Let's Discuss: Hands Off the Bouncy Castle
What about bored kids at protests?
This weekend, hundreds of thousands of Americans gathered in more than 1400 locations for the Hands Off protests, a massive display of condemnation against President Trump and his inflammatory, divisive and cruel administration.
On Saturday evening, a mom logged onto Threads and posted this:
(I’ve cropped her name because she has since deleted her post)
This post has now immortalized this user as the “Bouncy Castle mom”, for creating such an engagement uproar that a parody account (called @protest_bouncy_castle) already has more than twelve hundred followers on Threads.
Hundreds of commenters called the post tone-deaf, claiming it makes a “mockery of the resistance”. Some said the seriousness of the protests was weakened by thoughtless participants, for whom stopping Trump administration policies such as immigration raids, voter suppression and attacks on trans people wasn’t “entertaining enough.” Many posters called out the privilege of a white woman posting such a flippant remark, pointing out that the threats posed by the current US administration are far lower for her and her child, compared to many others.
One particularly succinct Threads poster wrote “it’s not a fucking carnival, Karen.”
As the discourse continued, some wrote that it’s reasonable to suggest making protests more kid-friendly and inclusive, and this effort will be rewarded as included children grow into more politically aware adults.
Some people commented that children cannot consent to the message of the protest, nor consent risk of being in a large scale political event, so shouldn’t be included in protest activity at all (bored or not), whereas others argued they had been attending protests with their children for years and always felt shored up by the community that surrounds a singularity of purpose.
Several commenters proposed that parents build a more robust community that provides childcare while adults attend protests.
Others (me) wondered privately if at any other point in history, did parents notice or care if their child was bored at a protest?
Years before I became a stay-at-home mom, I graduated from McGill University in Canada with a Bachelor’s degree in Political Science. In my time there, I learned that everything— everything— in our lives is political.
Our ability to walk down the street is political. Everything from sidewalks and street lights, to speed limits and safety are all decided by government systems.
The choice to gather in protest of an unjust government is a fundamental political right, as is the right to complain about how protests are organized.
Parenting is also political, as governments can (and do) control who can have a child and what role that child has in society. Because politics is involved in every part of human society, it is an inherently political act to bring a child to any gathering, whether protest, community BBQ, school, mega church, into the Oval Office, or safely home afterwards.
Children are political because they are human beings. So, do they belong at political protests? And if so, should protests aim to be kid friendly? On a scale of “reasonably safe” to “bouncy castle provided,” how kid friendly should a political protest be? How much of a protest should focus on amenities versus accessibility, to ensure everyone is able to attend, no matter how young, old, or bored they are?
At what point does the presence of children at a protest cross the line from public participation to belittling the cause?
What do you think?
I thought about this a lot, and honestly, I am of two minds here. On one hand, mothers should be able to participate in political action, and it's often true that the lack of community and childcare means they can't do that. That said, I wasn't able to attend the Hands Off protest in my red state suburb because I didn't have childcare. I didn't feel like my 2 and 4 year old could be adequately supervised in an environment with a lot of yelling, counterprotesting, and even some altercations. I expected that might happen, and it did. It seems sensible to me that any child who is too young to attend without a play structure nearby is likely too young to meaningfully understand, to keep themselves and others safe, and to be there.
I do think turning a protest into a block party somewhat undermines your ability to keep your wits about you and remember you are engaging in resistance, with its elements of risk. Also, if I were supervising my children in a bouncy castle, I don't think I would have been *doing the thing.* I might as well have taken them to a park.
There is a difference between inclusion/accessibility (is it physically possible to do this thing) and our preferences - and while there is overlap, I don't think we can say a protest is *inaccessible* to children if they're bored.
I echo the thought that communities should be thoughtful about childcare when planning political actions - and offer, say, a church/mosque/temple basement or community center for children whose parents want to participate. It's interesting to me that we don't consider that a form of resistance - caretaking is about as political as it gets.
So, I'm firmly on team Little Kids Don't Belong At Protests. They can't consent to being there, they usually don't understand the issue at hand, and their safety could be at risk. If they are young enough to want a bouncy castle and not old enough to not be bored, then they shouldn't attend.
Now, I do like the suggestion of the poster who said if you want a bouncy castle, rent one yourself and make that a safe place to land (heh, heh) for the kids in your community while their parents are at the protest. I actually think that's a great idea and am now mulling over what kind of childcare options could be a part of mutual aid.