respected. Your part is to help your husband do his part without unnecessary fallout or collateral damage.

You husband is key, but you are integral to ensure it happens to best effect all round. You want to win your FIL, not vanquish him. As much as he is a "pain", l advance that he is one that can be counted on to assist if needed. In fact, his "Feein' like a don" is probably due to that very fact. you ultimately want him as ally, not as enemy.

Doesn't seem like you have even communicated your observations or the issue to your husband. Please learn to communicate better and raise/address all concerns/issues with your husband as a matter of course in future. Likewise your husband should have been "on to this" a while back, or at least teased it out of you by now.

This type of situation can be for your long-term benefit. Open discussion of this type of issue will help bonding. It will help you as a couple fine tune your approach to situations and understanding of one another.

I haven't proposed "a plan". That's for you as a couple to do, based on your understanding of the dynamic and the desired outcome.

Hope I've helped. And hope it turns out for the best. In this instance and longer term.

Best
TV

Sagamite,

Long time dude. Hope you are well.

How is the search for "Miss Right for Mr Perfect" going? Hope well.

Wifey and I seem to have a social diary chocka with various invites. We often decline and sit tight at home to get quality time to ourselves and Jnr (who incidentally gets even more invites than mummy and daddy and is coo'ed over so much my head just dey swell). Anyway, rest assured when your big day arrives we will clear our decks and ensure we are there - and in whatever capacity you deem fit .

Not to derail, I just wanted to remind you of your earlier assertion that age was not a factor for men looking to marry. And a non-issue, unlike the way it is for women.

A little light reading to correct that erroneous notion - and to gee you up - and disabuse others who may be holding on to it.

http://www.fertilityauthority.com/men-only/getting-started-male-fertility-workup - scroll down on this one
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/woman/health/health/4500607/Your-partner-cant-conceive-Male-infertility-is-the-most-common-cause.html
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/1387412/Male-fertility-goes-down-after-men-reach-35-due-to-sperm-damage-caused-by-smoking-and-drinking-says-Dr-Stephanie-Bello.html

Apologies for derailing. Happy to take it elsewhere if required.

Best
TVigillintillsagagetsmarriednlderspleasejoinmeinprayerandfastin!

Proverbs 13.24
Proverbs 22.15

Legislation by the wicked for the foolish.

...I'm assuming you'd like to do it properly?

The first step is to prepare yourself. Are you right and ready? Are you prepared and armed with the requisite understanding? Are you mature and of sound mind and character? Do you have a soundly grasped, well articulated worldview - especially with regards to marriage? Do you understand the demands of being a husband and fatherhood and are you willing to embrace them and able to undertake them? Do you grasp the essence of marriage, the commitment and potential sacrifices required? Do you appreciate the essential qualities of a spouse and the character of one that would make a good wife? Would you appreciate someone that was there, almost there or had the potential to get there and journey with her if required. Would you purpose in your heart to remain faithful and committed once your vows are taken?

There are other steps, some that can be taken simultaneously. But firstly, set yourself right, make yourself ready, prepare yourself.

It's good that the desire is there...

For the ladies switch masculine and gender words/phases as appropriate. I was about making it gender-neutral, but I wouldn't want anyone to suppose I support or encourage that anathema, that abomination, that non-state erroneously termed gay-marriage .

Happy birthday @snthesis. I wish you lengthy days and the promise of all the "anniversary celebrations" that come with marriage for many years to come. And yes, you will need a job (or source of income). !

Best
TV

Hmmmmm...

This is a "before" discussion point.

Having said that, it is wrong for either spouse to make unilateral pronouncements of this nature. Be that by diktat, by deceit or by any other way. It can breed resentment and ill-will, which can escalate, with more serious and potentially destructive consequences.

In as much as there are no medical or financial impediments to their having further children, madam should rather "entreat" her husband in the first instance. Lots to be said here, about hubby, mummy and their son. Keep talking. Communication is key.

Although it's not first and foremost about them, is "hubby" oblivious to the family pressure? I wonder if he'd feel the same way if their child was a girl. His stated reason for having just the one doesn't appear to hold that much water. One more sonds like a reasonable compromise. Since it hasn't been said, I won't speculate on there being anything deeper.

Hmmmmm...

Best
TV

proudlyafrican: Dear NLers:
I am at the verge of divorcing my wife,facts leading to this decision will not be mentioned here for some reasons.

I'll come back to this

proudlyafrican: However,i am really concerned about the two kids who are products of this marriage considering the fact that they will be growing up in a single parent home.

You should be concerned about all parties involved, the fruit of your union, the woman you took vows with and of course yourself.

