{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02290748898678414, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007048458149779736, 'mean_word_length': 5.566473988439307, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Misogynistic cultural argument in parental alienation versus child sexual abuse cases

ABSTRACT This article argues that major advances in parental alienation (PA) theory, since its inception as the Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), have not consistently been applied in custody litigation practice, because they do not serve advocacy needs; whereas, the misogynistic cultural argument in PAS, when relied on implicitly but not stated explicitly, can win cases. It first discusses advances in modern PA theory that eliminate misogyny. It then reviews feminist advances (1960s to 1980s) to show the threat to patriarchal power, and the fathers’ rights backlash, to explain their demand for legal redress. The hypothesis that a misogynistic cultural framework undermines evidence-based reasoning in child custody cases is supported with studies associating misogynistic beliefs with irrational thinking in multiple scientific areas, including child custody; and documents that show misogyny is a serious concern in the U.S. legal system. The article concludes by stating the need for evidence of misogynistic bias in custody decisions.