Profile overview for MotherIsWatching.
Submission statistics

This user has mostly submitted to the following subverses (showing top 5):

1 submissions to funny

1 submissions to news

1 submissions to ProtectVoat

1 submissions to science

1 submissions to videos

This user has so far shared a total of 5 links, started a total of 1 discussions and submitted a total of 158 comments.

Voting habits

Submissions: This user has upvoted 57 and downvoted 0 submissions.

Comments: This user has upvoted 49 and downvoted 0 comments.

Submission ratings

5 highest rated submissions:

5 lowest rated submissions:

When you hate gay marriage but also molest little girls, submitted: 11/10/2017 1:23:45 PM, -9 points (+10|-19)

@fusir Is shilling and normalizing pedophilla on Voat, submitted: 11/12/2017 7:22:46 PM, -8 points (+3|-11)

Trump calls for removal of confederate flag, submitted: 8/19/2017 3:21:08 AM, -5 points (+2|-7)

Adaptation, culture, and the energy transition in American coal country, submitted: 10/28/2017 7:45:36 PM, 1 points (+2|-1)

Trump Quietly Nominates Mass Surveillance Advocate To "Protect" Your Privacy Rights, submitted: 9/5/2017 10:44:39 AM, 30 points (+38|-8)

Comment ratings

3 highest rated comments:

If Hollywood perverts and pedofiles are real news, why is Pizzagate fake news? submitted by 2impendingdoom to politics

MotherIsWatching 0 points 31 points (+31|-0) ago

Because the (((media))) knows if the public ever collectively takes the red pill, they are fucked

Men don't have equal rights in family courts and it's made men wary of marriage & fatherhood. What can we as women do to help? They need our support. submitted by Empress to TraditionalWives

MotherIsWatching 4 points 21 points (+25|-4) ago

Gotcha! Well, I have some perspective on this as an attorney who has studied family law (and learned a lot more about it over the past couple of years of MensLib...), and it's kind of a complex question. I'm going to limit my answer to the United States, which is what I'm most familiar with.

Some brief history: up until the mid-1800s, courts would award full custody to fathers in a divorce (this was a time when children were viewed basically as property of the father, and women had very few legal rights). A woman named Caroline Norton, an early feminist and activist, successfully petitioned the UK Parliament to pass a law, commonly known as the "Tender Years Doctrine," that would presumptively give custody to the mother (this law was adopted in a limited form in the late 1830s, and extended by the 1870s). This law was ported over, like much of UK law, to the US, where it was commonly used up until the late 20th century. Gradually, though, through the 20th century, this doctrine was challenged (in many cases on the grounds that it violated the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment), and by the end of the 20th century, nearly all states had abolished it in favor of the gender-neutral "Best Interests of the Child" approach (the standard is gender-neutral, I mean - as we go through this you'll see why the outcome isn't necessarily so).

The Best Interests standard is a multi-factor analysis that places as its primary focus what is best for the child in any legal proceeding (you see similar analyses used not just in divorce, but also adoption, child support, and extinguishment of parental rights (e.g. in serious abuse cases) proceedings). The specific elements of the test vary from state to state, but in general, a court will look at a list of factors to determine which parent should receive primary legal and physical custody. Common factors in different jurisdictions include: The wishes of the child, if the child is old enough to express them;

The continuation of a stable living situation (often including family home, neighborhood, extended family, and school);

Any history of mental illness, substance abuse, or physical neglect or abuse on the part of either parent;

Special needs of the child, and the ability of each parent to support those needs;

The relative situation of each parent and ability to provide childcare, including home/work balance;

The child's primary caregiver

I've bolded the last two because those are the ones that tend to result in a gender split that favors mothers in custody arrangements. Though we're seeing a cultural shift in stay-at-home parenting, in many cases, the primary caregiver is still the mother, while the father is the one who works (you'll notice how this also plays into the "continuation of living situation" element). A 2011 Pew study also found that even in two-income households, mothers spend approximately twice the time fathers do performing childcare duties. So, while not the dispositive factor (all of the factors are supposed to be evaluated equally, though taken together), courts often will end up awarding primary custody to the parent who spends the most time at home with the child, which is often the mother. Additionally, there's some research that indicates that judges still (possibly unconsciously) adhere to the Tender Years approach, even though it's not the law, because to them, the traditional arrangement is to have the mother take care of the children - but this is much more common among older judges (and much more common among older male judges than older female ones), with the effect quickly disappearing as younger and more progressive judges take the bench.

