#childism
Text
Unpopular opinion but the reason being a teenager sucks is less to do with hormones and social cliques and more to do with the fact adults fucking hate teenagers. The fact that adults expect teenagers to be able to take on adult responsibilities yet don't deserve rights of an adult. They don't see teenagers as human beings and they aren't prepared to see kids with their own formed identities and humanity. Teenagers are so sexualized and seen as needing to take on more and more adult responsibilities. Yet when they want rights and humanity they are denied. The years your brain spends wanting nothing more than to form an identity are being taken away from you. Teenagers are essentially being kicked out of social spaces unless they have an extra 40 dollars lying around anytime they want to go out. Teenagers being kicked out of the mall just for existing or groomed into the school to prison pipeline. And now creating legislation to keep them off the Internet. Our society hates teenagers. And does everything we can to hurt them. The fact that anyone makes it out of their teenage years without trauma is a fucking miracle frankly.
#personal rant#rant post#child rights#childism#adult supremacy#adultism#youth liberation#teenhood#teenagers#politics
9K notes
·
View notes
Text
okay, you know what? Running away shouldn’t be a crime. It shouldn’t be dangerous, either. Any kid should be able to leave their parents if they want, for any reason. No I’m not kidding.
“But Rue, where will these kids stay? Do you want them on the streets?”
of course not. In an ideal world, a kids would have multiple adults other than their parents they could look to for care, but I recognize that that will never be a reality for every single child. So: youth shelters, if they have nowhere else to go. There should be clean, warm shelters where anyone under 18 can stay for as long as they need, no questions asked. (And of course shelters that aren’t just for kids, but we’re talking about youth rights right now)
“But Rue,” I hear you say, “what if some moody teenager runs away after an argument?”
First of all, I’d rather a thousand moody teenagers run away than one abused child be trapped. Second, so what if one does? A kid needs time away from their parents, so they leave. The vast majority of them will get some time to cool down and then go back home, and if they don’t want to go back, period? Then nine times out of ten, they have a good reason. (Because yes, as hard as it is for you to believe, kids are humans who have common sense.)
“Okay, but what about the one time out of ten the kid doesn’t have a good reason?”
Then the kid doesn’t have a good reason. It doesn’t change anything. If someone wants to break up with their partner because of something stupid, you wouldn’t say they legally shouldn’t be able to. (And if you would, then you’re just a bad person.) No one should have to be in a relationship, romantic or otherwise, that they don’t want to be in.
11K notes
·
View notes
Text
something i don't see talked about enough is the fact that parents having constant surveillance over "their" children is normalized by our society
like seriously, parents will go install the Super Panopticon Kid Safe Parental Controls 2000 that sends their kid's internet history, recordings of their calls and texts, every file on their phone, and exact geolocation to the parents.
and if you ever point out that this is more likely to endanger kids than protect them, people suddenly bombard you with a thousand comments about how children are too stupid or immature to have the most basic privacy in their life.
4K notes
·
View notes
Text
Why we don’t like it when children hit us back
To all the children who have ever been told to “respect” someone that hated them.
March 21, 2023
Even those of us that are disturbed by the thought of how widespread corporal punishment still is in all ranks of society are uncomfortable at the idea of a child defending themself using violence against their oppressors and abusers. A child who hits back proves that the adults “were right all along,” that their violence was justified. Even as they would cheer an adult victim for defending themself fiercely.
Even those “child rights advocates” imagine the right child victim as one who takes it without ever stopping to love “its” owners. Tear-stained and afraid, the child is too innocent to be hit in a guilt-free manner. No one likes to imagine the Brat as Victim—the child who does, according to adultist logic, deserve being hit, because they follow their desires, because they walk the world with their head high, because they talk back, because they are loud, because they are unapologetically here, and resistant to being cast in the role of guest of a world that is just not made for them.
If we are against corporal punishment, the brat is our gotcha, the proof that it is actually not that much of an injustice. The brat unsettles us, so much that the “bad seed” is a stock character in horror, a genre that is much permeated by the adult gaze (defined as “the way children are viewed, represented and portrayed by adults; and finally society’s conception of children and the way this is perpetuated within institutions, and inherent in all interactions with children”), where the adult fear for the subversion of the structures that keep children under control is very much represented.
