The Power of Language:

How We Talk About Abuse Matters

The language we use to describe abuse does more than communicate what has happened. It can influence how harm is recognised, how experiences are interpreted, and whether someone feels able to seek support. For a person experiencing abuse, finding the words to describe what is happening may be difficult, particularly when the behaviour has developed gradually or what has been accompanied by affection, dependence, fear, or manipulation.

Thoughtful language does not require us to impose labels on another person’s experience. Rather it allows us to describe behaviour with greater accuracy, recognise the influence of power and context, and respond to people without inadvertently reinforcing shame or blame.

Why Language Matters

Language provides a framework through which we make sense of our experiences. When we lack the words to describe something, it can be difficult to recognise it as part of a broader pattern. Abuse does not always present itself in ways that are immediately recognisable. Controlling behaviour may initially be described as jealousy. Persistent pressure may be understood as affection or determination. Isolation may be framed as protectiveness. A relationship characterised by intimidation and control may simply be described as “toxic”.

These descriptions are not necessarily false. They can, however, be incomplete.

There is an important distinction between describing how behaviour appears and understanding what that behaviour is doing. Someone may feel jealous without becoming controlling. Someone may express concern without restricting another person’s independence. Someone may persist in expressing interest without disregarding another person’s boundaries.

More precise language can help us identify that distinction.

When Language Minimises Harm

The words we choose can sometimes make harmful behaviour appear ordinary, mutual, or less significant than it is.

Calling someone “possessive” may sound like a description of personality when the underlying behaviour involves monitoring, isolation, or control. Describing repeated sexual pressure as “being persistent” may obscure the fact that a person’s boundaries were not being respected. Referring to distress as “drama” can diminish an experience that may be profoundly affecting someone’s sense of safety.

Language can also influence where responsibility appears to sit.

Statements such as “they trusted the wrong person” or “they should have known better” can unintentionally position the person experiencing harm as responsible for failing to anticipate another person’s behaviour. A more careful approach asks what the other person did to establish trust, create dependency, exploit vulnerability, or disregard boundaries.

This distinction matters because the language surrounding an experience can become part of the experience itself. When a person is repeatedly told that they are overreacting, being difficult, or responsible for what happened, they may begin to question their own perceptions.

When You Cannot Find the Words

You may know that something felt wrong without knowing what to call it. You may recognise that you felt pressured, frightened, controlled, or diminished without being able to explain exactly why.

That uncertainty does not make the experience less worthy of attention.

You do not need to determine whether something meets a particular definition before seeking support. You can begin with what you know: something happened, it affected you, and you want to understand it.

Understanding can develop over time. The language may come later.

Pink Cross can support people to explore patterns of behaviour, understand their experiences, consider safety, and identify appropriate pathways for support without judgement.

Words Can Shape Understanding

There is no single vocabulary capable of capturing every experience of abuse. Language must remain flexible enough to account for individual circumstances, different forms of harm, and the ways people understand their own experiences.

What matters is that our language does not obscure harm, reinforce harmful assumptions, or place responsibility where it does not belong.

When we speak with greater precision and compassion, we create space for complexity. We become better able to recognise patterns that may otherwise remain hidden and better equipped to respond when someone is struggling to make sense of what has happened to them.

Sometimes, the first step towards understanding an experience is simply having the words to begin describing it.

The Importance of Context

Words such as “choice” and “consent” can also become misleading when they are considered without context.

A decision may appear voluntary when viewed from the outside while being shaped by circumstances that are not immediately visible. Fear, financial dependence, isolation, threats, manipulation, emotional attachment, unequal power, and concerns about what may happen after refusing can all affect the choices available to a person.

Recognising these influences does not mean removing someone’s agency. It means understanding that agency exists within circumstances, and that those circumstances can materially affect a person’s ability to act freely.

This is particularly important when discussing exploitation. Asking, “Why did they agree?” may place the focus almost entirely on the person experiencing harm. Asking, “What circumstances surrounded that decision?” allows us to consider the wider dynamics of power, vulnerability, and coercion.

The same principle applies to the question, “Why didn’t they leave?”

Leaving may not have been straightforward or safe. A person may have feared escalation, financial insecurity, homelessness, losing access to their children, social isolation, or retaliation. They may also have remained emotionally attached to someone who was causing them harm.

Understanding these circumstances does not excuse abuse. It allows us to understand why leaving is not always as simple as it appears.

Language and Trauma

Trauma can also affect the way a person remembers, communicates, and makes sense of what has happened to them. Disclosure does not always occur in a clear or chronological narrative. A person may hesitate, minimise certain details, contradict themselves, become emotional, appear detached, or struggle to find words.

These responses should not automatically be interpreted as evidence that an experience was insignificant or that a person is being unreliable.
For someone disclosing abuse, being asked to explain their experience in precisely the “right” way can itself become another source of pressure. They may already be questioning whether they will be believed. They may fear judgement, consequences, or being blamed for what happened.
A trauma-informed response makes room for uncertainty. It listens without demanding a perfectly ordered account and avoids treating a person’s difficulty in articulating their experience as a reflection of its validity.

Sometimes, the most supportive response is simply to allow someone the time and safety to find their own words.

The Language We Use About Survivors

The words used to describe people who experience abuse also deserve consideration. Terms such as “victim” and “survivor” can carry different meanings, and individuals may have different preferences.
Neither term should be imposed as though it can adequately define an entire person or experience.
More importantly, language should not imply that a person’s actions caused or justified the harm they experienced.
Someone does not become responsible for another person’s abuse because they trusted them, returned to them, remained silent, did not immediately seek help, or struggled to recognise what was happening.
Trauma-informed language recognises complexity without turning that complexity into blame.

Using Language More Thoughtfully

We can all become more conscious of how our language shapes the conversations we have about abuse.

Describe behaviour with precision

Rather than relying on only broad labels, consider what occurred. Specific descriptions can make patterns of control, pressure, or exploitation easier to recognise.

Consider the circumstances

A person’s decisions should not be separated from the environment in which those decisions were made
Avoid language that assigns responsibility to the person experiencing harm
Questions should create opportunities for understanding rather than imply that someone could have prevented another person’s behaviour

Allow people to describe their own experiences

Offering language can be helpful, but assigning a label before someone is ready can undermine their sense of agency.
Listen without demanding certainty
A person does not need a perfectly articulated account for their distress to be taken seriously.

Where to Find Help:

SWOP (Sex Workers Outreach Project)- (02) 9184 9466
1800RESPECT – 1800 737 732 or 0458 737 732
Project Respect – 0477 001 110

In an emergency call 000 or 106 for text-based relay service

Pink Cross is a survivor led charity that was created to take action against the critical epidemic of suicides, deaths, post-traumatic stress disorder, illegal drug use and violence within the adult entertainment and sex industries.

We release weekly newsletters to discuss current events and social issues that affect our supporters. We also provide valuable access to resources to ensure everyone has the support to access a safe and respected quality of life. At Pink Cross, we believe that every voice counts, so if you would like us to discuss a specific issue then please reach out.

Q Magazine applauds Pink Cross for the amazing work they do and suggest that if we all practiced a bit more acceptance rather than tolerance, the world would be a better place.