sweetcocoa:
I have never implied that loving some means you only want to sleep with them, love ofcourse is not attraction but attraction can lead to love and because it can get complicated, it is best to stick to that one person you are in love with.

Love is the least logical thing ever and it's no news that people get jealous about someone they love, so I don't see how you can claim to be in love and be comfortable with your lover sharing what you two have with someone else.

But what do I know?

bukatyne:


I do not think most cheating spouses want to end their marriages; that's why cheating is mostly hidden.

Do you want to carry out a census? There are more instances of an adulterous husband abandoning his family than an adulterous wife.

Jahblessme:


Because it's just se x and the aim is to have an orga sm and intense pleasure nothing emotional or feelings attached.
However,if the aim is to bond and count stars together plus cuddling my hand no dey that one.Each sexual encounter differs from person to person so love can be 100% seperate from sex.

Just my opinion oo especially in the face of all this lunacy that comes from infidelity..
I respect what you've written.

MRBrownJ:


i am sorry if I (a man) dont have the same views as you, but this discussion isnt about male vs female, is it?

MRBrownJ:


and my point is very clear n the issue by now...



my point is not about whether cheating is right or wrong, its about WHY people cheat... stick to the issue i raised based on the statement you made.

MRBrownJ:

.

again, my whole point is simply about WHY PEOPLE CHEA, but if you do come up with claims/questions that deviate from that school of thought then i will surely reply, as i earlier did.

MRBrownJ:


thats because the act of cheating is VERY simple... you either are strong and respect the r/ship you are in OR you cant respect that r/ship a fall. a strong person would do the RIGHT thing and control their immediate need, a weak one simply falls

MRBrownJ:


men and women do cheat because they cant control themselves and ACT RIGHT (within their r/ship) before going and have sex with another..., what they want afterwards is irrelevant to the point at hand.

MRBrownJ:


[s]you still havent said ANYTHING to counter anything i have wrote so far.. here it is again:
- how can anyone have unflinching love for a person and joyfully DISRESPECT that person and the union they are in?!
- what difference does it make why a person cheat, if the outcome (inability to control themselves aka WEAKNESS) is all the same[/s]?

sweetcocoa:
I don't wish he exists because as far as I'm concerned, he is bad news .

I have accepted the world the way it is, I only wish that humans will be better, thus making the world better.

Goodnight.

kaboninc:


It is not that you don't wish he exist or that or that you don't believe in god. It is that you hate him. You hate him because you've not found answers to questions that defies logic. Like why are we here in the first place? Like why are children born with deformities? Why will someone who claims to be a loving father orders the massacre of another group of people all because of an interest....

Good morning and trust you slept well.

TV01:

Yes . So what do you think should happen?

The wrong party seeks/is given redress. That's the correct legal wording - I stand to be corrected

Divorce always had a cause,. There was a Plaintiff and a defendant. May jurisdictions are changing to no-fault, hence there are simply a petitioner and a respondent. Not sure Nigeria has/will?

Cheating can be "the cause" of violence, cheating is not "cause" for violence. That is, I know it can trigger it, but, I'm not condoning it - no,no, don't mention it, it's your grasp of English, not mine .

They work it out. Why should there be a denial? Marriage is at it's heart a conjugal relationship. Without sex it's barely a marriage, and without consummation, it can be annulled. They work it out. Nothing that can't be fixed if the will is there.

TV

MRBrownJ:


well, if cheating means that much to you, that you are willing to die for it, then so be it

lezz:

Please the original question raised by Bukky is about if couples who cheat still want in on the union.

My answer was : for men and women it is different. So it's about man and women here. I was thinking only logic stood in the way. I now add Retrograde Amnesia as an overwhelming factor impeding factual conclusions here.

Mindfulness:
Where did you outline what should happen? I cannot see it.
Forgiveness or separation.

Yes, it is but I would like to know what kind of redress specifically.

Ok. And I guess you would like to blame and punish? In what way specifically?

Mindfulness:
I never said you were condoning it.

Mindfulness:
Well, in theory maybe. Not in reality, though.

Stillfire:
Now, my moralistic opinion is that cheaters in marriage should be fined and policed by the government and a considerable amount given to the partner that was cheated on.

Stillfire:
In the advent of lack of income to pay the government, the cheater goes to jail for a month or 2 or 3.

Stillfire:
It will not solve the cheating problem, but it would regulate it and help bring some sanity into the institution.

Stillfire:
The law is too focused on 'divorce'. Laws need to be introduced to protect and preserve the marriage institution and the partners involved in the institution.

Stillfire:
You will still have the right to leave the institution, but you will be fined for it. In Nigeria, where conclusions are analyzed and arrived at through religion, I don't see how most people would have a problem with this.

