The horrifying crisis unfolding at Penn State reminds us, yet again, of the carelessness of language used when we write about sexual violence.
In an AP article printed in the New York Times the headline reads, “2 Top Officials Step Down Amid Penn State Sex Scandal.” In countless other articles across far too many publications, journalists have also used the phrase “sex scandal” to refer to Penn State’s former defensive coordinator, Jerry Sandusky, allegedly raping and otherwise sexually abusing at least eight young boys.
A sex scandal is when, for example, a politician has an extramarital affair with a young female intern or when an evangelist preacher has an extramarital affair with a young masseur or another politician has a history of visiting escorts. In any such situation, there is (consensual) sex involved and the circumstances within which that sex was had are scandalous.
When we are talking about rape, sexual abuse, or sexual assault, and/or when these terrible acts of sexual violence occur between adults and children, we are talking about scandals of sexual violence. They are rape scandals, sexual abuse scandals, or sexual assault scandals but they are not sex scandals. Sex is consensual. Rape, sexual abuse, and sexual assault, as well as violent sexual acts forced upon children by adults are not consensual.
Additionally, focusing more on the impact this rape scandal might have on the legacy of an institution or a famed football coach instead of focusing on the impact the rape scandal (the acts of sexual violence themselves, the extensive, long term cover up, the permissive, corrupt culture that allowed the cover up to continue for more than a decade, etc.) has on the victims, is also careless and shameful.
The legacy that matters here is the one this travesty will create for victims of sexual violence who have so little incentive to come forward and name their accusers in a culture where acts of sex and sexual violence are represented synonymously. The language* used to write about sexual violence must reflect the acts of sexual violence that have been perpetrated and that language must do so without being exploitative or gratuitous. There can be no exception.
***
The Dart Center offers an excellent set of resources for journalists on writing about sexual violence and trauma.
***
You can read Roxane’s first “Vocabulary Primer” here. Also, if you haven’t already read it, please don’t miss Brian Spears’s excellent essay “The Spirit of Violent Lamentation.”
6 responses
http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2011/11/07/did-herman-cain-try-to-rape-sharon-bialek/
Speaking of misusing words: people keep accusing Herman Cain of “sexual harassment.” But groping for someone’s crotch and pushing her head towards his pants–that’s not quite the same as telling someone their job depends on sleeping with you. It’s sexual assault.
I also witnessed a FB discussion with people trying to compare Cain’s very unwelcome sexual advances (and sexual assaults, as CB pointed out) to Clinton’s affairs. KW and ML were of age, and engaged in consensual sexual acts. They were not raped, or groped. Regardless of what they said or did later. THOSE were sex scandals. I feel for those children, many of whom are now college age the,selves, it would appear from the time lines, and their parents now. These headlines must be horribly painful. Call it what it is–child rape.
Frankly, I’m glad to see media outlets taking the “innocent until proven guilty” thing seriously, which–if I’m being perfectly honest–is something you seem quick to forego here, Roxane.
Firstly, I think you’re attacking a connotation that YOU’RE imparting, which seems unfair to the journalists. I’m not so sure about this idea that consent is somehow built into the dictionary definition of “sex.” And it’s an important thing to wonder about, because you’re suggesting that a lack of consent makes “sex scandal” a misnomer…when I’d say that it’s a perfectly accurate label, albeit one that works more broadly–and inherently less inflammatorily–in much the same way as it worked in the Clinton case (as opposed to, say, “Cigar-in-Vagina Episode”).
Do you see what I did there? Using the most explosive terminology under the banner of “accuracy” is not a safeguard against trivializing the matter. It’s a tactic for swaying the court of public opinion…which is something I think good news organizations must always be vigilant against. And it’s not like they gloss over the actual accusation in the story. If we’re worried about them trivializing, I think “He’s been charged with sexually abusing eight boys over 15 years” takes care of that pretty handily.
I’m not even positing that the dude’s gonna end up walking. Sounds like he’s a really bad guy who raped a bunch of kids and deserves everything he gets and a lot more. But as an uninvolved “audience member,” I’m not obligated to allow for the possibility of his innocence. Journalists are…and I think it’s a little off base to attack them for using what sounds like a pretty thoughtful vocabulary.
Josh, Sandusky has not been accused of having sex. He has been accused of having non-consensual sex with minors. He has been accused of rape and sexual abuse not fucking a woman with a cigar. We are talking about scandalous sex versus scandalous sexually violent crimes so the matter of guilt has nothing to do with the terminology used. The presumption of innocence is denoted by the term alleged. This is not complicated.
thank you! thank you! thank you! please don’t stop-to use language like “molestation” in reference to children in foster care being repeatedly and systematically raped is as much a crime of negligence as not reporting it to the police and everyone in the community-
bless you-
a
“Sandusky has not been accused of having sex. He has been accused of having non-consensual sex with minors. He has been accused of rape and sexual abuse not fucking a woman with a cigar. We are talking about scandalous sex versus scandalous sexually violent crimes so the matter of guilt has nothing to do with the terminology used. The presumption of innocence is denoted by the term alleged. This is not complicated.”
Very well said.
Click here to subscribe today and leave your comment, or log in if you’re already a paid subscriber.