So there has been a great deal of controversy surrounding the recent talk that old school Men’s Rights guru Warren Farrell gave at the University of Toronto. Protesters troubled by Farrell’s repugnant views on incest and date rape, among other things, blocked the entrance to the building holding the talk; police broke up the blockade. You can find various videos of what went down on YouTube. I’m not going to try to sort out all the various claims and counterclaims about what happened.
I personally don’t approve of blocking people from giving talks, even if their ideas are repugnant. But I certainly do approve of holding people responsible for what they say, and Farrell – in addition to being wrong about nearly every aspect of relations between men and women – has said some truly awful things over the years.
Exhibit A: A notorious interview he gave Penthouse magazine in the 1970s in which he discussed a book he was researching about incest, tetatively titled The Last Taboo: The Three Faces of Incest.
Let me put a giant TRIGGER WARNING here for disturbing discussion of incest and child sexual abuse.
In the interview, he argued that incest could be a good thing for everyone involved. Indeed, he waxed poetic about the possible positive effects:
“Incest is like a magnifying glass,” he told interviewer Philip Nobile. “In some circumstances it magnifies the beauty of the relationship, and in others it magnifies the trauma.”
The book Farrell was working on never appeared, and Farrell would apparently prefer it if what he said in that interview simply vanished into the memory hole, but a radical feminist site called the Liz Library has a copy of the original 1977 magazine in which it appeared, and has put high quality scans of it online. You can find them here.
Here are some of the things Farrell said in that interview. I’ve put the direct quotes from Farrell in bold; the rest is Nobile’s summary of what Farrell told him.
The article summarized the “findings” of Farrell’s (at that time incomplete) incest research, starting with his take on mother-son incest:
Mother-son incest represents 10 percent of the incidence and is 70 percent positive, 20 percent mixed, and 10 percent negative for the son. For the mother it is mostly positive. Farrell points out that boys don’t seem to suffer, not even from the negative experience. “Girls are much more influenced by the dictates of society and are more willing to take on sexual guilt.”
Apparently, in his view, girls feel bad about the abuse not so much because abuse is inherently bad, but because “society” tells them it’s bad; he returns to this theme repeatedly.
Apparently Farrell’s “findings” about father-daughter incest were not quite as cheery:
The father-daughter scene, ineluctably complicated by feelings of dominance and control, is not nearly so sanguine. Despite some advertisements, calling explicitly for positive female experiences, Farrell discovered that 85 percent of the daughters admitted to having negative attitudes toward their incest. Only 15 percent felt positive about the experience. On the other hand, statistics from the vantage of the fathers involved were almost the reverse — 60 percent positive 10 percent mixed, and 20 percent negative. “Either men see these relationships differently,” comments Farrell, “or I am getting selective reporting from women.”
Yea, that’s right. He’s saying that the overwhelming majority of the abusive men he interviewed enjoyed sexually abusing their daughters, but for some baffling reason their daughters generally didn’t enjoy the abuse. And the explanation for this is that perhaps the daughters are lying – er, sorry, “selectively reporting?”
The bit about advertisements seems to suggest that Farrell went out of his way to try to find and interview women who felt positively about being sexually abused, but still was unable to find more than a small percentage who did.
The article continues. (This is Nobile summarzing Farrell, not Farrell’s direct words.)
In a typical traumatic case, an authoritarian father, unhappily married in a sexually repressed household and probably unemployed, drunkenly imposes himself on his young daughter. Genital petting may have started as early as age eight with first intercourse occurring around twelve. Since the father otherwise extends very little attention to his daughter, his sexual advances may be one of the few pleasant experiences she has with him.
Let’s just repeat that last sentence for emphasis:
Since the father otherwise extends very little attention to his daughter, his sexual advances may be one of the few pleasant experiences she has with him.
The article continues:
If she is unaware of society’s taboo and if the mother does not intervene, she has no reason to suspect the enormity of the aberration. But when she grows up and learns of the taboo, she feels cheapened.
So the incest “taboo” is the main problem, not the abuse itself?
And here is a doozy of a quote from Farrell directly:
“When I get my most glowing positive cases, 6 out of 200,” says Farrell, “the incest is part of the family’s open, sensual style of life, wherein sex is an outgrowth of warmth and affection. It is more likely that the father has good sex with his wife, and his wife is likely to know and approve — and in one or two cases to join in.”
