I have a technical question that maybe somebody here can answer: when a newspaper article, such as this one, says the woman was “sexually assaulted”, does that mean she was raped? If so, why does it not say “raped”? I have seen stories where the victim was described as having been sexually assaulted, but it was obvious that rape had not occurred, so I was wondering if there was some hard and fast rule about the use of the two terms in newspaper land.
Yes. When the use of the term is damaging to the perpetrator and he/she/it is a member of a protected class (minority, gay, Hispanic, African-American, etc.), then it is a "sexual assault". When the perpetrator is a white, heterosexual, Christian male, it is a "rape".
“Sexual assault” is a broad definition for a variety of sex crimes. I don’t want to get too descriptive here, but “sexual assault” typically includes forced sodomy, forced or coerced fondling and touching, anal penetration and vaginal penetration.
Depending on the jurisdiction, the legal definition of rape and sexual assault will vary. Historically, rape has been defined as forced sexual intercourse upon a woman. Other crimes of a sexual nature are typically considered sexual assault.
One can only guess what Mexico’s legal definition of rape and assault are. It is probably the Mexican definition that is in play here since this is where the attack occurred.
i hate that also about the media. I think they minimize “rape” to “sexual assault” to protect the perps. SA absolutely IS rape -— most of the time — from a legal perspective. No one likes to hear “rape”.....