Stillfire:


Who is Baroness Deech? I like her way of thinking.
The human tendency to bastardize institutions that are made to protect us is our bane. And it's this same excessive attitude (i.e. the inability to curb its excesses) that is killing patriarchy and caused a revolt from the women folk.
We should endeavor not to go down that same debilitating route patriarchy went.
Tales like these are not a win for women but an embarrassment as well as an excess that certainly needs to be curbed. We should always always aim to be fair.

Sagamite:


See the nonsense argument you gave to his valid question?

So it is cheating to give someone what they deserve and contributed?

Fck me!

So I go into business with someone and I put more money down and the courts should say "the less fortunate partner at an economic disadvantage", the profits must be shared 50/50?

WTF kind of arguments are you giving?

Sagamite:


Let me warn you in advance:

If you tell her a woman should leave a marriage after divorce with what she brought in and what she made in it, she would say you are saying "women should leave with nothing".

Those mean the same thing to her.

baby124:

Look I have a life to attend to. Not prolonging childish rants and insults. This shows you have no point to make. I think I am done giving you an ounce of my time here. I think I have done enough enlightening you. Since you are hell bent on ignorance. Wallow in it. As you can't do anything to change the law except cry on NL.

Sagamite:


Yes, but the argument put into law and normally quoted for awarding a spouse (usually a woman) ridiculous amount of money is that she is used to a certain level of lifestyle that the divorce should not reduce.

Then she goes and calculate, how much holidays, nannies, pedicure etc she needs and how much they cost before the courts orders the man to pay for these.

The bolded is now the ridiculous assumption by most women and they can't even understand why it should not be the case.

They are like that is the way it is and it should be because that is how it is now.

bukatyne:


Why do you think a woman is entitled to a settlement from her ex-divorce if they do not have a joint investment or if she was not an housewife?

Sagamite:


Hypocritical thief!

Is it not 90% you would take?

Stillfire:


You know for other men I'll be fair or not even take anything, but for you Sagamite I will take 100% of your earnings- fixed assets, direct or indirect costs. Try me!

Sagamite:


Yep.

That psychotic, petty and vengeful God that was created my medieval illiterates.

[size=18pt]YOU DIDN'T WORSHIP ME?

HEEEEEEEEEEEEELLLLL FIIIIIIIRE!!!!! [/size]

The one that killed his own son to cancel sins he could just had merely mentally cancelled.

The kind of crap fantasy stories medieval illiterates conjure up.

Sagamite:


When I stand up in that court and come and shake your hand with my charmed hand to congratulate you on your win, you will not be able to leave that court with your 2 legs or ever communicated with you senses anymore. They will carry you out as s vegetable (specifically, Okazi version).

I will use jazz to finish you right there, you will never enjoy that money.

baby124:

Abeg go back up and read. Not in the habit of repeating myself.

Mindfulness:


And the best line for today is where you said that Jesus is throwing tantrums in heaven.
The image of it made me almost choke on my tea. The Holy Trinity is not able to control the mess we are creating here.

Most of these stories were made up to control people. Pure politics. Fear is a very efficient way to keep people in check.
Teefy's favorite method. It may work in the romance section, who knows?

I don't care. I was born alone and I will die alone and in between I will socialize with people who are nice company. I will, just like you, rather be ten times happily married than one time trying to. My God loves to see me happy.

Sagamite:




What is not logical about marriage?

Are you saying people like Dangote should only fall in love with other billionaires? That is your justification for moronic laws? The state should put up laws that force people to marry certain types of people, not who they are attracted to?

Is it China or even North Korea?

Do you know what a "legal partnership" is? How is marriage a "legal partnership"?

bukatyne:


This is the most ridiculous thing ever.

If you want to maintain your lifestyle, stay married by all means like my Nigerian sisters.

You CANNOT eat your cake and have it.

Stillfire:


You people should leave my Jesus alone o. I love him.

Mindfulness:


And the best line for today is where you said that Jesus is throwing tantrums in heaven.
The image of it made me almost choke on my tea. The Holy Trinity is not able to control the mess we are creating here.

Most of these stories were made up to control people. Pure politics. Fear is a very efficient way to keep people in check.
Teefy's favorite method. It may work in the romance section, who knows?

I don't care. I was born alone and I will die alone and in between I will socialize with people who are nice company. I will, just like you, rather be ten times happily married than one time trying to. My God loves to see me happy.

Kimoni:



Pls how is marriage by Dangote to a high school drop-out a logical decision from Dangote's POV? knowing fully well the potential liability he could incurr from signing the darn paper? And with full knowledge of the other options available to him with which he could derive the same benefits that marriage offers without the attached risks? I honestly don't see this logic.

Fall in love? Where did I say that Saga? Is falling in love and marriage synonymous? Did you marry every girl you fell in love with?

No, the state cannot force people to marry anyone but in an event where there is a dispute between couples and the state cannot readily establish the utility both partners derived from each other during the course of the union or the worth of the alternatives they both had to forgo, how best does the state share their combined assets other than a ratio that nearly equates to 50:50?

If marriage is not a legal partnership to you Saga, then define what marriage is exactly? This is actually where i would have loved to start this discussion.

Stillfire:


You people should leave my Jesus alone o. I love him.

Sagamite:


Why do Nigerian women sign the piece of paper when they know they can be thrown out with just the clothes on their back and a few peanuts?

There is some utility they are benefiting from marriage, so if that happens to them it is okay.

