Karen Tompkins, of Montagu Road, Kingsbridge, writes:

I am responding to a couple of articles in the July 1 Gazette, the first being the Academy Gazette article written by a Year 12 student.

I was a leave voter, but I was not ‘singing in the streets till the morning’, as stated, but was actually doing what the article said the remain voters had to do, which was ‘drink their ­coffee and hurry to work’. So, exactly the same as me.

I actually went to sleep at 10.30pm on referendum night. I got up at 6am to walk the dog, eat, drink coffee and – surprise, surprise – go to work, like many leave voters. Yet according to the writer, this kind of activity only took place by remain voters.

So I have to question: is such wording – from this young ­student, most likely too young to vote, just like I was in 1974 when I would not have voted to join the EU even then – ­actually a form of discrimination against me and what would seem to be deemed as ‘my kind’, ie the non-species called a leave voter?

If it wasn’t so laughable and naive, I could actually take real offence and do something other than write this letter about such an attitude, but the writer is young and will become wiser one day and learn a bit more about the world and its ­inhabitants, I am sure. The ­article is written eloquently enough, but the writer needs to think very carefully about wording, as so far it is no better than those being used by senior politicians in the remain camp against the leave voters.

May I remind the writer and any like-minded readers that we are all human, as stated in the writer’s follow-on article in the same Gazette, and quote part of the late Jo Cox’s maiden speech to Parliament: ‘We are far more united and have far more in common with each other than things that divide us.’

It may well be that 72 per cent of 18- to 24-year-olds voted to remain, as the writer states, but not 100 per cent; and in fact, a large number of said age group didn’t even bother to turn out and use their ­democratic right to vote, which is shameful considering that many people fought hard to win the right to vote for the plebs, women and younger ­generation. And may I just say that this referendum was just that – our right as a country to be the democracy that was fought for.

Yet even with those ­honourable intentions, I, as a leave voter, am branded by many remainers as a racist, which I am not; unemployed, which I am not; and according also to an article in the same Gazette, written by David Hanmer of Toad Hall Cottages, I am not even a good person, as he clearly states that ‘the good people of the South Hams voted to remain’.

So then, not only am I ­apparently not a good person, I am, according to the writer of the article above Mr Hanmer’s, not even a person, or people, as the writer states that the ‘people of the South Hams voted to remain’ – so I don’t even come into the category of people, it seems. An unperson?

Am I to be slung out of the South Hams, perhaps? This is not looking good for me (tongue in cheek). Good job I’m a bit of a feisty sole, otherwise this almost hatred in writing I keep reading about ‘my kind’ could be quite upsetting.

So, in conclusion my fellow humans out there, however you voted, please treat me and ‘my kind’ with some respect, as I am reasonably intelligent and have worked solidly for 40 years, paying my taxes. I can at least hold my head up high because, in spite of having to work that day, I found time to go and vote and have a drink in the nearby pub after, supporting local business.

Oh, and by the way, my 21-year-old daughter, who has lived in London for three years studying to be a vet, voted to leave the EU; yet she is not unintelligent, studies with and has friends there of every creed, colour and nationality, was brought up from the age of three in the South Hams, but still voted to Leave the EU, 1. because she believes in ­democracy, and 2. because although she loves the diversity of London, she sees daily how severely overcrowded it is becoming. So what say you both to that?, I wonder.