I think that the animal right's movement could benefit from teaming up with the children's rights movement. The movements are similar for a few reasons:
- Both children and animals have a lower legal status as adult humans and are sometimes considered property
- Both groups have limitations that make them dependent on adult humans
- The abilities and intelligence of both groups are often undermined
- Their boundaries and wants can be ignored
- Both children and animals are subjected to legal violence under the form of "discipline" that isn't acceptable for adult humans
- The bodily autonomy of both groups is often denied and choices about them is often made for the benefit of their guardians and not themselves
- They are sometimes seen as things to acquire for the entertainment of adult humans. "So when are you two going to have kids? You have to have some, they're so cute!" "I got you a puppy as a present! Look how cute they are!"
- Their civil rights often depend on the votes and organisation of adult humans
- Comparing other civil rights movements (lgbt rights, women's rights, racial equality) to this civil rights movement is often seen as offensive. Similarly, comparisons to animals or children have often been used to undermine these other groups and deny them basic rights.
- Both groups have a different brain structure then adult humans, and thus different needs and behaviours.
So since animal rights activists and children's rights activists are often adult humans speaking on someone else's behalf, it would be helpful for us to work together and understand how to do that respectfully.
Okay, reading through better, I want to also add disability rights and elderly rights. A bit on different levels, yes, and I will outline that too (and youth and animals are also not on *exactly* the same social position). I’ve wanted to make a post about wanting solidarity between disability rights activism, youth rights activism, and elderly rights activism, some time ago; thank you very, very much on these points between youth rights activism and animal rights activism. I want to outline how disability rights and elderly rights also have these.
Also yes, I’m counting “elderly” as a category of “disabled” here because that is what old age is, the body breaking down. However, “elderly” is *also* a very socially distinct group, while ultimately it does mostly boil down to disability and ableism.
- Being legally disabled is a lower legal status. Legally disabled humans are not literally treated as property of non legally disabled adult non-elderly humans, and there’s no (that I know of) specific restricting legal status for elderly humans other than legal disability, but socially, on various levels, it’s often close to that.
- Limitations that make disabled (including elderly into “disabled”) humans dependent, well, nothing to add here.
- The lack of ability (including intellectual) is the *subject* of ableist oppression, but the abilities that an elderly or otherwise disabled human does have are often undermined because of the lack of some other ability. It’s often the same for youth and animals.
- Their boundaries or wants can be ignored — again, nothing to add here.
- Psychiatric system, especially (the “legal violence” bullet point in the original post)
- Just as well, the bodily autonomy is often denied and choices are made for the benefit of guardians and not themselves, although usually not to the extent that youth and animals are subjected to this (talking, like, body mods)
- Elderly humans are often seen as entertainment by non-elderly humans, anything an elderly human does is talked about like “cute grandma”. Similar things go for some other disabilities, like Down Syndrome. And in European past (don’t know much about else, sorry), visibly disabled humans, along with visibly intersex humans, *were* treated as things to acquire and exploit for entertainment. Freak shows, court jesters.
- While the point about the dependency of civil rights on the votes and organization of those not in the group is off for many disabled humans as we advocate for ourselves, other disabled humans cannot advocate for themselves for various reasons and have to depend on those who can, plus of course there are things like legal decisions (which was what the bullet point was about, actually, I think?), where the decisions *are* made very much not about the decision-makers themselves.
- Declaring someone’s lack of ability is the base point of almost any oppression. Then the advocates against that oppression often focus on disproving that lack of ability and can entirely ignore, or even go against, that actual lack of ability is still just about the opposite of a rightful justification for oppression.
- Different needs and behaviors than those prescribed as the abled norm, yep. (Including when applicable but not limited to brain structure)
I definitely agree yeah and I think I could have worded some things better in my original post. Teaming up doesn’t seem like the right word choice for example-
But yeah these groups and movements are not the same but there are similarities that can make it useful for activists representing these groups to listen to each other. And also every movement is stronger when it’s intersectional and people in more than one of these groups deserve inclusion, like disabled children for example.
And again I also want to stress that I understand the specific form of oppression that is comparing minority humans to animals and I’m trying to be sensitive around that. The systems of oppression and mindsets can be similar but that doesn’t mean the groups are, I marginalised humans aren’t any closer to animals than any other group of human.
Just wanted to take the time to add to my statement and thank you for your thoughts I think it’s really good.
And again I also want to stress that I understand the specific form of oppression that is comparing minority humans to animals and I’m trying to be sensitive around that. The systems of oppression and mindsets can be similar but that doesn’t mean the groups are, I marginalised humans aren’t any closer to animals than any other group of human.
Disagreed.
Minority humans who are not children and do not have specific disabilities also get compared to children (literally instrumental in colonization, as well as many other examples) and humans who have those disabilities. Making huge points of how They Aren’t Those is still bigoted.
To care at all about the idea of a group being or not being closer to another marginalized group is in itself bigoted, I think.
& thank you!
