Was this handled correctly?

[goofieslonglostsis]

Thanks EPSG, I agree with you.


Sunset; why focus on that "person or child"? Yeah it isn't the smartest use of the vocabulary. But really? I can find no ill intentions behind it. THAT is what would bug me, not the fact that a child gets mentioned after person. It wasn't meant in a negative, demeaning or whatever way. Perhaps the reality of things showed mentioning of just person would result in too many companies not taking kids into consideration? And instead of adult and child, person and child was used? Heck, what do I really care what the reason was; I can find no negative intentions behind it and that's what's the biggest value for me. Focussing on it does no good, but does easily leave one feel negative emotions.

 

[sunset30]

I didn't mean it as a dig or anything against any poster AT ALL, nor did I take any particular offence at "person or child" I just have come accross it several times (in various places, usually for legal reasons, so at a systemic level rather than as a criticism of anyone) and wondered whether there was a reason for the term rather than adult or child?

 

[goofieslonglostsis]

First up; I didn't take your posting as if you were being confrontive to anybody at all. I read it as if you read the legal quotes and the use of "person or child" had your feelings kinda hurt, the latter mostly because of the "isn't my child a person?".

Odds are there is no reason, or at least as in 'done on purpose because....'. Might be me, but I really do read it as either bad use of language and or mixing up 2 types of texts and not catching it (like for instance changing "person" into "adult and child"). I would highly doubt anybody would single out kids as another group than persons fall under.

Well, maybe one caracter on this globe I run into on another board I frequent. But that's such a huge ehm.... non childlover nobody takes what that individual says about kids serious anyway.