The more of this you watch, the more the red pill takes effect. It's great hearing this articulated when all you've had for years is that uneasy feeling that things weren't right but you couldn't quite encapsulate it. The actual speaker's content starts around 7:45
Mom and Dad had 8 kids. Dad had a trunk full of eighties hockey gear he never used. He had a motorcycle that he sold when I was 5. He had a bird shotgun that mysteriously disappeared during the move to the house he built (i personally think it's inside the walls lol). He worked for one of the most abusive rage-aholic bullies I've ever met, for the last 20-odd years of his career. He put himself into the middle management machine and traded self-employment, youth and freedom for job security and a benefit package that, ultimately, paid for Mom's cancer drugs. I'd consider it an honour to do the same.
My parents came from big families and I have 5 sisters and a brother . Most of of us only had a couple of kids each . My parents went through a similar life . Although myself and my youngest sister have seperated from our partners . The world is definitely a different place today . Because of the changes that Dr Warren Farrell discusses .
15:07 - 15:43 WOW! My mind is blown "We turn women into sex objects, cause it hurts less to be rejected by an object than it does by a full human being."
I would have no interest in training my wife like a dog. I'd settle for conditioning her behavior to encourage her into becoming a decent and civil human being.
@@jlewsd I think acting like a bitch is preprogrammed. In reality they're bitches because we've enabled it. As with dogs, often the real training problem is the handler. The dog will be a bitch if you let it. You must remember that it's not cruel to put rules, boundaries, and limitations on your dog. They benefit from your discipline and leadership and become happier dogs!
A friend introduced me to Warren Farrell and his book _Why Men Are the Way They Are_ in 1987 following the breakup of a longterm relationship. The book's contents catapulted me into a new awareness about men, women, and duplicitous feminism.
There are two goals that contradict each other. On the one hand women (still) prefer men with a high-income. And on the other hand women want to have high-income jobs themselves. It's no wonder men are much more motivated (one could say pressured) to get these jobs.
Thinking on what my dad might have done if he didn't have is family in really at a loss. My dad ended up taking care of his siblings when he was young because of absentee parents. He married my mom while both were still young and took are of her. During the Vietnam War my dad and his 2 brothers joined the Army and he volunteered to go to Vietnam so they wouldn't have to. While raising his family (me included) he never complained or even appeared, to me, to be bitter about having to provide. Certainly that became who he was. My dad had incredible amount of competence in multiple fields of trade. He loved reading, learning, and studying things. He was very intelligent and capable. Perhaps he could have been just about anything. I think he really would have liked to be a scientist, an inventor, or scholar of some sort.
I've already given references and even page number to all three. If you could look up the first point, but not the second, it means that you didn't actually check the book (since the two passages are right next to each other in the book), but rather trusted a second hand source to interpret the passage for you. That's probably why you got it wrong. (cont.)
Certainly. You'll find it if only you can be bothered to scroll down through the comments and check the link. It was in an interview with the magazine Penthouse. Other MRA's have asked for this source, but none so far could muster the strength to actually scroll through the comments and copy-paste the url. Will you be the first?
The problem is fear and weakness, people that refuse to hear or understand each other because they fear the actions of the few criminals and evil minds that are out there. And unfortunately the market and media supports the weakness because it gains profit of it. Truth is, evil will not change because it is an abnormality. The only thing we can do is confront the shadows of this world and grow strong. Stand the imperfection of this place but bring the maximum of support towards freedom.
"he was referring to women who say 'no' and then have sex anyways" No, he did not, and if you don't stop lying this discussion is over. OK? He referred explicitly to women who say "no" to sex, but still respond to kisses. Acknowledge this fact, or I will assume that you're not interested in honest discussion. "You've yet to support the other two complaints" I did provide references to all three claims. I don't know what you stand to gain from pretending like I didn't. Honesty now, ok?
When people think they can never understand how someone else feels just because that don't share the same color or culture generation or ideas it's the same as saying ( I don't need to think not be empathic, just tell me what to outer and I will please you regardless of Truth or circunstances
If you had any desire to actually learn something from this conversation, you could start by asking yourself why a description which has plenty of positive words and no negative words appears "neutral" to you.
28:45 no on cares for the pain of men. that is why you have to raise men to be strong. a weak man is lost, everywhere. the damage of a weak man to society is by far greater than making him strong.
We as men have never been allowed to express emotion. Even now, if you express, your emotion you will be called soft and made fun of. It starts from the time we are small boys, Momma said big boys don't cry! Cub Scouts, be of service to others and follow orders, etc, etc.