It might be very well true that the Brat has something unnatural and sinister about them in this world, as they are at constant war with everything that has ever been created, since everything that has been created has been built with the purpose of subjugating them. This is why it feels unnatural to watch a child hitting back instead of cowering. We feel like it’s not right. We feel like history is staring back at us, and all the horror we felt at any rebel and wayward child who has ever lived, we are feeling right now for that reject of the construct of “childhood innocence.” The child who hits back is at such clash with our construction of childhood because we defined violence in all of its forms as the province of the adult, especially the adult in authority.
The adult has an explicit sanction by the state to do violence to the child, while the child has both a social and legal prohibition to even think of defending themself with their fists. Legislation such as “parent-child tort immunity” makes this clear. The adult’s designed place is as the one who hits, and has a right and even an encouragement to do so, the one who acts, as the person. The child’s designed place is as the one who gets hit, and has an obligation to accept that, as the one who suffers acts, as the object. When a child forcibly breaks out of their place, they are reversing the supposed “natural order” in a radical way.
This is why, for the youth liberationist, there should be nothing more beautiful to witness that the child who snaps. We have an unique horror for parricide, and a terrible indifference at the 450 children murdered every year by their parents in just the USA, without even mentioning all the indirect suicides caused by parental abuse. As a Psychology Today article about so-called “parricide” puts it:
Unlike adults who kill their parents, teenagers become parricide offenders when conditions in the home are intolerable but their alternatives are limited. Unlike adults, kids cannot simply leave. The law has made it a crime for young people to run away. Juveniles who commit parricide usually do consider running away, but many do not know any place where they can seek refuge. Those who do run are generally picked up and returned home, or go back on their own: Surviving on the streets is hardly a realistic alternative for youths with meager financial resources, limited education, and few skills.
By far, the severely abused child is the most frequently encountered type of offender. According to Paul Mones, a Los Angeles attorney who specializes in defending adolescent parricide offenders, more than 90 percent have been abused by their parents. In-depth portraits of such youths have frequently shown that they killed because they could no longer tolerate conditions at home. These children were psychologically abused by one or both parents and often suffered physical, sexual, and verbal abuse as well—and witnessed it given to others in the household. They did not typically have histories of severe mental illness or of serious and extensive delinquent behavior. They were not criminally sophisticated. For them, the killings represented an act of desperation—the only way out of a family situation they could no longer endure.
- Heide, Why Kids Kill Parents, 1992.
Despite these being the most frequent conditions of “parricide,” it still brings unique disgust to think about it for most people. The sympathy extended to murdering parents is never extended even to the most desperate child, who chose to kill to not be killed. They chose to stop enduring silently, and that was their greatest crime; that is the crime of the child who hits back. Hell, children aren’t even supposed to talk back. They are not supposed to be anything but grateful for the miserable pieces of space that adults carve out in a world hostile to children for them to live following adult rules. It isn’t rare for children to notice the adult monopoly on violence and force when they interact with figures like teachers, and the way they use words like “respect.” In fact, this social dynamic has been noticed quite often:
Sometimes people use “respect” to mean “treating someone like a person” and sometimes they use “respect” to mean “treating someone like an authority” and sometimes people who are used to being treated like an authority say “if you won’t respect me I won’t respect you” and they mean “if you won’t treat me like an authority I won’t treat you like a person” and they think they’re being fair but they aren’t, and it’s not okay.
(https://soycrates.tumblr.com/post/115633137923/stimmyabby-sometimes-people-use-respect-to-mean)
But it has received almost no condemnation in the public eye. No voices have raised to contrast the adult monopoly on violence towards child bodies and child minds. No voices have raised to praise the child who hits back. Because they do deserve praise. Because the child who sets their foot down and says this belongs to me, even when it’s something like their own body that they are claiming, is committing one of the most serious crimes against adult society, who wants them dispossessed.
