Yet another dying gasp of the story about the questionable behavior of several Duke athletes at a party. Now it's about the judge who made inappropriate comments about the athletes. And still the woman is described as an "exotic dancer" hired to work at the party. I realize this is an attempt at a polite way to describe a stripper.
But what if it said the athletes allegedly raped a dancer hired to entertain at the party?
What if it simply said the athletes allegedly raped a woman at the party?
Why do the journalists think it's important that we know she was an exotic dancer? Does that steer us to think it's really not that shocking that she may have been raped? That it's maybe just a little bit okay?
Think about the classist bias in the contrast between "dancer" and "exotic dancer." Or between "a woman" and "a woman hired to ..."
[Disclaimer: yes, I know the charges were dropped. This post is about the language describing the woman, not the guilt or innocence of the boys (men?).]