Sexual Assault: A Cultural Problem or a Criminal Deviance?

By Eva Spijkers, LMFT 

Problem vs Deviance 

Is sexual assault best understood as a cultural problem or as criminal deviance? This distinction has significant implications for how we approach prevention, treatment, and societal responses to sexual violence. Let’s begin by looking at the idea of sexual assault as a sexual problem. From this perspective, sexual assault isn’t simply an individual moral failing but rather a societal problem that’s deeply rooted in power imbalances and cultural norms. Many cases of sexual violence—particularly those involving coercive actions—stem from learned behaviors that reflect these larger societal issues. For example, behaviors like unwanted touching or manipulation may not involve physical violence, but they still violate consent and stem from broader social dynamics like gender inequality or harmful attitudes about sexual entitlement. A lack of understanding of what consent actually means can contribute to situations where individuals may “accidentally” commit sexual assault, particularly when they don’t fully grasp the importance of clear, enthusiastic, and ongoing mutual agreement in sexual interactions. Consent is not just a bilateral "yes" or "no"; it is a nuanced, ongoing process that involves clear communication, respect for boundaries, and the recognition that consent can be revoked at any time. Research by Wood and colleagues (2019) emphasizes that these behaviors are often not inherently violent but coercive, meaning education and intervention could help change the underlying attitudes. In this view, the problem is systemic, rather than inherent to individual perpetrators. The key focus here is changing cultural norms around consent, power, and sexuality.

The Influence of the Manosphere and Gender Stereotypes

One clear example of how cultural norms influence sexual behavior is the rise of the manosphere, a collection of online spaces where men, particularly in communities like ‘pickup artists,’ spread ideologies that directly undermine the principles of affirmative consent. These communities often reinforce harmful gender stereotypes—such as the idea that men are entitled to sex and that a woman’s ‘no’ can be negotiated or ignored. This phenomenon illustrates how certain cultural and social environments not only tolerate but even promote behaviors that violate consent. In these spaces, harmful ideas about masculinity and sexuality are normalized, reinforcing the idea that men should be aggressive or manipulative in their pursuit of women, further perpetuating the cycle of coercion and potential violence. These ideas also reinforce stereotypes and creating systems that ignore the experiences of marginalized groups, such as men or LGBTQ+ individuals whose experiences might not fit traditional narratives of victimhood or perpetration and dismisses unique challenges in navigating consent due to heteronormative expectations, fear of discrimination, or rejection based on sexual orientation or gender identity (Hayes & Carpenter, 2013; Masters, 2010).

Challenges with Classifying Assault as a Sexual Problem

However, classifying sexual assault as simply a sexual problem comes with some challenges. One concern, as noted by Kolysh (2020), is that it risks stigmatizing survivors and potentially pathologizing perpetrators. When we frame assault as a “problem” that can be solved through education or behavioral change, we might inadvertently ignore the real harm caused to survivors or downplay the severity of the offense. 

Sexual Assault as Sexual Deviance

Now let’s consider sexual assault as sexual deviance. The idea of sexual deviance is rooted in criminology and sociology, where behaviors that deviate from social norms—particularly those that cause significant harm to others—are often labeled as deviant. In extreme cases, like predatory or serial sexual offenders, this labeling can be useful, as these behaviors clearly fall outside the bounds of what is socially acceptable.

However, the danger in categorizing all non-normative sexual behaviors as deviant is that it risks oversimplifying the issue (Hayes & Carpenter, 2013). Not every sexual assault or non-consensual act falls neatly into the category of deviance. For example, coercive behavior that doesn’t involve extreme violence might still cause significant harm but doesn’t fit the traditional criminological definitions of deviance. This oversimplification can also lead to moral judgments that fail to address the context and cultural influences shaping the behavior. 

Additionally, this framing can lead to the overpathologization of perpetrators, who may be viewed as people needing therapeutic treatment without fully addressing the social and cultural forces that influence their behavior. It’s important not to simplify the conversation into just a matter of individual reform, as doing so misses the broader systemic issues that need to be tackled.

Drawing the Line: Harm, Consent, and Cultural Context

How do we draw the line between what is a sexual problem and what is sexual deviance? The answer lies in nuanced criteria that take into account harm, consent, and cultural context. While behaviors like coercion, manipulation, or even non-consensual touch may not always meet the traditional definition of deviance, they still violate consent and cause harm. It’s critical to look at the degree of harm caused, the context in which the behavior occurs, and whether the individual respects the autonomy and consent of others.

We can’t just label behaviors as deviant without considering the underlying causes and cultural conditioning that may drive them. At the same time, we must recognize that certain extreme cases—like predatory behaviors—should be treated as more serious and inherently deviant. Drawing these lines is not about making rigid moral judgments but about understanding that different kinds of sexual offenses require different kinds of responses, from education and therapeutic approaches to legal intervention.

References 

Hayes, S., & Carpenter, B. (2013). Social moralities and discursive constructions of female sex offenders. Sexualities, 16(1-2), 159–179. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460712471112

Kolysh, S. A. (2020). Everyday violence: Catcalling and LGBTQ-directed aggression in the public sphere. Dissertation, City University of New York. Retrieved from https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/3161 

Masters, N. T. (2010). “My strength is not for hurting”: Men’s anti-rape websites and their construction of masculinity and male sexuality. Sexualities, 13(1), 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460709346115 

Wood, E. F., Rikkonen, K. J., & Davis, D. (2019). Definition, communication, and interpretation of sexual consent. In W. T. O’Donohue & P. A. Schewe (Eds.), Handbook of Sexual Assault and Sexual Assault Prevention (pp. 399–424). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23645-8_24