Categories
a voice for men creepy excusing abuse men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed men pedophiles oh sorry ephebophiles rape rape culture reddit sexual abuse sexual exploitation the c-word the myth of warren farrell warren farrell whores

Warren Farrell is doing an Ask Me Anything on Reddit today. Some suggested questions for him.

Ask him anything!
Ask him anything!

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.

 

 

 

 

Categories
alpha asshole cock carousel alpha males are these guys 12 years old? beta males boner rage citation needed creepy evil sexy ladies imaginary oppression men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny precious bodily fluids taking pleasure in women's pain the c-word

MGTOWer complains: By 18, women are "either dating 30 year old millionaires or (if less attractive) f***ing the football team."

Every Man Going His Own Way's favorite fantasy
Every Man Going His Own Way’s favorite fantasy

In case anyone was wondering, the Men Going Their Own Way movement has managed to survive the implosion of MGTOWforums.com that I wrote about a little while ago. Yep, the regulars from there have moved on to several new forums where they continue to celebrate their independence from the women of the world by happily discussing such manly hobbies as video games, model trains, taxidermy and knitting.

Oh, who am I kidding? They don’t talk about any of that stuff. Basically they continue to nurse their grudges against the women who wouldn’t date them in high school, somehow convincing themselves that the best way to be “free” of women is to obsess about them every minute of every day.

Take the charming fella who calls himself ManWithAPlan, who has managed to win himself nearly 1900 “likes” from his comrades on the MGTOW HQ message boards with comments like the following:

I hate [women] because most of them acted like stuck up cunts when they were young and hot. Then they hit 30+ and decide to settle down, and when there are no men to settle down, they start shaming men. This is where most of my hate/negativity comes from, the fact that these women feel entitled to “good” men after having spent the last 15-20 years telling guys “just because you bought me a drink/dinner doesn’t mean I owe you sex”.

And every woman acts this way. Oh you want to slut it up? Sure go ahead and be a cum rag, but I would never date a cum rag. And how would they react to that? “Oh well that’s your preference and you’re entitled to it”. Yeah right, they’d flip their shit and go into shaming language ahoy.

The reason I derive so much pleasure from this is because for the first time in their lives women are being held accountable for their actions. And they don’t fucking like it. Remember when some girl/woman got you in trouble for just crying while you weren’t in the wrong? This is fucking payback.

(Emphasis mine.)

This may sound a little harsh, but you need to remember that for most young women, life is just an endless VIP party:

Women are born with their so called value. By 15 or whatever they have the looks and power to attract most men. By 18, depending on how attractive they are, they’re either dating 30 year old millionaires or (if less attractive) fucking the football team. And they retain this value until at some point into their 30’s, sometimes 40’s. Men get nothing. We are born invisible. We have to claw, work and suffer for 2-3 decades before we get any recognition. And by that point, we no longer have the energy or fast metabolism we had in our youth. So that means double time for us.

Women are handed the world on a silver platter, men have to fight for it.

Is the MGTOW movement the least successful “independence” movement ever? They’re like someone who breaks up with you, angrily marches out the front door, slams it behind them — and then spends the next five years on your front porch peering in the window.

Categories
antifeminism are these guys 12 years old? evil women female beep boop homophobia irony alert men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny no girls allowed oppressed men PUA rhymes with roosh the c-word

Man who teaches men how to talk to women bans men who talk to women from his website

Day Game in progress
Day Game in progress

Roosh Valizadeh has made a career, such as it is, of teaching guys how to talk to women the Rooshy way. And not just how to talk to drunk women in clubs, where you’re lucky if they can even hear your clever negs over all the noise.

In his book Day Bang he sets forth his brilliant strategy for speaking to women in the daytime: start babbling to them about random crap like those slightly dotty elderly people who come up to you sometimes babbling about random crap.

No, really. You’re supposed to “open” with an “Elderly Opener” and segue seamlessly into “Elderly Chat,” taking your cues from the people who are the best at talking forever about nothing at all. “This is something old people excel at,” he writes.

They can have a one-hour chat stemming from an ice cream flavor because their life experience is so deep that they can seamlessly and casually connect it to a dozen other topics.

During the day I want you to think of yourself as a wandering, slightly confused old man who needs to gain information or knowledge. In my sock example, I played up that I was a style retard, incapable of buying a five-dollar pair of socks, when in reality I’m totally capable of making that decision.

And then – shazam! – you’re in like Flynn! Apparently women just melt for men who can’t figure out how to buy socks.

But it turns out that when there’s no possibility that the conversation will end with a bang, Roosh is far less interested in talking to women. Or at least in them talking back.

So much so that he’s not only banned women from commenting on his Return of Kings blog but, as of earlier this week, he’s also banning men who merely reply to women who happen to sneak past his anti-woman defenses and get in a comment or two before they’re banned. (He’s also banned “homos.” His term, not mine.)

Roosh’s announcement generated a good deal of discussion on RoK, mostly from supportive dudes glad that girls and talkers-to-girls are being thrown out of Roosh’s manly clubhouse.

roosh2

roosh1

Well, heck, that just means more women for me to talk to.