Sources:
“The Adult Gaze: a tool of control and oppression,”
https://livingwithoutschool.com/2021/07/29/the-adult-gaze-a-tool-of-control-and-oppression
“Filicide,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filicide
#repost of someone else’s content#medium repost#Alba M.#purity culture#ageism#adultism#youth oppression#childism#child abuse#parental abuse#youth rights#youthlib#youth liberation#parricide#nuclear family abolition#anarchism#note: I would consider reevaluating the demonization of adults who kill their parents too#many victims remain entrapped well into adulthood#there are still a lot of issues of economic dependency and control especially for young adults#and I don’t think such a totalizing power imbalance engendered in childhood is so easily levelled#even if an adult does become financially independent#likewise for adult victims of intimate partner abuse: also structurally made difficult for them to leave#even if not criminalized to the same degree#anti-abuser aktion
2K notes
·
View notes
Text
Absolutely love watching the evolution of a “cringe content” YouTuber (as in, someone who does “commentary” on “cringe”) go from shitting on gen z to shitting on gen a.
All the comments are the same. Always. “As a part of this generation, I’m sorry for what we’ve done,” “as someone who is gen _, we do not claim them,” “as someone who is (age), I’m sorry for what we have done”
STOP. STOP IT RIGHT NOW. DON’T BE SORRY JUST BECAUSE OF YOUR AGE. DON’T LET PEOPLE CONVINCE YOU THAT YOU’RE WORTH LESS BECAUSE OF WHEN YOU WERE BORN. YOU’RE BEING INDOCTRINATED. AND IT WILL NOT END IF YOU PARTAKE IN IT.
Why does it never end. Why does nobody ever learn that your age is not always an indicator of who you are as a person. Why is it so normal to beat down on literal children. What did they ever do wrong
#childism#youth liberation#youth rights#gen z#gen alpha#cringe culture is over#cringe culture is ableist#cringe culture is dead#cringe culture is stupid
367 notes
·
View notes
Text
Familiarize yourselves with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
The US hasn't signed it yet, but if they had the stunts the alt-right are trying to pull would definitely go against it.
We have to be on the forefront of the children's rights movement and protect it intersectionality along with other civil rights movements like trans rights, gay rights, women's rights, poc rights, indigenous rights, Jewish rights, disabled rights and all basic human rights.
If they go after one of us, they go after us all. Right now children aren't protect so they're being targeted first.
We can't let them use "what about the children" as an excuse to create laws that harm children and adults. But as far as I can see, we are not making as much noise about children's rights. People who care about children might be drawn to the alt-right if they falsely believe that this is the only children's rights movement, we can't allow that to happen.
So spread the word.
Children's rights are human rights.
Trans children's rights are human rights.
#human rights#anti facist#anti capitalism#leftist#children's rights#childism#think of the children#feminism#lib fem#choice feminism#womanism#men's lib#trans rights#poc rights#indigenous rights#disablity#actually autisitc#signal boost#spread the word#children's rights are human rights#un#activism#direct action#come on people let's make some noise
183 notes
·
View notes
Text
“My house my rules” is for not wearing shoes in the house or not eating food in bed. Not whether or not you are entitled to privacy and basic human dignity.
#i fucking hate that phrase#i have never once heard it used in a non-abusive context#parenting#childhood trauma#child abuse#childism#house-rat
96 notes
·
View notes
Text
What’s so “sinister” about a child knowing their rights? Being freaked out by doctor-patient confidentiality is not showing concern, you just want to control your kid because you view children as not deserving of privacy and autonomy. There are plenty of reasons why a 12-13 year would want to speak to their doctor without their caregivers present:
They could have questions about their growing body that they’re too embarrassed/scared to ask their parents because FUN FACT! Not all parents are safe to people to talk to!
Someone in their life could be abusing in some way them and either their parents don’t believe them or they’re too scared/ashamed to talk to anyone else about it and the doctor-patient confidentiality could make them feel safe enough to speak up!
Their parents are sex negative/strict Christians and the child wants to expriment sexually but don’t want to get pregnant, get someone else pregnant or get STI/Ds, their doctor can provide ways to avoid just that, like contraceptives, because GUESS WHAT?? Teenagers are going to have sex with each other whether you approve of it or not!