Leon Scott wtf are you rambling on about? if im happy or worried , theres no mistake you can see it on my face, my behavior and i dont intend to hide it... and certainly will discuss it if its a serious matter or just to share my joy i.e. if i say im concerned about future of my children... im implying that i love my children and im scared of forthcoming events love and fear just because im not moaning and bitching you dont see it as emotional? well... youre wrong, we express emotions simultaneously with rational thought. you think that womens exaggeration and incompetence to function in emotional state is superior to our ways? think again
Cauda Miller So if I dont express myself the way you do them im moaning and bitching? Really, that's part of the problem. Who the fuck are you to tell me how to express myself? I was pointing out that boys are taught from a early age to not speak out and to be of service to others.
Leon Scott who teaches boys not speak out and to be of service to others? we teach boys not to be whiney lil bitches and to respect those who deserve respect. crying solves nothing, if thats your thing, do it... but dont expect respect, cause youre a weakling who waits for rescue
Cauda Miller Who teaches boys not to speak out, society! I guess you didn't listen to the talk, who said anything about crying? You keep talking about crying, that's seems to be a problem you have. Since when has being stoic, been called crying? I don't recall having ask you to rescue me! Take care of yourself, I got this!!
Leon Scott look your original post. im just trying to explain mechanics of it. one who cries doesnt act and vice versa, and action is always prefered. i see no lack of emotion in mens behavior even if they exclude crying. if you want to exaggerate your emotions thats your choice, but be aware it carries repercussions for a reason. and dont worry no1 teaches boys to be silent, theyre louder than ever its just you pick silent chambers so your sensitivity doesnt suffer. youre detached from reality
Before the world loses this great man we had better start listening before it's too late. If there's any hope of a fair and just society I think it's by following his careful and ever changing advice. But if women are going to continue playing these games then can we put an end to the shenanigans and go back to what last worked?
I've grew up with a single parent (my mother). And i've pretty much only have had female friends. And I love women overall i envy them in many aspects. And no it's important to stands up for your self, women or man like you said. As the standards go for how to behave, I can agree with you 100%, fuck the standards, be as you want but it's just, it's better if you avoid insulting others in the process of making a point, cus if you do, your message won't come through to people.
10:50 this is actually quite interesting. he became a changed man during the process. it takes some time to actually undo the programming we all have gone through. he did. and a lot have to follow. 12:00 this is very important. 19:30 and this opened his eyes. it's when men get hurt, they realize something is wrong. a strong man will not understand what everyone is talking about until he experienced how women behave when danger is around or he is weak. a weak man is as attractive to a woman as is a hideous women to a man. most women don't and cannot take care of men. it never was something that was factored in during evolution.
I set out quite simply to investigate whether or not Dr. Farrell claimed that "raping your children is a good thing", as indicated. At this point in the discussion, I am satisfied that such was not the case. Your remaining comments are sensationalist, and for my purposes (above) do not merit further exploration. Thank you for contributing an opposing perspective to our conversation - I wish you well.
I will answer the question as soon as you've gone back and answered the questions you've left unanswered. You will be given exactly one (1) chance to do this. One more dodge, and you will be permanently ignored.
Not that I actually said he's doing it for his own benefit, but either way he does seem to benefit a lot from this, seeing as he has a huge mindless mob of misogynists praising him and pouring money over him.
Again, I'm not an activist. To directly quote Farrell in the Penthouse December 1977 issue: "I'm not recommending incest between parent and child, and especially not between father and daughter." He also expresses reservations about publishing his findings, saying "data like these can be used as an excuse for the continuation and magnification of [sexually exploiting children]." Farrell studied a touchy subject with (rare) touchy findings. I do not find his remarks objectionable.
(cont.) Even where he himself claims that in cases where a father rapes a daughter, the father generally feels ok about the rape, while the daughter (who was raped) generally feels very bad about it. His conclusion is that the discrepancy can't be reflecting the fact that one person was the rapist and the other was the rape victim - instead he turns to assuming that one of the parties must be confused or lying (he suggests that the girls - the victims - are lying). Acknowledge this.
(cont' pt. 2) Instead of psychopathy, the term ASPD is now preferred. Part of the definition of a person suffering from ASPD is the following (from the wiki): "a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others" Yup, spot on.
A little sample of the wonderful Dr. Farrell's words: "When I get my most glowing positive cases, 6 out of 200, the incest is part of the family's open, sensual style of life, wherein sex is an outgrowth of warmth and affection. [...] 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." Seriously, WHAT THE FUCK.
(cont. pt. 2) Actually, he very much was referring to date rape, and he makes that clear here: "If a man ignoring a woman’s verbal 'no' is committing date rape[...]" - this shows that he uses a definition of "date rape" that is actually correct. Ignoring a woman's no and having sex with her anyway, equals rape. He then goes on to say: "We have forgotten that before we began calling this date rape [...], we called it exciting." (cont.)