Excuse me, ladies, but I’m having trouble figuring out how these socks work. Do I put the delicious Pistachio ice cream in them before I put them on, or after?

Note: I really don’t want to give Roosh any traffc, but if you must, the link to his post is hidden somewhere in my post above. Thanks to MARK MINTER for alerting me to Roosh’s new policy.

Categories
a voice for men citation needed Dean Esmay evil women grandiosity gynocracy imaginary backwards land imaginary oppression mansplaining men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed men racism that's completely wrong the c-word the sound of his own voice whaaaaa?

5 Arguments Least Likely To Convince A Young Woman That A Voice for Men Isn’t a Misogynistic Hate Site

Hi, girls! Dean Esmay reaches out to the youth of America
Hey ladies! Dean Esmay reaches out to the young women of America

Not that long ago, an 18-year-old student named Carly, appalled by the rampant misogyny on display at A Voice for Men, sent a critical but thoughtful email to a number of the men associated with the site challenging them to rise above their hatred of women.

AVFM “Managing Editor” Dean Esmay decided to take her email as an opportunity to reach out to all the Carlys out there in the world in an attempt to win them over to AVFM’s peculiar brand of “human rights activism,” penning what he called an

open letter … not just to you, but to any young woman who has an open mind and is willing to be challenged on her prejudices.

Naturally, given that Men’s Rights Activists are some of the most verbose douchebags in history, it was long as hell — some 3000 words. But Esmay’s diplomatically worded attempt at outreach didn’t go quite as well as he might have hoped. Carly responded with a note saying that his open letter had merely

reinforced everything I believe. It seems we are at a stalemate, you will never agree with me, and I will never agree with you.

So where might poor Dean Esmay might have gone wrong in his attempt to win Carly’s heart and mind?

Let’s start here, with 5 Arguments Least Likely To Convince A Young Woman That A Voice for Men Isn’t a Woman-Hating Piece of Shit Hate Site, in the form of direct quotes from The Esmay himself. Since Esmay is so long-winded, I’ve highlighted some of my favorite bits in bold.

1)“[Y]ou’re 18, and so, not to put too fine a point on it, you are still a young skull full of mush.

2)[M]en have few to no voices speaking about issues that are specific to men, or defending men as a group, in this society. Until very recently in history men never have had such a voice. Because pretty much all civilizations for the last few thousand years have prioritized the needs and desires of women over those of men. For hundreds, even thousands, of years.

3)If you believe men have silenced women for thousands of years … you believe something that just not true.Furthermore, if you believe that, what you have to believe is that Asian men have been oppressing Asian women for thousands of years, black men have been oppressing black women for thousands of years, European men, Australasian men, and so on, have all been oppressing their women for thousands of years. And those weak women could do nothing about it. So what you believe here isn’t just wrong, it’s racist.

4)For most of history, being female was a privilege. It carried certain special rights that only applied to women, and special responsibilities that only applied to women, and through most of history, being male was a burden, a burden which carried certain rights that only applied to men, and those rights were there mostly so they could discharge their duties to women properly.”

5) “[Y]ou may occasionally see angry remarks or articles on this site. What I would hope you would do with that, when you do see it, is contemplate that there is a difference between righteous anger at real injustice, and what you seem to have misinterpreted as hate.

The funniest thing about Esmay’s “open letter” is that this bizarre crackpottery, easily seen through by anyone with any knowledge of history or sociology or, hell, the real world,  is his attempt to sound as reasonable as possible. He’s reined in the wild conspiratorial ranting he often indulges in when arguing with ideological foes; he’s avoided the misogynistic slurs (cunt, bitch, whore) favored by other AVFMers like Paul Elam and Diana Davison. And this is the best he can manage.

The Men’s “Human Rights” Movement isn’t ready for its close-up. And I suspect that it never will be.

EDITED TO ADD: A commenter has pointed out another quote I should have included as well. So here is BONUS EXTRA LEAST CONVINCING DEAN ESMAY ARGUMENT NUMBER SIX:

6) “The truth is, the most privileged class of people in the whole wide world are young women living in places like the US, UK, Canada, etc.–and if you want to be treated like an equal, you should not flinch or cry like a little girl if someone tells you that.

How dare you accuse us of sexism, you spoiled little girl!

Categories
a voice for men antifeminism are these guys 12 years old? attention seeking doubling down douchebaggery men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA playing the victim straw feminists the c-word the eternal solipsism of the MRA mind tumblr

A Voice for Men takes on feminist [rhymes-with-bunts] with new poster campaign

No, this is real. I didn't make it up. I just blurred out the c-word.
No, this is real. I didn’t make it up. I just blurred out the c-word.

Last week I wrote about the fondness of a certain Men’s Rights website for a certain four-letter word starting with the letter c. This week they’ve topped themselves — with a postering campaign based on the c-word.

Yep: A Voice for Men has thrown its support behind a postering campaign with the slogan: “Having a vagina is no excuse for being a C*NT.”

