What Is Sexual Abuse?

Find a therapist to heal from sexual abuse

Media framing child sexual abuse as a “relationship” harms children.

Sexual grooming is a psychological manipulation of children; language used to describe it can reinforce guilt.

Media portrayals often minimize female perpetrated child sexual abuse, but it is just as harmful.

Media language influences public perception of child sexual abuse and can increase harm to children.

Language shapes perception. Nowhere is this more consequential than in discussions of child sexual abuse. When an adult engages in sexual behavior with a child, it is sexual abuse. Yet media portrayals often use terminology that softens, romanticizes, or reframes abuse in ways that obscure power, coercion, and harm.

The media we consume influences how we interpret events, assign responsibility, and evaluate severity. Words such as “relationship,” “affair,” “involvement,” or “seeing each other” imply mutuality and consent. In the context of child sexual abuse, these implications are false. A child cannot legally or developmentally consent to sexual activity with an adult. Describing abuse using relational language risks distorting the inherent power imbalance and shifting perceived responsibility away from the adult perpetrator.

Research on sexual grooming provides important context. Sexual grooming is a manipulative process through which perpetrators choose vulnerable victims, gain access and isolate them, develop trust with the child and those around them, and then desensitize them to sexual content and physical contact. Following the sexual abuse, many perpetrators engage in what researchers describe as post-abuse maintenance strategies, which include tactics such as secrecy, normalization, threats, minimization, or inducing guilt to prevent disclosure. These dynamics frequently lead children to experience shame and self-blame, both of which are well-established barriers to disclosure. When media language suggests that a child “participated in” or “had a relationship with” an adult, it mirrors the distortions perpetrators themselves use to maintain silence and prevent disclosure.

The problem becomes particularly salient in cases involving female perpetrators. When women sexually abuse boys, media narratives are especially likely to frame the abuse as an “affair,” “forbidden romance,” or a “relationship.” Cultural myths about the sexual abuse of male children, such as the belief that boys are always willing participants or are harmed less by sexual contact with adult women, contribute to this reframing. Empirical research does not support the notion that abuse perpetrated by women is inherently less harmful. Male victims of female perpetrators experience the same adverse psychological outcomes, including depression, anxiety, trauma symptoms, and interpersonal difficulties, among others. Minimizing language reinforces harmful myths, diminishes perceived victimization, and may further silence male survivors.

Media coverage of the case involving Vili Fualaau and his teacher, Mary Kay Letourneau, illustrates this concern. Descriptions such as “sexual relationship,” “illicit affair,” or statements that the child “started a relationship” suggest mutual engagement rather than criminal sexual abuse. Such phrasing obscures the reality that an adult in a position of authority sexually abused a child. When authority, age, and differences in developmental level are reframed as romance, child sexual abuse is recast as choice.

However, minimizing language is not confined to cases involving female perpetrators. Media coverage of Jeffrey Epstein similarly revealed how terminology can obscure abuse. For years, reports describing Epstein and those around him as “having sex with underage girls” or referring to his victims as “young women” reflect language that shifts perceptions of adolescent minors into adulthood and reframes child sexual abuse as consensual activity. Descriptions that girls were “recruited” negate the grooming dynamics involved. In reality, Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell exploited economically and socially vulnerable minors, using money, status, and desensitization to facilitate abuse and prevent disclosure. As in cases involving female perpetrators, word choice has influenced public perception, blurring distinctions between consensual behavior and child sexual abuse.

Precision in language is not merely semantic. Framing theory suggests that the way information is presented influences how audiences interpret meaning and assign responsibility. When abuse is framed as romance, responsibility appears diffuse. When victims are linguistically aged up or portrayed as participants, harm appears diminished. Such portrayals may influence juror decision-making, policy debates, and, critically, survivors’ willingness to disclose. Children and adolescents who have experienced sexual grooming may already struggle with feelings of complicity and media-promoted narratives that imply consent may reinforce those internalized distortions.

What Is Sexual Abuse?

Find a therapist to heal from sexual abuse

If society aims to prevent child sexual abuse and support survivors, media narratives must reflect developmental science, legal standards, and empirical evidence. Children cannot consent to sexual activity with adults. Sexual contact between an adult and a child is child sexual abuse. Changing the words does not change the harm, but it can change who we hold responsible.

Stages of Sexual Grooming: Recognizing Potentially Predatory Behaviors of Child Molesters. G.M. Winters, E.L. Jeglic. Deviant Behavior. 2017.

For more information, see: Jeglic, E.L., & Calkins, C.A. (2018). Protecting you child from sexual abuse: What you need to know to keep your kids safe. New York: Skyhorse Publishing.

© Psychology Today