this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2025
76 points (96.3% liked)

Microblog Memes

8398 readers
6820 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Full text

top 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 28 points 1 week ago (2 children)

it feels weird debating "what age = 'children'" in a report about people getting blown up in a genocide

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

I don't see any debate. Just a definition for clarity since sometimes children are considered younger than other ages.

[–] knightmare1147@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

This. These semantics mean nothing, lives are lost and can never be replaced.

Edit: grammar.

[–] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 11 points 1 week ago

Semantics mean nothing

Semantics is literally the study of meaning.

[–] flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz 16 points 1 week ago (4 children)

The comment is not out of place. In many jurisdictions, a "child" is under 14, while 14-18 is a "young adult" or "adolescent"

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 29 points 1 week ago (3 children)

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.

[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

"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

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Women and children are usually two subsequent words which imply innocent people not involved in any combat.

It's because they want people to mentally subtract "military-age males" from the figures.

[–] flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Oh, didn't know about the meme, thanks

[–] anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 week ago

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.

[–] hansolo@lemmy.today 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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.

[–] GrilledCheese@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No? Like fucking take the effort to verify you’re claims my dude

https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/youth

“There is no universally agreed international definition of the youth age group. For statistical purposes, however, the United Nations—without prejudice to any other definitions made by Member States—defines ‘youth’ as those persons between the ages of 15 and 24 years. This definition, which arose in the context of preparations for the International Youth Year (1985) (see A/36/215), was endorsed by the General Assembly in its resolution 36/28 of 1981. All UN statistics on youth are based on this definition, as is reflected in the annual yearbooks of statistics published by the UN system on demography, education, employment and health.”

[–] hansolo@lemmy.today 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The claim was based on me attending "national youth day" activities with a bunch of guys that seemed way too old, and wondering why, then the same day the radio told me included people to to age 35, "according to the UN." So the data point stuck like that.

Which makes sense as this was a southern African nation that likely took their definition from South Africa. Which uses the age of 35.

https://1library.net/article/definitions-of-ys-of-youth-the-concept-of-youth.qop452mz

And the UN does recognize variance in the definition of "youth" in local contexts.

So either we're both wrong, or both right. You pick.

[–] GrilledCheese@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Fair enough. I apologize for the snarky tone.

[–] hansolo@lemmy.today 4 points 1 week ago

No worries, and to be fair, I didn't know the UN had its own standalone definition that ended at 24 until you mentioned it. So maybe we both learned about the grey area that caught us both up.

[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah, it would feel weird calling a 17 year old a child.

[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

If you're more than 8-10 years older than that, it absolutely does not feel weird in the slightest.

[–] Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 week ago

These unconvicted foreigners, who some people refer to as "InNocEnt ciViLiANs"

[–] NoForwardslashS@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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.

[–] lemmyknow@lemmy.today 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Minor Attracted People (MAP)?

[–] defaultusername@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

North American Marlin Brando Look-Alikes

[–] lemmyknow@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago

Oh, those guys

[–] teslasaur@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Gotta be specific so the pundits can't make up their own definition.

But who can really say, what defines children? /s

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And yet the brain isn't really fully developed until the early 20s.

It’s twenty five, not early twenties.