There is literally no such thing as 'sex with underage women.'

The language we use matters.

Words matter. And they especially matter when we are talking about the safety and well-being of children.

While the #MeToo movement has shed light on sexual assault allegations that have long been swept under the rug, it has also brought to the forefront the language we use when discussing such cases. As a writer, I appreciate the importance of using varied wording, but it's vital we try to remain as accurate as possible in how we describe things.

There can be gray area in some topics, but some phrases being published by the media regarding sexual predation are not gray and need to be nixed completely—not only because they dilute the severity of the crime, but because they are simply inaccurate by definition.

One such phrase is "non-consensual sex with a minor." First of all, non-consensual sex is "rape" no matter who is involved. Second of all, most minors legally cannot consent to sex (the age of consent in the U.S. ranges by state from 16 to 18), so sex with a minor is almost always non-consensual by definition. Call it what it is—child rape or statutory rape, depending on circumstances—not "non-consensual sex."


Another phrase that needs to go is "sex with underage women." Again, if someone is underage, sex is rape by law. But more importantly, the word "woman" literally means "an adult female." There's no such thing as an underage adult. "Underage" means "not adult," therefore "underage women" do not exist.

Racist women told Burger King manager to 'go back to Mexico.' He gave them a lesson in civics instead.

Teenagers under 18 are legally children, not "underage adults." Call them minors. Call them teens (though that gets fuzzy, as a teen could be 18 or 19). Call them children. But don't make them out to be young adults.

The phrase "had sex with underage women" is particularly harmful in that the wording downplays the reality of a grown man raping a 14-year-old. When we say that men like Jeffrey Epstein and R. Kelly are accused of "sex with underage women" or even "raping underage women," we paint a picture that dilutes how heinous alleged sex acts with children really are. (It also doesn't help that President Trump described his old buddy Epstein as liking "beautiful women" who are "on the younger side.")

And then there's the sexism aspect. How often do you hear the phrase "underage men"? Honestly, I'm not sure if I've ever seen or heard those words used together.

We have to avoid language that implies the girls involved in these sexual assault allegations were maybe-kinda-sorta willing parties, and that an old man's sexual appetite for girls "on the younger side" is somewhere in the realm of normal. It's not. It's disgusting and wrong and the only parties to blame are the grown-ass men who were the legally responsible people in the room.

Would you stay in a relationship with someone after learning they had a toxic political belief?

We need to avoid language that unnecessarily downplays that these people preyed on children. If the allegations are true, then these men — R. Kelly, Jeffrey Epstein, Donald Trump, and others who have been accused of raping teenage girls — are child rapists. Wealth, power, and prestige tend to shield people from the kind of swift judgment we'd lay down if a random adult male lured a 14-year-old into sex, but it shouldn't.

Language like "sex with underage women" only serves to protect pervy perpetrators and helps them get away with heinous crimes. It may be less comfortable to use the phrase "child rape," but legally speaking, it is more accurate.

Sex with a minor who can't consent is rape. "Underage women" don't exist. Teens younger than 18 are legally considered children. There's no gray area when it comes to the safety and well-being of children, and we need to stop using language that protects sexual predators and downplays their deeds.

Culture


Climate change is happening because the earth is warming at an accelerated rate, a significant portion of that acceleration is due to human activity, and not taking measures to mitigate it will have disastrous consequences for life as we know it.

In other words: Earth is heating up, it's kinda our fault, and if we don't fix it, we're screwed.

This is the consensus of the vast majority of the world's scientists who study such things for a living. Case closed. End of story.

How do we know this to be true? Because pretty much every reputable scientific organization on the planet has examined and endorsed these conclusions. Thousands of climate studies have been done, and multiple peer-reviewed studies have been done on those studies, showing that somewhere between 84 and 97 percent of active climate science experts support these conclusions. In fact, the majority of those studies put the consensus well above 90%.

Keep Reading Show less
Nature

As a child, Dr. Sangeeta Bhatia's parents didn't ask her what she wanted to be when she grew up. Instead, her father would ask, "Are you going to be a doctor? Are you going to be an engineer? Or are you going to be an entrepreneur?"

Little did he know that she would successfully become all three: an award-winning biomedical and mechanical engineer who performs cutting-edge medical research and has started multiple companies.

Bhatia holds an M.D. from Harvard University, an M.S. in mechanical engineering from MIT, and a PhD in biomedical engineering from MIT. Bhatia, a Wilson professor of engineering at MIT, is currently serving as director of the Marble Center for Cancer Nanomedicine, where she's working on nanotechnology targeting enzymes in cancer cells. This would allow cancer screenings to be done with a simple urine test.

Bhatia owes much of her impressive career to her family. Her parents were refugees who met in graduate school in India; in fact, she says her mom was the first woman to earn an MBA in the country. The couple immigrated to the U.S. in the 1960s, started a family, and worked hard to give their two daughters the best opportunities.

"They made enormous sacrifices to pick a town with great public schools and really push us to excel the whole way," Bhatia says. "They really believed in us, but they expected excellence. The story I like to tell about my dad is like, if you brought home a 96 on a math test, the response would be, 'What'd you get wrong?'"

Keep Reading Show less
Packard Foundation
True

I live in a family with various food intolerances. Thankfully, none of them are super serious, but we are familiar with the challenges of finding alternatives to certain foods, constantly checking labels, and asking restaurants about their ingredients.

In our family, if someone accidentally eats something they shouldn't, it's mainly a bit of inconvenient discomfort. For those with truly life-threatening food allergies, the stakes are much higher.

I can't imagine the ongoing stress of deadly allergy, especially for parents trying to keep their little ones safe.

Keep Reading Show less
popular
Amy Johnson

The first day of school can be both exciting and scary at the same time — especially if it's your first day ever, as was the case for a nervous four-year-old in Wisconsin. But with a little help from a kind bus driver, he was able to get over his fear.

Axel was "super excited" waiting for the bus in Augusta with his mom, Amy Johnson, until it came time to actually get on.

"He was all smiles when he saw me around the corner and I started to slow down and that's when you could see his face start to change," his bus driver, Isabel "Izzy" Lane, told WEAU.

The scared boy wouldn't get on the bus without help from his mom, so she picked him up and carried him aboard, trying to give him a pep talk.

"He started to cling to me and I told him, 'Buddy, you got this and will have so much fun!'" Johnson told Fox 7.

Keep Reading Show less
Most Shared