I read a small article in the Oxford Mail on Tuesday, November 22. The report sadly described how a 17-year-old was arrested for stabbing a man, aged 62, in Headington.

A serious story, of course, and I hope the victim makes a full recovery.

However, further on in the article the victim is described as “elderly”, at 62!

I see these ageist labels often used in your paper these days and I object!

No mention is made of his height, his colour, weight, physical condition or other spurious, unnecessary information, so why use the equally unnecessary adjective, “elderly”? Is it because the author of this little piece is still ensconced in their own little bubble of youth and can’t contemplate life after 40, or is it just carelessness?

I thought ageism was supposed to be frowned upon in this enlightened age, so why allow it?

At what age does the term ‘elderly’ become justified, I ask myself? ‘Never’ is the reply!

The next time the journalist concerned has to write an article about a 94-year-old man who has made his 18-year-old mistress pregnant, forget the ageist labels and merely state the ages.

Any human being alive above the age of five years will be able to work out the various characters’ likely levels of facility. Ageist adjectives are NOT necessary.

I do hope the journalist concerned won’t be too shocked when he or she finds out this letter was sent by email and not handwritten on parchment.

Perhaps I should turn up at your offices with a posse of similar minded ‘elderly’ people and flush the offending journalist’s iPhone down the toilet and burn their laptop, just to demonstrate our power and strength of feeling.

We could even record it on our iPhones and put it on Facebook within five minutes for the entertainment of the world!

Be warned!

RICHARD OAKLEY Witney (man 64, whitish, medium build, 6ft tall, balding, bespectacled, tetchy, curmudgeonly but not ELDERLY, nor a pensioner, senior citizen or any other similar unnecessary ageist adjective)