(Note: I’m relying on the Liz Library’s transcription of this quote; some of the text in their scan of this page is blurry.)
Farrell told Nobile that he was feeling hesitant about publishing his book, because it might encourage exploitation of daughters, but that he felt compelled to continue researching it for two main reasons:
“First, because millions of people who are now refraining from touching, holding, and genitally caressing their children, when that is really a part of a caring, loving expression, are repressing the sexuality of a lot of children and themselves. Maybe this needs repressing, and maybe it doesn’t. My book should at least begin the exploration.”
“Second, I’m finding that thousands of people in therapy for incest are being told, in essence , that their lives have been ruined by incest. In fact, their lives have not generally been affected as much by the incest as by the overall atmosphere. …
Farrell also hopes to change public attitudes so that participants in incest will no longer be automatically perceived as victims. “The average incest participant can’t evaluate his or her experience for what it was. As soon as society gets into the picture, they have to tell themselves it was bad. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. “
According to The Liz Library, Farrell now claims that the bit about “genitally caressing” children is a misquote, and that what he really said was “generally caressing.” You can see the scan of the page here; Penthouse clearly has him saying “genitally.”
But let’s assume that Farrell is telling the truth and Nobile misheard the word. Here’s the quote again, with that one word changed.
First, because millions of people who are now refraining from touching, holding, and generally caressing their children, when that is really a part of a caring, loving expression, are repressing the sexuality of a lot of children and themselves.
I’m not sure that’s much better; he’s still talking about “touching, holding, and … caressing” children in a sexual context.
Farrell has not, to my knowledge, challenged any of the other quotes in this interview besides that one. Nor, again to the best of my knowledge, has he forthrightly repudiated the substance of what he said. If he wishes to clarify or challenge any of this I will happily give him space here on this blog to do so.
I should note that in the interview Farrell stopped short of actually advocating incest. But his reasoning here is curious, to say the least:
“I’m not recommending incest between parent and child, and especially not between father and daughter. The great majority of fathers can grasp the dynamics of positive incest intellectually. But in a society that encourages looking at women in almost purely sexual terms, I don’t believe they can translate this understanding into practice.”
So apparently father-daughter incest – ie, sexual abuse – isn’t a good idea because in a sexist society fathers are likely to do it wrong?
I encourage everyone with the stomach for it to read the entire Penthouse piece, which also discusses the incredibly creepy views of some other incest “researchers” at the time.
I will highlight more of Farrell’s problematic views in future posts.
Thanks for making me google judgybitch, wow is she a piece of work. There’s a bingo card? Can I have a copy? My NWO and Steele ones are clearly useless now.
Ok, having just taken a crash course in judgybitch, I’m guessing spokenarbiter is not her — first, drive-by-trolling seems unlikely considering the sheer volume of her posts. Second, spokenarbiter did manage to form a sentence that made coherent sense. Much like DKM, the content of that thought was vile, but the thought itself came out in a coherent manner. Judgybitch seems allergic to logic, as well as absurdly self-centered.
Spokenarbiter and wwworzw may be one in the same though.
…why am I reading this drivel? My gods she is horrible, and boring, and too much of a train wreck to look away from. Maybe I should just go to bed, I’m expected to be showered, dressed, and at my cousin’s in 12 hours, ‘cept my evil brain seems to think it’s time to poke the internet, or maybe watch a movie, or something that is not sleep. Maybe I’ll just stay up until after dinner, they’ve got a couple <10 year old kids, so I can’t imagine we’ll be there that late…hmm…
@Argenti
Go here and refresh. That’ll generate a random card for you. I couldn’t figure out a cleaner/shorter link.
lowquacks — thank you, I just got to her rant about Amelia Earhart and might explode. Just a sample of the stupid — “Well, good riddance I say. Amelia died alone, in a fiery plane crash, leaving no children to mourn her. And that’s how the “modern” vision of marriage will end, too.”
Except we’re not really sure how she died, but top options are “fell into the ocean when she ran out of fuel” (not fiery), landed on an island and eventually died of exposure/thirst/hunger (no fiery, unless attempting to cook over fire might count) or, I guess, failed to land on an island and crashed, and died in a fiery plane crash…except I’ve never actually heard that last one. It’s assumed she either went down over water, or put the Electra down on land.
