2. 2
Definitions of Rape and Sexual Assault
In its essence, human sexual contact is achieved via basic instruments: consent or
negotiation, pressure or exploitation, and force or intimidation (Groth 2001). Consent or
negotiation is a mutually agreed upon, and freely participated in, sexual encounter free
from coercion. Nonconsensual sexual activity is an encounter in which a person is
unwillingly forced to participate in a sexual act; this may be pressured or forced upon an
unwilling victim. Pressured assaults involve a victim in a vulnerable situation, where
their non-participation in a sexual act will result in social, economic, or career
consequences (Groth 2001). A forced assault is one in which the physical safety of the
victim is threatened, and their non-participation in the sexual encounter will result
directly in physical harm; a forced assault is most commonly labeled by the term rape
(Groth 2001). In any situation, a nonconsensual sexual act is considered an assault (Groth
2001).
In the State of North Carolina, first-degree rape is defined in statute as vaginal
intercourse against the will of the victim utilizing a dangerous or deadly weapon, or
inflicts serious physical injury, or is aided and abetted by more than one person (N.C.G.S.
§14-27.2). First-degree rape also applies if the victim is a child under the age of 13 with
the age of the defendant at least 12 and at least 4 years older than the victim (N.C.G.S.
§14-27.2). Second-degree rape is vaginal intercourse against the will of the victim, or if
the person is mentally disabled, incapacitated or physically helpless (N.C.G.S. §14-27.3).
First- and second-degree sexual offenses follow the same format as the conditions for
first- and second-degree rape, weapon/age/multiple persons for first-degree and non-
willfully/mentally debilitated for second-degree (N.C.G.S. §14-27.4-5).
3. 3
The statutes for the State of North Carolina largely mirror the outline for
nonconsensual sexual acts identified by Groth (2001). The employment of a weapon
during the commission of a nonconsensual sexual act aggravates the crime, reflected in
the charge of first-degree; the exploitation of a minor by coercively using the power of
age is reflected in the first-degree charge for sexual offenses and rape. Second-degree
rape and sexual assault encompass the unwilling sexual contact between victim and
defendant, including states of mental incapacitation where the victim is particularly
vulnerable and consent is unattainable. The definition of rape in North Carolina does not
cover all nonconsensual sexual acts as it specifically identifies vaginal intercourse as the
condition for rape, meaning that penetration of any other type is ineligible for prosecution
under the rape statute.
The Offense and The Offender
In order to best understand the victimization of sexual assault and rape, a base
understanding of the actual offense and the offenders needs to be established. A sexual
assault results from the utilization of one of three types of attacks on the victim:
confidence approach, surprise attack, or blitz attack (Canter 1996). Confidence or con
approach is the utilization of verbal contact to execute a ploy of deception, gaining the
trust of the victim before assaulting. Surprise attacks employ the instrumental use of
force, either physical or psychological, in order to obtain control over the victim. The
blitz attack is characterized by the sudden, immediate use of extreme violence to render
the victim incapacitated (Canter 1996).
4. 4
Groth’s typology is widely regarded as the first explanation for the motivations
behind sexual assault. Rape and sexual assault are pseudo-sexual acts according to Groth,
the main motivation for which is power or anger (2001). Power motivated rapists seek
sexual control over their victims, utilizing sexual conquest as a means by which to make
up for perceived inadequacy (Groth 2001). Rapists motivated by anger utilize sexual
assault as a way to express repressed feelings of anger and rage, characterized chiefly by
severe brutality in the physical attack (Groth 2001). The expansion of these typologies
came from Hazelwood and Burgess establishing four types of assailants, stating that
rarely does a rapist exhibit the characteristics of only one type, but a combination thereof
(2008).
Power-reassurance rapists have no intent of inflicting any punishment on or
degradation of their victim, instead seeking to actualize a complex and ritualistic
consensual encounter (Hazelwood, Burgess 2008). Power-reassurance rapists ultimately
seek to reassure themselves of their virility, doing so by taking power away from their
victim. The level of force is instrumental, often implementing a surprise attack when the
victim is a stranger, and a confidence approach when the victim is an acquaintance
(Hazelwood 2008). Victims of this offender type are often assaulted at home, after a
period of surveillance that familiarizes the offender with their victim. Due to the desire of
this rapist to achieve a consensual sexual experience, the offender will often apologize to
their victim and make contact after the assault, extending the period of trauma for the
victim. These offenders are likely to be repeat offenders with a minimal amount of time
between attacks, and are therefore a significant threat to a community or geographic area.
