₦airaland Forum

Roycemadeit:
Frankly, I don't know why it's pretty difficult to comprehend my argument. I'll try to augment it for better clarity.


You all keep calling everything “nature” as if that automatically makes it right. It doesn’t.

A lion doesn’t justify its actions, it acts on instinct.

Humans do something different, we build systems, assign roles, and then try to defend them. That’s not nature, that’s choice layered over biology. The moment you start talking about “purpose” and “validation,” you’ve already left the animal kingdom.

The analogy fails because women are not antelopes.

Antelopes don’t organize, challenge systems, or rewrite structures. Humans do. Women have resisted, shaped societies, and changed laws repeatedly. Ignoring that doesn’t make your argument stronger, it just makes it selective.

And this idea that “whatever lasts long is natural and therefore justified” collapses under its own weight. As I wrote earlier, by that logic, every injustice becomes truth simply because it endured.

You may not be reasoning here but accepting power without questioning it.

you are all over the place quite unfixed and unsettled...I get you quite alright but you are not put together to solve the puzzles.

Nature is indifferent..Nature doesn’t assign blame, fairness, or moral meaning...Nature doesn’t “care” whether this is cruel—it only works.In nature, existence itself dictates behavior, not intention.

Same way patriarchy doesn't justify its action it acts on instinct

Now you are diving into philosophy and sociology,,even most branch of philosophy and sociology uphold a different worldview ftom yours...Nature operates by its own laws
Suffering is part of the structure of existence
Wisdom is learning to accept what you cannot control...Nature is not moral or immoral—it’s beyond good and evil
The lion killing the antelope is not “wrong”—it just is
From this view:
Your discomfort comes from human values, not from nature itself...in sociology this is how nature operates...purpose and validation is still within the framework of the animal kingdom
Traits emerge because they increase reproductive success, not because they are “fair” or “good.”
The lion’s hunting and the antelope’s fleeing are co-evolutionary arms races.
If antelopes didn’t run → population collapse and starvation.
If lions couldn’t catch prey → predators die, ecosystem destabilizes.
Predation, escape, fear, and death all maintain ecological balance.

The analogy is valid women are not antelope in the sense but symbolises an antelope persona.

What is the antelope persona...Instinct-driven
Its primary motivation: survival
Reacts immediately to danger → flight, alertness, vigilance
Doesn’t reflect philosophically or morally; it lives in the present
2. Cautious and alert
Highly aware of surroundings
Sensitive to sounds, scents, and movement
Hesitant to take risks → constantly scanning for predators
3. Social and cooperative
Often part of a herd → safety in numbers
Relies on group dynamics to detect danger
Shows a kind of collective intelligence, even without conscious planning
4. Vulnerable yet resilient
Physically weaker than predators → vulnerable
Mentally and physically adapted to outwit danger
Life is a continuous struggle, but it’s built to endure
5. Symbolic persona
If the antelope were a literary or philosophical character, it would represent:
Innocence and vulnerability
Persistence and resilience
The tension between fear and courage
A living symbol of the struggle inherent in life

when have women challenged system and it became effective or rewriting structures without the permission of patriarchy?..you are very funny

I still repeat that whatever lasts long is natural and therefore justified” as I typed earlier injustice if done for a good cause is clearly justified...example slave trade(nature's long lived permanent mark that left a good impact)...From an egalitarian lens → it feels harsh, unfair.
From nature’s lens → it’s just how life maintains itself...like a snake shedding it skin and springing up a new

I disagree with you...there is an addage that goes like this if you can't beat them then you join them...if you can't suppress nature then you adapt with nature...like I typed earlier wisdom is learning to accept what you cannot control

Dtruthspeaker:
Says the one who has been running all over the place talking Off Point since in your desperation to find something to say.
And, yet, finding nothing you are still talking Off Point, and now trying to pin a fabricated issue on me as you are still forgetting that this is a thread, so everything is recorded, so no change of post for you.

