One of the basic ideas behind affirmative action was that there is "systemic bias", or a(n) (un)concious effort to both discourage and actively bar women from participation. As evidence, the lack of female participation in such areas as engineering, medicine and the like were used.
When it was pointed out that women chose to not enter these professions the argument was made that society did not encourage it, as well as other social/structural reasons, and that "awareness campaigns" must be mounted to encourage women to seek these professions. This was in addition to millions of dollars and man-hours "tailoring" these professions to be more woman-friendly. This was all in the name of "equality" since it was meant to establish equality of outcome, not opportunity. This is the entire underpinning of such concepts as "affirmative action".
Shift the focus a tad to the Family Court system though, and such glaring deficiencies such as markedly fewer men getting custody of their children is glossed over by redefining "Joint Custody" to also cover what used to be called "Sole Custody with Visitation". This was done to counter initial arguments that fathers see too little of their children, and to APPEAR more equal.
Now that the evidence is mounting of severe inequalities in outcome in the Family Court system, these same feminist voices are pooh-poohing the whole thing saying "Men just don't go for custody as often as women", or "Men are fine with walking away".
See the hypocrisy?
In one instance, equality of outcome is paramount. So paramount in fact that even if people don't want to do it, we must work to convince them to, and make it as easy as possible for them to do so. But in the other, we should ignore everything because it's not really a big deal. Men don't care all that much anyway. "Awareness Campaigns"? For fatherhood? I suppose, as long as we blame men. "Systemic Bias"? What's that?