Depending on where you are domiciled, that single-parent home may be with the father or mother. Depending on the degree of acrimony/harmony in any separation, court rulings and individual circumstances, the long-term impact on the kids may vary from mild to severe, but rest assured there will be some impact. Same applies to the husband and wife.

proudlyafrican: I am looking at how best to help this kids living up their dreams,Sarah is 5 and wants to be a pilot,Anabel is 3 and wants to be a Doctor.

Simply put, the best way to help your Sarah and Anabel is to restore the harmony and engender a healthy home with their mother. Anything else is a distant second and to be frank, not actually about them.

proudlyafrican: I am not contesting the custody of the kids considering their age and the fact that i will not have time to look after them.Please i want advice on measures i can put in place to ensure this children grow up achieving their dreams.

Apart from voluntary/court mandated contributions to upkeep and agreed contact time, you will have little input and less say.

You say you are at the "verge of divorcing". I would urge you to reconsider and make every attempt to reconcile with your wife. Certainly for the long-term best interest and realisation of the dreams of your children, which is your stated aim/priority.

Appreciate you may have considered every measure exhausted and the decision may well be mutual. In that case the "divorce vultures" - who I see are already circling - will be on hand with break-up templates and roadmaps for splitting.

I wish your family all the best in this trying time.

Regards
TV

Hmmmm...

I am really heartened by some of the responses on this thread. Particularly from some of the women. So succinctly put by Missy B. Nailed. Kudos also to JK and CC. Efemena XY, I really appreciated the humble way reconsidered your position.

Kobojunkie pray tell, are you married? I'd really like to hear your thoughts on the commitment and sacrifice that is attendant to the matrimonial union. The most generous I can be is to say you sound very very naive.

The marriage commitment brings with it rights and responsibilities, an unusually high degree of commitment and sacrifice if required. If the presence of a third party is causing insecurity in a union, if an ultimatum is what it takes to nuke that threat, then it is worth it. It can even be a blood relative, let alone some random stranger.

No matter how trivial or baseless the concern of one spouse may seem, it should be taken seriously by the other. If he is indeed insecure, then it's part of her wifely remit to not only assuage that insecurity, but also take measures to bolster his confidence. Like someone said, it's long term. Shedding what is at best a dubiously motivated relationship is the very least that should be done. And no, it's not disrespectful to ask her to do so.

Your example of telling a best friend to stop communicating with someone else is a misapplication. Whatever "behind the refectory during break" vow you made to be besties, is nothing near or like the marriage covenant. I'll give you a better one. You are performing at a E level, your boss says make it D or above before year-end or you are out, is that not an ultimatum? Is it disrespectful? Will you ignore it?

The marital union is "one flesh". Can poison for the head be beneficial to the neck? Can what is good for the hand be bad for the feet? This PC/human rights based view of marriage is a complete fallacy and will shipwreck many.


@OP, you and your wife have come far. Please continue to strive together. Your current situation is not the best and your wife' attitude is somewhat innocent. I don't want to hazard a guess at the genesis of your relationship or it's dynamic, but work on this with her. Build the communication and the trust even more and when you are past this, please don't revisit it in anger.

We know contextually what currently obtains in Nigeria as far as relationships go. The "how many BF' should a girl have" thread does not even scratch the surface. The indigenous culture is fast becoming shot and relationships of all types and on all levels seriously impaired. It appears that one is either predator or prey, maga or mugu. Who in that situation and in their right mind - wouldn't walk around on full alert to any perceived or imagined threat to their marital home? There are very few that cultivate relationships for purely altruistic reasons these days.

Best
TV

As ever, in response to posts I speak both generically and specifically.

Generically it is the divine order – and still for the most part the cultural status quo - that men assume leadership. I say assume, because although it should be taken for granted, some men do not understand the dynamics of how too (or want too rather sadly), and others - both men and women - will often try to deny them this right/responsibility. Ultimately to the detriment of all.

Even in the West – and despite the best efforts of some – it’s still a man’ world. A disciplined, mature and responsible man calls the shots – and right now they are scarce - regardless. Let alone one that possesses all of those qualities and is God fearing with it. A man must still “quit himself like a man”. And such a one will be highly regarded and sought after for a husband.

Let fundamentals drive the situation, not the situation move you away from the fundamentals. What does your faith/worldview require? Understand it and do it. Aand if you get it wrong – as we all do at times – rectify the situation soonest, without fear or favour and be willing to pay the price.

Now to those who referenced my post;

Sis’ Ivynwa – Please take time to read and grasp posts in future. Refer to point 1 of the specific advice I proffered to OP. “Discuss and agree” with his wife was the gist there and was underscored by “communication”. My advice was never about “commanding = instructing/forcing”, but about “commanding = leading/ordering”. The use of the word “commanding” was a reference to Gods testimony of Abram. Point 2 was clear about “wise words and appreciation”. Earlier on I also cautioned about being confrontational or aggressive towards in-laws. I trust that answers your concerns.

