Home

Third chapter «Women»

Women, like men, are human beings. This is an incontestable truth. Therefore as humans, it is a fact that women are equal to men and to discriminate between them is a glaring inexcusable injustice. Like men, women eat and drink, love and hate. They can equally think, learn and comprehend, and they equally need shelter, clothing and means of transportation, and like men, they feel the bite of hunger and thirst, and they also live and die. But why are there men and women? Human community is not made up solely of men or women; it is naturally both sexes. Why is it then that both sexes were created? Why didn’t creation exclude one of the two? Why was it decreed that both sexes come into being? The existence of both men and women implies that there’s a natural necessity for the existence of both, rather than man only or woman only. It follows then that each is not exactly like the other, and therefore, there is a natural difference between man and woman. This in turn signifies an assigned role for each that differs in accordance with the difference between the two sexes. Each is to have his or her own prevailing conditions in order that they might live and perform their assigned roles. In order to understand this role we must understand the natural difference between the two sexes. Women are female and men are male. According to gynaecologists women, unlike men, menstruate each month. This menstrual cycle is a natural ailment that women must experience every month; if they cannot experience this, they are barren. When a woman becomes pregnant, due to her pregnancy, she becomes less active for about a year because her pregnancy inhibits her natural vitality until she delivers the baby. After delivery or miscarriage, a woman is in a state of confinement. Since men cannot be impregnated they do not experience the ailments that women do. Afterwards, a woman nurses the infant she gave birth to. She breastfeeds her baby for nearly two years, and this means that mother and child are necessarily inseparable for the duration of nursing. Hence, the woman whose activity has already been diminished is also directly responsible for another human being who needs to be aided with all his biological functions, or else will not survive. Men are naturally exempt from all this. These natural characteristics from the essential differences between women and men. They illustrate the essential for the existence of both male and female. Each sex has its own particular life role or function and these are different and irreplaceable - neither can ever assume the function of the other. In this context, it should be noted that these biological functions constitute a heavy burden on women and cost them a considerable amount of effort and pain. Nevertheless, human life would cease without these female functions which are neither mandatory nor optional but simply essential, and without which human life would cease altogether. Deliberate interventions against conception constitute an alternative to human life. Also there exists partial deliberate intervention against conception, as well as against breastfeeding. All these are links in a chain of actions in contradiction to natural life, the ultimate of which is murder as when a woman kills herself to avoid pregnancy, to avoid giving birth and breastfeeding. Although they vary in degree, these are not unlike other artificial interventions employed against the natural processes of life such as pregnancy and breastfeeding, marriage and motherhood. Dispensing with the normal function of the woman as a mother by allowing day nurseries to replace the mother’s care, is the first step towards dispensing with the human society and turning it into a merely biological society with an artificial way of life. To separate children from their mothers and cram them in nurseries is to treat them just like chicks in chicken coops, and it is only natural motherhood that is appropriate and right for the children of mankind. Children are to grow up in a family where motherhood, fatherhood and comradeship of brothers and sisters prevail and not in an institution resembling a poultry farm. Clearly, poultry need a mother’s care at certain stages, just like the rest of the young in the animal kingdom. Breeding these birds on farms, which are in a way similar to nurseries, is counterproductive to their normal growth. Their meat is more like processed meat; they are not tasty and may not even be nutritious because they do not grow naturally. As for children who are orphans and homeless, society is their guardian. Only for them should society establish nurseries, orphanages and the like to accommodate them. They are better off as charges of society than as charges of individuals who are not their natural parents. If a test were carried out to discover the natural propensity of a child, the child would choose his mother rather than the nursery. As a child is naturally disposed towards his mother, the mother is the natural and proper person to give the child the protection of nursing. Placing a child in a day nursery, is coercive and tyrannical and a violation of the child’s free and natural disposition. Natural growth for all living things is free and healthy growth. To substitute a nursery for a mother is a coercion that runs counter to the freedom of proper growth. Children who are shipped off to nurseries are led with compulsion as gullible simple-minded