Deconstructing Paul Elam’s and Warren Farrell’s Lies One by One

Every month or so the mainstream media outlets do a large report on the Manosphere, the online outposts of Men’s rights ‘activists.’ Every article written by these journalists exposes the misogyny and various online and offline behaviour of men who have come to a unique thought process about society, mainly that society is run by women. In fact, MRA’s have made up a new word for this phenomenon that only exists in their minds. They call it the ‘gynocracy.’ Mariah Blake of Mother Jones wrote a long essay about what many of these men call the father of the MRM, Warren Farrell and his protege Paul Elam who owns the website A Voice For Men, designated as a misogynist hate site by the Southern Poverty Law Center in the US.

Farrell published a book in 1994 called ‘The Myth of Male Power’ which has been re-released in a new online e-book format. The cover of the book features the silhouette of the ass end of a woman in an effort to pictorially explain Farrell’s thinking on how the ‘gynocracy’ works. A woman’s body, he claims, makes men completely powerless in various ways and this leads to things like workplace deaths, male suicide, men fighting in wars, boys doing poorly in school, false rape accusations and so on. In fact, every problem a male has in his life comes down to women’s bodies and how he covets them.

‘The most meanest and depraved of men come out on top, and women flock to these men. Their evil acts are rewarded by women; while the good, decent men are laughed at. It is sick, twisted, and wrong in every way. I hated the girls even more than the bullies because of this.’~Elliot Rodger

Since the publication of Mariah’s piece in MJ, Farrell and his colleague Paul Elam, are really angry. They claim Mariah didn’t focus on the right aspects of the MRM. Two articles [1] [2] and a one 1 hour long video have been produced by Elam and Farrell to respond to Blake on what they call a ‘man hating’ article.

Dissecting the video complaints I will show you that Blake wrote accurately about the MRM. Elam and Farrell have nothing to complain about. I realize that most people who follow the Manosphere, like I do, understand the dishonesty of Elam and Farrell and know that what comes out of their mouths are bold faced lies meant to rile up their male audience. Elam, on his hate site A Voice for Men, will even point his male readership to the offending articles so they can swamp the comment sections, filling it with what I consider even more proof that the authoress was correct about Elliot Rodger’s similar ideology to the MRM. If there’s one general rule I’ve witnessed in the Manosphere, it’s the epic use of strawmanning but the most noticeable is the contradictory positions these men hold.

‘If I can’t have it, I will destroy it. That’s the conclusion I came to, right then and there.‘~Elliot Rodger

Before I delve into this I will say that there are a small handful of women who call themselves Men’s Rights ‘Activists’ but they are few and far between and the men surely outnumber them in the amount of online output and direct personal attacking of women these men deem ‘misandric’ or ‘man-hating.’

Paul Elam accused Blake of saying that Elliot Rodger, a young man who went on a murderous rampage in California, was part of his website AVFM and then went on to argue that strawman. What Blake actually said was this:

‘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?’~Mariah Blake in Mother Jones

Clearly, Blake never said Rodger was part of the MRM or Elam’s site but in order to get his readership angry at her, Elam simply lied about it.

Now comes the proof that Rodger held the same beliefs as Elam and his compatriots. In 2014 Elam held a Men’s rights conference in Michigan. One of his featured speakers was Stefan Molyneux, a rabid libertarian who believes in what he calls ‘defooing’ which is the notion that children who are angry with their parents should cut the parents out of their lives completely. Molyneux thinks women aren’t sleeping with ‘nice guys’ and are ruining the world by sleeping with assholes. Sam Seder featured Molyneux’s diatribe on his Youtube show. Molyneux’s video catalogue includes titles such as No Excuse for Female Evil’, ‘Female Laziness: The Story of Male Exploitation and ‘Estrogen Based Parasites #killallmen’. 

