The Author(s) 2013 Reprints and permission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1077801212474432 vaw.sagepub.com 474432VAWXXX10.1177/10778012 12474432Violence Against WomenMaier The Author(s) 2011 Reprints and permission: http://www. sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav 1 Widener University, Chester, PA, USA Corresponding Author: Shana L. Maier, Department of Criminal Justice, Widener University, One University Place, Chester, PA 19013, USA. Email: slmaier@mail.widener.edu The Complexity of Victim- Questioning Attitudes by Rape Victim Advocates: Exploring Some Gray Areas Shana L. Maier 1 Abstract Despite efforts to educate and create community awareness, rape myths and victim- blaming attitudes persist in society. This research explores whether advocates express victim-questioning attitudes or questions, negative judgment, or frustration regarding victims behavior or choices. Data from interviews with 58 advocates reveal that the majority (76%) of advocates never expressed any victim-questioning attitudes during the interview. However, responses from 14 advocates (24%) show that victim-questioning has evolved into a much more complex, subtle form than historical victim blaming or acceptance of rape myths. Keywords rape crisis center, rape myths, rape victim advocates Introduction Despite efforts to educate and create community awareness, rape myths, and victim- blaming attitudes persist in society. Rape myths have been defined as generally false but widely and persistently held beliefs and attitudes that serve to deny or justify male sexual aggression against women (Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1994). Myths include the notion that victims lie about rape (Doyle & Barbato, 1999), victims precipitate rape (Amir, 1971; Garland, 2005; Holmstrom & Burgess, 1978; Lee, Pomeroy, Yoo, & Rheinboldt., 2005), rapes committed by acquaintances are less severe than rapes committed by strangers (Estrich, 1987; McGregor, Wiebe, Marion, & Livingstone, 2000), real victims sustain injury (Du Mont, Miller, & Myrh, 2003; McGregor et al., 2000), and marital rape is less Article 1414 Violence Against Women 18(12) severe than other rapes (Frese, Moya, & Megias, 2004; Kirkwood & Cecil, 2001). Myths about rapists include the notion that rapists act due to sexual motives (Garland, 2005). Rape victim advocates counsel rape victims or their significant others over the phone or in person; provide various forms of crisis intervention; accompany victims to hospitals, police stations, or legal proceedings; educate the community on wider issues surrounding rape; and fight for better treatment of rape victims by society and the medical, criminal justice, and legal systems (Du Mont et al., 2003; Martin, 2005). While past studies have illuminated systematic issues surrounding rape, there remains great need for additional research that includes rape victim advocates perceptions about rape-related issues. Specifically, do advocateswho are themselves members of a rape-prone society with a culture that typically questions rape victimsexpress victim-questioning attitudes or ques- tions, negative judgment, or frustration regarding victims behavior or choices before the rape? Do advocates ever struggle with common stereotypical conceptions of what a real rape should entail and how a real victim should look and behave? Do advocates ever place responsibility for preventing rape solely on potential victims? The present study explored how rape victim advocates perceive rape, rape victims, and rapists. Understanding advocates perceptions and attitudes is important because advocates are often the first responders and supporters for the victim. Rape victims may contact a local rape crisis hotline before disclosing or reporting the incident to anyone else. Research indicates that reacting negatively to disclosure influences victims emotional recovery (see Campbell et al., 1999), as well as whether victims blame themselves (Ullman, Townsend, Filipas, & Starzynski, 2007). If advocates express victim-questioning attitudes, this could be detrimental to victims. In addition, advocates tend to be the one constant source of vic- tim support; they are a crucial link, supporting rape victims as they navigate potentially unfriendly systems and confront hurdles, such as the medical exam, police interview, or trial. Consequently, their unconditional support and understanding are essential. Lastly, as advocates educate the community on wider issues surrounding rape it could be problematic if they hold unrecognized (or recognized) victim-questioning attitudes. There is limited research on rape victim advocates perceptions of rape, rape victims, and rapists, and the degree to which they fall prey to the negative attitudes toward rape victims that persist in society. This article attempts to fill this void in the literature. Review of the Literature Amir (1971) first introduced the term victim-precipitated rape, the notion that some- times victims are as blameworthy as offenders. Although dated, Amirs work is reflected in the belief that no victim is completely innocent or free from blame. Previous research has found that men are more likely than women to hold more negative attitudes toward rape victims and to accept rape myths (Best, Dansky, & Kilpatrick, 1992; Cowan & Campbell, 1995; Jiminez & Abreu, 2003; Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1994; Nagel, Matsuo, McIntyre, & Morrison, 2002; White & Robinson Kurpius, 1999). However, it is important to note that although men are more likely to do so, women also often accept rape myths Maier 1415 (Cowan, 2000). Rape myths reinforce the just world theory (Lerner, 1980), the idea that the world is a just place and bad things only happen to those who deserve them. It is func- tional for women to maintain this myth to deny their own vulnerability: The belief that only certain types of women are raped functions to obscure and deny the personal vulner- ability of all women by suggesting that only other women are raped (Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1994, p. 136). This illusion of invulnerability (Wiehe & Richards, 1995) helps others make sense of the crime by blaming victims. Most rape myths are based on traditional gender norms: Women are expected to behave in particular ways that confirm and reinforce their femininity in order to avoid blame for rape. Rape myths propose that only certain women or women with bad reputations are raped (Ward, 1995). A woman who claims to be raped is lying, possibly to seek revenge after being scorned by a lover, to cover up an illegitimate pregnancy, to appease feelings of guilt, or to save her reputation because she regrets her actions (Doyle & Barbato, 1999). Examples of victim precipitation include becoming visibly intoxicated, dressing provocatively, accept- ing a ride from a stranger, initiating some degree of sexual intimacy, or inviting a man into her home (see Burt, 1980; Garland, 2005; Lonsway & Fitzgerald, 1994). Misconceptions about the act of rape include the idea that it is impossible to rape a woman who does not want to be raped (Holmstrom & Burgess, 1978) and the longer a woman waits to protest, the more likely she desires the sexual encounter (Shotland & Goodstein, 1983). This first myth has a functional aspect: the false claim that a woman cannot be raped against her will denies the severity of the crime and the urgency for broader social change. A second prevalent myth regarding rape concerns the relationship between victims and rapists. Rapes committed by a stranger are more likely to be seen as real (Estrich, 1987) and as more traumatic (Frese et al., 2004). Victims raped by acquaintances are viewed as more responsible for the victimization (Whatley, 1996) and are not afforded the same treatment by the criminal, legal, medical, and mental health systems as women raped by strangers. There are also rape myths concerning the rapist. One myth posits that men are natu- rally sexually aggressive and should not be held responsible when they lose control of their sexual urges. At the core of this first myth is the false belief that rape is sexually motivated (Schwendinger & Schwendinger, 1983). Feminists and advocates for victims have struggled to change the cultural belief that rape is about sex to an understanding that rape is about violence and power (Brownmiller, 1972; Cahill, 2001). Although research has indicated that most rapists are not mentally ill (Scully, 1994), a second key myth about rapists posits that they perpetrate rape because they suffer from a mental illness or disease. Research suggests that this myth historically was widely held by college stu- dents (Giacopassi & Dull, 1986) as well as rape advocates (Renzetti, 1979). Several