They don’t use an asterisk.

The postering campaign, spearheaded by a Youtube antifeminist calling himself Bane666au, feature what purport to be real quotes from feminists alongside not-exactly-subtle stock photos depicting comically angry women. For example:

Categories
a voice for men antifeminism are these guys 12 years old? boner rage evil sexy ladies evil women FemRAs FeMRAsplaining hypocrisy irony alert men created civilization men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny MRA oppressed men paul elam the c-word vaginas

A Voice for Men presents: The [vagina-related slur redacted] Monologues

It is very c-worthy.
It is very c-worthy.

So the other day, in writing about the shutdown of MGTOWforums.com, I quoted a rather ironic comment from Men’s “Human Rights” Activist Paul Elam about the site, which he denounced as a hive of “self-consuming bitterness” that was essentially

one rolling “cunts and whores” diatribe after another, spiced only with vicious attacks on men who were deemed less than worthy by Nacho Vidal’s standards.

The irony, of course, was that if you replaced “Nacho Vidal’s” name with Elams’s, his statement was in fact also a perfect description of his own site, A Voice for Men.

But I didn’t really have the space to properly document just how pervasive “‘cunts and whores’ diatribes” are on AVFM. So today I’d like to start that process, by looking at some selected examples of times in which contributors to AVFM — not commenters, but actual article writers and in some cases staff members — resorted to the c-word to make their points, whatever the hell those happened to be.

Categories
a voice for men a woman is always to blame are these guys 12 years old? boner rage drama drama kings evil women gloating infighting men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny MRA oppressed men patronizing as heck paul elam red pill the c-word whores

MGTOWforums goes away — or does it?

mgtowroadsign3

A bit of drama in the land of misogyny: The guy behind MGTOWforums.com, the leading site devoted to so-called Men Going Their Own Way and one of the most reliable purveyors of highly mockable misogyny, has decided to, well, go his own way. (Sorry, I had to.)

Last night, MGTOWforums founder “Nacho Vidal” (not the real porn star) took the forums down, replacing them with a rather embittered farewell letter. But as of a few minutes ago, the forums were BACK UP again, albeit with no explanation and no new posts since last night. (Perhaps the site is just going to remain up as an archive?)

More on this as it develops, but in the meantime, let’s take a look at Nacho Vidal’s long goodbye:

Categories
attention seeking douchebaggery evil fat fatties evil sexy ladies evil short-haired women gender policing homophobia men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny PUA racism rape reactionary bullshit red pill rhymes with roosh the c-word

Return of Kings: Beware the insidious danger of the short-haired girl!

Hideous short-haired monster JEan Seberg poses with adorable mouse.
Hideous short-haired monster Jean Seberg poses with adorable mouse.

Having previously taken on such dire threats to Western Civilization as “fat girls,” “manginas,” and “rape tourettes,” the pickup-artists-cum-worldly-philosophers over at Roosh Valizadeh’s Return of Kings blog have decided to take on an even more insidious danger: Women — sorry, girls — with short hair.

In an alarming expose, guest blogger Tuthmosis reveals the shocking tuth, er, truth:

Categories
a voice for men a woman is always to blame antifeminism evil women FemRAs hypocrisy imaginary oppression irony alert male studies men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed men paul elam playing the victim the c-word whores

A Voice for Men calls Tory Shepherd a liar for saying it calls women “whores.” Then it calls her a “whore.”

Male Studies
Male Studies

A couple of days ago, Men’s Rights rageoholic Paul Elam angrily denounced journalist Tory Shepherd as a liar for saying that his A Voice for Men website “regularly calls women ‘bitches and whores,’ which it does not.”

Now, anyone who has actually read his website for any length of time knows this is patently false. As if to underscore just how baldly Elam was lying in his post three days ago, the site today ran a post attacking her with this headline:

Categories
a voice for men a woman is always to blame antifeminism conspiracy theory grandiosity imaginary oppression male studies men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed men paul elam the c-word whores

Australian “Male Studies” initiative under fire because of its connections to raving misogynists; raving misogynists blame feminists

Antifeminist attorney, A Voice for Men contributor and and would-be Male Studies lecturer Roy Den Hollander bustin' a move on the Colbert Report.
Antifeminist attorney,  A Voice for Men contributor, and would-be Male Studies lecturer Roy Den Hollander bustin’ a move on the Colbert Report.

NOTE: See the end of the piece for an important clarification from the University.

So it seems the new “Male Studies” initiative at the University of South Australia is running into a few problems. Well, one big problem: members of the general public have discovered that some of the people involved with the initiative are raving misogynists, or have chosen to associate themselves with raving misogynists.

Yesterday, a story by journalist Tory Shepherd noted that two of the lecturers have written for a notoriously misogynistic website by the name of A Voice for Men. (You may have heard of it.) One of them, the crankish American attorney Roy Den Hollander, even suggested in a post on that site that men’s rights activists may have to take up arms against the evil Feminists who run the world.