Compare this to Rodger’s manifesto and you’ll see the same ideology. The idea that women aren’t fucking ‘nice guys’ (him) and sleeping with other men is quite clearly the main source of Rodger’s anger. The very first line of Rodger’s manifesto is precisely the same as Molyneux’s idea that women are ruining humanity

‘Humanity… All of my suffering on this world has been at the hands of humanity, particularly women.’~Elliot Rodger

Also, Rodger was a member of a Manosphere forum called PUA Hate. Pick up Artistry is a common topic in the Manosphere. It’s basically a bunch of dudes creating elaborate schemes to get women to have sex with them which are more like rape then consensual sex. They call their various strategies ‘Game.’ Rodger was angry that Game didn’t work for him so he aligned with other males who were unable to sleep with women. This sexual focus is exactly what Farrell claims is the bane of men. Somehow, women’s bodies and the male obsession with them makes men incapable of living a good life. Every ill a man suffers is due to a woman’s body.

‘Finding out about sex is one of the things that truly destroyed my entire life. Sex… the very word fills me with hate. Once I hit puberty, I would always want it, like any other boy. I would always hunger for it, I would always covet it, I would always fantasize about it. But I would never get it. Not getting any sex is what will shape the very foundation of my miserable youth.’~ Elliot Rodger

So you see it’s not a stretch in any way to relate Rodger to men’s rights ‘activists’. Elam is being dishonest about this valid comparison. In fact, the entire philosophy of these men a la Farrell is that women have all the power because men want to have sex with them.

In a Google hangout, done just after Blake’s article was published, Farrell and Elam talked about the fact that Farrell featured a naked woman on the cover of his book. The analysis went no further. It was simply an affirmation that men are oppressed by their desire for women’s bodies and that sounds an awful lot like Elliot Rodger.

Farrell relayed a story about a man who took a women’s studies class, not to learn anything, but to sleep with what he called ‘independent women.’

‘I’ve heard man after man saying ‘I really like independent women.’ I took a women’s studies class but I did feel it went too far and there’s a woman in the class I really had an interest in and I think she had an interest in me too when we were beginning to flirt or go out with each other but I spoke up about this and that was the end of my potential, being able to make myself attractive to her. And that’s really tough.’~Farrell

The horror of not being able to sleep with whichever woman you want! Rodger had the same problem and like MRA’s he blamed women for it.

To further the cognitive dissonance, and to soothe himself, Elam insists that the founder of Mother Jones was really an MRA, like him, who understood that women’s bodies make men oppressed.

‘Mother Jones understood, like the woman in the classroom, that women wield tremendous power. That’s why Warren put the [woman’s]silhouette on the cover of his new edition of the Myth of Male power of a woman’s posterior because it was a homage to the fact that if you look at power between the sexes, oh man, it’s certainly not as simple as patriarchy.’~Paul Elam

This is the kind of severe cognitive impairment I can’t help pointing out. While these men think a woman not sleeping with them is a great oppression, like Rodger did, they then claim they’re actually helping men through activism.

‘It was all fueled by my wish to punish everyone who is sexually active, because I concluded that it wasn’t fair that other people were able to experience sex while I have been denied it all my life. I started to have the desire to create a world where no one is allowed to have sex or relationships. I again saw that as the perfect, fair world. Reproduction can be accomplished without sex, through artificial insemination. Sex is evil, as it gives too much pleasure to those who don’t deserve it.’~Elliot Rodger, Manifesto page 65

MRA’s, like Rodger, hate what they call ‘blue pill’ men. These are the men that have sex and relationships with women. AVFM is notorious for not only attacking women but attacking other men they consider ‘blue pill’ or ‘manginas.’ The mangina reference is interesting because the blue pill manginas actually get up close and personal to vaginas while red pill MRA don’t.  A vagina is related to women who are viewed as weak by MRA’s. It’s a gendered insult for one man to call another man anything related to a woman. MRA’s tend to use a lot of sexual innuendo, lots of references to vaginas, which they don’t usually have access to. At any given time you can look on the featured articles on AVFM and you’ll see that when Elam isn’t attacking women, he’s attacking other men who don’t share his hatred of women. It’s exactly what Rodger did. Rodger also hated men who had relationships with women.

