Meg Whitman is a highly accomplished woman. She was the CEO of eBay. When she joined eBay in 1998 it had 30 employees and revenues of $4 million. When she departed in 2008 it had 15,000 employees and annual revenues of $8 billion. This year she is running for California governor against an old man who is a card-carrying member of the California patriarchy (he is a former governor and his father was governor of California before him). In short, she seems to have just the kind of ‘non-traditional’ career arch that feminists should love.
Last Thursday an aide of the white male patriarch Meg is running against was caught on tape calling Meg Whitman a “whore”. One would expect feminist groups to up in arms over the insult.
And if one did indeed expect that, one would be disappointed. In fact, the President of the California chapter of the National Organization of Women, Parry Bellasama, sides with the patriarchy. Parry said, “Meg Whitman could be described as ‘a political whore.’ Yes that’s an accurate statement.”
You see there is one little itsy bitsy, teensy weensy problem with Meg Whitman. She isn’t a doctrinaire leftist. This is the same reason why organized feminists also hurl vitriol and spit venom at other accomplished powerful women leading ‘non-traditional’ lives, such as Margaret Thatcher, Sarah Palin, Ann Coulter, Michelle Bachman and Michelle Malkin (who is also a visible minority).
If feminism was merely a movement dedicated to ‘empowering’ women in non-traditional roles - and nothing else – then they would be supporting all of these people. But they are not. Their consistent opposition - often hysterical – of conservative women betrays their true calling. At their core, feminism has as little to do with empowering women, as environmentalism has to do with conserving nature. They are just front groups for socialism that are used to deceive people who otherwise would not find socialistic policies appealing.