₦airaland Forum

kennygee:
Why are the feminists marrying?

Because marriage is a product of collective human history.
Anybody who is human can choose to marry or not.

kennygee:
So Feminism is a blessing? Aren't there black pole who just have kids they can take care of. The Obamas must be whites. There are also white people who have baby daddy issues, those who don't are abortion regulars so that doesn't count.

Social economic issues are not measured by single good or bad examples but by representative statistics.
Another point to note that black are far more religious than their white counterpart, yet they have
a higher divorce rate than whites, many don't even belief in marriage.

Now ask yourself, why feminist hating black women can't hold their marriage together?

BadBradley:
Unfortunately, anti-slavery is never about freedom of choice for slaves but a call for usurpation, rebel and "taking what has been denied them".

It's been a trademark scheme of abolitionist to shame contented slaves, and slaves who elected to be chief whips.

People like John Brown are vengeful abolitionists who have a long agenda to change the world where whites[/b]and [b]blacks are rivals , never complementing each other .

Judge yourself, who do you sound like?

Better don't kill yourself Mr. Fredrick, Chimamanda is clearly focused on her goals,
it is you had to rant to defend an indefensible position.

kennygee:
Many people don't even understand what feminism is. They just jump on a bandwagon and give themselves labels they don't understand.

Even African american women didn't embrace feminism in it's raw state and settled for African Womanism cause they know that they cannot drag rights with the men.

Most "feminists" need to educate themselves, especially in Nigeria.

Read.

How has the respectful African-American women fared since they reject feminism?
Look at the success of being an humble men worshippers brought them, multiple
father baby mama business.
They are in short the worst of worst in every social economic indices.
How can the whites who embraced feminism have mores stable family life than those
wise Black-American women?

AHCB:
its only a matter of time. first it was toke makinwa, now it will be the turn of adichie. these women who go about challenging natural order will soon find themselves at the receiving end of it all

If people didn't challenge "natural" order, you will still be in the jungle competing with monkeys
for banana instead of holding a phone to type this gibberish.

GiantParrot:
Since you asked, here's what the lady dominique wrote:

The clear implication of dominique's comment is that identifying as a wife doesn't make her less of a person.

No , the clear implication of her comment is that Hillary is right by default(wife first) and Chimamanda's
comment were nonsensical and unnecessary. "Not making her less of a person" was entirely your invention
because her first post on the front page clearly show her position to feminism(wahala people).

Here's your response

You somehow managed to create a bad wife strawman. Something that was never argued for. Dominique never told anyone that if they didn't identify as wife on twitter, then they would make a bad wife. She only implied that she would be no less a person if she identified as a wife. These are completely different arguments.

The problem is that you jumped into the middle of a back and forth. I never quoted dominique
to begin with she quoted my reply to another lady who conflated Chimamanda's writing success
with her feminist views.

"Emancipate us from what" is clearly stating that her position of women being primarily seen as
a wife cannot be improved upon and those who try are deviants from the true path.
From my little knowledge, deviants against any traditional belief are bad models, it isn't far fetch
to think that ladies like Chimamanda belong to the bad wife category.

If you have followed the thread closely, you would have seen many responses warning single
women to ignore Chimamanda's posturing or they risk perpetual spinsterhood because no man
wants a bad wife.

Okay, you didn't do badly here. There was an unmentioned premise behind my earlier comment on Chimamanda which I am going to state very clearly now: The modern feminist movement is authoritarian, not much different from a traditional religion or a cult. Hence comments made within the context of feminism can hardly be viewed as mere suggestions. The mainstream feminist assumes the role of moral authority, and would love a dictatorship that permits only feminist thinking. This can be seen in the many incidences of feminists and their supporters employing mob outrage and shaming tactics to silence divergent views. It is this sort of "moral" (actually sanctimonious) indignation that can motivate Chimamanda to tell Hillary that she was "a little bit upset" about Hillary's personal choices.

To be authoritarian, you need authority to enforce your rule and a canon, unfortunately, I have never
seen or heard of someone been arrested or interrogated by feminist police. Where is the feminist bible
and who enforces their authoritarian "laws" using which authority?

I differ very much for Chimamanda with my comments. I hope you will be able to see the nuance here. I respect people's personal choices and stand strongly in opposition to authoritarian movements. I do not speak within the context of any authoritarian movement, which makes the people I argue with safe from the damning effects of mob outrage. I am a "live and let live" kind of person, as long as other people's rights are not violated. Naturally, I will speak out when I find statements/comments that can potentially violate that idea of "live and let live". Hence my stance against Chimamanda and the coercive feminist collectivism she espouses. You know too little about me to make that verdict of close-mindedness. Another logical fallacy committed - hasty conclusion.

Isn't it ironic that the person suffering from mob outrage here is supposedly part of the authoritarian crew?
To really get a perfect world you want to live in, you will need a state that ban any form of speaking for or
against the status quo, even North Korea isn't that extreme.

If feminism were a crime, Hillary will be in jail. She is not some innocent Mississipi Bible-thumping woman who is
being harassed by "authoritarian" feminists. The interview was between two feminists who voluntarily chose to
interact with each other.

Chimamanda is no more being coercive than any of your friends who ever suggested a contrary view
to the one you previously held. Do you jump and call him all sort of names for being coercive and
authoritarian when you can easily cut off the relationship with the "abuser"?
Do you think it makes sense that some people jump into your defence to malign that "stupid" friend
who don't want to live and let live?

