Depriving Men of Constitutional Rights

by Phyllis Schlafly
Family courts routinely deprive men of their fundamental right to parent their own children by charging them with a wide variety of trivial offenses. Family courts generally uphold feminist demands to kick a man out of his own home, and take control of their children and his money, based on a woman’s unsubstantiated allegations. A major weapon in this ongoing battle between men and women who don’t get along is the Violence Against Women Act. This law was passed in 1994 as a payoff to the radical feminists for helping to elect Bill Clinton President in 1992.

The Violence Against Women Act shows the hypocrisy of noisy feminist demands that we kowtow to their ideology of gender neutrality, to their claim that there is no difference between male and female, and to their opposition to stereotyping and gender profiling. There is nothing sex neutral about this law. It is based on the proposition that there are, indeed, innate gender differences: men are naturally batterers and women are naturally victims. This law is not designed to eliminate or punish violence, but to punish only alleged violence against women. Most of the shelters financed by the Violence Against Women Act do not accept men as victims.

This law has been known from the getgo as “feminist pork” because it puts $1 Billion a year of U.S. taxpayers’ money into the hands of the radical feminists. They have set up shop in domestic violence shelters where they promote divorce, marriage breakup, hatred of men, and false accusations, while rejecting marriage counseling, reconciliation, drug-abuse treatment, and evidence of mutual-partner abuse. There is no accountability for the taxpayers’ money spent in these shelters. This law provides the woman with free legal counsel to pursue her allegations, but not the man to defend himself. He is on his own to find and pay a lawyer.

Contributing Editor, Phyllis Schlafly, is the Founder and President of Eagle Forum. Used with permission.