Sexual Violence. Explaining Serious Offences Essay

Serious Sexual Offences

Sexual violence continues to be an issue for modern society, affecting both developed and developing nations across the world. These actions are a variety of different crimes, including assault, rape, acts against sexual integrity and a variety of other actions that violate a person’s freedom and right to choose partners. Apart from the legal definitions of serious sexual offences, scholars have developed multiple theories that aim to explain this type of behaviour. This paper aims to define serious sexual offences from a sociological and legal perspective, present and discuss significant theories that explain these offences and outline the main issues associated with these crimes.

Definition and Discussion

The definition and attitudes towards serious sexual offences vary from and incorporate the legal perspective of the matter and social approach to viewing these offences. This explains why in different countries different types of sexual crimes may be classified and prosecuted differently. From a legal perspective, the Sexual Offenses Act of 2003 regulates these crimes, their perception, and prosecution (Sexual Offences Act 2003, 2003; Sexual offences, no date). Most importantly, this legal document outlines the types of abuses and discriminatory actions that can be considered a sexual offence, protecting the victims of these crimes. Firstly, any sexual contact without consent is considered a sexual offence.

However, in order to prosecute the criminals, the policymakers must have clear definitions of each type of crime. For example, rape is defined as a “penetration by penis” in the Sexual Offences Act (Sexual Offences Act 2003, 2003). It should be noted, however, that crimes are both social and legal concepts, and the definition provided by the latter may not be the same as provided by academic or other approaches to serious sexual offences. While the legal prosecution of sexual offenders is crucial, Simons (no date) highlights the fact that to make society safer, it crucial to understand the underlying causes of serious sexual offences.

It is evident that not all sexual offences are reported to the police. Moreover, not all victims are able to report them in surveys because of personal feelings or fear, which may make it challenging to examine and evaluate the variety of crimes and the underlying causes. In general, these offences occur in different countries and for different reasons. Moreover, the Sexual Offences Act outlines a variety of possible sexual offences that can occur, ranging from voyeurism to lack of consensual sex (Sexual Offences Act 2003, 2003). Several national and international organizations developed their definitions of sexual offences. For example, the American Psychological Association, (no date, para. 1) defines it as “unwanted sexual activity, with perpetrators using force, making threats or taking advantage of victims not able to give consent.” This approach highlights the central aspect of such offences – use of force or other methods. The Crown Prosecution Service (no date) incorporates any non-consensual activities, including those that target children or aim to exploit individuals as serious sexual offences. The following section will review significant theories that aim to explain why these crimes occur.

Explanations for Serious Sexual Offences

Over the years, several theories that aim to explain the reasoning for serious sexual offences emerged. Some of them emphasize human nature or physiological issues. Others focus on society and more complex factors leading to rape. The typology introduced by Groth (1979) in the author’s book “Men who rape” outlines three key categories of sexual offences, more specifically rape. The author distinguishes anger rapists, power rapists, and sadist rapists. The first category of rapists according to Groth (1979) commits these crimes with an emphasis on humiliation and power, the second uses their power to carry out a sexual act without the consent of a victim, and the last category commits cruel acts to fulfil their fantasies. In general, this theory highlights some of the elements of sexual offences.

The main weakness of this typology is the actual analysis of criminal cases, which suggests different patterns of behaviour that can correspond to more than one category outlined by Groth. Arguably, the approach developed by Groth (1979) is partially outdated since more recent data by the World Health Organization (no date) and other research on the topic suggest that sexual offences are complex crimes. For instance, a study by Farmer, McAlinden and Maruna (2016) suggests that the majority of convicted sex offenders cite a variety of contextual factors that motivated them to commit crimes. In many cases, offenders are motivated by multiple factors defined in this theory. In other cases, they may have a different motif, which is not presented in the classification. Additionally, Faupel and Przybylski (no date) argue that multiple studies focusing on the population of sex offenders suggest that one of the key characteristics in Groth’s model – aggression is not prevalent in this population. The main issue that arises as a result – this theory of sex offences do not account for all variations and is not helpful in gaining a complete comprehension of sexual offences and their causes.

