In France, there would be more than a million fathers who would no longer see their children and would be "private", according to associations for the defense of fathers of fathers.Consider it!The figure was even taken up in a video by the Konbini media in 2020.We saw a father of one of these communities, tear to the eye, which narrowed his despair.Except that behind the poignant testimony, the obs and rue89 discovered a sordid story of domestic violence and infantile mistreatment, reoriented by a male father.As for the colossal figure of the million paternal paternal, its methodology is more than doubtful and actually corresponds to the share of mothers with the main residence of children among all French single -parent families.
So many info that led Konbini to delete his video.And a school case for the sociologist Édouard LEPORT."The movement of fathers' rights associations does not need to be very effective in its actions and its organization because at the slightest attempt, they find echo immediately," he explains.For two and a half years, the researcher met the members and assisted the permanence of these small communities, the total number of which is difficult to quantify."Many associations exist but are generally led by very few activists.But these are movements that have been there since the 1970s.Cumulated, they had impact.»He pulled a work: the daddy in danger?(Editions of the Maison des Sciences de l'Homme), in which he deconstructs the argument in vogue in this environment, which endorses domestic violence and shows visceral anti -feminism.
The almost all of the movement claims to defend gender equality.Are they feminists?
Nope.They use rhetorical tools and forms of presentation of themselves, in particular by using the discourse of equality but which is a surface equality, which flattens all the social issues.It is enough to listen to their claims to realize that they are quite clearly antifheministic and that they belong to the masculinist movement.
How do they defend themselves from sexism?
They use everything they can.At the individual level, it will be declarations of the type: "I am not sexist, I love my wife, my sister, my daughter ..." Completely depoliticized approaches.And there are associations that succeed in being funny by figures that claim to be feminism.This is the case of SOS Papa which was made by Evelyne Sullerot, one of the founders of the family planning, which is considered feminist.Except that it holds positions which are incompatible with part of feminism.
These associations visibility their marrains as irrefutable evidence that they are not sexist, that they defend humanism, some even go so far as to say that they have a feminism fight.They can also present themselves for equality, against a feminism that would have gone too far.Associations say that today it is men who are victims of sexism, they try to reverse the balance of power.These movements do not preocupate so much ideological coherence, especially on their consideration of feminism.They say: "We are not sexist, we love feminism", but they explain that at the same time "extremist feminists are the basis of all the problems of society.»»
What you describe is that these associations of defense of the rights of fathers are rather machines to create masculinism.
Absolutely.It’s very clear during observations.There is a whole work of reformulation, orientation or even impulse on the part of activists in the face of the requests of the fathers who come to seek advice. J’ai assisté à des moments où les pères sont un peu perdus, posent des questions et les militants leur disent par exemple : « Il faut demander la résidence alternée à tout prix»».Including when the visiting fathers show a little resistance, say that they are not entirely ready, that they cannot assume it.
Does this feel on questions of domestic violence?
Yes, and even on the issue of sexist and sexual violence in general.Activists put themselves in an unconditional support position for fathers. Quand certains parlent des accusations de violences conjugales portées contre eux, la première réaction des militants est de dire : « Elles font toutes ça, c’est de la malveillance»».They start from the principle that it is always false and that there has been no domestic violence.
Activists also believe that the question of violence against women is over -mediated and that it invisits the stake of couple violence suffered by men, which would be as important as that suffered by women.They insist a lot on psychological violence - which exists in the continuum domestic violence - but their definition of psychological violence made to men is really very extensible.Sometimes an opposition expressed by women is considered a domestic violence.Or the fact that the meal is not ready when the husband comes home in the evening.It's pretty incredible.
Are there situations that have particularly marked you?
On the one hand, there is this minimization and a reversal to say that men are the main victims. Et, à plusieurs reprises, j’ai observé une dédramatisation qui est assez glaçante, notamment plusieurs « blagues»».Comments of the style: "If we had stumbled our exs ten years ago, we would have already left prison and we would not be worse than what we are today.»» Cette phrase a été dite par le président-fondateur d’une des associations.There was also that at the end of a permanence: "If your ex annoyed you, you pay us 1.000 euros each and we will fart his mouth.»»
Is there a total debitation of domestic violence?
Yes, but even beyond that: there is a total disempowerment of men.Whatever they are blamed for, it is never their fault.They only react or they had no choice.It is always the fault of women, of society, of justice which is populated by magistrates.This gives mind -blowing situations.In one of the associations, I attended a woman's testimony during a permanence.After she mentioned the domestic violence she had suffered, she was advised to join the association. Comme ça, ils seraient plus forts « contre les associations féministes qui n’aiment pas les pères et pour qui les hommes sont tous violents»».We really see the blinders, the ideological prism which is stronger than anything, even stronger than the real interaction in which these words are said: domestic violence against a woman.
Does this discourse of associations amplify domestic violence?
Yes, I think, and for at least two reasons. D’abord, en minimisant les violences, en les « naturalisant»», en disant : « Quand on pousse les hommes à bout c’est naturel, ils sont violents»», la banalisation du phénomène participe à sa reproduction voire à son amplification.And the second very important aspect is that these associations provide a set of tools to avoid any consequence in perpetrating violence.The notion of parental alienation (1) is used by all the assos.This is something that is really very dangerous because it allows fathers to escape all the charges made by children during a separation, such as sexual violence.
What is parental alienation?
La théorie du « syndrome de l’aliénation parentale»» fait référence à un trouble dans lequel un enfant accuserait un de ses parents de violences ou d’inceste, ou ne voudrait plus le voir.It would then be due, according to this theory, to the manipulations of the other parent in cases of separation. Un concept est très décrié par la communauté scientifique, qui contribuerait à « occulter»» les violences dénoncées par les enfants.
In addition to this, these associations advise fathers to take illegal measures, especially not to pay the pension?
Yes, I observed that in a few cases.Activists have mentioned the possibility of declaring themselves insolvent or to make a file to the Banque de France to avoid paying pensions.They present it as the only recourse that exists not to pay it.This is a solution that is not very developed on which activists do not really insist.Fathers quickly oppose it because it is completely disproportionate and illegal.But it shows the state of mind of activists, consider it as a possibility shows how far they are ready to go to not pay the pensions.
Why do they enjoin them not to pay it?
Parce que la pension est vue comme une « rançon»», comme de l’argent qui est pris par leur ex-femme avec l’aide de la justice.At no time is it seen as money for the child.There is really a constant and constant speech on the fact that the money of pensions is removed from the fathers in an unjustified manner and that it only serves mothers enriching themselves and buying new shoes or I do notknow what.The idea that women divorce to enrich themselves with the money of their ex-husband is very lively and put forward, even if it is statistically false.
One of the presidents of an association made prison for that by the way.What is surprising is that its movement organizes a kind of family mediation.However, all his career is an extremely strong opposition with his ex-wife: he stopped paying the pension until prison for that.It is fairly well illuminated the ambitions of the association.Family mediation is mainly to make women yield and highlight the requirements of fathers.
