No book has had more influence over the Men’s Rights movement than Warren Farrell’s The Myth of Male Power. Published in 1993, in the heyday of the early 90s antifeminist backlash, it set the agenda for the Men’s Rights movement as it’s developed over the last two decades. He’s the one who came up with the notions of “male disposability” and the “death professions.” He’s the one who got MRAs fixated on the issue of draft registration.
Indeed, so pervasive has his influence been that if you see an MRA making a dumb argument anywhere on the Internet, the chances are probably more than 50-50 that it originated in the pages of Farrell’s book. Despite its age, and its eccentricity, The Myth of Male Power is still the first book recommended to MRA newbies in the sidebar of the Men’s Rights subreddit, the most active MRA hangout online.
It’s a book that deserves a lot more attention than I have been giving it on this blog. Sure, I’ve written about Farrell’s strange and creepy notions about incest, as set forth in a notorious interview in Penthouse in the 1970s, and about his recent attempts to explain away these views. But I haven’t devoted any blog posts to his most influential work. I intend to rectify that now, with a series of posts on some of Farrell’s chief arguments and assertions.
I will start with several posts on Farrell’s views on rape, which has been the subject of much controversy of late. This part will deal with his general statements on rape and sexuality; another will explore in more detail his views on date rape (did he really describe it as “exciting?”); and still another will look at the vast assortment of things he has inappropriately compared to rape.
Pinning down what Farrell “really believes” about rape – and indeed, about almost anything– is difficult. Farrell’s arguments, such as they are, are slippery and evasive. Instead of setting forth a clear argument about rape, Farrell instead provides us with a series of jumbled metaphors and strange comparisons. Instead of trying to summarize them – many of them defy summary — let’s just go through them one by one.
Farrell supporters will likely suggest that these quotes are taken “out of context,” to which I can only say: Check his book to see for yourself. None of his troubling quotes are any less troubling, or for that matter any clearer, in context, and many don’t have much of a context. Farrell writes in a rambling, free-associational style, and many of the “arguments” he makes in the following quotes seem to come from out of the blue, and are never developed further (though some, as you will see, are referenced again in later quotes).
Page numbers given are from the 1993 hardcover edition of The Myth of Male Power.
All that out of the way, let’s jump right in:
Near the start of his book , Farrell sets the tone for what will come by suggesting that men suffer as much sexual trauma from women’s mixed signals as women do from rape:
Feminism has taught women to sue men for sexual harassment or date rape when men initiate with the wrong person or with the wrong timing; no one has taught men to sue women for sexual trauma for saying “yes,” then “no,” then “yes.” … Men [are] still expected to initiate, but now, if they [do] it badly, they could go to jail. (p. 16)
Here, he elaborates on the notion that rape is a matter of bad timing, of “tak[ing] risks too quickly.”
In the past, both sexes were anxious about sex and pregnancy. Now the pill minimizes her anxiety and condoms increase his. Now the pimple faced boy must still risk rejection while also overcoming his own fear of herpes and AIDS and reassuring her there is nothing to fear. He must still do the sexual risk-taking, but now he can be put in jail if he takes risks too quickly or be called a wimp if he doesn’t take them quickly enough . (p. 168)
Here, Farrell falls back on the old “rape is misunderstanding” canard, and somehow manages to compare sexual activity –- from kissing up to and including rape — to eating a bag of potato chips.
It is also possible for a woman to go back to a man’s room, tell him she doesn’t want to have intercourse, mean it, start kissing, have intercourse, and then wish she hadn’t in the morning. How? Kissing is like eating potato chips. Before we know it, we’ve gone further than we said we would. (p. 311)
Here, he seems to seriously suggest that juries could do a better job judging rape cases if they were sexually aroused.
The problem with every judgment of sexual behavior is that it is made by people who aren’t being stimulated as they are making the judgment. A jury that sees a woman in a sterile courtroom, asks her what she wanted, and then assumes that anything else she did was the responsibility of the man is insulting not only the woman but the power of sex. (p. 312)
And then he returns to the potato chip metaphor.
A man being sued after a woman has more sex than intended is like Lay’s being sued after someone has more potato chips than intended. In brief, date rape can be a crime, a misunderstanding, or buyer’s remorse. (p. 312)
Farrell repeatedly tries to absolve men of sexual wrongdoing by suggesting that they are literally intoxicated by female beauty.