scholars have explored the perceptions and experiences of rape victim advo- cates. Renzetti interviewed rape victim advocates to examine their definitions and theories of rape, and the extent to which they accepted rape myths (Andersen & Renzetti, 1980; Renzetti, 1979). She found that although advocates attempted to redefine rape as an issue of power, rather uncontrollable lust, they sometimes expressed popular rape myths in their 1416 Violence Against Women 18(12) discussion of rape-related issues. For example, rape victim advocates often alluded to the myth that rapists are sick or psychologically unbalanced. Martin (2005) provides the most extensive research on rape crisis center workers. She concluded that rape workers (police, medical staff, legal professionals, rape crisis center workers) often exhibited both victim-blaming attitudes about rape, victims, and rapists (e.g., rape results from womens poor judgment, rapists are sick or cannot control sexual impulses) and feminist attitudes (e.g., rape results from the power imbalance between men and women). Campbell (1998) interviewed 168 rape victim advocates to explore the services offered to victims by the legal, medical, and mental health systems, and to evaluate whether these services met victims needs. Most recently, Payne (2007) surveyed 44 sexual assault crisis center workers to explore the barriers they encounter collaborating with health care profes- sionals. Although these studies examine rape victim advocates attitudes and behavior, they do not directly explore the extent to which advocates may adhere to persistent rape myths. Method Letters of inquiry were sent to the directors, program coordinators, or advisors at seven rape crisis centers or programs in fall 2003. 1 The letters of inquiry explained the purpose of the research (i.e., to explore the experiences and viewpoints of rape victim advocates) and requested access to interview the rape victim advocates affiliated with the center or program. Five of the centers were selected due to location and one center was selected because it is one of the oldest rape crisis centers and serves a large city in the United States. Participants from one university-based research center were unable to be recruited, so six centers or programs are included (five community based and one university based). Thus, this is primarily a convenience sample, which raises some methodological limitations; in particular, it is impossible to determine if the results would be the same if the included rape crisis centers were randomly selected from all centers on the East Coast. The sample is comprised of 58 women associated with six rape crisis centers or pro- grams located in four East Coast states. Based on the anticipated scarcity of male advocates and the recognition that including only a few males would not lend to comparability, males were not included in the research. There were, in fact, only eight male volunteers located in four of the centers and programs. 2 Individuals qualified for participation only if they had completed 40 to 50 hr of training, had been a rape victim advocate for one month or longer, and had worked with at least one rape victim in the past year. The average amount of time the 58 advocates in this sample have served as rape victim advocates with their current rape crisis center or program is 2 years. The advocate serving the longest had been an advocate for 15 years at the time of the interview, and the advocate serving the shortest time had been an advocate for 1 month at the time of the interview. Ten advocates had prior affiliations with other rape crisis centers or programs. Thirty-two advo- cates (55%) had their own personal experience of a completed or attempted sexual victim- ization. Participants ranged in age from 18 to 60 years old. Thirty-one percent (n = 18) of Maier 1417 the advocates were women of color. 3 Of the 58 advocates, 40 (69%) volunteered for the center or program, six (10%) were part-time paid staff members, seven (12%) were full- time paid staff, and five (9%) were interns. Advocates from centers and programs have the same roles and responsibilities. However, part-time and full-time staff members tend to have more contact with victims than volunteers. Advocates affiliated with the university- based center tend to have less contact with victims than advocates from community-based centers, because the university-based center serves a smaller population of potential victims. Because of the nature of the research, a qualitative methodology is most appropriate for in-depth assessment of the perceptions and experiences of study participants. 4 Qualitative research allows participants to articulate their feelings and experiences more clearly and in their own words, potentially providing more accurate and valid information (Flavin, 2001). Questions included in the interview guide were developed after a careful review of the extant literature. Based on previous research suggesting that some psychotherapists may be consciously or unconsciously biased against their clients (Dye & Roth, 1990), it was assumed that it is possible for advocates to unconsciously accept victim-questioning atti- tudes. Posing direct questions about rape myths or victim-questioning attitudes in a ques- tionnaire format could mask this problem. Instead, a semistructured interview guide was used not only to raise questions of interest to the researcher, but also to allow issues to emerge that the researcher may not anticipate (Iliffee & Steed, 2000). In this study, victim-questioning attitudes include questions, negative judgment, or frustration regarding victims behavior or choices before the rape. The term victim- questioning was selected over victim-blaming because of the complexity of advocates perceptions and because advocates did not explicitly state that victims deserve to be raped. In addition, the term questioning here implies an attitude rather than a specific behavior or action. Advocates who were aware of their victim-questioning attitudes insisted that they would not reveal their feelings to victims or treat victims differently. This research examines advocates attitudes and perceptions revealed during the inter- view; it does not address behavior, since rape victim advocates were not observed inter- acting with rape victims. The author conducted all interviews between October 30, 2003 and February 16, 2004. Interviews averaged 45 min to 1 hr. The shortest interview, conducted over the phone, lasted 25 min. The longest interview, conducted in person, lasted 2 hr. Of the 58 inter- views, 38 (66%) were conducted over the phone and 20 (34%) were conducted in person. Interviews conducted in person were conducted at a rape crisis center, the parent social service agency, a university office, a library, and a diner. Participants were not paid for their time. After all interviews were transcribed verbatim, a qualitative, inductive analysis using a grounded theory approach was utilized. According to Strauss and Corbin (1990), grounded theory refers to the emergence of theory from data that are systematically gathered and analyzed. This research does not test any specific hypotheses. Instead, the analysis involved first identifying core themes that emerged from multiple reads of the interview data (Rubin 1418 Violence Against Women 18(12) & Rubin, 1995). Themes were simply ideas or phrases that appeared in multiple interviews. The more frequently the same concept occurs in a text, the more likely it is a theme (Ryan & Bernard, 2003). Next, a more formal analysis of the data began, including open coding and axial coding (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Rather than focusing on line-by-line coding, transcripts were read numerous times and themes were identified. In order to systematically review the extent and context of victim-questioning attitudes, the second stage of the analysis included axial coding. The purpose of axial coding is to examine a category in terms of the conditions that give rise to it; the context in which it is embedded . . . (Strauss & Corbin, 1990, p. 97). The aim during this step was not only to identify if advocates provided victim-questioning responses, but if their response focused on victims, rape, or rapists. At this stage of analysis advocates who revealed victim- questioning attitudes were compared to those who did not. One major methodological limitation is that only one researcher coded the data in their entirety, so it is possible that others would interpret advocates responses differently. However, when specific data fell into more of a gray area regarding questioning or blaming of victims, the researcher consulted with two colleagues in departments of Criminal Justice and Sociology. In addition, the