REVIEW ARTICLE

Sexual violence against women: Understanding cross‑cultural intersections

Gurvinder Kalra, Dinesh Bhugra1
Department of Psychiatry, Mahatma Gandhi Mission Medical College and Hospital, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India,
1
Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College London, De Crespigny Park, London, United Kingdom

Abstract

Interpersonal violence whether it is sexual or nonsexual, remains a major problem in large parts of the world. Sexual
violence against children and women brings with it long‑term sequelae, both psychiatrically and socially. Apart from
sexual gratification itself, sexual violence against women is often a result of unequal power equations both real and
perceived between men and women and is also strongly influenced by cultural factors and values. Within sociocentric
and ego‑centric cultures, the roles and representations of genders, and attitudes toward sexual violence differ. Cultures
which are described as feminist, provide equal power to both men and women. Sexual violence is likely to occur more
commonly in cultures that foster beliefs of perceived male superiority and social and cultural inferiority of women.
Although culture is an important factor to understand sexual violence in its entirety, we need to look at, as well as beyond
cultural structures, their strengths and weaknesses.

Key words: Culture, gender, sexual violence, women

INTRODUCTION
Interpersonal violence against perceived or real weaker
partner is a widespread phenomenon. Sexual violence
is a profoundly negative and traumatic life event with
widespread psychological and sociological effects on
the victim irrespective of their gender. It often gives rise
to a wide range of negative emotions, embarrassment,
and existential questions such as “Why me?” It increases
feelings of helplessness and powerlessness in the victim
affecting their self‑esteem and producing feelings which
suggest that they may be vulnerable to further violence. It is
likely that the fear of sexual violence in women will restrict
their freedom and occupational opportunities and affect
their long‑term psychological well‑being. Sexual violence is
rarely discussed within professional circles partly because
of ignorance and partly due to inexperience in asking
serious personal sexual questions as well as associated
Address for correspondence: Dr. Gurvinder Kalra,
Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Mahatma Gandhi Mission
Medical College and Hospital, Sector 18, Kamothe,
Navi Mumbai ‑ 410 209, Maharashtra, India.
E‑mail: kalragurvinder@gmail.com
social stigma and shame for the victim and those related
to the victim. It is both a health and a social concern with
patriarchal, misogynist, and gender‑shaming undertones.
The World Health Organization (WHO) defines sexual
violence as “any sexual act or an attempt to obtain a sexual
act, unwanted sexual comments, or advances, acts to traffic
or otherwise directed, against a person’s sexuality using
coercion, by any person regardless of their relationship to
the victim in any setting, including but not limited to home
and work.”[1] Sexual violence happens in all cultures[2,3] with
varying definitions of what constitutes sexual violence.[4]
In this paper, we look at the cross‑cultural aspects of
gender‑related sexual violence against women. Although
there are different forms of sexual violence (for example,
male‑male sexual violence, male‑transgender sexual
violence), we focus on the male‑female sexual violence in
this paper.
Access this article online
Quick Response Code
Website:
www.indianjpsychiatry.org

How to cite this article: Kalra G, Bhugra D. Sexual violence DOI:

against women: Understanding cross-cultural intersections.
10.4103/0019-5545.117139
Indian J Psychiatry 2013;55:244-9.