Their parents could be an anti vaxxers and the child doesn’t want to get polio or some other illness that can be prevented!
Their parents could be controlling T3RF/GC cunts (just like the user who wrote the tweet above!) and wants to transition because FUCKING NEWS FLASH: Your children aren’t property and they’re autonomous beings, who deserve to make medical choices for themselves!
If your teenage child is desperate enough, they will try and go behind your back to transition or at the very least prevent going through a puberty that will make their dysphoria worse until they’re old enough to go on HRT.
If you think allowing a 13+ year old to have a say on who gets to be in the doctor’s office with them is “sinister” then maybe you need to ask yourself why you’re willing to deny your 13+ year old child privacy and bodily autonomy so you can ensure that only YOU get to decide what YOU want to happen to your teenager’s body!
#sage ponders#youth liberation#youth lib#child rights#youth rights#bodily autonomy#childrens rights#kids are people too#trans kids#trans youth#gender affirming care#anti terf#fuck terfs#dni terfs#anti gender critical#kids rights#children health#trans healthcare#child health#childism#adultism#body autonomy#anti ageism#adult supremacy
65 notes
·
View notes
Text
Uh-huh. You realize, coming from a 26 year old, that this is just ageism, right? "I'll only take you seriously because of your age"... and you think you're in the right?
Yeah, "14 years olds act more 14 about it" because typically a group with absolutely zero societal power that is literally treated as the subhuman property of their parents and irrational mindless inconveniences that are only here to annoy "real people" will get upset when you continue to treat them as such while reminding them of the absolute privilege and societal power you hold over them.
I was 14 too. I remember the frustration at no one taking me seriously. I remember the fury that when I turned 18, 20, 25, suddenly everyone believed me about the things I'd been saying for 4, 6, 10+ years. I remember the disillusionment that happened when I realized the only thing that had changed was not some arbitrary debunked number at which the brain "develops fully", not some threshold of "maturity", but simply that I was no longer the age at which the state had a chokehold around my personhood, or in some cases the age which people think my human rights should have been delayed to.
Because it's not like adults EVER have bad opinions about something you say online, right? It's not like they don't FREQUENTLY respond to you trying to talk to them about it with stubborn and willful ignorance. It's not like the OP of this or a similar post didn't once respond to my detailed and logical essay about ageism with "lol I'm not reading all that". It's not like unreasonableness and angry nastiness at a post is utterly unlinked to the age of the person perpetrating it, and people of all ages do this in equal numbers.
Oh wait, it's exactly like that, it's just that society supports and even rewards the exact same misbehaviors in privileged people that they condemn in marginalized people.
It's just that when an adult does this, it's either that they're arbitrarily right based on their age/other privileged identity and often the marginalized status of the person arguing against them (see: OP, every argument on antisemitism where goyim are seen as the rational and reasonable and therefore right ones), the person arguing is being "immature" and "might be lying about being an adult' or "is acting like a child" (transmascs being silenced about their oppression using infantilization, the concern trolling of people who are happily 'crazy', the infantilization of disabled people and especially those who are intellectually, cognitively, or developmentally disabled), or both.
They're right. Their age has nothing to do with what they're saying. However, it has everything to do with how you're mistreating them. If they had no age in their bio, you might have taken them seriously, at least enough to believe they might listen to your viewpoint and to treat them like an equal human being.
If they had had an age above (usually 20-25), your last grasp at defense would have been to discredit them by comparing them to a 14 year old or accusing them of lying about their age, precisely because even adjacency to that identity allows you to shut down any argument they make.
Unfortunately, when you're in your 20s and 30s, everything is influenced by how fucking 20-40 you are. You forget exactly how cruel and oppressive society is to children. You forget how people magically started treating you like a person instead of a thing that existed only to "irrationally" be angry at the world around you. You forget how you were right to be angry at how they treated you.
You forget that you were legally allowed to have someone else dictate what and when you ate, how you dressed, whether you received necessary medical care, whether unnecessary medical procedures such as intersex "correctional" surgeries and treatment were forced on you at any age, when and for how long you were allowed to leave the house, and if they hit you in a well-known erogenous zone it would have been considered "discipline" as long as they called it "spanking" and not "physical and sexual abuse. You forget this and any number of other things considered abusive if a partner or roommate were to do it to even someone who had just turned 18 two seconds ago.
