Fairfax Fail

At the moment I'm reading Judas Rose, the second in the Native Tongue series by Suzette Elgin. One central idea running though the series is that language shapes reality. I'm enjoying these books in that way one enjoys reading things that reinforce beliefs one already holds. For many years I've been of the opinion that the language we use reflects and shapes how we think, and that changing that language can help change the way we think.

As such the language used in the media relating to women really freaking shits me off. This piece of Fairfax reporting was a real corker.

Let's start with the headline "Girl sells sister, 7, to gang rapists in flat 13C". The active voice used for the 'girl sells sister' sets up the blame for the rape on the 'girl' (15 year old sister), while rapists remain passive to the rape. It's almost as if those gang rapists were sitting around minding their own business in flat 13C until some 'girl' came around to barter with them, and heck, there was nothing else to do so they bought. Can we think of a better headline? How about 'Men gang rape sisters', because if you actually get past the victim blaming in the article, you see they were both in fact raped.

The first half of the article is full of shock-horrors that the 15 year old could do such a thing, and wanting to get her tried as an adult, because she was 'paid' for her sister's rape. It's all set up as the big nasty sister sold the child, and isn't she evil! No one seems all that concerned that actually raping children is evil, that the men who committed these crimes are evil.

When you get through all that you finally read that the sister was also raped. But that's not mentioned, no, apparently she 'sold sex'. Deep breath, here we go again Fairfax, having sex with a child is rape, whether they 'consent' or are paid or what. The age of consent in New Jersey is 16 (if the other person is over 18), since both 'boys and men' were involved, I think 'was allegedly raped' would be a better term than 'sold sex' for gods sake!! The big sister in this story sounds like a messed up kid who was abused by a group of men, it's rape.

So we have two girls, one older, one younger. The older one is already being abused by these men, then they abuse the little sister too. Does no one bother to wonder what situation the older sister was in that this is where she ended up, with her little sister? What actual agency did this girl have? What actual power did she have in this situation? Not much I'm betting.

It is of course not the job of the news reporter to speculate on this sort of thing, but the way the whole article is set up puts the focus squarely on the conduct of the 15 year old child, instead of the goddamn rapists. The article reads like the rapists are periphery to the whole thing, passive, just doing what men do.