Gender-Egalitarianism and the Construction of Official Rape Rates

Abstract

Cross-national variations in official crime rates likely represent several concurrent criminological and non-criminological phenomena beyond actual crime occurrence, resulting in puzzling relationships between variables. For example, research shows that structural gender equality predicts official rape rates. I extend this literature by examining whether the ethos or mainstream country-level attitudes and beliefs toward gender equality (or gender egalitarianism) affect official rape rates. Results suggest that while countries with higher levels of gender egalitarianism in the public sphere have higher official rape rates, nations with higher levels of gender-private egalitarianism have lower official rape rates. These outcomes imply that progressive attitudes toward the full participation of women in work, education, and politics are disjointed from gender-egalitarian views on parenting, divorce, and abortion. My findings align with previous studies showing a paradoxical positive association between structural gender equality and official rape rates. I problematize earlier interpretations of similar results as a backlash effect of women’s parity. Throughout the paper, I reflect on the impact of statistical and social factors in constructing official rape rates. I propose using an updated gender ideology framework to understand the complex relationship between private and public dimensions of equalitarianism and official rape rates.

Appendices

Appendix 1

See Table 5.

Table 5 54 countries

Appendix 2

ICVS EU ICS Questionnaire, 2004–2005

Q80. First, a rather personal question. People sometimes grab, touch or assault others for sexual reasons in a really offensive way. This can happen either at home, or elsewhere, for instance in a pub, the street, at school, on public transport, in cinemas, on the beach, or at one’s workplace. Over the past five years has anyone done this to you? Please take your time to think about it.

• 1. Yes

• 2. No

• 9. Don’t know

Q220. You mentioned that you had been a victim of a sexual offense. Could I ask you about this? When did this happen? Was it

• 1. This year

• 2. Last year, in 2004

• 3. Before then

• 9. Don’t know/can’t remember

If answer is equal to code 2 then continue with question 221.

Else continue with question 222.

Q229. Would you describe the incident as a rape (forced intercourse), an attempted rape, an indecent assault or as just behavior which you found offensive?

• 1. A rape

• 2. An attempted rape

• 3. Indecent assault

• 4. Offensive behavior

• 9. Don’t know

Q230. Taking everything into account, how serious was the incident for you? Was it very serious, fairly serious, or not very serious?

• 1. Very serious

• 2. Fairly serious

• 3. Not very serious

• 9. Don’t know

Q231. Do you regard the incident as a crime?

• 1. Yes

• 2. No

• 9. Don’t know

Q232. Did you or anyone else report that incident to the police?

• 1. Yes

• 2. No

• 9. Don’t know

Appendix 3

Items: Gender-Public Equalitarianism

WVS: waves 2 (1990–1994), 3 (1995–1998), and 4 (1999–2000) (Inglehart et al, 2014).

Items asked respondents to which extent they agreed with the statements:

• 1. “On the whole, men make better political leaders than women do.”

• 2. “A university education is more important for a boy than for a girl”;

• 3. “When jobs are scarce, men should have more right to a job than women.”

Appendix 4

Items: Gender-Private Egalitarianism

WVS: wave 2 (1990–1994), 3 (1995–1998), 4 (1999–2000) (Inglehart et al., 2014); when no country observations were available in any of these 3 waves, data from wave 5 were incorporated (2005–2009).

Asked respondents if they approved or disapproved with the following statement:

• 1. “If a woman wants to have a child as a single parent, but she doesn't want to have a stable relationship with a man, do you approve or disapprove?” (three-points scale).

“Please tell me for each of the following statements whether you think it can always be justified, never be justified, or something in between”:

• 2. “Abortion” (ten-point scale);

• 3. “Divorce” (ten-point scale).