Why you shouldn’t shave your pubic hair

When it comes to personal hygiene, one major aspect that has been trailed by diverse reactions is the issue of keeping or doing away with pubic hair, the hair that grows in the frontal genital area of humans, located on and around the sex organs of both male and female.

To some, nothing else nauseates like seeing hair in their partner’s private part, while some people are delighted by it as the sight of it is even a major turn-on for them, and to some others, it really does not matter whether the hair is kept intact or not.

To Mr. Johnson Agbede, a lecturer in his mid 50s, there are a few other things that are as disgusting as seeing a hairy private part. “You know how it feels when you see thick (sometimes coloured) hair in someone’s armpit? That is the way I feel when I imagine anyone keeping his or her pubic hair. My wife knows and she dares not keep it. I don’t keep mine too and I make sure I shave every Saturday,” he added.

Agbede, who is a father of three, said he believes the hair should never be allowed to grow because, according to him, it tends to harbour dirt and cause body odour over time. “Keeping it just does not make sense. For what purpose?” he queried.

But just as much as Agbede despises pubic hair, Mrs. Taiwo Peters, a business woman and mother of two, says she sees nothing wrong with keeping the hair in that region “as long as it is kept clean.” Perhaps, her stance is also informed by her husband’s preference for keeping it intact.

“My husband tells me that seeing it turns him on and that the moment I shave it, I would be on my own. I could trim it mildly but not absolute removal. For him too, he doesn’t shave but he could trim it when it is becoming too bushy.”

Interestingly, those who support it say getting rid of the hair makes them feel clean and fresh while those against it say it does not allow for friction during sex and that leaving it is not harmful in any way. Thus, the argument keeps going back and forth. Findings however revealed that most people shave their pubic hair and their reasons differ.

Notably, the methods people use to get rid of the pubic hair include shaving (with the use of razor, clipper or scissors), creaming and waxing, which is a form of semi-permanent hair removal which removes the hair from the root before new hair starts to grow back in the area between four and six weeks.

But according to some experts, pubic hair should not be shaved; rather, it should be left as it grows because of the roles it plays as a cover that shields the organs from avoidable infections and friction. They noted that shaving could open up the skin for pathogens bacteria and viruses, thereby increasing the spread of sexually transmitted infections, skin irritation and other skin infections, like Molluscum contagiosum.

In addition, they said the removal of the hair could increase the risk of genital skin infections because small cuts or scratches occasioned by the removal of the hair could open the door for viruses to cause infections.

Even though the situation applies to both men and women, a study published on the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology found that about 60 per cent of women who shave their pubic hair were found to have at least one health complication, and the most common health challenges found were epidermal abrasion (a wound caused by superficial damage to the skin) and ingrown hairs.

The study revealed further that women who are obese are almost twice as likely to report a complication and almost three times as likely if they have total hair removal.

A consultant gynaecologist, Hugh Byrne, told United Kingdom Telegraph that the removal of pubic hair could lead to abscess, a swollen area within body tissue containing an accumulation of pus. He explained that an increase in abscesses as reported had been caused by bacteria that enter the body through the hair follicle that was left open. He however said the solution to such infection could be through the use of antibiotics or an operation.

According to a review of some studies on Journal of American Medical Association, published on Mail Online, the act of removing pubic hair could cause a deficit in the mucous membrane of the skin, which could allow viruses or bacteria to enter the body.

“Waxing causes deficit in the mucocutaneous barrier that may be sufficient for viral entry and transmission, potentially increasing the risk of acquiring STIs,” the report said.

The report added that waxing as a form of removing pubic hair does not only increase the risk of contracting STI, it also causes small injuries to the skin, the underlying structures, micro tearing of muscle fibres, the sheath around the muscle and the connective tissue. This in turn could lead to spread of infection, burns, bumps that form under the surface of the skin and folliculitis, which is an inflammation of the hair follicles.

It noted, “Pubic hair waxing can also cause burns, with most being superficial or partial-thickness burns, while bacteria including staphylococcus aureus, streptococcus pyogenes and pseudomonas aeruginosa were found to be among the infections people are at risk of contracting. They can be transmitted via contaminated waxing tools or from the person performing the procedure.

“Individuals who wax their pubic hair should be informed of this possible risk and perhaps be advised to abstain from sexual activity for a certain period of time after waxing.”

A gynaecologist, Dr. Olanrewaju Ekujumi, told Saturday PUNCH that when one shaves newly, the risk of transmitting skin infections to each other is high during sexual intercourse.

He said, “When you shave, there tends to be opening where the hair has been removed, it could be an avenue for organisms to penetrate and cause infections. So, when you shave, maybe you should avoid sex, even though it has also not been medically proven, theoretically, it is a possibility.”

Ekujumi explained further that even though some people feel very happy and comfortable when everything is nicely shaved, leaving the pubic hair unshaved has no negative effect on the body. He noted that the hair itself is a protective covering, such that before anything gets into the body through those areas, it would have overcome the hair first.

“In gynaecology, shaving has no medical implication, apart from the bumps and other things that could come with shaving or waxing. However, when someone shaves and the partner does not, if the person who shaves has coarse hair, it could irritate the person who does not shave,” he said.

When asked whether it is advisable to shave or not, he said it depends on what individuals want, but that instead of shaving, people could use scissors to trim the hair so as not to open up the skin.

According to a dermatologist, Dr. Funmilayo Ajose, there is no problem shaving or not shaving, but she suggested that those who wish to shave should do it correctly to avoid infections. However, she said people who have rashes when they shave their beards or legs should not venture into shaving pubic hair. Reason? She said rashes also tend to come up there and that it could be multiplied in the pubic area because the place is warm and germs and bacteria could rapidly multiply there.

She continued, “Some people’s pubic hair can be so strong that it can cause friction for their partner. So, it should be done in a way that it would not be prone to infection or irritation and ensure it does not have a sharp end that could make it a problem instead of being a solution. If in the process of shaving, the hair curls back and pricks the skin, it could introduce the germs that are outside the skin into the skin.

“However, there are non-irritant shaving chemicals that can remove the hair smoothly, but there is no harm leaving it and there is no harm shaving it.”

She explained that leaving the pubic hair does not lead to odour and shaving it does not reduce it, saying it depends on people’s personal hygiene.

 Source: PUNCH.

Ryan Giggs takes over Manchester United’s training

Ryan Giggs (right) will take charge of training on Monday after Van Gaal cancelled Sunday's session

Manchester United training was cancelled on Sunday and Ryan Giggs is taking the reins on Monday after Louis van Gaal flew home to Holland.

The manager’s future at the club became extremely bleak after the defeat by Southampton at Old Trafford on Saturday.

Van Gaal sounded like a beaten man on Saturday before jetting off, telling players and staff not to travel to Carrington for their standard running drills the day after a game.

The 64-year-old is in Holland for his daughter’s birthday and, while it cannot be helped, the timing is inauspicious.