babies, and for purely material reasons rather than compelling social reasons. Without the constraints and the gullibility of innocence, children would choose to stay close to their mothers and reject nurseries as an abnormal and inhuman alternative. The only justification for such an unnatural and inhuman process is the fact that the woman is in a position unsuitable to her natural role; she is required to perform duties other than social obligations, which are in conflict with the duties of motherhood. A woman, to whom nature assigned a natural role other than that assigned to men, must be in an appropriate position to perform her natural role. Motherhood is the female’s function, not the male’s. Consequently it is in the natural order that children should not be separated from their mothers, and any measure taken to do so is tyrannical, oppressive and dictatorial. Also, any mother who forsakes her duties towards her children goes against her natural role in life. A woman should not be subjected to tyranny and oppression, and should be given rights and provided with adequate conditions which would allow her to perform her natural role in normal conditions. The contradiction arises when necessity obliges women to forsake their natural function of childbearing and motherhood. This necessity indicates that they are subject to oppression and dictatorial treatment, since a woman in need of work, which would restrict her ability to perform her natural function, is not free and is compelled to work by need and in need no freedom indeed. To perform their natural female function, women need the conditions appropriate to an ailing person overburdened by pregnancy, bearing the load of another human life, and thus physically unable to perform other roles with efficiency. It is unfair for a woman passing through this stage of motherhood, to be placed in a situation that disagrees with her pregnant condition, i.e. to be required to exert physical effort. This would be tantamount to a punishment inflicted upon her for her betrayal of her maternal role; it is a tax imposed on her for entering the realm of men, which is naturally alien to their own. Those who believe that women voluntarily perform work that requires physical effort are in error. The grim reality indicates otherwise. They do such work because they were unwittingly led by the merciless materialistic society into compelling circumstances in which they have no alternative but to yield to social conditions in the mistaken belief that they are working of their own free will. In fact the alleged basis that maintains that women and men are in every respect not different from each other, deprives the woman of her freedom. The phrase “in every respect” is the grand deception that ensnares women. This idea destroys the appropriate and necessary conditions that women need and are unquestionably entitled to, to the exclusion of men by virtue of their distinctive natural role in life. To consider women capable of carrying equal burdens as men while pregnant is unjust and cruel; and to consider them as capable in times of hardship and fasting while breastfeeding is equally unjust and cruel. It is even more so if they are considered capable of doing a disagreeable job that disgraces and taints their femininity. It is also equally unjust and cruel to have women study a discipline that would lead them to jobs incompatible with their nature. However, there is no difference whatsoever between men and women as human beings. Both are not to be forced into marrying against their will and both are not to be divorced without the due process of law or without mutual agreement outside the courtroom, or even to be married without prior agreement on divorce. Moreover, the woman is the rightful owner of the house, because a home is necessary to women who become pregnant, who give birth, experience confinement and perform the duties of motherhood. Even in the world of other animals, the female whose natural duty is motherhood is the rightful owner of her home - the shelter of motherhood. It would thus be unjust to deprive children of their mother and to deprive mothers of their homes. The different biological nature of females bestows upon women characteristics different from those of men, in both form and intrinsic nature. Women are different from men in form because they are females, just as all females in the kingdoms of plants and animals, differ from the males of their species. This is an undisputable fact of nature. The male in the plant and animal kingdoms is born naturally strong and striving, while the female in both kingdoms is naturally born beautiful and gentle. According to these diverse characteristics and the laws of nature, the male voluntarily performs the role of the strong, striving being because he was born as such, while the female performed the role of the beautiful gentle being spontaneously, because she was born as such. This natural rule is just: on the one hand, because it is natural, and on the other, because it is the basic rule for freedom. All living things are created free, and any interference with this freedom is coercion. When these natural rules are breached or scorned, the values of life itself are abused and corrupted. Nature has been so designed so as to be in harmony with the inevitability of life from what is being to what will become. When a creature is born to life it is a living being and shall inevitably be so until