Illustration: NK NEWS
From Yonhap News:
Park Geun-hye’s ‘Devotion to the nation unmatched’
Saenuri Party president Hwang Woo-yeo declared at a party conference ‘No Englishman ever threw at rock to Elizabeth I (of England)‘ in defense of the opposition attacks against her, rhetorically asking ‘who would dare cast a stone at our beloved Park Geun-hye?’ He added that candidate ‘Shim Sang-jung [of the Democratic Labor Party] ought to apologise to women across the globe and our women sincerely, and receive due [disciplinary] measures.’
This was in response to the criticism leveled by Shim who described Park Geun-hye as ‘the representative of the party that oppresses women and does not represent women’s lives.’ Hwang said ‘Park Geun-hye lost her parents in her 20s and led the life as the head of the family, surrendering her personal happiness to devote her life to the good of her nation and citizens,’ emphasising how she threw herself selflessly to defend the ‘national security law and the private educational institution law in the coldest of winter days.’
Kim Sung-joo, Park Geun-hye’s campaign manager, said ‘her female presidential candidacy is the first of its kind in South Korean constitutional history’ and condemned the opposition’s attack on her status as ‘only biologically female’ as an unacceptably aggressive and conservative assault on an unmarried woman.’ Her [virginal] life has been dedicated to the state and as such it is no exaggeration to call it ‘marriage to the state.’ He concluded by urging the opposition candidates to issue an apology to Korean women across the country for arousing anger for undermining ‘her unparalleled devotion in matters of diplomacy and trade..’
‘The election of a female president is expected not because she is simply a woman but because of her female leadership, that will change the face of politics; alluding to Merkel or Thatcher does not represent all women just as Obama does not only represent African-Americans.’ Director general Seo Byong-soo chimed in for what he said were ‘typically patriarchal’ values on which the Democratic United Party is founded on and highlighted ‘slanderous comments made by Naggomsu members and perverted comments made by Kim Kwang-jin.’
He concluded that ‘Moon Jae-in almost adopted the slogan ‘the ROK Man’ during the primaries. Women are more likely interested in the process of winning, and her triumph against men who will gang up on her will result in a paradigmatic change in South Korea.’
Comments from Daum:
Extend the voting time so that I can cast a stone.
Which is the first, the state or the people, you shitheads. If it’s the state, you’re statist communists.
The Ministry of Gender Equality ought to sue this old fart! The state = masculine, this definition is sexual discrimination. If they defined the state as feminine, she must be a perverted bitch.
As a citizen, I am opposed to this marriage… How dare they… fuck…
I have never approved of this marriage.. This marriage is null and void
Dictatorship and violation of the constitution is marriage now???
He he let me throw you one~!
Hwang, are you bent on violating our constitution? Since when did we become a constitutional monarchy? Elisabeth who? The Saenuri people think the presidential election as some kind of joke.
They’re really really out of it. How is this any different from arguing that the state is your own private property? ke ke
The nation refuses you, so who is letting you marry who, just stay sin~~~gle all your life
‘l’estat c’est moi‘, I am reminded, and also I want to throw that stone.
And soon we will witness idol worship comparable to Kim Il Sung……
Totally psychotic. Comparing an idiot with Elisabeth I, ke ke
Who said you could marry the state? The state is the common property of the people. So your term ends and that counts as divorce? What a shit analogy. If you think you are deficient in some way, just admit it and come up with a realistic program of support for raising children… Not just some photo-ops and then later come up with some lame excuse. Dedication to the nation? Hah! ke ke
‘National Security Law, Private Educational Institute Law…..?’ What exactly was it about the state…. I really beg to differ on this….