5. 5
Power-assertive rapists do not seek reassurance of their masculinity, but exercise
a sense of entitlement in order to express their virility and establish dominance over their
victim (Hazelwood 2008). This offender group generally uses the confidence approach,
attacking the victim after their defenses have been reduced and trust has been granted.
The use of force can range from a moderate to an excessive level of violence, intensifying
with the resistance of the victim. No empathy is shown for the victim of the power-
assertive rapist. Victims of the power-assertive rape are often subjected to verbal assault
as well as physical, with degradation and dominance of the victim being integral towards
the gratification of the assailant (Hazelwood 2008).
Anger-retaliatory rapists act out of a hatred for women, personified by their
victim, employing a brutal level of violence while executing a blitz attack (Hazelwood
2008). These offenders choose their victims for no other reason than their representation
of a hated group, acting impulsively to retaliate for a wrong, perceived or actual (Groth
2001). These attacks are likely to occur at any time, with the victimization happening
because the victim was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. The violence
utilized in this attack is extreme, with the primary motivation being the expression of
anger with a secondary, opportunistic, sexual act (Hazelwood 2008). As a result of the
tactics employed by this offender type, victims are often in danger of a lethal attack.
Anger-excitation rapists represent the smallest percentage of attacks, but represent
the most violent and lethal threat. These offenders are sexual sadists who are sexually
excited by the victim’s response to emotional and physical pain (Hazelwood 2008).
Victims can be males or females of all ages, races, and demographics, subjected to the
paraphilic preferences of their rapist. Victims of these assaults have reported being
6. 6
subjected to foreign object penetration and extreme levels of pain, in addition to the
psychological pain experienced by being assaulted repeatedly (Hazelwood 2008). The
high-level organization of this offender makes prevention of assault extremely difficult.
Sexual assaults can also come as a result of the commission of a separate crime,
where the assault results from the opportunity to achieve sexual gratification. These
opportunistic rapists are generally the only rapists to be motivated chiefly by sex
(Hazelwood 2008). As a result of the rape of opportunity, victims of this rapist are
victimized twice: once by the commission of a robbery or burglary, and the sexual assault
that results. Gang rape is an assault characterized by a groupthink mentality (McRaney
2012). In almost all instances, a group leader initiates the act and there is almost always a
reluctant participant or participants who act in unanimity with the group, but recognize
the alternative. These attacks can result extensive injury to the victim, and the victim is
chosen because they are perceived as weak, vulnerable, and deserving of the attack
(Hazelwood 2008).
The Victim
The assault is the primary source of victimization for sexual assault victims, and
suitable victims are selected based upon the motivations of their assailant. Victims can be
categorized by their level of risk in accordance with their lifestyles and surroundings
(Hazelwood 2008). Low-risk victims have lifestyles that do not expose them to
criminogenic activities and spaces; these victims are targeted by their assailants and
actively pursued. Moderate-risk victims are essentially victims who would be low-risk
but due to circumstances such as employment, lifestyle, and situational hazards have an
7. 7
elevated risk at the time of their assault. High-risk victims are persons whose lifestyles
put them constantly in harms way due to participation in criminal elements such as drugs,
criminogenic locations, or associations with motivated offenders.
The immediate trauma of victims is reflected in the rates of Post-traumatic stress
disorders. Post-assault victims are highly susceptible to PTSD, with 94% of victims
experiencing PTSD within 2 weeks of the assault and 47% of victims within 3 months of
the assault (Ullman, Filipas 2001). Victims of sexual assault experience higher or lower
instances of PTSD based upon the nature of their assault or a history of sexual abuse.
Victims who were attacked by strangers, threatened by force or weapons, or physically
injured during the attack are more likely to suffer from higher levels of PTSD (Ullman
2001). Yet another aggravating factor for intensity of trauma and PTSD is a history of
sexual abuse in the victim’s past, with the victims feeling of lost control contributing to
more symptoms of PTSD (Ullman 2001).
