This perspective is antithetical to both the reality of situations of any given family, and a virtual deification of motherhood in concordance with the feminist peripheralizing of fatherhood.
And in the last 30+ years of the movement to peripheralize fatherhood, just look what has happened to society: drugs, crime, immorality, "alternative lifestyles", abortion....
The co-incidence is not coincidental.
It is cause and effect.
I'd like to note also that within the father's rights movement, those who are in it primarily for financial reasons form a distinct minority.
The vast majority want equal time with the children they love, and need protection therefor enshrined in law. The vast majority would trade every dime they have for equal time with their children.
And here is a critical point.
Too often, the rhetoric of "best interests of the child" is proferred with zero substance thereto attached.
The best interests of the child in reality, as opposed to in women-first fathers-last feminist philosophy, is for their time spent with each parent after the divorce to as nearly as possible reflect the time spent with each parent within the marriage.
Any objections to this are based upon a women-first perspective, not a child-first perspective.
I like that. That articulates it very nicely.
"An end to no-fault divorce AND the divestiture of the current gyncentricized and virtually immutable child-custody advantage would be the single most powerful tools for dramatically decreasing the divorce rate here in the United States of America."
To: ALL
With regards to custody, too often the family court takes the gender-feminist position, which is that women are the owners of the children, children are chattel subject to maternal possession, and fathers are ATMs and "visitors"
This perspective is antithetical to both the reality of situations of any given family, and a virtual deification of motherhood in concordance with the feminist peripheralizing of fatherhood.
And in the last 30+ years of the movement to peripheralize fatherhood, just look what has happened to society: drugs, crime, immorality, "alternative lifestyles", abortion....
The co-incidence is not coincidental.
It is cause and effect.
I'd like to note also that within the father's rights movement, those who are in it primarily for financial reasons form a distinct minority.
The vast majority want equal time with the children they love, and need protection therefor enshrined in law. The vast majority would trade every dime they have for equal time with their children.
And here is a critical point.
Too often, the rhetoric of "best interests of the child" is proferred with zero substance thereto attached.
The best interests of the child in reality, as opposed to in women-first fathers-last feminist philosophy, is for their time spent with each parent after the divorce to as nearly as possible reflect the time spent with each parent within the marriage.
Any objections to this are based upon a women-first perspective, not a child-first perspective.