That quote still doesn't say that raping children is good, or even that incest is good, the quote is completely neutral. It merely says that their lifestyle is open, and sensual, and that sex is seen as a part/result of that. There are women who kill their children out of some sick kind of love, acknowledging this doesn't condone the killing, it merely states fact. He merely recognizes that the importance and impact of sex isn't set in stone. To me that is neither shocking nor controversial.
I left out a completely irrelevant part, in order to save space. I have quoted that part previously in this thread. Sorry that you can't read for comprehension. So, just to make sure I understand you correctly, you openly admit that you have no problem with the statement "the incest is part of the family's open, sensual style of life, wherein sex is an outgrowth of warmth and affection"? In that case, I rest my case.
The ideas were indeed expressed by him in writing. If they had been intended as direct quotes, then I would've put them inside "...". See how that works? Calling me a liar (even though you won't say what I've lied about), a thief (but won't say what I've stolen), and a hypocrite (but won't say what I've been hypocritical about). This is not going very well for you.
I gave the book as a source, and I even gave specific page numbers. If you're too lazy to go check the source for yourself, then in what sense are you really looking for an honest discussion? The interview has been linked to in previous comments. If you are too lazy to go read my previous comments for the link, then, again, in what sense are you really looking for an honest discussion? Seriouslu, you MRA's need to try harder.
"When I get my most glowing positive cases, 6 out of 200, the [father-daughter] incest is part of the family's open, sensual style of life, wherein sex is an outgrowth of warmth and affection." The idea that for a mere 3% of cases, incest (ages not declared - unsure if they are rapes) worked out well is not that alien. Once, a claim that 3% of prostitutes led happy lives, or that 3% of people were healthily homosexual, or that 3% of sane people liked nudism would have been frowned upon.
The only thing I don’t agree with is the idea that women were socialized to like certain things in men and men were socialized to like certain things in women. I think those are ingrained in us. Across culture in time men women look for the same things, so you can’t say it’s societal indoctrination.
Warren Farrell has written that date rape is something that should be considered "exciting". Warren Farrell has written that being denied sex is just as bad as being raped. Warren Farrell has written that children who are raped by their parents shouldn't think of themselves as victims, but instead recognize that the rape was an act of love. But if you criticize Warren Farrell, you get called a "misandrist". WTF?
It is true that the part that wasn't a direct quote is not a direct quote. Don't know how this still is confusing you after all this time. The parts that are direct quotes, however, are direct quotes. What are you trying to accomplish here?
See, I actually provided a written source in which Farrell actually expressed these opinions. I know this is embarrassing for his fans. That's the entire point. Simply pretending like he didn't say what he demonstrably said, is not a good strategy.
Actually, he did say that incestual rape is a good thing: "the incest is part of the family's open, sensual style of life, wherein sex is an outgrowth of warmth and affection." He didn't say it's ALWAYS a good thing, but I never said he did. Did you not read the article? The whole thing is about the positive effects of raping your underage children. His thesis is that sometimes the child's life isn't completely ruined, so you should just go for it. How can you support this man?
I didn't miss that part (in fact it's been quoted earlier in this comment thread), but it deemed it insignificant in light of the entire long interview which is one long endorsement of incestual rape. The little disclaimer at the end does not excuse him.
(cont. pt. 2) It also doesn't excuse the fact that Farrell makes it clear that in his mind, the problem isn't that parents rape their children, but rather that society views the rape as a crime. He literally argues that we should stop calling rape victims "victims", and instead urge them to view the rape as a beautiful gift. These are the words of a complete and utter psychopath.
woah77 Indeed, what a weird world it would be if women were subjected to Men's "privileges" like the draft or working 70 hours a week while the guy works part time 20 hours a week and then raises the kids at home.
Nah, obviously not everything a psychopath says is always dead wrong. However, it is troublesome that someone who is clearly a psychopath could be elevated to the level of some sort of guru within the MRM. But then again, this does seem to be a running theme with MRA leaders (Paul Elam comes to mind).
So you agree with Farrell that raping your children can be a display of affection, then. Do you agree with him that date rape is exciting? Also, what do you make of his statement that since fathers who rape their daughters generally feel good about the rape, while the daughters, the victims of rape, don't feel very good about the rape, that must mean that the daughters are confused? Any comment on that?
Do you know how quotation marks work? If you think that there's anything in the context that excuses Farrell's statement, then by all means tell me and other commenters what that context is, specifically. Why is this so hard for you?
Oh, what a surprise. Even though Farrell clearly states that "incest [...] magnifies the beauty of a relationship", and that parents who don't molest their children "are repressing the sexuality of a lot of children and themselves", you are satisfied that he didn't actually say that. Even though he did. The famous MRA reading comprehension strikes again.