researcher also consulted with one of the directors from a rape crisis center (included in the sample). All were asked to review the section of the tran- script in question, and although they did not formally code the data, the researcher sought the input of all three women on numerous occasions during the analysis process. When there was disagreement over whether an advocate was questioning victims or accepting rape myths, discussions continued until a consensus was reached. The director of one of the centers also shared the results with several advocates during a meeting, and also with a codirector, and their reactions were shared with the researcher. Findings The research reveals that the majority (76%) of advocates never expressed any victim- questioning attitudes during the interview. However, responses from 14 advocates (24%) reveal that victim-questioning has evolved into a much more complex, subtle form than historical victim-blaming or acceptance of rape myths. Specifically, these data highlight the gray area between offering practical, preventive techniques women can take to avoid rape and blaming women who have not followed recommendations and are raped. Although advocates do not endorse or accept common or historically popular rape myths about rape or rapists, some ambiguity shaped their responses about victim precipita- tion and victim responsibility. While all advocates agree that victims do not deserve to be raped, advocates continue to fall prey to the common social tendency to place at least some degree of responsibility for rape prevention and victimization on women. Acceptance of the idea of victim precipitation or the notion that the offender alone is not always respon- sible for the offense has been suggested by prior research (Amir, 1971). The 14 advocates who questioned victims responsibility pondered if rape results from victims lack of assertiveness, poor choices, or miscommunication. Although ones per- sonal experiences of rape might influence such attitudes, the current data do not show a Maier 1419 distinctive pattern between personal victimization and victim-questioning attitudes. Moreover, limited experience working with rape victims does not appear to affect victim- questioning attitudes among advocates; the average amount of time these 14 advocates have spent advocating for and counseling rape victims is slightly more than 3.5 years. Race/ethnicity does not appear to play a role in shaping these attitudes, nor does ones status as a paid staff member or volunteer. Advocates who interacted with victims on the phone (hotline) and in person (hospital, police station, or court) were more likely to exhibit victim-questioning attitudes compared to advocates who interacted with victims in only one way (hotline, hospital exams, or court proceedings only). Perhaps those who assisted with victims in various ways had more experiences on which to reflect. Of the 14 advocates who revealed victim-questioning attitudes, nine (64%) were interviewed in person and five (36%) were interviewed by phone. Advocates interviewed in person were more likely than advocates interviewed by phone to reveal victim-questioning attitudes; nine of the 20 (45%) advocates interviewed in person revealed victim-questioning attitudes compared to only five of the 38 (13%) advocates interviewed by phone. All advocates were trained on the differences between facts versus myths about rape, rape victims, and rapists. Specifically, advocates were taught that rape is not caused by someones appearance, attire, or intoxication; most rape victims do not have bruises or other physical injuries; men can be raped; and prostitutes can be raped. Time was also spent debunking myths about rapists. Specifically, advocates were taught that the typical rapist is not a stranger lurking in the bushes, but is more likely to be the victims acquaintance. Statistics were presented during training. Many advocates discussed interactive exercises conducted during training that required them to identify false, stereotypical images about rape. These trainings may account for the subtleness and complexity of the victim-ques- tioning attitudes of those (24%) who revealed them. Perceptions of Rape Victims Across the six rape crisis centers, advocates indicated that they were cognizant of the range of victims who experience rape. Fifty-one advocates (88%) did not think there is a typi- cal rape victim, and seven correctly explained that the typical victim is raped by an acquaintance. Although most victims seeking services are women, advocates recognized that men could also be victimized. Throughout the interviews, advocates pondered the possibility that men are victimized much more than rape crisis centers are aware but sim- ply do not reach out for counseling or other services because of the stigma associated with rape or the idea that rape crisis centers are only for women. Advocates were asked whether women can take preventive measures to avoid rape. Only 12 (21%) stated that nothing can be done to completely prevent rape or sexual assault, even though 32 advocates (55%) had had their own personal experience of a completed or attempted sexual victimization. Although most advocates (71%) stated that rape is caused by mens need to exert power over women, very few mentioned the responsibility of poten- tial perpetrators. Advocates were more likely to question victims decisions preceding the rape than they were to fully blame perpetrators. 1420 Violence Against Women 18(12) As stated previously, some advocates (24%) revealed acceptance of myths about rape victims or expressed victim-questioning attitudes when they raised the issue of whether victims have more of a responsibility to prevent rape by communicating more clearly or making better choices. However, it is important to reiterate that although some advocates may have questioned victims responsibility, none ever stated that victims deserve to be raped. When advocates revealed these attitudes, it is clear that most were completely unaware that they were questioning victims actions or decisions. Others acknowledged their lingering biases, but stated clearly that they would not verbalize such feelings when working with victims. The complex and subtle ways that some advocates questioned vic- tims will be explored in the following section. Bad Choices According to a few advocates, rape victims have control over the choices they make preceding their victimization. According to Martin (2005), a mainstream 5 or nonfeminist discourse of rape asserts that women and girls who show poor judgment . . . precipitate rape (p. 123). Ten advocates (17%) used a nonfeminist discourse when they discussed the bad choices or unwise decisions that women make and the need for them to make better choices or smarter decisions to avoid bad situations. Examples of women who make bad choices or put themselves in bad situations are prostitutes, women who become visibly intoxicated, women who accept drinks that they did not make, women who attend parties or other social functions without a buddy, and women who get into cars with men they just met. A few advocates discussed the correlation between rape and intoxication, consistent with research (Mohler-Kuo, Dowdall, Koss, & Wechsler, 2004; Ullman, 2003). Advocates do not assert that women who are intoxicated at the time of a rape or assault deserve blame, but they do understand the fact that alcohol is a common factor in many date and acquain- tance rape situations and that when women drink or become intoxicated they put them- selves at greater risk of being sexually victimized. Phyllis (a pseudonym as are all names used in this article), who has been affiliated with a university-based rape program for 15 years, offers a mixed reaction to womens decisions to drink alcohol: If people would be smarter about the alcohol and drugs they do in certain situations they may be their own better advocate in their safety, and I think some people put their enjoyment and their fun above their safety and sanctity in preserving them- selves as an individual. Would I ever say that I think women should drink less to keep themselves from being assaulted as frequently? No. I think women should be able to do whatever they damn well want to do but I also do know practicality tells me that Im not going to go to a bar and tie one on and not have a friend there who is going to make sure nothing bad happens to me. This is a very complex response. Although at one point Phyllis discusses her personal prevention measures that may very well be practical, the total response also raises Maier 1421 questions about victims who do not follow the same preventive measures and put their enjoyment and fun above their safety. This response exhibits the pervasiveness of the