As to your live and let live beliefs, the world would still be in stone age if some visionaries had not challenge
the status quo through their words and writings. Remember those coercive and authoritarian abolitionist
who didn't allow businessmen to enjoy their lives in peace?

How about those unmarried spinsters and cuckhold men, as they were derisively taunted, who were championing women
suffrage when most women at that time don't want to vote and want to be left alone, why were they pointing guns at womens'
head and telling them vote or die?

Some rotten set of modern day feminists, those arrogant lots, even think a girl should be as educated
as the boy child, why can't they just shut up and let parent train their kids whichever way they choose?

The worse set of them feminists even think there is nothing wrong if a fellow feminist identify first as
a professional and not a wife, I mean what kind of a devil and authoritarian feminist even raise such
issues to begin with?

I believe there are no fully open minded or close minded people, a persons posture usually depend on the
issues being concerned. Perhaps you are open minded about every other issue but you clearly aren't comfortable with
this one.

mandate12:
The greatest problem with ur own crude feminism is that u r half-baked. We all know the dangers semi literates pose in the society- never eager to learn more.
U need not bother about the 'wife' thing caus u will never b one.

Typical empty-head, inventing words to make empty argument.
You are right in one aspect, semi-literates like you who can't intelligently defend their
position but resort to ad hominem are the greatest problems of the society.
They can neither think nor let others think in peace.

But if you think my assessment was wrong, explain how the use of "wife" in professional twitter bio benefits the society.
Don't bother replying if all you have to offer is another round of baseless platitudes.

GiantParrot:
Sounds more to me like you were setting up the props for a straw man argument. But go ahead and do your thing as you so please (you see, this is a simple courtesy of respect for personal choices that coercive collectivists like Chimamanda seem to be unable to afford other people who don't fit firmly within their sanctimonious "enlightened" ideology).

Please point out the straw man and not gloss over it to make a point.

Chimamanda asked a question/made a suggestion, I don't see any reason why people
are foaming in the mouth.
Have you ever commented on another person's choice, then you are not different from
Chimamanda, you are just too close-minded on other issues.

4C2215131:
This is the attitude that informed Adichie's poser to Hillary Clinton.

Not even close, I was reacting to a close minded post, while Chimamanda asked a question.

Fancying yourself as some self appointed messiah come to correct, enlighten and redeem poor gullible souls like us from ourselves.

Good luck with that.

You are right, in that it is nearly impossible to free yourself from a self-constructed prison.
But with constant discussion and fearless individuals such as Adichie, the future is bright.

BabaRamota1980:
A Society is a conglomerate of Communities, which itself is the congregate of family units.

There is a song track titled " A House is not a Home", sang by Luther Vandross.

A house is cold but a home is warm. Presence of woman makes the difference. When a woman is comfortably settled in a house her energies find outlets to fulfill her innate abilities. These outlets include domestic duties and reproduction. She will soon turn the house into a home and give it a ritual.

The rituals in turn become cultural. When you add the cultures of homesteads within a defined area you get a culture and customs. Men play the role of tying different disparate communities together to form society. This is nature of human survival.

A wife is the foundation and the backbone of thriving communities.

In communities highly populated by feminists individualism is their culture. You might live in a neighborhood for 10yrs and and dont know name of your neighboor five doors down from you. Divided interests, instead of common interests. Distance instead of closeness. Cold instead of warm relationships. Disagreements and breakup instead of support and survival.

Dont under-estimate the value and importance of a wife in the community.

You did not address my question.
How does the society benefits by a woman calling herself a "wife"?
All you stated were the roles of a wife which everyone already knows.

More specifically, how does the society benefits by a woman, using wife instead of
professional title on twitter?

StoneColdBiceps:
Small book wey she write we no go hear word again. I pity her hubby sha.

Adichie we know who are you Mr. biceps?

GiantParrot:
Where exactly did you find anyone making this argument?

Inductive reasoning my friend.

amicable09:
Haba! You should have made this point from the get-go. It took two replies and three posts from you to arrive here. Two long for me. Now that we are here, let's address the issue.

What are the merits of a wife preferring a professional title please? I looked at Mrs. Clinton's (this should vex Chimamanda a little more but I'm sorry ma'am) profile and saw that she included her professional titles in her bio. What then is the problem?

Good question, Hillary is more than a wife!
She was a Senator and a Secretary of state.
She has been involved with various form of activism including gender equality.
It therefore make sense that she identifies herself professionally first(my opinion) because it
will inspire younger generations of women that they can aspire to be whoever they want to be.

Chimamanda is upset with herself because she put WIFE first, MOTHER second while Mr. Clinton didn't start his with HUSBAND and FATHER. To her annoyance, I ask why the comparison? Is that why we are in this world? To be comparing ourselves with our peers or partners?

I haven't attacked her though, I have expressed my concerns and feelings about how she's taking this advice/counsel/interrogation of a thing in the light of feminism.

While Chimamanda's comparison may seem outrageous, her question is apt,
why use wife first?
a question which Hillary answered.

Most people in any kind of relationship compare themselves(direct or indirectly) with others, even
if they won't admit it. In a non-ideal world, humans live and die by comparison.