The journalist Juan Soto Ivars, who was so kind to present my latest book in Barcelona (about feminism, by the way), has written an article that has had a lot of impact. He titled it in force: I accuse the Constitutional Court to abolish the presumption of male innocence. Indeed, a judgment of Constitutional Court, With a presentation of the magistrate María Luisa Balaguer -A feminist in the worst sense and, therefore, absolutely sectarian- has been inclined in favor of a mother who filed a complaint for gender violence against the father who was proven false and of which he was acquitted.
A case similar to that of Juana Rivas, an emblematic example of the defamatory feminism and missing. The story is as follows: a couple is established in Vitoria, they have a child and after two years man requests divorce. Soon, the child is taken to the Coruña by the mother without parental consent. As he appeals to justice he is threatened with a complaint for gender violence. And indeed, The complaint is brought, proves false, But to the complainant, thanks to the principles “I do believe you, sister, although you are false” of the magistrate, it is free. In summary, the fake mother gets total custody and takes the child with her.
Above, the father is pointed out by the press on the radical left. The newspaper Public He heads the news in this ignominious way: «The TC protects a woman and her son forced by a judge to live in the city of the mistreating father. With this sentence, the Constitutional signs its doctrine in favor of the gender perspective in divorces and custody of sons and daughters in the context of sexist violence ». This, gentlemen, is to protect the kidnapping of the children by the mother. It is only necessary to have denounced for gender violence to the father, whether it is true or false. Is this watching for children?
In this case, we know that there was even blackmail. As Soto Ivars says: «The woman’s lawyer, who is his friend, tells a common friend to make the ex enter. The couple’s friend, scammed, records the conversation. What the lawyer poses is the following: if the man is established in Coruña, there will be no problems and will give him a broad visits regime; But if you do not accept this treatment, they will denounce it for gender violence. Is this the feminism of a Balaguer?
We are abusing privileges derived from a claim which aimed to compensate inequalities. Are we to get to the rights outrage? Women who fall in that are lowered. Political feminism offers certain women privileges in exchange for votes, not to say that it gives them a legal channel for a “gender resentment” that can become an irresponsible self -indulgence. The world is better with sexual equality. Nobody wants less rights. Men have improved, not worsened, their health and well -being in the most egalitarian societies. Even the gap of happiness among the sexes, which still favors us, has shortened in the last decades of empowerment and female rights. Most men would be very happy to tolerate even very high levels of disadvantage if that were compensated with proportional respect, but it is the withdrawal of all view and its replacement by an infamy Backless which makes the situation of men now totally unacceptable. It doesn’t surprise me That they are fed up.