societal attitude that women are responsible for preventing victimization and highlights one major societal dilemma: when does offering preventive techniques to women to avoid rape become victim questioning? Some advocates, like Phyllis, struggled to reconcile the idea that there are some measures women can take to put themselves less at risk in our rape-prone society, suggesting that prevention falls entirely on women. Charlene, who has been a hotline advocate for three and a half years, further questions womens responsibility for reducing rape by reflecting that rape would occur less fre- quently if women did not get themselves into bad situations by drinking too much. Such responses walk a fine line between understanding that intoxication is a factor in rape and placing full responsibility for avoiding bad situations on women. Amber, a victim of an attempted sexual assault, hid her anger with an intoxicated victim: I have had one case where I was just frustrated. She [the victim] had been drinking heavily and she wasnt sure what happened. . . . I think I was more angry not at the situation but how could you put yourself in that situation? Not angry like being angry towards her because thats not what I am there for. Inwardly I was like, Oh my God. I want to scream. I got out of bed at four oclock in the morning for this. It is tough sometimes and you have to step back and remember your role and not let this come out. These beliefs are consistent with other research findings that show that victims of sex- ual assault who have transgressed conservative social restrictions are seen as more deserv- ing of sexual abuse (Ward, 1995). Unfortunately the sentiment that victims who are intoxicated during the rape may be more blameworthy than victims who are not permeates criminal justice and legal systems and possibly university judicial proceedings. For exam- ple, when Kelly was in college she did not receive university support when she was raped by an acquaintance while drinking on campus. She did not pursue charges against her assailant because the university told her that if she did, she would be charged with under- age drinking. In summary, although some advocates say that women do not necessarily have to com- pletely abstain from alcohol consumption, a few advocates believed that drinking not only puts them at greater risk of being raped, but also at greater risk of being questioned or blamed. Research indicates that victims are not immune to this view; when victims con- sume alcohol they may perceive that they have contributed to their own sexual victimiza- tion (Fisher, Daigle, Cullen, & Tuner, 2003; Macy, Nurius & Norris, 2006). Statements made by some advocates exhibit absence of a clear conviction that engaging in sexual activity with an individual who is unable to consent is still rape. Another way women were perceived as making bad choices was when they accepted rides with strangers. Bonnie, who has never been sexually victimized, reflects on younger victims: There is that parent role that comes out in me that says, Why would you get in a car with them? Why would you do this? Although Bonnie questioned the judgment of 1422 Violence Against Women 18(12) younger victims, she later states, I dont care if you walk down the street naked. That doesnt give anyone the right to come over and throw you down to the ground and rape you. So although Bonnie questions potential victims judgment, she adamantly believes that no one has the right to rape another person. This highlights the complexity of the issue: advocates may question victims choices but stop short of stating that one persons bad choices give another individual a right to rape. Ashley also asserted at one point during the interview that rape is never a victims fault, but still recalls hiding her frustration from a victim who made a bad decision: I try my hardest in the hospital not to get frustrated. I was on a case where the survivor she had done something that I dont think I would have ever . . . She got into a car with someone she didnt know. My first thought when I heard that was, Oh my God, are you kidding? Why would you do that? Thats so dangerous. I was frus- trated that if she would have just kept walking this never would have happened. Ashley suggests women could make their choices more carefully by refusing a ride from men they just met. However, some advocates failed to question whether it is safe for women to accept a ride with men known to them despite the advocates training that the typical rapist is known to the victim. Furthermore, they do not express that men who offer rides to women, regardless of whether they are a stranger or an acquaintance, should be responsible for refraining from sexually victimizing them. Miscommunication or Lack of Assertiveness A few advocates questioned whether victims communicate clearly or mean no when they say no. Six advocates questioned if rape is caused by miscommunication and womens lack of clarity and assertiveness. To illustrate, Dana, who was sexually abused as a child by a coach, questions the meaning of no: I think no means no and thats what no should mean. But I know that its not always what it means, and it absolutely sometimes for some women means maybe or means yes. Miscommunication is not acceptable. But the reality is that no doesnt always mean no. Gloria, who was sexually abused as a child by her friends father, also used the term miscommunication, while Phyllis comments highlight victims lack of assertiveness: I would have to say if there is one thing that struck me as similar for most of the people I have worked with it was probably some level of non-assertiveness. And usually out of their awareness. They can usually define themselves as a person who doesnt like confrontation or somebody doesnt have good communication patterns with other people. But as far as knowing that they are not assertive or knowing that they give their power away in their interactions with other people . . . Maier 1423 Sandra suggested that women should be told, Say what you mean and mean what you say, and Lori wanted women to learn where the line is between wanting to be polite and needing to be more assertive. Krista agreed: I think we need to be teaching girls that they are allowed to say no. They are allowed to stick up for themselves. Although none of the advocates states that women who are not assertive deserve to be raped, responses are still troubling because they highlight the pervasiveness of the societal notion that rape may be nothing more than a case of he said, she said. Their responses also suggest that part of rape prevention is teaching women better communication skills; only one advocate men- tioned mens responsibility to understand that no never means yes. Causes of Rape When advocates were asked why rape occurs, most reflected on socialization of men and women, power differences between men and women, and general societal factors. First, many advocates classified our society as a rape-prone society where rape is deemed acceptable, and men and women are socialized to abide by gender norms. Starting at an early age, males are socialized to be aggressive, while females are socialized to be passive. In addition, advocates believe our society equates sex with violence. Betty Ann, who was sexually abused as a child by her stepfather, explained: All these gender messages that we learn from a very young age contribute to it and the whole culture of rape. Many of the words that are used for sex are violent. I think all that feeds into these ideas about what is acceptable that makes it ok to rape. Advocates believed that society also sexualizes women and portrays them as property, which is seen clearly in media images. Ann Marie reflected: Women are so sexualized in this country and we give people the impression that they have access to womens bodies. It gives legitimacy to the act [rape] almost. Second, the majority of advocates (71%) specifically stated that men use rape as a way to gain a sense of power and control over another person. Catherine, who has been an advocate for slightly over a year and was sexually assaulted both as a child and while in college, explains: It [rape] feels powerful. You are making someone do something that they are sub- mitting to your will. And thats a rush for some rapists unfortunately. Although the majority of advocates felt that rape is caused by a rapists need for power, when advocates were asked how rape can be reduced, surprisingly only 10 advocates (17%) stated that targeting men or potential rapists to change was the best way to reduce rape. These 10 women discussed the importance of teaching men to be accountable for their actions, that their actions have life-changing effects on their victims, that lack of 1424 