The questions I ask every feminist I hear these accusations from is, why exactly is a man who wants to opt out of his responsibilities as a father a coward and a woman who does the same thing with abortion “empowered” and “beating the patriarchy” or something like that? Why are these obligations that feminists are so concerned about only male obligations?
Almost any feminist today, be they a remnant of the second wave or a so called third wave moderate will revert to one programmed defense when faced with facts that paint an unsightly smudge across the believed to be good name of feminism. So simple is this defense that while it can so easily be set aside by those digging up the inherent bigotry of feminism, those tossing dirt back into the hole, feminists, seem to grip this new defensive mechanism as tightly as their ideal that women are being oppressed by men this very second.
A quick glance at this double standard operating procedure would not raise too many eyebrows among the general public. How could it? Men do indeed develop in such a way that the average man could do a large amount of damage to the average woman given a physical confrontation. This fact alone is what will run through the majority of minds when the issue of domestic violence is brought to their attention. However, the law is usually never so cut and dry or black and white when it comes to the imprisonment of the general public. There must be more to the nature of domestic violence cases that would make such an obvious gender oriented arrest mandate make sense, right? There indeed is more to the issue of domestic violence that explains the existence of the primary aggressor law, however, the facts do not shine a favorable light upon the law, let alone give it any justification.