Warren Farrell, the intellectual grandfather of the Men’s Rights movement, is doing an AMA on Reddit today at 1 PM Eastern time. UPDATE: It’s started, and it’s here.
AMA, in Reddit-speak, stands for Ask Me Anything. So I would encourage you to ask Mr. Farrell questions about anything he has said or written in the past that you find troubling, or even just confusing.
Here are some suggestions. Seriously, ask him any of these, as I’m not sure I’ll be able to be online when the whole thing goes down.
1) Mr Farrell, in your book The Myth of Male Power, you wrote that:
It is important that a woman’s “noes” be respected and that her “yeses” be respected. And it is also important when nonverbal “yeses” (tongues still touching) conflict with those verbal “noes” that the man not be put in jail for choosing the “yes” over the “no.” He might just be trying to become her fantasy.
Are you suggesting that if a woman clearly says no to sex, but does not stop kissing a man, that he is entitled to have sex with her anyway because she has given him a non-verbal “yes?” If not, what specifically do you mean? What sort of non-verbal “yes” would outweigh a clear verbal “no?” Why doesn’t her verbal no mean no?
Source: Myth of Male Power, page 315.
Screencap here: http://i.imgur.com/cwSoc.png
2) Mr. Farrell, regarding your research on incest in the 1970s, you told Penthouse magazine that:
“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.”
Were you actually suggesting that there are “glowing, positive cases” of parent-child incest – that is, child sexual abuse? How can child sexual abuse be “glowing” or “positive” for the child?
If this is not what you meant, what did you mean?
Penthouse also quotes you as saying that you were doing your research
“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.”
As I understand it, you’ve said you were misquoted and that you did not say “genitally,” and that what you actually said was “generally” or “gently.” But even with the word replaced, you are suggesting that parents are repressing their sexuality and their children’s sexuality if they don’t “caress” their children. What did you mean by this?
Sources:
Transcript of Penthouse article: http://nafcj.net/taboo1977farrell.htm
Scanned pages of original article from Penthouse: http://www.thelizlibrary.org/site-index/site-index-frame.html#soulhttp://www.thelizlibrary.org/fathers/farrell2.htm
3) Mr. Farrell, why did you choose a photograph of a nude woman’s ass for the cover of the new edition of The Myth of Male Power? Do you really think that male power is somehow negated by female sexuality?
4) Mr. Farrell, why have you chosen to associate yourself with the website A Voice for Men, a site that frequently refers to women as “cunts,” “bitches,” and “whores?” If you are not aware of this, would you disassociate yourself from the site if given clear proof of the site’s frequent misogynistic attacks on women?
If you’re looking for more ideas on questions to ask him, check out my posts on him in the archives.
These might be good to start with:
The Myth of Warren Farrell: Farrell on Rape, Part One
Warren Farrell’s notorious comments on date rape: Not any more defensible in context than out of it
What Men’s Rights guru Warren Farrell actually said about the allegedly positive aspects of incest.
MRA founding father Warren Farrell responds to questions about his incest research with evasive non-answers. And a smiley. (About his last AMA appearance.
Warren Farrell on Unemployment, Salesmanship, and Other Things That Are Like Rape, Supposedly
Also check out the excellent Farrell’s Follies series on Reddit.
And Fibinachi has a series on Farrell as well.
Is this actually Warren Farrell? I mean, look at this:
Farrell’s response:
It seriously looks like someone is taking the piss, here.
Hrovitnir:
When someone says “looks like Brad Pitt,” I think “so…nice looking gentleman of my father’s generation?” And I’m no callow youth, I am a grown-ass adult with a mortgage and doctorate and enough years on me to put me past the MRA-defined Lady Sell-by Date. I mean, I don’t know anything about the guy that makes me dislike him or anything, I just wonder for how long we have to accept this one guy as the avatar of quintessential male babe-ness. But yeah, physically just not my type either.