Though victims of sexual assault are most obviously victimized by the assault
itself, the issue of “secondary victimization” comes as a result of the societal reaction. As
a result of the ad-hominem fallacy, the victims are viewed as being implicit in their own
victimization (McRaney 2012, Ullman 1996). The just-world fallacy acts as a security
blanket, ensuring that the person employing the logical fallacy mitigates the chances of
their own victimization by asserting blame on the victim for their assault. These fallacies
attribute the assault to a direct result of characteristics exhibited and controllable by the
victim. Such characteristics include the sexual activity of the victim, the victim’s
clothing, the activities that the victim engages in, the resistance level of the victim, and
the use of alcohol by the victim prior to the assault (Ullman 1996). The widespread
8. 8
employment of these logical fallacies creates an unwelcoming sphere for victims to feel
comfortable reporting their crimes out of fear of a personal attack on their character.
The definition of rape in society is greatly affected by the availability heuristics
employed, applying associations with what is “real” rape in order to determine the
legitimacy of a claim (Brown, Horvath 2009). Even in situations where people are aware
of the fact that acquaintance rape is more prevalent, assaults by a stranger are viewed as
more serious and traumatic. This is true, in fact, as the vast majority of sexual assaults
(reported and unreported) are perpetrated by acquaintances (Brown 2009).
The societal reaction to sexual assaults creates an environment for the
perpetuation of learned helplessness, evident in the extremely low rate of reporting in
sexual assaults (Berzofsky 2013). According to a sample of college students conducted
by McMahon, 53% of college students agreed that the actions of a female student led to
her assault (2010). Even more damning is the evidence that suggests college students,
both male and female, believe that women “secretly desire” to be raped, with 15-16% of
males opining this way and 1-4% of females in McMahon’s study (2010). Perpetuation of
these rape myths teaches victims to feel helpless when they are victimized, fearful of
reprisal from their assailant or internalizing their experience out of a sensation of
helplessness while coping with the trauma of an assault.
The Scope of Sexual Assault
One of the largest shortcomings we face in understanding sexual assault is that the
majority of sexual assaults go unreported, with reports amongst college-aged students at
20% reported and 35% reported for all women (Berzofsky, Krebs, Langton, Planty &
9. 9
Smiley-McDonald 2013). Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) data on the rate of sexual
assault places college-age females (18-24) the most at-risk for sexual assault at 4.3
victimizations per 1,000 in 2013, compared to non-college-aged females whose rate of
victimization was 1.4 for every 1,000 for the same time-period (Langton, Sinozich 2014).
Male victims constitute less than 10% of the total victims of sexual assault according to
the National Crime Victimization Survey (Berzofsky 2013). College-aged females are
three times more likely to be victimized by sexual assaults than all other age groups, and
they are also less likely to report those crimes to authorities.
The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) helps us to understand the
reasons why victims of sexual assault don’t report their assault to authorities. A quarter of
the victims did not feel the need to report the crime to police because they felt that it was
a personal matter, and 1 in 5 cited a fear of reprisal from their assailant (Langton, et. al.
2014). Intrinsically, less than 20% of victims sought assistance from a victim service
agency, roughly the same proportion that reported their assault (Langton, et. al. 2014).
In 80% of the assaults against college-aged victims knew the assailant prior to the
assault, revealing that acquaintance rape vastly outnumbers blitz-style stranger assaults
(Langton, et. al. 2014). That proportion is mirrored in the relationship with the offender
for all age groups, with 78% percent of victims knowing their offender as a family
member, intimate partner, friend, or acquaintance (Berzofsky 2013).
What we understand about sexual assault is this: victims are more likely to be
between the ages of 18-24, are highly unlikely to report their assault to the police, and are
likely to be familiar with their assailant prior to the assault. That being known, the
statistics on the actual offense fit into the profile of the victim. In 1 out of 10 sexual
10. 10
assaults, the assailant was armed with a gun, knife, or other weapon during the
commission of the crime (Berzofsky 2013). 51% of college-aged students were assaulted
while pursuing activities away from home, and 50% of non-students were assaulted while
at home (Berzofsky 2013).
