MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

A Masculine Declaration of Independence

Filed under: Gender Politics,General — Downunder @ 10:48 am Fri 4th July 2014

It’s a dangerous occupation drawing comparisons between people, as you run the risk of bumping into other’s preconceptions and opinions.

However, after listening to the Youtube video of Warren Farrell speaking at the 1st International Men’s Conference, held recently in Detroit Michigan, I dare to take that risk.


Farrell’s contribution to the conference comes from decades of social research; so what he has to say is condensed and comprehensive, and based on the foundation of his considerable experience.

As much as feminists would like to laugh him off – they can’t – he has been amongst them, and knows them well.

There is an intriguing point that Farrell makes at the beginning of his speech, about his book the ‘Myth of Male Power’ (Review and Purchase) where he talks about showing the draft text to his father.

A father asks his son if he is prepared to wait a generation before people even start to consider his thoughts.

As wise a man as Farrell’s father was to make the observation, he under-estimated by a generation. The dogmatic resistance of feminism has held the conversation at bay for a further generation – but the conversation has begun.

It is a milestone and probably a great relief to Warren that this has finally happened within his lifetime. He has lived through the gauntlet of being ignored, ridiculed, attacked (and survived) to be respected not only for what he says, but for being right.

However just to clarify, the comparison I draw between Emerson and Farrell is not about the nature of their writings, but the courage to be different, in an often indifferent world, that likes to be habitual and normal, and becomes too accepting of the current circumstance.

With the rise of any civilization, it requires that men be collectivised and utilised for its survival, at the expense of their individuality and freedom.

That’s the fight that Farrell talks about, the conversation he is having with his peers and with the White House. We’ve had it here (to a degree) in New Zealand already, unsuccessfully, or successfully side-lined by politicians, depending on your point of view, but at least we are not alone in raising that same voice.

We have had our conventions, men’s tables, discussions, organisations, and we’ve even had Warren Farrell here in New Zealand back in the late 1990s.

Has the time come for that second wave of a raising of awareness, of the lack of political recognition of our issue? A call for initiatives that will steer New Zealand away from what Warren calls the ‘Boy Crisis’.

Where do we start – is it time to get Warren Farrell back to New Zealand again?

To hear what he has to say first hand and translate that to the New Zealand situation.

Now there’s a challenge for the inspired amongst us looking to bring about change.


  1. MGTOW – Not following the path like a sheep. Instead, be the lion and create the path for others to follow.

    Comment by ashish — Fri 4th July 2014 @ 11:36 am

    There’s another movement underway.
    Speaking here as a man who has survived the vitriolic misandric zeitgeist of feminism in NZ and anywhere else feminism has taken root, for virtually all my entire life, I cannot begin to express the relief with which I see this development.
    Of course there will still be anti-male laws and social conventions to overcome, academics, legal types and politicians to sort out etc, so I’m not getting ahead of myself here, but this is a new day all the same.
    Now where are the Kiwi anti-feminist women?
    Are you emboldened, ready to come out of the closet too?

    Comment by Skeptik — Fri 1st August 2014 @ 11:26 am

  3. Another poem from 20 years ago, hope it helps the undecided.

    Turn away your eyes from the sight
    Take care your view does not catch sight
    Secretly inside you cannot hide
    To be in love
    In untouchable dreams
    Desperately painful the selfish sight
    Cannot see reality
    Staring in your face ecstasy
    You need to come back to reality
    Run away from the path you see
    The danger in you view
    Turn away your eyes from the sight
    Take care you view does not catch sight
    Secretly inside you cannot hide
    They’ll find out your mind unwinds
    Foolish mind in reality
    To hide away when your mind still sees

    Comment by The man in Absentia — Fri 1st August 2014 @ 9:32 pm

  4. I don’t have a positive opinion of Warren Farrell. But if I have nothing nice to say, I best not say anything at all. 🙂

    What I do like is the ‘women against feminism’ movement. But let me rephrase them to my words. I like the women!!! I like them a lot because these young women are standing up for themselves. I hear them saying, “I am not weak. I worked, I sacrificed, I earned. Hear me roar”. Oh, if only single mothers would challenge society the same way.


    Somewhere on this site is a link to an article where feminists were quoted saying, “We missed a generation of women”. They now go to schools and indoctrinate young boys and girls the same way they did in universities. They are nurturing young children into believing boys are natural terrorists and predators to women while women don’t lie, don’t exploit, don’t hurt, and don’t need any boundaries. Oh my gosh, the girls will go crazy as they beg for boundaries. Everyone needs them.


