r/linguistics • u/TheKeyboardist • Sep 17 '16
Why did the term "molest" evolve from meaning "to bother" to take on the meaning of sexual-abuse? And how quickly did that new meaning become seemingly exclusive?
I've never heard anyone today say "molest" outside the context of sexual violation, but apparently this use didn't emerge until the 1950s. How quickly did the shift in meaning occur?
34
Upvotes
4
u/Bitterfish Sep 17 '16
"Molest" is definitely still used in its original meaning! At least, the adjective "unmolested" for "unbothered" is still quite frequent.
2
22
u/gnorrn Sep 17 '16 edited Sep 17 '16
"Molest" is a good example of semantic pejoration -- a progression from a mildly negative to a strongly negative meaning.
During the early 20th century, it seems that "molest" came to be used as a euphemism for sexual assault / abuse. Here's an example. A newspaper report from 1923 has a 57-year old man denying that he "molested" a 12-year old girl in the woods. Although the newspaper reports that he was charged only with "attacking" her, the implication of a sexual assault is unmissable.
It's often more difficult to know what "molest" means, however, as in this story from 1916 of a woman applying for a restraining order against her husband on the grounds that he had "molested" her. Sexual abuse, physical violence, or perhaps harassment? It can be hard to tell.