So, i had checkmated you since i told you that you had nothing to valid to say and you have been changing post since only for you to still find that my knights and rook and bishop have you snipered dead. So keep moving you would still find that you still have no more moves to make and that this was over since since even before i told you that there is no valid argument against the Truth.

recycle that stale word inside the trash and give me a befitting comeback..which I doubt you would...I think this is the maximum your mental incapacity can offer so your head don't burst out of exertion...

If I may ask which fabricated issue did I pin on you?..loool

"And just to lightly respond to it, all men who are promiscuous are always shamed; all of them. That is why none of you would allow such a guy to even date, (not to talk of marry) your sister/cousin exactly how you guys don't want to date or marry OS."

So this is the wannabe rebuttal👆 that I highlighted above is what you have been chanting like achoir singing out of ryhthm? cheesy

Look at your concocted quote and point out your flaws...i have been trying to neglect this hogwash masking as wisdom as to not shame u..but I will do anyways
1.Show me considerable reasonable data and statistics to prove that all men are shamed for being promiscous?
2.where are the questions and answers you presented during your survey to validate the submission of all men being shamed?
3.what made you come into the conclusion that casanova don't get married and olosho don't get married present facts?
4..give me hypothesis and analysis that makes you come into the conclusion that men are shamed as the same weight as women on matters of sexual promiscuity?
5.how did you arrive at the conclusion that me and every 8billion individuals in the world hold the same flawed perception as yours that casanovas and olosho are denied at tge dating pool?...give me facts, proof and evidence am waiting.

Pv..your previous thread didn't give backing to your premise you were threading off course at the wrong route....that's not a thread of men shaming men but a thread of a man saving his sister from being ridiculed from his inner circle casanova friends...am waiting for your replies

Roycemadeit:
You’re confusing what exists with what is justified.

A lion hunts out of natural instinct. A man dominating a woman is not instinct, it’s conditioning reinforced by culture, religion, and history. One is survival. The other is a system.

Power lasting a long time doesn’t make it natural, it just means it wasn’t challenged effectively. Slavery lasted too. That didn’t make it truth.

existence and justification are two sides of the same coin...human life requires a purpose or rational validation to be valid whereas a lion has found its purpose for hunting and killing antelopes and creating bloodlines.to the lion life itself has found validity in that course.both have found a different purpose to validate their existence..so what are you insinuating?

You are misinterpreting the whole concept...how you neglect the antelope persona is a cause for concern...you and the sexist are one and the same with a different agenda...if you claim one hunts to survive without taking into account the feeling of the antelope(the oppressed) then It also depicts that a man controlls a woman to create a survival hierarchy...a subject needs an object to survive while the object is at the mercy of the subject

Funny how you think this way...power lasting a long time is the nature...when a power is held by patriarchy and their is no disputable challenger or strong governing force against it then it becomes the nature...where you expecting matriarchs to dethrone it?. Oh don't be delusional...the same way a lion has been hunting antelope for survival since the beginning of time without any resistance or any force pulling it down in its mission is the same way patriarchy will forever control matriarchy
Slavery was a rule set up by the higher patriarchs but was the same time abolished by the same patriarchs ...cos lower patriarchs(the black men) were at the receiving end of the harsh treatment..they didn't abolish it because of women they abolished it cos the black men were at the receiving end of it...

Roycemadeit:
I get what you are saying. But, it's a little all over the place. We can't equate men to lions and women to antelopes, if we are gonna do that let's all be lions. That'l lions feed on antelope is a natural instinct.

Their creators didn't make anyone more special than the other. It is the men who told this lies that also told that their creator is male.

The world is held together by force, illusion, and inherited arrogance. The idea that men should rule because they are stronger is not wisdom, it is primitive thinking that survived long enough to disguise itself as truth.

Strength has never proven intelligence, only the ability to control, and control without restraint decays into chaos.

