Gender Bias in the Family Courts are not caused by Female Supremacy.

Many people in MGTOW (Men going their own way) and Men's Rights (including some in ATS) say that the reason why Family Courts favor mothers over fathers is because of female supremacy. Well I would say its false. The real cause of this was due to out dated laws.

Institutional sexism is no new concept. One place we might not expect to see it is in the family court system. Unfortunately, it’s prevalent in our courts, even if it’s unintentional and we see it most often negatively impacting men in child custody arrangements and alimony awards.

Historically, family structures were different than they are now—women traditionally stayed at home with children, while men traditionally went to work. It was only natural the family court system developed in a more favorable way towards women when it came to child custody and financial disputes. The system is lagging to catch up to the way family dynamics have changed over the years.

Many states are trying to fix this issue by passing equal parenting time laws and with alimony reform. Florida recently tried to pass, albeit unsuccessfully, a bill that would both reform current child custody laws to a shared parenting plan and nix permanent alimony. At least 20 states in total have considered passing equal parenting time laws, but lawmakers don’t quite seem ready for such a change and we’ve got a long way to go.

familyblog.legalmatch.com...

It also has a lot to do with the stereotype that women tend to make better mothers while men are always the terrible parent in a divorce court which isn't entirely true in real life.

Keep in mind though while I don't agree SJW feminists/misandrists are the cause of it, I do agree they are ignoring the issue. Blaming them entirely for the gender bias in courts will not solve anything.

a reply to: starwarsisreal

Soooo, what does your title completely contradictory to the story. The story says there is discrimination against men in family court. Ask any damn man that has gone through the courts, the mother has to basically be a two dollar crack whore that is mentally retarded just so he can get 50/50 custody. I for one spent 5 years and 50k to get and keep 50/50 custody.

Camain

originally posted by: starwarsisreal
Many people in MGTOW (Men going their own way) and Men's Rights (including some in ATS) say that the reason why Family Courts favor mothers over fathers is because of female supremacy. Well I would say its false. The real cause of this was due to out dated laws.

Institutional sexism is no new concept. One place we might not expect to see it is in the family court system. Unfortunately, it’s prevalent in our courts, even if it’s unintentional and we see it most often negatively impacting men in child custody arrangements and alimony awards.

Historically, family structures were different than they are now—women traditionally stayed at home with children, while men traditionally went to work. It was only natural the family court system developed in a more favorable way towards women when it came to child custody and financial disputes. The system is lagging to catch up to the way family dynamics have changed over the years.

Many states are trying to fix this issue by passing equal parenting time laws and with alimony reform. Florida recently tried to pass, albeit unsuccessfully, a bill that would both reform current child custody laws to a shared parenting plan and nix permanent alimony. At least 20 states in total have considered passing equal parenting time laws, but lawmakers don’t quite seem ready for such a change and we’ve got a long way to go.

familyblog.legalmatch.com...

It also has a lot to do with the stereotype that women tend to make better mothers while men are always the terrible parent in a divorce court which isn't entirely true in real life.

Keep in mind though while I don't agree SJW feminists/misandrists are the cause of it, I do agree they are ignoring the issue. Blaming them entirely for the gender bias in courts will not solve anything.

At some point that's just semantics. I don't believe in "female supremacy." However, you correctly note that it may be related to outdated laws that reflect outdated gender stereotypes.

Some feminists agree that these are stereotypes and roles that need to be deconstructed as part of patriarchy and related roles. The good ones also recognize that there are stereotypes within that which harm and trap men, including in family court.

However, in my experience a larger percentage of social justice or feminist type folks do not in practice acknowledge this or show it in interpersonal situations. Many appear to either not really be that studied on these subtleties, or out of anger want to simply flip around the perceived power dynamic and are happy to mistreat men or white people, or be given preferential treatment given the chance. This is what worries me most, the latter which is the majority.

At the point one is fine just taking away men's perceived privilege, yet keeping laws or practices that benefit women (no draft for women, family court, domestic violence practices), then it IS gender bias and disingenuous "feminism."

a reply to: camain

First off, sorry for the **** you been through. As a man, I believe that no man should pay for a mother who turns out to be a terrible parent.

However, keep in mind though attaching female supremacy to gender bias in courts is not the answer. The real answer is to acknowledge that not all women can be good parent just as not all men are terrible parents.

The problem is, both lawmakers and SJW feminists are refusing to acknowledge that reality.

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

The problem is though groups like MGTOW and Men's Rights are lumping SJW feminism with gender bias in courts when in reality, they are two completely issues.

I think it help if they separate the issue of gender bias in family courts from misandry.

a reply to: starwarsisreal

It is probably a huge disservice to lump mens rights groups in with MGTOWs. They are an ocean apart.

I also don't think this has anything to do with female supremacy. Just pure laziness and corruption that is riddled through the family courts.

One group wants to make changes that brings equality and the other group dosen't want to change anything, they will adapt to the current situation regardless.

a reply to: starwarsisreal

Clinton's Title IV-D welfare revision has played an even larger role. States are paid by the federal government for going after "deadbeat dads." The money paid to the states isn't earmarked for any specific use by the feds, making it a very desirable and lucrative general budgeting tool for the states to grub on. This has lead many states to automatically grant custody to mothers, letting them slap often outrageous child support figures onto the shoulders of dads with the expectation being that they will ultimately fail to meet the obligation and the state can go after them for what they owe, getting a nice tidy sum from the feds in the process.