Full text
it feels weird debating “what age = ‘children’” in a report about people getting blown up in a genocide
This. Semantics mean nothing, lives are lost and can never be replaced.
I don’t see any debate. Just a definition for clarity since sometimes children are considered younger than other ages.
The comment is not out of place. In many jurisdictions, a “child” is under 14, while 14-18 is a “young adult” or “adolescent”
You might not be familiar with it but “people under 18” is a long standing propaganda trope.
What Reuters could have said is “Children, defined as people under 18”. But they hit the “people under 18” keyphrase.
It’s because they want people to mentally subtract “military-age males” from the figures.
Oh, didn’t know about the meme, thanks
“meme”
“Children, defined as people under 18”
People under 18 whom it defines as children
Aside from including your ‘meme phrase’, I don’t see the difference
Women and children are usually two subsequent words which imply innocent people not involved in any combat.
I think the UN also counts anyone under 35 as “youth” as well. So there’s a lot of statistics-related terminology to deal with here.
There needs to be a clear legal standard, and 18 Years is the arbitrary line we agreed on.
When a 17 Year old go to war, they are child soldiers, and when they get bombed/starve, they count towards the children death toll.Yeah, it would feel weird calling a 17 year old a child.
If you’re more than 8-10 years older than that, it absolutely does not feel weird in the slightest.
What if it was a 17 year old Israeli?
But who can really say, what defines children? /s
These unconvicted foreigners, who some people refer to as “InNocEnt ciViLiANs”
Reads like one of those “pedophilia is a legitimate sexual orientation” people, who I forget the term for, but do not care to have in my search history.
Minor Attracted People (MAP)?
Gotta be specific so the pundits can’t make up their own definition.
And yet the brain isn’t really fully developed until the early 20s.