The term "genocide" carries immense legal and moral weight, but it can feel abstract or clinical when applied to the visceral, immediate horror of bodies being blasted into the sky. It may also feel inadequate because: 1.) Scale and Intensity: The sheer scale of destruction in Gaza—entire neighborhoods reduced to rubble, mass displacement, and the targeting of civilians—may feel like it exceeds the boundaries of what "genocide" typically evokes in public imagination, which often centers on historical examples like the Holocaust or Rwanda. 2.) Intent and Systematic Nature: While genocide implies intent, the relentless, systematic nature of the violence in Gaza, combined with the use of advanced weaponry against a largely defenseless population, might feel like a new category of violence that demands a term reflecting both the technological disparity and the deliberate targeting of civilians. 3.) Emotional Impact: The term "genocide" may not fully convey the emotional and moral outrage of witnessing such acts in real-time, especially through raw imagery like the one in the X post. The abstraction of legal terminology can feel detached from the lived reality of suffering.