Yesterday Warren Farrell – the intellectual grandfather of the Men’s Rights movement, the man who single-handedly came up with probably half of the terrible arguments that are endlessly rehashed daily in the manosphere – went to Reddit and proclaimed “ask me anything!”
And so we, and a lot of other people, did. And he even answered a couple of the questions I posted here yesterday – though as I sort of suspected he pointedly ignored the questions about his incest research. Still, there were so many astounding things said in that discussion, both by Farrell himself and by his various supporters, that it’s going to take a couple of posts to get to them all.
Let’s just start with the ass question, shall we? Because there was nothing quite so astounding in that whole sprawling thread, or at least the portion of it that I managed to read, as “Dr.” Farrell’s – he has a PhD in political science –answer to the ass question.
![DoloresCruz1982 86 points 22 hours ago (174|87) Why is a woman's butt on the cover of a book about problems faced by males in our society? permalink save report give gold reply [–]warrenfarrell [S] 2 points 20 hours ago (184|182) i assume you're referring to the profile of a woman's rear on the new ebook edition of The Myth of Male Power. first, that was my choice--i don't want to put that off on the publisher! i chose that to illustrate that the heterosexual man's attraction to the naked body of a beautiful woman takes the power out of our upper brain and transports it into our lower brain. every heterosexual male knows this. and the sooner men confront the powerlessness of being a prisoner to this instinct, we may earn less money to pay for women's drinks, dinners and diamonds, but we'll have more control over our lives, and therefor more real power. it's in women's interests for me to confront this. many heterosexual women feel imprisoned by men's inability to be attracted to women who are more beautiful internally even if their rear is not perfect.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/warrenbutt.png?resize=528%2C398&ssl=1)
That’s right. Warren Farrell literally believes that heterosexual men are powerless in the face of SEXY FEMALE BUTTS. They are BUTT HYPNOTIZED by women’s shapely buttocks, virtual prisoners to the power of DAT ASS.
Not only that, but they are slaves as well, forced to earn more money than women so that they can “pay for women’s drinks, dinners and diamonds.” Who knew that the wage gap was caused by the ass crack?
We like big butts, and we cannot lie. But that way tyranny, I espy.
Only if men can free themselves from the TYRANNY OF THE BUTT they can “have more control over [their] lives, and therefor [sic] more real power.”
But who will write the new Declaration of Independence from the tyranny of Queen Ass?
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for horny dudes to get rid of the boners which those ladies have caused with their smokin hot dumpers and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the babies who have got back requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation, and that is, ladies we can’t think straight if we’re looking at DAT ASS all the time.
Oh, but “Dr.” Farrell is worried about the ladies, too. I mean, he said so:
it’s in women’s interests for me to confront this. many heterosexual women feel imprisoned by men’s inability to be attracted to women who are more beautiful internally even if their rear is not perfect.
Yes, you’re beautiful on the inside to m….holy crap did you see the ass on HER!?
Now, this isn’t entirely new. As I’ve noted before, Farrell makes a version of this argument in his book, talking about secretaries manipulating their bosses with their “miniskirt power, cleavage power, and flirtation power,” [p. 21] describing “female beauty” as “the world’s most potent drug,” [p. 85], and arguing that “many men feel ‘under the influence’ the moment they see a beautiful woman.” [p. 320]
But these, er, arguments weren’t the central focus of his rambling treatise. Now, at the age of 70, by not only putting a naked ass on the cover of his book, but also by defending it in such ludicrously overblown terms, he’s decided to put this unsolicited update from his penis at the center of his argument about the alleged powerlessness of men.
Yep, the closest thing that the Men’s Rights movement has to an intellectual heavyweight seems to think that the most pressing issue facing men today is how sad and mad and confused they feel because they can’t immediately have sex with every hot piece of ass that walks by (and, presumably, the women attached to these asses).
It’s really hard to find a better symbol of the sexual entitlement – and sexual resentment – that lies at the heart of the Men’s Rights movement than this.
Oh, and by the way, my new book is still available for purchase. So far I have sold no copies. Which might have something to do with the $1000 price tag, and also the fact that I haven’t actually written it. But you’ve got to admit the cover is pretty good.