Stillfire:
This will enable only sincere people to get into that institution. The only exception would be if both parties prior to the marriage agree to have an open marriage. Also there will be the freedom of not getting married at all.

Stillfire:
Naa it does not mean that much to me. Just having a discussion on a theoretical basis.

Now, my moralistic opinion is that cheaters in marriage should be fined and policed by the government and a considerable amount given to the partner that was cheated on. In the advent of lack of income to pay the government, the cheater goes to jail for a month or 2 or 3. It will not solve the cheating problem, but it would regulate it and help bring some sanity into the institution. The law is too focused on 'divorce'. Laws need to be introduced to protect and preserve the marriage institution and the partners involved in the institution. You will still have the right to leave the institution, but you will be fined for it. In Nigeria, where conclusions are analyzed and arrived at through religion, I don't see how most people would have a problem with this. This will enable only sincere people to get into that institution. The only exception would be if both parties prior to the marriage agree to have an open marriage. Also there will be the freedom of not getting married at all.

lezz:
No one said it is .

Isn't it funny, given the debate-worthiness of the females here none has found that submission worthy of debunking? None but you, a male

My postulation has been simple. When men cheat, they often do so for fun or just because they can or for ego.
They still love and keep their union even though they can easily divorce and remarry.( the majority of cheating men that is)

Now whether this cheating is right or wrong, is not within the scope or intention of my submissions. I simply answered the question Bukky raised.

The morality of cheating was your idea and you somehow managed to weave it into the discuss.

Over 70% of married men have admitted to cheating. That's those who agreed to be surveyed and owned up. If we take into account those who didn't give an opinion for one reason or the other, the mark will sour to 85%

And all of them are weak!!! Your stand is annoyingly simplistic and base. Religion is the only factor that defines cheating. Again you're taking this discuss away from it's original limit.

Men cheat and still want to stay in marriage, true or false? Answer that!!!

You're saying what you've been saying and what I've been debunking over again.

TV01:

I have outlined my position from a faith position here; https://www.nairaland.com/2347293/possibility-divorce-according-bible/1#45577314

Even if one does not subscribe to the Biblical position, marriage - even civil - is a freely entered into contract. You don't simply renege on a contract without consequence, otherwise, the contract was of no import in the first instance.

By law, the only reasons for divorce where the 3 A's - adultery, abandonment and abuse. So redress. As stated divorce was previously a "fault" issue, so the party looking to leave, or responsible for the split would render forfeits, be it the house, p/alimony, custody etc. And as we saw in that earlier thread, even the 3rd party in an adulterous situation should be penalised. "

No-fault" divorce essentially makes a marriage contract meaningless. Not that I see it as a contract, but over and above that, a covenant. And of course forgiveness is an option for the wronged party

I've made that clear, but your arguments suggests that people are either condoning it, or seeing it as the logical consequence of cheating.


So denial - or reticence, or imbalance, or abeyance - of sex can never be overcome? And the only way to resolve the issue is to cheat


TV

MRBrownJ:


makes sense, but sadly:
1) such law would simply facilitate cheating for rich men, who would gladly pay the fines
2) such law would remove the responsibility of acting RIGHT in marriage, from spouse to government.... no bueno!
3) such law focusses solely on compensating the cheated and doesnt really help the institution of marriage
4) such law "punishes" men who want out of marriage,as if marriage was a life sentence
5) such law favors the desperate women who pretend to be who they are NOT until they get married, and reveal their true self after marriage, thus wanting to stay married AT ALL COST (even if/when they are in a miserable union)
6) such law favors the women who were sexy and attractive before marriage, and who turned into baby whales after a few babies, and forces their husbands to stay with them, even if they dont want to any longer.
7) the cheating partner, AND the person he cheated with, would need to be punished for this law to make some sense. any woman/man sleeping with a married person must pay half the fine imposed... so that people must think twice before being with anyone

Stillfire:


Naa it does not mean that much to me. Just having a discussion on a theoretical basis.
Now, my moralistic opinion is that cheaters in marriage should be fined and policed by the government and a considerable amount given to the partner that was cheated on. In the advent of lack of income to pay the government, the cheater goes to jail for a month or 2 or 3. It will not solve the cheating problem, but it would regulate it and help bring some sanity into the institution. The law is too focused on 'divorce'. Laws need to be introduced to protect and preserve the marriage institution and the partners involved in the institution. You will still have the right to leave the institution, but you will be fined for it. In Nigeria, where conclusions are analyzed and arrived at through religion, I don't see how most people would have a problem with this. This will enable only sincere people to get into that institution. The only exception would be if both parties prior to the marriage agree to have an open marriage. Also there will be the freedom of not getting married at all.

crackhaus:

Hard to admit, but all this talk about who has a right to cheat in marriage will be better laid to rest of women collectively try to abolish this thing called marriage rites (bride price) being paid on their heads.