244 Indian Journal of Psychiatry 55(3), Jul-Sep 2013

 Kalra and Bhugra: Cross cultural aspects of sexual violence
CULTURE AND SEXUAL VIOLENCE: THE
INTERSECTIONS
Much of what an individual is today is shaped by the
culture that he or she is born in and lives through,
acquiring cultural values, attitudes, and behaviors. Culture
determines definitions and descriptions of normality and
psychopathology. Culture plays an important role in how
certain populations and societies view, perceive, and
process sexual acts as well as sexual violence.
An important element in the WHO definition of sexual
violence is use of ‘‘coercion’’ or force and there is a high
possibility that there are cultural differences with respect
to what is labelled as ‘‘forced’’ sexual intercourse.[5] Various
cultures describe certain forms of sexual violence that are
condemned and other forms that may be tolerated to a
degree, the culturally legitimized forms of violence[6] thus
giving rise to a continuum with transgressive coercion at
one end to tolerated coercion at the other.[4] For example, in
South Africa, only the rape of white women was prosecuted
under an apartheid system, while sexual violence against
black women was accepted as a part of life.[7] Childhood
marriages in certain parts of rural India involve marriage
and sexual relationship with a girl who is not yet an adult.
It, thus, amounts to sexual coercion and is considered
illegal. However, the entire issue is sanctioned by personal
laws defined by individuals who partake in such marriages[8]
as condoned by Khap Panchayats who decide on marriage
partners in certain parts of North India. Similarly, sexual
violence is considered legitimate by young men in South
Africa who also believe that mental health is negatively
affected by lack of sex.[7]
Prevalence
Cultural aspects of sexual violence can be understood from
observations and literature on interpersonal violence (IPV)
in the context of sexual acts. Higher rates of sexual violence
are expected to be more prevalent in cultures that encourage
objectification of women, thus making them appear inferior
to men.[9] However, not all cases are reported to the
respective authorities and as high as 67%‑84% of cases of
sexual violence may go unreported[10] due to the sensitivity
of the issue,[11] thereby making it difficult to gather exact
figures and true sense of the problem. It has been postulated
that the rates of unreported sexual offences are higher in
some Asian cultures where virginity is highly valued and a
woman’s modesty is of utmost importance that gives her
family the much required respect.[12]
There have been suggestions that sex ratio may contribute
to prevalence of sexual violence. The male‑female sex
ratio (ratio of men to women in the population) in India
has been “historically negative”[13] ranging from 930 females
per 1000 males in 1971 to 940 per 1000 males in 2011,[14]
reflecting a dismal situation. A sex ratio of 940 in 2011
Indian Journal of Psychiatry 55(3), Jul-Sep 2013
represents a male population of about 623.7 million and
a female population of 586.4 million that amounts to a
difference of around 37.3 million in the two genders.[14]
In parallel, the incidence of sexual violence cases has also
risen, but it is difficult to ascertain correlation between the
two. According to the National Crime Records Bureau, the
number of registered rape cases in India increased by 873.3%
from 2,487 in 1971 to 24,206 in 2011.[15] The cases of sexual
violence on children in India have also increased by almost
336% from 2,113 cases reported in 2001 to 7,112 cases in
2011.[16]
Within the evolutionary psychology framework, a higher
male‑female sex ratio (more men than women) gives rise to
competition among males for female mates. This may lead
to sexual jealousy and frustration among men contributing
to sexual violence.[17] This theoretical framework looks
at sexual violence as a method used by men to ensure
the sexual fidelity of their female mates.[18] However,
this may also mean that this theory is applicable only to
intrarelationship sexual violence as it refers to fidelity,
which occurs within the context of a relationship. This
hypothesis may, thus, not explain the rise in cases of child
sexual abuse where there is no question of fidelity. It is, of
course, entirely possible that this rise is likely with better
and accurate reporting.
A paradoxical hypothesis by Guttentag and Secord[19] argues
that a high sex ratio with fewer women compared to men
raises the value that men give to women thus reducing
the chances of him resorting to intimate partner violence
including sexual violence.
Meanings attributed to gender
Within any sociocultural setting, the meaning of being a
man/woman and manhood/womanhood may vary[20] with
masculine identity being associated with experiences and
feelings of power.[21] Paternalistic cultural models encourage
the view that men protect women from harm, thus giving the
impression that women are largely incapable of protecting
themselves.
In addition to violence, the incident of sexual violence
involves elements of control, power, domination, and
humiliation.[12] In order to gain power and control over their
victims, perpetrators of sexual violence resort to practices
such as abduction, isolation, manipulation, coercion,
threats, and sexual abuse.[22] Offenders may not necessarily
find the act sexually gratifying but it is the meaning
attributed to power for men that may override sexual goals
in such acts. This is very well exemplified in sexual violence
against children, which is fundamentally an expression of
power over a child’s life.[23] Resisting the offender’s attempts
is unlikely especially so in the case of children since they do
not always have the cognitive maturity to understand the
wrong‑ness of the act.
245
 Kalra and Bhugra: Cross cultural aspects of sexual violence
It has also been postulated that gender equality may
increase sexual violence in the form of male backlash,[24]
with men being more commonly known to commit sexual
violence across different cultures.[25] The Indian society is
at present witnessing a shift from being male‑dominating
to being gender equal; it is thus possible that the recent
increase in the number of sexual violence cases in India is a
result of the male backlash for the growing gender equality.
It is also entirely possible that increased media attention
may attract some individuals to perform these acts so that
they gain a degree of infamy.
Attitudes
