Warren Farrell, Interviewed In Penthouse, December 1977 ******: The Last Taboo By Philip Nobile

 









Quoted material from article ; the article's quotes of Farrell are in bold

****** would be just another media trend, faddishly seduced and abandoned after repeated use, were it not for two forthcoming studies that promise to turn the prohibition on its head. Both introduce and uphold the notion of positive ******, an especially dissonant oxymoron that will madden therapists and confuse the masses more than the Kinsey reports did twenty-five years ago...

Kinsey collaborator Dr. Paul Gebhard, currently director of the Institute for Sex Research in Bloomington, Indiana... is releasing Kinsey's startling ****** material for incorporation in Warren Farrell's work-in-progress,The Last Taboo: the Three Faces of ******...

NBC'S "Weekend" visit to the Santa Clara County Child Sexual Abuse Treatment Center in San Jose will not help Farrell and Ramey convince anybody that ****** is less than a scourge. Host Lloyd Dobyns was so depressed by the content that he told the audience in his introduction that he wasn't sure he'd watch himself if it weren't his own program. What followed was a montage of contrite fathers and exploited daughters pouring out unrelievedly sad stories of ****** and grief. To interrupt the monotony of the documentary, producer Clare Crawford-Mason frequently cut to Hank Giaretto, director of the treatment center, for background and wisdom on the taboo. Giaretto was positively against ****** and linked it to prostitution, drug abuse, and sexual dysfunction in daughter victims. In his experience the normally repressed impluse overpowered law-abiding, middle-class fathers when they were down and out professionally and alienated from their wives. These men looked toward their blossoming daughters first for consolation and then for sex...

"It was like interviewing Cuban refugees about Cuba. 'Weekend' recorded sexually abused children speaking about their sexual abuse, which is valuable, but the inference is that all ****** is abuse. And that's not true."

...Although he vowed not to speak out prior to publication (probably in 1979), he consented to a one-time debriefing at a Chinese restaurant near his Riverside Drive apartment overlooking the Hudson River in Manhatten. At thirty-four, he is separated from his wife, who is an IBM executive, and childless...

[according to Farrell] Mother-son ****** represents 10 percent of the incidence and is 70 percent positive, 20 percent mixed, and 10 percent negative for the son. For the mother it is mostly positive. Farrell points out that boys don't seem to suffer, not even from the negative experience. "Girls are much more influenced by the dictates of society and are more willing to take on sexual guilt."Warren Farrell admires Giaretto's rehabilitative mission 
among legitimate victims, for his own investigation of positive ****** allows for considerable negativity, particularly in the father-daughter category. But he faults "Weekend" for its skewed perspective. "It was like interviewing Cuban refugees about Cuba. 'Weekend' recorded sexually abused children speaking about their sexual abuse, which is valuable, but the inference is that all ****** is abuse.

The father-daughter scene, ineluctably complicated by feelings of dominance and control, is not nearly so sanguine. Despite some advertisements, calling explicitly for positive female experiences Farrell discovered that 85 percent of the daughters admitted to having negative attitudes toward their ******.
Only 15 percent felt positive about the experience. On the other hand, statistics from the vantage of the fathers involved were almost the reverse -- 60 percent positive 10 percent mixed, and 20 percent negative. "Either men see these relationships differently,"comments Farrell, "or I am getting selective reporting from women."

In a typical traumatic case, an authoritarian father, unhappily married in a sexually repressed household  and probably unemployed, drunkenly imposes himself on his young daughter Genital petting may have started as early as age eight with first intercourse occurring around twelve Since the father otherwise extends very little attention to his daughter, his sexual advances may be one of the few pleasant experiences she has with him. If she is unaware of society's taboo and if the mother does not intervene, she has no reason to suspect the enormity of the aberration. But when she grows up and learns of the taboo, she feels cheapened.  If she comes from the lower class, she may turn to prostitution or drugs... The trauma is spread through all classes, Farrell observes, but ****** is more likely to be negative in the lower class...

"When I get my most glowing positive cases, 6 out of 200," says Farrell, "the ****** 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."