You forget that while it was technically illegal for your parents to starve you, to beat you, to emotionally abuse you by gaslighting or daily verbal abuse or manipulation, to torture you, to sexually abuse you, to hurt you to the point of you developing PTSD and or dissociative disorders, that there is very little recourse for actually enforcing it. You forget that you just have to hope that a different adult believes you, and in order for them to do that you usually have to fit a stereotype of a good victim and that your parents usually already have to be not in good standing with your community.
You forget how many cases of actual textbook abuse CPS does nothing about for "lack of proof" despite a supposed societal narrative of "believe victims".* You forget that they prioritize reunification even in cases of actual physical abuse, often with the abuser themself. You forget that you were a member of the only class that can have the police called on them like dogcatchers to drag them back kicking and screaming to their abusers, with no recourse or means of escape provided, because the state depends on and serves the institution of the "nuclear family". You forget that historically police served to return escaped property to their owners, and still do so today.
(*Believe victims if they have any measure of societal power that causes consequences for not believing them. Believe victims as long as you will be judged by most people for not believing them. Believe victims only if you can be held accountable for not doing so.)
As a disabled person and therefore a vulnerable adult, I had the unique position of being treated as a child until I escaped at age 23. It was all the same arguments - that it was "for my own good", that I was "incapable of making those decisions for myself" (or apparently, finding someone I did trust to make them for me, because I was "unreliable enough" I couldn't even do that), and so on.
This only made me realize that, despite the fact that none of that was true, it wouldn't be okay even if it was. It's not okay for disabled adults who DO need significantly more help caring for themselves than I do and who are profoundly cognitively or intellectually disabled to have their autonomy infringed on and their consent violated.
So why, then, is it okay to do to a child, regardless of their actual ability to take care of themselves or "make rational decisions"? Why is it okay to treat a child this way? Why is it okay to regard someone as fundamentally subhuman until an arbitrary cutoff?
Why is it okay to assume complete and total irrationality and unreasonableness on the part of an entire class of people just because as a subjugated and oppressed class they are still on rare occasion irrational or unreasonable? Isn't that bog-standard bigotry?
Why is it okay to justify their oppression by them being sometimes unable to fully stand on their own two feet, without help or community, under the weight of the oppressive system itself that serves to reinforce that? Why claim the purposeful elimination of tools and obscuration of helpful skills and knowledge under the guise of "protecting them" shows that they are incapable of surviving without those violences in a system that you claim is not, in fact, openly hostile to them?
And yes, this does all matter in the context of petty online discourse, because it is these systems that serve to reinforce and be reinforced by this casual ageism.
It is reaffirming the ideas which uphold these systems - that children are incapable of being rational people with reasonable emotional responses to mistreatment, who have to be told at every point what is in fact fair and how they must react to not face active bigotry for their immutable identity. It is conditioning children to beg for scraps of respect so that they learn assimilation early and go on to perpetuate childism when they themselves become adults.
It's petty and cruel, and it's destroying my faith in humanity to see marginalized people I otherwise respect sharing this. Y'all of all people should know better. Y'all of all people should be able to see how it maps to multiple of the various types of oppression and even intersectional oppression and then goes further.
Y'all of all people should be able to remember how being a child was your primary identity and primary form of marginalization, because you could legally be allowed to be abused for your other marginalized identities and most people in fact supported your family doing so, or at least felt that even if it was wrong it was still "their right" to do so.
Maybe you were privileged enough to have a supportive family, but I know for a FACT most of you weren't.
Kids are considered uniquely incapable of having any identity that is not immediately apparent - of knowing they are chronically ill or queer or plural or neurodivergent. They are considered incapable of having valuable and complex thoughts about politics or religion. They are not listened to or considered experts on the specific intersectional discrimination they face for immediately apparent identities, such as being children of color or visibly disabled. Adults within those groups are considered the experts on forms of discrimination they'll even admit they no longer experience, but that children continue to.