Across cultures, attitudes toward gender are likely to affect
how male‑female relationships are viewed, and subsequently
how the sexual offenders and the victims are viewed. In
her seminal work on cross‑cultural aspects of heterosexual
rape, Sanday[26] studied 156 societal structures and found
that rape is a vital part of a sociocultural configuration that
revolved around IPV, male dominance, and an “ideology
of toughness” in men and weakness in women. Carrying
Sanday’s work forward, Briere and Malamuth[27] explored
if sexuality variables (sexual experience, importance of
sex, relationships with women, use of pornography) and
attitudes that encouraged violence toward women were
associated with self‑reported likelihood of raping or using
sexual coercion. They assessed 352 male introductory
psychology students at the University of Manitoba and
found that the likelihood of raping or likelihood of using
force could be predicted on the basis of rape‑supportive
attitudes and a combination of attitude and sexuality
variables but not on the basis of sexuality variables alone.
Thus, personality traits seem to have a more important role
in the ‘‘construction’’ of rape.
It is possible that cultures which have more sexually liberal
attitudes may have higher rates of sexual violence but
equally in less liberal societies same attitudes may apply.
Jaffee and Straus[28] indicated that there is no relationship
between sexually liberal attitudes and sexual violence,
but instead posited a significant association between
urbanization, poverty, high percentage of divorced men,
and incidence of reported sexual violence.
Stereotypes
Burt[29] described rape as the psychological extension
of a dominant‑submissive sex‑role stereotyped culture.
Socioculturally transmitted attitudes toward women, rape,
and rapists can predict sexual violence.[30] Such stereotypes
are often internalized from the male dominated sociocultural
milieu. Sexual violence can result from a misogynist attitude
prevalent in a culture. It has been pointed that cows
are treated better than women in India.[31] In rural India,
for example, girls have no independent control of their
sexuality. They are expected to get married and produce
children, thus shifting the control of their sexuality from
246
one man (the father) to the other (the husband).[31] A man,
thus, plays the most important role in a woman’s life in
India as he does in many other cultures which may have
traditional patriarchal attitudes.
It is possible that in cultures where man and his manly role
are prized better, additional perceived or real power may
encourage them to think of their ‘‘rights.’’[9] If a woman resists
sexual intercourse, it may be perceived as a direct threat by
men to their masculinity, triggering a crisis of male identity
and contributing to sexual control and violence as it is seen
as a way of resolving this crisis. It has been reported that
victims who attempt resistance or escape from the situation
are more likely to be brutalized by the offender,[32] thereby
giving an inflated sense of power to the abuser as was seen
in the New Delhi gang rape case of Nirbhaya in December
2012. It is likely that in patriarchal cultures, any resistance
from the woman victim is perceived by the offender as an
insult to his ‘‘manhood’’ further provoking him to resort to
more violent means to control the victim.
A largely prevalent and clichéd but incorrect stereotyped
belief is that sexual violence is often provoked by an
attractive, scantily, and seductively dressed woman who
is out alone at night; this situation influences a man who
then goes on to commit sexual violence on the woman.[12]
This belief falsely puts the complete onus of the act on the
victim, further victimizing her in the process. Given the facts
that acquaintance rape is more common than stranger rape
and that even a girl child is often a victim of sexual violence;
it is thus merely a myth that only the young, attractive, and
seductively dressed women are raped.[12] Perceived or real
vulnerability of the victim is a far more important factor
compared to attire or attractiveness.[30]
Consequences of sexual violence
Sexual violence can have widespread consequences not
only violating its immediate victims but also the wider
meaning of freedom and basic human rights.[33] The
perceived consequences of sexual violence vary across
cultures. In sociocentric societies where shame is a more
prevalent emotion, the victims of sexual violence may not
open up about their trauma and hence may not report it.
This not only affects the victim negatively but also affects
an understanding of the true nature of trauma and rates
of these acts, thereby influencing policy‑making. In
sociocentric cultures, relations between people are at the
core and individual identity is subsumed in the family or
kinship. Comparatively in ego‑centric cultures, relations
with the ‘‘self’’ are at the core with ‘‘independence’’ being
given more importance than ‘‘interdependence.’’ Socio‑ and
ego‑centric cultures are said to have different emotional
expressions and experiences in terms of shame and guilt,
respectively.[34] These different emotional experiences are
due to the very basic tenet of these cultures: Sociocentric
cultures being more socialized tend to give rise to a more
Indian Journal of Psychiatry 55(3), Jul-Sep 2013
 Kalra and Bhugra: Cross cultural aspects of sexual violence
social feeling of shame which cannot be felt in the absence
of social relations. In contrast, egocentric cultures are more
individualistic and give rise to a more private feeling of
guilt.[34] Thus, the emotions in a victim of sexual violence are
shaped by the culture of the victim. In sociocentric cultures,
where the dignity of the family (izzat) comes before that
of the individual member, the notion about harm resulting
from sexual violence is shared more by the family members.
On the contrary, in ego‑centric cultures, this harm from
sexual violence is much concentrated around the dignity
and identity of the individual member. Thus, concepts
of self also vary. Hofstede[35] has also divided a cultural
dimension on masculinity and femininity of cultures where
gender roles are different.
Victims of sexual violence face the danger of suffering
negative reactions upon disclosing their trauma, the most
traumatizing of which includes being blamed for the
assault.[36] Studies have indicated a relationship between
high levels of gender prejudice and stereotyping and high
