This is actually a myth. Evidence shows that fathers are actually favored and privileged in divorce courts - which makes sense if you think for five minutes about the fact that the courts were created by men, the laws were created by men, the majority of judges and other officials involved in court proceedings are male, etc. For example, despite claims that fathers are "discriminated against" in terms of custody because they are less likely to have primary custody than mothers, studies show that not only are 90+% of custody decisions made by the parents without the involvement of the court (and most of those involve the parents mutually deciding that the mother will have primary or sole custody), but when fathers do seek custody in the courts, they get it around 80% of the time,
even if they are abusive or otherwise unfit, ie an alcoholic or drug addict. Recent laws also
mandate a 50/50 custody split, often enforced even if the father is unfit or abusive. There is substantial evidence that courts favor fathers to the point that when mothers allege abuse (of themselves or their children) they become significantly more likely to
lose custody to the abusive fathers (whereas when fathers allege abuse of themselves or their children, they by and large do
not lose custody). This phenomenon exists
even when the courts found the abuse allegations to be credible - so even when they believed that a father was abusive, they were
still more likely to give the abuser custody of his victims and refuse custody to the non-abusive parent.
Other common issues like child support and alimony are ones that are fundamentally gender neutral - a woman who doesn't have custody of her children pays child support, and a woman who was the breadwinner is often ordered to pay alimony to an unemployed or SAHF ex-husband, it's simply much more common for women to be custodial parents and to be SAHMs or underemployed to care for children. Furthermore, in many states they have changed the standards for alimony so that almost no one gets it, at the urging of Men's Rights Activist groups - in some states you are now only eligible for long-term alimony if, for example, you were married for over ten years and didn't work for at least, iirc, seven years. The most common form of alimony is short-term, which typically lasts for a year or two at the
most and is awarded solely to help the unemployed or stay at home parent partner to obtain housing and find a job. Again, this is awarded to men as well as women depending on employment status at the time of divorce.
Men are favored in divorce courts by a massive margin, and that margin is only getting bigger as Men's Rights and Father's Rights groups continue to push for more favorable-to-them laws and policies all over the world.
Fun fact: Until the mid-1800s, fathers had full and total custody of all children after divorce, and it was completely within their legal rights to refuse to
ever allow those children contact with their mothers ever again. It was only in the 1870s that it became common practice to allow mothers to retain custody of their very young children, ie infants and toddlers, and even then it was most common practice for men to retain full custody of any and all children over ten. It's ridiculous to me that people think a system that was created with such clear and obvious bias towards men would magically become biased
against men and super misandrist apparently
right around the time that women got the right to have their own credit cards.
