...is that the reason some parents insist that youth liberation is suggesting that they must "lose" rights in order for youths to gain them is because too many modern parents view power to control as being inextricably enmeshed with their rights. They also seem to euphemistically define "parental rights" as being synonymous with what is actually parental powers. So, by losing their power to control with an iron hand, they view that as the loss of almost everything that makes them parents, i.e., their ability to exercise power and control over almost every aspect of their kids' lives regardless of whatever their personal merits may be, until they are past the arbitrary Magic Age where they are instantly awarded most of their legal adult rights by the state, also regardless of what their personal merits may be.

This would be similar to a pre-Civil War white plantation owner arguing with you that you were taking away his "rights" by liberating his chattel slaves, whom he spent so much money feeding, clothing, etc.

Yes, this is nonsense and dirty pool politics, but thankfully many parents do see the difference and fully support youth rights out of principle. As one good example, the of the U.S.'s foremost youth rights supporters, Robert Epstein (author of "The Myth of the Teen Brain" and Teen 2.0, and a regular adviser to NYRA) is a father of four. So there is no inherent opposition between the institution of parenthood and the youth liberation platform. Only parents who feel their power is greater than any principle of freedom, or mistake power for "rights," seem to have this issue and attitude towards youth lib.