levels of victim blame.[37,38] The social stigma resulting from
sexual abuse is higher in Asian cultures where anything with
sexual connotations is highly stigmatized.[12]
Understanding of socio‑sexual processes
Cultural variations in gender roles and permitted gender
behaviors may play an important role in cases of sexual
violence by men from one culture on women from a
different culture. Sexual bargaining is a social process by
which potential partners communicate interest/disinterest
in pursuing a sexual relationship with each other.[39] This
process may be largely influenced by the way genders are
seen across cultures. There is a high possibility that men
from a sexually conservative culture may interpret nonsexual
behaviors or platonic interests of women from sexually open
cultures, as sexual in nature resulting in sexual violence.
Overall, several studies have reported that men are more
likely to misinterpret and make errors in decoding women’s
platonic interests as sexual signals.[40‑43] This could result
from a higher likelihood in men to perceive the world in
sexualized terms[39] or due to men’s bias to perceive sexual
interest.[44] There is a possibility that such errors in decoding
are more likely to occur in men from sexually conservative
cultures, although this would need further exploration.
Biology versus culture
Sexuality like various other biological processes is said to
be controlled by genetic factors. However our knowledge,
understanding and expression of sexuality are also
influenced by our cultural background.[33] Scholars have
often debated that biology plays a role in sexual violence.
However, it needs further exploration whether the act of
rape is biologically coded or is culturally determined.
The biological or evolutionary theory of sexual violence
emphasizes that evolution applies to sexual violence just
Indian Journal of Psychiatry 55(3), Jul-Sep 2013
as it does to any other aspect of life[45] and that it reflects
adaptations constructed over evolutionary time,[46] but this
remains a controversial idea. It views sexual violence as a
result of a man’s “natural” sexual urge, which is different
from that of a woman. This difference in sexual urges is said
to be a result of early evolutionary changes and adaptation
for successful sexual reproduction. Due to sexual selection,
men use the reproductive strategy (including sexual
violence) of impregnating as many women as they can to
spread their sperm and to maximize the number of female
eggs that can be fertilized. This theory looks at sexual
violence as a natural behavior resulting from a biological
propensity to reproduce and have a net positive effect on
the person’s (resorting to sexual violence) reproductive
success.[45,47] This theory, thus, accepts the act of sexual
violence resulting from a man’s aggression as a natural
thing but has thus been challenged.[48] Agreeing to this
theory would mean that every man has an innate propensity
for sexual aggression and inflicting sexual violence. This
theory, thus, searches roots of sexual violence in one’s
genes and completely ignores other factors that may come
into play later on in life.
Another theory attempts to describe sexual violence in
terms of cultural explanations, claiming that sexual violence
is socioculturally constructed. It, thus, negates biological
underpinnings for a man’s sexual urges, claimed by the
biological theory. This theory looks at other important
factors such as gender power equations, moral values,
attitudes toward violence, and so on to be contributing
toward sexual violence. Based on these, Sanday[26] divided
cultures into two types: Rape‑free and rape‑prone cultures
which are moulded by sociocultural values; the former
are more balanced in gender equality and have low rates
of rape, whereas the latter have high rates where women
are excluded from positions of power while restricting
their freedom and objectifying them. Sanday[26] pointed
out the widespread existence of rape‑prone societies but
absence of rape‑free societies. On similar lines, Otterbein[49]
examined 17 cultures and reported that cultures with
rigid sex‑role systems showed higher sexual violence. The
sociocultural theory, thus, explains sexual violence in terms
of social expression of male power or patriarchy. If one
agrees with this hypothesis, it would mean that patriarchal
societies will witness more sexual violence compared to
the gender‑equal societies. Thornhill and Palmer[50] collate
these two hypotheses, arguing that the socially learned
behaviors known as culture are largely biological and hence
an overlap of biological and cultural factors occurs in sexual
violence.
Cultural sanction of violence also may encourage sexual
violence. For example, higher rates of rape were observed
by Le Vine[51] in the Gusii or Kisii tribe of Kenya. In Gusii
marriages, sexual aggression is a sanctioned behavior,
wherein men are encouraged by other society members to
247
 Kalra and Bhugra: Cross cultural aspects of sexual violence
use pain and be sexually aggressive on their wives during
sexual intercourse. This is done in order to show one’s
power. It is argued that the higher rates of rape among the
Gusii occur when marital sexual aggression overflows into
the premarital or extramarital area.[51]
Whether sexual violence is influenced by biological or
cultural factors, it has major influence on the mental health
and functioning of the victim especially due to the social
responses to the violence.[52] Negative social reactions lead
to higher levels of mental health issues in the victims.
CONCLUSION
Although the issue of sexual violence has remained
largely ignored until now, ignoring it further is no longer
acceptable. It, thus, becomes crucial to acknowledge
that sexual violence transcends national and cultural
boundaries. In the absence of such acknowledgment,
sexual violence may continue to grow. The causes of sexual
violence are complex and like many other crimes, sexual
violence may not be completely understood and explained
by a single factor; culture is one of the many factors that
may be important in our understanding of sexual violence.
It is an important research question as to what causes
variation in the incidence of sexual violence in different
cultures. Cross‑cultural aspect of sexual violence is a highly
under‑investigated and under‑researched area. An important
step toward understanding sexual violence and its victims
would be to re‑phrase and re‑understand various models of
patriarchy/matriarchy and various gender roles and gender