The truth is that some men (even if they don't say or act like it) have this innate belief that a woman who milked them with expenses such as bride list, bride price, paying for almost everything in the wedding including her wedding dress, and basically giving her the big Cinderella wedding she always dreamed of...has no right to cheat on him - it is what it is.

Women should help themselves and help everyone. Whether you're a working wife or not, some men still feel a woman has no right to cheat on them with the way Nigerian marriage rites are structured.

What you should be trying to deal with is the foundation, which poses the question
"Why exactly do a lot of Nigerian men feel that their wives have no right to cheat on them?" - don't rush, think about it deeply and tell me what you come up with.

fancyupage:


I have answered you. Ignorance

In the yesteryear when women have no protection in law such mumbo jumbo stood but no longer valid.

MRBrownJ:


BWAAAAAAAH you are a comedian, i give you that! retrograde amnesia, REALLY?! are you really that clueless that you will now try to smoke screen this whole discussion with BS, just to try to look like your are making any sense?!?!?!?! ok lets recapitulate, if we may:

you sir Lezz wrote that you thought i was a female hiding behind this moniker. and that No male will be so inexperienced and subjective... you continued by saying that, given the debate-worthiness, of the females here on NL, none has found your submission worthy of debunking. None but me MBJ, a male
so we can clearly understand in theses above quotes that Lezz is not talking about the subject of this thread, he is talking about MY person, MY gender, and he actually believe that, as a man, i should think and REASON like he does, agree to whatever he is writing and have the same school of thought as he does, just because i am a MAN... i guess i should throw my brain in the lagoon, and follow him as a brainwashed sheep, right?!

so I MBJ replied that i was sorry if I (a man) didnt have the same views as he did, but that the discussion wasnt about male vs female
this discussion started by me raising a point that he made about "why people cheat", and certainly not about males of NL vs the females of NL.... and thus he shouldnt even CARE whether i am a man or woman, and instead focus on the subject (and content of what i wrote), and NOT my gender, which is irrelevant here.

and the crazy reply Lezz gives me is that this thread IS indeed about male vs female...
so i guess, because he "THINKS" it is about male vs female (and i am a male), i should disregard my views on the subject, join the "male team of NL" and agree to his views, right?! bwaaaaaah!

furthermore Lezz now writes that i came to counter his point, so our discussion is about the issue HE raised not my "points".
the problem in this discussion is that Lezz is bringing the earlier discussion he had with Bukatyne, as the subject of our debate, while it aint.i just raised a point he made during his discussion with Bukatyne, a point which i fully disagree with. does this mean that any point i make must have any relevance to the debate he has with Bukatyne, HELL NO! my issue is SOLELY on the statement that he made, aka:"A woman's cheating, by the very nature of her sexual and emotional disposition, entails far more graver betrayal than that of a man. Chauvinist? Maybe, but true all the same.A man may cheat and still worships the very ground his wife walks.A woman may cheat and she's body and soul detached from her husband completely." so, THIS is the subject of our discussion, nothing else. and makes NO difference whether he said it during a debate about couples cheating OR the reason anyone cheats?!

in simple terms: this is just as stoopid as, for example, we're having a debate on domestic violence, then someone would say a statement such as "men are inferior than women", and if i am against that particular statement, any point i bring to the table must be relevant to domestic violence?! ABSOLUTE NONSENSE!!!!! any point i bring must be relevant to why men are NOT inferior to women, and nothing else.

crackhaus:
@ fancyupage, still curious as to how you respond to my last comment on the first page.

Surely, I didn't type all that for nothing unless I'm to believe you're in total agreement.

crackhaus:

Not that one, the last post on page (0).

crackhaus:

Lol, I like how you think.

The fact that women find it hard admitting to anything that puts them at a disadvantage is enough to take the opinions of most with a pinch of salt.

A married man wearing his wedding ring is 9times more likely to get hit on than a married woman wearing her wedding ring.
With women, once they're married their 'signal' drastically reduces in the eyes of most men and they suddenly become unapproachable.
There are exceptions though, but only a crazy dude looking to score an easy lay and run away will attempt it.

On the contrary, a married man will still be getting the hits especially if he looks good.
In fact the more married he is, the more attractive he seems to a woman if only just on the surface and not for anything sexual.

Just stating facts, no need for anyone to feel threatened.






******
The reason I outline these facts is to perpetuate the idea as to how cheating to men is seen differently as it is to women.

