Your position is obviously wrong both with regard to the Unicode standard and with regard to the meaning of the word "character."

Unicode does not define "character" because that term is far too imprecise for a deterministic standard. And the Unicode standard is extremely clear that an abstract character may be represented by multiple code points.

"A single abstract character may also be represented by a sequence of code points—for example, latin capital letter g with acute may be represented by the sequence <U+0047 latin capital letter g, U+0301 combining acute accent>, rather than being mapped to a single code point."

> Of course, in real life, character is a silly made-up word that means whatever you think it means and using it to refer to an extended grapheme cluster or glyph is probably closer to how people really think of them anyway.

Human language and writing are the defining inventions of the known universe. Unicode just happens to be one way of representing them. Referring to them as "silly and made up" in comparison to Unicode is nothing short of extreme mental illness.