I like my barber after all I've been going there since I was 12, which is not as impressive as it seems considering my whole decade abroad thing. However there is clearly a bond, you would all agree. My barber has finally paid me for my decades (fine, years) of loyalty. It gave me the inspiration for a blog post. Now this is a big deal, cos I've been slacking a bit on the whole posting thing, and it's been over a week since the last once. So y'all say a big thank you to my barber.

The conversation at the barber was sparked by a Nigerian movie, which is renowned the world over as a veritable fount of ideas. This Nigerian movie chose to focus on the topical issue of children from a previous relationship. As you would expect the child was causing a lot of friction and angst for the romantic leading. I know this based on all the eye-rolling and hand-wringing I witnessed.

A female customer was watching the movie via the mirror while being fitted for an "Anita Baker" At one point of the movie, she tsked about how sad it was that men were unable to accept children of prior relationships. That women were clearly more understanding in this matter.

The men in the room, mostly the barbers, were not willing to take such a comment lying down. They rose as one to declaim that it was indeed the women who were worse. After all it is a known fact that the women would mistreat the child. Everyone knowns that men would be more understanding in those situations. One of the barbers even used himself as an example saying that he wouldn't care if his woman had a child from a previous relationship.

My first instinct was to come down on the side of the woman, blaming the barbers' delusions on too much Snow White as children (Damn Disney!!!). How can any credible person say that women are worse than men when it comes to children from previous relationship. I'm sorry, I just can't see a nigerian guy, let alone his mother, agreeing to marry a woman who had a child from a prior relationship. However I can see, and have seen, women marry men with children from prior relationships.

However I realised that in this instance, as in most others, the men and the women were talking about two separate things:

The lady was talking about the willigness of the women to accept children from past relationships, something that women clearly do more than me.

The men were talking about treatment of children after the decision was made. The men were saying that given the decision of the man to pursue the relationship, he would treat the child better than a woman would in that situation - which I submit is an arguable point.

It still doesn't wash as an argument though, look at is this way. Take a scenario in which a couple that is now broken up had a kid in the last year, and answer these two questions:

who would you expect to be married in three years time?

and

whose spouse would you trust to take care of the kid?


The first answer to my mind, is the guy, and the second answer is a shrug. So I am almost definitely going to declare this new battle for the women.

However I have decided I don't need to, time will sort this one out. After all the Nigerian inability to use contraceptives in the prescribed manner is resulting a lot more people having children up and down the place, and they will give us enough evidence to come to a conclusion.

I will say that y'all don't have to be driven by the facts and can opine to your hearts content. So who wins this one - the "Anita Baker" or the Barber?

There is a story making the rounds in the financial services community that is too good not to share:

Apparently a branch manager at one of the V/I bank branches made all of her marketing staff kneel down for not meeting their deposit targets. After word of this got out, the manager was sanctioned by head honcho at headquarters. In some versions she was reprimanded and in others she was sacked. I like to think that she was patted on the back and told to keep up the good work :D

I know it's bloody absurd, but it's hilarious right. Imagine coming into work one day and being told to kneel down as punishment. I mean the maturity of the lady that she thought kneeling down was sufficient enough punishment for failing to meet a business target. I mean, I can clearly imagine that marketing woman being driven to extremes of offering sex to a client just to avoid kneeling down. I mean I'm not a woman, but I know that I would seriously consider it. After all being made to kneel down is a fate worse than death.

Now let us leave aside the idiot woman who thought kneeling down was the height of punishment, and address those special people that actually knelt down instead of rolling their eyes. As you would expect the male senior managers were the first to go on their kneels. I guess they felt that they had the most to lose. Think about it, if they lose the job, their no-qualified arse would not be able to cop that N15m salary with 100% bonus, rock those two cars, romance the beautiful professional wife, and organise the unilag going model girlfriend. Who wouldn't drop to their kneels at the thought of losing the good life.

My heart actually goes out to the junior people on the marketing team who supposedly were some of the last to drop to their kneels. They do not deserve the gutless wonders that they have as superiors. Telling these young ones that the only thing that matters is job security sets a very bad precedent for them for the rest of their careers. People who would do anything to keep the "job" would literally do anything. It is a short step from kneeling down to not get fired, to coming back to the bank without your skirt to not get fired (true story - it was a long jacket)

I like to think I'm the kind of person that would have rolled my eyes and walked out, but I suppose I cannot judge the people until I am in that kind of situation. Still I just can't see it. What about you? What would you have done?

Wow! I got 13 comments on me last post and only two of them were mine. If you guys keep this up, I'm gonna think that people read me blog again. I mean this post got more comments that my last four posts combined. I was talking with another ancient blogger (2 years is clearly ancient in blog terms) and we were of the opinion that we are like those neighborhoods that used to be cream 20 years ago, 10 years ago became a ghetto, and presently are becoming gentrified. I decided that we (at least) I am either in the descent to ghetto phase, or firmly in said ghetto.

I just want to say a brief shout out to all my peeps that were stuck in petrol queues this weekend because of the almost strike. I know y' NUPENG is a %(!*%!!#. However u have to understand that if NUPENG did not flex its power it might lose relevance. After all people have to remember that they are the ones that forced Babangida out of power. I mean NUPENG also cares about you, that is why they went on strike. I mean people are suffering, and NUPENG has to stand up for them.