High and mighty? Nope, just pointing out that you were generalizing my group. And I did watch the video, as well as the other two, I actually watched the whole thing before commenting on what you had to say. But go ahead, assume some more about me.
The remark you quote has been contested by Farrell as a mis-quote, as noted on the website you linked earlier: thelizlibrary. org/fathers/farrell6.htm You are welcome to doubt him. It is his word as a PhD against that of Philip Nobile, a journalist.
No, there are several different options. You could, for example, do a survey in which one of the questions asks whether the person was ever a victim of incestual rape, and one other question asks the person to describe their feelings toward the rape. In your scenario, you're just sitting around hoping that random rape victims will self-report. In my scenario, I've defeated the problem of under-reporting by asking direct questions. And no rapes had to be staged, either. Voila.
WRONG. I didn't use any ad hominems whatsoever. Calling someone a psychopath isn't an ad hominem unless you do it as part of your argument. I called him a psychopath AFTER presenting my argument, based on the conclusions of the argument. Look up "ad hominem" in a dictionary, and you will learn this for yourself.
No, you're wrong, he did say that. Here: "That day [the father] deflowered [the daughter] to their mutual satisfaction." It's a good thing that apparently you are able to identify the utter immorality and psychopathic tendencies of Farrell. Now if you would only stop defending him.
I must have overlooked the part of this presentation where Dr. Farrell claimed that "raping your children is a good thing". Could you kindly provide the timestamp for this remark?
Firstandforemost87: very funny. However, I came here to express my quibbles with the avalanche scenario at around the 18 minute mark. Sure, there are plenty of "women and children first" situations that are unfair to men, but the doctor's example that if his brother's womanfriend had gone scouting with him, that more eyes and ears would have (or probably would have) saved both their lives is reaching. Probably they both would have died, her even more senselessly. Great work, Farrell.
Listen to that disclaimer. How carefully they had to instruct women to have an open mind. I think in a later video somebody says the year is 1994. This was recorded 6 years before I started high school (2000). Literally around the time he gave this talk I was being preached the Feminist dogma in elementary school. My Spidey sense tingles every time I hear a lie. I think back now that none of this should have happened. I never should have been taught these lies. Society should never have humoured them. This ship should have been righted decades ago people! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
Also direct quote from Farrell: "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" You didn't care to mention that part. Why not? Dishonest much?
Not an activist of any kind. Thank you for your flattery. Could you kindly tell me where I *will* find Dr. Farrell claiming that "raping your children is a good thing"?
Well finally you've come out and said it. The reason so many women get raped is because other women are sometimes ambiguous in their communication. Victim blaming 101. I think we're done here. Bye.
Or, alternatively, you could google for Warren Farrell's interview with Penthouse, where he spoke warmly of the benefits of incestual rape, and even explained in detail how a father raped his virgin daughter and how great the rape turned out for them all. Whatever seems less exhausting.
The more of this you watch, the more the red pill takes effect. It's great hearing this articulated when all you've had for years is that uneasy feeling that things weren't right but you couldn't quite encapsulate it. The actual speaker's content starts around 7:45
This. So true. Good comment.
***** ill back that anyday friend. :)
Mom and Dad had 8 kids.
Dad had a trunk full of eighties hockey
gear he never used. He had a motorcycle that he sold when I was 5. He had a bird shotgun that mysteriously disappeared during the move to the house he built (i personally think it's inside the walls lol).
He worked for one of the most abusive rage-aholic bullies I've ever met, for the last 20-odd years of his career.
He put himself into the middle management machine and traded self-employment, youth and freedom for job security and a benefit package that, ultimately, paid for Mom's cancer drugs.
I'd consider it an honour to do the same.
My parents came from big families and I have 5 sisters and a brother . Most of of us only had a couple of kids each . My parents went through a similar life . Although myself and my youngest sister have seperated from our partners . The world is definitely a different place today . Because of the changes that Dr Warren Farrell discusses .
Warren Farrell is crazy ahead of his time.
Not even close to Ernest Belfort Bax though.
15:07 - 15:43 WOW! My mind is blown
"We turn women into sex objects, cause it hurts less to be rejected by an object than it does by a full human being."
I need to remember that one!
What a shitty attempt to excuse the objectification of others. Males own version of what vulnerability might look like. Mind blowing indeed.
There's a book called "How to Train Your Husband Like a Dog." Somehow I think "How to Train Your Wife Like a Dog" would cause a bit of a stir.
I would suggest the title for the female version be "How to Train Your Wife Like a Bitch".
I would have no interest in training my wife like a dog. I'd settle for conditioning her behavior to encourage her into becoming a decent and civil human being.
