asker

touchmybuttock asked: I was really curious about your opinion on single fathers raising their children on their own, and how sometimes they get mistreated in the court system when they're trying to get custody of their kids. What do you think? Do you think that men should be given "a harder time" when it comes to being a single parent? A lot of people dealing with these cases think that a man can't raise a kid correctly. What do you think? I'm just really curious.

My first thought is that there really isn’t gender bias in the court system, unless you think that men who didn’t do the majority of the childcare pre-divorce should still get custody of the children post-divorce. 

My second thought it that maybe men wouldn’t get “mistreated” by the courts so much if they hadn’t set up a system in which women got to clean up shitty diapers because men decided they were too good for it. 

The thing about custody and fatherhood, and this is something I have personal experience with, is that men want to be able to say they’re parents without actually parenting. At least on a general scale and I swear if anyone “not all men”s me on this well just fuck you in advance.

Like my own bio-dad, but example. He ended up signing away his custody and visitation rights, in fact all of his parental rights, to myself and my sisters. This is because my mom had gotten re-married and wanted my then stepfather to be able to adopt us, because my bio-dad wasn’t around and never paid child support and was generally a dickhead.

He wasn’t around for the birth of either of my older sisters, and I don’t believe he was around for mine either. 

Yet to this day he still talks about how “his daughters” were taken from him. As if he was somehow mistreated by the legal system when he willingly signed away his rights to his children after never being there for them in the first part.

So yeah, when they divorced my mom got custody. My dad didn’t do shit as far as parenting, and according to statistics men in general don’t do the majority of caretaking/parenting. 

So essentially the argument, in my opinion, about this supposed mistreatment of men by the courts when it comes to custody is that men want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to be parents without doing any parenting, and when the courts won’t let them do that, they get upset.

I mean, I’m sure someone has a story about how their dad was a single dad and the best dad ever and he was mistreated by the courts, but again I’ll say - men created and benefited from a system in which women were designated the caretakers of children, were not allowed to work outside of the home because they had to have and tend to children, etc. 

And now they want to get upset because women are still considered those caregivers (mostly because they are, in fact, still doing most of the caregiving).

Sounds like a case of male tears. If men have a problem with the court system or our current paradigm when it comes to parenting, I guess they’ll have to change it. But blaming women or feminism for it ain’t the way to go about it, and it’s certainly not a battle I’m going to drop everything to fight. 

Material feminism – one that is cognizant of the effect of class on a woman’s life – is vital. A bourgeois variant of feminism serves the bourgeois woman alone, no one else. We have seen the outcome of the imperial feminist and her entrepreneurial sister – both often the same person – and we know what good is the stance to drop bombs on women to save them and the stance that bellows of empowerment meanwhile employing child labor for domestic work. If young feminists of today seek a better tomorrow, they must materialize efforts on collective social justice – instead of individualist advancement – that is exceptionally compassionate to the needs of the overburdened and impaired. It is the only way forward. There is no other way.

Mehreen Kasana, Of the Neoliberal Feminist (via listopada)

AYEEEEE LOOK AT THE HOMIE THO!!!!!

(via mangoestho)

(via plantaplanta)

Ready your hankies ya’ll because here comes #YesAllMen

alimarko:

Always remember that women who call themselves feminists will be accused so many times of being man-haters, but when a man kills women just for being women, he is called mentally unwell, and a madman rather than a woman-hater or misogynist. 

(via karlsparxxx)

pomeranianprivilege:

autarkical:

pomeranianprivilege:

capitalists are not feminists 

can we stop with the “you have to be socialist/communist in order to further the liberation of women all over the world” thanks

no

FEMINISM DOES NOT EXIST SO WE CAN HATE MEN. IT EXISTS BECAUSE MEN HATE US. — calinewarkwc69 (x)

(via hermione-ganja)

We can’t even agree on what a ‘Feminist’ is, never mind what she would believe in and how she defines the principles that constitute honour among us. In key with the American capitalist obsession for individualism and anything goes as long as it gets you what you want, feminism in America has come to mean anything you like, honey. There are as many definitions of Feminism as there are feminists, some of my sisters say with a chuckle. I don’t think it’s funny. —  bell hooks, 1984 (via mangoestho)

(via pomeranianprivilege)

I left liberal feminism, because it doesn’t tell the “male gaze” to fuck off, it FUCKS it. I left liberal feminism, because it told me that I was only powerful if my power satisfied men’s needs, if my power meant being on my knees taking a “Money Shot” while a man, conditioned from the very system that oppresses me, jerks off to my subordination. I left liberal feminism, because it argues in a POST-patriarchal context, telling me that my sexuality is my own, while in fact, males will always own it as long as male dominance is a political, economic, social and cultural reality. Which it presently is.

(via angrywomanistcritic)

sex negative for life. 

(via awkosaur)

I left liberal feminism, because it told me that I was only powerful if my power satisfied men’s needs

(via shortbreadsh)

not to mention the call for more female CEOs without any criticism of the capitalist oppression that all CEOs perpetuate, and the women who are thrown underfoot for women to rise to the top of the corporate ladder

not to mention “it’s the CHOICE that’s important”

not to mention “feminism is the radical notion that women are people”

not to mention the white savior mentality and anyone who tells hijabis that they are anti-feminist

(via gaymermaids)

(via afractalparticle)

Lifestyle feminism ushered in the notion that there could be as many versions of feminism as there were women. Suddenly the politics was being slowly removed from feminism. And the assumption prevailed that no matter what a woman’s politics, be she conservative or liberal, she too could fit feminism into her existing lifestyle. Obviously this way of thinking has made feminism more acceptable because its underlying assumption is that women can be feminists without fundamentally challenging and changing themselves or the culture. — bell hooks, Feminism is for Everybody (via excelenciatropical)

(via the-uncensored-she)

"I love women," is not a get out of jail free card. Thicke pulled the same bullshit when he was accused of degrading women in "Blurred Lines": "When we made the song, we had nothing but the most respect for women," he said. How nice of you to say so, Mr. Thicke. Alas, your work shows the opposite to be true. I am fairly certain many of the men who buy sex and consume porn also think they do it because they really, really, love women. NOPE. You love women like I love wine — as something I consume selfishly for my personal benefit and as a product. — Meghan Murphy (No, “female-appreciation” is not the same thing as feminism)

(via hermione-ganja)