This is not just queerphobia or ableism or racism or any other number of forms of bigotry. This is specifically childism intersecting those forms of bigotry. It is not just not okay because of their queer or disabled or racial or other identity. It is not okay because children are fucking people, and yeah, deserve to be treated as equals and not be condescended to even in the actual rare cases where their reasoning is not completely rationally sound - just as is the case for disabled people, I might add.
If you can see how one is ableism but not how the other is bigoted childism, if you can't see the parallels between two cases where
-most individuals in a class are fully rational and intellectually capable people purposely being mislabeled as not so in order to justify their subjugation
-which is fundamentally reliant on the societal acceptance of mistreatment of those who may not be fully rational or intellectually capable (which is deeply ableist/childist, oppressive, and wrong),
-and where those who actually aren't fully rational or are intellectually incapable face no reprieve both in being weaponized against members of their own class with relative privilege AND in fighting their own mistreatment, which unlike in the case of those who might be able to convince others of their capability is considered always justified on the basis of their incapability, while not actually being okay on ANY basis,
then I can't help you.
To be clear, the reason it is ableist and/or childist to label someone as intellectually incapable when they are not is not at all because actually being so would be in any way bad. It's because it relies on the deep, insidious ableism/childism against those who are considered intellectually capable to function. It is essentially a separate facet of that same ableism/childism, and one specifically functions because of the other facet of ableism/childism that says that all members of said class are incapable and therefore need to be mistreated in the same way as those who actually are.
"No one deserves to be treated this way," is fundamentally how this oppression should be addressed, period. Understanding how it functions differently for different people, and how easily the most vulnerable members of an oppressed class could have their liberation tossed aside in order to pursue assimilation for the less vulnerable is still important, though. Understanding that your own oppression relies on the total subjugation of part of your community on the basis of an ontological trait that they have and you do not is actually paramount in recognizing both your own relative privilege and how to effectively fight the oppression you all face.
Or to put it simply, it's important to recognize that if you're being oppressed because someone is claiming you're something you're not, that that oppression isn't okay toward the people who are that thing.
Anyway, adults who talk about childism, adultism (I apologize that I struggle to remember the difference between the two, much like I struggle with the difference between ableism and disableism), and youth liberation also hold privilege. As I mentioned above, the most that someone can use to discredit me here is to say that I'm immature or they think I'm secretly a child.
Even the people who really don't want to examine their own privilege and complicity in their hierarchical relationship with children are more likely to listen to me, and if they don't they'll make fools of themselves with such lines as "I refuse to read anything longer than a twitter post to educate myself on complex systems of oppression".
I'll keep trying to stand up for children anyway. Not just because I actually remember what it's like to be 14, but because I have a responsibility to do so as an adult. I'll uplift the voices of the children who quite honestly are way better at explaining this and have a far better understanding of both the direct experience and the sociological theory behind it than I ever will be.
Also note: I didn't anywhere in this post point out how people who are 17 and some months are functionally indistinguishable from those who have just turned 18, or how variations in "development" might cause some who are 15 or 16 to be very similar to others who are 18, or so on.
Quite frankly, I don't think that matters. I do think 14 year olds deserve to be treated with respect just as much as 17.99 year olds, and I also think often 17.99 year olds face much of the exact same mistreatment and oppression (especially systemically) as 14 year olds. The exceptions where legal emancipation can help those over 16 are both rare enough and require trading being controlled for being unsupported. Therefore I think that while a more nuanced conversation about this could take place within the communities actually affected by this, I think it's neither appropriate nor helpful here.
I'd also like to remind people that predators are often successful at grooming children because they pretend to treat them with respect and take them seriously. The answer to this should not be "oh, anyone who respects children is a groomer", but rather, "hey, maybe if everyone treated children with respect and took them seriously, actual predators would have one less avenue through which to target and harm children".
As a CSA victim myself, I will NEVER stop doing anything and everything I can to prevent more children from becoming victims. I only care about what's effective, not what feels good in pseudo-proxy revenge fantasies against imagined perpetrators while very real ones continue to go unnoticed and unchallenged by society.