Policies and Prevention
Women constitute roughly 85% of the victims of sexual assault and as a result of
the public perception of rape and sexual assault, are often placed in the position of
preventing their own victimization. Tim Beneke points out the psychological limitations
that women face as a result of their near-constant defense against becoming a victim of
sexual assault (1982). Under the threat of rape and sexual assault, women are unable to
enjoy nature in the same way that men are, for fear of being in solitude and therefore
vulnerable to assault. Women also find themselves unable to earn as much money, out of
the need to avoid “unsafe” situations such as public transportation, lower-income
neighborhoods, and jobs that create schedules which may increase their risk of
victimization (Beneke 1982). Instead, women are forced to own their own cars, pay more
for housing in safer areas and apartments off the ground floor, and restricting their
mobility at all hours for chances of employment.
Environmental criminology encourages the prevention of crime by designing the
spaces we exist within to mitigate the criminogenic aspects of public and private spaces
(Felson, Boba 2010). Behavioral consequences come as a result of the fear of crime, and
that is especially true with women, whose fear of public space limits their individual
freedoms and ability to enjoy public life (Yavuz, Welch 2010). Remedies proposed in
11. 11
order to mitigate this perceived fear of crime range from the simple and inexpensive to
the costly and complex. Discouraging criminal activity can be as simple as keeping
public spaces clean and civil, thereby making those areas uninviting to criminal activity
(Yavuz 2010). Presence of fear of crime increases at night, a consistent factor in
perceived fear for college-aged students on campuses (Sloan, Fisher & Wilkins 1996). As
a result of this perceived threat public spaces should design areas that do not present
conditions that will foster fear, such as: reducing the amount of dense vegetation,
ensuring that areas are well lit, and that “blue light” emergency call boxes are situated in
areas that will provide a feeling of safety in isolated areas (Day 1994).
As important as fostering the perception of safety in public areas is, what we
know about the nature of sexual assault is that 80% of sexual assaults occur between
acquaintances and in the homes of the victims or the assailants (Langton 2014). As a
result, significant efforts should be directed towards eliminating what is known as the
bystander effect (McRaney 2012). The bystander effect is a fallacy that is employed
when a person observes a crime or an incident, yet instead of intervening in the situation
relies on the notion that someone else will do something, hence creating a chain of logical
fallacies. The understanding of this phenomenon may be an important tool in the
prevention of sexual assault given that bystanders are often present for the pre-assault
phase (Burn 2008). Bystander intervention programs represent a departure from common
sexual assault prevention programs in the sense that they address audiences not as
potential victims or perpetrators, but rather as potential bystanders that may intervene to
prevent sexual assault.
12. 12
A well-known model of bystander intervention comes from the situational model
employed by Latane and Darley (1970). Intervention comes as a result of this process:
bystander(s) must notice the event, interpret the event as an emergency, assume the
responsibility for acting, decide what action to take, and make the choice to act (Latane
1970). Understanding this model also presents potential barriers towards the reliance on
bystander intervention to prevent sexual assault. Such barriers include: a failure to notice
the sexual assault, failing to identify the situation as intervention-appropriate, failing to
assume the responsibility of intervention (bystander effect), failing to intervene due to a
lack of skills, and failing to intervene due to audience inhibitions (Burn 2008). Gender
and social norms play a large factor into the willingness of a bystander to intervene as
well. A woman’s higher risk of sexual assault may motivate them to pay closer attention
to high-risk situations, and men may be less likely to intervene due to an increased
adherence to rape myths or gender norms that prevent them from intervening when
crossing the boundaries of sexual consent (Burn 2008).
In a study conducted by Shawn Meghan Burn, results showed that men were less
likely to intervene in high-risk situations, due to a lack of skills to identify high-risk
situations (2008). As a result, it is recommended that bystander prevention programs
incorporate educational material in the form of real-world situations that explain what a
high-risk situation is. High-risk situations for acquaintance sexual assault and rape
include intoxication, moving to isolated areas, and situations where consent is impossible
such as mental incapacitation and age (Burn 2008). The importance of bystander
intervention stems from its ability to prevent assaults from happening, eliminating the
trauma of the victim and the perpetuation of miseducation about sexual assault and rape.
13. 13
Moving Forward
Sexual assault is one of the most underreported and damaging crimes in the
United States, a statistic that is due to a host of factors ranging from the personal,
intimate nature of the crime to the reaction of society to its victims. Efforts to prevent this
crime by creating safer public environments for at-risk victims, if successful, will prevent
a very small proportion of total crimes. The education of high-risk age groups is
extremely challenging, a result of the perpetuation of virus-like rape myths that assert the
blame not on the offenders but on the victims themselves. The desired remedy is
therefore two-pronged: the debunking of rape myths that perpetuate ignorance and
misdirect fault, and the education of high-risk demographics to be able to identify high-
risk situations and execute interventions. Steps to make potential victims feel safer should
be taken, but the lions share of effort should be put towards the education of potential
offenders and capable bystanders who can actively prevent this crime from happening
behind closed doors.
