Categories
facepalm misogyny MRA pedophiles oh sorry ephebophiles sexual abuse victim blaming warren farrell

What Men’s Rights guru Warren Farrell actually said about the allegedly positive aspects of incest. (Note: it’s even more repugnant than that sounds.)

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.

464 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Melody
11 years ago

@ Jodi: I’ve met Patricia Briggs daughters and read her books. I’ll be honest not a huge fan of her kids, but love her books.

Tulgey Logger
Tulgey Logger
11 years ago

It’s a nearly 40 year-old article from a not-that-reputable source and Warren Farrell has said he was misquoted.

Dude. Bingo. First, Farrell was born in 1943. It doesn’t matter how old it is: he was a grown fucking man when he gave the interview and he should have known better. As Ugh pointed out, his views on other things are not much better.

Second, it’s up to him to identify the ways in which he’s been misquoted, and he’s only identified two of those in the email displayed on the Liz Library site. You’ll notice that David didn’t even quote one, the part about “treaters,” and for the other David substituted “generally” for “genitally” and found it not much better than before—and the content of the rest of what he said is pretty messed up. Googling “Warren Farrell misquote penthouse,” I found no further examples identified. I guess he must either not care much about or not have many corrections of this article that is apparently completely unreliable because it’s Penthouse.

I hope now you’ll be taking Germaine Greer to task for her book ‘The Beautiful Boy’, where she leers over images of pre-pubescent and adolescent boys, or Eric Clapton for voicing support for far-right extremists in the 1970s, or Margaret Sanger for speaking at KKK rallies.

If you have a criticism of Germaine Greer’s book, then either make it or link to it. And yes, Margaret Sanger was a racist. But guess what: the blog is about misogyny, not whatever Bingo wants to talk about.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
11 years ago

Hands up anyone other than the trolls who thinks that David is, or is pretending to be, and investigative journalist.

BTW – Happy Thanksgiving, American commenters! I’m finishing up some chores now, will eat roast pork and watch movies later. No turkey since it’s just me and Mr C and there’s only so much turkey we can eat before we get tired of it. Hopefully the fact that we won’t be loading up on tryptophan means that we’ll actually be able to stay awake for the movie.

On “the issue is more complex” – nothing there but an attempt to rationalize away bad behavior by shifting some of the blame to the other person.

Tulgey Logger
Tulgey Logger
11 years ago

Two blockquote fails in one day. I am not thankful for my blockquoting abilities today. 3rd unblockquoted paragraph is Bingo.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
11 years ago

On the intro to feminism idea, it depends what angle you’re most interested in. If you’re looking to put feminism in a societal context and understand why things like the MRM exist as a response, as well as the whole War on the Uterus stuff you see from Republicans, then Susan Faludi’s “Backlash” might be a good starting point, and it’s a nice readable book intended for a general audience, not too academic.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
11 years ago

The funny thing about the “well aren’t you going to criticize Sanger and Greer?” stuff is that it’s already been done many times. I’ve even seen people criticizing both of them on Jezebel, and that’s I know MRAs read that site and consider it ultra-feminist (LOL).

thenatfantastic
thenatfantastic
11 years ago

Oh by the way

I hope now you’ll be taking Germaine Greer to task for her book ‘The Beautiful Boy’, where she leers over images of pre-pubescent and adolescent boys, or Eric Clapton for voicing support for far-right extremists in the 1970s, or Margaret Sanger for speaking at KKK rallies.

I don’t know who Margaret Sanger is but I can, have and do criticise Greer and Clapton for all those reasons and more. But as others have said, this is a blog for mocking misogyny.

thenatfantastic
thenatfantastic
11 years ago

I’ve just read the Wiki article on Sanger and she seems to have been a definite product of her time but it’s not as clear cut as Bingo put it, to no one’s surprise at all.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
11 years ago

Margaret Sanger = founder of Planned Parenthood. She had eugenicist leanings, which is why she’s often criticized for those despite the fact that Planned Parenthood in its current form is a Very Good Thing. Seriously, this has been written about by so many feminists and womanists – Google “Margaret Sanger racist” and see how many hits come up.

Tulgey Logger
Tulgey Logger
11 years ago

Claptonboobz: Right Wing Three Time Rock n’ Roll Hall of Fame Inductees. I Mock Them.

thenatfantastic
thenatfantastic
11 years ago

Yeah, I should probably know who she is, but as you know I’m not from the US and I try to avoid looking up to or even in some cases bothering with first wave feminists, because their views were so flawed as to pretty much nullify the good stuff they did. Same with second wave too in a lot of cases. But I guess we all do that, unless you’re an MRA, at which point you double down on the horrid things someone said ninety forty years ago and pretend like racism child abuse is actually TEH BESTEST THING EVAR.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
11 years ago

See, that’s the thing. I can think of at least one person on our side of the political fence who said horrible things about adults having sex with kids in the 70s (Pat Califia), but usually when I see feminists talking about hir they’ll acknowledge that those ideas were horrible (and in cases like mine end up rejecting Califia entirely because of those statements), rather than making excuses or pretending that those statements don’t matter like MRAs are doing with Farrell and the incest issue. The seventies really were full of this kind of shit, but that doesn’t make it OK or let the people who made those statements off the hook, because there were plenty of prominent thinkers who made it through the seventies without issuing “yay child abuse!” statements.