it dies. Survival between the beginning and the end is thus based on the natural law of creation, a state of neither compulsion nor choice, just nature taking its course; it is natural freedom. In the worlds of man, animals and plants, there must be both sexes, for life to occur and to proceed on its course from being to non-being. This does not happen by the mere existence of male and female, but by the fully efficient performance of the natural roles for which they were created. If this does not happen the course of life is impaired for one reason or another. This is the present state of societies almost everywhere in the world, as a result of the roles of men and women becoming confused by the attempts to transform women into men. In harmony with their particular nature and its purpose, men and women must excel themselves in the roles naturally assigned to them. To resist this situation is regression, a course that goes against nature and destroys the basis of freedom, for it is hostile to both life and survival. Men and women must relentlessly adhere to the role he or she was created for. Abandoning this role implies compelling circumstances that in turn, imply an abnormal situation. The woman who refrains from childbearing, marriage and motherhood, and who forsakes her gentleness and dismisses adornment for health reasons is a woman who relinquishes her natural role in life, because of these compelling health conditions. The woman who refrains from childbearing, marriage or motherhood in favour of work also relinquishes her natural role in life because of compelling circumstances. The woman who abstains from one or all these functions for no substantive reasons, relinquishes her natural role in life because of compelling and morally deviant circumstances. Thus, abandoning his or her natural role in life for a male or female is an indication that he or she is subjected to abnormal circumstances, opposed to freedom and are a threat to survival. Therefore, a world revolution is needed to do away with all the materialistic conditions that prevent women from performing their natural role in life and so drives them to carry out men’s duties in order to achieve equal rights. Such a revolution is inevitable, especially in industrial societies. It is a reaction to the instinct of survival, even without any instigator of revolution, not even from The Green Book. All societies today look upon women as little more than a commodity. In the East she is looked upon as a personal possession to be bought and sold, and in the West her femininity is not recognized. Driving a woman to do a man’s work is an unfair aggression against the femininity that is naturally bestowed upon her for a natural purpose essential to life. Man’s work obliterates the beautiful features which creation awarded to women so that they might perform their particular role. It is just like flowers that need to attract pollinators to produce seeds. The role of plants in life would come to an end if we were to obliterate flowers, and it is the same with butterflies, birds and other female animals that are colourfully adorned for this vital natural purpose. To undertake man’s work, women must abandon their role and beauty and become men. A woman has full rights and need not be coerced to turn into a man and forsake her femininity. There is a natural difference between men and women resulting from the difference in the physical constitution between the two sexes that gives female organs functions different from those of male organs. There is also a difference in disposition, nature, temperament and shape of body. A woman is beautiful, compassionate and emotional. She is easily frightened and is generally a gentle being, while a man is aggressive by virtue of his inbred nature. It is absolutely uncivilized to ignore these natural differences between men and women. It is against the laws of nature, is destructive to human life, and is a real cause of the wretchedness of human social life. In the industrial societies of our time, women have adapted themselves in order to perform masculine physical work, at the expense of their femininity and natural function in life, and to the detriment of their beauty, mind and duties of motherhood. It would be stupid, even dangerous to civilization and humanity to imitate such materialistic and uncivilized societies. This is not a question of whether women should or should not work. It is ridiculous to pose the problem as such. Work and opportunities should be made available by society to all capable and needy individuals, women and men, provided that each individual works in an appropriate domain and is not coerced by oppressive circumstances to go into inappropriate domains. To have children working in adult domains is dictatorial and an outrage, and to have women working in the domain of masculine work is similarly dictatorial and an outrage. Hence, freedom is to have an individual learn an appropriate discipline to qualify for work befitting to himself, and dictatorship is to have an individual learn an inappropriate discipline and thus be driven to do work unbefitting to himself. Work that befits a man is not always work appropriate for a woman, and knowledge that is suitable for adults is not the knowledge suitable for children. There is no difference in human rights between men and women or between adults and children. Yet there is no full equality in terms of their duties.

Home