Since when is rape a “sex scandal”?

So You Think You Can Blog logo. Features the mudflap girl dancing. Image by Patrick Sheehan

A SYTYCB entry

A version of this piece appeared on my personal blog Great Scott, A.

Despite the common recognition that sex and rape are not the same, why does the media refer to incidents that solely involve sexual assaults and abuse as “sex scandals”? In my mind, a sex scandal involves two (possibly more) adults engaging in consensual sex acts and for whatever reason, they should not be doing so. The “scandal” is that the fact that they are engaging in sexual acts and that this information has been made public. Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinski. Sure, you could make an argument that his powerful position may have influenced the situation, but it was clearly not rape. Other examples of “sex scandals” that follow the logic of the term: videos or pictures of celebrities having sex, Anthony Weiner tweeting pictures of his crotch, Herman Cain’s former mistress making it public that he was unfaithful or John Ensign’s skeevy attempt to hush his mistress by having his parents pay off her husband. Those are scandals that involve sex or sex acts perpetrated by consenting adults. They are all VERY different from sexual assault, rape and sexual abuse.
I understand that the term “scandal” can mean anything from:

1.a disgraceful or discreditable action, circumstance, etc.

2.an offense caused by a fault or misdeed.

3.damage to reputation; public disgrace.

4.defamatory talk; malicious gossip.

5.a person whose conduct brings disgrace or offense.
From Dictionary.com

or
1 a : discredit brought upon religion by unseemly conduct in a religious person 
 b : conduct that causes or encourages a lapse of faith or of religious obedience in another

2: loss of or damage to reputation caused by actual or apparent violation of morality or propriety : disgrace

3 a : a circumstance or action that offends propriety or established moral conceptions or disgraces those associated with it 
  b : a person whose conduct offends propriety or morality

4: malicious or defamatory gossip

5: indignation, chagrin, or bewilderment brought about by a flagrant violation of morality, propriety, or religious opinion
From Merriam-Webster

or

1. A publicized incident that brings about disgrace or offends the moral sensibilities of society: a drug scandal that forced the mayor’s resignation.

2. A person, thing, or circumstance that causes or ought to cause disgrace or outrage: a politician whose dishonesty is a scandal; considered the housing shortage a scandal.

3. Damage to reputation or character caused by public disclosure of immoral or grossly improper behavior; disgrace.

4. Talk that is damaging to one’s character; malicious gossip.

From The Free Dictionary

The term “scandal” and its various incarnations are not what I have an issue with; it is the usage of that word proceeded by “sex” – “sex scandal”. Rape is not sex, so if something involves rape and not sex, we should not classify it as having anything to do with sex. Rape and sex are similar in **possibly** one way (as I see it) and that is the physical action. It is the context that makes them dissimilar and horrific.
Were I to show a picture of a black man doing farm work to one group of people and tell them he was a farmer, then to another group of people and tell them he was a slave, the reaction would surely be different, even if the physical action is similar. Mainstream media seems to believe that if genitals are involved, the terminology for what occurred involving those genitals can used interchangeably. I say we demand otherwise.

I know that media outlets look for opportunities to short-hand headlines and that alliteration is a commonly employed tool in lots of written work. When I hear “Penn state sex scandal” I know what they are referring to, but it is incorrect. Sex is willful. Rape is not.

It is time we as a culture stop referring to horrific criminal, immoral acts as “scandals”. The attempted cover-up of these events could possibly be classified as scandals, but that only minimizes how they are thought of in the collective conscious of our citizenry and is no excuse to short-hand such crimes. It is true that *some* media outlets are calling these incidences “Sex abuse scandals”. That seems more accurate, but why not go for complete accuracy? “Penn state sexual abuse cover up” or “Penn state child-rape and cover up”? When news outlets use the term “child-sex” my thought process is usually ““child-sex”? Oh, you mean rape”. Because since children cannot consent, any sexual act that they are forced to engage in is not “sex”, it is rape.

  • 
Staff Sgt. Luis Walker raped women and did immense psychological harm to members of the air force he was supposed to train to serve our country.
  • Monsignor William Lynn covered up mass rape and sexual abuse of boys in the church.
  • Jerry Sandusky raped, abused and molested young boys.

These were not “sex scandals”. Rape and abuse is not a “sex scandal”. The covering up of institutionalized rape and sexual abuse is not a “sex scandal”. These were crimes of the worst nature, complete with manipulation, humiliation, dehumanizing the victims and then rewarding the perpetrators. They should not be in the same boat as a celebrity sex-tape, an affair between married people or an affair between civil-servants in which one was paid off to keep quiet. They might be shady behaviors, but certainly, not the same as rape. It is time we acknowledge that and call it what it is. It is rape, not a “sex-scandal”. If there is a cover-up involved, that fact should be preceded by the crime; which is rape, not a “sex scandal”.

Disclaimer: This post was written by a Feministing Community user and does not necessarily reflect the views of any Feministing columnist, editor, or executive director.

Join the Conversation