"In the pre-dawn darkness of today’s presidential inauguration day,  I faced a choice, as a lifelong liberal feminist who  voted for Donald Trump for president: lace up my  pink Nike sneakers to step forward and take the DC Metro into the nation’s  capital for the inauguration of America’s new president, or wait and go  tomorrow to the after-party, dubbed the 'Women’s March on Washington'?
                  The  Guardian has  touted the 'Women’s March on Washington' as a 'spontaneous' action for women’s  rights. Another liberal media outlet, Vox,  talks about the 'huge, spontaneous groundswell' behind the march. On its  website, organizers of the march are promoting their work as 'a grassroots  effort' with 'independent' organizers. Even my  local yoga studio, Beloved Yoga, is renting a bus and offering seats for $35.  The march’s manifesto says magnificently, 'The Rise of the Woman = The Rise of  the Nation.' 
                  It’s an  idea that I, a liberal feminist, would embrace. But I know — and most of  America knows — that the organizers of the march haven’t put into their  manifesto: the march really isn’t a 'women’s march.' It’s a march for women who  are anti-Trump.  
                  As  someone who voted for Trump, I don’t feel welcome, nor do many other women who  reject the liberal identity-politics that is the core underpinnings of the  march, so far, making white  women feel unwelcome, nixing  women who oppose abortion and hijacking  the agenda.  
                  To  understand the march better, I stayed up through the nights this week, studying  the funding,  politics and talking points of the some 403 groups that  are 'partners' of the march. Is this a non-partisan 'Women’s March'? 
                   
                  'Partners also  include the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which wrongly designated Maajid  Nawaz, a Muslim reformer, an 'anti-Muslim  extremist' in a biased report released before the  election. The SPLC confirmed to me that Soros funded its 'anti-Muslim  extremists' report targeting Nawaz. (Ironically, CAIR also opposes abortions,  but its leader still has a key  speaking role.)'
                  
                     
                  
                  Roy  Speckhardt, executive director of the American Humanist Association, a march 'partner,'  told me his organization was 'nonpartisan' but has 'many concerns about the  incoming Trump administration that include what we see as a misogynist approach  to women.' Nick Fish, national program director of the American Atheists,  another march partner, told me, 'This is not a ‘partisan’ event.' Dennis Wiley,  pastor of Covenant Baptist United Church of Christ, another march 'partner,'  returned my call and said, 'This is not a partisan march.' 
                  Really?  UnitedWomen.org, another partner, features videos with the hashtags #ImWithHer,  #DemsInPhily and #ThanksObama. 
                  Following the money, I poured through documents  of billionaire George Soros and his Open Society philanthropy, because I  wondered: What is the link between one of Hillary Clinton’s largest donors and  the 'Women’s March'? 
                  I found  out: plenty. 
                  By my  draft research, which I’m  opening up for crowd-sourcing on GoogleDocs,  Soros has funded, or has close relationships with, at least 56 of the march’s 'partners,'  including 'key partners' Planned Parenthood, which opposes Trump’s  anti-abortion policy, and the National Resource Defense Council, which opposes  Trump’s environmental policies. The other Soros ties with 'Women’s March'  organizations include the partisan MoveOn.org (which was fiercely pro-Clinton),  the National Action Network (which has a former executive director lauded by  Obama senior advisor Valerie Jarrett as 'a leader of tomorrow' as a march  co-chair and another official as 'the head of logistics'). 
                  Other Soros grantees  who are 'partners' in the march are the American Civil Liberties Union, Center  for Constitutional Rights, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. March  organizers and the organizations identified here haven’t yet returned queries  for comment.  
                   On the  issues I care about as a Muslim, the 'Women’s March,' unfortunately, has taken  a stand on the side of partisan politics that has obfuscated the issues of  Islamic extremism over the eight years of the Obama administration. 'Women’s  March' partners include the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which has  not only deflected on issues of Islamic extremism post-9/11, but opposes Muslim  reforms that would allow women to be prayer leaders and pray in the front of  mosques, without wearing headscarves as symbols of chastity. 
                  Partners also  include the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which wrongly designated Maajid  Nawaz, a Muslim reformer, an 'anti-Muslim  extremist' in a biased report released before the  election. The SPLC confirmed to me that Soros funded its 'anti-Muslim  extremists' report targeting Nawaz. (Ironically, CAIR also opposes abortions,  but its leader still has a key  speaking role.) 
                   
                  
                    'Much  like post-election protests, which included a sign, 'Kill Trump,' were not  'spontaneous,'  as reported by some media outlets, the 'Women’s March' is an extension of  strategic identity politics that has so fractured America today, from campuses  to communities. On the left or the right, it’s wrong.'
                  
                   
                  Another  Soros grantee and march 'partner' is the Arab-American Association of New York,  whose executive director, Linda Sarsour, is a march co-chair. When I co-wrote a  piece, arguing that Muslim women don’t have to wear headscarves as a symbol of 'modesty,'  she attacked the coauthor and me as 'fringe.'
                   Earlier,  at least 33 of the 100 'women of color,' who initially protested the Trump  election in street protests, worked at organizations that receive Soros  funding, in part for 'black-brown' activism. Of course, Soros is an 'ideological  philanthropist,' whose interests align with many of these groups, but he is  also a significant political donor. In Davos, he told reporters that Trump is a 'would-be  dictator.' 
                  A  spokeswoman for Soros’s Open Society Foundations, said in a statement, 'There  have been many false reports about George Soros and the Open Society  Foundations funding protests in the wake of the U.S. presidential elections.  There is no truth to these reports.' She added, 'We support a wide range of  organizations — including those that support women and minorities who have  historically been denied equal rights. Many of whom are concerned about what  policy changes may lie ahead. We are proud of their work. We of course support  the right of all Americans to peaceably assemble and petition their government—a  vital, and constitutionally safeguarded, pillar of a functioning democracy.'
                   Much  like post-election protests, which included a sign, 'Kill Trump,' were not  'spontaneous,'  as reported by some media outlets, the 'Women’s March' is an extension of  strategic identity politics that has so fractured America today, from campuses  to communities. On the left or the right, it’s wrong. But, with the  inauguration, we know the politics. With the march, 'women' have been appropriated  for a clearly anti-Trump day. When I shared my thoughts with her, my yoga  studio owner said it was 'sad' the march’s organizers masked their politics. 'I  want love for everyone,' she said.  
                  The  left’s fierce identity politics and its failure on Islamic extremism lost my  vote this past election, and so, as the dawn’s first light breaks through the  darkness of the morning as I write, I make my decision: I’ll lace up my pink  Nikes and head to the inauguration, skipping the 'Women’s March' that doesn’t  have a place for women like me."