    To be frank, (he’s a good man, lol) I prefer the generation of women feminists missed. Look at how powerful they are, look at how they are everything feminism should have wanted for women, look at the way they think for themselves, stand for something….. They are the next leaders and they will work hard, question, challenge….. everything capable women should do, IMO.

    You go girl!! Stand up for yourself and most importantly, don’t let others tell you how to do life. If feminism really is a women and girl’s movement and you can make it better, JUST DO IT!!!

    Comment by julie — Sat 2nd August 2014 @ 12:05 am

  5. Lewis’ law was first articulated by Helen Lewis on Twitter in August 2012: “Comments on any article about feminism justify feminism.”
    Anita’s Irony is an internet law stated by Joseph Reagle in March 2013, inspired by the PyCon 2013 forking and dongles incident and the Feminist Frequency Kickstarter backlash, and reads:
    Online discussion of sexism or misogyny quickly results in disproportionate displays of sexism and misogyny.
    Godwin’s law, coined by Mike Godwin in 1990, states that:
    As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.

    I was going to write an argument how these things go in never ending circles.

    Eg, Lewis law, feminism = feminism, or attack feminism = feminism, an article on feminism implies examination = feminism needs defending, an artical on equality for women implies examination of women in the comunity = feminism needs defending, MMM

    Now i’ve got stuck, what happens if the article does show that to inforce the present ideology of feminisn one does have to commit Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity, and acts of Genocide against men. MMM. Now my, my Mr Godwin’s Law. How else can one say those things if the word fits. Does an exception exist when it does take place. IE a group of people who to achieve their version of equality for women(or other thing), but prescibe that any crime can be imposed on men(or other thing) to achieve it.

    Your argument is true unless the argument is true Mr Godwin, online or not, and it did not take time to occur, the “name” was a legitimate description for our behavour towards men for eternity. We have always known these individualsed Genocides have been part of humanity. read the Clan Of The Cave Bear series. Begining from our first trying to understand and define our existence as individuals, and developing rules at governing it. We have known of these crimes, but had no solutions to fix them.


    Mankind has solutions at its grasp, the battle was always going to end, it was just about bringing women with us. They are the victims to. They have a new freedom, they just have to see it, and fight for it.

    An argument that goes forever is an insanity Mr Godwin, why, because one sided conversations are silent ones. If the implications of likeness to the actions of (Nazi or Hitler) occur. IE to rule the world with a version of the truth. Insanity Mr Godwin, but with mankind it cannot be ruled out as taking place.


    Lets hope that part can be resigned into history

    Feminist, It would be a sad day when nobody fought in that corner. Or when nobody fights for the corner of men. But together, with the common intent, us.

    Comment by The man in Absentia — Sat 2nd August 2014 @ 12:34 am

  6. I would like to add to my comment just in case someone struggles with common sense.

    These young women aren’t holding up words pro extreme rightwing ideology. They are pro equality if you read their words. They are saying they want equality.

    They don’t give any hint, IMO, that they are about to throw away all their hard earned accomplishments and demand women go back in time to some make believe 1930’s to 1950’s era during WWII, etc (when life was tough).

    I don’t know if many are aware that women were prescribed cocaine in the 1950’s. It was called the ‘little blue pill’. Women were stoned and cocaine would have made ‘pottering around the house’ enjoyable. Unfortunately, not all were so lucky so not all were in the ‘good housewife’ club. In NZ, as in the rest of the world, the 1950’s was far from a utopia.

    Comment by julie — Sat 2nd August 2014 @ 12:37 am

  7. To The man in Absentia,

    You make good points. I presume your words are for everyone. 🙂

    I give something also. Perhaps it might be useful to someone.

    NZ women took on two movements during the colonial era in NZ.
    1. The (American) Woman’s Christian Temperance Union
    2. The English feminist movement based on the philosophy of John Stuart Mills

    Women’s involvement in group 1, led to lobby against them voting. Because of fear they would abolish alcohol, they gained the right to vote the following term AFTER non-land owning men got to vote.

    The second group was more complicated, IMO. I personally see a movement from the crowning of Queen Mary I and Elizabeth I. Some of the arguments against women ruling were funny like, “Women’s brains are smaller”. I can see the sense in that argument, lol.

    …………….. Anyways,

    Whatever will be, will be. (The future’s not ours to see, Que sera, sera). 🙂

    Comment by julie — Sun 3rd August 2014 @ 10:37 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar