"Kramer vs. Kramer" is a 1979 movie starring Dustin Hoffman and Merryl Streep. Essentially the plot is that Merryl Streep's character leaves her family for a long period of time for a vague reason, and Dustin Hoffman's character is left to take care of their son by himself. Something like a year later, she comes back and they go into a custody battle over their son, Billy.

My question really revolves around the arguments made in the trial. I couldn't find longer clips, but Merryl Streep's character argues in this one:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HZ56REwh3o, and Dustin Hoffman's character argues in this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=re0xt6hDdqE. In the end, Merryl Streep's character gets custody of Billy.

I'm a pretty young guy, so I'm not sure if I'm beating a dead horse with this movie discussion, but I'd really like to know if these cases are truly that slanted towards the mother, and maybe why?