Though, if she did land the Electra, well, it’s possible the only reason she wasn’t found is because everyone assumed that a woman could never do what she was attempting, so she must’ve fucked it up…
That’s right, sexism might’ve killed her, a fiery plane crash probably didn’t. But okay there judgybitch, you keep right on judging. (It’s here, if anyone wants to fume with me.)
My mother just popped in all “you know we’re going to your cousin’s today right?” and “no I don’t want coffee!”
Lol, apparently my fresh ground and Mexican brick espresso French press coffee is too strong for her…and most people XD (including the not-an-ex, ze actually called it scary when I suggested it for surviving midterms).
Couple of pots of that should keep me wide awake until after the party, just don’t ask me to work any power tools! (lots of caffeine resulted in the only time I’ve had a drill taken away from me, fun times)
Oh, are we talking about coffee again? In that case, can anyone recommend good light roast coffees that I can buy online/in stores? I know I could get some at various super fancy coffee snob companies that operate locally, but I’m thinking there are probably cheaper options. I use a French press, and it needs to be pre-ground since I use my grinder for spices.
I am entirely the wrong person to ask about light roasts, sorry! And now that my parents have stopped screaming about a gift bag, I’m going to go make my coffee (short version is that she’s upstairs and he’s downstairs and half deaf, so this was mostly screaming to be heard…still, I’m not playing translator for that mess)
I fail to see what he said wrong. He researched incest with an open mind, and reported what he found. Sounds to me like you’re attacking him for reporting reality, a reality you don’t like. No surprise there then.
Eh, I should probably just haul my ass to Philz or Blue Bottle and get something there, I’m just feeling lazy because it’s cold and wet. It is odd that I’ve been developing an aversion to dark roasts though, I didn’t used to mind them.
@Mike
research =/= deciding all the women you interview must be lying or whatever
In fact, research very specifically does not include trying to explain away findings that you don’t like.
So, Mike, you think “an open mind” means agreeing with abusers who thought it was fine, and disagreeing with victims who were not happy with what was done to them.
Congratulations, you’ve just shown yourself to be another rape apologist. WTF does it take to get it through your head that incest is child abuse and there is NOTHING GOOD about it? What part of the word indefensible do you not understand?
@CassandraSays
Do you have an album of the year or any musical observations on this year for the other thread? I’d be interested to read.
Not really, I’ve been far too focused on fashion this year rather than music.
You could still give us a few thoughts! Haven’t been keeping up with that really.
I guess the fact that nothing particularly impressive is really sticking out in my mind is sort of its own verdict, huh?
Probably.
I’m talking mostly about metal, though, since that’s what I’ve been focused on. The new Cradle of Filth was pretty good for its genre. The discovery of dance-oriented death metal amused me, but I can’t say I really care for the results.
You mean that Morbid Angel remix album, or is there other stuff out there? Or are we just talking grindcore or Enter Shikari-type stuff?
I mean this kind of stuff. There’s a whole scene in Gothenberg, apparently.
*sigh* I wrote up a nice long detailed explaination of the sicentific method, and got accused of not having an open enough mind.
Hey Mike? Do us all a favor and reread what I wrote, for you are the one who may want to open one’s mind just a wee little bit.
In less annoying topics, can anyone explain what an “English style spread” means in relation to Christmas Eve dinner? I apparently will be dining at one this evening, and would like some clue what I’m in for!
I’d imagine some sort of roasted bird (goose if you’re going to be really traditioal), gravy, roast potatoes, Yorkshire pudding, some sort of boring vegetable side dish (oh, England), and Christmas pudding. Hopefully they’ll light the pudding on fire, and have Christmas crackers with little hats in them.
So…roast potatoes and boring vegetables, dandy…thank the gods my mother already made the lasagna!
Sorry for my lack of enthusism, clearly some people like it, and I might be interested depending on the bird being roasted, but I don’t do mystery gravy, and Christmas pudding looks gross, so that leaves the boring stuff, and maybe the Yorkshire “pudding” (how is that pudding?)
Oh well, at least I have lasagna, and my mother’s given me permission to make a salad if I want, so maybe I’ll decide I do want to. (w00t for dinner with my cousin’s GF cooking for both sets of kids?)
Yorkshire pudding done well is amazing, but I dunno how good it’s going to be if the person making it doesn’t do so all the time. Christmas pudding is nasty, but the floorshow part can be fun?
Well here’s hoping they decide to allow fire near the 9~14 year old crowd (I wouldn’t, I’ve met my cousin’s older son! Kid’s just like his father, lol)