A 35 year replication study (1984 > 2019) looked at how people perceive **male victims of sexual assault by female perpetrators**. The results are uncomfortable:
⭕ * Female participants became *more* likely (in this specific scenario) to:
* say the male victim “encouraged it”
* assume he “enjoyed it”
* view the experience as less harmful
⭕ * Male participants, however became *less* likely to blame male victims over time.
And overall, male victims assaulted by female perpetrators were still:
* seen as more responsible
* assumed to experience more pleasure
* taken less seriously than other victim–perpetrator combinations
---
So IMO this is not just random bias - it reflects how social narratives shape perception. When a system strongly reinforces: “male = perpetrator” & “female = victim”, then cases that don’t fit that pattern get mentally “corrected”:
* harm is minimized
* responsibility is shifted
* seriousness is reduced
We didn’t just raise awareness - we **optimized for one type of victim**. And like any system that over-optimizes - it creates blind spots, distorts judgment and quietly sidelines people who don’t fit the dominant frame
This doesn’t mean female victims’ issues aren’t real. They absolutely are. But It means **fairness isn’t divisible**. If your framework can’t recognize *all* victims accurately,
then it’s not justice it’s a selective lens.
⭕ And selective lenses always come with a cost.
---
⭕ Judgments About Male Victims of Sexual Assault by Women: A 35-Year Replication Study
DOI: [https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605211062990](https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605211062990)
Source: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34978934/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34978934/)
---
Want to leave a comment?
hey I see you just made this sub. I'm adding the politics tag to it, if that's cool.
-Cicero