- A married man with little or no no self control in that position will cheat on his wife with any of these women and not bring emotion into it, after all she made it easy.
- A married woman who may or may not be getting more attention will not cheat at the drop of a hat. Her first line of defence to any man that even mistakingly approaches her is to reveal her marital status.
If the man persists, she automatically begins to feel really attractive and sexy within herself because she doesn't understand why a man who knows her marital status doesn't even care and is still 'dying' for her.
This is where a woman's emotions begin to kick in.
Long story short, by the time she eventually has sex with him, it won't be because she just wants to have fun but because she genuinely feels something for the dude.

Of course there are women who can disconnect emotions from sex but we know their type - we talking about the 'normal' women here.


Cheating can and will never be seen the same when it is done by a man as opposed to when it's done by a woman....unfortunately.

This of course isn't the only reason why this is so, there are other reasons but I was only expanding on Lezzs' premise.

lezz:
[s][/s]

[b]You just managed to appear stupider than you already are.

I give it to you; Your denseness and demency will defy medical and intellectual interpretation!!!

Hollow-headed sponger!!!

Admit it, you felt the feverish compulsion wuzz-bags often do whenever a female asks them a favour
Your needed to impress Bukky after she summoned you. her summons have displayed your ignorance and quasi-analphabetim in a celebratory fashion.

Your lack of intellectual endorsement and desperate need for female validation has rendered you an intellectual vegetable and a salivating woowoo.

Please, my dummy-dumb-dumb, the pic attached is the genesis of this debate. Pay attention to bukky's questions and how I answered it in relation to men and women.

So the issue from the get-go was about when people cheat, do they still wantsl to remain in the marriage. IT ISN'T ABOUT THE INTENTION, IT ISN'T ABOUT THE MORALITY, IT ISN'T ABOUT HOW "WEAK" THEY ARE.


Boneheaded, dyslexic, woozy doofus!!! The answer is men cheat but are likely to remain in marriage. yes. Over 70% of men cheat but we don't have that figure of divorce, do we?

You didn't read the posts or peruse the matter before charging like a sex-famished savage to answer Bukky's summon and type your idiocy away.

Olodo lecturer. Insecure toad!!!

I thought you had sever dementia, alas! I didn't know you have perceptual disturbances and word-blindness to go along!!!

Vain simpleton.

Evasive numbskull!!![/b]

MRBrownJ:


i am sorry if what i wrote hurt you in such a way, lol, so much insults, just because i showed how you tried to weasel your way out of the comments you made. i must have hit the jugular vein bwaaaaaah!

lezz:
I could deal with plain stupidity and ignorance alright.

What smothers and chokes me is "emboldened" ignorance and deceit; you have them in abundance!!!

MRBrownJ:


dont worry my brotha, we all know that when people have nothing INTELLIGENT to say on a subject, they start insulting to derail threads.
sadly, not with me, lowering myself to your level and throwing childish insults, would be only beneficial to you.

loooooolz, you were never part of the subject, buddy.

You only quoted me when a female requested you do and your need to impress her got the better of your cognitive abilities!!!

You didn't even address the issue, you brought in a new argument that wasn't even under contention!!!

You're emotionally wavering, intellectually hollow and logically numb.

Epileptic Püssy-poacher

MRBrownJ:


dont worry my brotha, we all know that when people have nothing INTELLIGENT to say on a subject, they start insulting to derail threads.
sadly, not with me, lowering myself to your level and throwing childish insults, would be only beneficial to you.

a woman who desire the traditional route must accept to become a husband's SLAVE... because thats what our mothers were.

nasha1:
Was ur mother a slave?my mum wasn't and is not.so a woman taking care of her OWN home nd her OWN kids is a slave?smh with this kind of mentality.

MRBrownJ:


i am just gonna copy and paste my reply since your are asking the same question all over my posts...

any women who lived the traditional way were slaves to their husbands, yes!!! doing ALL the chores wasnt even a debate, it was their JOBS, whether they liked it or not. husband's only job was to go to work and make money. if thats what your mother does tday then yes she is a slave indeed.

nasha1:


I wanted 2 post one nd if u know network,u will understand.Now u acting like a little girl,u didn't have 2 do what i did.
nope,u are emotional.was is a debate for their husbands 2 go hustling under the sun and rain,taking care of their kids and a wife?The man had a JOB too and i still maintain ur mother was the slave one,my mum enjoyed caring 4 her home and husband,she worked too and right now,she is enjoying her life because her 3 kids are grown nd dad still take care of her even tho she makes her money because he is used 2 it,she's still his responsibility.According 2 ur logic,any men who worked,put their lives in danger,having 2 wake up early nd come back late everyday was a slave because working wasn't even a debate.smh
Now tell us,how was it 4 her?