Lassa fever: Lagos officials kill 7,243 rats in markets

Lassa virus is transmitted to humans from contact with food or household items contaminated with the excreta or urine of infected multimammate rats

The Lagos State chapter of the Environmental Health Officers Association of Nigeria on Monday said it had killed no fewer than 7,243 rats in eight major markets in the state under its ‘De-rat Market’ programme.
This came as the state government called on the health officers to intensify safety awareness campaigns across the state.
Speaking at a workshop on Lassa fever, which was organised by the ministry of Local Government and Community Affairs, the health workers association’s President, Samuel Akingbehin, said the 7,243 rats were killed at the Onigongbo, Oshodi, Oke-Odo, Ikotun Idanwo, Ojuwoye and Mile 12 and Alaba Rago markets.
Akingbehin said de-rating the markets was part of the association’s efforts to curb the spread of Lassa fever in the state.
“The exercise is strategic in our effort toward the prevention of Lass fever. We call on other agencies in the state to de-rat markets and stop Lassa fever.”
Akingbehin appealed to traders across the state to understand the efforts of the association to rid the markets of rats and rodents.
He said the plan was to de-rat markets in one local government area per day, starting from 5pm.
Akingbehin said, “We decided to put the exercise in the evening due to the nocturnal nature of rodents and our members had recorded successes in the markets visited till date.
“It took us about three hours to cover the Oshodi Market when our members went there for the exercise. Today, Monday, we will be visiting Suru-Alaba Market in Orile with about 400 EHOs to de-rat it.”
The Commissioner for Local Government and Community Affairs, Muslim Folami appealed to the health workers to go to the nook and cranny of the state to sensitise the residents.

Is Jesus God?

Have you ever met a man who is the center of attention wherever he goes? Some mysterious, indefinable characteristic sets him apart from all other men. Well, that’s the way it was two thousand years ago with Jesus Christ. But it wasn’t merely Jesus’ personality that captivated those who heard him. Those who witnessed his words and life tell us that something about Jesus of Nazareth was different from all other men. Jesus’ only credentials were himself. He never wrote a book, commanded an army, held a political office, or owned property. He mostly traveled within a hundred miles of his village, attracting crowds who were amazed at his provocative words and stunning deeds.
Yet Jesus’ greatness was obvious to all those who saw and heard him. And while most great people eventually fade into history books, Jesus is still the focus of thousands of books and unparalleled media controversy. And much of that controversy revolves around the radical claims Jesus made about himself—claims that astounded both his followers and his adversaries.
It was primarily Jesus’ unique claims that caused him to be viewed as a threat by both the Roman authorities and the Jewish hierarchy. Although he was an outsider with no credentials or political powerbase, within three years, Jesus changed the world for the next 20 centuries. Other moral and religious leaders have left an impact—but nothing like that unknown carpenter’s son from Nazareth.
What was it about Jesus Christ that made the difference? Was he merely a great man, or something more?
These questions get to the heart of who Jesus really was. Some believe he was merely a great moral teacher; others believe he was simply the leader of the world’s greatest religion. But many believe something far more. Christians believe that God has actually visited us in human form. And they believe the evidence backs that up.
After carefully examining Jesus’ life and words, former Cambridge professor and skeptic, C. S. Lewis, came to a startling conclusion about him that altered the course of his life. So who is the real Jesus? Many will answer that Jesus was a great moral teacher. As we take a deeper look at the world’s most controversial person, we begin by asking: could Jesus have been merely a great moral teacher?

Great Moral Teacher?

Even those from other religions acknowledge that Jesus was a great moral teacher. Indian leader, Mahatma Gandhi, spoke highly of Jesus’ righteous life and profound words.[1] Likewise, Jewish scholar Joseph Klausner wrote, “It is universally admitted … that Christ taught the purest and sublimest ethics … which throws the moral precepts and maxims of the wisest men of antiquity far into the shade.”[2]
Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount has been called the most superlative teaching of human ethics ever uttered by an individual. In fact, much of what we know today as “equal rights” actually is the result of Jesus’ teaching. Historian Will Durant, a non-Christian, said of Jesus that “he lived and struggled unremittingly for ‘equal rights’; in modern times he would have been sent to Siberia. ‘He that is greatest among you, let him be your servant’—this is the inversion of all political wisdom, of all sanity.”[3]
Many, like Gandhi, have tried to separate Jesus’ teaching on ethics from his claims about himself, believing that he was simply a great man who taught lofty moral principles. This was the approach of one of America’s Founding Fathers, President Thomas Jefferson, who cut and pasted a copy of the New Testament, removing sections he thought referred to Jesus’ deity, while leaving in other passages regarding Jesus’ ethical and moral teaching.[4] Jefferson carried around his cut and pasted New Testament with him, revering Jesus as perhaps the greatest moral teacher of all time.
In fact, Jefferson’s memorable words in the Declaration of Independence were rooted in Jesus’ teaching that each person is of immense and equal importance to God, regardless of sex, race, or social status. The famous document sets forth, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights …”
But one thing Jefferson didn’t answer: If Jesus falsely claimed to be God he couldn’t have been a good moral teacher. But did Jesus really claim deity? Before we look at what Jesus claimed, we need to examine the possibility that he was simply a great religious leader?

Great Religious Leader?

Surprisingly, Jesus never claimed to be a religious leader. He never got into religious politics or pushed an ambitious agenda, and he ministered almost entirely outside the established religious framework.
When one compares Jesus with the other great religious leaders, a remarkable distinction emerges. Ravi Zacharias has studied world religions and observed a fundamental distinction between Jesus Christ and the founders of other major religions. All religions provide instruction for a way of living. But it is only Jesus who offers deliverance, forgiveness for sin, and transformation. “Jesus did not only teach or expound His message. He was identical with His message.”[5]
The truth of Zacharias’ point is underscored by the number of times in the Gospels that Jesus’ teaching message was simply “Come to me” or “Follow me” or “Obey me.” Also, Jesus made it clear that his primary mission was to forgive sins, something only God could do.
In The World’s Great Religions, Huston Smith observed that of all religious leaders only Jesus claimed to be divine.[6]
And that leads us to the question of what Jesus really did claim for himself; specifically, did Jesus claim to be God?

Did Jesus Claim To Be God?

So what is it that convinces many scholars that Jesus claimed to be God? Author, John Piper explains that Jesus claimed power which uniquely belonged to God.
“…Jesus’ friends and enemies were staggered again and again by what he said and did. He would be walking down the road, seemingly like any other man, then turn and say something like, ‘Before Abraham was, I am.’ Or, ‘If you have seen me, you have seen the Father.’ Or, very calmly, after being accused of blasphemy, he would say, ‘The Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.’ To the dead he might simply say, ‘Come forth,’ or, ‘Rise up.’ And they would obey. To the storms on the sea he would say, ‘Be still.’ And to a loaf of bread he would say, ‘Become a thousand meals.’ And it was done immediately.”[7]
But what did Jesus really mean by such statements? Is it possible Jesus was merely a prophet like Moses or Elijah, or Daniel? Even a superficial reading of the Gospels reveals that Jesus claimed to be someone more than a prophet. No other prophet had made such claims about himself; in fact, no other prophet ever put himself in God’s place.
Some argue that Jesus never explicitly said, “I am God.” It is true that he never stated the exact words, “I am God.” However, Jesus also never explicitly said, “I am a man,” or “I am a prophet.” Yet Jesus was undoubtedly human, and his followers considered him a prophet like Moses and Elijah. So we cannot rule out Jesus being divine just because he didn’t say those exact words, anymore than we can say he wasn’t a prophet.
In fact, Jesus’ statements about himself contradict the notion that he was simply a great man or a prophet. On more than one occasion, Jesus referred to himself as God’s Son. When asked whether he thought it far-fetched for Jesus to be the Son of God, lead singer of U2, Bono, answered:

