Just like how social production is distinct to regular production I think the hierarchy between parent and child is also unique and incomparable to more material connections like ‘slave/master.’ Parents have some inherent justification to the life experience they lord over their literal immobile infant; how this changes over time and between individuals, and with intent, is a conversation to have, but in general a well-intentioned parent deserves to inhabit the position in the hierarchy.
I don’t disagree, and honestly I have not seen his lectures so I have no clue what his point was, it might be insane. I guess reflexively I tend to get combative towards people/parents who tend to justify the hierarchy even when the children are like practically adults. I also take issue with the basis that parents get to make all decisions for their children with no outward input. We have too many children dying from preventable diseases because parents decided “it’s my kid, my body” basically, and refuse vaccines or proper medical care for their children.
Yes this is a strong point I don’t disagree with either. I look at it like this: Yes, parents should be afforded their natural right to access their children. No, parents should not have medical, total financial, or personal control over their kids until an arbitrary age. The secret sauce imo is properly socialized childcare; parents could be granted the benefit of the doubt that they’ll do right because there’s so many resources available to them to make it manageable, this also ensures a social standard of education & healthcare applied at the youngest possible age.
At that stage you could severely increase the legal penalties for neglecting your child and introduce more safety nets in way of developmental check-ins and home visits. I would support an outright ‘parenting license’ in a hypothetical society where childcare was completely socialized.
Just like how social production is distinct to regular production I think the hierarchy between parent and child is also unique and incomparable to more material connections like ‘slave/master.’ Parents have some inherent justification to the life experience they lord over their literal immobile infant; how this changes over time and between individuals, and with intent, is a conversation to have, but in general a well-intentioned parent deserves to inhabit the position in the hierarchy.
I don’t disagree, and honestly I have not seen his lectures so I have no clue what his point was, it might be insane. I guess reflexively I tend to get combative towards people/parents who tend to justify the hierarchy even when the children are like practically adults. I also take issue with the basis that parents get to make all decisions for their children with no outward input. We have too many children dying from preventable diseases because parents decided “it’s my kid, my body” basically, and refuse vaccines or proper medical care for their children.
Yes this is a strong point I don’t disagree with either. I look at it like this: Yes, parents should be afforded their natural right to access their children. No, parents should not have medical, total financial, or personal control over their kids until an arbitrary age. The secret sauce imo is properly socialized childcare; parents could be granted the benefit of the doubt that they’ll do right because there’s so many resources available to them to make it manageable, this also ensures a social standard of education & healthcare applied at the youngest possible age.
At that stage you could severely increase the legal penalties for neglecting your child and introduce more safety nets in way of developmental check-ins and home visits. I would support an outright ‘parenting license’ in a hypothetical society where childcare was completely socialized.