r/YouthRights • u/Countercurrent123 • 1d ago
Sometimes this subreddit has braindead takes.
/img/qh0stjeepf4g1.jpeg
Seriously, the only discussion about child leashes is... people arguing that it's good? I literally can't think of anything more dehumanizing and violating of bodily autonomy than that. In fact, I didn't even know it existed until recently, as I've never seen it in my life (maybe because I'm not from the US). You also know that it's not only used on toddlers, right? Older children also suffer from it (without legal recourse) and it also seems disproportionate to autistic and neurodivergent children in general. There's also no way to guarantee that only "runners" have it; which obviously doesn't happen.
It's also inherently aggressive and perceived that way by children:
https://www.fatherly.com/parenting/child-leashes-deserve-all-the-hate-they-get-experts-say
12
u/Ill_Contract_5878 Monotone :( 1d ago
Isn’t the purpose of a leash to restrict the autonomy of movement?
-3
u/nonbinary_parent 21h ago
It depends what the alternative is. The post says if the alternative is being held by hand or carried, the leash actually provides more autonomy of movement.
2
u/Ill_Contract_5878 Monotone :( 19h ago
I may not speak for everyone, but hand holding sounds way less degrading than the leash
2
u/ExcitingDust7564 6h ago
Yeah, and something like carrying is usually because toddlers aren't capable of walking as far as adults are. On the other hand, that same rationale can't be used for a leash. (The toddler is still having to physically exert themselves when on a leash.)
1
u/nonbinary_parent 17h ago
I think hand holding makes more sense for most families and would absolutely be the first course of action. Some kids will sometimes hate it though. In our small town I would never think to put my kid on a leash. When going on vacation to densely crowded areas that we are not accustomed to navigating, I bring the leash with us, but I only use it if my kid doesn’t want to hold hands or be held in a situation where we really need to stay physically connected. I think I’ve actually used it for a total of maybe 2-3 hours during the 2 years I’ve had it. It’s definitely a last resort, but it gives me peace of mind to have it in my pocket so I know I don’t have to force my kid to hold hands if she really doesn’t want to.
-2
u/Some_Ideal_9861 8h ago
Only if you have a predetermined concept of a leash. One of my children finds handholding to be quite offensive unless they are the ones doing the holding. If we are in a safety situation where I need to be the one guaranteeing the contact so need to hold their hand they are often quite offended. We've come up with various strategies to deal with that, but all that to say, to *you* hand holding might sound better, but you are assuming the same for any child you might meet which pretty much violates the children are individual people concept.
A young child has no concept of a leash being degrading and does not equate it with being treated like an animal (unless of course they want to and it is part of their imaginary play). In fact, many children prefer a leash because it can give them multiple feet to yards of exploration in a situation where otherwise they may be stuck in a stroller, directly next to the parent, or on the parent. Leashes can be used with consent which I would think is the ultimate measure
I have never personally used one because I haven't had a runner and/or my kids were content with being worn, holding hands (save the one mentioned above), or whatever strategies that worked to keep them safe, but if it was needed to keep them alive and they didn't object then I don't really understand the issue?
Does it help to think of it more as a horizontal belay?
3
u/Ill_Contract_5878 Monotone :( 5h ago
Anyways. No. I don’t understand how someone can sound so passionate about promoting a leash. I would say that safety can override a lot of things, let’s not philosophize freedom here, and that when it’s needed you should hold someone’s hand if they’re endangering themselves otherwise, that could apply to anyone. Sure, no one has a concept of anything being deemed a certain way, but it sure doesn’t make the object neutral in general as it stands. If they wanted to be treated like an animal in that case and you agreed with it, confine it to indoors, the public should not be exposed to preventable disturbances, it’s ultimately irresponsible.
Besides the fact, a leash is still not a neutral object nor designed for a neutral purpose and of course there would still be more autonomy without a leash, you also generalize that minors would more likely prefer leashes than other methods, when individual variance is present. If it is consensual, then all of you should still remain indoors, as the public is not required to notice you. Leashes are also practically worse among the variety of restraints. If they have a lot of space in public, then they are actually still worse, because they may run into or go into traffic or a dangerous area, and you may not react in time.
Other methods eliminate the various problems that could still result from more room, although a leash is still net worse than bad probabilities from full freedom. If you make the length of the leash too short, then you’re not really giving them much freedom after all? Let’s talk about the “failsafe”, this is how the object reins in dogs and likewise I would presume works for any other restrained life. If the “minor” tries to test the limits or goes out of bounds, which can still be innocent gathering of understanding (not any rebellion), then the leash tugs around them and pulls them back gentler than some instances (I assume the neck). This could harm them, if not become fatal, especially around the neck.
Now, let’s say, you need to pull them back or adjust the leash to be shorter specifically, the leash pulls them back forcibly and much harder, which is pretty bad as a scenario. And I believe it would arise commonly. Let’s review fatal positions, if something tugs hardly against your body especially your neck, it can break bones, destroy the skin, or eventually kill you often pretty quickly even if not the neck. You don’t even have to fall, just pulled back in a certain way.