[Re one of Farrell's reported "case studies"] ... the writer happened to be at his beach house alone with his attractive fifteen-year-old daughter.... His wife's appendix operation had curtailed his sex for the previous five months... the women on the beach and a few beers had led him into special temptation. When the daughter emerged from the bathroom in a towel, he greeted her in the nude and erect. Although he had never consciously desired ****** before  he told his daughter he missed sex. Without further prompting, she fellated him...Two weeks later the daughter walked around the house naked until the father approached her. That day he deflowered her to their mutual satisfaction. But the father was careful not to push things. He did not want to hurt his daughter, who seemed to have an active sex life with boys her own age.  Several weeks later, the daughter took the initiative again...

Farrell realizes the risks that attend publication of this book. "In a society where men are powerful and exploitive and insensitive to women's feelings, which is reinforced by female adaptiveness and a daughter's lack of power, data like these can be used as an excuse for the continuation and magnification of that exploitation. When I consider that, I almost don't want to write the book."   [ cf Myth of Male Power: Farrell does not believe that this is the way society is, but rather, that it's women exploiting men.]

Since neither victim nor benefactor needs Farrell's confirmation, why does he gamble with bringing on a sexual deluge? "First, 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. My book should at least begin the exploration."

"Second, I'm finding that thousands of people in therapy for ****** are being told, in essence , that their lives have been ruined by ******. In fact, their lives have not generally been affected as much by the ****** as by the overall atmosphere. My book should help therapists put ****** in perspective."
 

Farrell also hopes to change public attitudes so that participants in ****** will no longer be automatically perceived as victims. "The average ****** participant can't evaluate his or her experience for what it was. As soon as society gets into the picture, they have to tell themselves it was bad. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy."

If pushed to the wall, would Farrell urge ****** on families? "****** is like a magnifying glass," he summarizes. "In some circumstances it magnifies the beauty of the relationship..."

 
























http://www.nnflp.org/farrell/taboo1.jpg

http://www.nnflp.org/farrell/taboo2.jpg

http://www.nnflp.org/farrell/taboo3.jpg

http://www.nnflp.org/farrell/taboo4.jpg

http://www.nnflp.org/farrell/taboo5.jpg

http://www.nnflp.org/farrell/taboo6.jpg
 

Vivagalore Vivagalore
31-35, F
12 Responses Nov 27, 2012

<p>any one who came to this story by way of youtube by jackbarnes... please be ware!!!! </p><p>
he is a well known *** hole and he goes out of his way to hate on women/feminist here on exp proj, and any one else who he doesn't lik.</p><p>he made those videos, hoping to ruin them.<br />
<br />
jack feels powerless over his world, and he sees women as a threat to that delusional world he lives in. </p><p>he has called feminist *****, *****,******* and has threatened them and their families and friends by way of shot gun, many of the feminists here are in contact with authorities. due to jackbarnes aka knightrunner </p><p>he claims to have a wife and daughter but yet he spends all his free time on exp prog and avfm and youtube making videos about feminist he hates on.</p>

there are some taboos i think are worth fighting and are silly. this isn't one of them.

Something else:<br />
>>> "....[according to Farrell] Mother-son ****** represents 10 percent of the incidence and is 70 percent positive, 20 percent mixed, and 10 percent negative for the son."<<<<br />
Does he have no mention of men abusing boys? If so that's a glaring little omission.<br />
...I have talked online to men who were victims of mother-son sexual abuse...ba<x>sed on that, I'd say it's very harmful...<br />
Some child sexual abuse survivors make it through their abuse by telling themselves what the abuser often says-that the child likes it, deserves it or wants it.<br />
This denial of fright, pain, confusion, and/or distress wins the abuser's approval and "love"...<br />
<br />
A certain subset of these formerly-abused adults are usually the ones who think there's nothing wrong with being sexual with a child...after all they "liked" it...o.O

Chimpanzees do it. It has been around since forever. It is a part of our evolutionary roots. Just like some get urges to take something from another by force. The lizard brain, as they say, is in us all and is the very foundation upon which higher intelligence exists. However, over time we have been given the opportunity to learn and evolve beyond certain base urges when they might arise for the betterment of ourselves and others. If we as a society determine that a minor is not allowed to make adult decision regarding many things, then sex with a parent can only ever be a criminal act, regardless of the small percentage of participants that claim it to be a positive experience. We must always be made accountable to our baser desires, whether it is breaking into your neighbors house, beating someone up because you just don't like them, or having sex with a minor regardless to ones relationship to them, taboo or no taboo it is irrelevant. He makes a moot point.