I take children seriously because it's the right thing to do, but also specifically to fight CSA. I also remind anyone who needs it that they do NOT know they can trust me or anyone else on that sole basis. While I want to be a safe adult, doing so in a society where children have no recourse against mistreatment fundamentally requires them protecting themselves by not trusting me just because I recognize the power I have over them and the ways in which they are abused.
(This is another example of how the fearmongering mindset over generational friendships, particularly between minors and adults, is just as harmful as the pushback against comprehensive sex education and coming from the same puritan and christofascist roots. Knowing that something is sexual abuse just allows victims to voice what they're experiencing. Having safe adults who respect them allows children to recognize the manipulative behaviors and other red flags of unsafe adults.)
Anyway, all the original post is saying is "I don't like when members of an oppressed class stubbornly refuse to compromise on being treated as equal people with valuable thoughts and rational responses to mistreatment, and in fact insist on being listened to when I say things that are cruel, unfair, and untrue."
(When did use of "unfair" become a synonym for "whiny snowflakes children who just can't see that life is inherently unfair" in leftist spaces that purportedly fight against systemic injustice, anyway? When did it become something "immature" in the fight against identity-based violence that is inherently not fair?)
So I guess, act more 14 about it. I'll continue acting more disabled and queer about ableism and queermisia, so I fail to see what's bad about that. But imagine thinking that interacting with someone on the basis of their age is useless and thinking you're in the right for it. Truly showing their entire ass.
#childism#adultism#youth liberation#cw csa mention#csa mention#it's sometimes shocking to me that people are so much more ignorant about child liberation than even like. mad liberation and stuff#but it makes sense bc children are fundamentally THE most oppressed class on the planet#also yes I'm using USamerican ages here bc that is what I have perspective on#I welcome people from countries where personhood is granted at different ages to weigh in#also I use children here but I'm not sure if I should say 'minors' or something else instead esp when primarily discussing teens so like#lmk if I need to change that#undescribed#needs ID
83 notes
·
View notes
Text
An argument against youth rights I see a lot is “but what if the children do The Bad Things?”. Many people do horrific things all the time but that does not mean you should take their basic rights away, especially not taking away the rights of a group they’re a part of (wonder where we’ve seen this before).
82 notes
·
View notes
Text
Even if Minimum wage jobs were just for teenagers that wouldn't justify such low wages. Call me crazy but if a child can work like an adult and puts in the amount of effort and responsibility of an adult and is expected to work as intensely as an adult would. They should get paid like an adult actually. It's so weird how in this country children are expected to face the burdens of adulthood and be ok with having none of the rights of adulthood.
4K notes
·
View notes
Text
“Kids don’t need the same rights as adults, their brains aren’t as sophisticated”
hm. Hm. Gee. Gee bud, it almost seems like you maybe, I don’t know, stumbled into one of the biggest historical justifications for oppression that we know of. I don’t know, that just sounds sort of familiar. Gee.
554 notes
·
View notes
Text
saying “kids aren’t property” is about as useful as saying “protect trans kids” in a world where kids are property.
it’s not possible to protect trans kids in desperate situations without breaking several laws, going to jail and being put on a register, because kids are property.
what people actually mean when they say “protect trans kids” is “protect the “lucky few” whose parents accept them, and don’t mention the others”.
you might say “the only way to protect those kids in *less than ideal* situations is to appeal to their parents and get them to realize how misinformed they are”.
i guarantee the Matt Walsh’s of the world do not give a shit about whatever information you have. they take pleasure in “beating the trans” out of their kid until they end up a shadow of their former self, or until they outright unalive themselves - at which point the abusive parent gets to play the victim, blaming the trans community for the loss of their kid. and they get away with it, despite literally being the root cause of their child’s death, because kids are property.
