You may remember the embarrassing spectacle a couple of months back when Warren Farrell asked the readers of A Voice for Men to help him pick out a cover picture for a new ebook version of The Myth of Male Power, the 21-year-old crackpot bestseller that more or less provided the, er, intellectual foundation for today’s Men’s Rights movement.
It wasn’t just embarrassing because AVFM is a noxious hate site that regularly calls women c*nts and whores and helps to organize informal campaigns of harassment directed at individual women. It was also embarrassing because all three of the pictures were sexualized images focusing on specific female body parts. You can guess which three, and you’d be right: tits, ass, and vagina (the latter tastefully covered in a merkin made of moss).
Well, Farrell ended up rejecting all of these images in favor of … a different picture of a woman’s butt. Yep, the screenshot above features the actual cover of the recently released ebook version of The Myth of Male Power. (You can see it in its full sized-glory over on Amazon.)
The implicit message of the cover couldn’t be clearer: men may seem to run the world, but women can control and exploit them through the power of their sexuality. Male power is undercut by … butt power.
Am I reading too much into a cover image? Farrell doesn’t really believe this nonsense, does he?
Well, in the introduction to the ebook, Farrell writes:
In case you’re wondering, “genetic celebrity” is Farrell’s term of art for any attractive woman.
But golly, you say, the fact that a dude feels “powerless” because he can’t have sex with every woman with a nice butt that happens to wander across his field of vision doesn’t actually mean that men are powerless or that male power is a myth. Well, Farrell has an answer to this as well. And by “answer” I mean, well, whatever this is:
Got that? I’m not sure there’s anything there to get; it’s nothing more than hand-waving to distract attention from the nonsensical nature of his previous statements. In case any Men’s Rights activist ever brings Warren Farrell up as an example of a respectable, “academic” MRA, you may wish to point out that almost nothing Farrell writes ever actually makes any fucking sense.
In the book itself, Farrell repeatedly suggested that male power can be undone almost completely by the sexual power of women. In one oft-quoted passage, he wrote about the effect that a “secretary’s miniskirt power, cleavage power and flirtation power” allegedly has on their male bosses. (Myth of Male Power, p. 21)
While that statement has earned a certain notoriety for its sheer ridiculousness, Farrell went further elsewhere in the book, essentially arguing that men are as addicted to female “beauty” as drug addicts are to the drug of their choice — and as helpless.
“Sexually, of course, the sexes aren’t equal,” Farrell wrote. “[M]any men feel ‘under the influence the moment they see a beautiful woman.” (p. 320, emphasis in original.)
This sort of temporary “intoxication,” Farrell argued, leads men into shackling themselves to these temporarily sexy tyrants for the rest of their lives — thus agreeing to support them (he suggested implicitly) even after they get old and ugly. (p. 85.)
In Farrell’s original book, this “argument,” such as it is, was merely one of many that he thought undercut the alleged “myth of male power.” Now, with the butt on the cover, he’s put it front and center. Or, more precisely, rear and center.
Warren Farrell, you’re an ass, man.
Oh, awkward segue here, I just wanted to show off the cover to the new edition of my classic book, The Myth of Human Power.
It will soon be available for one million dollars in cash in unmarked bills, upon delivery of which I will sit down and write it for you. It will probably be pretty short and not very convincing.
Sigh. So, then, who has the power in that dynamic? The wealthy man or the woman who must seduce and flatter and latch onto to the wealthy man and pray he doesn’t dump her for some younger woman once she starts getting old and no longer “commercially attractive?”
And it’s solely the fault and responsibility of those who are choosing to do “dumb shit.” Women are not the gatekeepers of men’s self-confidence. Low self-confidence is not an excuse for shitty behavior of any kind, up to and including violence. Not receiving “validation” from a woman is not an excuse for shitty behavior of any kind, up to including violence.
This is something that seems painfully obvious to me.
Arch…I just caught that. Women being harassed, assaulted and abused is just “dumb stuff” and of course, we’ve only heard of it on the news. No, asshole, most women get to live it. We don’t need to hear about it on the news.
How so? Do tell.
badmin:
Bullshit. With this sentence you’ve proven you know nothing about feminism. Stop trying to criticize something you know zilch about.
