WHEN JUSTICE ISN’T GENDER-NEUTRAL: RETHINKING
VICTIMHOOD IN SOCIETY
INTRODUCTION
When a woman lodges a report of sexual assault, she is often looked upon with suspicion. Also,
when a trans person is attacked, you never hear anything about it in the media. And when a man
attacks his partner, people still ask the woman, “What did she do to cause this?” These are not just
individual moments of ignorance, they reflect a deeper problem with how we analyse and
understand victimhood.
Victimization is not just confined to a crime. It is a story about power perception and justice. And
for women and LGBTQ+ people, especially from those marginalised communities, the path to
being seen and to getting justice is strewn with obstacles. Gender shapes not only who is targeted
but also how society responds. Globally, violence against women and LGBTQ+ individuals is all
too common, but they are still masked by stigma and bias. For instance, the World Health
Organisation states that 1 in 3 women around the world has experienced physical or sexual
violence in their lifetime. But public narratives of “victims” are limited. The “ideal victim,”
sociologists observe, is weak, innocent, and poses no threat. By this logic survivors who do not
conform to such given parameters are assertive women, LGBTQ+ people, radicalized groups or
others seen as deviant and are less likely to be believed or helped, many victims opt not to report
such assaults because they are afraid of being held responsible, punished or judged and disbelieved
by authorities. The article explores how social norms, institutional structures, and cultural
narratives shape who gets to be seen, heard and believed.
THE ‘IDEAL VICTIM’ AND GENDER NORMS
Sociologist Nils Christie famously described the ideal victim as the individual whose suffering
resonates with or is close to the heart of society’s values, such as little children, the elderly, or the
fully defenseless individuals who have been harmed by no fault of their own, but at the hands of
pure evil. On the other hand, people who appear to be self-sufficient, sexually active, or otherwise
“non-virtuous” are often seen as less credible victims. For instance, independent women or those
who wear clothing that does not fit into the conservative standards are frequently vilified when
assaulted (“she was asking for it”). In contrast, same-sex or non-traditional relationships may not
fit in with the idea people have of innocence. As one analysis notes, only survivors whose
characteristics and crimes resonate with established social norms can obtain sympathy and
legitimacy from the people.
The romanticisation of such an image excludes many women and LGBTQ+ survivors. In
patriarchal cultures, even some cisgender women are expected to be modest and passive; those
who deviate from such norms, like working women, sex workers, etc., risk being seen as deserving
of violence. Transgender and queer victims also often fall outside public empathy. Research in
Nigeria, for instance found that “all cases of sexual violence were against LBQ+ women,
highlighting that lesbians, bisexual and queer women were disproportionately targeted. Yet
stereotypes of femininity and sexuality mean such victims may be blamed or ignored. Concisely
put, the myth of the ideal victim that is the “pure” schoolgirl assaulted by a stranger at night skews
attention toward only a narrow slice of suffering. All other victims, like gender non-confirming
survivors, have trouble trying to conform to the expected narrative.
BARRIERS TO REPORTING AND JUSTICE
Institutions often discourage reporting such events and seeking justice, even when someone is a
victim. Survivors frequently face victim-blaming attitudes at every step. Studies show that victims
who report sexual or domestic violence tend to receive a hostile reception from police or court
staff who question their credibility and ask them about their clothing, behavior, and history. This
causes many to refrain from coming forward. One review note: “Victims often choose not to report
due to fear of reprisals, fear of disbelief or humiliating treatment by the authorities”. In other words,
a survivor weighs reporting the trauma against being treated as the real perpetrators. As a result,
many crimes never make it to the authorities.
The judiciary and the legal systems can also disfavour the victims. In many countries, marital rape
is not a crime, and some jurisdictions even allow rapists to escape punishment by marrying the
victim. In 2019 UN Women highlighted that only 4 out of 10 countries criminalise marital rape,
and in some cases, rapists can escape prosecution if they marry their victims. These loopholes send
a clear message that domestic, or “family” violence, is tolerated. Indeed, impunity thrives on both
discriminatory laws and stereotypes. An Equality Now report found that in America, rape survivors
are often denied justice due to harmful gender stereotypes that blame victims, the normalisation of
sexual violence, and contributions to widespread underreporting. The report found that class, race,
and gender discrimination systematically prevent survivors from accessing justice.
Cultural taboos and the absence of services aggravate these issues. Safe shelters, legal aid, or
counseling are hard to find for many of those survivors, especially those who live in rural or
conservative areas. In regions in which police or doctors are male-dominated and not trained in
trauma-informed care, women and LGBTQ+ victims can be retraumatised by secondary abuse in
the system. With high thresholds for legal evidence, for example, the necessity of multiple
witnesses for rape, very few cases lead to conviction. Taken together, the system of law
enforcement and justice disproportionately does not treat survivors as deserving, and a deep
concern for victims is not being believed or treated fairly by authorities.
INTERSECTIONAL VULNERABILITIES
Gender does not exist in a vacuum. Scholars use the term “intersectionality”, coined by Kimberlé
Crenshaw, an American civil rights advocate and law professor, to describe how overlapping
identities of race, class, disability, and migrant status create unique patterns of disadvantage. In
victimisation, that means certain people experience multiple, mutually reinforcing risks.
