I only go for women that like me first.
I don't care if they are just 5 or even less of such women in the whole universe.
You will come to a phase in your life that you will discover that one solid genuine relationship worth more than all these "you look like a triangle, are you Bermuda?"
It becomes genuine romance Vs notch counts. Cos it's notch counts that normally turns men into Shakespeare, Nietzsche, Newton, Einstein, and Elon Musk all at once.
For me, I'm too rational or say nonchalant (but I know you PUAs will say I'm scared of rejection. Lack confidence. Scarcity mindset et al., Ok you won) to start persuading or convincing a woman why she should like me. Don't have the time for such "how to win friends and influence people."
Kudos to the rest of you.
At least, as a woman, you are now a witness of female audacity, arrogance, entitlement mentality, and delusion.
So, when men are complaining about women you already know what they are talking about.
You're squatting with me. I went to work and returned tired and exhausted, only to receive a text from you saying that your boyfriend is around and that I shouldn't come home yet. Is it my apartment or your boyfriend's apartment?
I agree with this because most men actually lose focus when dating. And at the end, they lose women, money, and their dreams.
However, telling men they should only be concerned or interested in love when they are financially buoyant already turns love into a contractual and transactional affair. There's no love where you expect the man to be rich before you see him as a man to either date or marry him. Love is in both foundation and finishing; ugly and beautiful; good and bad; soft and tough; war and peace.
What you didn't also put into consideration in your post is that a rich man can turn into a pauper after a year or more in marriage. This you can't deny. So, at that stage will you advise the man to divorce and go rebuild himself before thinking of a wife again?
You might say it happened in marriage. It's not his fault. But it's also similar to pre-marriage. It is that same man. And the same love we are talking about. The definition of love doesn't change. However, we define love from individual experiences which is totally wrong. Love is love, regardless of what you think, feel, or know.
Reducing men to their ability to provide alone confuses women into thinking that a worthy husband is one that can solely provide for all her needs. This makes love transactional. That means the basis of the relationship is his ability to provide and when he's unable, the union can end - the contractual side.
It therefore also means that since it's only financially buoyant men that should think of love and romance, it will also be nice that rich men shouldn't be accused of infidelity and promiscuity when they can use their money to acquire as much women and "love" as possible.
There's even no guarantee that a man will make the huge money and big break at the particular time he needs it. Simply because life happens. Hardwork, intelligence, patience, consistency, staying single, tenacity, determination, etc will not stop death or the adverse effects of life to befall you when they knock at your door. Inasmuch we are being optimistic and hopeful, it doesn't make us to become the dictator of life or invincible.
Being financially stable as a man before dating or marriage is valid. But judging genuine love on that basis is wrong. Love is not only meant for rich folks. There's love at every phases and places you find yourself. Ignoring love and relationship because you are waiting for a big bang financial breakthrough is a big mistake. You're getting older and biology factors is taking turns on you. We are not even talking about the unfavorable economic changes.
It's not love when you choose to date or marry when you've become financially buoyant and comfortable. Else, you will only meet gold diggers. Better start when you're still at the bottom. True loyalty is not when your friend and lover is in a position of power, affluence, and authority - it's when both of you are in the trenches.
Love doesn't stop you from working hard and building something great. Love doesn't make you stupid. Love doesn't make you financially negligent. Our actions when in love leads to this, not LOVE in itself. Because every intention about LOVE in its truest definition is pure and genuine.
Your advise is valid because most young men of today are stupid and lack understanding of life and female nature and psychology. However, that's not the best route for a man who truly desires genuine love.
It comes down to self-awareness, purpose, phase in life, and pursuit. A man who understands purpose and ambition will not abandon it and pursue women, also, he won't deny himself quality romance and genuine love because he's not yet up to societal standard of financially stable man.
staying single when you know you canโt provide is one of the smartest decisions you can make as a man.
i know a lot of guys want love, they want to have a woman to talk to, someone to care for and maybe build something with but building your future and a relationship at the same time is hard, itโs really hard.
most men lose focus cos theyโre spending their time, money and energy on the wrong things instead of using them to build their future.
then they get stressed and upset, wondering why they not seeing positive or significant results. that is why staying single for now is not a punishment but wisdom. donโt worry, youโre not missing out, lol
look, the same way you wouldnโt invite a person into a building with a poor foundation is the same way you shouldnโt bring a woman into your life when your foundation isnโt solid. a woman worth loving deserves to walk into something stable not into a construction site and be asked to help you figure out the blueprint.
so my friend, use this season to build your character, income, career, discipline and your relationship with God. build a life that is ready for her before she arrives, become the kind of man who is ready to handle what love brings, not someone who is simply hungry for it.
This is a man who lack love at home.