Biological

The explanation of serious sexual offences offered by the supporters of this model related to brain abnormalities or other physiological dysfunctions, due to which people commit these crimes (Faupel and Przybylski, no date). Other possible explanations of why some individuals engage in acts of sexual offences and others do no maybe genetics, chromosomes or hormones, according to this model. One can argue that this theory ignores the personal motivation of individuals and delegates the responsibility for the crime towards factors that he or she have no control over.

The biological theory, however, lacks concrete evidence that would show consistent evidence of abnormalities and dysfunctions. Multiple studies on brain abnormalities conducted in 1988 by Langevin et al., and throughout 1990 and 2000 by Aigner et al., Corley et al., Galski, Thornton and Shumsky, 1990 have proven that they are not present in most cases of the examined offenders (cited in Faupel and Przybylski, no date). Based on this, it can be argued that the biological theory lacks concrete empirical evidence that would support the claim that some abnormalities or malfunctions lead to serious sexual crimes. As such, these issues cannot help understand the behaviour of offenders and develop strategies for mitigating the risk of sexual assault based on the premises of the biological theory.

Sociological

According to this approach, sexual assault is a result of societal factors. A case of rape and murder of an Indian girl in 2012 is an example of such attitudes. In the article explaining Leslee Udwin’s documentary based on these events, the journalist describes the shock when talking to the men who committed the crime and their lawyers (Delhi rapist says victim shouldn’t have fought back, 2015). Primary, they believe that what they committed was fair since girls in India have no right to go out at night. Such an approach is a disturbing practice, and Udwin explains that in India girls have little value in the view of their family when compared to boys (Delhi rapist says victim shouldn’t have fought back, 2015). This leads to this inequality, supported by society, despite the fact that legally both men and women are equal and rape is considered a crime in India.

This model is supported by statistical data and reports made by international organizations. For instance, according to the statistics by the World Health Organization (no date), rape rates are higher in countries where the society is patriarchal. For example, in India, 32,500 of cases were reported in 2017, which is lower than the estimated 40,000 cases in 2016 (Reuters, 2019). It should be noted that the overall population of this country exceeds one billion people, making it a country with a relatively low per capita rate of sexual offences. This signifies one of the issues with the sociological theories, although it is possible that many of the victims do not report these offences.

All in all, this theory appears to be valid for explaining the outside factors that motivate sexual offenders. However, a question of why in India, despite the societal acceptance and prevalence of rapes, these crimes are not committed by everyone remains. The question is, why in a society that views women as lesser than men, not everyone has a connection to sexual offences remains. This inconsistency suggests that there are other, more personal factors that motivate individuals to commit these crimes, which are not explained by the sociological theory. Therefore, this approach does nor help understand the personal motivation of a person who commits sexual offences.

Malamuth’s ‘Confluence Model’

The confluence model highlights several characteristics that enable sexual offences. Faupel and Przybylski (no date, para. 20) outline the two key elements of this model – “promiscuous-impersonal sex and hostile masculinity.” When the two are combined, they result in aggressive sexual behaviour of a person. Such individuals do not have a desire to establish a long-term relationship, which would imply intimacy (Malamuth and Hald, 2016). In addition, this theory draws on some implications of the difference in evolution and sexual activity of men and women, suggesting that men have a less significant preference for a long-lasting relationship.

In general, some of the implications of this model are valid and help understand serious sexual offences. For example, the link between dominance and aggression has been reported in different researches (Terranova, Ferris, and Albers, 2017; Vize et al., 2019). However, there are shortcomings connected to use of the evolution model as a basis for explaining human behaviour. Additionally, situational factors, such as society’ perception as the basis of the sociological model are not included. Despite these factors, this theory provides some valuable insight into the question.