Sis’ CC – Not just lucky, but also blessed. And truly the grace of God abounds. Strategy? Me. It’s all about fundamentals and principles. And faith if you have it. I command my home. Simples. And I won’t be run by my in-laws. QED. A wife that sides with her family is no wife. A man of the type I described above will always get a good wife. Wives sef if his worldview permits it. A mis-step at that point by my in-laws – especially if concurred with by my WTB – and I would have considered myself still looking. Whatever their “strategy”, God is still God and my home mine to command.

My WTB’ feelings? Can’t say I was unduly bothered. Any distress would have been short-lived. My concern was building her understanding. She gets it and pertinently, so do her family.

Insults? I’m sure what I wrote to IVY will clear up that point. Combative? Sure, if the situation warrants it. Insultive?. Please don’t unfairly characterise me or read inferences into my posts.

Long memories? As che che narrative here reveals, failure to deal with this issue at onset has led to a catalogue of incidents and one unending saga. Having allowed liberties to be taken early on, the brother is now in a loop of in-law abuse. And you come asking him to overlay his weakness with what exactly? Even as they escalate the oppression on his head.

Onatise doesn’t seem to understand from what I can see. And yes he does seem to have suffered same. I’d guess his positioning and response were also wrong.

Johndoe100 – regards. Most of the women that proffer advise here, should in my opinion just stop. Especially when it comes to the male essence and manly conduct. They give girly counsel, seek to feminise you and then turn around and deal with you for not being a man. Utter bull.

@OP – Your in-laws lord it over you. Treating your home like a hotel and you like a bellboy. Aided and abetting by your “wife” quote/unquote. Hmmm.

In a way your situation is good, as it’s gotten to a point of push comes to shove. Previously you were content to let things slide abi? Not realising that this kind of rubbish always escalates. Until they pack you out of the house and either introduce a new husband or simply take over themselves.

My advice? Gird yourself, don your armour and bear arms. Not just combative, but also warlike. Today na today.

Your kids – not sure where they are in all this. Ensure they are being provided and cared for. If they are with you, get a relative or help to assist if required.

Your wife – make contact with her. Tell her in no uncertain terms that you expect her home, to resume her duties and responsibilities towards you and the kids asap. Don’t make any offers, just set that basic expectation. Don’t let her have use of any of the family assets until she’s back home.

Your In-Laws – can all be dealt with as one. They have no regard for you and you have hitherto validated that. In future, no stays unless previously agreed by you. In the short to near term I would consider that visits should be kept to a minimum if at all. Longer-term, if there is no wholesale change from them, plan to effectively exclude them except for absolutely required contact, until such time as they get it. If they "advised" you to build the house nko? Did they donate the land or sponsor the build?

Your Family - Did you marry your wife well? Let them know what's going on and listen to their counsel. My preference is for you to take the lead in all instances. If it ultimately requires further mediation. Have those who were present when you "married" or Male elders state or concur with your position at any meeting.

In any event, please refer to point 1 of my initial response. Have that time of dialogue with your wife. Feel free to reference the remains of her brothers marriage – is that what she wants for herself? – and to ask if she is seriously planning to return to her parents permanently? Winning her back is key. Your aim is to resume your marriage and progress. Be conciliatory, but not cowardly.

I would personally saddle up, take a few choice men of valour, ransack that their hamlet and reclaim what is mine. But don’t over-extend yourself dude. Feel free to take the girly-girly, limp-wristed advice being proffered and see where that gets you or if it results in meaningful and lasting change.

Thank me later.

T – commanding like a 5 star General, warring like a Legionnaire - V

ps – loving your wife isn’t doing what she wants and kow-towing to your in-laws.

che che: My mother-in-law is tearing my home apart. should i tell her its time to leave or i should wait for my wife to do that? my baby is a month old now.

Evening all,

@OP before I say anything, may I please ask a few questions?

1. This is your third child - congratulations by the way - so presumably your MIL has been to stay before?
2. And you still haven't outright dealt with her or devised a strategy with your wife to manage her behaviour?
3. Or are you saying she has suddenly turned ogre and was all sweetness and light prior to this?
4. Plus, she seems to have manouvered your wife into throwing in her lot with her against you?

Altogether sounds one kind sha? Any way sir, apologies upfront, I will be cruel to be kind . You need flogging! Truth be told, sounds like you are taking a bit of a beating already .

Listen carefully - Be a man! (said on my best faux chinese market stall owner voice!)

