What's in a name?

Victim or survivor? Which term best describes those who have experienced sexual violence? Over the past few years, the phrase 'rape survivor' has become common parlance in academic literature and the media, and it is easy to see why. 'Survivor' carries connotations of strength and resilience. The verb 'survive' bestows agency on the recipient of the violence; 'victim' gives agency to the perpetrator.

Interestingly, Barbara Ellen's Guardian article on the trivialisation of rape - somewhat ironically entitled 'Rape: lets take more care when we talk about it' - sticks with the more traditional 'victim'. 'It is never the victim's fault that a rapist strikes', Ellen writes. Who has the agency in that sentence? Not the 'victim', who is a passive recipient of the violence. The rapist, on the other hand, 'strikes'; he is active, powerful.

If we replace victim with survivor, the phrase has a completely different tone: 'It is never the survivor's fault that a rapist strikes'. Now both the rapist and the survivor are active. The survivor is not just a recipient, but an agent. A survivor has more dignity than a victim. She has autonomy, power, and a future. She is alive.

Read up on language, power, and rape:

• Linda A. Wood and Heather Rennie, 1994. 'Formulating rape: the discursive construction of victims and villains', in Discourse & Society 5(1), pp.125-148.
• Elizabeth M. Schneider, 2000. Battered women and feminist lawmaking (New Haven: Yale University Press).