Children Need... THIS?
THE FATHER'S RIGHTS MOVEMENT: IN THEIR OWN WORDS
Apparently, Warren Farrell has persisted in shmearing his vomitus around the internet protesting, among other things, the publication of the information put out on these webpages. Dean Hughson (see his entry on what has affectionately come to be known as The Pig Page) recently forwarded the following drivel to the Witchhunt listserve. It appears to be an email directly from Warren Farrell written in May 2000. It is reproduced here in the entirety in the blue text. liznotes comments are interspersed in gray text.
Michelle was nice enough to make this clean and better to read. Thanks. Dean
A statement you allegedly made
Thanks for going directly to the source. Since I have been writing in support of what I call empowerment feminism, but in opposition to what I call victim feminism, I have been a target of the efforts of Liz Kates and Trish Wilson to personally attack almost all the father's rights advocates. In my case, they have been successful in making some people fearful of looking at the research I have done in areas such as domestic violence (in Women Can't Hear What Men Don't Say, by Tarcher/Putnam, 1999).
Since the fear starts with the accusation of my being pro-incest, as it did at your roundtable, I appreciate the opportunity to separate the truth from the fiction. Highlights first: I have never been pro-incest.
In the Penthouse article, the word "genitally" should be "generally".
I have let Liz Kates know this in writing.
This does, though, imply that I did do a study about incest. That is correct. I conducted it in the '70s after Random House published The Liberated Man, a pro-feminist book based on my years on the Board of N.O.W. in New York City.
I never published the findings on incest despite having a contract with Bantam books to do so in book form.
As a result, the topic of incest is not the subject of any of my writing. All four of my books -- as well as my experiential workshops -- are attempts to get both sexes to understand the other.
(The bad news is that this is not likely to be achieved in my lifetime. The good news is I guess I'll always be fully employed!) My forthcoming work is to be titled [bleep]. It is very much on what is in the best interests of the child. Incest is not a topic in the book. Now, some more detail...
I refrained from publishing the incest findings because I feared that what I found would be distorted and misused. (It's a bit ironic that it still is, even though I did not publish it!) I allowed myself the one interview with Penthouse to get a sense of whether the message would be distorted in print, or after print, or both.
When I saw that the answer was both, I gave up a multi-year research effort.
Obviously this cost me considerably. You may wish to know my motivation for undertaking the incest study.
It evolved from reading in Ms. and other sources in the early '70s that incest was like terminal cancer. This attitude seemed to me to hold out no hope for a cure. I wondered whether therapists, by seeing the most difficult cases, were creating this conclusion in the same way we had about homosexuality being a disease by looking largely at a patient population that was unhappy.
I felt that if a non-patient population had a larger variety of experiences, we might have information to better help people who were traumatized.
So I put ads in papers soliciting anonymous over-the-phone intensive interviews from people experiencing any form of incest, from cousin-cousin and brother-sister to father-daughter and mother-son, asking them to rank their experience as positive, negative or mixed. I created lie detector tests that I built into the interviews.
Some of the ads I placed solicited experiences perceived either as positive or negative; other ads solicited only positive, until I attained enough people who perceived their relationship as positive to have numbers large enough to make comparisons to the negative (since the negative ones were obviously more easily attainable).
The focus of the book was broadening the base of therapeutic options for interventions that could reverse trauma. The Kinsey Institute ranked it as, by far, the best and most responsible study ever done on the subject.
However, in the process of always being asked about the positive experiences, the deeper purpose of the study often got lost.
I saw this happen in the Penthouse interview, and sometimes I contributed to the process by not being media savvy enough. I felt that if I did not publish the material, I would be able to limit the exposure of the information to in-depth workshops with only professionals.
So that is what I did.
As I mentioned above, my most recent work has included an examination of all the domestic violence research and the outlining of approaches that can minimize violence by anyone. I have just returned from training therapists in Ireland, mostly directors of women's shelters, on these approaches.
The [bleep; sorry no advertising here] book examines research from around the world on the effects on children when brought up only by moms vs only by dads; it looks at what dads and moms tend to contribute that is unique--and why--and what needs to change legally and psychologically to make dads as much a part of the home in the 21st century as women became to the workplace in the 20th century. Obviously sending mothers out of the family without bringing dads into the family leaves children with a parenting vacuum.
MAIN PAGE | COLLECTIONS
HISTORY LIBRARY | RESEARCH ROOMS
| THE READING ROOM
FATHERLESS CHILDREN STORIES | THERAPEUTIC JURISPRUDENCE | WOMAN SUFFRAGE TIMELINE | THE LIZ LIBRARY ENTRANCE
as otherwise noted, all contents in this collection are copyright 1996-2012
the liz library. All rights
This site is hosted and maintained by argate.net. Send queries to: sarah-at-thelizlibrary.org.