Is the expression ‘a legitimate rape’ logically appropriate and viable? [closed]

Solution 1:

Originally, legitimate and legal meant "pertaining to (the) law, defined in a law / by law". Later, they acquired a secondary, stronger sense of "allowed or approved by law".

The latter meaning has become so strong in legitimate that it is the first one we think of, almost suppressing the more basic meaning of "defined by law". This already happened with Latin legitimus with the same meaning.

This congressman used legitimate in the sense of "as defined by law", which I think has become so marginal for most speakers of modern English that they feel it is almost incorrect, it is jarring, because "allowed by law" is syntactically always possible as well, and the latter is the dominant sense of the word. So he meant rape as defined by law, but what he said sounded more liked rape as allowed by law, which is of course not possible.

As an alternative, you could say he used it meaning "as allowed by reason", as in a case of rape that reasonably deserves the name. This is by all means possible, but it is an unfortunate choice of words here, because the senses involving the actual law are so much present here that what he says becomes a bit confusing.

Solution 2:

Cerberus gives a plausible, but incorrect, interpretation of Akin's words. Akin has a history of trying to pass legislation that redefines rape into "forcible" and non-forcible varieties, such that only "forcible" rape is really rape in his mind. Akin even later clarified in an interview that he meant to use the word "forcible". Thus the correct interpretation for "legitimate" in this sentence is "genuine"

If it is genuinely a case of [forcible] rape...

That is, if the slutty woman didn't entice the helpless man and trap him with her sexual powers, and now lies about it claiming he raped her.

So grammatically, the phrase "a legitimate rape" should really be more like "legitimately a rape".

Solution 3:

We're on a not-so-fine line between "English" and "politics" here, but here's my two cents.

Accorinding to thefreedictionary.com, the word "legitimate" can mean:

1. Being in compliance with the law; lawful: a legitimate business.
2. Being in accordance with established or accepted patterns and standards: legitimate advertising practices.
3. Based on logical reasoning; reasonable: a legitimate solution to the problem.
4. Authentic; genuine: a legitimate complaint.
5. Born of legally married parents: legitimate issue.
6. Of, relating to, or ruling by hereditary right: a legitimate monarch.
7. Of or relating to drama of high professional quality that excludes burlesque, vaudeville, and some forms of musical comedy: the legitimate theater.

Obviously Mr Akin did not mean definition #1: rape is a crime and therefore cannot be "lawful". #2 and 3 are also pretty unlikely, and 5, 6, and 7 are clearly irrelevant. That leaves #4: "authentic, genuine". That makes perfect sense in context. He was distinguishing an actual, real rape from a false accusation.

In my humble opinion, the uproar here is all about politics. If Mr Akin had referred to a "legitimate robbery" or a "legitimate insider-trader accusation", as opposed to false charges for, say, purposes of insurance fraud or to harm the target of the accusation, I doubt anyone would be making a big deal about his use of the word "legitimate". Yes, some might think of definition 1 and note an amusing juxtaposition of words, but it would be at most an amusing footnote, not the huge storm that has been made of it.