Most men have absolutely no problem finding touch, warmth, affection, intimacy and understanding. That is because, thankfully, most men are total asshats who think women are some kind of subhuman object. Most men view woman as human beings. Also, BTW, what makes you think women don’t also desire touch, warmth, affection, intimacy and understanding?
WTF is with these stupid hash tags? What are you, 12? You’re 12, aren’t you?
And what exactly are you trying to prove with that gruesome little story?
You #1 requires a citation. I’ll hold my breath while you go find it.
..and if respect an autonomy is too high a price to pay, then who the fuck wants that man’s companionship anyway? Seriously, respect or GTFO. Nobody needs a person in their life who views their humanity and equality as a burden. Feminism is the only movement that has ever fought back against the very warped view of masculinity you keep insisting you are against.
Your #2 sounds alot like sex with a healthy dose of one directional ego stroking. Intimate touching = sex. What is it exactly that you think a woman would gain from such a relationship?
Oh dear:
“1) feminism has elevated the price of female companionship past what a large segment of the male population is capable or willing to pay.”
Um, fella, I’m going to have to ask if you know what feminism even is? As in, have you ever read a book about it? Or did you get all your information from MRAs? Because I don’t recall any feminist guidelines that involve women becomming more effective golddiggers. What are you talking about when you say the movement “elevated the price of female companionship”? Give me a citation where a noted feminist encouraged women to charge for their companionship, please.
“2) When I say validation I mean everything to include touch, warmth, affection, intimacy and understanding. More and more men are going to be brought up into a world without these interactions so to consolidate our experiences under a banner makes perfect sense. #MGTOW”
That sounds like a threat that no one here would ever be actually afraid of.
Do you not know of any man in a happy relationship? Or have you never experienced one before and assume no other man has. Why are you assuming their are legions of men who never experienced a hug before?
“@Binjabreel I’ve broken up more domestic violence incidents then I could count.”
I’ve broken up a couple myself. I didn’t ask for a medal afterwards. Are you? Oh wait, you are…
“They were lucky to have me.”
“@weirwoodtreehugger: The young lady met her client at a club he took her back to his place where they did the transaction. When she couldn’t find her cell phone she pulled out a knife and chased him to his car.”
Yes. This sounds scary. Point?
“The man watched as she cut up his car threatening him to come out. He pulled a gun out of his glove compartment and shop at the window.”
You mean “shot” ?
Oh, wait, your backpedaling now. Claiming all men are victimized by sex workers who turn them into sex junkies sounded absurd to even you, hence you telling this story to make it sound like sex workers usually terrorize their clients. And maybe you think it’s a counterpoint to our arguements that men choose to hurt women.
Argh! That should read “…most men are NOT total asshats.”
Most men are NOT total asshats, thankfully.
Sorry for any confusion, everyone. Please accept this kitty eating a snowcone:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_70rJ1ndenM0/SNlx2Ua5GKI/AAAAAAAAFQ0/Njd0c866bpo/s1600-h/Unbenannt-1.jpg
So feminism has brought women more financial and other independence, meaning that they’re no longer under as much pressure to accept abusive or unwanted relationships in order to survive — and this is a bad thing?
BTW, that’s my take on what “feminism has elevated the price of female companionship” means.
I’m also waiting to hear what the point of the gun/knife fight was. Is that one confrontation supposed to demonstrate the dynamic between all sex workers and their clientele?
Well, you know, women now expect to be treated with respect and to have agency (the right to say no to anyone they want for any reason they want). They also expect to have the freedom to earn a living and live the life they choose, without being pressured to conform to outdated societal norms or to latch on to any available man (no matter how badly he behaves or how horribly he treats her) in order to be able to get a bank account, buy a car or a home, etc.
Buddy-boo is right in that there is a percentage of the population for whom treating a woman like a real, live person is just too much to ask. I just don’t think the percentage is as high as he would like people to believe.
Ninja’d by cloudiah!
@Sparky @Hellkell see this is a perfect example of y’all disagreeing with me for a stupid reason. Of course feminism has women in the job market, more in higher paying carrier feilds, more women who refuse to settle down, more women who are choosing their jobs over there marriages and more women who don’t want to be married to their work aday spouses any longer. Am I making this up? No.
I’m not even going to mention the divorce laws.
