A Quote by John Calvin

Yet consider now, whether women are not quite past sense and reason, when they want to rule over men. — © John Calvin
Yet consider now, whether women are not quite past sense and reason, when they want to rule over men.
In the beginning no power differential existed between male and female. God empowered both with full rights and responsibility to rule outward over all creation, not over each other. As we know all too well, the fall changed everything, precipitating male rule over women and also the rule of some men over other men, a.k.a., patriarchy. Within patriarchy, women no longer derive their value from their Creator, but from men - father, husband, and sons. Within patriarchy, a woman's value is gauged by counting her sons.
Men need rule books. Women want men to intuit what they want. And only about 2% of men can do that, and most of them are not heterosexual.
I love the power women have. I think women rule the world because they rule men. Manipulating men - that's our job. That's what we're on the planet for.
I can imagine in a century or two that rule by women will be seen as a better bet than rule by men. What's wrong with men is that they tend to look for the violent solution. Women don't.
The reason women are always reluctant to reveal their age is because other people label them as 'past it'. In the 21st century, women over 60 are not past it - we are vital, active, sexual beings, living life to the full.
The reason men rule is because women let them.
The democratic rule that all men are equal is sometimes confused with the quite opposite idea that all men are the same and that any man can be substituted for any other so that his differences make no difference. The two are not at all the same. The democratic rule that all men are equal means that men's being different cannot be made a basis for special privilege or for the invidious advantage of one man over another; equality, under the democratic rule, is the freedom and opportunity of each individual to be fully and completely his different self. Democracy means the right to be different.
Most men - not just the men in Brentwood - are scared of powerful women with brains. There's something in a man that makes him want to have power over a woman - whether it's in the bedroom or because they earn more money. It boosts their egos.
The real difference between democracy and oligarchy is poverty and wealth. Wherever men rule by reason of their wealth, whether they be few or many, that is an oligarchy, and where the poor rule, that is a democracy.
I grew up in a household where there were really, really strong matriarchal characters. I think that's true of many Asian households. People tend to think of Asia as a misogynistic society or a society where men rule. At least in my experience, the women rule the household; the women rule the social scene. The men often become very useless.
Men's ideas about what women are have been formed from their ruling caste position, and have assigned women characteristics that would most advantage their masters, as well as justify men's rule over them. They do not represent 'truth' but have been promoted as if they were, with the backing of science and patriarchal views of biology.
Feminism insists on women's right to make choices - about whether to marry, whether to have children, whether to combine work and family or to focus on one over the other. It also urges men and women to share the joys and burdens of family life and calls on society to place a higher priority on supporting caregiving work.
But the past does not exist independently from the present. Indeed, the past is only past because there is a present, just as I can point to something over there only because I am here. But nothing is inherently over there or here. In that sense, the past has no content. The past - or more accurately, pastness - is a position. Thus, in no way can we identify the past as past
Men's clothing is more pure in design. It's more simple and has no decoration. Women want that. When I started designing, I wanted to make men's clothes for women. But there were no buyers for it. Now there are. I always wonder who decided that there should be a difference in the clothes of men and women. Perhaps men decided this.
I think the working men and women are getting hammered right now. They want someone they can trust to stand with them. And part of the reason so many conservatives are uniting behind our campaign is, I'm the only one who led the battle against amnesty, has led the battle to secure the borders, has led the battle for the working men and women of this country.
Those who invalidate reason ought seriously to consider whether they argue against reason with or without reason.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!