25 November, 2014

Turkish President Says: Women Aren’t Equal to Men

Posted by Socrates in China, Eastern culture, equality, feminism, Feminists, sex differences, Socrates, women, women and 'equality', yin and yang at 5:55 pm | Permanent Link

(Above: the Chinese yin and yang symbol)

Good for him. Equal means “the same.” What sort of idiot would believe that men and women are the same? (Actually, men and women are “the yin and the yang.” Granted, that’s an Eastern, not a Western, concept, but it fits: where one sex is stronger, the other sex is weaker. Men and women compliment each other).

[Article].


  1. Similar posts:

  2. 09/22/15 Men and Women Are Equal, They Say 52% similar
  3. 12/20/09 I Want My Equalocracy and I Want It Now 46% similar
  4. 07/22/15 The Evolution of Authority: First, Men Had It, But Now Women Have It 43% similar
  5. 04/22/16 The Media and Prince’s Death 35% similar
  6. 12/19/18 The Federal Reserve Raises Interest Rates — Again 34% similar
  7. 4 Responses to “Turkish President Says: Women Aren’t Equal to Men”

    1. Tim McGreen Says:

      “Equality” is a false, subversive death-cult created by neurotic Jewish dykes to destroy the goyim. Let me hear the Jews deny it. They certainly don’t believe any of it themselves.

    2. fd Says:

      Yin – Yang. The dog chasing its tail. Funny but on point.

    3. mrcrouton Says:

      Erdogan is right on this issue, but he’s a piece of excrement for his assisting the destabilizing and destruction of Syria.

    4. Mary O Says:

      The yin and yang are equal and opposite. For example, the sun is yang, and the moon is yin; both natural forces are necessary for life on earth.

      Similarly, most people would say both their parents, father and mother, had an equal influence on them growing up.

      So men and women are “equal,” since both sexes are necessary for humanity to exist.

      The government’s plan since the 70s has been to tap the productivity of White women for a short-term economic boost.

      The immigrants were brought into our country to supposedly “free” White women to work twice as hard in workplace.

      Homemaking was smeared as an avocation, mainly because the benefit that a woman creates in serving her own children, family and neighborhood cannot be taxed.

      How do you slap a tax on home-cooked meals that cost less, but are more nutritious and better-tasting than the usual take-out pizza that Americans now live on?

      How do you slap a tax on the difference between a child being raised by the teenage Mexican nanny-of-the-week and getting quality attention from his own mother?

      How do you slap a tax on having a neat, orderly and well-maintained home rather than the usual mess caused by having the whole family “on-the-go”?

      How do you slap a tax on the spiritual enjoyment that an older person may get from regular family visits rather than being in the company of some thuggish Caribbean home health aide?

      The housewife of previous generations was creating an untaxable benefit, and therefore she had to go.

      Marriage was pushed back into the 30s.
      Abortion was made legal and “on-demand.”
      Divorce was made easy and commonplace.
      Title IX pushed young women into team sports to pay for college tuition — to make them more masculine.
      Almost all jobs began to require college — to prevent young marriages — which are usually more stable in the long term.
      The single lifestyle was glamorized.
      The left pushed the idea that young people must “find themselves,” (that is, waste a decade doing drugs and 3rd world missionary work) before marriage.
      Then, of course, came the whole gay and lesbian movement.

      The goal was to keep everyone away from home and family to maximize their taxable income.

      But the entire idea is also anti-child. We are now seeing the lack of White children being used as excuse to flood the country with hostile foreigners.

      Today a homemaker is often referred to as a “stay-at-home mom.” The term itself implies that staying at home is terribly unusual. They tend to be wealthy, and do not seek outside employment due to concerns over their children’s psychological well-being. However, because they are in a minority, they tend to spend lots of time alone, and don’t get enough support. They are disparaged as working out all the time “since they don’t have anything else to do” and drinking red wine all day long.

      Our whole culture has to change for women to receive respect based on the real help they are providing to people rather than just the amount of their paycheck and their job title. Raising a White child properly is a lot more important than writing law briefs and similar routine office assignments.

      What is the point of having a child if one is not allowed to raise him?