Violence Against Women 18(12) resistance does not equal consent, and that any sexual activity with an individual who is intoxicated or passed out is rape. Although the vast majority of advocates asserted that rape is about a mans need to exert power over another person and that some may not understand what they are doing is rape, very few noted that the best strategy to reduce rape was forcing men to change. Rapists Advocates in this sample do not accept traditional myths about rapists and provided responses characteristic of what Martin (2005) refers to as a feminist discourse. A femi- nist discourse says that rapists are normal boys and men (Martin 2005, p. 123). Most advocates believe there is no typical rapist; it could be anyone looking for a means to gain power and control. Sandra, who experienced an attempted rape by a friend, reflected: Thats the scary part. You meet people and you know that they dont look like mon- sters and thats scary because you dont know who you know that does that kind of behavior. It could be a relative or a friend of yours or someone you used to date. Thats scary. Bonnie agreed that there is not a typical rapist: If he was a typical rapist everyone would be able to pick him out on the street. Thats why you have your date and acquaintance rapes because they [rapists] are not typi- cal. They look like your average nice guy next door, the kid you grew up with, your neighbor around the corner. Moreover, advocates do not believe the common myth that rapists are crazed lunatics or have severe psychological problems. All but one advocate rejected that rapists were crazy during the time of the rape. Research conducted with convicted rapists supports that rapists are not sick or psychologically imbalanced (Scully, 1994). Advocates also were highly aware of the fact that the vast majority of rapes are perpe- trated by someone known to the victim. Twelve advocates (21%) specifically stated that it is very hard for women to prevent rape and sexual assault because of the probability that they will be victimized by someone known to thema friend, a boyfriend, a husband, a sibling, a parent, or a neighbor. However, when the vast majority of advocates offered sug- gestions for preventive measures that women can take to avoid sexual victimization, they were slightly more likely to suggest measures that would protect victims from stranger rapes rather than from acquaintance rapes. These prevention techniques include not leaving ones home at night, not walking alone, not walking on dark streets, refusing a drink from a stranger at a party, making sure keys are ready before approaching a car, carrying a cell phone, and always being aware of surroundings. Ashley, for instance, warned women against accepting a drink from someone they dont know. Eliza warned against leaving a friend in a room with a strange guy. However, Ashley did not consider the likelihood that Maier 1425 an acquaintance or date of a potential victim may also put a rape-facilitating drug in a drink, nor does Eliza recommend not leaving friends in a room with someone they know. Although advocates are aware that stranger rape is much less likely than acquaintance rape, when asked how women can prevent rape, some still tend to revert back to the myth that the rapist is a stranger. Thirty-eight advocates (65.5%) believed being raped by an acquaintance is more trau- matic than being raped by a stranger because the victim may trust the acquaintance, it is unexpected, and it causes victims to doubt their discretion regarding whom to trust. Also, such victims are more likely to face disbelief and blame from society and criminal justice officials. Teresa, who was raped by an acquaintance, explained: Acquaintance rape is harder to get through. It is easier for society to blame a victim in that scenario. When you get into the he said, she said battles, people wont believe survivors quite as much when it is acquaintance rape. Krista, who has never been sexually victimized, agreed: I think the recovery process for getting over an acquaintance rape is much more trau- matic because everyone understands that the guy who jumps out of the bushes was wrong, and everyone feels terrible for you and thats horrible. It doesnt have the same stigma, as, you are lying and made it up, you asked for it, you didnt tell him no. Societal disbelief may lead to self-doubt and self-blame by victims. Kim stated: I think because the most acceptable form of rape by society is the stranger rape, the rape where a woman is dragged into a back alley and raped, and I think that is clearly seen as a crime and I think a woman or man has a better chance of being able to conceptualize that as a crime against him or her. Ann Marie, who has never been sexually victimized, agreed: Plus we have that rape myth that you are going to be raped by a stranger so you begin to doubt if this is really rape. I have so many clients who have said that, I cant fathom that I was raped because in my mind you are raped by a guy jumping out of the bushes at gunpoint, not by the guy I was dating or my friend. I think they feel more responsible. Only two advocates believed that rape committed by a stranger is more traumatic than rape committed by someone known to the victim because you cannot play mind games with yourself to make yourself believe it is not any different than consensual sex, or because victims are more likely to believe they are going to be killed. The remaining 18 advocates could not commit to whether one was more traumatic than the other because they felt it depended on the specific situation or person. 1426 Violence Against Women 18(12) Complexity of Victim-Questioning Attitudes The complexity of perceptions of rape victims and victim-questioning attitudes is revealed in the present study; it was apparent through the contradictory answers of some advocates that they were not aware they held any stereotypical viewpoints and did not realize when they were questioning victims decisions. Also, it is important to reiterate that the majority (76%) of advocates never expressed any victim-questioning attitudes during the interview. Moreover, every advocate who revealed some level of victim-questioning attitudes also expressed that victims never deserve their victimiza- tion. Most advocates simply did not realize they had internalized any bias. This unrec- ognized internalization of victim-questioning is best seen in Rachaels idea of the typical victim: Typically lower educational backgroundthings that tend to be people who do not make the best choices, not that that excuses anything but sometimes I will think internally, Ew. That wasnt the best idea to take a ride home from three guys at a bar. Usually somebody with lower self-esteem . . . not low but lower. A lot of times survivors feel like deep down it was their fault. Personally I would never think it was my fault but I am coming from a different place. But I spend a lot of time trying to convince survivors that they did nothing wrong. It triggers with me, Why are they so convinced they did something wrong? Rachael, who never had a personal experience with sexual victimization, is clearly unaware of her biases. Like Rachael, other advocates acknowledged that when they have negative views about rape victims, they do not verbalize them to victims. Veronica, who was sexually abused by a teacher, agreed that accepting a ride from a stranger at two oclock in the morning is stupid. But she said, Even if you are thinking that in your head you can never say that. Ashley, who was frustrated with a victim who accepted a ride with a stranger because if she would have just kept walking this never would have happened, explained that she kept these thoughts private: I would certainly never say that to her because that is me judging her and that is a terrible thought to have and me thinking that is equivalent to me thinking that it was her fault and she could have avoided this. I would certainly never express it to a survivor. Bonnie, who has gut feelings that every woman who cries rape has not necessarily been raped, said she would not treat these individuals differently or reveal her feelings. Some advocates who expressed victim-questioning attitudes stated that it was their job to support the victim. They would only have negative thoughts internally and would never tell a victim because they believe that keeping these thoughts to themselves is suf- ficient. During interviews, these advocates did not challenge themselves on these thoughts, Maier 1427 nor did they question whether victims were aware that they did not believe them or were questioning their judgment even though they did not verbalize it. When discussing their reactions to victims, advocates never questioned whether their feelings or judgments