Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

niyad

(113,225 posts)
Thu Jan 29, 2015, 10:51 PM Jan 2015

Mad Men: Inside the Men's Rights Movement—and the Army of Misogynists and Trolls It Spawned

(never could stand this man)

Mad Men: Inside the Men's Rights Movement—and the Army of Misogynists and Trolls It Spawned

How did an ex-feminist once hailed by Gloria Steinem become a hero of the haters?


On a balmy afternoon last June, dozens of demonstrators carrying "Stop the Violence" and "Rape is Rape" placards descended on the Hilton DoubleTree in downtown Detroit. They had come to protest the first-ever national gathering of the men's rights movement, which aims to battle discrimination against men but has drawn criticism for stirring up hatred of women. Two weeks earlier, a sexually frustrated 22-year-old named Elliot Rodger had gone on a suicidal rampage in Santa Barbara, California, killing 6 people and injuring 13. He had left behind a chilling 137-page manifesto suffused with a bitter misogyny and language commonly found in men's rights forums. "The girls don't flock to the gentlemen. They flock to the alpha male," Rodger wrote. "Who's the alpha male now, bitches?" His attack ignited a firestorm online, spurring women to share their experiences of misogyny via the hashtag #YesAllWomen, and bringing major media attention to the men's rights movement.

With irate phone calls and even death threats pouring into the hotel in the run-up to the conference, its organizer, A Voice for Men, was forced to move the event to a local Veterans of Foreign Wars hall. The group warned ticket holders by email that "ideological opponents" were likely to show up, and that they would be "looking for anything they can to hurt us with."
When conference goers arrived several weeks later, they were greeted by a cadre of burly security guards. A computer glitch at the check-in desk sent the line snaking into the parking lot, where some men lounged listlessly on the hot asphalt. Finally, about an hour and a half after the first workshop had been scheduled to begin, the doors swung open. The crowd clattered up the stairs to a dimly lit room with scuffed mint-colored walls and a water-stained ceiling. There, amid rows of folding chairs, stood Warren Farrell.

A soft-spoken septuagenarian with a silver beard and delicate hands, Farrell explained with a smile why he'd asked the security team to stand down: "I said it didn't look like there were any killers out there." There was a burst of laughter. After a while, he asked everyone to stand up. "Put anything you have in your hands down and just give that person in front of you a nice shoulder rub," he said. Tension faded from the men's faces. Over the next several hours, Farrell doled out hugs, regaled them with stories about his days as a feminist icon, and waxed lyrical about fatherhood and male sacrifice. He also invited the men to share their personal pain. Some wept as they spoke.
Welcome to the Manosphere: A guide to terms of the men's rights movement

Farrell is widely considered to be the father of the men's rights movement. In a series of books published since the 1980s, he has made the case that the primary victims of gender-based discrimination are men—casualties of a society that relies on their sacrifices while ignoring their suffering. He blames this phenomenon for a litany of woes, from the plight of blue-collar workers to the state of veterans' health care and rising suicide rates among young men. Many of today's men's rights activists view Farrell's 1993 book, The Myth of Male Power: Why Men Are the Disposable Sex, as their touchstone, and the online forums where they congregate are steeped in Farrell's ideas.

. . . .

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/01/warren-farrell-mens-rights-movement-feminism-misogyny-trolls

36 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Mad Men: Inside the Men's Rights Movement—and the Army of Misogynists and Trolls It Spawned (Original Post) niyad Jan 2015 OP
Very frightening shenmue Jan 2015 #1
indeed it is. niyad Jan 2015 #2
I tried to get through the piece; but, got distracted by ... 1StrongBlackMan Jan 2015 #3
That is exactly as far as I got. Control-Z Jan 2015 #5
He attempted to co-opt the history of Black folks ... 1StrongBlackMan Jan 2015 #6
pretty much what I have always thought about him. niyad Jan 2015 #9
the men who cannot hack having to treat women like human beings Skittles Jan 2015 #4
And some of them have the gall to call themselves progressives, and allies, etc etc. geek tragedy Jan 2015 #8
disgusting, but not surprising. niyad Jan 2015 #10
Farrell is the "don't put men in jail for date rape" guy. geek tragedy Jan 2015 #7
even more disgusting than I ever thought him to be. niyad Jan 2015 #11
"Before we called it date rape, we called it exciting" geek tragedy Jan 2015 #12
he is making me rethink my position on poppets. niyad Jan 2015 #13
The Manosphere has been filled with pricks & sleazeballs since day fuckin' one. AverageJoe90 Jan 2015 #14
it certainly has been getting far worse. niyad Jan 2015 #15
It has been getting worse -- it isn't enough for them to just 'go their own Nay Feb 2015 #30
you have put it brilliantly. niyad Feb 2015 #33
+1000 smirkymonkey Feb 2015 #34
That's the danger when you have a theoretically positive movement Blue_Tires Jan 2015 #16
a theoretically positive movement based on a lie, you mean? the lie being that males are niyad Jan 2015 #17
You're right, it was fucked up from the git go. MrScorpio Feb 2015 #26
no matter how much they would like us to believe that they, and they alone, are the niyad Feb 2015 #31
it was never co-opted, the theoretically positive part was just a fig leaf to mask the nasty, geek tragedy Jan 2015 #21
A dysfunctional man explaining how to remain dysfunctional to other men already predisposed. Jefferson23 Jan 2015 #18
reading that whole piece was an exercise in self-restraint so that I wouldn't start niyad Jan 2015 #19
Totally understandable..that man is peddling dangerous ideas. Jefferson23 Jan 2015 #20
There used to be big flamewars at DU over Warren Farrell. geek tragedy Jan 2015 #22
Yikes, the guy does not even seem to be able to cloak his hostility in the slightest..awful Jefferson23 Jan 2015 #23
. . . niyad Jan 2015 #24
Wow. MrScorpio Feb 2015 #25
K&R nt F4lconF16 Feb 2015 #27
K&R Small Accumulates Feb 2015 #28
you are most welcome. niyad Feb 2015 #32
A very, very disturbing quote: Nay Feb 2015 #29
Thank YOU! smirkymonkey Feb 2015 #35
Seems like their default position is, Jeff Murdoch Feb 2015 #36
 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
3. I tried to get through the piece; but, got distracted by ...
Thu Jan 29, 2015, 11:48 PM
Jan 2015