You command your household sir; and that includes wives, children, in-laws, out-laws, friends, whatever. Particularly so in the Naija context as some of them are just mickey takers

First, don't listen to any of the "womanly" advice on this thread. If they have their way, they'll have you baking "I Love MIL cupcakes". If I could swear eh!

For me opportunity came to spell it out before we were actually married. Omo, I grabbed it with both hands. We went for a "gathering" of my WTB' family. I'd already said "no wedding talk" as this was regards something and someone else. As it happened - and it was always going to with a dozen or so females in attendance - the girls stated discussing the wedding. At one point one of my wife's sisters - the dominant one - questioned my family input.

Ah!!!! With all my WTB' siblings, their spouses/partners and my future MIL present, I turned on her like a harbour shark. When I finished there was stunned silence. Meanwhie, I was preparing for strike 2. Needless to say, it was not necessary. From that time on all her family approach me with caution. We've are all lovey dovey now - and I'm great pals with my SIL - but I've still got my finger on the trigger.

We left shortly after. When we got back to mine, I strictly warned my WTB, that if she ever sides with anyone against me - even if I'm wrong - there would be trouble. In fact, If she didn't go to war on my behalf if anyone spoke ill of me or even doubted me...'nuff said.

Men, be men! Better to let your in-laws fear you 100% than disrespect/despise you 1%. Set your stall out on this point as early as possible and don't give an inch. Many will test you to see how much they can get away with. I'm not saying be confrontational or aggressive. Just firm and assertive. Abeg, don't scare your sweetheart away 0!

When we had our first born, both mothers turned up. I said "one can stay at a time". They said how do we arrange it?. I said what's my own?? just make sure that my wife is supported and my son well cared for. I'm off to the gym . There has been no problem whatsoever, or if there has been, they are sure to ensure it does not come to my notice. Yes 0! I deal with my own mother too if required.

Any problems and they would have both been out. And I would have personally given them their marching orders. Forget all this go and call "senior aunty or send for big mummy" wussy/girly-man counsel. It's your home. Command it. And be seen to command it. Skirt is slapping you and you want to call blouse to save you? Nansense.

OP' own is far gone, but I'll say this;

1. Your wife is off-message. Start your remedial action here. Remind her of what you are both committed to, your achievements thus far, your future plans and your joint priorities. That should be the prosperity of your union without fear or favour. Remind her of the effort and sacrifice you've both made and the danger of letting your MIL' behaviour going unchecked. Agree a plan with her (communication with your wife has been impaired, restore that. And note it may not be a conversations job. It may take time. Be patient).

2. The plan is for MIL' departure - preferably on the next coach outta town. You should be the one to tell her. Best with your wife present, but mute or possibly chipping in to support you 100%. Choose your words wisely, "you appreciate the time she spent and the support she's given....yada, yada...but you'd like some time alone as a family...don't explain 0! Command dammit!

3. If you can't successfully accomplish 1. above you have a bigger problem than you think.

4. Presumably you are not beholden to MIL or any IL in any way?

5. All the best. Please update us.

Regards
T - commanding like a Field Marshal - V

Sagamite,

you have a decent premise, but I consider it unbalanced by numerous extremes and not grounded in reality. Let me explain;

ATM – It’s overly pejorative and depicts women as bulging-eyed desperadoes. And sure there may be some of that persuasion, but surely you don’t think all 30-35 year olds (even from our demographic) are so anxious as to cast away all caution?

Goal Oriented – Likewise, I think we are both agreed that having a “GO” approach to marriage is fine, but your painting it as a do or die mindset for women of a certain age to the extent that all thought goes out of the window is at best patronizing. And it cannot apply universally.

Duration 1 – I have stressed, duration of courtship is not an absolute key. The ability to reach a critical level of shared understanding, compatibility and commitment on a basis of transparency
and clear end point is. Oft times the ability to conclude quickly is due to the couple being further along the “curve of readiness”. “Shotgun” cannot be the universal conclusion here.

And no, I never got to the point of proposing to anyone else after 3 months, but as each couple is unique, so is every individual encounter. I met some that I knew where “close “, but one thing or another meant we didn’t make end-game. It happens. But this all builds towards that grand finale.

Duration 2 – A 10 year relationship is for the most part unfeasible. Very few from our – or any – demographic will hang about for that long. It’s feasible if they both start early, but not if she is ready. Not keen, not anxious, not desperate. Simply ready. And if she’s “blue chip” she’ll be sought after and won’t be left unsold for very long. I hope you read the “how my bestie stole my man” thread?

Remember your set of unbelievable gifts and extraordinary talents are not universal to all men !.

Limiting Factors – Again mostly around age as some sort of absolute rubicon – but singularly for women. Yes, all told, men have a wider window, but the “men can wait forever” mantra is a dangerous fallacy (or as you put it “Age is a negligible-to-insignificant factor for men”). There is a marked decrease in vigour, libido and fertility in men – for many from their mid to late thirties. Don’t be deceived, the vigour of youth is just that, of youth. Don’t confuse it with a zest for life.