“No, it’s not far-fetched to me. Look, the secular response to the Christ story always goes like this: He was a great prophet, obviously a very interesting guy, had a lot to say along the lines of other great prophets,… But actually Christ doesn’t allow you that. He doesn’t let you off the hook. Christ says, No. I’m not saying I’m a teacher, don’t call me a teacher. I’m not saying I’m a prophet….I’m saying I’m God incarnate.” And people say: No, no, please, just be a prophet. A prophet we can take.”[8]

Before we examine Jesus’ claims, it is important to understand that he made them in the context of the Jewish belief in one God (monotheism). No faithful Jew would ever believe in more than one God. And Jesus believed in the one God, praying to his Father as, “the only true God.”[9]
But in that same prayer, Jesus spoke of having always existed with his Father. And when Philip asked Jesus to show them the Father, Jesus said, “Philip, have I been with you so long and you don’t know me? Whoever has seen me, has seen the Father.”[10] So the question is: “Was Jesus claiming to be the Hebrew God who created the universe?”

Did Jesus Claim To Be The God Of Abraham & Moses?

Jesus continually referred to himself in ways that confounded his listeners. As Piper notes, Jesus made the audacious statement, “Before Abraham was, I AM.”[11] He told Martha and others around her, “I AM the resurrection and the life; he who believes in me, though he is dead, yet shall he live.”[12] Likewise, Jesus would make statements like, “I AM the light of the world,”[13] “I AM the only way to God,”[14] or, “I AM the “truth.”[15] These and several other of his claims were preceded by the sacred words for God, “I AM” (ego eimi)[16]. What did Jesus mean by such statements, and what is the significance of the term, “I AM”?
Once again, we must go back to context. In the Hebrew Scriptures, when Moses asked God His name at the burning bush, God answered, “I AM.” He was revealing to Moses that He is the one and only God who is outside of time and has always existed. Incredibly, Jesus was using these holy words to describe himself. The question is, “Why?”
Since the time of Moses, no practicing Jew would ever refer to himself or anyone else by “I AM.” As a result, Jesus’ “I AM” claims infuriated the Jewish leaders. One time, for example, some leaders explained to Jesus why they were trying to kill him: “Because you, a mere man, have made yourself God.”[17]
Jesus’ usage of God’s name greatly angered the religious leaders. The point is that these Old Testament scholars knew exactly what he was saying—he was claiming to be God, the Creator of the universe. It is only this claim that would have brought the accusation of blasphemy. To read into the text that Jesus claimed to be God is clearly warranted, not simply by his words, but also by their reaction to those words.
C. S. Lewis initially considered Jesus a myth. But this literary genius who knew myths well, concluded that Jesus had to have been a real person. Furthermore, as Lewis investigated the evidence for Jesus, he became convinced that not only was Jesus real, but he was unlike any man who had ever lived. Lewis writes,
“Then comes the real shock,’ wrote Lewis: ‘Among these Jews there suddenly turns up a man who goes about talking as if He was God. He claims to forgive sins. He says He always existed. He says He is coming to judge the world at the end of time.”[18]
To Lewis, Jesus’ claims were simply too radical and profound to have been made by an ordinary teacher or religious leader.

What Kind Of God?

Some have argued that Jesus was only claiming to be part of God. But the idea that we are all part of God, and that within us is the seed of divinity, is simply not a possible meaning for Jesus’ words and actions. Such thoughts are revisionist, foreign to his teaching, foreign to his stated beliefs, and foreign to his disciples’ understanding of his teaching.
Jesus taught that he is God in the way the Jews understood God and the way the Hebrew Scriptures portrayed God, not in the way the New Age movement understands God. Neither Jesus nor his audience had been weaned on Star Wars, and so when they spoke of God, they were not speaking of cosmic forces. It’s simply bad history to redefine what Jesus meant by the concept of God.
Lewis explains,

Now let us get this clear. Among Pantheists, like the Indians, anyone might say that he was a part of God, or one with God….But this man, since He was a Jew, could not mean that kind of God. God, in their language, meant the Being outside the world, who had made it and was infinitely different from anything else. And when you have grasped that, you will see that what this man said was, quite simply, the most shocking thing that has ever been uttered by human lips.[19]

Certainly there are those who accept Jesus as a great teacher, yet are unwilling to call him God. As a Deist, we’ve seen that Thomas Jefferson had no problem accepting Jesus’ teachings on morals and ethics while denying his deity.[20] But as we’ve said, and will explore further, if Jesus was not who he claimed to be, then we must examine some other alternatives, none of which would make him a great moral teacher. Lewis, argued, “I am trying here to prevent anyone from saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God.’ That is the one thing we must not say.”[21]
In his quest for truth, Lewis knew that he could not have it both ways with the identity of Jesus. Either Jesus was who he claimed to be—God in the flesh—or his claims were false. And if they were false, Jesus could not be a great moral teacher. He would either be lying intentionally or he would be a lunatic with a God complex.

Could Jesus Have Been Lying?

Even Jesus’ harshest critics rarely have called him a liar. That label certainly doesn’t fit with Jesus’ high moral and ethical teaching. But if Jesus isn’t who he claimed to be, we must consider the option that he was intentionally misleading everyone.
One of the best-known and most influential political works of all time was written by Niccolò Machiavelli in 1532. In his classic, The Prince, Machiavelli exalts power, success, image, and efficiency above loyalty, faith, and honesty. According to Machiavelli, lying is okay if it accomplishes a political end.
Could Jesus Christ have built his entire ministry upon a lie just to gain power, fame, or success? In fact, the Jewish opponents of Jesus were constantly trying to expose him as a fraud and liar. They would barrage him with questions in attempts to trip him up and make him contradict himself. Yet Jesus responded with remarkable consistency.
The question we must deal with is: What could possibly motivate Jesus to live his entire life as a lie? He taught that God was opposed to lying and hypocrisy, so he wouldn’t have been doing it to please his Father. He certainly didn’t lie for his followers’ benefit, since all but one were martyred rather than renouncing his Lordship (see “Did the Apostles believe Jesus is God?” . And so we are left with only two other reasonable explanations, each of which is problematic.