Now, it's crucial to understand that this entire analysis is only used in ~4% of custody cases. In the large majority of custody arrangements (around 80%), parents determine the custody arrangements on their own (with the court simply signing off on the agreement if it appears reasonable), and the majority of those couples decide that the mother should have primary custody (the remaining ~15% of cases are decided through some kind of mediation process, often required by the court before a judge steps in). It's also very important to note that, though the studies on this topic have tended to be small, the best data we have show that when fathers ask for custody, and actively advocate for it, they are awarded sole or joint custody at least half the time. Some argue that there's a remaining disparity because men are discouraged from asking for custody by their attorneys, or simply don't pursue it because of the time and financial costs of going through a contested custody litigation - there may be some truth to this, but for the former, this argument seems based on an expectation of gender bias in family courts that the data don't convincingly bear out. So, TL;DR: When a court determines custody, custody will often go to the mother because she is the primary caregiver - but only a small minority of cases are decided by a judge. The vast majority of custody arrangements are agreed to by the parents themselves, often giving primary custody to the mother. When fathers seek custody, they receive it at around the same rate mothers do. In the /r/MensLib sense, a lot of the gender disparity in custody we see boils down to traditional gender roles, at several levels. Women are often the primary caregivers because men are often the primary breadwinners; changing this dynamic so that more men are primary caregivers should reduce the disparity. Men may be discouraged from seeking custody because of an expectation that courts will award custody to the mother regardless of circumstance, an effect that likely played a role in the past but is rapidly shrinking as judges grow out of traditional gender expectations for families. Men also can take more control of custody arrangements - whether set by the couple themselves, or with a mediator - by simply being involved with their children (anecdotal, I admit, but among my divorced friends, almost all of the men are heavily involved in their kids' lives and have worked out essentially split custody with their exes). As a final note, you will occasionally see proposed legislation to require a presumption of split custody in divorce proceedings, legislation that is routinely opposed by feminist groups such as NOW. Despite what some will tell you, this is not because "feminists" are trying to maintain a gender disparity in custody: it's because it's a bad idea. Such a presumption would not take into account the factors I listed under the Best Interests standard, and so wouldn't necessarily result in the best outcome for children or parents; it also would require overcoming the presumption even in cases of e.g. child abuse or alcoholism, which is just as bad for fathers with abusive wives as it is for mothers with abusive husbands. The problems with the Best Interests standard are much better addressed by eliminating the traditional gendered family roles by promoting men as involved and reliable parents, and by educating men on the actual outcomes of custody disputes.

Be Silent! submitted by Crossing to funny

MotherIsWatching 2 points 10 points (+12|-2) ago

It's the first time she's felt anything since her cucked husband gained 40 pounds and started wearing cargo shorts.

3 lowest rated comments:

Are you Goats getting a flu shot this year? submitted by 8butternut to AskVoat

MotherIsWatching 12 points -10 points (+2|-12) ago

literally a guessing game evidence based prediction that typically provides 40-60% reduction in risk of infection, and reduces the severity of infections (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/vaccineeffect.htm)).

Fixed that for you. The rejection of evidence-based medicine and science is the reason with have 300 genders and men can be women now. IF you're not part of the final solution, you are part of the problem.

Are you Goats getting a flu shot this year? submitted by 8butternut to AskVoat

MotherIsWatching 9 points -9 points (+0|-9) ago

Flu virus mutates every year.

And they produce a new formulation every year in response.

zero protection what-so-ever.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/vaccineeffect.htm

The seasonal Flu vaccine provides roughly 40-60% reduction in infection risk and reduces the severity if you do get infected.

Exclusive Judge Roy Moore Announces Plans to Sue Washington Post: We Expect the People of Alabama to See Through This Charade submitted by pcdude to politics

MotherIsWatching 10 points -9 points (+1|-10) ago

If he was going to sue, the suit would have been filed days ago. A lawsuit would involve discovery, something Pedophile Roy doesn't want happening. He just needs the threat of a lawsuit to maintain plausible deniability.