‘Addison treated me like a lowlife every time I hung out with them, and he kept bragging about the girls he met at parties in Malibu. I indignantly accused him of lying, as that was what I wanted to believe. He was only amused by my envy. I then found that Addison deleted me from his Facebook friends list out of the blue. This was the last slight I would bear from him, and I subsequently sent him a hateful Facebook message in response. I then viewed Addison as a bitter enemy of mine. He truly was a disgusting and treacherous little bastard.’~Elliot Rodger

Let’s do a quick look at AVFM and see what’s headlining there. Let’s see if there’s any ‘activism’ to help men and boys today. Currently, the top 3 articles have nothing to do with men’s issues. All three articles are about bashing PZ Myers, a self proclaimed feminist ally of Freethought Blogs, bashing Cenk Uygur of the Young Turks because he interviewed an MRA and showed her to be ridiculous, and an article by a black man bashing other black men who love women. Even the side titles at the top are devoid of discussing any issue males face.  The bashing of anyone who doesn’t share AVFM’s misogynist world-view is standard practice but it’s mostly women that are targeted.

In the effort to rewrite bad press, Paul Elam indulges in fairy-tale explanations as to why the mass media didn’t tell the ‘truth’ about the MRM. In the case of Blake’s article he claimed she couldn’t write a truthful article otherwise the feminists would attack her and she’d have to take down the article. He even went as far as to say MJ would lose stock and funds if Blake ‘told the truth.’ This might be a reference to Gamergate, a male mob that targets female gamers and developers for abuse and sends emails to various companies to convince them to cut advertising funds to various gaming sites that publish support for women in tech.

Warren Farrell had some interesting analogies in response to Blake’s article.

‘Women see themselves as ants and men as elephants which gives them an excuse to hurt the elephant as much as they want.’ ~Warren Farrell

This isn’t the first case of Farrell’s questionable comparisons. In an earlier Google Hangout with Elam and Golden he compared a man paying child support to being a rape victim. I suppose one could say this is Farrell’s modus operandi: making strange comparisons in order to claim women are the scum of the earth. In fact, The Myth of Male Power is really just a long-winded group of metaphors in an attempt to make men’s position in society comparable to women’s lower status.

‘The equivalent of a woman being treated as a sex object is a man being treated as a success object.’
― Warren Farrell

The quote above is from Myth of Male Power. Anyone can see which of the two is powerful and which isn’t. When you’re simply a repository for a man’s penis you are hunted, prey. You’re an object whose lower economic status funnels you into abuse and male violence like prostitution and pornography.  Successful men are able to wield power and buy those women. It’s a failed analogy.

Farrell’s metaphors call into question his feminist credentials which he flashes to the media often in an attempt to gain credibility. The fact is, Gloria Steinem, once she figured out he had some strange positions, refused further contact with him. Farrell admits this openly. He relays a story about a television appearance he did with her. He claims she conspired with the producers to end the show because he brought up the pay gap. Afterwards, she wouldn’t return his calls and the show was never aired. Instead of taking this gracefully he went to Toys R Us and bought a plastic phone and sent it to her. It seems Farrell doesn’t take rejection very well. Rodger didn’t either.

Rejection issues is a major theme for MRA’s as it was for Elliot Rodger. Not being selected by women, as outlined by Farrell, seems an instant path to misogyny and even murder. Rodger may have never visited AVFM but he certainly held the same ideology. Blake’s expose was completely accurate no matter how much Elam and Farrell cry foul.

Happy Valentine’s Day to the women of the world!

UNITE!

Advertisements

12 thoughts on “Deconstructing Paul Elam’s and Warren Farrell’s Lies One by One

  1. Food for thought for sure. Like you I’m interested in the deep psychology of these misogynists. There’s been a lot of discussion of nature and nurture, but not so much about the third area – psychodynamics, or depth psychology, or developmental psych, whatever you want to call it.

