Alpha Esq

Software Developer, Law Graduate and Alpha Male

[Alpha Esq @alpha_the_dev]

You are speaking truth here, but let me add something many won't say out loud.

These men shout "virgin or nothing" because they know exactly how they moved in their younger days. They chased girls, disvirgined some, enjoyed the thrill, then moved on without looking back. Now that age is catching up and they want to settle, they suddenly remember family name and legacy. They fear bringing home a woman whose past mirrors their own wild years. Deep down, they worry about comparison, about whispers, about the day their wife might throw their history back at them in anger.

But here is the part that stings. They still expect full fire in the bedroom after marriage. No dry season, no excuses, no "I am tired" for long. They want the experience of a woman who has known nothing, yet the performance of one who has seen everything. That is where the real contradiction sits.

The unexpected truth? Many of these same men were once the reason some girls lost their way. They pressured, they promised, they collected, then disappeared when responsibility knocked. Now they want untouched purity as if the market is still fresh.

Tell me this, if you have eaten from every plate before, why act shocked when your own plate no longer looks special?

At the end of the day, every man must look himself in the mirror and decide what standard he truly kept. Because the woman you choose will live with the consequences of the life you lived before her. Think about that before the next loud demand.

[Àgbà John Doe @jon_d_doe]

The reson why some men are shouting "virgin or nothing" is because of the awful things that they have done with different women.

Men a big hypocrites.

And most of them are not ready to be in a sexless relationship.

End.

[Maxvayshia™ @maxvayshia]

They all look tired, fatigued, hungry and foolish. And they all have the look of only one peoples other tribes are worried about in the quest for unity in Nigeria.

[OurFaveOnlineDoc 🇬🇧 🇳🇬 @OurFavOnlineDoc]

This is a new world-class hospital completed and built in El Salvador by their president with the equivalent of 85billion naira.

An audit by the nigerian senate uncovered 210 TRILLION naira was “missing” from NNPC in 2017-2023.

Nigerian politicians need to be tied and killed.

[Sir Dickson @Wizarab10]

Tinubu has so underperformed that we have forgotten how bad Buhari was. We knew it was going to be worse than Buhari’s tenure, but it was unimaginable that a country could be this bad.

[MR DANIEL @Maazijnr]

Yesterday evening, I Went on a date with this girl, it was our first time meeting, I walked in prepared, had 200k in my debit card.
Before the night ended, I was borrowing from opay just to complete payment.
Thought i was man enough until she smiled, that smile changed the entire budget.

[Alpha Esq @alpha_the_dev]

An explanation

[👑S.A.L.A.K.O🕊 @UnkleAyo]

That's where the active role, men like this played for decades.

If I dey talk, e dey be like I dey crase.

This man and his useless movies psychologically warped religious morons.

Junks of gory heaven/hell lamba he was producing as movies, for decades.

Religion is strategic.

[Alpha Esq @alpha_the_dev]

@KerenKBitto That boy use to joke too much

[Alpha Esq @alpha_the_dev]

@Mrbankstips Boss try dey drop better code for sporty bet some of us can't create stake acc😪😪

[Alpha Esq @alpha_the_dev]

@39billion Y don't u try cooking like 3 days game it has more chance of booming

[Alpha Esq @alpha_the_dev]

People need to understand that there is a direct relationship between the ineptitude of the Nigerian government, the failure of the Nigerian state, and the fanaticism with which many Nigerian churches and church members behave.

If you observe the average Nigerian Christian or regular churchgoer, you will notice a level of religious intensity that cannot be explained solely by love for God. There is often another factor at play: survival. For many people, religion is not merely a spiritual commitment; it becomes a coping mechanism in an environment where the state has failed to provide security, opportunity, healthcare, reliable infrastructure, and economic stability.

As a result, many Nigerian Christians come to see their relationship with God as essential to their survival. Their faith is no longer simply about loving God, worshipping God, or seeking spiritual fulfillment. It becomes tied to the belief that without God, they cannot make it through life.