emerged in nonverbal cues. Discussion Although individuals undergo 40 to 50 hr of training before becoming advocates, and over half (55%) of the sample had their own personal experience of a completed or attempted sexual victimization, 14 advocates (24%) expressed some degree of victim-questioning attitudes. Although most (76%) advocates did not reveal victim-questioning attitudes, the fact that 24% did is significant; this group is a population we would least expect to hold these attitudes. Victim-questioning attitudes were conveyed when advocates criticized or questioned victims for making bad choices that put them in bad situations or for failing to be assertive. It does not appear that an advocates personal experience of sexual victimization influ- ences victim-questioning attitudes. Half (50%) of those who expressed victim-questioning attitudes during the interview had their own personal experience of victimization. This is consistent with research conducted by Carmody and Washington (2001) that found that victims and nonvictims revealed similar attitudes about rape myths. This highlights the possibility that advocates in this sample who have had a prior experience with sexual vic- timization may question their own behavior and internalize a sense of responsibility. Race/ ethnicity does not appear to play a role in shaping these attitudes, either. Twenty-nine per- cent of those who displayed victim-questioning attitudes were women of color; 31% of the total sample were women of color. This research indicates that advocates neither endorse nor accept historically popular myths about rape or rapists. The vast majority of advocates strongly asserted both that rape is about power and control, not about sex or sexual desire, and that rapists are normal, not mentally disturbed. It is encouraging to see that these myths have been challenged and discarded since the 1970s when Renzetti (1979) found that rape counselors allude to the myth that rapists are sick or psychologically imbalanced. The purpose of this article is not to criticize the 24% of advocates in the sample who revealed victim-questioning attitudes. Despite my own education on violence against women, previous experience as a volunteer rape victim advocate, and anger over the way some members of society, medical staff, law enforcement, and the legal system question and blame victims, I was surprised and dismayed when my interviews with some advocates made me aware of my own personal biases against victims of which I had previously been unaware. Advocates, many of whom were victimized at some point in their own lives, are dedicated to supporting, counseling, and advocating for victims. Being a rape victim advo- cate or counselor requires a compassionate heart. Advocates dedicate at least 40 hr for training, volunteer countless hours to ensure that rape victims never feel like they are alone, spend their holidays and weekends counseling victims over the phone, and leave their homes at all hours to support victims in hospitals and at police stations. It is possible 1428 Violence Against Women 18(12) that the few advocates in this research who expressed victim-questioning attitudes would be surprised and possibly upset by their biases, especially since most did not acknowledge when negative or judgmental thoughts emerged in their interviews. This research extends previous rape research in several ways. First, responses from these few advocates (24% of sample) reveal that victim-questioning has evolved into a more subtle, complex form than previously thought. The complex nature of the acceptance of rape myths and victim-blaming attitudes is supported by previous research. Buddie and Miller (2001) concluded that it is possible that people believe in rape myths and blame rape victims for being raped while simultaneously agreeing that rape is harmful and victims need to be treated sympathetically. During training and follow-up meetings, advocates should be encouraged to reflect on their perceptions about the victims they assist. Martin (2005) also concluded that rape workers (law enforcement, medical staff, legal system, rape crisis center workers) often used both mainstream and feminist discourses when dis- cussing rape. However, unlike Martins comparison of several mainstream organizations perceptions of rape to those of rape crisis centers, the present research explores how rape victim advocates perceive rape, rape victims, and rapists. Second, the study reveals that the systematic and societal questioning of rape victims is so pervasive that it even invades the thoughts and attitudes of some individuals dedicated to assisting and advocating for rape victims. Most who exhibited victim-questioning atti- tudes during interviews were completely unaware that they were doing so. One advocate summarized this notion: Sometimes I even have my struggles with those stereotypes and those images we have. Theyre just such a part of culture that every now and again I have them creep up. Another advocate was resigned to the fact that we are all human. Human advocates do not escape the influence of societys pervasive attitudes, often beyond their own recognition. Although advocates are well-trained and passionate about issues surrounding rape, it is impossible to place them in a vacuum free from all the influ- ences of a rape-prone society. Research has indicated that rape prevention programs do not always reduce rape-supportive attitudes (see Brecklin & Forde, 2001), therefore it is essen- tial that we continue to strive to reduce the pervasiveness of victim-blaming and question- ing attitudes through education as well as less blameworthy depictions of victims by media. It is possible that advocates who questioned victims decisions or responsibility did so as a mechanism to protect themselves from their own feelings of vulnerability. It is also possible that advocates may question victims choices and behaviors to maintain an illusion that they are invulnerable to rape because they would never make bad choices or lack assertiveness. The just world theory may be functional for advocates exposed to the real- ity of rape on a consistent basis, as exhibited in a phrase used by an advocate questioning a victim who accepted a ride with a stranger: She had done something I dont think I would have ever . . . Advocates may question victims in order to deny the possibility that they could also be sexually victimized. Third, advocates who were aware of their internal negative thoughts stated that they would never verbalize their beliefs or biases to rape victims. They believed that keeping these thoughts to themselves is sufficient. They did not question whether such negative thoughts or judgmental attitudes may be revealed in nonverbal cues. They brushed off their Maier 1429 questions or judgments with a simple, I would never tell the victim that is what I thought. During the interviews, they did not challenge themselves on these thoughts, nor did they question whether victims are aware that advocates dont believe them or are questioning their behavior even though the advocate does not verbalize it. Fourth, the majority of advocates felt that rape results from a rapists need for power. However, when they were asked how rape can be reduced, surprisingly only 10 advocates (17%) stated that targeting men or potential rapists to promote change was the best way to reduce rape. It is possible that advocates focus on victims rather than perpetrators because they are affiliated with rape crisis where the focus is on services for victims. Nonetheless, although it is important that rape crisis centers educate potential victims on how to protect themselves, it is also essential that perpetrator accountability is included. Lastly, it is interesting that although advocates understand that the vast majority of rapes are committed by someone known to the victim, and over half (53%) of the advocates have their own personal experience of a completed or attempted sexual victimization by some- one known to them, they continued to provide strongest warnings against stranger assaults. Advocates may not know how to protect themselves or educate other potential victims on how to protect themselves against potential rapists who are acquaintances, or advocates may simply be regurgitating typical warnings given to women that suggest protective mea- sures against stranger rape. Ullman (2007) explains that, Risk reduction programs typi- cally try to keep women from ever being attacked by advising them to restrict their behavior by avoiding risky situations. Unfortunately, many women are attacked by men they know in situations they thought were safe (p. 425). Nonetheless, despite their knowledge of victimoffender patterns, advocates did not normally educate