Would you honestly counsel a man over 35 – 30 even – to court for a minimum of 6 – 10 years? Even with prospects a minimum of 10 years younger?

You paint all women as unpredictable and all but unbalanced. I’ve said before, in that case marriage simply becomes untenable, no matter your risk mitigation strategy. Time actually becomes a non-factor

For a solid 3 month review, satisfy yourself on the following in – not strict – order of importance;

• Physical attraction
• Worldview & how rounded
• Character & how balanced
• Aspirations (mostly around family life and career)
• Readiness (mainly for marital life and the required adjustments)
• Commitment (primarily to “being” and her view of “what being” a wife entails)
• Relationship with immediate/wider family, particularly her father. See it live if poss.
• Circle of friends and other key relationships
• Genealogical & cultural backround, tastes/preferences, education etc. are secondary.

Time together may well throw up pressure situations where content will be clearly exposed, but I don’t believe in forcing these or attempt to “test”. Some scenarios may just not happen, in courtship or marriage. And where they do, analyse her responses critically, was she just caught cold or was she faking all along. Was the response commendable, a deal-breaker, or will time and growth make that a non-issue? Very quickly, the mouth will reveal the contents of the heart.

Am I saying it has to be 3 months? No. It all depends on context. I always tended to do a bit of ground work if possible before I even thought of making an approach. Every individual, every situation and every encounter is unique.

Keen to hear what your list contains and why it takes at least 6 years to get 70% of the way through it?


Best
TV

Sagamite: I have no threshold percentage as humans are complex and different, so one should focus on the percentage that meets their risk appetite. There are those that meet for 6 weeks and go and marry in Vegas. Na dem wahala. But the less the percentage the bigger the risk of failure.

That said, I am CONFIDENT that 3 months will never be sufficient as I have never met anyone in my life I felt I know sufficient well after 3 months. And that includes even those I spent everyday with in boarding school who were free with me talkless of someone I probably meet (at best) 3 times a week for 3 months and who has a goal to achieve and will act to achieve that goal at all cost.

"Goal Oriented"...good point. Firstly are men not goal-oriented when it comes to marriage? I think you miss a trick here,as you seem to assume that marriage must not be the aim ab initio. But when everything checks out and the feeling is intense, marriage can be broached? Marriage being on the agenda right from the off is not a bad thing. It helps focus and helps prevent long "going-nowhere", "never getting there" affairs. After all to many, affairs are not an end in and of themselves. Marriage is the whole point.

Sagamite: Understanding people's "sincerity, purpose and mutual commonality" will take more than 3 months to ascertain genuinely even when they are free-spirited, talkless of when (a) they are goal-orientated, (b) the goal is critical and (c) they will be willing to pretend to achieve that goal. You WILL NOT know someone to 30% in months even if you were jobless and spent the whole day with them, talkless of 70%. In my view, If you want to know someone 70%, you might be looking 2 years.

Even if we agree that (a) is the case, both (b) and (are) are at best assumptions. I wanted to marry, but was happy to remain unmarried - forever - if I didn't meet the right girl.

I wonder what you mean by "know"? I refer to their aspirations, desires, worldview, background, values, morals. I don't think it will take 2 years to prove. Anyway, 2 years for 70%. Definitely an improvement on the 10 years, and certainly doable. If of course 70% is sufficient for you to proceed?

Sagamite: An increased period of time can make the acting unsustainable, set ideal goals and the prolonged contact is better for assessing compatibility. The minimum should be nowhere near 3 months, that is shot-gun and fire fighting. As Reference said earlier, women would be smarter if they start earlier rather than be delusional, rude people with their head up their arse.

I was not being prescriptive about 3 months. Simply stating it worked for me.
Compatibility is based on mutual attraction along with shared aspirations and values. It's no long thing. You can have different tastes and ways yet still be compatible.
Certainly, increased time potentially reveals more, but (a) you are pre-supposing "acting" and (b)don't think it's not sustainable if present

And agree with you about "women starting earlier". But still you seem to assume that age is not a factor for men? There are still practical implications for both. And starting earlier without the emotional maturity or understanding can actually be a bad thing.

Lot's of women make poor choices based on being unlearned and unprepared when they commence relationships. The experiences then keep repeating on them and you hear phrases such as "I always go for cheats/drunkards/bad boys etc. Or all men are bastards (i.e. I can't tell the difference and always choose wrong due to my ignorance and wrongly set primers!)It's learned behaviour, just bad learning,that is never corrected. Age does not improve things, just introduces bitterness and desperation, due to the wrong notions, bad experiences and the "tick tocking".

