By Dan Scott

The feminist movement has cleverly fooled the Family Law courts and politicians into believing in the victim versus abuser politics. The emphasis put on women as victims and men as abusers. In the real world however, there are three groups: Children who are the victims of politics, winners (women) and losers (men). Children almost always end up as the victim in the custody decision since the Family Law system is only looking for the fulfillment of the stereotypical single parent, i.e. the mother. According to current legal practice, women by virtue of their genetics are the best parent unless rebutted by obvious evidence of drug and alcohol abuse, prostitution or abandonment. This is why men only receive 10% of custody awards, however, no Family Law judge will openly dare to proclaim this practice. The only way the Family Law system can continue on this path is secrecy by discrediting men as disgruntled losers in a legal contest.

Some people view shared parenting as a means to get women not to end a bad marriage instead of what it really is, a fair break for children and by extension equal treatment for men as parents. This view is based on the victimization of women held by feminists and their supporters who insist that men as a group are stereotypically abusers and therefore not capable of being good parents. Such assertions are more geared to preventing fathers from having equal influence on child rearing to that of women. It is clear that feminists want the imbalance of 90% custody awards to continue in favor of their group in order to maintain their agenda in the courts. If it were not so, then why aren't they demanding equal treatment under the law for everyone? Why are they not insisting on an equal break for children and men? As long as they can continue the smoke screen of victimization and vilify men as "deadbeat dads", their group they believe is better off. It doesn't matter if another group is suffering at their gain, namely children.

Feminism as practiced today has devolved into nothing more than me first group politics, seeing no harm in gaining an advantage by taking the rights of others based on the claims of victimization of the past. The claim of victimization is always the excuse of the abusive class to deny equal rights to others. If one were a true Feminist, they would demand equal rights for all as a means to safe guard rights for their group. They would recognize as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. did when he said, "Justice denied anywhere diminishes justice everywhere." The reason this for this should be obvious, challenging and reforming a legal system that makes excuses to discriminate prevents that system from doing it your group and everyone else in the future. As long we through group politics insist on a myopic view of the world, we by the very nature of pushing our agenda deny the equal rights of others.

If we can not commit to the Declaration of Independence which states, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men(kind) are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights", then freedom itself is in jeopardy of devolving into self indulgence at the expense of others. The self indulgence of one class leads to abuse of all other classes, this is a historical truth.