The irony is that people should ideally love God even when survival is not at stake. Faith should be a choice, not a desperate necessity. But many religious institutions thrive on creating or reinforcing the perception that outside God there is no hope, no prosperity, no protection, and no future.

This produces an unhealthy dependence on religion. The individual’s relationship with faith becomes less about conviction and more about necessity.

That is why a truly functional Nigeria could have profound consequences for religion. If the roads improve, security improves, the economy improves, and people discover that they can survive, and even thrive, without relying on religious institutions for every aspect of their lives, many would begin to reevaluate the relationship they have had with religion.

Some might remain believers, but their faith would become more voluntary and less survival-driven. Others, however, might react in the opposite direction. Having spent years believing that religion was indispensable, they may feel deceived when they discover that many of the things they attributed solely to divine intervention can also be achieved through functional institutions, good governance, and economic opportunity. In some cases, that disillusionment could even produce hostility toward religion and religious leaders.

This is why many pastors have a strong incentive to preserve the perception that life outside God is impossible. If people stop believing that their survival depends on religious institutions, the influence, authority, and economic power of those institutions inevitably diminish. And when that happens, some religious leaders risk facing not only a loss of income, but also public resentment from those who feel they were conditioned to depend on religion in ways that may not have been entirely spiritual.

[Ozedikus Nwanne @Ozedikus]

Your religious leaders have chosen to remain silent because subconsciously they know that if the country becomes better, places of worship will be empty. Most people go there seeking hope and if everything was good, only those who genuinely love God will attend services and there’s not a lot of them

[Alpha Esq @alpha_the_dev]

People need to understand that there is a direct relationship between the ineptitude of the Nigerian government, the failure of the Nigerian state, and the fanaticism with which many Nigerian churches and church members behave.

If you observe the average Nigerian Christian or regular churchgoer, you will notice a level of religious intensity that cannot be explained solely by love for God. There is often another factor at play: survival. For many people, religion is not merely a spiritual commitment; it becomes a coping mechanism in an environment where the state has failed to provide security, opportunity, healthcare, reliable infrastructure, and economic stability.

As a result, many Nigerian Christians come to see their relationship with God as essential to their survival. Their faith is no longer simply about loving God, worshipping God, or seeking spiritual fulfillment. It becomes tied to the belief that without God, they cannot make it through life.

The irony is that people should ideally love God even when survival is not at stake. Faith should be a choice, not a desperate necessity. But many religious institutions thrive on creating or reinforcing the perception that outside God there is no hope, no prosperity, no protection, and no future.

This produces an unhealthy dependence on religion. The individual’s relationship with faith becomes less about conviction and more about necessity.

That is why a truly functional Nigeria could have profound consequences for religion. If the roads improve, security improves, the economy improves, and people discover that they can survive, and even thrive, without relying on religious institutions for every aspect of their lives, many would begin to reevaluate the relationship they have had with religion.

Some might remain believers, but their faith would become more voluntary and less survival-driven. Others, however, might react in the opposite direction. Having spent years believing that religion was indispensable, they may feel deceived when they discover that many of the things they attributed solely to divine intervention can also be achieved through functional institutions, good governance, and economic opportunity. In some cases, that disillusionment could even produce hostility toward religion and religious leaders.

This is why many pastors have a strong incentive to preserve the perception that life outside God is impossible. If people stop believing that their survival depends on religious institutions, the influence, authority, and economic power of those institutions inevitably diminish. And when that happens, some religious leaders risk facing not only a loss of income, but also public resentment from those who feel they were conditioned to depend on religion in ways that may not have been entirely spiritual.

[Alpha Esq @alpha_the_dev]

@thesiriii Explain setting camera to cry?

[Alpha Esq @alpha_the_dev]

You solve it like this: 2 raised to the power 2 equals 4. 4 times 2 equals 8. 5 raised to the power 2 equals 25. 25 times 2 equals 50. Then 6 raised to the power 2 equals 36. 36 times 2 equals 72.

[YoungHoon Kim @yhbryankimiq]

IF YOU SOLVE THIS, YOUR IQ IS MENSA LEVEL. CAN YOU?