The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

Evito – belatedly echoing the messages above. Welcome to Man Boobz and I too am so sorry you went through that.

Do you like kittens and cute furries generally? Here’s one as a sort of cyber-hug-if-you-want-it.

http://youtu.be/NEYtIZHdGik

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
11 years ago

I’m confused as to what Clapton has to do with feminism. By all accounts he isn’t exactly an ardent feminist.

The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

When did relevance ever matter to MRAs?

And of course they’re never going to say “Farrell’s ideas about incest were disgusting” or anything like it, because that would be admitting there’s something wrong with abuse, and the whole thing with the MRM is (as we all know) is that it’s an abusers’ lobby. Doesn’t matter what sort of abuse, either.

ithiliana
11 years ago

Some stuff on feminism–cross pollination from Pharyngula’s Wiki:

http://pharyngula.wikia.com/wiki/Feminist_link_roundup

I enjoyed Faludi’s BACKLASH very much (readable, detailed, and with good sources listed).

The good thing about the wiki is that the resources are online!

Evito–I have been reading feminist works since the early1980s, and did my dissertation on ethnicity and race and gender in North American feminism, and teach women writers and stuff–if you have some specific interest in the literary/cultural studies (or feminism and sf writer which is my special field of interest), let me know, and I can list some names!

ithiliana
11 years ago

@CassandraSays: I gather driverbytroll wants to let us know we cannot criticize Warren Farrell for anything unless we criticize everybody else who has ever said anything dodgy, therefore, Clapton!

At least that’s what I got out of it.

And the idea that feminist haven’t critiqued other feminsts’ works: ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Stone ignorant, trollboy is.

hellkell
hellkell
11 years ago

Evito, welcome, and thank you for sharing your story, that took some guts.

I can’t believe the new gross trolls we have crawling out of the woodwork to defend Farrell. Well, I can, but if this is the hill they want to die on they are some fucked up people.

Tulgey Logger
Tulgey Logger
11 years ago

Also, dear failsuze, your follow-through was terrible. You said absolutely nothing substantial about why Armstrong is Teh Worst Person Evar. Don’t you know that you’re supposed to link to something with the implication that it’s the most horrible thing and we’re all going to shit our pants when we read it, but when we do we find out it’s actually pretty reasonable because your type prefers to live in a world all its own?

Come on, now. This isn’t that hard.

Evito
Evito
11 years ago

@Mr. Futrelle
Thank you. I figured you were simply busy, and I am not an impatient personality at any rate. Please, enjoy your Thanksgiving and take your time responding. There is no rush, and I appreciate your input.

@Everyone Else
I wish to extend my sincerest thanks to everyone who has welcomed me so far. It is very nice to actually be accepted on a site and not have to prove myself…Mr. Futrelle knows what I’m talking about but I’m unsure if it should be mentioned yet. Perhaps later when I know people better…

As for small animals, I DO love them. Right now, I live in an apartment that doesn’t allow cats/dogs/fish, but I have hamsters and parakeets so it is fine. I’ve cared for numerous wild animals at a semilocal rehab/raising center as well. Let me tell you…petting a full grown Barn Owl is probably one of the most awesome things you could ever hope to experience!

I have to go walk my mom’s dog now, but thank you all once more. (And a happy Thanksgiving to those who celebrate it.)

Fitzy
Fitzy
11 years ago

Hermione and Evito, you’re both brave and strong. Thanks for having the guts to put your stories out there.

… petting a full grown Barn Owl is probably one of the most awesome things you could ever hope to experience!

Now I’m so very jealous I’ll be surprised if this type doesn’t post in lovely envy green. I love owls, but I don’t have the know-how to handle birds of prey. So I have to settle for just admiring them at the bird sanctuary.

whataboutthemoonz
11 years ago

It is very nice to actually be accepted on a site and not have to prove myself…

Manboobz: where the only thing you have to do to make people like you is NOT think incest is okay.

+1 on the owl jealousy 🙁

On a slightly different note, I am continuously amazed at how often misogynists think feminists are out to get them like some kind of boogeyman, but then they show up in feminist spaces in order to troll.

Sometimes I wonder how the MRM would react if feminists randomly decided one day that they ought to troll AVfM the way they troll here.

Falconer
11 years ago

Thanks for speaking up, Evito, I have hot, fresh hugs here for you and anyone who wants one (assholes excepted).

I think I’ve said before that when I tried to read Faludi’s Backlash I had to put it down because it just made me so upset to read about all these men being assholes to women. And then the book had to go back to the library, and I’ve never checked it out again. Maybe that makes me a naive weakling, but I’m not going to bring up my son(s) thinking women are Less Than, even though that’s probably the least I can do.

Crumbelievable
Crumbelievable
11 years ago

Hey Boobzie! I’m surprised you didn’t ban me for bringing up Ms. Armstrong

Dave doesn’t ban people for dissent, though I’m sure you’d love to think so in order to fuel your complex.

Look, if you want to get a rise out of us you’re going to have to try a lot harder. We’ve already dealt with some particularly vile MRA trolls here so you’ve got big shoes to fill.

1 6 7 8 9 10 19