History of Feminism
Related: About this forumFarrell’s notorious comments on date rape: Not any more defensible in context than out of it
Last edited Tue May 28, 2013, 03:15 PM - Edit history (1)
We have forgotten that before we began calling this date rape and date fraud, we called it exciting.
This sentence is at least as puzzling as it is disturbing. Calling date rape exciting is pretty foul. But what on earth is date fraud?
To find out, lets do what Farrells supporters insist we always do with his more troubling remarks: look at it in context to see if it is somehow more defensible or, at the very least, to see if we can discern what exactly is is he even meant.
Looking at the sentence in context in The Myth of Male Power, we find that it appears in the midst of a long discussion not only of date rape but also of a number of other dating-related behaviors that Farrell claims traumatize men in the same way date rape traumatizes women. So lets back up a bit to let him spell out his basic premises and define what date fraud is in the first place:
While the label date rape has helped women articulate the most dramatic aspect of dating from womens perspective, men have no labels to help them articulate the most traumatic aspects of dating from their perspective. Now, of course, the most traumatic aspect is the possibility of being accused of date rape by a woman to whom he thought he was making love. If men did label the worst aspects of the traditional male role, though, they might label them date robbery, date rejection, date responsibility, date fraud, and date lying. (p.313, The Myth of Male Power, 1993 hardcover edition)
http://manboobz.com/2013/05/03/putting-warren-farrells-notorious-comments-on-exciting-date-rape-in-context/
redqueen
(115,103 posts)And that when I tried to call attention to it, I was attacked.
Yep. Speaks fucking VOLUMES. LOUDLY.
ismnotwasm
(41,975 posts)I think one of my many problems with this is when I show it to the more or less reasonable men in my life, they're appalled. And these guys aren't necessarily all that aware of feminism-- pretty regular Joes, actually. But they see this and are WTF, that's sick.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)and yet people had the audacity go looking for reasons to ban women from this group for much less horrific and less serious things.
Says a lot about the integrity of quite a few people.
ismnotwasm
(41,975 posts)See, this is what I honestly don't get, there's nothing to defend with this person, he was a bitter ball of discontent and rage, promoted rape and pathological emotional manipulation, all the while whining, whining whining.
Who buys into that shit? The reason I brought up the regular joes--take a couple of bikers I know, they'd see this behavior as bullshit whining as well as weak, and these guys aren't any gold standard for the enlightened male, by any means.
So that leaves the nut jobs or secret nut jobs who listen to this. Or misogynists. But I repeat myself...
redqueen
(115,103 posts)He euphemistically refers to it as 'family sex', but it's raping your own children.
Yep, people here have defended him by claiming that the Obama administration offered him a job. Of course the only source for this claim was this sick sack of shit himself, but ... well ... some people are desperate to defend him, for some reason.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)First hit when putting his name into the DU Search Site function gave me this from last July...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=894972
Many in that thread did their best to defend the vermin without appearing as though they were defending him. The Usual Suspects... every f*cking time.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)on that thread that surprises me in the least,not one. I'm sure if I emptied my ignore list many of them would be there too. Yuck.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)redqueen
(115,103 posts)ismnotwasm
(41,975 posts)I have to agree. The more time I spend reading his dribble the more appalled I am.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)MadrasT
(7,237 posts)I wish I could say I was surprised.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)some of these men are that they have to find a woman who actually WANTS to have sex with them? The inhumanity of it all.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)Oh wait, no... no I'm not.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)is too much for some to concede. It is completely disgusting that such ideas are propagated.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)To see so much invested in pushing the idea that it's perfectly fine to pressure someone into having sex with you if they don't want to.
MadrasT
(7,237 posts)it is such a *burden* and so *restrictive* to only fuck people who actually want to fuck you
Geez nobody would *ever* get laid if actual enthusiasm is required
redqueen
(115,103 posts)that all those 'feminists who criticize sexual power dynamics are just bitter cause they can't get laid!' types are just projecting.
Considering that is so not an issue for me that line is reasoning is amusing.
Some of the young Turks, I suppose would consider middle-aged sex analogous to their own parents, and therefore reject what isn't going to make them feel good, or make them uncomfortable.
Others have no excuse, unless its a saga of Mommy/ex-wife/fear of rejection issues. Which still isn't an excuse for deliberate obtuseness
MadrasT
(7,237 posts)that "the species would DIE OFF if men waited for enthusiastic consent"
redqueen
(115,103 posts)Did you see the 'if I can't offer to buy you a coffee, humans will become extinct' blog post?
It demolished that nonsense handily.