    Or maybe there has been a lot of discussion but it’s been put in some other category. The postmodernists are always going on about Desire. Well, that’s what the misogynists are complaining about – male desire, and why it must never ever be frustrated. I’m not a psychologist, but this need to possess, control, subjugate, and hold onto a woman at any cost, right up to murdering her so she’ll stay pure in his memory, sounds like a kind of plain old aggression (sexual subcategory), that mainstay of male biology.

    You show how the misogynists have rationalized, denied, and projected their way into a topsy-turvy “theory” that women are doing something to them, when men are doing it to themselves and women! It would be funny if it weren’t so dangerous. It’s always the woman’s fault when the man obsesses over her, suffers when she won’t “be mein”, and “is forced” to hurt her because her very existence is an insult that makes him upset.

    If women are using their sex power to make jelly of men (and this refers I suspect only to to that small minority of thin white young women, the rest of women don’t actually exist), and “nature” made it so, well, that’s what burqas are for, amirite? That’s the implication, that to stop women running the world,they have to be unseen, as just having to look at one can make a male ruler do anything she wishes, like stopping war and rape…amirite?

    As for that other kind of power that women DON’T have, like running the world and everything in it and having sovereignty over their own bodies, that shit is just stuff men naturally are born with (though they enjoy trying to take it away from each other), and to share it with women is against nature.

    Still, women retain this one magical witchy power of being able to make men sad when women do assert sovereignty over their bodies by controlling access. Women should not have that gatekeeping power…because women’s bodies are coveted by men, and men’s covetousness is more important than women’s right to human sovereignty, amirite? Well, you said all that better than I can, HMQ.

    Radfem theory as I understand it incorporates several roots of women’s universal subordination – appropriation of their labor (Marx), appropriation of their legal sovereignty (Liberalism), and approriation of their sexuality, including sex and reproduction. That last one is where liberals and Marxists fear to tread – and maybe the biggest and most ancient root.

  2. Forgot to say that this a particularly inspired and detailed article. Well-done! Each of the three leading misogynist lights you discuss slots into parts to play in this drama of oppression; Farrell the theorist, Rodger the enforcer, Elam the organizer/demagogue. Your weaving of Rodger’s manifesto statements with other misgynistic statements shows how it all adds up to a unified ideology.

  3. Does anyone happen to know how many people actually participate in the manosphere? I find the outright hatred for women on those sites to be crazy, & I guess Ii’d like to hope that there are not that many of them.

    • It’s an incredibly small group. They like to think they are a large group by buying followers on Twitter and making several sock accounts to upvote and downvote videos on Youtube and other sites. I’ve managed to discern that most of them are either older divorcees who are angry at women because they went through a bitter divorce, usually caused by the male abuser who resents paying for their children, or they are young men who have less than 4 pubic hairs and have no life experience, who are nerdy and play video games (hence Gamergate), and are very scared of women. Some of them are in relationships and are married but they are very few and far between.

      They like to think that they’re making this huge impact on society by not dating women or marrying (MGTOW) but they’re not. These men think that by not dating and marrying they are going to crash the economy or somehow the State is going to collapse. They’re really deluded and self-important. They constantly go on and on about how the State hates the fact they don’t go out with women or marry but the State doesn’t care a fig. Many of them are rabid libertarians who think the State is totally run by women who are out to oppress them financially. The stories they come up with are just fantastical, such as the State is going to ‘punish’ them with a Bachelor tax because they’re not getting married. This is how bloody dumb they are.

  4. Waren Farrell used to chair the NAtional Organization for Women. Thats a feminist organization and probably the biggest in the world. He is the only man to be allowed to do that..Now what does that say about him? i will give you time to think it through. Have you provided a demonstration of the legal bias against women? oh wait. there isnt one. Women do not run the system but feminists would have you believe that poor little women had nothing to do with shaping society and still don’t. Thats crap.

    • Hahahah. No he wasn’t a national chair you doofus. Plus, they booted him out when they realized what a misogynist he was. Legal bias? Oh the fact that abortion is a privacy matter and not a public one as it’s written in the law. You’re a moron and have no idea what you’re talking about.

Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s