Abdul🥷🏼

|| 𝐑𝐞𝐛𝐞𝐥 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐚 𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞🥷🏼||

[Abdul🥷🏼 @sirsavagex]

𝙴𝙸𝙳 𝙼𝚄𝙱𝙰𝚁𝙰𝙺🌙

[Abdul🥷🏼 @sirsavagex]

@delelasisi72 @Letter_to_Jack Who do you think supplied it from abroad to them 🙂

[Abdul🥷🏼 @sirsavagex]

@hezekiaholly @Wizarab10 All those carnival wey rugged men full.

This life no prove anything for anybody oo

[kira 👾 @kirawontmiss]

caring about homeless people only when they’re attractive is sick

[Abdul🥷🏼 @sirsavagex]

@hezekiaholly @Wizarab10 Thank God say you use your sense Oyo’s for no fit see this tweet today 💯😂

[Abdul🥷🏼 @sirsavagex]

@Lazarus_112 @egbe_ntu Good goy👍🏻

[STUNNER @Cr7Godbrand]

Women were never oppressed. There was NO oppression. What women call oppression today was just PROTECTION.

Let me break it down for you:

1. VOTING:
Women say "we couldn't vote." But back then, voting was not a right, it was a RESPONSIBILITY. Only people who owned property, paid heavy taxes, held public office, or were drafted to DIE in wars could vote.

100% of the people dying in wars were men. You want to vote to send men to war, while you sit at home safe? Makes zero sense. Voting was linked to the DRAFT. You vote, you go to war. Men understood that.

2. BANKING:
"You needed your husband's signature!" Yes, because by LAW, a woman was LEGALLY PROTECTED from debt. Her husband was the head of household and by law HE was 100% liable for ALL debts she made. If she borrowed and couldn't pay, THEY CAME FOR HIM, not her. Creditors went to jail or lost everything - the husband.

So of course his signature was needed. He is the one who goes to prison if you don't pay.

3. PROPERTY - COVERTURE:
They cry about coverture. Coverture meant when you marry, your property merges under ONE name, the husband's, because there was ONE tax filing per household, not two like today. ONE household, ONE name, ONE tax.

It was not to steal from you. It was because the husband was legally responsible for you. If you got sued, he paid. If you owed taxes, he paid. He took your debts too.

These men had mothers they worshipped and daughters they would die for. They were not oppressing women, they were covering them.

4. CONTROLLING WOMEN'S BODIES:
The biggest lie. Back then there were NO abortion pills, NO condoms that worked, NO diapers, NO formula, NO government money to raise a child alone as a single mother, NO good jobs for women to survive alone.

Who bears the most risk in unprotected sex? THE WOMAN. She gets pregnant for 9 months, she risks death during childbirth, which was very common then.

So what did society do? They made sure women stayed virgins until marriage, and made sure men MARRIED them before sex. That is not oppression, that is PROTECTION from becoming a single mother with 3 kids and no food.

And it WORKED. Single motherhood rate was less than 5%. Marriage rate was 90%. Children grew up with fathers.

Today you have "freedom" - 40% single mothers, fatherless homes, abortions everywhere, and women crying that men don't want them.

There was never oppression. There was a system that understood biology and protected women from the consequences of their own choices.

[Abdul🥷🏼 @sirsavagex]

@lucheelou @TrendingEx Omoo…Mumu plenty for this app o

[Ben @Spar_tacuss]

“my ex used to beat me “

me: ok i can do that

“my ex was toxic “

me: ok i can be toxic

“my ex used to give me monthly allowa…”

me:

[Abdul🥷🏼 @sirsavagex]

@eyilucky13 @kunmigbenga Damn! You, your fam and your sister no levels if na another man dey finance her lifestyle before them marry💯

[Abdul🥷🏼 @sirsavagex]

@AlamutuOla @TheLowkeyMummy An idle woman is a dangerous woman

[STUNNER @Cr7Godbrand]

Let me explain women’s biology to you that your MOTHER wouldn’t teach you.

Women cannot survive by strength. So nature gave them a different survival trick: fit in or die.

They don't have a truth filter. They have a SAFETY filter.

A man hears an idea and thinks: "Is this true or false?"
A woman hears an idea and thinks: "If I say this, will other women still like me? Will I be cancelled? Will I be alone?"

Belonging matters to women more than truth. Always.

That's why mass media owns them.

You put the same slogan on every TV, every TikTok, every Instagram ad - "girlboss," "finding myself," divorce glow "you don't need a family," "freeze your eggs"

and her brain thinks it's REAL because every woman is saying it.

You don't need to convince her with evidence. You just need to make her think EVERYONE ELSE already believes it.

She will swallow any lie if it makes her feel included.

Tell her being a single mother at 35 with a corporate job is empowerment and she'll clap, even while she's on antidepressants and crying herself to sleep.

Tell her being a wife at 20 with 3 kids is oppression, and she'll laugh at her own mother.

The media doesn't win by being right. It wins by making her scared to be LEFT OUT!!!

Real intellectual independence requires the ability to stand alone and defend yourself when the whole crowd turns on you. That kind of courage is built on physical strength. Only a mind that knows it can survive outside the herd dares to ask:

"Is it true - even if everyone says it's false?"

Only men can do that.

_"It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies..."_
*- George Orwell, 1984*

[Abdul🥷🏼 @sirsavagex]

@darnie_dees @OurFavOnlineDoc Shay pastor Chris be Jesus?

Understand life

[Abdul🥷🏼 @sirsavagex]

@funnyaries0418 @RollinRhythms Using this scenario, would you say America has progressed or regressed

[Abdul🥷🏼 @sirsavagex]

@kamsysrevenge She for do this one for Oshodi na. Make boys run move the phone

[FNG @bigfarter228]

@WiggerMaggot Even the fact that I had to see this is rape

[𝟎𝟒. @niellxx0]

how it feels to be self aware and still repeat self destructive patterns

[Aloyinlepon @Sugarboyadeola1]

When someone tries to provoke me but there’s money in my account

[Motionz Samzy 🇳🇬 @samzy_yt]

The interesting part is that two things can be true at once:
A message can deserve examination, while the people delivering it can still be deeply flawed.
If a preacher abused the trust placed in them, that tells us something about the preacher not automatically about the truth or falsehood of the message.
Even a bad messenger can carry a message worth investigating.
So the real question isn’t simply, “Were some of the messengers corrupt?” History already gives us enough reasons to say that some were.
The better question is: Can the message itself withstand scrutiny when separated from the character, motives, and mistakes of those who delivered it?
Don’t confuse the messenger with the message.
Sometimes the smartest audit isn’t deleting the entire file because one page was compromised.

[asekun @EngrAsekun]

Can I call you to vent? No. When you dey your ovulation period, did you call me?

[Abdul🥷🏼 @sirsavagex]

@ayamdayamond @Shadaya_Knight Do anything wey sweet you👍🏻