@@jlewsd I think acting like a bitch is preprogrammed. In reality they're bitches because we've enabled it. As with dogs, often the real training problem is the handler.
The dog will be a bitch if you let it. You must remember that it's not cruel to put rules, boundaries, and limitations on your dog. They benefit from your discipline and leadership and become happier dogs!
A friend introduced me to Warren Farrell and his book _Why Men Are the Way They Are_ in 1987 following the breakup of a longterm relationship. The book's contents catapulted me into a new awareness about men, women, and duplicitous feminism.
9:30 - 14:00 should be mandatory law for every feminist. They should have to go back and listen to how they talk about speaking with or about men.
There are two goals that contradict each other. On the one hand women (still) prefer men with a high-income. And on the other hand women want to have high-income jobs themselves. It's no wonder men are much more motivated (one could say pressured) to get these jobs.
Its hilarious how extensive his credentials are in this video, and then realizing this was filmed years ago.
Thinking on what my dad might have done if he didn't have is family in really at a loss. My dad ended up taking care of his siblings when he was young because of absentee parents. He married my mom while both were still young and took are of her.
During the Vietnam War my dad and his 2 brothers joined the Army and he volunteered to go to Vietnam so they wouldn't have to.
While raising his family (me included) he never complained or even appeared, to me, to be bitter about having to provide. Certainly that became who he was. My dad had incredible amount of competence in multiple fields of trade. He loved reading, learning, and studying things. He was very intelligent and capable.
Perhaps he could have been just about anything. I think he really would have liked to be a scientist, an inventor, or scholar of some sort.
glad i found this.. i love the internet
Good Opening by Janet. This is a Woman's Rights Activist with humility and Sanity.
wow. this guy is smart. The bit where is was talking about how we objectify the people who hurt us. This is the information I need.
Warren kicking butts in 1994. Excellent.
I've already given references and even page number to all three. If you could look up the first point, but not the second, it means that you didn't actually check the book (since the two passages are right next to each other in the book), but rather trusted a second hand source to interpret the passage for you. That's probably why you got it wrong.
(cont.)
Certainly. You'll find it if only you can be bothered to scroll down through the comments and check the link. It was in an interview with the magazine Penthouse.
Other MRA's have asked for this source, but none so far could muster the strength to actually scroll through the comments and copy-paste the url. Will you be the first?
How would you feel if a man said that about women? Most women are not as great as they think they are. Innate value provides and unjustified arrogance
The problem is fear and weakness, people that refuse to hear or understand each other because they fear the actions of the few criminals and evil minds that are out there. And unfortunately the market and media supports the weakness because it gains profit of it. Truth is, evil will not change because it is an abnormality. The only thing we can do is confront the shadows of this world and grow strong. Stand the imperfection of this place but bring the maximum of support towards freedom.
"he was referring to women who say 'no' and then have sex anyways"
No, he did not, and if you don't stop lying this discussion is over. OK? He referred explicitly to women who say "no" to sex, but still respond to kisses. Acknowledge this fact, or I will assume that you're not interested in honest discussion.
"You've yet to support the other two complaints"
I did provide references to all three claims. I don't know what you stand to gain from pretending like I didn't. Honesty now, ok?
Yup, what I originally claimed (and still am claiming) is right there for everyone to see, and has not yet been refuted. Wanna give it a go?
When people think they can never understand how someone else feels just because that don't share the same color or culture generation or ideas it's the same as saying ( I don't need to think not be empathic, just tell me what to outer and I will please you regardless of Truth or circunstances
All I can think of when watching this is a more extroverted well spoken version of the Stapler Guy from Office Space. Must be the glasses...
If you had any desire to actually learn something from this conversation, you could start by asking yourself why a description which has plenty of positive words and no negative words appears "neutral" to you.
Very profound message.
Yeah, I guess I am just not that stressed out. To me babies are stressful. I wouldn't wish them on anyone.
Always lovely to hear a reasoned argument.
All too true.
28:45 no on cares for the pain of men. that is why you have to raise men to be strong. a weak man is lost, everywhere.
the damage of a weak man to society is by far greater than making him strong.
Fantastic !
We as men have never been allowed to express emotion. Even now, if you express, your emotion you will be called soft and made fun of. It starts from the time we are small boys, Momma said big boys don't cry! Cub Scouts, be of service to others and follow orders, etc, etc.