Benefit

Many people have lied for personal gain. In fact, the motivation of most lies is some perceived benefit to oneself. What could Jesus have hoped to gain from lying about his identity? Power would be the most obvious answer. If people believed he was God, he would have tremendous power. (That is why many ancient leaders, such as the Caesars, claimed divine origin.)
The rub with this explanation is that Jesus shunned all attempts to move him in the direction of seated power, instead chastising those who abused such power and lived their lives pursuing it. He also chose to reach out to the outcasts (prostitutes and lepers), those without power, creating a network of people whose influence was less than zero. In a way that could only be described as bizarre, all that Jesus did and said moved diametrically in the other direction from power.
It would seem that if power was Jesus’ motivation, he would have avoided the cross at all costs. Yet, on several occasions, he told his disciples that the cross was his destiny and mission. How would dying on a Roman cross bring one power?
Death, of course, brings all things into proper focus. And while many martyrs have died for a cause they believed in, few have been willing to die for a known lie. Certainly all hopes for Jesus’ own personal gain would have ended on the cross. Yet, to his last breath, he would not relinquish his claim of being the unique Son of God. New Testament scholar, J. I. Packer, points out that this title asserts Jesus’ personal deity.[22]

A Legacy

So if Jesus was above lying for personal benefit, perhaps his radical claims were falsified in order to leave a legacy. But the prospect of being beaten to a pulp and nailed to a cross would quickly dampen the enthusiasm of most would-be superstars.
Here is another haunting fact. If Jesus were to have simply dropped the claim of being God’s Son, he never would have been condemned. It was his claim to be God and his unwillingness to recant of it that got him crucified.
If enhancing his credibility and historical reputation was what motivated Jesus to lie, one must explain how a carpenter’s son from a poor Judean village could ever anticipate the events that would catapult his name to worldwide prominence. How would he know his message would survive? Jesus’ disciples had fled and Peter had denied him. Not exactly the formula for launching a religious legacy.
Do historians believe Jesus lied? Scholars have scrutinized Jesus’ words and life to see if there is any evidence of a defect in his moral character. In fact, even the most ardent skeptics are stunned by Jesus’ moral and ethical purity.
According to historian Philip Schaff, there is no evidence, either in church history or in secular history that Jesus lied about anything. Schaff argued, “How, in the name of logic, common sense, and experience, could a deceitful, selfish, depraved man have invented, and consistently maintained from the beginning to end, the purest and noblest character known in history with the most perfect air of truth and reality?”[23]
To go with the option of liar seems to swim upstream against everything Jesus taught, lived, and died for. To most scholars, it just doesn’t make sense. Yet, to deny Jesus’ claims, one must come up with some explanation. And if Jesus’ claims are not true, and he wasn’t lying, the only option remaining is that he must have been self-deceived.

Could Jesus Have Been Self-Deceived?

Albert Schweitzer, who was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1952 for his humanitarian efforts, had his own views about Jesus. Schweitzer concluded that insanity was behind Jesus’ claim to be God. In other words, Jesus was wrong about his claims but didn’t intentionally lie. According to this theory, Jesus was deluded into actually believing he was the Messiah.
Lewis considered this option carefully. He deduced that if Jesus’ claims weren’t true, then he must have been insane. Lewis reasons that someone who claimed to be God would not be a great moral teacher. “He would either be a lunatic—on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell.”[24]
Most who have studied Jesus’ life and words acknowledge him as extremely rational. Although his own life was filled with immorality and personal skepticism, the renowned French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–78) acknowledged Jesus’ superior character and presence of mind, stating, “When Plato describes his imaginary righteous man…he describes exactly the character of Christ. …If the life and death of Socrates are those of a philosopher, the life and death of Jesus Christ are those of a God.”[25]
Bono concludes that a “nutcase” was the last thing one could label Jesus.

“So what you’re left with is either Christ was who He said He was—or a complete nutcase. I mean, we’re talking nutcase on the level of Charles Manson….I’m not joking here. The idea that the entire course of civilization for over half of the globe could have its fate changed and turned upside down by a nutcase, for me that’s far-fetched….”[26]

So, was Jesus a liar or a lunatic, or was he the Son of God? Could Jefferson have been right by labeling Jesus “only a good moral teacher” while denying his deity? Interestingly, the audience who heard Jesus—both believers and enemies—never regarded him as a mere moral teacher. Jesus produced three primary effects in the people who met him: hatred, terror, or adoration.
The claims of Jesus Christ force us to choose. As Lewis stated, we cannot put Jesus in the category of being just a great religious leader or good moral teacher. This former skeptic challenges us to make up our own minds about Jesus, stating,

“You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”[27]

In Mere Christianity, Lewis explores the options regarding the identity of Jesus, concluding that he is exactly who he claimed to be. His careful examination of the life and words of Jesus led this great literary genius to renounce his former atheism and become a committed Christian.
The greatest question in human history is, “Who is the real Jesus Christ?” Bono, Lewis, and countless others have concluded that God visited our planet in human form. But if that is true, then we would expect him to be alive today. And that is exactly what his followers believe.

Did Jesus Really Rise From The Dead?

The eyewitnesses to Jesus Christ actually spoke and acted like they believed he physically rose from the dead after his crucifixion. If they were wrong then Christianity has been founded upon a lie. But if they were right, such a miracle would substantiate all Jesus said about God, himself, and us.
But must we take the resurrection of Jesus Christ by faith alone, or is there solid historical evidence? Several skeptics began investigations into the historical record to prove the resurrection account false. What did they discover?

Source: y-jesus.com

Woman beat up husband because he refused to have sex with her

Sondra Earle-Kelly allegedly battered her husband because he refused to have sex with her. According to Metro UK, 51-year-old Kelly hurled ceramic figurines at her husband when he refused to stop watching TV and make love to her then proceeded to beat him with a pair of nunchucks.

Police found blood on the walls of the couple’s apartment when they arrived. Earle-Kelly, who was also said to have taken a tranquiliser tablets over the course of the evening, was charged with aggravated domestic violence and spent the night in a Charlotte, South Carolina police cell.

Source: Metro

Inmates blow prison wall open in mass breakout

Inmates in one of Brazil’s roughest prisons used explosives to destroy a wall and escape en masse into surrounding streets, prompting a frantic manhunt, the AFP reported.
Media footage of the brazen breakout on Saturday in the northeastern city of Recife showed the blast ripping a hole in the main wall around the Frei Damiao de Bozanno facility.
After a cloud of dust and debris clears, a stream of men dressed in ordinary clothing can be seen dashing into the narrow streets before police arrive on the scene.
Pernambuco state justice authorities were quoted by Globo news site saying Sunday that 40 inmates escaped and that 36 had now been returned to custody, two killed, one hospitalized and one remained at large.

It took hours for officials to give figures, with Brazilian media initially reporting that as many as 100 prisoners could have got out.
One of those killed was shot after breaking into a local home, police said on Globo television. Footage showed the man lying in a pool of blood on the floor.
This was the second mass breakout in the same area in a week. Fifty-three inmates fled Wednesday from the Professor Barreto Campelo prison, near Recife, and by Sunday only 13 of them had been recaptured, G1 news site reported.
Escape attempts are frequent at Pernambuco prisons, the most overcrowded in Brazil. Facilities designed for 10,500 inmates maximum hold around 32,000 people, according to a 2015 study by Human Rights Watch.
Many prisoners have to sleep on the floor and there are so few guards that officials turn day-to-day control over to selected inmates who are given keys to the prison’s interior, the report said.

Man U results don’t match £250m investment – David Gill

Manchester United's Louis van Gaal has come under intense pressure due to the team's poor performance this season PHOTO: AFP

Manchester United’s results are not good enough after the investment made in the team, but top director David Gill on Sunday called on fans to stop jeering under pressure coach Louis van Gaal.
Facing a new onslaught after a 1-0 home defeat by Southampton, Gill, a former chief executive who remains on the United Board, said, “Clearly we all hoped the results would have been better and everyone is disappointed with that.
“Undoubtedly it has been a season of underachievement given the investment that was made in the summer.”
Gill told the BBC that the boos aimed at Van Gaal and his team as they left the field on Saturday were the worst he has seen.

