LogFAQs > #965063200

masterplum posted...

Adult man?

But that assumes the news story is the killer, Most articles I have read have had the lead of the 10 people killed, which makes the killer additional details which changes the readers perception.

It probably doesn't help that I discuss rhetoric quite a bit with my spouse who teaches high school rhetoric classes so the nuances of these sort of things are especially apparent to me so it bothers me when people make blanket statements about them

Yeah, at this point you're being willfully obtuse if you're going to die on the hill of "being called a teenager is actually worse for a killer than being called an adult". Even in your earlier example, look at your own words:

"One is an adult who we can't control because society says that person is now able to fend for themselves
The other is a child who should have been protected meaning proper safe guards should be enacted to prevent it in the future"

According to you, we can't control an adult, while a child should have been protected. The latter infantilizes the mass murderer and makes it seem like he's a victim in his own right.

The whole reason for this wording debate is to point out how the black VICTIM of an act of violence is called a "man", which is an inherently more threatening term than "boy", thus making the violence against him seem more justified by comparison. Meanwhile, the white PERPETRATOR of an act of violence is called a "boy", which makes him come across as less rational and less in-control of his own actions, thus his actions, however horrific and heinous, can be downplayed.