Language Matters: Stop Censoring Sexual Assault Survivors

Content warning: Sexual assault

Every week, I volunteer as a medical advocate for sexual assault survivors. This means I’m called into hospitals around the Chicago area to help support and advocate for survivors as they receive treatment for any form of sexual violence they’ve experienced. 

When talking about my experiences as an advocate, I was surprised how uncomfortable people became during conversations surrounding sexual abuse and violence. 

I’ve recognized most people tend to avoid the use of words like sexual assault, penetration and rape. 

The avoidance of descriptive language is a pattern also seen in media, the usage of these terms often leading to videos being taken down, age-restricted, or demonetized on popular platforms like TikTok, Instagram and YouTube

Censorship of words like “rape” and “sexual” assault can be detrimental to the healing process of victims by limiting their ability to speak out, impacting societal comfort around descriptive language about sexual violence and creating an aura of shame and judgment surrounding discussion or disclosure of sexual violence. 

The issue of censorship has become so prevalent that the implementation of new policies and procedures may be necessary to protect voices and reimagine public perception of survivors. 

Surivivors’ reactions to the trauma of sexual assault can vary due to differences in age, gender and community. Aspects of the assault — including the level of violence, injuries sustained and the survivor’s relationship to the perpetrator — also affect the healing processes. 

The way a survivor is received after disclosing their assault to someone directly impacts their healing process. 

Negative reactions, like judgment or blame, can expose survivors to higher rates of depression, substance abuse and the development of PTSD, according to a study by the National Center of PTSD. Alternatively, the study found positive reactions like offering help and listening led to better coping skills expressed by survivors. 

Negative reception to survivors can in part be traced back to media portrayals and censorship of survivors’ testimonies. A 2020 study showed that media often favors perpetrators of sexual assault and encourages non-descriptive depictions of sexual assault. 

Censorship in media platforms is intended to protect users from threats like sex trafficking. In 2017 The US passed the “Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act” and the “Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act” — more often referred to as the “FOSTA-SESTA” act 

These acts were intended to prevent sex trafficking on social media platforms by requiring platforms to censor — take down, restrict, or demonetize —  content that referred to prostitution or alleged solicitation of sexual services.

Unfortunately, a 2024 study found that popular platforms like TikTok would over-regulate sexual language leading to popular hashtags like #sexualassault and #rape being taken down. Additionally, posts using words like “rape” or “sexual assault” were also flagged and removed, even without the use of these hashtags.  

Many survivors and advocates turn to the use of algospeak — the purposeful misspelling of substitution of  moderated words — to ensure their videos aren’t taken down. When sharing their stories, survivors will often use the word “grape” instead of rape, and “SA” instead of assault.

Over-regulation discourages survivors from using descriptive language to share their stories and advocate for change. For many survivors, using these terms is essential for their healing process and affirming their experience.

Being forced to use muted language when referring to sexual violence can lead to survivors feeling ashamed of their assault, impacting a survivor’s decision to access support services or speak up. 

Censoring people’s sexual abuse stories due to the direct language they use can create the impression that survivors’ stories are too horrible to be shared. This notion can be isolating to survivors, encouraging them to keep the details of their assault secret. 

When survivors are empowered to use their voice, they’re able to advocate for change. Censorship demoralizes people by making them second-guess their experience and limiting the reach their story has. 

Current policies around sexual violence censorship don’t act in the best interests of survivors. 

As public support is necessary for policy change, media platforms’ language censorship frameworks are preventing the formation of new guidelines capable of helping survivors. 

Instead of focusing on the words themselves, media platforms need to implement nuanced policies that can differentiate advocacy stories from people who are being harmful. 

A removal of blatant censorship around descriptive language referring to sexual violence would change popular social narratives around sexual assault, affirm survivors’ experiences and empower them to share their stories, ultimately creating a framework for survivors to create change.