Gender bias refers to a situation where a decision making authority such as a family court or arbitrator tends to make partial decisions in favor of one party on grounds of gender. The issue of gender bias is most conspicuous in cases involving the legal separation of parents. Gender bias typically comes at the point where children custody is concerned. Apparently, many people have termed the common act of family courts to assign the mother child custody as gender bias (Stoner 259). One such person is David Pissara, a divorce attorney that has been in legal practice for well over a decade. In his article, "The "Y" Factor: Gender Bias, Child Custody and the Great Parenting Myth", Pissara explains that women are favored on grounds of traditional beliefs and myths that have no place in modern society. Pissara further criticizes the fact that the bias in favor of women is based on unjustifiable biological phenomena. This paper endeavors to criticize Pissara’s view as it is assumes a degrading tone, a sexist approach, a chauvinistic perspective and a one sided viewpoint.
The fact that Pissara uses such words as breastfeeding and the woman’s uterus makes his argument as chauvinistic as can be. While the general idea may bear some sense, the use of such words makes Pissara appear like a sexist, who is in obvious favor of men in the divorce scenario. Apparently, giving birth and breastfeeding a child are processes that demand much respect. This is especially so because these are essential processes, without which human life could never exist. Degrading and looking down upon such processes amounts to gross chauvinism. Additionally, David Pissara comes out as a true sexist by giving an example of his client who is male (Pissara 1). He describes the man as being a, seemingly, good parent. He does not, however, give details of the case that led to the divorce between the man and his wife.
In describing the man’s wife, Pissara uses the term vindictive implying that the woman and her lawyer are exceptionally malicious (Pissara 1). While it may be difficult to judge the woman, Pissara should have given the details of the case so that all readers can fairly judge her. By referring to a principle that upholds respect for women as outdated, Pissara bring himself out as an outright chauvinist. The article by Pissara cannot sell among many people as it uses degrading language, which may, in some cases or to some people may be offensive. For instance, very few people would understand why David Pissara refers to man’s feelings as animalistic instincts.
Notably, Pissara refers to the family court system as a system that recurrently sides with the female gender. Rationally, besides being unethical, this statement is full of contempt and disrespect for the family court system. The one sided arguments in Pissara’s article makes it subjective. Typically, objective arguments and discussions touch on both sides of the coin (Fine and Harvey 45). David Pissara brings out women as extreme opportunists. Towards the end of his article, the counsel says that men should be considered as being equally good parents and not monthly alimony checks. This statement implies that women are inconsiderate and quite opportunistic. From the foregoing, it is clear that David Pissara’s article is not objective in addressing the issue of gender bias. It takes a chauvinistic, sexist view which is evidenced by the degrading language used to describe women and the entire family court system.
Works cited
Fine, Mark A., and John H. Harvey. Handbook of divorce and relationship termination. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2006. Print.
Pissara, David. "The "Y" Factor: Gender Bias, Child Custody and the Great Parenting Myth". The Huff Post 28 March. 2011. Print
Stoner, Katherine E. Divorce without Court: A Guide to Mediation & Collaborative Divorce. , 2012. Print.