Before dominance hardened into systems, there were societies that understood balance. Not perfection, but cooperation. In places like Ancient Egypt, power was not imagined as a lone authority. Even in their divine order, figures like Isis stood alongside, not beneath.

Patriarchy is not nature, it is repetition turned into belief, a system that transformed difference into hierarchy.

Now the consequences unfold. Men cling to control, women resist subjugation, and both sides mirror the same struggle for dominance. This is not progress, it is conflict in symmetry. Relationships become contests, respect becomes conditional, and cooperation is mistaken for weakness.

its quite funny how you tossed the antelope aside as if it was an inconsequential fraction and centered more on the lion persona that's the same way sexism has closed their minds to the voice of women on prejudice and centered more on exalting themselves in the bandwagon of patriarchy..you said is in the nature of a lion to hunt for antelope...your points solidifies and strengthen the patriarchal system but you didn't notice that you inadvertently shot yourself in the leg. A sexist man can also say it is in his nature to dominate and rule over a woman...so therefore that makes him a man...after all his religious indoctrination permits that

The men didn't tell the lies..what their senses can see, observe and perceive became their reality

It was wisdom for them to decipher the contrast...they found weakness in the feminine figure..and were so smart enough to sabotage and exploit it...its another kind of wisdom that stood the test of time...and that was enough reason for it to be their truth

I disagree,,, you control what you have power over...and the controlled cannot rebel cos they lack the strength, willpower, fortitude and defence to resist oppression...chaos can never be in the picture cause the controlled was compelled by their controller to endure in silence...

Guy don't compare immortality with mortals...spirits are equal but when it takes on a human form then equality seizes to exist

Patriarchy is the nature.. for it to have stayed so long without confrontation or dethronement..then that's the model nature will follow till the end of time.

I object..men will keep on controlling like you previously typed in quote "that lion feeds on antelope it is a natural instinct"...so therefore it is the natural instinct of a man to assert his hunger for control on a woman..after all women will always resist but will eventually end up being controlled..just like the antelope will resist but later ends up being devored by the lion..it is the sad reality of life...both sides can never mirror the same struggle for dominance...it is not a conflict of two rivals of equal strength..this is a conflict of the powered and the powerless..one mirrors being dominated and the other mirrors being the dominator..this is progress to exalt patriarchy and belittle matriarchy..there was never a symmetry in the first place life itself is not balance the male figure is not identically proportional to the feminine figure so equality will never exist..so your point on this symmetry is null and void..there was never a contest in the first place majority are drooling over men for poverty alleviation scheme, to avoid loneliness and societial stigmatisation...the only contest is in the minority where we have Pack load of feminist and radical misandrist...their numbers are insignificant to start a revolt...yes respect has always been conditional...everybody wants what they want for their own personal gain..and lastly a beggar has no choice...if you can't beat them you join them to exalt patriarchy to high heavens..that's another form of weakness

9

Dtruthspeaker:
Though, this departs from the point but i will address it.

And correction as you can see that the name "Eve" came only after she had made them fall but her name too was Adam. Genesis 5:2 shows you this.

So, you see, even the name "Adam" belonged to both of them even though male Adam was first.

So you see none of these prove that male Adam was superior to female Adam for Genesis 1: 26 -31/ 2:23 and 25 shows that everything male Adam had was equally shared by female Adam, even down to his name.