[Alpha Esq @alpha_the_dev]

@yhbryankimiq You solve it like this: 2 raised to the power 2 equals 4. 4 times 2 equals 8. 5 raised to the power 2 equals 25. 25 times 2 equals 50. Then 6 raised to the power 2 equals 36. 36 times 2 equals 72.

[Alpha Esq @alpha_the_dev]

If a person purchases or keeps a cow known to be dangerous, violent, or reasonably capable of causing serious harm, the law imposes a duty on that person to properly restrain and control the animal. The rationale is simple: ownership and control carry responsibility. Once an animal is within your custody, you are expected to take reasonable precautions to prevent it from causing foreseeable harm to others.

Therefore, where the owner fails to adequately restrain such an animal, and the animal goes on to kill another person, liability attaches to the owner, not because he physically committed the act himself, but because his negligence created the conditions that made the harm possible. The law treats this failure as culpable because a reasonable person in that position ought to have anticipated the risk and taken steps to prevent it.

The principle is that one who has control over a potentially dangerous animal cannot escape responsibility for the consequences of failing to exercise that control. If violence from the animal was foreseeable, and the owner neglected to prevent it, the resulting death is attributable to that negligence.

[IJAODOLA JAMIU @_fefas]

Lawyers, if your cow kills someone or destroys properties

Who will bear the liabilities?

[Alpha Esq @alpha_the_dev]

If a person purchases or keeps a cow known to be dangerous, violent, or reasonably capable of causing serious harm, the law imposes a duty on that person to properly restrain and control the animal. The rationale is simple: ownership and control carry responsibility. Once an animal is within your custody, you are expected to take reasonable precautions to prevent it from causing foreseeable harm to others.

Therefore, where the owner fails to adequately restrain such an animal, and the animal goes on to kill another person, liability attaches to the owner, not because he physically committed the act himself, but because his negligence created the conditions that made the harm possible. The law treats this failure as culpable because a reasonable person in that position ought to have anticipated the risk and taken steps to prevent it.

The principle is that one who has control over a potentially dangerous animal cannot escape responsibility for the consequences of failing to exercise that control. If violence from the animal was foreseeable, and the owner neglected to prevent it, the resulting death is attributable to that negligence.

[Alpha Esq @alpha_the_dev]

@zillionokoye I have followed you

[Alpha Esq @alpha_the_dev]

The moment people see images of Africa on magazines or television, images of children suffering from kwashiorkor, children crying from hunger, villages destroyed by war, famine, insecurity, and poverty, the immediate instinct is usually emotional. People want to trigger their sense of African pride and say, “This is not Africa.”

But the truth is, it is Africa. Not Africa in its entirety, but a very significant part of Africa.

Let us stop pretending otherwise.

If you are living in Northern Nigeria, there is a very high chance that your community has been affected by insecurity, insurgency, banditry, displacement, or poverty in one form or another. If you are in the Democratic Republic of Congo, generations of people have lived under the shadow of conflict and war. If you are in South Sudan, war has shaped the lives of millions. Across several African countries, instability, poverty, disease, hunger, and weak institutions are not isolated incidents. They are realities that define the daily existence of countless people.

That is precisely the part of Africa that needs help.

Now, when somebody like Elon Musk says that the average African villager may be less happy than the average American living in Beverly Hills, I think the entire framing is flawed from the beginning. The issue is not happiness. Happiness is an unreliable measurement.

The proper measurement is quality of life.

Whether somebody is smiling or not is irrelevant if the person has no access to healthcare, no access to quality education, poor nutrition, unstable electricity, insecurity, and no economic opportunities. Happiness can exist in almost any condition. A person can be poor and happy. A person can be rich and miserable. Somebody can lose a parent and still laugh the next day. Somebody can have everything materially and still feel empty.

So happiness is not the standard we should be using when discussing development or human welfare.

The real question is this: how well does the person live?

Can the person feed properly? Can the person access medical care? Is there security? Is there education? Is there infrastructure? Is there opportunity? Those are the real measurements of a functioning society.

