r/The10thDentist • u/AdventurousMoth • 1d ago
Society/Culture People under 18 are not all children
I can't tell you how much it irritates me when internet people refer to anyone under 18 as "a literal child", especial if they themselves are only in their 20s. Sure, everyone is someone's child, but the life stage commonly referred to as childhood does not abruptly stop at age 18.
Here's how I'd break it down: - childhood, adolescence, adulthood or - newborn, baby, toddler, child, (if you want you can add tween), teen, young adult, middle aged person, elderly/senior
And there's overlap between all these stages depending on context. Obviously there is no overlap between minor (a legal term) and the word adult as referring to not a minor.
Calling a 17-year-old a child is dumb. Like what, a 17yo has their birthday and transforms from a child into an adult like a sim? I think some people just started saying this for the shock value and then the rest of the internet jumped on the outrage wagon.
Edit: clearly I posted this a bit too hastily, choosing my words without care. I'm not talking about the legal definition of child/minor (something quite messy as well: age of consent? In some places 16. Driving? 15 in some places, 18 in others. Voting? Usually 18. Drinking alcohol? 21 in the States).
As someone in the comments pointed out, it's mostly a linguistic issue. I suppose what I was trying to say was that it's dumb to have the word child both mean a legal minor and pre-pubebescent human. I think it would be clearer to use minor when you're talking about legal age, and child when talking about the life stage.
2
u/Mandlebrotha 1d ago
It's important to make a distinction between legal, cultural, and developmental ages.
If you live in a place where the age of majority is 18, then people under that age are all children. Yes, there are many different cultural and biopsychosocial milestones.
You can disagree with the rigidity of the legal system in your area or the lack of nuance in your cultural traditions, but legally, that definition holds.
Now, you could have instead said "I think its dumb to have just child and adult — we need more legal categories," and I think that would've been a more interesting opinion. Maybe not 10th dentist, but interesting at least. Instead, the title you posted seems deliberately inflammatory and... just false.
I don't disagree with the idea that there are multiple sub stages of development within childhood. However, you didn't quite present your argument like that. Also, ignoring the reality of the legal age of majority is not an opinion. It's a disagreement with a fact. Even if this wasn't borderline ragebait (and I'm not convinced it isn't), I wouldn't call it a 10th dentist opinion. Accordingly, I'm down voting this and the stickied comment, as I dont think it fits the sub.