Gloria Steinem once famously said “women are not going to be equal outside the home until men are equal in it,” a sentiment that is both easy to agree with and likely true. Feminism loves to refer to the dictionary definition of itself, and point smugly to the central concept of equality, but something happened between Gloria Steinem and “Christmas is a goddamn clusterfuck that oppresses women” Jessica Valenti. Somewhere on the journey, feminism became about hating men, keeping all of women’s traditional privileges and actively opposing any version of equality that doesn’t embrace the two basic tenets that govern everything feminists represent: men suck and women deserve their privilege.

Don’t believe me?

Let’s look at the history of shared parenting. The majority of this research was conducted by historian and citizen blogger Prentice Reid. As early as 1986, the president of one chapter of the National Organization for Women, the largest feminist organization in the US, complained about the unfairness of equality when it meant giving up a traditional female privilege. Women, feminists argued, are equal, except when they are special and then equal doesn’t count and is unfair and won’t everyone please remember that men suck? In 2001, feminists refused to even sit at the table with men to discuss men and women sharing, equally, the responsibilities and decisions involved in parenting.

What is the rationale behind opposing equality? Men suck. That’s what feminist opposition to equality boils down to. How do men suck? Let us count the ways.

According to NOW’s 2005 statement opposing shared parenting, kids seeing their fathers isn’t necessarily a good thing. Surely, in the case of abusive or negligent fathers, that is likely true. It is also true of abusive or negligent mothers. Feminists insist all fathers should be denied the right to equality because some fathers might be abusive or negligent, while completely ignoring the fact that most violence against children is carried out by women. And don’t even try to get feminists to address the piss poor job most single mothers are doing. Children without fathers in their lives suffer in measurable, meaningful ways, but feminists fight tooth and nail to keep Daddy on the margins.

In 2009, NOW upped the ante, and declared that fathers who want a relationship with their children after divorce are really only interested in controlling the woman. Fathers don’t really want to go to dance recitals or school picnics or rake the leaves in the backyard or cuddle with their kids, watching the game on TV because they love their children and want to maintain lives and memories with their babies. No. It’s because men want to access and control the woman.

Narcissist much? Feminists make everything about themselves.

It’s a gift.

A gift that hurts men, hurts children, and ultimately hurts the women feminists purport to be protecting as damaged children struggle to find their path in life without their Dads. Feminism doesn’t care about men, children, or even women. They care about their jobs. Being a feminist is profitable. Which is why NOW came out against mediated custody settlements, too. Know why? Because when rational adults sit down to talk with skilled arbiters they tend to come to the same conclusions: equality is good for everybody. Joint custody is the most common outcome of mediated custody settlements. No lawyers, judges, counsellors, women’s studies graduates involved at all.

That hits feminists where it hurts. In the wallet.

The next time some irate feminist points to the dictionary and accuses you of not understanding what feminism even means, ask her why, if feminists believe so fervently in equality, they oppose equal parenting? How will women ever be equal outside the home if men are not equal within in?

If you oppose shared parenting, you oppose equality.

Yeah, that probably makes you a feminist.