"When it comes to determining child custody, however, sexism is the rule"
About this Quote
Phyllis Schlafly knew exactly how to jam a crowbar into a supposedly “natural” consensus. Coming from a woman famous for defending traditional gender roles, the line lands as a provocation: if even Schlafly calls sexism “the rule,” the listener is pushed to concede the problem must be real, routine, and structural, not just a few bad judges. The “however” is doing covert work, too. It frames custody as the exception to whatever she’s been arguing elsewhere about men and women: maybe women benefit from chivalry, maybe the sexes aren’t locked in a zero-sum fight, maybe feminism overstates discrimination. Then she pivots to the one arena where she claims the system tilts hard and predictably.
The intent is political, not merely descriptive. Custody becomes a wedge issue, a way to mobilize fathers, skeptical moderates, and anti-feminists around a grievance that can be packaged as common sense fairness. “Sexism” here is strategically unspecified: she doesn’t say anti-woman or anti-man. In Schlafly’s ecosystem, it typically means courts privileging mothers, treating fatherhood as optional, and policing masculinity through law.
Context matters: late-20th-century battles over no-fault divorce, women’s entry into paid labor, and the rebranding of “family values” politics. Custody fights were becoming cultural flashpoints, and Schlafly’s formulation converts messy individual cases into a clean rule. It’s rhetorically potent because it reads like a disappointed admission, not an ideological attack: a small sentence that smuggles in a big claim about who the system is built to trust.
The intent is political, not merely descriptive. Custody becomes a wedge issue, a way to mobilize fathers, skeptical moderates, and anti-feminists around a grievance that can be packaged as common sense fairness. “Sexism” here is strategically unspecified: she doesn’t say anti-woman or anti-man. In Schlafly’s ecosystem, it typically means courts privileging mothers, treating fatherhood as optional, and policing masculinity through law.
Context matters: late-20th-century battles over no-fault divorce, women’s entry into paid labor, and the rebranding of “family values” politics. Custody fights were becoming cultural flashpoints, and Schlafly’s formulation converts messy individual cases into a clean rule. It’s rhetorically potent because it reads like a disappointed admission, not an ideological attack: a small sentence that smuggles in a big claim about who the system is built to trust.
Quote Details
| Topic | Equality |
|---|
More Quotes by Phyllis
Add to List