Thus, when God was calling for Adam after the fruit, any of them could have answered but female Adam could not answer because she was more wrong than male Adam so, knowing women she must push him to answer on their behalf for as we all know that a person who has sinned the most cannot come out from hiding first exactly how the student who always comes late is always at the back of the line of late comers. (Anyway, this is aside)

But the bottomline is that there is no evidence of male Adam being superior to female Adam before the fall and all that you presented are unsubstantiated constructs created to give male Adam an edge of superiority over female Adam because they could find no substance.

you are even more ignorant than i thought you are

Let me school you..you naive, clueless, unknowledgeable being
In Book of Genesis 5:2, the verse says that God “called their name Adam” (in some translations). Here’s what that means:
The word “Adam” comes from the Hebrew (adam)”, which can mean “human,” “mankind,” or “humankind”, not just a specific male name.
So in this verse, it’s being used in a collective sense—referring to both the man and the woman together as humanity.
What about Eve?
The woman is specifically named Eve later in Genesis 3:20, where Adam gives her that name.
Simple takeaway
Genesis 5:2 is not saying Eve’s personal name was Adam.
It’s saying that both male and female together were called “human” (Adam) in a general sense...

I still repeat Adam and eve were not equal before the curse take for instance their biological and physical differences as evidence that God did not intend for them to be equal in role or authority, even before the Fall.
The primary arguments regarding physical strength include:
Designed for Protection and Labor:Adam was created with greater physical strength, he was naturally designed for the roles of protector and provider. if God intended for them to be interchangeable or exactly equal, He would have given them identical physical capabilities.
The "Weaker Vessel" Concept: Some interpretations of 1 Peter 3:7, which refers to women as the "weaker vessel," are applied retrospectively to the Garden of Eden. this "weakness" refers to a physical body that is a "vessel" for the soul, suggesting that while their spirits may be equal, their physical design creates a natural hierarchy of capability.
Adam’s Role as Worker: Adam was placed in the garden to "till and keep it" (Genesis 2:15) before Eve was created. this heavy physical labor was assigned specifically to him because of his superior strength, establishing a distinct, non-equal role from the beginning.
Eve as the "Helper": the term "helper" (ezer) implies a secondary role where Eve supports Adam's primary mission. her physical design—typically smaller and less muscular—was a deliberate choice to reflect this supportive, rather than leading, role.

Dtruthspeaker:
Every grown person knows what bias is and the types of bias people play and how biased people never listen to nor consider any information opposing their bias. And that is what you have already done as your question "Where did you get your data, analysis, and survey to come..." proves it. Especially as I even showed you where they all came from in rebuttal of the facts that fuel your bias, yet here you asking for what I have already answered.

So, your bias rules you beyond reason and you cannot be reasoned out of it especially as it stands you have still not challenged none of my rebuttals.

which rebuttals did you reveal here that i will have to challenge?...
By using an olosho and a thief example..is that even a befitting rebuttal to the previous discourse?
You haven't given me any reasonable tangible data, or questionnaires you carried out recording the content of discussion neither have you given me analysis and statistics for you to arrive at this ur futile conclusions?

Your rebuttal of your olosho and thief analogy is very lame..as I have given you a rebuttal on that as well whereby the double standards is seen visible in a realistic perspective...you are just going in circles

Dtruthspeaker:
I know you would say all these as fuel for your bias. For yes Genesis 3 shows what caused it but you want to pretend like you do not understand why.

Which is what I explained to you at the beginning before the argument moved when i said "Siblings, classmates and your age mates both male and female were all equals like Adam male and female, until one of you did a wrong thing eg when your friend became a thief, all of you casted him aside and no one respected him anymore.
Same thing when you found out that your classmate in secondary school was into runs.

So, women are lesser than men is because they did something that was very very bad like a thief or molester.

Which is what happened to Eve in Genesis 3.
Obviously nairaland is anty Christianity as all the things that I should say get me banned.

Nevertheless, Christianity is not sexist but rather Eve committed sins that cannot be forg.... And like DNA proves that a wife has cheated, all the children the DNA caught must follow her and go. That is what happened to women. And as romance and family section have shown women are bad and cannot be respected. So why would God want to use an unrighteous people like that?

stop using the word "bias"...I doubt if you know the meaning....your using the word in the wrong context

I have already given you an analogy of women being shamed for the same thing men do but the contrary could be said about the male counterpart....this double standards happen on a daily basis...so what are you insinuating?

