WARREN FARRELL

I've gone from being quite wealthy, when I was defending women, to being quite poor defending men.

Companies like I.B.M. have offered women scholarships to study engineering for years, and women engineers routinely get higher starting salaries than men.

We always look at the 'Fortune 500,' and we say, men in power, but we don't look at the glass cellar as opposed to the glass ceiling and say, men also are the homeless, men are also the ones that are the garbage collectors. Men are also the ones dying in construction sites that aren't properly supervised for safety hazards.

For example, the equivalent of a woman being treated as a sex object is a man being treated as a success object.

Nobody really believes in equality anyway.

If women had to promise to provide for a man for a lifetime before he removed his veil and showed her his smile, would we think of this as a system of female privilege?

Is there discrimination against women? Yes, like the old boys' network. And sometimes discrimination against women becomes discrimination against men: in hazardous fields, women suffer fewer hazards.

The five different areas in which boys are in crisis - education; jobs; emotional health; physical health; and fatherlessness - are handled by different portions of the government.

Men's competitive team sports focus on the balance between individual achievement and team achievement with the emphasis on team achievement.

Boys with a 'failure to launch' are invisible to most girls. With poor social skills, the boys feel anger at their fear of being rejected and self-loathing at their inability to compete.

So we've moved from an era when women's biology was women's destiny to today, which is an era in which men's biology is men's destiny.

Once boys' and men's challenges are clear, the question 'why now' quickly becomes 'why didn't we see this sooner?' The answer? Virtually every society that survived did so by socializing its sons to be disposable.

The problem is that Americans care more about saving whales than saving males.

I definitely agree with choices for women, but I do not agree with choices for women when they eliminate choices for men. Rather, I think that the sexes need to make choices that lead to the maximum amount of win-win for both sexes.

It evolved from my experience in the fifties, growing up during the McCarthy era, and hearing a lot of assumptions that America was wonderful and Communism was terrible.

When women hold off from marrying men, we call it independence. When men hold off from marrying women, we call it fear of commitment.

Financial analysts make a lot more than accountants.

The women themselves say they're far more likely to care about flexibility. The men say, 'I'm far more likely to care about money.'

My wife's income allowed me to do what I really loved. I realized that women's liberation is men's liberation, too.

The average full-time working male works more than a full-time working female.

Virtually every society that survived did so by socializing its sons to be disposable. Disposable in war; disposable in work. We need warriors and volunteer firefighters, so we label these men heroes.

We take men's obligation to earn money, and when they do it well, we blame them for having power and being oppressors. And when they don't do it all, women just don't marry men who are reading 'I'm Okay, You're Okay' in the unemployment line.

Men are often a lot less vindictive than women are, because we are rejected constantly every day.

I don't think there's anything that is a greater area of discrimination against women today than the fact that nowhere in the world is there a female role model in team sports that more than half of a general audience would recognize.

There are 80 jobs in which women earn more than men - positions like financial analyst, speech-language pathologist, radiation therapist, library worker, biological technician, motion picture projectionist.