Sexually, of course, the sexes aren’t equal. It is exactly a woman’s greater sexual power that often makes a man so fearful of being rejected by her that he buys himself drinks to reduce his fear. In essence, her sexual power often leads to him drinking; his sexual power rarely leads to her drinking. If anything is evidence of her power over him, it is his being expected to spend his money to buy her drinks without her reciprocating. …
It is men – far more than women – whose mental capacities are diminished when they are “under the influence” of a beautiful woman. (p. 320)
But Farrell thinks it’s “sexist” – against men – to put men in jail for “selling sex” to intoxicated women:
As long as society tells men to be the salespersons of sex, it is sexist for society to put only men in jail if they sell well. We don’t put other salespersons in jail for buying clients drinks and successfully transforming a “no” into a “maybe” into a “yes.” If the client makes a choice to drink too much and the “yes” turns out to be a bad decision, it is the client who gets fired, not the salesperson. (p. 321)
We’ve only just begun to scratch the surface of Warren Farrell’s equally daft and disturbing views on sex and rape. Stay tuned.
I can’t even get past the first sentence.
Feminism has taught women to sue men for … date rape when men initiate with the wrong person or with the wrong timing
Who “initiates” by sticking their penis in someone? Is that even possible?
I mean, is he really trying to make “rape” and “awkward move in for the kiss that gets turned away” the same thing?
If memory served, Farrell also insists that everyone in prison for rape will be raped by “actual” criminals. This doesn’t lead to a discussion of how to stop prison rape, of course. Just to an insistence that we couldn’t let innocent date rapists go to prison. If you read it, as I did, with no understanding of feminism or patriarchy you end up thinking that any woman ever could accuse you of rape at any time and that you’d get raped in prison within the week.
Ugh…. Everything that guy sounds says worse
TW rape (trying to find out some of his logic):
So… if rape isn’t a crime, why is he sad that they’ll be raped by “actual” criminals
and jesus, I felt dirty after writing that. Bleh. X|
Thanks for replies guys, you all said the same so I address it in general.
I understand that people don’t think all drunk sex is raped. But there are many levels of drunk, where I usually disagree. Like I said passed out or unable to communicate is an obvious rape. 2 wine glasses is not even drunk. But then there is “plastered” where one drank like a 6 pack, half a bottle of vodka etc. Still able to talk, go crazy etc, but yes very drunk. In this case I don’t think the decision to have sex should not be taken seriously. One still wants it even if next day the world looks very different.
I am a woman who had her share of such drunk sex, never regretted it (in my opinion if i wanted it then then it was a great decision), I often don’t remember the whole night but am pretty coherent during the night, i saw pictures and videos (not sex videos lol) of me from parts of the night which i don’t remember and i can see that i was thinking. I just personally find it a bit insulting when such intoxication is considered not being able to consent. Not by all of course, just based on some recent online discussions.
One thing about it though is that I sure know that nobody (or at least not 99.999999999999% of the population) would go claim rape just for regret reasons. It is already hard to prove when it is true this would be trouble for nothing.
Okay, I have never been drunk before but WTF? Like…. what kind of sicko would want to sleep with someone who’s “plastered*”, anyway. Even if it is not rape, it is morally skeevy unless both people are at the same level of impairment.
Also, I have never, ever heard of people being “plastered”, wanting sex, and then saying they were raped… unless they actually are.
*and do to me never drinking before id even k what that means.
“If memory served, Farrell also insists that everyone in prison for rape will be raped by “actual” criminals. This doesn’t lead to a discussion of how to stop prison rape, of course. Just to an insistence that we couldn’t let innocent date rapists go to prison. ”
OMG, I never heard that one. sick!
“Okay, I have never been drunk before but WTF? Like…. what kind of sicko would want to sleep with someone who’s “plastered*”, anyway. Even if it is not rape, it is morally skeevy unless both people are at the same level of impairment.
Also, I have never, ever heard of people being “plastered”, wanting sex, and then saying they were raped… unless they actually are.”
Well, its not like i surround myself by straight edgers when i get drunk, we get wasted together. lol
And like i said, i absolutely agree with the second paragraph. i never claimed rape after it unless it really happened. and neither did anyone else i know
And you will find many many judges and DAs who agree with you, Catwoman. And those judges and DAs and thinking along the same lines as you, where they listen to what the rapist has to say and discount the victim’s story. Meanwhile, in reality we’ve got a plastered, talking woman who says no and tries to push her rapist off of her, but she’s too drunk to (1) fight the rapist off and (2) remember a coherent story of what happened that evening. Because of this, the rapist rapes her and she is left with a story that doesn’t sound credible enough to convict the rapist.
But this is a different attitude one has to change Bee. Not that one can’t have coherent sex when wasted, but that rape can indeed happened in such situation and not dismiss someone’s claims.
…Does he get all his ideas about the world from Sublime songs?
Wait, he predates that song. Did Sublime get their ideas from him?
It’s the exact same situation, Catwoman. It’s just that you believe the rapist’s story, and I … don’t.
As far as the drunk sex thing, here’s my problem: I have been in the situation where I was pretty drunk (as in, couldn’t remember it very well the day after) and have been adamant about wanting sex with someone (someone I usually would not be attracted to)*. Sex then happened. They told me they didn’t notice anything out of the ordinary, and they couldn’t tell that I was drunk at all. I know other people who have been the same way. I know this is not the main issue here, but it does happen. I assume most people here would not consider that rape – I wouldn’t, but I did have someone (a man) tell me he thought it was recently.
That’s not what MRAs mean, though. They seem to think ‘persuasion’ is necessary to get a woman to have sex with you, which, you know, says a lot about them.
*Yes, I am an evil cock-carousel rider, blah blah blah
@nerdypants
The “wrong timing” is key in Farrell’s thesis. It’s just that the guy stuck out his penis *before* making sure the other person consented, whoops! It’s just a silly mistake of action reversal. Women are such confused herd animals that they have been convinced by feminists that they don’t like being raped. I mean, like incest, the rapist totally doesn’t mind, he even likes it, so we should take this into account in the cost/benefit analysis.
/barf
Yes, that’s exactly the kind of thing I meant. Except I’ve been told I become more coherent and talkative when I drink.
Carlyblue, that kind of situation generally wouldn’t be legally considered rape (and the woman who finds herself in that situation wouldn’t have a reason to claim it was). That’s what’s making this conversation with Catwoman so annoying. That’s great that you were into it and weren’t raped! However, other people have been raped while drunk because the person they went home with used the fact that they were drunk and unlikely to fight back or be reliable witnesses as a way to ensure that they’d never be charged with rape.
@ Catwoman
I understand you mean well, but it’s not all about you, catwoman. If you’re ok with that situation, all the power to you. If you think that having to be a bit more enthusiastic in your consent or being clear of your intentions before you are drunk (with a right to change your mind of course) is too high a price to pay for less people-who-are-not-you getting raped, I think you might want to check your priorities.
Tone is hard to translate in text, so I just want to point out that I am not trashing you. In fact, I hear myself a few years ago in your text. But when you check what is meant by drunk rape, I think you’ll find out that it’s different than what you assumed. In other words, very few people would say that you were raped in the example you just gave.
Thanks for the reply David. From what I remember there’s some dubious arguments in the chapter on rape, basically implying no conviction = female lying, when of course it could be anything (simply not enough evidence, police maladministration, etc), and simply uses that to bolster the idea of an epidemic of false rape claims…yeah. I don’t buy that, that’s all I’m saying. (I think that’s what it argued, but I cant check offhand).
Brain: how bad could it be?
“Near the start of his book , Farrell sets the tone for what will come by suggesting that men suffer as much sexual trauma from women’s mixed signals as women do from rape:”
Brain: holy shit it’s already worse than I expected…
“Here, he seems to seriously suggest that juries could do a better job judging rape cases if they were sexually aroused.”
Wait….wait…how? I… I am at a loss of words… Bwuh?
@historophilia
“And on another note, hello everyone! I haven’t been around in a while as I’ve just started back at University and have had a hell of a lot to do with essays due in, exams in a few weeks and various other things.”
Hi! Good luck with your feminist society group.
“David, did you slog through the whole book? You deserve some kind of medal for subjecting your brain to that.”
Seconded.:p I was getting the urge to skim his bs just from the select quotes.
