3 ms·
I understand there are lots of reasons to protect the tribes, but I'm really disturbed by the article as it states "Funai told locals not to discuss the inciden
by gregoriol 2y ago
I understand there are lots of reasons to protect the tribes, but I'm really disturbed by the article as it states "Funai told locals not to discuss the incident". Why an "incident"? the situation described by the article doesn't seem at all to be an incident, but rather normal and ok
Also "Funai officials arrived soon after, and [...] he was taken to a nearby facility operated by the group", why not just let him live and go back to his people? (even though he would go back later) also the article states that they couldn't communicate right away with him, so did they force him to go with them? why so much situation for a guy who wandered around and found some people to talk to? maybe looking for some help?
- neallindsay 2y ago> Why an "incident"? the situation described by the article doesn't seem at all to be an incident, but rather normal and ok In colloquial use, "incident" has recently taken on a negative connotation because people don't generally use it except to refer to situations they would rather not elaborate upon. But in the slightly-formal language of newspaper writing it is frequently used to refer to the event that the article is talking about without repeating themselves. In this context it is neutral and has no negative connotation.
- jeltz 2y ago> Euphemistic meaning "event that might trigger a crisis or political unrest" first attested 1913. Recently? That use has been attested since at least 1913.
- neallindsay 2y agoFair point—that's older than I thought, but newspaper writing still uses the word in its non-euphemistic sense.
- oguz-ismail 2y ago> why not just let him live and go back to his people? What if he'd contracted a disease?