For instance, people belonging to marginalised races and ethnicities are many times more likely to
experience violence and poor responses. And in Canada, Indigenous women experience some of
the highest rates of abuse in the country. Approximately 63% of them have reported being victims
of violence compared to 45% of non-Indigenous women. Even more stark, Indigenous women and
girls make up 21% of gender-related homicides in Canada, while they are just 5% of the female
population. Police and legal institutions more often fail to protect these Indigenous survivors and
end up retraumatising them again. Advocates believe this is due to the long-practiced systemic
racism and colonial legacies that are still being followed.
Similar things happen worldwide when people are categorised based on caste or class. Women
who belong to the Dalit community in India are highly vulnerable. Activists report that Dalit
women’s bodies are targeted for violence, and on average, ten Dalit women in India are raped each
day. Unfair judgment due to caste keeps justice from being served in most cases. The study found
that society often neglects when Dalit women are raped, suggesting that being a Dalit woman
makes them less worthy of protection.
Disability comes with a higher risk of such acts. U.S. data show that women who have disabilities
are found to be at greater risk of sexual or physical abuse and find it difficult to access help. One
survey found that women with disabilities have a 40% higher chance of intimate partner violence
than non-disabled women. On top of that, people with physical or psychological disabilities are
faced with further barriers to reporting, such as inaccessible shelters or reliance on caretakers. Only
about 3% of sexual assaults against people with cognitive disabilities are ever reported, often
because the perpetrators are known to the victims and the victims fear they will not be believed or
will lose essential support.
These examples reinforce that when one faces several forms of inequality, their risk of being
harmed and neglected by the system also increases. As one indigenous advocacy group emphasises,
structural and systematic barriers, such as racism, sexism, and discrimination, not only make
Indigenous women more prone to violence but may also keep them away from using the help
resources available to them. In other words, prejudice centers around specific identities in our
society and institutions. While an economically stable, able-bodied woman can turn to experts and
courts, an immigrant woman of colour with disabilities may not see that option. Intersectionality
theory shows us that we must look at each person’s experience.
POLICY REFORMS AND BEST PRACTICES: THE INDIAN CONTEXT
While gender-based violence is a global concern, India presents a unique socio-legal landscape
shaped by its diverse population, patriarchal traditions, and evolving legal changes. Lately, many
state and national projects have appeared to solve these issues with positive outcomes. Here are
several examples of approaches and efforts India is using to bridge the gender justice gap:
The Mission Shakti project in Uttar Pradesh involves changes in many institutions to make women
safer and more empowered. A part of the initiatives includes making women’s help desks available
in police stations, employing a beat policing system, and time-bound investigation protocols
monitored via the ITSSO portal. Women police officers provide better care and understanding
about crimes such as domestic violence, sexual harassment, and cyberstalking. Several
investigations have been concluded with higher conviction levels, which have increased the
community’s confidence in the police.
Assam is the first state in India to release an official policy against human trafficking and witch-
hunting which often impacts tribal and rural women. It aims to prevent crimes against women by
protecting survivors, rehabilitating them, prosecuting the guilty, and relying on committees in both
districts and villages. This is among India’s few policy responses to culturally sanctioned gendered
violence, representing a shift from reactive policing to a rights-based preventative framework.
Despite significant economic growth, Haryana has historically recorded one of India’s lowest
female sex ratios. In response, the government formed district-level task forces to strictly apply
the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (PCPNDT) Act. They also organise
campaigns to increase awareness among communities.
By taking this initiative, the concern is to alter society’s views and ensure that medical
professionals are held responsible.
Tripura is working to improve the lives of its women and girls with its 2025 women’s
empowerment policy. It introduces a third of government jobs reserved for women. Every state
police post considers people from disadvantaged sections-Incentives for female entrepreneurship.
Low-interest loans and scholarships are part of what is offered. The focus on rights has improved
the nation’s gender parity index and increased the number of women in the workforce.
India's new criminal laws replacing the IPC and CrPC emphasise women’s safety by introducing
Time-bound investigations and trials in cases of sexual violence and introducing provisions for
electronic and zero FIRs. A medical examination will be provided to the victims within 24 hours.
These actions aim to enhance efficiency in the criminal justice system, especially by considering
victims of gender-based violence.
To help survivors of gender-based violence, the Centre for Public Policy Research (“CPPR”) and
other advocacy organisations are developing policies such as tools to monitor and track digital
cases, gender sensitising training for law enforcement, and other ways to treat survivors with
compassion in court. This helps shape change and encourages others to trust the institution.
CONCLUSION
Gendered victmisation does not happen by chance. It depends on how power is arranged in society
and can be upheld by various groups. The invisible nature of many survivors' experiences who do
not fit the ideal type reminds us that change must be systematic. According to UN agencies and
experts, what happens to women and LGBTQ people is a major concern that affects everyone, not
just some individuals. Addressing this issue requires law reform, better training for police and
court employees, and the provision of support to everybody. If victimhood culture is to be
challenged, gender and other biases should be attacked at all levels. Only after this can we provide
support and justice to every person who has suffered, without blaming them.