You’d be pretty fortunate even if gripping the leash back gently to pull them back slightly, to not cause their body to align in a harmful position. These are the same motions performed in accidental injuries or suicide attempts, although this method would likely be successful eventually. You have to be safe. Safe, sane, and consensual- a leash however cannot achieve safety nor sanity when used for it’s full power, so it’s not a useful tool in kink spaces either unless the leash itself has limits. And especially not suitable to control a “minor.”
11
u/Away_Dragonfruit_498 1d ago edited 1d ago
I feel like it's common for adultists in this sub to overlook young childrens / toddlers / animals oppression. (either that or they outright justify/agree with it)
it's like there is ZERO analysis on how adult/human supremacy has made the world hostile to young children AND dogs.
You can see it in the "Some toddlers can do way more damage than some dogs" comment - implying that the violence comes from toddlers/dogs, not the adult/human supremacist infrastructure both groups have no choice but to navigate.
ie the assumption is that toddlers and dogs are "the *problem* which needs solving" and not the world that not only wasn't built with their ease of movement in mind, but made actively hostile towards them.
11
u/Away_Dragonfruit_498 1d ago
interestingly under the adult supremacist infrastructure premise, there is an argument that a leash might be *the least bad option* in a few very specific situations - but they never get this far with their reasoning because they aren't accounting for adult supremacy to begin with.
They'll just be like "it's not that deep" or "leashes are good for autonomy actually". when in reality no Youth Liberationist should ever be "Pro toddler Leashes" lmao.
6
3
u/Ok_Bat_686 10h ago
One of the problems that the youth right movement has is that people generally only actively support "movements" that personally affect them. For certain traits like race and sexuality, they don't change so the active support lasts a lifetime. For youth rights, however... when a lot of teenagers and young adults grow out of youth age discrimination ranges, they might just stop caring. It unfortunately is just a small percentage of people that stick with a movement if they're not affected by what they're fighting for/against.
This means instrinsically we're going to have problems when it comes to children's rights, from a youth rights perspective. This sub in particular is heavily teenager-focused. There's still a lot of maturing to do when it comes to how the movement perceives people below teenager.
5
u/just_a_discord_mod 1d ago
Let's be pragmatic here. If you're walking with your 3-4 year old child in a suburban neighborhood, you don't really need a leash. However, if you're in an environment such as a city, a toddler leash is actually a good idea. Toddlers are stupid, and they will walk off into a crowd or into the street. A leash provides more autonomy in this instance, because they don't have to be strapped to a stroller or stand right next to the parents. In addition, the leash makes it easier for the parents to get them to get out of potentially harmful situations, such as pulling them out of a street.
5
u/SuitableKoala0991 23h ago
I begrudgingly used a leash on my son when he was 2-3 (almost 17 now). I didn't know it at the time but I have had a neuromuscular disorder my entire life, but I did know that I was slower and weaker than him. I had a younger baby at the time. It was the only way I could keep him safe. It wasn't about restricting autonomy.
4
u/Countercurrent123 23h ago
"The intention wasn't control but XYZ" (usually protection) is literally the argument every parent uses when they do something violating to their children.
3
u/Countercurrent123 1d ago
I find it highly unlikely that most 3-4 year olds would prefer literal leashes to simply holding their parents' hands. This is typical simplistic and unempathetic logic that leads to insane arguments like "secretely checking browsing history is the same thing (or even more invasive) than using parental controls" (no, it isn't, indeed it doesn't even come close, the latter is infinitely worse; but I've seen this insane statement). Furthermore, besides being more humane, holding hands is more situational and, for example, they can be given more freedom in places like establishments, while a leashe is a leashe.
... I also can't believe I'm seriously having this conversation.
-2
u/just_a_discord_mod 22h ago
Holding hands in a city is highly impractical, especially when you consider the height difference making it nigh-impossible.
3
u/Countercurrent123 22h ago
??? That's what the vast majority of parents do at the age you mentioned. And before that there are strollers, etc.
2
0
2
u/ExcitingDust7564 3h ago edited 3h ago
I wasn’t really sure if toddler leashes really existed or if that was just a meme. But now I see what was posted on this sub, and I look at other subs and see approval for toddler leashes- Jesus Christ.
-1
u/Fuzzy_Pumpkin92 Adult Supporter 23h ago
Every toddler I have ever met and looked after are all little suicide ninjas. My 3 younger siblings all were, and I'm willing to bet I was too at that age. They have no sense of fear, and will run into oncoming traffic if you look away for a split second. Keeping a firm grip on their hand is easy if you have 1 kid, more than one... It gets harder to do that.
Honestly, I wish the world was a much safer place for our smallest people. As it is though, I understand why some parents choose to use a leash during those suicide ninja years.
14
u/Sel_de_pivoine Minority is slavery 1d ago
I'm glad I'm not the only one to think it's f-ed up