Point of correction equality never existed even before the fall/curse
evidence that God established a functional hierarchy from the start.
Key Arguments for Pre-Fall Inequality
often from a complementarian perspective, suggest that while Adam and Eve were equal in essence (both bearing God's image), they were unequal in role and authority based on the following:
The Order of Creation: The fact that Adam was created first is seen as a sign of "primogeniture"—the biblical principle where the firstborn or first-created holds the leadership position.
The Source of the Mandate: God gave the original command regarding the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil to Adam before Eve was created. This implies Adam was the primary moral guardian and was responsible for teaching the law to Eve.
The Naming of Eve: In ancient biblical culture, naming something was an act of exercising authority over it. Adam named the animals, and he also named his partner "Woman" (Ishshah) before the Fall.
The Purpose of Creation: Genesis 2:18, which states Eve was created for Adam to be his "helper" (ezer). the direction of this service (Eve helping Adam, rather than Adam helping Eve) indicates a specific authority structure.
Representational Headship: When humanity fell, God called out to Adam first, even though Eve had eaten the fruit first. this shows God held Adam accountable as the "head" or legal representative of the pair.

Interpretations of the Curse
While you mentioned the curse (Genesis 3:16) where God says the man will "rule over" the woman, this wasn't the introduction of authority, but the distortion of it.
Pre-Fall: Leadership was supposedly perfect, loving, and sacrificial.
Post-Fall: The "rule" became harsh, domineering, or a source of conflict between the sexes.

Under advanced scrutiny your premise have no substance to stand the test of time

Dtruthspeaker:
I know you would say all these as fuel for your bias. For yes Genesis 3 shows what caused it but you want to pretend like you do not understand why.

Which is what I explained to you at the beginning before the argument moved when i said "Siblings, classmates and your age mates both male and female were all equals like Adam male and female, until one of you did a wrong thing eg when your friend became a thief, all of you casted him aside and no one respected him anymore.
Same thing when you found out that your classmate in secondary school was into runs.

So, women are lesser than men is because they did something that was very very bad like a thief or molester.

Which is what happened to Eve in Genesis 3.
Obviously nairaland is anty Christianity as all the things that I should say get me banned.

Nevertheless, Christianity is not sexist but rather Eve committed sins that cannot be forg.... And like DNA proves that a wife has cheated, all the children the DNA caught must follow her and go. That is what happened to women. And as romance and family section have shown women are bad and cannot be respected. So why would God want to use an unrighteous people like that?

do you really know the meaning of bias?...you just use words that has no correlation to the discourse just to make a futile point that is already dead on arrival...

Where did you get your data, analysis, and survey to come into the unrealistic conclusion that your religion doesn't reek of sexism and misogyny even when the evidence is glaring in your fallible bible ?
What you don't know is far greater than you...its quite glaring, obvious and undeniable,...in some cases silence is far more better than exhibiting an embarrassing or blatant lack of understanding...the funny part is how you delude yourself with confidence on a subject you know nothing about .

In your case is willful ignorance, you refuse to accept and acknowledge facts that are clearly presented to you..your ability to argue passionately about a topic while getting all the basic facts wrong is shameful and disgraceful

StillDtruth:
This is what I said

It is you who with a fallacious mind wants to view it with extreme bias and prejudice.

A clear case of confirmation bias in operation For look at all the Christian threads here, which one called for sexist views?

None,

So, you jare the same as the people accuse

I am not viewing it with extreme bias and prejudice...it is what it is....your religion upholds great misogyny

How long have you being on this forum Christian thread for you to concoct this false conclusion in your distorted mindset?

You are not making any sense

Dtruthspeaker:
You are for Christianity never teaches anyone to be sexist and prejuducial..

yes it does!