It’s every man for more appropriately every woman for herself in this modern era.
Sparky,
Thanks for the new desktop background.
leatapp: 🙂
budmin: So, basically, you’re admitting your butt-hurt that women can and do take care of themselves without having to be completely dependent on men; and that women have lives and wants and needs of their own that they feel completely justified in pursuing, whethe or not a random man approves or disapproves? That women aren’t stopping whatever they are doing to cater to the hurt fee-fees of whatever man thinks he deserves her time and attention, no matter what she wants?
A list of things that are actually good:
“Of course feminism has women in the job market, more in higher paying carrier feilds, more women who refuse to settle down, more women who are choosing their jobs over there marriages and more women who don’t want to be married to their work aday spouses any longer…”
The last one is good, if in fact, the woman chooses not to be married anymore for any reason.
Why don’t you approve of sex workers? It sounds like you’re in favor of marriage or relationships that mirror prostitution.
Shiraz, I’m going to hazard a guess that while those marriages resemble prostitution in way, the key issue trollboy has is that the woman is completely powerless in those senarios. Hookergal pointed out that she can say no.
Since minibud is boring, I’m going to attempt to change the conversation to discussing the terrible skit Saturday Night Live did last night about MRAs:
http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/jewelry-party/2755299
Full of virgin- and appearance-shaming and other racist (those Latin women, amirite?) crap, missing the point about what’s wrong with the “movement,” and also completely unfunny.
There are a bunch of threads up on r/mr about it, which is probably the most amusing part of the whole thing.
Bud,
Yet marriage is so popular that same sex couples are striving for the right to marry and straight folks continue to marry whenever they like. Not everyone wants to marry. Not all people who marry wish to remain that way. Funny how you suggest that it is men who don’t want to “pay” for companionship with basic respect, but then claim that it is women who are making the choice not to marry. So, what you are saying is that people once married because it was socially unacceptable not to and because women were forced into marriage in order to survive and now they are free to make the choices that are best for them and that isn’t always marriage. That hardly means it’s every man for himself. It means that people have fought for and won personal freedom. That’s not a bad thing, Bud. Also, love, sex and companionship still exist outside of marriage. You don;t seem to understand the difference between you being unhappy that women are free to choose to be with other men or not with men at all and all love and light disappearing from the world.
It has been said, but I’m gonna say it again: Men are still having happy, healthy relationships with women. Many men enjoy being in mutually respectful relationships with independent women who are only with them because they wish to be and would not want a woman to be stuck settling for them or using them as a source of income out of desperation. There are men who do not see women as a means to an end and being decent people as the high price they pay for nookie.
If you see yourself as being such a low life, then no woman can help you see yourself as anything better. You have got to fix your view of yourself and of others, because it’s as twisted as a corkscrew. You are choosing to be bitter and see the world through a skewed lens where everyone else’s lemons are sour. This is actually good news for you. You don’t have to be an embittered jerk. You don’t have to accept twisted ideas about masculinity. You don’t have to be afraid of women.
@Nloudiah_”So feminism has brought women more financial and other independence, meaning that they’re no longer under as much pressure to accept abusive or unwanted relationships in order to survive — and this is a bad thing?”
No. It’s not a bad thing, but at this point it’s becoming a survival thing for men too. We have to consolidate our wealth. We have to figure out what’s the best way to petition the state for assistence. We have to cut off the excess baggage of societal expectations. We have to define masculinity on terms so that we could hold our heads high. We have to learn how to say no to a system that is getting more hostel towards us by the day. We need to learn how to live with each other as men.
So, to budmin, loss of privilege = increased hostility
Hmm…
Cloudiah,
Blah…I don’t want to watch it. It sounds horrible. It sounds like another swing and miss from SNL. That reminds me of an old flash animation cartoon called Naked Angry Pat in which he and his roommate decide to “drink until SNL is funny again”. They end up blacking out.
@Shiraz
My guess is twofold:
1) He wants women to save more than their body. (So yes. Not saying no and such pesky things.)
2) He also wants to keep “plausible” deniability. (In a mock voice of wounded dignity: “Of course I don’t frequent sexworkers I’m married!”)
save -> sell. I really shouldn’t drunk post. :/
I think I’m bored now.
Ok. Gonna start Sunday dinner. Bye everyone.