women on the reality of acquaintance rape. The findings of this research are tempered by a few limitations. First, the study exam- ines attitudes and conceptualizations about a sensitive topic. It is often difficult to deter- mine if attitudes match behavior. Rape victim advocates may be aware of the politically correct or socially desirable answers to some questions and simply provide those, regard- less of their true feelings. Since the research does not include observation of rape victim advocates interaction with rape victims, it is impossible to determine if attitudes match behavior. Every attempt was made to move respondents beyond socially desirable answers through use of multiple probes and rephrasing of questions (e.g., What do you mean by that statement?). Second, although the author did not intend to lead respondents in any way through question phrasing, it is possible that the wording of questions influenced how respondents answered. Third, Berg (1989) recommends the coding of qualitative data by two or more researchers to assure that naturally arising categories are used rather than those a particular researcher might hope to locateregardless of whether the categories really exist (p. 43). As previously stated, only one researcher coded the data in its entirety, so it is possible that others would interpret advocates responses differently. However, when specific data fell into more of a gray area regarding questioning or blaming of vic- tims, the researcher consulted with several colleagues. Because of the complexity of per- ceptions of rape victims and victim-questioning attitudes, future research should begin with a clearer conceptualization not only of victim-questioning attitudes, but also of when 1430 Violence Against Women 18(12) revealed attitudes or perceptions reach the level of being victim-questioning. 6 Perhaps in addition to open-ended questions, subjects responses to a series of vignettes that contain traditional rape myths (e.g., real victims sustain injury, women lie about rape) as well as more complex, subtle victim-questioning attitudes revealed in this research (e.g., women should not drink to a point of intoxication) could be assessed to better quantify respon- dents attitudes. Fourth, the majority (66%) of interviews were conducted over the phone. It is possible that advocates who were interviewed in person were more comfortable and therefore may have been more likely to reveal victim-questioning attitudes or provide more candid responses to all questions. In addition, it is impossible to observe participants facial expressions or other nonverbal cues during phone interviews. The observation of facial expressions or other nonverbal cues could have been important data considering that advo- cates who were aware of their victim-questioning attitudes insisted that they would not reveal their feelings to victims or treat victims differently. 7 For interviews conducted over the phone, it is impossible to know whether advocates did not verbally reveal (or did reveal) victim-questioning attitudes, but their facial expressions or nonverbal cues were contrary to their stated responses. Fifth, as previous research has indicated that females have more favorable attitudes than males towards rape victims (Cowan & Campbell, 1995; Jiminez & Abreu, 2003; Nagel et al., 2002; Ward, 1995; White & Robinson Kurpius, 1999), this research is limited because it only includes female respondents. Future research should also assess male advocates perceptions of rape, rape victims, and rapists. Finally, some advocates revealed that they kept any judgmental attitudes private and did not reveal them to victims. Since victims were not included, it is impossible to determine if advocates were unknowingly revealing biases to victims or if victims picked up nonverbal cues that indi- cated that advocates questioned their decisions or doubted their stories. Despite these potential limitations, this research has provided insight into a previously unexamined realm: the questioning of rape victims by rape victim advocates. As discussed previously, this research contributes to the rape literature by addressing the lack of empiri- cal work that examines whether rape victim advocates ever have victim-questioning atti- tudes. It serves as a foundation for future research and provides several suggestions for policy change. First, rape crisis centers and programs need to provide training on how to recognize unexamined internalizations of biases against rape victims, a challenge for advo- cates living in a society where rape myths and victim-questioning attitudes are so perva- sive. Second, rape crisis centers and programs should encourage advocates to consider the possibility that rape victims may sense victim-questioning attitudes even if these attitudes are not verbally communicated. Advocates should be challenged to question if their atti- tudes ever affect the work they do. Third, rape crisis centers and programs also need to continue to educate members of society about rape and misconceptions surrounding rape in an attempt to decrease victim-blaming and questioning on a societal level. Fourth, rape crisis centers and programs should place a stronger emphasis on the responsibility of men to stop rape and offer more educational programs addressing male accountability. As one advocate stated, men should be taught that no doesnt mean yes. Finally, since advo- cates are well aware of the reality of acquaintance rape, yet primarily provide warnings against stranger assaults, rape crisis centers and programs should discuss with advocates Maier 1431 the importance of providing potential victims strategies to protect themselves against potential rapists who are acquaintances, quite a challenging feat. However, the results also beg the question if offering women preventive strategies to avoid sexual victimization may lead to victim-blaming or questioning. For example, if society gives women the practical advice that they can decrease risk of sexual victimization by not becoming intoxicated, then does this imply that victims who disregard such advice are to blame? Also, does it ignore the fact that women can take all of societys suggested preventive measures and still be raped? These questions warrant further discussion and attention in future research. Acknowledgments I would like to thank all of the directors and coordinators at the rape crisis centers and programs who granted me access to their advocates. Also, this project would not have been possible without the advocates who allowed me to interview them. I thank Susan L. Miller and the anonymous reviewers for comments on an earlier draft. Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Funding The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Notes 1. If the program is not embedded in a larger social service agency it is referred to as a center. If the program is embedded in a larger social service agency it is referred to as a program. There are no differences between advocates from centers and programs; all have the same training and responsibilities. 2. One male was interviewed because of encouragement by one centers director, who was concerned about eliminating males from this type of research. However, the data from the interview are not included in this article. 3. Seven advocates (12%) were African American, five (8%) were Hispanic or Latina, four (7%) were multiracial, one advocate (2%) was Indian, and one advocate (2%) was Asian American. 4. The data for this article come from a larger study that examines the transformation of rape crisis centers and programs, addresses how rape victim advocates understand rape victims within a cultural context, and details rape victim advocates perceptions about rape law reform (Maier, 2004). 5. Mainstream discourse includes some of the following perceptions: rape results from mens sexual impulses, rapists are sick, women are responsible for preventing rape, and rape results from womens poor judgment. Feminist discourse includes the following: rape results from the power imbalance between men and women, normal men rape, and rape can be 1432 Violence Against Women 18(12) eliminated through societal change and placing responsibility on men who rape (Martin, 2005). 6. Thank you to the anonymous reviewer who made this suggestion. 7. Any relevant participant reactions were noted by the researcher at the conclusion of the inter- view (e.g., participant seemed upset, angry, uncomfortable, rushed) Eight of the nine advo- cates who expressed victim-questioning attitudes who were interviewed in person showed no nonverbal cues that either supported or contradicted their stated responses. One advocate gave a look of disbelief and disappointment when questioning why younger women accept rides with strangers. References Amir, M. (1971). Patterns of forcible rape. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Andersen, M. L., & Renzetti, C. M. (1980). Rape crisis counseling and the culture of individual- ism. Contemporary Crises, 4, 323-339. Berg, B. (1989). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Best, C., Dansky, B., & Kilpatrick, D. (1992). Medical students attitudes about female rape victims. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 7, 175-188. Brecklin, L. R., & Forde, D. R. (2001). A meta-analysis of rape education programs. Violence and Victims, 16, 303-321. Brownmiller, S. (1972). Against our will: Men, women and rape. New York: Simon and Schuster. Buddie, A. M., & Miller, A. G. (2001). Beyond rape myths: A more complex view of percep- tions of rape victims. Sex Roles, 45, 139-160. Burt, M. (1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psy- chology, 38, 217-230. Cahill, A. J. (2001). Rethinking rape. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Campbell, R. (1998). The community response to rape: Victims experiences with the legal, medical, and mental health systems. American Journal of Community Psychology, 26, 355- 379. Campbell, R., Sefl, T., Barnes, H. E., Ahrens, C. E., Wasco, S. M., & Zaragoza-Diesfeld, Y. (1999). Community services for rape survivors: Enhancing psychological well-being or increasing trauma? Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 847-858. Carmody, D., & Washington, L. (2001). Rape myth acceptance among college women: The impact of race and prior victimization. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 16, 424-436. Cowan, G. (2000). Womens hostility toward women and rape and sexual harassment myths. Violence Against Women, 6, 238-246. Cowan, G., & Campbell, R. (1995). Rape causal attitudes among adolescents. Journal of Sex Research, 32, 145-153. Doyle, S., & Barbato, C. (1999). Justice delayed is justice denied: The experiences of women in court as victims of sexual assault. In J. Breckenridge & L. Laing (Eds.), Challenging silence: The innovative responses to sexual and domestic violence (pp. 47-58). Sydney, Australia: Allen & Unwin. Maier 1433 Du Mont, J., Miller, K., & Myhr, T. (2003). The role of real rape and real victim ste- reotypes in the police reporting practices of sexually assaulted women. Violence Against Women, 9, 466-486. Dye, E., & Roth, S. (1990). Psychotherapists knowledge about and attitudes toward sexual assault victim clients. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 14, 191-212. Estrich, S. (1987). Real rape. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Fisher, B. S., Daigle, L., Cullen, F. T., & Tuner, M. G. (2003). Reporting sexual victimization to the police and others: Results from a national-level study of college women. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 30, 6-38. Flavin, J. (2001). Feminism for the mainstream criminologist: An invitation. Journal of Crimi- nal Justice, 29, 271-285. Frese, B., Moya, M., & Megias, J. (2004). Social perception of rape: How rape myth accep- tance modulates the influence of situational factors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 143-161. Garland, T. (2005). An overview of sexual assault and sexual assault myths. In F. P. Reddington & B. Kreisel (Eds.), Sexual assault: The victims, the perpetrators, and the criminal justice system (pp. 326). Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press. Giacopassi, D. J., & Dull, R. T. (1986). Gender and racial differences in the acceptance of rape myths within a college population. Sex Roles, 15, 63-75. Holmstrom, L., & Burgess, A. W. (1978). The victim of rape: Institutional reactions. New York: John Wiley. Iliffee, G., & Steed, L. G. (2000). Exploring the counselors experience of working with perpe- trators and survivors of domestic violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15, 393-412. Jiminez, J., & Abreu, J. (2003). Race and sex effects on attitudinal perceptions of acquaintance rape. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50, 252-256. Kirkwood, M. K., & Cecil, D. (2001). Marital rape: A student assessment of rape laws and the marital exemption. Violence Against Women, 7, 1234-1253. Lee, J., Pomeroy, E. C., Yoo, S., & Rheinboldt, K. T. (2005). Attitudes toward rape: A compari- son between Asian and Caucasian college students. Violence Against Women, 11, 177-196. Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum Press. Lonsway, K. A., & Fitzgerald, L. (1994). Rape myths: In review. Psychology of Women Quar- terly, 18, 133-164. Macy, R. J., Nurius, P., & Norris, J. (2006). Responding in their best interest: Contextualizing wom- ens coping with acquaintance sexual aggression. Violence Against Women, 12, 478-500. Maier, S. L. (2004). Navigating the transformation of rape crisis centers and programs: Experi- ences, views and struggles of rape advocates. Unpublished doctorial dissertation, Univer- sity of Delaware, Newark, DE. Martin, P. Y. (2005). Rape work: Victims, gender, and emotions in organization and community context. New York: Routledge. McGregor, M. J., Wiebe, E., Marion, S. A., & Livingstone, C. (2000). Why dont more women report sexual assault to the police? Canadian Medical Association Journal, 162, 659-662. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2/e. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 1434 Violence Against Women 18(12) Mohler-Kuo, M., Dowdall, G. W., Koss, M. P., & Wechsler, H. (2004). Correlates of rape while intoxicated in a national sample of college women. Journal of Alcohol Studies, 65, 37-45. Nagel, B., Matsuo, H., McIntyre, K. P., & Morrison, N. (2002). Attitudes toward victims of rape: Effects of gender, race, religion, and social class. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 20, 725-737. Payne, B. K. (2007). Victim advocates perceptions of the role of health care workers in sexual assault cases. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 18, 81-94. Renzetti, C. M. (1979). Theories and definitions of rape by rape crisis counselors. Unpublished Masters thesis, University of Delaware, Newark, DE. Rubin, H., & Rubin, I. (1995). Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data. London: Sage. Ryan, G. & Bernard, H. R. (2003). Techniques to identify themes. Field Methods, 15, 85-109. Scully, D. (1994). Understanding sexual violence: A study of convicted rapists. New York: Routledge. Schwendinger, J. R., & Schwendinger, H. (1983). Rape and inequality. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage. Shotland, R. L., & Goodstein, L. (1983). Just because she doesnt want to doesnt mean its rape: An experimentally based causal model of the perception of rape in dating situation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 46, 220-232. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Ullman, S. E. (2003). A critical review of field studies on the link of alcohol and adult sexual assault in women. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 8, 471-486. Ullman, S. E. (2007). A 10-year update of Review and critique of empirical studies of rape avoidance. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 411-429. Ullman, S. E., Townsend, S. M., Filipas, H. H., & Starzynski, L. L. (2007). Structural models of the relations of assault severity, social support, avoidance coping, self-blame, and PTSD among sexual assault survivors. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 23-37. Ward, C. (1995). Attitudes toward rape: Feminist and social psychological perspectives. Thou- sand Oaks, CA: Sage. Whatley, M. A. (1996). Victim characteristics influencing attributions of responsibility to rape victims: A meta-analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 1, 81-96. White, B., & Robinson Kurpius, S. (1999). Attitudes toward rape victims: Effects of gender and professional status. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14, 989-995. Wiehe, V., & Richards, A. (1995). Intimate betrayal: Understanding and responding to the trauma of rape. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Author Biography Shana L. Maier, PhD, is an associate professor in the Criminal Justice Department at Widener University. She received her BS and MS degrees from Saint Josephs University, and her PhD from the University of Delaware. Her research interests include the treatment of rape victims by the criminal justice, medical and legal systems, and perceptions and experiences of rape victim advocates, Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners, and detectives investigating rape allega- tions. She is the author of numerous articles and book chapters, and a coauthor of the sixth edition of the textbook, Women, Men and Society (Allyn and Bacon).