In a formal social context — i.e. 13 year old performs at a piano recital — we’d say “young woman/lady” to elevate and show respect for their effort.
In a familiar social context, I might call that same kid “twerp” because she stole my clicky pen to stim with.
In a criminal context, we’re talking about agency.
Young women (18+) can be independent, have a job, make decisions about their lives. They have enough agency to say yes to having sex with an older man.
Children (<18) can’t give informed consent like that, which makes sex with an older man automatically sexual abuse.
The press is being accused of implying that the victims (children who did not have the agency to give consent) belong to a category that can consent to sex with old men (young women) in a context (criminal) where agency matters.
Children (<18) can’t give informed consent like that
Do note that this is according to American law (and some other countries). It is younger in many other countries. Of course not so young as the little kids who were victims of this travesty.
But yeah, I get your reasoning. 👍 Wording and phrasing definitely matters in the light of context!
Uhm, I agree with the sentiment but allow me to be a bit anal for a second. (Trust me, this is strictly about language, not morals.)
Don’t people in English speaking countries say “young woman” to, say, girls in their teens? I.e. 13 and up, or like, shortly after puberty hits?
If you’re a “young woman”, yet still underage, are you not then, by reduction, an underage woman?
What am I missing? 😅
What? No? Maybe colloquially, a mother might say “young lady” to her daughter, but that doesn’t mean she thinks her daughter is an adult.
Right, that’s not really what I meant either. 👍
Context.
In a formal social context — i.e. 13 year old performs at a piano recital — we’d say “young woman/lady” to elevate and show respect for their effort.
In a familiar social context, I might call that same kid “twerp” because she stole my clicky pen to stim with.
In a criminal context, we’re talking about agency.
Young women (18+) can be independent, have a job, make decisions about their lives. They have enough agency to say yes to having sex with an older man.
Children (<18) can’t give informed consent like that, which makes sex with an older man automatically sexual abuse.
The press is being accused of implying that the victims (children who did not have the agency to give consent) belong to a category that can consent to sex with old men (young women) in a context (criminal) where agency matters.
Do note that this is according to American law (and some other countries). It is younger in many other countries. Of course not so young as the little kids who were victims of this travesty.
But yeah, I get your reasoning. 👍 Wording and phrasing definitely matters in the light of context!