A proper low self-esteem man. A man who doesn't know his worth.
After using money, blood, and sweat to train her in school, he decided to give her a car surprise as a graduation gift to persuade her into marrying him.
He's even lucky she rejected him and the car gift. Most women will collect the ring and car and take him into the next stage - premium pepper+
You men don't always listen.
Use your brain to lead women instead of your pocket.
Money can't buy genuine desire.
@SovereignIM You get a bit of break if you're able to make your money without kowtowing to any employer or source. Money is the major reason we all are in this game. If you're buoyant enough, your freedom isn't far off.
The important thing to note here is that it is more about friction and function than expenditure. There is a level of comfort you need to be much more functional, and sometimes (not always) that comfort usually requires spending more or moving to a more expensive place that removes friction.
Yesterday, as I was driving between Ghana and Togo, I realized how important NOT being afraid of the police or criminals appearing suddenly was to my ability to think and be functional. I could also plan my time better with stable infrastructure.
Sometimes you don't need to spend more; you simply have to remove yourself from the source of friction that's preventing the function. That move could even be lateral.
I have told many friends to move away from London to other parts of England after seeing them struggle and achieve limited results. When they did, not only did they save money, but their productivity quadrupled.
In Accra, I moved around a bit. From East Legon, to Ridge, now in the mountains where I found peace and quiet. This place is cheaper than the other places I had lived, but makes me more functional.
I figured the UK and most countries out early enough. When I was in Lagos, I was away from Lagos most weekends and it kept me sane out of the rat race. I saw Late Otunba Balogun doing it every weekend and finally understood why he did and why he lived the way he did for people famously known to be frugal. He was a very functional person.
Many people think hustling and living under hard conditions are virtues in themselves, but they are not. Effort without exponential reward is stupidity. If you pay more and can get more, it is a better way to be on the path to getting even more.
I'm not missing any point at all.
It's all about profession and job description.
There are cleaners and there are also concierges in every organisations.
A cleaner is expected to clean and go home. Not running errands.
A concierge is expected to run errands not do security or cleaning job.
We're all working in substandard organizations that combines 5 roles into 1 and complain when workers don't meet up.
You can't judge his attitude without correcting the causative factor. If they have left him in his security post alone, we won't have been having this conversation.
Even if you're a novice, you'll always stand tall when you are on the shoulders of giants.
The difference between an unlucky and lucky man is that the former is invisible while the later is visible.
Skills matters.
Competence matters.
Determination matters.
Passion matters.
Good grades matters.
But if you've all these and still invisible to your helpers, you'll always remain at the bottom.
One thing is to be seen, another thing is to be seen, held, and led by the right people.
Time and chance happen to them all.
Regardless, stay in constant motion.
Act like a king and you'll be treated as one.
It's not faking it.
It's stretching yourself to a standard by actively doing the work even if you're not there yet.
Is every girl allergic to building on her own and making generational wealth for herself and family?
Women will always claim to be independent until it comes to putting their hands on deck and doing the job that truly speaks "independence".
A man on motion definitely knows he will accomplish his missions and turn his dreams into reality. He doesn't need a woman before he can do so. Notwithstanding, having a woman who is on the same mission with him or in motion too will make the journey adventurous.
Empress and her fellow modern women just want to be spectators around a struggling man until he makes progress.
Your points are accurate.
Just to chip in a few:
Sending a security man errands when he's actively on duty is extremely wrong whether you're tipping him or granting him a favour. Even if it occurs, it should be at an extremely low probability.
It's not a security man's job to buy fuel, pump water, sweep the compound, or buy lunch.
Tipping him on how he mans his post is valid.
Tipping him on how he does his job sleekly is valid.
Tipping him on how he's able to detect every moves in his environment is valid.
Granting him favour in whatever way you deem fit is valid too.
But tipping him on running errands is wrong at all front. Because he ought not to be doing that.
Security is not casual work. It's a solid profession. For lives and properties to be secured, he must always remain in his duty post.
However, because we are in a paralyzed and dysfunctional society, the abnormal is constantly celebrated over the normal. Abnormal is the norms over here.
Tiping your office security N1k for buying your lunch, is not you doing him a favour. He earned it. If e easy, stand up from your seat and go get the food yourself. Calculate the financial cost of the stress of going the distance to get the food and back.
If you want to do him a favour, give him money for no reason. Someone would do you a favour, but you would see yourslf as the one doing them a favour because you earn higher than them and don't respect them.
If you send money to your colleague that does the same work with you and asked them to please get you lunch on their way back from wherever they were going, you see it as them doing you a favour because you respect them. You don't see it as a favour done to you when it is done by the office security or cleaner because you don't respect them. If you treat these people well and respect them, they will be happy to do things for you. You've become entitled to their help that you now expect them to use their money to fund your lunch.
