Feminism Has Been Hijacked By Outside Interests

The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines feminism as:
1. 1: the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
2. 2: organized activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests

Feminism is described as an organized movement, a “political theory,” including political activity for the benefit of women’s rights and furtherance of equality. Most feminists would argue they are working to improve the lives of women. But who exactly organizes the political activity at the center of contemporary feminism, and what are the real motivations behind these groups?

When reviewing the political movement as a whole, especially in light of the recent Women’s March, one quickly finds glaring evidence that the political movement known as feminism has been hijacked by interests whose work opposes or ignores women’s rights.

Most participants in the recent Women’s March probably had good intentions. However, as documented by Asra Q. Nomani, George Soros funded over 50 groups who “partnered” with the event. This brings up serious questions as to the motivations behind the March.
Soros was one of Hillary Clinton’s large donors during her unsuccessful Presidential run, losing $1 billion according to the WallStreet Journal. His involvement in the Women’s March as well as anti-Trump protests in the wake of the election could be seen as retaliation after the loss of his financial investment in Hillary’s candidacy. Soros referred to Trump as a: “would-be dictator” warning about what his win could mean for the long-term health of democracy.” Is it any surprise, then, that Soros would be linked to funding the Women’s March? Or that its Hollywood proponents would threaten Trump’s life? How this political vendetta passes for feminism is absurd in this author’s opinion.

To use the moniker feminist in America in 2017 apparently requires signing political and mental sovereignty over to the likes of Soros, O’Donnell and Sarsour, who will decide which political candidates are acceptable to vote for, and which religion is acceptable to follow. Such developments do not demonstrate progress for women’s equality, but an attempt to subvert the population and put it further under oligarchical control. Speaking at the Women’s March, Madonna infamously described “thinking often” about “blowing up the Whitehouse.” Previously Rosie O’Donnell had also advocated “Martial Law” to Prevent Trump’s inauguration. Such Hollywood rants appear preoccupied more with the destruction American democracy than they are concerned with women’s dignity or equality.

Soros also funds the Arab-American Association of New York, whose executive Director is Linda Sarsour. She served as an organizer of the women’s march. Sarsour has been linked to members of the terrorist group Hamas. One of her tweets stated: “shariah law is reasonable and once u read into the details it makes a lot of sense. People just know the basics.” The apparent doublethink involved in squinting so that her views could be forced into any type of legitimate definition of feminism is laughable. Sarsour serves as yet another example of the feminist movement having been taken over by Soros linked interests with no concern whatsoever for furthering women’s rights.

Even articles that fiercely criticize Trump on his treatment of women call Hillary’s Soros-funded brand of feminism “superficial” and a “failure.” The New Republic wrote: “Her reliance on Hollywood endorsements reflected a deeper problem in the Democratic Party: superficial progressivism packaged as real social justice.” Wikileaks emails from the Clinton campaign revealed that Hillary hypocritically paid women less than men, to the point that it worried her own campaign. CNN noted that the:“Clinton campaign worried that the “huge discrepancies” would be noticed by journalists, according to internal Clinton campaign emails exposed by WikiLeaks.”

Notable silence continues on subjects like acid throwing. Unfortunately this is an every day occurrence in numerous countries. The Huffington Post noted; “Acid attacks happen every week in Bangladesh and fewer than ten percent of them are followed by a conviction” Young women whose faces are permanently disfigured by acid attacks are ignored because they do not fit the correct Soros-Feminist “narrative.” The Huffington Post also wrote: “For Shumi, leaving the hospital was a huge mental hurdle…” In addition to being scarred for life, women like Shumi are abandoned by their families because of the social stigma attached to acid victims. For feminists to ignore this and other important issues is morally unacceptable.

Another uncomfortable subject for Soros-brand ‘Feminists’ is that of Child-Brides. In 2014 the Grand Mufti in Saudi Arabia reaffirmed there would be “no opposition” to “underage marriage.” The Guardian also reported marriages of prepubescent girls in 2011: “Atgaa, 10, and her sister Reemya, 8, are about to be married to men in their 60s.” This represents a massive failure of American feminism to address the victimization of girls who have no autonomy to fight for themselves. The Women’s March also neglected to address Female infanticide, practiced in many countries due to negative associations with the birth of daughters as well as burdensome dowry traditions. The documentary film “It’s A Girl” documented this issue, as did the film “Girl Killers (2012)

Female genital mutilation also continues in many areas. Journalist Abigail Haworth witnessed 248 girls undergo this mutilation in one day. Such horrific abuses against women are a serious issue actively ignored by American and Western “feminism.” While the Soros- backed Women’s March seemed obsessed only with ‘blowing up the Whitehouse’ and imposing martial law after Soros lost his $1billion investment on Hillary, it loudly ignores the real suffering undergone by women around the world.

Such hypocrisy is morally repugnant. How is this excused, tolerated or ignored by feminism as a political movement? Feminism’s inaction on these topics is shameful and hypocritical to the point that the movement fails to fulfill the term as defined by Webster. The “feminist” movement in the United states as it exists currently might be better considered another branch of many Soros front groups, as it does not act for the interests of women but only for the interest of Soros and those who fund and incite events like the Women’s march, not addressing any of the real problems faced by women that desperately need immediate intervention.

Why were participants in the German Women’s March chanting Allah Akhbar? What does this phrase have to do with the rights and equality of women? Again this reveals the March and contemporary feminism has been hijacked by outside interests who do not support women’s rights. Or for that matter, gay rights. How can members of the LGBTQ movement honestly turn a blind eye to their fellow humanity suffering and dying and being flogged in Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern states, simply for existing?

It is saddening and repulsive to me, to witness a movement which is supposedly for women, organized by individuals with ties to terrorist groups and who advocate religious laws that deny women’s most basic human dignity. That this behavior is tolerated and endorsed by so-called “civil rights” groups is shameful. Moral authority is not assumed, it is earned. Just because one wears a pink p**sy hat and opposes Trump, does not mean that everything they say is automatically moral or that they serve the interests of women as opposed to Soros.

Author: Elizabeth Vos

Writer and Associate Editor at Disobedient Media.

4 thoughts on “Feminism Has Been Hijacked By Outside Interests”

  1. “Female genital mutilation also continues in many areas”

    This statement sums up the whole article really. Genital mutilation of males is still legal in the West!

    Feminism doesn’t need to be hijacked to become a hate cult that doesn’t really care about equality. It was like that from the beginning.

  2. It was hijacked long ago. Betty Friedan was a Communist, even in her college days. During her marriage, she was such an oppressed housewife she had a full-time maid.

    The gains women have made are fully justified. But it’s not surprising that the radical roots of feminism are now showing.

Comments