Last edited Fri Jan 30, 2015, 02:44 PM - Edit history (1)

his attempt to co-opt the (Black) Civil Rights Movement, in an attempt to minimize the man-crazy:

Farrell told me that these tactics make him uncomfortable, but he argues that all movements have—and need—their extreme factions. "I've been through the movements," he said. "I've seen how Martin Luther King alone was dismissed. It took Stokely Carmichael and Eldridge Cleaver to say things that were pretty ridiculous in some ways, but that brought the attention that led to Martin Luther King being seen as the nice, centered, balanced person."


Martin Luther King was dead before Carmichael and/or Cleaver became widely known outside of Black Power Movement (Hell, I would hazard to guess few Black folks, except those in the Bay Area, even knew who they were until shortly before MLK's death, so it is MORE unlikely that white America had heard of them) ... and both advocated Non-violence until after MLK's death.

So, it is unlikely that neither Carmichael nor Cleaver, played any role in white folk's thoughts regarding MLK (until the white washing of MLK, 20 years later, where white people just loved them some MLK) ... And, unless Farrell was a Bay Area white guy, into the Black Power Movement in 1967, I doubt he had even heard of them until after MLK's death.

IOWs, he's just making sh!t up.
 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
6. He attempted to co-opt the history of Black folks ...
Fri Jan 30, 2015, 08:25 AM
Jan 2015

, truly oppressed people, to draw a parallel between with the suffering of white males in this country ... all he left out was a (mis-attributed and misunderstand) "By any Means Necessary" quote ... It sounded good and reasonable; but alas, his ignorance betrayed him (to anyone that knows Black history.

I might have been able to choke down another paragraph or two had he made the historically accurate, MLK/Malcolm reference.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
8. And some of them have the gall to call themselves progressives, and allies, etc etc.
Fri Jan 30, 2015, 11:14 AM
Jan 2015

They'll even post his garbage at DU.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
7. Farrell is the "don't put men in jail for date rape" guy.
Fri Jan 30, 2015, 08:59 AM
Jan 2015

Men citing him is like white people citing David Duke.

 

AverageJoe90

(10,745 posts)
14. The Manosphere has been filled with pricks & sleazeballs since day fuckin' one.
Fri Jan 30, 2015, 06:06 PM
Jan 2015

Having done my research on these fellows, this isn't a new phenomenon: it goes back several decades, actually.....although it may be true that many it's worst iterations are a more recent problem.

Nay

(12,051 posts)
30. It has been getting worse -- it isn't enough for them to just 'go their own
Tue Feb 3, 2015, 07:51 PM
Feb 2015

way' -- which is exactly what they should do if they think they are being mistreated by women. After all, many women with decent jobs think marriage is quite optional, and would rather be single (even with children) than marry or remarry badly. So why don't these men just go do this? God knows they've got it a lot easier -- they tend to have better paying jobs, they have been brought up on the so-called Playboy culture which, from the 1950's, has encouraged men to be players rather than family men. So what's their beef?

Well, I expect their main beef is that they no longer (legally) have a whole slice of humanity that they can abuse at will. They can't abuse women in general without someone noticing, and it's also more difficult to "buy" themselves a hapless wife they can abuse in private, knowing she has nowhere else to go.

It's a male mindset that is extremely dangerous.

Blue_Tires

(55,445 posts)
16. That's the danger when you have a theoretically positive movement
Fri Jan 30, 2015, 06:19 PM
Jan 2015

and let it get co-opted and taken over by the nutbars...

niyad

(113,225 posts)
17. a theoretically positive movement based on a lie, you mean? the lie being that males are
Fri Jan 30, 2015, 06:24 PM
Jan 2015

actually the only real discriminated against group.

