18 Comments

One of the factors that never seem mentioned in the discussion about the male-female wage gap is the litigation risk. Given the choice between equally attractive candidates, an employer has to consider the risk of hiring a woman or a person in any other group covered by discrimination law. A young white male is the only person who cannot sue for discrimination if fired. For this reason, I have argued that discrimination laws hurt the people they are trying to protect.

Expand full comment

> and, yes, the severity of female-on-male domestic abuse

I really don't believe that claim. Male upper body strength is obviously far higher than a woman's, so injury is much more likely, and men engage in the most severe kind of violence (homicide) at many multiples the rate at which women do.

Expand full comment

I'm not sure how I feel about Farrell. A few years back I read The Boy Crisis which he co-wrote with John Gray. Or, I should say I started reading it. The first half, which if I recall was written by Farrell, seemed quite good. Well argued, compassionate, gives data, etc.

The second half was John Gray, and it very quickly starts talking positively about homeopathy -- yes, homeopathy -- as an effective ... something. TBH, I don't even remember anymore why it was brought up in the context of the book. But I couldn't continue reading it at that point.

Like I said, I think the second half was the other author, but I have a lot of trouble taking Farrell seriously if he'll willingly put his name on a book that unironically pushes homeopathy.

(I hope I'm not misremembering that terribly)

Expand full comment

Maybe TC will enjoy this opinion-piece from today's conservative NZZ (Swiss-German). By a female feminist: "Women have never had it so good. Nevertheless, new disadvantages are always being identified. Patriarchy lives on as a phantom - The men are fought with a militancy that was justified fifty years ago but is alienating today. Feminism runs out of arguments if the enemy image of men is not kept alive." https://www.nzz.ch/meinung/maenner-als-feindbild-die-klage-des-feminismus-vom-patriarchat-ld.1738076?kid=nl164_2023-5-18&ga=1&mktcid=nled&mktcval=164_2023-05-19&reduced=true

Expand full comment

I first encountered Warren Farrell 30 years ago. He has been a voice in the wilderness. Unfortunately, he's still a voice in the wilderness: the fact that you hadn't heard of him until now speaks volumes. And, as you see, the things he has been saying have needed to be heard. And he has been saying them for 30 years. Thirty. Three decades.

Phase II of the equal rights movement - getting equal rights for men - stalled maybe 40 years ago and even now that observation is so thoroughly ignored and dismissed that it hasn't even reached the status of being "controversial" yet.

Expand full comment

Sorry for the length of this, its somewhat off topic but it relates to a women's issue that is being ignored. I received this blurb from a political newsletter and if you look at the site it has solid evidence and logic raising even larger issues of concern, this is just one tiny bit of it:

Fair elections require protection against coercion

Over the last couple decades, there's been lots of fuss over the ability to use mail-in ballots. The idea being that, if someone could have their ballot mailed to them, we'd see more participation, and thereby conclude there was less "disenfranchisement." Although this change has made the voting process more convenient by not needing to travel to a poll, I believe it undermines a more fundamental requirement of fair election. That is true privacy.

You see, nearly 2000 years ago, the Athenians came to know the importance of people being able to cast their vote without any outside influence. At the time, all citizens had to worry about the Roman aristocracy employing bribes and threats to influence the vote outcome.

Nearly every western country followed suit and eventually adopted secret ballots. With France starting in 1795, the UK in 1872, and the US in 1884.

Private voting at a polling place was the norm - except for rare exceptions, such as during times of war - until about 25 years go. Additional, an exception was allowed for votes to be cast using an absentee ballot, assuming someone had a specific reason for requesting an absentee ballot.

Along with increased convenience, however, a seldom-discussed problem as accompanied the mail-in ballot, that being domestic coercion.

While domestic violence has become more openly discussed, other forms of abuse remain hidden. According to a CDC survey, 42% of both men and women report being physically abused by a partner in their lifetime. Even today, it's not well known that many people experience coercive control by a partner, 49% of women and 46^ of men. A significant minority also confess that in their lifetime a partner "made decisions that should have been yours to make", affecting 26% of women and 21% of men. Moreover, there exists another form of domestic abuse that still is not acknowledged in the US which exposes a flaw in our democracy.

The Center for American Progress states, "Survivors of intimate partner violence must be able to make their voices heard in elections. To do this, they need access to election information materials, along with the ability to register to vote and vote safely in person at polling places or other designated voting locations."

So while we might cheer the increased convenience of mail voting, let's not be so naive as to think there's no downside to it.

For more information on this topic, see TheBigIllusion.com

Expand full comment

I grant that it is possible that in a world without female feminists, a man could have become a feminist, and perhaps astute students of history will provide examples. But I wonder if in the real world a man has ever become a feminist via any route other than caring about what female feminists think (likely for psychopathological reasons).

Expand full comment