“No one likes to see that. We’re fans as well as directors and we don’t want booing, we want cheering. But I think we’ve got to stay calm.”
Manchester United have spent £250m ($355m) on players since Van Gaal arrived in 2014 but after the latest defeat they are fifth and five points adrift of a top four Champions League place.
Van Gaal has been particularly criticised for United’s style of play. Saturday was the seventh time they have failed to score at Old Trafford this year.
Van Gaal accepted the supporters’ criticism after what he called a “poor match.”
“I know that everyone, from the owners and Louis Van Gaal and his team, is working extremely hard to turn that around. It’s not easy but we have to stick together,” Gill said.
The Old Trafford torment has fuelled reports of meetings with Pep Guardiola and Jose Mourinho writing a letter to United’s leaders.
Both have been strongly denied however.
Mourinho’s agent rubbished an Independent on Sunday report that the Portuguese coach wrote a six page letter to Manchester United setting out why he should be their next coach.
“It is absolutely ridiculous and totally absurd,” Jorge Mendes said in a statement on his website.
Mourinho, free since being sacked by Chelsea in December, wrote a detailed analysis of how United could be overhauled and how he would adapt his style of management to suit the Old Trafford style, according to the Independent on Sunday.
The 52-year-old Mourinho has been linked with the job before, but United chose David Moyes to succeed Alex Ferguson in 2013 and Van Gaal to come in a year later.
Gill declined to comment on the Mourinho report but did say he does not believe Van Gaal is finding the United job more difficult than he imagined.
Van Gaal is having to come to terms with a more competitive Premier League, said Gill.
“He’s managed at the top level, at the top clubs in Germany, Holland and Spain, I don’t think he’s found it that difficult but the sheer competitiveness of English football is there for everyone to see.”

El Salvador asks women not to get pregnant until 2018

Source: The Washington Post

Brazil mobilizes against outbreak of mosquito-borne virus

South America’s biggest country has seen a rise in cases of a disease triggered by the little-known Zika virus being linked to a surge in congenital brain malformations.

MEXICO CITY — The rapid spread of the Zika virus has prompted Latin American governments to urge women not to get pregnant for up to two years, an extraordinary precaution aimed at avoiding birth defects believed to be linked to the mosquito-borne illness.
What until recently was a seemingly routine public health problem for countries that are home to a certain type of mosquito has morphed into a potentially culture-shaping phenomenon in which the populations of several nations have been asked to delay procreation. The World Health Organization says at least 20 countries or territories in the region, including Barbados and Bolivia, Guadeloupe and Guatemala, Puerto Rico and Panama, have registered transmission of the virus.

Although the Zika virus has been documented since the 1940s, it began its assault on Latin America in the past several months. The hardest-hit country has been Brazil, where more than 1 million people have contracted the virus. In the past four months, authorities have received reports of nearly 4,000 cases in which Zika may have caused microcephaly in newborns. The condition results in an abnormally small head and is associated with incomplete brain development. Colombia, which shares an Amazonian border with Brazil, reacted to its own Zika outbreak, numbering more than 13,000 cases, by urging women not to get pregnant in the next several months. Other countries, including Jamaica and Honduras, also have urged women to delay having babies.
After more than 5,000 suspected Zika cases were reported last year and in the first weeks of 2016, El Salvador on Thursday took the most extreme stance so far: Deputy Health Minister Eduardo Espinoza urged women to refrain from getting pregnant before 2018. The Central American nation saw its first suspected Zika cases in November and sent samples to the United States to be tested for the virus, Espinoza said in an interview.

“The recommendation is that people plan their pregnancies, that they avoid if at all possible to have babies this year,” Espinoza said. “This is the first time that we have suffered an attack of Zika virus, and the first attack is always the worst.”
A campaign to delay pregnancy would seem to be an implicit endorsement of birth control. For a region that is majority Roman Catholic, this presents a potential conflict, as the church has long condemned contraception. The Rev. Hector Figueroa, a priest in charge of health issues in the San Salvador archdiocese, said that the pregnancy alert appeared in the Salvadoran news media Friday morning and that the archbishop had not had time to formulate an official response.
“Morality says that people shouldn’t have that control” over procreation, Figueroa said. “But the church also isn’t going to say something that runs contrary to life and health.”
“This is a very delicate issue,” he said.
As in other countries in the region, Salvadoran authorities have tried to slow the spread of Zika by launching fumigation programs in mosquito-breeding areas. Radio and television public-service campaigns have called on pregnant women to cover their skin to avoid bites.
Outside the National Maternity Hospital in San Salvador, Selina Velasquez Cortez, a 30-year-old employee of a sardine factory who has been trying to get pregnant for two years, said there is no way she will stop trying now.
“After so much time wanting to be a mother, I’m not going to give up now” because of the deputy health minister’s statement, she declared. “I think it’s absurd.”
Most people who have contracted the illness experience no symptoms. But Dinora Martinez, a 46-year-old secretary at a private health clinic in San Salvador, said she, her husband and their two adult sons had suffered when they contracted the virus in 2015.
“Pain, fever, aching joints. I couldn’t move my feet and thought I’d never be able to walk again,” she said. Her office has seen a rise in the number of Zika patients.
“The clinic has been full,” she said.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Friday added eight to a list of 14 countries and territories it has urged pregnant U.S. women to avoid because of the risk associated with Zika outbreaks. So far there is no vaccine for the virus.
Zika is spread by two types of Aedes mosquitoes, which carry a clutch of fever-causing pathogens as they buzz in search of fresh blood. Besides the Zika virus, the mosquitoes transmit dengue, chikungunya and yellow fevers. An adult who contracts Zika might find the experience relatively mild: a slight fever, a rash, and pain in the joints and behind the eyes.
But the real devastation apparently strikes the children born to women with the illness, who can have permanent physical and mental defects, according to research in Brazil linking a surge in the number of microcephaly cases to Zika. There is also growing concern that Zika virus could be linked to Guillain-Barré syndrome, which can result in weeks of paralysis.
In the city of Santa Marta on Colombia’s Caribbean coast, a nurse in the maternity ward at the Clinica La Milagrosa said that the news about Zika and possible birth defects has scared many people. At least 500 of Colombia’s reported Zika cases involve pregnant women, according to the Health Ministry.
“There are women coming in really worried,” said the nurse, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “With everything that’s on the news about malformations, mothers are scared.”
Health Minister Alejandro Gaviria has advised Colombians to delay pregnancy for the next six to eight months. So far, 106 babies have been born to Zika-infected mothers, and the infants are under observation to determine whether their development has been affected by the virus, the ministry said. Colombia expects as many as 700,000 infections in the general population.