14. 14
Reference:
Beneke, T. (1982). Men on rape. New York, N.Y.: St. Martin’s Press.
Berzofsky, M., Krebs, C., Langton, L., Planty, M., & Smiley-McDonald, H. (2013,
March 7). Female Victims of Sexual Violence, 1994-2010. Retrieved April 22,
2015, from http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4594
Bowie, S. I., Silverman, D. C., Kalick, S. M., & Edbril, S. D. (1990). Blitz rape and
confidence rape: Implications for clinical intervention. American Journal of
Psychotherapy.
Brown, J., & Horvath, M. (2009). Do you believe her and is it real rape?. Rape:
Challenging contemporary thinking, 325-342.
Burn, S. M. (2009). A situational model of sexual assault prevention through bystander
intervention. Sex Roles, 60(11-12), 779-792.
Canter, D., & Heritage, R. (1990). A multivariate model of sexual offence behaviour:
Developments in ‘offender profiling'. I. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry, 1(2),
185-212.
Day, K. (1994). Conceptualizing Women's Fear of Sexual Assault on Campus A Review
of Causes and Recommendations for Change. Environment and Behavior, 26(6),
742-765.
Edwards, K. M., Turchik, J. A., Dardis, C. M., Reynolds, N., & Gidycz, C. A. (2011).
Rape myths: History, individual and institutional-level presence, and implications
for change. Sex Roles, 65(11-12), 761-773.
Felson, M., & Santos, R. (2010). Crime and everyday life (Fourth ed.). SAGE
Publications.
15. 15
Ferraro, K. (1996). Women's Fear of Victimization: Shadow of Sexual Assault? Social
Forces, 75(2), 667-690. Retrieved April 22, 2015, from
http://sf.oxfordjournals.org/content/75/2/667.short
Groth, A. N. (2001). Men Who Rape: The Psychology of the Offender. Da Capo Press.
Hazelwood, R. R., & Burgess, A. W. (Eds.). (2008). Practical aspects of rape
investigation: A multidisciplinary approach. CRC Press.
Langton, L., & Sinozich, S. (2014, December 11). Rape and Sexual Assault
Victimization Among College-Age Females 1995-2013. Retrieved April 22,
2015, from http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5176
McMahon, S. (2010). Rape myth beliefs and bystander attitudes among incoming college
students. Journal of American College Health, 59(1), 3-11.
McRaney, D. (2012). You are not so smart: Why you have too many friends on
Facebook, why your memory is mostly fiction, and 46 other ways you're deluding
yourself. New York: Gotham Books.
North Carolina General Statutes. Chapter 14, Article 7A.
http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/Statutes/StatutesTOC.pl?Chapter=0014
Porter, L. E., & Alison, L. J. (2006). Examining group rape: A descriptive analysis of
offender and victim behaviour. European Journal of Criminology,3(3), 357-381.
Simons, D. (2014, October 1). Chapter 3: Sex offender typologies. Retrieved April 22,
2015, from http://www.smart.gov/SOMAPI/sec1/ch3_typology.html
Sloan, J. J., Fisher, B. S., & Wilkins, D. L. (1996). Reducing perceived risk and fear of
victimization on campus: A panel study of faculty members, staff, and students.
Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 12(1), 81-107.
16. 16
Ullman, S. E. (1996). Social Reactions, Coping Strategies, and Self Blame Attributions in
Adjustment to Sexual Assault. Psychology of women quarterly,20(4), 505-526.
Ullman, S. E. (1999). Social support and recovery from sexual assault: A
review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 4(3), 343-358.
Ullman, S. E., & Filipas, H. H. (2001). Predictors of PTSD symptom severity and social
reactions in sexual assault victims. Journal of traumatic stress, 14(2), 369-389.
Yavuz, N., & Welch, E. (2010). Addressing Fear of Crime in Public Space: Gender
Differences in Reaction to Safety Measures in Train Transit. Urban Studies,
2491-2515.
