I wrote about the way the language is interpreted by some pdocs in some jurisdictions. The DSM doesn't require penetration, but the way the language is interpreted, some pdocs proceed on the basis that...
Threatened or actual physical assault.
Threatened or actual sexual violation.
It's not possible to interpret this any other way than it is written. Threatened - meaning, "almost happened". And actual, meaning "happened".
One could debate whether dry humping is physical assault or sexual violation, I suppose. But it unequivocally
threatens sexual violation.
Someone grabbing my genetalia is at minimum, threatening a sexual violation, and at maximum, making one.
The DSM (or ICD) does not relate to what the law in any jurisdiction might say.
Threat is determined through both the doctor's objective observation of the description of the event, and their subjective observation of the client's perception of the event. If the person experienced it as sexual threat, and it is clear enough that it was a sexual threat (go back to my grabbing genitals example), then it's a qualifying trauma.
It's more important to remember that not everyone with trauma develops PTSD. So, this is why the OP should be talking with a doctor about the whole picture of what they are both remembering and experiencing.