Sagamite: If there is any diminishing returns, I would not expect it to be any period less than 6 years except of-course the person is goal-orientated (ATM) who just wants to marry and ignore the risk hoping on faith. Such women (ATM - Anxious to Marry) have made a calculation that a potential imperfect marriage with opportunity for kids and high self/social valuation is far better than a life of spinsterhood with a sense of being a social reject. I am a guy, that calculation is not to my favour, I would do what is in my self-interest and would not be mugu-ed to go against/diminish my self-interest for the "fantastic" benefit of being called a "real man". Secondly, ATM women normally missed in their calculation that an imperfect marriage includes a Hellish marriage.

You miss the praticalities. If you meet a "right and ready" 25 year old, and linger for between 6 and 10 years she'll be wondering "what's the delay". She'll move on way before then, or someone else will snap her up. If she's not "R&R", there's no point getting with her as she is immature and anything you "know" is not really known as she is still developing.

Sagamite: The disruptive relative that makes short wrong is the goal-orientated approach that potentially may lead to misleading acts. A high length of time ensures both parties goal is reasoned and not blinded by a misplaced goal.

Goal oriented is no bad thing. I actually think it's the way to go. It brings focus and clarity and helps quickly conclude. You are right to use the term "may" for short,but wrong to use "ensures" for long. It simply a function of honesty and commitment of those involved, not the length of time. In fact that could lead to false confidence and not going deep. Gisting and hanging out instead of proper courting.

Sagamite: I would rather marry someone that (a) adores me and want to be with me (this is just figurative, as if no sane women would not feel like that ) than (b) marry someone that wants to marry. You are likely to get the former after a long acquaintance, and the latter after a short acquaintance. The older the woman is, the more likely it is the latter too. Adding short acquaintance plus older maiden just almost irrevocably compounds the possibilities in the latter umbrella (someone marrying you because they want to marry). It is not rocket science.

Why are (a) and (b) above mutually exclusive? A mature person would insist on both. I would not commit to love someone who adores me without a marital conclusion in mind. That's not logic, its jejune romance.

Sagamite: Are you having a laugh? And you would know 100% if WTB would cheat with Clooney after only 3 months of knowing her? Based on what? What she told you? The values she vocalised?.

Is that any more laughable than believing your wife cannot take off with George because you courted her for 10 years, whatever she may have said, or not said?

Sagamite: I never said you can eliminate risk. But you can understand, manage and prepare for it just like banks and investment firms do. You will be a lunatic to give your money to a bank/investment firm that says it would not do its upmost best to manage risk over one that actively does.

I also understood, managed and prepared for risk. First by preparing myself and then by seeking out someone of like mind. With faith as foundation and basis for understanding/approach.

Sagamite: No 1, you must be Baba Sala reincarnated if you believe you have seen anyone here testify to long blissful marriages. If you regard, 3 years of marriage as long blissful marriage, count me the fck out. Read up on 7 year itch. Google even has predictive text as you type it. After that look at how many marriages fail after 20 years.

No risk methodology survives 7 - 20 years unchanged. Eliminating risk and fortifying the union is ongoing. Not solely a pre-marriage exercise. You talk as if all the work is done prior and relates to the entry and possible exit (prenup)? A great deal is done prior, but most is done during and is ongoing to sustain and fortify and obviate and exit strategy.

Sagamite: No 2, feel free to believe someone coming here and raving about successful, lovely, happy and blissful marriage but I am Sagamite from Soyindo in Sagamu. The omni-intelligent one specially created with a special brain by Baba God (Olugbala, Olorun Oba), I don't fall for such. Critical analysis and thinking is my forte. I have already given you example of people that say such: https://www.nairaland.com/958447/many-married-men-unhappy/7#11087793

Critical analysis is not the sole determinant of success in "messy real life". Don't let "analysis paralysis" stop you living it.

Sagamite: That is like asking me if reproduction limitations is not a factor for men like it is for women?

Or are men not also into shoes and matching bags?

Or are men also not into fairytale wedding days?

Those are ridiculous arguments not worth my commenting on.

Nonetheless, men are subject to their own set of limiting factors, constraints and variables. In what was and still essential is a mans world, why would we structure or enforce something that mostly benefitted women? You do insist that marriage is man-made no?

G'night.
TV

Sagamite: No 1, there is no place I said you can know anyone 100%.

What would you consider a threshold percentage (and as a corallary to that, why can this percentage not be reached in 3 months? what is the minimum time for the minimum percentage?)

Sagamite: No 2, you should realise the longer you know someone, the better you would know them. So you should know even though long term relationships do not eliminate risks, it reduces it better than short term ones.

