The Word You're Looking for is "Rape"

A few days ago, I found out that my daughters friend was raped. She is 4 years old. I found out via a local news article. The article fails to use the word rape although that is what happened. Instead, the article and corresponding tv news broadcast say that a 4 year old child, who doesnt even have the ability to understand what has happened to her was wrong and evil, performed oral sex on her rapist, framing it as though there was some degree of consent. Children cannot consent to sexual acts; they do not have that ability. They do not have the knowledge and reasoning and experience to do so. She was raped, and the news anchors and whoever wrote the article appeared to actively avoid the word, despite the act falling into the legal definition of it.

I dont understand their failure to fully and accurate describe the act as exactly what it was: rape. Are they going easy on him? Furthermore, the title of the written article says that the man who raped my daughters friend was accused, while the body of the article states that he confessed. The use of the word accused implies that whether or not he committed rape against a toddler was still in question, when it had already been confirmed. There was no question. I dont understand the point in saying a confirmed act of sexual violence against a child is only an accusation. I dont understand the thought process behind framing the rape of a child as the result of any sort autonomy on the childs part. Surely these news reporters understand the significance of connotation and denotation when it comes to choosing the words they use. Surely they understand the difference between a confession from the mouth of a perpetrator and an accusation. Im certain that a lot of thought goes into crafting headlines.

And as these thoughts buzzed about in my mind, I saw yet another news report of a similar crime as I scrolled through my Facebook news feed. In this story, a teenager was arrested for posting a video of himself raping a child under the age of two years old. Once again, in this news story, the word rape was not used. Instead, the news anchor said the teen posted a video of himself having sex with the child. Again I was a bit more than bothered and quite confused by the way this story was framed. Having sex implies a certain level of consent; however, it was not sex. It was rape, and I do not understand why they did not just say that. Calling it anything other than exactly what it is appears as though they are trying to downplay the severity of the crime, and I do not understand why anyone would want to do that. Maybe it is not a conscious effort on the part of the reporters to disrespect the victims and their families in this way. Im sure there is no malicious intent, but I do wonder what sort of subconscious bias must have played a role in how these stories were presented. In both stories, the victims are African American. Could that have something to do with the medias failure to report the horrors inflicted upon these kids as rape? Its possible. Could it be symptomatic of our societys issues with rape culture? Thats also possible. Could it be our problem with labels, such as our failure to call the Alt-Right neo-Nazis even though theyre goddamn neo-Nazis? Yet another possibility.

Whatever the cause may be, I wish that members of the news media would not be so bizarrely lenient or forgiving when reporting the crimes of monstrous individuals who knowingly, consciously, willfully carry out acts of violence against innocent people, especially when those innocent people are children. Do better.