In other news, I saw one guy pick up 15 chicks in about 5 mins. He did them all at once to. I know, I know. It sounds impossible doesn't it. However when you are a member of the entourage of an American performer at the This Day Music festival, it's a piece of cake.

Here is what you do - be at Eko hotel on a saturday evening around 8, walk in to the resturant where 15 women are seated around the table. Look to see that they are all dressed like it's a Saturday evening and are clearly planning to party. Notice the fact that all of them seem to have shared one bottle of champagne between themselves. Now introduce yourself to them as a member of XX (didn't hear the name) entourage. Ask them to come up to see y'all when they are done. Hear them agree and know that your work is done.

I just want to let y'all know that I am not hating on the women for doing the whole groupie thang. After all I went to a sports mad American university, and some of my best friends were groupies :D

In closing I must say that the New Yorker Obama cartoon is beyond ridiculous, I mean are they effing kidding! As someone said, if they were saying that this was a portrait of right wing views, why didn't they have some republican (read McCain) think it in a bubble.

Aiight I'm done.

Like most people in my generation, I discovered the existence of the question upon my first viewing of When Harry Met Sally

If you saw the movie you probably already know the question, however I will repeat it for those benighted souls who should immediately run to their nearest video club / store and rent / buy this classic.

The question is simply - Can Men & Women Be Friend

The answer in the movie was - No cos the sex stuff always gets in the way

This answer is like the law of gravity - no matter how much you wish it doesn't exit, there a'int nothing you can do about it.

In these so-called "post-modern" days, it is believed that we have indeed dispensed with the past, that men and women can be friends. We have declared gravity to no longer exist

Believing that men and can be friends without the sex stuff getting in the way is like me believing I will fly as I swan dive of Third Mainland Bridge. You cannot wish away the fact that if you click with someone, at some point in time you will think that you should be attracted to that person.

To my mind there are three cases in which men and women can be friends. To be clear we don't mean - "hey wassup, how are you" friends cos those friends come in all genders. We mean deep and meaningful friends, who get each other and all that jazz. Now with that caveat, on to the categories:

1. The Silent Sufferer

One person likes the other but the feeling is not returned. It has come up already, and has been "resolved" - The one is willing to suffer the psychological torture in order to maintain a certain closeness. The other is willing to allow the one to go through the pyschological torture in order to keep a friendship - after all the two click and have fun together

2. The Past Hook Up

Been there done that got the t-shirt. The two have tried the couple route and realised that they got along like a house on fire that finally burnt down. However they still have fun together and so once the scars of the break-up are past they can eventually be friends. This category suffers from occasional Friends with Benefits syndrome.

3. The Wanabe Egyptians

Those souls that think denial is a river in Egypt. These are the ones that believe that all is fine and that they are just friends and everything is fine. That they click, but are like brother and sister and are in fact not attracted to each other. Well eventually something gives, they find out that they are not indeed like brother and sister, well unless of course they are Egyptians (-100 cool points for anyone that got the reference). Anyhow this group of people either become category 1 or category 2. So think of the category 3 people as in transition to either of the two above categories.

In closing, before you attempt to disagree with me - think about your experience and experiences of any and all of your friends, and see if you can come up with a case of close friends of the opposing sex without any lingering sexual tension.

Now discuss.

In 2004, our beloved Bill Cosby created a bit of a ruckus when he castigated poor black parents for failing to raise their children to an acceptable stance. The response of the black community to Bill''s statement was basically a replay of the scene in Eddie Murphy's "Raw" stand up when Eddie quotes Richard Pryor and says "Tell Bill I said have a coke and a smile and shut the f**k up"

It goes without saying that there was an element of truth to what Bill said about the poor black parents however people were not willing to hear that figuring that it did not put the blame where it mainly belonged. To their minds, personal responsibility does have a part to play, but government policies and institutional racism are the main culprits.

Flash forward to 2008 and an Arewa Consultative Forum meeting in Kaduna. These Northern leaders were clearly fed up with what they saw as the whining of the state governors in the Niger Delta for higher derivation and decided to hit back. An uncharitable person would say that they were worried that their share of the pie would have been reduced.They said basically that Niger Delta gets enough money and that the state governors are the main cause of the Niger Delta situtation. They said that the governors are corrupt and have stolen the money meant for the people.

For the most part the Arewa were treated like Bill Cosby. Standard reply was that the ACF is clearly an ignorant body, or it is just another ploy of the north to try and gain power they have lost and such like (read this vanguard link for more details on the reaction). There were also some responses acknowledging the truth of the ACF statement, however they were in the minority.

However my favorite response was the guy that said, that the EFCC said that thirty governors were corrupt and the Niger Delta has only 6 so corruption is not just a Niger Delta issue. I wonder if someone pulled him aside later and told him that he actually was helping the ACF make their point.

I'm sure I could have told the ACF what would happen. Even though the Niger Delta governments are the most corrupt individuals in Nigeria nothing could have mobilized support for them in the region like NORTHERN LEADERS daring to criticise them. I don't know what you've heard, but the Northerners aren't the dog's bullocks down on that side.

So what do you think about the political blunder that was the ACF statement?