“no parent wants their child to die”
there are literal conservative parents (including Matt Walsh) on record saying they would rather have a dead child than a trans child. they could not be telling you with any more certainty that they are perfectly willing to enact genocide on their own kids.
what parents actually mean when they say “kids aren’t property” is “i see MY kids humanity therefore they are not property”. oh really Brenda? then why aren’t you protesting the law that says that kid *is* objectively your property huh? surely it should anger you that a loved one whose humanity YOU see doesn’t have their humanity recognized by the state?
does it not boil your blood you when you have to make decisions on your kids behalf? decisions you should know your kid is capable of making themselves, because as you said you “see” their humanity?
or does seeing your child’s “humanity” actually just mean seeing them through a lens of adult enforced dependency? whereby the dependency actually benefits you because you yourself are dependent on *it* - boosting your ego and self esteem because it adds to a sense of purpose and control?
after all when there are areas in your life are out of your control, what better way to gain a sense of control by controlling another person’s entire existence?
what’s that? oh it doesn’t feel like you’re in control of your kid either? you’re struggling to hold it together as a parent and everything is chaotic? yeah no shit Brenda, that’s because you’re not supposed to own and control other people for 18+ years!
kids push back at any attempt to control them against their will - some more than others (others will submit and say it’s “for their own good” because it’s safer to do so when there’s no alternative and you’re oppressed) because that is the rational fucking response to being literal property.
165 notes
·
View notes
Text
https://twitter.com/deathpigeon/status/1630097242442047488
[image ID:
When people try to raise the age of majority they’re doing so because they understand that children lack power in society and they’re trying to increase how many lack power and increase the concentration of power.
If someone tells you that 25 is the start of adulthood they’re saying that they think that too many people have autonomy, choice, and freedom and they want to take that away from them.
If someone tells you that neurodivergence means you stay a child longer than neurotypicals they’re telling you that they think that more neurotypicals deserve autonomy, choice, and liberty than neurodivergents.
When someone says these things, listen to them and understand it as the horrifying statement that it is.
/end image ID]
2K notes
·
View notes
Text
So um I feel like people are confusing the term "minor" with the term "child"
A child is a young human, in the same way that a puppy is a young dog.
A minor is anyone the government has deemed it fit to oppress due to being younger than eighteen.
I'm turning nineteen this Saturday, and I am still a child. I am by no means fully grown, in any sense of the word except maybe in height. There is no cut-off point between being an adult and being a child. There is no magical date when you stop being a child. There is only a date when the government has agreed to stop oppressing you because they have to let you have rights eventually, and they decided eighteen is as good a time as any. I am a child with privilege given to me by the government due to a pre-established number that they made up.
114 notes
·
View notes
Text
EDIT: Corrected for ableist language. NPD hate isn't cool!
When reactionaries talk about "parental rights" what they really mean is their perceived "right" to own and control an entire person for at least 18 years while the state does the bare minimum to protect the aforementioned child/children.
But it goes deeper than that. Even well meaning liberals and progressives will treat their children as their inherent property.
"No one gets to tell me how to raise MY child!", "kids have it SO easy", "My kids will understand why I'm punishing them when they're older." All of it is condescending and crummy.
I'm so so sick of it. Me and so many others (especially those who don't fit the NT cishet norm) were so totally failed by their well-meaning parents who had no qualm about utilizing verbal, psychological, and even physical abuse in a vain effort to make their children conform to a world that fundamentally isn't made for them.
My status as a poor queer person will most likely preclude me from ever having children of my own, be they biological/fostered/or adopted (this is by design, btw. Don't want the disease spreading through the populace). But I'm rapidly approaching the point where I see all willing parents as suspect. Why do you want to have kids? What makes you equipped to do so? Do you agree that children are an oppressed people group? How are you planning on mitigating this? How are you planning on fostering a diverse community for your child to inhabit? How do you plan on going about unschooling your children?
I see no one except for the most radical/punk parents asking half of these questions. Gee, it's almost as if parenthood attracts abusers who want an excuse to live out their pent-up power fantasies and repeat the cycle of abuse and trauma for one more generation.
#childism#youth liberation#unschooling#community#anti natalism#child liberation#epitome of queer rage#child emancipation#i just hate parents lol
73 notes
·
View notes
Last Seen Blogs
wadey-wilson
prev. winston-wilson
ask-numberjacks
Ask the Numberjacks
azumetapraline
Welcome to Blorboland 🌠
kulawat
blogpom.me
solarizzz
☆*:.｡.solvrizzz.｡.:*☆