MrScorpio

(73,630 posts)
26. You're right, it was fucked up from the git go.
Tue Feb 3, 2015, 04:32 PM
Feb 2015

All they did was cloak their intentions by co-opting civil-rights language.

These men have never been oppressed.

niyad

(113,225 posts)
31. no matter how much they would like us to believe that they, and they alone, are the
Tue Feb 3, 2015, 11:23 PM
Feb 2015

ones suffering discrimination. I wonder what it is like to wander the world that completely clueless.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
21. it was never co-opted, the theoretically positive part was just a fig leaf to mask the nasty,
Fri Jan 30, 2015, 07:11 PM
Jan 2015

snarling misogyny and resentment of the progress women have made.

Farrell is supposedly the 'respectable' godfather of that movement and he's as big of a swine as they come, just marginally less obvious than pigs like Elam.

Jefferson23

(30,099 posts)
18. A dysfunctional man explaining how to remain dysfunctional to other men already predisposed.
Fri Jan 30, 2015, 06:50 PM
Jan 2015

Creepy guy..wonder how many who are part of this movement share that upfront
about themselves when they meet women.

His response to MJ is interesting and so are the responses from some of the men..ack.

K&R

niyad

(113,225 posts)
19. reading that whole piece was an exercise in self-restraint so that I wouldn't start
Fri Jan 30, 2015, 06:53 PM
Jan 2015

throwing things.

Jefferson23

(30,099 posts)
20. Totally understandable..that man is peddling dangerous ideas.
Fri Jan 30, 2015, 07:05 PM
Jan 2015

Did you think it was odd how he describes what began to set in motion his divorce?

I found it really weird..he seemed less than forthcoming..I'm not sure I want to know more..creepy guy.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
22. There used to be big flamewars at DU over Warren Farrell.
Fri Jan 30, 2015, 07:13 PM
Jan 2015

A certain group of folks would post what the guy said and defend even his most egregious statements.

At long last they've been shamed into giving up that cause.

Do a site search for his name, very illuminating.

Jefferson23

(30,099 posts)
23. Yikes, the guy does not even seem to be able to cloak his hostility in the slightest..awful
Fri Jan 30, 2015, 07:30 PM
Jan 2015

to hear he was defended on any level.

Small Accumulates

(149 posts)
28. K&R
Tue Feb 3, 2015, 05:10 PM
Feb 2015

These men are so damaging to our culture. It's important that their true, vile natures are exposed. Excellent piece of reporting! Thank you for bringing it to light.

Nay

(12,051 posts)
29. A very, very disturbing quote:
Tue Feb 3, 2015, 07:39 PM
Feb 2015
Even those women who are less successful have "enormous sexual leverage over men" and "can use the power to get external rewards," he wrote. Men, on the other hand, have been reduced to "success objects," judged solely by their status and earning potential.

The idea that women, just by being women, have sexual leverage and thus are magical and monstrous, is the most disgusting and horrifying thing I have ever heard.

Men, that 'sexual leverage' is ALL IN YOUR HEADS, both the big head and the little head. Are you so lacking in self-control that you can't simply refuse sex with these women who would 'harm' you? Why do any of you ever marry? You shouldn't. And you should kiss the ground for the existence of hookers, because that's how you should be 'serviced.' And as far as men are judged for earning power, who started that? Men, that's who. From time immemorial, women have been little more than chattel to men -- the most beautiful or the ones from good family were sold/bartered/traded like cattle. The only way a woman could have any kind of life was to marry a man with a decent amount of property, and it's HER FAULT for looking at your earning potential???? Up until just a couple of decades ago, this was how marriage and family worked, thanks to the way women were sequestered away from the public square, with no way to earn enough money, and no way to (morally) have children unless they were married. And that's all women's fault???

Unfuckingbelievable.

Paradoxically, a lot of these MRAers bitch about how women won't marry them -- they're stuck up, they don't know what a 'good' man is, they don't know their sociobiological place in nature, they want to call all the shots in a marriage, they are bitches, etc., etc. -- men, be HAPPY they don't want to marry you! You should be happy these women stay single; why aren't you?

Oh, yeah, I forgot. Independent women don't have to kiss your ass in any way, and that's what REALLY bothers you. A REAL society would show women their place in the hierarchy, wouldn't it? And that place would be under you somewhere, no matter how pathetic a creature you are, because you are male.
 

smirkymonkey

(63,221 posts)
35. Thank YOU!
Fri Feb 6, 2015, 09:47 PM
Feb 2015

Well said. This crap just angers me to no end. They take no responsibility for their part in this fucked up system. And it's just so whiny and pathetic how they blame women for all their woes. They have no idea how weak and spineless it makes them look.

Jeff Murdoch

(168 posts)
36. Seems like their default position is,
Sat Feb 7, 2015, 06:12 AM
Feb 2015

"Waaaahhh, they won't let me beat you, rape you, own you! Waaaahhhhh!"

Won't someone call the Waaaahhmbulance for these delicate flowers?

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Mad Men: Inside the Men's...