Submitted by Victor on
Promoting the use of clear language among children’s rights advocates
Children are exposed to many forms of violence, some, it would seem, more extreme than others. The term extreme violence is gradually being used at the international level as an umbrella term to refer to violence perpetrated by so-called “violent extremist groups” during armed conflicts. This violence includes killing and maiming, abduction, forced recruitment, and rape and sexual exploitation. Yet the term contains several deficiencies.
Firstly, while extreme violence is clearly a variation of wording used in the terms “violent extremism” and “extremist violence”, it does not have a generally accepted definition, so its meaning remains elusive, which leads to it being used arbitrarily.
Secondly, the term gives a name to violence that is perpetrated specifically by “violent extremist groups”, despite the individual forms of violence committed already having names, suggesting that rape, for instance, by an armed group is different from rape by anyone else. This denies the fact that violence against children is exactly that, regardless of the perpetrator.
And thirdly, that the term categorises violence as extreme suggests that some forms of violence are more - or less - reprehensible than others. The law indeed treats violence by its degree of severity; but the use of adjectives like extreme, which are not standardised or legally recognised, means terminology risks being understood subjectively and used arbitrarily. What’s more, the issue raises the question that if certain violence is defined as extreme, what would constitute, say, mild violence? And are adjectives such as mild even defensible? In such circumstances, the prudent approach is to call things by their existing names.