Leon Scott wtf are you rambling on about? if im happy or worried , theres no mistake you can see it on my face, my behavior and i dont intend to hide it... and certainly will discuss it if its a serious matter or just to share my joy
i.e. if i say im concerned about future of my children... im implying that i love my children and im scared of forthcoming events
love and fear
just because im not moaning and bitching you dont see it as emotional?
well... youre wrong, we express emotions simultaneously with rational thought. you think that womens exaggeration and incompetence to function in emotional state is superior to our ways? think again
Cauda Miller So if I dont express myself the way you do them im moaning and bitching? Really, that's part of the problem. Who the fuck are you to tell me how to express myself? I was pointing out that boys are taught from a early age to not speak out and to be of service to others.
Leon Scott who teaches boys not speak out and to be of service to others? we teach boys not to be whiney lil bitches and to respect those who deserve respect. crying solves nothing, if thats your thing, do it... but dont expect respect, cause youre a weakling who waits for rescue
Cauda Miller Who teaches boys not to speak out, society! I guess you didn't listen to the talk, who said anything about crying? You keep talking about crying, that's seems to be a problem you have. Since when has being stoic, been called crying? I don't recall having ask you to rescue me! Take care of yourself, I got this!!
Leon Scott look your original post.
im just trying to explain mechanics of it.
one who cries doesnt act and vice versa, and action is always prefered. i see no lack of emotion in mens behavior even if they exclude crying. if you want to exaggerate your emotions thats your choice, but be aware it carries repercussions for a reason. and dont worry no1 teaches boys to be silent, theyre louder than ever its just you pick silent chambers so your sensitivity doesnt suffer. youre detached from reality
Before the world loses this great man we had better start listening before it's too late. If there's any hope of a fair and just society I think it's by following his careful and ever changing advice. But if women are going to continue playing these games then can we put an end to the shenanigans and go back to what last worked?
I've grew up with a single parent (my mother). And i've pretty much only have had female friends. And I love women overall i envy them in many aspects. And no it's important to stands up for your self, women or man like you said. As the standards go for how to behave, I can agree with you 100%, fuck the standards, be as you want but it's just, it's better if you avoid insulting others in the process of making a point, cus if you do, your message won't come through to people.
10:50
this is actually quite interesting. he became a changed man during the process.
it takes some time to actually undo the programming we all have gone through. he did. and a lot have to follow.
12:00 this is very important.
19:30 and this opened his eyes. it's when men get hurt, they realize something is wrong.
a strong man will not understand what everyone is talking about until he experienced how women behave when danger is around or he is weak.
a weak man is as attractive to a woman as is a hideous women to a man.
most women don't and cannot take care of men. it never was something that was factored in during evolution.
Did you find these videos from the incident in Toronto? Yeah, he's awesome.
I set out quite simply to investigate whether or not Dr. Farrell claimed that "raping your children is a good thing", as indicated. At this point in the discussion, I am satisfied that such was not the case.
Your remaining comments are sensationalist, and for my purposes (above) do not merit further exploration. Thank you for contributing an opposing perspective to our conversation - I wish you well.
Dr. Farrel could not hang with my friends, he had a golden opportunity to yell "HOOOLLLLLDDD!!!!" like hew was in the movie 300
I wish this guy would come to my college.
If you want to join a discussion you have to actually add something - an argument, for example.
lecture starts @ 7:37
Yup. And yes he IS awesome.
Nice dialogue! I loved this!
Each video I watch of his makes me learn and beg for more insight. I really wish Dr. Farrell would come talk at my college.
I don't know that it was transcribed incorrectly, and neither do you. But thanks for playing.
I will answer the question as soon as you've gone back and answered the questions you've left unanswered. You will be given exactly one (1) chance to do this. One more dodge, and you will be permanently ignored.
Not that I actually said he's doing it for his own benefit, but either way he does seem to benefit a lot from this, seeing as he has a huge mindless mob of misogynists praising him and pouring money over him.
49:26
Yes.
Skip ahead to 5:19 to bypass the intro.
Again, I'm not an activist.
To directly quote Farrell in the Penthouse December 1977 issue:
"I'm not recommending incest between parent and child, and especially not between father and daughter." He also expresses reservations about publishing his findings, saying "data like these can be used as an excuse for the continuation and magnification of [sexually exploiting children]."
Farrell studied a touchy subject with (rare) touchy findings. I do not find his remarks objectionable.
(cont.)
Even where he himself claims that in cases where a father rapes a daughter, the father generally feels ok about the rape, while the daughter (who was raped) generally feels very bad about it.
His conclusion is that the discrepancy can't be reflecting the fact that one person was the rapist and the other was the rape victim - instead he turns to assuming that one of the parties must be confused or lying (he suggests that the girls - the victims - are lying).
Acknowledge this.
(cont' pt. 2)
Instead of psychopathy, the term ASPD is now preferred. Part of the definition of a person suffering from ASPD is the following (from the wiki): "a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others"
Yup, spot on.