What frustrates me is when people deliberately ignore these measurable realities and shift the conversation toward emotional concepts like happiness, as though happiness alone cancels suffering.

It does not.

Now, concerning pride and self-esteem, I think many people misunderstand what self-esteem actually is. Self-esteem is personal. It should come from your own values, your own competence, your own achievements, and your own character.

The moment your sense of worth becomes dependent on the achievements of your race, tribe, country, or ethnic group, you are no longer operating from personal self-esteem. You are operating from group identity.

And when people derive superiority, worth, or emotional validation from the achievements of the groups they belong to, that is where bigotry begins.

So when somebody says that seeing starving African children on television damages their self-esteem, what they are really saying is that their sense of worth depends on collective racial imagery rather than personal substance.

That is not self-esteem. That is emotional dependency on group identity.

If your personal worth collapses simply because negative images of your continent are shown on television, then your identity was never truly yours to begin with.

[Magatte Wade @magattew]

The aid industry raises money by showing the world images of African children with flies in their eyes and swollen bellies. 

That money is supposed to help us.
But those images do something else too. They plant a belief. 

One of my employees, Yahara, told me she grew up thinking Africans were inferior because every magazine showed people like her looking pathetic while the world "saved" them.

Aid didn't just fail to fix poverty. It taught an entire generation of Africans to feel small.

[Alpha Esq @alpha_the_dev]

The moment people see images of Africa on magazines or television, images of children suffering from kwashiorkor, children crying from hunger, villages destroyed by war, famine, insecurity, and poverty, the immediate instinct is usually emotional. People want to trigger their sense of African pride and say, “This is not Africa.”

But the truth is, it is Africa. Not Africa in its entirety, but a very significant part of Africa.

Let us stop pretending otherwise.

If you are living in Northern Nigeria, there is a very high chance that your community has been affected by insecurity, insurgency, banditry, displacement, or poverty in one form or another. If you are in the Democratic Republic of Congo, generations of people have lived under the shadow of conflict and war. If you are in South Sudan, war has shaped the lives of millions. Across several African countries, instability, poverty, disease, hunger, and weak institutions are not isolated incidents. They are realities that define the daily existence of countless people.

That is precisely the part of Africa that needs help.

Now, when somebody like Elon Musk says that the average African villager may be less happy than the average American living in Beverly Hills, I think the entire framing is flawed from the beginning. The issue is not happiness. Happiness is an unreliable measurement.

The proper measurement is quality of life.

Whether somebody is smiling or not is irrelevant if the person has no access to healthcare, no access to quality education, poor nutrition, unstable electricity, insecurity, and no economic opportunities. Happiness can exist in almost any condition. A person can be poor and happy. A person can be rich and miserable. Somebody can lose a parent and still laugh the next day. Somebody can have everything materially and still feel empty.

So happiness is not the standard we should be using when discussing development or human welfare.

The real question is this: how well does the person live?

Can the person feed properly? Can the person access medical care? Is there security? Is there education? Is there infrastructure? Is there opportunity? Those are the real measurements of a functioning society.

What frustrates me is when people deliberately ignore these measurable realities and shift the conversation toward emotional concepts like happiness, as though happiness alone cancels suffering.

It does not.

Now, concerning pride and self-esteem, I think many people misunderstand what self-esteem actually is. Self-esteem is personal. It should come from your own values, your own competence, your own achievements, and your own character.

The moment your sense of worth becomes dependent on the achievements of your race, tribe, country, or ethnic group, you are no longer operating from personal self-esteem. You are operating from group identity.

And when people derive superiority, worth, or emotional validation from the achievements of the groups they belong to, that is where bigotry begins.

So when somebody says that seeing starving African children on television damages their self-esteem, what they are really saying is that their sense of worth depends on collective racial imagery rather than personal substance.

That is not self-esteem. That is emotional dependency on group identity.

If your personal worth collapses simply because negative images of your continent are shown on television, then your identity was never truly yours to begin with.