Abuse Excuse: How Sexual Abuse and Assault Are Minimized in Different Ways Across Different Age Ranges

      The image seen below is a visual representation of how the claims of sexual abuse survivors of different age ranges are usually minimized, ignored, invalidated, and effectively silenced.

     The most common way that sexual abuse and assault claims made by people under five years old, seem to be "They're too young to remember the abuse" and "they're not forming memories at that age". It follows, from this, that what happened didn't really count as abuse, so it's almost as if the abuse didn't happen.

     Children age five to nine seem to have the problem of not being young and vulnerable enough to elicit as much sympathy as would be necessary to respond to claims made by a child of this age. Sadly, this age group - five to nine years old - is probably the age range at which most child molestation victims begin to experience abuse. Abuse of children within this age range is downplayed by lines of thought such as "They're too old for me to care" or "they're not young enough for me to care", or "younger kids have it worse". So this line of thinking goes, it doesn't really matter if those kids are abused, because it's possible to point to another group of kids who have it worse.

     Abuse of children age eleven to thirteen is typically minimized with sayings such as "They've got to start sometime" and "They've got to learn somewhere". This line of thinking sweeps-aside the notion that one must be of age to give fully informed consent in the first place, and simply reasons that the fact that the accuser is underage doesn't matter, because they are not that far beneath the age of consent.

     Abuse of children ages fourteen and fifteen often revolve around claims that the child "knew what they were doing", so therefore, the sexual contact must have been consensual. The assertion that the person has already begun puberty, is also frequently used as an excuse as to how the sexual contact must have (or could have) been consensual.

     Abuse of children ages sixteen and seventeen often focus on the place or places where the alleged sexual contact happened, largely due to the fact that different states have set different minimum ages necessary to be considered capable of giving informed consent to sex. These laws have also changed across time, so what year the contact occurred, also influences whether the accuser would have been considered old enough to consent at the time. However, the mere fact that the accuser was legally capable of giving consent, does not necessarily mean that the accuser did give clear affirmative consent on that particular occasion. Thus, a sexual abuse accuser's being over sixteen years of age may be used against them. The claim that the contact was not consensual, is dismissed, simply because the person was able to consent (and without regard to the fact that, before the incident in question, they did not consent).

     An argument which goes along those same lines, is typically used to invalidate the abuse claims of people between the ages of eighteen and twenty-four. Just as with people ages sixteen and seventeen, those age eighteen to twenty-four are assumed to have consented - on particular occasions, when they claim that the contact was unwanted - simply based on the fact that they were old enough to consent. Just as being above the age of consent in one state does not automatically make sex consensual, being above the age of consent in all states also does not automatically make sex consensual.

     Twenty-five years is commonly cited as the age at which our brains finish forming. Some put this age at twenty-eight. Whatever the truth is, it appears that our brains finish forming years after most states set their legal ages of consent to sex (as well as marriage, driving, smoking, drinking, signing a contract, voting, etc.). This situation causes many people to believe that people age twenty-five and above, must have consented to sex they claim was unwanted, simply because the person was well over the age of consent. Again, being above the age of consent is not proof that every sex act you are involved in, was consensual.

     Some people commit fraud, manipulation, drugging, and overt acts of physical force in order to get sex. The only direct relationship which the age of the victim has, to whether sex is consensual, is the relationship between age and maturity, for non-disabled people. This correlation signifies that people under a certain age cannot be deemed capable of giving fully informed consent, by society and the law, due to their diminished ability to understand long-term and permanent consequences.

     Although the image below omits the specific age group of people age sixty or sixty-five and older, it should be noted that many jurisdictions, consider people of advanced age to be feeble, and thus incapable of consenting to sex, when the other partner is not also of advanced age.

     Senior citizens, people who will soon become senior citizens, and people who are dating senior citizens, should be aware of any and all existing laws which may limit the age range of the people with whom they can legally engage in sexual activity. There may also be laws providing for longer sentences for those who commit sexual abuse and assault against people over a certain age.

To view the above image in full resolution,
right-click on it, and open it in a new tab and/or window,
and download if necessary.

Image created on March 28th and 31st, 2025.

Article / explanation of image written on March 31st, 2025,
edited and expanded on April 1st, 2025.

Published on March 31st, 2025.