“Trufax: Women are never concerned about AIDS!)”
New mra theory: women invented aids to punishstudly men having sex. Any women who says she has aids is lying.
…wow I feel icky trying to think of these things. I could imagine them saying it though.
@aaliyah
“Would it be silly to say that Warren Farrell makes my skin crawl every time I read his work?”
No. He makes my skin crawl too, even though I was forewarned by my sister right before I started reading it was worse than I’d assume.
“Schroedinger’s Rapist–the premise that women cannot know which men are rapists, and thus must act as if any given male could have the capacity to rape = Misandry!
Warren Farrell declaring that pretty much all straight men are two drinks from losing our ability to restrain the rape beast inside each and every one of us = Pro-Male Activism!”
Mras sumerized. This is why I’m glad I found feminist spaces to talk, it actually makes me more comfy around men, not hate them. Something anti feminists don’t seem to get…
@tugley logger
“The more I learn about Warren Farrell, the worse he seems. This holds true no matter how much I learn about Warren Farrell. You’d think there would be some kind of drop-off in this effect by now. Can there be? Pretty please”
Yeah, it’s like, just when you think he can’t get any worse… Kinda sumerized my views on the mras too…
@catwoman
“there is one thing I often disagree with on rape with other feminists. I don’t think that drunk sex is rape. Unless one is so drunk that one is passed out or close to it. Having sex with someone who is not one’s type because he seems great when drunk is not rape.”
And… I agree with you. You seem to have confused ‘feminist’ with’hivemind’. And from what I’ve seen in the feminist spaces I hang out in, the idea that any drunk sex is rape is not a terribly common one.
The bit about sex and worries about potential risks is a great example of why all of his theories about gender are such crap. He’s determined to shoehorn everything into a paradigm where once upon a time women had X problems and men had Y problems and these problems were different but more or less equal in difficulty. The thing is, women have always had to worry about disease in the same way men do, and then had an extra layer of worry about getting pregnant that men didn’t typically have. But he has to ignore that to make the situation fit his theory, so he does.
@Bee OK, yes I see what you’re saying. Except I think Catwoman was kind of saying the same thing as me. Also, if both people are equally drunk, surely one cannot be considered more guilty than the other? (I know MRAs are always saying ‘the man gets blamed in that situation’, which likely isn’t true, but how exactly do you determine it?)
I think it’s best I exit this conversation. Sooner or later I am going to say something very stupid, and any topic that has to do with both rape and MRAs is guaranteed to make me upset or angry at some point anyway.
Catwoman: The goal with the talk about ‘drunk sex’ is to get guys, in particular, to think it through in this way: “How certain am I that the person I am considering sleeping with is, in fact, not so inebriated that they are incapable of giving informed consent to that act? If it’s not 100%, then how high a percentage of uncertainty is too high for me to be willing to risk becoming a rapist?”
If I am genuinely certain that the person I’m with is willing and eager, then taking a moment to ask that question in my head–or hell, even out loud, to her–isn’t gonna diminish my fun in the least. If, however, the answer to that question is some number below 100%, I should really reconsider my intentions. And there’s plenty of ways to do that:
1: Slow down. If she’s not ripping off clothes and howling at the moon, then odds are, she won’t mind a bit more foreplay. Let things move on for an hour or two, while letting the inebriation wear off. Hell, you’ll probably both be better in bed for it.
2: Ask out loud, if you haven’t already. I’ve heard MRAs complain about hypothetical women who get upset at this approach. If such women actually exist, then I would suggest that those are women that mature individuals should probably not sleep with–not because they’re likely to accuse you of rape in the morning, but because they’re clearly not mature enough to handle that sort of decision, regardless.
3: If you’re looking for a potential relationship (rather than just a one-night stand), the option of simply stopping for the night, sharing the bed, and waking up the next morning raring to go is also on the table, or should be.
Wait, but aren’t these sexist guys almost always also homophobic (except when they can try to use gay people to their advantage)? Logically, gay men* invented aids./SARCASM
*lesbians don’t exist/EXTRA SARCASM
@ Catwoman
Nuance, it’s a thing you might want to look into! Also you might want to cool it with the pronouncements about what amount of alcohol consumption renders people tipsy versus plastered, given that alcohol tolerance varies widely between individuals.