Wow, Dente!! Amazing research! I've got no words....

[ cf Myth of Male Power: Farrell does not believe that this is the way society is, but rather, that it's women exploiting men.] -------

I have read that book and that is not my interpretation AT ALL, of what he was saying in it. Rather, he was proposing that while women had had their own sexual revolution against imposed sexual roles, men had not, and so he went about proving that case - with the result that, like bailing out half of a canoe, until they do, neither gender will be free of imposed roles.

Moreover, I'm not sure why you have quoted a passage from that book in reference to some statement on the effects of ****** --unless you were attempting to flag the mention of "daughters" in the passage, a non-sequiter in terms of the subject matter you are presenting here. To my mind, it's a bit like Micheal Moore splicing together different Heston speeches, about different things, to make it appear as if he was continuing a single statement or making emphasis or support for something that suited Moore's agenda in the film.

The way you have characterized his view is disengenuous, the way you have selected quotes as if to draw a link is disenginuous, and calls into suspicion everything that's written here.

That's not to say I support whatever the content of the article was. I have no opinion on it, largely because I don't trust your representation of his view.

If you aimed to convince an undecided, you blew it when you treated me like I was dumb.

The article is what is posted... the clarification in the brackets was done because Warren had issue with his view on society being misrepresented.

My post is the the article from the penthouse article, it contains nothing from me, it certainly wasn't spliced by me...furthermore it was published by Penthouse in 1977 exactly as it is presented here...if Warren Farrell felt he was misrepresented surely he would have sought legal remedy.

Square brackets usually signify authorial asides, I don't know what the accepted practice is for quoting something which already has sq brackets in it. I'd suggest you add a note attributing that comment to the original author. I was confused by that as well.

&gt;&gt;"....Rather, he was proposing that while women had had their own sexual revolution against imposed sexual roles, men had not, and so he went about proving that case - with the result that, like bailing out half of a canoe, until they do, neither gender will be free of imposed roles."&lt;&lt;

I have not read the book...but think that gender roles are useless social artifacts that harm people.

I support men having a sexual revolution.

2 More Responses

I was kinda following this in a "I don't agree with his agenda, but he's not necessarily wrong on the facts" way (I'm sure there are some people who, after the fact, view their ****** in a positive light, but that doesn't make it OK for the parents to do it in the first place). Although his self-confessed attempt to bias the sample by only advertising for positive stories was pretty shameless; how is that an acceptable basis for a scientific study? But then he goes and openly advocates.... that stuff he openly advocates. I can't recall the exact phrasing and can't bring myself to read it again. Euccch. And immediately after saying he's worried about encouraging people who might be holding back from doing exactly that! Talk about trying to have your cake and eat it. "I don't want to encourage parents who are repressing incestuous feelings to exploit their underage children, but on the other hand, repression's bad so you should go fondle your kids if you really want to." Whaa?

Your interpretation was pretty close to my own. I don't mind if controversial topics are discussed or studied in a scholarly way...but, it should at least be scholarly.

To me this was justification, not a study, of a self serving agenda.

So you object to the study of controversial topics?

This is shocking and deplorable. I had no idea Warren Farrel held these appalling views. Several years ago I read a book by Farrel and though he was at times extraordinarily pro male I did not find him to be overtly discriminatory or misogynistic.
I am truly horrified. I feel sick.

That's not true, many people spoke out about this, many feminist leaders spoke out, furthermore, Warren knew it would not received well, he stated that is why he never published his findings, he also has spoke fairly recently about how he feels about this issue and the article.

I am shocked and appalled, but I must offer a contrary view on a few issues.

1. Just because this guy supported men's rights post-divorce and this guy is wrong about ****** doesn't mean that he is right about men's rights post-divorce. Ditto for many of the other causes he supported. Valid attacks against some of his positions do not mean none of his positions are valid.

2. I am offended by his statements regarding parent/child ****** on implications on ********** -- which is NEVER acceptable. ****** isn't only about parent-child. I was shocked when I learned that my great-aunt married her first cousin. That is ******. I was told that these things were commonly done in those days (1930s?). I dunno. But they seemed happy, they were adults, it worked for them -- how is it for me to say?

