One manner in which
anti-feminists (feel free to read as misandrist women haters) derail feminist arguments is alluding to
instances in which women supposedly experience privilege. Following our
facebook post on abusive women and malicious mothers, I did some thinking… and
reading!
Often, the nay-sayers
use the court system – and custody battles in particular – as
an example.
It’s true that mothers
are more likely to receive custody of their children in a divorce. But the
source of the bias is not in the courts – it’s in the
marriage.
Straight Marriage
Struggles
The institution of
straight marriage perpetuates patriarchal gender roles during marriage as well
as during its complement, divorce.
The same unfair
assumptions that undermine the tradition of straight marriage are the ones that
mire their divorces.
Statistically, it
appears that the family courts are biased against fathers.
For example, 83% of
mothers receive custody of their children in divorces. Additionally, men are awarded
less support on average than mothers who are awarded support.
There is also plenty
of anectodal evidence citing situations where mothers were awarded custody in
spite of fathers demonstrating interest and potential to provide and care for
their children.
There are even organizations
that exist to protect fathers’ rights.
Unfortunately, these
organizations are missing the mark. I think they are even guilty of selective
fact finding and misplacing blame on mothers or even on biased courts.
There are three main
problems with their arguments:
1. They Draw
Incomplete Conclusions from the Divorce Statistics
On the surface, the
custody and support averages are skewed toward women.
There are
organizations that demonstrate unfair court bias against men with statistics,
but they ignore that the outcomes of these institutions are a manifestation of
the patriarchy in our very own society.
Even if the courts are
biased, they are not biased because they dislike men.
They are biased
because they are reflecting the patriarchal notion that men are not meant to be
caregivers and that women are not mean to breadwinners.
2. They Demonize Women
Oftentimes, these
arguments simply blame women.
Some say nasty (even
abusive) mothers manipulate the laws that are already pitched in their
favor in order to keep children away from their fathers.
They call this malicious
mother syndrome.
Is there some basis
for this stereotype? Unfortunately, yes.
But is that the norm?
No way.
Saying that all
mothers – or even most mothers – who file for divorce want to
keep their children from their fathers out of spite with utter disregard for
the children’s best interest and relationship is unfair and unfounded.
In fact, the majority
of custody settlements – even those that favor the mother –
are reached by mutual agreements outside of the courtroom.
That means that both
parties agree in these situations that the mother should have custody.
This is also an unfair
manifestation of patriarchal gender expectations in marriage – and those
expectations are self-imposed.
3. They Value Fathers’ Rights over
Children’s Rights
The greatest issue
with some of these fathers’ rights organizations is that they put personal
rights and interests over the rights of the children.
There are extenuating
circumstances when mothers (and fathers) are not suited to be
in their children’s lives. But more often than not, children benefit from
having both their mother and their father in the picture.
Unfortunately, often
these organizations offer methods to minimize child support. That sort of greed
has a direct effect on the daily lives of children.
Finally, these
organizations advocate for laws that allow abusive fathers to have rights to
their children because they believe these laws are manipulated to advantage
women.
Not every fathers’
rights group is guilty of this, but many of them are. Although fathers have the
right to be involved in their children’s lives, they also need to put
the rights and needs of the children before their own.
In lieu of recent
fathers’ rights movements, research has surfaced that demonstrates how the
family courts hurt women as well. For example, victims of domestic violence are
often characterized as unfit for parenting.
Although many of these
organizations have terrible means to achieving fathers’ rights, they are
motivated by a good central goal: They want to change the assumptions
surrounding the role of a father in marriage and divorce.
They do not believe it
is fair that more women are receiving custody at higher rates.
And although I
disagree with their characterization of the causes of this imbalance, I can
empathize with their intentions.
So if the bias against
fathers is not coming from the court system, where is it coming from?
Gender Roles
As I mentioned
earlier, the majority of these custody agreements are decided outside of a
courtroom.
That means that the
gender roles that are perpetuated in straight marriage are translating into
divorce, often without the force of law.
The truth is: If
we are going to equalize straight divorces, we need to equalize straight
marriages.
Unfortunately,
patriarchal gender norms hurt divorce just as much as they hurt marriage.
Marriages based on
equality, lead to better co-parenting after divorce.
If we want to
encourage co-parenting during and after divorce, some changes to straight marriage have
to occur first:
1. Encourage Fathers
to Nurture
One detrimental result
of restrictive gender roles is that fathers are discouraged from nurturing
their children.
By telling fathers
that nurturing is meant for mothers, we are encouraging their absence during
pregnancy, birth, and beyond.
Using an evolutionary
defense to discourage fathers from bonding with and nurturing their children
just creates unnecessarily absent fathers. Countless studies suggest that these
assumptions are wrong as well.
In fact, men may even experience
hormonal changes once they become fathers in order to facilitate their roles as
caregivers.
In order to improve
fathers’ relationships with their children after divorce, the relationships
need to be stronger during the marriage and encouraging fathers to take on
caregiving roles creates the strong relationship.
2. Encourage Mothers
Who Want to Have Careers
The same narrow gender
roles that keep men from caregiving keep mothers from maintaining their
careers.
Women are entitled to
choose which caregiver model works best for them.
Some choose to be full
time caregivers, and that is awesome!
Others would prefer to
continue their careers, and that is also awesome!
Unfortunately, women
who choose to stay in their careers are often accused of being bad mothers.
I’m not a mother, but
I would think having two involved caregivers has quite some tangible benefits. Not
only is the male breadwinner model terribly presumptuous and empirically wrong, it
also puts undue pressure on fathers to be sole breadwinners and discourages
them from participating in parenting responsibilities.
Even when women choose
to be full time caregivers, that does not mean men should not participate.
Their relationship with their children is still important – and
full-time caregiving mothers need self-care time.
3. Encourage Parents
to Share Family and Domestic Responsibilities Equally
Even in families where
both parents work, women still spend more hours per week providing primary
care.
Men and women are both
capable of equal participation in and outside of the home, in order for
fathers to be considered equally worthy caregivers in the eyes of the court,
they must first be equal caregivers within the home.
Further, most custody
arrangements are decided between parents. Fathers must create bonds with their
children through caregiving and demonstrate a commitment their children in
order to defy the unfair gender stereotypes that define their position in the family.
In fact, studies have
shown that when both parents work full-time and mothers are still providing the
majority of the housework, they are more likely to be unhappy and seek divorce!
So if we want to
change the role of fathers in divorce, we must first address the roles of
fathers in the home.