If they sign it, then if that happens, then that is their fault and we should accept it that way.

Why do they even sign the paper with a Nigerian man knowing the risk of them being beaten up and he having multiple concubines?

Why do they now open their stuuuupid mouth to complain when those happen to them?

I am just appplying your logic here.

ronald4lif:
Women sha. I'm flummoxed as to what gives them or anyone else for that matter a sense of entitlement to another's acquisition. So because we got married automatically qualifies and grants you the leverage to have a share in a man's self-acquired assets.

The reaction from them lots here further buttresses that they're either not ready for egalitarianism or their campaign is to secure certain privileges at the detriment of the male folk. Else, I see no reason why anyone would subscribe to this selfish legislation that would see a man forfeit his wealth to a leech. When women are ready for equality, we'd talk. For now, it's all a ruse.

Sagamite:


The question is why should he face that potential liability or risk?

No, the state cannot force people to marry anyone but in an event where there is a dispute between couples and the state cannot readily establish the utility both partners derived from each other during the course of the union or the worth of the alternatives they both had to forgo, how best does the state share their combined assets other than a ratio that nearly equates to 50:50?

Kimoni:



Pls how is marriage by Dangote to a high school drop-out a logical decision from Dangote's POV? knowing fully well the potential liability he could incurr from signing the darn paper? And with full knowledge of the other options available to him with which he could derive the same benefits that marriage offers without the attached risks? I honestly don't see this logic.

Fall in love? Where did I say that Saga? Is falling in love and marriage synonymous? Did you marry every girl you fell in love with?

No, the state cannot force people to marry anyone but in an event where there is a dispute between couples and the state cannot readily establish the utility both partners derived from each other during the course of the union or the worth of the alternatives they both had to forgo, how best does the state share their combined assets other than a ratio that nearly equates to 50:50?

If marriage is not a legal partnership to you Saga, then define what marriage is exactly? This is actually where i would have loved to start this discussion.

ronald4lif:
Women sha. I'm flummoxed as to what gives them or anyone else for that matter a sense of entitlement to another's acquisition. So because we got married automatically qualifies and grants you the leverage to have a share in a man's self-acquired assets.

The reaction from them lots here further buttresses that they're either not ready for egalitarianism or their campaign is to secure certain privileges at the detriment of the male folk. Else, I see no reason why anyone would subscribe to this selfish legislation that would see a man forfeit his wealth to a leech. When women are ready for equality, we'd talk. For now, it's all a ruse.

ronald4lif:
Women sha. I'm flummoxed as to what gives them or anyone else for that matter a sense of entitlement to another's acquisition. So because we got married automatically qualifies and grants you the leverage to have a share in a man's self-acquired assets.

The reaction from them lots here further buttresses that they're either not ready for egalitarianism or their campaign is to secure certain privileges at the detriment of the male folk. Else, I see no reason why anyone would subscribe to this selfish legislation that would see a man forfeit his wealth to a leech. When women are ready for equality, we'd talk. For now, it's all a ruse.

baby124:

Please stop trying to discuss sense to someone who is hell bent on not seeing it. Find something else to do with your time abeg. He does not have anything to say, he doesn't even know what marriage means. He needs to calm down and understand carefully what it means to be married and its attendant responsibilities. Ladies reading, thread carefully and enter with your eyes wide open abeg. There are human beings and men like TV alive. That's all from me on this matter. If you vex untop wetin I write.
I no kuku call anybody name or their Sagamu village in this write up. So if pepper body de hotting you. Continuooo.
As for me, 50:50 of what I can see all the way. We all know everyone hides what they can and only discloses what they can afford to lose. So who is fooling who. Hehe. But the law is clear that the property must be shared. . Anybody that does not like it can bury themselves in a swamp with a ton of weights holding them down.

Kimoni:

No, the state cannot force people to marry anyone but in an event where there is a dispute between couples and the state cannot readily establish the utility both partners derived from each other during the course of the union or the worth of the alternatives they both had to forgo, how best does the state share their combined assets other than a ratio that nearly equates to 50:50?

Kimoni:


Lol...pls don't mind Sagamite. He is actually the next Akarigbo of Sagamu o but the gods won't stamp their confirmation if he refuses to get married. Why do you think TV01 has been on his case for years?

We are watching him...

baby124:

Please stop trying to discuss sense to someone who is hell bent on not seeing it. Find something else to do with your time abeg. He does not have anything to say, he doesn't even know what marriage means. He needs to calm down and understand carefully what it means to be married and its attendant responsibilities. Ladies reading, thread carefully and enter with your eyes wide open abeg. There are human beings and men like TV alive. That's all from me on this matter. If you vex untop wetin I write.
I no kuku call anybody name or their Sagamu village in this write up. So if pepper body de hotting you. Continuooo.
As for me, 50:50 of what I can see all the way. We all know everyone hides what they can and only discloses what they can afford to lose. So who is fooling who. Hehe. But the law is clear that the property must be shared. . Anybody that does not like it can bury themselves in a swamp with a ton of weights holding them down.

Kimoni:


Lol...pls don't mind Sagamite. He is actually the next Akarigbo of Sagamu o but the gods won't stamp their confirmation if he refuses to get married. Why do you think TV01 has been on his case for years?

We are watching him...

Sagamite:


You are talking crap.

And anytime you are asked to explain your crap, you are ranting disconnected crap.

So, please don't talk about discussing sense.

You should go into relationships expecting to leave with what you put in, not other people's money.