blog.co.uk  »  Next Blog  »    Create your own blog for free •   •  Flag this blog Login

Ages of man

by KandAmoist @ 19/09/2007 - 08:20:53

When is a youth a man? it seems to me that according to the news coverage, a 17 year old male, if a victim, is termed a youth, whereas if accused of a crime he becomes a man. Anyone else noticed this?

And when does a male infant become a boy and then make the transition to youth?

Boy, youth, man are not - in my opinion - definitions that are relevant only to legal matters, but they also carry an emotive element, related - I think - to the way society believes it has a duty of care to the vulnerable; the younger the person, or the way that person is defined, then the greater our duty of care - because they are not capable of taking on that care for themselves.

There are many ways in which we are subtly influenced by such word-related perceptions of maturity. There was a considerable debate on another blog about the age of (sexual) consent: my take on that is that individuals mature emotionally and physically at different chronological times - and on that basis some could be "ready" to have an "adult" sexual relationship from any time from say 15 years onwards, but because of those individual variations then society must make all efforts to limit the explotation of "young" people and set the legal bar a bit high for safety's sake. Also, society's differ, what mey be appropriate in the UK in 2007 is not necessarily what is appropriate in other cultures.

But let me get back to the original questions - have you noticed how the news media reports age differently, according to the context, and where should we draw the lines between boy, youth and man - and of course the female equivalent - and indeed, should they be the same age divisions for male and female?



 
 

Trackback address for this post:

authimage

Comments, Trackbacks: Hide subcomments

jangorjangor [Member]
2007-09-19 @ 09:35

And why hide their identities? Surely its better to name and shame?

KandAmoistKandAmoist [Member]
2007-09-19 @ 10:07

I believe that someone merely accused of a crime has the right not to have their name associated with that crime in the minds of the public, until they are found guilty.

There ae too may cases where innocent people have been accused of crimes, and indeed found guilty. Today, the Great British Press seem to take great delight being judge and jury as well. Yes, by all means name and shame the guilty - not the innocent.

But do you have a comment on the questions I originally asked?

phinebootyphinebooty [Member]
2007-10-05 @ 14:33

I am not sure i understand the question. the media is always biased nin the way they report, you are right about that, but i thought children were children until the age of 12, when they become youths till 19 and then yourng adults till about 26. i am talking in terms of society and the law. however as u rightly say some children seem to mature faster than others and therefore we need certain things to be regulated.

I cant stand it when someone is "allegedly" accused of something, the media portrays them as guilty already. these days they sometimes exclude the sowrd "suspect2 in their reports. i guess saying a 17yrold who is dead is a "youth" is to emphasise the loss of a young life, however they should still call the killer a youth as well. whats the difference if they are the same agi#e? maybe you have to mbe a "man" to kill as opposed to being a boy? i dunno, sorry for the nonsensical reply

Leave a comment :

Your email address will not be displayed on this site.
Your URL will be displayed.
Allowed XHTML tags: <!, p, ul, ol, li, dl, dt, dd, address, blockquote, ins, del, a, span, bdo, br, em, strong, dfn, code, samp, kdb, var, cite, abbr, acronym, q, sub, sup, tt, i, b, big, small, img>
URLs, email, AIM and ICQs will be converted automatically.
Options:
 
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Set cookies for name, email & url)
Validation code:
Please enter the above code here:
For protection from spambots (case-sensitive).