expectations. It is high time we start understanding barriers
and cultural strengths that are responsible for higher or
lower rates of sexual violence cases in different cultures.
REFERENCES
1. World Health Organization. World report on violence and health. Geneva,
World Health Organization; 2002.
2. Rozee PD. Forbidden or forgiven? Rape in cross‑cultural perspective.
Psychol Women Q 1993;17:499‑514.
3. El‑bushra J, Piza Lopez E. Gender‑related violence: Its scope and
relevance. Focus Gend 1993;1:1‑9.
4. Heise  L, Moore  K, Toubia  N. Defining “coercion” and “consent”
cross‑culturally. SIECUS Rep 1996;24:12‑4.
5. Thompson NJ, Potter JS, Sanderson CA, Maibach EW. The relationship
of sexual abuse and HIV risk behaviors among heterosexual adult female
STD patients. Child Abuse Negl 1997;21:149‑56.
6. Baron L, Straus MA. Rape and its relation to social disorganization,
pornography and inequality in the USA. Med Law 1989;8:209‑32.
7. Armstrong S. Rape in South Africa: An invisible part of apartheid’s legacy.
Focus Gend 1994;2:35‑9.
8. Ouattara M, Sen P, Thomson M. Forced marriage, forced sex: The perils
of childhood for girls. Gend Dev 1998;6:27‑33.
9. Daley EM, Noland V. Intimate partner violence in college students:
A cross‑cultural comparison. Int Electron J Health Educ 2001;4:35‑40.
10. Greenfield  L. Sex offenses and offenders. Washington, DC: Bureau of
Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice; 1997.
11. Watts C, Zimmerman C. Violence against women: Global scope and
magnitude. Lancet 2002;359:1232‑7.
12. Ward CA. Inserto F. Victims of sexual violence: A handbook for helpers.
Illustrated ed. Singapore: Singapore University Press; 1990.
13. Rajalakshmi TK. Worrisome trend. Available from: http://www.
frontline.in/navigation/?type=static&page=flonnet&rdurl=fl2810/
248
stories/20110520281010700.htm Frontline 2011 May 07‑20, 28 [Last
accessed on 2013 May 6].
14. Census of India 2011. Gender composition of the population. Available
from: http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011‑prov‑results/prov_results_
paper1_india.html [Last accessed on 2013 May 13].
15. Incidence Of Cognizable Crimes (IPC) Under Different Crime Heads
during 1953 to 2011. Available from: http://ncrb.nic.in/CD‑CII2011/
cii‑2011/1953‑2011.pdf [Last accessed on 2013 May 8].
16. Gohain MP. 336% increase in child rape cases last decade; 48,338
child rape cases between 2001‑11. Times of India, April 20, 2013.
Available from: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013‑04‑20/
india/38692535_1_integrated‑child‑protection‑scheme‑human‑rights‑
national‑crimes‑record‑bureau [Last accessed on 2013 May 6].
17. D’Alessio SJ, Stolzenberg L. Sex ratio and male‑on‑female intimate
partner violence. J Crim Justice 2010;38:555‑61.
18. Buss DM. The dangerous passion: Why jealousy is as necessary as love
and sex. New York: The Free Press; 2000.
19. Guttentag M, Secord PF. Too many women? The sex ratio question.
Beverly Hills: Sage; 1983.
20. Cornwall A, Lindisfarne N. Dislocating masculinities. London: Routledge;
1994.
21. Moore H. A passion for difference: Essays in anthropology and gender.
London: Polity Press; 1994.
22. Anderson JE, Abraham M, Bruessow M, Coleman RD, McCarthy KC,
Harris‑Odimgbe T, et al. Cross‑cultural perspectives on intimate partner
violence. JAAPA 2008;21:36‑44.
23. Rajani RR. Child sexual abuse in Tanzania: Much noise, little justice. Sex
Health Exch 1998;1:13‑4.
24. Martin K, Vieraitis LM, Britto S. Gender equality and women’s absolute
status: A test of the feminist models of rape. Violence Against Women
2006;12:321‑39.
25. Koss MP, Gidycz CA, Wisniewski N. The scope of rape: Incidence and
prevalence of sexual aggression and victimization in a national sample of
higher education students. J Consult Clin Psychol 1987;55:162‑72.
26. Sanday PR. The socio‑cultural context of rape: A cross‑cultural study.
J Soc Sci 1981;37:5‑27.
27. Briere J, Malamuth NM. Self‑reported likelihood of sexually aggressive
behavior: Attitudinal versus sexual explanations. J Res Pers
1983;17:315‑23.
28. Jaffee D, Straus MA. Sexual climate and reported rape: A state‑level
analysis. Arch Sex Behav 1987;16:107‑23.
29. Burt MR. Cultural myths and supports for rape. J Pers Soc Psychol
1980;38:217‑30.
30. Rodabaugh B. Austin M. Sexual assault. New York, Garland Press; 1981.
31. Kumari R. Rural female adolescence: Indian scenario. Soc Change
1995;25:177‑88.
32. Levine S. Koenig J. Why men rape: Interviews with convicted rapists.
London: WH Allen; 1983.
33. Herbert TW. Sexual violence and American manhood. Illustrated ed.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 2002.
34. Zimmerling R. ‘Guilt Cultures’ vs ‘Shame Cultures’: Political Implications?
Paper given at the International Conference on Reassessing Democracy:
New Approaches to Governance, Citizenship and Multiple Identities
in Comparative Research. AK Interkultureller Demokratievergleich.
International University Bremen, June 20‑21, 2003.
35. Hofstede G. Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors,
institutions, and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage;
2001.
36. Campbell R, Ahrens CE, Sefl T, Wasco SM, Barnes HE. Social reactions
to rape victims: Healing and hurtful effects on psychological and physical
health outcomes. Violence Vict 2001;16:287‑302.
37. Lonsway KA, Fitzgerald LF. Rape myths: In review. Psychol Women Q
1994;18:133‑64.
38. Pedersen SH, Strömwall LA. Victim Blame, Sexism and Just‑World
Beliefs: A Cross‑Cultural Comparison. Psychiatry Psychol Law 2013.
Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2013.770715 [Last
accessed date on 2013 June 5].
39. Farris C, Treat TA, Viken RJ, McFall RM. Sexual coercion and the
misperception of sexual intent. Clin Psychol Rev 2008;28:48‑66.
40. Abbey A, Cozzarelli C, McLaughlin K, Harnish RJ. The effects of
clothing on dyad sex composition on perceptions of sexual intent: Do
women and men evaluate these cues differently? J Appl Soc Psychol
1987;17:108‑26.
41. Abbey A, Harnish RJ. Perception of sexual intent. The role of gender,
alcohol consumption, and rape supportive attitudes. Sex Roles
1995;32:297‑313.
42. Abbey A, Zawacki T, McAuslan P. Alcohol’s effect on sexual perception.
J Stud Alcohol 2000;61:688‑97.
43. Lenton AP, Bryan A. An affair to remember: The role of sexual scripts in
perceptions of sexual intent. Pers Rel 2005;12:483‑98.
Indian Journal of Psychiatry 55(3), Jul-Sep 2013
 Kalra and Bhugra: Cross cultural aspects of sexual violence