A little sample of the wonderful Dr. Farrell's words: "When I get my most glowing positive cases, 6 out of 200, the incest is part of the family's open, sensual style of life, wherein sex is an outgrowth of warmth and affection. [...] 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."
Seriously, WHAT THE FUCK.
(cont. pt. 2)
Actually, he very much was referring to date rape, and he makes that clear here: "If a man ignoring a woman’s verbal 'no' is committing date rape[...]" - this shows that he uses a definition of "date rape" that is actually correct. Ignoring a woman's no and having sex with her anyway, equals rape.
He then goes on to say: "We have forgotten that before we began calling this date rape [...], we called it exciting."
(cont.)
That quote still doesn't say that raping children is good, or even that incest is good, the quote is completely neutral.
It merely says that their lifestyle is open, and sensual, and that sex is seen as a part/result of that.
There are women who kill their children out of some sick kind of love, acknowledging this doesn't condone the killing, it merely states fact.
He merely recognizes that the importance and impact of sex isn't set in stone. To me that is neither shocking nor controversial.
I left out a completely irrelevant part, in order to save space. I have quoted that part previously in this thread. Sorry that you can't read for comprehension.
So, just to make sure I understand you correctly, you openly admit that you have no problem with the statement "the incest is part of the family's open, sensual style of life, wherein sex is an outgrowth of warmth and affection"?
In that case, I rest my case.
The ideas were indeed expressed by him in writing. If they had been intended as direct quotes, then I would've put them inside "...". See how that works?
Calling me a liar (even though you won't say what I've lied about), a thief (but won't say what I've stolen), and a hypocrite (but won't say what I've been hypocritical about).
This is not going very well for you.
Well as long as some form of change will come, that's fine.
Every feminist should have to watch all three parts of this.
I gave the book as a source, and I even gave specific page numbers. If you're too lazy to go check the source for yourself, then in what sense are you really looking for an honest discussion?
The interview has been linked to in previous comments. If you are too lazy to go read my previous comments for the link, then, again, in what sense are you really looking for an honest discussion?
Seriouslu, you MRA's need to try harder.
Why comment if you're going to openly admit that your comment was useless?
That limousine driver story was depressing
Nice generalizations you got there.
"When I get my most glowing positive cases, 6 out of 200, the [father-daughter] incest is part of the family's open, sensual style of life, wherein sex is an outgrowth of warmth and affection."
The idea that for a mere 3% of cases, incest (ages not declared - unsure if they are rapes) worked out well is not that alien. Once, a claim that 3% of prostitutes led happy lives, or that 3% of people were healthily homosexual, or that 3% of sane people liked nudism would have been frowned upon.
The only thing I don’t agree with is the idea that women were socialized to like certain things in men and men were socialized to like certain things in women. I think those are ingrained in us. Across culture in time men women look for the same things, so you can’t say it’s societal indoctrination.
Warren Farrell has written that date rape is something that should be considered "exciting".
Warren Farrell has written that being denied sex is just as bad as being raped.
Warren Farrell has written that children who are raped by their parents shouldn't think of themselves as victims, but instead recognize that the rape was an act of love.
But if you criticize Warren Farrell, you get called a "misandrist". WTF?
It is true that the part that wasn't a direct quote is not a direct quote. Don't know how this still is confusing you after all this time. The parts that are direct quotes, however, are direct quotes. What are you trying to accomplish here?
See, I actually provided a written source in which Farrell actually expressed these opinions. I know this is embarrassing for his fans. That's the entire point. Simply pretending like he didn't say what he demonstrably said, is not a good strategy.
Actually, he did say that incestual rape is a good thing:
"the incest is part of the family's open, sensual style of life, wherein sex is an outgrowth of warmth and affection."
He didn't say it's ALWAYS a good thing, but I never said he did.
Did you not read the article? The whole thing is about the positive effects of raping your underage children. His thesis is that sometimes the child's life isn't completely ruined, so you should just go for it.
How can you support this man?
I didn't miss that part (in fact it's been quoted earlier in this comment thread), but it deemed it insignificant in light of the entire long interview which is one long endorsement of incestual rape. The little disclaimer at the end does not excuse him.
(cont. pt. 2)
It also doesn't excuse the fact that Farrell makes it clear that in his mind, the problem isn't that parents rape their children, but rather that society views the rape as a crime. He literally argues that we should stop calling rape victims "victims", and instead urge them to view the rape as a beautiful gift.
These are the words of a complete and utter psychopath.
57:45 That would be such an upheaval.
woah77 Indeed, what a weird world it would be if women were subjected to Men's "privileges" like the draft or working 70 hours a week while the guy works part time 20 hours a week and then raises the kids at home.
Yeah you're right ;)
There's no place in your comment where a "not" could be inserted and change the meaning of anything.
