**TL;DR** — **It is an individual choice.** Unless someone has gone through the horrifying experience of being raped, they cannot place themselves in the victim’s or survivor’s position. It would be an understatement in the extreme to say that rape precipitates seismic change in someone’s life. It changes the way that they view themselves. As a result, individuals use different labels to describe their experience. ‘Survivor’ has become a term increasingly used because it allows the individual to reclaim their power. [Rape is fundamentally a crime of power] (https://time.com/5789032/victim-survivor-sexual-assault/). Yet, the term survivor returns the power to the individual. It can be viewed in the terms that ‘this has happened, but it is not going to break me’ (this is not a quotation but rather a way of articulating the thought process). The rapist has not broken the individual. The use of the term survivor was seen particularly in the trial of Larry Nassar, the convicted serial rapist and sex offender, former USA Gymnastics national team doctor, former osteopathic physician, and former professor at Michigan State University College of Human Medicine. The footage of the trial (available on YouTube) sees the term ‘survivor’ used to describe each of the women who were brave enough to come forward and speak out against their abuser. Likewise, Amos Guiora’s book _Armies of Enablers_, which analyses the Nassar trial, exclusively uses the term survivor. Similarly, the website [Everyone’s Invited] (https://www.everyonesinvited.uk/read-testimonies-page-37) describes the accounts of rape as ‘survivor testimonies’. However, women who have been raped [disdain] (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/15/i-disdain-the-word-survivor-michelle-bowdler-moira-donegan) the word survivor. This based on the rationale that they _endured_ the rape rather than _surviving_ it. ‘Victim’ meanwhile is the more accurate description of what has happened for some as they have been violated without being in fear for their life. To that end, when it comes to defining themselves in relation to their rape, some choose to use the term that best reflects their experience. This is their prerogative. In sum, it is not a question of how ‘we’ describe people who have been raped, but rather how ‘they’ choose to describe themselves. Both labels are used and so it is our responsibility to respect the choice of each.

**TL;DR: 'Survivor' can be a helpful term for some people who have experienced rape, however, we should work hard to protect the term 'victim' as well.** Nowadays it seems the word ‘victim’ is used as an insult, often tied to phrases like ‘professional victim’, and ‘victim culture’, both extremely damaging in a culture where rape is too often blamed on the victim or dismissed. The word ‘survivor’ steers clear of this stigma, attaching something positive to people who have experienced rape. The term acknowledges the resilience and bravery of rape victims, and when used to refer to themselves, can help some people heal and see a future after devastating abuse. Mentioned above by jh2211, Aly Raisman’s speech at the hearing of Larry Nassar, USA Gymnastics doctor sexually abused many young athletes, comes to mind, as she told him that she was ’no longer a victim’ but a ‘survivor’, that the gymnasts abused were now a ‘force’ against him, and that he couldn’t take the love of gymnastics away from them. However, we should continue to use the word ‘victim’ to acknowledge the harm that is done to rape victims and the predatory nature of rape, and should not let the term be hijacked by those who victim blame or dismiss rape and sexual assault. The issue with the term ‘survivor’ is that it often consigns the damage of rape to the past when in reality, victims often deal with the effects for the rest of their lives. The term ‘survivor’ has its place, but perhaps should only come from victims themselves rather than imposed from the outside, and never because ‘victim’ has a negative stigma attached.

**TL;DR – Since “survivor” conveys a little more than “victim” in regard to the nature of rape, I believe it remains a useful term in this area of discourse.** • At the end of the day, it is down to the individual who has experienced a rape attack to decide how they would prefer to be called. • However, I believe that the term “survivor” should still be used because it more explicitly acknowledges that rape is a violent act. This is because the term is commonly used to describe instances where a person has emerged from a dangerous situation, for example a [“hurricane survivor”](https://www.weather.gov/safety/hurricane-survivors) or a [“shooting survivor”](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43069670). In contrast, the term “victim” is not used in the same way. To illustrate this point, a person can be described as a “victim” of prank calling, which is a non-dangerous act. In light of this, it would sound rather strange to refer to such a person as a prank calling “survivor”. To do justice to the individual in question, the term used to describe the attack needs to encapsulate its abhorrent nature. In my view, "survivor" does this well.

We should call them whatever they want us to call them. Some people prefer survivor. Some don't. Hell, some rape victims don't even want to be referred to as a "victim". I'm not going to then proceed to refer to them as a rape victim. I'll just have to figure something else to do with my language in the moment.