THE SCOURGE OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE
The term “sexual violence” often appears in the literature but its definition is broad and the term is used to describe rape by acquaintances or strangers, by authority figures (including husbands), incest, child sexual abuse, stalking, sexual harassment and homicide. Definitions are inherently normative. Defining sexual violence too broadly can reduce discussion to the level of the rhetorical, and risks obscuring the specifically sexualized nature of the violence and associated trauma. On the other hand, defining sexual violence too narrowly may fail to reveal the sheer diversity and scale of the problem and may lead to inappropriate or ineffective policy responses. For example in many legal codes rape is defined exclusively in terms of penile-vaginal penetration. In effect, this reduces other kinds of penetration (and male victims) to the status of lesser offenses. At its most fundamental, sexual violence describes the deliberate use of sex as a weapon to demonstrate power over, and to inflict pain and humiliation upon another human being. Thus, sexual violence does not have to include direct physical contact between perpetrator and victim: threats, humiliation and intimidation may all be considered as sexually violent when they are used with the above purposes. A number of international agreements and treaties legitimize action in relation to gender, sexual violence and the HIV epidemic. However wide disparities persist between universal declarations and local realities. Many societies implicitly (or even explicitly) tolerate and condone sexually violent behavior under specific circumstances: for example heads of household (usually males) may abuse others (wives, dependent relatives, children and servants) more or less with impunity. This is especially likely to be the case in situations where migrant laborers are recruited as domestic servants and their legal status in the country is entirely dependent upon their continuing employment. Such conditions may be a virtual license to abuse. Attempts to explain sexual violence in terms of nature, biology or evolution, not only over-simplify a complex phenomenon, but in effect (if not intention) perpetuate the problem by implying that it lies beyond human control. Sexual violence is a gendered phenomenon: its nature and extent reflect preexisting social, cultural and economic disparities between men and women. The relationship between victim and perpetrator reflects existing power differentials or struggles between people: for example between husbands and wives, between older men and younger men or children, between sex workers and clients or police, or between members of particular ethnic groups. In the same way that sexual violence mirrors gender inequalities so it reflects other forms of social inequality. Far from being universal, sexual violence is clearly associated with specific social settings and circumstances: in particular those characterized by social and political conflict and the breakdown of law and order which can occur in their wake; situations in which relations are hierarchically structured in terms of dominance and submission (most commonly reflected in terms of gender relations but possibly in other social or political rivalries). The vast majority of sexually violent acts are committed by men, whether against women, children or other men. The role of substance use, particularly alcohol, in relation to sexual violence is multi-faceted and complex. It is also gendered. Particular substances, e.g. alcohol,may affect individual behaviour (for instance in relation to disinhibition or aggression) while the social settings in which they are consumed, for example exclusively
male environments, may implicitly or explicitly condone sexually violent behaviour. However women may also be implicated as accomplices or as perpetrators: within the family, mothers in law may abuse in-marrying women. The sexual victimization of men and boys occurs and does so on a considerable scale in certain situations. However, it is highly likely that the shame and stigma associated with such violence will result in massive under-reporting. Responses to sexual violence against boys and men also reveal the extent to which sexual victimizations and passivity are perceived, in many cultures, to be utterly inconsistent with masculine gender and sexual identities. While there is always the danger that highlighting the need to consider male sexual victimization may distract attention from the more substantial problem of –sexual violence against women and girls, this does not necessarily follow: understanding more fully the specifically gendered and sexual dimensions of sexual violence, without resorting to uninformed generalizations and gender and sexual stereotypes, may prove ultimately to be illuminating in addressing the problem of violence more generally.
In addition to the psychological and emotional consequences of sexual violence, survivors may experience physical injury, unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections. The possibility of HIV transmission may be facilitated by damage to the genital area. A study in Mumbai reported that 20% of all pregnancies among adolescents seeking abortion had occurred as a result of forced sex, while a study in Thailand reported that one in ten rape victims had been infected with a sexually transmitted disease. The physical consequences of sexual violence may be easier to enumerate than the psychological, emotional or spiritual damage which may result and which may be devastating. In recognition of the longer-term nature of the trauma associated with sexual violence, a specific set of symptoms, not directly related to physical injuries sustained at the time of the assault, are gaining recognition as the “Rape Trauma Syndrome” which describes a devastating form of post-traumatic stress disorder (first diagnosed among military combat veterans). The consequences of situations of mass violence do not disappear in the post-conflict period. Rather they are borne (often in silence and shame) by survivors, by communities and by society at large. The healing of such trauma does not occur spontaneously but needs to be facilitated through sensitively provided health and welfare services for survivors and through collective mechanisms which bear witness and pursue justice for what was done.