Your correlation of increased time = increased knowledge = decreased risk is flawed. Yes there should be a minimum time, but anything after this leads to diminishing returns. To whit, if you can know someone to say 70% in one year, what added benefit would the additional 9 years bring in that regard? Plus other factors at play could possibly destabilise the relationship. You could find yourself in a perpetual "non-completion" loop here?

You miss out sincerity, purpose and mutual commonality at the start, and risk, staleness, divergence and "losing your kill" to events/someone else to end - as opposed to complete.

Sagamite: No 3, how does your short relationship even generatte sufficient known risks, talkless of legislating for it and unknown risks? This is like a Nigerian average joe laughing at a Nigerian Olympic athlete for not being able to beat Usain Bolt, when he himself cannot run 100m in 40s. Short courtship is inferior to long ones when it comes to identifying and dealing with risks.

Short vs. long is relative. it's depth that is the key. And the key to reaching that depth is understanding and approach.

Sagamite: No 4, "If someone can be trusted with a fiver, they can be trusted with £5m". Don't be silly! Ridiculous statement.

Not really. Agreed there is more pressure, but character should out. Like saying ones WTB will not cheat with Mukaila the smelly impoverished butcher, but will with George Clooney the movie star UN special envoy. She is either a cheat or not.

Sagamite: No 5, "past returns are no indicator of future performance"? Who used past returns? I am using current returns, current assets and relative competitive position with strong application of quantitative risk analysis, sensitivity analysis, scenario planning and asset depreciation assessment to evaluate likely future asset valuation. Your faith based short relationship approach can not even do all that because you have very limited knowledge of the asset, with majority of that knowledge being what the seller (who would gain) has told you is the bulk of your due diligence. That is why they have a Chinese Wall in investment banks and firms used independent assessors/valuators vigorously.

Hmmmm. However "foresnsic" you make the romance and regardless of the "investigative "nature of the dating. Whatever quantitative and qualitative risk models you apply and empirical market research based on extensive data sampling you employ. You cannot eliminate risk. Plus, plus, market for don move now? Bro' you gats to trade at some point na? All this Fantasy stock selection na spreadsheet money *)!! Whither cap growth and div income? The only way to escape the possible ups and downs is to not invest. that's not IB, that BS (building society).

Sagamite: No 6, if someone saying "we courted for 2 month and have been married for 1 year without a problem, so that is evidence it does not matter" is the type of testimony you want me to take seriously at my intellectual level, you must be havin a laff! Let them come and tell me about their marriage in 15 years time.

On that same basis there are those who have testified on this thread to long blissful marriages. Nuff' said. Please refer us to testimonies of those who courted for 10+ years. And correlate the increased successful and sweetness.

What you are likely to find is an insufficient population to carry out a proper study, 'cos it is rare unless you start dating pre-adulthood. And the sample you do obtain is unlikely to isolate length as an advantage per se.

Sagamite: No 7, "I am not alone in testifying that for mature, honest (and God-fearing) individuals a suitable courtship leading to a happy marriage". RUBBISH! What you should be reading between the line here is that it is a function of a woman's age that leads to short courtship, not maturity or honesty, as I have told you before. ATM women are not about maturity, they are about resignation to fate, compromise and self-interest.

Again, your arguement is somewhat lop-sided. Is age not a factor for men? Are all women devoid of maturity. Is honesty the sole preserve of males? Don't hate on all women because of the hearts of some, even if that is most. I have my 95 percenters rule, which I've previously mentioned. I didn't let that deter me as I only wanted the one. Just honed my skills and improved my game accordingly. Man down. Man up!

Sagamite: No 8, I would rather use my intellect anyday than rely on some medieval fairytales called religion.

Faith does not preclude intellect 0! But I would never rely solely on my own understanding.

Abeg readers no vex. Sagamite is my mission field !!!

Yours
TV

Sagamite: The guy wanted to use financial marketism to shakara me into submission ni na. I had to show-off and give my own come-back noni.

Shakara ke? Me? I was merely using a simple analogy to illustrate my point, not score them.

Sir, please put us out of your misery now. Go get hitched .

Haba
TV

Tgirl4real: Eeehhh! Sagamite no go kill person with his qualitative, quatitative and risk analysis grammer. Na wa o, dat girl don enter am.

Me sef dey fear !

Tgirl4real: I can only hope TV01 will not respond. If not, we are in for long epistles.

Red rag !!! I'm coming....

Saga,

I see you snuck in here after I left to preach your life by logic and not by intuition, your living by intelligence and not discernment religion .

If you spend 100 years with someone, you still won't know everything about them. Are you their maker? Can you know every detail of their make-up, or every aspect of their persona? Can you legislate for every influence or for enviromental factors?

