A Hidden Anti-Feminist Discourse in Chile
from the Shared Parenting Foundation
HAVANA TIMES – In a context where the feminist movement has achieved significant advances in making sexist violence and gender inequality visible, within the framework of a new International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women this November 25, organizations have emerged that, under the cloak of “shared parenting” and the defense of children’s rights, promote a discourse that undermines these achievements.
A clear example is the Shared Parenting Foundation of Chile, an entity that presents itself as a defender of mothers, fathers, and families involved in separation processes, offering legal guidance, psychological support, and workshops. However, when analyzing its public narrative, a concerning pattern emerges: a focus centered on “false accusations” which, in practice, minimizes gender-based violence and reproduces patriarchal stereotypes.
The foundation, created with the goal of promoting parental co-responsibility, argues that children have the right to an equitable relationship with both parents after a separation. This, in principle, sounds reasonable and aligned with principles of equality. Nonetheless, its emphasis on concepts like “parental alienation” and “false accusations” reveals an agenda that ignores the structural context of sexist violence.
In its social media posts, testimonies from parents (mostly men) who claim to be victims of unfounded allegations are repeated, leading to restraining orders and loss of contact with their children. For example, they describe cases in which complaints of “psychological violence” or “harassment” are based on minimal evidence, demanding a “false accusation law” that would impose penalties equivalent to those of the alleged crime. This discourse is not neutral. By prioritizing the narrative of “false accusations,” the foundation contributes to a global anti-feminist storyline that questions the credibility of victims of gender-based violence.
International studies, such as those by the UN and feminist organizations, indicate that less than 1% of gender-based violence complaints are false, while the underreporting of actual violence is massive due to fear, revictimization, and impunity, as highlighted by Barbara Sepúlveda, president of the Association of Feminist Lawyers of Chile.
Thus, insisting on placing false accusations at the center delegitimizes the testimony of thousands of women who suffer abuse and perpetuates the idea that complaints are “weapons” manipulated by mothers in custody disputes. This not only ignores the power imbalance in intimate relationships but also puts children at risk when exposed to violent environments, by promoting shared parenting as an absolute norm without considering evidence of abuse.
Likewise, an example of its anti-feminist discourse is the participation of key figures in the foundation in organizations aligned with male victimization. Claudia Casanga, a lawyer with the Shared Parenting Foundation, is also part of Men Abused Chile, a group that focuses on defending men who claim to be victims of abuse in family contexts, often minimizing or questioning reports of gender-based violence.
Another revealing aspect of the Shared Parenting Foundation’s agenda is its active celebration of International Men’s Day, commemorated every November 19. On its website and social media, it publishes content dedicated to this date, such as interviews and reflections highlighting topics related to masculinity and the challenges men face in contemporary society. Although this promotion presents itself as a call for equity, it is framed in a context where narratives that victimize men are emphasized, aligning with movements that question feminist progress.
This celebration of Men’s Day is not isolated; it reinforces the foundation’s anti-feminist pattern by prioritizing discourses that divert attention from structural gender inequalities. While ignoring or minimizing feminist commemorations such as International Women’s Day or the Day against Gender Violence, it dedicates resources to highlighting dates that, in its interpretation, serve to counter what it perceives as an “excess” of focus on women.
Additionally, the Shared Parenting Foundation posts videos on its social networks from figures such as Nina Mahsati, a well-known anti-feminist activist who presents herself as a defender of the “anti-feminist woman”. Mahsati discusses issues related to child support, divorce, and shared custody that align perfectly with the foundation’s narrative, reinforcing ideas that question feminism and promote a victimized view of men in family disputes. This implicit collaboration with anti-feminist voices further evidences the organization’s ideological bias, disguised under the pretext of parental equity.
As if the above were not enough, the Shared Parenting Foundation has had a relationship with former presidential candidate Franco Parisi, whom they have publicly thanked for including their proposals in his government program, such as support for the Shared Parenting Law and sanctions for “false accusations” in contexts of contentious separations. This relationship is particularly ironic and revealing, given that Parisi has faced criticism for a massive child-support debt—at one point exceeding 200 million pesos—which subjected him to a travel ban, preventing him from returning to Chile during the 2021 presidential election.
It is therefore unsurprising that the foundation speaks of “equity in parenting” but rarely addresses how patriarchy disproportionately burdens women with childcare, or how separations often expose economic and power inequalities. Instead, it focuses on portraying men as victims, hiding the fact that most domestic violence is perpetrated by men. This does not promote true co-responsibility but rather a covert defense of the patriarchal status quo. To move toward a just society, we need policies that prioritize the protection of real victims and foster non-violent masculinity.
Ultimately, organizations like the Shared Parenting Foundation could make a meaningful contribution if they abandoned their anti-feminist bias and aligned themselves with an approach that recognizes structural gender inequalities. Otherwise, they will continue to be part of the problem, eroding the rights won by feminism and jeopardizing the well-being of the children they claim to defend. It is time to dismantle these discourses and build from collective care and substantive equality.