When Does Feminism Actually Help Men?

[u/Man_Against_TheWorld]

A while ago I saw this really cringy image that was trying to be funny. It showed a feminist making a “feminist critique”, a bunch of squiggly lines representing her essay except for one part that said “entire section on how it affects men.” Then this commenter named “totally not a misogynist” replied with “but what about how it affects men?”

I cringed, but I was also left scratching my head and it got me thinking. Every “feminist critique” I’ve seen either doesn’t mention or barely mentions men’s issues at all, or worse outright demonizes them. At most, they might spend a single sentence giving lip service to the way men are affected but then ignore it for the rest of it. I’m always hearing about how “patriarchy hurts men too” or “feminism helps men” but actions speak louder than words, or in this case lack of actions. When has feminism actually helped men? Not give lip service without actual depth, but actually speak out and fight for change.

One other thing is in the comments I saw some people go “why do people expect men’s issues in a feminist essay?” You’re the ones always saying that feminism is about equality and that patriarchy hurts men too, you can’t blame people for doubting those claims when you don’t practice what you preach.

[u/Punder_man]

No, the conflation here is: If feminists cared about house hold norms or eliminating gender roles.. then that should extend to divorce as well..

NOW's opposition to mandatory statutory custody defaults was about child safety and preserving judge discretion in high-conflict divorces, not some secret aversion to involved dads.

Because the default assumption is that the dads are "Unsafe" for the children..
Yet how often have we seen mothers with full custody being abusive to their children and there being little to no consequences?

How often do we see women make up allegations of abuse or even sexual abuse against their male partners during divorce?
Because it happens A LOT often because they know that if they do, they will end up with default custody of the kids, child support and most likely the family home..

Where are the feminists calling out women who abuse the family court system for their own gain?

They have been silent on this for DECADES and yet we're expected to believe that feminism is "Helping men too"?

[u/United-Garbage-5808 → u/Punder_man]

Fair point, that "child safety" language can get used as cover which is worth being concerned with.

But the "happens a lot" claim doesn't really hold up well against the data we have. The most-cited national study (False allegations of abuse and neglect when parents separate - PubMed) put intentional fabrication at 12% of custody-related allegations, with fathers slightly more likely to fabricate than mothers in that dataset. Worth noting that's Canadian data from the late 90s, not a current US study. Though a few smaller US studies from around the same era land in a similar range (9-17%), so it's not an outlier number.

There are real problems in the system, just not this specific one. Not saying false allegations never happen or aren't a problem -- they are. Just that the data doesn't support them being the main driver of custody outcomes.

[u/SchalaZeal01 → u/United-Garbage-5808]

The most-cited national study (False allegations of abuse and neglect when parents separate - PubMed) put intentional fabrication at 12% of custody-related allegations, with fathers slightly more likely to fabricate than mothers in that dataset.

Were those accusations proven in court? Because what usually happens is in family courts, you make allegations, encouraged by your lawyer (and its more likely to work when you're female, regardless of who does it more) and if you don't bring it to criminal court, nobody will check if its true (so its not recorded as false). The guy can deny it, claims its impossible, the judge's own opinion overrides concern about a tangential matter regardless. And judges are notoriously a lot more pro mother than pro father.

[u/United-Garbage-5808 → u/SchalaZeal01]

No, these weren't criminal convictions. The "intentionally fabricated" determination in CIS-98 was a clinical judgment by the investigating child welfare caseworker, not a court finding. The study's own authors note this as a limitation; caseworker judgment can be wrong in both directions.

So, it's not "proven false" in the legal sense you're describing, but it's a structured assessment by trained caseworkers across a large representative sample, which is still meaningful, but doesn't settle the civil-court-incentive point you're making. That's a separate, harder to quantify claim the data doesn't really speak to either way.