May 2026 - Save - Leading The Policy Movement For Fairness and Due Process On Campus

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Henry Herrera

Telephone: +1-301-801-0608

Democrats Hit With Double-Dose of Bad News About Male Voters

WASHINGTON / May 27, 2026 – Last week was a spectacularly bad one for members of the Democratic party.

First, the Quinnipiac poll revealed on Wednesday that Congressional Democrats are garnering only a 16% job approval from American men (1).

Overall, the poll found that only 20% of registered voters approve of the way Democrats are handling their job in Congress. The male respondents likely were responding to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, who has become famous for making laughable claims such as her recent gaffe that Venezuela lies “below the equator.”

Many of AOC’s inflammatory remarks have targeted men (2):

“Misogyny transcends political ideology: left, right, center. This grip of patriarchy affects all of us, not just women.”
“Men suffer from being under patriarchy. They don’t go to the doctor. They suffer from much higher rates of completed suicides.”
“‘Boys will be boys.’ Is that also the reason why you’ve chosen to block the Violence Against Women Act too, Mitch McConnell?”

The second dose of bad news arrived the very next day. The Democratic National Committee released the autopsy of its failed 2024 presidential campaign (3), in which Donald Trump won a majority of all votes cast and handily carried all seven swing states.

The 192-page DNC document – replete with typos, missing footnotes, and non-sequiturs — admitted that the “national campaign had a specific problem with male voters….Harris saw dramatic drops in support among young Latino men and young Black men compared to Biden’s 2020 performance.” (4)

The document concluded that male voters “require direct engagement. The gender gap can be narrowed. Deploy male messengers, address economic concerns, and don’t assume identity politics will hold male voters of color.”

Inexplicably, the DNC report made no mention of the hot-button issues that are likely to engage male voters, such as inflation, gas prices, or religion. In fact, the entire report refused to even mention the words, “white men.”

Recent data show men hold stronger pro-family values than women. Compared to women, men are more likely to view marriage positively (38% vs. 22%), aspire to parenthood (57% vs. 45%), and prefer larger families (48% vs. 37%). Men also exhibit lower rates of marital infidelity and divorce initiation. (5)

If Democrats seriously aspire to reconnect with male voters, above all they need to reconsider their long-standing embrace of feminist ideology.

Negative views of feminism are on the upswing. Last month, Evie Magazine published an article titled, “Hating Men Isn’t Improving Your Life.” Commentator Lisa Britton declared bluntly, “Female-led misandry is mainstream, and it’s in our schools, our media, our Hollywood blockbusters, and our university lecture halls. Podcasts hosted by women casually trash men as toxic, incompetent, sexist or irredeemable…The hatred isn’t just on the fringes. It’s everywhere.” (6)

Democrats need to make major changes, or brace for yet another round of stunning losses this coming November.

SAVE – Stop Abusive and Violent Environments – is a 501(c)3 organization working to assure due process, fairness, and equal opportunities for men.

Links:

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Henry Herrera

Telephone: +1-301-801-0608

Email: info@saveservices.org

Delusional: Lawsuit Demands NY Courts Discriminate Against Fathers in Child Custody Cases

WASHINGTON / May 22, 2026 – A group calling itself “The Women’s Coalition” filed a federal lawsuit earlier this week in New York State. Forty-one named women, joined by 100 unnamed Jane Does, are asking a federal judge to rule that New York’s family courts discriminate against mothers in child custody cases (1).

Feminist activists are calling the case a civil rights breakthrough — a claim that is directly contradicted by the evidence.

Tender Years Doctrine in Disguise. The Complaint argues that mothers are almost always a child’s primary bond and caregiver, and that any ruling which fails to weigh this factor heavily is “discriminatory” (1). This is the “tender years doctrine” in all but name — the old rule that mothers should automatically get custody of young children. New York courts abandoned this doctrine 50 years ago as illegal sex discrimination (2). The U.S. Supreme Court has been equally clear: Under Craig v. Boren, no state may favor one sex over the other without clearing a high constitutional bar (3).

Mothers Already Receive the Lion’s Share of Custody. The U.S. Census Bureau reports that 80% of the nation’s 12.9 million custodial parents are mothers (4). An 80-to-20 outcome cannot be considered as evidence of bias against mothers.

Discredited Research. The Complaint relies heavily on a 2020 study by Joan Meier, which claims that mothers raising abuse allegations are “discredited” 59% to 98% of the time (1). That study has been strongly criticized for selection bias, miscoded cases, and methods that pre-load its conclusions. The leading rebuttal is Lorandos and Bernet’s Parental Alienation: Science and Law, the standard reference work in the field (5).

Constitutional Inversion. The Plaintiffs ask the court to apply “strict scrutiny” — the most rigorous constitutional test — but only against fathers (1). They want sex discrimination to be forbidden when it hurts mothers, and required when it helps them. The Fourteenth Amendment does not work that way (3).

The Complaint’s other main sources are a 1986 New York task force report and a 2002 California NOW pamphlet (1) — 40 and 24 years old, respectively.

In short, the Complaint asks a federal court to discriminate against fathers as the cost of “equal protection” for mothers — and to do so while citing antiquated and discredited reports. Such delusional claims demonstrate feminism’s preference for a gynocentric narrative over data and evidence.

SAVE – Stop Abusive and Violent Environments – is a 501(c)3 organization working to assure due process, fairness, and equal opportunities for men.

Links:

The Women’s Coalition et al. v. State of New York et al., Civil Action No. 1:26-cv-04188 (S.D.N.Y., filed May 19, 2026). https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/?q=1%3A26-cv-04188
Watts v. Watts, 350 N.Y.S.2d 285 (N.Y. Fam. Ct. 1973). https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2057418/watts-v-watts/
Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (1976). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/429/190/
U.S. Census Bureau, Custodial Mothers and Fathers and Their Child Support: 2017, Report P60-262 (issued May 2020). https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2020/demo/p60-262.html
Lorandos, D. & Bernet, W. (Eds.). (2020). Parental Alienation: Science and Law. Charles C. Thomas Publisher. https://www.ccthomas.com/details.cfm?P_ISBN13=9780398093273