My security does errands for me, and every errand comes with a tip. That is thank you for doing this because it is not his job. Favour is when I give him money for no reason which happens often or when he has special needs and makes a request and I give him money. You need to start respecting people as human beings, not by how much they earn. This thing is a common problem in our society.
The whole problem started when a security man also doubled as an errand boy.
It clearly shows that her working place are not serious about safeguarding their lives and properties.
Since our new security man resumed work in March, my colleague usually sends him to get her lunch.
She usually sends โฆ5,000 to his Opay.
The food she buys doesn't exceed โฆ4,000, hence the extra tip is for him.
She has done this everyday since that March.
On Tuesday, as she sent him as usual, she later called him on phone to add Tigernut which is sold for โฆ1,700 without sending any extra money.
Only for our security guy to call her, and asked for the extra โฆ700.
My colleague didn't pay attention to him, because she was busy at work.
Only for our security guy to come back to the office to ask for the extra โฆ700 without even buying the food.
Angrily, she asked him to send back her โฆ5,000 that she wasn't interested in the food again.
Now our security guy went and told HR that since this week, that my colleague totally snubs his greetings, and it is making him so uncomfortable.
Tight knitted woven devotion to each other. A complete unification of hearts. That moment when the two actually become ONE. That the absence of one feels like a heartbreak, hence, the tendency to always keep stalking to check if they are safe and sound. To check if they are alive. The yearning for your true love and desire. Healthy obsession. This is when both are crazily in love with each other.
The difference between stalking as a love language and stalking is that the former is as a result of mutual devotion and appreciation for the wholesomeness both carries in their hearts. It's like the synergy between the soul and the flesh - inseparable. Stalking in the later form is begging for love where there's no love. Unhealthy obsession.
Granddaughter shares the before-and-after transformation of her 76-year-old grandmother after leaving Nigeria, and the striking change has left many questioning the quality of life in Nigeria.
This is the difference between quality and quantity.
The determinant factor here is not even the price but the aesthetics and symbol of status attached to both in how they're being perceived.
Tin is a symbol of elegance, status, quality, strength, longevity, excellence, pride, and beauty. Can't roughly be handled. Its sharp edges will cut your fingers if you dear manhandled it. It's shiny and attractive.
Sachet is a symbol of easiness and care free. Doesn't bothered being tossed to and fro because its flexible nature can make it adapt to different pressure. It has an enticing quantity and a cheap price but still holds less value in the eyes of both top and low consumers.
When it comes to speaking value for value, even the lowest consumer knows which one is the best.
I bought a container of milk for โฆ6,500 at the supermarket last time but today I decided to get the sachet for โฆ4,200 instead.
Poured it into the empty container and it filled it up completely.
That means Iโll stick to the sachet since itโs cheaper but gives the same quantity.
If youโve been buying the milk container for โฆ6,500, try the sachet milk for โฆ4,200 and pour it into your container itโs the same quantity, just a better price ๐
There are more beautiful women in the universe than high value men (HVM).
Because these women are mostly available to the HVM, the majority of men who are low value men, thinks that beautiful women are scarce. And that's why when you see a beautiful woman with a low value man, there's a high tendency that he will pedestalise her.
Men don't have problem with dating down. They've been doing it for aeons and will eternally do it.
The problem we're experiencing in the dating market today is as a result of economic changes that has also affected our culture and social lifestyle.
Imagine saying your husband that earns 1million naira per month is your equal when you you're earning 250k or way less.
A man that's earning times 3 of your income and still chooses you needs to worshipped and praised every day. Because there's nothing you are actually doing for him in that household that he can't do at a lesser costs with little to no drama. Seeing him as your equal is raw foolishness.
Hypergamy is a great blessing to men.
Let me explain:
Because the cost of pregnancy is high for women and women don't just open their legs for any man, men strive hard to become men women desire. And that striving hard made them become better and stronger than women in all ramifications.
The basis of life is sex and procreation. Every other thing is just icing on the cake. Because without sex and procreation there will be no civilization and every great thing humans have witnessed and yet to witness comes from the chamber of sex.
Sex is easy for women but difficult for men. So, for men to get sex, they must engage in different performances and acrobatics and which has shaped them into what they are today.
Neither culture nor social changes can ever erase hypergamy - that's a permanent evolutionarily work nature has infused women and that gene is waxing stronger.
Because if women decides to date lower, men will not strive to get better. And if men don't get better society can't witness development.
What's men reward for dating down: power, control, and authority over humans and the universe.
However, due to economic and social changes, men are becoming aware of the sexual mating strategies and are having a serious doubt about it. Some are even checking out of the game entirely. But everything that happens is nature's way of ensuring balance between the homo sapiens.