Change is is also inevitable and in a lot of instances unpredictable. He said to me, he said "there are some things I wish I had known before marriage, but you know, there are some things you cannot know until you are married". You cannot replicate the crucible of marriage and all that a lifetime together may bring. Not by mere observation, no matter how long. Not even by co-habiting

You poo poo adding faith to the mix, but what is your guarantee? You reduce it to risk elimination, you can't even use logic to legislate for known risk sef, let alone unknown risk. Your obsession with pre-nups and contractual risk mitigation is simply odd. And why monetise it all the time? If someone can be trusted with a fiver, they can be trusted with £5m. Maybe you should look inward?

Reducing it to an algorithim may well work, but I can see that approach calculating out all the joy, expectation and hope. Plus it seems it requires an inordinate amount of time to apply? With all the brainboxes and systems in the world in the industry, stock market pro's will still disclaim any product with "past returns are no indicator of future performance". Why? because there is sentiment and emotion involved and no one has full knowledge.

People are testifying what worked for them and you sneer? At least prove your own pudding. Put your thesis into practice and come and tell. I'll diarise to visit this thread 10 years hence !

I am not alone in testifying that for mature, honest (and God-fearing) individuals a suitable courtship leading to a happy marriage can be undertaken in a few months. You don't have to agree and I am in no way being dogmatic. To each his own, but why challenge what others are living, especially with nothing of your own to show.

What if you want male children, but only have females, what if - God forbid - a terrible illness stikes? Is it intelligence that removes the risk or deals with it?

Sir get real. And erm...get married. Please. NL awaits.

Kindest
TV

Tgirl4real: TV,

From what Jenny also said about her hubby, it seems we women take a longer time to decide than the men. Call it our indecisive nature. Men (matured ones) know what they want from the word go and they usually don't allow emotions to cloud their mind.

Possibly, but I don't necessarily see any gender difference here if both are "there" to begin with, or just mature. I can be the worst when it comes to buying stuff - just like JK outlined above - my wife just shakes her head and laughs. But for this one thing - "wifing" - I was sharp. I had to be sharpened sha 0!

I gave my WTB a compelling value proposition. It didn't take her long to get it.

Marriage is an art/skill/sense that should be inculcated in us from a young age. It doesn't happen as much anymore and what people see modelled is mostly k-legged. People are running scared.

Best
TV

Sagamite: Why would you want to, and why does it make sense to, put the needs and happiness of someone else ahead of yours?

Oh I get it, a leading question as a platform to show us how glaringly intelligent you are ! Or are you being rhetorical?

- Not feelings, they change
- Not any evolutionary hogwash about the survival of the species
- Not necessary chivalry, as it cuts both ways

For me it's the "two become" one union. To love ones spouse is to love oneself. No difference. My commitment to houring my wife and putting her first regardless. And not just because it makes me feel good. Sometimes its a pain and downright inconvenient.

Oya, we await your postulations o sagacious one.

Best
TV

Not only can you not know someone a 100% no matter how long you get to know them neither can you legislate for how they will "develop/grow" over time. That's why character and aspirations are key, along with a clear agreement of what exactly your union will entail and your joint commitment towards it. Cake.

And I put God ontop - and by the side and behind, above and below - fully hedged. I was ultimately at peace because I'm God fearing and put Him first in this.

Early on before I became well versed, a few tried to dribble me. Even later on, the odd one almost breached my defences. But He always intervened or led me aright.

Ecclesiastes 7:26 - And I find more bitter than death The woman whose heart is snares and nets, Whose hands are fetters. He who pleases God shall escape from her, But the sinner shall be trapped by her.

Best
TV

Tgirl4real: @ TV01,

On second thoughts...could it be that those that didn't turn out right didn't get their priorities right? So, it's not about being lucky or unlucky

I think that pretty much sums it up and is the point I was making. If people follow your first post to the letter and then some, whether they do it in 1 day or 1 decade, the chances of a happy union are high.

I am of course taking mature, honest individuals.

If a man were to meet someone on say July 1, would it really take until December 31st to figure out if she is wife material?

All things being equal, he'll know at first meeting if he fancies her or not. Her religion if he deems that important on the first date or before - no, 3 months and I don't know his name/age business - and her character, values and aspirations by the third - with a few phone chats in between.

Then spend time in her company, to really get to know her. The attraction - not just physical - is either growing or fading. Her character and behaviours are either being re-enforced or revealed as false. Six months? For where? Even if it's a date a week and phone chat is capped at 60 minutes over the same period.

I couldn't imagine dating someone for 6 months before deciding if she's wife material or not. She either is, is not, or is not ready. That will be clear quick time.

Not for those simply "hanging out" or "dating" for datings sake.

Best
TV