Breaking my comment silence because ugh I am all kinds of disturbed by this whole ama. Speaking as someone whose father got custody in the parental split, I’m a prime example of when fathers (who up until this point had left the majority of the raising to the mother, ’cause you know women’s work) should back down. He was terrible, “doing his best” as so many people have tried to tell me, but seriously my father was a man who should not have been left to raise four children by himself. And so when I see things like apparently how children do better with single fathers than with single mothers, I just can’t. Surely this dude realises that this has a lot to do with how motherhood and fatherhood are viewed in general by society? Especially when it comes to single parenthood.
Lalalalalala. That is so funny…and makes so much sense!
RE: Arete
Yeah, he’s not my type either. I don’t know WHY women are supposed to not have any sexual tastes except what men set up for them, except I totally do.
Oh, hello allwomenarenaturallysubmissive. Funny seeing you here!
Hi LBT! I’m flattered. I hope you’re well. I’m pretty good overall, pretty crap right this second as I’ve agreed to work at my now-despised-workplace tomorrow and go to (muay thai) training that is my favourite thing in the world but also makes me freeze in fear. Because my brain hates me.
Heh, I don’t really think about Mr Pitt getting on a bit but I guess it’s true! I love this so bad:
Well, sorry things are shit at the moment, but glad things are generally good overall! Good luck conquering that fear!
Yeah, Brad Pitt is getting older isn’t he? It’s kinda weird, I’m used to celebrities not doing such ordinary human things.
Thanks. And yeah, what is with that? Stop messing with my world! 😀
Speaking of celebrities aging, this thread inspired me to check up on Jonathan Taylor Thomas. Always wondered what happened to that guy.
I have no problem with a man being afraid of rejection. I’m afraid of rejection too so I can empathize.
What is a problem is when a man who is a “Nice Guy” has the notion that because he fears rejection, women aren’t allowed to reject him without being labeled a bitch or a whore.
On Brad Pitt: I had a huge crush on him in the mid 90’s when I was a teenager. I was obsessed with Interview With The Vampire. So was my best friend. We watched it a few times a week. I still think he’s pretty attractive when he doesn’t have an overly slovenly appearance, but I definitely would not sexually harass or rape him if I was in the same room.
OMG JTT! Haven’t thought about that guy in a loooooooong time! Run, Simba!
Do I need to come back and be explicit that I don’t mean to say that I think being fifty is incompatible with being attractive? Because I don’t want to come off like my whole point was “LOL UR OLD!!1” I was seeing it more like how anti-feminists are always going on about Sex & The City, as though it hasn’t been off the air for ten years and isn’t irrelevant to…pretty much everyone else at this point. But then, I guess the grasping at the rags of the past inflexibility inherent in that is right in line with the goals of Patriarchy’s #1 Cheering Squad.
The fuck is this? When a woman agrees to a date, she does not make a choice to be sexual, but she does make a choice to explore sexual possibilities.
And if she explores those, “possibilities” and decides against them?
Oh, right, he paid for dinner.
Asshole.
He has also described Paul Elam as “caring” and expressed nothing but praise for AVfM. That’s telling.
What if the woman offers to split the check? Is she still beholden to give up the sex?
I agree with you, LBT, that there are far better things to see than W.T.Farrell’s creepy bullshit.
Like big cats destroying pinatas.
So cute! I love it when big cats act like house cats.
“Can we refer to the misters as the Ranks of the Butt-Addled?”
The “addled” are not very “adult”.
@pecunium: I know, right? That’s not even a fraction of the groan-inducing shitblubbery in this book. The Myth of Male Power reads like a 3-year old throwing temper tantrums because he’s not treated like the center of the universe (minus the cuteness of said 3-year old and the mitigating factor of him, you know, being three years old instead of a grown up man). If I didn’t know about them through wehuntedthemammoth.com, I’d have a hard time believing there are people who pretty much base their entire worldview on this.
The writing is horrendous, the logic is unbelievably flawed, Farrell’s tendency to minimize women’s experiences to the point of making them irrelevant while making a gigantic deal of the tiniest inconveniences men face under the patriarchal system is disgusting, his constant universalization of his own experiences is insulting, the misreading of facts makes me weep for humanity, the lack of citations is so fucking unscientific it makes me gringe, the lack of critical thinking regarding the sources he does cite is making me cry and the willful ignorance regarding gender issues is just baffling.