Timothy 2:12: “I [Paul] do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet”. This verse is often interpreted as restricting women's roles in church leadership and public life.
Ephesians 5:22–24: “Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church”. Critics argue this passage promotes a power imbalance, portraying women as the property of their husbands who must submit without question.
Leviticus 15:19-20: "And if a woman have an issue, and her issue in her flesh be blood, she shall be put apart seven days: and whosoever toucheth her shall be unclean until the evening. And every thing that she lieth upon in her separation shall be unclean: every thing also that she sitteth upon shall be unclean". This and similar passages from Leviticus are cited as treating menstruation as inherently "unclean," a perspective which has historically contributed to social taboos and marginalization of women.
Deuteronomy 22:28–29: This passage describes the legal outcome if a man rapes an unengaged virgin: he must pay her father fifty shekels of silver and marry her, never being allowed to divorce her. Critics point out that this law treats the woman as her father's property that was damaged, with no mention of the victim's consent or choice in the arranged marriage to her rapist.
Numbers 31:17-18: In the context of war against the Midianites, Moses commands the Israelite forces to "Kill every male among the little ones, and every woman who has known a man by lying with him. But all the young women who have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves". This is frequently highlighted as a passage that dehumanizes women by treating virgins as spoils of war.
Genesis 3:16: Following Eve's sin in the Garden of Eden, God tells her, "Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you." This is interpreted by some as a divine justification for male dominance and female subordination.

you are clearly ignorant of the gospel you spread

Dtruthspeaker:
You have called them scum men, sexist men. That means that they are people we should not listen to. And actually as you see in romance and family section, everyone rejects their views and casts them out. So, you are barking at the wrong tree

I am not barking at the wrong tree ..the religion you uphold is the foundation behind prejudice and misogyny...think again

Dtruthspeaker:
For saying "sexist men' you have used a minority unreasonable sect to judge the whole. And that is what has made your post very myopic and very wrongly given and unreasonably biased.

And therefore, by your bias you are no different from the sexist men whom you condemn

sexist men are not the minority they are the majority.. so your perception is warped and your reasoning flawed

⁷

Dtruthspeaker:
We all met the world imbalanced however we all see what causes imbalance. And that is when someone does a wrong.

Siblings, classmates and your age mates both male and female were all your equals hence that word we say "na your mate". Until one of you did a wrong thing eg when your friend became a thief, all of you casted him aside (except those who are thieves like him) and no one respected him anymore.

Same thing when you found out that your classmate in secondary school was into olosho.

So, women are lesser than men is because they became oloshos. Which is why a virgin girl/woman is always equal to a boy/man which is why we all say to men unqualified to have her "you no worth her'.

So like the thief and rapist when a woman becomes an olosho she will become lower than a man. That is what nature has shown

cut that crap

You forgotten the adage used by your fellow scum men...I type in quote "a padlock which many key can open is disregarded as useless and should subsequebtly be thrown away while a key that opens many padlock is called the masterkey"....you failed to understand that women will be shamed for doing the exact thing men do..to them men and women are not the same...stop trying to defend what is undefendable

You mentioned the 2natashas...hahaha haha boy is trying to use the minority to uphold a vague viewpoint
1.How many matriarch do we have as opposed to patriarch?
2.How many women are given the equity to pursue their dreams like men?
3 How many women are not Stereotyped into pursuing a certain kind of career...even though that career isn't what they want?
4.How many women are told to stop halfway in their dreams as not to threaten the man?
5.how many women are doing the same job with men in an established institution but yet not receiving the same salary?....
6.how many women are allowed to own houses in their fathers properties?
7.how many femicide as opposed to homicide?
8.How many successful women are allowed to pay groom price and have their husband name change to theirs?...in most culture paying groom price is unconventional...according to Roycemadeit...culture does not determine truth it is just guidelines and law laid down by partiachs...doesn't mean cultures are not subject to criticism and changes

You talk about equality as if equality precisely in nigeria exist? Social media and reality are not the same...this your ideology has no head and tail to stand on the prejudice ravaging women..think again and come up with a better comeback