44. Koukounas E, Letch NM. Psychological correlates of perception of sexual
intent in women. J Soc Psychol 2001;141:443‑56.
45. Thornhill R. The biology of human rape. Jurimetrics J 1999;39:137‑47.
46. McKibbin WF, Shackelford TK, Goetz AT, Starratt VG. Why do men
rape? An evolutionary psychological perspective. Rev Gen Psychol
2008;12:86‑97.
47. Gottschall JA, Gottschall TA. Are per‑incident rape‑pregnancy rates
higher than per‑incident consensual pregnancy rates? Human Nature
2003;14:1‑20.
48. Jonathan M. Human biodiversity. New York: Walter de Gruyter, Inc; 1995.
49. Otterbein K. A cross‑cultural study of rape. In: Otterbein K, editor. Feuding
and Warfare. Amsterdam: Gordon and Beach Science Publishers; 1994.
p. 119‑32.
50. Thornhill R, Palmer CT. A natural history of rape: Biological bases of
sexual coercion. Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Press; 2001.
51. Le Vine RA. Gussi sex offenses. A study in social control. Am Anthropol
1959;61:965‑90.
52. Martin SL, Parcesepe AM. Sexual assault and women’s mental health. In:
Garcia‑Moreno C, Riecher‑Rossler A, editors. vol 178. Violence Against
Women and Mental Health. Key Issues Mental Health. Basel: Karger;
2013. p. 86‑95.
Source of Support: Nil, Conflict of Interest: None declared

