Gloria Steinem: How the CIA Used Feminism to Destabilize Society

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Mar, 9 2003 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Gloria Steinem: How the CIA Used Feminism to Destabilize Society
By Henry Makow Ph.D.
March 18, 2002

"In the 1960's, the elite media invented second-wave feminism as part of the elite agenda to dismantle civilization and create a New World Order."

Since writing these words last week, I have discovered that before she became a feminist leader, Gloria Steinem worked for the CIA spying on Marxist students in Europe and disrupting their meetings. She became a media darling due to her CIA connections. MS Magazine, which she edited for many years was indirectly funded by the CIA.

Steinem has tried to suppress this information, unearthed in the 1970's by a radical feminist group called "Red Stockings." In 1979, Steinem and her powerful CIA-connected friends, Katharine Graham of the Washington Post and Ford Foundation President Franklin Thomas prevented Random House from publishing it in "Feminist Revolution." Nevertheless the story appeared in the "Village Voice" on May 21, 1979.
www.savethemales.ca...


Mod Edit: Trimmed down huge cut and paste



[edit on 12/1/04 by FredT]




posted on Mar, 10 2003 @ 04:14 AM
link   
Never Sleeps,

I don't know if you right, but I know that you know how to hit a nerve.


I think your topic will not stay a one post topic. Many post are comming, I can see them.


P.S : I * think * you right.

[Edited on 10-3-2003 by ultra_phoenix]



posted on Mar, 10 2003 @ 06:47 AM
link   
www.rense.com...


Consider the souce.

Why do we have a new wave of people posting entire articles from other sites? And to top it off, no commentary, as if we are to believe this is their words (it's written in the first person, with no other explanation).

Never Sleeps should get some sleep.



posted on Mar, 10 2003 @ 07:49 AM
link   
When i read the title i thought im gonna love this.

But whats with these articles, they never seem to get to the point and need to rumble on for several pages.

But the dist of it is true. The whole movement was designed so that everyone would dance to their music.
Women are so far up their arses that they're dragging everybody else with them.


arc

posted on Mar, 10 2003 @ 09:44 AM
link   
hmmmm not quite sure just how to take that article, but first thoughts on it:

feminism existed before the 1960's - think Pankhurst, right to vote, suffragettes....

feminism covers equality issues such as equal pay for a man and woman doing an identical job. Hard to say how that one has had such a bad effect on society.

Some women don't want to be wives and mothers - sorry....

Bit of a bad article really - author seems to be attempting to link the CIA with their dislike of feminists. And I can't quite grasp the link I'm afraid. A rather tenuous attempt to blanket-bash feminists by the look of it - unfortunately there are a lot of women who agree with the principals of equality but refuse to give themselves the label of feminist due to the actions of Steinem, Camila Paglia and her ilk

'fannies with teeth' as my dear dad refers to them



posted on Mar, 10 2003 @ 01:51 PM
link   
This is the same CIA as is mentioned in these articles about women who filed sex discrimination lawsuits? The Central Intelligence Agency?

www.digenovatoensing.com...
www.businessweek.com...
www.psu.edu...

www.cia.gov... (this one goes back to the 1980's)


And that was their way of promoting feminism, eh?

Well, it's an intriguing thought but you'd think that instead of creating situations where 500+ of their agents filed a class action lawsuit against them that they'd start out by making sure that women had equal pay and equal power and creating a harrassment-free environment.



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 01:09 PM
link   
I was going to submit this myself but a Google search brought me here.


I'm against feminism. I'm a stay-at-home wife and mother. I don't need a career to be fulfilled. Having had a job outside the home, I'd rather stay home! Your worth as a member of society should not depend on how much money you make.

Being a housewife is not about being barefoot and pregnant constantly--heh, my husband only wanted one child--for financial reasons. Though if I become pregnant again we'll simply have two children (he's had a vasectomy so the chances of that are next to none).

I sure don't feel like I'm a slave. Hubby works, I take care of the baby and the house, it's called TEAMWORK. He doesn't consider me his slave. He wants to do something, my input is always welcome. Where do these women get off whining about an "oppressive patriarchy"? Give me a BREAK!

Now as far as women's rights--First of all, the early feminists believed abortion to be wrong. Their thinking was, considering that women were treated as property, it wasn't right that a woman should treat her own children as property to be disposed of as seen fit.

Women WERE allowed to vote before the 19th century. Voting rights were dependent upon property ownership/head of household. So a single woman or a widow could vote if they owned property. Men could vote if they owned property. But in the early 19th century the "Enlightenment" came along and women were to be considered ornaments. Now that I agree is not right, and that's what Susan B. Anthony et al fought against.

Men and women are different and there's nothing wrong with that. A man's role is not superior to a woman's role and vice versa. Men and women are supposed to COMPLEMENT each other; that's why they're different. They need each other--two halves of a whole.

Contrary to what people think of the Bible, NOWHERE in the Bible does it say a woman has to be dumb and uneducated. Take a look at Proverbs 31, starting in verse 10.



posted on Nov, 30 2004 @ 11:19 AM
link   
So the website 'save the males' thinks that feminism was sponsered by the CIA. Wow, what else is there too say. the articles lack of sourcing and justification just shows this to be the sort of nonsense put out by fools who dont realised that the world has changed for the better now that women are more equal.



posted on Nov, 30 2004 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Uncle Joe
So the website 'save the males' thinks that feminism was sponsered by the CIA. Wow, what else is there too say. the articles lack of sourcing and justification just shows this to be the sort of nonsense put out by fools who dont realised that the world has changed for the better now that women are more equal.


Women have always been equal to men in worth. But there ARE differences between men and women physically, and emotionally. Women tend to be more emotional, men more logical. A feminist would have you believe that it's nurture instead of nature, that boys and girls are blank slates, when studies have proved exactly the opposite.

Yes, women are the weaker vessel, which is why she needs a man. Men need a woman to protect. They fit together like a puzzle. I find it rather poetic.


If you compare Biblical womanhood with what the hard-core feminists promote, you'll see that feminism is just plain ugly. Feminism pits men against women, and oh btw promotes sexism--beat up on the guys. Your hard-core feminist also considers heterosexuality to be sexism.

Ladies Against Feminism



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 06:21 AM
link   
William good catch


On the feminism/CIA connection I think the jest that the CIA rode the back of feminism could easily be true. I still remember an old cartoon of a drugged out hippie holding out his palm with a sign 'I refused money from the CIA' while he took in cash summed things up in the 60/70 time frame.

The CIA may or may not have been the culprit, but some thing with lots of power kept society in a turmoil. The article makes for a good read to me. Some bits of info in there.

Men long ago realized they were semi-expendable to society. One man for how many women and society can still function rather well and grow. Men have never developed the ability to give birth or nurse, therefore for a society to grow women are needed. The Cossacks and other societies figured this out early on and developed means whereby property passed through the woman.





top topics
 
0

log in

join