In case you needed a clearer explanation of the power of women’s bodacious hineys, one Redditor by the name of Doldenberg has scienced things up for us and provided us all this useful graph. First, his brief explanation:
Being a brave Alpha from TRP, I have found the solution to the evident misandrist oppression of men by cute butt owners meaning owners of cute butts, not cute owners of butts, or butt owners of cute, or…, that is, ranking butts on an objective BMV (butt market value) scale. I’ve made the data up in my head, but it seems plausible. According to this data, the butt loses BMV when having sat on to many objects, while it’s cuteness only works as a limiting factor. I have made a handy graph[1] with supporting data and sources to explain my theory.
“They are BUTT HYPNOTIZED by women’s shapely buttocks, virtual prisoners to the power of DAT ASS” <– This sentence is pure gold
THE POWER OF KITTEN COMPELS ME.
Also interested to learn that apparently men have an “upper brain” and a “lower brain.” So men are dinosaurs*!
*It’s okay, I know the “two-brain” thing isn’t true.
OMG that explains everything! You see, the extra brain isn’t in their butts, it’s in the butts of attractive women, which is how we oppress them with our asses. Since we won’t let them touch our butts they’re unable to use their second brains.
Women ARE evil.
You have to be seriously full of sexual entitlement to think that you’re oppressed because you can’t immediately have sex with every woman you see that you fancy. No-one is entitled to sex with anyone. That’s not oppression, that’s called fair, and real life.
I’m not oppressed because I fancy the guy that plays Jon Snow in Game in Thrones but I can’t have sex with him. Women fancy men that they can’t have as well. That’s not oppression!
Oppression is being banned from going to school and then shot in the head or having acid thrown over you when you argue you should be allowed to go – which happens to millions of girls around the world.
Warren Farrel must seriously believe that women are objects, so must the rest of the MRM.
Well, Farrell is a Doctor, as he loves to remind people, so he must know all about brains.
Well, shit, if men are that easily overcome then we SHOULD instate a gynocracy. Who on earth can entrust The Big, Red Button to some /man/ who may feel so overwhelmed by his baser impulses that he swoons and accidentally presses The Button and BLAMMO! WORLD WAR III!!!!
And does he really think that women are not attracted to men? What about men’s ‘six-pack and rock hard abs’ power?
Attractive people are noticed more by the opposite sex shocker. Doesn’t neccessarily mean they have power. Or, if they do, it’s a short-lived one. And it might make them powerless in other ways – attractive women are sometimes stereotyped as bimbos, and attractive men are also often seen as bumbling idiots. They’d both probably find it harder to be taken seriously in business/academic/scientific settings.
Either way, it’s not oppression not to be able to have sex with someone you fancy whenever you see them.
I don’t feel imprisoned at all by his stupidity. What a sad old man.
So fucking true…
I mean, isn’t also one of their favorite tales that women must be under control of men because they are children overcome by emotions?
Can’t they state just one thing without un-stating it in the next sentence?
I’m attracted to both men and women, so in theory that’s twice the number of potentially distracting butts wandering around, but that doesn’t make me feel powerless. In fact, if you’re a person with a nice butt and I happen to see it, then thanks, that brightened my day!
This is not because I’m a woman, it’s because I’m not a hateful asshole who wants to blame all my problems on other people.
Seriously, I have a pretty nice butt. Not to toot my own horn or anything. If I could use my booty power to run the world, I would. Same goes for my cleavage. Warren Farrell is an idiot. The only power T&A gives you is the power to find a sexual partner. Women are not handed promotions, elections, awards or the ring of power because of dat ass. Asses don’t have mind control powers. They aren’t drugs. How misandric Farrell and other MRAs are to presume that men are savage beast who lose all mental faculties because butts.
Off topic, but is the MRM behind the effort to ban Hop on Pop from Toronto libraries. It sure sounds like it. http://gawker.com/toronto-library-asked-to-ban-hop-on-pop-to-protect-dads-1569815920/all
When will Dr. Seuss stop killing innocent dads? When will his reign of misandry terror end?
You gotta love how heteronormative the MRM is, too. I guess it’s because we queer peeps are too occupied trying to get some modicum of representation in the government and the media to be whining about how sexual frustration is a form of oppression.
And do they think women never get flustered in the presence of hot guys? It’s baffling. Straight, cis men aren’t the only people who have sex drives.