Nah, obviously not everything a psychopath says is always dead wrong. However, it is troublesome that someone who is clearly a psychopath could be elevated to the level of some sort of guru within the MRM. But then again, this does seem to be a running theme with MRA leaders (Paul Elam comes to mind).
Maybe you wanna give it a go, since all the other dudebros either failed, didn't try, or fled the scene?
So you agree with Farrell that raping your children can be a display of affection, then. Do you agree with him that date rape is exciting?
Also, what do you make of his statement that since fathers who rape their daughters generally feel good about the rape, while the daughters, the victims of rape, don't feel very good about the rape, that must mean that the daughters are confused? Any comment on that?
Do you know how quotation marks work?
If you think that there's anything in the context that excuses Farrell's statement, then by all means tell me and other commenters what that context is, specifically. Why is this so hard for you?
Oh, what a surprise. Even though Farrell clearly states that "incest [...] magnifies the beauty of a relationship", and that parents who don't molest their children "are repressing the sexuality of a lot of children and themselves", you are satisfied that he didn't actually say that. Even though he did.
The famous MRA reading comprehension strikes again.
I would suggest to do interviews. Women who refuse to participate will obviously not be counted in the data.
Don't know why this is so hard to grasp.
i agree 100%
Isn't this from the 80s? The dress and hairstyles, et al. Except they didn't toss around "diversity" back then. Does anyone know when this was filmed?
High and mighty? Nope, just pointing out that you were generalizing my group.
And I did watch the video, as well as the other two, I actually watched the whole thing before commenting on what you had to say.
But go ahead, assume some more about me.
The remark you quote has been contested by Farrell as a mis-quote, as noted on the website you linked earlier:
thelizlibrary. org/fathers/farrell6.htm
You are welcome to doubt him. It is his word as a PhD against that of Philip Nobile, a journalist.
Exactly
No, there are several different options. You could, for example, do a survey in which one of the questions asks whether the person was ever a victim of incestual rape, and one other question asks the person to describe their feelings toward the rape.
In your scenario, you're just sitting around hoping that random rape victims will self-report. In my scenario, I've defeated the problem of under-reporting by asking direct questions.
And no rapes had to be staged, either. Voila.
WRONG. I didn't use any ad hominems whatsoever. Calling someone a psychopath isn't an ad hominem unless you do it as part of your argument. I called him a psychopath AFTER presenting my argument, based on the conclusions of the argument. Look up "ad hominem" in a dictionary, and you will learn this for yourself.
No, you're wrong, he did say that. Here: "That day [the father] deflowered [the daughter] to their mutual satisfaction."
It's a good thing that apparently you are able to identify the utter immorality and psychopathic tendencies of Farrell. Now if you would only stop defending him.
When was this actually recorded, the nineties?
I dunno why feminazis don't like this guy, he is a lot like them, but not as deluded. He knows all of their tricks, tho.
Sadly, your comment isn't as bad as some of the other MRA's who have tried to reply to this.
I must have overlooked the part of this presentation where Dr. Farrell claimed that "raping your children is a good thing". Could you kindly provide the timestamp for this remark?
I used direct quotes.
Amen
Yes, I meant to say run out of "steam". But you probably also have no stem, who knows.
Firstandforemost87: very funny. However, I came here to express my quibbles with the avalanche scenario at around the 18 minute mark. Sure, there are plenty of "women and children first" situations that are unfair to men, but the doctor's example that if his brother's womanfriend had gone scouting with him, that more eyes and ears would have (or probably would have) saved both their lives is reaching. Probably they both would have died, her even more senselessly. Great work, Farrell.
Listen to that disclaimer. How carefully they had to instruct women to have an open mind.
I think in a later video somebody says the year is 1994. This was recorded 6 years before I started high school (2000). Literally around the time he gave this talk I was being preached the Feminist dogma in elementary school. My Spidey sense tingles every time I hear a lie. I think back now that none of this should have happened. I never should have been taught these lies. Society should never have humoured them. This ship should have been righted decades ago people! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
Also direct quote from Farrell: "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"
You didn't care to mention that part. Why not? Dishonest much?
Not an activist of any kind. Thank you for your flattery.
Could you kindly tell me where I *will* find Dr. Farrell claiming that "raping your children is a good thing"?
Well finally you've come out and said it. The reason so many women get raped is because other women are sometimes ambiguous in their communication. Victim blaming 101.
I think we're done here. Bye.
Or, alternatively, you could google for Warren Farrell's interview with Penthouse, where he spoke warmly of the benefits of incestual rape, and even explained in detail how a father raped his virgin daughter and how great the rape turned out for them all.
Whatever seems less exhausting.