All in all, it’s a nerve-grinding experience. Not because it’s “[a] bombshell”, as the quote on the cover of this edition of the book promises, unless you define ‘bombshell’ as something that makes your eyes roll on the floor, makes you feel like throwing up, makes you want to tear an expensive borrowed book to shreds and set it on fire because dear lord this is horrible how can any human being have written this crap how can they have a degree how are they even breathing through all that stupid aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
In which case yes, it is a bombshell all right.
Anarchonist, if this were Amazon,com, I would “like” your review. It really is kind of amazing. It’s the kidn of book you read and you say to yourself, unable to quite believe it, this was actually published by a major publisher? Editors read through this crap and said, yep, this meets our standards! What the hell.
Anyway, I waded back into the reddit thread. Jesus. So many guys who really don’t want to accept that women can say no, and that they have to accept that as an answer.
It gets kind of hilarious once your brain snaps and you’re forced to just kind of stare in awe at the sheer mindnumbing skull-bombery going on. So you’re right there, Anarchonist! Completely agree with the sentiment.
And David, too. You just kind of mutter and go “Come on, what? You published this? Have you read it? Look! He references the same Cosmo article eight times in four different subjects! He gets quotes wrong! He literally lies about easily verifiable facts! He repeats himself constantly! Aaaaarh!”
I think my favorite aspect isn’t so much the constant misreading of books or referencing reviews rather than the actual scientific work of other people, no, my favorite aspect is the sheer balls to the walls disrespect for the Navy.
Warren Farrell… Just hates the Navy.
I don’t know why, I have no clue, but really, it’s the single largest segment of the book that’s not broken into some weird sub-header. And he just… rails on the Navy. Besides just forgiving, in fact, cheering on!, hazing and bullying and harassment as “Character building” (Where have I heard that before?), it’s just so wonderfully full of bitter rage:
And it’s such a beautiful shift, from overblown historical fiction to “Oh, and also, some male soldiers feel the women soldiers just aren’t serious enough about their job!”. Yup. Ain’t go no facts, but the death of 37 sailors is just the same as the U.S. Signal Corps finding that some men feel that the women recieve easier assignments.
Wait.
No.
I lied.
My favorite part is the positive reviews by other people. I’ve come up with a game. You take a snippet from the glowing reviews, then flip to a random page of Myth of Male Power and insert a quote.
REVIEW:
FARRELL
REVIEW:
FARRELL:When we think of burning witches at the sake, we often think of the Salem witch trials and men burning women. In fact, the Salem witch trials were a direct results of two girls who experienced epileptic convulsions and blamed their convulsions on the “witch-craft” of several women in Salem. The Salem witch trials were a results of the community believing the girls without question and trying to save the girls. When a community condemned a woman as a witch, they did not believe they were condemning a woman: they believe this woman was a nonwoman – that she was supernatural
REVIEW:
FARRELL:
REVIEW:
FARRELL:
If it makes you laugh, you take a shot. Water, protein shake, whatever is around.
I’ve been super stressed recently, and under a lot of pressure, and I don’t think I’m actually coping that well because it’s awkward and new and strange, but just… being able to zonk out and read this book and just realize that, holy hell, look at this, look at this, I’m currently trying to build a time-machine out of wood for a project I barely understand I have to write up a 40 page report for friday using means I barely know and I’m pretty sure the sensor I want to be able to pick up hand signals don’t work so I’ll have to wing that and what the hell is agility based reiterative design processing anyway and how does it relate to the casuality of time travel and flow management in art installations, and you know what? It’s like:
Doesn’t matter!