How 'Star Wars 8' Could 'Lose' Against 'Avatar 2'

There is a part of me that just wanted to be obnoxiously giddy about the notion of Star Wars Episode 8 opening within a week of Avatar 2 in December of 2017. I was initially tempted to throw on ”The Burning Heart” from Rocky IV as I tapped out this post, but that would presume I’m picking a side. Walt Disney made the smart play yesterday and moved Rian Johnson’s next Star Wars movie from Memorial Day 2017 to December 15, 2017. I discussed an hour ago why that was the best possible choice for all parties, so I won’t rehash that here. And the fun part of the date change is that it potentially created a situation where Star Wars Episode VIII would open just a week prior to James Cameron’s Avatar. If that happens, the would-be “winner” may not be the one you’re presuming.
Now said 20th Century Fox sequel hasn’t been officially slated, and depending on who you ask it was either supposed to open on the 15th or on Christmas weekend of 2017 presuming James Cameron got the film done in time. That’s not a guarantee, as Cameron has been tinkering with the screenplays for his next few Avatar films for half-a-decade. But let’s assume James Cameron is able to do what needs to be done in time and he and Fox refuse to find safer waters. Then we have a situation where the biggest “wholly original” cinematic franchise of all time goes head-to-head with the last great “wholly original” cinematic franchise.
So presuming this plays out like Alice Through the Looking Glass versus X-Men: Apocalypse, as opposed to the never consummated Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice versus Captain America: Civil War battle, who wins such a showdown?  Well, on a global scale, especially outside of America, my money is still on Avatar.
First of all, if this needs to be said, there need not be explicit winners and losers in a given match-up if both films are big hits, and there is a reason I put quote marks around “loses” in the headline above. To quote the Sisters ad campaign, #YouCanSeeThemBoth  (or should that be “I see you both”?) during the holiday stretch between their respective opening weekends and whenever they leave theaters. If they both end up being good-to-great, then all the merrier. But while Star Wars: The Force Awakens is by far the biggest-grossing film of all time in America, with a likely $925 million final total in the cards compared to Avatar‘s $760.5m domestic cume, it’s not even a contest overseas. Avatar is still far-and-away the biggest grossing movie of all time worldwide.
As of this writing, with Star Wars winding down around the world, it looks like J.J. Abrams’s sci-fi sequel will end up just over/under $2 billion worldwide. It may or may not best the $2.1 million global total of James Cameron’s Titanic but the $2.788b total of Avatar is just too far away. And its overseas total is probably going to be over/under $1.3 billion, #3 on said list and behind Titanic ($1.5b overseas) and Avatar ($2b overseas alone). Okay, so Avatar remains the overseas and worldwide box office champion of the world while Star Wars utterly dominates America.

Recommended by Forbes

That’s rather appropriate since Star Wars is and was a uniquely American myth and there is no law saying everyone all over the world has to embrace it as we’ve embraced it. But looking over the comparisons between Avatar and Star Wars: The Force Awakens, the numbers are loud and clear. In almost every single overseas territory where Avatar and Star Wars: The Force Awakens both played, the James Cameron movie made more. Here is a sampling of the respective overseas totals, not accounting for the expansion of the marketplace (yay, Avatar!) or overseas currency deflation (yay, Star Wars!) over the last few years:
Australia: $105m vs. $60m
Brazil: $58m vs. $26m
China: $204m vs. $103m (and counting)
France: $175m vs. $80m
Germany: $162m vs. $100m
Hong Kong: $22.9m vs. $10.7m
India: $24m vs. $4m
Japan: $171m vs. $100m
Mexico: $44m vs. $14m
Poland: $28m vs. $15m
Russia: $117m vs. $25m
South Korea: $105m
Switzerland: $15.7m vs. $11.5m
United Kingdom: $150m vs. $165m
Venezuela: $5m vs. $17m
That isn’t to say that The Force Awakens did poorly in these territories. We’re still talking about the third or fourth biggest overseas grosser of all time, during a period where overseas currency has been weakened by a strong dollar. But in terms of comparing the respective overseas runs of those two blockbuster titans, there are only a handful of territories big or small where The Force Awakens made even a little bit more than Avatar. For most of the territories big and small, it wasn’t even close.
There are reasons for this, specifically the world’s embrace of Cameron’s pioneering 3D craftsmanship, the appeal of visiting Pandora again and again, and the primal “indigenous people rise up and beat back western imperial conquerors” narrative being both potent and topical around the world as the post-9/11 “War on Terror” campaign was in full swing. And the end of the day, for much of the world that hasn’t spent the last 35 years devouring Star Wars-related pop culture, The Force Awakens was just another high quality sci-fi fantasy blockbuster in a sea of such fare.
Without the nostalgic attachment to the world, nor any kind of specifically domestic desire to “avenge” the artistic failings of the Prequels, The Force Awakens is either a somewhat conventional sci-fi blockbuster that feels like a riff on classic Hero’s Journey fables or a loose remake of that first Star Wars film you saw awhile back in one form or another. And again, that’s okay. Star Wars is our fairy tale and any “first installment of a new trilogy/franchise reboot that earns $925 million domestic off a $200m+ production budget and restores the faith of the fandom in a given property is doing fine whether or not it becomes kind of the global box office as well.
But in terms of placing bets on which film comes out victorious, the fact remains that Avatar 2 would have to take a massive dive in global grosses while Star Wars: Episode 8 would have to seriously improve its overseas profile in two years for them to either somewhat tie each other or for the Jedi to come out on top outside of America. Now both of those are plausible possibilities, as Disney will surely focus on overseas box office next time out (since America is fully on-board) while we have only theories in regards to how the rest of the world will react to a second Avatar movie eight years after the first one.
I wrote a much-shared piece in December of 2014 about how Avatar earned a whopping $2.788 billion at the worldwide box office and then was mostly forgotten (or consigned to ridicule) on the pop culture landscape. Sometimes I wonder if that post is going to be “the one” I’m remembered for, but I digress. To be fair that was mainly in regards to American audiences. It is entirely possible that the rest of the world will embrace Avatar 2 as “their franchise” in the same way we embraced Star Wars as our defining cinematic series.
While I’m not sitting here proclaiming that a theoretical Avatar 2 will do the same obscene business as the first one did whenever it does open, nor am I so quick to assume that audiences here and abroad will forsake it the second time out as if it’s a classic “unasked for sequel” in the vein of Ted 2. The pessimist thinking is that Avatar was a “right movie at the right time” fluke and that a sequel won’t be remotely as well-embraced nearly a decade later. And that may be true. But it’s just as likely that the rest of the world may well embrace the return of Avatar eight years later to as much of an extent as we Americans embraced the return of Star Wars ten years after Revenge of the Sith.
With the all-important notion that just because Star Wars 8 and Avatar 2 end up opening close to each other in America doesn’t mean their respective overseas openings don’t get spaced out a bit, in order for Star Wars 8 to play better overseas than Avatar 2 then the Star Wars film would have to play like an Avatar movie while Avatar 2 would have to perform like a Star Wars sequel. And as of this juncture, I still have to argue that Avatar 2 has the advantage outside of America if only by virtue of the original film being something of a leggy “by popular demand/word of mouth” box office triumph here and abroad.
If Avatar 2 is embraced in any number of overseas territories (like China for example) as the return of “their” franchise in a manner similar to how Star Wars: The Force Awakens was treated as a the return of “our” franchise last month, well, then watch out. That’s speculative, but it’s not implausible.
There are any number of reasons to presume that these two titans won’t go head-to-head. James Cameron and 20th Century Fox could just adjust their plans and drop Avatar 2 on December 14, 2018 with his next three installments dropping every other December so as to alternate with new Star Wars “episodes.” That would actually be the best case scenario for both parties, and again it means we moviegoers win every single December indefinitely. And considering Walt Disney is still allegedly plotting “Avatar Land,” it is in their interest for Avatar 2 to reignite interest and passions in the franchise as well.
But if a head-to-head showdown does happen at the end of 2017, it wouldn’t surprise me to see Star Wars dominate in America while Avatar kicks a little bit more butt overseas. So in that sense, they both win.
No matter when they open, I am firmly rooting for both films to do whatever they need to do to qualify as hits.
I remain a Star Wars fan despite the fact that I liked The Force Awakens a little less than you, and I too look forward to seeing the further adventures of Rey, Finn, and Poe as we get more face time for Mark Hamill. And I loved Avatar back in 2009 and still love it today, treasuring it as presumably the very last mega-budget original franchise fantasy that wasn’t preordained to be a franchise and didn’t need a mega-huge opening weekend to wrack up mega-huge worldwide grosses. And if James Cameron assures me that Avatar 2 will make me “shit myself with my mouth wide open,” then I come to the theater with an extra pair of undies.
Both franchises, decades apart, are vital specifically due to the fact that they are “cinema first” franchises. They weren’t based on a book, a cartoon, a play, a television show, or a comic book. They were wholly “built from scratch” cinematic adventures that captured the imagination of the whole world. It would be oddly appropriate to see them go head-to-head and both triumph accordingly, a sign that there is value in spending the time and money to at least try to create wholly new worlds now and then. So who wins in a Star Wars Episode 8 v Avatar 2 showdown?  We do.

