Can you please not post in a throwaway/flamewar style to HN? We're trying for something else here. What you bring up is no doubt one relevant aspect of a long career, but on HN we want comments that enhance curious conversation, not kill it.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. They include:

"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."

"Eschew flamebait."

I didn't initially understand your comment, but you mean basically something like that the origin of feminism was in socialism and the CIA saw that it was going to be unavoidable or at least popular and wanting to avoid this leading to socialism becoming popular they decided to make a bastardized version that cuts off any socialist aspect and just turn the whole thing into the modern liberal feminism?

Women's rights are human rights. We all win when that happens (except for those that exploit and abuse them).

Assuming your summary is true, does that have anything to do with the virtues or failing of feminism? After all socialism also (indirectly) gave us weekends, paid holidays, sick leave, social security, state pensions, and decent healthcare. (Shame about the authoritarian psychopathic leaders etc. but that’s clearly not linked to any specific political leaning).

I mean, if you’re against feminism, then I think you’re definitionally against the freedom of choices in life for fifty percent of humanity. It’s an unconditionally evil stance. The fact that most of the people who noisily complain about it are so clearly inadequate in their personality ( no one with actual confidence in their worth needs to spend their time crowing about it) doesn’t help.

This is only half right. The capitalists loved feminism. Biggest expense of many businesses is labor. Double the labor pool, labor cost plummets, & profits skyrocket, so of course the capitalists at the CIA appreciated Steinem, and vice versa.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Steinem#CIA_ties_and_le...

Would add that Alan Greenspan made a similar remark about his consulting firm. How he hired as many women as he could, since he could get sharp ones at a considerable discount.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5432331

> CIA operative tasked with obfuscating the socialist origins of feminism

I've read this sentence multiple times, but it still does not make sense to me

Lmao do you have sources to support any piece of this claim?