No matter how garbled and odd my thoughts are: They are not this vile spawn of hatred, filth and disregard for the human race
(Oh. My. God. I’ve been noticed! David himself thought my review was good! *waves self* Okay, play it cool, play it cool…)
@David: Thank you! So true. As someone who has just spent literally months doing little else besides researching, researching some more, double-checking, making sure all references are exact and true etc., I find it almost personally insulting that something like Farrell’s book of bullshit is approved. Why can’t I come up with a bunch of unsupported claims and get a movement behind me? The Hip Anarchonist Movement for Best Unorthodoxy, Radical Grooviness and Extreme Radness has currently only one member. Maybe if I wrote The Myth of Mail Power to disprove the widespread belief* that mailmen and mailwomen control information, I could break the chains of oppression of those in charge of delivering mail, and get them to join me!
Or perhaps only the assholes will join me. The vast majority of mail delivery people will laugh at me, because my book will be fucking stupid. Sounds about right.
And yeah, that reddit thread is a mess. I’m not surprised that it turned into a circlewank, since expecting critical thinking from the MRAs is sort of like expecting your pet bear to have eyes that shoot laser beams. It would be awesome, sure, but not very likely to happen, and if it did, it wouldn’t be a bear anymore. It would be a laser bear, completely different. And awesome. Wait, what were we talking about? Ninja wizards?
@Fibinachi: Thanks!
Oh lord, don’t remind me of those passages. I’m feeling physically ill. I have to do something to get my mind off… Hey! Look at the fluffy bunny! Look at it!
https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/8166177280/h2D6E9802/
And you know what, your description of the benefits of reading that awful book almost exactly matches mine! Yesterday, I had a critically important research paper evaluated, and amidst all the panic and self-doubt and feeling that it’s not good enough and I’ll never graduate and oh god they’re going to completely tear it apart, I told myself:
“Well, Anarchonist, no matter how jumbled your paper, no matter how unclear your writing style, no matter how you fail at the proper forms of academic discourse, at least you weren’t the sorry person who wrote The Myth of Male Power. That has to count for something.”
Which once again proves the real value of MRAs: making the people around them feel better about themselves.
*By “widespread”, I mean it was mentioned once in an episode of Seinfeld.
Speaking of noticed, I literally just noticed that there is an actual link to my random blog in that post.
Thank you David! That’s really really cool. Now I shall join Anarchonist in playing it cool and casual and not at all swooning. Although, really – thanks.
I just finished reading through a significant portion of it and you deserve a medal for diving into such assholery, David. The conversation with ArstanWhitebeard was unbelievable.
Not being a man, I can’t say for sure none of this happens but these sound like complete fabrications to justify ignoring lack of consent:
I loved this next bit: 🙂
Question:
WF:
Tracy quoted this above but I wanted to quote it again with some added emphasis. Does anyone else find it weird that the question is about tactics for getting adult male issues heard – not by women specifically mind, just people in general – and WF immediately starts whacking on about what turns women on and off? As though sexual attention is the same thing as respectfully listening to someone else’s point of view? As though being aroused by someone is the same thing as empathizing with them? I feel like this says so much about Farrell’s attitudes to women, men issues and sex in general, but it’s so convoluted that I can’t even begin to unpack it. Any thoughts, Mammotheers?
It’s also pretty telling that the first “adult male issue” he jumps on is “fear of rejection when dating”. Can we just put this one to bed, MRM? You don’t have a right to dates! Or sex! Or even companionship! Check the UN Declaration of Human Rights! That shit ain’t there. Therefore, fear of rejection while dating is not a human rights issue. It is not a grave social ill. It’s not an awful systemic evil that women inflict on men. It’s not a gender issue. Fear of rejection is a reality for all humans, regardless of gender, who wish to be romantically or sexually involved with other humans in some capacity. The crushing realisation that someone you want to date really doesn’t want to date you is not more keenly or deeply felt by men.
No matter your gender, there is no way to guarantee that people are going to respond positively to your romantic advances 100% (hell, even 50%) of the time. Sometimes that can be very painful. It can take a toll on your self-esteem. I know! I’ve been there! Despite being in possession of a butt that has been openly admired by several men! If you can’t handle rejection, you can avoid dating until you’ve learned how to handle it. If you don’t like the way traditional gender roles impact on dating (e.g. man always does the asking, man always pays) spend time around people who think these gender roles are bullshit and actively reject them. (Hint: a lot of these people are feminists).