From time to time I ponder why there is such a divide between the feminist movement and the fatherhood movement. I wish this divide didn't exist, or at least that it were smaller. Yet sometimes I read things which make me believe that the divide will never be breached. Such is the case when I read the exchange below on the feminist website Truth and Justice: Family Court Reform.

There was a discussion of Parental Alienation Syndrome and criticism of my co-authored column Protect Children from Alienation (Providence Journal, 7/8/06). PAS occurs when, after divorce or separation, one parent turns his or her children against the other parent, destroying the loving bonds the children and the target parent once enjoyed. In the discussion feminist bloggers and commenters portrayed PAS as a nonexistent fraud used by battering and/or molesting fathers to wrest child custody away from protective, loving mothers.

As part of the discussion, one father, who identified himself as "amanwhocares," wrote:

"[Those] who want to think or imagine that PAS...does not exist, have your heads in the sand...The case of myself and my daughter is classical...Much of the reason for certain individuals vitriolic rejection of PAS as a credible and epidemic symptom of disease is that they themselves are suffering from DENIAL...My daughter and I fought the good fight but everybody we encountered would not do their jobs. They cared not for truth or justice. They only wanted the money.

"Today my daughter, twenty years old, returned to her mother by some deeply confused zealots from the Justice for Children, Houston, Texas, just had a baby, moved back in with her mother, having dropped out of high school two years ago. Don't one of you tell me PAS does not exist. Had she remained with me she would likely be now about to finish her college education and headed onward for a medical degree."

The feminist response is:

"I think 'amanwhocares'' posting is a wonderful example of the fuzzy logic spewn by maligned, arrogant and irrationally- minded batterers. His is a typical, asinine and patently denial-laden, delusional response from batterers: his assumed superiority and his accusing his victims of his own criminal conduct and malevolent motivations.

"His response also shows the depth of a batterer's personality disorder...[asserting] that all the legitimate research from learned scholars is just 'lies' is a good glimpse into the defective psyche of a batterer.

"His posting also shows that the only successful approach in holding batterers accountable is an aggressive criminal justice response from legitimate men in law enforcement."

Interesting--the man complains about being separated from the daughter he loves, and the feminist response is to label him a "batterer," and then pontificate on how his sad, angry letter is reflective of a "batterer's mentality."

Like the feminist quoted above, I know little about this man's case. But if his response is indicative of a "batterer's mentality", I wonder how a non-battering man is supposed to react to having his loving bonds with his children eviscerated?

I suppose the feminist would respond that such an injustice would never happen in our pro-male/anti-woman family law system. Lady, you must be kidding...

This entry was posted on Friday, February 9th, 2007 at 10:54 am and is filed under Family Law, Feminism/NOW, Fatherhood, Fathers' Rights/Noncustodial parents' rights, Shared Parenting, Parental Alienation/PAS, Marriage, Children's Rights, False Accusations, Sexism, Divorce/Separation/Child Custody, Misandry, Gender Issues (Misc.). You can trackback from your own site.