We’re Using All the Wrong Words to Describe Jeffrey Epstein’s Victims
Why do media outlets continue to use language that frames some of Epstein’s actions as consensual sex?
--
We still don’t have the language to talk about sexual violence — and nothing exemplifies this reality better than the case against Jeffrey Epstein.
Dozens of Epstein’s victims showed up at a federal courtroom in Manhattan on Tuesday to attend a hearing about dismissing the indictment against the late sex offender, who faced two sex trafficking-related charges at the time of his suicide. Much of the coverage was disturbingly — though predictably — indelicate, given the subject.
“He… engaged in sex acts with the girls during naked massage sessions,” the New York Times reported. CNBC described Epstein’s pedophilia as “sexual obsessions.” The Associated Press said the teenage girls had “[fallen] into Epstein’s web” when talking about the process by which the financier groomed dozens of teenage girls to become abuse victims. In each instance, these news outlets failed to emphasize the depth of Epstein’s abuse, glossing over the fact that Epstein’s teenage victims were forced into circumstances they did not consent to.
Tuesday’s coverage followed a familiar pattern of whitewashing. In the four days following Epstein’s arrest in July, Jezebel counted at least 90 mentions on TV and radio news outlets of the term “underage women” to describe Epstein’s victims, who were actually teenage girls. (Some of the victims mentioned in his indictment were as young as 14.) Prestigious print and digital outlets also fell prey to this oxymoron. But even after news outlets rightfully moved away from the term, they continued to frame — often unintentionally — some of Epstein’s actions as consensual sex or downplay his abuse.
Of course, the problem goes well beyond Epstein. Susan Ehrlich, a professor of linguistics at York University in Canada, has done extensive research on the language surrounding sexual violence at criminal trials. She tells GEN that judges often describe sexual assault in terms that more closely resemble consensual sex in their decisions, even when the perpetrator is guilty. For example, they may use the word “fondled” instead of “groped.”