Author Help: Online submission of the manuscripts

Articles can be submitted online from http://www.journalonweb.com. For online submission, the articles should be prepared in two files (first
page file and article file). Images should be submitted separately.
1) First Page File:
Prepare the title page, covering letter, acknowledgement etc. using a word processor program. All information related to your identity should
be included here. Use text/rtf/doc/pdf files. Do not zip the files.
2) Article File:
The main text of the article, beginning with the Abstract to References (including tables) should be in this file. Do not include any informa-
tion (such as acknowledgement, your names in page headers etc.) in this file. Use text/rtf/doc/pdf files. Do not zip the files. Limit the file
size to 1 MB. Do not incorporate images in the file. If file size is large, graphs can be submitted separately as images, without their being
incorporated in the article file. This will reduce the size of the file.
3) Images:
Submit good quality color images. Each image should be less than 4096 kb (4 MB) in size. The size of the image can be reduced by decreas-
ing the actual height and width of the images (keep up to about 6 inches and up to about 1800 x 1200 pixels). JPEG is the most suitable
file format. The image quality should be good enough to judge the scientific value of the image. For the purpose of printing, always retain a
good quality, high resolution image. This high resolution image should be sent to the editorial office at the time of sending a revised article.
4) Legends:
Legends for the figures/images should be included at the end of the article file.

Indian Journal of Psychiatry 55(3), Jul-Sep 2013 249

Copyright of Indian Journal of Psychiatry is the property of Medknow Publications & Media
Pvt. Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv
without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.