Buhari Wants Religious Studies Made Compulsory, Bans Wearing Of Hijab In Public Places

President Muhammadu Buhari has called for compulsory inclusion of religious studies in the school curriculum in the country while presenting a speech at the end of Qur’an recitation held in Lafia, the Nasarawa state capital.
President Muhammadu Buhari who was represented by the Minister of Education, Alhaji Adamu Adamu, said that the call has become imperative considering its importance in inculcating moral-right behaviour in the life of people in the society.
He explained that religious study in the school curriculum would inculcate good moral behaviour in the students and change the life for good.
Adamu, who also cleared the air on the issue of wearing Hijab, said President Muhammadu Buhari has not said anything against the wearing of Hijab, adding that President Buhari would not like to say anything that would go against the religion, saying the President is a respecter of religion.
He explained that the wearing of Hijab would only be resisted from public places to expose those that use it to explode bombs in the public domain.
Earlier in his key note address, the Sultan of Sokoto Muhammad Sa’ad Abubakar applauded the organisers of the Qur’an recitation and added that the Qur’anic recitation would help inculcate good moral behaviour to the believers
He called on Muslims to pray for peace in the country for development to strive.
Also speaking, Governor Umaru Tanko Al-Makura who served as the host explained that the aim of Quran recitation is to inculcate the word of the Holy Qur’an into the mine of Muslims in order to promote peace in the society.
Al-Makura who condemn the act of Boko Haram that used the name of Islam to perpetrated their dreaded act called for it stoppage for peace to reint in the country.

Jennifer Aniston Throws a Star-Studded Birthday Party for Producer Pal in L.A. – and Courtney Love Performs!

Nicole Richie (far left), Sara Foster (fourth from left), Jennifer Meyer (fifth from left), Rachel Zoe (sixth from left) and Amanda de Cadenet (far right)

Source: Rachel Zoe/Instagram - People Magazine

Jennfier Aniston knows how to throw a party.

The actress hosted a star-studded birthday bash for friend and producer Heather Parry at the Nice Guy in Los Angeles on Saturday night, a source tells PEOPLE. Guests included Jessica Alba; Nicole Richie, who wore a black and gray patchwork fur coat; Barely Famous star Sara Foster; Rachel Zoe; jewelry designer Jennifer Meyer, who designed Aniston's wedding ring, and Amanda de Cadenet.

Zoe, 44, shared a snap of a big group of famous friends sitting at a table, wishing Parry a happy birthday.

"Oh what a night with too many pretty ladies I love celebrating our @heather_parry," Zoe wrote.

Keep up with Jennifer Aniston in the pages of PEOPLE Magazine by subscribing now.

Of course, it wasn't just pretty ladies at the event. A source tells PEOPLE that Orlando Bloom was at the event and husband Joel Madden also attended the bash along with Meyer's husband Tobey Maguire. Zoe also shared a snap of herself hugging none other than Diddy.

She wrote, " love a @iamdiddy sandwich with my @jenmeyerjewelry #grouphugs#greatfriends #happybirthday@heather_parry."

Meyer also shared a snap on social media, showing herself and Foster blowing kisses to Parry.

"Happy birthday@heather_parry we love you," she captioned the picture.

The source also tells PEOPLE that Courtney Love performed at the event, although neither she nor Aniston were featured in an Instagram snaps. Parry, who most recently served as executive producer on Adam Sandler's The Ridiculous 6, is clearly close to the Hole singer as she frequently shares photos of herself with Love.




The birthday star and Aniston worked together when Parry served as a producer on the 2011 film Just Go with It, which also starred Sandler. (Parry serves as the Head of Film for Happy Madison Productions, Sandler's production company.)

11 signs you’re in an emotionally abusive relationship

Being in an emotionally abusive relationship can damage your soul. These are the signs you need to watch out for and get out before it's too late...

By Anuradha Varanasi  

The first thing that comes to mind about an abusive relationship is being subjected to beatings, verbal abuse and constant humiliation. Though your instincts constantly flash warning signs towards certain behaviours of your partner, you tend to ignore them because you console yourself with the fact that he hasn’t hit you or publicly humiliated you (yet). However, many of us are unaware about the fact that most signs of a highly abusive relationship are far more subtle than that.
Do not make the mistake of continuing to stay in the relationship if you notice any of these 11 signs or behavioural traits in your partner because such toxicity will only erode your self-esteem and confidence in the long run. In fact, even men can be victims of emotional abuse. It would be much more prudent if you try focusing on developing and pursuing your own academic or professional interests, instead of allowing someone to control your life and general well-being. Here’s what it’s like living in an abusive relationship.

