In my opinion at least

The sjws love this kid

well, you might be able to make the case that this violates the child's individual rights

Well i think the ideal is the child have not developed individuality (self autonomy) yet, so there for can not have individual rights.

ultimately I think you must impose a particular moral authority to fully make the case that this is wrong, though

Just look at this Facebook post

https://www.facebook.com/ELLEuk/videos/10154752797466301/

The child has been brainwashed into thinking this is okay

in that case wouldn't he be his parents responsibility? if there is no responsibilty to society as a collective

Yes

That's how grooming works, you convince the child to "give consent".

and it isn't the parent's right to do this because

“This is so angering to me. I'm seeing people say it's "his" choice. When you are a kid, don't know if you remember this, but you were literally an attachment of whatever beliefs and values and thoughts and opinions they had. This has the liberal agenda written all over it. Kids at that age don't have the capacity to know what they want apart from what their parents want. I remember as a kid just saying yes and agreeing to whatever my mom said because I just wanted to do and say things she would like. I'm not an agreeable person. That's just kids! They don't know who they are and don't have the full capacity to delve into that yet so they latch onto whatever the parent feeds them. It's clear that these parents are fueling this. It's also clear that he's mimicking whatever he's seeing on TV. They aren't raising a child, they are raising someone under the name of a political agenda who will spend their life very confused. The fact that the Mom is using feminine pronouns. It's like does she want a transgender child? Boys can like girly things without ever being fed the notion that they must be girls just as girls can like boyish things without ever being fed the notion that they must be boys. The ironic thing is that the entire thing is supposed to be "gender is fluid." If gender is fluid then why on earth whenever a child displays something not typically female or male THEY MUST be the opposite gender? Clearly gender isn't fluid and if a child doesn't act fully male and plays with dolls then he must fully fit into the female category. Or vice versa.”

and I would agree Stargazer, the child must subject to an authority that has his best interests at heart

If it was a straight 8 years old girl giving lap dances to straight old men, people would be outraged.

this is the best thing for society

it would seem the "liberal" thing to do would be to not interfere in the affairs of the parent and child, right?

But instead it’s a 8 year old boy crossdressing giving lap dances to old men

You don’t have to align with everything liberal

Yes. I suppose that is the liberal way but we aren’t right on everything

No Apotheosis, because he will be an individal so parents can do just anything

By that logic, the liberal thing to do would be to not interfere with slave owners' affairs.

good point, it's about the child's liberation

but on what grounds is this bad way of raising the child? Is it more liberating for the parents to be raising them as they see fit, is it more liberating to let the child do what he wants, or is it more liberating for the state to intervene when necessary?

doesn't this entirely depend on a separate moral judgement than what is "liberating"

isn't it what is good for the self, family, and society in a particular balance what is ultimately important??

and wanting to push your idea of "good," instead of leaving people as they are in a state such as this is anything but "liberal" but is the moral thing to do?

What is important is what is liberating for the indidual, while yes kids are not yet individual are there for tecnicly the property of the parents, but since kids eventaly become individals people should not interfer with that procces, killing, abuse, exc.

ah, so it is a particular process of raising children that you want to enforce. at least, it is bounded where this in particular is out of bounds

they must be raised in such a way that they become an "individual"

makes sense

under the classical liberal ideology it makes sense to recommend children be raised in such a way that they become capable members of a classical liberal society and will champion your ideals

but is that not enforcing your values onto a collective?

I don't think rasing children to be free will make them want freedom necessary.

I just don't think you can only take individual rights into some kind of calculus without appealing to some kind of societal (collective) good

tricky situations like this, with families and children, expose this

classical liberalism tends to abstract people away into atomized individuals with no past, group associations (like one's family) and no duties or obligations to those groups

Well, yes. People don't allways follow those groups

but we are all part of families and it's by no means a trivial case

well, we wouldn't want people tyranized by their group, right?

except