I support children's rights, which are usually best served by maintaining a relationship with both their parents, and I believe that is achieved in joint custody with equal parenting time.

I must say that I do not want a man that promoted ****** and ********** in the late 70's until the late 80's to be sitting on any groups involving the well being of children.

In general, I agree with you. As far as joint custody with equal parenting, that depends on many things, including the mental health of the parents, their work schedules, how far they live from the children's school, etc.. I agree that, all other things being equal, that equal parenting time should be the goal.

And I agree with you that, on the basis of this information, this man should not be in any position to advocate for the needs of children.

His opinions on anything regarding human relationships should be considered tainted. He has a warped sense of right and wrong.

...First-cousin marriage actually only raises the birth-defect risk about 4%, and it was common.
...Child molesters generally think that what they themselves want is good for the child and enjoyable. That denial is well-nigh bulletproof.
...There is a minority of sadistic abusers, who really just do get off on tormenting their victims.

1 More Response

I'm gonna be sick.

This makes me want to hurt someone.

****** between consenting adults is creepy. But ****** with a minor is abuse and there's no way anyone can convince me otherwise.

Hear, hear.

agreed!

...Yuk.
...I did not know what my dad was doing to me, much less what society thought of it. It was still horrible.

(((hugs))) I know hyli

"First, 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 ex<x>pression, are repressing the sexuality of a lot of children and themselves. Maybe this needs repressing, and maybe it doesn't. My book should at least begin the exploration.".<<< can't find the words.

WARREN FARRELL:

Icon of the Father's Rights Movement.
Advisor to F.R.E.E. (Father's Rights and Equality Exchange.)
Member, Board of Directors, National Congress of Fathers and Children.
Member, Board of Directors, Children's Rights Council.
Supporter of and touted by AFC (American Father's Coalition rights lobbyists.)
Advocate for men's rights post-divorce.
Advocate AGAINST the Violence Against Women Act.
Author of Myth of Male Power, a book of nonsensical illogic and propaganda.
Political science Ph.D who decided to study sex and advertised for examples of "positive ******" on the part of daughters.
Advocate of joint custody.
But still lists as a primary "credential" all over the place that he was once a member of the board of N.Y.C. N.O.W. (Note, a CITY chapter. Also that this was before his ****** research, here 1977, and his "falling out" with the feminists [because of his ****** pedo ways])
A man with no professional expertise pertaining to children or in law, no particular personal child-rearing experience we can glean, now lecturing to all these groups, and sitting on -- terribly interested in these matters -- so many "father's and children's rights" (codespeak for men's rights) boards.

I was about to highlight that too. I feel sick to my stomach.

It is sickening...

I honestly don't know what to say... But Girlwriteswhat is supporting this guy!!!?

Nope, you're right, I don't. I know some people out there advocate **********... and I'd rather not even think about it. Am wondering if physical castration would be quite enough for such people.

Two words that should never be paired - "advocate **********". :(

^^^ a man with a plan!

He at a minimum shouldn't be sitting on boards advocating for the rights of anyone but, especially not of children.

BTW this man does custody evaluations of children for court

I don't feel well. :(

Wait... Who are all the people letting him sit on boards &amp; do custody evaluations???

Correction, he charged exorbitant fees to fathers for custody evaluations that where later deemed inadmissible... He belongs to the MRA/Fathers Rights Groups listed above.

But aren't there legal checks before a person is appointed to a board regarding child welfare?

see accomplice's response I guess the MRA feels his support of ****** and ********** isn't a big deal. It is them appointing him to the various boards.

*see

If you excuse me a minute, I need to go throw up...

Right. Gotcha... Ew.

"Girlwriteswhat is supporting this guy!!!?"
...If she is, then she's as much of an ideologue as the people she pillories...or she hasn't got the lowdown on this creep.
Too bad, I thought she had some decent points about rape of males...

It's not just the feminist-academic subculture that likes to sweep male rape under the rug, it's our whole society.

I genitally caress my inner child all the time.. is this bad? Am I harming him? Should I stop?

...You might have to start shaving your palms, there, sparky...

I've liked a great many things things Girlwriteswhat has said. I've always found her to be honest, logical &amp; well rounded. Recently I was told she has slipped to the dark side... I've yet to investigate that for myself however.

18 More Responses