1. He isolates you from your friends and loved ones
This is a standard move of an abusive partner. By isolating you from your friends and family, he can get the perfect opportunity to manipulate you and control other aspects of your life. If he constantly tells you not to discuss your relationship or any other issues the two of your might be facing, it is mainly because he doesn’t want a third party to point out that you’re being manipulated. Another reason is, he feels threatened by your relationship with your friends and loved ones.
2. He has severe jealousy issues
There is nothing endearing or cute about a jealous boyfriend. If he is almost constantly worried or paranoid about you talking to people from the opposite sex, it only means he is projecting his insecurities and control issues on you. If you continue staying in a relationship with an irrationally jealous person, it is only a matter of time before they unabashedly invade your privacy by going through your emails, instant messages and social media accounts.
3. He belittles you and your accomplishments
This behaviour is mainly exhibited by people who are dissatisfied with their own career and academic choices. If he mocks your degree or looks down upon your job, don’t brush it off by telling yourself that it was said in jest. It is a sign that he doesn’t respect you enough to support and encourage you professionally.
4. You feel like you’re ‘trapped’ in the relationship
It is only a matter of time before you will feel like there’s no way out from your relationship if your partner has a PhD in emotional manipulation. This is a huge red flag your instincts are flashing that it is time to walk away especially if you find yourself putting up with the same behaviours repeatedly even after you communicated with your partner that it is hurting you. It could be something as seemingly small or ‘trivial’ as inconsistencies in keeping promises or his word.
5. You constantly feel like it’s all your fault
This is a tell-tale sign of a manipulator. You will constantly find yourself apologizing for his irrational behaviour. Emotionally abusive partners will try their best to make you feel like whenever anything goes wrong in the relationship, it is your fault.
6. Frequent guilt trips
One of the reasons why people find it so difficult to walk out of an emotionally abusive relationship is because their partner has such a tight rein over their feelings and emotions. Once you allow them to gain complete control over your emotions, even initiating a breakup is an uphill task because he will always find a way to talk you out of it with false assurances and convince you that if you do certain things for him, things will be smooth sailing.
7. Refusal to communicate or listen to you
Have you repeatedly been in situations where you’ve waited for a call or message for several hours on end after he said he would do so at a specific time? There’s a high chance he is intentionally making you wait. The reason behind this is because he wants to keep you under close control and this is one way to do it since you’re left wondering why he never contacted you throughout the day.
8. He is dominating and invades your personal space
God forbid a heated argument breaks out, he won’t even think twice before locking the room/house door to prevent you from leaving unless you allow him to go on venting about an ‘issue’ he created. If he comes over to your place even after you repeatedly told him not to or lurks around your building premises forcing you to meet him, please be sure there is nothing romantic or cute about this kind of behaviour. It clearly means he doesn’t respect you or the boundaries set by you.
9. Constant phone calls and text messages
While he keeps you on a short lease by intentionally ignoring your call or messages when you need to talk, he makes the habit of repeatedly trying to contact you when you are out with your friends or family. This is because he’s trying to keep tabs of your whereabouts and activities. You will notice the incessant calling and messaging after informing him that you’re going out to meet your girlfriends or colleagues for drinks or dinner. This is  another sign of insecurity and controlling behaviour.
10. You have to deal with extreme mood swings
He can be extremely affectionate and loving one moment and then fly into an irrational rage the next. Anything you could say could make him angry even without any provocation. When you’re around him, you are constantly scared and feel like you’re walking on eggshells. .
11. He is passive aggressive
He refuses to show any sign of vulnerability and doesn’t openly discuss about what is bothering him. Instead, he will have episodes where he tends to sulk and cut off any form of communication until you ‘get the hint’. Any attempts you make to communicate is stone walled with a ‘Fine’ or ‘Whatever’. If he tends to behave passive aggressively on most occasions instead of trusting you with his issues, this is another sign of emotional abuse you shouldn’t ignore.

(Photos) See photos of Miss Africa USA, Francess Udukwu

 

Udukwu, first competed in and won the Miss Nigeria USA pageant. She is the current title holder of the Miss Africa USA pageant.

  Frances Udukwu looking beautiful
(missafricausa)

Frances always had a connection to Nigeria, although she was raised in USA by Nigerian parents. Her Nigerian parents weren’t so happy about her pageant dreams at first but once she made them understand what she hoped to do with it, they supported her.

The beauty queen who majored in public health and health systems management in university never wanted to be a beauty queen, rather, she admits she “just fell into it.”

  Frances Udukwu looking gorgeous
(thatbeautyqueen)

Frances, who worked as a health consultant at the biggest federal consulting firm in the DC area, will love to use the pageant platform to further her humanitarian efforts for women, aged 18-35, with empowerment and education.

In closing, the stunning beauty reveals that in spite of her many inspirations in life, she wants to stay true to herself. She also advises people to leave things in the past…”remain the best versions of yourself in this new year and do not let fear be a factor”.

Adele and Kendrick Lamar Among Stars Set to Perform at Grammy Awards

Adele; Kendrick Lamar

Adele will have to wait until next year's Grammy Awards for her new album 25 to be nominated, but that's not going to stop the English diva from taking over this year's show.

On Wednesday, organizers announced the first round of artists who will dominate the Grammy stage on Feb. 15 – and the "Hello" singer is on the list.

Kendrick Lamar, The Weeknd and Little Big Town are also lined up to perform their hits, while MusiCares' person of the year Lionel Richie will receive a special tribute.




Lamar leads the pack of stellar nominees, which were announced in December. With 11 nods, the rapper has the second most nominations in one year ever. And he's not disappointed about being second to Michael Jackson, who nabbed 12 nominations thanks to Thriller in 1984.

"I'm still soaking that all in," Lamar told The New York Times in December. "Michael will forever be the greatest."

The "Alright" rapper added: "I'm glad it was at 11. I would never want to even think about putting myself on the same level as Michael, simply because I haven't put in the work that he did. It couldn't be a better number."

Why we can’t tackle Lassa fever like Ebola – Minister

Prof. Isaac Adewole

Health Minister, Prof. Isaac Adewole, has lamented what he described as the culture of silence permeating the Nigerian society in reaction to the outbreak of Lassa fever pandemic in the country.
Speaking to State House correspondents at the Presidential Villa on Wenesday, the minister cited the case of Ebonyi State, which had so far records about five cases of Lassa fever but never cared to report his Ministry for necessary action.
The minister denied that cases of Lassa fever were hidden, but admitted there were not brought to the public knowledge until it became late. His words, “Not that they were hidden but they were never brought to public knowledge. There is also what we can consider to be culture of silence in some of our states. For example, we recognised Ebonyi State as one of the endemic states.
“And since the outbreak, Ebonyi has not recorded a single case or reported a single case. We despatched our surveillance team to Ebonyi and we discovered five cases.
“We are not having a resurgence. What we had over the years is a situation which Lassa is endemic in Nigeria. And as I said on numerous occasions, we have these outbreaks. In 2012, we had the highest. We have 1700 case and that declined.

“Last year, we had 441 cases. And what has happened is that for the first time in the history of the country, we are being transparent and open and we are telling the entire world what the situation is and that is what is different.
“We are also concerned. We want to find out why we are still having this Lassa fever in spite of human and material resources that we have in this country. We inaugurated a Lassa fever eradication committee chaired by one of the foremost virologists in this country and we are committed to signing the obituary of the Lassa fever this year.”
Explaining why the war against Lassa fever may not be fought the way the country tackled Ebola, the minister said the source of Ebola in Nigeria was traced to one person that imported it into the country.

According to him, “We can not win the battle against Lassa fever the same way we won the one against Ebola. Ebola happened to be a single importation to Nigeria. Lassa fever is endemic in Nigeria. In 2012, we had upsurge in 26 states. So, it is there but I can assure you that with what we put in place this year, we will sign it off.”
He said the federal government was determined to get to the root of the issue saying, “What we want to do is put across some innovative funding mechanisms, ability to manage and put to use 10,000 primary health care centres across the country over the next two years. In the next 100 days, we will flag off 110 of these centres.
“We will start with the one in Fuka where we first had this outbreak. We will do one per senatorial district, 109 to make 110 in 100 days. This year alone, we will do 5000.”