Finkelhor’s ‘Precondition Model’

The premises of this model is the idea that there are four components, ore preconditions that must exist in order for abuse to occur. It was introduced and developed by Finkelhor in 1984 and can be applied to understand child sexual abuse (Faupel and Przybylski, no date). It incorporates motivation, overcoming internal and external inhibitions and battling resistance of a victim. The precondition model does not explain the emergence of the first factor -motivation to commit such crime, which is its primary weakness. However, as suggested by Faupel and Przybylski (no date) little empirical evidence that would support Finkelhor’s hypothesis currently exists. This means that in general, the model is useful, but more research of real-life cases is necessary to support this model.

Ward and Siegert’s ‘Pathways Model’

The Pathway Model can be applied to explain the serious sex offences of children. The main implication of it is the dysfunctioning of psychological mechanisms. Ward and Siegert highlighted the following mechanisms – “intimacy deficit pathway, deviant sexual scripts pathway, emotional deregulation pathway and antisocial cognition pathway” (as cited in Faupel and Przybylski, no date, para. 50). These elements include taking advantage of a situation, distorted thoughts and emotions and antisocial lifestyle. The issue with this model is a lack of evidence since the majority of the theory’s premises are based on ideas from other fields.

Ward and Beech’s ‘Integrated Theory of Sexual Offending’

The varied models that aim to examine and evaluate serious sexual offences presented above all offer distinct approaches to this issue. Ward and Siegert made an attempt to integrate different theories and create a comprehensive and unique model (Faupel and Przybylski, no date). The main implication of it is that a variety of experiences during childhood as well as situational factors and sociocultural specifics result in people becoming sexual offenders. Additionally, sex from this perspective serves as a mean of satisfying not only physiological but also the psychological needs of an individual. The issue with this theory is the emphasis on impulse control, which is not always the case with offenders (Faupel and Przybylski, no date). However, it offers a cohesive explanation of serious sexual crimes.

Conclusion

Overall, serious sexual offences are a type of crimes that involve abuse and discrimination, as well as sexual contact without consent. The following are the main classification theories used to explain why these offences happen – biological, sociological, confluence mode, precondition mode, paths, and integrated theory of sexual offending. This paper discusses the straight and weaknesses of each sexual offence theory, outlining the key characteristics and statistics that either support or refute a model.

Reference List

American Psychological Association (no date) Sexual abuse. Web.

The Crown Prosecution Service (no date) Sexual offences.Web.

Delhi rapist says victim shouldn’t have fought back (2015). Web.

Farmer, M., McAlinden, A.-M. and Maruna, S. (2016) ‘Sex offending and situational motivation: findings from a qualitative analysis of desistance from sexual offending’, International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 60(15), pp. 1756–1775.

Faupel, S. and Przybylski, R. (no date)Chapter 2: etiology of adult sexual offending. Web.

Groth, N. A. (1979). Men who rape. New York: Plenum Press

Malamuth, N. and Hald, G. (2016) ‘The confluence mediational model of sexual aggression’, The Wiley Handbook on the Theories, Assessment and Treatment of Sexual Offending, pp.53-71.

Reuters (2019) Statistics on rape in India and some well-known cases.Web.

Sexual Offences Act 2003. (2003). Web.

Sexual offences (no date). Web.

Simons, D. A. (no date) Chapter 3: sex offender typologies.Web.

Terranova, J., Ferris, C. and Albers, H. (2017) ‘Sex differences in the regulation of offensive aggression and dominance by Arginine-Vasopressin’, Frontiers in Endocrinology, 8, pp. 1-10.

Vize, C. E. et al. (2019) ‘Using dominance analysis to decompose narcissism and Its relation to aggression and externalizing outcomes’, Assessment, 26(2), pp. 260–270.

World Health Organization. (no date)Sexual violence.Web.