2 hours ago, swiftcoder said:
Choosing to engage with a controversial topic is itself a statement thereon, whether or not you intend it to be one.
No it isn't. Choosing to feature a topic, and choosing to make a statement are two separate things. To make a statement is a deliberate active process. Watch:
Sometimes children are used in warfare.
I just said it. I didn't say I was for it. I didn't say I was against it. I didn't say I was neutral in regards to it. I didn't say I wanted to discuss it. I didn't say I didn't want to discuss it. I didn't say anything about it, other than that it is.
Choosing to feature a topic that CAN BE considered controversial CAN BE considered as a statement thereon. It's not up to me what another person takes to be a statement or not. And just because another person can consider something I have said to be a statement about something doesn't make it the case. Reality doesn't work like that.
One can use such a feature while remaining completely passive towards any wider ideals or concepts about the feature. And doing so is not a statement about that passiveness.
Of course, I'm aware of many of the ways* that the things that I say and do CAN BE interpreted, and, generally, I feel that I should do so responsible. But I don't always things this of the things I do, and I don't think that because this is something I (generally) try to do that it is an absolute maxim for mankind.
I can write a story. That story can feature soldiers. Those soldiers can be children. The fact that that aspect can have specific connotations or interpretations by some people doesn't make those connotations or interpretations of that aspect. Not any more than my featuring soldiers is a statement about war, or my writing a story is a statement about stories/prose/sentences/words/fiction/the English language, or the fact that my characters all eat meat is a statement about vegetarianism, etc.
*This list seems to be inexhaustible.