The most incredible thing to me about the AMA, other than the butt thing, was how Farrell types like a 14-year-old girl texting. All lower case, shortened words, etc.
I expect more from a PhD. Especially when there was often a 10-15 minute gap between his responses, which weren’t all that long to begin with.
He also pooped several mentions of AVfM, and their conference. I suspect he’s taking a cut of the conference proceeds as his fee, and they’re starting to worry about how few tickets they’ve sold.
So MRM main argument is pretty much “Look what you made me do.”
Also apparently for MRM, Farrell and the likes “women” (the ones who opress them) only constitute young and sexy females in perfect (ass) shape that gives them raging boners, every other kind of woman (which is the majority of the female population) simply doesn’t exist or doesn’t matter.
Wut wut, fuzzy kitty butt! The power of fluff compels you!!!
In all seriousness, though, ol’ Warren really is a bummer. All that pulling of assfax has clearly gone to his head. And I don’t mean the big one, either. That one’s rattling like an empty ol’ gourd.
AHAHAHAH.
No, seriously. Men being powerless prisoners to their lust is such a cop-out, and speaks not only of trying to wriggle out of responsibility for said lust, but also of disdain towards men.
Who is it that hates men again? And why are people who are apparently literally powerless to stop their genitals from taking over their brains in charge of this whole shebang again?
What is WTF a doctor of? Proctometry with a specialization on the effects of buttators on the male penis neurons. He is a pioneer on the extraction of DATa ssets from posterior studies.
Remember, posterior hoc ergo propter hoc.
He’s a doctor of political science, FWIW. Really, if you’re not a medical doctor, it’s kind of silly to go around calling yourself doctor.
Good gravy. What diploma mill graduated him?
I think that the power of projection is astonishing in Farrell.
Perhaps we should now call feminism “callipygianism”. The radical notion that we can benefit from institutionalized callipygian power and dominate men in the process.
As far as the whole “Doctor” thing goes, I don’t mind non-M.D.s with Ph.D.s or whatnot using Dr. as their honorific, but if they’re putting it on a book or whatever, they should probably make sure it’s written as “Dr. Assfax, Ph.D.” or “Dr. Buttface, M.D.” and not represent themselves as something they aren’t. The knowledge sets needed for a Ph.D. versus an M.D. are very different, but I don’t mind knowing that someone has the (probably extremely narrow) scholastic knowledge needed for a Ph.D., as long as they’re being upfront about what they studied and not pretending that a Ph.D. in polisci makes them experts on the sociology of gender or whatever. Likewise, I don’t want an M.D. lecturing me on the “science” of why climate change isn’t real – you being a scientific expert on any subject you’re vaguely interested in doesn’t follow just because you’re some kind of doctor.
Like, my husband is a doctor of geology, but if we’re talking about psychology, he knows that he’s basically Jon Snow-ing it up, and understands that I know a hell of a lot more about the subject than him, because that’s what I studied, even though I only rate a B.S. Hell, he’s even more than willing to admit that there are tons of subjects that fall under the heading of geology that he knows next to nothing about, because they weren’t his area of study.
Why would the MRM claim men are mentally incompetent when aroused? That should be one of the things they fight against. Of course, the reason is that it frees us from responsibility for our own behavior. I can’t count the number of times I’ve heard men justify their actions towards women by claiming they can’t help it, because “I’m a guy”.
MRAs should also develop a body of anti-callipygianist theory in order to elaborate on the relationship between shapely butts and institutionalized power. In such an endeavor it is hoped that they can tackle pressing questions of great theoretical significance. Such as:
“How shapely must a woman’s butt be in order to disempower a man?”
“What role does a shapely female behind play in the capitalist mode of production?”
“How can we approach the question of overthowing the matriarchal callipygiarchy – that is, the institutionalized system of callipygian misandry?”
“Are there pro-butt slurs that straight men can reclaim for themselves?”
And various discursive analyses of the relationship between callipygiarchal discourse and institutionalized misandry.
Unfortunately, MRAs are so bad at analyzing any form of social oppression that they probably can’t even develop an internally coherent theory about the oppressive power of women’s butts.
Anyone who thinks lady-type people don’t get flustered in the presence of attractive people has never been around me when… well, ever. Between hot people and cute animals, clearly I am THE MOST OPPRESSED EVAR!!!! It’s astonishing how I get anything done, really.